You look so enthused!

Maybe a little redudant, but a good summary of the 80

pages

Maybe a little redudant, but a good summary of the 80

pages

 

LOL!

Maybe a little redudant, but a good summary of the 80

pages

 

Somebody's gotta do it (as I rarely visit this thread).

lol ... 80 pages ... wow.

 

 

... Is this a UO record?

yes

I still laugh at the fact this thread was started by an Anonymous

Guest. Was it someone who still posts here?

 

Can someone explain to me what those round pod things are in front of the Freedom Center?

^ Those are supposed to be two upscale restaurant spaces with outdoor dining, flanking a large are of public greenspace.  This was put on this block to address Freedom Center concerns about what kind of business might locate adjacent to the center.

^huh?

^ "huh?"  Exactly.  I hadn't heard that before.  You'd think that the Freedom Center would just be happy that something is finally getting built, which will bring additional visitors to them.  Are they actually getting picky with the development, or are they just trying to make sure that they aren't hidden behind something else?  Surely they can't prefer their current neighbors (weeds and rocks).

huh?!?!?!!?

 

These two restaurant spaces have been in the plans since Carter released their plans way back when.  This is nothing new.  All you have to do is scroll back 30 or so pages and find the initial release :-)

Yeah, I know that it's not a new addition.  I just didn't realize that it was a concession to the Freedom Center, that's all. 

The picky folks own a certain horrible football team. Can we send the Browns back to Masillon or Cleveland or whereever? I think the Freedom Center didn't want to end up in the middle of a party district.

oh.  yea those freedom writers, or whatever they call themselves, can suck my left nut.  jk, i love you.

The picky folks own a certain horrible football team.

 

Very true.  I'm still not convinced that they won't pitch a fit before the next phase begins.

Good news (pssst... Randy!)  :clap:

 

BREAKING NEWS, FROM THE URBAN OHIO NEWS NETWORK

Senate overrides Bush water projects veto

First time in a decade Congress has passed bill over presidential rejection

Associated Press, November 8, 2007, Reported 15 minutes ago

 

WASHINGTON - President Bush suffered the first veto override of his seven-year-old presidency Thursday as the Senate enacted a $23 billion water resources bill despite his protest that it was filled with unnecessary projects.

 

The vote was 79-14 to pass the bill. Enactment was a foregone conclusion, but it still marked a milestone for a president who spent his first six years with a much friendlier Congress controlled by his Republican Party. Now he confronts a more hostile, Democratic-controlled legislature, and Thursday's vote showed that even many Republicans will defy him on spending matters dear to their political careers...

 

 

That's cool!!!     There are quite a few great projects included with this..    (Not to mention our little pet project here at home.)

Hmm... Urban Ohio News Network... UONN. Sounds kind of catchy.

Hmm... Urban Ohio News Network... UONN. Sounds kind of catchy.

 

Nothing like tooting your own horn.

From the Enquirer:

 

Let's not make Banks into another cloneville

 

I love this town. It's always good for a laugh.

 

Designers agree on the Banks - give it a distinct personality. So let's get a Hard Rock Cafe, an ESPN Zone, a Wal-Mart, a Red Lobster, a McDonald's and a Wendy's. We can fill in the spaces between with a pseudo streetscape like the ones that they have at Easton in Columbus, or the Promenade in Cleveland.

 

After we survive the ride through Over-the-Rhine on our new streetcars, we can get off at the Banks and pretend that we are in one of those other stylish, fun and open locations in trendy Ohio. In fact, if we squint a little it will look like every other homogenized development anywhere in the U.S.

 

 

Ward Plona

 

Loveland

 

I honestly believe that everyone involved is working to prevent this from happening, and that this person has no concept of what is proposed.  However, if the renderings above are any indication, there is nothing unique about the project whatsoever.

 

 

My worst fear is the developers will be too conservative on this project. More than anything the Banks needs "places" not destinations. Those will create themselves.

As for Wanda, they all said the new Square would be a waste of money and a failure, no one would use it and look how that turned out.

 

The veto, kind of funny all the Democrats were elected to eliminate spending, specificly earmarks and provide transparency. And over riding the veto showed they were more than willing to trapple those promises. Even though it does help Cincinnati.

Sorry for getting political, but  in addition to the few good things listed the bill also includes,

more money for one of Representative Don Young's (R–AK) infamous Bridges to Nowhere (Section 4005).

a costly commitment to periodic nourishment of sand beaches,

Authorization of $5,300,000 for the construction of Lake Lanier Olympic Center in Georgia (Section 5061);

spending proposals targeted to wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects—that are a state and local responsibility

 

Didn't want Bush to look like the total bad guy, he didn't write this crappy bill.

