1 minute ago, 646empire said:

Wasn’t that decades ago tho? Or have they re clad again?

A single decade + ago. It went from EIFS to a painted metal panel rain screen system in 2012.

4 minutes ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

A single decade + ago. It went from EIFS to a painted metal panel rain screen system in 2012.

interesting I have to go take a look

Street View from 2012 shows the recladding in progress: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1351863,-84.518513,3a,31.3y,170.87h,98.21t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1snhAjXBfQgz_NXbsgCBLOdw!2e0!5s20120601T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D-8.209088397220171%26panoid%3DnhAjXBfQgz_NXbsgCBLOdw%26yaw%3D170.86771364119946!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDMyNC4wIKXMDSoJLDEwMjExNjQwSAFQAw%3D%3D

 

As somebody who hasn't frequently been up close to the building, I wasn't aware of the recladding. Just passing by on MLK/Clifton, the before-and-after of the cladding was pretty indistinguishable from a distance, in my opinion. 

3 minutes ago, jwulsin said:

Street View from 2012 shows the recladding in progress: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.1351863,-84.518513,3a,31.3y,170.87h,98.21t/data=!3m8!1e1!3m6!1snhAjXBfQgz_NXbsgCBLOdw!2e0!5s20120601T000000!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D-8.209088397220171%26panoid%3DnhAjXBfQgz_NXbsgCBLOdw%26yaw%3D170.86771364119946!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDMyNC4wIKXMDSoJLDEwMjExNjQwSAFQAw%3D%3D

 

As somebody who hasn't frequently been up close to the building, I wasn't aware of the recladding. Just passing by on MLK/Clifton, the before-and-after of the cladding was pretty indistinguishable from a distance, in my opinion. 

We were SO close to getting rid of the obnoxious colors. I've always hated them and they did a mockup with various finish options, and the general consensus was to move away from the former pastels. That is until the former Dean of Architecture who had commissioned the building butted in and overruled general consensus. It's unfortunate.

I am pro-pastel. The colors relate to the different densities of foam and were intentionally selected in the original design. I remember seeing the mock up. The different brushed aluminums that were the alternate would have made the building look armored and completely change the tone. What is this general consensus you speak of, haha? I remember it being hotly debated.

when they built the new part of DAAP, I thought the state said the cladding was too expensive for a college building.  Then suddenly, 10 years later, it leaked? they re-did all the recladding to stop the leaks? Or, maybe they just got what they wanted in the first place. Driving by, it looks so close to what it was; I can't tell the difference. Sort of reminds me of the need to rework the leaky convention center. Water always wins.

It was previously more textured and looked like popcorn ceiling and had large radii where the panels met. Now the panels are smooth and I think have some sort of strip between them.

IIRC, Eisenman wanted the building to built with the metal rain screen system but it was value engineered out of the project in lieu of EIFS. EIFS is susceptible to moisture if it is not properly installed or damaged. The material then expands and molds once moisture is allowed in. This was happening all over the building. The new material is a metal rain screen, meaning that all of the moisture protection layers are behind the metal panels that are held off of that surface by a channel. Water can infiltrate past the metal panels, but then rolls down a waterproof surface just behind the metal panels to the ground. 

41 minutes ago, RJohnson said:

when they built the new part of DAAP, I thought the state said the cladding was too expensive for a college building.  Then suddenly, 10 years later, it leaked? they re-did all the recladding to stop the leaks? Or, maybe they just got what they wanted in the first place. Driving by, it looks so close to what it was; I can't tell the difference. Sort of reminds me of the need to rework the leaky convention center. Water always wins.

I was in it during the 1990's remodel and graduated right before it was done sadly. The efis was not the designer Eisenman's original choice but the colors most definitely were. The original material was a stone based covering if i remember right not the metal it became. The Efis was settled on to reduce costs and not wanted by anyone except those paying for it. Us students got to see it snowing styrofoam for months as it was carved into shape before sealing. Our industrial design classrooms even went a few months without windows looking into an unheated atrium with a plastic sheathing roof, it was a good learning experience if nothing else. I'm also on team pastel, anything else would be wrong and camouflage the shapes which flow nicely into the hills.

2 hours ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

I am pro-pastel. The colors relate to the different densities of foam and were intentionally selected in the original design. I remember seeing the mock up. The different brushed aluminums that were the alternate would have made the building look armored and completely change the tone. What is this general consensus you speak of, haha? I remember it being hotly debated.

