^I think they are planning on demolishing University Plaza.

Thank God; that shopping center is ugly and outdated. That dark tunnel they created is very uninviting, (especially with the sub-par chinese food on the way in). I  prefer the place on McMillan on the way up the hill (best won ton soup EVER).

 

It will also be interesting to see how much more college students actually go to that area.

That is a really cool layout. I take it that big building is a Kroger (in the spot where the current one exists?)

 

You are correct...it is that large (red-ish colored) building that has the interior surface lot.

I'm glad to see they are going with the interior surface lot instead of the typical exposed. That is probably my number one pet peeve. I can't stand seeing vast surface lots, creating a barren wasteland before you get to the destination. They are always 1/4th full and always ugly.  It's such an aesthetic drain.

These drawings kind of remind me of what an architect told me once, "If you're bidding on a high school football field, put a dome on the model".

 

But really, just another appeal to suburban tastes dropped in the city, not unlike what's there now.  And the proposed demolitions on the west side of Euclid are humorous -- that street, especially the 2500 block, has some fantastic row houses.  Corryville's really a great example of how people prefer cartoonish imitations to the real thing. 

 

The whole "Ghetto Kroger" thing has to stop, I've never understood people's problem with this store.  It's snobbery and food snobbery all at the same time.  If you actually drive out of the area to get food, you're just doing what advertising and pop culture programed you to do.     

 

 

>But really, just another appeal to suburban tastes dropped in the city, not unlike what's there now. 

 

What are you basing this on? You don't know what all design standards they're going to follow through with unless you have an '85 DeLorean that allows you to see the future (in that case I'd like to borrow it). Hell, the courtyard-like parking lot itself is a huge improvement.

 

>The whole "Ghetto Kroger" thing has to stop, I've never understood people's problem with this store.  It's snobbery and food snobbery all at the same time.  If you actually drive out of the area to get food, you're just doing what advertising and pop culture programed you to do.   

 

Pop culture doesn't dictate my level of annoyance when I get asked for spare change in the frozen food isle. Everyone in uptown thinks that Kroger stinks for many reasons. It sounds like you'd rather see inner cities decay than to see unsustainable shopping centers get redeveloped in a way that's more integrated with the rest of the urban fabric. 

The whole "Ghetto Kroger" thing has to stop, I've never understood people's problem with this store.  It's snobbery and food snobbery all at the same time.  If you actually drive out of the area to get food, you're just doing what advertising and pop culture programed you to do.

 

I just think the residents of this neighborhood/area deserve better than this piece of junk.  It goes much further than the exterior of the building...the interior is atrocious and the products available there are sub-par to what is offered at newer and/or better Kroger stores.

Much better, Thanks Rando.

>What are you basing this on? You don't know what all design standards they're going to follow through with unless you have an '85 DeLorean that allows you to see the future (in that case I'd like to borrow it). Hell, the courtyard-like parking lot itself is a huge improvement

 

I don't like an environment that looks like it was devised with Adobe Illustrator, this type of design that reassures secular pop-culture sentiments, which is what Starbuck's and this whole recent "clean" exterior style exemplified by the new Calhoun St. dorm insinuate.  The interiors of these types of shops reassure the visitor "you're creative, you're important, you have some perceptive edge over the helplessly uncool people out there", which I hate. There's alway a phony warmth to those interiors, crisp music played at a very specific volume, etc.  I look at that building on Calhoun St. and I imagine a nerd with his two big monitors side-by-side, dragging and dropping, tweaking adjustment layers, etc.  My heart is gladdened only by knowing that out of all those rooms there's a good chance there's some bong water being spilled at this very instant and the potential for other old-fashioned hootenanny overcoming the preppy university racketeering.     

 

>the interior is atrocious and the products available there are sub-par to what is offered at newer and/or better Kroger stores.

 

I've bought food at the store hundreds of times over the years and look how I turned out.  Never had somebody bum me for money or seen anything out of the ordinary happen there.  And I don't understand what these grandiose meals are that college students are apparently putting together, I never had money in college for the exotic wonders the Hyde Park Kroger.  When I was in school, buying a box of JTM's was a big deal, something to celebrate. 

