Jump to content


Dirt Lot 0'
  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

85 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. I am so satisfied with the street wall this project is creating along this part of High. It's nice particularly because everything on the campus side is set back a considerable amount, so it really helps to hold the street better and make a nice, cohesive corridor. Also the fact that all of this density will allow for a great public plaza that mirrors what is... not one on the campus side at the Wexner, and you have a real improvement to the public sphere (of course the retail tenants, rents, etc. is a whole different conversation, and I am reacting solely to the physical form of this). Also, this new building seems to have a grand double-height space that fronts the street that will be great for events, so that'll be some nice activation as well.
  2. Arguably, that could have been installed pre-decision about stalling building B and it's just going to wait there until they decide to resume that work.
  3. I assume the proposal would envelop the "Bullwinkies" complex to the south? That is a pretty significant footprint. I hope they try and incorporate the historic facade but I know that's asking a lot of the Uni District
  4. You also gotta keep in mind the Confluence site was basically a blank slate ready to dig, versus Cincinnati had to abandon ROWs and demolish buildings, etc. Plus the location is more restricted for construction, materials retrieval, etc.
  5. "prominent design treatment for the street’s three intersections – illuminated metal pylons at each corner with a line indicating the high water mark from the 1913 flood" That's awesome. Glad they're trying to maintain some historic identity in this development -- since they're starting at a wholly blank slate.
  6. Oh, I sort of assumed this was what they meant by a pedestrian thoroughfare -- what reason do they have to close it up? It could literally be a pedestrian thoroughfare cut through the garage, visually extending Rush Alley through the garage but only allowing for pedestrians to utilize the tunnel And, if that is the intention, what would be even cooler would be if they bore a small pedestrian tunnel under the the next set of tracks to the west, connecting through to Gravity 2.0! I made a quick exhibit to illustrate my point...
  7. Thanks for the info! Unfortunately, as a landscape architect, I am all too aware of architects just plopping plants on any and all parts of buildings, just imagining anything can grow anywhere... It is always a cop out for spending money on some aesthetic architectural feature, and almost zero guarantee that any planting will be seriously attempted (or even adequately designed for).
  8. Also, do we know if they plan to underground the powerlines as they redo the street infrastructure for this? I can only imagine that would be part of this brand new district...
  9. I understand that they're basically utilizing the parking garage as a buffer with the railroad tracks... I do question why they wouldn't just add an additional floor or two to the larger parking garage and reserve that parcel to the south side of State St for future development (parking garage or other), especially since the piece at the corner of Town and Starling is left empty, even in the master plan...?
  10. Is this going to be the same as the Kroger development where they completely ignore the backside of the building's garage facade? Given this spot is a little less egregious because there is a building to the north, but the fact that the Kroger development did that facing the STREET (and it was APPROVED) will forever irritate me...
  11. This is arguably the same thing that they're doing at The Banks -- development is only over a certain height to deal with floodplain/insurance issues. It just... sucks for pedestrians all the time. What Cinci did right is that the street level is also elevated above garage, although that's obviously insanely expensive compared to... this.
  12. Looks like they're already shying away from their rusty red color scheme. Updated render posted on the project website. Construction set to begin next month. https://buildingthefuture.osu.edu/projects/interdisciplinary-research-facility
  13. I have to laugh out loud that what they're fighting is a reallocation in square footage to reduce the office component and increase residential units... Are they blissfully unaware of the state of the world right now? I think it's a smart move by the developer, and it has no real impact whatsoever. UA is in their own little bubble that really needs to pop sooner rather than later.
  14. It is SO much worse. It had a lot of charm before, some real architectural interest and nice historical references in its facade. Now it's just another awful box (and some commissioners LIKED the new design BETTER?!)
  15. I wish they owned and better incorporated the existing buildings -- Obviously the lot directly east of the firehouse isn't included in the owned parcels, but it is strange and will prevent any other substantial infill to complete the block
  • Create New...