The Banks

[Cheesehead]

10 years after the initial planning, ground was broken today. Too little too late or will it save downtown Cincy?

[xudeltasig]

Maybe too late, maybe not, but from everything I've heard/seen it appears to definitely be too little. I haven't followed the project very closely but it seems like they are planning for way too much office and living space and not enough retail/food/etc... Just MHO, though, hopefully I'm wrong, I would love to see a revitalized downtown.

[PM Thor]

Train wreck. They "woulda, coulda, shoulda" done this project so better you could have given it to 3 dayton players and it would have gone smoother and faster. It's going to be half assed, over budget, and late, I can guarantee all of that.

Yet somehow when they put in two restaraunts/bars, and they take off (ala Gameday), and just watch, all the politicians will take credit for The Banks being a success.

Just watch, at 3 the politicians will be fawning all over themselves saying how they got The Banks done, where in reality they butchered this project to all Hell.

I am hoping and praying that the Washington Park area project goes better, but I doubt it.

[jdm2000]

Just MHO, though, hopefully I'm wrong, I would love to see a revitalized downtown.

No offense here, but have you been downtown lately? The makeover at Fountain Square has done wonders for downtown. My wife and I eat out downtown probably every two weeks or so, and it is consistently crowded and vibrant. Things have really turned around, and my hope is that the Banks will keep building on that. There's actually a lot of exciting projects happening downtown -- the Banks, the new Great American building, the continued happenings around the square, plenty of condo rehabs and builds (places like Parker Flats, etc.). It's a really exciting time downtown right now. I hope the Banks can keep the momentum going.

[xudeltasig]

Honestly, I haven't been downtown in the evening for quite some time outside of an event (show at the Aranoff or USBank Arena, etc...) I'm glad to hear things are starting to turn around though. Hopefully, the Banks project will be completed sooner rather than later and will help to build on that.

[XUOHTX]

Anything is an improvement. I can't see how adding the banks could possible not help downtown. Right now its a mess of concrete. I'm just happy they have finally done something at this point. I always go downtown when I come back home to check out any improvements. Imagine in a few years, new skyscraper, new condos, over the rhine revitalized, and the banks project done. I think the future is bright for the city.

[PM Thor]

You forgot CityLink too!

Woohoo!

[Juice]

I always felt the Banks were a "Ill believe it when I see it" project. I have the fear that it is just going to be a collection of lame, chain restaurants that we have 4 different versions of already in this city and a couple bars that only slimeballs will go to. I really do not have much faith in this project.

Downtown has gotten better but its confined to a select area of about 3 blocks at best. Hopefully the Banks will help enlarge that area.

[Jumpy]

the banks can't make downtown any worse than it actually is, so by default it will be an upgrade.

My vision for the banks: a place with at least one good bar to hang out before/after Reds games. If it has that, I will be happy.

[BENWAR]

Can you imagine the jokes we could of made if they started it yesterday and not today. :D

[boozehound]

I'm not sold. First of all, I cannot imagine that this city needs more condos. Between the condos going up in Cincinnati, Newport, and Covington, and all the condos and row houses on Eastern Ave (some of which are still vacant, BTW), I can't imagine people paying the prices they are asking for those condos, when they could go 10 minutes down Kellogg and get a 4000 sq ft house in Anderson for the same price.

As far as office space goes, I think that I read recently that downtown office space is at about 60% occupancy. Sounds like we need more office space.

What we need downtown are bars, restaurants, and parking. And not Have a Nice Day Cafe and Bar Cincinnati types, but bars that are fairly unique, and most importantly, not exorbetantly expensive. Mainstrausse is right across the river...

[xeus]

I don't know if I've ever been more cynical about a development project than I am about that stupid trolley.

[PM Thor]

I also think it is quite prophetic that the actual groundbreaking ceremony was delayed by eighty minutes. That speaks volumes in itself on this development.

[jdm2000]

I don't want to get on my high horse, because I'm something of an urbanphile--hey, it's a passion, just like Xavier basketball. But three points I will make:

1) The city's office vacancy rate is generally around 16%, which is very good for a market this size--Cincy's vacancy rate is almost always lower than that of Columbus, Cleveland, and other comparable cities.

2) I am really behind the streetcar -- it is not going to be a transit solution so much as a development tool. Over The Rhine is a great untapped resource with, quite honestly, more potential than just about any other place in the country. Developers are more likely to put the money in when they know there's some permanence transportation-wise, which the streetcar brings--unlike a bus route, it can't just change tomorrow. Over the Rhine is on the verge right now, and I think this may be the thing to push it over.

3) I don't think that there's any more of a glut of condos downtown than there is a glut of subdivision houses out in West Chester. The real estate market is tough all over. Plus, my understanding is that the Banks will be starting with apartments, which is something I think is really missing (and could do really well) downtown.

I'm not originally from here, but I think that Cincy has a ton of potential. I'm just pumped to see some real positive steps taken to move it forward.


Sorry for the soapbox. But being a civic booster for Cincy is like hating Dayton for Thor--it's in my blood. :)

[Kahns Krazy]

Everyone says they want neighborhood bars downtown, but what will make the banks successful is mass appeal. I love Arnold's, but a place like that just isn't going to draw the critical mass that is necessary for a successful wide-scale project. You also need to be willing to pay a little more for downtown entertainment.

What Cincinnati really needs is an attitude adjustment. All too often I hear opinions about downtown from people who don't go there. That's like me telling someone the Cincinnati Opera sucks. How the hell would I know? There is not a parking problem downtown. After work hours, it's not hard to find free parking in most areas, and if you want to be right on the square, it's like $3. There are free events on Fountain Square a lot.

I disagree with JDM on the Trolley, at least not yet. I have seen the proposed route, and I don't believe that it can be compared to Portland's streetcar situation, but that is a whole different discussion.

There is a significant portion of the Cincinnati population that won't be happy with anything. People were getting frustrated with suburban sprawl, so they put together a set of architectural guidelines addressing "infill" - building on existing lots as opposed to knocking down acres of trees for a new subdivision. Sounds good, but when someone actually did it on Observatory avenue in Hyde Park, people went batshit crazy.

Cincinnati doesn't like change to the point that some people refuse to acknowledge it even after it has already happened. Everyone loves to talk about how Newport and Covington are showing up Cincinnati. I guess that's true if our goal is to have a liquor store next to a smoke shop every 100 yards in our downtown, or if we're glad when it snows because at least that fills the potholes.

Scoot over JDM. Is there more room on that soapbox?

[Jumpy]

Everyone says they want neighborhood bars downtown, but what will make the banks successful is mass appeal. I love Arnold's, but a place like that just isn't going to draw the critical mass that is necessary for a successful wide-scale project. You also need to be willing to pay a little more for downtown entertainment.

What Cincinnati really needs is an attitude adjustment. All too often I hear opinions about downtown from people who don't go there. That's like me telling someone the Cincinnati Opera sucks. How the hell would I know? There is not a parking problem downtown. After work hours, it's not hard to find free parking in most areas, and if you want to be right on the square, it's like $3. There are free events on Fountain Square a lot.

I disagree with JDM on the Trolley, at least not yet. I have seen the proposed route, and I don't believe that it can be compared to Portland's streetcar situation, but that is a whole different discussion.

There is a significant portion of the Cincinnati population that won't be happy with anything. People were getting frustrated with suburban sprawl, so they put together a set of architectural guidelines addressing "infill" - building on existing lots as opposed to knocking down acres of trees for a new subdivision. Sounds good, but when someone actually did it on Observatory avenue in Hyde Park, people went batshit crazy.

Cincinnati doesn't like change to the point that some people refuse to acknowledge it even after it has already happened. Everyone loves to talk about how Newport and Covington are showing up Cincinnati. I guess that's true if our goal is to have a liquor store next to a smoke shop every 100 yards in our downtown, or if we're glad when it snows because at least that fills the potholes.

Scoot over JDM. Is there more room on that soapbox?

I agree up to the point about Northern Kentucky (Newport moreso than Covington). Over the past ten years, Newport has grown exponentially due to the infighting of Cincinnati City Council. They couldn't stop bickering with each other long enough to say OK when Hofbrauhaus said that they wanted one of the first authentic German beer houses in the world to be in Cincinnati. What happened? Newport stepped in with open arms. Coupled with their entertainment district (which was actually planned and developed ON TIME), they have stolen the show from the Banks project. All those bars, clubs, movie theaters, restaraunts, comedy clubs, etc. have revitalized that area immensely and are replacing all the liquor stores, smoke shops and strip clubs that dominated the area for so long.

[jdm2000]

Yeah! I knew there had to be another pro-Cincy person around here....

Even though we disagree on the streetcar, I am behind the rest of the post 100%. I often wonder how much time people who complain about downtown actually spend there. Or how much they have spent in other places. I worked downtown in Columbus for a summer two years ago, and let me tell you, downtown Cincy after 5:00 is about like NYC compared to C-bus downtown after 5:00. There's a lot of good stuff going on downtown right now--I really hope the Banks keeps the ball rolling.

