New rail in Clifton Avenue will be less expensive than new rail Downtown, on a per-mile basis, because there is less existing stuff in the street to move, and more room to work. If you don't believe me, go to Duke, Water Works, Cincinnati Bell, MSD, etc. and ask to see the records.

 

Besides that, the route that I have proposed is shorter overall, and less complicated, especially if it is bi-directional with no turns and powered by diesel. It will unquestionably be less expensive to build.

 

On the Downtown question, I DO want to go Downtown - eventually. I don't necessarily want to go downtown FIRST. Basicly, I want a route that is constructable NOW, within the current funding situation and political atmosphere.

 

 

 

 

 

^ Say, for the sake of argument, this route were cheaper to build. I doubt it, but let's just assume that it is.

 

But then look at the benefit side of the equation in terms of economic development. The entire east side of Clifton Avenue is tax-exempt property. Burnet Woods will never see development. All of the facing land of the University of Cincinnati except Wilson Auditorium and the College of Law has been recently and completely redeveloped. Good Samaritan is a non-profit with a fully built-out site. Then there are a bunch of fraternity and sorority houses. A high school. Not a lot of upside. But hey, we just want to build a rail line, and this one looks easy, so let's do it.

 

E&S's ideal route, such as it is, reminds me of the logic behind the Oasis Rail Line. Guys, look, there are some tracks there, so let's put a train on them. No matter that half the walkable ridership is in the river, no matter that the line is flanked by a steep hill on the other side, no matter that it floods -- there are tracks there, so let's put a train there.

 

You build these systems for a purpose, not simply because of the desire to have a train somewhere, anywhere, as long as it's cheap.

^Justify your $250 million figure 8th. We're waiting.

 

Gee, I feel like I am repeating everything. I already did this, but here it is again.

 

the 2007 feasibility study, if I remember correctly, called for $110 million or so for the whole system, including $15 million for utility relocation.

 

MSD wanted some $15 million for sewer work. The city told them to take $3 million and live with it.

Water Works wanted something like $20 million. Again, the city pressured them to deal with less.

Duke wanted $20 to $30 million, depending on which source you use. I don't think Duke is going to be a pushover, and in the event that a court says that they have to pay to move the Duke utilities, I think Duke is going to do everything they can to raise rates to cover it.

So, the feasibility study said $15 million, but Duke, MSD, and Water Works say up to $65 million. That's $50 million more than what the feasibility study said.

 

I took the $110 million and added $50 million. Now we are up to $160 million.

I don't really have a reason to get up to $250 million, other than a feeling that the intiail estimate was way too low. It is common for projects such as this, which I consider a pet project, to get out of hand, simply because the initial estimate was too optimistic. The stadium project was initially supposed to be $250 million for two stadiums; it ended up more than double that just for the football stadium. I didn't get into any of the other utilities, such as Level 3. Of course, if Duke ends up raising their rates to cover it, what do you think the other utilities are going to do?

 

This is my own opinion, and not based on any official record from the City or anyone else. Most of my data came from this board, or from sources cited on this board, and I am going by memory. Take it for what it's worth. And, thanks for waiting.

^Justify your $250 million figure 8th. We're waiting.

 

Gee, I feel like I am repeating everything. I already did this, but here it is again.

 

the 2007 feasibility study, if I remember correctly, called for $110 million or so for the whole system, including $15 million for utility relocation.

 

MSD wanted some $15 million for sewer work. The city told them to take $3 million and live with it.

Water Works wanted something like $20 million. Again, the city pressured them to deal with less.

Duke wanted $20 to $30 million, depending on which source you use. I don't think Duke is going to be a pushover, and in the event that a court says that they have to pay to move the Duke utilities, I think Duke is going to do everything they can to raise rates to cover it.

So, the feasibility study said $15 million, but Duke, MSD, and Water Works say up to $65 million. That's $50 million more than what the feasibility study said.

 

I took the $110 million and added $50 million. Now we are up to $160 million.

I don't really have a reason to get up to $250 million, other than a feeling that the intiail estimate was way too low. It is common for projects such as this, which I consider a pet project, to get out of hand, simply because the initial estimate was too optimistic. The stadium project was initially supposed to be $250 million for two stadiums; it ended up more than double that just for the football stadium. I didn't get into any of the other utilities, such as Level 3. Of course, if Duke ends up raising their rates to cover it, what do you think the other utilities are going to do?