 

 

From the Enquirer:

 

Let's not make Banks into another cloneville

 

I love this town. It's always good for a laugh.

 

Designers agree on the Banks - give it a distinct personality. So let's get a Hard Rock Cafe, an ESPN Zone, a Wal-Mart, a Red Lobster, a McDonald's and a Wendy's. We can fill in the spaces between with a pseudo streetscape like the ones that they have at Easton in Columbus, or the Promenade in Cleveland.

 

After we survive the ride through Over-the-Rhine on our new streetcars, we can get off at the Banks and pretend that we are in one of those other stylish, fun and open locations in trendy Ohio. In fact, if we squint a little it will look like every other homogenized development anywhere in the U.S.

 

 

Ward Plona

 

Loveland

 

I honestly believe that everyone involved is working to prevent this from happening, and that this person has no concept of what is proposed.  However, if the renderings above are any indication, there is nothing unique about the project whatsoever.

 

 

 

I think that  bloger from Loveland has a legit point, not just for Cincy and the Banks but for the entire US.  Urban developments in typical American cities have left little to be desired.  Lets hope they get the Banks right.  I know many people disagree with me but I still think one thing that gets Americans out and about is shopping and I think some upper-end/uinique retail could do very well.  JMO.

yea the banks shouldnt  be a clonesville usa.  but this, coming from someone who resides in clonesville usa, I mean loveland. 

aha i just giggled a little bit to myself outloud

The veto, kind of funny all the Democrats were elected to eliminate spending, specificly earmarks and provide transparency. And over riding the veto showed they were more than willing to trapple those promises. Even though it does help Cincinnati.

Sorry for getting political, but  in addition to the few good things listed the bill also includes,

more money for one of Representative Don Young's (R–AK) infamous Bridges to Nowhere (Section 4005).

a costly commitment to periodic nourishment of sand beaches,

Authorization of $5,300,000 for the construction of Lake Lanier Olympic Center in Georgia (Section 5061);

spending proposals targeted to wastewater and drinking water infrastructure projects—that are a state and local responsibility

 

I don't think that the Democrats were elected to eliminate spending.  I suppose one can make plenty of arguments against this bill as being filled with local "pork"; that being said, the income tax that acts as the federal governments primary means of revenue comes from everyone, and why shouldn't the money be spent on things in the country that benefit everyone.  You have to locate Army bases and interstate highways in real space too.

 

These sorts of projects don't make up major portions of the federal budget, unlike defense spending, service on the national debt, and health care.  It's too bad there isn't a better calculus for what sort of infrastructure projects get built and which don't.  I feel like Ohio is getting screwed all the time out of worthwhile projects that instead go to crappy states with political clout.

^The Washington Metro and the Big Dig in Boston are the prime examples of that.  There was some stat awhile back stating that Hamilton County taxpayers get 88 cents back for every dollar put into the federal transportation budget (I believe SORTA does receive a federal subsidy) but residents of the District of Columbia get an incredible $4 back for every dollar! 

^I was referring more to states like Mississippi or on the Great Plains that constantly bitch about the feds but take in more federal dollars than the put out.  I remember that table of statistics you are referring to as well; I think New Jersey got screwed the most, getting on 63 cents for every federal transportation dollar they contribute.

 

I don't mind in theory contributing more to the pot than we get back, there are just two things about it that bother me: 1) that are elected representatives from both parties don't complain more and work together to make sure Ohio gets a good return on what it pays for; and 2) that real value is being squandered through this haphazard manner of allotting projects.  I can't think of a single state outside California that would better be served and make better use of high-speed rail than Ohio.  Eight major cities in the 37th biggest state- where else does that percentage exist?

That is correct, apparently Ohio has the highest population density of any inland state and a higher population density than France.  I've brought this up in conversation before with rail skeptics and they think I'm either fabricating it or they come back with something like "they'll mess it up" or "they'll skim the money" and of course "who'll ride it?".  Generally discussing passenger rail and mass transit (or Cincinnati developments like The Banks) when you're the only proponent and knowledgeable person in a room means putting up with having facts laughed at.  Someone brought up riding Amtrak to Washington, DC from Union Terminal recently and I didn't even attempt to correct her when she stated you have to go to Chicago first to get to Washington, DC.  She was so convinced of it (and apparently the train, after turning around in Chicago, then goes through West Virginia), she was practically telling it on the mountain.  It's always kind of amusing when somebody mixes up information like that, until you stop to remember we have to put up with these kinds of people in voting booths instead of an Intergalactic Council of Elders making the big decisions.   

