City Blights

Gentrification implies that there are certain social hurdles that must be cleared in order to form a mixed, thriving community in the targeted area and to ensure that those affected by the transition most, which include but not limited to the African-Americans downtown and the Price Hill-Avondale-Walnut Hills ring of neighborhoods, are treated with respect and their civil rights are not being assaulted. Gentrification does need justification, because it is a societal evil. OTR was primarily white until the 1950's. The West End was primarily black in the 1940's. When the city decided to play Sim City with the neighborhood and build segregated public housing, and later, idiotic routes for interstates and expressways, this destroyed the heart of Cincinnati, which was in the West End at the time of demolition. It affected downtown, uptown and the westside like nobody's business. Blacks were moved here, no wait, go there, etc. the ripple effect on our city has been that of a natural disaster. When white Cincinnatians decided to give up on downtown, that was city elite leaving disenfranchised blacks with the issue of a declining large district that would be expensive to maintain and rehabilitate. Now that it's trendy to live in more urban backdrops again, blacks should not demand a larger voice and at the very least, more explicit explanations for the changing politics downtown? I hope Cincinnati isn't the next city in a long line of Washingtons and Chicagos to push its blacks out of its most valuable assets, instead of being one of the first cities to encourage a rebirth of its most historic neighborhood with a black majority intact.

Should it even be expected to? I've seen OTR in it's current state. Bring on the "gentrification"! It can't be any worse than the last few decades there have been. Yes it should, because societal benefit is the universal justification for gentrification. When you take out the human factor of altering an entrenched neighborhood, you now have politicians working with developers to line their pockets and nothing more.

Academic studies and real-life are two different things. Gentrification rarely attacks the interurban issue of cyclical poverty and disenfranchisement, particularly along sociopolitical lines, which is the central issue of OTR's problems. It's no coincidence that those who typically agree with gentrification are not of the same ilk as those who lived among the dilapidation as a child of that community or as a long-time resident with a locally average social mobility.

Little known fact: 45% of the ridership of the Downtown/OTR streetcar loop is projected to be persons earning less that $20,000 per year. It's in the city's study. It will certainly save a lot of money for low-income families in the area served, many of whom spend a quarter to a third of their disposable incomes on local transportation. Once the streetcar is underway, what is done with the displaced culture of OTR, who is credited for the improvements to our city, and who is blamed for the drawbacks and pitfalls that will also accompany this paradigm shift? I know of at least one guy who has pondered these biggies. Clue - he's very unpopular on UO.

Haha, my ears don't like it either.

Really? Enlighten me. Who exactly? It is statements like this that are infuriating to me. You throw the Brewery Dist. under the proverbial bus to everyone in efforts to push your own cause. The CityLink campaign did the same thing to the West End. What do you tell developers when your project doesn't happen? I have a bit more faith in all of OTR than you do, with or without a streetcar and am not willing to say that the viability is solely dependent on a streetcar. This is not how you sell this thing. When you have someone like me and many others here in OTR that want in the worst way to be for it but have to defend the areas inevitable viability from constant statements like this, you are making a mistake. Come on people, are you just here to fool yourselves or do you really expect others to believe this? This just is not the case at all. What development that is in place now was streetcar proposal driven? The streetcar would not have even been entertained if it weren't for the development and if you would put it to the people that way, that the streetcar is a protection of your investment both in the CBD and OTR then perhaps you would get somewhere but that train may have already sailed. To say that OTR's development is thanks to your proposal is just laughable and finds no basis in reality. The frustrations here never stop.......... This city is going nowhere if they can't figure out how to revitalize OTR, I can't stress that enough. In other words, Cincinnati may or may not be going places but either way, it's going to happen slowly. Who's going to invest? How will the transportation work? Who's going to be pissed off in the process? What lingering social and economic effects will this have on Cincinnati's poor and mentally ill? Unfortunately, downtown is a haven for many of these people, and other areas might not be so willing to accept these people as part of society.

Love to see the City taking an interest in this part of town.

