kendall

What a cool idea.

New locution for a new location.

locutus, How about doing a little research before running your fat mouth.

I'd really like to see neighborhood maps, that are clickable to bring up the pictures of that 'hood.

A 119-unit tower seems pretty dense for that area. The surrounding blocks are mostly single-family, small apartment buildings, and professional/commercial uses. And in 6 floors? Those must be some dinky little units. I view this as flooding a neighborhood that needs stability with small, inexpensive (student?) apartments. Mt. Auburn must not have a viable neighborhood council, if it did, it'd be all over this one.

Those lamps are a great local quirk. Plus they're actually useful, because you always know where I concrete triangle or median is. Usually, they rest atop their own poles, but not uncommonly they are attached to a walk sign pole or streetlight pole. They are ubiquitous throughout the city neighborhoods, including CBD, OTR, West End, Mt. Auburn, Corryville, Clifton Heights, Avondale, etc. I believe they are a city phenomenon only, and especially at intersections with major roads such as Reading, MLK, Madison, Liberty and the like.

Incredible news! I like the innovative glass wall that slides up to create a patio. If the units are going on sale tomorrow, a rendering has got to pop up somewhere soon.

Sure, these buildings could be more attractive. But they also could be a lot uglier. As I've said in the past, at least this is development in the center city, not Mason, West Chester, or Hebron.

Wow, there's been a lot of press on this lately. Butler must have some sway with the editorial boards. From today's Cinci Post: Design for condos earns praise By Jeanne Houck Post staff reporter "Magnificent." "Inspirational." "Unique." "A work of art." Those were words used by Covington residents, business leaders and city officials Monday after reviewing Corporex Cos.' plans for "The Ascent at Roebling's Bridge," a futuristic condominium high-rise on the riverfront. In separate hearings, world-renowned architect Daniel Libeskind presented to the city's Architectural Review Board and then to civic leaders and Covington residents his plans for a 21-floor, crescent-shaped tower with expansive glass windows and an asymmetrical "swooshing" roof. Even people with questions about the tower, proposed to be built just west of the Roebling Suspension Bridge, could not help praising the plans drawn up by Libeskind, who was chosen to design new buildings for the World Trade Center site in New York City. On Monday, the city's architectural review board agreed to recommend the city commission approve plans for the tower, which is to include 80 upscale condominiums on 18 floors and a lobby, plaza, swimming pool, restaurant and, perhaps, some retail space, on the other three floors. Referring to the beauty and boldness of the design, architectural review board member Robert Lape said, "This would be a sculpture located next to the Suspension Bridge, basically." More at http://www.cincypost.com

This project got started after one of our councilmembers (don't remember which one) was jealous because the Newport side of the bridge looks pretty with flowers, bushes, and trees. Instead of that we get this... Yikes.

What an incredible design. If it is built like this, it will be a true landmark. I hope the relevant decisionmakers realize what an opportunity this project is!

After reading those plans, I've noticed that the urban planners responsible sure are good at coming up with euphemisms to describe pre-existing conditions in a study area.

It's great to see some investment in neighborhoods that don't get enough.

I agree, it'd be nice if there was some first-level retail in the building. On weekends, it will be just another dark, empty building. At least the cladding they're applying to the parking ramp levels should make it look better than a regular parking garage. And it is "high rise" development downtown.

^ Now that's what I'm talking about: 1) A locally-owned destination retailer to add momentum to a major reuse/redevelopment project and 2) Jungle Jim's so close I can frequent it!

Cincinnati should annex the main part of Columbia Twp. (the shopping district described in this thread), upgrade the sidewalks and Ridge Road to create a cohesive shopping district with Center of Cincinnati and the proposed Millworks site. Let the other pieces of the township go to the largest contiguous municipal unit. We're talking about a key corridor joining Cincinnati and the inner ring suburbs. Given the difficulties these areas are faced with due to sprawl, a highly fragmented governance/decision making structure is the last thing that is needed. Does anyone know where Columbia Twp. kids go to school?

The building looks great from the outside now with the new windows. With the new garage and condos going in across the street, it is a welcome beacon of investment in the neighborhood. And a very stark contrast to areas just a block or two away.

With the scale of this project as proposed, some sort of connector is going to be a necessity. Even with the existing retail in that area (which draws many fewer shoppers than Millworks would), the going gets tough at peak times. I hope they can work out a satisfactory deal for the connector. The "neighborhood feel" of the parts of Oakley surrounding the Millworks site is already long-gone. This development would generate important sales tax revenue for Ham. Co. and, eventually, good property tax income for Cincinnati. I say eventually, because I'm sure the development will receive generous property tax credits.

I believe Norwood tried to use a "blight" designation to get Eminent Domain approved here. That category has long been recognized as a permissible use of eminent domain. Of course, it has been applied to areas that many people would not consider blighted, but if property owners don't fight back, then the blight declaration is pretty much just a procedural step. To seize (with compensation) areas that are not even arguably blighted for economic development purposes is a much more contentious issue. In fact the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in a case (Kelo v. City of New London) on this very issue a couple weeks ago. You can find all the info you wanted about the Kelo case and more at: http://supreme.lp.findlaw.com/supreme_court/docket/2004/february.html

It sure would have been nice if the powers that be hadn't sold the soul of the riverfront to the Reds and Bengals.

Additional interstate access at MLK and I-71 would alleviate a lot of rush hour congestion around the university and hospitals. My guess is that's what this is really about.

^Maybe they're just planning to excise a few wood-frame buildings and unadorned teens and 20s infill. I hope that's all.

Great news!!

Yeah, fights happen at or around most bars. In my opinion, whether frequent fights should lead to revocation of a liquor license is a matter of degree. At a certain point, an establishment becomes a cancer on the neighborhood. In every town or city I've ever lived, a bar has been closed or threatened with closure after frequent fights and/or a shooting. I know the patrons of the Bay Horse will go elsewhere to drink once it closes. But to me it doesn't make sense for the community to just assume the new watering hole will also be an epicenter of violent behavior and illicit activit, and so justify letting the Bay Horse persist. That would be like not jailing an armed robber because, eh, he'll just do it again anyway when he gets out.

The Bay Horse is the dive to end all dives. The bar is busy from 5am-2pm because many of its clientele are unemployed (I am often panhandled by patrons just out of the Bay Horse). There is a radius of urine and beer stench within a 1/3 block in both directions. I've never seen a police run there personally, but during my recent ride-along, the officer commented that there are a lot of runs to the Bay Horse, usually for fights. I say close it down.