I've bought food at the store hundreds of times over the years and look how I turned out.  Never had somebody bum me for money or seen anything out of the ordinary happen there.  And I don't understand what these grandiose meals are that college students are apparently putting together, I never had money in college for the exotic wonders the Hyde Park Kroger.  When I was in school, buying a box of JTM's was a big deal, something to celebrate.

 

This Kroger serves more than just the college students that shop there...there is a full-time neighborhood that should be respected and given something better than this.  Kroger has yet to figure this out with their inner-city stores.

But really, just another appeal to suburban tastes dropped in the city, not unlike what's there now.

I hear this sentiment quite often on this message board and I have never really understood it.  It seems like every new development gets tagged with this 'pandering to the suburbs' label.  Isn't the goal of this development to attract people and dollars away from the suburbs?  If the development is not ideal, what is the better alternative?  How can a redevelopment of the shopping center, one that includes a large grocery store, be 'more urban'?

 

The whole "Ghetto Kroger" thing has to stop, I've never understood people's problem with this store.  It's snobbery and food snobbery all at the same time.  If you actually drive out of the area to get food, you're just doing what advertising and pop culture programed you to do.   

 

I lived in CUF for 3 years and I rarely shopped at that store because the quality of food is terrible.  The meat looks old and the vegetables look like they are rotting half of the time.  Seriously, you can't tell the difference between a steak that expires two weeks from now and one on the discount rack.  They are both discolored and nasty.

Also, the food selection is very strange.  They try to stock products for both lower income people and college students, but the result is a limited selection for both.

I am not going to eat food that I don't trust, no matter what the 'advertising and pop culture' have programmed me to do.  I shop at Findlay Market, IGA, and even the OTR Kroger instead.

with the kroger discussion:

 

I always went to the Queen City Kroger (on Kenard) whenever I needed to do any real grocery shopping because the Kroghetto as it is lovingly called on campus has horrible selection and absolutely 0 selection of ethnic food choices. Queen City Kroger is much better. The Kroger in Hyde Park is ridiculous and I nearly got lost. The one at Anderson Towne Centre is even more absurd...

I just came in contact with an updated site plan for the Short Vine plan...this one shows how the reconnection to Vine Street will work, as well as, Kroger with a rooftop parking lot.

 

 

*NOTE: The area for the newly announced Hampton Inn, IHOP, Starbucks, parking garage, and TBA bank is not reflected in this site plan.

^ This map is a little hard to understand?

^ This map is a little hard to understand?

 

What are you confused about?  I can do my best to answer your questions...

 

*Keep in mind much of this plan is drawn in over existing structures...some of which will probably not be torn down at least for another 10-20 years (i.e. CVS and the banks in-between McMillan and Taft).  Another example is the newly completed Charlton Place project along Jefferson Avenue...it is just about brand new and yet it is not reflected in this plan.  I am just guessing that this was drawn up before the project was built, but I don't think it was.

with the kroger discussion:

 

I always went to the Queen City Kroger (on Kenard) whenever I needed to do any real grocery shopping because the Kroghetto as it is lovingly called on campus has horrible selection and absolutely 0 selection of ethnic food choices. Queen City Kroger is much better. The Kroger in Hyde Park is ridiculous and I nearly got lost. The one at Anderson Towne Centre is even more absurd...

 

My wife and I have been using Corryville Kroger to meet about 40% of our grocery needs (all but "stocking up" trips) for the last 3 or 4 years.  It's relatively small, can be crowded, and there is some loitering outside the entrance. 

 

As a previous poster mentioned, there is an interesting dichotomy in the merchandising, some products for your stereotypical low-income buyer and others clearly targeted toward your stereotypical young professional.  The beer aisle, which is incredibly large relative to the square footage of the place, includes everything from 40s of malt liquor to seasonal craft brewery selections. The store carries a modest but serviceable selection of wine, imported cheeses, organic, and vegetarian foods. 

 

Another poster said there are zero ethnic food choices.  That's not true, though you're not going to find the same number of products you would in Hyde Park.  But you can find what you need to whip up a quick thai noodle or curry dinner, for example.

 

I have also shopped at the Krogers in Bellevue, OTR, Walnut Hills, and the aforementioned Queen City Kroger.  Of those, the Queen City location is the by far the best, but the location is not convenient for us.  The Corryville store is similar in size to the Bellevue one, though Corryville stocks more of the cheeses, wines, craft beers, etc.  The produce and meat are not excellent in either case.  OTR is very small for a full-service grocery store, and omits things like floral, bakery, and seafood counters.  The produce selection is very limited, and last time I was there Killian's was the highest end beer offering.  Walnut Hills hasn't been remodeled in about 20 years, has limited produce, somewhere between OTR and Corryville, but it is rarely crowded so we use it for smaller trips for packaged food, household items, etc. due to the convenience of the location.

