natininja

I never denied such a thing exists. I denied that there exist neighborhoods like OTR where they are ubiquitous.

The biggest problem with RestorationConsultant's predictions for OTR is that they have not come to fruition in any city anywhere ever. Whereas every developed country has multiple cities with densely built urban cores like Cincinnati's with high property values in the center, walkability, transit access, TOD, etc. RC uses the argument that a mixed-income future is fantasy for OTR, and I think it's a strong argument because there isn't really a city with a vibrant core that has a reasonable mix of incomes (despite many cities ostensibly working toward that ideal). But somehow RC suspends this measure for what's realistic when he imagines a neighborhood of preserved historic tenements turning into low-density housing full of 50-something executives with three-car households.

No one said Cincinnati was New York (but we ARE competing for the same residents), though BTW there are large portions of New York that have single-family detached houses with garages and the whole nine yards. And in fact there are some personal garages on the island of Manhattan, so I apologize for a bit of an overstatement in saying "What don't they have? Personal garages in their downtowns." -- that was a little too strong, as most (or all) cities probably do have a few. But it's not very popular to have them in many downtowns, and certainly not in New Orleans, so your anecdote doesn't disprove anything but the strongest reading of my statement. Another thing you should take into account is that, while 20- and 30-somethings may be priced out of Over-the-Rhine in the next couple decades, in two decades today's 20- and 30-somethings will be 40- and 50-somethings, with more money and their same entrenched car-light habits. I would actually submit that the trend likely to die is the one of car-dependent people living in dense neighborhoods; the novelty will wear off and people will realize they can drive to downtown in a few minutes from a neighborhood that more reasonably accommodates their addiction. The main distinguishing factor of living in OTR vs. Fort Thomas is walkability. If you look at real data you'll see a greater move in retrofitting suburbs to be walkable and bike/transit-friendly rather than inner-cities getting car elevator garages.

I definitely agree there. And I really think racial politics would become a sh!tshow if we had a ward system. I'd rather not poke that wasp nest.

^^ Look at the comment I was responding to: This is not what has happened in cities around the US or the world as urban cores gentrify. Indy is a horrible example to cherry-pick, as it has nothing remotely resembling OTR. Hell, New Orleans would be a better cherry-pick. It's an affordable southern city with a legitimately dense urban core.

um, yeah, like Cincinnati Touche.

Sounds like you have a good punching bag to blame everything you don't like on. White flight and redlining were rampant across the country, regardless of the type of government cities had. I suspect there's about as much correlation with most of the other things you mention. Regarding present-day demolitions, the unfortunate fact is most Cincinnatians simply don't care, or even support demolitions in their neighborhoods with the misguided understanding that the presence of old buildings causes crime. You and I, of course, know they are actually perhaps the greatest asset to ensure the long-term economic viability of the city. But in a democracy, regardless of a ward system or none, the demolitions would continue until minds are changed. If you think wards are a safeguard against corruption, I suggest you study Chicago (among other cities).

Most big cities around the world indeed have wealthy centers and a ring of poverty on the outside. What don't they have? Personal garages in their downtowns. On the contrary, they have high-valued, densely developed land where space for cars is kept to a minimum because its market value is lower than that of commercial or living space. If OTR follows "every other major city," this is the pattern that would establish itself.

Edit: Oops, I messed up and edited instead of quoting and lost this original message.

A "representative district council" would be a disaster. In a city notorious for historic racial divisions, city government has been positively groundbreaking for its inclusiveness and integration, especially in recent years. So many cities that have a ward system have deep racial political divisions. Implementing such a system would be a huge step backwards for racial relations in this half-black, half-white city. Be careful what you wish for.

^ Like the Gherkin in London or the Torre Agbar in Barcelona?

Well I will say the blanket term "Clifton" is inappropriate. Clifton is absolutely distinct from CUF and Corryville (and certainly Avondale and Mt. Auburn, parts of which occasionally get lumped in there too). Treating CUF as a single neighborhood, but acknowledging the historic separateness makes sense to me. Neighborhoods like O'Bryonville, Kennedy Heights, or the Village at Roll Hill make significantly less sense.

I guess it makes sense to call that whole area University Heights. You know, because it contains the University (or at least West Campus). I don't know if that's what happened to The Heights, but it would make more sense than adding the space to Clifton Heights (and it's not really connected to Fairview at all so, I think that's out of the question). It would be an improvement in nomenclature, really. But we definitely need to know if there are now 51 neighborhoods! From Wikipedia:

Cranley ate the winning entry.

Stop spoiling our fun :P You have to admit it's a bit humorous to have all these articles flying about saying it's a done deal and amidst them there's one with Cranley saying he's out of the (bleeding-edge) loop. People went to Fox19 before Cranley.

Bingo - Mobile phones. Most people would not have a mobile phone or would not replace their handset as often if they had to buy the device outright. Errybody in Cleveland got they Obamaphone.

Even if they didn't pay for them but nudged them ahead in the public discourse it'd be nice. I mean it seems like they should, at the very least, be supportive of the idea behind closed doors. It would improve the value of their real estate investment and increase QoL for their workers.

^ You're assuming Brown would expect the change to increase ticket sales, or (more precisely) increase revenue from ticket sales more than it decreases revenue from parking. Considering his rumored opposition to the streetcar, that might be a big assumption (and, who knows, he might even be spiteful enough about it to risk taking a small hit to lower ridership). Regardless of speculation, these things should be considered. I favor attaching the tickets to parking spaces rather than sports tickets, because I'd rather keep cars on the ends of the streetcar route. It also so happens that the city/county (and, consequently, SORTA) have more influence over (semi-)public parking garage tickets than sports tickets, too, so it would be easier to implement and more universally useful. Though I guess SORTA could just tell ticket spotters to accept same-day Reds/Bengals tickets as a valid pass (however it could invite forgery).

With any luck they won't tell him when or where it's happening. Cranley: I don't believe it! They didn't tell me! And I'm important!

They might get the parking revenue from the on-site garage, but not from any of the other lots all around downtown. I think Eighth & State's point is that it might reduce the number of people parking in the Banks lot, which reduces revenue to the Brown family.

Parking at the Banks and Washington Park should include streetcar tix (I'd say maybe 4 to cover a fairly full car; maybe 2 adults and 2-3 kids). Some cities in Europe have parking lots on the periphery of ring roads with subsidized rates and free transit tickets (primarily for commuters). It's a good model for keeping city centers ped/bike/transit-oriented.

What are the chances GE helps pay for this? I'm thinking pretty decent.

Surprise, they're keeping little Napoleon out of the loop. And he can't fathom that being the case.

If he makes as much as he wants to make being open a few hours a day, especially if he's older and not looking to build up his career, he's got a pretty sweet hassle-free gig, and I can understand why his ambitions aren't expanding with possibilities presented by neighborhood change.

Here's a clickable link Damn dude, that's a creepy place. What is that? What "springs" in there, the walking dead? Dare you to stick your arm in that hole. 8-) Reminds me of this but architecturally superior.