I am all for the concept, but this seems like it packs a lot of stuff on a very skinny space!

 

$100M complex to be built on Purple People Bridge

Business Courier - by Lucy May

Date: Thursday, November 11, 2010

 

 

Developers want to build a $100 million entertainment complex on the Purple People Bridge that would be the first of its kind in the nation.

 

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2010/11/12/100m-complex-to-be-built-on-purple.html

If it weren't for it being directly over the river, I'd say it was dead before it was even put on paper ... Sounds interesting ... bring it!

Hmm... Something like this could work on the side where the current walkway is not located. I'd like to see a rendering to see what exactly they have in mind.

I'm skeptical until I see some renderings. I'd hate to see some garish tourist trap (a.k.a. Newport on the Levee) marring a landmark structure like that. It's not like there aren't plenty of vacant parcels on either side of the river that could support an entertainment complex. Also, I'd like to see the bridge preserved for future streetcar and/or light rail use.

Definitely agree there! On the Cincy side, there are plenty of open parcels all around the base of the bridge. This development should go there.

Definitely agree there! On the Cincy side, there are plenty of open parcels all around the base of the bridge. This development should go there.

That's exactly what I was thinking.  Putting this development on the bridge seems unnecessarily complicated when there is land on the Cincy side.  It also sounds like they're trying to build NOTL on top of a bridge right next to NOTL.  I'll believe this one when I see it. 

I'm not for it being an entertainment complex... but I am ALL for the PPB being activated along its length, its a long walk for some people... It would be great to fill those "empty spaces" you guys reference with high density residential on both the Newport and Cincy sides.  Anyway I am really looking forward to some renderings. 

 

^{At DAAP we talked about doing something similar with residences along an unused Brent Spence.  But if the BSB is still going to have local and highway traffic...just has some decent walking/biking/jogging/green space along it would complete a GREAT 2.5 mile loop from from the PPBridge along the Cincy Riverfront Park across the BSBridge then along Riverfront Commons in NKY...creating a Regional Central River Park, and a development on the PPB would nicely cap the space.}

 

brent spence housing concept=

Infrastructure reuse is becoming more popular. San Francisco Bay bridge reuse concept from a UC Berkely proposal=

While there are precedents for bridges with buildings on/along them, the fact remains that it's still a bridge and must work as such.  The silly bar/restaurant they've put on the bridge in the past has been a huge impediment to anyone crossing the bridge, especially by bicycle.  If they took over the pedestrian and railroad section of the bridge for development but left the roadway then it might be ok.  There's certainly unused space, but it would need to be used wisely so it doesn't create more problems.

Kill this. What a silly idea, when there's another entertainment complex in the same location. Why do they think this would be successful when Newport on the Levee isn't really doing so hot as it is? And yeah, please at least use vacant land or repurpose a surface parking lot for projects like this, there's plenty of that to spare. Leave the bridge for transportation purposes -- I agree with the idea that it could be a potential streetcar route in the future

I almost thought the article was a joke (or hoping it was).

Reminds me of the proposal to turn the old 6th Street Bridge between Huntington, WV and Chesapeake, OH (over the Ohio River) into a flea market. That idea didn't go anywhere, and it was soon demolished to make room for the new, adjacent span.

 

It's already bad enough to use this throughfare as a cyclist, let alone when they have beer tastings, fashion shows and everything else mid-span. They regulate through traffic to a 4-foot wide path. If they can't afford it, let someone else manage it who can devise good ideas ... you know, don't charge $$$ to walk on top of a bridge, tethered, in purple outfits where they can't take photos.

It's already bad enough to use this throughfare as a cyclist let alone when they have beer tastings, fashion shows and everything else mid-span. They regulate through traffic to a 4-foot wide path.

 

1) It's private property. If they want to close it off for special events like Riverfest or hold events on it to raise money to cover their expenses, they reserve that right. They didn't purchase it to better serve cyclists.

 

2) There's another bridge on the other side of the aquarium a few blocks down. Use that one.

 

If they can't afford it, let someone else manage it who can devise good ideas ... you know, don't charge $$$ to walk on top of a bridge, tethered, in purple outfits where they can't take photos.

 

Curious to hear what your good ideas are for it.

Hotel planned on Purple People Bridge

BY LAURA BAVERMAN • [email protected] • NOVEMBER 12, 2010

 

NEWPORT— A $100 million railroad-themed hotel and restaurant complex could be built on the Purple People Bridge, the first of its kind in the nation.

 

 

Bridge owner Newport Southbank Bridge Co. has forged an agreement with DW Real Estate Holdings, a shopping center developer in Hyde Park, to lease the existing railroad tracks and the space above the walkway for a 160,000-square-foot entertainment complex.

 

Full story at:

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20101112/NEWS0103/311120042/Hotel-on-Purple-People-Bridge-

 

I mentioned a concept like this but with condo's a few years back.

 

London Bridge is falling down,

Falling down, falling down.

London Bridge is falling down,

My fair lady.

Some existing Radical Redesigns: Bridge-to-Home Building Conversions

 

 

http://dornob.com/radical-redesigns-bridge-to-home-building-conversions/

It's already bad enough to use this throughfare as a cyclist let alone when they have beer tastings, fashion shows and everything else mid-span. They regulate through traffic to a 4-foot wide path.

 

1) It's private property. If they want to close it off for special events like Riverfest or hold events on it to raise money to cover their expenses, they reserve that right. They didn't purchase it to better serve cyclists.

 

2) There's another bridge on the other side of the aquarium a few blocks down. Use that one.

 

If they can't afford it, let someone else manage it who can devise good ideas ... you know, don't charge $$$ to walk on top of a bridge, tethered, in purple outfits where they can't take photos.

 

Curious to hear what your good ideas are for it.

 

It's is a private bridge, but the Taylor Southgate Bridge (the one you mentioned) is adjacent. While I have biked over the bridge many times (faster, smoother), it is obviously much more scenic and slow (for many non-street riders) to take the Purple People. It's a shame they don't capitalize on it more with realistic proposals: if funding could be found to simply deck over the unused L&N/CSX alignment, they could do so much more with the bridge. Beer tastings are fine, so are fashion shows, but both are not reliable streams of money. And neither are ideas that are poorly executed (bridge climb) or conceived (roller coaster).

 

There is a financial aspect to this, which is understandable, but let's be realistic: the ACoE will not allow this. I showed this to Mr. C (redacted name) of the ACoE Huntington Dist. and he just laughed. He laughed when the people in Huntington submitted a proposal for flea market stands on the bridge there, and he laughed at an unrealistic proposal for a hotel somehow affixed to the bridge.

 

My idea? Bring back some novel entertainment on the bridge. Reopen the climb but make it realistic (and fun). Discover creative funding to add the third deck. And so on. If they can find the funding or idea to build a hotel, then they can install a deck.

 

It should be a transportation venue, which is what it was designed to be. A shame that we won't see something more useful come out of it, like light rail or a streetcar.

 

London Bridge is falling down,

Falling down, falling down.

London Bridge is falling down,

My fair lady.

 

I cited the exact same thing in a conversation today!

 

I absolutely do not think it's a good idea to have hotels and restaurants on the bridge. Also, is nothing sacred?

They expect people to walk to the center in the dead of winter? Or this will cover the whole span? How much weight can the bridge hold?

^ My impression is it would cover the whole span, or the majority of it...hotels are pretty big, no?

 

Not a good idea, though I don't know how you make a bridge worth owning without tax subsidies, leasing it to a railroad, or charging tolls (obviously not possible here). It's kind of a silly thing to buy, really. IMO, Newport should buy it, if possible. Newport businesses stand to benefit the most from its existence and continuation of current use.

 

Something like this would be a good idea for Brent Spence, as nati streets mentioned.

I understand why they're trying to do this, but I don't see how this could be accomplished successfully.  I'll reserve judgment until I see renderings, but I don't hold out much hope for this project.  I'd prefer to see a large hotel at NOTL instead.  God knows there's plenty of space in there.

 

Also, I'd like to see the bridge preserved for future streetcar and/or light rail use.

 

What I've been hearing about light rail is that the Taylor Southgate is preferred.  I'd love to see a Newport streetcar that goes over both bridges though.

 

...if funding could be found to simply deck over the unused L&N/CSX alignment, they could do so much more with the bridge.

