The goal with retail in the Gateway Quarter thus far has been to bring in specialty retailers and make it a "destination" type of business district.  With more and more residents moving in, I would like to see more essentials like a small grocer, a dry cleaner, maybe a variety of clothing shops, etc. move in... in addition to lots of new restaurants of varying price points.  (Venice on Vine is a rather inexpensive restaurant but they're always closed when I'm down there.)

Wow.  I live at 13th and vine, and love it.  Then I read comments describing the neighborhood as "ghetto" because "There were tons of people out loitering on the sidewalk, music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic, and there was just a general sense of lawlessness" - and I think "Oh yeah, those attitudes are what I don't like about Cincinnati." 

 

It sounds like "loitering" is the same as standing and talking on the sidewalk, but only when you don't look affluent.  Actually, I think I noticed a large group of people "loitering" on the sidewalk in front of Senate yesterday evening.

 

Maybe if more people in Cincinnati would talk to people not like them, or even say hello, we'd all be a little less paranoid; there would be more people on the sidewalk and the street; and you wouldn't have to suffer so much "ghetto feel" because of all the other pleasant distractions. 

 

 

^

It's not just Cincy. I live in Washington D.C. possibly the liberal Capitol of the East Coast, and people here talk about how much they love diversity until it's in their face. I work in a largely "progressive" office where people claim to be for poor people, however they never will interact with any of them. People in Cincy do avoid poor people, whereas here people simply ignore them. People always say that it's only like this in Cincy, but it's really not. It's everywhere.

^ OK I get that.  And, I appreciate the comment.

 

But this is Cincinnati's place in time to do it differently.  OTR is at the interface.  During the current period when people who have been separated by sprawl and zoning are actively mixing, that is the time to stretch and learn.  Not to reflexively wish that Gateway quarter looked like a suburban strip mall.

 

And, it's possible.  It happens every day at places like Tucker's diner, which I'd guess you'd have to call "super ghetto".  Nice people from all walks who get along and enjoy being together.  We need more places like that.

It sounds like "loitering" is the same as standing and talking on the sidewalk, but only when you don't look affluent.  Actually, I think I noticed a large group of people "loitering" on the sidewalk in front of Senate yesterday evening.

 

I think this sums it up nicely.

 

Having grown up in a neighborhood where there was absolutely NO diversity, it was a huge shift for me even when I first moved to CUF.  But the more you "stretch and learn", the more you reprogram your built-in instincts.  Coming from where I did -- If I can feel comfortable in a diverse neighborhood, talk to people who are different than me, and not pass judgment about other groups -- Anyone can do the same.

Wow.  I live at 13th and vine, and love it.  Then I read comments describing the neighborhood as "ghetto" because "There were tons of people out loitering on the sidewalk, music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic, and there was just a general sense of lawlessness" - and I think "Oh yeah, those attitudes are what I don't like about Cincinnati."

 

It sounds like "loitering" is the same as standing and talking on the sidewalk, but only when you don't look affluent.  Actually, I think I noticed a large group of people "loitering" on the sidewalk in front of Senate yesterday evening.

 

Maybe if more people in Cincinnati would talk to people not like them, or even say hello, we'd all be a little less paranoid; there would be more people on the sidewalk and the street; and you wouldn't have to suffer so much "ghetto feel" because of all the other pleasant distractions.

 

This is a bullshit comment.

 

So, you are somehow rationalizing this:

 

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple.  This what turns people off.

 

 

*ahem*

 

You were also the one carrying a notebook in Over-the-Rhine, writing down what you thought of the (black) people, and deliberately walking across the street and away from the (black) people because you thought they were all thugs and drug dealers.

^

Yeah, I still do but i dont bother posting about it on this board.

 

And, so what?  I don't see what I wrote back then contradicting:

 

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple.  This what turns people off.

 

You agree this is acceptable public behavior?  Yes or no.

 

 

 

 

 

Anyway, whats going on is the Gateway Quarter is liminal space.  It's between places.  So the juxtaposition is a bit jarring.  As the place becomes more gentrified the urban underclass who used to live there will thin out.  In fact on some blocks, particularly those vacant blocks along Race, it's pretty quiet. This was the genius of the 3CDC strategy, that the place had to be redone by entire blocks, not piecemeal.

 

One would expect, as this happens, the place will seem less "ghetto" and start to attract fewer  "pioneers" and more generic yuppies.

 

It will be interesting to watch this happen.

^

Yeah, I still do but i dont bother posting about it on this board.

 

And, so what? I don't see what I wrote back then contradicting:

 

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple. This what turns people off.

 

You agree this is acceptable public behavior? Yes or no.

 

I'm Asian. Can I go bumping down the street in my Toyota RAV4, windows down, and blast out Avril Lavigne? Would you have a problem with that? Or only if I'm black and listening to rap?