 

Also, I'm not sure what the population of Lyon is, Wikipedia states it as 470,000.  I've been there and the place isn't that big (although of course it does have a multi-line subway system).  Even if it's two million, a Chicago > Indianapolis > Cincinnati high speed line could support passenger rail as could Chicago > Toledo > Detroit and Chicago > Toledo > Cleveland.  Paris and Lyon are roughly 250 miles apart, a similar distance to any of those.     

 

We all hate pork.

Except when its our pork.

I was just making the case that for once Bush wasn't evil vetoing a pork-filled bill.

 

On the subject of mass transit

Megabus to Chicago kicks ass!

 

My whole thing with Bush on this issue maybe shouldn't just be directed at him, but guess what...he's the leader and therefore the buck stops with him, right?  The thing that perturbs me about this vote is how the vote actually turned out.

 

Of the 11 or so in Congress that voted this down...2 were from the Cincinnati Metro - a region that has been extremely good to Bush over the years.  If it were just about the pork why wouldn't this have been vetoed down in previous year by Bush?  I don't believe in pure coincidences...it just seems a little fishy that two Congress members from the Cincinnati Metro who seemingly have an anti-city bent voted against a bill that would have provided significant funding for a massive inner-city project.  This was then followed up with support from the president.

 

Now maybe this is the conspirator and/or narcissist in me coming out, but we have seen MUCH stranger things from this administration than that.  I don't know every single vote and the record of all the Congressional members from the Cincinnati region, but I don't think it is a stretch to say that Chabot and Boehner have probably been consistent conservatives with an anti-city bent.  Ever since the Reagan years cities have been getting the shaft, it's time for change in DC.  We need pro-city politicians that want to fix the problems of our inner-cities.

Bush loses first veto fight

Banks part of bill

BY MALIA RULON | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

November 9, 2007

 

WASHINGTON - Ohio's two U.S. senators voted Thursday to override President Bush's veto of a massive water resources bill that includes $30 million for The Banks.

 

The 79-14 vote was the first time one of Bush's five vetoes failed to stick. It came after the House voted 361-54 on Tuesday to override the veto...

 

 

Cities have never really had much federal support and when they it probably did more harm (see urban renewal, highway system, and public housing). I'd say we'd be better off with a block grant system based on a good, fair system rather than the political battle for earmarks. It would be more reliable money. The lowest level of government is usually the most democratic and the best able ascertain its needs and wants.

Cities get the shaft because of years of media washing the suburbs.

One issue that frustrates me the most is that everyone wants to move farther and farther out, but then complain about gas prices.

If commuters had to shoulder the true cost of their commutes they would live much closer to where they work.

Instead even people like me who ride the bus must subsidize their long commutes.

OTR Foundation: Why it is the wrong time for the Banks

Building Cincinnati, 11/6/07

 

Although the agreements for the Banks have been signed, there is always room for discussion.

 

On October 29, the Cincinnati Enquirer featured a story about a letter it received from Over-the-Rhine Foundation Executive Director Michael Morgan, in which Morgan argued that the Banks project would hurt redevelopment efforts in his neighborhood.

 

While the article was generally fair, Morgan believes that it failed to address the positive visions of development that were offered in the letter.

 

Morgan sent a copy of the letter to Building Cincinnati and notes that it addresses sustainable development and lessons learned from other cities.

 

In the interest of presenting many different perspectives, the synopsis will be posted here. A link to the full letter can be found at the end of this post.

 

 

WHY IT IS THE WRONG TIME AND PROJECT FOR THE BANKS: Synopsis

 

1. Cities across America are facing huge lawsuits by developers because construction projects have been halted or delayed due to funding glitches. The current Banks proposal calls for moving forward with a project that could cost $1-billion without secure funding. This leaves the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County open to potentially catastrophic liabilities.

 

2. The City of Cincinnati currently lacks sufficient revenue to maintain its infrastructure and existing programs. Any “new” tax revenue sources are already needed to run and maintain the city. We do not have an “extra” $27-million. We need to properly fund our infrastructure, parks, schools, and encourage sustainable investment in our existing neighborhoods.

 

3. What is the projected, net economic benefit of the Banks? There is no reason to believe that this proposed project will have ANY positive economic impact. The Central Business District, Over-the-Rhine, and dozens of other business districts throughout the city have vacant retail space. There is no reason to believe that additional retail space will benefit rather than harm the business community and the regional economy.

