Chas Wiederhold

And in the first scheme the Metropolitan Theater >> State Theater >> Lighthouse Worship Center would be at risk. It no longer looks like this, but it was, at one time, a stunner. BUT: I just messed around with my first scheme... the theater's lobby and façade could be saved, its center line used as the center line of the field. Imagine: Midfield centered on the façade of this building. From the façade and west for 15 feet box seats would extend down into the bowl that they excavate for the field. Inside the restored lobby, a stadium bar/restaurant. On the second floor and roof, press and photographers. Above, the pillow-y contemporary canopy protecting this piece of architecture from further harsh damage from the environment.

Ask and ye shall receive. Though... I do not feel that those historic buildings are so hopeless. Yes, it's more of a situation of "remaining teeth" than "missing teeth"... but the amount of demo required with this proposal makes me uncomfortable. I mean... I am not comfortable about the demo of the Lighthouse Church/Theater in the first option I drew, either. If this were a real scenario, it becomes a question: would you rather save one piece of unique historic architecture or 10 pieces of common historic buildings. Also... in all scenarios, Revelations Baptist Church is untouched... that is one rad, goofy piece of architecture.

I used the footprint of Red Bull Arena to create this (because I haven't been able to stop thinking about it... I live a block away). The opportunity to redevelop and infill this park of Central Parkway would be incredible. The major fatality in this is the Lighthouse Church/Theater. In my wildest of dreams, the façade would be deconstructed and reconstructed as an entry gate. I have thought about but haven't explored concepts that rotate the stadium 90 degrees or justify the stadium all the way to Central Parkway. This would terminate Central Ave. which I do not think is ideal, but that would alleviate John Street and the Laurel Homes development from an imposing building with a minimal setback, as is shown in the graphic.

The best way to have new construction "fit in" is to use high quality materials and good detailing. It is difficult to imagine any contemporary stadium being contextual, but I see this as one huge festival tent. I like what ETFE does and can do; the lightness and softness, the opportunity for lighting and projection. I like how MEIS/MSA has a reveal around the super columns; sort of expressing this cleat coming down in the corner. I think the plinth is key for the urban context... it will give folks a sense of arrival at a monument, of sorts. There are some elements that could really contribute to the vitality of the street on the West End site when the design is explored for site specific application. It would be great to see team shops, concessions, bars all engaging with the street and the stadium. I'd love for this facility, on the West End site, to be a year round venue. All said... this is barely even at a schematic design level (a site response is needed for this to be considered schematic, and a building that can be plopped in 1 of 3 very different locations is NOT site specific.) When/if this building is constructed... it will look very, very, very different from what it does now.

My guess is that all graphics you see, including the blue and orange tint of the stadium canopy, are all projection and lighting effects. I really hope so anyway... a blue or orange canopy like that wouldn't look good anywhere/would fall out of fashion.

To frame the discussion a bit: There is a difference between talking about this building architecturally in a scientific sense and talking about it architecturally in a professional sense.

Because we have giant egos of course! In all seriousness though... if this were a discussion about heart attacks, I would probably announce myself as a cardiologist if I was one. We're talking about the architectural opportunities and merits of this project, it is hoped (and rarely awarded) that an architect's expertise would be valued in the conversation.

As an architect, you will rarely see balconies on an apartment development. They are an insurance nightmare and most developers/owners will just avoid them so they don't have to insure the building for a higher cost. This is because the thought process is most renters are more negligent than a home or condo owner. Therefore they might throw things off the balconies or even have parties beyond maximum capacity on balconies, or worse. Comment about operable windows again goes two fold. One being insurance companies don't like the idea of the exterior being perforated allowing the chance of people falling out, throwing out items, etc. Other being someone could leave windows open, leave for weeks on end and allow the weather to come into the building and cause damage. Both operable windows and balconies are more likely in a condo project than an apartment complex. I am an agreement with you on the parking garage it needs to be finessed. Again it comes down to ROI though and alot of developers will look at what has already been achieved through design and say that is enough. Push comes to shove and things start to become over budget you will start to hear Value engineering pop its ugly head out and those panels you see now might just become horizontal guardrails at every level. As another architect, I'll begrudgingly let you have the balcony one... but I am completely astounded that, as an architect, you think that having operable windows is a risk not worth taking for insurance reasons. I have never lived in a building without operable windows. Even my 250 sf micro-studio in Seattle had two 12" Tilt-turn operable windows adjacent to the 4' picture window. As for the water risk, an awning opening window could solve that. There are solutions. An architect's job is to show value in solutions... not to break every time the insurance company or developer says something is too expensive. That type of attitude is why we can't have nice things.