 

...My idea? Bring back some novel entertainment on the bridge. Reopen the climb but make it realistic (and fun). Discover creative funding to add the third deck. And so on. If they can find the funding or idea to build a hotel, then they can install a deck.

 

I've always thought that the bridge would be more useful if it was modified to have one deck, with the existing supports piercing through, so that pedestrians could wander through the entire width of the bridge.  As it stands now, you're right, that middle pathway is very confining when an event is scheduled on the main deck.

 

Also, I agree with you about the bridge climb.  I've always thought that steps and guided tours were a bad idea.  They would be better off installing hand holds and making it more of a rock-climbing experience where you climb over, under, and through several times on a set path as you cross the bridge.  It would cater to a smaller set of people, but it would be unique and attract climbing enthusiasts looking for something different to try.

I know it seems rather absurd, but I can dig a very funky hotel on the rail side of the bridge. It would have to be very European in vibe - something you'd expect in Manchester or Dusseldorf or Bochum.

This seems like one of those projects that will never go anywhere

Why are people so against this? It's the kind of thing that could quickly become a regional (if not larger scale) attraction.  It would be a one of a kind development.  I think it could be pulled off quite well as a hotel/retail complex that still provided outdoor pedestrian space.  As has been pointed out already, the Taylor-Southgate makes for a better bike crossing, anyway. 

 

This thread is so full of naysayers that it's starting to look like the Enquirer comments section!

I don't know why people are against stuff so much when it's not their money being used.

Taylor-Southgate is a terrible bridge for bikes.  Newport does a good job of keeping it clean, I'll give them credit for that compared to Covington who doesn't do squat for the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge.  Nevertheless, the roads on either end aren't nearly as bike or pedestrian friendly as on the PPB, partly because there's nowhere to actually stop.  The PPB is a meeting place for many, whether on the Kentucky or the Ohio side, because there's wide areas next to the road when you can stop and wait.  Another problem for Taylor-Southgate is that it has very bike-unfriendly expansion joints on either end of the main span, which necessitate some side-to-side weaving. 

 

I think the resistance here is that it's a frickin' bridge, which is meant for crossing from one end to the other.  Sure having some interesting stuff on it can be cool, but not if it impedes that crossing.  It's become a very important pedestrian and cycling link across the river, and to disturb that would be unfortunate, to say the least.  Private property or not, an established use for the bridge has developed, and to diminish or eliminate that use would be an affront to the community.  Also, I just don't see how they could get anything of any meaningful size to fit within the existing structure.  The hangers and cross braces are so numerous that the space would still be very broken up.  To keep it from being nothing more than a long hallway would require building across the entire width of the bridge and cantilevering out on either side as well.  I agree that it would be unique and certainly interesting, but it's also rather gimmicky too, and the comments about all the vacant land on either side of the bridge still hold.

I think the resistance here is that it's a frickin' bridge, which is meant for crossing from one end to the other. Sure having some interesting stuff on it can be cool, but not if it impedes that crossing. It's become a very important pedestrian and cycling link across the river, and to disturb that would be unfortunate, to say the least.

 

The entire width of the bridge is currently not open to pedestrians anyway... which is a shame.  But seriously you are critiquing a project that there are little to no details of yet!  WTF?  This could be a very exciting project.  There is nothing that would require a 100 room hotel to take up the entire width of the bridge.  The "complex" could easily be broken in to segments that allow for 1, 2, and 3 width sections of the bridge to be completely open at various times, so saying that the hotel would need the entire width is premature. 

This forum has gotten way ahead of itself in judging a project which could become an activating presence for the river.  As much as Cincy Riverfront Park is thought of as an activating presence it is for the most part a buffer from activity... IMO we should open to this idea and we should not assume that this project will close the bridge to pedestrian traffic.  Its success will be dependent upon pedestrian traffic!

I also worry about impacting the bridge as an historic structure.  It's a very nice looking span currently, despite not being fully utilized.  If the hotel gets built and goes out of business, it becomes an eyesore.  I'm not saying that will happen, but future use is worth considering before heavy modifications take place.  Again, I'm anxious to see conceptual drawings of their plan.

I'm not against this, I just don't believe it will ever happen.  I would love to see renderings.

I think the resistance here is that it's a frickin' bridge, which is meant for crossing from one end to the other. Sure having some interesting stuff on it can be cool, but not if it impedes that crossing. It's become a very important pedestrian and cycling link across the river, and to disturb that would be unfortunate, to say the least.

 

The entire width of the bridge is currently not open to pedestrians anyway... which is a shame. But seriously you are critiquing a project that there are little to no details of yet! WTF? This could be a very exciting project. There is nothing that would require a 100 room hotel to take up the entire width of the bridge. The "complex" could easily be broken in to segments that allow for 1, 2, and 3 width sections of the bridge to be completely open at various times, so saying that the hotel would need the entire width is premature.  

This forum has gotten way ahead of itself in judging a project which could become an activating presence for the river. As much as Cincy Riverfront Park is thought of as an activating presence it is for the most part a buffer from activity... IMO we should open to this idea and we should not assume that this project will close the bridge to pedestrian traffic. Its success will be dependent upon pedestrian traffic!

 

Uh, even without the details, it still fails in my opinion because, as Jeffrey stated above, it completely diminishes the role and nature of the bridge, which is to transport people to and from one side to the other. Given that there are mass lots available for redevelopment on either side that are vacant or vastly underutilized (e.g. NOTL), and parts that are still up in the air (the office building & hotel for The Banks), there is foreseeable demand for a hotel that will be very expensive to design, engineer and construct on a bridge -- granted it even musters up any support from the AoCE. There are very few, if any, profitable bridge ventures -- because of all of the situations described in the above posts.

 

If they thought that the bridge climb was going to generate thousands upon thousands of visitors per year (they estimated 85,000 to 100,000 in a 10 Nov. 2005 Enquirer article), create 100 jobs and have a $25 million economic impact (Cincinnati Business Courier 12 June 2006, derived from the University of Cincinnati Economics Center for Education & Research, another reason to doubt much that comes from that "think tank")... Only 10,000 crossed it in 2006, and the numbers were plummeting fast (they did two steep price cuts before calling it quits). They only laid off a handful of people involved.

I don't know why people are against stuff so much when it's not their money being used.

+1

 

I'm not against this, I just don't believe it will ever happen.  I would love to see renderings.

+1

It won't happen simply because they won't be able to get a hotel to join them.  The Banks are already lobbying Boutique hotels to move into there for a 200 room hotel with a pool and ample parking, let alone building a hotel over a bridge (where do the guests cars go?).  21C is planning on moving here in a couple years (pending the Metropole suit) and we've already had several hotels in Cincy close in the last couple years.

 

There isn't a market for it, AND everyone should do a little research on the company that they are partnering with... their accomplishments are amazing.

From a practical standpoint, it just doesn't seem feasible.  The issues of access for fire rescue vehicles and egress requirements to meet building codes are onerous enough as it is.  To satisfy that they'd likely have to leave the roadway section of the bridge open for fire trucks.  That leaves little room for much in the way of a building on the pedestrian and rail spans, and the pedestrian span may not even be wide enough for a code-compliant hallway.  I don't think the outdoor walkway/"fire lane" would be tolerated for a hotel with people walking by all the time.  Then there's the issue that it's a Kentucky bridge, but large vehicles can only access it from the Ohio side.  Some rebuilding of the approach next to NOTL would need to happen to allow fire trucks from Newport to get onto the bridge.  I could go on, but the whole thing just sounds like a complete code nightmare, and for good reason. 

p.s. in terms of marketing Cincinnati needs to distance itself from Newport and that Carnival that is going on in Covington, so I would say NO to any form of development that is not a bridge that connects these two identities. It may work in Florence, Italy, but in terms of this idea.....get real. This development could be designed by the most famous of architects and be "stunning" and I would still denounce this project, period.

p.s. in terms of marketing Cincinnati needs to distance itself from Newport and that Carnival that is going on in Covington, so I would say NO to any form of development that is not a bridge that connects these two identities. It may work in Florence, Italy, but in terms of this idea.....get real. This development could be designed by the most famous of architects and be "stunning" and I would still denounce this project, period.

 

WTF? Cincy establishments and businesses benefit from attracting patrons from the residential neighborhoods that surround them, that includes the NKY river cities.  As a city-state oriented thinker I basically see the whole basin as Cincy, and have no problem connecting with the opposite side of the Ohio's banks as much as possible.

I definitely keep the KY side distinct from Cincy in my mind, but I agree they should be as connected as possible!!!

 

It's funny, there has always been a very noticeable cultural shift when you cross the river. But the last time I went to Covington/Newport, I realized that with all the preservation going on over there, and corresponding gentrification, the change is not so abrupt or noticeable as it once was. The working class people of Cincy and NKY (or really any two places) have a bigger cultural gap than the educated elite, I guess is the explanans.

hate to say it but i went to the Enquirer site today... anyway the article on the site with reference to the PPB project talks about building up a garage at NotL's site B (the site directly to the East of the current NotL structure). This could really good thing if done correctly...

The article then says the developers would look to run an elevator system horizontally out from that... its funny though that literally the very next paragraph of the article discusses open air utilities etc that would have to be run out to the hotel and how this would could be a looming problem. At least I find this funny whereas you would run the electric in a chase with the horizontal elevator.... so there would be no problem.  (it would be great if they would just hire someone to write development articles who knew what they were writing about)

Hmm don't bridges freeze before roads? The water lines better be very insulated and heated.

Hmm don't bridges freeze before roads? The water lines better be very insulated and heated.

 

right so they would be inside an internal insulated elevator chase.

My perspective:

 

It just seems like an idea doomed to failure like the bridge walk.  More than one of us predicted that it was a failed business model from the start.

 

I'd hate to see something as successful as the PPB end up with an empty or rundown development on it after 5 years.

The article then says the developers would look to run an elevator system horizontally out from that...

Sweet a Wonkavator!!

 

Hmm don't bridges freeze before roads? The water lines better be very insulated and heated.

 

right so they would be inside an internal insulated elevator chase.

 

This is interesting. Code dictates water lines cannot run on an outside wall, and if buried they have to be at a minimum depth of 36 inches. Also, the main will likely be at least a 4 inch main for fire protection. I don't know how they will do this if all sides of the main have to have 36 inches of cover. I'm sure they will be working with the people in Frankfort on this, although they can be very uncooperative.

if the elevator runs from inside the parking garage, they should never have a 36" cover problem.  The development would likely be heavily weighted to the NKY side, the water line would run from inside the parking structure through its transition to commercial and into the Hotel seamlessly on a chase on opposite side of the elevator line which should by the elevator dimensions alone afford more than 36".

 

**but these are details, and we have no real idea of the development vision yet.... i just found the article citation funny.

Is there any meat to this project or is the Enquirer just an attention whore?

Those two options are not mutually-exclusive.

Is there any meat to this project or is the Enquirer just an attention whore?

 

Most of the people that work at the Enquirer don't like living in Cincinnati but are too dub or do't have the balls to move away.

Most of the people that work at the Enquirer don't like living in Cincinnati but are too dub or do't have the balls to move away.

 

I would guess that you are wrong about this assumption.  The Enquirer writers are constantly arguing for Cincinnati to be less progressive.  That doesnt fit the profile of someone that is pining to move away.

^I just get fed up with them that's all.  Anytime something cool is happening like bridge development, casino etc...there's always a counter article immediatly published.

In the Enquirer, the announcement that construction would start was titled "1500 parking spaces to disappear"

 

 

Really?? Not, thousands of jobs to be created! or, new development could revive pendelton!

 

Nope- just how parking spaces will be lost. 

Ohio side of Purple People bridge revamped

1:24 AM, Sep. 30, 2011  | 

Written by

Jane Prendergast

 

 

The dead bamboo, yellow poles and overhead strings of lights are gone - and the Cincinnati side of the Purple People Bridge is a lot more purple now.

 

Volunteers repainted poles and new planters. They planted daylilies, coneflower and hibiscus. Purple benches, each with its donor's name on a plaque, line the walkway. The new look - it was shepherded by Councilwoman Laure Quinlivan, who thought the bridge was too ugly to be an inviting gateway - will be unveiled at a ceremony Friday at 1:30 p.m.

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20110929/NEWS0108/109300335

Pictures of the upgrades: http://www.thaddandmilan.com/2011/09/prettier-purpler-people-bridge.html