So, what are some big fears/concerns you have for your Ohio City?  These can be either physical concerns (e.g. buildings or projects) or non-physical concerns (e.g. crime or education).

 

For Cincinnati, the following really jump out at me:

 

1.  5th and Race Parking Lot - This project has been overshadowed recently by the Banks and the Fountain Square deals.  However, this piece of land is very important from a retail point of view to both Macy's and Sak's (especially Sak's).  If not addressed soon, this could give the department stores fodder for closing up shop.

 

2.  Violent Crime - The recent shootings over the last month or so in downtown and OTR are serious issues for concern, people are getting killed just sitting in the park.  Something has to be done about this.

 

3.  Population Loss/Home Ownership - While parts of Cincinnati are making great strides in both new home construction and renovations (downtown and its environs, Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout, East End, Oakley, Clifton, Univ. Hts.), the City still is losing population.  Giant strides are occuring in the core, but what about the near west side?  Ever driven up the beginning of Harrison/Queen City Avenue or parts of River Road, it looks like a middle eastern country ravaged by war (granted I don't spend a lot of time on the west side, so I am not trying to bash it).  Walnut Hills is slowly getting better on the side bordering East Walnut Hills, but the core of WH remains pretty nasty.

 

 

Those are the top three that come to my head, love to hear what everyone else has to say.

 

 

My biggest concern for Cleveland is any sort of dramatic economic downturn (like $100 a barrell oil) that will scrap all of the plans for the city that are on the drawing board.

 

Then for the next 50 years Clevelanders would talk about the fabulous plans of long ago.....

Kinda like what happened in the depression.

 

Not that I am a wet blanket, but oil hit $60 a barrell today....not good

 

 

I agree with the Fifth and Race parking lot.  To have that type of land use right in the center of the city is a crime.

 

This is one of those topics I'd like to "think on" for a little bit.  I'm sure I'll come up with something soon.

for columbus my concerns are the lack of concern for pedestrians in some areas, bob taft :lol: ,all the parking lots, and the fact that most residents think the food donatos makes is pizza

for columbus:

 

light rail- i think that columbus needs light rail. i believe it will help improve life in general and encourage people to use public transportation. i enjoy my car and all, but taking I-670 in the mornings can be a real pain in the butt

 

city center- i hope something is done with city center. it would be nice if it could be turned into the mega star shopping center it was, with store like gucci, chanel, neimans, saks, macys or bloomingdales, vuitton, ralph lauren, etc... if not, i think a mixed use mall would be great, especially for all the people starting to move downtown. i think they should make it an outdoor mall like easton, except it would be in a real downtown(town square) environment. to me the new city center would have upscale/luxury stores, fountains, gardens, promenades, etc....(to make it really nice and attractive)!

 

I-70/I-71- this highway mess needs to be fixed. i think they should set up a toll system or add HOV lanes not only to this section of freeway, but to I-670 and 315. but i hope that something will be done in the next few years.

 

morse road/northland area- i hope that they continue with the great re-development in this area. i went to school in that area(go northland high vikings!!!) and i dont want to see it go to waste. i like what they are doing with the old northland mall site and the beautification of morse road!

 

parking lots- there are too many in downtown and i know they have potential to become residential space or office space or parks, etc...

 

that all that i could think off for now, but i am sure something else will come to mind and/or someone will mention something

Exactly what I was referring to in #2 above....

 

Gunmen's 40 shots 'shock' West End

'It's a weapon that's designed for war'

 

By William A. Weathers

Enquirer staff writer

 

 

WEST END - The men who sprayed more than 40 bullets Wednesday night at Linn and York streets were gunning for a rival drug dealer but struck two women who were innocent bystanders, police said Thursday.

 

Neighbors were amazed that more people weren't hurt, and police were concerned about the use of the high-powered assault rifles by men - still at large - who witnesses said circled the block more than a dozen times in a Chevrolet Trailblazer before they stopped the SUV, got out and started firing.

 

"It's a weapon that's designed for war,'' Sgt. Harry Roberts, president of the Cincinnati Fraternal Order of Police, said.

 

"The body armor we use will not stop them. These (the shooters) are people who have complete and utter disrespect for any life."

 

The shooting started about 9:25 p.m. at Linn and York near a Popeye's Chicken restaurant at 1920 Linn St.

 

At least two of the bullets, believed to be fired from semiautomatic assault rifles, struck two women who had just left a neighborhood grocery store.

 

The two women, one hit in the shoulder and the other in the leg, were fortunate to have escaped life-threatening injuries, police and friends of the victims, Latonyia Cheatham and Joann Burton, said.

 

Police say Cheatham, 37, is in danger of losing her arm. Burton, 42, is scheduled for surgery today to repair the bones shattered in her foot.

