jjakucyk

LOL "Chopra made two unsuccessful attempts to secure state historic preservation tax credits to support a redevelopment." More like failed to do the required documentation for the application. Extensive as-built drawings and photography need to be done as one of the very first pieces of the application process, and I don't think that ever happened.

^ And it's 5/3 instead of 3/5 because the Fifth National Bank was the bigger of the two at the merger, so they got their name first. Seems pretty standard to me. Plus having only 3/5 of a bank would be kind of bad marketing anyway.

Neglect and fire...though I'm surprised burned buildings can be left without more supervision.

^ I've mentioned this before, but I think a big reason these features are not implemented is because they're counter to what parking meters are for. They're about allocating limited space by ensuring turnover. In many cities (Cincinnati included) it's illegal to feed the meter. When your time's up you're supposed to move your car. That said, some of these app situations might actually help in that they can be programmed to disallow adding more time without getting a new space number, meter code, or printed receipt, but then the convenience aspect is lost so why bother?

Grade-separating intersections like these can be ok where it makes sense topographically, and at MLK/Clifton and MLK/Vine/Jefferson it certainly does since MLK sharply slopes up to meet both cross streets. The problem is the connector street to allow turns, which when the traffic engineers get a hold of it turn it into a wide-radius, multi-lane, highway-esque loop that completely kills that one corner (unless you happen to be White Castle).

^ Because it's a telephoto shot. Also that's where all the turnouts into the maintenance facility are. It's hard to tell if they've finished tensioning all the wires and setting everything straight yet.

^ Ok yeah but that was almost a year ago now. Seemed relevant to the current discussion.

Here's a few construction shots from last week with many of the new masonry openings being cut in.

I can't take credit for the image, but it fits UC very well.

My guess is they're carry-out only so they could avoid having a bathroom for patrons. While the "lobby" looks pretty big and empty, once you cram in an accessible bathroom there's not much space left for ordering and dining. It is kind of an annoying catch-22, but I'm not surprised they went this way.

Ever seen Eguisheim? Doesn't get much cuter or more walkable than that.

Then there's this thing :-D

^ That's correct. The self-storage units on Vandalia are on the right-of-way. There's one or two buildings built over it on Powers and Dreman too, but the Gantry is by far the biggest thing. It's unfortunate that the underpass at I-74 was completely obliterated and filled with earth. It almost seems like a deliberate attempt to sever the right-of-way and prevent any reuse. Here's what Hamilton and Blue Rock looked like in the 1940s when the railroad was still active. http://www.jjakucyk.com/transit/chd/large-21.html

So...people who then won't need the bridge?

With so much of our economy tied to home-building/sprawl, places like that can just carry on from momentum alone. People move there for jobs, need houses, houses get built, it generates more jobs, repeat. The problem of course is that the growth industry is in many cases just growth itself.

Brutalism seems to generally be an abomination on the exterior, but I've been surprised by the quality of some interior spaces I've come across. Zimmer Auditorium at UC for instance is nasty on the outside, and even the auditorium itself is pretty blah, but the hallways and lobby with their patterned brickwork and terrazzo floors, wall sconces, and changes in height and overlooks, not to mention warm color palette, make for some pretty comfortable and pleasant spaces. Because of the concrete thickness and various design and detailing parameters, these buildings tend to get some fairly intimate spaces like window nooks or cozy corners with lower ceilings, as well as things like planters and integrated railings and benches. This tends to extend to later waffle slab buildings from the 1980s as well, in part I think because you need pretty massive interior walls to hold up that concrete structure overhead. Those walls have to be brick or more concrete, but in an interior application, so you (hopefully) get more approachable materials and finishes, plus some other fun nooks and crannies. Since brutalism itself is specifically about "raw concrete" the architects were looking for every possible way to make it do different things and experiment, it wasn't just an afterthought or "only" for the structure and nothing else. There also seemed to be more attention to details on the inside that are lacking these days. That doesn't mean they weren't simple and streamlined, but I think much more care was given to material choices, finishes, and color. It also seems that the 60s and 70s were defined by more warm-colored metals, so your concrete brutalist building was filled with brass, bronze, and anodized aluminum, all of which tend to patina in much the same way that concrete gets more tan as it ages. Yes these buildings deserve much of the hate the get for their exterior appearance, but at the same time they can be surprisingly inviting on the inside. Dunnhumby is "just a concrete building" by comparison.

Despite the amount of light coming in, the concrete and the overall color scheme and detailing on the inside makes the building feel cold, harsh, and foreboding. Aside from a few accents it's all a cold gray. As someone said before, it feels like the whole thing is the parking garage. That's fixable though. Soffits can be built, surfaces can be repainted, light fixtures can be changed, and carpet can be swapped out over time. That's my personal judgment which some coworkers of mine also agree with. Personally I don't care for the exterior either. The massing is fine, but the surface treatment with the randomly jostled windows is just so "trendy" that I can't help but view it as a bit of a farce. If it wasn't Darth Vader charcoal gray I wouldn't mind it as much. That just makes the exterior as looming and overbearing as the inside, and for no particular reason (the windows will still pop just as much at night if the rest of the building was lighter). If they really wanted to make a statement with it they'd make it multicolored, which I suppose is still possible down the road. To the layperson though, I would confidently say that most would look at the building and say "it's ugly" or greet it at best with a heartfelt "meh."

^ I'm sure the solution is somewhere in the middle. Swales, retention basins, and stream dylighting just drives development further apart and makes achieving walkability more difficult. Rain barrels and permeable paving are good moves but limited in capacity and longevity. Multi-story dense urban development with narrow streets seem to be the best option overall because a it reduces the need for wide streets for driving and parking, and also reduces the per-capita roof area (a 100 story building has no more roof space than a 1 story building with the same footprint). Since we've already paved over paradise, so to speak, I think we'll need to use all the green AND gray strategies availble to keep any one from becoming too onerous.

How sad is it that we have both underground AND overhead electric on some streets? Talk about the worst of both worlds. There's underground electric on Madison Road through most of Hyde Park, probably some sub-transmission line between the substation in Oakley and Walnut Hills, but there's still overhead primary and secondary distribution. So all you get from that is one less set of wires on the poles, but now there's underground cables to maintain as well.

As long as it's structurally doable, many times it isn't, at least not without performing a façadectomy.

It's funny (and sad) how urban architectural design has basically polarized into two main trends. First there's the cheap shlocky stuff like the rendering above, The Banks, Columbia Square, Oakley Station, etc. which look like several already uninspired buildings smashed into each other. Then you have the "trendy" modernist boxes with randomly placed vertical windows creating sort of a shattered skin effect, like Dunnhumby and Mercer Commons. Both types are so "me-too" that they're already completely dated.

They're moving their office from Stark Street to there to get some more space.

Why is this county censored? Lol too funny! http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=picka

There's been a few places where they took those right turn slip roads out, like at Madison and Woodburn, and also the Dana to I-71 northbound ramp. Still there's others they seem to have no interest in removing, such as Dana and Duck Creek, right across from the one I previously mentioned. I believe there's also one planned for MLK eastbound to I-71 southbound, but that may or may not be ODOT's doing. I do know that all were eliminated from the new I-75 Mitchell Avenue interchange, but someone at the city made ODOT add one back in from I-75 southbound to Mitchell westbound, for some reason. Then of course there's Clifton and MLK which is just a disaster in every possible way.

^ I was going to say basically the same thing, but you beat me to it. The topography is certainly a factor as well.