According to Eisenmann himself when he lectured in 2007, the colors were selected because they represented the various colors of oxidation in different parts of the existing building's bricks. Which is nonsense considering they are the same colors he happened to choose for many of his other projects at the time, so it was just post rationalization.

 

Maybe my memory is fuzzy (very likely haha), or maybe it was simply that my grad class had consensus, but I know Chatterjee had to convince the administration at the time to keep the colors, or so we were told by Jerry, Udo, and Vincent. Who really knows though.

Well the fact that the average Cincinnatian hasn't heard of or noticed this building, despite likely having sat at a traffic light and driven past it many times, illustrates how much the only people who care about it are future, current, and former architecture students. 

 

Changing subjects, has there been any conversation regarding a re-lowering of Nippert Stadium's playing field and the restoration of the original stands?  The conversion for soccer with the cutouts looks terrible. 

3 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

Well the fact that the average Cincinnatian hasn't heard of or noticed this building, despite likely having sat at a traffic light and driven past it many times, illustrates how much the only people who care about it are future, current, and former architecture students. 

 few could point out the school of nursing (if that is still the school at MLK and Jefferson), but it's good to have nurses around. the average American is more concerned with birthdays, holidays, their bingo seat at church and who shot john. 

On 3/23/2025 at 1:16 PM, taestell said:

If the EPA site is sold, the city should reconnect Jefferson Avenue, eliminate the awful Jefferson/Vine/Short Vine/MLK intersection, and let the superblock heal back into walkable urbanism.

 

 

I feel it would make more sense to reconnect Scioto from Calhoun to Nixon and bring back Lakewood St. from Bishop to Scioto. Reconnecting Jefferon would make for one Hell of an intersection at MLK.

Edited March 27Mar 27 by anusthemenace

1 hour ago, Lazarus said:

Well the fact that the average Cincinnatian hasn't heard of or noticed this building, despite likely having sat at a traffic light and driven past it many times, illustrates how much the only people who care about it are future, current, and former architecture students. 

 

Changing subjects, has there been any conversation regarding a re-lowering of Nippert Stadium's playing field and the restoration of the original stands?  The conversion for soccer with the cutouts looks terrible. 

 

They aren't filling in the cutouts. It was dangerous before with the brick wall right next to the corner of the end zone.

 

Also, it looks fine, and they're not going to waste their time "lowering" the field. That would make the viewing angle worse for the north side of the stadium. Not sure what you're on about 

On 3/25/2025 at 2:37 PM, ucnum1 said:

As far as I can tell new renderings of the new  1200 bed 3 dorm buildings.

These aren't crazy tall, but it will be wild how prominent these will feel coming up the Vine hill.

I am really glad something is finally getting built here.

 

I really like the 4th building on the west side of Scioto Ln.    That fills the space and looks to me like it will fit well.

 

The other 3 just seem, off,  to me.   I realize I am probably in the minority here.  The odd angle of the middle building.   What looks to be excessive green space in an area right next to busy roads.  I doubt any students will ever spend any time hanging out there.     The exterior cladding being different on all three buildings, but they are all connected.  Like they are trying to pretend they are all distinct buildings with different uses or something.  

 

I would have thought one large building, mostly rectangular in shape, with a nice interior courtyard would have made more sense.  Fill the space better, and then give students a green space that is sound protected from the roads.  Towers on either end, 5 stories tall along Calhoun and McMillan.  

 

I realize this is adding a whole bunch of dorm rooms.  But given that UC keeps adding more and more students each year, I would have though they would have wanted to fit in as many rooms as possible here.  

42 minutes ago, JoeHarmon said:

The other 3 just seem, off,  to me. 

i thought the same. If you are building all three at once, why not make it more integrated? I think, and I'm probably wrong that the skiywalks, if you will, are all on the same level. That way the students who are walking to class don't have to trudge up the hill from vine. Or, at least it looks that way. 

Apropos of the recent Burnett Woods discussion.  The city is wrapping up repairs on one of the restrooms and will soon spend more on the restroom near the shelter.  I don't have a feel for how much these are used so don't have any opinion on the ROI.

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2025/03/28/how-much-do-cincinnati-hamilton-county-parks-spend-on-bathrooms/82414493007/

On 3/27/2025 at 5:31 PM, ryanlammi said:

 

They aren't filling in the cutouts. It was dangerous before with the brick wall right next to the corner of the end zone.