 

Jerry Dudley, a friend of Burton's, heard the gunfire, but like many in the area, he initially mistook the hail of bullets for fireworks.

 

"She is very lucky," he said of Burton, who is the mother of three of his children.

 

Dudley said gunfire is so routine in the neighborhood now that he stays in the house at night.

 

"It's a shame that you can get used to the gunfire like it is an everyday occurrence, an everyday occurrence just like the sun coming up," he said.

 

Dale Mallory, president of the West End Council who lives on Dayton Street not far from the shooting scene, said he heard the gunfire "that went on forever."

 

"I got calls from some of my neighbors that jumped straight out of their beds (when they heard the gunfire). I tell you we're in shock. My neighbors are afraid. The senior citizens say they don't come out after 9 o'clock."

 

Said George Beatty, who owns Junebugs Riverside Bar-B-Que on Linn Street a block away from the shooting scene: "I don't have a problem with gangsters killing gangsters, but when they kill (shoot) innocent people, that's a problem."

 

Said 51- year-old Nathaniel Harmon, a longtime West End resident, who lives near the shooting scene: "I heard boom, boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. I thought it was over."

 

But the shooting continued, Harmon said. "I stopped counting at 14 or 15."

 

Dexter Daniels, proprietor of DDDT's and Sons grocery on Linn Street, had just gone inside the store when the shooting started.

 

"I knew those weren't no firecrackers,'' Daniels said.

 

The shooting continued for "18 to 20 seconds - maybe a little longer," he said.

 

When Daniels looked outside a moment later, the shooters had already fled. "All I saw was smoke."

 

He was surprised there were only two shooting victims.

 

"I figured I was going to see bodies all over the place," he said.

 

The two women who were wounded had just left his store, Daniels said.

 

The neighborhood has a lot of pedestrian traffic, including children, Daniels said. Two 9-year-old twin girls had walked past his store just before the shooting, and their mother with "tears streaming from her eyes" came running up the street looking for them right after the shots were fired.

 

"You could see the horror in her face."

 

Fortunately, he said, the girls had gone inside another nearby store before the shooting started.

 

The shooting has prompted Dale Mallory to revive his idea of hiring private security officers to help patrol the neighborhood.

 

The idea is no slap at police, but they need help, he said.

 

"The police have done a good job. They've been here."

 

In the police radio broadcast right after the shooting, officers were alerted that the suspects were armed with several guns of the SKS type with bullets that can penetrate police protective vests.

 

"It will go through bulletproof vests, car doors and light armor," Cincinnati police Lt. Steve Kramer said Thursday as he held one of the 7.62 x 39mm shell casings recovered from the shooting scene. More than 40 of the shells that were fired from an AK47 or SKS-type semi-automatic high-powered assault rifles were recovered at the shooting scene, he said.

 

The three suspects who fled in a white Chevrolet Trailblazer were apparently shooting at a man who was involved in the theft of some drugs from them several weeks ago, District 1 commander Capt. James Whalen said.

 

The SUV had circled the block 14 or 15 times before the suspects stopped the vehicle got out and fired shots from at least two assault rifles in the direction of the intended victim, who was standing near the intersection of York and Linn streets, a known drug sales corner, Whalen said.

 

Whalen refused to say who the intended target is but did say it appeared that he escaped unharmed.

 

At an afternoon news conference at the Popeye's restaurant, Vice Mayor Alicia Reece said she had talked with police officials, and they had agreed to start foot patrols in the West End.

 

Several residents told Reece that the drug trade has brought the guns into the neighborhood.

 

State Sen. Mark Mallory, who attended Reece's news conference, took issue with her approach to the West End's crime problems.

 

"City Council should not dictate crime-fighting plans to the Police Department,'' Mallory said. "They should find out from the Police Department what tools they need to reduce crime, give them those tools, hold them accountable and let them do their jobs."

 

Mallory, brother of Dale Mallory, and Reece are both candidates for Cincinnati mayor.

 

Cincinnati police have confiscated 624 guns so far this year.

 

Capt. Whalen said police do not think that there is a connection between Wednesday night's shooting and another one Tuesday night at Vine and Green streets, Over-the-Rhine.

 

In the Over-the-Rhine shooting, two people in a vehicle were driving around throwing firecrackers out the window, he said.

 

Some people on the street protested, Whalen said, and a vehicle stopped and a man fired a shotgun at a crowd of people, hitting two. Several people in the crowd returned fire before the shotgun-toting man fled. The two shooting victims, who had non life-threatening injuries, ended up near the Popeye's restaurant in the West End before police located them, Whalen said.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050624/NEWS01/506240375/1077

 

Cincinnati

 

1) Drug dealers and the people that buy from them.

