JoeL

I think I've mentioned this before, but if The Banks is successful, people are just going to call it "Downtown" or probably just "over by the ballparks/river." Branding is great for the real estate development part, but unless they are going to run the retail like a self-contained lifestyle center, I think most people won't really care after completion.

Anyone know about that new steel building that's going up Downtown on Broadway. I saw the article that KZF design is renovating the old building next door - however this is new construction one block south. Is it part of the same project (the article mentions KZF bought two buildings) or is this something else entirely?

It's such a weird experience to walk through the Cincinnati (Mills) Mall. Especially because the building is so much NICER than the TriCounty Mall. This is a great case study on why location location location is the most important thing of all. Apparently even more important than renovated, updated space.

What's with all the complaining? There is nothing wrong with this: It's a perfectly good building. Again, very much like what they've put up at Atlantic Station, which is a very good thing. Frankly, a building like this is going to be much more contemporary and much more aesthetically pleasing than some pretentious deconstructivist experiment. The Ascent is the 1-in-100 "starcitect" building that actually looks good. They got very lucky. If Cincinnati tried to follow that example, we'd end up with dozens of piles of architectural mistakes before we ever got our landmark. So I don't think that's a good strategy.

It's a good article. I saw it on planetizen the other day. I'm glad that some areas are begining to understand the stupidity and high cost of the cul-de-sac. Follow this link if you want to see a great illustration of the problems with the cul-de-sac. What should be a 20 yard stroll turns into a 5 mile journey that's not realistic without a car. http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=fernside+rd,+jacksonville,+fl&daddr=peerless+lane,+jacksonville,+fl&geocode=&hl=en&mra=ls&dirflg=w&sll=30.312905,-81.51668&sspn=0.033566,0.053387&ie=UTF8&t=h&z=14

Yes, this area could certainly use more hotels, in my opinion. I live somewhat near the Rookwood exchange site, and there are very few hotel options. You'd basically have to send someone to Kenwood or a more expensive place downtown. The area could really use a couple of mid-level chains like the Springhill Suites that was jus built near downtown. Anyway, it's a moot point because this project might as well be dead. I'm sure something will get built eventually, but they'll probably propose something entirely different again, before a shovel turns any dirt.

Hard to tell with just the one small rendering, but I generally like the office tower design. As mentioned above, it is very similar to Atlantic Station - and I think that's a great thing. The Atlantic Station offices look great in person, and this rendering looks like the same style. If you have to go modern, reflective glass (with blue tones, not black) is the way to go. This style of office building has worked very well in many other cities.

Great photos jmecklenborg! You ought to spam the Equirer's message board with links to those photos next time some idiot complains that the Banks is a "mud pit."

Some other news article mentioned that Wal-Mart will be opening in November. Personally, I don't shop at Wal-Mart much, but I like to have the option available to me. However that disaster on Highland Ave is the most disgusting big box store I've ever been to, and that's saying a lot. I will not shop there again. Wal-Mart's new construction tends to be much nicer and cleaner, so I'm looking forward to the improvement (and the inevitable closure of the Highland Ave store). For you city boosters, think of it this way ... tax revenue is leaving an unincorporated suburb, and moving to city limits.

I agree that the turret is an unusual proportion if you look at the building in isolation. However, if you consider the entire streetwall, the proportion seems quite good. Anyway, I like it a lot. I'm very much a neo-traditionalist, however, I'm still happy to see a building with contemporary features since the "bones" of the structure fit in with the historical context surrounding it.

At least it was a building undergoing demolition. Hopefully that won't make it more difficult to contain the fire.

I can appreciate some good city-boosting, but I can't find a problem with the Kenwood name. It's called Stratford at Kenwood because it's ... near Kenwood!! God forbid. They'll drive on Kenwood Road, and shop at the Kenwood strip malls. Even if you're looking at it from a civic pride standpoint, Cincinnati is getting the property taxes, and that's what counts. Anyway, everyone should also remember that Cincinnati is unusual in that it has extremely well defined neighborhood boundaries. Not all American cities are as serious about their neighborhood definitions as around here. (It's kind of provincial, honestly.) In most cities, it's perfectly normal for a popular neighborhood name to spread well beyond its original boundaries. Besides, at the end of the day, people who live in Kenwood still say they're from Cincinnati. So I can't imagine why anyone would be embarassed over Kenwood getting a building name. Really? Embarassed?

Yeah, there's something fishy going on with how much they spent. Aerial Trams are some of the cheapest per mile possible forms of transit (they're just not used more because of low volumes and slow speeds). It's absurd that they managed to spend $57 million. Plenty of Ski resorts have longer trams, and they did NOT cost $57 million!! I also agree that a Mt Adams Tram in Cincinnati would be fantastic. It's basically the perfect setting for a Tram. A popular hilltop location with a huge parking crunch.

To each his own, I guess. Personally, I think that they've handled the scale and overall feel of the development quite well. It's a narrow block, and it transitions from residential houses on one side, to huge university buildings on the other. Given the context, I think the landuse and scale is fantastic. They did a good job, in my opinion. My only real complaint - like others have mentioned - are the blank garage walls on McMillan. However, if I had to choose between McMillan and Calhoon, I think they made the right choice again by directing the activity towards Calhoon. Now if I had my druthers, I would prefer neo-traditional architecture to the contemporary stuff they are building. But that's not really a valid land use issue, it's just my taste. Aside from the blank garage walls, I can't think of any other issue that the planning department would have grounds to dissaprove of?

