City Blights

When are people going to understand that the opposition to the streetcar is related to the overall picture of regional public transportation? I don't care what anchors DT and UT, it doesn't get people who aren't already close downtown and it doesn't get people to our other regional job centers, such as up and down 71 and 75. Also, the "wait and see" approach to the Banks and the streetcar are directly tied to the ineptitude of the local government over several decades. Bottom line: the City has to gain the public trust back. Chastizing citizens for this is counter-productive. All the powers-that-be have to do is communicate CLEARLY with the public on their intentions, and keep on working. If the plans are sound, then it will work, if not...

62,136--That’s the number of residents, according to the 2000 Census, in Downtown, Over-the-Rhine and Uptown, the neighborhoods served by the streetcar line running from the Riverfront to the Zoo in Avondale. That is the about the same number of people who live in the neighborhoods of: California, Camp Washington, Carthage, Columbia-Tusculum, The East End, East Walnut Hills, English Woods, Fay Apartments, Hartwell, Kennedy Heights, Linwood, Lower Price Hill, Millvale, Mt. Adams, Mt. Lookout, North Fairmount, Queensgate, Riverside, Sayler Park, Sedamsville, South Cumminsville, South Fairmount, Spring Grove Village, and Winton Hills http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2009/02/10/62136/#comments Incidentally, many (most) of the areas you listed are in disarray and in some cases, bordering desertion. I could have looked up the crime rate in Uptown/Downtown and it would be astounding. You have to support city neighborhoods if you don't want them to end up like Fairmount.

There seems to be a couple primary issues with the streetcar that DO need to be addressed: -The current plan is small-scale. When and what will be done to A) increase the scale to the level of a true transit system, or B) clearly communicate to the public on why a centralized loop is the only thing City Hall can agree on concerning rail transit? -Why can't the city manage its existing infastructure any better? Rehabilitation and a coat of paint to standing properties as well as inspired infill could do much more for Cincinnati as the streetcar as currently proposed. Mt. Adams is the only neighborhood in Cincinnati that can give you an impression of what a healthy 19th century neighborhood should look like, and that's a problem.

j3shafer, in the Midwest, St. Louis passed Cincinnati, then Chicago, and later, Cleveland and Detroit by 1910. Buffalo and Pittsburgh passed Cincinnati. Railroads had a big effect on the economy, yes, but proclaiming Chicago as the sole reason Cincinnati stagnated unlike any other city of our demographic and era is erroneous.

Not to get too far off topic, but I'm pretty familiar with St. Louis, not to the point of a resident obviously, but the scale of Cincinnati's downtown neighborhoods along with heavy blight isn't really found in St. Louis. You hit the nail though, there are blocks and blocks of abandonment in STL, particularly along the river. ESL and the Illinois side of St. Louis is one of the darkest, deadest places I've ever been. There is NOTHING going on, including standing buildings and actual neighborhoods at the riverfront of ESL. Cincinnati's riverfront is much more developed than that of St. Louis, that's for sure. My specific comparison of OTR to other slums is the scale of 2-6 story buildings shaping the cityscape.

I want to start by saying, thank you so it goes, dmerkow and Flying Dutchman for not writing me off as some kook. Now let's get down to business...Cinci is one of the original powers in this country. You have to go to NY, Philly or Beantown to find areas similar to OTR's mystique. With that said, the city stagnated in the late 19th century and never received that huge turn of the centry boom Cleveland, St. Louis, Pittsburgh and others received. One could argue it was due to our slum index and boss politics, but whatever it was, we fell pretty far because of it. I don't think there's any question that Cincinnati fell as far, if not farther than most of the cities I compared ours to. I don't like comparisons either, but it's all we have to go by, especially in cities with similar roots to Cincinnati, for ex. Budweiser could have just as easily been a Cincinnati beer if not for Eberhard Anheuser moving to St. Louis from OTR. jmecklenborg, Cleveland has suffered in part because of the Fed and the State (like all cities), but still doesn't stack up well on a local level if you factor those hierarchies out. Cleveland has ran itself into the ground just like any other stagnant city. The Rapid isn't the model for urban transportation, but it is major transportation, and it does support residential neighborhoods over flashy commercial lines. I believe in a blend of both. REK, I understand revitalization is the key. What I can't understand is, why can't we use a little common sense to get other projects going in the meantime? Central Pkwy could be a "New Brighton" with ornate walkups just like Central Ave. What about the history in Walnut Hills, and I don't mean by Ursuline. The Incline District in Price Hill is a good idea, but why not push a little harder for functional inclines in places like Price Hill and Mt. Adams (connected to Eden and our cultural centers, continued up the Eastside)? I think the Harrison loft project is crucial to the future of this city, much more so than the Banks. Imagine what we could do with this city if the areas around OTR weren't Mayan ruins? I have ideas for this city, I just don't know if anyone downtown is listening.

