Someone near and dear to him should step in and save him the embarrassment. I can't help but feel sorry for the guy. If he could think straight, he might even support the streetcar.

Here's the podcast:

 

http://danieljohnsonjr.com/spjpod/2010/05/cincinnati-streetcar-debate/

Would it be amusing to listen to, or just frustrating?

I dunno, my wife thought it was pretty amusing. It's about twenty minutes, I think.

It's not amusing. It's not exactly frustrating. It's painful, but not for the reasons you'd expect.

 

Luken is seriously out of it and just repeats and rambles. John almost comes off as an a55hole for not going easy on him.

 

The comment I made before about feeling sorry for him has been reinforced about five times. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

Here's the podcast:

 

http://danieljohnsonjr.com/spjpod/2010/05/cincinnati-streetcar-debate/

 

"It's a billion dollar bet. I go to the race track and uh...I tell my wife...I uh...went and she says: 'how'd you do?' So I says: I broke even... (long pause) ... but, I  uh, had a $300 dollar hot dog. That's the kind of economics you're getting with the streetcar."

 

I got to that part about five minutes in and turned it off. Between him and stephan Louis, I'm starting to think that they're just a lousy deadpan comedy duo. Sad part is, these guys are serious.

 

I love how Luken is still whining that Portland got to vote on their streetcars and we're not. Yet, we had an issue on the last ballot asking people if they wanted to vote on passenger rail transportation. His cronies even wrote it. People voted and said: no.

 

In our application to the feds, can we ask for money to buy a condo in Florida, then ship Tom Luken there to be with his own kind?

So is he wrong about this company that did the feasability study secretly getting the contract?  Okay just heard John's response that PB did not do the feasability study but HDR did.

 

Then Luken says they are partners, and that PB really did the study.

 

Is he wrong for asking these questions?

 

John, are you connected in any way to either of these firms?

As a former reporter maybe you can describe why local news coverage tends to blow while local sports coverage maintains quality.

 

 

No, I can't describe it. I don't live in Cincinnati so I don't read the Enquirer, although when they and other publications have news articles about rail and transit I do read them -- unless they start getting on a one-side kick then I refuse to read them anymore. Otherwise I rarely read newspapers, watch TV news or listen to radio news. It's all too superficial and not research based. I do read magazine articles and journals, especially from trade publications that deal with rail and transit. But that's about it.

Is he wrong for asking these questions?

 

No, but these are questions that could be asked privately and/or researched.  They don't need to be thrown out carelessly in a public setting, because regardless of the answer, there are some listeners who will only remember the question.

So is he wrong about this company that did the feasability study secretly getting the contract? Okay just heard John's response that PB did not do the feasability study but HDR did.

 

Then Luken says they are partners, and that PB really did the study.

 

Is he wrong for asking these questions?

 

John, are you connected in any way to either of these firms?

 

I am not connected with either PB or HDR, though I have friends who work there.

 

HDR did the feasibility study. It was conducted mostly by their staffs in Portland and Washington. PB brought a local knowledge of street conditions and local traffic issues. I know that with respect to the economics of the project -- which seems to be Luken's main complaint -- that work was done entirely by HDR out of their Washington office.

 

I don't know the exact contract status of either PB or HDR now. I'm not sure either are under contract because until a few days ago, there was no money appropriated by the city to pay them. These firms partner on some projects and compete against each other on others. It kind of depends on which company has knowledge of the particular project, has people available and is competent to do it. I'm unaware of the cabal Luken hints at.

 

Luken has some sort of vendetta against PB. He brought up the issue of the Big Dig repeatedly during the Issue 9 campaign and was repeatedly reminded that it happened over a period of 10-20 years ago and had nothing to do with anything here.

 

Luken was not wrong in asking these questions. He was not wrong the first, or the second or the tenth time he's asked them. The answers are all of public record. But having heard the answers, he continues to ask them dramatically in front of unknowing audiences to create doubt and suspicion. I called him on it.