 

What if I ride my bike and impede traffic behind me because I'm slower than an auto?

 

What about the hordes of people in front of Senate on Friday night during the Tweetup? Should they have been corralled inside? They were quite a noisy bunch! And we all know that some black people find offense to the gentrification, so yeah...

 

What edale wrote is his own personal interpretation. I live in Over-the-Rhine, like Mr. Jim Uber, and we can tell from first-hand accounts of life here in this neighborhood; you can't with your little notebook and personal racial dislikes. Yeah, music does "bump" from cars in some neighborhoods, but it was no different than the white kids who did that around the University of Kentucky when I went there, or during a Friday night in Ironton, Ohio in downtown. And have you been up to UC? Kids walk in the street, disregarding traffic signals and lane markings all the time. But they are mostly white. So it's different.

 

Personally, I don't use the crosswalks all that much. I cross mid-block often because there isn't that much traffic and I can jog across. And I do roll down my windows and listen to music. Am I now frowned upon?

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple. This what turns people off.

^Truth.

 

Agree or disagree?

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple.  This what turns people off.

^Truth.

 

Agree or disagree?

I would agree with this assessment. Walking in front of traffic (not okay) is different than simple jaywalking (okay). And it's pretty rude when the music in someone's car is so loud that you can't hear the person across from you, or hear the music on your own car's stereo. Although I do think there's a fine line between "too loud" and an acceptable noise level. Bass also has something to do with this issue -- loud bass-bumping techno is generally more intrusive than loud jazz, for example (though this probably has less to do with the genre and more to do with the sub-woofers and the stereo's settings).

 

Generally, I'd be less concerned with the music than walking in traffic. The music issue is personal preference, whereas the traffic issue is about safety.

Well, Jeffrey, since you called my feelings, based on my life experiences, bullsh!t, I'll just go ahead and say that you are rac!st.  There.  Even.

 

Some folks put way too much emphasis on nice and tidy.  That's my opinion.  I'd prefer that OTR develop in a way that encourages more people to move here that are at least tolerant, and even better, willing to go out of their way to interact with different people.  That can happen in Cincinnati, and will create a healthier environment.  I'm more afraid of Jeffrey and his friends moving in and making this, socially, just like every other place, than of the "uncivil" black people jaywalking and, you know, talking on the streets.

 

As far as I'm concerned, Jeffrey and others like him can take his notebook and go do research at strip malls.  But I'm sure that won't make him quite as interesting at dinner parties.

 

 

I'm Asian. Can I go bumping down the street in my Toyota RAV4, windows down, and blast out Avril Lavigne?

 

 

I'm going to interject and say yes, I for one would be very annoyed at anyone blaring Avril Lavigne.

Jim I like the way you're talkin my friend.  OTR renovation is not an experiment for white people to see what black people are like

Wow.  I live at 13th and vine, and love it.  Then I read comments describing the neighborhood as "ghetto" because "There were tons of people out loitering on the sidewalk, music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic, and there was just a general sense of lawlessness" - and I think "Oh yeah, those attitudes are what I don't like about Cincinnati." 

 

It sounds like "loitering" is the same as standing and talking on the sidewalk, but only when you don't look affluent.  Actually, I think I noticed a large group of people "loitering" on the sidewalk in front of Senate yesterday evening.

 

Maybe if more people in Cincinnati would talk to people not like them, or even say hello, we'd all be a little less paranoid; there would be more people on the sidewalk and the street; and you wouldn't have to suffer so much "ghetto feel" because of all the other pleasant distractions. 

 

 

 

Listen, I live in a neighborhood in Los Angeles that is far more diverse than anything that exists in Ohio, so don't preach to me about appreciating diversity in neighborhoods.  The building next to me is almost entirely section 8, and I enjoy the fact that all people have a spot in my neighborhood.  That said, embracing diversity, and embracing ghetto culture is not one in the same.  Black culture is not synonomous with ghetto culture, and in implying that it is, you're sounding pretty racist yourself, Mr. OTR progressive resident.

 

Like I said, on the weekend and in the evening I think the Gateway Quarter is a pretty cool place with a nice vibe, but this weekday experience leads me to think that it's still pretty rough at times.  I keep tabs on the new developments, and the improvement has been incredible, but I sometimes think I'm expecting too much too fast.

 

By the way, the nice crowds of people on the street were talking very loudly using the N word almost every other word, there was trash all over the sidewalk up near Kroger, and they were hanging out in front of a vacant building, not a new restaurant/bar.  But if it makes you feel better to lable everyone who has a critique of the neighborhood a racist, then go ahead, that's really productive. :roll:

embracing diversity, and embracing ghetto culture is not one in the same. Black culture is not synonomous with ghetto culture, and in implying that it is, you're sounding pretty racist yourself, Mr. OTR progressive resident.

