Civvik

Congrats. Nice to get some recognition.

To this day I'm not entirely sure which concept plan this rendering came off of, only that it's looking south across Freedom Way, I guess. And I can't think of anywhere that would design and build those buildings in America. They'd have to get someone like Leon Krier to do all the architecture. :P

I didn't see anyone talking past each other or getting out of hand? Again, there is no need for you or anyone else to judge the conversation itself by calling it silly. If you have information to add, just add it, and your professional knowledge and perspective will stand on its own merit. There is no need to go chasing off the laymen!

Let's take the ego down a notch, seriously. Most people here aren't architects or planning professionals. If you have information to add, just add it, there's no need to make a judgement on the conversation itself.

Irrelevant. It doesn't matter what the Enquirer itself wants or believes. That's the point. I just want them to write intelligent, well written and topical stories. Covering a project by 3CDC and in the same page linking a ridiculous op-ed about some guy who moved downtown and didn't like the noise from the garbage man is craven. If they are finding that they can't be a viable operation without cowing to this kind of stuff then their time has past.

This is what keeps deep-sixing the Enquirers credibility. They bleat indignantly that they are a fair and professional example of journalism. But they are just a media company that needs to sell papers in the suburbs to survive, so they are literally incapable of publishing a story about city development without adding a little story to pinch the city in the ass at the same time. That's fine, they can do that if they need to sell papers. But there's no way anyone will take them seriously.

So was it an anachronism that the Italianate fad of the 1850's was inspired by Italian villas of the 1500's? Or was everything up until modernism just "inspiration" because construction methods didn't change much until then? I do see what you are saying, but I think of an anachronism as something that seems patently out of place for its time, like a caveman with a gun. In a neighborhood of building style X, why not keep building in style X? Also, what about the small movement in architecture, allied with New Urbanism, that wants to resurrect classical architectural design conventions? Would they have to come up with some style that was totally novel in order to avoid being an anachronism?

See, this attitude is curious to me. How is replicating or complementing an older style an anachronism? Does that follow, then, that everything new must be of the newest style? Did you check out those Irish buildings? They are pretty damn nice, and I wouldn't dismiss that project as an anachronism. And I will concede that 150' is a lot of building to build on Vine, and putting the same metal panels over all of it is going to screw any notion of "verticality." But I think if you start playing with other materials like brick, and try to draw out those more vertical building elements in 150' of facade that you're going to start wandering away from the sleek modern vibe they are going for and into the realm of "transitional crap." Then again, maybe not. I'm not an architect. Maybe someone would like to sketch something out that would be build-able, lasting and satisfy the Italianate feel of the neighbors.

^ Slightly better than excellent. There's only one thing better than that. And that's the fact that if we win, Cincy builds a streetcar system, and if we don't, Cincy builds a streetcar system.

That's not true. She refuses to let me follow her on Twitter because I put "too many personal issues" posts on Twitter. Even though that was 2009. Still won't let me follow her. Which begs the question: If she doesn't like what I post, why can't I follow her? She doesn't have to follow me back! Oh yeah, and her hair looks like she styles it with a rake. Props for bringing that comment full circle.

Actually, I don't know if the modern building is ultimately the best choice for the location and I do understand the goals of the historic preservation board. Some people have been commenting that "OTR isn't Disneyland" but in a way, it is. We have decided that it is a special place and we want it to look a certain way. How is that very different from a theme park? I think I differ from some people here in that I'm not a history buff, just a design buff. I don't revere the historical value of OTR, honestly. I just think it's pretty and irreplaceable, it gives our city an edge, and I support efforts to perpetuate that. I like the overall historical narrative of the neighborhood, but I really couldn't care less what each individual building was for 100 years ago. But that's just me. My opposition to faux-historic for Mercer is that I think it will turn out worse than a modern building because the budget is too low. So, more or less, I'm for the modern building because we execute those pretty well, even with middling budgets. They can, to some extent, be about design more than craftsmanship. Historic buildings, on the other hand, are far more formulaic design-wise while their beauty comes from their craftsmanship. Some people though, hell maybe even most people, wouldn't notice poor quality on faux-historic new construction, and the seamless style of the neighborhood would please them more than a bad-ass glass curtain condo.

I was thinking about what something faux-historic might look like on the block, so I whipped up something last night in Sketchup: We used to create these kinds of very formulaic dummy infill models all the time. Strangely enough, it's often what developers end up building, especially on low or mid-range infill projects. Anyhow, it gives some sense of what more historic proportions might look like.

How would flexibility on style of new construction lead to loss of existing building stock?

