Tag: planning

Categories
News

Be a part of the 2009 YPKC

In 2006 Mayor Mark Mallory launched the Mayor’s Young Professional Kitchen Cabinet (YPKC) – the first of its kind anywhere. The goal was to tap into the minds of those young people that so many cities are trying to both retain and attract.

Each year one hundred young professionals are tapped from all over the tri-state to volunteer their efforts to help make the Cincinnati region a more welcoming place for young people. The young professionals work on a variety of committees with different focuses. They work within their various committees and then push forth their ideas. If those ideas gain approval from the YPKC as a whole, then they are then directed to the Mayor’s office.

The YPKC is a great opportunity to get involved especially if you’re one of those many people who have had that brilliant idea come to you in the middle of the night and think, “boy it would be nice if I had the opportunity to talk to the Mayor about this.” Well you can.

You can apply now to be a member of the 2009 YPKC. I was fortunate enough to be a part of the 2008 YPKC as a member of the Transportation Committee. Due to travel plans, a spring graduation and other time constraints I will not be able to once again apply. I do strongly encourage everyone else who is interested to do before the December 3rd deadline (sorry for the late notice).

Categories
News

Planning for buildings, or planning for people?

This question is the premise of my senior thesis. I am asking the question of whether our current planning techniques are simply planning for the built environment and not necessarily for the people who inhabit that built environment.

This was never a problem until more recent times as places were built around people and the activities they perform. We are now building our environment to fit a financial model, corporate goal, or a well-intended comprehensive plan if we are so lucky. But even in the best example things like land use patterns seem to regulate on a non-living level. I tend to think we should be planning and regulating with the living in mind.

When we build subdivisions and neighborhoods is what we’re trying to set out to accomplish building setbacks, lot sizes and building heights? Or is what we’re really trying to accomplish a matter of livability and sense of place?

Casual interactions between people buying food from street vendor

It seems to be that different types of uses generate different types of activities (i.e. coffee shop vs. post office), and that different densities generate different levels of activities (i.e. downtown vs. suburban track housing). So I ask the question, should we be planning based on the premise of human interaction and activity instead of land use or form?

If a neighborhood wants to be quieter than a downtown then can’t we plan for lower densities so that lower levels of activities occur? If we want a variety of interactions to occur from an intimate conversation to a casual head nod should we actually be planning for a variety of the uses that promote such interactions?

People tend to follow the see and be seen theology where they like to see others while they also desire to be seen by others when out in public

The reason I ask is because as well as the planning process is thought out, it is as equally ill-delivered. People in the suburbs want a sense of place and a sense of belonging just as much as someone who lives in a brick walk-up. We need to start planning in a way that creates such an environment for the people living in our cities and towns, and not just hoping that things adjust to the way things are going now.

Categories
News

Cincinnati Mills

Seemingly doomed from its start, Forest Fair Mall was completed in stages from 1988 to 1989, and featured nearly 200 stores and four anchors. Located in northwest Cincinnati, it was one of the state’s largest malls, and most impressive. That was one of its only positive highlights, however. The shopping center was completed for $50 million over budget and left the owner saddled with debt.

Not surprisingly, the builder, L.J. Hooker, declared bankruptcy only months after the complex was completed. In the years ahead, the mall was bought and sold, positioned and repositioned, and remodeled and shuttered. It was a high-end regional mall, and outlet center, and a retail and entertainment complex, although it it neither of those descriptors today. Today, it is known simply as Cincinnati Mills.

The mall struggles despite having several some successful outlots and several thriving stores, including Bass Pro Shops. For example, one of its last tenants in the eastern wing, Guitar Center, is departing. This leaves only two minor shops to fend for themselves in the most remote location of the shopping center, and it is doubtful that they will remain there for much longer.

What does the future hold for Cincinnati Mills? Not so much. It features two major tenants that are departing: Guitar Center and Steve and Berry’s, and one entire wing that will essentially become vacant. Major redevelopment is needed at this site, although with the ever struggling economy, this may prove to be a bit of a challenge.

For more information, including a historical overview and additional photographs, check out Cincinnati Mills at Abandoned.

Categories
News

Streetcar Fun

Mt. Adams Incline in the distance as viewed from 4th & Vine in the 1920’s
Streetcar promotion

“Observation Cars” offered scenic rides around the Queen City for a mere 25 cents during the Summer months.
“Highwater Cars” were developed in response to several large floods. These enabled the transportation of people who were in flood-stricken areas of the city.
Fountain Square around 1925
Eden Park entrance in 1905. After stability concerns this streetcar route was moved to Gilbert Avenue, with the bridge later removed.
Downtown streetcar loop plan connecting with several of the nearby suburbs. It’s funny how history repeats itself.

If you’ve enjoyed these photos, feel free to browse through the rest of the photos I’ve uploaded from the late 19th and early-mid 20th Centuries. You can view the full Photobucket album here, or you can choose to check out the annotated photo thread I’ve posted on UrbanOhio.

Categories
News Politics Transportation

Regional SORTA agreement reached

At at 10am meeting this morning City and County leaders announced an agreement over an expanded transit authority. Currently the Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority (SORTA), which operates Metro, is bounded by Hamilton County’s boundaries.

This agreement will for the first time extend their jurisdiction beyond Hamilton County and into Butler, Warren and Clermont Counties. This sets the course for expanded transit service into those surrounding areas underneath one unified authority.

This reorganization, of SORTA, has long been an issue with City Council member John Cranley, County Commissioner Todd Portune and has been championed by Mayor Mark Mallory. These three along with SORTA Board president Melody Sawyer Richardson addressed the media at this morning session.

The reorganized SORTA will now be known as the Greater Cincinnati Regional Transit Authority, and will have a 13 member board made up of 7 members appointed by the City of Cincinnati and the remaining six from Hamilton County. As of yet, the Business Courier has reported that no other elected officials from surrounding counties have committed to participate in the new regional system.

Of those 6 County appointees, three will be selected “with input” from Butler, Warren and Clermont Counties. If those counties decide to formally join the new authority they would then be able to directly appoint board members. The majority control is up for grabs with the City of Cincinnati maintaining that majority for now. If another county or city decides to contribute more than 50% of the authority’s budget then they will gain majority control.

The catch here is that those contributions can be measured either through the entities direct contribution or by measuring the total fare revenues paid by that entities constituents. It could also be determined on a per-capita basis of the entities share of their state and federal transit dollars allocated to the Greater Cincinnati Regional Transit Authority.