Jump to content

jmicha

Burj Khalifa 2,722'
  • Content Count

    4,107
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

17 Good

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Not sure what you're having trouble seeing. There's nothing in any of those that's overly challenging to understand. Maybe you just aren't the type of person who would ever be viewing a design competition submission? They're interesting, but all of them rely in part on demolishing something that has already been developed. Which is a shame. I get why they made those moves in each, but still, it would have been stronger to use real world scenarios.
  2. Zoning here is such a crazy mess of rules, regulations, overlays, special districts, etc. haha. But it's fun to see what can and can't be done. I like having the advantage of understanding the zoning to know what can and can't happen in the future with these kinds of sites. I'm hoping something prominent does get built here. It's an extremely dramatic site looking from Brooklyn. Would be interesting to have a Lower Manhattan skyline with two equal peaks instead of just one.
  3. No. That requires a zoning change. That has only successfully happened a few times in recent history but takes years and you can't legally hold up a project for future zoning changes. Without a zoning change there's nothing anyone, including Gale, can do about it since it's as of right. It's the exact same reason her opposition to the 57th Street supertalls amounted to a hill of beans. The only thing that really could have stopped another supertall is if this site was in a landmarked district, but it's not. It's highly unlikely this will get split back up. It's more valuable as one collective assemblage. It's more likely that the tower that gets built won't be as skinny as proposed which will help with the current state of construction and the market, but that's to be seen.
  4. Dead duck in its current incarnation, but definitely not dead long. Hundreds of millions in consolidated air rights means someone will surely buy it very quickly. Expect a building of similar height (possibly even the same design) to rise on that site at some point in the nearish future.
  5. It's also possible their plan for a tower above won't require full demo and rather selective demolition. That corner might be able to remain occupied during the process. Always an option.
  6. That's looking awfully blank for many floors on all sides...I don't like that. I'm fine with smaller buildings. I would have loved a skyline breaker, but it never felt all that achievable (despite my biggest hopes) and as time went on I think it was clear it wasn't happening as originally planned. With that said, it needs to be better. It's not a good plan right now. Those laneways aren't worth crap if every level within visible connection is empty and blank. That's just an alleyway at that point. There's a difference. Hopefully when renderings of the updated laneways are shown they'll have more life, but it isn't looking promising from these images.
  7. Something huge COULD be proposed for there. At minimum they know they want 4-5 stories of retail and office, but then are in the RFP stage for residential above. That could mean a large tower (and likely does). I think it's just too early to really know what they're exactly going to do so that's why the details are thin on the residential side of things.
  8. Yes, but the existing building was literally unusable without removing every other floor so that ceiling heights would be more than 7' high. And even then, the columns were situated in a way that wasn't great for development. Additionally, we all know very well those lots aren't for sale, so that argument is unfortunately null at this point. Thirdly, this is an insanely dense development for the building's size. Demolition is something I am fine with if what replaces it winds up better serving the city over what could have been done with what was there, and what was there couldn't do much for the city. Obviously then there are other factors like design that I consider, but I trust Senhauser to do a good job.
  9. There is at least one alleyway in OTR in Cincy that has wood pavers. I'm completely drawing a blank which alleyway it is, but it's somewhere around Main Street.
  10. Such as? I'm trying to think of any major projects announced in CUF other than the one at Vine/Calhoun/McMillan (that was more concept than project) that haven't come to fruition. So far everything that I can think of has been built or is under construction in phases.
  11. I know that I'm just preaching to the choir here, but taking the streetcar up Vine and then having it branch off in two directions, one that follows either Jefferson or Short Vine to get out towards the zoo and another which goes down Calhoun/McMillan and turns north onto Clifton and eventually extends down to Ludlow and Northside beyond (when the city elects a decent mayor and council body) would be amazing for all these developments. It would touch nearly every major node that's developing. Uptown is becoming much more dense around its existing nodes and new nodes, like The District, developing out of essentially thin air. Something needs to tie them together and to other existing nodes further out and in the basin.
  12. That site plan is an improvement of feasibility. It's still way too much retail, but I think they realistically would have struggled to actually get all that office space filled in that spot. A primarily resident-focused development makes much more sense. I'm somewhat concerned about their plan for a more vertical hotel than has been built anywhere else in the area. I have a feeling that may end up being value engineered to be a typical squat 5 story hotel as you see being built in most places. Overall the site plan is pretty good. There are a few odd moments, but overall it integrates well with UC and Clifton. Also, if they actually somehow manage a 20 story residential tower in that spot those views are going to be insane. Its highest floors would be nearly twice as high above the ridge as Calhoun/Siddal which have amazing views from their upper floors.
  13. I don't really deal much with large amounts of fill in my projects, so my knowledge of numbers is admittedly limited. Am I crazy or did they not determine that filling under 2nd Street would have cost more than building the Riverfront Transit Center? Regardless, you'd still need to build retaining walls, implement drainage, use fill capable of holding up the venue, etc. That's going to be more expensive than just filling in with general backfill.
  14. Filling in with dirt would be much more expensive actually. It's the whole impetus of building the Riverfront Transit Center. Structure is expensive, but volume isn't. With fill, you're doing every cubic inch of that volume.
  15. I joined almost exactly 10 years ago as a result for a search of a place to learn more about what would eventually become U Square as I lived across the street and the sign saying, "coming soon" was put up. At that point I had only been in Cincy for about a year and as a "new to an urban area" teenager, I knew next to nothing about OTR. But these forums are what made me learn about what OTR was about and the energy surrounding its potential. I attribute this forum and OTR specifically to the creation of 2018 Jmicha who lives exclusively in urban areas and can't get enough of urbanism, transit, etc. and could never go back to living in suburbia.
×
×
  • Create New...