Here's some very high quality infill in Ireland, the best I've seen lately that matches a historic context. It CAN be done, but god knows how much this cost... http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=814202&page=7

This is all true. But honestly, what would be worse? Cheap modernism, or cheap faux historic? I kind of don't want cheap brick anywhere near this thing, it could just go so, so bad... Moral: They seem to be working with pretty thin margins here. This isn't a wealthy area...yet. People get excited about infill and don't stop to remember that a lot of these projects are barely happening, from a financial standpoint.

They didn't strike me as too out of scale? The people on the balcony are leaning against what is presumably a 36" rail, which would make the man about 6' and the woman about 5'10", tall for a woman but not a giant. They aren't all perfect, but that particular rendering didn't strike me as unprofessional...

Um, like, every day?

Also, too, in the same commission summary packet, they approve the closure of Broadway in front of the Casino so it can have a...front yard. Buildings downtown shouldn't have front yards. This move also enshrines the ass of the county jail as the street frontage on the west side of Eggleston across from the Casino. I wonder if anyone considered closing Eggleston instead, creating a new parcel adjacent to the jail, and building a liner building to hide the jail and create a fully activated block on Broadway. Maybe none of that was feasible, but we are getting a casino site plan where the building appears to recoil in horror from the intersection of Central and Eggleston. And it looks like they aren't going to do anything with the open space but sod it over like a golf course. Nice.

Also, how that board approved the hideous Walnut Street building that replaces the little green one is beyond me. Talk about obliterating all your credibility in one awful decision. The Walnut Street building is by far the worst of the entire proposal. I wouldn't approve that anywhere in Cincinnati, much less in OTR. Jesus Christ.

I think it looks fine. We can't replicate 1800's Italianate. It's not our era. I'd rather we build what we know how to do well rather than get some shitty brick rowhouse design. Even our finest brick infill developments today are no match for the detail of OTR's building stock, and it's far more flattering to accept that than to let the preservation board piss in the pot.

Dude, you're approaching troll status. You need to seriously think about the next thing that you post here, or it's going to be much worse than a moderator come flying out the barn at you.

I don't know if anyone's thought of this before, but it would be fun to host an "Urban Ohio Charrette." Throw a couple urban planning challenges out there, for example how to get a transit line to Northside, or what to do with the empty lots on Central Parkway, etc. Find a meting space, add some beer, have "mods" that can bring some technical or historical knowledge, and see what all of our armchair planners come up with.

When's the earliest they could do another referendum? May? -COAST is about to fight off a lawsuit. -They'd have to get all their signatures all over again. -If Smitherman busies himself with his shiny new council position and actually doesn't mobilize the NAACP for signatures, it could take them even longer to get another referendum going. -For the last two they had the warm summer months to get out into the neighborhoods, and even then, they took until the last minute to get everything turned in. -The Banks will be open in spring, the casino actually looks like a building already, Washington Park will be open and flooded with choir singers. You couldn't ask for a better backdrop for the "Your streetcar under construction here" signs.

We'll see what she can do with the bridgedoggle/75-widening. She's been the one paying lip service to tying it to neighborhood redevelopment. So far, it's just talk, from what I can tell. The state DOT (aka the asphalt mafia...no really, if you've ever worked with these guys, for the most part, you'd understand) is a very, very big boy in the sandbox, and he likes things to go his way. However, there is precedent for working with them; The Banks was a good example of that. Some DOT's are more sophisticated than others, depending on who the current secretary is. Pennsylvania, for example, recently had a very sophisticated secretary, and a lot has been done there to get their DOT away from zombie-road-widening. In Ohio, I'm not sure what will happen now that we have an asphalt boy back in charge. To be sure, high oil and material costs in the 2000's helped more sophisticated transportation secretaries push their agendas forward. I can say, however, that you can't do much better than Qualls to put in the ring with these guys, she is one of those people who "really gets it" in terms of linking transportation and good city building.

Great post, Civvik; one to really think about! Just one question, though, concerning your "not-so-smart" list--the very last one mentioning "slogans," etc. Absolutely no disagreement here--we're all probably tired of the relentless and useless "naming" (the "Blue Chip City," etc.). However, I sense that something important may be emerging here in the Queen City--and that is that the city just could develop as a "Mecca of Marketing," considering the powerful presence of P & G, Kroger, and Macy's, etc. So, briefly, what are your thoughts here? In no way do I want to hijack this thread by taking off on this idea, but I really would like to hear from those of you "in-the-know" (perhaps in another thread) if such a development is realistic or feasible? Probably best for another thread, not sure which one though. I'm not a mod anymore. :P