CincyIntheKnow

Completely unrelated to the consistently, blatantly incorrect posts we have been seeing lately. Is it possible to block certain posters?

I think the answer lies with whose job it was to move this project forward. No one solely had that responsibility, so it didn't happen. They need a 3cdc-like development corporation to handle the banks, and not wait for developers to come to them and insist that their way is the only way forward (concert venue).

Arches were created structurally to span openings. It doesn't span if one side is floating. Thanks for the wikipedia text.

Sullivan's arches were rooted in expression of materiality, structural expression, and depth of light and shadow. The arch in this building is an applique, it doesn't even have one of the legs. It is almost whimsical in nature, like a postmodern interpretation of arches (i.e. Venturi). I am not saying arches=bad, I am saying in this application it needs some tweaking, in my opinion.

That arch is more Venturi than Sulllivan. But my biggest point of contention is that with the style of architecture of the rest of the building, it seems like they need to either bump it up or tone it down. It's in a weird limbo... But then again, I may be in the minority.

I'm probably in the minority, but no matter how much I want to like the arch, I wish it wasn't there.

"Familiar" means mountains. I don't think it's staying in Park City.

Boulder, the compromise candidate. Still has the mountain vibes, the Redford family has close ties to CU, and better state politics than Utah. I think Cincinnati was just too much change for them to swallow.

Who got it?

SLC: Tradition and growth, but spread out

Lipstick on a pig

But then LA got 2 NFL teams.

Great suggestion, they really do nice work. Then again, the university really hasn't developed a poorly detailed building in decades. We really shouldn't be surprised if these turn out. Very nice

A relocation to Cincinnati feels more like a reboot/ rebrand for Sundance, than just a relocation. It seems like most people struggle with the fact that it cannot continue to be what it currently is, either financially in its current location or the stigma loss of the mountain town in Cincinnati.

The day after opening day, when spring has officially started and the city is abuzz?

Speaking hypothetically, if a decision was already made and it was Cincinnati, what would be the ideal date for them to announce it (ideal for the city)? Opening Day? Taste of Cincinnati?

Could niosh take the EPA building?

Based on existing demand, it would more than likely be an extension of the existing campus green, lined with dormitories. This would make a central housing hub that can accommodate both campuses.

That type of building does not belong anywhere, let alone OTR.

I would think that future growth would be a big part of the selection process... Cincinnati is the Paris of America... And the Austin of the Midwest

Maybe I should clarify that the Cincinnati Open is a very big deal, but it being located in the far suburbs limits the benefit to the region. Sundance has more potential due to time of year and it being so close to the urban core. I am excited about Sundance, and think it will benefit Cincinnati. I will hold judgement on the "game changer" part.

:D

Maybe the city can have Christmas lights up on street trees and in Washington Park, a little sparkle can go a long way to help the charm factor

And as great as the Cincinnati Open is, it has not been a game changer for the region, just more exposure. I don't mean to sound skeptical, I am just curious of how much SFF would actually change Cincinnati.

I only know of it, admittedly I have not been. Sundance, like any other festival, would have great impact. But would it cause the significant uptick in investment/population like the streetcar (what I consider to be a game changer)?