 

4. This project will impede existing efforts to revitalize Downtown, Over-the-Rhine, Uptown, the West End, Northside, and Price Hill. These areas already vie for scarce resources and are full of vacant buildings that could be turned into marketable apartments and residential units if they could only acquire the political will and financial support. Funneling $1-billion of public and private resources to build a new neighborhood will starve the existing ones – especially those in the urban core struggling to rebuild.

 

5. The money would be better invested in restoration of existing buildings. Historic preservation and restoration creates more jobs, more revenue, and more wealth than new construction. (See page 5) In addition, the existence and demolition of vacant buildings is costing the city millions of dollars a year, plus the indirect costs of crime and blight.

 

6. It is unwise to create financial priorities that will divert more investment away from the things that stimulate economic growth and draw people to the city. Arts organizations, cultural events, and festivals are crucial economic stimuli. They’re also what most people in the region value most about Cincinnati. However, they are currently struggling from serious budget cuts. The Banks will exacerbate the loss of jobs and business that will result from more arts funding cuts. (See page 4.)

 

7. Hamilton County would have a more dramatic impact and produce a greater return by investing in a holistic system for social service delivery and de-concentrating poverty. A recent Harvard study shows that modest policy changes can produce 200% increases in property values in struggling areas. Such an investment would benefit the entire region and produce hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars of increased tax revenues without raising taxes. (See page 6.)

 

8. Targeted investments in key neighborhoods would also improve the quality of life in the city, decrease our expenses, and increase tax revenue without raising taxes. Proper investment in Over-the-Rhine, for example, could realistically produce over $8,000,000 a year in additional real estate taxes, plus tens-of-millions more in sales tax, businesses taxes, and increased tourism. (See page 8.)

 

9. The Banks will do nothing to make us “a destination.” Nobody travels to a city because it has an Applebee’s in a new storefront. Tourism is driven by the things that make cities culturally, architecturally, and historically unique. Tourism is driven by what sets you apart, not what makes you like every suburb in America.

 

10. We are failing to learn lessons from other cities and our own past. As a recent Brookings Institute study notes: “Too often, cities’ economic development policies are more about chasing after the latest fads than strategically developing and implementing plans that capitalize on their unique assets…The proliferation of stadium and convention center building over the past 15 years illustrates this trend. Even with hard evidence that such projects rarely pay the expected dividends, city leaders continue to pursue them.” Cities fall into an “any development is better than nothing” trap. “Whether due to a genuine hope that they will beat the odds, a desire for short-term (e.g. political-cycle) returns, or simply a lack of imagination, these types of practices allow local governments to avoid the real challenges associated with fueling economic growth that is robust, sustainable, and inclusive – challenges that they must overcome.” (See page 4.)

 

For more information, contact the Over-the-Rhine Foundation at: [email protected], (513) 721-1317, or at 1317 Main St., Cincinnati, Ohio 45202. The OTR Foundation is a non-profit dedicated to protecting Over-the-Rhine’s historic architecture, preserving and promoting its rich history and cultural heritage, and encouraging policies that support responsible development and growth.

 

Read the entire letter on Scribd

 

http://www.building-cincinnati.com/2007/11/otr-foundation-why-it-is-wrong-time-for.html

 

Some people don't believe in the domino effect... i guess. As you build up and improve one area of town, it starts to spread as people want to be near to this new development and the attractions it has. This spreads outward, and other areas benefit through new commercial development and housing re-development.

I respect Mr. Morgan and his ideas greatly, but I hope in time he will be wrong about this...!!!!

The Banks will do nothing to make us “a destination.” Nobody travels to a city because it has an Applebee’s in a new storefront. Tourism is driven by the things that make cities culturally, architecturally, and historically unique. Tourism is driven by what sets you apart, not what makes you like every suburb in America.

AMEN!

But if they are doing this for Tourism, we're already screwed. It should be built for us.

And the Banks will not compete with OTR but it will with the 'bubs and Ovation.

The Banks and streetcar will absolutely help improve OTR.

^ I used to think that The Banks would compete with Ovation.  But the more I think about it, the more I believe that the two can co-exist.  The Banks should have no trouble bringing in restaurants, bars, businesses, and residents.  Not in that location, it's amazing.  And Newport's addressing a need with Ovation that is mainly office space and high end residential.  NOTL already does great business at night, but is deserted during the day (even at lunch time), because no one works in Newport's downtown area.  Having a bunch of new offices right next door would address this issue.  And whether I like it or not, there's a divide in this region at the river.  Lots of people prefer to stay on their own "side", so I don't think that the high end condos in each development will compete with each other that much either.

