chinkley

Now is not the time to buy in northern Brooklyn: http://gothamist.com/2016/01/13/l_train_tunnel_closure_years.php

But that would be incredibly expensive. Plus, what do you do at either end? There aren't a lot of places to visit or things to do at the top or the bottom.

What in the world is the "Journal-News"?

Not sure where to put this: http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2016/01/what-could-new-life-for-price-hill-s-historic.html Price Hill Will is looking into creative adaptations for the old Price Hill Incline. Numerous urban designers, architects, and other creative types, not to mention regular community members, have had a go at envisioning the space anew. I really like the idea of a winding, serpentine path. Make the railing out of tile and it could look just like Gaudi's Parc Guell: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/10485011608064296/

Huh those closing times are very surprising (and makes me realize how little I am out past midnight...)

This is great news for Madtree, and I'm happy that they have the demand to merit expansion and are able to move into such a unique space. However. I am once again frustrated by the "assistance" that will be provided by the City and State, i.e. $$$. What about this move/expansion merits public money? The renovation/ rehab of the Rocktenn space? A carrot to keep the brewery in the region? They are moving a mile. 5280 feet. If they believe that moving to a larger space will enable them to expand in a profitable manner, then they should do so. If the move is not financially feasible, then they should not make the move, and no public money should be made available. Doing so is a gross distortion of the free market. Just my two cents.

That's gonna be a big parking garage! :-D

But we're not New York!

After the last Liberty street meeting ended, I was speaking with some of the people from the city and one of them threw out that they were very close to eliminating a "lane or two" from CP...and then the streetcar came in. I wasn't focused on it at the time, but that comment has come back to me and I'm frankly puzzled by it. The streetcar takes up a single lane for two blocks. It doesn't prevent left turns. What has materially changed regarding the format of CP that now precludes taking away that lane or two?

according to DOTE at the Woodward meeting, it's a steady 18000 from 7 am to 7 pm

Wowwww. The shell game continues.

Looks like the murals are indeed coming back to downtown Cincinnati: http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/hamilton-county/cincinnati/downtown/union-terminal-murals-to-be-mounted-outside-convention-center I'm ecstatic that they are being saved and moved home, but am a little sad that they are going on the Central Ave side of the Convention Center. Seems that few people will have the opportunity to walk by them in that location and really admire the artwork.

done!

"Potential impact to the community"? What, like nicer, calmer streets? Too bad the city can't put an amount on the increase in property values / investment along the streets and use that future amount to offset the cost of conversion today.

This is random and not particularly on topic, but does anyone know where I can find historical information on Cincinnati's neighborhoods' population? The city website only gives 2010 and 2000 populations. I'm interested in the whole 20th century. Thanks!

The question has to be why the "streetcar suburbs" did not prevail over the freeway suburbs? Government. The streetcar suburbs were generally healthy and viable before the government decided that it was going to spend breathtaking amounts of money imitating the Autobahn and opening up thousands of miniature Oklahoma Land Rushes in what were until then far-flung boondocks. Basically. I think the interstates would have been ok if they would have terminated at the edges of cities as they were originally intended to do. The system originally proposed by Eisenhower never led into the cities and cut up the neighborhoods that already existed. I wonder if a similar outcome could be had by not building as many exits/entrances to the highways. Exits every 5 to 10 miles inside cities, as opposed to every mile or 2.

This probably comes from the fact that rehabbing a dozen 3-4 story buildings all in a line creates a much nicer neighborhood feel and gives the perception that there are a lot of people and a lot of stuff going on, even if in real terms one 30 story building would be denser and thus have more bodies in a given space. It's ironic that downtown feels liveliest precisely where the buildings are shortest: on Walnut at the Aronoff.

My parents looked at one of the top units in that tower building, and they did comment on the amount of ambient noise. I know that as I walk through sawyer point / bicentennial commons every day at lunch there is a lot of noise coming from 471, but then I'm much closer to it.

Dixie Terminal, I believe!

Going back to 1932: http://www.historicaerials.com/ My God, that 1932 aerial is freaken dense! Look at the 1956 one: you can trace the western half of the subway ROW. Then look at how filled-in the eastern half had become in terms of housing. Our subway would have been so successful at every point: industry, entertainment, residential.

also telling that they're asking for money for garages, not transit. :x

In a city with forward-thinking leadership, this exact sentence would be used to argue for light rail.

Is the center of Madisonville a ghetto because no one invests in it, or does no one invest in it because it is a ghetto? The corner of Madison and Whetsel should be the most valuable (expensive and sought-after) land in the neighborhood. That's what being at the "center" means. Now, going in to why it is no longer the case isn't what I'm after, nor would it help the current state of affairs. However, I just don't see how a development located on a dead end street on the periphery of the neighborhood is supposed to really benefit the whole area -- to create a ripple effect as Ryan said. And not to nit-pick but I'd say that downtown M'ville is only a bit farther from 71 than the drive-in is.

It's a sad commentary on our urban design priorities that a developer thinks his apartment project has a better chance at a former drive-in movie theater site than, say, at the corner of Whetsel and Madison. I fail to see how this development, in its present location, will benefit the neighborhood it is in. It doesn't build upon surrounding existing buildings; it is isolated; it requires a car to access. On the other hand, a building that fully utilized the open land in the heart of Madisonville would build upon the success of surrounding projects (the old 5/3 Bank building, for example; people could walk to the ground floor retail, which would mean more eyes on the street; residents could walk to work in that neighborhood, or much more easily catch the bus to downtown. The current development benefits only the developer; a development in "downtown" Madisonville would create a powerful feedback loop to benefit the whole neighborhood and spur future development.

Isn't the flip side of the no abatement = no operating revenue that the city would have more tax receipts coming in, which means more money coming in that can be used for everything, operating costs included? Obviously there's a line where projects would be unfeasible w/o an abatement, and I understand the logic that some money is better than none. You're right that this case is particularly upsetting because of the back story and bad feelings surrounding the whole thing. I won't pretend to know the whole story, but I think that this particular case warrants special consideration. It's a feeling of being used that really rankles. If Developer X came to the city and proposed that 50 story tower and laid out why he needed an abatement, that's different in my mind than the dirty fight that has happened between W&S and the Anna Louise Inn. That W&S was willing to endure a lot of bad press in order to secure the property, only to turn around ask for a 100% tax abatement, strikes me as self-serving and dishonest.