Agreed. I know lots of blacks who are quite in touch with their "blackness" who would not approve of or identify with some of the behavior you described. They aren't all rich, either.

First of all Edale, I didn't call you a racist.  That was reserved for Jeffrey's comments.  For you, I disagreed with the generalities you used to describe undesirable characteristics of a neighborhood. 

 

Maybe, being with you on the streets that particular time, who knows, I might agree with you that it was undesirable behavior.  Who knows?  But reread your original post, before you embellished it to respond to my criticism.  The behavior you describe is too general and to me describes a vibrant street life.  Have I run across the street in front of traffic to avoid going to the corner?  Of course.  Have I loitered on the sidewalk talking to people?  I sometimes do it on purpose; living in a dense format neighborhood gives me that opportunity.  I'm no fan of really loud music inside a car - don't know how they stand that - but whatever, to each his own.

 

You were obviously right - your post wasn't popular, at least not with me.  What exactly did you want or expect, as a reply?

 

And go ahead and keep using the term "Mr. OTR progressive" for me.  I'll keep trying to live up to it.

 

Jim, have you ever driven down the street only to have some pedestrian mosey their way across the street in front of you (not at a crosswalk), forcing you to go from regular speed to an almost complete stop? I have, lots of times (people of all races). It especially happens in "ghetto" areas. It's not the same as quickly running across, so you make it out of the way before you inconvenience a motorist too much. It's a calculated "eff you, I'm important...for this one moment" gesture.

 

Given the context of how edale was describing the scene, I find it hard to read "walking across the street in front of traffic" the way you are reading it. I also find it hard to believe that you would want to defend such rude (and dangerous) behavior.

 

I do understand that you want to defend your neighborhood, though. And I also understand that some people have irrational fears/issues with minority areas. But I don't think you've been appropriately charitable in your interpretation of what edale originally posted. (While I see it reasonable to take issue with some of it, I think the traffic issue is exceptionally poignant and indefensible.)

...they were hanging out in front of a vacant building...

 

You aren't talking about me and some exploring friends, right?

 

That said, there are a lot of generalities that certain people have been throwing around. Sure, Jeffrey and edale sound a lot like my parents, especially when they first set eyes on my building (the Emery). "There are a lot of colored people around, is it really that safe?" Are they necessarily racist? No, they are just very sheltered. One is from a very-white country; the other from northeast Kentucky, so they were not introduced to other ethnicites, cultures and races as most on this board.

 

They saw people hanging out on the street corners as drug deals going down; abandoned buildings as lookouts; broken sidewalks as a sign of ill-maintenance; and a predominantly one-race district as a ghetto -- because that is the technically true term.

 

wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

ghetto: "A poor densely populated city district occupied by a minority ethnic group linked together by economic hardship and social restrictions."

 

It's the same in Palisades Park, NJ, a Korean-town, where one small, small section of town holds all of the poor Mexicans and latinos. It's a ghetto.

 

Or Lower Price Hill in Cincinnati, home to poor Appalachian-migrants and descendents. It is also a ghetto.

 

Ghetto does not necessarily mean it is crime ridden, where drug deals go down, or where the unsavories hang out. It is where a concentration of poor and disadvantaged -- of any race, color and ethnicity exists. Using the term ghetto as a determinative statement is not only incorrect, it leads to interpretations of that individual in question being a racist, whether true or not.

 

But does a ghetto necessarily lead to crime? Or does being disadvantaged and poor lead to higher incidences of crime? The latter is the only factually and statistically verified statement; lower income levels leads to more crime, period. There is no denying that; it was the basic principle everyone is taught in say, Poverty Economics. They are the subset that has fewer resources, and have the greater "need" to steal and thrift.

 

And where do you draw the line? Do the same experiences in the predominantly black Over-the-Rhine translate over to the predominately white Lower Price Hill? Or the car-modding crowd that cruise around on Friday and Saturday nights in downtown Ironton? Or the men in suits in downtown Cincinnati that jaywalk? And how far can you describe your "unconfortable" experiences without stating that you are a racist?

 

One stated he delibrately avoided any interaction with black people whatsoever by crossing the street and going down a side street to get away. He was offended by the sight of people on the streets, especially on any street corner. The other is offended by loud music blaring out of cars and by jaywalkers -- singling out one particular race subtlety. Is one more racist over the other, or is the prejudice over not having a greater bond and association with a particular race, ethnicity or color driving these awkward emotions? We can all generalize it -- I have black friends, I know black people, I live near diverse people -- but statements, even ones that are subtle, can color you in a manner that is you may not like.

 

Mr. Uber and others, such as myself, see it differently. We live here. We see people of all colors, races and walks of life jaywalk, blare loud music, huddle the corners or sidewalks. Did you see Senate Friday and Saturday night? Or the music blaring out of the Righteous Room? Or the crowds of people in front of Arnold's? Of course not, we generalize, we single out a particular ethnic group we don't usually associate with or know much about.

^ I'm sorry, but using 'ghetto' to imply a high-crime area is colloquially accepted across all ethnic, racial, and socioeconomic divides that I am aware of. I realize that's not the original/literal meaning of the word, but it is used that way, across the board. You might make a case that the way this evolved is morally suspect, but I think it's a jump to accuse someone using the word in this way of being morally suspect.

Jim, have you ever driven down the street only to have some pedestrian mosey their way across the street in front of you (not at a crosswalk), forcing you to go from regular speed to an almost complete stop? I have, lots of times (people of all races). It especially happens in "ghetto" areas. It's not the same as quickly running across, so you make it out of the way before you inconvenience a motorist too much. It's a calculated "eff you, I'm important...for this one moment" gesture.

 

You know, I completely get, and got, that.  I'm just choosing to interpret it in a different context.  Some days, I want to tell people to eff off when they do that to me.  Other days, I am patient and just let them walk past.  I like the more patient person, better.  So I'm saying that part of living in an area like this is to try and understand why people might want to behave that way; I think that's very useful for everyone.  I am disagreeing strongly with a viewpoint that I regard as reactionary.

 

I had an experience just today that might make my point better.  I was having breakfast at Tucker's, which has become a Saturday ritual for me that I enjoy very much.  I was meeting a friend, who was late, and I was holding a stool at the counter for her.  This young black guy was sitting at a booth, and the waitress asked him to move to the counter cause he was alone (it's a very small place).  So he starts to sit down next to me, at the stool I was trying to save for my friend. In the most polite fashion possible, I said I was trying to hold this for my friend, and asked if he could take another of the open seats.

 

This guy gives me a look of such contempt - I was taken aback.  I apologized again when he very slowly moved to a nearby seat, and then thanked him again when he sat down.  No response.  Just a silent look of hatred.  If someone had asked that of you or me, it would have been "Oh sure, no problem."  When I left, I went over to him and told him that I appreciated him moving for us, and that I didn't mean anything by it.  He shrugged, but didn't look quite as mean.  Maybe he realized that he overreacted.

 

My point is that these attitudes are all over the place out there, and they are responsible for some of the behavior described, but I don't think it's that useful to label it as "uncivil" and then just say that "gentrification will save us", which was the thread that was going on here.  That's not going to solve anything. 

Some days, I want to tell people to eff off when they do that to me. Other days, I am patient and just let them walk past. I like the more patient person, better.

 

You would love New Orleans for that.

 

I don't think it's that useful to label it as "uncivil" and then just say that "gentrification will save us", which was the thread that was going on here. That's not going to solve anything.

 

I agree with that, but I don't agree with refusing to call uncivil behavior "uncivil". I understand people act in many ways for many reasons. For example, lots of people are deprived of love and affirmation, and it leads them to act out in selfish ways. While patience and a degree of tolerance is called for, acceptance is not. Ultimately, people must be accountable for their own actions, and I do think almost everyone knows when they are doing something they shouldn't -- even if they are more or less primed to behave in a certain way, they still make that choice.

 

I'm glad you did what you did at Tucker's; that takes special skill. I probably would have, on the one hand, felt guilty that I'd offended the guy, and on the other hand reassured myself that I didn't do anything wrong. And just leave it to that internal struggle. My difficulty in dealing with this type of situation is one reason why I gave up on teaching as a profession. I struggle with expressing empathy to someone who may not be open to accepting it.

It's not just Cincy. I live in Washington D.C. possibly the liberal Capitol of the East Coast, and people here talk about how much they love diversity until it's in their face. I work in a largely "progressive" office where people claim to be for poor people, however they never will interact with any of them. People in Cincy do avoid poor people, whereas here people simply ignore them. People always say that it's only like this in Cincy, but it's really not. It's everywhere.

Yeah, this a great point. I was just in DC where I have many 20-something friends who are of every political category. They might be different politically, racially, and socioeconomically but they all like the same (generic, gentrified) areas. In fact, a couple conservative friends who are a little older just moved from DC to Arlington while two of my more liberal friends who live in DC said they are "way too hip" to live anywhere but DC. It's such a joke, they're all bland as hell wannabe yuppies when it comes to their lives but "progressive liberals" or "traditional conservatives" in their minds.

 

But this is Cincinnati's place in time to do it differently. OTR is at the interface. During the current period when people who have been separated by sprawl and zoning are actively mixing, that is the time to stretch and learn. Not to reflexively wish that Gateway quarter looked like a suburban strip mall.