 

My big hope is that more and more businesses will leave places on the outskirts of town like Mason, Florence, West Chester, and Union, in favor of being in the heart of the city.  It looks like there's definitely going to be room for this type of migration on both sides of the river.  Let's just hope that the demand is actually there.

That is only kind of true, they are going to come for the Reds and Bengals and the Freedom Center. They will have some place to hang out and hopefully spend some money.

several problems with this idea.

1.) it costs more to restore than build new...by alot. fire codes, health codes etc are the reason and they're right to demand superior construction than times of old to prevent public safety/health concerns.

2.) the value of the real estate there is a major lost investment if not done now under rather ideal circumstances that have finally come about.

3.) I don't see any stadiums to add draw to otr. the banks has more value as a development right now. if it didn't than carter dawson wouldn't be willing to invest in it there they would invest in otr. otr should be kept residential and redeveloped as such. I'd even like to see, as a now resident of otr, a day when, like parts of newport, they create resident only street parking in otr and tasteful lots and garages arise along the streetcar route for downtown commuters which would spur more development for otr anyway.

 

I may have a very hollistic view on succesful urban redevelopment but otr/downtown/ and the banks cannot afford to compete, they must cooperate if they are to thrive. obviously the streetcar is vital for all three.

While I think that OTR is far more valuable than the Banks in every way imaginable, the fact is that it is good for both places to be developed.  Right now the political will exists for the Banks project, so it is being done.  Although it may take away from OTR presently, I think that is a hard claim to substantiate.  Ultimately each development is served by the other.

yeah thats what I meant I just came off being a little banks partial...soowwwrryyy. we need to start thinking like one city instead of individual neighborhoods.

Because I'm far to lazy to post the whole thing (lots of images), here's the block-by-block breakdown that I posted on my blog:

http://www.building-cincinnati.com/2007/11/banks-block-by-block.html

 

The City has all of the agreements posted here:

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/pages/-17503-/

 

 

 

^ thanks.  great information about the phases and what is planned on going in.

It still looks like they don't plan on adding a front to 2nd St. on Block 4.

I'm not sure that would look right. Hopefully they change their mind.

If your going to be looking at a garage or surface lot from 2nd St., they better at least make it look nice.

While I think that OTR is far more valuable than the Banks in every way imaginable, the fact is that it is good for both places to be developed.  Right now the political will exists for the Banks project, so it is being done.  Although it may take away from OTR presently, I think that is a hard claim to substantiate.  Ultimately each development is served by the other.

 

Here is what I posted on Building Cincinnati:

I highly doubt that this will hurt the redevelopment of neighborhoods like Northside, OTR, Uptown and Price Hill. It is a completely different market we're talking about here.

 

I'm sorry, but I'm not sure I'll ever see the day where neighborhoods like Northside, OTR, Uptown and Price Hill see rents that start out at around $1,500 a month.

 

Plain and simple...this is a market that these others neighborhoods are not attracting and to be quite honest...I don't know if they ever could attract these high of rents with the aging housing stock that each of them have.

Did anyone else see this pathetic attempt at satire in yesterday's Enquirer op-ed section?

 

 

Waterboarding on Banks: That would be distinctive

BY J. MICHAEL SKAGGS

 

As daylight saving time ended, I read The Enquirer pondering the cultural state of the world, and especially Cincinnati. The front page led me to think about "High school playoffs," "Time to choose a health plan," "Election 2007," "Antioch College gets reprieve - at least for now," and "A sense of place."

 

Margaret A. McGurk wrote the article defining the future of the Cincinnati: "Designers agree: Make Banks stylish, fun & open - and give it a distinct personality." She goes on to say, "In simple terms, it means personality - the shape, size, sight and smell that makes one location different from another. It's how you know you are in Mariemont, instead of Manhattan."..

 

 

J. Michael Skaggs is a photographer, adjunct instructor at Northern Kentucky University and caretaker at St. John's Unitarian Universalist Church.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20071111/EDIT02/711110349/

 

That's the dumbest, most juvenile, least imaginative thing I've seen out of the Enquirer in a long while - and that's saying a lot.  It's not even creative and actually very inappropriate.  How can an editor look at that and think it's a good idea to publish that garbage?

Yea!  What the hell!     Let's just put a wave pool right in front of the Freedom Center!    It'll WORK! :wtf: