The only land they can really develop is between Wade to the south, Central to the East, John to the West and Liberty to the North.  Basically just two blocks.  Maybe they can do something to the south east of the stadium if they can acquire that land and the police district moves.  But Taft, Laurel playground and the housing west of John St aren't going anywhere.  So it's not exactly going to be some huge development, and it's definitely not going to completely surround the stadium.  

 

Also the fanbase already goes to Clifton for every game so lets calm down on the "don't want to be exposed to crime/poverty."  Clifton and its surrounding area isn't exactly a thriving neighborhood of upper class folks.  And while there are a lot of families from the northern burbs who go to games there are just as many millennial's who live within the city limits.  They're not going to lose any season tickets because of the stadium location, it's all about putting a quality team on the field.  

21 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Yeah they're totally shooting themselves in the foot.  Whatever they throw up isn't going to have the long-term appeal that it could have if they insisted on high-quality stuff that fits the context.  Instead we're going to see a Holiday Inn Express, Fuddrucker's, etc.  

 

 

God who opens a new Fuddrucker's

Put a stadium in the middle of a dense urban area and then surround it by parking garages and The Banks II so that fans can enjoy "the city" but "without having to be exposed to crime/poverty."

 

It would have made so much more sense to put this thing at Ovation where there is plenty of room for infill and the team would have gotten basically no pushback regarding gentrification.

Just now, taestell said:

It would have made so much more sense to put this thing at Ovation where there is plenty of room for infill and the team would have gotten basically no pushback regarding gentrification.

 

Ovation was public housing up until about 2005.  It's only "gentrification" if it's in the City of Cincinnati,  

Right, while we see article after article about gentrification in OTR (and now the West End), and yet no one seems to notice when gentrification happens in other parts of the region. Despite the fact that the vast majority of development in OTR has not resulted in direct displacement (most of the buildings were already vacant prior to being fixed up) while in Newport, public housing was literally demolished to make room for Ovation...but people have already forgotten about that.

4 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

 

 

God who opens a new Fuddrucker's

 

That's what they'll be saying about microbreweries in five years.  

 

 

Jesus some of you are acting like they're taking a wrecking ball to blocks of historic buildings.  There are seriously like 7 buildings in the area we're talking about. 

14 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

That's what they'll be saying about microbreweries in five years.  

 

 

That's what you were saying about microbreweries five years ago.

4 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

Jesus some of you are acting like they're taking a wrecking ball to blocks of historic buildings.  There are seriously like 7 buildings in the area we're talking about. 

 

They already tore down the old theater, two OTR-type buildings facing Central Ave., and a 2-family on Provident St.  They have designs on everything from the Ballet down to the Monster Buidling, and even District 1 Police HQ.  And you can bet that if Taft hadn't just been rebuilt in 2005 they'd be after it as well.  

 

14 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

They already tore down the old theater, two OTR-type buildings facing Central Ave., and a 2-family on Provident St.  They have designs on everything from the Ballet down to the Monster Buidling, and even District 1 Police HQ.  And you can bet that if Taft hadn't just been rebuilt in 2005 they'd be after it as well.  

 

And we're getting what will end up being a $300+ million development from it.  Most people would consider that a win.  Some of you apparently would rather see a run down building stay just because it's really old.  This isn't OTR which is designated as a historic neighborhood.  West End has very little historic buildings thanks to the governments work decades ago.  If some buildings need to go to make way for a giant development, in an area that hasn't seen private development in decades, then so be it.  

41 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

Jesus some of you are acting like they're taking a wrecking ball to blocks of historic buildings.  There are seriously like 7 buildings in the area we're talking about. 

 

As was mentioned previously, if you keep these 7 buildings, and use them as the template for infill, you will end up with some quality architecture designed on a human scale.  FCC will have an awesome little two block area next to their stadium.  If you tear them all down, you will end up with bland car oriented garbage.

25 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

And we're getting what will end up being a $300+ million development from it.  Most people would consider that a win.  Some of you apparently would rather see a run down building stay just because it's really old.  This isn't OTR which is designated as a historic neighborhood.  West End has very little historic buildings thanks to the governments work decades ago.  If some buildings need to go to make way for a giant development, in an area that hasn't seen private development in decades, then so be it. 