[boozehound]

I don't want to get on my high horse, because I'm something of an urbanphile--hey, it's a passion, just like Xavier basketball. But three points I will make:

1) The city's office vacancy rate is generally around 16%, which is very good for a market this size--Cincy's vacancy rate is almost always lower than that of Columbus, Cleveland, and other comparable cities.

2) I am really behind the streetcar -- it is not going to be a transit solution so much as a development tool. Over The Rhine is a great untapped resource with, quite honestly, more potential than just about any other place in the country. Developers are more likely to put the money in when they know there's some permanence transportation-wise, which the streetcar brings--unlike a bus route, it can't just change tomorrow. Over the Rhine is on the verge right now, and I think this may be the thing to push it over.

3) I don't think that there's any more of a glut of condos downtown than there is a glut of subdivision houses out in West Chester. The real estate market is tough all over. Plus, my understanding is that the Banks will be starting with apartments, which is something I think is really missing (and could do really well) downtown.

I'm not originally from here, but I think that Cincy has a ton of potential. I'm just pumped to see some real positive steps taken to move it forward.


Sorry for the soapbox. But being a civic booster for Cincy is like hating Dayton for Thor--it's in my blood. :)

I stand corrected. If office vacancy is really 16%, that is pretty decent. When I heard the 40% figure, I really wasn't sure where I heard it, but it seemed very high.

Apartments are a good idea as well. Downtown could use some more of those. My opinion about the condos is based primarily on my driving down Kellogg several times a week and seeing condo complexes that have "2 units left!!!" signs. The thing is, those signs have been up for years. I know that Kellogg isn't really downtown, but it is definitely in the vicinity.

On a positive note, it sounds like the owners of the new bars on the Banks won't have to worry about Chris Henry coming in and tearing the place up. So they've got that going for them, which is nice.

[jdm2000]

I agree up to the point about Northern Kentucky (Newport moreso than Covington). Over the past ten years, Newport has grown exponentially due to the infighting of Cincinnati City Council. They couldn't stop bickering with each other long enough to say OK when Hofbrauhaus said that they wanted one of the first authentic German beer houses in the world to be in Cincinnati. What happened? Newport stepped in with open arms. Coupled with their entertainment district (which was actually planned and developed ON TIME), they have stolen the show from the Banks project. All those bars, clubs, movie theaters, restaraunts, comedy clubs, etc. have revitalized that area immensely and are replacing all the liquor stores, smoke shops and strip clubs that dominated the area for so long.


I think Newport has done a great job, but I don't believe all the hype--there's a definite "pro-suburb" bias in the local media that Newport gets the benefit of. Notice that anytime a store or restaurant closes in downtown Cincy, the Enquirer is all over it--yet do you read any stories about how Newport on the Levee's retail part has floundered from the outset? There's plenty of empty space over there, but you wouldn't know it from the media.....they are to be commended for the good stuff they've done, but the way that they get a pass (mostly by being compared favorably to downtown) gets to me.

[Kahns Krazy]

I agree up to the point about Northern Kentucky (Newport moreso than Covington). Over the past ten years, Newport has grown exponentially due to the infighting of Cincinnati City Council. They couldn't stop bickering with each other long enough to say OK when Hofbrauhaus said that they wanted one of the first authentic German beer houses in the world to be in Cincinnati. What happened? Newport stepped in with open arms. Coupled with their entertainment district (which was actually planned and developed ON TIME), they have stolen the show from the Banks project. All those bars, clubs, movie theaters, restaraunts, comedy clubs, etc. have revitalized that area immensely and are replacing all the liquor stores, smoke shops and strip clubs that dominated the area for so long.

Newport has its share of success, but spend some time over there and tell me if it's really as widespread as you claim. The vacancy rate in the Levee is pretty high. The failure of the Bridge Climb was epic. The IMAX theatre has stood empty for years. Other than the restaurants in the Levee (and several of these have turned over), Haufbrahaus is the only successful new development outside that building. The liquor stores are still over there. I can think of at least three withing a two block radius of the levee. The strip bars/ unglorified whorehouses are still there. The subsidized housing is still there.

Newport has a destination dinner/bar/movie theatre complex, but it hasn't sparked any redevelopment like we're talking about in Cincinnati.

Edit--- JDM just types faster than I do.

[jdm2000]

I stand corrected. If office vacancy is really 16%, that is pretty decent. When I heard the 40% figure, I really wasn't sure where I heard it, but it seemed very high.

Apartments are a good idea as well. Downtown could use some more of those. My opinion about the condos is based primarily on my driving down Kellogg several times a week and seeing condo complexes that have "2 units left!!!" signs. The thing is, those signs have been up for years. I know that Kellogg isn't really downtown, but it is definitely in the vicinity.

On a positive note, it sounds like the owners of the new bars on the Banks won't have to worry about Chris Henry coming in and tearing the place up. So they've got that going for them, which is nice.

Well, I haven't looked at the rate in awhile, but it's usually in the mid-to-high teens for Cincy. (But don't quote me on that, I could get a more accurate count.) And many downtown folks will point out that it's not a zero-sum game--when the last round of building was kicked off in the late 70s/early 80s, we got the 580 building, PNC Center, Atrium buildings, Chemed, Scripps, and P & G buildings all built within about a twenty year span. Obviously, the capacity in some sense fosters the demand--hopefully that is what will happen with the new Great American building and the Banks.

[Kahns Krazy]

Booze, you are the only person I have ever heard call Kellogg "in the vicinity of downtown".

[jdm2000]

Okay, just because I hate people who say stuff and don't back it up (and thus I don't want to do that here)--the Real Estate statistics on the Cincinnati Regional Chamber website show downtown's office vacancy rate as follows:

Class A - 6.9%
Class B - 16.1%

Outside CBD (downtown):

Class A - 30.4%
Class B - 24.2%

If accurate, those numbers for downtown are awesome.


This ends my rapid-fire posting -- I'm done with lunch, sadly.

[xeus]

I can't help but look at JDM's avatar and picture it saying, "Now just hang on second and I'll explain to you why we need this trolley. First, take a look at these occupancy rates."

[boozehound]

Booze, you are the only person I have ever heard call Kellogg "in the vicinity of downtown".

Well, I guess I don't really mean Kellogg, as much as I mean eastern ave. I would consider it pretty close to downtown. Some of the developments are right across the street from the boathouse.

[Kahns Krazy]

Ahh. Yes, much different. Kellogg doesn't start until you pass Delta Ave.

[Smails]

There is not a shred of doubt in my mind that the Banks will be a roaring success....initially. Everyone is clammoring for non-traditional, non-franchised bars and eateries. Hey, I love a local dive just like the next guy, but in order to have sustained success the Banks is going to have to cater to the masses, more specifically families. So yes, there will probably be an ESPN Zone or something like it on the banks and as a father of three, that's the kind of place that needs to be down there if I'm going to bring the Smails herd South from Wyoming. I know the food sux and the theme is tired but places like that survive. Remember when Main Street was all the rage? Not so much any more..that was perhaps the most family-unfriendly entertainment district ever. I loved it when I was in school, buy it had absolutely no staying power. I want my kids to be engaged in the downtown expereince they way I was when I was young. I'll eat bad chicken wings and look at bad sports momentos if that means there's an afordable outlet for taking my family to the Banks.

I can't take my kids to a place where they have nothing to do. All the character in the world is not going to keep my 4 year old son entertained. He needs pop-a-shots and putting greens to stay active. I know it's cheesy and cliched, but if the Banks is going to survive it needs to have a couple BW3 type places. If Cincinnati wants me to bring my family of 5 downtown for a Saturday, it needs have something for everyone.

I work downtown and I'm excited that ground has been broken. All the pissing about dropping the ball is out the door for me. What sense does it make to bitch about how poorly this project was planned 6 years ago? That crap is neither here nor there as it pertains to what the future holds. We are in the 'now' and the now is a new riverfront development that should be generating some excitement.

[Jumpy]

Kahns/JDM-

I'm not arguing the success of Newport so much as I am arguing that it could have been here, instead of there. All that development shot up overnight over there because our city has been dying for it. Some of it has lasted, some hasn't. That's the nature of the beast. But the thing that upsets me and many other Cincinnatians is that all of that business could have, cratch that, SHOULD have been here. All we needed was someone in the city government to lead the project. They didn't and now we see Newport where it is and the Banks just now breaking ground.

And I think that you underestimate the revitalization that has happened there, Kahns. Just 20 years ago
Newport was a stinking cesspool operated by a crooked mayor with supposed mob ties. that place was worse than Over the Rhine. NO ONE would go there. Now, it is THE downtown area entertainment district that everyone goes to.

[Kahns Krazy]

Kahns/JDM-

(1)I'm not arguing the success of Newport so much as I am arguing that it could have been here, instead of there.
(2)Now, it is THE downtown area entertainment district that everyone goes to.

I'm going to start with (2) first, because it is just untrue. First of all, it's not a 'district' at all, it's a mall. And it's not a good mall. Compare the vacancy at Rookwood Pavillion to Newport. Second, not everyone goes there. In terms of generating the tax revenue the city of Newport was hoping for, the whole development has been a pretty good size failure. It's not all bad - I'd much rather have the Aquarium than the Freedom Center, and the movie theater is a success. Brio, Mitchells, Tropicana and Clauddaugh seem to have staying power, and Hofbrau is a home run. Which leads me back to...

(1) I disagree that it all could/should have been here. It is better for our Banks development that the other side of the river is different than it was 20 years ago. How much investment do you think we would attract if we were a 500 yard walk from the cesspool that was Newport/Covington 20 years ago? Keep in mind that we built nearly $1 billion of new stadiums on our riverfront in the same time frame. Yes, we missed the boat on Hofbrau, but there has been a lot on this side of the river that a lot of people choose to overlook when making the "us vs. them" argument.

[Kahns Krazy]

If you have a chance, pick up the "Pulse/Downtowner" that's out now. There is an interesting interview with a group that has a vision for revitalizing the over the rhine area and the local brewing history. Many of the thoughts in this thread are repeated in that interview.

[Raoul Duke]

I've thought for a while now that much of downtown's future, the Banks in particular, is largely contingent on one thing - amenities. I'm not talking about hotels, fine dining, and nightlife. I'm talking about Kroger's/biggs, Blockbuster, gas stations - the staple items.

People have suggested that I live downtown (I work here), but that's always been the hangup for me. I don't feel like trying to cross the 75 bridge at 5 o clock to buy groceries, and I suspect a lot of others feel the same way. Any other large city with a vital urban core has those types of amenities. I lived in London for a while and that, to me, is the perfect example of having the infrastructure in place. As far as I know though, there are no plans for any of those places downtown.

And I think that having those staples in place would fuel condo occupancy, which in turn would fuel the success of the Banks and potentially OTR. I'm not saying the Banks should have a blockbuster store, but all the fine dining and nightlife is for naught without a strong urban core.

[mostly harmless]

As to the proliferation of office and residential at the Banks, this is exactly what this project needs. Retail can only survive on the "street level" and having many residents as well as employers in the same development on upper floors above the retail development will lead to high rental rates and desirable retail tenants as well as popular restaurants and bars locating at the Banks. Now that the majority of the public funding has finally (well almost finally) been secured for the garages and street improvements, the project should begin moving fairly swiftly, with the first couple of blocks completed in the next three years.
When all is said and done, the Banks will have over 3,000 residents (the majority of which will be upper middle class with disposable income levels that are very desirable), one to three hotels, 200,000 - 400,000 SF of retail (the Rookwood Commons portion of Rookwood is 321,000 SF - which is more than adequate - they are not looking for large department stores), and between 500,000 - 1,000,000 SF of Class A office space (about 3,500 - 6,000 employees). These new buildings will steal some existing tenants downtown, but will also lead to new tenants relocating downtown. This facility will probably not affect vacancy on an overall level and will force existing buildings to renovate and pour capital into keeping existing Class A and B buildings competive. It may also lead to further office building to apartment conversion, which will continue to bring more residents back downtown, which is a good thing for the overall strength and desirability of downtown.

[Raoul Duke]

I share some of the other posters' skepticism about the success of Newport. One other thing you also have to consider is Cincinnati and Newport's respective bargaining positions. From my general observations (mostly from articles in the Business Courier), Newport and Kentucky offered amazingly favorable financing terms to developers. Newport was in a position to, and needed to, attract new business and development as quickly as possible.

I know it sounds counterintuitive based on the Banks' progress, but Cincinnati can afford to be a little more picky about its terms. While Cincy has also offered pretty favorable tax deferrals for its developments, I don't think they're anywhere near as favorable as those offered by Newport. Cincinnati has a more mature and robust downtown area (and fundamentally different) than Newport; it can command a higher price than that across the river. If Cincinnati were offering the same terms as Newport, it would do you a disservice as an Ohio taxpayer.

Of course, it's certainly arguable that Ohio taxpayers are being done a disservice by the masterminds in charge of the Banks development.

[xudeltasig]

I've thought for a while now that much of downtown's future, the Banks in particular, is largely contingent on one thing - amenities. I'm not talking about hotels, fine dining, and nightlife. I'm talking about Kroger's/biggs, Blockbuster, gas stations - the staple items.


I couldn't agree more. I have often wondered why people would want to live downtown and have to drive 10-15 mins for gas and groceries and not even have a convient place to go get cold medicine if need be at 10pm. These things seem like such a pain that I would never want to live downtown. I don't know that we need a Kroger (although I do believe there is one in OTR, or used to be, but I'm not sure if people use it or not) or Bigg's per se, but even a couple of smaller grocery shops throughout town that would be convient to the people walking home from work. I heard rumors awhile back that someone wanted to put a Super WalMart (or maybe it was Target) over on Eastern across from all the condos/town homes they are building over there which might not be a bad idea (grocery, pahrmacy and probably gas station all in one outside of town but still VERY convient to residents).

[jdm2000]

The "amenities" issue is a chicken/egg type argument--people won't move there till there's a grocery store, but a grocery store won't build until there's enough people there.

My response would be that, from the people I know who live downtown (sorry, I live in Pleasant Ridge--the wife demands a yard), the issue is not nearly as great as some might think. There are smaller places to pick up everyday stuff--Silverglades, Walgreens, etc.--and while there is a Kroger in OTR, the better option is Findlay Market. Plus, as many rightly point out, why is it such a big hassle to drive five minutes to the grocery? Don't you usually have to drive five minutes to Kroger's even if you live out in West Chester?

All that said, as more people move downtown and create a critical mass, these things will come. Hopefully the Banks will help create that critical mass of residents -- I think 10,000 people downtown would be enough to get a small grocery; given the likely demographics, it could be perfect for a Whole Foods or Fresh Market type place.

[Raoul Duke]

The "amenities" issue is a chicken/egg type argument--people won't move there till there's a grocery store, but a grocery store won't build until there's enough people there.

My response would be that, from the people I know who live downtown (sorry, I live in Pleasant Ridge--the wife demands a yard), the issue is not nearly as great as some might think. There are smaller places to pick up everyday stuff--Silverglades, Walgreens, etc.--and while there is a Kroger in OTR, the better option is Findlay Market. Plus, as many rightly point out, why is it such a big hassle to drive five minutes to the grocery? Don't you usually have to drive five minutes to Kroger's even if you live out in West Chester?

All that said, as more people move downtown and create a critical mass, these things will come. Hopefully the Banks will help create that critical mass of residents -- I think 10,000 people downtown would be enough to get a small grocery; given the likely demographics, it could be perfect for a Whole Foods or Fresh Market type place.

I agree with you in principle, but I would formulate the issue a little differently: at what point is a proprietor willing to bear the risk of establishing a business (grocery, etc.) downtown?

Because as I understand it, some of the condo/apartment growth has already taken place, albeit at a less than stellar pace. So I don't think you necessarily have the chicken/egg issue. It's just a matter of at what point the proprietor is willing to accept the risk. And there are fiscal tools that can create incentives.

I also think driving to the grocery is different in west chester vs. downtown. The idea of living in an urban setting is that you don't have to drive for that kind of stuff. Especially if it's across 75 bridge at rush hour, and you either don't have a car or have to park in a garage a few blocks away. As I mentioned, any major urban living area has those amenities in relatively close proximity.

[blobfan]

2) I am really behind the streetcar -- it is not going to be a transit solution so much as a development tool. Over The Rhine is a great untapped resource with, quite honestly, more potential than just about any other place in the country. Developers are more likely to put the money in when they know there's some permanence transportation-wise, which the streetcar brings--unlike a bus route, it can't just change tomorrow. Over the Rhine is on the verge right now, and I think this may be the thing to push it over.


While I concede that a streetcar could be good for business development, I have some concerns. Are people really going to ride a streetcar from downtown to OTR? Am I supposed to drive in from Pleasant Ridge, park at the square then hop a trolly to get to Findlay Market? Why wouldn't I just finish my business downtown then hop in my car and park again in OTR? Are enough people going to be living downtown to create enough OTR development to justify its $100 million price tag? I'd really like someone to explain to my why so many of our politicians are droolling overthemselves to get push this through.

Now that they've finally broken ground, I feel fairly positive about the Banks. It's been missing momentum for so long. I'd rather see my tax dollars go to a failure developing the Banks than that palace for a bunch of spoiled athletes and their corrupt owners to play in 15 times a year that blights our skyline.

Washington Park is where my negative feelings lie when it comes to downtown development. What's the latest on CPSs attempt to screw up the deal?

[Kahns Krazy]

Once again, the gas/groceries argument is one I hear from people that just don't know what is available downtown. Gas is a retarded argument. You can't walk to get gas. Groceries is not much better. I actually live walking distance from a Kroger, and I have walked there. Twice. Once, I was too drunk to drive, and once was because I wanted some fresh air and only needed breakfast stuff. Otherwise, driving to the grocery store is not a problem. It certainly hasn't adversely impacted Mt. Adams. People don't move into an urban setting so they can avoid driving for groceries.

There are several options for shopping downtown. There is not a need for a full service grocery store downtown. Moreover, it is logistically nearly impossible. Kroger/biggs style grocery stores require loading docks, and that just isn't going to happen downtown. A fresh market would be possible, but the most realistic solution is expanded offerings/hours at Findley Market.