 

This is my own opinion, and not based on any official record from the City or anyone else. Most of my data came from this board, or from sources cited on this board, and I am going by memory. Take it for what it's worth. And, thanks for waiting.

 

You don't really have a reason to get up to $250 million, other than that's what you've heard on 700WLW.

You build these systems for a purpose, not simply because of the desire to have a train somewhere, anywhere, as long as it's cheap.

 

You build these things for a purpose, and in this case the purpose is to

1. Show that it can be done and that people will ride it.

2. Get experience constructing rail in Cincinnati, and make the utilities comfortable with it.

3. Get drivers, bicyclists, etc. comfortable with it. 

4. Clear up a bottleneck in the bus system.

5. Get experience operating the system.

6. Increase mobility.

7. Promote development.

8. Get some good photo-ops.

 

This Clifton route is a good route. It is a much better route than the proposed OASIS commuter line. It's a better route than the Kingsport Corridor, and a dozen other routes proposed by paid professionals. It has a better chance of getting built than the Over-the-Rhine and Downtown loop. I would use it. I know lots of folks would. Why so much hatred?

 

I don't want to start a war of "my route is better than your route." I just want to say, again, that the Over-the-Rhine and Downtown Loop will not fulfill any of the purported advantages that it is supposed to if it doesn't actually get built, unless you consider all of the attention as an advantage. (Indeed, the streetcar project has brought some new interest to Over-the-Rhine already.)I do believe that the Clifton route will be much less expensive to build, and therefore has a much better chance of actually being built, and it is a worthy project in it's own right. If I had my wish, I would build the Clifton route AND one in Over-the-Rhine and Downtown, but considering limited resources, I would build the Clifton route first, because it's easier.

 

 

You don't really have a reason to get up to $250 million, other than that's what you've heard on 700WLW.

 

I came up with that on my own, not from WLW.

You don't really have a reason to get up to $250 million, other than that's what you've heard on 700WLW.

 

I came up with that on my own, not from WLW.

 

Well, you certainly do echo the COAST/700WLW fact-free talking points.

^ Say, for the sake of argument, this route were cheaper to build. I doubt it, but let's just assume that it is.

But then look at the benefit side of the equation in terms of economic development. The entire east side of Clifton Avenue is tax-exempt property. Burnet Woods will never see development. All of the facing land of the University of Cincinnati except Wilson Auditorium and the College of Law has been recently and completely redeveloped. Good Samaritan is a non-profit with a fully built-out site. Then there are a bunch of fraternity and sorority houses. A high school. Not a lot of upside. But hey, we just want to build a rail line, and this one looks easy, so let's do it.

E&S's ideal route, such as it is, reminds me of the logic behind the Oasis Rail Line. Guys, look, there are some tracks there, so let's put a train on them. No matter that half the walkable ridership is in the river, no matter that the line is flanked by a steep hill on the other side, no matter that it floods -- there are tracks there, so let's put a train there.

You build these systems for a purpose, not simply because of the desire to have a train somewhere, anywhere, as long as it's cheap.

bingo

I honestly don't see a reason for a streetcar line anywhere else in the city. The basin has the potential for high density mixed use development that will give a return in tax revenue. The Clifton route has nothing more to offer. You could just run more frequent buses.

It's the T.O.D., stupid.

It has a better chance of getting built than the Over-the-Rhine and Downtown loop.

 

Clearly, it doesn't.

 

In case you missed it...

 

The downtown/OTR route is under construction and the only discussion of this "more affordable" Clifton line is coming from you.

If a line is built on Clifton to Ludlow, then to Northside, nearly all buses from Hamilton Ave., Coleraine Ave., and elsewhere could be turned at Knowlton's corner.  But as John Schneider mentioned there are few developable sites along that route where the city could realize a significant rise in property values.  Streetcar lines on Vine, Burnett, Reading, Gilbert, Woodburn, etc. would each realize a higher ROI than one on Clifton, at least until it reaches Northside and could start saving Metro significant operations costs. 

 

 

In case you missed it...

The downtown/OTR route is under construction and the only discussion of this "more affordable" Clifton line is coming from you.

 

 

This is directly from the Horstman ariticle:

City Manager Milton Dohoney Jr. Tuesday acknowledged that City Hall’s inability to reach an agreement with Duke “threatens to pose significant cost risk” and also could delay construction of the Downtown riverfront-to-Over-the-Rhine line.