I appreciate your candor. I only wish people respect my opinion, as I respect the optimistic zeal over our changing city.

Cincinnati is a very bad place compared to most cities. Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati flow together like a hot dog with chili and cheese on it.. What are "most cities"? And maybe you can give us some criteria that you're basing it on? Otherwise, it seems you are just making sweeping pronouncements about what an awful place Cincinnati is. Let's look at some critical urban issues - education, transportation, poverty, segregation, minority representation, budgets, corruption, crime and the most important of all, entertainment. Now let's look at some comparable cities that perform poorly in almost every category: -Detroit. Nuff said... -Cleveland. Though they have decent transportation, and don't struggle as much to have their minority voice to be heard and acknowledged as representing equal citizenry. -St. Louis. Better transportation, cleaner, safer downtown without panhandling, downtown casinos, and no slum like OTR/West End. Astounding homicide is a black eye on the city, though. -Baltimore. Not great transportation, but more than what we have here. Better schools, better executed plans for their stadiums, their Banks project is already built and nationally known (Inner Harbor) despite a terrible homicide epidemic that exceeds our own -Pittsburgh. No comparison, take Pgh. Cincinnati doesn't match up well, thus it's no secret why we fall at the bottom of every poll and research study documenting where people want to live and visit and where people should live and visit based on opportunity and offerings.

The Banks+centralized streetcar+livelier downtown doesn't make Cincinnati anywhere near perfect. It's almost the same place, except more to do. I've been behind this city my whole life and this will not change, but frankly I'm tired of City Hall and Hamilton County dropping the ball every chance they get.

Cincinnati is a very bad place compared to most cities. Detroit, Cleveland and Cincinnati flow together like a hot dog with chili and cheese on it..

Try looking at the city from a realist point of view. OTR and the surrounding areas are still festering slums, the PBS deal has crippled the county budget and canceled untold resources that would have went to our poor, the Freedom Center needs a seven-figure bailout annually because the Banks has took so long. The streetcar will completely revitalize OTR like the Rapid has kept Cleveland from falling into disrepair? Some of you guys need to get real about what you think changes a major city. That's education, jobs and home ownership by those who previously could not claim quality on any of those fronts. The people who will move along this streetcar won't be that at all. Those people will be stuck in Evanston and Seven Hills, poor as ever. Until something is done about the clear socio-racial divide in our city, you are saluting lip service, congratulations. What's really funny is, you think you're calling me out by ignoring the issues that can't be ignored, and that's what 700 does best. You give them a topic like welfare, and they'll simplify it down to people that are plain lazy that shouldn't be U.S. citizens instead of looking deeper into the situation of generational poverty, something Cincinnati has a whole lot of. When this city catches up, I'll give City Hall their due. Until then, keep the shortsightedness coming guys...

You could have asked before the "what the hell" came out. This isn't necessarily what I do, but I do work for urban solutions based on empirical research in the way they do. http://www.cgdev.org/files/9136_file_WP94.pdf Our city is in bad shape, and somebody has to be honest about facing that reality. Change won't happen overnight, and hasn't happened in quite a while. Remember DT leading up to the riots? I'll reserve my right to hold my applause for City Hall.

a couple of cranes is where a project like this gets it start, they're not going to put up more than they can use. it was a lazy question bc it could have taken 13 seconds to find the answer to and got responded to in a smartass way that was funny. chill out, it's not blind optimism, its enthusiasm for what one may feel as the city making progressive, beneficial moves... it's the easy and popular thing to bash the city and the opposite to support it. get your own thoughts instead of being told them The bottom line is, the city and county completely mishandled the riverfront development plan from 1996-present. If people are wondering whether this project will ever get built, they aren't wrong to be tired of waiting. I think you're confusing progressive politics with progress. The Banks finally under "construction" is progress, but I wouldn't consider the 13-year wait and uninspired architecture progressive politics. The blind optimism comment was for thomasbw. There is no proof that the city has been able to revitalize its downtown, core neighborhoods or establish efficient public transportation. In fact, there's plenty of proof to the contrary, but he seems to believe the city is capable of pulling off such things in a timely and successful manner that fulfills the promise of the visions fed to the public. Basically, know the history and form your own opinions, even when the masses (in this case, UO) don't agree with you. What is this ideal that thinking outside the box is easier than not? The City and County proposed a flawed plan, and most people on here are running with it til the end. Admirable, but hardly difficult.