 

It's not amusing. It's not exactly frustrating. It's painful, but not for the reasons you'd expect.

 

Luken is seriously out of it and just repeats and rambles. John almost comes off as an a55hole for not going easy on him.

 

The comment I made before about feeling sorry for him has been reinforced about five times. It would be funny if it weren't so sad.

 

Tom Luken's a former mayor and congressman. He's been in the public arena for many years and can take care of himself. It's part of his game to appear folksy and unsophisticated -- "a man of the people."

 

On the subject of rail in Cincinnati, Luken leaps at any chance to appear anywhere, anytime to talk about an issue about which he has little understanding. He approaches these the subject not in the spirit of wanting to inform the public or present alternatives but to cast aspersions on firms and people who have worked hard on these projects for many years. I see no reason to give him an open field to do that.

John, I have to commend you for keeping your cool during that, and you did NOT come off like a jerk at all. 

John:

Sorry, I didn't mean to say you did come off as a jerk, just that you, doing exactly what you were supposed to do, seemed so effortlessly to have won the debate. It was a bit like Katie Couric in the Sarah Palin interview -- Katie was just doing her job, but man did she deliver a beating. Only difference is: Luken is not a spring chicken like Palin, he's a demented old man.

 

He's embarrassing himself, because he thinks he's up to a task that his mind just cannot handle anymore. Even from the shallow, folksy angle, he just can't pull it off. Regardless of what I think about the man and his politics, I am sympathetic to this on a human level. It's like when you want to take the car keys away from dad, but you know it's going to kill his ego.

 

I sincerely apologize if I offended you -- I think you did, and are doing, great work! :clap:

^ You didn't. I just thought it was good to get Tom Luken's M.O. out to everyone on this list, because he'll be back again and again. Any of us may encounter him, and it's good to know what to expect.

Thanks for the explanation John.  I didn't think you came off as being hard on him, he just sounds like an old man who has trouble getting his thoughts together.  As you said, its the same folksy attitude he has had for years.  Certainly, most of these guys don't remember his time as an elected official.

 

I know you think I am anti-rail under any circumstances, but that really isn't true.  My opinions are just that, opinions.  They are expressed here on UO, nowhere else.  I'm not out actively campaigning against streetcars or trains.  I think when I first commented in this thread, there was no talk about going uptown, just the downtown circulator.  That alone sounded ridiculous then, and still does to me.  A passenger would have to be downtown to use the streetcar, but there were/are no plans to improve HOW that passenger gets there.  I would have preferred the streetcar plan would START somewhere outside of downtown, bringing passengers to the city.  But its just an opinion.

 

My other issue is the destruction of the western neighborhoods of the city caused by the revitalization of OTR and the West End.  Certainly the downtown area will improve and grow as the gentrification continues, but then what do we do 30 years from now, when these other neighborhoods are completely destroyed?  They are still part of the city, and I believe they've been neglected.

^ Dan, the scale of the rail system you're proposing above would require a tax increase, and right now, no one has the appetite for that.

 

With growing highway congestion and higher fuel prices, that's bound to change at some point.

 

With respect to neighborhoods outside the initial alignment, be mindful that the city has plans, but no timetable, to expand the streetcar network over time. The map is on the city's web site. But even if that were never to happen (and I'm sure it will), downtown and uptown are the engines of our city. They have 54% of the jobs and produce 70% of our city's tax revenues. Reinvigorating them is a strategic move to generate more wealth than can be used for improvements throughout the city.

Dan, I'm definitely sympathetic to your worries about the western neighborhoods. The thing is, it's really not an option to allow the core neighborhoods to continue as they have been. If Cincinnati is going to pick itself up by the bootstraps and have a thriving economy, downtown and OTR must be in order. You must know this, since you clearly spend some time thinking about urban issues.