When it comes down to it, the people I hear arguing the most against downtown living aren't really the people that are going to move downtown. People that move into urban areas aren't really concerned that there isn't a blockbuster around the corner because that demographic doesn't include sitting at home watching rented movies among their top recreation activities.

I don't understand why some people are so anti-downtown. They never go, couldn't tell you what is there, but have no problem pointing out all the problems they perceive there to be.

[Raoul Duke]

Once again, the gas/groceries argument is one I hear from people that just don't know what is available downtown. Gas is a retarded argument. You can't walk to get gas. Groceries is not much better. I actually live walking distance from a Kroger, and I have walked there. Twice. Once, I was too drunk to drive, and once was because I wanted some fresh air and only needed breakfast stuff. Otherwise, driving to the grocery store is not a problem. It certainly hasn't adversely impacted Mt. Adams. People don't move into an urban setting so they can avoid driving for groceries.

There are several options for shopping downtown. There is not a need for a full service grocery store downtown. Moreover, it is logistically nearly impossible. Kroger/biggs style grocery stores require loading docks, and that just isn't going to happen downtown. A fresh market would be possible, but the most realistic solution is expanded offerings/hours at Findley Market.

When it comes down to it, the people I hear arguing the most against downtown living aren't really the people that are going to move downtown. People that move into urban areas aren't really concerned that there isn't a blockbuster around the corner because that demographic doesn't include sitting at home watching rented movies among their top recreation activities.

I don't understand why some people are so anti-downtown. They never go, couldn't tell you what is there, but have no problem pointing out all the problems they perceive there to be.

I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but as I mentioned, I work downtown, where all of the buildings have loading docks. And I happen to like it down here. I take an interest in its future. And part of the demographic you mentioned consists of retirees, who I think might enjoy watching a movie instead of hitting the bars every night.

This is a bit old, but at least someone agrees with me:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/10/02/editorial1.html?jst=s_cn_hl

[Kahns Krazy]

I couldn't agree more. I have often wondered why people would want to live downtown and have to drive 10-15 mins for gas and groceries and not even have a convient place to go get cold medicine if need be at 10pm. These things seem like such a pain that I would never want to live downtown.

Fortunately for the downtown residents, these things just aren't true. There are gas stations in Covington and Newport and on Linn Street. There are full service pharmacies downtown open until 10PM and hotels that have 24 hour shops that are likely far more convenient than the options most people currently have from their home.

Where do you walk at 10PM when you need cold medicine currently?

Lifetime Cincinnati residents get stuck with perceptions that are frequently not true. Just because a river separates Cincinnati and Covington doesn't make it a "10-15 minute drive". Clifton is very close to the northern side of downtown. All of the "amenities" that you currently enjoy are likely just as close downtown.

Personal preferences are fine. I prefer not to live in the west chester type suburbs, and I pay a premium to live where I do because I like the area. However, I don't need to make up things about why suburb living is bad to justify my decision not to live there.

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm not sure if this was directed at me, but as I mentioned, I work downtown, where all of the buildings have loading docks. And I happen to like it down here. I take an interest in its future. And part of the demographic you mentioned consists of retirees, who I think might enjoy watching a movie instead of hitting the bars every night.

This is a bit old, but at least someone agrees with me:

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2006/10/02/editorial1.html?jst=s_cn_hl

I'm not really directing anything at anyone. I did pick up on the blockbuster comment because it was the first time I've heard that included with the gas/grocery argument. Downtown features the public library, which has an enormous selection of videos available free of charge, every day. If every neighborhood had the downtown library, I doubt you'd see as many blockbuster stores as you do now.

The buildings have single door loading docks, and many of them are not equipped for full tractor-trailer size trucks. Moreover, I believe there are restrictions on full size trucks in the business district at certain hours. I read a story either in the Enquirer or the Courier that discussed the loading dock limitations. I can't find it now.

As the downtown population increases, so will the shopping options. I thought I heard that Bleh was expanding to a mini market store, though that plan may have been scrapped. Silverglades, Findlay Market and the Deli at the end of 4th street are all convenient options. If you're into movie rentals but want to live downtown, netflix, On Demand cable options and the internet all provide alternatives to Blockbuster.

My point is that the "roadblocks" that some people claim are the reasons they aren't going to move downtown are likely superficial. Thousands of people point the the lack of a grocery store, but I serioulsy doubt those people would start looking downtown if a grocery store opened tomorrow.

[jdm2000]

While I concede that a streetcar could be good for business development, I have some concerns. Are people really going to ride a streetcar from downtown to OTR? Am I supposed to drive in from Pleasant Ridge, park at the square then hop a trolly to get to Findlay Market? Why wouldn't I just finish my business downtown then hop in my car and park again in OTR? Are enough people going to be living downtown to create enough OTR development to justify its $100 million price tag? I'd really like someone to explain to my why so many of our politicians are droolling overthemselves to get push this through.



Yes, the idea is people will ride the streetcar--and really, it's more designed to be ridden from OTR to Downtown. It's tough to explain--the streetcar is a transit piece, but it's also a development piece. So while some people will use it to commute, the big benefit is that it will also spur development in OTR, which is a huge untapped resources. I don't expect that people will drive from P.Ridge just to ride the streetcar. I do expect that people may drive downtown, go to Findlay Market in the morning, go to a Reds game in the afternoon, and then hit dinner, all just by hopping on and off.

As to the cost: The streetcar will theoretically result in investment that is a multiple of the amount spent on it. Say it gets a multiple of 5:1 -- that's $500m invested in OTR, which would be huge. That's a great rate of return--and the potential return is actually much, much higher, if you check out the results of the streetcar in Portland.

My last point on the cost angle is this: Think of how much has already been spent on, for example, the stadiums. We're talking something in the neighborhood of 3/4 of a billion dollars, and that was ten years ago. At $100m, the streetcar is a relative bargain.

Biggest thing that galls me, however, is that we spend far more on highways and don't bat an eye. Here's a good example: some folks in eastern Ohio are pushing for an expansion of US 22 into a four-lane expressway. They're looking at spending $1 BILLION for 28 miles --and for a road that will in a lot of ways just be parallel to I-70. That's $35.7 million per mile. The streetcar is only $25 million per proposed mile. And you don't even want to think about how much replacing the Brent Spence bridge is giong to cost--I don't know how far that span is (1/4 mile maybe?), but they're talking about spending $3 Billion just to replace that. Hell, for that amount, you could have commuter rail for the entire Greater Cincinnati region. For my money, the streetcar looks like a bargain.

[blobfan]

Yes, the idea is people will ride the streetcar--and really, it's more designed to be ridden from OTR to Downtown.

I'm not sure I want it to be easier for people in OTR to come downtown. The demographic would have to change A LOT. Yes, I realize that's a stereotypical view of OTR residents. I believe that the majority of the residents there are simply trying to get by. But it seems to contain a large percentage of people that refuse to live by basic morals and laws of the greater community.



As to the cost: The streetcar will theoretically result in investment that is a multiple of the amount spent on it.


The key word there is "theoretically." The same argument was made with the ballparks.



Check out the results of the streetcar in Portland.


Portland to Cincinnati is an Apples to Oranges comparison. I believe Portland's streetcar is part of a larger public transit strategy that has been in development for years and is part of the core of urban planning for the area. In Cincinnati it would be 6 miles of track isolated for years if not decades to come until someone comes up with the next phase. Or it will be abandonned entirely, like our subway system.



Think of how much has already been spent on, for example, the stadiums.


I didn't vote for the stadiums. The stadiums don't begin to cover their costs. Just because we paid too much for one thing, doesn't mean we should pay a lot for something else.



Biggest thing that galls me, however, is that we spend far more on highways and don't bat an eye.


I agree we spend too much on roads and should do a better job of creating public transport. Again, this does not, in my opinion, justify a stand-alone trolly line that would cost $100M. I realize the long term plan is to make it part of a larger system but I don't see how you can start with one small piece and have only a vague idea of what might come in the future. True planning starts by looking at the big picture and implementing individual componants. That's why I voted for the transportation issue a few years back. I wasn't completely on board with the light rail thing but definitely support a revamping of our current public transportation, which is woefully inadequate and inefficient.

Unfortunately, none of your arguments are new to me. I still do not see any reason to support the streetcar plans at this time under these conditions. It's being pushed so hard, in spite of community objections, that I'm starting to wonder who's in line for kickbacks on the construction.

[jdm2000]

I'm not sure I want it to be easier for people in OTR to come downtown. The demographic would have to change A LOT. Yes, I realize that's a stereotypical view of OTR residents. I believe that the majority of the residents there are simply trying to get by. But it seems to contain a large percentage of people that refuse to live by basic morals and laws of the greater community.



I understand where you're coming from, but you probably should look at the demographics before you rely on this as an argument. Best guesses are that there are fewer than 10,000 people living in OTR right now -- which is something like 10% of the number of people who lived there at its peak. The area is already changing demographically already as well. I guess my question would be, are you saying we should wait to make any sort of connection until the area is "acceptable" to connect to? Because that sort of defeats the point, which is to revitalize the area.



The key word there is "theoretically." The same argument was made with the ballparks.


