LincolnKennedy

I'm not going to lie to you dude, the reason the realtors are shoving Hyde Park down your throats is because you've got $400,000 to spend and your parameters (city living, skittish wife who wants to walk) essentially dictate Hyde Park/Mt. Lookout. These neighborhoods will work for your conditions. Taking a quick glance at one of the local realty websites it seems like you could get some really nice houses in Hyde Park for you budget. I wouldn't bother with a condominium in that area. North Avondale is great, but your wife's safety perceptions may be an issue. You're going to have the same perception issues in East Walnut Hills as well. Columbia Tusculum could work if you want something a bit more urban. I don't know how many Appalachian families are still in the area, and to be quite frank I always found those folks to be more disconcerting than black folks, but I don't think that's the norm for most people. If you feel like you're getting ripped off in Hyde Park/Mt. Lookout, or you just want to see something different, then I think the neighborhood that's going to make both of you happy is Pleasant Ridge/Kennedy Heights. Wyoming is a good choice as well, but it's a bit further from the center. If I were you, I'd tell the realtor to take you to Hyde Park/Mt. Lookout, Pleasant Ridge/Kennedy Heights, and Wyoming. Possibly a couple houses in Amberley as well, but that neighborhood isn't really as walker friendly as the others I mentioned. Welcome to the neighborhood.

There's a great article in the January/February issue of The Atlantic Monthly that discusses the way the Chinese economy is run, and the reasons for their trade surplus and large purchases of American debt. It ties in slightly with the sovereign wealth fund angle that was discussed earlier. It's somewhat typical behavior from an East Asian country to value full employment as the highest social priority which seems to be the point of the current Chinese economic model. But they may very well be entering a stage where they need to start investing more of their gains back home in the form of infrastructure and environmental and product quality regulations that will make their goods more expensive. http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/fallows-chinese-dollars

This picture is incredibly sexy.

Yeah, Gallis said something to that effect. I remember that report came out right before I got back to town from college. I remember participating in some Hamilton County open citizen participation at Music Hall that was to work on getting a plan going for the county. Also some guy named Myron Orfield had a region plan or set of recommendations, and then right before I left town again (in July 2003) there was some presentation by the worst chucklefuck of them all, whose name escapes me, at the Mercantile Library (which makes at least 4 consultants coming up with 4 different plans or sets of recommendations in the span of 4 years). This guy basically advised the city to invest in Fountain Square and Findlay Market and Washington Park. I think that 3CDC might have been the result of his recommendations, but at that presentation at the Mercantile I was livid. I was pacing back and forth, drinking numerous plastic cups of complementary white wine, telling any stranger near me how ridiculous it was to pay some guy from out of town to tell us what was perfectly obvious to begin with. I've never understood why exactly these types of consultants are needed, except maybe to convince donors or corporations to fund things like 3CDC, or maybe to give someone an excuse to have a wine and cheese partie at places like the Mercantile Library.

I had to read that book in college. And to think the worker's steel mill is now owned by some dude who probably bought it on the cheap in the mid 90s. Those Russians get slammed by both the communists and the capitalists.

^I don't think anyone is questioning the inherent value of the questions themselves. It would be great if we asked these types of questions about new city projects and periodically reviewed whether or not they met the expectations. The problem is that no one can remember any other instance in which any proposal sent to the finance committee was met with this type of request. Cranley has been on council since before 2001, and he's chaired the finance committee since he screwed the pooch as chair of the Law and Safety Committee and used his tough as nails leadership to allow a riot to begin in council chambers. When the city wanted to hire 100 police officers after Phil Bates' murder, do you think His Plaidness asked any questions like "What projects will need to be cut to fund these 100 new police officers?" I think we have a right to expect some consistency in the process. This is a great description of the current development climate and the choices we actually face.