 

If we let downtown/OTR deteriorate, the city will at best be stagnant, meaning little new money and jobs will be coming in. That's not good for the western neighborhoods, either. With an attractive core, we can bring money and jobs, and more neighborhoods will have a chance at prosperity. It's the one part of the city where revitalization really can break us out of the zero-sum game.

Listening to this podcast, I really wish someone would call out Tom Luken on these statements about Parsons Brinckerhoff:

 

 

"I looked that up the other day. And it's secret, but it's true. It's documented. But they're not going to tell you that."

...

"Parsons  Brinckerhoff has the contract. They got the contract." ... "Did you hear me?" ...  "They got the contract. I've seen that in print. They got the contract."

 

 

If this is secret, how did he see it "in print"? And if it's "in print", why can't he produce the contract to back up his statements?

 

 

I smell a PB lawsuit coming.

 

So what does this have to do with the streetcar?  There's basically a moratorium on net increases in density.  Big developments like the Banks or QCS and organizations like 3CDC can afford to buy the "sewer credits" they need, which basically amounts to paying for new sewers and treatment facilities outright.  For someone trying to grow a business or renovate apartments, it can be very difficult. 

 

Does this concern anyone else? This seems like it could have some negative consequences for the streetcar and expected development around it.

>Luken has some sort of vendetta against PB. He brought up the issue of the Big Dig repeatedly during the Issue 9 campaign and was repeatedly reminded that it happened over a period of 10-20 years ago and had nothing to do with anything here.

 

Ironically Luken was a US Congressman during the time when the bulk of the Washington Metro was built. In his 16 years in the city he must have seen the construction sites and been aware of its steady expansion. 

 

 

 

 

My other issue is the destruction of the western neighborhoods of the city caused by the revitalization of OTR and the West End.  Certainly the downtown area will improve and grow as the gentrification continues, but then what do we do 30 years from now, when these other neighborhoods are completely destroyed?  They are still part of the city, and I believe they've been neglected.

 

Some thoughts- 1) I assume what you mean by 'destruction' of West Side neighborhoods is the increase in Section 8 housing in the area.  The first thing to remember is that OTR was destroyed in essentially the same manner.  The Denhart properties were all Section 8 and they became Section 8 for the same reason West Side apartments became- because the landlords could get higher (and guaranteed) rents from the program than they could from the market.  OTR was effected the same way in which the West Side is being effected.

 

The West End was different, since those were housing projects owned and operated by CMHA.  The destruction of Lincoln Homes and Laurel Court was policy, but the residents who went from there to Section 8 moved to the West Side because the Section 8 properties in OTR were so derelict that they weren't usable.  Denhart went bankrupt about 4 years after they cleared out those two projects in the West End- OTR would never have absorbed those residents regardless of of 'gentrification' or 3CDC because those building were not inhabitable and would never have been approved by either the Section 8 renters or the authority that evaluates the landlords.

 

Also CMHA and the federal government, not the City, determined how federal housing programs would exist and how they would be executed.  The City might bear some responsibility for the choices by a lack of opposition or simple ignorance, but if you want to fix the problem you have to go to CMHA, which is why Westsiders started getting themselves elected to the CMHA Board.

 

The big problem the West Side has is that it is disconnected from both the University/Pill Hill area and the I-71 corridor.  It's all about topography (and ball bearings).  That's why people will pay more to live in a dinky house in Oakley or new condo in OTR than a grand old house in Westwood, because Westwood is further removed from other stuff.

 

In my opinion, the public goods the West Side needs are: 1) a direct (and distinctly marked) bus that connects to the University/Pill Hill area; 2) improved neighborhood business districts; and 3) a targeted approach to teardowns (they kind of already have this, but they could make it better).  I would also suggest strong outreach from the Catholic parishes to new Latino immigrants as well.

