For the sake of conversation, lets assume that The Banks/Riverfront Park, QCSII, and the basic streetcar line have been completed. With all of those things in place the question must be raised...what next? What do you think either will be or should be the next big developmental undertaking in Cincinnati?

I would like to think the basin would have a pretty good jump start to sustain its growth and private development on it's own.  I would like to see the city start focusing ALL of it's energy and resources on its older first generation burbs.  (Walnut Hills, Westwood, P-Hill, Avondale, Camp Washington, Northside, etc.)  These hoods will be instrumental in holding on to and increasing population in the future.

Broadway Commons...

Broadway Commons...

 

Yep.

 

... I've thought about creating a very similar thread a few days ago, so good thread.

 

 

 

There is so much energy going on right now in this city, it's unbelievable. It seems like there are major projects going on all over the place. I was just on Red Bank road yesterday and couldn't believe how different that area is starting to become.

 

 

 

 

 

What's next? (I say):

 

• Connect Mt. Adams to downtown.

• Connect OTR better with downtown. They're working on it with Central Pkwy., but fill up those surface lots.

• US Bank is a huge eye sore and so are those damn rusted steps near it. Re-clad US Bank arena and make that place friendly to pedestrians.

• We need one or two marinas DOWNTOWN. I know that you can't just put a marina anywhere (because of a major current, but build one as close as you can to downtown. Toronto's is just ridiculous. People literally poor onto the marina and there are even markets that have opened up around the marina. I know it's different sitting on a lake, but it can be done)

• Lighting: Cincinnati needs to update their damn lighting downtown. The 1970's balls just don't cut it.

• Get more people downtown. A large residential base will make anything happen downtown.

• I'd like to see more monuments, statues, public art, etc ... downtown.

• Condo towers: Build them tall(er), this way you can offer more affordable housing to younger people.

• Movie theatre: Building one downtown. Something like a RAVE in West Chester or the Esquire in Uptown.

• Blockbuster Downtown.

• Urban grocery store downtown.

• Less expensive restaurants downtown.

light rail line from broadway commons, to xavier, east to mariemont, loveland,

• Lighting: Cincinnati needs to update their damn lighting downtown. The 1970's balls just don't cut it.

 

Respectfully disagree. The balls, as you call them, are great. They integrate well with the unified street signs/traffic lights on downtown streets, and I appreciate their minimalism.

 

If you ever read Cincinnati Observed, the author takes note of how good they look. Anything that would replace them would look faux-historic probably, and worse.

? Lighting: Cincinnati needs to update their damn lighting downtown. The 1970's balls just don't cut it.

 

Respectfully disagree. The balls, as you call them, are great. They integrate well with the unified street signs/traffic lights on downtown streets, and I appreciate their minimalism.

 

If you ever read Cincinnati Observed, the author takes note of how good they look. Anything that would replace them would look faux-historic probably, and worse.

 

Well, the book was published in '92 ... not the best time period for inspiration.

 

 

I'm not saying we should put something modern there either. It's not that I have anything against something that's aged, it's just our perception in 2007 that has changed. What I have in mind is something similar to 4th St. between Walnut and Vine (the black lights that have an English feel to them). I don't think color is the answer either, but if they were black then that would make a world of difference imo.

^"faux-historic"

 

Great phrase. I will be using that a lot on here. ;-)

At the risk of devolving this thread into a discussion of balls... (ahem)

 

Well, the book was published in '92 ... not the best time period for inspiration.

 

I'm not saying we should put something modern there either. It's not that I have anything against something that's aged, it's just our perception in 2007 that has changed.

 

You can disagree that the lights are attractive, but your reason can't be that 15 years is too long to think something is attractive. Or that 1992 was a bad time to form an opinion.

 

To paraphrase: I'll be honest with you... I'm a Michael Bolton fan. For my money, I don't know if it gets any better than when he sings "When a Man Loves a Woman." Recorded in? 1992. Case closed. Or wait, that movie was made in 1999, can it still be funny?

 

Seriously, I think that the integrated signs/traffic lights are a real design achievement, all these years on. They are simple, restrained, and effective. They have become an important design element that indicates this is downtown Cincinnati and the lights match them very well.