 

It's just a matter of answering the question: Is development good just because it is development?

 

Personally, I'd rather wait a while and have had the neighborhood remain mostly residential, with infill and some mixed use near the major arteries as individual developers move into the area.  The Home-arama plot and filling in the missing City West lots would have been a nice start.

Edited June 11, 20196 yr by 10albersa

We have examples that prove that preserving historic buildings and integrating them with new infill works, right across Central Parkway from here. In an era where preserving buildings and leveraging historic assets has become the de facto development ethos, demolitions like this become more and more egregious. 

 

However look at what we have lost in the last few years: The Dennison, Hudepohl and a few others.

 

Both of these could have been leveraged to contribute to the growing success of Cincinnati. Instead they are missed opportunities. In city development there is often a compulsion to trade the better options for the slightly better options. When we muddle our potential, we squander our success.

9 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

a giant development

 

It's not big.  It'll be half the size of Nippert Stadium.  

 

It would be like if The Bengals moved from Paul Brown into Nippert.  

57 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

They already tore down the old theater, two OTR-type buildings facing Central Ave., and a 2-family on Provident St.  They have designs on everything from the Ballet down to the Monster Buidling, and even District 1 Police HQ.  And you can bet that if Taft hadn't just been rebuilt in 2005 they'd be after it as well.  

 

 

I wouldn't put TAFT beyond them -- they are making it an unbearable place to try to teach and learn. The school board may have to move the school for the sake of the people who have to be inside it.

47 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

If some buildings need to go to make way for a giant development, in an area that hasn't seen private development in decades, then so be it.  

 

This is the exact attitude that led to the demolition of the West End for Queensgate. Switch "private" with "public", and it's the exact attitude that led to even more demolition of the urban basin for I-75, I-71, Liberty St, public housing in the West End, etc. 

 

I am no fan of FCC or this project, but I will admit that I think once this whole stadium construction saga is over, this will represent a win for the urban basin. I don't like how FCC has continued to treat poor people and historic buildings as being expendable, and I think there is a whole lot of hubris coming from FCC, which I cannot stand. That said, IF the stadium can attract new housing and commercial development around it, jump-start (or accelerate) rehabilitation and infill development in the West End, and provide a nice business boost to bars and restaurants in OTR on game days, this will probably be worth it in the end. We shall see.

Edited June 11, 20196 yr by edale

29 minutes ago, JYP said:

We have examples that prove that preserving historic buildings and integrating them with new infill works, right across Central Parkway from here. In an era where preserving buildings and leveraging historic assets has become the de facto development ethos, demolitions like this become more and more egregious. 

 

However look at what we have lost in the last few years: The Dennison, Hudepohl and a few others.

 

Both of these could have been leveraged to contribute to the growing success of Cincinnati. Instead they are missed opportunities. In city development there is often a compulsion to trade the better options for the slightly better options. When we muddle our potential, we squander our success.

 

I think you summed it up quite nicely, @JYP. I'm a fan and supporter of this team, but I will admit that the stadium saga has been a bit of a disappointment (reaching all the way back to the opposition of Newport). I'm no architect or urban planner, my "taste" in design is based solely on what I like, but I don't find the stadium too terribly off-putting for its environment. That being said, it's incredibly disappointing that no one seems to be learning the lessons of the past (in regards to both the West End and "urban renewal" as a whole). It's incredibly easy to say: "oh, it's just X buildings," but why should Cincinnati settle as it always does? Why not build a stadium better suited to the area? Why not integrate historical structures, etc. into surrounding development? These buildings and structures have stood the test of time. Liberty Center, Newport on the Levee, Kenwood, etc. wont.

In the end, the development will probably be a win, but Newport on the Levee and The Banks should be some hard lessons to look at. Because the people everyone thought would go to those spaces aren't there, they're in the neighborhood across the street from the new stadium. 

Also, @jmecklenborg, speak for yourself on Fuddruckers! It may be a chain, but that's a chain I will gladly welcome back to this market. Don't piss on my hamburger hopes. 