 

I didn't read the memo myself. I am taking Horstman's word for it.

 

This is a serious issue. I will acknowledge that there is some work going on with the water main, but that is no guarantee that the streetcar as it is currently proposed will ever be finished and operational. There is a very serious risk that the streetcar will not be completed. In my opinion, the Duke issue is more important than either one of the ballot issues, or anything that COAST has done.

 

My whole point about the Clifton line is that there are, in fact, alternatives to the Over-the-Rhine loop. I mentioned the Clifton line only because I was specifically asked to provide an alternative. There are millions of alternatives; the feasibility study of 2007, which resulted in the promotion of the Over-the-Rhine loop, only looked a a few alternatives, all of them within Over-the-Rhine. There is no rule that says that any new streetcar in Cincinnati has to be in Over-the-Rhine, neither is there any rule that says it has to be a "modern" streetcar, as opposed to a historic one, or even a streetcar, as opposed to light rail or buses. The Cincinnati Streetcar as is is proposed today is the one that was chosen, and we have to live with that decision, good or bad.

 

At this point there is a lot invested in the Cincinnati Streetcar as proposed today. All of that is a sunk cost. Our best option may very well be to abandon that project and consider a different project. I don't expect that to happen, because that's usually not the way it works out.

 

That's enough for now. You guys wear me out sometimes.  :-)

 

 

 

8TH, NO OTHER CITY IN AMERICA HAS FACED THIS SORT OF SHOWDOWN WITH THEIR UTILITY COMPANY WHILE BUILDING A STREETCAR LINE.  YOU COMPLETELY FAIL TO FACTOR IN LOCAL OBSTRUCTIONISTS WHO ARE ALMOST CERTAINLY USING DUKE'S ABILITY TO SENSELESSLY STALL THIS PROJECT IN EXCHANGE FOR $$$ OR SOME OTHER POLITICAL FAVOR.  BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON.  INSTEAD, FOR THE THIRD OR FOURTH YEAR IN A ROW YOU CONTINUE TO ASSERT --  WITH NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER -- THAT THIS STREETCAR LINE SOMEHOW FACES TECHNICAL HURDLES GREATER THAN THE CHANNEL TUNNEL, THREE GORGES DAM, OR MISSIONS TO MARS.

Actually, this problem does arise in other cities from time to time, and it has never stopped a light rail or streetcar project. In Minneapolis, the telephone company tried to hold up the project. A Federal Court suit resulted, and the phone company lost. Milwaukee is having similar issues with several utilties right now.

 

Quimbob, I could definitely see a streetcar line on McMillan between Hughes Corner and DeSales Corner. Lots of vacant sites, lots of terrific buildings, and about the only way for UC's residential population to grow.

Utility issues hold up a whole host of highway and bridge projects all the time (and R/W issues for that matter); you just don't hear about them typically

A line on Mcmillan circulating down Montgomery at Desales through Evanston and to Xavier is an economic boon waiting to happen.  The City should have moved forward with proposing other lines already.  Line 1 is being built as we speak, so publicly showing that there is no intention to stop after the Downtown loop is operational may actually be received well by the public.  The most notable and factual argument the opposition has formulated thus far is that Line 1 only serves a fraction of the city.

Follow this link for photos of anti-streetcar graffiti at the Blue Ash Airport:

 

http://www.urbancincy.com/2012/08/blue-ash-poised-to-create-legacy-park-at-former-airport-site/#comments

Smitherman show on 700wlw right now

I wonder if any of the TOAST members wrote some of the graffiti? It's basically the same thing that they do on Twitter all day.

8th & state seems to forget that the Downtown to Zoo streetcar line has nearly 100,000 jobs in walking distance & 40,000 residents in walking distance.

 

The Ludlow to McMillan line is about 35,000 jobs in walking distance & probably the same number of residents.  The difference is that Corryville, Downtown & OTR are ripe for massive investment & increases in population. Clifton isn't about to grow dramatically & outside of U Square, CUF is pretty built out. And none of those are about to add jobs.

Follow this link for photos of anti-streetcar graffiti at the Blue Ash Airport:

 

http://www.urbancincy.com/2012/08/blue-ash-poised-to-create-legacy-park-at-former-airport-site/#comments

 

James Fallows of The Atlantic has been writing a series of columns exploring the concept that we've moved into an era of "Post-truth Politics" and how the media has no idea how to cover this new paradigm.