To be honest, it really would be beneficial to know the answers to most of these questions. It's too bad that Cranley is just using these questions to stall or even squelch the proposal, which is obvious from the first question he asks: What projects will need to be cut to fund the streetcar project? Cranley is a schmuck. He's always been a schmuck, and from the looks of the way he is acting now, he's going to continue to be a schmuck. His "support" of the streetcar has been disingenuous. What's his position? Does he think the city needs commuting rail more than this? He can't honestly be for giving SORTA more money for buses, (which he seems to be suggesting in Section IV of the questions) since he's been the biggest critic of the Metro since Tom Luken. Since this is Cranley's last term as a city councilor and his ambition seems to be undiminished despite the voters repeated rejection of him for other, more prominent offices, his personal interest in this question is curious. I suspect he is using this moment to burnish his "budget hawk" credentials with the intention of appealing to the voters of the 31st District of the Ohio House of Representatives (currently occupied by Steve Driehaus) which encompasses western Cincinnati, Addyston, Cheviot, Cleves and North Bend. Otherwise he's just being an ass, which is also possible.

Can you imagine what a fast and convenient high speed rail link would do for all of these airports if they were connected (+ Cleveland)?

^If these guys don't get the cash the city and county ought to put the whole project on hold until the street car is built. At most, they should build the parking garages.

^So the east portal is where those stairs are, or is it exactly over the street? Is it at the same height as Fort Washington Way? Hate to be a pain, but do you have a view of the west portal as well?

So the RTC is able to accommodate both the buses and a potential rail line? Would there be a problem with putting a light rail line through there? Where are potential east and west portals?

^Let's hope this reflects the start of a new trend.

^These are some great questions. It does seem bizarre and wasteful to me. But I suspect that the premium that Delta gets to charge at it's hub is worth it for the people who are willing to pay it. It's not much different from the experience of purchasing a new car. It would probably be easier for a manufacturer to make automatic windows standard (and floor mats and cruise control as well) but they will end up making more money by charging for these add-ons that most people want. The only difference is that the nation's airways are a public good.

Certainly an interesting idea, but I feel like you'd have to charge a nominal fee so that the public treats it with respect. Except for "high culture" places like museums, people tend to treat things that don't cost anything like they are valueless.

^Those are the Western-Southern built (I think) properties on Walnut Street. They are at least 7-10 years old. I don't know a ton about them. They are kind of like cheap imitations of the stuff that exists across the street.

I agree with this, though I think it is fair to add that both of these neighborhoods (and I'd toss in Lower Price Hill as well) were the primary first stop for immigrants to Cincinnati, and the lack of immigration between 1924-1965 probably helped contribute to the decline of those neighborhoods (black folks and Appalachians represent an internal migration to the city but they still flowed into these same neighborhoods). Pretty much every federal action or lack thereof since the Second World War has slammed inner cities in general and the Midwest in particular. Since the way the federal government interacts with cities and states doesn't look like it's going to change anytime soon, I think that cities gaining the technical know how and capacity to become stewards of the property in their borders is the trend, and not necessarily a bad thing. Michael, what's your experience in how the local and state government can help or hinder the market in these high input and high risk locations?

^Its funny that you both mention the dispersement of the federal government from outside of the Greater Washington Area. Aside from the State, Treasury, Justice and Defense Departments I don't see any particularly compelling reason for any of the other executive departments to be located in the capital region. As for the Washington Metro, I wasn't aware that the surrounding suburbs had made any contribution. When I was living in DC in the late 90s I was under the impression that the primary reason that the Metro didn't go all the way out to Dulles Airport was because Virginia refused to pay for it.

I don't usually comment on the picture sets, but this was a great one. Makes me want to stop in Mansfield some time. I'd also like to defend your "lovely Court House". With the exception of the path leading from the sidewalk to the front entrance (particularly that ramp), I think it is a pretty tasteful attempt at using classical motifs in a modern setting. It's modest and it looks like a Court House, so at least it does it's job.

^I agree with this, and I think that the type of involvement changes with the changes in the general economy, as well as with the parameters that the federal government sets up (either explicitly or in an ad hoc fashion). Taking Cincinnati as an example, it's pretty clear that the shifts in the economy and technological improvements have made the it clear that the city has to take the lead in redeveloping old properties and brownfield sites. This seems like an area where the free market fails, and it's just too petty for the state and federal entities to really pay any attention to. With the new focus on the environment and what seems to be a growing consensus that this is an issue that the public takes seriously, it will be interesting to see if any new federal legislation comes about concerning water usage. Places like the high plains of the Dakotas and Montana have been depopulating largely out of a lack of water, yet other arid areas like Las Vegas and Arizona are the most rapidly growing areas in the country. It doesn't seem sustainable to me.