Edited June 11, 20196 yr by Gordon Bombay

49 minutes ago, JYP said:

We have examples that prove that preserving historic buildings and integrating them with new infill works, right across Central Parkway from here. In an era where preserving buildings and leveraging historic assets has become the de facto development ethos, demolitions like this become more and more egregious. 

 

However look at what we have lost in the last few years: The Dennison, Hudepohl and a few others.

 

Both of these could have been leveraged to contribute to the growing success of Cincinnati. Instead they are missed opportunities. In city development there is often a compulsion to trade the better options for the slightly better options. When we muddle our potential, we squander our success.

 

Well put and I’ll add the following: for a variety of reasons we have forgotten how and do not build buildings that are human scale, have granular footprints, drive and support pedestrian activity, and incorporate elements that add up to “character” anymore. So if these historical buildings are razed wholesale whatever replaces them is likely to feel corporate, generic, and incapable of reinventing itself or providing sustained demand once the newness wears off. 

Edited June 11, 20196 yr by thebillshark

56 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

It's not big.  It'll be half the size of Nippert Stadium.  

 

It would be like if The Bengals moved from Paul Brown into Nippert.  

Nippert seats ~36,000.  Despite what they claim that place does not hold 40,000.  The new FCC stadium will be 26,000.  So just on seats alone it's not half the size.  On top of that the actual stadium is going to be bigger on a sf/seat measurement then Nippert because it won't be built tightly in the middle of a college campus.  I love watching games there but the bleachers and small concourses are terrible to deal with at crowded events.  I'm also including this two block future development in the total size of the project.  So this thing will end up being just as big if not bigger then Nippert in terms of how many acres it takes up. 

2 minutes ago, Cincy513 said:

The new FCC stadium will be 26,000.  

 

Will it?  The damn thing is under construction and we still haven't seen the final plans.  Berding has lied about absolutely everything so far, but let's start believing him now.  

 

 

 

33 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

 

Will it?  The damn thing is under construction and we still haven't seen the final plans.  Berding has lied about absolutely everything so far, but let's start believing him now.  

 

 

 

 

Except we have, of course, seen plans for the stadium just not for the plan around the stadium. 

 

https://www.fccincinnati.com/west-end-stadium and https://www.meisarchitects.com/fc-cincinnati/mr4q386fpgviv7iq5hxqf4ao9iv1ja and even more detailed architecture plans have been posted previously in this thread. Stop letting your hatred for soccer and Jeff Berding warp the facts. 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 11, 20196 yr by cincydave8

^ he hates everything and everyone. 

"my eyes, my eyes" screams Estelle Parsons with her first look at no matter what is put up at Liberty and Central Parkway. In this rendition of Bonnie and JMecklen

4 hours ago, cincydave8 said:

 

Except we have, of course, seen plans for the stadium just not for the plan around the stadium. 

 

https://www.fccincinnati.com/west-end-stadium and https://www.meisarchitects.com/fc-cincinnati/mr4q386fpgviv7iq5hxqf4ao9iv1ja and even more detailed architecture plans have been posted previously in this thread. Stop letting your hatred for soccer and Jeff Berding warp the facts. 

 

 

Except, of course, Meis was mysteriously replaced as the architect for this stadium, remember? The fact that FCC fired this firm months ago, but continues to use its plans and renderings on its website is telling. They also include images showing the orange wrapping on the stadium, which Berding said would no longer be used. Ultimately, it appears we still have not seen final plans or renderings for this stadium.

 

I would contend your fandom is getting in the way of seeing how ridiculously poor FCC has handled this stadium situation from day 1. As a project that is receiving public subsidy and requiring the relocation of residents, the public has every right to know what is getting built, how it will look, how the light and noise will impact its surroundings. 

24 minutes ago, edale said:

 

Except, of course, Meis was mysteriously replaced as the architect for this stadium, remember? The fact that FCC fired this firm months ago, but continues to use its plans and renderings on its website is telling. They also include images showing the orange wrapping on the stadium, which Berding said would no longer be used. Ultimately, it appears we still have not seen final plans or renderings for this stadium.