There would still be street parking on the north side of the west bound lane and the south side of the east bound lane. I want this to work, haha.

I know that this project is about shovel ready at this point but I do have some architectural grievances to file. 1) That the apartments' only outdoor space is common is a pet peeve of mine. A small balcony for each unit seems like it would be a game changer. That subtracts from the SF but also from the conditioned space, plus you get a balcony. I don't understand why that didn't get past the developer's pro-forma. I'm sure the architects argued for it. 2) The glazing on the apartments doesn't appear to have operable windows at this point. I'm not being dramatic: I'd probably die if my home did not have operable windows. 3) The garage is huge, and it's not going anywhere. I believe the openings need to be screened with a perforated metal or mesh from floor plate to floor plate. Without doing this, the building will seem hallow. And one not-grievance, but opportunity: What are the chances that Court Street could reclaim the parking spaces for a Piatt Park style park? Those ~98 parking spots could be moved into the garage. Return of the Canal Street Market (which was the homeliest of all of Cincinnati's downtown markets)?

I'm excited about the train component of this... couldn't we just build the train part and forget about the airport part -OR- enhance the airports that already exist. Is there a mechanism that allows Ohio and Kentucky to work together on making CVG better?

Do people think that FCC could fit a stadium of the capacity they need between John St and Central Ave? Upon first consideration, it seems like they may have to close Central Ave and expand east to Providence Street to get everything in. Although I like to think that all seating needs could be accommodated within the existing block and auxiliary services (parking, vending, team shop, offices) could be built on the east side of Central Ave. David Beckham’s Miami soccer stadium won’t include parking https://archpaper.com/2017/05/david-beckham-miami-soccer-stadium/ It also might be interesting to see FC Cincinnati not build structured parking, instead, relying on the streetcar stops that are within 5 blocks of the stadium (two at Washington Park, two at Liberty on Elm and Race). Would FC Cincinnati contribute to an extension of the streetcar to Uptown or Northern Kentucky?

David Beckham’s Miami soccer stadium won’t include parking https://archpaper.com/2017/05/david-beckham-miami-soccer-stadium/ Don't know whether to start this conversation here or in the FC thread... so both for now, mods can delete where appropriate. With FC Cincinnati talking about stadiums in Newport and at Taft, it might be worthwhile to discuss how they could avoid having to build structured parking and instead, contribute to a Northern Kentucky loop or an Uptown loop that could make existing parking garages useful for streetcar stops at Elm & Liberty/Washington Park (two blocks to the Taft Stadium) or new stops at the Ovation project.

I am really digging the muted iridescences of the panel they are using. It will change colors before your eyes as you walk and depending on how the light is hitting it.

I agree that the style of artwork Keep Cincinnati Beautiful has been using looks really bad. The fake doors, windows, and flower boxes they paint don't look good and they scream "THIS BUILDING IS ABANDONED!" If you want to see a much better example of painted plywood, look at the building across the street from Please (NE corner of 14th & Clay in OTR), where an artist did a nice little mural on the plywood. Also, Urban Sites is rehabbing several storefronts on Main and they simply painted the plywood black. It looks much better than what Keep Cincinnati Beautiful does. I'm on Team Ryan Lammi. I think we who live with the painted windows and flower boxes see the KCB work as a sign of neglect and abandonment, but when I bring people in from out of town, they love it. Contemporary Artist Albano Afonso was so inspired by the doors that he created the macro-graphic of doors that cover the facade of the CAC building for some time. I think, for many who live in the core, the KCB doors have become part of the forgettable landscape. For outsiders, they are a signal of positivity despite negative circumstances (abandonment). Lindsay Nehls' painting across from Please! is top notch, however. Truly exceptional.

I need to visit it up close and in person, but I am pretty certain what you are seeing is just an intermediate cladding. They will put aluminum lathe on top of this and then hang the actual cladding from the lathe.