I'm going to borrow one of your points, and say that just because the ball parks don't have the economic impact some would like (and I have no information on that), doesn't mean this won't. ;) More seriously, while I would love for this to be a sure bet, very few things in life are. I guess my viewpoint is I think we will have very good returns on the streetcar, so let's go for it. But I understand if you're not convinced.




Portland to Cincinnati is an Apples to Oranges comparison. I believe Portland's streetcar is part of a larger public transit strategy that has been in development for years and is part of the core of urban planning for the area. In Cincinnati it would be 6 miles of track isolated for years if not decades to come until someone comes up with the next phase. Or it will be abandonned entirely, like our subway system.



I can't agree with this entirely. I think Portland to Cincinnati is apples to apples in a lot of ways--similar size cities, the area being served by the street car is a similar size (and was in a similar state before the streetcar), and Cincy is actually denser, population wise, than Portland. I guess the other thing to say is that, again, while it involves transit, it's really more about development. Is your argument that a streetcar will only work if you have light rail in place? Because while I may not like the contents of the plans, I have no doubt that there are long-term transit plans in place for Greater Cincinnati.

As for the part about it being "six miles of isolated track" or "abandoned", I question how you're so sure of that. We won't know if it succeeds or fails until it's in place, but I hope to see the effort made.




I didn't vote for the stadiums. The stadiums don't begin to cover their costs. Just because we paid too much for one thing, doesn't mean we should pay a lot for something else.



I'll agree to that. But I don't think this is a case of "paying too much for something else." I think it's a solid investment.




I agree we spend too much on roads and should do a better job of creating public transport. Again, this does not, in my opinion, justify a stand-alone trolly line that would cost $100M. I realize the long term plan is to make it part of a larger system but I don't see how you can start with one small piece and have only a vague idea of what might come in the future. True planning starts by looking at the big picture and implementing individual componants. That's why I voted for the transportation issue a few years back. I wasn't completely on board with the light rail thing but definitely support a revamping of our current public transportation, which is woefully inadequate and inefficient.

The streetcar is designed to complement the current long-term transportation plans in place--it's going to circulate in the urban core, while theoretical light rail running along I-75 and I-71 will serve commuters farther out in the city and in the suburbs. The streetcar has done nothing to get rid of or replace the planning that went into the proposal you voted for, or other proposed transit options, like the east-side commuter rail on the Oasis line. So I'm not totally sure what you're getting at here. And as for starting with a single piece, the voters in 2002 made it clear that they wouldn't fund a larger system that sought to do most of it at once. So if we can't do it piece by piece or all at once, how can it be done?




Unfortunately, none of your arguments are new to me. I still do not see any reason to support the streetcar plans at this time under these conditions. It's being pushed so hard, in spite of community objections, that I'm starting to wonder who's in line for kickbacks on the construction.

I understand and respect your opposition to this. I'm not quite sure, however, where the "community objections" are coming from. Most vocal opponents to the streetcar that I have seen in local media (or on the 'net) tend to be from the suburbs--and since this is going to be paid for by the city only, I'm not going to give them a lot of credit as representing the community.

But to each his own. I appreciate that you have a well-reasoned position and have clearly looked at it pretty closely, as opposed to folks who bash it in a knee-jerk reaction.

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm okay with the streetcar as long as it is part of a complete plan. The streetcar on its own will not automatically create investment. The streetcar, along with specific plans for development along the route, can be part of something huge. I'd like to see a good part of that $500m investment lined up before the streetcar construction starts.

If the city were willing to commit to an entertainment district along the lines of what the Main Street area was moving toward pre-riots, I think that would be a very important piece. 2 things that could really create something special: 1) No auto traffic. Visitors to the area could walk in or ride the streetcar. (I believe Portland's streetcar services a no auto traffic area, but I'm not certain on this). 2) An entertainment district that does not have an open container law. Think New Orleans. Give the area something not available elsewhere, and make it easy to get there and you've got a building block.

I think it could be successful, but it isn't going to be successful on its own.

[jdm2000]

I'm okay with the streetcar as long as it is part of a complete plan. The streetcar on its own will not automatically create investment. The streetcar, along with specific plans for development along the route, can be part of something huge. I'd like to see a good part of that $500m investment lined up before the streetcar construction starts.

If the city were willing to commit to an entertainment district along the lines of what the Main Street area was moving toward pre-riots, I think that would be a very important piece. 2 things that could really create something special: 1) No auto traffic. Visitors to the area could walk in or ride the streetcar. (I believe Portland's streetcar services a no auto traffic area, but I'm not certain on this). 2) An entertainment district that does not have an open container law. Think New Orleans. Give the area something not available elsewhere, and make it easy to get there and you've got a building block.

I think it could be successful, but it isn't going to be successful on its own.

Great post as always.

I, too, would like to see specific commitments re: investment. I'm not sure how specific we will get, though, but the anecdotal evidence is very good--just last week (IIRC) there was a story in Enquirer or City Beat about a group of property owners in the "brewery district" part of OTR that are really counting on the streetcar, and are getting ready to dive in investment-wise.

I really like your ideas on the open container and no auto traffic bits. It will be interesting to see, though. I think OTR's potential as an entertainment district is more along the lines of a place like the Village in NYC--a residential area with bars and entertainment options, as opposed to an entertainment-only place. Which is cool. If it keeps up, I could see 7th street (or even west 4th street) morphing into an entertainment district.

[blobfan]

I, too, would like to see specific commitments re: investment. I'm not sure how specific we will get, though, but the anecdotal evidence is very good--just last week (IIRC) there was a story in Enquirer or City Beat about a group of property owners in the "brewery district" part of OTR that are really counting on the streetcar, and are getting ready to dive in investment-wise.

Actually, that's the article that heightened my concerns about the streetcar most recently. Perhaps you missed the claims by the Freedom Center that they were counting on Banks development to have started sooner and made plans accordingly? Do you really think the fate of these businesses moving into OTR will be better? Fortunately they seem to be staying near Findlay Market, the one area there that seems to get any real business traffic.

I'm curious why you think there are grand plans for transportation in the city. All indications are that there are none and the Mayor and our Council are grasping at the streetcar like a drowning person reaching for the nearest floating object. There's no real plan for getting out of the water, just the desperation to do something, no matter how futile.

Just because funding for transportation isn't in place doesn't mean they can't come up with a general plan. From what I've heard, there's little stomach among current Council members to make one.

[jdm2000]

I guess my question would be, what sort of "city transportation plan" are you looking for? For good or for ill, transportation planning is generally done on a much broader level than the city level. The city can have its input in, say, the I-75 project ("Thru the Valley"), but it isn't the driving force on those. Transportation planning is really the purview of folks like SORTA and OKI. At this point, there's not a whole lot that the city is going to be able to plan "transportation-wise" -- Cincinnati's streets, interstates, and rail ROWs are where they are, and there can't be much done to change it. Folks like OKI do have plans in place--in fact, some might criticize and say all they do is plan.

[jdm2000]

Actually, that's the article that heightened my concerns about the streetcar most recently. Perhaps you missed the claims by the Freedom Center that they were counting on Banks development to have started sooner and made plans accordingly? Do you really think the fate of these businesses moving into OTR will be better? Fortunately they seem to be staying near Findlay Market, the one area there that seems to get any real business traffic.



I think there's a huge difference between folks building businesses in OTR and the Freedom Center people. Business owners locating in OTR are generally risking their own money, and I think that if they are investing there, they believe in OTR with or without the streetcar--though the streetcar may get them where they want to go faster.

[Kahns Krazy]

I was thrilled to see that, just over 10 years after the initial planning for the project and just over 10 days after the groundbreaking, the Cincinnati public housing authority decided to jump in and insist that 180 to 270 of the 1,800 housing units planned for the Banks be designated as public housing, or section 8 housing.

I'm sure that will be a key selling point in setting the premium pricing for the other 1,600 units.

No time like 10 years too late to bring this up. I think the city should hire Doug Rich to figure this all out.

[blobfan]

I was thrilled to see that, just over 10 years after the initial planning for the project and just over 10 days after the groundbreaking, the Cincinnati public housing authority decided to jump in and insist that 180 to 270 of the 1,800 housing units planned for the Banks be designated as public housing, or section 8 housing.


My favorite response was the person that made the distinction between section 8 and affordable housing. I can support housing for people with jobs but if we're going to provide section 8 house at 10-25% of total as suggested, why didn't we leave it as it was when they called it the Bottoms?

[jdm2000]

I like it even better that the CMHA folks are basically not masking the fact that it is because they're upset that there's Section 8 in their neighborhood, and want to spread it around to everyone else.

[Kahns Krazy]

I like this whackpod response:

Low-income housing is already made available in plenty of areas of the Queen City. The Banks should not be one of these areas. However, I would really like to see low-income housing in Kenwood, Madeira, Hyde Park and Indian Hill. I'm sure the Camargo Country Club set would welcome these families with open arms.
Candy Shannon, East Price Hill

[blobfan]

Everyone's so worried about their damned rights they keep forgetting to do right.

I'm too young to be this cynical and cranky!!

