Jump to content


One World Trade Center 1,776'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

112 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Seelbach says construction of the Liberty Street project is still scheduled to proceed as scheduled, despite COVID. Ground breaking scheduled for April 6:
  2. The property disclosure says: "We undertook a comprehensive program of foundation stabilization shortly after we purchased the property. All plans, receipts, etc are available for inspection." That implies they already addressed the foundation issues, but perhaps there are ongoing issues. The disclosure statement doesn't reveal anything else alarming, and says that there haven't been any structural issues in the last 5 years.
  3. Exciting! There's so much good potential for that site. A few other links: I found the Covington press release: https://www.covingtonky.gov/news/2020/03/12/city-buying-irs-site The Cooper Cary "vision" document: https://www.covingtonky.gov/Portals/covingtonky/Documents/Guidelines/2019_12_17_final presentation2.pdf And I also found out that Woolpert is getting involved. Woolpert press release: https://woolpert.com/resource/woolpert-teams-with-cooper-carry-to-plan-redevelopment-of-covington-riverfront-site/
  4. Good points all around.
  5. The intersection of Ravine and McMicken is in need of pedestrian improvements and I'm wondering if a mini-roundabout would work here. If not a roundabout, what would work better? The challenges: Currently there are stop signs from all approaches EXCEPT for uphill (northbound) Ravine. My understanding is that the rationale for not having a stop sign (or signal) on northbound Ravine is due to the short distance (~180 ft) between Central Parkway and Ravine, and the fear that traffic would back up onto Central Parkway, causing accidents. The crosswalk across Ravine is ~80 ft, which would suggest a minimum of 20 second crossing time (based on 4ft/second). Ravine and McMicken are both ~60 ft right-of-ways (including sidewalks), with 4 lanes. Ravine south of McMicken doesn't have curbside parking. Ravine north of McMicken allows curbside parking. Ravine (appropriately named) is a steep hill. This causes cars to speed downhill. McMicken makes a turn at the intersection, causing a tight ~45 degree angle at the southeast corner of the intersection. There are only painted crosswalks on the south and west intersections. The east and north intersections are unpainted. Eastbound traffic on Central Parkway is not allows to turn left onto Mohawk Place. The speed limit on Ravine is 30mph, and 35mph on Central Parkway. 30 mph = 44 ft/second. That means a car drive up Ravine will hit the intersection in ~3-4 seconds. A pedestrian trying to cross Ravine is unable to safely cross the 80 ft intersection. Proposal: Goals: improve pedestrian safety, slow cars down, minimize "backing up" of cars onto Central Parkway. A mini-roundabout with a small, traversable island to allow for trucks/buses that are unable to navigate tight radius. Reduce traffic lanes to 10' with physical barriers/curbs to slow traffic as cars enter intersection Create short crosswalks that allow for easy pedestrian crossing. Allow left turn from eastbound Central Parkway to Mohawk Place. This will reduce some traffic onto Ravine while also helping support the Mohawk Neighborhood Business District (NBD) by allowing simpler more direct access to the center of the NBD. I'm curious to hear other people's thoughts on how this intersection could be improved.
  6. ^It cracks me up when NIMBY folks complain about a developer offering "shoebox" apartments/condos... as if they believe they're going to be forced to move into one just because a new building in their neighborhood offers small apartments.
  7. Yeah - I got a photo of them doing the brick removal last week. They're probably having problems with water infiltration, probably the result of trying to cut too many corners.
  8. That's a beautiful building, right on the streetcar line. And always good to see more residential coming to downtown.
  9. Yeah, I hope they keep the prices under $10. Comparing to Skyline, it depends on how large the portions are. A large 5-way at Skyline is $9.09, while a small is only $5.59.
  10. Naive question - is there any advantage to one or the other? I honestly don't know.
  11. ^Possibly related, I noticed there is construction fencing and heavy equipment on site at the surface parking lot adjacent to MLK and in between Burnet and Harvey. The site is owned by UC Health, but I'm not sure what their plans are for the site. Looking at the building permit for the site, it appears they might just be re-grading it. This site would be ideal for infill... so I hope that whatever grading work is done isn't merely for the sake of keeping the site surface parking forever.
  12. Pretty sure this is just a concept design, so I wouldn't get too excited. If money were no object, then yeah maybe something like that could be built... but I can't imagine anything of that scale/quality getting built on that site (outside/atop the levy) any time soon.
  13. The view from the north will be mostly concealed by the new buildings... I understand the skepticism from @10albersa but I'm hoping the city/county won't let FCC use the chunks of land adjacent to Bauer and Central Ave as surface parking, in which case those parcels will have no value until they're built on. But the view from John St will leave the garage exposed and the stadium just has surface parking, so I wish they did a better job with the John St elevations: Full presentation at: https://www.scribd.com/presentation/448805129/FC-Cincinnati-presentation-to-Hamilton-County-Board-of-Commissioners-Feb-25-2020#fullscreen&from_embed
  14. folks - can we try to focus on Oakley development here?
  • Create New...