jdm00

It depends on what you want out of the grocery. If you want something very small for downtown residents only, then I would say this is an ideal location. If you want something that's going to attract both downtown and OTR residents, then I don't think this is close to ideal. As someone who lives at 13th and Vine, I can tell you my chances of going to this location for a grocery--even if it is a very nice grocery--are slim to none. It's quite a haul for anyone in OTR; and it's exacerbated by not being on the streetcar line, which would make it easier when it comes to lugging groceries back as a pedestrian. I think that as redevelopment continues, we will end up with more residents in OTR than in Downtown. It may be the case that we end up with a larger store right near Central Parkway, as Civvik suggests.

Honestly, other than the fact it was announced as part of this project, this doesn't seem like an ideal spot for an urban grocery store. Somewhere more central would provide access to downtown residents and attract more OTR residents.

According to the March 4 story by Chris Wetterich, the developer was trying to get New Market Tax Credits for this project. The Courier is reporting that Cincinnati didn't get any New Market Tax Credits this go around. http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/morning_call/2014/06/cincinnati-shut-out-of-federal-tax-credits.html?ed=2014-06-06&s=newsletter&ana=e_cinci_rdup

I agree with a lot of what you've said there. I think that the commute times are a big deal--it is pretty easy to get around with a car in Columbus--and the timing of the 2008 recession certainly put it in a very difficult spot. And there is obviously less of a reason to do something that may be transformative from a business development perspective if the city feels like it's doing well already. I don't know so much about the "business-oriented" aspect of it. I would argue that Cincy is at least as business-oriented as Columbus, and perhaps even more so, but the streetcar is certainly not being built because business got behind it. Now, if the point is that the only way that this kind of thing can happen is IF business gets behind it in Columbus, I confess that I have no idea about that, and don't know the facts ont he ground so to speak. But I think that projects like this are in a lot of ways more political than business-oriented, and if someone in Columbus (whether part of or supported by the business community or not) has the political will to get the project going, it could certainly happen without the business community getting behind it. I will be watching with interest to see what happens next, in either event.

I don't think saying I threw Cleveland "under the bus" was matter of fact, but to each his own. My point was that the violence could indeed have been much worse, and that overreacting to it only adds fuel to the fire for city opponents. Sorry if the Cleveland example offended you. Here's hoping that the story doesn't have much negative effect. I actually think it will go by the wayside fairly quickly, whenever the next juicy story pops up.

Asbestos remediation is complete, which has partially revealed some wooden floors. May be possible to rehab those floor--not clear at this point. Next step is the rest of the interior demo (i.e., taking down all of the drop ceilings, paneling, etc.).

As opposed to where? It's a big city with a big crowd for this event. These things unfortunately happen. While no violence is good, in the grand scheme of things, this could have been much, much worse. Just this weekend Cleveland had something like 2 killed and six shot in a big crowd. I'd prefer that there was no crime at all, and people should be upset about it. But I hope we don't blow this out of proportion and give ammunition to people who are upset with the city's momentum. Why the need to throw Cleveland under the bus? A death is still a death, but it was one person killed in a neighborhood known for crime at a big party that got out of hand. Not near or in downtown Cleveland. Not throwing Cleveland under the bus--it was the most recent instance that came to mind of a crowd that got out of hand and had a death and several people shot, so I mentioned it purely by comparison sake (i.e., the issue with Taste was a crowd that got out of hand and had violence). I don't see what the location has to do with it. Also, why so defensive? My point is simply that it could have been much, much worse, not that Cleveland has some kind of problem.

As opposed to where? It's a big city with a big crowd for this event. These things unfortunately happen. While no violence is good, in the grand scheme of things, this could have been much, much worse. Just this weekend Cleveland had something like 2 killed and six shot in a big crowd. I'd prefer that there was no crime at all, and people should be upset about it. But I hope we don't blow this out of proportion and give ammunition to people who are upset with the city's momentum.

^I should have been clearer (and the post I am referencing is from ColDayMan at the top of this page, so maybe I am going blind). When I say "suburban" I don't mean that they refuse to identify with the city--more that even though they living in the city, they live a more suburban lifestyle which may affect the way they vote on these things or perceive these issues. Your example of ranches and split levels is a good one. I would suggest that simply because of the greater size, there is a far greater proportion of Columbus residents who live in what I would characterize as post-war, auto-centric suburban-style developments in Columbus than in Cincinnati. (History of when the development occurred obviously plays into that as well.) I am theorizing (and this could be wrong) that those voters don't think quite the same way about things that are more downtown/urban-centric, like streetcars that will only serve 2-3 miles of the city, as the voters in German Village or the Short North. And that would seem to affect the ability of these kind of projects to get off the ground. Cincy has plenty of that type of housing, too, but a lot of the city is older and resembles more of a streetcar-oriented neighborhood (that would have actually been served by streetcar) than a post-World War II suburban style development. Just like the "Old Columbus" sections compared to the farther out stuff in Columbus.

None of those things are good. By the same token, I (and friends of mine) park on 14th street all the time, including overnight, and have never had any problem. And I've never had any of my friends accosted in any way while living in OTR. And I have friends who have their cars broken into on the street in neighborhoods like Hyde Park and allegedly "safe" suburbs. So a lot of that may just depend on anecdotal experience. Sherman, didn't you move out of OTR several years ago to Northside? I don't want to play the "things have changed" card too much, but even since I moved down in early 2011, things are unbelievably different than they were.

Generally, I think that the competition wouldn't be a bad thing. As a Cincinnatian, I wouldn't say that I "fear" something like that happening. Cleveland has had rail for a long time, and it's not in a whole other league than C-Bus or Cincy. And if you consider the streetcar light rail, then it's almost impossible for Columbus to build a system before Cincinnati. Practically, it sounds like Columbus has many of the same issues facing Cincinnati in terms of political will to get this done. I generally consider Columbus to be more liberal than Cincy, but someone elsewhere in the thread (or maybe in the Cincinnati Streetcar thread, I dunno) made the point that any Columbus-wide votes necessarily take in a large amount of voters that are more suburban than urban. In that regard, while Cincinnati may be hamstrung by having fewer residents and less money because of its limited geographical size, it does allow for the city proper to be greatly influenced by urban-minded voters; if it had Columbus-size boundaries, people from say Indian Hill would be voting on the streetcar. This could be a real hurdle in getting a streetcar/light rail up and running in Columbus. And as the recent zoo levy failure in Columbus demonstrates, the electorate of Columbus/Franklin County may look very skeptically at tax issues to fund big projects. In the end, I would be happy to see Columbus get a streetcar or light rail in place, but right now all we see are some stories advocating things like rail to the airport, a streetcar, or intercity rail to Chicago. Until there is a real champion somewhere out there--politically, business-wise, or heck just an unrelenting advocate like John Schneider--it may be awhile for these things to come to fruition. I hope they are successful, but the city sure seemed a heckuva lot closer to a streetcar a few years ago than it does to any rail now.

I'm sure there will be bonds floated to pay for the viaduct. But it doesn't seem apples to apples to me. Tolls on the viaduct would equate to fares charged to ride the streetcar, which I understand is in fact going to happen. Of course, the real issue is people just aren't used to tolls to drive their cars. Until that changes, people will react negatively to any toll roads--or certainly at least to tolling anything in the future that you can currently ride on untolled (BSB, etc.).

Why on earth would a police officer refer to something as "general mayhem"? Do they not have PR people?

Agree with that. However, weren't those previous estimates revised upwards as a result of challenges by the city to the figures? I don't think this is a challenge figure but instead is calculated based on whatever method they normally use, which gives me hope that it is more accurate (as their pre-challenge figures in the 2000s showing the population dropping seem to have been accurate). Let's hope.

New census estimates for cities are out. Cincinnati has gone back up over 297,000 -- actually ahead of where we were as of the 2010 census. Awesome. http://factfinder2.census.gov/bkmk/table/1.0/en/PEP/2013/PEPANNRSIP.US12A

Your definition of "best" and mine differ then. Kenwood Towne Center is just a mall with bad traffic and a parking problem, nothing special. They've just parlayed their centralized location and proximity to some wealthy neighborhoods into becoming the premier shopping destination in the region. You have to count the anchor tenants, though. Without those, Kenwood Towne Center is Northgate Mall. To their credit, Kenwood has done a very nice job of locking up several high profile stores that are exclusive to the region (Restoration Hardware, Nordstrom's, Crate & Barrel, The Apple Store, Pottery Barn, Williams Sonoma, The Cheesecake Factory, Maggiano's, now Saks, and possibly Tiffany's). That's why they perform better than other shopping districts in the area. If you don't have to visit one of the stores that is located only in Kenwood, it isn't worth passing up whatever venue is closest to you, like Rookwood Commons or Crestview Hills Town Center (auto-oriented, though they may be). I have to say, I went to Northgate recently because I was in the area. The difference between that and Kenwood in terms of the mall itself--quality of stores, foot traffic, etc.--is akin to the difference in urbanity between walking in OTR and walking through a circa-2005 subdivision. I was truly amazed at how much more upscale and thriving Kenwood is.

I'll have to disagree with you. Living near Sawyer Point, I see activity there all the time. The tennis courts get a lot of use even with the change from free to paid use in 2013. You'll see families daily at the playground/picnic area. And the bike rental at Yeatman's Cove appears to be doing very well on weekends as well as evenings. Also, from May through September there isn't a weekend that the skating rink doesn't have an event tent(s) up and rented out for a party. Well I have to disagree with you! ;) My mileage may of course vary. And it may be more the Yeatman's Cove part I am thinking of than what is more properly considered Sawyer Point.

The Lager House does have outdoor seating. It has been, by all accounts, a huge success. As for whether that building is the right use for that location, it's actually in the parks, not at the Banks. Fairly sure that is the only real "building" that is going to be in the Smale Riverfront Park. I have been pleasantly surprised with how used the riverfront park is already. There are always folks down there jogging/walking/using the front porch swings, and I think it's going to be even more so when they get the rest of the park done. And the entire area is a lot more active whenever there is a game. I will say that, as someone who jogs down thru both Sawyer Point and the Riverfront Park fairly often, I NEVER see anyone at Sawyer Point, but I always see people in the Riverfront Park, for whatever that is worth.

Saw something on Facebook about plans to tear down the old Davis Furniture building on Main. Anyone know anything about that?

OK, but while you are thinking it is not enough high end, it will be tearing up the likes of Target, Meijer, Kohls, and the rest. Oh, I'm not saying that. I agree it will be very successful. I agree there are many people in Butler and Warren counties who will shop there. All I am saying is that it has been pitched by some as being some sort of "high-end" destination for the entire region. That sure doesn't seem to be taking shape. I think it will be a very successful shopping destination for the people in those suburbs, but having a Dillard's and a Dick's is not going to draw shoppers from, say, downtown and Indian Hill. Kenwood, on the other hand, will draw the shoppers nearby to it who want a Dillard's or Macy's, but also the high-end shoppers from everywhere in the region who want to go to Saks, Nordstrom, or whatever. I don't think we are disagreeing, kjbrill.

I think it will be successful, but it's not going to be nearly as "high-end" as some of the literature claimed. Dillard's and Dick's is not going to move the needle as a regional destination--for most of the people in the region, those stores are already close at hand. And really, I think that makes sense. There is a lot of money out that way, but not the same levels of money as around the Kenwood area--which is why you see Saks (and potentially Tiffany's, it sounds like) heading to Kenwood.

Wow. That's a big sign. Cool.

Whoops! I managed to miss that. I think I was looking at the pictures rather than the text....

Aren't quite a few of these--the houses on Wold and Keys Crescent--technically in East Walnut Hills, not Hyde Park? (Great shots by the way!)

You can see the potential. How old is it?