 

And, it's possible. It happens every day at places like Tucker's diner, which I'd guess you'd have to call "super ghetto". Nice people from all walks who get along and enjoy being together. We need more places like that.

It's only possible in a very limited sense that is fortunately stretched because OTR is so large. A complete restoration of OTR without displacing some people is impossible. To change the neighborhood for the better, people need to change their ways. To say nothing about the supposed aspects of "a vibrant street scene" like booming music and meandering in the street, the systemic tolerance of squalor and vice in OTR cannot be accepted if a complete restoration is to be expected. As far as I can tell, the material and locational assets of the community deserve a better motto than "most dangerous neighborhood in America."

 

*ahem*

 

You were also the one carrying a notebook in Over-the-Rhine, writing down what you thought of the (black) people, and deliberately walking across the street and away from the (black) people because you thought they were all thugs and drug dealers.

^I don't know what you're trying to accomplish with this post Sherman but I, for one, enjoy Jeffery's take on what's going on in OTR.

 

 

^

Yeah, I still do but i dont bother posting about it on this board.

 

And, so what? I don't see what I wrote back then contradicting:

 

music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic

 

...this is uncivil behavior in my book, pure and simple. This what turns people off.

 

You agree this is acceptable public behavior? Yes or no.

 

I'm Asian. Can I go bumping down the street in my Toyota RAV4, windows down, and blast out Avril Lavigne? Would you have a problem with that? Or only if I'm black and listening to rap?

 

What if I ride my bike and impede traffic behind me because I'm slower than an auto?

 

And have you been up to UC? Kids walk in the street, disregarding traffic signals and lane markings all the time. But they are mostly white. So it's different.

 

Personally, I don't use the crosswalks all that much. I cross mid-block often because there isn't that much traffic and I can jog across. And I do roll down my windows and listen to music. Am I now frowned upon?

Yes, you are frowned upon in my book. I could go into my own discrimination against people who 1)drive RAV4s, 2)blare Avril Lavigne or any other music regardless of window position, 3) impede traffic because they're on a bike but I won't because it would be rude. And, no, it's not different just because the UC kids are mostly white. There are other issues that come into play other than race when one is in an unfamiliar environment with a type of person one is not accustomed to.

 

Well, Jeffrey, since you called my feelings, based on my life experiences, bullsh!t, I'll just go ahead and say that you are rac!st. There. Even.

 

Some folks put way too much emphasis on nice and tidy. That's my opinion. I'd prefer that OTR develop in a way that encourages more people to move here that are at least tolerant, and even better, willing to go out of their way to interact with different people. That can happen in Cincinnati, and will create a healthier environment. I'm more afraid of Jeffrey and his friends moving in and making this, socially, just like every other place, than of the "uncivil" black people jaywalking and, you know, talking on the streets.

 

As far as I'm concerned, Jeffrey and others like him can take his notebook and go do research at strip malls. But I'm sure that won't make him quite as interesting at dinner parties.

Jim, you make good points but to call Jeffery a racist was below the belt. He wasn't right to call out your statement as BS but I think he honestly thinks that tolerance of that (in his opinion) uncivil behavior is BS. The problem your having with Jeffery's opinion is not his supposed racism but his adherence to different standards than yours and application of discrimination. Discrimination is not necessarily racism btw.

 

I liked your point on "neat and tidy" and I much prefer the rough around the edges, dilapidated (but not too much) structures to "over-restored" properties. Reminds me of Chelsea on L.I. http://www.pbase.com/jimrob/chelsea

 

The perils of over-restoration fall on the other side of a very fine line but for the time being OTR doesn't have to worry about that or the displacement issue.

 

And finally Jim, I presume you're the same Jim Uber referred to by Kaid Benfield in one of his posts about OTR? If that's you (I'm assuming it is), it is important to understand that everyone who cares for OTR might not agree with your reasons for loving OTR which are quoted below:

"I, and many others, moved here in the hopes of finding a truly racially and economically and socially integrated community . . . Right now the need for funding, for keeping rain and vandals out of beautiful buildings so they are preserved, outstrips the concerns about gentrification. The possibilities and the degree of poverty and vacancy are both so great, that to have any complaints at all about the $100M that has been invested over the last few years can seem like madness.

 

But the time question the "how" of redevelopment will come, once the money flows easier and redevelopment seems inevitable. I'm curious about how this has been done successfully elsewhere. And I admit this is the only part of OTR that makes me pessimistic about its future."

from http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/revitalizing_overtherhine_part.html#comment3663

 

If I was going to be pessimistic about OTR's future, my worries would gravitate toward a 2001 scenario where riots and disorder scare off well-intentioned "white men in suits" as you say.