 

Also there was talk about future expandability that we haven’t heard anything further on that since the Music Hall noise issue came out. Is this still being designed into the plans? For example the employee lot to the west between the stadium and John Street looks like it could possibly accommodate expansion? That means they would have to break up the circular canopy though. 

12 hours ago, edale said:

 

Except, of course, Meis was mysteriously replaced as the architect for this stadium, remember? The fact that FCC fired this firm months ago, but continues to use its plans and renderings on its website is telling. They also include images showing the orange wrapping on the stadium, which Berding said would no longer be used. Ultimately, it appears we still have not seen final plans or renderings for this stadium.

 

I would contend your fandom is getting in the way of seeing how ridiculously poor FCC has handled this stadium situation from day 1. As a project that is receiving public subsidy and requiring the relocation of residents, the public has every right to know what is getting built, how it will look, how the light and noise will impact its surroundings. 

 

I would contend that you're making broad brush strokes. I'm not defending what FCC has done, they clearly could have handled this whole saga better and I have previously posted that I think Jeff Berding just needs to shut his mouth. I'm just pointing out that Jake acted like we haven't seen stadium plans but we have from multiple sources and have been posted in this thread. We have NOT seen plans for the site around the stadium. I too will be disappointed if it's just parking garages. Too many people want to make this black and white on whether or not your support the stadium or not. Of course it's not that simple and people should stick to the facts regardless of beliefs. The stadium design may have few more minor changes as all stadium plans do but the basic look, layout and seating capacity has long been established which is the point I was making. 

 

The bottom line is there are posters on this forum will hate FCC no matter what they do, even if the final plans had been posted and were an urbanist dream come true some posters would still stomp their feet and complain. Their are also plenty of supporters, not so much on this forum that I've seen, that will support FCC no matter what including supporting scrapping the Liberty Street diet. Both of these type of people add nothing to a civil debate or discourse on what our city should be. 

Edited June 12, 20196 yr by cincydave8

12 hours ago, cincydave8 said:

The bottom line is there are posters on this forum will hate FCC no matter what they do, even if the final plans had been posted and were an urbanist dream come true some posters would still stomp their feet and complain. Their are also plenty of supporters, not so much on this forum that I've seen, that will support FCC no matter what including supporting scrapping the Liberty Street diet. Both of these type of people add nothing to a civil debate or discourse on what our city should be.

 

This isn't true at all, I attend some FCC games and watch about half of them on TV.  I used to be all-in on what this team was doing before the stadium debacle.  Then they picked the West End, then they continued to stumble through negotiations with the WECC and didn't consider Newport even though it had to be a million times more attractive from a money standpoint, then they oversold the fact that the city/county got a good deal, then they got s****y when residents and businesses that were getting displaced were asking for help and money.  

 

The Liberty St "diet" amendments and out-of-place design are the least important parts to me.  Mgmt has been bad at just about every turn.  You know what solves all of the above?  Newport....  But god-forbid Lindner invest any money across the river, or that FC Cincinnati isn't located in Cincinnati proper.

12 hours ago, edale said:

 

Except, of course, Meis was mysteriously replaced as the architect for this stadium, remember? The fact that FCC fired this firm months ago, but continues to use its plans and renderings on its website is telling. They also include images showing the orange wrapping on the stadium, which Berding said would no longer be used. Ultimately, it appears we still have not seen final plans or renderings for this stadium.

 

I would contend your fandom is getting in the way of seeing how ridiculously poor FCC has handled this stadium situation from day 1. As a project that is receiving public subsidy and requiring the relocation of residents, the public has every right to know what is getting built, how it will look, how the light and noise will impact its surroundings. 

They announced two months ago the stadium would still have the orange glow but less then the original rendering.  

 

"And yes, the orange glow remains – but in ribbons rather than a full wrap around the bowl-shaped stadium"

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/03/new-renderings-fc-cincinnati-stadium-show-every-seat-covered-protective-canopy/3347495002/

 

It's way too late in the process to make major changes to the stadium design.  They can make further tweaks or minor changes but there isn't really time for large changes to the stadium structure/layout.  What you see in that articles pictures is likely very close to what it's going to end up looking like.  It's rumored Meis was fired because they didn't think they could make the MLS deadline of having the stadium open in spring of 2021.  Honestly I'm questioning if it gets completed by then as well.  I wouldn't be shocked if we end up with a situation like Portland this year.  They had to play their first 3 months on the road while they waited for their stadium addition to be completed.  I'm sure FCC is doing whatever they can to have it ready for March of 2021 but I'll feel better when we start seeing it come out of the ground.  