 

2) Sprawl.

 

3) City Council.

 

 

Can we just refer people to the Cincinnati crime thread and not post the stories in here?  Don't wanna muck up the thread too much.:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=3152.0

Here are just a few that I thought of.  Some are duplicates of what some of you have said.

 

These are in no particular order:

 

1) Crime, specifically:

   a) Perception of crime - The perception that the entire city is a cesspool, and people fear even entering it

   b) The random/violent nature of some of the recent crimes - More assault weapons on the streets, people shooting into crowds of innocent people, children caught in the crossfire

   c) Bad police/community relations - There is no faith in the police force with residents.  They can do nothing right, and their hiring policies are in question.  People believe the police are out to get them, therefore they will not cooperate and get some of these thugs off of the streets

 

2) The lack of faith in the city to get anything done - This ranges from large projects down to basic city services.  It plays out as apathy.

 

3) The deterioration of the housing stock, specifically in the "middle" neighborhoods - More investment is being seen in the central city, while other neighborhoods struggle to get many revitalization dollars.  Proper maintenance could cut off future catastrophe.  (I will add that there seems to be a little more activity in the last couple of years in this regard.)

 

4) The city needs better P.R. - The city can't rest on the fact that it's the largest city in the region and just expect things to be okay.  It's a new environment--the city needs to get out and sell, and sell hard.  They need to work tirelessly in this regard.  As it is now, many people see no reason to live, to work, or to play in the city.

 

5) City-county relations must change - They have to quit being enemies and quit trying to outplay each other.  It's damaging to the city, and it's damaging to the county.  Many people leave just to escape this circus.

bump...this is a pretty cool thread, or could be.

For Dayton, too many to list.

 

I think Grasscats number 3 is a big one for Dayton, too

 

) The deterioration of the housing stock, specifically in the "middle" neighborhoods - More investment is being seen in the central city, while other neighborhoods struggle to get many revitalization dollars. 

 

...to which I would add, for Dayton, the old 19th and early 20th century neighborhood commercial corners and districts.  There are also some older 19th Century, neighborhoods, not just the middle neighborhoods, that are going to be lost here, as well.

 

I seem to be of a one track mind about it lately, but my big fear for downtown is the loss of the Arcade. 

 

 

I'm affraid that the municipal and political fragmentation in Hamilton County will end up hurting the region down the road...particularly the City of Cincinnati.

This:

 

My top 3 include --

1. Political infighting, like we've seen between Hamilton County and Cincinnati.

2. Suburban sprawl, but that won't be slowing down much anytime soon.

3. Expansion of highways and funding issues with light rail and transit in general.

and the fact that most residents think the food donatos makes is pizza

You bite your tongue

 

So, what are some big fears/concerns you have for your Ohio City?  These can be either physical concerns (e.g. buildings or projects) or non-physical concerns (e.g. crime or education).

 

For Cincinnati, the following really jump out at me:

 

1.  5th and Race Parking Lot - This project has been overshadowed recently by the Banks and the Fountain Square deals.  However, this piece of land is very important from a retail point of view to both Macy's and Sak's (especially Sak's).  If not addressed soon, this could give the department stores fodder for closing up shop.

 

2.  Violent Crime - The recent shootings over the last month or so in downtown and OTR are serious issues for concern, people are getting killed just sitting in the park.  Something has to be done about this.

 

3.  Population Loss/Home Ownership - While parts of Cincinnati are making great strides in both new home construction and renovations (downtown and its environs, Hyde Park, Mt. Lookout, East End, Oakley, Clifton, Univ. Hts.), the City still is losing population.  Giant strides are occuring in the core, but what about the near west side?  Ever driven up the beginning of Harrison/Queen City Avenue or parts of River Road, it looks like a middle eastern country ravaged by war (granted I don't spend a lot of time on the west side, so I am not trying to bash it).  Walnut Hills is slowly getting better on the side bordering East Walnut Hills, but the core of WH remains pretty nasty.

 

 

Those are the top three that come to my head, love to hear what everyone else has to say.

 

 

 

1. Lack of streetcars. 

 

The others will all fall into place.

Cincinnati

I'll stick to things that aren't always a concern, such as crappy city/country relations. I mean they are better now than they have been in my lifetime so I won't complain too much.

 

1. The real estate depression keeps the Banks from accelerating and getting finished.

    1a. That the same real estate bubble crushes some of these fascinating plans for the river.

2. That the westside continues in downward trajectory. The city blew up the West End for a good reason, but when they all moved to Price Hill and Westwood that didn't really accomplish anything besides hurting a couple middle/working class 'hoods.

3. That Cincy won't get its act together and start moving to multi-modal public transit in the Greater Cincinnati/Dayton region.

