Hot News!
• Tea Party leader gets grilled by NAACP membership
On today's date in The Beacon archives, we published:
•Smitherman still saying the issue is about a “streetcar” (2009)•More on Amy Goodman’s Arrest and the Struggle for a Free Media (2008)
•Journalist Amy Goodman Unlawfully Arrested At RNC (2008)
•Seizing Illegal Guns—Thinking About 2% (2007)
•Information or Advertisements? (2007)
•Nick Lachey: “I have never supported George W. Bush.” (2007)
Contact Us
v mail: (513) 685-0678
e mail: click here
Wednesday, April 04, 2007
3CDC Encourages Kids to Play on Steps
Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati
Not until recently did I find this link describing the Fountain Square water wall for children. I had just heard about it as a new feature for the redesigned Square, and I had been looking forward to it. (I keep trying to find reasons to like something about the new Square, and I keep wanting to enjoy that public space with my son.) This past weekend, I found the new interactive water wall was operational—but unfortunately it is another dud brought to us by 3CDC.
I imagined an interactive water element for kids to be located in a self-contained corner of the Square, or someplace where I could easily keep an eye on a group of children having fun. I even thought its location would be such that you could bring a small group of friends down to have the kids play while the adults sat at a table chatting.
Such thoughts are mere fantasy, and the placement of the water wall is awkward, at best.
Almost half of the water wall is located against a flight of steps. I just don’t think it’s generally a good idea to encourage small children to play on steps. While the Fountain Square steps may not be long and steep, they are steps nonetheless—so it’s strange that the designers for 3CDC would want to encourage a weird safety hazard like that.
The water wall also features some jets that shoot up little splashes periodically, located on a small landing between two flights of steps. (See diagram.) When I was there, these jets would activate a cycle every five minutes or so—which meant the kids had a long wait before something fun would start to happen.
Because of how everything is placed, a parent can’t look away from the children for even a few seconds. A momentary distraction by something on the jumbotron could be the only window a kid needs to run down the steps toward the 5/3 building and around the corner, out of sight.
• Share This Article! | Listen to this article |
|  |
Register
Anonymous comments are allowed, but you can create an account above to stamp your name and to avoid typing the anti-spam code.
If you are not familiar with our rules for leaving comments, click here! The Cincinnati Beacon is not responsible for the contents of any comments. Comments do not represent the views of the moderators of The Cincinnati Beacon.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
04 Apr 2007 at 02:52 pm | #
Um, I used two different pedal-type triggers to control the water jets when I was there with my kids.
Fortunately they - my kids - did not disappear around any corners, even when my boy ran around the platform that the water wall is on the side of, he came back into view immediately. You’re mis characterizing the environment when you state that a child could run out of sight at the end of your piece.
I mean, the water wall might be a little underwhelming, but it seems like you’re really just reaching.
Everyone should see it in the evening, however. Very neat looking.
04 Apr 2007 at 05:38 pm | #
I agreed with Anon #1. Keeping an eye on your children is called parenting. You could make the same argument for the local mall, Kroger, movie theather, basketball game, etc… By the way, there is 1 corner that they could “disappear” around. The rest of the Square is flat. You’re reaching.
One reason that the waterwall is tame is so that it doesn’t distract from the Tyler Davidson Fountain. You don’t want them competing. I agree that the jets are a bit underwhelming. I wish they’d shoot more water.
04 Apr 2007 at 05:50 pm | #
If there is one corner kids could disappear around, then the water wall is next to it.
Let’s talk about a local mall. Several local malls have designated play areas. The best ones are the ones where there is a single entrance. So, yes, I can let my son enter, and if I lose site of him for a second—no big deal, because I know he can’t have gotten far.
Other malls have seating areas positioned in a manner that caters to keeping an eye on your kids. Not so at Fountain Square. The water wall is on a flight of steps. The jets are, as has been mentioned above, “underwhelming.”
How many “underwhelming” things need to happen before we all stop defending 3CDC? How many underwhelming multi-million dollar renovations before we are allowed to say, “Stop it!”
04 Apr 2007 at 07:02 pm | #
Dean
“The jets are, as has been mentioned above, “underwhelming”.”
If the jets weren’t underwhelming; you would be raising “holy hell” about the extreme danger, of the out of control water feature, that will most certianly put out the eye of an innocent child. Since the saftey of the public has been your misguded battle cry in your ongoing vendetta against Fountain Square; now that the water feature shows up and is safe, all you can do is complain about it. Why don’t you go play on the “invisible” steps.
04 Apr 2007 at 07:02 pm | #
I think the pop-jets are somewhat underwhelming, but the rest of the space I love. I like the openess, I like the new location of the Fountain, I love the LED board.
Here’s a question: can you ever NOT bash 3CDC?
Why not put a fence around every area we expect our children to go? Or better yet, put them on a leash.
04 Apr 2007 at 08:22 pm | #
Good point JDF. The problem is, you can’t win. Make it safe and it’s underwhelming.