[Johnny X]

I used to bag on Cincinnati until just before I left the Queen City to move to Detroit. Detroit is terrible in every way imaginable, except the support for their local professional sports teams.

There are legitimate gripes with Cincinnati, I understand, considering some of the sprawl and the relative commutes to get groceries, etc. But in Detroit, you'll have to drive 30 minutes (maybe more, considering the construction on I-75) just to find a grocery store where the produce isn't rotten. It's also segregated worse than Cincinnati ever was or ever will be. And there's nothing aesthetic about it either, except when seeing the Chrysler Building in your rear-view.

So even though Cincinnati might be smaller and arguably have less to offer than Detroit, I'd take Cincy any day of the week. By far the best city I've ever lived in, and I had to move around quite a bit as a child.

[jdm2000]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think Cincinnati is great. I wouldn't trade living here for any other city like it (or even for NYC or Chi-town). But this kind of crap (the CMHA thing) gets old.

[Cheesehead]

This whole thing is by far one of the worst ideas to come along in quite a while. What a great way to doom the project and make it fail.

[blobfan]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I think Cincinnati is great. I wouldn't trade living here for any other city like it (or even for NYC or Chi-town). But this kind of crap (the CMHA thing) gets old.

On that, I agree. Cincinnati is often under-rated by its inhabitants, myself included. In fact, I'd go so far as to say I like Cincinnati. I like the history. I like the people, except when they vote in the same brain-dead slate of councilman. We seem to work very hard to pick people that speak before thinking.

[jdm2000]

This whole thing is by far one of the worst ideas to come along in quite a while. What a great way to doom the project and make it fail.

Don't worry about that. It's just political grandstanding--it's not going to be able to stop the project or anything like that. From what I've read in the papers and blogs, if CMHA wanted to get public housing at the banks, they would have to buy the housing at market rate and then lease it at a subsidized rate, which I can't imagine will happen. It should move along with this just being another blip--and a blip that's gotten almost an entirely negative reaction.

[Kahns Krazy]

Interesting vote on the Streetcar project yesterday. We've gone from unanimous support, to a 6-2 vote out of the finance committee, with the chair of the finance committee (and the only one I'm convinced has any real world concept of money) voting against it.

Fortunately, the project can't go anywhere until the remaining funds are committed.

I still think this can be a good project, but only with widespread buy-in. Currently, the public sentiment seems to be that it won't work. That can be self-fulfilling. If the city moves forward with this project with the mentality that "the people are stupid, we know what's best, and we're going to do it anyway", I see failure for the streetcar.

[jdm2000]

Kahns,

I normally agree with you about 100%, but I'm not with you on this one. I'd wager that Cranley has as little "real world" sense of money as anyone on the council--he's basically been a politican since he got out of law school. (Full disclosure: I say this as someone who has supported Cranley for both council and congress.) I feel a sense of reassurance that the most vocal streetcar supporter--Bortz--is also the one with probably the best business pedigree (i.e. Towne Properties).

As to the self-fulfilling prophecy aspect, I think that depends. The general public reaction at the time to the Fountain Square renovation, as I recall, was a heavy dose of "they're moving the fountain for $42 million -- what a waste of money." But the city forged ahead, and was proven right--I don't think many folks (outside of folks in the exurbs who probably never come downtown anyway) would say with a straight face that the FS rehab hasn't been well worth it and a real catalyst for revitalization downtown. I'm hoping that the streetcar soldiers on much the same.

[Kahns Krazy]

I don't know Chris Bortz personally, but I don't necessarily think that hopping from an $18k per year high school to a $50k per year college to a specially created position at Daddy's company necessarily give someone the real world exposure to how money works for the rest of us. His business pedigree may be fine, but don't forget that the Bortz family was all too happy to sell one of their closest friends down the river when the sh*t hit the fan. I sure hope Chris doesn't run the city like Neil runs Towne.

My support for Cranley's handling of finance in the position he's in comes from a meeting I watched in 2003 when Sorta wanted to bump Metro fares. Everyone else on council was ready to rubber stamp the approval. Cranley really got on their ass about what they were doing to keep their operating costs down. Sorta claimed to have eliminated 50 people. Cranley asked for their names. Sorta had to admit that they hadn't really eliminated 50 people, they had just eliminated 50 positions that they were going to add. Sorta was forced to go back to the drawing board and re-work their budget. Even the other council members were surprised at Cranley's tenacity.

Honestly, I don't watch much of the council meetings, but that one move impressed me enough to trust Cranley as chair of the finance committee. And in full disclosure, I do know John personally. We're not hanging out at the bar on Fridays, but we were at St. X. at the same time, and I talk to him when I see him.

And while it's nice to agree on a lot of things, I find the areas where people don't agree are the ones that spark interesting conversation.

[GuyFawkes38]

The only way I will get on the streetcar is if it had bullet proof windows.

[Kahns Krazy]

Oh no. How will the downtown revitalization happen without you?

[GuyFawkes38]

Oh no. How will the downtown revitalization happen without you?

That's a legitimate question.

Here's what they should do:

Build a streetcar line which goes from the banks to UC and the hospitals. Don't do a stupid loop. THIS IS THE KEY. THE PORTION WHICH GOES THROUGH OVER THE RHINE SHOULD GO UNDERGROUND WITH NO STOPS FOR SAFETY REASONS.

[jdm2000]

And there we have it. Don't let reality get in the way of your perception. Sounds like Joe Deters, consistently trying to paint the city as some kind of war zone despite inconvenient facts like the murder rate dropping 25% last year (and down something like 20-25% from that number so far this year).

Hey Guy, I'm going out to dinner at Nicola's in *gasp* Over-the-Rhine tonight. Do you have an armored car I can borrow?

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm coming around more and more on the streetcar thing simply because the majority of the people that are against it have no factual basis for their opposition. The forum section of the paper today has a sampling. One guy is convinced that city council has only approved it because all of the money invested will go to their friends. Another guy suggested that the only people that will ride the streetcars are the criminals that are all over the streets, and the only thing the streetcar will do is give them "another free ride". I find it fascinating that people actually have these opinions and take the time to write them down.

I have some huge concerns that if this project isn't well planned that it won't have the kind of return that it would need to be a successful project. I have concerns that $100 million in infrastructure money might be invested in other ways that would generate similar or better returns. However, I am not against the project.

I think Downtown needs to be better than it is today. If it isn't getting better, it's getting worse. Take a look at Detroit. We can't afford that kind of downturn in this city.

Back on the title of the thread, the Banks, I walked past the site where they're actually moving dirt around. They are digging out the remaining foundation pieces of Riverfront. There are some giant blocks of concrete down there. It's interesting to watch big projects and all of the things that go into them.

[blobfan]

I'm coming around more and more on the streetcar thing simply because the majority of the people that are against it have no factual basis for their opposition.

KK, where is the factual information supporting the streetcar? Everything I've seen so far is conjecture and estimates on returns. Remember how well those estimates on returns for the stadium investments turned out?

[XU 87]

I like this whackpod response:

Low-income housing is already made available in plenty of areas of the Queen City. The Banks should not be one of these areas. However, I would really like to see low-income housing in Kenwood, Madeira, Hyde Park and Indian Hill. I'm sure the Camargo Country Club set would welcome these families with open arms.
Candy Shannon, East Price Hill

I don't think this is a whackpod response. Plenty of people are for low income housing- just don't build it in their neighborhood. This woman apparently has subsidized housing in her neighborhood, and she probably has to deal with many of the things that come with subsidized housing- like crime and loss of property value.

[PM Thor]

Just to put this in perspective. The city is willing to raise about 100 million (through many sources) for the streetcar project.

Yet the fire department begs for just 3 million to finance desperately needed new ambulances to add to the number available (which is shockingly low right now), and the city "can't find the money".

[blobfan]

Just to put this in perspective. The city is willing to raise about 100 million (through many sources) for the streetcar project.

Yet the fire department begs for just 3 million to finance desperately needed new ambulances to add to the number available (which is shockingly low right now), and the city "can't find the money".

I'm with you Thor. I can see some merit to the streetcar project but there are so many other ways to spend the money with better returns.

[XU 87]

Where exactly are these street cars going to travel? Downtown, for the most part, is very compact. Everything in downtown, for the most part, is within a few blocks of everything else. So is someone going to take a streetcar from a restaurant on Fountain Square (5th and Vine) to Aronoff on 6th and Walnut?

[blobfan]

Where exactly are these street cars going to travel?

I think they are meant to run up Vine to the Findlay Market area and from there to Clifton. I guess the idea is that people can work downtown, shop at Findlay Market, live either downtown or in OTR and use the trolley to get around. Ideally, this will spur housing in OTR and entertainment along the trolley line. It's a noble idea but I just don't believe it's worth a $185M initial investment plus who knows how many hundreds of thousands (if not millions) per year to run and maintain.

[XU 87]

I just don't see the demand to live downtown and then shop at Findlay Market and go to Clifton. Trolleys would be nice to have but there are a lot of nice things to have. It would be nice if UD could win an NCAA game. But as we know, we can't have everything.

The interesting thing is that downtown and near downtown housing has relatively exploded in the past few years (see Eastern Avenue, St. X apts, McAlpin condos etc). So why do we need trolleys?