 

Now maybe you think they aren't ornate enough (I can't bring up a mental image of the lights on 4th street, but I must admit being naturally disinclined to something that's "English") or that they don't fit it with the architecture of downtown. But there's a lot of architectural languages being spoken downtown, and those humble lights are content to remain silent, floating above the din of the city, steadfast and resolute, showing our way home.

the future of cincinnati will have almost nothing to do with our choice of lighting

Cramer, I'm not saying that the lights aren't cool, because the book was written in 1992 ... I'm saying that the author's opinion could change 15 years later.

 

To paraphrase: I'll be honest with you... I'm a Michael Bolton fan. For my money, I don't know if it gets any better than when he sings "When a Man Loves a Woman." Recorded in? 1992. Case closed. Or wait, that movie was made in 1999, can it still be funny?

 

Or ...

 

Heman was an idol to me 15 years ago, but now he's nothing more than a cartoon hero.

the future of cincinnati will have almost nothing to do with our choice of lighting

 

Changing Cincinnati or undertaking in Cincinnati (as the author of the thread asked)?

 

How big a project is to scale is an opinionated answer. It's subjective. What may be a big deal to me, may not be one to you.

 

 

http://m-w.com/dictionary/undertaking

light rail line from broadway commons, to xavier, east to mariemont, loveland,

 

Screw that. I would love to see light rail in Cincinnati but if it extends to the suburbs and they get several stations in each municipality, I'm not voting for it. It's a waste of money. Light rail should cater to an urban environment more-so than suburbs or exurbs. An exception would be stations near big employment centers in the suburbs.

Here's what I have in mind:

 

I second ALL of Cincinnatus's suggestions.

 

Regarding Mt. Adams: walking through the underpasses and parking lots around the Greyhound area, then up the Court St. and Oregon St. steps, feels very dicey -- if not exhausting -- at night (although I've never seen anyone around there except the rare sleeping homeless person on the steps). I suppose hoping for a touristy, heritage incline (a la Pittsburgh) is a little unrealistic? Mt. Adams does have a lot of tourist appeal for people staying downtown. It's practically the first place I take relatives or friends when they visit.

 

Speaking of bad connectivity, the Purple People Bridge is an under-utilized resource. It looks great on the Newport side, but the underpass/parking lot/narrow, secluded walkway path to the bridge from the Cincy CBD is also very forbidding after dark. Even during the daytime, crossing Pete Rose Way is a nuisance without *proper traffic lights*. Central Parkway could use a pedestrian traffic bridge or London-style pedestrian "subways." (Oh wait, there's one already been dug!) Like you all have said above, the highways and big roads surrounding the CBD in general seem to really strangle it, which imo helps to keep it a mere 9-5 office world ... Cincinnati Big Dig(s)? :lol: Put the cars underground instead of the people, hmm.

completely agree with j3shafer. Those 3 are top priority.  I know there is design plan regarding a connection bw downtown/westend and Union terminal area, which would be nice.  I actually asked today about an air tram to Mt Adams and down the road, conectivity to Mt Adams should be addressed.  Still #1 IMO is rehb of OTR.  A evived OTR would do absolute wonders for the city..we seem to be headed there.

I would like to think the basin would have a pretty good jump start to sustain its growth and private development on it's own.  I would like to see the city start focusing ALL of it's energy and resources on its older first generation burbs.  (Walnut Hills, Westwood, P-Hill, Avondale, Camp Washington, Northside, etc.)  These hoods will be instrumental in holding on to and increasing population in the future.

I more with this perspective than with the continued focus on downtown. With the a priori statement at the start, I'm assuming the basin will have enough energy for a decade or so. Uptown certainly has some energy around UC and to a lesser extent along Gilbert, but I'd like to see it spread West (though I'd be willing to take the Hamilton Ave. corridor before dealing with Price Hill). I actually think using the Museum Center to reinvigorate the basin would good. Though the rebuilding of 75 and the Brent Spence is going to straight suck. I guess I'd focus on the Madison Ave. corridor, then probably a toss up between Montgomery and Reading Road corridors. I'd actually really like to see streetcars replace the 'Tro on the local corridor routes, like the 4, 17, and to a lesser extent the 24.

Development is great, but I believe Cincinnati needs to concentrate on ways to make sure that all of the development efforts that are currently underway can be sustained.  The services behind the current development are the "next step".  If we get so caught up in the next project without having the infrastructure in place to take care of the last project, then ultimatly we are spinning our wheels.