 

Also, it looks fine, and they're not going to waste their time "lowering" the field. That would make the viewing angle worse for the north side of the stadium. Not sure what you're on about 

IIRC there are utilities below the field. They couldn’t lower the field without a huge expense. 

Just now, Broman said:

IIRC there are utilities below the field. They couldn’t lower the field without a huge expense. 

 

I recall that when FC paid to have the field raised and the bottom 2-3 rows of bleachers removed, they also had to give UC funds to switch it back after the soccer team moved.  So it appears that UC simply pocketed the money.  Further, the stadium lost 2,000 premium lower-deck seats, a significant source of revenue.  

 

But the main problem is that the stadium looks nowhere near as nice as it did originally.  It's not just the cutouts themselves - it threw off the whole look.  The elevated end zone bleachers now just plain look funny, like they were cut off at the knees.  Since they were. 

 

 

 

 

Losing the lower seats really took a lot away from the looks and experience. 

FCC didn't raise the field, they just took out the first 1-2 rows to make the field bigger/wider.  Those first couple rows between the endzones were worthless seats though because you couldn't see over the players, coaches, cheerleaders, media, and any other people on the field.  Those weren't premium seats, they were some of the cheapest ones due the obstructed views. There's a reason why every football stadium built in the last 50+ years doesn't have seats that low on the sidelines.  They don't make sense for American football. 

 

For the end zone seats I'm sure UC would change them if they could make more money.  The horseshoe end is the student section so again they are some of the cheapest tickets.  They're also not going to fill back in the corners because of player safety issues. 

Remember when Mardy Gilyard bowled that kid over in the corner?

On 3/28/2025 at 11:23 PM, Lazarus said:

 

I recall that when FC paid to have the field raised and the bottom 2-3 rows of bleachers removed, they also had to give UC funds to switch it back after the soccer team moved.  So it appears that UC simply pocketed the money.  Further, the stadium lost 2,000 premium lower-deck seats, a significant source of revenue.  

 

UC had the ability exercise the option in the contract and chose not to do so. Those seats were not premium, they were average at best in the corners, and sideline seats were awful. It was +/- 1200 of the hardest to sell seats in the house. 

 

They also helped pay for the new video board.

 

Edited March 31Mar 31 by tonyt3524

Also it's not that unusual to have the cutouts. Just look at Indiana's stadium...

 

Edited March 31Mar 31 by tonyt3524

6 minutes ago, tonyt3524 said:

Also it's not that unusual to have the cutouts. Just look at Indiana's stadium...

 

I'd rather not. The Hell even is that?

Edited March 31Mar 31 by anusthemenace

22 minutes ago, anusthemenace said:

I'd rather not. The Hell even is that?

Edited 20 minutes ago by anusthemenace

That stadium uses the arch to create more space for the football field.

On 3/31/2025 at 11:32 AM, tonyt3524 said:

Also it's not that unusual to have the cutouts. Just look at Indiana's stadium...

 

I’m pretty sure IU, Virginia Tech, Wake Forest and a few others used the exact same plans for their stadiums. 
 

For Nippert, if you wanted to restore the horseshoe to be smooth (it’s been 10 years and really the only person complaining is a miserable person online) you could shave off the first few rows of the student section. If they don’t improve the team, there won’t be that much demand for seats anyway.

drove past UC today. The Athletic Center is looking good, at least from the angle I saw, and a very tall crane tower is going up for the new dorms. uptown is moving on up.

 

My YouTube thread brought up this link.  it could be good watching the new bridge. if and when it happens. 

 

Edited April 13Apr 13 by RJohnson
added images

That cam was panning and zooming when I hit play. May be a dumb question, but who is controlling it?

 

And those tower cranes up at Vine and Calhoun are TALL!

Edited April 14Apr 14 by Rabbit Hash

The depth perception here is really throwing me. It almost looks like College of A&S Building is on Calhoun/McMillan. Pretty cool.

55 minutes ago, Rabbit Hash said:

That cam was panning and zooming when I hit play. May be a dumb question, but who is controlling it?

i think the person 

Aaron Preslin

@apreslin

 

3.39K subscribers•497 videos

More about this channel ...moretwitter.com/apreslin

A second taller tower crane was put up for the new dorm buildings over the weekend.

 

 

2 hours ago, ry.bread said:

A second taller tower crane was put up for the new dorm buildings over the weekend.

