BlauBaum

Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, but I believe the major issue is with the MSD (which is county owned--READ: THE PROBLEM--and operated by the city under a contract) versus the GCWW (which is city owned since the early 19th century). One organization drains water, the other pumps it in and purifies it.

So it goes is correct. The private garages will be built by the developer at the same time as the buildings on top of the parking podium. These garages being built now will connect with the URFC garage as well as all connecting to the RTC. When I worked for the Port Authority I actually helped us get a grant (for Congestion Mitigation Air Quality) because they were planning on using these garages as a park and ride for a downtown shuttle based in the RTC.

I really disagree with changing Henry to 20th. A person from outside of Cincinnati will not be better oriented, because they would have no idea how many blocks Over-the-Rhine, or the basin stretch (without previous research...which at that point they'd just as well see Henry street on their map). We would also lose a historic street name, which is not only historic in theory, but is the intersection that is always refered to when Christian Moerlein is referenced (in books AND in beautiful historic advertisements). I have always been in favor of restoring the German street names, however.

Osam, Good to know that the entire banks will have some variety at least...and obviously I understand the limitations of time and how they effect coordination. I'm not sure though that I agree with your assessment that the only way to make this development work design-wise is to found a group willing to loose 10s of millions of dollars in some altruistic gesture for the city. This is certainly not the biggest project ever built, or the most difficult.

Weedrose, we are all kind of assuming that the infrastructure lifting the development out of the floodplain is going to be solid, long lasting stuff. If it isn't, nothing will succeed above, no matter how good the design. I took the thread to be currently discussing the aesthetics of the buildings developed on top of these garages. My point was--and maybe I was misunderstanding you--that we can't afford to make sure the garages are well built, and then just say, 'OK, now whatever can be built, as we've got good foundations and anything above them can just be torn down an we'll start over.' That would be very dangerous and wasteful--but I think the developers would like the design review board to take that stance! ;)

They would definitely have to get demolition permits for all those buildings. Does anybody know if there are any historic guidelines for Corryville? I don't think it's a historic district, but it would be useful in this case, as the body of regulations would be against razing this block. It's also good to hear that the city owns a lot of the land needed. If the city can be convinced this is not good, it could stop them from going forward with the cost of demolition.

I'm glad to see the opinions of the folks in this thread really turn on this project. This is a neglected block, but the bones of it are historic save one or two buildings. There really isn't a need to be tearing down any historic buildings in this city! On top of all of that, the last building on the block was (maybe still is) Bruce Goetzmann's office--the head of historic preservation at DAAP for many years--and is a well maintained historic town home!! The fact that anyone would have even considered this project, in this location is absolutely ridiculous. The fact that a prominent member of the very same business district would be considering this...DISGUSTING. Here's a tip for the owner of Martino's. Renovate the several buildings you already own to their former glory into an awesome bar and restaurant. Oh, and burn all the Pittsburgh sh!t while you're at it. ;)

I'm not clear on the number of levels of parking (including the exterior "Plaza" level), but it seems like a few bays(structural) on the bottom level of the McMillan side could be spared for small retail of some sort. Any amount would be better than a huge wall of parking. I guess it all depends on how far back they are willing to excavate into the hillside. It is a challenge, but I believe this is the biggest issue with the plan.

This project is really becoming very destructive. There are some really fantastic buildings on Jefferson that were once well to do homes (not to mention "the Florence" which was covered earlier in the thread). Not sure which buildings you are referring to, but it worries me to hear that.

Ram, to have a good design does not mean a signature architect needs to be involved. However your point is well taken that SEVERAL architects could have made this project less monotonous. There are multiple firms in town with the fire power to make this into a great project (most with better design credentials than C+R). A competition would have been a great way to divide this up amongst several firms, or just one prominent piece. It would also have provided a huge economic stimulus to a local architectural community that desperately needs one. Heck, make the majority of the competition judges the members of the design review board, and you could reduce the process of approval to one meeting! Oh well, what do I know?

Weedrose, this is a particularly dangerous attitude. We shouldn't be designing and building structures ESPECIALLY AT THIS SCALE, to last for only 25 years! This project will be successful if it attains LASTING SIGNIFICANCE. If it does not, it will be viewed as another failure for Cincinnati, and it will be a huge zit on the face of our city, which other cities will laugh at for the next however long it takes to get the political will to spend another vast amount of money to demolish and rebuild. I've said this several times on this forum, and I'm glad to see that Council member Qualls agrees with me, and that the design review board is doing their job. Civik: Cole+Russel MAY be capable of good designs, but they sure as heck have not been demonstrating that for a long time. They are the Walmart of Cincinnati architectural firms. How the exact team that produced the unorganized fiasco of a building that is the new SCPA in historic OTR got the largest, most publicized commission of the decade is an f-ing mystery to me. The design review board needs to keep the leash tight here, or we'll end up with a Gateway Condos project X 10. :drunk: Also, thanks Enquirer for providing us with one image of the actual design...sheesh! :x

I couldn't agree more. It's kind of disturbing how silent this group has been publicly recently. Streetcar/Progress advocates need to be out there pressing the flesh in a big sort of way! How do we get mobilized? I've sent a few emails to the CFP folks, but have only been told that a "yard sign drive" using YPs is coming up.