2. That the westside continues in downward trajectory. The city blew up the West End for a good reason, but when they all moved to Price Hill and Westwood that didn't really accomplish anything besides hurting a couple middle/working class 'hoods.

 

Wow, what a charged statement.  The westside as a whole is not heading in a "downward trajectory".  Some neighborhoods - yes, but the whole westside - NO.  Be careful with blanket comments such as that; I'm sure people living the better areas would take offense.  Westwood is also not doing all that bad, right now it is primarily Price Hill that is struggling.

 

I would also like to say that the city did not blow up the West End, this was a combined process that was driven primarily from the feds for I-75.  Not to mention, I don't think you can ever really "blow up" a neighborhood (as you so elequantly put it) for any good reason.  Poor people deserve a neighborhood and a decent place to live just like wealthy individuals deserve that opportunity.

I wish the city would support more redevelopment in Price Hill. Even if investors/developers aren't that interested, they should work that much harder to make them interested. The west side gets so overlooked in general, even by people on this forum. I see a lot of new rich subdivisions in Green Township but Price Hill, south fairmount, and camp washington etc are deteriorating and they'll probably get worse if there ends up being a lot of displacement in OTR, in the future.

I'm moving to West Price Hill/Covedale area in August. My roommate bought a really nice place on Kellywood off of Guerly (sp). I'm going to miss being so close to UC's campus, but the neighborhood and house are really nice!

Price Hill Chili is your friend!

never been. where is it?

2. That the westside continues in downward trajectory. The city blew up the West End for a good reason, but when they all moved to Price Hill and Westwood that didn't really accomplish anything besides hurting a couple middle/working class 'hoods.

 

Wow, what a charged statement.  The westside as a whole is not heading in a "downward trajectory".  Some neighborhoods - yes, but the whole westside - NO.  Be careful with blanket comments such as that; I'm sure people living the better areas would take offense.  Westwood is also not doing all that bad, right now it is primarily Price Hill that is struggling.

 

I would also like to say that the city did not blow up the West End, this was a combined process that was driven primarily from the feds for I-75.  Not to mention, I don't think you can ever really "blow up" a neighborhood (as you so elequantly put it) for any good reason.  Poor people deserve a neighborhood and a decent place to live just like wealthy individuals deserve that opportunity.

 

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

In the mid 1900s, a similar thing happened.  To build I-75, the city plowed a large tract of the west end (slum clearance plan).  This resulted in Cincinnati's 'second ghetto', which emerged by the Cincinnati Zoo.  Cincinnati did not learn from this mistake.  They are currently working on a 'third ghetto' in Price Hill.  The recent crime wave on the west side proves the point. 

never been. where is it?

If you're heading west, it's on the right side.. you'll see it.

2. That the westside continues in downward trajectory. The city blew up the West End for a good reason, but when they all moved to Price Hill and Westwood that didn't really accomplish anything besides hurting a couple middle/working class 'hoods.

 

Wow, what a charged statement.  The westside as a whole is not heading in a "downward trajectory".  Some neighborhoods - yes, but the whole westside - NO.  Be careful with blanket comments such as that; I'm sure people living the better areas would take offense.  Westwood is also not doing all that bad, right now it is primarily Price Hill that is struggling.

 

I would also like to say that the city did not blow up the West End, this was a combined process that was driven primarily from the feds for I-75.  Not to mention, I don't think you can ever really "blow up" a neighborhood (as you so elequantly put it) for any good reason.  Poor people deserve a neighborhood and a decent place to live just like wealthy individuals deserve that opportunity.

 

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

In the mid 1900s, a similar thing happened.  To build I-75, the city plowed a large tract of the west end (slum clearance plan).  This resulted in Cincinnati's 'second ghetto', which emerged by the Cincinnati Zoo.  Cincinnati did not learn from this mistake.  They are currently working on a 'third ghetto' in Price Hill.  The recent crime wave on the west side proves the point.

 

I realize that crime is going up in SOME areas on the westside, and that SOME areas on the westside are experiencing decline.  With that said I reinterate my original point that not ALL of the westside is declining.  I would venture to say that Covedale, parts of Westwood, and even pockets of Price Hill are doing just fine.  Sure they may experience crime like anywhere else, but it's not out of control.

 

It's too easy to confuse where you are at on the 'westside' and make blanket statements.  I'm just defending the westside nabes...I'm sure if you ask people in Clifton about this kind of thing they would have similar thoughts (thomasbw...cramer).

I'll actually stick by my statements.

What Cincy did to the public housing in the West End is basically what Chicago has been doing in Cabrini Green and similar places. Those were warehousing the poor public housing. To ever get serious about fixing OTR and downtown meant clearing out the large public housing and the problems that followed it. Unfortunately, the market and patterns of migration sent those folks up Glenway, Queen City, and Harrison. Look at the size of the Catholic schools on the west side and you'll see the degree of decline. A chunk of the Boone Cty and Harrison growth is old west siders getting as far away from the city as they can. I know there are still wide swathes of strong neighborhoods, but the once solid west side has been weakened in a major way. It is pretty clear that Cincy's worst neighborhoods right now are the Fairmonts.

Sure there is crime in Clifton, we forgot with hills how close Avondale is to Clifton especially over near Bishop and the like. In walking around different neighborhoods in the city, I have felt the most worried in Westwood along Harrison closely followed by parts of OTR. Clifton, PRidge, KHeights, not so much.

^clifton's crime is pretty small.  aside from $28 motel rapes and thefts from autos around burnet woods, there are very few part one crimes.

In more than seven years in the neighborhood, the only crime I've experienced is two car radios stolen.

Look at the size of the Catholic schools on the west side and you'll see the degree of decline.

 

It would be nice to summarize everything so simply as you seem to do...

 

I would like to add that the westside also boasts the largest (# of students) public HS in the state (Oak Hills).  Now if you're going to follow with...well that's not in the city.  My response is that the vast majority of students who attend the catholic high schools on the westside are also not from the city.  They are from places like Delhi Twp, Green Twp, Colerain Twp.  Ask someone at Elder or Seton HS where the majority of their students live...here is a hint, it's not the city.

 

The point I've been trying to make is quit generalizing so damn much.  All of the westside is not Price Hill...hell there are even different sections of Price Hill if you really want to get down to the nitty gritty.  For example Lower Price Hill is very different from West Price Hill...East Price Hill is also different from West Price Hill.  Just quit making these blanket statements that are untrue to about 80% of the area you are actually talking about.

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement above; with a voucher, a Section 8 person can use it anywhere they want, it is not based on the neighborhood, but if the landlord is willing to accept it, and if the tenant can cover the additional rent that the voucher does not cover.

Look at the size of the Catholic schools on the west side and you'll see the degree of decline.

 

It would be nice to summarize everything so simply as you seem to do...

 

 

The city line is of vital importance to this thread. My concerns for the county and the region are quite different than those for the areas within the city boundaries. As recently as 10 years ago (not so long ago), the Catholic grade schools that were feeders into the high schools were double the size they are today.

My point is that these are signals that all is not well within the city boundaries on the West Side. Driving around many of the neighborhoods, such as Mt. Airy, parts of Westwood, quite a bit of Price Hill gives one the sense the trajectory is going in the wrong direction. Do I hope that things get better? Absolutely, but once a community starts to seriously abandon the city they don't come back and Cincinnati's West Side was a particularly tight community, but unfortunately it is no longer one that sees itself as invested in city life to the extent it once did.

My fear (pt of this thread) is that the West Side is following a trajectory more like Roselawn and Bond Hill rather than Pleasant Ridge and Oakley. - caveat, I'm not speaking toward race here but rather their relative decline in terms of property values and rising crime -.

I would argue anyway that Oak Hills size is a symptom and signal of the decline, because 30 years ago they would have been at West Hi, Aiken, Walnut Hills or Elder. -snarky ? do they let West Siders into Walnut? -

 

As to the question about Section 8 and so on. Part of it was simply market forces and the dynamic of migration patterns. Those displaced by the changes went to the nearest affordable neighborhoods, the Fairmonts and Price Price Hill. If you go look at the real estate listings from the late 90s and early 00s it seemed like the whole neighborhood was for sale. That is when the slum landlords moved in and a substantial portion of the core of the community moved on.

 

dmerkow, you sure do a lot of research. Do you work for the enquirer by any chance?

My point is that these are signals that all is not well within the city boundaries on the West Side. Driving around many of the neighborhoods, such as Mt. Airy, parts of Westwood, quite a bit of Price Hill gives one the sense the trajectory is going in the wrong direction. Do I hope that things get better? Absolutely, but once a community starts to seriously abandon the city they don't come back and Cincinnati's West Side was a particularly tight community, but unfortunately it is no longer one that sees itself as invested in city life to the extent it once did.

 

This is particularly interesting, because if you are saying that westsiders of the past felt more invested in city life than they do today then I'm not real sure what you mean.  When people first started settling atop the hill in the Price Hill area it was to escape the city...much like Mt. Healthy and the other hills.  Only the wealthy were able to traverse the hills, so it was essentially the first type of exclusionary measures.  They didn't want to be a part of "city life" back then, which entailed of overcrowded living conditions, poor health standards, pollution, etc.

 

I would say that about the time you are discussing people then started to move towards Delhi and southern Green Twp.  Those people today are now moving to northern Green Twp, far west HamCo, and SE Indiana.  Is it because something has changed in the area...is it because the people have changed, or is it the same exact trend that is happening in every city, and every region across the nation.  It's a matter of sprawl probably some of the other conditions factored into that, but the major driving force is that of people wanting to live on 1/2 acre + lots...2,000-3000 sq.ft. home...and have an SUV.

 

The westside is still a very tight community and if you don't believe me, try attending a Westwood Community Council meeting sometime.  That neighborhood that as you describe it "moving in a downward trajectory" has great community involvement, the city's largest neighborhood population, and some of the most clout of any city neighborhood around.  In my mind that's a tightly nit community.

This is getting pretty silly, obviously I've found a sore spot. You haven't disproven what I've said but rather provided a more positive gloss on what I perceived as a problem that Cincinnati is dealing with. You clearly think things are coming up roses. I don't.

 

I'll try again though. I'm not saying the West Side is OTR or Avondale. The challenges that the West Side are dealing with now are happening in cities across the country. Those neighborhoods that survived the urban crisis of the 60s, 70s, and into the 80s are finding the problems they once thought were confined to the 'ghetto' are now at their doorstop. All through that era, the core West Side neighborhoods were thought to be impenetrable and not as likely as central and eastside neighborhoods to fall prey to the vagaries of urban decline.

 

I'll also stick with my community analysis. Of course suburbanization started in the fifties. Someone had to fill up Delhi, Green Twnship, and Colerain Twnship. However, there has been a perceptible change since the early 90s.

 

If you think Cincy's problems are located elsewhere more power to you, but besides the recent push for redevelopment along the views in Price Hill, I don't see the same level energy flowing around the West Side that exists downtown and Greater Hyde Park.

 

I hope I'm wrong and that everyone (within the city boundaries) are completely satisfied with their quality of life and want to stay there and encourage their friends and family to live there too. I hope that massive investment flows there as well. That would make Cincy a much stronger city.

This is getting pretty silly, obviously I've found a sore spot. You haven't disproven what I've said but rather provided a more positive gloss on what I perceived as a problem that Cincinnati is dealing with. You clearly think things are coming up roses. I don't.

 

You are baffling at times...I have not been saying that the westside Cincinnati neighborhoods are in great condition, but rather I have been saying that they are not ALL suffering a downward trajectory.  I would also like to inform you that new construction does not necessarily equate to a neighborhoods success.  There has not been all that much investment in Northside either, but do you also consider that neighborhood to be a failure??

 

My other point has been that your blanket statements like Westwood and Price Hill are becoming ghettos for example...are not accurate, and MANY people would take offense to that kind of a statement.  Mainly because many working class...non-ghetto residents still reside in those neighborhoods.  If you feel you've hit a nerve...you have.  I don't appreciate blanket anti-city statements with racial backing.

 

You may not like the fact that low-income housing exists, and that's your problem, but low-income housing does not always equal the fall of a neighborhood.  Re-examine your points please, and talk to me again when the elitist comments have been dropped from your argument.  Until then I see no validity in your statements.

 

Let me reiterate that I am not arguing the fact that some neighborhoods may be having tough times, but I am arguing why/where that is occurring.  Your rationale is off base.

 

I'll try again though. I'm not saying the West Side is OTR or Avondale.

 

You said you're more scared of Harrison Ave. than anywhere else...

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement above; with a voucher, a Section 8 person can use it anywhere theywant, it is not based on the neighborhood, but if the landlord is willing to accept it, and if the tenant can cover the additional rent that the voucher does not cover.

 

Cincinnati's immediate western suburbs contained a moderate amount of section 8 housing prior to 1998.  As the west end was redeveloped and English woods was cleared, the number of section eight units climbed exponentially and disproportionately on the west side of the city.  By the late 1990's, it seemed that section 8 housing was taking over blocks.  People started moving out of their neighborhood.  Many of these houses sold to landlords who chose to rent out to section 8 tenants.  This, in turn,  made people more inclined to sell their home.  This was the proverbial "slippery slope".  City government recognized that there was a problem and in 2004 and passed legislation to cap vouchers in the western neighborhoods.  In a small amount of time, neighborhoods changed dramatically.

 

It was intimated in a prior post that some arguments in this thread are racially charged.  I sincerely hope that my comments were not perceived that way. I was stating that the city has dealt with a similar problem in the past.  I occurred the last time that a slum was cleared.  And yes, I would qualify that part of the west end and English woods as slums by today's standards.  I only ask why the city would allow such a large migration of low cost housing to one or a few neighborhoods.  The city has the power to cap vouchers!  You would have thought that they would have learned from the past.  The most racist part of the whole issue in my mind is the migration one predominately low-income black population to a new zip code.  It seems that what was a black west end now becomes a black price hill.  I believe that the best policy would be one of integration, one of assimilation of lower income housing in a variety of neighborhoods, independent of race.  Isn't integration a national policy or at least an ideal?