 

 

We’re finally going to have a decent amount of tower cranes by the end of the year. These as well as I’d say 2 for the FC development and another 1-2 for the convention hotel. Hopefully we’ll see The tower at The District at Clifton Heights start construction (hoping it’s still a tower). Could add another to Newport if the Margaritaville hotel actually happens. Maybe one for the old IRS Site in Covington. 
 

Seeing all these cranes while coming down the cut in the hill will really be great and will showcase that our city is growing! 

Yes right now it's a grower. Soon to be a shower.

University of Cincinnati approves $47M for Crosley Tower project

By Lara Schwartz – Staff reporter, Cincinnati Business Courier

Apr 23, 2025

 

University of Cincinnati’s board of trustees has approved a nearly $50 million spend for the next step in its Crosley Tower project.

 

UC’s board April 22 approved $47.3 million for the remediation and demolition of Crosley Tower and the Clifton Court Garage in its next step in constructing a new STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) facility.

 

The tower, which was named after UC alumnus Powel Crosley in 1969, serves as a lab and research building for the College of Arts and Sciences. It requires remediation of materials like its lead paint and asbestos plaster before demolition. The university said these materials are safe when intact, but do require remediation before disassembly.

 

MORE

I think a new STEM building warrants some fancy architecture.

26 minutes ago, 646empire said:

I think a new STEM building warrants some fancy architecture.

I would hope so. And it's next to DAAP. We will see though, I've heard that it won't be very vertical and that area is somewhat hidden without any height.

University of Cincinnati approves $15M for final phase of work on campus building

By Lara Schwartz – Staff reporter, Cincinnati Business Courier

Apr 24, 2025

 

The University of Cincinnati is wrapping up work on one of its academic buildings.

 

UC's board of trustees approved $15.5 million to fund the final phase of renovations to Rieveschl Hall, which houses biology and chemistry labs, during its meeting April 22.

 

Work on the building, which was in need of upgrades to its infrastructure, technology and interior, began in May 2023. The building remained online amid renovations to allow for continued teaching and research.

 

MORE

This is interesting, and perhaps gives us some insight into what will replace Crosley Tower:

 

Quote

The final phase will also demolish the bridge between Rieveschl Hall and Langsam Library to support the visual extension and pedestrian connection to the new STEM facility from Library Square.

 

13 hours ago, taestell said:

This is interesting, and perhaps gives us some insight into what will replace Crosley Tower:

 

 

Yeah that was a nice add.

UC seeks team for $12M renovation project Uptown

The University of Cincinnati is seeking a team to start a new multimillion-dollar construction project.

UC is planning a $12 million renovation to its Medical Science Building on its Uptown East/Medical Campus.

The building, known as MSB, has been renovated over multiple phases in the last decade. Originally constructed in 1974, the MSB is in need of modernization. However, working around the research being conducted throughout has proven to be a challenge, according to Monika Watkins, university architect and associate vice president for UC Planning, Design and Construction.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2025/04/28/uc-seeks-team-medical-sciences-renovation-project.html

I got a first look of the building a month or so ago and let me tell you it is BEST IN CLASS. Can’t wait for people to see it fully. The building is huge in person.

Architecture as a recruiting tool: University of Cincinnati to open $134M athletic center

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/growth-and-development/2025/06/09/university-of-cincinnati-athletics-to-open-new-sheakley-indoor-practice-facility-and-performance/83995494007/?tbref=hp

Edited Monday at 01:01 PM3 days by 646empire

UC unveils new $134M indoor practice facility and performance center: PHOTOS

By Madalyn Blair – Intern, Cincinnati Business Courier

Jun 12, 2025

Athletic performance training for University of Cincinnati athletes has entered a new phase.  

On June 11, UC welcomed guests, athletes and donors to a ribbon-cutting ceremony to unveil its $134 million indoor practice facility and performance center. Its completion marks the end of a more than two-year construction process that kick-started almost in lockstep with the school's move to the Big 12 Conference in July 2023.

MORE

Who influenced who?

It’s a stunner! The design is spectacular. The weight room is the best I’ve seen. Love the garage doors opening to the field. The facility being multi storied really creates a building that feels different from competing facilities.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKyB5E9suJn/

https://www.instagram.com/p/DKxlnWZO88n/?img_index=1

Edited 17 hours ago17 hr by 646empire

dont forget the new airport bldg... triangles are apparently the trend

Extras: https://www.cincinnati.com/picture-gallery/sports/college/university-of-cincinnati/2025/06/12/sheakley-indoor-performance-center-renovations-photos/84164726007/