cramer

Found it. The Southern Railroad puts money into the capital budget, not operating. Page 15 of the Capital budget from the link above: Page 19 (of the pdf, that's 15 of the budget doc) That comes to almost a quarter of the 2006 capital improvements budget. I'd like to see some of those funds go into a restricted budget line for rail improvements. That's enough money to generate a local match for streetcars or some kind of rail system, especially if the tunnels are useful.

^You can find the 05-06 biennial budget here: http://cincinnati-oh.gov/cmgr/pages/-5241-/

Kidding aside, I think it's extremely helpful if folks use the naming convention of "CITY - Topic title" for threads. It's just good form.

^ I completely concur. And since we're all talking about rail travel and ho wit compares with flying, I thought I'd pass along this bit from James Howard Kunstler: http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/2006/06/riding_the_rail.html

My understanding is that you have to have a history of riding in Penn and pass an advanced class, then you're allowed to not ride with a helmet. I've heard that he didn't have the appropriate license, just an expired permit. If true, he shouldn't have been riding at all, but definitely not without a helmet.

Native Cincinnatian here. I root for Michigan. The rivalry has been cycling lately. Michigan dominated the Cooper years, which is why he's gone. And Tressel has owned Carr.

And Brent Spence may have been an excellent Congressman, but I chafe somewhat at the appearance of any sort quid pro quo -- for naming something after a guy who helped get the funding to make it happen. I'm getting out of my depth though, since I don't know too much about Spence the man or the bridge.

OK, I relent on Brent Spence. How about you replace that with the Aronoff Center?

He championed Cincinnati. It's better than naming it after someone who isn't from here. It's better than naming it after someone who paid for it. It's better than naming it for the guy who got funding for it (Brent Spence Bridge, anyone?). It's only made slightly worse by the fact that we don't know if he had anything do with Government Square. And that some people prefer brevity, even though everyone will still call it Gov't Square. It strikes me as odd that people that clearly enjoy Cincinnati would be against naming something after a man who gave more to the city than any of us ever will. Go figure.

Of course I know that John Roebling built the bridge... that's what we call sarcasm. I also know that Charles P. Taft II is "Mr. Cincinnati." Here's a guy that could've been a national political figure (son of a president and all), but wanted to serve his city, which he did for decades. He's essentially the preeminent public servant. I could be wrong, but is he honored anywhere for it? Maybe government sqaure isn't the best fit, I'll grant that, but I get the impression that they just want to give props to guy who should've gotten them long ago. Murray Seasongood has a park and a pavillion in a park, after all. While googling is a handy way to find information quickly, the fact that RiverViewer didn't find anything doesn't mean Taft didn't do it. We don't know that he didn't have anything to do with transit, or that he as steadfastly anti-transit. For all we know, he was involved in building the federal courthouse or in the many renovations the area has already undergone. Considering he served on Council from '38-'42, '48-'51, and '55-'77, that's not an outrageuos assumption. According to wikipedia, "He was an avid fan of the Cincinnati Reds baseball team and sometimes listened to games on the radio with an earplug during city council meetings." The guy should get something named for him just for that alone. Monte, the reason you call it the Roebling Bridge might be because you didn't live here when it wasn't called that. All the locals I know call it the Suspension Bridge.

Do you mean that someone has to have something to do with whatever their name is on? What does John Kennedy have to do with an airport in New York? What does Reagan have to do with an airport in DC? Or Albert Savin with a convention center? What does Robert A. Taft have to do with a high school in the West End? Or Wm. Howard Taft with a street? Nothing directly I suppose, but people have this funny habit of naming things after important people as a way of honoring and remembering them. Go figure. Clearly, Charles P. Taft was an important figure in Cincinnati — especially in the city's government. Makes sense to me. And naming something after him had the desired result: RiverViewer took the time to look him up and learned a few things. At any rate, I'm sure everyone will go right on calling it plain old Government Square, so you needn't be too concerned. Just like everyone still calls the John A. Roebling Suspension Bridge just "The Suspension Bridge." What did Roebling have to do with that bridge anyway?

I remember Windsor well...it is amazing when you're 18. Smoking fake Cubans, hanging out in casinos, hitting on skanks. It's awesome. I wish Cincinnati were more like that.

Check out www.easterncorridor.org A main reason the East side is favored in this case is that conditions are favorable. And the EC plan isn't just commuter rail lines or light rail. There's a whole host of transportation involved -- reconfigured roads, a new (controversial) bridge crossing, bike paths I think, and rail. There's also a land use component. The driving force may be the poll results, but there's also the issue of need. OKI studies showed that distances traveled along the eastern corridor are far lower than anywhere else in the region in the same amount of time. Since traffic engineers love nothing more than system efficiencies, this is where they focus. We're lucky, I think, that the transportation planners on the job have included a rail component and didn't just recommend ramming x number of highway lane miles through. It's my hope that if the EC rail line can be built, it can serve as the first taste of rail for the region, and everyone else will want to (I can't resist) jump on board. IIRC, this is a unique model for the US, both in including land use and transport in one plan, and in the funding sources. If they can actually build this without a tax increase, all the better.