8th & state, you seem like you're in the pleading stage.

^ "He doth protest too much, Methinks."

Dan Carrol in for Bill Cunningham: Chris Finney on at 1:06PM.

Listened to this via podcast today and Finney stated that COAST would be filing a lawsuit next week over the Blue Ash airport sale. Didn't the all the transactions between Cincinnati and Blue Ash to undo/redo the sale occur on Wednesday the 29th?

According to Dohoney as quoted by Horstman,

 

City Hall's inability to reach an agreement with Duke threatens to pose significant cost risk and could delay construction.

 

That's from Dohoney, not me.

 

My interpretation of that statement is that Dohoney is publically admitting that there is a problem with the Duke utilities that could result in either a higher cost than expected or could result in the streetcar not opening on schedule.

 

I think that the cost estimate as published in the feasibility study in 2007 was not enough to complete this project, and if I had the chance, I might have proposed another rail project that I think was more realistic. The 2007 study set the tone for this project, but it was flawed, and we are living with the consequences. That's my opinion.

 

That is all. Please don't hate me because of something that COAST or WLW said or did.

^Even if the City had to pay the full cost of the 8 foot Duke utility relocation costs, that adds $12-15 million to the project's price. That doesn't add up to anywhere near the $250 million figure that you are irresponsibly bandying about.

CITY SPOTLIGHT: Cincinnati and the Streetcar: Part II

Submitted by kapoppel on Thu, 08/30/2012

 

Recent chatter covering my prior blog "Cincinnati Chooses the Streetcar...but Why?" is propelling me to clear the confusion.

 

READ MORE: http://www.cnu.org/cnu-salons/2012/08/city-spotlight-cincinnati-and-streetcar-part-ii

 

 

Looks like Columbus Underground scooped us. It's Katie Poppel's rebuttal to the concerns raised by members of of this site and other individuals regarding her first CNU editorial.

^ I noted with interest that she is using Census "Journey to Work" data to try to establish that "everyone in Cincinnati drives." Over the years, nationwide, rail opponents have repeatedly cite these data to establish that "no one will ever use it."  It's a universal tactic for rail opponents, which makes me suspect that she is simpatico with them. Cincinnati rail opponents have cited these data time and time again since 2001.

 

But these are citywide data which have little relevance to the car-light populations of downtown and OTR. Plus, only about 20% of all trips are commute trips, so they don't describe the utility of what will be an important tool for all aspects of urban living.

 

Having said that, I do think the Cincinnati Streetcar will be used for a lot for commute trips simply because 1% of all the Fortune 500 corporations in America, including two of the top 50, happen to be within a couple of blocks of the line.

John, I was going to send you a private message about this subject but your inbox is full.

^People choose between the options available to them. Most people in Cincinnati drive because it is their only option. No one is going to use rail that doesn't exist.

 

I know lots of folks who drive who say that they would take transit if it was available.

John, I was going to send you a private message about this subject but your inbox is full.

 

Please try again. Empty now.

>Listened to this via podcast today and Finney stated that COAST would be filing a lawsuit next week over the Blue Ash airport sale. Didn't the all the transactions between Cincinnati and Blue Ash to undo/redo the sale occur on Wednesday the 29th?

 

I think it took place on Monday the 27th, and the airport itself closed, officially, at 8am on Wednesday the 29th.  Blue Ash takes full ownership on Sept 1, which was 9 minutes ago.

I had to work in the office up north earlier today and swung by the airport on my way home this evening (Aug. 31), demolition prep has already begun, excavators are in place and a truck was going around removing the airport's lights that once marked where to land.

>Listened to this via podcast today and Finney stated that COAST would be filing a lawsuit next week over the Blue Ash airport sale.

I had to work in the office up north earlier today and swung by the airport on my way home this evening (Aug. 31), demolition prep has already begun, excavators are in place and a truck was going around removing the airport's lights that once marked where to land.

 

By next week, all traces of the airport may be gone! Reminds me of Judge Alvin Krenzler in Cleveland in the 1970s who owned the historic, ornate Hippodrome theater. A group of preservationists intended to buy it and file an injunction to stop Judge Krenzler from demolishing it for a parking lot. So Krenzler got a crew out in the middle of the night and had the theater half demolished by the time the court opened in the morning. There was no point in filing the injunction then.