 

Now if you've made it this far in the post, you're starting to see the issue that dwellers of the urban core are faced with - lack of a large, well-stocked, full-service grocery store.  There are four or five grocery stores within a few miles of each other but none of them individually, or even collectively, adds up to Hyde Park Kroger or Bigg's, which are right next to each other.  A new Kroger in Corryville would be a welcome addition.

North is on the left, that might be throwing you off. The street with a median with trees in it is Jefferson. The street that terminates on the south end in a 5-way intersection is Short Vine, which now also connects with Vine. The eastern leg connects to Auburn Ave.

 

Interesting to see that dashed line suggesting a desire to send Eden all the way to McMillan.

Regarding that Kroger, from an operational standpoint, it is obsolete.  I worked for a nationally known vendor all through college, and occasionally made deliveries to that Kroger.  It has one of the smallest backrooms of any major grocery store in the Cincinnati area (I've worked just about all of them), and it is desperately short on dock space.  Vendors with light product like Little Debbie, Frito-Lay, Hostess, etc, always need to unload outside onto carts before bringing product into the building, which is unpleasant when it rains.  And if Coke and Pepsi happen to show up at the same time and need the only available dock, forget it.  One of them has a long wait ahead of them before they can even start working.  Most of the time the back room itself is navigable with a cart, but around certain holiday weekends it fills up and is a nightmare to work with.

 

Most of the old Krogers with this design layout have been replaced or remodeled at this point, leaving this dinosaur on it's own.  I'm glad to hear that there's a plan for this thing.  I was starting to wonder if it would ever be updated.

 

Also, I love that roof-top parking lot.  It may not end up being pretty, but it's a great way to reclaim that totally wasted square footage and reduce the surrounding surface lot, allowing more room for development.  And it's not like the roof of a Kroger is ever attractive to start with.  Nice.

Thanks Cramer ... I see it now. I guess the POI's that I was looking for were changed with this plan, so it was throwing me off.

I'd actually rather have a store that isn't completely full service.  I tend to prefer store specialization.

What's amazing about these plans is the intent to bulldoze another third of Corryville.  The first third was of course demolished by UC, totally upsetting the population that had supported the Vine St. and McMillan/Calhoun business districts, as well as kicking out the parishioners of the area's spectacular churches, leaving one in particular famously vulnerable to Walgreen's.

 

Aside from the bulldozing, two things characterize everything that's happened in Corryville for the past 40 years:

 

1. Abandonment of the traditional avenues (Vine and University) for side streets that were turned into borderline highways, specifically Jefferson and St. Clair aka Martin Luther King Drive and the one-waying of Wm H Taft.  These now main streets don't have traditional commercial frontage and simultaneously bypass the traditional commercial strips and suck them dry with auto-oriented junk like the University Plaza, MLK McDonald's, and so on.  Crossing Jefferson at any point headed west is confusing because sightlines to Calhoun or any point into campus are obscured.  Even crossing at Corry to continue on Corry looks like you're going nowhere.     

 

2. Fortress Corryville.  The 3 Sisters, the newer dorms along Jefferson, the EPA, the parking lot buffer between MLK and University Hospital, the Vontz and its weather stains, the woefully toyish Mariott with its pasted-on turret and its propeller hat missing a propeller.  None of them meet the superstreets in a traditional way, they are all car-oriented.  The new Stratford Place or whatever it's called hates the neighborhood too.  The area looks terrible and this new development with the hotel won't help.     

 

Given the amount of noise on Jefferson Ave. which helps keep rent low there presently, I doubt they will be able to attract people willing to pay $700/mo.  If the Mt. Auburn Tunnel were under construction right now, the leveling of Jefferson and Glendora for high density development would make more sense, but realistically, where are the people now who would be living in these buildings if they existed currently?  Without mass transit, what unseen forces are giving urgency to this redevelopment?       