 

Jim I like the way you're talkin my friend. OTR renovation is not an experiment for white people to see what black people are like

Haha, this is a common statement when it comes to gentrification now isn't it? It turns my stomach when people start referring to everyone as a member of an identitarian group. You're either black or white and that's the end of it. There are tons of white ghettos but you hardly ever here of the gentrification problem in them because white ghettos are less likely to be gentrified because of the lack of architectural appeal/historic significance and proximity to centers of commerce (CBDs).

 

Reminds me of this image from the Whitopia thread:

 

embracing diversity, and embracing ghetto culture is not one in the same. Black culture is not synonomous with ghetto culture, and in implying that it is, you're sounding pretty racist yourself, Mr. OTR progressive resident.

Agreed. I know lots of blacks who are quite in touch with their "blackness" who would not approve of or identify with some of the behavior you described. They aren't all rich, either.

Great point. I can't say it enough how irritating it is for supposedly open-minded people to automatically associate 'ghetto' with black even if the area under discussion is overwhelmingly black.

 

 

If you read edale's original post and Jeffery's replies, you'll see nothing about race was ever mentioned.

Anyways, I was pretty disappointed with the overall feel of the area on this visit. I walked from Central Parkway up to 15th to check out the progress happening on the latest round of rehabs, and found the street scene to be extremely chaotic and, for lack of a better word, ghetto. There were tons of people out loitering on the sidewalk, music was bumping from cars going down the street, people were walking in the middle of the street in front of traffic, and there was just a general sense of lawlessness.

 

This is my first time down to the Gateway Quarter during a weekday in the middle of the day, and I must say I'm really disappointed. The buildings that have been rehabbed look great, but the the neighborhood still felt really shady on this visit. It won't deter me from visiting again next time I'm in Cincy, but I know if my mom or sister had been with me, they would have probably left with very little inclination to return.

I can't help but (mostly) agree with you edale. My first real experience with OTR was before the 2001 riots and it was one of the most depressing places I had ever been. Since then I've been there a few times and a lot of the things that depressed me persist but the statistics and my eyes don't lie. There are tectonic changes happening in the neighborhood. Sure, the aforementioned 'ghetto' street scene persists but what seemed impossible just a few years ago has come to pass (see this 2005/2006 thread about Vine Street: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3248.0.html). At any time, the area can fall back and the forces of alienation and crime can gain strength but with each day the chances that OTR will go the way of real "ghettos" decreases. I'd be willing to bet that chances the revitalization of OTR fails or stagnates are much higher than the chances it will turn into a Yuppie Whitopia anytime soon.

 

Things like Miami University's Center for Community Engagement hold some promise: http://arts.muohio.edu/cce/

Especially if they could learn a few lessons from the University of Dayton's nationally recognized Fitz Center for Leadership in Community:

http://www.udayton.edu/artssciences/fitzcenter/about_the_program.php

 

 

@@@@@@@

 

This clip sums up what's going on in the minds of those who took umbrage with Jeffery's disapproval of what edale described:

The points about stereotypes made by Buckley in the interesting clip you posted are useful.  I doubt that any of us can define racism.  But all of us use stereotypes every day.  If I have an awareness of my stereotypes, I can realize that while they are useful they are still just stereotypes, and as such apply to an aggregate population and not necessarily to any one individual.  If I do not have an awareness of my stereotypes, I lose that perspective.  Having stereotypes doesn't make anyone racist, but I think that losing an awareness of them can make a person act racist.  Once you actually believe your stereotypes apply to any one individual, then I'd say you're racist.  That's not a theoretical or learned definition, just something I pulled out of thin air that makes sense to me.

 

I'd say that in large part this thread is about people arguing over different degrees of awareness of stereotypes.

 

And yes, I'm that jim uber responding to the post by Kaid.  Obviously I'm aware that my opinions are not shared by everyone.  But I'm opinionated, like most people here.  As far as development of OTR goes, I'm probably not nearly as "anti-gentrification" as you might think.  I think that OTR needs to be gentrified, but think it should eventually be primarily done by individuals as opposed to corporations.  Hopefully that will happen if more people see a good future for the area and choose to invest their money in property and arrange for the renovations themselves.  While I like the Gateway quarter, I hope that the ultimate renovation of OTR does not look like a big version of that.  My reasons don't have anything to do with the way the physical renovations are being done through 3CDC, which I think are fine.  I just imagine that the social development of OTR will be different if individual scale rehabilitation takes root. 

Gotcha, thanks for the further explanation.  You're making sense with the blind stereotypes applying to all individuals as racism but I don't think that's what Jeffery was doing, partly because I've read a lot of Jeffery's work.

 

Your story about Tucker's was enlightening and it showed that it really takes two to tango, so to speak.  If both of you had been stand-offish that'd be a bad situation but you went the extra mile.  Most people don't do that, especially with people they aren't familiar with.