 

I am a west-sider.  I would like to have seen city council act before they did.  When people were being displaced, they could have put caps on vouchers for each city neighborhood.  This would have ensured that each city neighborhood could retain its identity.  This would also work to mitigate the damages in terms of crime and property devaluation.

Both English Woods and the West End are 'westside' neighborhoods technically, right?  So these people were simply moving from one westside nabe to another.

 

I would agree that a cap or percentage system would be great when dealing with low-income housing.  But see how far city council gets with a measure like that with Hyde Park, Mt. Adams, etc...

 

Not to mention, for something like this to be truly successful it has to be done on a regional level.  The problem is still that the City of Cincinnati (330,000 or so people) has to deal with all of the social issues for a region of over 2 million.  This is an unfair burden on the city and it's taxpayers.  What makes this even more tricky is that Cincinnati has the challenge of trying to work with all of the fragmented municipalities and 3 different state governments.

 

Do you think Nky would like to have this same thing in place?  Sure they also carry some of the load, but it is slim compared to what Cincinnati has.  I believe that they can live with the status quo...as can most communities, since they don't have to deal/pay for these issues.  If you can politically get this done in Cincinnati...you should seriously run for some higher office, because you've got talent.

 

*When I say you it does not mean anyone inparticular...rather you in a general sense.*

 

This is pretty much what I was driving at. The hope is always that integration would help a neighborhood increase its desirability. I think this is the case with PRidge and Northside. Unfortunately as Jesse so strongly shows that isn't what happened throughout the West Side. One has been careful when dismantling public housing slums. It isn't simply one neighborhood to another, the government basically exists the housing businesses and throws those people on the market whether the market can handle it or not. This development, no matter who you construe it, hurt many neighborhoods.

 

I am quite troubled by the way this thread developed. Somehow expressing concern about the general direction of the communities of the city-West Side was over time construed as racist and elitist. Ad hominem attacks like that seem unnecessary and not particularly constructive. Clearly a couple disagreed with the general direction of WS life. That's fine, but those people pushed the discussion in a particular direction. 

 

 

I am quite troubled by the way this thread developed. Somehow expressing concern about the general direction of the communities of the city-West Side was over time construed as racist and elitist. Ad hominem attacks like that seem unnecessary and not particularly constructive. Clearly a couple disagreed with the general direction of WS life. That's fine, but those people pushed the discussion in a particular direction.

 

You may not be pleased, but it is the way you worded/constructed your opinions that got that response.  You solely attributed decline to low-income housing...and there is much more to it than that.  When you take into account what most people perceive as low-income housing...you then have your element of race.  Choose your words more carefully next time if you had meant to present your opinion differently.

 

I don't know what is racist or elitist about any of this.  I don't understand your logic on the issue.  People are describing a migration trend and expressing concern over a neighborhood.  If there is a piece of the puzzle that he /we are missing, please state it instead of dancing around the topic. It seems that YOU are assuming that section 8 = black.  If that is in fact the truth, then the racist aspect of this is not the description of the migration.  It is the neighborhoods like Mt. Adams, Hyde Park, etc. who had the money and political clout to say "not in my neighborhood". 

Quote from: The_Cincinnati_Kid on June 23, 2007, 01:02:20 PM

Quote

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement above; with a voucher, a Section 8 person can use it anywhere theywant, it is not based on the neighborhood, but if the landlord is willing to accept it, and if the tenant can cover the additional rent that the voucher does not cover.

 

To clarify, I was simply stating that a voucher allows the holder to take it anywhere someone is willing to accept it.  This was the whole point of trying to disperse the Section 8 housing out around the region without any one entity having to own strictly Section 8 buildings. 

My biggest concern for Cleveland is any sort of dramatic economic downturn (like $100 a barrell oil) that will scrap all of the plans for the city that are on the drawing board.

 

Then for the next 50 years Clevelanders would talk about the fabulous plans of long ago.....

Kinda like what happened in the depression.

 

Not that I am a wet blanket, but oil hit $60 a barrell today....not good

 

 

Wouldn't high energy costs make urban living that much more attractive to the masses?  Cheap energy is what got us into this mess to begin with.

 

I think the biggest thing that threatens Cleveland's mega project is:

 

One Politics

 

Two The rising cost of Steel.

 

Wouldn't VERY expensive oil drive the demand up for intown living and thus be part of the fuel those megaprojects need?

