cramer

I understand where you're coming from, in a way. But calling folks who live on Key's Crescent "middle class" is just silly.

Kirk Alley?

well, i don't have access to any photos right now, so someone else can have my turn.

Evanston, on Montgomery rd near Ruth Ave, just up from 5 points

I agree with the sentiment of the editorial, but the whole "Cincinnati could have been Chicago if it had only built more or better railroads" is an old myth that needs to be retired. Attributing rail development as the reason for the historical growth of Cincinnati vis a vis Chicago is short-sighted at best and at worst is sympomatic of good old Cincinnati brand "could have been a contenda-ness," to coin a phrase. Besides, depending on when one considers the "late 19th century" to have begun, let's generously say 1870, Chicago was already larger than Cincinnati, so the thesis of her first paragraph is manifestly false. This is the sort of historic mythology that obscures more than it enlightens.

I grew up in Hyde Park, mainly. I now live on Findlay Market, above Madison's. A lot in between, in Ann Arbor or Cincinnati.

I ride a Vespa ET4. Sold my car, and ride year round. A mild winter here in Cincinnati meant I only missed a few days due to weather. Cars aren't typically malicious as with bikes, it's just that drivers are tuned into seeing other cars, so they'll look right through you. Riding is a much more mindful experience than driving, since you have to be much more attentive and aware. A determining factor was that it was a 4 stroke. 2 stroke engine development has progressed so they aren't as polluting as they used to be, but that was a non-starter for me. Extremely low emissions -- I'm not sure where it would rate on the EPA emissions level, but I recall being told 20% of the average 4 cylinder car, which is about what that chart reflects. The Buddy looks to be a great bike. I know of a few in town. A very quick 125. Seth from Metro Scooter in Cincinnati is planning on racing his.

What jumps out at me is that the story seems to be sourced mainly by Dan Deering. He was ousted from the executive director position at CHCURC over a conflict of interest. I thought he was off the board completely, but he's definitely not in charge. Just something to keep in mind. I'm not saying the story is therefore illegitimate, but I bet something else is up... Maybe Deering is just blowing the whistle on it, maybe he wants to get attention focused so folks are pressured into agreeing to the loan terms he mentions...

^ Yeah, it's the Ten Year Lates Scooter Club. We meet Wednesday nights at The Comet. Great group of folks. It's not affiliated with a shop, though Dave from Metro Scooter in Evanston is right in front of Tarbell, and Seth from Metro is riding the side-car Stella to Jim's left. http://tenyearlates.com/

Hey, that's me in the Reds hat in the back ground, with the I <3 OTR sticker on the cowl. Fun time. <img src="http://www.pbase.com/reh/image/62962533.jpg"</img>

Actually, it's TCBY's passing that I lament. And I am a shell of my 12 year old self.

Having lived in Hyde Park from '78 to '95, from my perspective HPS is a shell of it's former self. The only evidence you need is the list of restaurants in the above post. Having said that, the new building looks pretty good.

Dollars to doughnuts I'm the only one here who gets that joke. Well done. Can you cross post that into the Fountain Square thread on the new logo? Seem appropriate.

Big Lebowski

Speaking of those colors... where have I seen them before... Oh yeah, http://www.3cdc.org/

First, it's absurd to respond to criticism of design by saying "Your design principles need to be sharpened" or "you must not be familiar with branding identity and marketing." This sort of claim to authority is always a weak way to make a case, but especially so since we all can see and make aesthetic judgments. Since we've been bombarded for the past, oh, century by ads, marketing, and branding, I think we're all familiar with it and can relay our opinions without being derided as ignorant amatuers. To me, the logo isn't necessarily childish as much as it looks like it's trying to be a Web 2.0 company, when it's a 19th century public space. I realize they're trying to update and invigorate the image of the square, but I think this misses the mark. The circle in the square is an iconic figure, but here it feels like it could be for anyplace -- I don't feel like it means anything to the place it's representing. At least the design is flexible enough to denote events, and can easily lose those colors, which already are starting to look dated. I also don't like the heavy-ish weight sans serif typeface and the small leading. I think a serif could have done the work of making it seem new while still staying classy. I can't recall it now, but I vaguely remember a bicenteniial era logo of the fountain that i much prefer. (Side note, Macintosh is not a company, Apple makes iPods. For all their ad budget, they still haven't delivered that message to you. Hmm... so much for the power of brandng :))

