chinkley

Funny how I specifically noticed this building on my walk to work this morning, and here it is in the news! There are multiple uses that I can think of that don't require opening windows in the lower half of the building: movie theatre (as others have said), grocery store, a couple very large conference centers / presentation stage / auditorium. There is good access on the Race St side for moving large amounts of stuff like food. A large mural or two on the 6th St side would also do much to relieve the monotony of the current blank wall.

I noticed that there were the air pressure tube things along main the other day. Do those just measure the number of cars going over them, or can they also track speed? One of the biggest reasons I can think of to make main two way is to slow the cars down. right now it's open season.

It would be a very cool place for a tower. Just last night I rode my bike down 5th and thought about how visually arresting it would be to have a large building at the end on the southern side. The Park place condos don't quite make the picture. However, that being said, I think the Woodford building is structure that really contributes to the park. And, W&S already has a parking lot behind it on the 5th street side. Conceivably, a tall skinny tower could go there (besides the point, but Cincinnati doesn't have any really skinny buildings, so this one would really stick out (pun intended)). Or, they could spend the money to build on top of their existing HQ, as has been discussed here, and has been done in NYC. Jake's comment is spot on.

I would question the wisdom of putting condos right next to an above-ground highway, but then who am I kidding: there will be about 10 floors of parking before the living space occurs. I also can't wait to destroy the picturesque nature of Lytle park with an ugly parking garage where the Woodford building currently sits. However, our overlords John Barrett and Co surely know what's best. And finally, assuming that current W&S employees park at Great American, does all this *new* parking mean that there will be a surplus? So for the next big project, we won't be wringing our hands over how there isn't enough parking to go around, and where will the city find the money to subsidize yet another garage?

I thought there were no more parking minimums in over the rhine?

Fun anecdote to go off the idea that people walk everywhere in NYC... My girlfriend, who lives in Brooklyn, was in town this past weekend. I live without a car in over the rhine. We went to my parents' place in the near burbs (took the bus and then got picked up), and after hearing that we had walked from the Taft museum to Mt Adams to eden park the day before, my mom asked my girlfriend how she enjoyed all the walking and "getting around without a car." Now to be fair, it was incredibly hot Labor day weekend, so the heat was definitely a drag on the experience, but I was quick to point out that being in NYC, Jill walks everywhere herself. To which my mom replied, oh but they can take the subway everywhere, and only walk the last couple blocks. Girlfriend agreed. Now, my parents love to walk. They go to New York and walk everywhere; my Dad once described a walk that seemed to cover a third of Manhattan. Literally they don't use the subway (they do take cabs). So I'm not sure if the mindset for Cincinnati is that one doesn't walk here, or what. The disconnect is real.

John Schneider and others have come up with a new (ok, not very new, but he has a pretty picture and detailed explanation) idea on getting rail transit in Cincinnati out of the basin and into uptown. It involves continuing the current streetcar tracks north on Main and Walnut, merging onto Main by the Rothenberg school, and then tunneling northward. An open-air stop would be just north of Christ, near the old Glencoe / Little Bethlehem area (at Valencia). The tracks would then tunnel further north under Inwood, McMillan, and Taft before daylighting in the Jefferson median around University. From there it would most likely follow MLK to the abandoned Blue Ash line which runs to Xavier. The following is my analysis: Pros: - offers quick service from uptown to the basin - touches major employers and dense, walkable neighborhoods - touches areas ripe for dense redevelopment - really increases frequency of train arrivals / departures in CBD due to combining of "Uptown" and "Findlay Market" lines - avoids mess of multiple intersections in basin along vine, and at top of the hill Cons: - not sure I like the Mt Auburn stop location. Currently emerges into a field, and is downhill from Christ / Auburn Ave. Measured distance from Auburn to east end of Valencia is ~900ft. Would there be an really long escalator from Auburn? - service, once in CBD, will be slow unless given signal priority and maybe even eliminate certain existing stops - obviously, since this is only theoretical, there is no consideration being given to externalities, such as surrounding land use. Biggest red flag is current redesign of Corryville kroger, which would be about a quarter of a mile away, and is absolutely suburban in layout. Another red flag would be the crossing of 71 on MLK... do current construction plans take light rail into account at all? If anyone else can think of anything, let me know. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1677702245798897&id=100006774138073&substory_index=0

I'm usually posted up on my fire escape above main every evening or so, watching the world go by. I have noticed that I seem to be one of the few occupied fire escapes, though.

Why? That's how every urban neighborhood throughout the entirety of human history has grown and matured over time. I'm largely in agreement with jjakucyk here. If nothing was allowed to change / become denser, then (as an example) Orchard St would still be an orchard. Definitely not advocating for pulling down old houses to build crap, but incremental development must be allowed to occur. And I'm a believer in a property owner largely being able to do what he or she wants with his/her property. Let's leave the big brother micromanagement in the form of homeowners associations to the suburbs.

And like said wendy's, no one is going to be walking there.

