nati streets

Luke- you might try to PM him...

Actually a bit better than I was expecting. I wonder what they will do with the corner of the lot- I like to see something that had a bit more frontage for urban feel purposes. It was kind of nice to see Carew and QCS from that intersection, after they regraded the site this summer... is any view of the towers still present?

Last I checked SORTA did not just run buses "downtown."

^ It would just be too logical for the Enquirer to have an article that provides information per alternatives to driving... though it seems to me to make a decent read for those people who dont realize THIS IS NOT as huge of a problem as they think is.

Thanks Cygnus. The solid yellow on the south side of the first shot now makes a lot more sense.

I have always enjoyed this sign and would as a potential buyer pay less for an apartment/condo in the building if it was taken down. IMO its distinctiveness makes the site more desirable, who doesn't want to be able to tell people where they live based on a reference to the sign or to the building as the old cincy color co building

A few high/moderate retailers would seem appropriate for the site and provide some transition from the small storefront Plum street area to the Macy's Department store area. Any combo of an Apple Store, Zara, B&O Concept, or coffee shop would seem fitting for the hotel area and market scale. -While I had hoped such a stretch might find its way along Central Parkway, but this area would seem a better fit... along a streetcar line, in a mixed use high traffic, high density area, plus it would better contribute to the Race business district than a department store.

^Per 5th and Race you have a point. But this is the same firm that pushed heavily to preserve this area of downtown in the 1960s and with Councilman Taft created the cap over 71/Lytle Park. They do have an historic record of preserving this nook of town, and their current interest in adding residential to the area makes me give them the benefit of the doubt on this project. (Both 420 and The Woodford do not have office friendly interior layouts- that said if any building is lost it will be 420 and for the residential and corporate gain I do not see a problem with that. Cincy has more gems over on the western or northern parts of the basin that imo we should concern ourselves with preserving before a fight is put up about 420.)

No need to apologize. I'm just out of town, and curious. thanks for the pics (keep them coming)

While I'm usually annoyed by the Cincy Enquirer (to the point of a mad rage really) this is a decent article that gives those of us who fear and entirely 3CDC owned OTR hope. http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101028/COL04/10290322/Firm-revives-OTR-buildings

Cygnus- this is looking West from atop the Roebling right?

^ Only The Woodford is in the Lytle Park Historic District. http://cincinnati-oh.gov/cdap/images/cdap_img3699.gif

I do not believe they have 1000 employees here. Scripps Networks are now a different company from E. W. Scripps, which will still be located in the E. W. Scripps Tower downtown.

Conversely the site between 4th and 5th (created by the demo of The Woodford and 420 buildings) would generate a site 175' x 400'. The question has to be whether W&S is interested in having the new HQ adjacent to their historic HQ creating a more visible presence from 71 south or if they are more interested in being part of the 3rd street wall. (Depending on this decision the high-end condominium complex would take other site...) I think it would be nice to see some residential windows lit up along 3rd street.

(1st let me apologize for the length of this post) Its important to note that the Hearst Tower was planned to reach only 20 stories (+the six story base) at the completion of its addition. Its structure no where near anticipated the loads of the present building (as evidenced by Foster's new structure http://www.architecturelist.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/hearst-tower.jpg) This is just to say that I'm sure the W&S Building is similar and it would not be as simple as adding floors- the more important aspect of the 4th and Broadway Site is the zoning. Hearst was able to create the tower despite its historic status because of the architect (Joseph Urban's) original plan for the tower and the zoning permits that still existed from the 1920s. Does W&S have similar permits, and or is that building on a historic register? (As I recall it is, but I dont know about the permits.) I do know that there were two thesis projects from UC's MArch program, 5 years ago which partnered with W&S to study the site and propose a Class A tower, which still incorporated the existing building. One pulled a Hearst type addition, the other encased part of the existing structure in glass with that glass wrapping up to the southern facade of the new tower on the site just to the east of the existing W&S building. [One of the students was my TA at the time, his document can be found here http://etd.ohiolink.edu/view.cgi?acc_num=ucin1116273955] W&S funded some of his research and worked with him in a number of meetings. It is safe to say that we are a good 6 years into the W&S study already. (The linked thesis document has very few renders of Paul's solution which was two towers with one bending away from the other. Fig 7.2 and 7.5 do the best job of displaying the solution.)

^I've met Mr. Thomas, I too liked him. I was just reacting to what his position seemed to represent and where it seemed to be leading given his previous ambitions. (I'm probably also jaded by the current election cycle) On the CAPS I am of the opinion that at least 50% should be buildings. I am against the idea of sculptures- Pershing Square in LA used to sit right outside of my office and it was basically just a sculpture in a greenspace created for aerial viewing... basically it sucked walking past during lunch and was wasted space (not earning tax revenue or being used for active recreation). As far as skyline contributing sculptures... the hotel at The Banks is 8-9 stories in the renderings, and they do not reach the air-rights zoning for The Banks which I believe was around 150ish so a 200+ foot sculpture would be needed to be seen from the river view which is referred to. (depending on the sculpture those point loads might be in excess of the 4 story dead load able to be carried by the CAP) IMO there are more attractive views of the CBD.

Maybe jmecklenborg can sort this one out: Is the 46M-50M that is generally quoted on the project for all 4 caps (2 fulls and 2 partials)? In that case is it realistic to say that with this funding, even without grants, we could have at least 1 cap in place in 6-7 years?

Lincoln: more likely Thomas is positioning himself for a future campaign for higher office. One with ad like: "When on city council Thomas publicly opposed the back-room methods of Mayor Mallory... Thomas for transparency, Thomas for order." Or some BS Back on topic its great to hear about the CAPS. 10% is roughly 2M/year, but the 2M/year is more important as a matching fund balance when applying for grants and hopefully would put us in better standing for future applications.

8th and State: Rail has numerous advantages over bus including: less traffic congestion, less asphalt deterioration (which it has been pointed out requires millions to replace), pollution reduction, transportation diversification, and speed. Yes speed, present and in the future. Present: While current reports quote service times based on stops all along the line, no one ever said that the train has to stop at every station. Thus, express services (C direct to C lines) at 80mph would make the trip faster than a bus dealing with traffic. Future speeds will provide safe travel double current highway "maximums." Also I believe the point of the highway investment numbers are basically to fly opposite your contention that "rail must stand on its own..." The US highway system stands on hundreds of Billions in investment to service people who can afford cars or choose to have cars (not everyone does but everyone has to pay for highways). In no way does any other form of national infrastructure stand on its own.

ninja: thanks for the welcome. ^phatty: I don't think a box is necessary in fact the geometric regularity is part of the reason the current cooling tower/mechanical sticks out so much. Really the crown just needs either a partial cover or some added depth to catch light and attract your eye away from the mech beyond. So courtesy of me not being able to sleep, I provide the following options. *Of note the triangular additions to the thickness (again in a perforated metal) are my favorite, and provide a changing design compliment from multiple angles. ** Gray=Signage. Structural diagram from the Business Courier.

From an architectural and maintenance standpoint glass would be a bad choice, because it is a solid sheet and because this is in a service location. An open metal mesh could fasten to the back or front of the structural elements in a more cost effective solution. The mesh would also have the benefit of catching light, having less wind resistance, and being lighter weight. An Okalux product similar to the mesh used at Des Moines Public Library ( http://www.floornature.com/media/photos/30/4804/wr621_1_popup.jpg) but in stainless steel (http://www.architectural-mesh.com/images/architectural-wire-mesh-10.jpg), could be cut to fit the triangular structural frames. A large scale pattern could be created with areas left open and mesh behind or in front of the structure.