I’ll go way back to my earlier assessment a couple articles ago: we should completely flatten the Square and make sure there are pads everywhere just in case.
If you’re worried about your kid running around the corner and loosing him then pay more attention. How do you handle Reds games then?
Think of all the nasty hiding/loosing places in the old design if that’s going to be your complaint. There were corners and walls everywhere.
05 Apr 2007 at 01:24 am | #
No Mike, the problem is the public can’t win because council doesn’t listen. Council gave 3CDC control of our public sqaure and the revenue for 40 years. We didn’t approve of moving the Tyler Davidson fountain that had been redone a few years earlier.
We don’t approve of their gentrification in OTR using our tax dollars. We don’t approve of secretive and unaccountable, private government that lies.
05 Apr 2007 at 03:28 am | #
^ I approve of those things, and I am a citizen. Please don’t speak for me. I probably wouldn’t have moved the fountain, but I generally like the new square. I suspect the great majority of taxpayers and voters support 3CDC, and they especially want to see a major overhaul of OTR. What is your proposal for OTR? Just throw more and more tax money at the secretive, unaccountable agencies like REstock, so they can hoard more vacant buildings? The city leadership should have cut off your funding years ago, but they have no guts.
05 Apr 2007 at 10:05 am | #
hey 3CDC Has Got to Go, you make the same comment over and over and over again. “Tax payers don’t approve of 3CDC…40 years of revenue…OTR Gentrification…” Dude, we’re talking about a waterwall on Fountain Square.
05 Apr 2007 at 11:56 am | #
#7: Your position is the popular one here at the Beacon. You don’t approve of X, Y, and Z.
Fine. Hey, largely, I agree with you.
Why not address the issue that’s being discussed here instead of regurgitating the Beacon party line?
The Beacon is awesome - but we all know what the general attitude toward 3CDC is here. I hardly think that people need to jump in everytime the organization is mentioned and re-voice their general feelings towards it. It’s just not a constructive addition to meaningful discourse.
Now back to your regularly scheduled water wall comments.
05 Apr 2007 at 01:24 pm | #
Mike, we’re talking about the poor design of 3CDC’s new Fountain Square. The public didn’t approve of it and 3CDC lied about the real cost to us. That is relevent to the topic because nobody approved this design which includes a kids waterfall that isn’t all that kid friendly.
You keep saying the same things over and over. “3CDC is great, Dean your being too nitpicky etc.”
JamieNc, the public spoke when 3CDC took the design to the public. It fell with a “thud” and that’s why 3CDC had to take it straight to council to get it rammed through. The historic preservation society didn’t want the “genius of water” moved and the group that raised $3 million to have the fountain renovated a few years prior didn’t want moved either. If you liked it good for you, but 3CDC didn’t ask what you thought did they?
Anon, as long as 3CDC trolls like Mike, JFD and you want to pretend that we should be thankful for this private unaccountable new government that has already deceived the public, I will be here to tell the truth. It’s called free speech and you don’t have to be president of the Enquirer or be a CEO to use it.
My points are relevent to the topic. 3CDC’s poor design of our square. The way they did it without approval from the public (instead they bought council) and similar bad behavior from this same group of so called “experts”. The point is the bad design is 3CDC’s fault and 3CDC HAS GOT TO GO!!!
05 Apr 2007 at 06:54 pm | #
I would like some clarification on what exact amount of tax payer dollars are being used by 3CDC.
I’m talking about actual dollars that are leaving the city coffers and into 3CDC’s fund. I’m not talking about lost revenue from the parking garage that we won’t have anymore because that is a done deal.
Someone above mentioned that tax dollars are being used to gentrify OTR by 3CDC. Exactly what money from the city coffers is being transferred to 3CDC and being used in OTR?
From what I understand this isn’t happening, but if you can show a clear money trail on this I would appreciate it. It is one thing to say it, but please show some proof to your allegations. I’m sick of hearsay by stupid posters by the name of “3CDC SUX” and “OMG I’M AFRAID TO PUT MY NAME DOWN.”
05 Apr 2007 at 07:00 pm | #
Check out this interview with Chris Bortz.
It’s been awhile, but if memory serves, he talks about money from a street paving fund that went to 3CDC. It’s ironic, because later he talks about how good government is about getting the basics done—like paving streets.
Seen any unfixed potholes around?
But Robert, why not go to City Hall and try to get some concrete, printed financial information. Better yet, why not go to 3CDC. Share with us what you’ll find!
We’re still trying to wade through that mess!
05 Apr 2007 at 09:19 pm | #
Robert, you must be asking about the actual dollars that are leaving the city coffers and going into 3CDC’s funds, minus our lost revenue from the city’s parking fund. Those are obviously two different numbers and of course some of the other deals are “done deals” also so you’ll have to be specific if you really want the answer.
It’s a great question though strangely asked. Robert, have you heard of the Gateway I and Gateway II projects? Or any of the other 3CDC projects in OTR like the Music Hall garage? That’s where the clear money trail is.
BTW, did you give up on council forever or are you just taking a break?