Michael L. Redmond

I am really glad you brought this up. Things are taking off already. Yet there are new units as low as 85,000 and phase II has more that are just as low, perhaps slightly lower. Many of the units are priced between 100-150,000 and I would not say that is so out of reach for the majority of people when you take into consideration the average home price in Cincinnati is over 200,000. That being said, keep in mind that most of buildings were empty or are in the process of emptying themselves. This is not the same gentrification game that has been played in the past, the rules are different now. Before, gentrification generally happened because of upper ranging housing pushing out lower ones so new pushing out old residents. Today, it is the lower income people, the original residents, who with a voucher in their hands, are deciding to live in place that is better, safer, and gives them and their children a chance. The slumlords can no longer fill their buildings in OTR and the West end and in some cases have been forced into bancruptcy as they can not compete with Westwood, Price Hill, etc. So the gentrification equation has flipped. Down here it didn't start with the development, that came later, after the mass exodus of those looking for better living conditions.

Grammer's keeps its character BY STEPFANIE ROMINE | [email protected] Grammer's, the historic German restaurant in Over-the-Rhine, reopens as a bar tonight. Located at the corner of Liberty and Walnut streets, Grammer's still has its original beveled glass entrance, which was custom-made in Germany. New owners Marilyn and Martin Wade, who bought the restaurant from former Cincinnati vice mayor Jim Tarbell last year, are retaining the original décor. The bar, which will be open Tuesday through Saturday from 4 p.m. until midnight or 1 a.m., will serve limited German fare. Local brews, including Christian Moerlein and BarrelHouse, will be among the seven on tap. For more information, call 513-421-8300.

I was thinking Reed Hartman but we are both probably right. I think that the connection with the social service is in the method of her argument. Throw out some numbers and some over reaching rhetoric and hope something sticks.

and if someone will put it in Cheryl Crowell's front yard, I will take a hundred or so. This lady is nuts. She is not just anti streetcar, she really seems to be anti redevelopment of OTR. Perhaps I am reading something into one of her post, but I sense a bit of bitterness and disdain towards Gateway as well. Not to mention her use of "funny math" the highly publicized GATEWAY DISTRICT (no longer OTR you should note) with it’s luxury condos sitting at 12th and Vine. So in agreement with Chris S, we can now add the 17,500 people living in the CUF neighborhoods that might come down and buy those $500,000+ luxury condos on the market. from Cincinnati beacon Now I know a bit about Gateway and she is sorely misinformed. If this is typical of how she portrays things that she doesn't agree with, then I can put no stock in what she says about the streetcar.

Thank you.

So lets get him on here. Do you know him?

Oakiehigh, Not sure what to make of that. Wasn't my saying "email this guy and get him on here so we can ask him a few questions?" an offer to "enlighten these people and INCLUDE them on the ULTIMATE MASTER PLAN"? Do I agree with "Why would this city support $100 million effort to shuffle a couple hundred people a day around Over-the-Rhine and Downtown?" in exchange for "link Westwood to Mount Washington and Bond Hill to Uptown" or his assessment of the streetcar to simply "make it easier for bar hoppers to hit OTR and Fountain Square" No! I disagree with that whole heartedly. He may be respected in Price Hill, thats great. I have some sway here in OTR and I believe that was in part what he was commenting so I say "we should be contacting him due to the fact he is such a vocal member of that area." because I am a vocal member in this area. So when it comes down to it, I don't think we are disagreeing here. I am ripping him a new one and he can come on here and defend his position against me.

I like positive reinforcement. But honestly, I am not completely convinced that everyone realizes that some are against redevelopment efforts. When I first began working on things down here I never expected my biggest detractors would come from other community activist both in and out of downtown. It amazes me that so many say they want one thing, but truly only want to maintain the status quo. So perhaps I am preaching to the choir, or perhaps I am trying to rally the troops to help bring about real change.

Is there any city money involved? Because other developers have to sit in front of these developers/politicians to get there projects going and what if they are building across the street as a competitive development? Does having a city council member on your development board give you an advantage that others do not? If the answer is yes, then is it because of influence? If yes, then that is a problem.

To Cincinnati Public: I have no children, what is in it for me? To the Zoo: I have not been there in years, what is in it for me? To the Freedom Center: I have never been there, what is in it for me? To the Ballparks: I do not follow sports, what is in it for me? To the Convention Center: I never go to conventions, what is in it for me? I could go on and on. Connecting the two largest employment centers, not connecting bar to bar as he said, is a good thing. Making our City more competitive in attracting business and new residence is a good thing. I believe that Mr. Witte would have a much harder time with justifying any expenditures that affect the whole cities good in Price Hill vs Downtown and I am rather sure he would not want to be held to that standard. This comes down to "reverse-NIMBY ("NotInMyBackYard") argument" as Caseyc said. He and others realize that it is a good thing but fear any positive move by downtown as it may negatively affect their neighborhood. My question is what is wrong with those neighborhoods if it is criminals default location to operate out of. Perhaps our cleaning up of OTR is serving to highlight the failures and shortcomings of neighborhoods like Westwood, Price Hill and others. Address those shortcomings Mr. Witte and improve your community, do not fault our efforts in improving ours. Will someone email this guy and get him on here so we can ask him a few questions?

I am trying to highlight, not appeal to, their true nature.

If that is truly the criteria, and I am not doubting it is, then I should oppose any initiative for the Westside as it does not benefit me at all. If this line of thinking resonates, then nothing will ever get done and then it will not be an issue of benefiting, it will be one of collectively loosing.