 

Now do not get me wrong, I am all for moving forward with a massive developmental push, but how do we make sure that the existing, and the future projects are still viable 10, 15 or 50 years after they are done? 

I agree with rando on Broadway Commons- I feel it is the largest eyesoar in the city (Not to say that the banks isn't a more important eyesoar. I also think reconnecting east and west (Broadway Commons and Union Terminal via Central Parkway and Ezerald Charles) is incredibly important. I think that by 'rebeautifying' Central Parkway will help spur development in OTR and reconnect it to DT

Someone recently brought up an interesting idea on the Broadway Commons area.  I thought it was different...

 

A state of the art sports complex.  Put in baseball/softball fields, an Olympic size indoor pool, basketball courts, exercise facility/trail, playgrounds. The CRC could use it for many of their different leagues and it would be available to the public.  I guess it would be like Lunken.  I mean I'm sure you could tweak it many way but I like the concept.

 

Thoughts and opinions?

Someone recently brought up an interesting idea on the Broadway Commons area.  I thought it was different...

A state of the art sports complex.  Put in baseball/softball fields, an Olympic size indoor pool, basketball courts, exercise facility/trail, playgrounds. The CRC could use it for many of their different leagues and it would be available to the public.  I guess it would be like Lunken.  I mean I'm sure you could tweak it many way but I like the concept.

Thoughts and opinions?

 

If I were King, the coliseum would have been rebuilt on Broadway Commons.  The old building is terrible, and It would have wrapped downtown perfectly to have the Convention Center to the west, Baseball and Football at the River and the Coliseum to the east.  It would have been better for Main to have the spill out from concerts etc right to our front door vs a quick jump across the river to Newport.

 

The access off Reading, the parking, the leverage of multiple venues, the visibility, year around activity....it is a no brainer, much more so than baseball that goes dark half the year.

Someone recently brought up an interesting idea on the Broadway Commons area.  I thought it was different...

 

A state of the art sports complex.  Put in baseball/softball fields, an Olympic size indoor pool, basketball courts, exercise facility/trail, playgrounds. The CRC could use it for many of their different leagues and it would be available to the public.  I guess it would be like Lunken.  I mean I'm sure you could tweak it many way but I like the concept.

 

Thoughts and opinions?

 

Could be similar to the Chelsea Piers proejct in NYC, which has been a huge success. Includes a place called basketball City(5 courts/lockers etc), indoor soccer fields, batting cages, golf range (hotting balls into the Hudson), a very deluxe gym, a few restaurants.  In Ny it really improved the quality of life but obviously its much easier for downtown Cincy residents to leave the city and do all these things than it was for Manhattanites to leave and find all these activities.  Still, I think this is a very solid idea. 

 

I actually agree w/ Redmond 100%.  A multi-purpose arena would be absolutely perfect there and would allow probably most importantly, would allow for the destruction of US BANK arena.  Right now, it is an eyesore on the riverfront and really of a waste of space.  Unfortunately I don't see this happening unless Cincy got an NBA or NHL team.

 

    Something sounds familiar....

 

    Broadway commons, or more specifically, Deer Creek Commons just north of it, used to be a major baseball destination, before I-71 destroyed it.

Maybe we need a thread on eyesores around town that needs to get gone. I'll second the Coliseum as a colossal waste of space and a key position in the city. But basically it will sit there until someone thinks we really need a winter pro sports team.

Maybe Broadway Commons could kill two birds with one stone.  First it would eliminate arguably the largest eyesore remaining in the city, and secondly it could provide a fantastic location for some type of transit hub.

 

There was/still is buzz about a light rail line that would traverse that general area...plus there is already the Greyhound Station on the northern end of the site.  There is lots of dead space that will always be hard to productively use along the interstate...which would make for a good location for service barns for light rail trains.

 

You could create a grand transit hub for the city/region there that is centrally located and take care of most of that site.  The rest of the space would most likely be left closer to OTR/CBD and essentially could be returned to the grid and allow new infill projects that would reconnect that site with the existing urban fabric, because right now it is an island.

I agree with rando on Broadway Commons- I feel it is the largest eyesoar in the city

 

You misspelled "eyesore", but the misspelling gave me a great idea for a song. I'll excuse it.

