dlueg

To add insult to injury, the architects didnt do themselves or their client any favors by releasing those renderings. Spend 5 seconds looking at them and you can tell how horribly out of scale the people/trees/cars are in relation to the proposed buildings... I have no idea if those renderings were shown to the review board, but amateurish renderings like those can kill a project... they can totally alter the way people feel about a building because its not the true relation of a person to the building. if you want an example of what i'm talking about, in the rendering on the previous page, on the balcony in the upper right there is a girl taller than a 7' or 7'-6" door... its stuff like this that makes a building look chunky and out of proportion.... the glass is just a matter of taste, but the perceived scale of the project, as a result of these poor renderings can really affect the attitudes of the people you're trying to impress.

"One question I have though, is why are we suddenly getting this deluge of beige brick in Cincinnati? I've always considered this a red brick kind of town. The Banks, the Casino, that horrible orange-y brick up at University Heights..." interestingly, if you think about it.... that color of brick, stone, precast is really common throughout downtown.... the carew tower, dixie terminal, the 4th and walnut center, the cincinnati bell antenna tower, the addition to shillito's, the phoenix, the hamilton county justice center and many more all are beige/tan/orangish brick... many many many more buildings downtown are limestone, or beige precast... think proctor and gamble, taft tower, atrium center, federal buildings etc... so while there are some nice red brick buildings downtown, i feel that beige/orange color (while i may not necessarily find it the most aesthetically pleasing in its current uses) is not without pervasive historical precedent in cincinnati...

To avoid writing a book on mecklenborgs comment, I'll just say: Or because stagnation of thought breeds stagnation of society. Look at any great civilization, what they build reflects their values. If our current desire is for the civilizations of the past, so be it. Mine, personally, isn't... (not to be mistaken for an argument against preservation)

slightly off topic from the streetcar discussion... to revert back to esterpico's question... of design and context in a historic area, I am of the belief that nothing new should try to imitate something old. they had their reasons for making things the way they did, and we should have reasons for making things the way we do, context or not. (its probably the 7 years of architecture school, not in cincy, but it doesn't take long to start to understand this neighborhoods history) but anything that is faux historic, no matter how well done, is a complete disservice to whatever neighborhood it is in. to provide an example of what i feel is an incredibly successful project: i was in bruges, belgium (a unesco world heritage site) last summer and happened across this house (i'll have to link my flickr account, since i am not on the computer with my photos) the pictures are pretty poor since i was only using my old iphone, but it gets the point across... three story, 500 year old brick context, typical flemish style detailing and a completely contemporary insertion that in my opinion blends perfectly. contrast creates cohesion in this case. (the argument will be made that its singular and as such does not destroy the surrounding fabric) but the point is, it can be done, and any attempt to persuade otherwise is misinformed. http://www.flickr.com/photos/53941591@N04/4990894557/#in/set-72157624957960742/ there are two photos of the house discussed above.

south building is definitely open. moved in last tuesday.

just in case you all didn't know, the developer (rock gaming) has asked the contractors to remove all workers from the site, effective yesterday. i'm assuming this has happened. so work has now officially ceased on site. the hope is that this will generate some local push back against the governor in an effort to come to a solution as soon as possible, as he is now, in this case, officially costing jobs and money to the local economy.

in the interest of fairness, that picture must be decently old. i'm pretty sure that the building pictured prominently with the paramount vodka sign doesnt even exist anymore... (per the soapbox article, i believe it was the one that was demolished in february... and even on google earth, the building looks significanly more decrepid than it does in your photo.) they do appear to be interested in saving what is deemed "historically significant" specifically what that means to members of the board, or whether or not i am convinced that they will, is yet to be seen... but as i feel is all too often the fault of many on this board, just because it is old does not mean its good or significant. the character of a neighborhood does not come from a cornice. time and design did not stop in 1900. modernism and postmodernism, specifically when dealing with urbanity is total shit and has left us with quite a stain on most of our cities. but reverting to the techniques and styles of our predecessors is not the answer. architectural form is reflective of the population it serves. the needs and skill set of people 100 years ago, were such that those building types were pervasive. now, unfortunately, we have too many people making half-assed attempts at historicist architecture and lt looks pathetic. either save something or tear it down and build something that speaks to the will of our epoch. personally i am in favor of saving as much as humanly possible and i sincerely hope that they decide to do so, but in many cases (just as old doesnt equal good) new doesnt always equal bad. i am tired of new urbanist faux historicis bullshit. many of the buildings on that street (including that awful "divine day care center" across the street) could be demolished and infilled without significantly altering whatever character you may perceive east mcmillan street to have. street presence is the key in any attempt at urbanity, not necessarily what is above it.

i realize this is probably my first post.... but i am moving in, but not until june, when the south building is finished... moving back to cincinnati from philadelphia. (also an architect, graduating from grad school, also looking for a job, ram23)