Remove Ads

Author Topic: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News  (Read 373696 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5782
    • http://www.cincinnati-transit.net
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1855 on: June 26, 2014, 09:20:24 PM »
The thing is that Rheingeist proved you could do pretty much nothing to a space and people will show up and show up in large numbers.  Obviously Taft Ale House is trying to be something different, but the exact same target demographic is going to Rheingeist.  I bet they could get away with opening something in the "raw" church and just as many people would show up and spend almost as much money.  Even if it's only half as much money, they could still theoretically make twice as much if their overhead is a fraction of what they're planning. 

Offline Cygnus

  • Bringer of Balance
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1856 on: July 01, 2014, 01:49:47 PM »
New single family home construction now underway at 1428 Elm St.

Brick work began yesterday:
"It's just fate, as usual, keeping it's bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton

Online neilworms

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1857 on: July 09, 2014, 11:57:37 AM »
Just saw this through OTR matters:

http://otrmatters.com/pendleton-street-townhomes/

Looks like there is going to be some new construction along with a renovation of an old townhome.  I know some architects will probably disagree with me, but this is way above average infill for the area, and they look pretty nice, keeping in mind that the first photo is of the backs which don't look as nice.

Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1858 on: July 09, 2014, 01:04:32 PM »
I personally think it's silly to build something new to look old so in that regard I really don't like these, but I get why they're doing what they're doing and respect that decision. I just hope the material choices are high quality. If they end up looking like the garbage infill on Walnut that was trying to look old it'll be a huge opportunity lost.

It's good to see some new construction though with street-fronting buildings and alley-accessed garages.

Online ryanlammi

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Wololoo
    • Flickr Profile
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1859 on: July 10, 2014, 10:12:33 AM »
I personally think it's silly to build something new to look old so in that regard I really don't like these, but I get why they're doing what they're doing and respect that decision. I just hope the material choices are high quality. If they end up looking like the garbage infill on Walnut that was trying to look old it'll be a huge opportunity lost.

It's good to see some new construction though with street-fronting buildings and alley-accessed garages.

I don't feel like this new development is trying to pretend to be old. It's just fitting in with the surrounding buildings. It's using brick (good), regular windows (good), appropriate scale, and street-facing.

There are some very stark differences, though: It appears the windows are taller than the surrounding buildings (allowing more light into the buildings). The buildings have a slight setback at portions where windows face perpendicular to the street/sidewalk. Small balconies will exist in the front.

I personally think this is the best infill for a neighborhood like OTR/Pendleton. It doesn't seem to be pretending to be anything it isn't (like the affordable housing on Walnut). And it isn't using new building materials that distract from the historic nature of the neighborhood (look at Walnut and Mercer). As long as the materials look good after construction I am ecstatic about this development. This is everything new construction in this neighborhood should be. Different, yet similar.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 10:16:02 AM by ryanlammi »
"We both would have looked silly if he came in, got out and came back in.

- Tim Burke, Hamilton County Democratic Party Chairman

Flickr Profile

Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1860 on: July 10, 2014, 10:20:17 AM »
I guess that's what I'm saying though. Obviously there are big differences, but overall it's not new looking. I'd much rather see modern materials, modern massing, modern windows, etc. in a new building than just taking what exists in the surrounding context and modifying it to be somewhat new. For example, I feel like the John Senhauser modern rowhouses up in Mt. Adams compliment and contrast the old homes significantly better than the new-old ones that exist up there, even if they are built really well with high quality materials.

Online ryanlammi

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Wololoo
    • Flickr Profile
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1861 on: July 10, 2014, 10:25:07 AM »
Do you have examples of which buildings in Mt. Adams you're talking about? Or addresses even so I can just look at them on Google Maps? I'm curious to see what they look like.
"We both would have looked silly if he came in, got out and came back in.

- Tim Burke, Hamilton County Democratic Party Chairman

Flickr Profile

Online IAGuy39

  • 367'-PNC Bank
  • **
  • Posts: 97
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1862 on: July 10, 2014, 10:52:27 AM »
Personally, I really like the infill apartment building on Walnut and I believe Mercer?  Travis Estall had a photograph on instagram of it the other day but I am not entirely sure of the exact address (I would link but maybe Travis would want to)?