But basically it will sit there until someone thinks we really need a winter pro sports team.

 

When I mentioned the arena going there, I had the sports aspect more to the back of my head and the concerts more in the forefront.  Thinking more towards concerts, what if you have Union Terminal that is almost an amphitheater type design, mirrored on the east.  Not to that scale, but open, similar design, concert oriented?  You of course run into the seasonal problem again, but I believe would be a cost effective way to bring in the large scale concerts from places like Riverbend closer to the core therefor leveraging that audience to give a greater economic effect to the city.

redmond, I don't think you could ever justify the cost unless a winter sports team played there but ideally, it would be a great idea.  JMHO. 

 

The more I think about it, though, the more I feel the sports/recreation complex would be a great and feasible plan. I don't think it would have to be private though i.e. you have to pay for membership.  You can have various membership tiers depending on what the indicidual wants. I think the sports leagues could play many of their games there.  Overall, I think a project like this would go a long way to improving quality of life downtown and Over the Rhine.  Think about it...makes the prospect of buying a place in OTR that much better.

redmond, I don't think you could ever justify the cost unless a winter sports team played there

 

You are probably correct.  But I guess that raises the question in my head which is better for that space, value added to homeowners with a service related facility or the overall economic stimulus of a concert/sports venue?  I do not know.

how's this t-shirt http://www.wireandtwine.com/store/products/cincytransit.html  boast for the future of Cincy?

 

I wish we had someone making something similar for Cleveland.....

 

Off topic, is there a hostel or reasonably priced hotel in downtown Cincy?  Me and my wife are planning on heading down to check out some new recent developments financed with market tax credits.  you can PM any recommendations to me so as not to clutter this thread.

 

 

how's this t-shirt http://www.wireandtwine.com/store/products/cincytransit.html  boast for the future of Cincy?

 

I wish we had someone making something similar for Cleveland.....

 

 

 

Hey gives us a break, we got the shaft when you guys desgined our "city of steam" shirt lol.

 

how's this t-shirt http://www.wireandtwine.com/store/products/cincytransit.html  boast for the future of Cincy?

 

They have these shirts at Park + Vine.

redmond, I don't think you could ever justify the cost unless a winter sports team played there

 

You are probably correct.  But I guess that raises the question in my head which is better for that space, value added to homeowners with a service related facility or the overall economic stimulus of a concert/sports venue?  I do not know.

 

I think a recreation/sports complex could increase residential demand downtown and OTR and if you have city-wide leagues using it i.e. recreational hoops, softball etc etc, it gets more and more people alloverthe city coming downtown. 

I would love to see a sports arena at broadway, but i don't know what the chances of us getting an NBA or NHL team are.... What about a large city park... all the large greenspaces are either on the riverfront or in the hills.. this would be a huge draw for otr and the entire east side of the city.... and rando about your idea about the transit hub is very similar to what Charlotte is trying to do with their Third Ward district. They are building their minor league stadium, a five acre park, and a new transit hub.

Love the talk on Broadway Commons guys.  Some dfeeinite potential there whether it begins next year or 5 years from now.  Here is my take on some of the ideas here:

 

1) Arena: As I said great idea that could be an economic boon for the city neighbhorhood and also help the riverfront by tearing down that eyeSORE of US BANK.  I just don't see it happening though.  Arenas are several hundred million and unless there is a pro sports team playing there, I put the odds of this at slim to none.  Hope I'm wrong.

 

2) Greenspace/city park - Am a huge fan of urban parks and greenspaces buth with the new riverfront park and Eden park not too far away, not sure there is a need here. I think it would have a better chance of happening than an arena but not sure I see a huge need.

 

3) transit Hub - This idea seems strange to me, especially at that location.  As far as busses go, you alrady got the hub at governer's square and under the Freedom Center.  I don't see the streetcars really needing a "hub" perse' so unless a light rail/commuter  line was to be added, I just don't get this idea.

 

4) Mixed resedential/commercial/retail/ entertainment- Cincy will not need another one after the banks.  Enough said!!