 

I agree with you concerning OTR turning into a big Gateway but I'm not worried about that.  I don't think corporations would spend what is necessary to rehab the entire 300 some odd acres.  Most will undoubtedly be done by individuals or local community groups.  Cincinnati would be lucky to be such a draw that people were pouring into OTR from all over to live but I doubt that's going to happen.

 

Individual scale rehabilitation taking root is my highest hope for OTR right now.  For that to happen the social paradigm that's persisted for so long must change.

I don't usually chime in on this kind of stuff but I am upset that someone would be intimidated by the current state of Over-the-Rhine, which is a cupcake compared to how it used to be. 

 

Maybe those folks would be happier if there were more cupcake stores in the Gateway Corridor .  .  .

I wonder how long this thread title will remain relevant.

probably at least until most of the drug and prostitution business is gone, and the driveby shootings stop!

 

Don't be a wimp, Dan. Walk with some confidence, hold your head up and interact with people. It's not that bad. I used to walk through OTR all the time and I've never had any problems other than aggressive panhandlers. Life is too short to live your life in fear.

Based on 2009 Part I Crimes and 2000 census data, OTR is has the 8th highest per capita crime in the City.  The lowest is Pleasant Ridge.  Here they are in decending order (Note: CBD is number 1 due to a huge daytime population and, in 2000, relatively small night time population so it appears much higher)

 

1 CBD

2 California 

3 Queensgate 

4 Linwood

5 South Fairmount

6 Camp Washington

7 Lower Price Hill

8 Over-The-Rhine

9 Corryville

10 Kennedy Heights

11 East Walnut Hills

12 Winton Place

13 Walnut Hills

14 Carthage

15 Fay Apartments 

16 Mt. Adams

17 Pendelton

18 Columbia Tusculum

19 Riverside-Sayler Park

20 North Avondale-Paddock Hills 

21 Fairview-Clifton Heights 

22 Northside

23 West Price Hill

24 West End

25 Westwood

26 Clifton

27 Roselawn

28 East Price Hill 

29 Mt. Auburn

30 Avondale 

31 Winton Hills

32 South Cumminsville-Millvale 

33 University Heights

34 Hartwell

35 Sedamsville-Riverside

36 North Fairmount-English Woods

37 Bond Hill

38 Oakley

39 Mt. Airy

40 College Hill

41 Sayler Park 

42 Evanston 

43 East End

44 Madisonville 

45 Hyde Park

46 Mt. Washington

47 Mt. Lookout

48 Pleasant Ridge

 

 

So it's the most dangerous neighborhood in the country but only eight most dangerous in Cincinnati. 

The walletpop survey took the entire number of crimes in OTR and divided by the population of Census tract 17 only (which contains about 1/4th of OTR's population) resulting a 'crime rate' four times higher than it should have been. 

So it's the most dangerous neighborhood in the country but only eight most dangerous in Cincinnati. 

haha exactly. Why is pendleton seperate?

That's how the city reports the crime stats.

And Part II?

Part II crimes are generally considered "quality of life" crimes.  I don't think they really factor into how 'dangerous' a neighbhorhood is.

Wow, Pendleton is between Mt Adams and Columbia-Tusculum?  For some reason I've always thought that those old tenements East of Pendleton St on 13th were a little more rough than that.

 

Also, why does Google Maps take me to the area of Columbia Pkwy just downhill from Summit Country Day School and label it "Amberley, OH" when I type "Pendleton Cincinnati" in?  Is that a glitch or was that area historically called Pendleton and/or Amberley?

There are two different Pendleton neighborhoods.  The one east of OTR is the one most people know, but there was also a Pendleton in the East End along Riverside Drive between St. Andrew's Street and Delta Avenue. 

 

I find that list that thomasbw posted to be extremely misleading.  I mean, Linwood more dangerous than Walnut Hills?  Pleasant Ridge being at the bottom while Kennedy Heights is near the top.  East Walnut Hills worse that Walnut Hills?!?!  There's some very weird stuff going on behind those statistics. 

The list is a ranking of Part 1 crimes per capita.

 

Pleasant Ridge had 49 Part 1s to Kennedy Heights 777.

 

 

Linwood had 180 Part 1 crimes but a population of only around 1000.

Walnut Hills had 866 Part 1 crimes but has 11,000 residents.

East Walnut hills had fewer crimes than Walnut hills, but only about 1/5th of the population. 

 

 

 

Definitely happy to see Mt. Washington still near the bottom of the list, after all these years. Grew up there and never had a single problem. Had a bike stolen out of the garage once, but that's about it.

At the last Safety Sector meeting in OTR, the police reported that Part 1 crimes were down about 3% over last year.  Not as significant as past drops but still headed in the right direction.  Unfortunately there has been a spike in car burglary's city-wide and OTR is no exception. 