 

It always struck me that the West Side could benefit most from a "we're cool with you doing that, so long as we get this little thing" approach that is targeted and incremental.  But the 'West Side' is hardly as monolithic as it is portrayed and those individual neighborhoods fight with each other just as much as they fight with the rest of the City.

It's all about topography (and ball bearings).

 

LMAO

It's all ball bearings nowadays.

No offense to the west side and its inhabitants but if I have a choice between a strong basin or a strong west side, I choose strong basin. Of course, ideally we would have both.

 

Sorry but I think the notion of destroying one neighborhood for the betterment of another is ridiculous.

 

The big problem the West Side has is that it is disconnected from both the University/Pill Hill area and the I-71 corridor. It's all about topography (and ball bearings). That's why people will pay more to live in a dinky house in Oakley or new condo in OTR than a grand old house in Westwood, because Westwood is further removed from other stuff.

 

In my opinion, the public goods the West Side needs are: 1) a direct (and distinctly marked) bus that connects to the University/Pill Hill area; 2) improved neighborhood business districts; and 3) a targeted approach to teardowns (they kind of already have this, but they could make it better). I would also suggest strong outreach from the Catholic parishes to new Latino immigrants as well.

 

The west side is mere minutes from I-75, I-71, downtown, Mt. Adams, Newport, Uptown, and Covington by using Glenway, Warsaw, or Queen City. The westside also has some of the most active residents and neighborhood organizations.

The westside doesn't want or need to be closer to the I 71 corridor.  That's what is nice about it.  One can be downtown in minutes.  Yes, its very parochial, and we laugh when lifelong westsiders tell us they don't know how to get to Sycamore for a swim meet.  Yes, sometimes it is irritating when you've lived somewhere for 30 years, and you are still considered an outsider!  As my daughter once told me when she was 15, "Dad, you're not from the westside, you don't understand how its done"!

 

I realize that I'm just old, and that 30 years ago to most of you seems like an eternity, but to me it is yesterday.  What has happened to Price Hill and Westwood in the last 30 years is a shame.  If you guys think its ok, for the success of downtown, then you will have a successful downtown at the expense of the city's other neighborhoods.  So be it.

What do you propose be done, Dan? OTR and Downtown have put in their time, and have suffered for decades because of the extreme concentration of poverty.  I hope we don't have to destroy one neighborhood for the betterment of another, but as John said earlier, a healthier core does mean a healthier city as a whole. Price Hill seems to be on the rebound with Price Hill Will and the City Lights project, and growing Latino community.  I think a strong core actually will help Price Hill (at least East Price Hill) because it is so close to downtown.  If OTR and Downtown turn into strong, nice neighborhoods, Price Hill should benefit off of proximity alone.  Sort of similar to the 'Hyde Park effect' felt in Oakley, Norwood, and even parts of Madisonville. 

People also need to get over the notion that any improvement in one neighborhood automatically pushes poor people into others.  While that can and has happened in some areas, it doesn't need to.  Severely depressed neighborhoods like OTR have so few people left that there's not many to displace anymore.  A strong revitalized core will, instead of displacing poor people into surrounding neighborhoods, bring jobs that will allow those people to not be poor anymore.  That's the real goal here, not to shuffle the poor around like dirt to be swept under a rug, but to get them out of poverty so they can contribute to the region's economy as well. 

I realize that I'm just old, and that 30 years ago to most of you seems like an eternity, but to me it is yesterday.  What has happened to Price Hill and Westwood in the last 30 years is a shame.  If you guys think its ok, for the success of downtown, then you will have a successful downtown at the expense of the city's other neighborhoods.  So be it.

 

How does "what happened to Price Hill and Westwood in the last 30 years" have anything to do with a streetcar line proposal?  If anything, their decline seems to mirror what's happened to other near-CBD neighborhoods (OTR, the West End, Covington, Newport, etc) over the same time period.  Making the core more attractive should help all of those neighborhoods,  not hurt them (even though the KY ones I mentioned won't get the benefit of increased tax collection).

