DEPACincy

He says without a shred of evidence.

Most of it is single family zoning unfortunately.

Most places around the country grew faster in the 90s. Michigan, Indiana, and Kentucky all had higher growth rates than previous or subsequent decades too.

I'm not fighting anything. Just asking questions about their methodology and what it means. It just doesn't seem to me that it's a very good metric to meaningfully show anything. Maybe I'm wrong on that account. I would like to understand it better. I'm bullish on Ohio. I'm not trying to be a negative Nancy. I hope you're right that it will be a bright decade for us.

Ohio ranks below average for life expectancy, median household income, median wage, population growth, job growth, etc. etc. etc. I'm not sure Site Selection's methodology is useful if you can rank so poorly in all those categories and still come out one top. What good is "corporate investment" if it doesn't benefit our citizens? Where is that investment going if we rank so poorly in job and wage growth?

You shared a lot of anecdotal examples of companies saying Ohio has a great business environment but when companies locate somewhere they almost always say that. I could find you examples from all 50 states. Is there any data you've seen that shows that Ohio is in the top-tier (or even above average) when it comes to corporate investment?

My favorite is the guy that just moved into the city in April and then is surprised that there are city noises and other people around. Like dude, if you don't want to be around other people or hear noises then don't live in a city. If you expect to be able to park right in front of your house, don't live in a city. If you can't deal with narrow streets and on-street parking, don't live in a city.

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/12/19/library-board-calls-surprise-meeting-fate-north-building/966614001/

I'm very optimistic that the Shell station itself will be redeveloped in the next decade.

And yet, the existence of the Shell has not kept OTR from becoming a hotbed of tourist activity.

It didn't disappear. It just moved to somewhere else. This doesn't seem like a good idea since, long-term, this location should be something much more productive than a gas station. I would imagine if 3CDC or the city have long term goals for this location it would be a large mixed-use development, not an auto-oriented space.

It seems like an apples to oranges comparison honestly. Galla Park was allegedly allowing and encouraging illegal behavior. Serving drinks to underage people, for example. Shell is just existing and people are doing illicit things nearby. Of course, if you're an employee at the Shell you're not going to put yourself at risk by trying to confront the drug dealers. It would be different if the Shell was actively encouraging the illegal activity. As far as I know, that's not the situation. And FWIW, the Shell looks shady and I know that crime does occur there. But I've filled up there a lot and never had a negative experience. I think, to a certain extent, there's a sense among white suburbanites that it is more dangerous than it is because a lot of young black people hang out around it.

So I thought it was super cool to see the US win. But can someone explain to me like I'm five why we need the Nations league when we already have the Gold Cup? And what the difference is? I know basically nothing about the way this works.

Sometimes. Sometimes not so much. We had a big yard, but some of our nearest neighbors had corn and soybeans right up to their doorstep basically. But more importantly, there's only so much you can do in that yard. If you're a kid you could play tag or wiffle ball, but there are no other kids within a mile to play with. So you end up hitting a wiffle ball around the yard by yourself until you get bored, then you go in and play video games. If you're an adult, there's not much you can do in that yard. You could jog or walk laps I guess, but that gets old real fast. If you're wealthy you could install a basketball court or pool, but most people don't have that kind of money. Poor people are basically out of luck. An urban neighborhood is much more conducive to a physical lifestyle.

Having lived on an actual farm, I can tell you that there is very little opportunity for exercise. Sure, if you're working the farm you're getting exercise. But most people who live on farms aren't doing the actual work. And modern machinery takes a lot of the physical activity out of farming anyway. If you're working the farm, that can mean sitting on your butt in a tractor cab all day. And then you're basically stuck in your house unless you drive somewhere. When we go visit my farm-town living family I dread how inactive we will be. I go out of my way to find spots to hike because otherwise there will be very little physical activity. And this isn't just my opinion, study after study show that rural folks are a lot less active because the rural lifestyle in 21st Century America is not conducive to physical activity.

Why not both? A great neighborhood has a mix of bars, restaurants, groceries, and dinner places. You need to have activity on the street morning, noon, and night.

I used to ride my bike in Camden on a regular basis. It's still super duper poor and there are definitely areas to avoid, but it's not scary anymore. I met a lot of really nice folks on the streets of Camden.

I would think that the streetcar and BRT could use the same lane. Also, with the Reading and Hamilton Ave lines sharing ROW for part of their routes I hope that means they'll be first. Quicker, easier, cheaper implementation.

I'm no expert, but I feel like you could add a skin to it.

Oh the demand is there. Just gotta get the city and county to move on it. That's the limiting piece.

Awesome that it blocks One Lytle.

But the Seattle example isn't gentrification either. It's a bunch of new housing being built on a parking lot downtown.

I guess 6 stories isn't too tall for OTR after all.

They were referring to the previous proposal, which was going to be 25 stories.

I'm actually okay with it because, if I remember correctly, this has like twice as many units as the former proposal, despite being a lot shorter. More people in that location is awesome. The other tower would've been a silo. This addresses the street very well.