Of course, if the project is truly successful, people are just going to call it "Downtown" or the downtown riverfront. After all, the Banks is clearly within a close enough walking distance of Fountain Square to be considered the same basic neighborhood. However, until they can cap the freeway, I guess there will still be a huge psychological barrier to a fully connected neighborhood.

I can appreciate the historical context, however that word "Losantiville" should never see the light of day outside of an historical reference. It was a weird gimmicky name at the time, and remains so to this day.

Yeah, UFC 96 is going to be Saturday at the Arena. They've started to run an event during the Arnold Classic every year because there's such a strong overlap in the audience. It's actually a really uninteresting fight card. But they're just assuming that the Arnold attendees will go see it regardless of quality.

I can understand opposition to the extent that someone simply dislikes change. That's a natural instinct, and virtually any project in the history of development projects will have opponents who like the way things are (or used to be). But as far as the character of the street goes, I'm just not sure that's a strong factor in this context. First of all, you have all these people who clearly think the character will IMPROVE with this change. Furthermore, the pedestrian mall is addressing serious infrastructure issues (both pedestrian and auto) in an amazingly inexpensive way. If this project is even half as successful at reducing pedestrian and auto conjestion as the proponents say its going to be, it'll be one of the cheapest fixes in the history of the city!! :)

Great retort! That last part is particularly striking. My wife and I are basically the type of young professionals Cincinnati is supposedly trying to attract. We almost didn't move here because of negative reputation, and although we like it alright, it's doubtful that Cincy will be our permanent home the way things currently are. (And that seems to be a very common sentiment among the friends we've made here) But a streetcar system that gentrifies OTR and invigorates the center city into something like Portland would change all that. My wife is about as intolerant of grit and decay as any person I've ever met, and yet she was in absolute awe of OTR's potential and the latent beauty of the neighborhood. I don't understand why critics like the dean can't understand this. Just TALK to any professional in their 20s or 30s. They desperately want to live in gentrified urban places like Portland. The streetcar would be an amazing magnet for affluence. It's stunning that the city has come so far with its plans, yet people want to throw it all away.

Lol ... you guys really believe in keeping threads alive. Over 2 years between post #1 and post #2!! :) Thanks for the extensive update. Oakley Sqaure is already pretty nice, although I guess it's a little dated, so I'm sure the streetscaping will be a welcome improvement. Also, I'm sure expanding the park will be well received, and the new streetscaping North of the square is certainly overdue. I don't really understand the complaining about traffic on Minot. Like the article says, if you shut it down, traffic will just move to Markbriet. Why should Minot get to reduce their traffic at the expense of other streets? I live on a through street far busier than either of those two, and I'm perfectly happy with my property values. So maybe I lack their perspective on the evils of the grid system.

Thanks for the update. And for the record, I doubt you could ever tell people on this forum "more than they ever wanted to know" about the Banks. ;)

I'm surprised by some of these negative comments. Personally, I predict that this experiment will be a huge success. Have the naysayers been to Times Square recently? I could hardly believe the stunning changes that happened between visits in 2003 and 2008, and it was already pretty damn nice in 2003. Now, the area is so vibrant and completely overcrowded with pedestrians, it's practically begging for this kind of pedestrian mall. There's certainly no question that the pedestrian component itself will be successful. Failed pedestrian malls of the past were usually built as an attempt to inject urban vitality to a street. Conversely, Times Square already has the vitality to the point that pedestrians are dangerously spilling off the sidewalks in the first place. This is one of the few places in America where the pedestrian demand totally outstrips the pedestrian infrastructure, and I'm glad to see that the city will be bumping up the supply!! As for the traffic, these articles point out that Broadway is a break in the grid, and is actually counterproductive to Manhattan's traffic flow. I'll be interested to see if this part comes true, but it makes logical sense.

The site development is well underway. There is a really (shockingly) nice pet kennel already built, as well as some decent looking apartments and maybe retail under construction. I think the new stuff is a superior landuse overall. Then again, I tend to be a bit biased against anything where you have to stay in your car.

There was an article about this maybe last week. The article said that the fare cuts were simply because local traffic was WAY down. With the cut in hub traffic, I think they finally realized just how many people are driving to Dayton, Columbus, etc (the airport is often DEAD compared to even 8 or 9 months ago for those of you who haven't gone lately.) I have tickets out to the West Coast that probably cost a couple hundred more than they would today - so I'm a little pissed. However, I'm flying a lot this year, so I'm just glad that fares are down so far. I'll come out way ahead in the end.

He's talking about Joe Biden, who basically did the exact same thing - he made statements that FDR was president when the great depression started. Regardless, there are plenty of economists who argue that FDR's policies greatly worsened and lengthened the depression. Most professors absolutely idolize FDR and the New Deal, so that argument rarely makes it into the textbooks. However there are tons of respected economists who suggest that, although it was trade barriers and interest rates that started the depression, it was FDR's spending that really extended it. Of course, this is just a perfect mirror to the current economic debate. Can you spend your way out of a recession? FDR, Keynes, and Obama firmly think so.