A strong revitalized core will, instead of displacing poor people into surrounding neighborhoods, bring jobs that will allow those people to not be poor anymore. That's the real goal here, not to shuffle the poor around like dirt to be swept under a rug, but to get them out of poverty so they can contribute to the region's economy as well.

 

I'm not sure about that.  It sounds nice, but the reality is that not everyone is qualified for every job.  And not everyone is willing to do every job.  There is also a certain percentage of the population that is simply unemployable.  Revitalization isn't going to change that. 

...The big problem the West Side has is that it is disconnected from both the University/Pill Hill area and the I-71 corridor. It's all about topography (and ball bearings). That's why people will pay more to live in a dinky house in Oakley or new condo in OTR than a grand old house in Westwood, because Westwood is further removed from other stuff....

That is a common misconception about the west side, that it is isolated, it is very convenient to pill hill and downtown. I think the West Side suffers mostly from perception issues, that it is a backwater berg closer to Indiana than Cincinnati. Plop an Hyde Parker on Glenmore Ave and near Mercy and they would swear they were on Erie Ave, some grand old houses you mentioned. Not being the glitzy address that the East Side is keeps rents and house prices low, and the west sider's liked that. But, no one would argue that Price Hill's been shit upon, and that has a ripple affect proceeding west.

 

The City of Cincinnati put out a press release recapping the developments on the streetcar from last week.  the full text is here: http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2010/05/17/cincinnati-streetcar-the-week-in-review/

    "How does "what happened to Price Hill and Westwood in the last 30 years" have anything to do with a streetcar line proposal?"

 

  True story that I heard from an Elder grad:

 

  "I went to Elder, my Dad went to Elder, and my Grandfather went to Elder, but I'm not sending my son to Elder. The crime in that neighborhood is gotten so bad that it isn't safe anymore."

 

    Another story:

 

    "I know people who sold their houses for a $60,000 loss in Price Hill."

 

    Price Hill didn't suffer a gradual decline over many years. Price Hill declined very fast - just about a decade. The reason is very clear - folks who were displaced from Laurel Homes by the City West development moved to Price Hill.

 

    Another one, this one not from Price Hill:

 

    "We've got kids at our school who don't have the ability to pass the state test, no matter how much effort we teachers put into them. They all come from one Section 8 apartment complex."

 

    City West is of course heavily subsidized by the city, and very much praised on this board. But, the other side of the coin is that Price Hill suffered a mighty blow. The long time residents are not happy about this.

 

    In addition, the long time residents know that the West Side will be the LAST to get improved transit service of any kind. They are sick and tired of being ignored by the city government. They are not necessarily against the streetcar, but they are suspicious of anything that happens in another neighborhood.

 

    The first ring suburbs are really hurting.

 

   

Another item to note that happened about 30 years ago is the completion of I-74 connecting with I-75 in 1974.  Like many other interstate highways around the country, once the interstate penetrated the city, it spread out an depopulated the part of the city into which it ran.  People could now live farther out in on the west side Colerain Township, Grosbeck, Dent, etc.

The west side really is isolated in that people who don't live there have little reason to go there.  There's no major employment centers on the west side like there are in more central or eastern locales.  Historically, nearly every non-downtown neighborhood within the Cincinnati city limits became a streetcar suburb of sorts (with the exception of Winton Hills, Roselawn, and Mt. Airy).  A streetcar suburb in Cincinnati is a place where people live, but who worked and did most of their shopping downtown.  Many of the neighborhoods in the Mill Creek Valley as well as the east side (Norwood, Oakley, Madisonville) also had major manufacturing job centers, so their connection to downtown wasn't as important.  Uptown has UC and the hospitals for jobs.  These factory and university/hospital jobs draw people from all over.  What of that is there on the west side? 