Agreed. It would be nice to see the new developments take a cue from many of the the contemporary renovations of older buildings where they are designing front and back units. That said, nothing they have done prevents that from happening, necessarily. The two story townhomes really should be the same height or taller than the existing building. I don't necessarily understand the logic behind making them two stories other than the ability to inflate prices through scarcity. womp womp. The gaps are truly perplexing. I can be happy with the buildings on 14th. 1) They increased the height of the corner building. I can't believe they were going to consider a 1 story building there! 2) The designs are modern with reference to this historic patterns without being ostentatious or fake.

It looks like the Crew just has two fields and a fieldhouse. Do they have more facilities elsewhere that you know of, Ryan? https://www.google.com/maps/place/4175+Alum+Creek+Dr,+Obetz,+OH+43207/@39.8838278,-82.9368057,817m/data=!3m2!1e3!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x8838870ed47c692b:0x5f68d083aa669cbb!8m2!3d39.8838237!4d-82.9346117 In the case that FCC doesn't care to be close to Nippert and that they would want growing room, it really becomes a race to the cheapest and vastest land. Recreationally, I would still like to see them in the Little Miami floodplain around Lunken (floods, I suppose, aren't ideal for training). This is where they would be launching their academy? I feel like the northern suburbs are already well served by select soccer teams and FCC's youth program might decimate those programs.

Anyone care to speculate where they could see FC Cincinnati building its practice facilities? Columbus Crew's facilities are about 10 miles south of MAPFRE Stadium. My guess is that FCC would want to find something closer to Nippert and in a more entertaining area with a bit more ceremony. I could be wrong... just my hunch. In this age of Public/Private partnership could a questionably ethical deal be struck to place practice facilities in Burnet Woods? Perhaps there isn't a flat enough spot. Could something be accomplished along the river near Lunken Airport or Lower Price Hill? http://www.cincinnati.com/story/sports/soccer/fc-cincinnati/2016/12/13/fc-cincy-has-goals-question-how-many-do/95393868/ FC Cincy has goals. Question is, how many will do it? Most moves made by Futbol Club Cincinnati are done with Major League Soccer in mind. The big-picture goal always remains in sight. For now, though, the club is still in the United Soccer League and therefore is knee-deep in prep work for the 2017 season. That means focusing on filling out the club's roster, improving its infrastructure and bracing for a possible shakeup in U.S. soccer's lower leagues.

An unfortunate priority on garage/garage doors on a street that probably never has an issue with street parking availability. Suburban Urbanism at its best... worst?

I don't think that the community center should be moved. It's in a critical spot in the community, it is well scaled architecturally. While it doesn't necessarily follow the rhythm of the other buildings in the neighborhood to a level of mimicry, I think the building would be a great candidate for an ambitious mural project. Living in Philly right now, I think and Isaiah Zagar style mosaic would be great covering this building. That roller rink is an underused asset... I remember going to roller nights there when I was in undergrad. Some of the most fun I've had! I love drinking, but it was a nice way to spend an evening without alcohol!

I speculate it will be used as a flex building while other buildings are renovated or as overflow space for overcrowded colleges for a while. While I didn't spend too too much time in that building, I can't remember it being insufferable...

That Rhinegeist site was the subject of an international architecture competition back in 2012. Really interesting proposals if you go to ArchDaily and search "Live Make Cincinnati" [i can't post external links yet out of my newbiness]

I read into that and assume that they are making drop off traffic turn around at Woodside and Campus Green Dr. either at a roundabout or following all the way along Campus Green Dr. to MLK to exit.

[Hi, long time lurker... OTR Resident on a 3 year UC Masters periodic exile in Seattle/Philly] Great photo set. West of Vine is just one big construction site. Thanks for showing how 15th St is turning out. My place is on Magnolia. While they've been there a few years now, I find the new-construction, street-facing, single-story garages on Republic to be really poor uses of a lot. I might be so bold to say they offend me from a density/urbanist perspective. Anyone else? Is there a way to prevent that type of construction in the future? Glad to see more expressions of contextual contemporary popping up in the neighborhood with Terry Boling, Jose Garcia, Nick Dewald, and 3CDCs new projects. Wish Towne Properties could figure out how to do the same instead of erecting faux-historic Italianate.