And no one cared. They incentivised poverty on one hand and offered slumlords guarateed money to keep them locked away in crime infested, no hope environments on the other. The Feds woke up and realized this didn't work, I just wish that some of these social services would wake up as well and realize they are part of a system that did more to perpetuate the problems of the people vs doing anything to truly help them. Yet they are the ones who come out as Holier than thou.

I would go even beyond that and say they were de facto prisons for people and kept them locked into a poverty cycle that was designed to last, not just for decades, but for generations. We have a habit of making ourselves feel better at the expense of the people we are trying to help.

This argument transcends the streetcar and highlights a major issues that we are facing in the redevelopment of downtown. People like Mr. Witte believe that this is a zero sum game. If one dollar is spent here, it is one less that is spent there. This is flawed thinking much the same way that believing that ignoring the inner city would not negatively effect the surrounding communities. It is an easy argument to overcome so long as you can make your case in a public enough fashion to rebut all of the people that this type thinking resonates with. He may not be wrong about Price Hill but I think that you are missing the the fact that this came from a federal shift that triggered the bankruptcy of people like Tom Denhart down here and the mass exodus out of OTR to better living conditions that could be found in low cost, relatively safe areas on the West Side. The efforts in OTR only became possible because of this shift and allowed for the purchase of mostly empty buildings. The focus of the city only sped up the redevelopment, but it was going to happen eventually--slower, but eventually. Even the CBD argument with the redevelopment of Fountain Square could be argued was a competitive move that both attracted new business as well as helped support the expansion of the convention center to make us more competitive in that arena as well. Those same dollars spent in Price Hill does not get you the same return.

Everyone benefits from a strong downtown. This argument is brought up time and time again primarily out of ignorance by groups who on one hand will say how bad downtown is and on the other hand say lets not do anything for downtown. Without a strong core, Bond Hill is negatively affected, Mount Washington is negatively affected, Westwood is negatively affected, Price hill is negatively affected, even Mason and West Chester is negatively affected. A strong downtown is what drives the entire city. This is our face to the rest of the nation and the place that people come for things like conventions when they get their only taste of what Cincinnati is. We need to put the money where it is most visable and that is downtown, not Westwood. When you think of Chicago, what comes to mind? When you think of New York, and on the flip side Detroit or any other major city, what comes to mind? It is the downtowns, not the suburbs. The same is true for Cincinnati. If we want to leave a great taste in some ones mouth when visiting our city then we need to put our best foot forward in the urban core. That will get you more business, and more people saying Cincinnati is a place I would love to live. That is what benefits everyone, Citywide. How many people are in the CBD, OTR, and Uptown daily vs Westwood, Price Hill, and Mt. Wash daily.

I think you mean project based and you bring up a good point. If we are decentralizing public housing and dispersing it and these are many of the same people who would use some of these social services, should the social service not also be dispersed? I say yes, and I would also say that the concentration of social services does lend to the same problem as concentrated public housing and many of the same arguments could be used.

The number really doesn't mean that much to me other than provide a helpful way to demonstrate to others in very simple terms the overload that we have here. It could be 1 and be to many if that 1 is a Citylink and the sheer size and volume of serviced people has a negative effect on the entire surrounding area. To me, specifics like these are more helpful in demonstrating, not just the inundation, but the failure of the services. Well intentioned people give every year to groups like these and do not realize these stats. I want a better OTR and that involves the dispersement of these organizations, but at the same time I would truly like to see more than 137 out of 4,200 get out of this vicious cycle.

I will ask the Chamber of commerce what criteria they used at tomorrows safety sector meeting. Another problem is the number does not account for the size. The Free Store may account for only 1 but are looking to expand now and does not change the number. Also I do not know if it takes into account sub organizations within the social service such as the transitional housing component of the Drop Inn Center. Mercy Housing may be counted as 1 but have multiple buildings on Main. Over the Rhine Community housing may only be one but with buildings spread throughout all of OTR. I am less worried about the actual number that is reported and more worried about the real impact on the ground.

Randy, This has nothing really to do with the streetcar per se, but the area of the Brewery Dist and its development. My question is, when does the reality match the rhetoric. Nor would I say that it is just a matter of isolation or inaccessibility, but one of adaptability. What is an adaptive use plan for some of these buildings? And is that plan based in reality. Steve says they have it, so I guess now we wait.

Ok, well scratch what I said then, you guys are moving along swimmingly! That was a bowl of sarcasm with a side of disbelief but I hope you are right.

I think that the marketing is great, and the historical marker, wonderful. But if you say you are on track with development projects in the Dist then ok, I stand corrected, I guess.

Just thinking does not a brewpub make. But I agree, it would be wonderful.

I thought everything went very well. John Schneider I believe won the best speech of the day award. Very well written, very well delivered. Another good point was made by Julie Faye who pointed out the number of studies that have been done on various transportation projects since 1990 and none of them had come to pass so lets treat this one differently and not study it 'to death'. It was a great showing, great energy, and a good mix of people with different perspectives.

This will not be pleasant, but the only way that we are going to make headway here is to draw attention to the failures of these social services and to a lesser extent, those who support them. People want to feel good, feel that they are doing there part whether that truly helps the 'person in need' or not. That is generally not the goal and this needs to be hightlighted. The media needs to start asking the simple question of various homeless people in OTR, "how long have you been homeless?" And when they get the answer of 1 year, 5 years, 10 years then the next question needs to be to the service, "where have you failed?" with a follow up question to its contributors "why do you continue to support them?"