 

I'm not trying to say the west side is backwards or anything, but it's not somewhere that many people would be likely to have to go, whereas downtown, Clifton, Hyde Park, and even Kenwood are, for various reasons.  The west side started as a bedroom community for downtown workers, and it still is a bedroom community.  Even on the east side of town, these sorts of neighborhoods that were wholly dependent on their streetcar connection to downtown, without any self-supporting industry or job centers are the ones that are struggling the most (Walnut Hills, Evanston, Avondale, Kennedy Heights).  There's no shortage of troubled neighborhoods on both sides of town, and just because the west side doesn't have a Hyde Park doesn't mean they're being singled out as a place for the poor to go. 

 

Of course there's other reasons for various neighborhood decline, and we can't address them all.  A comprehensive streetcar and light rail system for the whole city would definitely help, at least in my opinion.  However, to suggest that we shouldn't try to prop up a certain failing neighborhood because it would be somehow unfair to the others will only lead to nothing happening and all neighborhoods being the worse for it. 

 

  You are right, but Price Hll was stable up through the early 1990's, more than 20 years after I-74 opened.

5 anti streetcar letters released by the Enquirer today bringing the May total to 22 Negative and 2 positive.

 

In combination with April, that brings us to 42 Negative and 3 positive

 

From January to the present, the total is 55 Negative and 3 positive...

 

 

Only 1 of the letters today was from a City Resident.  And by their use of the word "clank" twice in the letter, I would imagine they remember the old streetcar system and are not aware of the details of the current proposal.

Only 1 of the letters today was from a City Resident.  And by their use of the word "clank" twice in the letter, I would imagine they remember the old streetcar system and are not aware of the details of the current proposal.

 

I must correct myself...I missed the letter entitled "Another 'trust us, you'll like it' Promise"....

 

So that's 6 negative letters for the day. 

 

That adds 1 to the may total in my previous post making it 23 negative and 2 positive

 

Combined with April is 43 negative and 3 positive.

 

Since January is 56 negative and 3 positive...

PS this is morphing into its own topic. If you want to keep up the discussion of the first ring suburbs we can move it.

 

Cincinnati's attempts at gentrification and displacment of those in poverty pale in comparison to what Chicago has been doing to Cabrini Green.

 

Well you can say that again.  I've lived here for 20 years and it was clear for most of that time the prevailing attitude was to ignore OTR and hope it would go away.  The complete reversal of that attitude in City government is the most significant and beneficial policy shift I've noticed.  As someone mentioned before, it's paradoxically due to the "great unrest" of 2001.

This is an initial Enquirer Streetcar letters by neighborhood breakdown/summary from January 1, 2010 - May 17, 2010...The number to the right of each neighborhood represents the number of letters sent in (Some are the same person I should add.  For example: Luken sent in multiple letters from College Hill).  The "©" represents it being one of the 52 Cincinnati neighborhoods based on this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cincinnati_neighborhoods

 

59 letters total (56 against the project, 3 in support)

 

Alexandria - 1

Amelia - 1

Anderson - 1

Blue Ash - 3

California© - 1

Cheviot - 1

Colerain - 2

College Hill© - 4

Columbia Township - 1

Delhi - 2

Downtown© - 1

Fairfield - 2

Finneytown - 1

Green Township - 2

Hyde Park© - 4

Indian Hill - 1

Kenwood - 1

Loveland - 2

Maineville - 2

Monfort Heights - 2

Montgomery - 2

Mt. Lookout© - 2

Mt. Washington© - 2

Price Hill© - 1

Sayler Park© - 2

Sharonville - 2

Springdale - 1

Springfield Township - 1

Sycamore Township - 2

Union Township - 1

Walnut Hills© - 1

West Chester - 2

Western Hills - 1

Westwood© - 2

White Oak - 2

 

The 3 positive letters were from: Hyde Park, Downtown, and Blue Ash...