I don't know what is racist or elitist about any of this.  I don't understand your logic on the issue.  People are describing a migration trend and expressing concern over a neighborhood.  If there is a piece of the puzzle that he /we are missing, please state it instead of dancing around the topic. It seems that YOU are assuming that section 8 = black.  If that is in fact the truth, then the racist aspect of this is not the description of the migration.  It is the neighborhoods like Mt. Adams, Hyde Park, etc. who had the money and political clout to say "not in my neighborhood".

 

I'm not sure...I must have misinterpreted the following statement incorrectly, but it seems to have some strong undertones to it.  If I am wrong please forgive me, but it seems similar to the statements of "we don't want those people living here" or "whenever those people come into an area it immediately goes downhill"...you know those types of statements.  I'm going to drop this now, whether one of you two chime in, for another hit at my stance, or not.

 

2. That the westside continues in downward trajectory. The city blew up the West End for a good reason, but when they all moved to Price Hill and Westwood that didn't really accomplish anything besides hurting a couple middle/working class 'hoods.

Are the section 8 recipients moving into these west side neighborhoods mostly black? 

 

Yes or no?

 

If yes, and if the theory of vouchers is that recipients can move anywhere they want to, there is either self-selection happening or there is racial steering within the local real estate/landlord community.

 

If yes, then this:

Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

..sounds to me like the kind of white flight that was going on in Detroit, as described in The Making of the Urban Crisis

 

 

 

 

or East Cleveland that went from around 98% white in 1950 to around 90% black in 1960

Wasn't there a lawsuit against the City of Yonkers by a higher level of government because they purposely placed section 8 housing together in one part of town, instead of making it dispersed? Then CHMA did a study and found that all of their section 8 housing was in the central city and west side of town, offered monetary incentives to east side communities if they accepted public housing, but all of them turned it down. I can't remember any details. Anyone know a place online with more information?

 

It makes sense that places susceptible to section 8 housing are places with inferior or cheap housing stock because of the high amount of wear-and-tear put on the properties by tenants. As far as the west side is concerned I see PARTS on Delhi and Bridgetown as being at risk. But certainly no one renting out their nice new house in Green Township is going to rent it out to someone with a section 8 voucher.

 

If you look at the crime data for this year, east price hill and west price hill have similar amount of crimes, with east price hill having more confrontational crime (rape, murder).  Judging by the statistics, Westwood isn't "as bad" but there is a high number of crimes, and Westwood isn't considered a desirable place to live. Cincinnatipolice.org won't let me open PDF files with the 2005 and 2004 data so I can't tell if that's a steep decline but as far as "downward projectory" I'd say Avondale and Walnut Hills take the cake right now; and I blame police surges in OTR for it.

Wasn't there a lawsuit against the City of Yonkers by a higher level of government because they purposely placed section 8 housing together in one part of town, instead of making it dispersed? Then CHMA did a study and found that all of their section 8 housing was in the central city and west side of town, offered monetary incentives to east side communities if they accepted public housing, but all of them turned it down. I can't remember any details. Anyone know a place online with more information?

 

I'd be interested in the answer to this too.  If this is what happened this is a form of "steering by nonparticipation".  I didn't know landlords can refuse to accept vouchers. 

 

 

I think that what he says is true.  Look at where the section 8 housing went after the west end/otr was blowed up: It was all in Price Hill, Westwood, Fairmount, etc.  The city did not disperse these vouchers evenly around neighborhoods.  For instance, there was no representation of voucher housing in Mt. Adams.  In Price Hill, it was a capitalist free for all.  The slum lords bought properties on the west side and applied for section 8 housing.  Some streets became 75% section 8 in a very small window (less than four months).  This caused crime to rise and a general devaluation of real estate in the area. 

 

Not sure what you mean by the bolded statement above; with a voucher, a Section 8 person can use it anywhere they want, it is not based on the neighborhood, but if the landlord is willing to accept it, and if the tenant can cover the additional rent that the voucher does not cover.

 

Also, "the city" didn't issue any vouchers at all, they are issue by Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority, an entity governed by federal housing laws.

It seems to me that there are two reasons why some of the west side neighborhoods are supposedly "declining."  First, some bad element came, and the good element left, as in the people who had pride and cared about the neighborhood.  I know quite a few people who have moved out of Westwood.  THese same people were perfectly content until they suddenly saw "strange" people walking around the neighborhoods (their words, not mine.  They mention streets that are now scary.  Now, it's been four years since I've lived on the west side, but I don't notice what makes these particular streets scary and so on.  I did not pick up any racial undertones in the posts by jessehallum and dmerkow, but I wonder if racism has played a role in this.  I do wonder if some people who moved did so because a black person moved on their street which used to be all white.  If this is the case, that is really sad.  I also think some people moved because they wanted the bigger house with the bigger yard, and moving out further is the trendy thing to do.