1 minute ago, Cincy513 said:

They announced two months ago the stadium would still have the orange glow but less then the original rendering.  

 

"And yes, the orange glow remains – but in ribbons rather than a full wrap around the bowl-shaped stadium"

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2019/04/03/new-renderings-fc-cincinnati-stadium-show-every-seat-covered-protective-canopy/3347495002/

 

It's way too late in the process to make major changes to the stadium design.  They can make further tweaks or minor changes but there isn't really time for large changes to the stadium structure/layout.  What you see in that articles pictures is likely very close to what it's going to end up looking like.  It's rumored Meis was fired because they didn't think they could make the MLS deadline of having the stadium open in spring of 2021.  Honestly I'm questioning if it gets completed by then as well.  I wouldn't be shocked if we end up with a situation like Portland this year.  They had to play their first 3 months on the road while they waited for their stadium addition to be completed.  I'm sure FCC is doing whatever they can to have it ready for March of 2021 but I'll feel better when we start seeing it come out of the ground.  

 

Odds are they would just play a few matches in Nippert if needed. I don't see any way this gets done by the start of the 2021 season but maybe they'll prove me wrong.

30 minutes ago, 10albersa said:

 

This isn't true at all, I attend some FCC games and watch about half of them on TV.  I used to be all-in on what this team was doing before the stadium debacle.  Then they picked the West End, then they continued to stumble through negotiations with the WECC and didn't consider Newport even though it had to be a million times more attractive from a money standpoint, then they oversold the fact that the city/county got a good deal, then they got shitty when residents and businesses that were getting displaced were asking for help and money.  

 

The Liberty St "diet" amendments and out-of-place design are the least important parts to me.  Mgmt has been bad at just about every turn.  You know what solves all of the above?  Newport....  But god-forbid Lindner invest any money across the river, or that FC Cincinnati isn't located in Cincinnati proper.

 

Yes, we're all aware of what has happened. I was just trying to say there are very strong opinions on this issue and some people will dislike FCC regardless of what happens while some people will support everything FCC has done. I'm a fan of the team but realize this process has been bad and clearly FCC has done things wrong or at least could have handled it better. 

25 minutes ago, tonyt3524 said:

 

Odds are they would just play a few matches in Nippert if needed. I don't see any way this gets done by the start of the 2021 season but maybe they'll prove me wrong.

Yeah good point forgot about that.  I think Atlanta had to play a couple additional games at Georgia Tech's stadium the year Mercedes Benz stadium opened.  

2 hours ago, cincydave8 said:

The bottom line is there are posters on this forum will hate FCC no matter what they do, even if the final plans had been posted and were an urbanist dream come true some posters would still stomp their feet and complain.

 

I completely disagree with this. Every person that I have ever seen complaining about the stadium has an actual reason for complaining. Whether it's the architecture/urban design or the displacement of residents and businesses. You may not agree with their complaints/criticism but they still have a valid reason for complaining. To say that the complainers don't have valid complaints and simply hate Berding and the team so much that they are blinded to the facts is incorrect.

I'm an FC season ticket holder and I'm a West End home owner (bought in well before FC was ever thought of).

 

I talk often with my neighbors about this and I will say that aside from the fear tactics from the Josh Springs/Brian Garry's of this issue, most West End residents in the Dayton Street historic district are pretty optimistic on positive promises that the team has made.  It's kind of hard to pass judgement on things like soccer fields for kids, community events etc. at this point because we are still pretty early in the process.    The one thing that is a common comment from residents is that Berding early on promised that nobody would be displaced.   Whether you agree or disagree with the 14 or so renters being displaced, Berding should have never made that comment.   It was a mistake and people have remembered it possibly because the outside activists and media keep reminding them.   