Doing my typical drive-by comment thing.... -Ghiz is being the politician she's always been, and I for one hope she is not an elected official in 2011. -Council is awful, among other city and county offices -The streetcar movement is in danger of falling on its face because the good folks downtown failed to understand what would get a public rail done in this town. If we've got an unfinished subway right under our feet launched at a time where the high rate of violence rate was not an issue, how in the hell did Cincinnati leaders think they would be able to push a loop through neighborhoods with horrible reputations in today's sociopolitical climate? A line to farther out areas east and west, sadly, was not critical to the realization and construction of Phase I for reasons of nobility, but for social appeasement necessary to get this thing done, and done efficiently. Do I think Phase I will happen? Yes. Will it be on time? There's plenty enough air to go around for all of us.

A ton of cities define themselves with trees on NBD's and/or in many of their neighborhoods, Chicago, Detroit and Cleveland being notables. I personally like the old pictures of Cincinnati when there were no trees downtown, just a concrete city and the accompanying vibe. IMO what's great about Cincinnati is the housing is generally very visible from the street due to a lack of curbside trees, and it adds an urban flavor that makes many of our neighborhoods.

Yea, knocking over hotdog and newspaper stands is a "very serious riot" :wink: Sure there were a few fires and store windows broken but it was mostly just hoodlums running around. The media totally blew the whole thing out of proportion and OTR suffered for a couple of years. If you guys are afraid to cross central pkwy, I will hold your hand and walk you across. It's not that scary.. geez. :roll: You know what scares me?? DOWNTOWN west chester, sharonville April 2001 riots and the boycott set this city back ten years, easy. Not sure where your value system lies, but A LOT of people have been murdered in Cincinnati since the riots, and at a significantly higher rate. Sadly, human life seems more disposable to those with less ties to the ghetto than those in the midst of the crisis who are seen as the problem. When has it been proven that locking away as many brown people as possible deters crime, fixes your city's financial situation, and brings cohesiveness between communities of varying ethnicity and class? The prison industrial complex and the unjust laws that justify it cause crime by preying on other ills of society (public education, housing, generational poverty) in order to gain capital while fracturing the already taxed homestead and community. If you are convicted of a crime, you are a criminal. This does not mean you earned a ticket to hell, or you deserve to be declared a lost cause, but that's all I ever hear thrown around in Cincinnati. In many Third World nations and developing countries, the laws are three times as tough, and there's not even a pseudo-democratic process in place like the one we have here. This still has not curbed violence and corruption, because if it did, they might not be "developing countries" anymore. Rehabilitate. Legislate. Re-define crime. Do not build more jails. Build streetcars and affordable commercial districts in impoverished areas.

Been a while since I have been on, just catching up... -Hamilton County does not need additional space for incarceration. Building a jail = pleading for racial issues and further disenfranchisement of black neighborhoods, which is extremely taxing on the city financially and socially. -I agree with John. The stadium deal has soured Cincinnati on a big spending plan that doesn't have 75 or 71 in it, though I would definitely classify 2001 as a very serious riot. -The Metro is underfunded and poorly planned. Let's all agree that is the major reason our bus system is terrible. -The scale of OTR should be utilized no matter what gentrification or advances in transit occur downtown. Our downtown neighborhoods are on the scale of a place like LES and Boston's downtown areas. We have to remind the world and ourselves that we live in one of the more elite urban fabrics in America.

The Flats isn't dead at all; in fact it can be a pretty good time. However, it has several issues such as crime and vacancy that we don't want on the Ohio.

That's a good idea. The surface space on low ground could be developed high-density, joining with Broadway Commons. That would be really cool to see.

The Banks (at the Banks) is fine, and so is Freedom Way. After all, blacks who made it to Cincinnati often were relegated to enjoying their freedom in tenement districts in the Bottoms, which is close to where the street is now. Not to mention the museum...

'cept Cincinnati....once again my argument for a broader system and politicians not worried about climbing the conservative Cincinnati ladder has been turned into anti-streetcar, anti-city, anti-transit rhetoric. The streetcar is necessary and nothing short of vital. Operating under the assumption that the issues outside of downtown contribute heavily to the decline of our city is useful when planning economic growth and social integration that could be spurred by a streetcar.