 

The enquirer is publishing 66% of the letters regarding the streetcar(positive and negative) from outside of the 52 Cincinnati neighborhoods.  In addition to that, there is only 1 letter from someone who lives along the route(The person who wrote it from downtown - I believe Brad Thomas).  No letters from uptown or OTR.  So 98.3% of the letters are from areas that aren't in the neighborhoods affected by the streetcar route(including a majority that aren't even close to the projected route)

 

Of the 39 letters from outside of Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 38 were negative for a 97.4% negativity rate. 

 

Of the 20 letters from within Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 18 were negative for a 90% negativity rate. 

 

Combined, the 56/59 negative letters equal a 94.9% negativity rate.

 

 

 

  ^--- Nah, interest is OTR is due to a growing disapproval of sprawl as Kuntsler describes it, a renewed interest in traditional cities as Jane Jacobs described them, and a realization that a place like Over-the-Rhine is not likely to be built anywhere in the United States today. Interest was growing before the riots. In the 1990's, the facades were improved one by one - some of the buildings were vacant, but at least they looked good - and gradually the neighborhood came to have a respectable apearance instead of a bombed-out ghetto. There aren't as many broken windows as there used to be.

 

  "So what does this have to do with the streetcar?  There's basically a moratorium on net increases in density.  Big developments like the Banks or QCS and organizations like 3CDC can afford to buy the "sewer credits" they need, which basically amounts to paying for new sewers and treatment facilities outright.  For someone trying to grow a business or renovate apartments, it can be very difficult." 

 

  "Does this concern anyone else? This seems like it could have some negative consequences for the streetcar and expected development around it."

 

    This has negative consequences for the entire city! Basicly, the policy of the EPA is to build new development with new sewers in greenfields, instead of adding to problems in the city. Few pay attention to sewers, but developers do, and countless development concepts have failed in the city because of sewer issues.

 

    We could easily spend $500 million in the proposed streetcar corridor on sewers.

 

    James Rhodes, former governor of Ohio, said "Never build anything underground. You won't get credit for it." Addressing some of the sewer problems in the core would go a long way toward revitalization. Yet, politicians won't get credit for it, because it's underground. The streetcar is something that the media can take a picture of, along with stadiums, performance halls, art museums, fake cable-stayed bridges, and fancy buildings with curved Italian stone walls.

 

    Back in the Boss Cox days, the ruling political party was called the "Sewer Republicans" or something like that.

 

   

NBow - that's some impressive work. Not that I like the result, but you must have put a lot of time into that.

 

 

NBow - that's some impressive work. Not that I like the result, but you must have put a lot of time into that.

 

 

 

Thanks Eigth.  I definitely am not ruling out any possibility of a brainfart here or there with the numbers, but I believe this version is accurate.  I should add that there is one letter from White Oak in April that really wasn't for or against the streetcar...He wrote about how they ran in a flood when he was growing up in the 40's or something along those lines.  So I just took that one out of the final tally

This is an initial Enquirer Streetcar letters by neighborhood breakdown/summary from January 1, 2010 - May 17, 2010...The number to the right of each neighborhood represents the number of letters sent in (Some are the same person I should add. For example: Luken sent in multiple letters from College Hill). The "©" represents it being one of the 52 Cincinnati neighborhoods based on this wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cincinnati_neighborhoods

 

59 letters total (56 against the project, 3 in support)

 

Alexandria - 1

Amelia - 1

Anderson - 1

Blue Ash - 3

California© - 1

Cheviot - 1

Colerain - 2

College Hill© - 4

Columbia Township - 1

Delhi - 2

Downtown© - 1

Fairfield - 2

Finneytown - 1

Green Township - 2

Hyde Park© - 4

Indian Hill - 1

Kenwood - 1

Loveland - 2

Maineville - 2

Monfort Heights - 2

Montgomery - 2

Mt. Lookout© - 2

Mt. Washington© - 2

Price Hill© - 1

Sayler Park© - 2

Sharonville - 2

Springdale - 1

Springfield Township - 1

Sycamore Township - 2

Union Township - 1

Walnut Hills© - 1

West Chester - 2

Western Hills - 1

Westwood© - 2

White Oak - 2

 

The 3 positive letters were from: Hyde Park, Downtown, and Blue Ash...

