1012

I don't get it. Isn't there one just a couple of miles away near Highland and Ridge?

Ain't that the truth! I was amazed no windows were blown out when it exploded.

2008?? You have GOT to be joking. It took them how long just to get FSW done, and that ended up as nothing more than a nondescript building with a few stores? It started out to be the tallest building in Cincinnati, so don't expect me to share your optimism about the Banks. At this point, I'm ready to call it "the joke that never was."

Okay, somebody tell me one more time.....this project is going to be built by when? I mean, that's if it gets built at all. :roll: This is the typical dickering around that you see happen in Cincinnati, and which always ends up in something much less than what was originally envisioned. (Remember FSW?) I predict by the year 2015, we will only see a couple of 2-story red-brick buildings that house a few shops and maybe a restaurant. The rest will be surface parking and....um, what's that green stuff? Oh yeah, GRASS!

That's very funny, and very true! And it isn't so much NKY that farts around, so much as it is Cincinnati. That's why Newport and Covington are leapfrogging ahead of us with so many projects.

If you're so in love with Cincinnati and all it has to offer, why are you bothering to go to the VOA center? (For what it's worth, I've only been to the stores there once. And didn't even buy anything while I was there.) Interesting that you think of me as part of a disease. You really don't know as much about me as you seem to think you do. Apparently what I have said has really threatened you in some way, because you feel this incessant need to defend Cincinnati against some criticism from people like me. It's like a pit-bull that has been irritated. You can't deal with anyone that has a different opinion than you, and that is truly sad - and the real disease.

Ain't that the truth!! A big fat AMEN to that. :clap: This latest debacle just illustrates why this project is probably never going to be done. There is simply too darned much bickering that goes on when it comes to getting a project done. It's no wonder Northern Kentucky is leaping ahead of us so much.

I've seen it for myself. I'm not impressed. How old are you? Do you remember downtown from the late 60's through the mid 80's? I do - vividly. And compared to then, today it's dead. How many stores are closing downtown, hmmm? How many restaurants are hanging it up, including the 5-star Maisonette, because of lack of business, hmmm? Compare that to the success of VOA and Union Centre, and THEN come back on here and tell me downtown isn't dead, or dying. You're comparing apples to oranges. Aside from the fact that parking downtown is a nightmare, you may see more people on the actual sidewalks down there because they HAVE to walk to get to where they want to go. And yes, I've seen The Streets of West Chester on a busy evening, and there are so many people you have to pay extra attention when driving through the complex. The Banks needs to be the front door to the city, and should draw people down there. A neighborhood full of shops and condos will NOT do that. Neither will another park. I agree a dramatic bridge would greatly enhance the image of downtown, but there is ample room for a monument as well. If it takes a unique regional/world monument to get me down to the riverfront, so be it. We already have a ton of park space on the riverfront, and I haven't been down there for years. You're right - they aren't world recognizable. Show a picture of the Roebling Bridge to someone in Germany, or Tokyo, and ask them where it is. They'll probably say New York, because people automatically associate that age of suspension bridge with the Brooklyn Bridge. Besides, I'm not just talking about a monument alone. It would need to blend in with the entire Banks project. Whether it is a gimmick or not wasn't my point. It's simply something that would enhance the project. Why was there ever talk about the 1200' tower that was planned for Newport? It was all about creating something that would draw people from around the world. Yes. Unless you want to consider me a liar. Interesting comment, considering you don't even know me at all. So you have no idea what would draw me down there. Great. Stupendous. But whatever happened to the Banks being a project that was supposed to be for the whole region? Let's stop the back and forth, because we will quickly grow to dislike each other. I have my opinions and you have yours. We'll leave it at that, okay?

I have mixed feelings about it. I think it's rather boring looking - and I would say too boxy, except for the curved corners. It would look a lot nicer if there were some sort of cut-out on the sides that extended from the ground to the top. Or maybe if there were some sort of stepped back floors toward the top.

