Jump to content


Key Tower 947'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral
  1. Emporis has the American Building at 255 feet as well: https://www.emporis.com/buildings/122035/american-building-cincinnati-oh-usa And it also lists the new apartment building at Eighth and Sycamore as either 215 feet or 238 feet. I am certain that building is shorter than this new Court and Walnut building. https://www.emporis.com/buildings/1249430/8th-sycamore-cincinnati-oh-usa
  2. So this has me confused. According to this--which is obviously not authoritative--the American Building is 255 feet tall. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tallest_buildings_in_Cincinnati This Courier article says that the new Kroger/Court and Walnut building topped out at 206 feet. I could be totally wrong, but the new building looks pretty much the same height as-- and maybe just a tad taller than--the American Building. Any ideas? Is this a typo, and it's really 260 feet tall?
  3. Not trying to pile on Travis, but Atrium One also has some underground parking as well.
  4. I think that's fair. There is definitely a lot of nuance in the American system. And I'm just happy to have rational discussions on these issues, even on the internet.
  5. We're going to have to agree to disagree on the constitution "codifying" the Articles of Incorporation. There was no doubt that the states had the power under the Articles, but there's a pretty seismic shift from the states to the federal government--in things like taxation, standing armies, borrowing, etc.--in the Constitution, and certainly the developments since then (the Nullification Crisis, the Civil War) have really made it clear that, while they are "dual" sovereigns, federal sovereignty outranks the states when there is any kind of conflict. But of course, disagreeing is fine. Law enforcement is an interesting point--certainly the states have the police power (along with general health and welfare powers), but when there are conflicts between state and federal authorities where both claim jurisdiction, I feel like the feds tend to prevail. Finally, I think I learned far more about the structure of American government as an undergrad from history and political science classes than I did in law school. I feel like the focus on cases in law school meant there was much less of a discussion of the context of things. Or, practically speaking, I read a ton of the Federalist Papers as an undergrad, and I'm not sure if I saw anything more than excerpts of one or two essays in law school.
  6. A couple things: we are a constitutional republic, but we are also a democracy. You may be thinking in terms of direct democracy vs. representative democracy--we are certainly the latter, but since the earliest days of the Republic, there have been voters. The suffrage has expanded (from wealthy property owning white males to everyone), but we've always been a representative democracy. That voting aspect may not be clearly enshrined in the earliest parts of the Constitution, but as a practical matter, there has been a voting aspect to the American system of government--whether on the state or local level--since the founding. Second, your description of the Federal government as "designed to be "weak" because the true sovereign has always been the state" may describe the Articles of Confederation, but not the Republic under the Constitution. Look no further than an issue like gay marriage--no doubt many states still have constitutional bans on gay marriage on the books, but also no doubt that those are inoperative, because federal law overrules the states in that instance. The Supremacy clause is clear that when there is a conflict, federal law prevails. I don't see how you can characterize any entity as the "true sovereign" when its laws are subject to overrule by another sovereign.
  7. 13 floors will be a good size there. The northeast side of downtown has really changed in the past 3 years between this, the new Kroger development, and the two previous apartment buildings. A nice little infill building boom there.
  8. I'd be really surprised if they did. With the renovations at 5/3 Arena, it (like Cintas) is now in the 10,000-11,000 seat range, which is smaller than the typical NCAA sites.
  9. I'd love to get a European take on this whole discussion. For all the feelings of superiority that someone living on the coasts or in Chicago may have, I wonder if the typical European sees any difference in the level of "culture" between Grove City and Chicago. (Which is not to pick on Grove City; it seems like a pretty typical suburb when I drive through it.)
  10. This will certainly help, but there are structural difficulties that will prevent Main Street between, say, 7th and Central from ever being a hopping, bustling part of downtown, especially in the evening. The Courthouse is not going anywhere, and it brings with it a variety of uses that will never contribute to evening activity (attorneys' offices) and other uses that are perhaps even detrimental, but will definitely always be located there (say, bail bonds locations). So I think we can certainly improve it, but there's always going to be that part of Main that can only change so much, given the government offices located there.
  11. I can only guess you weren't downtown circa 2000. The level of street activity is so much better now in the evenings than it was 20 years ago that it's not even comparable. And it's not like Tiffany's or Macy's were staying open in the evenings to draw crowds. If anything, those department store/retailing tracts have always been traffic killers in the evening, because they weren't open. The cumulative effect of the rebirth of downtown dining and the end of the skywalks has made it so much better in the evenings that it's still light years ahead. I agree it would have been nice to be proactive. My vote would be to try and consolidate some of the very nice, successful local retailers already downtown into a more concentrated area. Things like Bromwell, the print store on 4th street, Richter and Phillips, etc. all seem to do quite well downtown. Unfortunately, those places are also now in good positions where they currently are, so it's very unlikely. But that, to me, is the kind of thing we should be looking for, rather than a silver bullet of getting a Nordstrom or whatever downtown. That, or get an Apple store in there and make a go of it that way. (Wishful thinking.)
  12. jdm00


    There is nothing about the service of a warrant, subpoena, or any other court document that is the equivalent of a "manhunt"--which is what we get when there's someone on the loose who has committed a violent crime or is otherwise a dangerous fugitive. Could it be a simple word choice error on COAST's part? Or is it dog-whistle politics? I'll let you decide.
  13. jdm00


    It's interesting that you use Canada as an example of a "single entity." You should take a look at Quebec sometime--I doubt there's any U.S. state with the level of independence that Quebec has, particularly in things like language and education. And IIRC, Quebec never ratified or otherwise acceded to all the necessary acts that the commonwealth countries typically do when they sever from England, though I could be wrong about that.
  14. jdm00


    I have voted in every single election I've been able to. I think there was a grand total of 2x, in my 22 years of voting, where I dealt with the BOE for address changes. There's a reason they ask you about that kind of stuff at the BMV--it's the law, and it's an extremely efficient way to do it.
  • Create New...