And how did Newport develop their Riverfront and all Cincinnati has is a big parking lot?

[XU 87]

And there we have it. Don't let reality get in the way of your perception. Sounds like Joe Deters, consistently trying to paint the city as some kind of war zone despite inconvenient facts like the murder rate dropping 25% last year (and down something like 20-25% from that number so far this year).

Hey Guy, I'm going out to dinner at Nicola's in *gasp* Over-the-Rhine tonight. Do you have an armored car I can borrow?

Certain parts of the city are very dangerous. There's no escaping that fact. And Over-the-Rhine is one of the most dangerous parts of the city. Thre's no escaping that fact either.

If the murder rate drops from very high to high, that doesn't mean the city, or at least certain parts of the city, are relatively safe.

There's a reason that the Main Street bars haven't done very well since the riots. Unfortunately, people don't feel safe down there at night.

[Juice]

Besides not being safe by Main St., it is annoying as hell to fight off 5 bums from your car to the bar. Each one asks for change and each one does not take no for an answer. I am not trying to sound like Scrooge here but its pretty annoying and it can cause some people to be nervous as well.

The lack of good parking is also a problem. I do not feel like my car is safe if I go into a bar for an extended period of time. These are the main reasons I stayed away from Main St. bar when they actually existed.

[Kahns Krazy]

I just don't see the demand to live downtown and then shop at Findlay Market and go to Clifton. Trolleys would be nice to have but there are a lot of nice things to have. It would be nice if UD could win an NCAA game. But as we know, we can't have everything.

The interesting thing is that downtown and near downtown housing has relatively exploded in the past few years (see Eastern Avenue, St. X apts, McAlpin condos etc). So why do we need trolleys?

And how did Newport develop their Riverfront and all Cincinnati has is a big parking lot?

I was just going to post an update on the Banks construction, but I hadn't seen your post here.

I think the reason you don't see the demand to live downtown is precisely because there currently isn't a reliable way to go "car-free". The demographic that is moving into urban areas is not as attracted to downtown Cincinnati as other markets that truly offer a no car option. The Streetcar is designed to provide the infrastructure around which that environment can be built.

The current 'explosion' and demand represent the early adopters for returning to downtown living. These people placed a premium on the urban lifestyle that made them willing to accept some inconveniences to live there. At this point, that market is stable. In order to draw additional people downtown - a necessity for making the Banks a success, downtown living needs to be made more attractive to a broader market. Proponents of the streetcar system argue that the streetcar will accomplish just that.

And the Newport argument again. Anytime you want to take your lunch break with me and walk through Newport, just give me a call. Assuming we don't get stuff thrown at us, you'll see the 'development' in Newport is not unlike the city in Blazing Saddles. Once you take a look behind it, it's the same old Newport.

I had a big weekend planned of the Bridge Climb, followed by an IMAX movie and a little jazz at Upstar Crow or Fat Fish Blue. Unfortunately, all of these businesses have crashed and burned. The Brass Ass is still there though, going strong, where for $1.50 you can get a can of beer (open it yourself) and for another buck you can catch something from a coke-addicted stripper and/or her mom.

[Fred Garvin]

I had a big weekend planned of the Bridge Climb, followed by an IMAX movie and a little jazz at Upstar Crow or Fat Fish Blue. Unfortunately, all of these businesses have crashed and burned. The Brass Ass is still there though, going strong, where for $1.50 you can get a can of beer (open it yourself) and for another buck you can catch something from a coke-addicted stripper and/or her mom.[/QUOTE]

Sounds great. I guess my phone was broke again.

[jdm2000]

Certain parts of the city are very dangerous. There's no escaping that fact. And Over-the-Rhine is one of the most dangerous parts of the city. Thre's no escaping that fact either.

If the murder rate drops from very high to high, that doesn't mean the city, or at least certain parts of the city, are relatively safe.

There's a reason that the Main Street bars haven't done very well since the riots. Unfortunately, people don't feel safe down there at night.

Sorry that I missed this post before. Just a couple things.

"If the murder rate drops from very high to high, that doesn't mean the city, or at least certain parts of the city, are relatively safe."

Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "very high." The problem--if it's really a problem--is that Cincinnati has actually had historically low crime rates in relation to other comparable cities. So even in the last few years, when the rates were "higher", they were really just more in line with peer cities.

"And Over the Rhine is one of the most dangerous parts of the city. There's no escaping that fact either."

Is OTR dangerous? Sure, probably like just about anywhere else if you're in the wrong situation. Is OTR (and downtown in general) some kind of war zone, like many folks and media in greater Cincinnati seem to want it to be? Not according to the City of Cincinnati's crime stats. In fact, the stats show that District 1 (downtown and surrounding) actually has the fewest reported part 1 crimes of any District in the city. http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/police/downloads/police_pdf18315.pdf

Now, I grant you that OTR had two murders from January-March this year. That's more than I'd like to see--but less than several suburbs, I'm certain.

"There's a reason that the Main Street bars haven't done very well since the riots. Unfortunately, people don't feel safe down there at night."

Could be. Or could be they were operating on an unsustainable business model and weren't going to last where they were. Could be that Newport's nightlife near the Levee undercut their location as the "it" spot to go to. Could be that those bars are now getting hammered by places that have opened up in the CBD, like Sully's, Lodge Bar, Bang, Cadillac Ranch, and whatever McFadden's turned into. Establishing an entertainment "hot spot" that keeps its status as a hot spot is not an easy thing to do; hip bars are prone to coming and going. But pointing to the bars closing on Main Street as evidence of how bad things are in OTR--when the population is on the rise, crime is declining, and there is very significant investment taking place--I'm not buying that.

[jdm2000]

KK, where is the factual information supporting the streetcar? Everything I've seen so far is conjecture and estimates on returns. Remember how well those estimates on returns for the stadium investments turned out?


Try this one. www.cincystreetcar.com

[jdm2000]

I

I think Downtown needs to be better than it is today. If it isn't getting better, it's getting worse. Take a look at Detroit. We can't afford that kind of downturn in this city.



Kahn's, this is I think the first thing I've seen from you in the last couple weeks that I can't agree with. I think Downtown is making huge progress, and is light years ahead of where it was in, say, 2004. The energy around Fountain Square and the real success of that rehab has been more than I expected. It's made a huge difference. Factor into that the consistent progress in OTR, improvements in the crime rate, and the big happenings at projects like the Banks and Queen City Square, and I think Downtown is getting better, not worse. But we do need to keep moving forward...can't let up at all.

[jdm2000]

By the way, saw some interesting stuff today. While I'm all for the streetcar, I would ultimately like to see a regional rail program in place that would provide commuter rail throughout Hamilton County (and beyond, if Warren/Butler/Clermont etc. want to be involved). The streetcar may be a first step in that direction.

Of course, voters in Hamilton County overwhelmingly rejected the light rail sales tax in 2002. Here's the interesting part:

Cost of barrel of oil, November 2002: $26
Cost of barrel of oil, now: about $125
Cost of gallon of gas, November 2002: about $1.40
Cost of gallon of gas, today: almost $4.00

At the time, the studies indicated that the light rail plan would have cost the average Hamilton County family about $68 extra per year. I don't know about you guys, but I would love to have that rail system (sixty miles of rail, a route up 74, 75, 71, and uptown through Hyde Park to Newtown, plus a horizontal connector north of the city) instead of paying $80 each time I fill up with a tank of gas.

[Stonebreaker]

The Banks should have been done years ago. This highlights the ineptitude of leadership in Cincinnati. Northern KY has all the growth, and we have two stadiums. They get the business before and after the games. It's a shame, but I've been wondering why Cincy hasn't done anything with downtown within a month of moving here 13 years ago.

[jdm2000]

Stoney, just a couple things--Kahn's is right on on the mirage that is Newport on the Levee. Look past the periphery, and you'll see that it's not all it's cracked up to be.

As to the Banks, yes, I wish that they had been done long ago. But it's finally moving in the right direction.

[Kahns Krazy]

Kahn's, this is I think the first thing I've seen from you in the last couple weeks that I can't agree with. .

I'm not opposed to anyone having a different opinion, but I think I miscommunicated my point. I, too, think that downtown is moving in the right direction. The business district is strong, with new restaurant openings in the face of soft market. The residential market is strong in the 8th street and south areas as well. What I was referring to is the north downtown/ OTR area. This area needs continued investment to capitalize on the growth downtown.

Fred, I was not actually planning a weekend tour of defunct Newport establishments. We do need to get out for a hike soon though.

[GuyFawkes38]

At the time, the studies indicated that the light rail plan would have cost the average Hamilton County family about $68 extra per year. I don't know about you guys, but I would love to have that rail system (sixty miles of rail, a route up 74, 75, 71, and uptown through Hyde Park to Newtown, plus a horizontal connector north of the city) instead of paying $80 each time I fill up with a tank of gas.


It sounds very cool. But I have trouble imagining such a transport system in Cincinnati.

Is there a precedence with a city with Cincy's low population density having such an extensive system? I can only think of Portland.