 

All in all I hope FC stays true to their commitment to the residents and kids of this community 

2 hours ago, taestell said:

 

I completely disagree with this. Every person that I have ever seen complaining about the stadium has an actual reason for complaining. Whether it's the architecture/urban design or the displacement of residents and businesses. You may not agree with their complaints/criticism but they still have a valid reason for complaining. To say that the complainers don't have valid complaints and simply hate Berding and the team so much that they are blinded to the facts is incorrect.

 

Aren't we talking about 7 residents give or take and a handful of businesses? Also architecture is subjective.

 

Archeticture is art. You will always have people who are divided by how something looks. 

 

If this wasn't FCC, but rather Amazon building HQ 2 in the West end and building a sparawling super campus in the West end there would be 0 criticisms. 

2 minutes ago, troeros said:

If this wasn't FCC, but rather Amazon building HQ 2 in the West end and building a sparawling super campus in the West end there would be 0 criticisms. 

Well that's a ridiculous take.

3 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

Well that's a ridiculous take.

 

Why? 

If Amazon said they moved to the West End for the history and urban environment and were going to be good neighbors without displacement then immediately took out a couple of blocks prior to getting designs done asked for tens of millions in tax breaks and millions up front and started kicking folks out as their footprint expanded we would see the same people make the same complaints. This is not about soccer or Berding himself (though he does have baggage from the PBS years) it is about how all of this is playig out and how the promises made upfront are not going in the interest of people who like well built urban environments. The urban environment we hoped would improve with such a large investment and influx of people going to games. That atmosphere could be wonderful if played correctly, I personally am disappointed in how it seems to be going so far, and even more so if it is surrounded by parking and a FCC run entertainment district that isolates it from the community in exchange for perceived 'safety'. I had high hopes, but we will see how it goes.

1 minute ago, SleepyLeroy said:

If Amazon said they moved to the West End for the history and urban environment and were going to be good neighbors without displacement then immediately took out a couple of blocks prior to getting designs done asked for tens of millions in tax breaks and millions up front and started kicking folks out as their footprint expanded we would see the same people make the same complaints. This is not about soccer or Berding himself (though he does have baggage from the PBS years) it is about how all of this is playig out and how the promises made upfront are not going in the interest of people who like well built urban environments. The urban environment we hoped would improve with such a large investment and influx of people going to games. That atmosphere could be wonderful if played correctly, I personally am disappointed in how it seems to be going so far, and even more so if it is surrounded by parking and a FCC run entertainment district that isolates it from the community in exchange for perceived 'safety'. I had high hopes, but we will see how it goes.

 

Even if it meant 100k new jobs and gigantic economic urban core rippple effect?

One name for you - Josh Spring. I think he and is cohorts would still criticize regardless of the 100,000 jobs. Now, how much attention that criticism gets played in the media and credibility it gets, and how much this impacts political decisions, clearly would likely be reduced compared to what is happening now. But don't think everyone would be swayed by creating jobs or larger investment. 

59 minutes ago, troeros said:

Also architecture is subjective.

 

Archeticture is art. You will always have people who are divided by how something looks. 

 

While there may be aesthetic choices that are subjective to architecture, there are many aspects that are not. For example, if the curved glass facade of a building acts a magnifying glass and literally burns people below, that is objectively bad. The architect and their team clearly screwed up. Additionally, architecture is not an art, it is also  scientific and mathematic. The sun example given above is not an issue of subjective artistry, but an issue of scientific response to the environment. Critiquing architecture can be entirely subjective at times, but there are many cases in which a design just utterly falls flat in an objective manner.

Edited June 12, 20196 yr by Largue

1 hour ago, troeros said:

If this wasn't FCC, but rather Amazon building HQ 2 in the West end and building a sparawling super campus in the West end there would be 0 criticisms. 

 

I can not think of a more apples-to-oranges comparison than a stadium vs. a new Amazon campus.

 

If Amazon wanted to build a campus in the West End, it would probably look a lot like the campus they built in Seattle: multiple new-construction buildings mixed into an existing urban neighborhood. Fine-grained urbanism, not megablocks. Preserving the facades of existing historic buildings and building new modern additions on top of them. And supporting the addition of transit-only lanes, bike lanes, bikeshare stations, and traffic calming improvements to the neighborhood.