 

Socialism/Urban 'Renewal' in American cities didn't stop. It just got taken over by the universities, especially state-run ones. Government can do good things, but remember UC is a state institution and a lot of their attempt to remake the area around campus represents all the worst parts of getting government involved in urban life.

Most of the damage done to Corryville that jmecklenborg speaks of occured when UC was not a state institution but a city institution.  When I first got here in 1971, Calhoun St. was lined with single family homes (used as offices) for most of the street from St. George up to Calhoun Hall.

 

I don't blame the university for trying to expand.  It can only help the area at this point.

I agree, UCincinnati needs to learn from their mistakes. What universities need to consider, is promoting development that isn't so rigid in form; create buildings that are highly adaptable, to prevent more and more demolition. Everything is so catered to specific uses. Whenever I go to Northwestern I see so many beautiful victorian homes that are used by the university as department offices within the university. Dan, were those "offices" on Calhoun St. used by the university? Anyone have pics of what Calhoun looked like before it was a wasteland?

To be honest I look at Uptown as an area in transition...one that not only the university should be involved with, but the city as well.  Uptown has one of the fastest growing industries and we should not miss out on growing that field here.

 

Secondly, I think it is quite reasonable for the Consortium to attempt this renaisance and attract these people into the urban core.  I don't think anyone (including you jmeck) would oppose the idea of having thousands of new/additional residents in the urban core.

 

Currently Uptown is the second largest employment center in the metro (second only to Downtown)...however, only a VERY small fraction of these residents live within the city limits.  If you could get that percentage higher, and bring some much needed wealth to some of these Uptown neighborhoods then I don't see how you lose.

 

Sure we're losing the historical framework of what these neighborhoods once were, but things in this area have drastically changed, and we'll never be able to attract these types of professionals to Uptown with the existing housing stock.  It is old and antiquanted...I don't view change as a bad thing in this particular instance.

Corryville could have been Mt. Adams (and in the 80s, it was unclear which one would win - the loss of Jewish Hospital among other changes really undercut the health of the neighborhood, that and tearing down of the West End). Anyway, maybe Corryville will work, but it has the problem of too much big money. Big money likes to do big things, like build 'big' buildings in neighborhoods rather than maintaining the character of the neighborhood through selective re-use. There has been a loss to the urban fabric. Uptown actually declined quite a bit in the 90s and is only beginning to grow again.

It did suck in the 90's.  I spent alot of time there in the latter part of the decade out of high school.      It is 100 times better today with the potential to only get better.

>I agree, UCincinnati needs to learn from their mistakes.

 

UC has been making mistake after mistake for decades.     

 

 

>What universities need to consider, is promoting development that isn't so rigid in form; create buildings that are highly adaptable, to prevent more and more demolition. Everything is so catered to specific uses.

 

Like every piece of starchitecture on that campus?  What's hilarious is how Guerry, Liebeskind, etc. build ridiculous additions to classical buildings...can't wait to see what happens in a few years when their free standing buildings get additions.  Hopefully they'll be obscured as much as possible. 

 

 

>Whenever I go to Northwestern I see so many beautiful Victorian homes that are used by the university as department offices within the university.

 

Well they could have left the Corryville streetscape in place while expanding west, instead they just bulldozed it all leaving a blank square with nothing to play off.  Universities that grew slowly like Ohio University tend to have fantastic campuses for just this reason.  Dozens of OU offices from the omsbudsman to the Jewish student center are in 19th century homes, there was never any "urban renewal" project there, it's the university that Modernism forgot.  And Postmodernism so far as well.     

 

>Dan, were those "offices" on Calhoun St. used by the university? Anyone have pics of what Calhoun looked like before it was a wasteland?

 

I have some photos of the old rowhouses on film but don't have a film scanner.  In 1998 one strip near the Shell gas station was renovated and looked pretty nice. 

 

>Sure we're losing the historical framework of what these neighborhoods once were, but things in this area have drastically changed, and we'll never be able to attract these types of professionals to Uptown with the existing housing stock.  It is old and antiquanted...I don't view change as a bad thing in this particular instance.

 

The exact same types of homes and apartments are being renovated en masse in Northside, so your argument failed.  It has nothing to do with the actual buildings, it has to do with the attitude.  The exact same types of homes from 1900-1920 with the exact same gas lights stand in College Hill that exist on Ludlow Ave. and in Hyde Park, but College Hill doesn't carry the same value as those places.   