Having a thick stone foundation was actually the standard for a well built home in those days, and is therefore quite common here in Cincinnati. The use of concrete for a residential project would be pretty rare until the 20s or 30s. It is definitely fun to think of the associated labor moving all this raw material though! Down in OTR we have some brewery foundations that are 40-50' deep!! And of course are made of stone. It always amazes me to think of how cheap labor must have been in constructing buildings before the 20th century.

Sorry to chime in late here on the subject of the private development exteriors, but here goes: Buildings should not be judged only on whether or not they serve their initial programs well. Take the UP development. Yes, they function well, housing people, and providing spaces for retail on the first floor, but in 20 to 50 years, will people still want them around? Aesthetics are essential to create a legitimate and lasting sense of place. It is not because of the usefulness and utility of the Italianate buildings in OTR that makes them worth preserving. In fact, this is often a hindrance to preserving them. It is the quality of materials, the variety of their facades, and their overall aesthetics that make them SIGNIFICANT to our heritage and culture. We have spent a lot (politically, economically) on making this brand new neighborhood, and if we want it to be successful and last as a significant development for many years, the value that design adds must be carefully considered. We're starting from scratch, so we have a great opportunity for producing something lasting. If this turns out to be another University Park (except times 10!!), it will be a failure. This neighborhood has to be something people will find worth preserving in the future.

Looking good "Consultant". Is heat-gunning the method you've been using for stripping all of your trim, or having you tried chemicals as well? I'm especially curious what you may have had success with on interior trim (just because there is usually so much).

We shall see... For some reason they didn't mention that part of the speech in their article. Somehow I'm not expecting a major turnaround. The facts are something the Enquirer doesn't seem too terribly concerned about. Actually, you'll note if you read it again, they did mention that part, they called him "combative". This is how the "inquirer" labels people who point out the fact that they are deceptive and largely biased against the City of Cincinnati. Someone on here mentioned earlier about how we have all the facts to prove the benefit of the streetcar, but haven't been able to effectively communicate them to the electorate in the city. Since the members of the media are obviously not interested in these facts, does anyone know if there's some TV spots, or public rallies, or anything else in the works? This message has got to get beyond the people who read this forum and their friends! Maybe Cincinnatians for Progress needs to have a rally on the Square!

Honestly, most modern masons aren't comfortable with OTR brick and lime based mortar, because they are not used to laying brick to support anything but itself! Brick bearing walls are an art and a science. They built them thick, with soft mortar (called sacrificial) so that the actual structure of the wall would not lose integrity. The "glue" (mortar) between the brick allows the wall to respond to a lot more pressures due to moisture, wind, ect...Most suburban buildings are built of wood or metal studs, and then clad. Buildings in OTR have outlasted, and will outlast them for a long time. Good point about the lateral bracing, BTW Ram! Ever noticed when one building is taken down, the different types of brick are exposed in party walls? Not all brick was meant to be exposed to the elements or sight!

Ohio as a state dates back to 1803. But take Cincinnati for example. Cincinnati was founded in 1788. So Ohio is probably not as "new" as you would expect. The big boom in Cincinnati was the 1870s-1920s. I think this is probably when you will find most of the housing stock in the city is from. It's important to note that this is also the time period when the first "Inner Ring" suburbs where being build which are in the city proper (ie. Price Hill, Walnut Hills, etc...). Awesome, sexy stuff...I would think Cleveland was probably having a similar boom period at that time.

There were actually a ton of cameras there, so keep an eye on the TV news for a bit of coverage.

Another interesting note, DNK is also a minority owned business. I'm sure the exact numbers will come out soon, but I think their team leader said the group had 10 minority and small business member companies on it. TAKE THAT NAACP!! :wave:

I thought the same might be true...But him taking NAACP support away from the Anti-Progress amendment would totally make it obvious that he blatantly misused his power to make money for his family. I don't know how (if the conspiracy is true) he would back out of what he's gotten himself into.