 

The enquirer is publishing 66% of the letters regarding the streetcar(positive and negative) from outside of the 52 Cincinnati neighborhoods. In addition to that, there is only 1 letter from someone who lives along the route(The person who wrote it from downtown - I believe Brad Thomas). No letters from uptown or OTR. So 98.3% of the letters are from areas that aren't in the neighborhoods affected by the streetcar route(including a majority that aren't even close to the projected route)

 

Of the 39 letters from outside of Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 38 were negative for a 97.4% negativity rate.

 

Of the 20 letters from within Cincinnati's 52 neighborhoods, 18 were negative for a 90% negativity rate.

 

Combined, the 56/59 negative letters equal a 94.9% negativity rate.

 

 

 

I know that a letter from Westwood that was well researched and positive wasn't published.  I wonder how many more like those weren't as well

That is a common misconception about the west side, that it is isolated, it is very convenient to pill hill and downtown. I think the West Side suffers mostly from perception issues, that it is a backwater berg closer to Indiana than Cincinnati. Plop an Hyde Parker on Glenmore Ave and near Mercy and they would swear they were on Erie Ave, some grand old houses you mentioned. Not being the glitzy address that the East Side is keeps rents and house prices low, and the west sider's liked that. But, no one would argue that Price Hill's been sh!t upon, and that has a ripple affect proceeding west.

 

It's not that the West Side isn't close to downtown and Clifton (and once again, my point was about its proximity to the Uptown employment area only) it's that it isn't closer to commute from vis-a-vis other neighborhoods that also happen to be easier to commute to Blue Ash, Mason, etc.

 

Here's the problem with the 'Price Hill's been shit upon argument'- for that argument to be taken seriously you have to actually have a central authority who is doing the shitting.  If anything, Price Hill has suffered because of a lack of a centralized authority dictating where poor people will be.

 

The western suburbs like Delhi and Green township were settled much later than those east and north, and their conspicuously dated housing stock is really what holds them back.

 

People forget that Mt. Adams was a blue collar neighborhood until the 70's.  Mt. Adams gained cache because it is the closest hill to the CBD and it has defined boundaries- the hill on three sides and the park on the fourth.  These things are the random externalities that make a difference when you are trying to redevelop and area.

 

There's no building in Oakley Square that's necessarily better than what's around the Covedale Theater.  The big difference is that you can get to 71 from Oakley Square in about 5 minutes.  Growth went up 71 because it didn't have 75's industrial legacy.  I don't see how one can downplay the significance of that twist of fate.

 

 

Mt. Adams gained cache because it is the closest hill to the CBD and it has defined boundaries- the hill on three sides and the park on the fourth.

 

The elimination of air polluting industries and railroad operations in the Deer Creek Valley below Mt. Adams was also a big factor. 

Not when one of them is your urban, economic center. Without DT/OTR/Uptown, there is no west side.

 

Cincinnati's attempts at gentrification and displacement of those in poverty pale in comparison to what Chicago has been doing to Cabrini Green.

 

And why does that make what has happened here right? When you try to fix something you don't look at the past and see how others have screwed up, you look to the future and what could be.

 

And as far as being a destination, no the west side is not a destination. However, it is composed of a great populous of civil servants, nurses, and other blue collar worjers that are integral to the core functions of this city. Without the people of the westside the city could not function and all these destinations you speak of are irrelevant. You can't just crap on one side of town because businesses and attractions aren't located there. You have to realize these are people are allies that serve the city and will fight for the city, but not at the expense of their own neighborhoods.

Sorry fellas. I moved the chit-chat about I-74 to the I-74 thread....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,549.0.html