Arena Arbitration
On June 11, 2025, the AIA Cincinnati Urban Design Community hosted a panel discussion about the site selection for the proposed new civic arena in downtown. More than architects and design professionals were in attendance to hear a presentation of the site selection study and responses by AIA member urban design experts. Pete Metz, VP Civic and Regional Partnerships with the Cincinnati Regional Chamber was the featured presenter. Panelists included University of Cincinnati Professor Vikas Mehta and Professor Emeritus Frank Russell, AIA. Urban Design Chair Aaron Kingsley, AIA and Co-Chair Manuel Granja, AIA, MC’ed the program.
Civic advocates propose a new sports arena for the city to replace the aging Heritage Bank Center on the riverfront. The proponents promise expanded programming, enhanced entertainment value, and additional economic impact. Metz presented a recent study sponsored by the Cincinnati Regional Chamber that identified and evaluated three potential sites for this program outside of its current location.
From Google Earth provided by Frank Russell
This presentation and panel discussion highlighted the urban design implications of arena development at each of these potential sites. The event offered an opportunity for AIA membership and others to gain insight into the urban design impact of a massive new building program for the city center and allowed members to contribute their expertise in dialogue about how best to integrate the outcome into the urban context.
The learning objectives of the event were:
Describe a major civic building program and typology and its impact on the well-being of occupants and communities.
Appreciate the broad criteria used for site selection including social, economic, and environment considerations
Understand priorities of site selection for a major public building program.
Explain the potential impact of large scale building programs on the physical urban context and the people who experience them.
Metz presented a justification for a new and expanded arena (18,000 seats - $600m) outside of the current Heritage Bank Center site on the riverfront. Considering its nearly fifty year age and the need to compete more effectively with regional peers for a variety of events, an updated structure and additional programming are called for. With the current building viewed as suboptimal for renovation and the site complicated and costly to rebuild on, up to 14 sites were considered for new construction with three locations deemed most appropriate. Weighted scoring criteria of the site study included Site Acquisition, Land Area/Access, Amenities/Public Services, Population, Parking, Public Transit, and Catalyst for Off-Site Development. Three sites emerged as most favorable:
West Downtown Site: A site at the west end of 4th Street that will be made available by the realignment of I-75 for the new Ohio River bridge. Unoccupied - 9.62 acres. Benefits from access to existing parking infrastructure, a favorable grade change, walking distance from Fountain Square/the Banks, proximity to the Convention Center, and affordable acquisition cost although timing of availability is a concern.
Town Center Garage Site: bounded by Central Parkway, Ezzard Charles Drive, Central Avenue, and Charles Street. Occupied by a parking garage and WCET studios - 6.37 acres. Benefits from proximity to entertainment assets in Over-the-Rhine/FC Stadium, might stimulate further development in the West End, and is more readily available, although is smaller in size and requires relocation of WCET.
Casino North: adjacent to the existing Hard Rock Casino and bounded by the 471 ramp to Liberty Street, Reading Road, and Gilbert Avenue. Unoccupied - 9.62 acres. Although not scoring as well, this site benefits from potential private partnership (casino), parking accessibility, and grade change. Limitations include remoteness from urban core, lessened proximate development impact, and traffic access issues.
Panelists focused exclusively on the urban design compatibility and context appropriateness of each site based on the program as outlined.
Mehta structured his comments around two aspects of how the proposed arena might be compatible or not with its urban context. He questioned how this building typology and programmatic activity would “fit” the pace of urbanity around it. Would this program disrupt the rhythms of urban life around it, or would it contribute vitality in a productive way? Secondly he was concerned with the concept of how the arena, because of its programming and potentially expressive building typology, might be understood in terms of “speed” – is it a “fast” building? – and if so where does it belong in context?
On the first point, he noted that the high energy activity and “hyper-programming” of a sports arena at the northern sites would be markedly different and possibly conflict with the slower pace of Over-the-Rhine and especially the primarily residential Pendleton neighborhood.
On the second point he remarked that the West Downtown Site has the specific advantage for this unique building typology, because of its position at the gateway of the high volume Ohio River bridge. In this context the experience of the building from the highway, is, of course, one understood by the viewer who is traveling highway speed. Therefore, the “fast” building typology and program has a better match with its contextual highway location and the viewer experience. Consequently this building form is appropriate for an iconic gateway landmark for the west face of Downtown. Luckily, on its eastern face the building can be shortened and scaled to the pedestrian because of the site’s grade change from east to west. And as it relates to the Downtown pedestrian experience, Mehta observed that an anchor civic program at the west end of 4th Street would do much to emphasize the often lacking east-west connectivity and directional “energy” and “pull” in downtown – from Lytle Park through Fountain Square and to the Convention Center.
Russell opened his comments with an observation about how the proposed sites fit within previous urban design frameworks. While no mention of the site selection process entailed alignment with existing city approved plans for Downtown (Cincinnati City Council recently approved FY2026 funding to develop a new Downtown neighborhood plan) all three locations are compatible with the Alshuler/3CDC urban framework concept of 2004, potentially anchoring southwest, northwest, and northeast corners of the basin within clusters of synergistic civic entertainment activity.
Remarkably the Town Center Garage/WCET Site development concept, which would put the arena on Central Parkway, eerily corresponds with the “City Beautiful” inspired urban framework vision of the 1925 City Plan for the basin.
From 1925 Official plan for the City of Cincinnati provided by Frank Russell
This 1925 plan envisioned a necklace of civic functions and monumental buildings along Central Parkway which, because of its width, is suitable for large-scale building massing. However, a closer look at the historic rendering and an understanding of the existing scale of civic buildings that exist - the courthouse, SCPA, and Music Hall - leads to the conclusion that a modern arena, not much smaller than the FC stadium, would dwarf in both height and footprint, any of these civic structures. The western face of the site offers a more daunting incompatibility with smaller scale historic residential structures on Central Avenue.
Russell remarked that, in terms of scale compatibility, the West Downtown and Casino North sites are more appropriate to their immediate context, which includes the likes of the casino complex and the convention center. Both of these sites would accommodate super-sized sculptural and iconic building forms which might fit in well with the immediately adjacent interstate highways (I-71, I-471, and I-75) and establish compelling blimp-ready, identity-branding gateway views for the city in media production. In summary Russell pointed out that an urban design intervention of the scale proposed at the Town Center/WCET Site, would need finely tuned contextual sensitivity not commonly seen in the design of modern sporting venues and the potential for negative environmental impacts on the adjacent Betts-Longworth Historic District and Over-the-Rhine historic fabric may be too great.
We want to hear from you. What are your thoughts about a new Arena and the proposed sites? Please join the conversation on the Urban Design LinkedIn group. Additional reports and coverage of the potential Arena sites are available on the program page.