No chance whatsoever, how proactive. edale, where is the exaggeration? The city is divided about one streetcar loop because of the numerous longstanding problems here in Cincinnati such as crime, blight and public transportation that have eroded our tax base. Again, this wouldn't be nearly as big if Cincinnati was accustomed to experiencing any measure of success in civil projects and developments. A new convention center is the most successful thing the city has been able to do to generate income and stabilize an economic region since...no joke, I can't think of what off the top of my head, somebody help me please? "Portions" of good neighborhoods is part of the problem. We have sections and streets in good condition all over, but as a whole we suffer. Sometimes we even come up with new names for them for not only socioeconomic reasons, but as a concession that we can't save/assist the bulk of the area, so preservation becomes key. Economically, I bet you'd find that most of those enclaves you mentioned are not in line with what you would find down the street, or average on a citywide scale. BTW, Northside and Corryville are not stable; they are very much in transition. Agree on Mt. Washington, Pleasant Ridge and Hyde Park though.

Ok, too many quotes to keep track of, but... Cincinnati's downtown neighborhoods were once ethnically divided as most of you know. When many German and Irish families left downtown, OTR became a concentration of black poverty coincidentally around the time that highways were cutting through the western downtown areas, parking lots were being built over top of our eastern downtown areas, and the Laurel Homes was fully "integrated". The 1950's was a time of great deindustrialization in Ohio, and those with social mobility found no use for core industrial neighborhoods anymore, particularly by the mid 60's. Only recently has the city even come close to formulating a competent plan on downtown revitalization and marketing, and the fact that we're having this dialogue suggests much needs to be done. Cincinnati has been afraid to market itself as a tough, industrial city with strong core neighborhoods as evidenced by the Broadway Commons debacle. For one, the area around Crosley should have never been destroyed, and two, baseball in Cincinnati should have stayed where it was and not in a mudpit. Riverfront generated good income for the City, but was just another 70's concrete circle that didn't last and was devastating for the athletes themselves to play on. For some reason, we're still stuck on this family-friendly, play-on-the-river culture as our only ticket out of this never-ending spiral instead of merging this concept with other parts of our city that could turn themselves into decent-sized hubs of mixed-income shopping and pedestrian activity. Bringing a streetcar to Price Hill would bring tons of support to this project, and quiet even more naysayers that spread the real ignorance I hear posters complain of. I understand people are fed up with the negativity, stagnation, and close-mindedness in this region and believe me, I'm just as tired. I also understand that this won't be San Francisco overnight no matter what. I just happen to have a different view of how we can get Cincinnati as a whole thinking about our city as a whole, and not just their part of town. Unfortunately, one of the best ways to get people to buy in is to pay them off, and if a bigger system that ambitiously makes it to Westwood as well as Mt. Lookout could get our voter base behind a small tax bump, it's a viable option to better our city as much as we can. "Hipsters" wasn't an insult to anybody. It's my honest take that the City wants twentysomethings with degrees that can still call daddy for a quick $100 to live on the route, and "hipster" would qualify for part of that demographic. Obviously I'm being partially facetious, but my fellow Cincinnatians are so passionate about change in this city that they've lost a sense of humor! Things I never said: -the streetcar should start in Price Hill, or everywhere, or anywhere but DT -tourism is a bad thing. I'm familiar with Atlanta, and while there are some pretty desolate areas in Atlanta proper, there are some very average looking areas income-wise not far from DT as well. Cincinnati? Eh, not so much. Homelessness in Cincinnati is one of our biggest black eyes, hands down. Let's not get into a Cincinnati-Atlanta comparison. That's one we can't win right now. osogato, you're right, but at the same time, downtown has been a mess for so long that other areas might be required to uplift it.

The point is that, the city bailed on downtown decades ago and as a result of bad policy and a lack of jobs that support our specific tax base of mostly laborers with little to no education, our neighborhoods have deteriorated quite a bit. Because of the longlasting effects of dying neighborhoods (think Cleveland), the effort to invest in Price Hill and Walnut Hills, among others, should be much greater than the single-minded focus of hipsters and corporate urbanites that want to pretend its 1890 again. These other neighborhoods matter too. What about those people with the blisters on their feet from hiking Cincinnati hills day by day? Connecting the Westside with a couple lines is not only a humanitarian gesture, but politically shrewd. Who do you think loves WLW so much? Not just the suburbs. What's going to happen when an out-of-towner realizes our streetcar system is actually one loop, and the gentrification happening around that line is not indicative of the state of 95% of our communities? Anybody with a brain would think that Cinci could have/needs to do a little (lot) more.