 

Look at the horribleness of McMillan Manor, yet another recent fortress-style addition to Corryville.  What promise is there that this type of junk isn't going to overrun Corryville?  Add to the Corryville situation that a lot of the Victorian row homes from the 1800's are duplexes and it's a miracle all of Eden Ave. hasn't bee bulldozed yet. 

 

And more fallout from the Nightmare on Calhoun St. is the recently relocation of Taco Bell to McMillan & Highland, which required a demolition or two.  UC is too cool for fast food, goes to great lengths to rid its environs of them, and we'll see of other fast food places start tearing down more properties outside the university's orbit.  In an auto-oriented area, there is a market for drive-throughs, so I don't what other result the university was expecting.     

 

It's kind of like demolishing public housing thinking the crime's going to go away.  Demolish fast food and it might take a year or two but it will be back.  With the lack of rail tranist, the Walgreen's threat to demolish St. George shows nothing's safe from the profit potential of drive-thru's in that area. 

^You are very good at bringing up the bad examples (i.e. McMillan Manor, the Taco Bell, etc), but you fail to mention the good examples.  I don't see what is wrong with Charlton Place, Stetson Square, or even University Park for that matter (aside from the poor design execution).  I think the new project on the McMillan Park site will also be a great addition to the neighborhood.

 

The examples you cite are examples where planning and a good vision did not exist.  This is becoming less and less the case with the Uptown Consortium taking the helm.  CHCRUC also is not going to let their property become the next McMillan Manor.  I agree that change can be bad, but that does not mean that all change is bad.

All of these places are designed to make suburban kids feel safe and at home near campus.

All of these places are designed to make suburban kids feel safe and at home near campus.

 

Neither Charlton Place OR Stetson Square are marketed towards students.  Charlton Place consists of ownership properties...and Stetson Square is marketed towards medical professionals working in the medical block.

Oh they are still kids, they just happen to be med school grads and maybe law students. They just seem older because they work hard and make more money than urban planners or historians.

^Everyone knows urban planners start out in six figures and they don't even have to work hard.

 

My next door neighbor Nelson said people think he's crazy for living in Clifton Heights. He's associate dean for the college of education.

...

I don't disagree with those who say the new stuff is out of scale with the old stuff...that is a fact.  What I want to know is what should be done to help turn this neighborhood around...it seems to make perfect sense for it to go to the higher density stuff that is being built given its location/proximity to jobs.  It would also seem that these professionals would desire a different type of housing stock other than what is present.  There is PLENTY of the existing stuff to go around in that part of town and it is never going to be wholly replaced.  So what should be done with the rest...is something like Charlton Place acceptable?

 

I think, given the neighborhood's issues, that a project like Stetson Square is absolutely fantastic.  I would also argue that something like a redo of University Plaza will do wonders.  I'll go even further and say that once the dust settles on the area with University Park and McMillan Park, that people will be thrilled with the end result...especially when compared to what was previously there.  Sure there are some things here or there that could have (and should have) been preserved, but you've got to break a few eggs to make an omelet, right?

 

Are we all at least on the same page that Corryville needs some attention?

I don't think Charlton Place can be defended as even mediocre, it's a perfect example of how developers get this idea that they're going to pay homage to Italianate row houses but then get the proportions, colors, and materials all wrong.  Here they took generic windows and doors from suburban complexes, got some place somewhere to make those funny little hats, and threw it up.  The alternating circles and diamonds are straight off a strip mall.  Thousands of young women raised in midwestern suburbs who are part of the Teach for America program are living in the real thing in New York City, yet only the fake, feminized thing can sell in Cincinnati?     

 

 

 

I haven't actually looked it up but I suspect that a fair amount of Corryville's housing stock dating from the 1920's replaced earlier row houses contemporary to those that still stand.  Typically these 1920's homes are shabby and nobody's going to lament their passing.  But row houses from the 1880's and 1890's identical to ones that sell for millions in New York City stand on Euclid, where these drawing forsee more Charlton Places.  Again, they're treated like gold in New York, here they're treated like trash.   

 

 

In a more or less perfect world, I wouldn't mind seeing the density increase closer to the Short Vine and and then emphasize rehab further away. Short Vine should be have the downtown for uptown. If Steger had all the money he wanted, he was going to bury the intersection of MLK, Jefferson, and Vine, could have been cool.