I agree that buildings should be lifted out of the flood plain, but wouldn't a stilt structure accomplish that? Basically the parking garage without the second (middle) level complicating things and increasing the cost? Travis, loving your idea for smaller blocks as a continuation of the over-the-rhine street grid.

crazy to think that ~700 parking spaces costs $29 million, or around $40k / spot. What would a $40k bus stop look like? Or in pedestrian improvements? How nice could we make it to walk around downtown with that kind of money?

^^ going along with the above, I've never fully understood what the underground parking at the banks is for... If the goal is to just life everything out of the flood plain, concrete stilts would work just fine. Who is supposed to use all that parking? If not residents, then CBD workers? If so, why is there such a need for in-building parking with each new proposed tower?

That's awesome. Been wondering what was going on with that place for a while. They'll get a lot of foot traffic being opposite Rhinehaus, and between vine and main.

on top of that, that part of CP is honestly the nicest. The wide median with mature trees is very appealing visually. Further east the median gets laughably small and useless.

wow those pictures make that garage look HUGE.

That's what's slated to go in there? That would be FANTASTIC.

I'd love to see Central Parkway lined with buildings as tall as the ones along Park Ave in the Upper East Side of Manhattan, but with a pedestrian experience more like Commonwealth Ave in Boston's Back Bay. So, 8-12 story buildings but a wide grassy median for walking with lots of benches. We could go full imitation and add a half dozen statues to the median as well. Famous Cincinnatians or something.

A coworker and I were walking through Smale at lunch earlier in the week, looking at the skyline, and he opined that there is a city ordinance stating that no building can be taller than Carew. Great American got around it because it is down on 3rd St. Anyone know if that ordinance part is true?

I know the 40k number isn't easily reached. Might not ever be reached. Still something to shoot for. I do agree that the smaller stores, like NYC bodegas, are probably going to pop up sooner and would make a bigger difference in terms of overall accessibility to food for people living in the basin. On a side note, does anyone have hard and fast numbers on how many people live in lower price hill, the west end, otr, pendleton, and cbd?

Urban locations don't make sense for a "one size fits all" grocery environment. The OTR Kroger is great for the essentials and supplementary specialty stores would be more beneficial. Because grocery shopping in urban areas isn't a once a week kind of activity but rather a once every day or two activity there isn't as much of a need for a store to carry everything one needs. A series of smaller, more specialized stores meets the needs of an urban population better than, say, the Newport Kroger jammed into The Banks. I've never understood this sentiment. If by "one size fits all" you mean a supermarket with parking and huge set-backs so it can be accessed by cars and pedestrians, then yes, that's totally not right for an urban setting. However, a large, top of the line grocery store is definitely something that works in an urban environment. I remember going to visit my girlfriend in NYC and going grocery shopping at the large, 2-story place about 8 blocks away. It was cheaper than the corner convenience store on her block, and had everything you'd want. The second floor was actually the basement, accessible by stairs or a large elevator. Only real difference is that everything was a bit more squished together. And before anyone says, "this isn't new york!" I will preemptively push back and say that Cincinnati's urban basic can easily support 40,000 people. And that a large grocery store in the middle of the three neighborhoods, say around CP and Walnut, with a layer or two of parking between the grocery store and upper apartments/offices, would see a ton of use.

That air tram looks sweet! I would amend the route to just come down 5th street; completely redo Government Square to have the air tram on a second story above the bus bays. How would that be for some sick multi-modal integration! Probably not possible overall, unfortunately, because of how close to the building you'd be. A much better idea, I think, would be to have something like that go from Mt Adams to the empty lots just north of P&G on Broadway.

Regarding the variability or lack there-of of the new construction on mercer, couldn't there been some variation in height at the very top? Even if it's a foot or two, it would make a difference because the buildings aren't that tall.

general question: It seems like a lot of us accept the fact that when it comes to highway expansion, added lanes don't equal less congestion, but rather due to induced demand, mean the same or even more congestion. Hence, the billions that we (the state of ohio) have spent on widening 75--and theoretically will spend to build a new BSB--will not actually lead to reduced commute times. Therefore, we should be pursuing other transportation modes: light rail, BRT, HOV lanes, walking, bike lanes. Why then are we accepting of more parking garages, with the expectation that it will lead to higher density development in the surrounding areas? (Such as the empty lots between sycamore and broadway in Pendelton.) Won't the garage under Ziegler encourage more people to drive downtown to park? It clearly will not present an alternative to the current mode of driving and parking. What will this underground garage do that the above-ground one at Reading and Sycamore doesn't do? It seems to me that the only way to get people to not drive is to give them other options. Not more places to park, in the hope that some of those spots can become the "+1" parking tied to a particular apartment unit a couple blocks away. This leads to a much greater question: why is 3cdc, or by extension the city, unwilling or unable to invest in something as simple as a covered bus stop, or a couple additional buses, from key parts of the city, to induce people downtown? I believe that if you build a space that people truly want to get to, they will find a way to get there, come hell or high water. Just look at the history of our country: no one in their right mind should have spent months crossing the Atlantic, without the promise of a great reward on the other side. And yet here we are.

^^ there's also one on northbound Central Parkway between 12th and 13th, or thereabouts