 

That was just one night. This is a three-day, four-night weekend....

>Listened to this via podcast today and Finney stated that COAST would be filing a lawsuit next week over the Blue Ash airport sale. Didn't the all the transactions between Cincinnati and Blue Ash to undo/redo the sale occur on Wednesday the 29th?

 

I think it took place on Monday the 27th, and the airport itself closed, officially, at 8am on Wednesday the 29th.  Blue Ash takes full ownership on Sept 1, which was 9 minutes ago.

 

Did he say what the basis for the lawsuit is? There has to be some perceived wrong doing, he can't just sue because he needs some $$.

I took this photo Thursday night of the closed Blue Ash Airport.  You can see the yellow Xs that got painted on indicating the airport is closed.

 

As a general aviation pilot I am always sad to see an airport close, because new ones don't get built anymore.  But it is hard to argue with the logic of what both cities are trying to accomplish.

 

To me, this really does not have anything to do with the streetcar, and connecting the airport closure to the streetcar to me just seems like a way to stir the pot.

 

The City of Cincinnati owns an asset worth in excess of $30M which provides basically no benefit to the city itself (maybe a bit to the region).  This capital can be unlocked and used elsewhere and the streetcar is one of a few priorities identified for the money.  If the streetcar project did not exist I would bet that the city would still have its eyes on the $.

 

Blue Ash, on the other hand, sees the best use being a park, and is not interesting in operating it.  I'm sure if all the "economic benefits" some of the preservation groups like to argue were real, Blue Ash would want to keep it open.

 

So from Cincinnati's perspective you have an asset worth millions being completely underused and which brings no benefit.  From Blue Ash's perspective you have a big waste of space that they see better used as a park.

 

I wonder if COAST would care so much about this airport if Cincinnati was instead donating the proceeds to the Brent Spence bridge?

Thanks so much for the photo.  I added these lines to show the revised property lines, as of Sept 1, 2012 (that's today).  The triangle in red is now owned by Blue Ash and will become the park.  What is in blue is still owned by the City of Cincinnati, including the runway.  The very small strip of land between the runway and the buildings is where Cincinnati planned to rebuild the airport in 2006, however they either did not apply for the FAA grant or they didn't win the money.  So this area is in limbo, with the city probably sending equipment up there shortly to tear up the runway.  There has been no public discussion at this point as to whether Blue Ash is interested in buying it or if Cincinnati will sell it off to private developers.  It is valued at around $20-25 million.

 

 

It is valued at around $20-25 million.

 

What is your source?

COAST is launching two lawsuits. One to "stop the blue ash airport cincinnati streetcar Boondoggle deal" and the other is to "stop duke from increasing rates for the streetcar boondoggle"

 

These guys seriously need to get laid

COAST is launching two lawsuits. One to "stop the blue ash airport cincinnati streetcar Boondoggle deal" and the other is to "stop duke from increasing rates for the streetcar boondoggle"

These guys seriously need to get laid

As long as there's no procreation.

>What is your source?

 

I was unable to find the source where that is mentioned.  That is the number I've heard tossed around though. 

 

According to this document, in 2001 the value of the Blue Ash Airport land was $108,000 per acre:

 

http://city-egov.cincinnati-oh.gov/Webtop/ws/council/public/child/Blob/467.pdf?rpp=10&m=459

 

The airport was actually sold for a bit more than that since it was sold at the peak of the real estate bubble in 2006.  The remaining section does not front a major street however it has additional value now that it will front a very nice park AND is a contiguous strip of land.  Specifically, it is about 750x5,000 feet.  The real flaw of the piece of land is that as residential it would face the wall of various businesses that form the airport's diagonal southern border.  But it would probably do well as apartments or commercial.  I think you would want a new road that runs the length of the strip rather than trying to gain access points onto Reed Hartwman Highway. 

 

OK, thanks. Has the City indicated what it wants to do with the land?

I think the most likely option is a big new suburban style office park that is built using a Joint Economic Development District in which the City & Blue Ash split the earnings tax on all jobs in the JEDD and set a clause that all jobs there must come from outside Cincy or Blue Ash.

The document linked to above says Blue Ash wasn't interested in creating such a district back in 2001, however things might have changed, since that document assumes that Blue Ash would want to redevelop the triangle of land rather than make it a park.  We are of course now talking about the strip of land that was supposed to become the reconfigured airport.

