OCtoCincy

^ ya, The title implies 14th best OUT IF ALL OF THE US!!!! When really its just 14th out of the 25 they rated, and 14th best out of 25 is actually 12th worst out of that list. It's actually a bullshit way to do a ranking. It's not the 25 largest cities, or 25 largest metros, and it's not a best of list. It's the ranking of 25 cities whose data they were able to easily get. The actual ranking says "This ranking includes the largest 25 US cities that provide open public transit data" That is how they were chosen- but many reports are saying 25 best public transit systems.

CREEPILY phrased the same- haha. I always forget the SORTA thread exists- and from the looks of it, so do lots of other people.

:) Oh by the way! In light of this Tarbell article, I've just been informed by a friend that this forums very own thomasbw (Brad Thomas) was just confirmed to join the SORTA board! Congrats!

You're being sarcastic right?

^ word.

Also edale, nothing I said could loosely be interpreted to say kick out the poor people. I even specifically said 3CDC needs to keep buying only empty buildings & not displacing residents. Way to include over the top & extreme language to criticize a good point. OTR has around 3000 low income units & is getting nearly 200 more in the next year and a half. To deny that we should not be filling OTR with low income, even when HUD says it shouldn't be, is living in a fantasy world. No one is saying tear down or convert affordable housing. I'm saying full empty buildings with market rate units to create a stable balanced neighborhood. HUD agrees. Add more low income, but not in poor neighborhoods. That's a recipe for failure. Renovating low income is also necessary. Not adding more to struggling neighborhoods, but creating a higher quality Affordable housing stock is great.

^ there are about 3000 low income units in OTR. Federal guidelines say the vacancy rate of low income offerings is too high and fought to deny 3CDC affordable housing tax credits for adding 30 more units (Model has worked out an exemption, hence why they're basically the only ones adding low income). Back in the day we used to just say put them all in one neighborhood, I don't want to see them". That was wrong & it in no way helped anyone. Today the general school of thought is that mixed income does better than low income towers or federally created ghettos solid with low income. The City of Cincinnati has 90% of the low income offerings in the county. As soon as more is added to the county it's filled. Low income doesn't mean you don't own a car and have to live in OTR to walk everywhere. Many of my low income, section 8 neighbors Definitley have cars. We need to continue spreading out our low income developments across more neighborhoods & dramatically increasing our home ownership base. It's become one of the lowest of a major city in the country and in the end, makes it more difficult to help those in poverty when our city is constantly broke because we lost our middle class. For a healthier balance to OTR, we need more market rare housing, it's already one of the densest low income communities in the country. We shouldn't REMOVE any affordable housing from OTR at all, but at 3000 units of low income, it's pretty damn high as is and maybe it can stay there for a little while. (remember 3CDC has only added 200 units of market rate housing in 5 years.) On a grander scale we need more low income housing across the county, evenly.

Of course there is poverty. But your declaration that poverty = crime & danger is offensive. The vast vast majority of people in poverty are non-violent, not dangerous individuals. You need to learn that fast. There are estimated by CPD and CIRV to be 800 active violent criminals in Cincinnati who cause nearly all of the violent crime in the City. A city of 300,000. 800 people keep you fearing for your life when you step foot in a city where reality shows its almost a certainty that no one will hurt you. Just because you see poverty & assume danger does not mean Cincinnati is "one of the most dangerous cities" in America. We have a major poverty issue to deal with. But that does not mean all those people are dangerous.

Clifton Heights near Vine Street. I am downtown almost daily and walk most places I go. I was asking CityBlights (he was who I quoted). He seems to think Cincinnati is out to get him.

^ I hope it's not more low or mixed income. Model is already adding 180 more low income units to their nearly 400 already existing low income units in OTR. 3CDC is trying to play nice by adding low income into their projects. Every low income advocate will hate them no matter what. If they add 30 it's too low. 100? Still too low. Unless they add an equal amount, they won't make josh spring or anyone else like him happy. They should stick to what they do best but make sure they aren't buying occupied property.

Records show its owned by "Carrie L Moller" who purchased it in 2004. The building tothe north was recently purchased by "Elm Street Aquisition" in January & the building to the south is owned by "James & Waline Sloan", was purchased in 2001 & has $2k in delinquent taxes.

"dangerous is such an overused, meaningless term. Is Cincinnati dangerous if you're an average non-drug using person? No! Not at all! Wow-MAYBE your car window will get broken (but not stolen), maybe someone you know might get mugged at 2am. But those are big maybes. There is almost a 0 murder rate in Cincinnati for non-criminals or non-drug users or non-gang members. That sounds pretty good to me!

What neighborhood do you live in?

Looks good. You should get a group & email the city about increasing its stabilization fund.

Can we move this discussion of urban attire to an appropriate thread. Thanks. Totally disagree on 2-waying 14th. What is the point?? Are we to assume people are idiots and can't figure out 1 way streets? Or that if it's not 2 way people will leave OTR & never come back? If they pass 15th they can turn on 13th or 12th now to get to the park. Make 15th 2way. It's way wider & significantly under utilized. Keep 14th as is.

Come on Sherman, get real. No one is saying Cincinnati is the center of the food universe or whatever, that's a stupid statement. But if you lived anywhere else or remember downtown and the urban core 10 years ago, you know there are certainly some great food options that didn't exist five and 10 years ago. We went from an urban core that had several great restaurants, world class, but countable on two hands, to dozens and dozens of unique fun new really good places to eat all over. Of course you can find one or two nice places in Mason and I'm sure they're very good, no one is disputing that- but denying that Cincinnati has a great food arsenal that mitigates against the loss of daveeds is silly. We are at the point now where when we lose a big business downtown to the suburbs, it's really upsetting. But when we lose a restaurant, we know there're dozens of other great options that hadn't been there when daveeds was just opening.

Thank you. I've heard Phase 2 funding is contingent on county, state or fed funds for a garage. Not likely on yhe next year or so :(

Are you sure Mike Halama is doing Hapa? I heard that before but thought it did not materialize. What I hear now is Embers doing a sushi restaurant in Trinity Flats, and the Pho Lang guys doing "Asian Street Food" across the street. Maybe Halama is partnered up with Embers, but I originally heard he was leaning more towards Thai. Ah....rumors. I heard an Asian place is going on the first floor of the paint building.

It's by the former owner of Beluga.

Huh? Are you implying there is something bad about the word Hapa? Hapa is a Hawaiian language term used to describe a person of mixed Asian or Pacific Islander racial or ethnic heritage- via Wikipedia. Is that bad?

Also, the interior use of space by a non-profit has nothing to do with people's opinions on the design & the way it fits into the skyline. It's shockingly immature to say everyone who likes it is being "political". That's coasts argument and it's a really poor one.

Same here.

^ also because there was little residential investment originally.

City is going after two of the four parcels

Auditor values it as $500,000. City's independent audit put it at $1.4 million. They bought it 5 years ago for jus about $500,000. Can anyone tell me anywhere in the country where an empty warehouse that got new skylights & replaced decades old electrical has suddenly more than doubled in value during the recession??