In 2005 OTR had 1,845 Part 1 Crimes.

In 2009 it was 1,093.

And its still falling (albeit more slowly) in 2010.

I would bet in 2011 it will be less than 50% the 2005 number.

Thought this question about safety walking from Fountain Square to OTR was relevant to this thread:

 

http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowTopic-g60993-i402-k6050602-Walking_from_Fountain_Square_to_Over_the_Rhine-Cincinnati_Ohio.html

TBH, I think the responses on there are fairly rational...

^I'd agree. Being cautious and smart is key in any urban environment, not just OTR. There aren't any discouraging remarks about walking around OTR, just intelligent suggestions on how to stay safe in an urban environment you're not familiar with.

On 9/12/2005 at 1:00 AM, gener said:

First i must say that i haven't lived in Cinti for five years.  However i still make the occasional trip and know some who live there still.

 

I would never compare OTR to Tremont.  There isn't a comparison for OTR to a Cleveland neighborhood.  It is a good sized neighborhood north of the CBD.  The shared border with the CBD is an eight or ten lane divided road that used to be the canal (or the "Rhine") that ran through the city from the I-75 corridor.  You know when you've left the CBD when office buildings are replaced with fantastic Victorian row houses that are rotting from the inside out. 

 

Obviously it was a major German neighborhood (but really what wasn't in Cinti?) years ago and has since become generally a place for poor African Americans and Appalachians.  It definitely has the worst rep in the city (even though i would be far more concerned about walking through the west end or at people's corner) and while there was some money made on Main St with the night life during the turn of the last century, that is certainly on the down slide...  but definitely just one street of "development" which really didn't do much in the way of rehab and sent rents through the roof along Main for crappy old units.  And nothing at all like the Warehouse District that is a neighborhood within the CBD and has a booming housing market.  Did you know that the Warehouse District is completely rehabbed at this time?  Anyway, with the exception of Pendelton (a sub neighborhood within OTR that doesn't want to be associated with OTR) i really wouldn't spend to much time down there myself except at the market when open or at the music hall when there's a show.  Which is a real shame because it really is a beautiful example of urban design with a fantastic park and one of the largest collections of Victorian age housing.

 

I'd hate to say it, but everything i see and hear points to OTR sliding further since the riots a few back.  In closing i would say that i would venture into OTR on foot if i had a reason, but i wouldn't take the lady friend (ie my wife) or some kids.  I would definitely be conscious of my surroundings.  But in the end only those of us into urban spaces would be interested in seeing this part of town.  And while it isn't as bad as everyone thinks in the square exurban world, it is still pretty bad.

Was searching for something else and came across this thread... and the posts on the first few pages!

 

They are definitely worth reading... above is one of my favorites to capture how things were. It’s crazy to think how different OTR was 15 years ago! Thankful for how it is now.

 

Redevelopment can do bad things, and certainly gets a bad rap by some, but when you consider how much of our history and character has been saved by the rehabbers it absolutely happened at the right time. 

9 hours ago, SWOH said:

Redevelopment can do bad things, and certainly gets a bad rap by some, but when you consider how much of our history and character has been saved by the rehabbers it absolutely happened at the right time. 

 

3CDC has done amazing things for our city and it's incredible how they get nothing but pure hatred from the "gentrification smdh" crowd. They're not perfect of course, but have managed to rehab an enormous amount of abandoned buildings (a.k.a. no direct displacement) and incorporate a meaningful percentage of affordable housing into their overall portfolio.

On 9/8/2005 at 12:24 AM, jmecklenborg said:

>Sycamore and Main have improved from their state 20 years ago, but that isn't saying much is it?

 

I've never liked any of those bars down there.  They're all forcing their atmosphere on you and they're too expensive.  Someone needs to open a bar with $1.25 beers, a rowdy juke box, and plywood restrooms.   

 

In other news, Jake has always been Jake.

42 minutes ago, taestell said:

 

3CDC has done amazing things for our city and it's incredible how they get nothing but pure hatred from the "gentrification smdh" crowd. They're not perfect of course, but have managed to rehab an enormous amount of abandoned buildings (a.k.a. no direct displacement) and incorporate a meaningful percentage of affordable housing into their overall portfolio.

 

There's always a racial undertone to those anti-gentrification arguments, and obviously I'm for building strong communities for all and not just those with deep pockets, but I think a lot of folks don't understand how bad OTR actually was. It wasn't some stable-ish working class neighborhood like the Mission, it was actively and rapidly being abandoned even by the African American community post-riots. If you could get out, you did. We're talking illegal tenements and severely unsafe living conditions. These are places that people shouldn't have been forced to live in anyway, and it's shameful that we let that happen, but people shouldn't pretend that it was a bunch of happy factory workers or whatever that got forced out by greedy hipsters.