BY LUCY MAY
The Cincinnati Enquirer
Three out-of-town urban design experts came to town Tuesday to hear about Cincinnati's Reds ballpark debate and turned the discussion on its head in 90 minutes flat.
After presentations from advocates of the two rival stadium sites, each out-of-town professor let loose with criticisms that questioned some of the core beliefs behind both the Broadway Commons and riverfront sites:
- Tony Costello, a Ball State University architecture professor, said when he first heard about the "Wedge," he assumed it must be the site at Broadway and Reading Road. "That site has more of a fit like a tight shoe than the riverfront site," he said.
The "Wedge" site, of course, is a nickname for the riverfront site next to the Crown, which is also known as Baseball on Main.
- Jack Nasar, an Ohio State University architecture professor, said he had an immediate negative reaction to the Broadway site because he worried it would hurt the nearby neighborhood.
Broadway backers, of course, argue a ballpark at Broadway would help nearby residential development in Pendleton and Over-the-Rhine.
- Ruth Durack, director of the Urban Design Center of Northeast Ohio in Kent, Ohio, said she thought the city's riverfront was far too valuable to be cluttered up with big sports facilities and that putting the Reds and Bengals on the riverfront would send a message that the community most values sports and competition.
Proponents of the riverfront site, of course, argue both stadiums on the riverfront could create a compelling new "post card" for the region that would draw new visitors and new business.
Their comments were part of a forum sponsored by the Cincinnati Chapter of the American Institute of Architects at the Mercantile Library downtown. Former Gov. John Gilligan moderated.
A crowd of about 100 people packed the library to hear the fresh perspectives of three people who can't vote on Issue 11.
Issue 11, of course, is the ballot measure that asks Hamilton County voters to create a county charter that would require any new Reds ballpark be built at Broadway Commons.
Hamilton County and the Reds already have a deal to build a new riverfront ballpark, and a "yes" vote on Issue 11 seeks to undo that deal. A "no" vote endorses the riverfront site.
Ultimately, Mr. Costello came down in favor of the riverfront, saying Cincinnati has a proud baseball heritage and a big enough riverfront to include both stadiums and a grand public park.
Mr. Nasar opted for Broadway, saying while the decision is "a very close call," Broadway Commons "makes a lot more sense than plunking it down on the waterfront."
Mr. Nasar also questioned the pro-riverfront assertion that the Broadway site would be better for housing, questioning whether there was enough demand for such a housing development and whether one would even be viable on the site.
Ms. Durack, the only one who wasn't a diehard baseball fan, hesitated making a call. She said the community would be better served to ask itself what Cincinnati wants to say about itself with the placement of the stadium.
It's hard to resist the logic of locating the football and baseball stadiums next to each other because the two facilities can share parking and because the complementary seasons can help support entertainment venues in between, Ms. Durack said.
Stadiums also make lousy neighbors, she said.
"They do have bright lights and screaming fans and people who do nasty things as they walk back from the games," Ms. Durack said. "I suspect the historic Pendleton district is going to take kind of a beating if the stadium goes (to Broadway.)"
But finally she concluded: "Don't squander your riverfront for buildings you'll be sorry about some day."
The point of the forum was to bring in people who understood urban planning and could take a fresh look at the debate that Cincinnati has lived through for years.
All three applauded the public for taking such an interest in the community's $1 billion stadium investment, and Mr. Costello gave one last piece of advice: "I hope each and every one of you make as much of a commitment to the $700 million in repairs needed for your schools."