Anyways, I think it looks really nice and compliments the other buildings around it nicely.  Once the neighborhood continues to develop it will blend in seamlessly, in my opinion.


Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1863 on: July 10, 2014, 11:39:55 AM »
I'm not sure the exact addresses, but there are several on Fort View Place that are really well done and fit well with their surroundings. Then there are the three townhomes on Monestary and Oregon which, when (if?) the other six are ever built will be a nice modern row. The Palisades fits its surroundings well but it's also pretty disconnected from the rest of Mt. Adams so I'm not sure I'd include that in my list.

I'm not sure who designed them, but there are also all those new ones on Baum Street which introduce some interesting new materials to Mt. Adams which is nice and their massing and scale fit nicely within the context.

1064 Celestial is a decent example of a larger infill house that's modern while still feeling appropriate. I don't like they painted it yellow (it was originally white) and the garage is a little more snouty than I'd like, but it's a good example.

http://www.senhauserarchitects.com/MonasteryResidence.html

I'm interested in seeing how that one turns out. I think it'll be a good example of a large-scale infill project in a location that is more traditional. It has a modern neighbor that's a poor example of this same type of project so it'll be good to see the contrast.

There's a new, massive house at the very end of Hatch Street before it turns into the Cloisters apartment complex. I personally love it and its scale seems to work well despite being a humongous house. And its garage doesn't face the street which is awesome. But its material selection is modern and part of why I like how much it contrasts the older homes while not being so wild to be offensive.

Offline ProkNo5

  • Living and Loving Milwaukee
  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Posts: 1762
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1864 on: July 10, 2014, 11:59:02 AM »
Do you have examples of which buildings in Mt. Adams you're talking about? Or addresses even so I can just look at them on Google Maps? I'm curious to see what they look like.

I generally agree that faux historic is a bad idea, but contemporary can be even worse sometimes.  I absolutely despise 978 Hatch St: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.109172,-84.495713,3a,75y,343.23h,86.58t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGlzottZRjajm5dpyzOA-7w!2e0

I'm not a big fan of anything happening in the 1200 block of Ida either: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.110622,-84.498976,3a,75y,296.07h,94.81t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snTLHWvJYI80ILbzLsipXCA!2e0

At the same time, this faux historic building is beautiful and the centerpoint of the neighborhood: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.107726,-84.49771,3a,75y,335.55h,95.49t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sH-bGpBlgUG1y1PLlYbp5pg!2e0


I think the SCALE and MASSING are what matter most.  Even though Mt Adams has its fair share of cringe-worthy infill, the neighborhood still feels intimate and historic.  Corner buildings are BY FAR the most important buildings in maintaining that character.  So far, I'm elated with the way Trinity Flats and 14th and Vine turned out.  One Mercer...I'll repeat, scale and massing.  Beyond the corner buildings, I'm all for any development as long as they maintain veritcality in the neighborhood.
Here's to Cincinnati, The Queen of the West,
A dirty old city, but still nobly blest.
For it's here that fine arts with the frivolous twine,
A veritable Deutschland just Over the Rhine.

Offline jjakucyk

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1402
    • Cincinnati Traction History
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1865 on: July 10, 2014, 12:04:07 PM »
Why are bricks and double-hung windows automatically not modern though?  It's like the argument that streetcars are old technology while automobiles are modern, but there you're comparing 120 year old technology with 110 year old technology.  Big whoop. 

Even so, brick and more ancient materials like stone are still hallmarks of modernist designs.  Just because they can be made cheaper on an assembly line into thin veneers or other complex shapes doesn't make them inherently better or more true to some aesthetic ideal.  Glass and metal (whether steel, aluminum, or titanium) have been around for nearly a century now too.  If you want to really be cutting edge then you should probably be looking at carbon fiber construction, or maybe some sort of 3D printed structure.  Otherwise you're really just setting arbitrary boundaries for what's "modern enough to be ok" versus not.  If your goal is to always be on the cutting edge and to constantly reinvent the wheel, then you can never learn from and adapt what works best for the conditions at hand, and that just makes buildings more expensive and less durable. 