 

5) Sports/Recreation Complex - I really like this idea the most.  A real state of the art complex with  fitness center (to include indoor track, beach volleyball, climbing wall etc), indoor/outdoor tennis, indoor-outdoor hoops center, swimming pool (retractable roof)softball field, soccer/football field. Like I said earlier, this would do wonders to attract potential residents o downtown/OTR and improve quality of life. Kids camps, sports leagues, various classes... IMO it really fills a need.  I don't think it has to be a "wow" like the Banks but there will certainly  be enough there to really make it great.

Perhaps there would be a way to design such a park, that would leave space for a new Arena should the demand ever arise. My only thought is that how much dirt would need to be moved to provide a flat space for some of these facilities and considering the proximity to the jail would there be issues thusly.

What issues would the proximity to the jail cause?

No one wants to live or work next to a jail. Like social services, it's just not attractive. I don't support the jail because we incarcerate enough people as it is and the money is better spent on programs that prevent what causes people to end up in jail in the first place.

The way that sentence was written it sounded like moving dirt close to the jail is an issue. 

 

I don't think being near a jail is that big of a deal in general.  Is there a genuine fear of someone escaping from the jail and going to Broadway Commons after it is developed?  Perhaps I am naive.  If it is a real concern, maybe the right answer to the question that started the thread is to build the jail that was just voted down.

"No one wants to live or work next to a jail."

 

Umm, the Cuyahoga County Justice Center is located catty-corner to Key Tower. The $1-billion project slated for the Warehouse District is across the street from the Justice Center. You may not want to live or work next to a jail but you're projecting your tastes rather than stating a fact.

I don't think being near a jail is that big of a deal in general.  Is there a genuine fear of someone escaping from the jail and going to Broadway Commons after it is developed?  Perhaps I am naive.  If it is a real concern, maybe the right answer to the question that started the thread is to build the jail that was just voted down.

 

Since the jail downtown was built in the 80s, only two inmates have escaped.  Neither one got very far and were found quickly.  I think one even broke his legs in the process and could not move. 

 

It sounds to me that jail escapes are rare, and I would think escapees would want to get away as far as possible from the jail.  I can't imagine they would want to hang around Broadway Commons.

I'm not worried about the inmates while they are in jail but the people moving in and out of jail are right there. Maybe it isn't issue worth worrying about.

"No one wants to live or work next to a jail."

 

Umm, the Cuyahoga County Justice Center is located catty-corner to Key Tower. The $1-billion project slated for the Warehouse District is across the street from the Justice Center. You may not want to live or work next to a jail but you're projecting your tastes rather than stating a fact.

 

I'm not saying it can't work or be successful but from what I've learned in class, you do get opposition. I personally don't see jails as any threat to a neighborhood and certainly not a CBD.

One issue with an athletic complex would be the funding for it.  This would be a massive effort and would demand lots of funds, plus lots of money for operating costs year in and year out.  I just don't see how the city can afford to take on that kind of thing.

 

Now I understand that all of these are just hypothetical, but I just think some are more realistic than others.  This one seems to be a stretch unfortunately.

I'm sure that Mike Brown could offer some advice on how to get a stadium funded.

I'm sure that Mike Brown could offer some advice on how to get a stadium funded.

:laugh:

Or any of the various cities that managed to get them financed by private investors lol

"No one wants to live or work next to a jail."

 

 

If I lived in KY, I might agree with this!!   

Those guys have been leaving the doors unlocked in a couple different NKY county jails.

What, like three different jailbreaks this year?

I can't see the city ever paying for another stadium at least in the first half of the 21st century. It would either have to built with private money or built by some institution that could share it with the city. Maybe the art academy will get a D-1 basketball team or UC could build a streetcar line to the spot and then build the new basketball arena there rather than on campus which is basically running out of space, especially if the football team wants a 45,000 seat stadium.

I can't see the city ever paying for another stadium at least in the first half of the 21st century. It would either have to built with private money or built by some institution that could share it with the city. Maybe the art academy will get a D-1 basketball team or UC could build a streetcar line to the spot and then build the new basketball arena there rather than on campus which is basically running out of space, especially if the football team wants a 45,000 seat stadium.

 

Financing aside for a minute.  Would it be viable?  Could the location attract the business (concerts/sports or otherwise)to be profitable?  Is it the right use for that location?  If so, then financing is possible, it may have to be creative, but it is possible.  And I believe it is possible to do a private project to a great extent. And keep in mind, the value of the location is 2 fold if another use is simultaneously presented on the current river side site.