Taking it out of the realm of the feds, what do you all suppose is the proper level of involvement of government at the state and local level?

^I agree that that is Summers main complaint. I'll admit the start was confusing and round about. What I was getting at was taking Summers comment that I highlighted and divorcing it from the context of SWF's (which aren't mentioned in the quoted text) and instead thinking about what it implies about government intervention in a capitalist economy. Is it simply a situation of diverting dollars from one place to another, with results that possibly harm the overall economy, basically a form as bribery? Or is it an inevitable and important part of the process? Or does Summers (and by implication, the average economist) get it wrong, that value maximization isn't effected, or that some of the values being maximized are the lives of people in that space? It's broad, but that's kind of what I was aiming at.

I'm getting a bit tired of the superficiality of media coverage. Some complaints: This can't be right. While the city may have seen those 8,000 jobs move to outside the metro area, and it may have even incurred a net loss of 8,000 jobs, 8,000 jobs didn't just disappear from the regional economy. In addition, if someone living in Pleasant Ridge and working downtown had his job move to West Chester last year, the city didn't even lose that person's payroll tax. This dismal fact is very possibly disingenous. I'm not in real estate, but I suspect the 1 million feet of empty office space is largely Class B office space that is being picked up by rehabbers and being converted into condos. Finally, large swaths of Hyde Park and Clifton aren't being abandoned by the country club set who yearn to breathe free in Kentucky and Clermont County. There's no space in the city for high-end housing, and hasn't been since basically the end of the Second World War. But even given that fact, people still manage to squeeze it into previously marginal areas, like Eastern Avenue, Downtown and Mt. Adams (granted it started earlier in Mt. Adams, but that place didn't become hot until the seventies). To be fair, I don't see anything new in this plan except an aggressive desire to build the streetcar and perhaps a belated realization of potential office space in places like Oakley/Madison and Seymour Reading. This move toward transit-oriented development is good, but I'd like to see a real plan and commitment toward that end.

This is well spoken, and basically the crux of the problem. We aren't going to get anything done until people understand what it is all about. In particular, it is important to get out the type of information that no one knows about but changes the whole nature of the ballgame. For example I was was blown away when I found out that Ohio has the same popultion density as France, and the largest population density of any state in the U.S. that isn't on the east coast. Everyone else I've repeated those statistics too has also been taken aback. In addition to educating the general public, there needs to be a concerted effort to educate the local small fry movers and shakers who command the loyalty of all those revolving door Republican statehouse politicians who have controlled the State of Ohio for the past fourteen years. A campaign focused on the local leadership of those areas that would significantly benefit from regional rail is appropriate. All of what I've stated might already be happening. Civindr just inspired me to rant. But I'm afraid that Strickland doesn't have the political stones to push this thing forward like it needs to be pushed.

This subject is a bit detached from the day to day but I thought it was interesting and decided to share it. I was reading an article where former Treasury Secretary, Larry Summers, was discussing the problems inherent in sovereign wealth funds. Sovereign wealth funds are government investment arms primarily designed to convert the present day receipts that come from national oil revenues into wealth that is more long-term, diversified and stable. Summers discusses some of the problems with SWF's in the article: http://www.slate.com/id/2182746/ I was intrigued by the second point Summers brought up regarding SWF's, reprinted here: 2. Multiple-motive issues. "It's the premise of capitalism that people own shares to maximize value. But if you think of an investment made by a state fund, there could be multiple motives. Perhaps we want the airline to fly to our country, perhaps we want the bank to do extensive business in the country, suppose we want suppliers in our country to be sourced, perhaps we want some disablement of a competitor for our country's national champion. When there's no assurance that value maximization is not being pursued, there is a potential question." His question has considerable merits given what we conceive of as the purpose of the independent capitalist style economy. But isn't Summers complaining about exactly what every city, county and state economic development office does in the United States? How can we rectify the supposed losses of value (the non-maximization of value that Summers says is occuring since other motives are driving the investments) with the necessity to play the game of local industry retention and creation?

This site is a lifeline for me. But I could see how in conventional life it might be a bit of an impediment.