Just walked back home from the event. The City Manager announced the winning development team from the three that responded to the RFQ. The team includes (among others) local firms Parsons Brinkerhof, Burgess and Niple, Megan Construction, and DNK Architects. The most interesting thing was that standing there, amongst the other members of the team, behind the mayor himself, was a SMITHERMAN! Smitherman's family's concrete company mentioned in the Phoney Coney article (http://thephonyconey.blogspot.com/2009/05/its-blue-ash-airport-mcfly.html)is a main member of the team. I wonder what the result of (and the intention behind this move) will be?

1860s

Consultant, As I've said earlier, Cincinnati has been forward thinking for a long time—there are many, MANY examples of this. As far as it relates to government and urban planning, Cincinnati once had an excellent public transit system that supported the city. As yet another example of how forward thinking Cincinnati was, it manufactured and sold its streetcars to other cities. This system was systematically dismantled by corporate interests (mainly automobile companies) from outside. 40-50 years ago other cities were using the “blight=bulldozer” method of urban renewal. Why do you think we have the largest remaining group of Italiante buildings IN THE U.S.. Other cities demolished their stock of these wonderful, urban buildings—CINCINNATI DIDN’T. With the formation of HUD in the 1960s first under the Johnson administration, many of Cincinnati’s historic buildings were rehabbed to be decent housing for lower income families. Unfortunately, much of the federal money came with contracts that allowed landlords to continue renting to these people, while not maintaining their properties. Thus the cycle of poverty and neglect that these buildings have gone through was brought about and reinforced by the Federal Government. This is why OTR and to a lesser extent, the West End have the stock they do today, but also why they are in bad shape. Speaking of OTR, what blocks are you talking about that the city is sitting on letting decay? Contrary to your statement, most buildings in OTR have been historically owned by individuals, and weren’t maintained due to Federal housing policy. That’s why so many buildings sit vacant. The city does not have the resources or the power to remake Over-the-Rhine. 3CDC, which is a public private partnership between the city, major corporations, and developers, is making HUGE strides. But this kind of stuff doesn’t happen over night. Also, I should mention that buildings HAVE been lost in cities other than Cincinnati after attaining designated status in cities like Atlanta, Denver, and even…dare I say it…Portland!! You also mention Charleston, Savannah, and New Orleans. I don’t know about Savannah and New Orleans, but do you have any idea how long it took to make Charleston into what it is today??? Charleston was basically the start of historic preservation as we know it in America. That effort started back in the 1930s!! That’s 70+ years!!! Also, I’m sure being a southern city, it had no problem making changes to neighborhoods (especially at that time) when certain populations viewed as undesirable to its progress tried to move in. You also mentioned Findlay market and the streetcar proposal. Findlay market continues to be popular, and I know of more and more people frequenting it every week. Currently, there is a proposal to build a streetcar, which would greatly benefit the market—make it full more often and invigorate the surrounding neighborhood (which I live in, btw) with needed private investment. The city council passed this very forward thinking proposal, but it has gained some typical opposition. However it is the NAACP, the Green Party, and COAST who are not forward thinking here. NOT CINCINNATI. We are preparing for a hard fight, but there are many who believe and are willing to work for defeating this opposition. In the end there are a lot of us who are forward thinking in Cincinnati. Historically, the city HAS been forward thinking, and for the most part it is trying to accomplish a lot and turn itself around. Your poor attitude and denial of Cincinnati’s progress only discourages people who would seek to better the city, and encourages those opposed to progress. This residence should be saved—I’ve made this clear in my posts—but just because a few bureaucrats down at the building department don’t understand the value of a Hannaford house doesn’t mean a city which is proud and trying to change itself always had a lack of forward thinking. It’s poor wording at best.

I certainly hope this is true. Myself and a friend are the only house on our little block in OTR who have started to do this. The problem is NOT that these buildings aren't worthy of saving--it's finding the right people to save them. It is not necessary economically viable for most people to try and save these buildings, and --despite your claims that Reading Road is tame--it's certainly NOT viable for almost any developer--which is why this doesn't happen in a fast way. The person undertaking this will definitely have to have a pioneering spirit, not have to not mind the isolation/island effect, and most importantly the funds to do it properly to be successful. I really hope someone like that grabs up this house! But I still stand by my statement, the IMMEDIATE area is the greatest impediment to this building being saved (Caseyc, there definitely is some momentum up further toward you into Rose Hill). As far as this comment is concerned, it is one made out of ignorance. Cincinnati pretty much invented television and radio broadcasting, professional baseball, the world series, and many other innovations. It is because Cincinnati was so forward thinking that we were prosperous enough to have not only the types of historic architecture we are discussing, but also the incredible amount of it--as well as our cultural institutions, which any city our size would be envious of. It's statements like the one quoted, and the attitudes behind it that continue to allow people to find the demolitions of our history acceptable, and I am sick and tired of hearing it. :whip: