RiverViewer

I wanted to give an update on 830 Lincoln, but it appears as though I'll have to give a preview instead:

Looks more like the Flat Houses thread!

No, sorry, not an action shot...probably only a few minutes after they hit...I've gotta find the shot with the car on our front lawn, though...

I used to live at the house right on that corner - if you were driving up Whitfield and pulled out in front of someone on Ludlow, they would swerve into our lawn, or hit you and get knocked into our lawn. Seemed like there were accidents there every couple months. I know I have pictures of one guy's car on our lawn, but I can't find it - this will have to do: If they're able to time that light in coordination with the one at Middleton, I would think things could still move smoothly. The north end of Whitfield doesn't need it - we could run over to Middleton to turn left, or pull out onto Ludlow, left onto Whitfield and thence to points east - but definitely on the south end - it was really dangerous coming up Whitfield and turning left on Ludlow.

There's a place for cities, there's a place for forests, there's a place for sculpted parks, there's a place for amusement parks, there's a place for residential neighborhoods, there's a place for freeways, and there's a place for farmland. Do you disagree with that? As for this policy, I don't know the details, but I don't have any problem with the state paying to preserve forests, or parks, or historic buildings, or, for that matter, farmland. Buying every last farm? No. Buying key farms for preservation? Sure. Do you disagree with that? And if so, do you also disagree with the state funding forests and parkland? If not, how is forest and parkland different from farmland? If you can answer those questions, we can have an excellent discussion...

Well, that ain't gonna happen. I honestly wish it could - the publicity is probably the worst thing for the situation, and I really don't see how his family life impacts his work in setting policy for the city. If were convicted of a crime, then perhaps - but even if that were the case, it's months away. But the fact is, it's America in 2005 - wishing this could be a private matter is like wishing nobody would bother covering celebrity trials - it just ain't gonna happen. At least not while he still holds elected office.

Wonderfully done! [insert gay joke here] [ha - he said "insert"!]

If someone argues that things aren't as they appear, I can buy that, bide my time and wait to see what shakes out. But if someone argues that yes, things are as they appear - he beat his 14-year-old son with a belt, raised welts and bruises - but that's okay, because it's discipline, don't you see? No, I don't buy that. Spanking is corporal punishment; smaking a toddler's hand is corporal punishment; perhaps, in the most extreme cases, a slap on the face could be corporal punishment. Hitting a kid with a belt and raising welts on his back, his arms and his chest - that's assault. It's a shame he's a high profile individual - the most important thing here is the family, keeping the kid from getting fucked up by the situation - since this ordeal will play out in the public eye, I suspect true healing is impossible, and that's a shame. For that reason, I'd think his resignation is the best plan - if you want to protect your family, you get them to a safe place first, then start rebuilding things - and that safe place is in privacy, with whatever help you can get. The fact that he seems determined to let this play out in public tells us something about his priorities, it seems to me. And that's fine - bad people can set wise policy for the city, and good people can set foolish policy for the city. I just don't think it's the decision I'd make in this situation.

That may be, and this may make me part of the problem, but fuck them. I don't harass folks who come to my neighborhood. I don't intimidate the innocent. I don't abuse people randomly because I think I own my street and their kind aren't welcome or something stupid like that. Fuck them, there's no excuse for it. (Er...that's directed entirely towards those who would abuse folks - please, Jeff, don't think it's directed at you or your comments in any way!)

I loved this one: I trust the guy's joking...

I use Sycamore/Auburn most of the time, Clifton sometimes...I pretty much avoid Vine, because of the stories you hear of beer bottles being thrown and the occasional mini-riot...

They've had the sign up for this project for probably a year or two now, but it looks like they finally got it started - in fact, it's almost finished. Here's a picture from October 24th, 2004: ...and here's the same view from today: A few more shots: The round stone wall was already here, but it really needed some work - the top layer was falling apart. You can see in this shot that they've fixed it and put a new top layer of stone on it: I think this is one of the most unappreciated overlooks in the city - when folks go to Alms, they normally go to watch the planes at Lunken. But where else can you go to see the 275 bridge to your left, and Mt. Adams to your right? It's a great spot, especially in the winter with the leaves gone...

They can be awfully bright at night or when it's dark and overcast, and I think 8 seconds ends up being pretty frenetic - I always seem to glance up, start processing the data, and then it's gone on to something else...but all in all, it's not that big a deal.

^And not only busy, but with all the hospitals, the fire station, plus District Five police, any physical impediments to moving thru there impacts emergency services.

I know this is off-topic, but how many fucking newspapers do you read, grasscat? I mean, dude, thank you so much for following all this stuff and posting it and everything - but sweet Christ, WUPW?

I wonder where this project lies in relation to the line between fixing actual problems and just looking for something to do. When you've got a problem, a brainstorming session is great - but Ludlow isn't de-vitalized, and sure as hell doesn't need revitalization. It's vital already. Yes, there are some things to improve, and some of these ideas are great - I like adding Wi-Fi, I like maybe shutting off Telford and making a cool pedestrian area. I guess my main worry is that someone's going to come along and try to sculpt a gaslight district out of the gaslight district, you know? Like, you don't need a nine person committee to figure out how to promote a diverse, eclectic neighborhood - you just have to get the hell out of the way and let Ludlow be what it grew to be. If you tried to build it, you'd end up with Crocker Park. I assume the first line is a disconnected thought from the next two, because I don't understand how restricting parking helps relieve the need for more parking. Now I love pedestrian-friendly areas. I loved the two years we rented right on Ludlow, being able to walk to the IGA and the wine shop. I loved car-free living, even if that just meant the car stayed parked for the whole weekend. But too much parking ain't Ludlow's problem. I think the parking squeeze is a good thing - the place is consolidated, not built high but still dense. But I don't know that restricting parking further is going to do much to help things out. I hate to point this out, but Ludlow Avenue is a major artery linking uptown to the west side. Yes, traffic and pedestrians need to play nicely together - but you've got to throughput traffic on that road, there's just no two ways about it.

Ooo...exciting...I'd make it if I didn't have class...thanks for your pending reporterage!

A landlord friend was completely open to the idea of accepting Section 8 vouchers - to his mind, it was a much more guaranteed payment, where 80% of the rent or so was coming from the government - plus the renter has a lot of incentive to come up with the rest of it, and not to trash the pad, because he faces losing his vouchers. Everyone is incentivized appropriately, and things should work fine. But the reason he didn't do it was primarily horror stories he'd heard about the onerous inspections. He doesn't keep slumlord housing or anything - he's got 50 to 80 year old single to three family homes in East Walnut Hills, they rent in the $700+ range, and he keeps them in great shape - I've lived in one of his units. But to be Section 8 approved is much harder than FHA approved, and supposedly if there's any chipped paint anywhere in the house - in a door jamb, or in a window frame - you've got to get tested for lead paint. Given the ubiquity of lead paint before 1978, it's not unlikely that it's in there somewhere. And given the ubiquity of lead in gasoline for so many years, it's possible that there's plenty of lead, even without lead paint. And once lead is discovered, you've got to remediate it, Section 8 or not, and that can get excessively costly. If you're working on a margin near break even in the first years of an investment property, dropping $10K or more on lead paint remediation is a deal killer. And then the other ticky-tack fixes add up too. I don't know how much of this is true - this is second hand, and not based on research, just based on horror stories - but it is the reason that at least one very good landlord decided against Section 8. Anyone know if there's any validity to these worries?

I thought McDonald's had given up a while ago, and were just staying open a couple months, which time period ended this month. But Inn The Wood will be missed...I really wish UC would have worked with them...can't say I'll miss ICrapALot Chili much, though... Here's the online story you referenced: Campus-Area Development Picks Up Steam Safer Environment Would Make UC More Attractive POSTED: 6:50 pm EDT May 4, 2005 UPDATED: 7:18 pm EDT May 4, 2005 CINCINNATI -- After months of legal battles, plans to redevelop the area around the University of Cincinnati campus are picking up steam. News 5 learned Wednesday that both Acropolis Chili and In the Wood restaurant have given up their legal fight and settled with developers. They'll both be closing their doors in late June and the McDonald's across from old St. George has just dropped off its keys. Demolition could begin as soon as Monday, but the next spot for big changes will be the corner of Vine Street and Jefferson.

<darth vader voice>impressive</darth vader voice>... I guess I assumed that since Columbus has annexed everything from Coshocton to Grand Lake St. Mary's, that Grandview would have been taken down for the count, but I was obviously quite wrong!

Spagio's Cellar, on Grandview at West 2nd in Grandview Heights. So I guess that's outside the city limits? If it were inside the limits, would they have to disallow smoking, or is there an exception for a cigar bars? I was under the impression that even the stricter version of the Cincinnati ban would have allowed the Havana Martini Club to stay in business (which, as a cigar bar, means allowing smoking inside).

Damn...I'm trying to remember - when I wrote that, I thought it was right on High Street, but that was Saturday night...someplace west of downtown, but I don't remember where. I'll find out and repost...

I was in Columbus last weekend (my wife's 15 year high school reunion), and Friday we went to a cigar, wine and beer place that allowed smoking. So there are definitely exceptions - just probably very few...

I was wondering why the benches face away from the view...

Wow...thanks for compiling those numbers! I love that Cincinnati has more than 60K people within 2 miles of downtown - that's pretty incredible, I wouldn't have guessed it. But I'm happy to be one of them!