 

At first the rationale for Blue Ash making this a park didn't make much sense to me.  Then I realized that there probably won't be another opportunity in the city's history to do this, since there is no other large piece of land within city limits left to be had.  So if they wanted a large park at some time int he future, they'd have to buy the land and tear stuff down. 

 

As for the JEDD, I'm not sure it's worth the hassle since there's not much tax revenue to be had.  If there are $20,000,000 in wages, Blue Ash only gets $250,000 per year.  For a city with a $30 million budget, that's not making or breaking anything.  For Cincinnati it matters even less.   

^

 

Blue Ash recently developed it's last vacant parcel of over 17 acres.  All undeveloped land is now under 17 acres. 

 

This is a 98 Acre site.  Assuming this has the potential to become a fully developed corporate office park you could assume at least 3000 jobs on fully built out 98 acre office park.  That's actually a very very very low estimate for a site of this size.  Madisonville's Suburban-style Medpace campus is certainly less than 10 acres and is over 1000 jobs. 

 

As this would be a new suburban office park lets assume the average salary is $50,000.  That's $150,000,000 in wages.  Assume they come up with a hybrid of 1.6% (Cincinnati is 2.1%, Blue Ash is 1.25%) and they split them each at .8% (this is all just imaginary but semi-possible).

 

That's $1.2 million for each municipality each tax year once the site is fully built out.  The "difficulty" of a JEDD is maybe 6 months of legal wrangling & political negotiating on details and then passing an agreement between the municipalities.  I hardly believe that's too difficult that it wouldn't be worth going after.

 

Outside of a JEDD, what would happen with the site?

At first the rationale for Blue Ash making this a park didn't make much sense to me. 

 

Sometimes a local government will make land into a parik in order to PREVENT some other kind of development that is perceived to detrimental.

 

For example (and this is just an example that I made up,) suppose that the City of Cincinnati wanted to open a new landfill on the Blue Ash airport to replace the Elda Landfill. Blue Ash obviously doesn't want a landfill, but there is little they can do about it since the land does not belong to them and has been a commercial use for decades. Blue Ash could prevent opening up a landfill by purchasing the property and making a park of it.

 

 

>That's $1.2 million for each municipality each tax year once the site is fully built out.  The "difficulty" of a JEDD is maybe 6 months of legal wrangling & political negotiating on details and then passing an agreement between the municipalities.  I hardly believe that's too difficult that it wouldn't be worth going after.

 

I was assuming far fewer employees at an average salary of $40,000.  I'm not sure any of us really know what sort of jobs are really out there, in what number, that could be recruited to this site, unless someone on this board just happens to be in the business of commercial suburban real estate development. 

 

 

>Outside of a JEDD, what would happen with the site?

 

Parkland would be nice, but even this additional parkland would not act to significantly buffer ambient noise from I-71 and other large roads.  Even in 1,400 acre Mt. Airy Forest there is really no spot free of I-74's soundtrack. 

 

 

^ Parkland would be nice, but I highly doubt Blue Ash is going to pay another ~$18 million to the City to get another 100 acres of park land. 98 acres is incredibly valuable as a potential source of tax revenue. No municipality has enough $ right now to forgoe such an attractive development option.

Actually they could build a second golf course.  The course would raise the property value of the existing buildings along Reed Hartman that back up to the airport. 

Golf courses don't bring in that much revenue. Having read the City Manager's budget document, the City's golf courses are barely covering their costs after the state ruled they are no longer property tax exempt.  And is spending millions to raise property values for office parks through expensive golf courses a top priority for struggling hamilton county governments?

 

Additionally, the city owns those 98 acres.  The city is closing golf courses (Dunham) not adding them.  So unless Blue Ash wants to propose another tax increase to buy an $18 million piece of land, then build a municipal golf course that would not be property tax free, it's not gonna happen.

 

There are two viable options.  Homes or office park. Parks and recreation are highly unlikely, expensive, create little revenue and Blue Ash just started a 130 acre park, I doubt they're going to add 98 more at a cost of $18 million just to purchase the land. Cincinnati is going to charge full value if it's to be developed as residential as that might draw away residents from the City- why would they give a break in cost to lose residents?  If there is a JEDD and an office park built the City could either lease the land, or sell it to a developer and then get earnings tax revenue.