 

FC Cincinnati acts like it is their god-given right to take ownership of public right of way surrounding the stadium. When Amazon took over public right-of-way around their campus they agreed to invest $5.5 million in transportation infrastructure surrounding their campus, which was used to build new protected bike lanes and purchase an additional streetcar for the Seattle Streetcar system. You think Berding would ever agree to a deal like that?

45 minutes ago, Moonstruck0 said:

One name for you - Josh Spring

 

Yeah, the guy is annoying and goes overboard often, but good on him for realizing that FCC dug themselves a hole choosing the WE before doing their homework.  In a world where billionaires have leverage 99% of the time, its refreshing to see poor people take advantage of their leverage here. Good for them.

 

They made a dumb business decision choosing the west end, and I'm glad they aren't easily steam-rolling their way out of it.

Edited June 12, 20196 yr by 10albersa

^ Josh Spring does not deserve to be taken seriously. The fact that people continue to negotiate with the clown gives him credibility and power to which he deserves none. If he wanted to be an advocate for the homeless, he should be working to forge a collaborative agreement for their direct benefit instead of pushing for policies that exacerbate their situation.  He is the pied piper and all he does is make the lives of those he promises to help worse. You want to improve homelessness in Cincinnati, the first step is to get rid of Josh Spring.

53 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

I can not think of a more apples-to-oranges comparison than a stadium vs. a new Amazon campus.

 

If Amazon wanted to build a campus in the West End, it would probably look a lot like the campus they built in Seattle: multiple new-construction buildings mixed into an existing urban neighborhood. Fine-grained urbanism, not megablocks. Preserving the facades of existing historic buildings and building new modern additions on top of them. And supporting the addition of transit-only lanes, bike lanes, bikeshare stations, and traffic calming improvements to the neighborhood.

 

FC Cincinnati acts like it is their god-given right to take ownership of public right of way surrounding the stadium. When Amazon took over public right-of-way around their campus they agreed to invest $5.5 million in transportation infrastructure surrounding their campus, which was used to build new protected bike lanes and purchase an additional streetcar for the Seattle Streetcar system. You think Berding would ever agree to a deal like that?

 

Don't praise those Amazon developments that much. Just try to buy anything around there. You can't since Amazon and overuse of Mommy's Basement apps kept storefront businesses away. So even if it looks mixed use or traditional it isn't really since the downstairs is mostly office.

FC Cincinnati lands approval for ‘skeleton’ of its $250 million stadium

 

 

FC Cincinnati received unanimous approval Friday morning for the superstructure of its $250 million stadium in the West End.

 

Cincinnati Planning Commission voted to approve the final development plan for the stadium and parking garage superstructure for FC Cincinnati’s soccer-specific stadium. The project is expected to come back to the commission two more times. 

 

The final development plan for the final stadium design, which includes the signage, lighting, sound design, landscape, parking, circulation, materials and finishes, number of events, event management and engineering, is expected to go before the commission in August. There also will be a final development plan for the on-site future development.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2019/06/14/fc-cincinnati-lands-approval-for-skeleton-of-its.html

FC Cincinnati to announce new stadium design Tuesday

 

FC Cincinnati has announced it will unveil the latest design for the West End stadium Tuesday morning.

 

After aesthetic redesigns, zoning changes and conflicts with residents on the area over the purchase and planned demolition of apartment buildings in the West End, FC Cincinnati plans to show the public its new design for the home they're planning to build in the West End.

 

https://www.wcpo.com/sports/fc-cincinnati/fc-cincinnati-to-announce-new-stadium-design-tuesday

---------------

Random rumors or r/FCCincinnati state it's quite a departure from previous designs and construction materials. We'll see tomorrow. 

https://www.westendstadium.com/ 

 

New and probably final renderings up. 

 

.

.

.

.

.

Surprise surprise, all the development around it has disappeared into surface lots. 

its very sterile looking. Wish we got more of a GABP look than PBS 

I love how that giant cell tower pole stays and is so prominent in the rendering!