Seems I've missed a few posts. :-D Had to take care of some business these past couple of days. I'll try to catch up now. I'm not really hung up on the height of buildings - at least not as much as I used to be. And I'm not using the height of buildings as the sole factor in assessing it as a conservative city. I'm merely stating that its conservative attitude is evident in the choices made with respect to the projects it has done in the past. (Not all of them, so don't misread that.) As a whole, it is a conservative place. Period. People here aren't as open to accepting liberal ideas. The majority of people in the region voted for Bush. They generally frown upon gay and lesbian rights. Community values dictate that pornography is frowned upon, and you won't find adult stores in the county. That hardly screams "liberal" to me. (I don't advocate porn. I'm just mentioning it because it is such a hot topic whenever it comes up in the area. Remember all the flack around Flint and the Hustler stores?) To address your comment, Carew Tower indeed DOES rise higher than the surrounding hills. So do a couple of other buildings. And as far as a 1000' lookout tower on the riverfront, why would that appear anymore out of place than a 1000'+ lookout tower that was proposed for Newport? Thank you. I completely agree! I currently don't live in Cincinnati. I live in Fairfield. But I've lived in the area for over 40 years. Until I was almost 25, I lived on the west side - predominantly Price Hill and Delhi. After that, I moved to the Oakley/Hyde Park area until I was 32. Then I moved up to Butler County. Was there a reason you asked? Exactly. It is rather pathetic that this town is so behind the times when it comes to DOING what really NEEDS to be done. Because like it or not, Cincinnati needs those of us in the suburbs in order to survive. Same as Kentucky and the airport. Cincinnati itself only encompasses a small fraction of the total amount of land and population in SW Ohio and NKY. I beg to differ. They are building tons of new office parks in the suburbs. In West Chester, Mason, Sharonville, Northern Kentucky, etc... And I thought we just concluded that part of the reason QCS2, or any other building taller than Carew Tower, hasn't been built yet is because of the lack of demand for Class A office space - ?? As for your list of recent projects....I have yet to come see any of them. I haven't even driven on Fort Washington Way since it was completed. And besides, what's your point? How are they any indication that the city is liberal? The city is still losing population. People are heading to the suburbs and even out of the region entirely. Even though 60% of the city may have voted for Kerry, I repeat that Cincinnati as a whole encompasses a very small percentage of the population of the area, and there are certainly more people who live in Hamilton county outside the city limits than live within, and Hamilton county predominantly voted for BUSH. If you want the proof, I'll give you the link. And do you think that really would have happened if it hadn't been for all the negative news about the city? And yet The Dock is such a flashy, glittery place in a highly visible part of town, right? Oh no wait, it's a converted warehouse under some highway underpasses down near the gravel pits on the river. Yeah, real gay-friendly place. How many other gay bars in the area are located in nondescript corner buildings, or are clearly identifiable as gay bars? I'm not saying it is the most conservative place on earth. But it does have a reputation for being a predominantly conservative town. If it is such a liberal place, why does it have such a hard time retaining younger people, or drawing them to the area. It's a FAMILY-ORIENTED region. And that's fine. But that most always identifies with being CONSERVATIVE. That illustrates my point about Cincinnati being a conservative place, unwilling to embrace change. Why should it be dictated that the skyline can only peak at Fountain Square? For one thing, the city has already blown it because we have nothing but a short squatty department store at FSW, and unless they are planning on blowing up 5/3rd soon, or the Westin, it's pretty much a done deal that there will never be a building taller than Carew at FS. When there is no willingness to embrace change, you have the very definition of conservative.

I think you may have misunderstood what I meant. I was referring to a visible physical monument that would be a new symbol for Cincinnati. St. Louis has the Gateway Arch (despite those who don't like it, to the rest of the world that sees it, they recognize where it is). San Francisco has the Golden Gate Bridge. Washington DC has the Washington Monument. New York has the Statue of Liberty and Empire State Building. L.A. has the Hollywood sign. Seattle has the Space Needle. Etc... That's what I meant when I said they need something unique on The Banks. Something that would be recognized as "Cincinnati". On a side note, however, I realize there are some unique things downtown. But they've never drawn me downtown. The last time I was in the Taft Museum was when I was in elementary school YEARS ago. I think the last time I was in Saks was probably about 18 years ago. I have yet to go into the CAC, Freedom Center, Tiffany's, or Brooks Brothers. And I live 20 miles north of downtown. Something else...if those attractions are so great, why is downtown so dead? ;-)

Granted, there are issues with office vacancy rates. But it can't be the only reason why over the past 20 years there hasn't been any progress toward building the city's new tallest, when other cities have built their new tallest. While other developers secured financing for those buildings, Cincinnati somehow couldn't pull it off. I think as a whole TPTB lack vision for this city. I remember stories of how city council balked at ideas for various projects because they were afraid of how it would look or fit in with surrounding buildings. In itself, I can understand that. But they aren't willing to do anything on a grand scale that would really add a dramatic flare to the skyline. Case and point: Back when there were plans to do FSW, people complained because they didn't think it should be taller than Carew Tower. That's a pretty narrow, stuffy attitude in my opinion. Cincinnati IS a pretty conservative place. People don't generally like change around here. Maybe the political landscape is changing. But I'll believe it when I see something really dramatic happen to the skyline. Build a 1000' lookout tower or sunsphere by the river, and I'll accept that I'm wrong. ;-)

Short and simple, this is how I personally feel about it: Given the history of how so many grand, lofty plans for towering skyscrapers in this town have bit the dust, I'm not holding my breath that QCS2 will be built to such a scale that would make it the tallest building in the city. The city is just plain and simply too conservative to think about anything that would knock precious Carew Tower down a peg.

Thanks! I've visited the site off and on for quite a while and until now I've been hiding in the shadows. Like a groundhog, I thought maybe it was time to pop up out of my hole in the ground. :wave: I guess my idea of The Banks being "done right" is anything that generates a return of people to the riverfront for more than just a Reds or Bengals game with the subsequent retreat across the river for entertainment afterwards. If you can give people like myself a reason to come down there, it might also regenerate some interest in downtown. (I live in Fairfield.) But along with that, I'd also like to see something done down there that would become a new and unique symbol of Cincinnati, so that when shown to people throughout the world, they would recognize it was Cincinnati and choose to come here to see it up close and in person. Let's face it, two stadiums alone just doesn't cut it.

Of course. But my point is what kind of project would constitute it "not being done right"? Do we want nothing but open park space down there? Or do we want shops, restaurants, condos, office space, hotels? Do we want the inclusion of unique tourist attractions, on par with Newport on the Levee? Do we want some sort of towering monument that becomes a new and more visible symbol of Cincinnati? In short, WHO is going to make that decision? Who SHOULD make that decision - city council alone? Or should the voice of the people be included? "Done right". It's a matter of perspective. What may constitute "done right" to one may not constitute the project being "done right" for another. :wink:

I think you would need to define having it "done right".