Do these posts specify when, where and how much it will cost to get to Glenway or Peebles Corner? I'd like to stop repeating myself as well.

Clearly name-calling and bad spelling are the two best options to refute an opinion. Here's a few facts - Cincinnati doesn't have a clear vision on how to expand the streetcar nor the incorporation of commuter rail and LRT into our region. I'm sure other posters would agree that releasing job info isn't a good idea. Rather than checking for spelling, why don't you start checking for facts. Phase one of the streetcar is the route from the river front, up through the CBD, and into OTR. THE VISION TO EXPAND THE STREETCAR HAS ALREADY BEEN FORCED INTO THE PROJECT. You know, the phase going up the hill and into Clifton is phase 2 right. The very fact that there are 2 phases shows that there is a plan for expansion. Once the streetcar gets going, city leaders will (again) look into adding light rail to Cincinnati. It was defeated heavilly in 2002, and until we get some sort of rail transit (aka streetcar), people's views will not magically change. And I'd really like to know what name I called you. All I did was state that you make claims that are simply not true about the city. What are these future phases i.e., what streets, what neighborhoods are they to run through, how much and when? I like some of the ideas thomasbw came with, but I wonder what SORTA and Hamilton County are doing while all this expensive government intervention is underway. If there was ever a time to push LRT and/or a bigger streetcar, it would be much easier to sell if stimulus funds and federal aid were footing a gaudy number.

Clearly name-calling and bad spelling are the two best options to refute an opinion. Here's a few facts - Cincinnati doesn't have a clear vision on how to expand the streetcar nor the incorporation of commuter rail and LRT into our region. I'm sure other posters would agree that releasing job info isn't a good idea.

The NAACP was founded because American blacks were not receiving the legal and social representation they should have been receiving. This is still true in modern day America, particularly Cincinnati. He brings up a valid point - when is the city going to realize that it is half-black and absolutely has to make some concessions on what the black community might want done in this city, not just the ideas created by bureaucrats and pushed by black politicians.

What I've been saying the whole time. Smitherman isn't as crazy as people think.

Because we don't want a situation where the only line that gets done between now and the next ten years is the one currently proposed. We also don't want to further discourage the tax base we have that marginally benefit from the streetcar. When you tally up how much we've spent in both time and money between FWW, the Riverfront Transit Center that doesn't provide a benefit to mass transit, the Freedom Center and the stadiums, a streetcar network is not any bigger. I would add that none of the aformentioned have brought vibrance to our neighborhoods, sparked development, or stabilized a community the way a streetcar could along Gilbert, Montgomery or Madison Roads.

Exactly, that's why this is a project within the City's boundaries. If the City thought it was feasible to fund a city-wide streetcar network in one fell swoop they would probably try to do that. The reality is that most people, even city residents, won't be able to stomach a significant tax increase that would be needed to pay for such a large system all at once. This is why you build it in phases...and the most logical starting point is the commercial center and most densely populated area of the city (Downtown/OTR/Uptown). See: http://www.UrbanCincy.com http://www.CityKin.com http://www.Building-Cincinnati.com http://5chw4r7z.blogspot.com http://www.BuyCincy.com http://CincyStreetcar.wordpress.com http://www.TheBanksBlog.com Those are just a few to get started. How much of the Riverfront Development Plan is the City eating? If two lines would cost $180 million, $800 million for a much bigger system is a do-able number with competent accountants drawing the schedule. We all want what's best for the City, and a localized development isn't it. It seems that most Cincinnatians really don't care whether or not it gets done, because most Cincinnatians can't utilize that line without automobile usage, so the price tag becomes an issue. For Fairview and Clifton, it's HUGE. I could see that are really turning around, and into the mixed-class eclectic eutopia it's supposed to be. OTR? Eh, I'm not sold on a complete 180 happening down there based on the complexities of that neighborhood, though a streetcar through the West End to Union Terminal, fanned out to Price Hill, Fairmount, through Camp Washington and on to Northside could help repopulate areas without the same pragmatic issues as OTR, and reconnect our oldest neighborhoods. There's some great architecture in these areas as well that people would love to be exposed to if they had a reason to go over there.