^ Good point. The Elder St location has a locked breezeway running between it and the neighboring building. Dude is talking about installing iron grates in the mosaonry as anchor points to lock to. Orchard st, I would just lock it to a fence, put it on the street, or lock it in the alley. So, more out in the open on Orchard.

So, if one were considering a potential move into OTR, what would you go for, Orchard St or Elder St on the north side of Findlay Market? Living on Findlay would be in a building a friend is buying, is cheaper, wireless internet, more secure, bigger, arguably nicer. Orchard is more in my territory, and I feel like I know my way around a bit more. It strikes me as being safer. Of course, the friend who is buying the building on Elder was pistol-whipped on Main last fall, so maybe not. Let me know your thoughts. I'm guessing jmecklenborg is against it.

^Excellent point. Reading those comments is immensely depressing -- it's like a murderer's row of idiots. The best part of all of them is that several people complaining about Cincinnati from Clermont County can't even spell Clermont County. Reminds me of a quote about Bill Brasky. "He hated Mexicans. And he was half-Mexican!... And he hated irony."

Rob Dibble punched me in the mouth was my favorite. I'm thinking of making a t-shirt.

^I've been inside 550 Boal. It's huge, and could be really excellent if rehabbed right. Would make two solid apartments, maybe three. Big yard in back too and parking access from an alley in rear.

^I can't vouch for them all, no. I know some that are very competent, talented, and eager to make a difference. Do you mind if I ask what neighborhood(s) you've been involved with? I think most of the problems stem from simply being understaffed. I'm sure morale is extremely low. But back to that original contention—that a "real" planning department could've or would've stopped this. It's not a foregone conclusion that a planner would decide, after analyzing the area and its needs, to zone in a pedestrian friendly use on the corner of two major thoroughfares and a highway ramp. I'm not sure it's really appropriate for the area, no matter how much it would appeal to the residents of Prospect Hill. Maybe, maybe not. Of course a Check Cashing place is not what I'd like to see, but there is the matter of private property rights. At any rate, I hope the planning department is reconstituted and respected following the next city budget.

^I think that it's unfair to say that they have no vision in the department. Seems to me that they're hamstrung and suffer from a lack of leadership, and face some outright hostile forces in the Manager's office. You're right that they're spread too thin... but as I stated, there's a plan that covers this parcel made by the planning department. I don't have access to it right now, so I don't know exactly what the idea was, but the problem comes down to implementation. So, why didn't it happen? Partly because all impetus to actually enact the OTR plan ended when Lemmie came in and the "task force" decided to privatize a lot of the planning functions of the city. Money set aside for OTR plan was taken for other purposes. Which is a longwinded way to say that I agree that a fully-constituted Planning Department, firing on all cylinders, may have been able to prevent undesirable development, but it would not have been a lay-up. Especially not without the more fundamental requirement -- support and means to do their jobs. I guess what I object to is the characterization that CD&P is "marginally capable and lacking ANY vision." If you have any direct experience, I'm interested in hearing it.

This could happen with or without a city planning department. It's difficult to completely curtail private property rights. It's not an incompatible use according to the commercial zoning that I presume exists on that corner. Besides, there's a OTR plan that had a proposal to edxtend the gateway there, I think. And there's a planning commission that could've made an effort to shut this down but they'd have no leg to stand on b/c of the commercial zoning.

I don't think that the building on the northwest corner is that bad, all things considered. I don't care for it's relation to the street, but it's tough to pull off since there's no sidewalk. Tearing down the Y is the disgrace. And it's not for traffic purposes, either. The replacement is hideous. Actually, the best thing about the project so far has been the new sidewalks and slightly reoriented Parkway.