^ Or a guy who isn't prone to blind optimism. Daytonnatian's question was valid. This project has dragged on for thirteen years, and all we have to show is a couple cranes. REK got smart at a time when it wasn't called for.

^ Definitely, given the slug's pace of this project.

It's probably going to happen. How long it will take and if it will live up to the promise are a couple I can't answer.

It's difficult to speak your mind as well. The results speak for themselves, so as long as we're discussing conceptual projects, where do we go from here? Is an Uptown station the best way to branch future service to other communities?

What about the Lukens and the P&G Pipeline, Simon Leis, Joe Deters, Uncle Phil...

You hit the nail on the head. People in Cincinnati simply hate downtown, whether it's because of a race issue or what...they simply want downtown to fail as if downtown failing somehow helps surrounding neighborhoods. but doesn't like the streetcar plan because he's "sure that the city will find a way to screw it up, just like they screwed up by putting GABP on the river instead of in Broadway Commons, where it belongs." We wouldn't even be talking about The Banks right now if the shared infrastructure of the stadia were not available to lift the riverfront out of the flood plain, something Cincinnatians have been trying to to do for 220 years. You guys have to admit, Cincinnati has botched a lot of decisions regarding downtown for a long time. It's hard to make people believe the City all of a sudden knows what they're doing because someone said so.

Regardless of the success rate, those 8 miles will have a large impact on this entire region, and measurable impact on Detroit, Atlanta and Florida. The streetcar as currently proposed impacts Downtown ,Over-the-Rhine, Uptown, and hopefully, tourists. The streetcar as currently proposed cannot lower poverty in Cincinnati, but less traffic on 75 in addition to a new Brent Spence could increase the amount of freight coming through, or better yet, jobs in this region. If the city wants to address poverty and tax base, it should sell a bigger system that might cost $800 million but serves the entire city. I could see the city getting behind the idea that a streetcar is coming to the ignored westside, trendy eastside, and most importantly, the forgotten ghettos. LRT can be handled by SORTA.

The land between the stadiums is precious. Wasting it with buildings you can find in developments in Columbus and a number of other cities is not a good idea in a city starved for that little extra to put it back on people's radar as a destination. Buildings have to stand, and there will be plenty of time to criticize the architect. THAT is why a vintage appeal is critical to the Banks.

Are buildings hard to build tall, or to build period? Is it 40 feet not being a big deal, or 80 years representing monumental change in Cincinnati? That's called disqualification. thomasbw, funny thing is, Pittsburgh has two buildings over 700 feet AND light rail in a very comparable metro. Nice try. This is just too funny, on the tallest building in Pittsburgh "In the planning stages, U.S. Steel executives considered making the building the world's tallest, but settled on 840-ft (256-m) and the distinction of being the tallest building outside New York City and Chicago" Cincinnati is achieving a personal goal of eclipsing Carew, and unfortunately that's it. I could see a large building going up after the economy settles, but I do question why they broke the story as a 210 meter building that could only get taller, then shortly thereafter shortened it to 201 meters. If they were able to acquire that much information on the spiraling financial crisis that quickly, they should pack up and be flown to Washington.

Are buildings hard to build tall, or to build period? Is it 40 feet not being a big deal, or 80 years representing monumental change in Cincinnati? That's called disqualification. thomasbw, funny thing is, Pittsburgh has two buildings over 700 feet AND light rail in a very comparable metro. Nice try.

Because it's Cincinnati and it's Uncle Carl and it was supposed to be 689'', they went to the press to inform the city, and then one day it was 660''. I believe they actually added one floor while subtracting nine meters. Cin-cin-nati.

Chunks of info courtesy of Randy....but I still look at the rendering and see 690, not 660.