Most cities Cincy's size currently only have 1 or 2 lines (Cleveland, Baltimore, St. Louis, Charlotte...). And then there are a lot of denser and larger cities than Cincy with only 1 or 2 lines (Dallas, Atlanta, Detroit, Rome...)

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the next time Cincy outlines another transport scheme, it would be prudent to unveil a plan for only 1 line.

Plus, I think the extending the streetcar network should be the first priority.

[GuyFawkes38]

And I have to say I strongly disagree with the "our downtown must be awesome..And we need to pour investments into it..." attitude on this thread.

I like cities that sprawl outward with rich and diverse neighborhoods. When you go to Chicago to soak in the city, you don't head to the loop. You go Lincoln Park, Bucktown, Uptown, Hyde Park, etc....

I've never understood the desire by city councils to invest the vast majority of funds into downtowns, which are naturally ugly, trashy, and unlivable areas.

Decentralization is the future. Likewise, I hope funds are invested in a decentralized manner in the future.

[wkrq59]

Newport on the Levee might not be what it's cracked up to be but it and the surrounding restaurants and places to visit in Northern Kentucky sure beat the living hell out of downtown Cincinnati.
Please, I love street cars..Ride them when I go to Pittsburgh, New Orleans, but please not Cincinnati--High speed light rail connecting downtown with Tri-County, Northgate, Kenwood, Union Centre Blvd. and the entire I-75 & 71 & Cross County-275 corridors.
Please not running from Clifton to Over The Rhine. Please, please, no,no,no. By the time the streetcar rails that exist are dug up and a couple of barns rebuilt to house them as terminals, the criminal element will be the only people who ride the damn things.
REINVIGORATING THE DOWNTOWN CORE ISN'T GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE NO ONE, REPEAT NO ONE in his or her right mind will ride a street car from Clifton and "Uptown" Huh??? to Over the Rhine, unless they want to be a target for rape, assault, mugging, theft and possible murder-death-kill.
And pray tell why in God's Holy Name would anybody want to come to downtown Cincinnati after 3 p.m. except to get to Northern Kentucky?
Oh, you might want to go to the stinking U.S. Bank Arena, where you can mortgage your home for the price of admission, parking and a 3 ounce coke that's all ice for $3.50 or a soft pretzel that hard enough to use on the ice if they ever run out of pucks, or a hot dog for $5 that turns green when you bite into it; you need hot mustard (that opens your sinuses) to kill the taste.
Or how about the Great White Way on Walnut Street. Parking is a joke and it is not safe to walk the streets after 5 p.m. even in daylight saving time. Or you could go to the Museum Center, which I think closes at 4 p. Try walking around outside that Cincinnati Monument at night. Now there are always the restaurants in the hotels downtown. Again, the parking alone will bankrupt you if you can afford the gasoline to get your car going.
While the City by the Lake with its entertainment district, its ballpark, its good sized CLEAN arena next to the ball park and the entertainment district and a new football stadium and, Oh never mind.
By the time the Banks is built I'll probably be dead and gone and in no position to enjoy it even if I could afford it. But I can always go to the Freedom Center which by then will have built a new entrance but if the city fathers don't bail it out with taxpayers money, it will go bellyup before the Banks ever begins.
Oh well, there's always the Kenwood Towne Center and the new developments off Union Center Blvd and that area. And the Olive Garden has moved to a new location north of Northgate and TGI Fridays still has good burgers and Applebees has good hot French onion soup and right down the road south on Colerain is Walts, with the best damn barbequed ribs in town, better than Montgomery Inn or Burbanks or whatever. Peace, people.
But don't forget to wear your kevlar vest for the street car ride from uptown to OTR and on to downtown and back. They're hot but you'll get used to it if you wanna live.
And so it goes.:D:p

[jdm2000]

If Q's being sarcastic, that's a great post.

So I'm going to go with it being sarcastic, because I don't want to ruin my love for all things Q. :D

[jdm2000]

Newport on the Levee might not be what it's cracked up to be but it and the surrounding restaurants and places to visit in Northern Kentucky sure beat the living hell out of downtown Cincinnati.


Sorry, I couldn't let this one go. What do we have on the NOTL ledger? Claddagh, Bravo (or Brio? I always forget), Mitchell's Fish Market, Hofbrau Haus (admittedly awesome), Tropicana (or did that close?) Hooters, Don Pablos. Amy I missing anything?

Downtown:

Jeff Ruby's; Morton's; Pigall's; McCormick & Schmick; Boi na Braza; JeanRo Bistro; Nada; Via Vite; Nicholson's; Rock Bottom; and soon to be joined by Oceannaire. That's not even throwing in places like Shanghai Mama's, Margarita's, and the like.

It's not even close. It's XU v. UD.

[wkrq59]

t's not even close. It's XU v. UD.AAAAARRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHH---dayton....aaarrrrgggghhhh

Of course Q was being sarcastic.....Don't fergit ur vest:D

[Kahns Krazy]

Q writes some good stuff. This isn't it. When it comes to downtown, Q is a cranky old man.


And pray tell why in God's Holy Name would anybody want to come to downtown Cincinnati after 3 p.m. except to get to Northern Kentucky?

Bars, restaurants, museums, nightlife, hotels, sporting events, concerts, theater, free events on the square, . As I've said before, about the only thing downtown is missing is a movie theater.

Tonight, there is a Murder Mystery party at the Taft Museum. The Reds have a game. Cincinnati Shakespeare Company is performing Long Day's Journey Into Night. There is some sort of lecture series at the Aronoff titled "Isabella Rossellini: Some of Me'. Not sure that's my taste, but sounds interesting for some people. Beauty and the Beast is at the Aronoff as well. Bang nightclub is hosting a benefit for the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society. Bob Moses and the Chicago Quartet are performing at the Blue Wisp. The Patsy Cline tribute "Always Patsy Cline" is playing at the Showboat Majestic. Dottie Warner & The Wayne Shannon Trio are playing at Arnold's Bar & Grille. The Great American Trailer Park Musical which has been getting excellent reviews and has already been extended 2 weeks, is playing at Ensemble Theatre of Cincinnati. There is a freestore/foodbank hunger walk in Lytle Park. Most of the downtown bars that have live music will have music tonight, nearly all with no cover.

There are also about 50 downtown restaurants that will be open for dinner if you'd just like to grab a bite and relax. There are 3 beautiful riverfront parks to enjoy (which is 3 more than there are on the other side of the river).

[Kahns Krazy]

Is there a precedence with a city with Cincy's low population density having such an extensive system? I can only think of Portland.


The argument is that the cause and effect are inverted. The city has lost 170,000 residents over the past 50 years because the benefits of living in the suburbs have been more attractive than living in the city. Proponents of the streetcar are saying that the system will draw residents back into the city core, improving the tax base and adding valuable resources to the city.

I don't know if that's true or not, but that is the argument.

[Fred Garvin]

And I have to say I strongly disagree with the "our downtown must be awesome..And we need to pour investments into it..." attitude on this thread.


Decentralization is the future. Likewise, I hope funds are invested in a decentralized manner in the future.

Kahn's hero John Cranley loves dencentraization. At least when it comes to low-income housing. Well, except with English Woods. No way he wanted those vouchers heading over to his Price Hill/Westwood district. But hey, he once impressed Kahn's with his performance at a Sorta hearing.

[Fred Garvin]

Kahns,

I normally agree with you about 100%, but I'm not with you on this one. I'd wager that Cranley has as little "real world" sense of money as anyone on the council--he's basically been a politican since he got out of law school. (Full disclosure: I say this as someone who has supported Cranley for both council and congress.) I feel a sense of reassurance that the most vocal streetcar supporter--Bortz--is also the one with probably the best business pedigree (i.e. Towne Properties).



He went straight from Harvard Law to running for Congress. This constitutes real world experience in Kahn's World.

[Fred Garvin]

There are 3 beautiful riverfront parks to enjoy (which is 3 more than there are on the other side of the river).[/QUOTE]

Yeah, that Theodore Berry Friendship Park has got it all over Devou Park.

[GuyFawkes38]

Not knowing who John Cranley is, I looked up his biography:

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/council/pages/-3243-/

wow, kind of crazy. Perhaps he might have the intellect to challenge my opinions.

[jdm2000]

There are 3 beautiful riverfront parks to enjoy (which is 3 more than there are on the other side of the river).

Yeah, that Theodore Berry Friendship Park has got it all over Devou Park.[/QUOTE]

I love Devou, but to call that a "riverfront park"....is Eden Park on the riverfront too? I mean, I can see the river.

[Kahns Krazy]

He went straight from Harvard Law to running for Congress. This constitutes real world experience in Kahn's World.

You are correct, by which I mean you are wrong. Cranley worked for a downtown law firm and taught classes at UC law for about 3 years before running for Congress.

John lives in a townhouse he bought in Price Hill for $149,000
Chris lives in a condo Daddy's company bought in Mt. Adams worth about $550,000.

In terms of politicians who have a personal understanding of how the average Joe earns and spends money, I'm going with Cranley.

[jdm2000]

I hate to disagree with Kahn's, but he did run for Congress right away (in 2000). He was appointed to City Council sometime thereafter, and he didn't become involved with UC law until 2002 or 2003. Then, of course, ran again for Congress in 2006.