What is the price on ground floor retail in the 1400 block of Main, average $/sq ft in general or specific locations?

Evendale's not in the city. Oakley + 10 years = Hyde Park with big boxes.

I agree, it is your fault. I also agree that the Banks should fill in holes in the market, not cater to bases that are already well-covered. Hooray for mixing metaphors.

I used to and currently work for different cultural institutions in town. The "typical" visitor to each were suburban moms.

Dude, you're going to move if another fine clothing store opens? I wouldn't hold your breath on some of the places on your square wishlist. I'd like to see them too, but I can't imagine they'll happen. American Apparel is already coming to Clifton Heights/Fairview. Doubt Apple would leave the Kenwood, since the northeast is where the money is and they're essentially a luxury brand. UO spent a load to rehab the church, and they'd do better among their core market near UC. I think Vespa Cincinnati should move downtown -- but just like these places, I doubt it. But yeah, I know what you mean. A mix of retail, both in kind and in target demographic is ideal. I don't know why these suits can't get it. Surely they've been to other cities on business trips? Or do they never leave their hotel bar? As for supporting Main as it is... I think the only places that come close to doing good business are the galleries and mid century modern furniture places. They've got huge prices that can justify low volume. These other places you mention are the opposite. They need high traffic, high volume to cover costs in relatively low margin retail. I hope Nick chimes in to talk a bit about his understanding of the shopping landscape on Main. But my view is that it's hurting. And this hurting, both on the bar and commercial fronts will soften the residential market.

My dad bought a house in Hyde Park in 1976 for the equivalent of about $120-125k in 2005 dollars. He sold it about 20 years later. In the 10 or so years since, and some improvements, the price has skyrocketed -- it's now valued at about $425k. The problem is that young people and families have been priced out of desirable neighborhoods, and that's a huge reason why people move to the burbs. It has a lawn and they can afford it. The problem is that the housing stock that is left in the City that's affordable comes with it's own set of difficulties, whether it's the condition of the house, the borderline neighborhood, or crime, etc. Arts and cultural institutions depend hugely on suburban audiences (especially for growth) and monetary support. This may not have been the case many years ago, but it is now. I think that these things are desirable to suburbanites, or at least a certain subset of suburbanites. I think the ratio of Hyde Parkers and Masonites (?) that attend the CSO is closer than you might imagine. Nouveau riche is as blue blood does, if you like.

And by not much I mean quite a bit. Just not the way it is today, with boards and commissions. The Northwest Ordinance is really a seminal planning document. And of course there's the most famous of all 19th century planning relics, Haussmann's Paris. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Paris Paris is of course simply the ne plus ultra of many European cities that were reborn after conscious planned effort in the 19th Century.

Not much, but neither did a lot of activities of the modern era. To put it very generally, planning came about largely as a way to reasonably manage the results of the industrial age. Cincinnati was at the forefront of the planning movement in the US, which is why it's ironic and troubling that the department was castrated.

What's so-so money? It's not buy a Benz money... Depends on if you work for the gov't or private I suppose. Check Planetizen, or Money Magazine's website, I think they have a breakdown of starting pay and average compensation. As for the planning dept... It exists now, and planners work there, it has just been rolled into the Community Development Department and severely under-resourced. When they say bring it back, they mean make it whole again, staffed up and as it's own department. I hope so, at least. There are still anti-planning elements at City Hall leftovers from the Luken-Lemmie regime. Both of those folks wanted to privatize the planning function and outsource it to folks like Jeff Anderson and Bob Smjyunas. Somewhat under the radar, a neighborhood plan is being developed for Mt Washington. And a lot of work is going on in OTR in conjunction with 3CDC and the Findlay Market Association.

Bortz states (and since he's something of a development insider, I suspect he knows) that the market for the empty nester is reaching a saturation point. I think he feels that the $400k and up asking prices aren't going to be realistic. Besides, if nothing but people who can afford half a mil for a condo live there, it's not going to be the kind of place you want to visit.

It's already not market driven. We're subsidising the per unit cost. The market has driven parking lots, and before that produce stands, the Old Spaghetti Factory, and Caddy's.

Usually I find the place to be silly, but the cincinnatibeacon.com website has had some interesting contributions from Todd Portune and Chris Bortz about the Banks. Especially this one: http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/magaddiction/comments/chris_bortz_too_soon_for_to_choose_a_developer_for_the_banks/ In his follow-up comment, he states: "The Banks should attract a younger buyer who will need a lower price point. Average sale price will also drop to ensure a mixed-income community." Go read that link, it's interesting.