Thousands of young women raised in midwestern suburbs who are part of the Teach for America program are living in the real thing in New York City, yet only the fake, feminized thing can sell in Cincinnati?

 

NYC also has a LOT more new construction than we do...so those that want new construction can have that, and those that prefer the ones with more character can have that.  There should be a little something for everyone.

 

I haven't actually looked it up but I suspect that a fair amount of Corryville's housing stock dating from the 1920's replaced earlier row houses contemporary to those that still stand.  Typically these 1920's homes are shabby and nobody's going to lament their passing.  But row houses from the 1880's and 1890's identical to ones that sell for millions in New York City stand on Euclid, where these drawing forsee more Charlton Places.  Again, they're treated like gold in New York, here they're treated like trash.

 

I don't disagree with you here...those beauties from the 1880's and 1890's should stay and DEFINITELY be preserved, unfortunately most of that has already been lost.  This was certainly the case on Calhoun Street, and its the case for most of the area.

Unless you get some totally random perfect storm of events, you have to demolish buildings and have large new shiney projects to attract more wealthy people. Charlton may look suburban but only a professional could afford to live there and that's their point. Those Charlton Place units probably have great interiors, whereas most of what's on Euclid are probably dumps inside.

I'm sorry, but maybe I've missed the suburban renaissance in Cincinnati or something...where is it you find stuff like Charlton Place in the 'burbs?

>Unless you get some totally random perfect storm of events, you have to demolish buildings and have large new shiney projects to attract more wealthy people.

 

Well there's no new construction in German Village or Victorian Village.  Little houses in German Village no different from those in Corryville and other Cincinnati neighborhoods sell for $500,000.  In Cincinnati the issue is that there are too many of these neighborhoods, too many hillside views, too many river and city views that distract investment from Corryville and other old neighborhoods.  Northside is the exception, since it has no view of anything but its own self. 

Corryville is certainly NO German or Victorian Village

Thousands of young women raised in midwestern suburbs who are part of the Teach for America program are living in the real thing in New York City, yet only the fake, feminized thing can sell in Cincinnati?

 

NYC also has a LOT more new construction than we do...so those that want new construction can have that, and those that prefer the ones with more character can have that.  There should be a little something for everyone.

 

I see where you're coming from, but why can't new construction ever have any character?  Every new place I'm in (outside of a loft, of course) has the same 3 inch baseboards, the same handrail from Home Depot, the same 6-panel hollow doors, beige carpet (or laminate floors masquerading as hardwood), white walls, etc.  I'm not against new construction itself, I just don't understand why it always has to be so cheap and bland.

^I never said that is should be without character...the better design the better for everyone.

^ Oh, I know you didn't.  I didn't mean to imply that.  It just seems to be the case with new construction more often than not.  They make it look okay from the outside, they make it comfortable on the inside, they build it as cheap as possible, and then they move on.  Even if the buyer has the ability to purchase "upgrades" it's still always mass produced crapola that makes the house feel more expensive but never more unique.

^Sad, but true.

^ Oh, I know you didn't.  I didn't mean to imply that.  It just seems to be the case with new construction more often than not.  They make it look okay from the outside, they make it comfortable on the inside, they build it as cheap as possible, and then they move on.  Even if the buyer has the ability to purchase "upgrades" it's still always mass produced crapola that makes the house feel more expensive but never more unique.

 

McDonaldlization of architecture!

I thought that this might be relevant here...

 

UC to shut down power plant, buy energy

BY DAN MONK | CINCINNATI BUSINESS COURIER

January 29, 2008

 

UPTOWN - Rising natural gas prices have led the University of Cincinnati to shut down its 4-year-old power plant, a move it expects will save more than $1.5 million in 2008.

 

UC trustees today approved a one-year contract with Duke Energy Corp. (NYSE: DUK), enabling UC to purchase electric at rates "substantially below the standard tariff rates," according to a report prepared for trustees by UC attorney Gregory Mohar. "This recommendation follows an exhaustive operational and financial analysis of our power-generating facilities conducted by the office of the senior vice president for facilities and is supported by the opinions of outside energy consultants."

^^^

 

>I agree, UCincinnati needs to learn from their mistakes.

UC has been making mistake after mistake for decades. 

That's hilarious. Save money by not using the huge power plant you just built.