I guess the point is that architecture is not 100% pure art, it's a practical art that has to be grounded in a number of hard rules.  So for the most part just about everything that can be done has been done already somewhere else.  Ergo, every design is going to be derivative of something that came before it.  So if a contemporary glass and steel box is derivative of a 1950s glass and steel box, is that really any more legitimate than a contemporary brick row house derivative of an 1880s brick row house?  I would say no, not inherently.  The trick is in the execution.  Because the rules of historical architecture are much better known (if implicitly rather than explicitly), poor execution of modern examples are much easier to spot.  Since there basically are no rules for modern design styles, it's much easier to just say "oh that's how it's supposed to be!" 

Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1866 on: July 10, 2014, 12:07:36 PM »
^^Though I disagree with your assessment of the faux historic building in Mt. Adams you refer to as beautiful since I see that as one of the worst abominations in the entire city in terms of how it feels (though its ground level, I'll admit, does a good job of engaging the street which is obviously critical) I'll agree that when done super well it's not always bad. In fact that's most of what I do at my job and I really enjoy it. But that's mostly because I really appreciate the level of detail and craft that goes into our projects regardless of style. But that requires a lot of money in order to make work which is why, as a whole, faux historic buildings usually turn out poorly. Most people aren't willing to actually invest the capital necessary to make something new actually match the quality of old.

^My wording was poor before when I said "materials." That term was far too loose to actually get the meaning I meant across. I have no problems with the physical materials being, say brick, but would prefer they use them in a way that isn't trying to mimic the way they're used in old construction. A good example of using brick but in a modern way nearby to OTR is on Steger Student Life Center's columns. The brick only wraps two of the sides of the columns as to expose the actual structure, concrete, beneath. The bricks aren't structural masonry and are openly showing that they aren't. I like that. These rowhomes, with only very slight modifications, could still fit into their surroundings well but show through the way materials are used that they aren't the same as their context.
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 12:11:56 PM by jmicha »

Online thebillshark

  • 367'-PNC Bank
  • **
  • Posts: 56
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1867 on: July 10, 2014, 12:13:11 PM »
I'm definitely not an architect, but in general new construction made to look historic doesn't bother me at all, especially as urban infill. 

Are there any modern companies or craftsmen that can mimic the elaborate Italianate cornices of the olden days?  It seems like when they do build faux historic this part is usually left blank or there are just a few plain features added that seem to suggest a cornice. 
« Last Edit: July 10, 2014, 12:13:46 PM by thebillshark »

Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1868 on: July 10, 2014, 12:37:35 PM »
^Absolutely, but it's extremely expensive. Which is the problem. Because the end result is almost always what you describe. Either a blank spot or really awful, plain features trying to suggest a cornice. And at that point, why bother?

Offline jmecklenborg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5782
    • http://www.cincinnati-transit.net
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1869 on: July 10, 2014, 01:06:07 PM »
In Saving Private Ryan they blow up a cardboard French town with historically correct proportions.  With most new buildings built in a historic style, they get the proportions completely wrong.  Why can Hollywood set designers hit it spot-on but architects can't even come close? 

Online taestell

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Posts: 1736
    • UrbanCincy
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1870 on: July 10, 2014, 01:08:55 PM »
Personally, I really like the infill apartment building on Walnut and I believe Mercer?  Travis Estall had a photograph on instagram of it the other day but I am not entirely sure of the exact address (I would link but maybe Travis would want to)?

Anyways, I think it looks really nice and compliments the other buildings around it nicely.  Once the neighborhood continues to develop it will blend in seamlessly, in my opinion.




Here's the building at Mercer and Walnut:



While it doesn't try to emulate the surrounding buildings (which is good), I think the architecture is kind of "meh" and is pretty much the same as USquare/The Banks/The Gantry. I actually prefer the new building at Mercer and Vine, which I think succeeds by using so much glass and not having a "patchwork" effect that is common on so much of this CR-style architecture.

Online ryanlammi

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1414
  • Wololoo
    • Flickr Profile
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1871 on: July 10, 2014, 01:11:00 PM »
Those windows are so ugly... That's the kind of stuff I hate
"We both would have looked silly if he came in, got out and came back in.

- Tim Burke, Hamilton County Democratic Party Chairman

Flickr Profile

Offline jmicha

  • 629'-Rhodes State Tower
  • *****
  • Posts: 662
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1872 on: July 10, 2014, 01:12:44 PM »
In Saving Private Ryan they blow up a cardboard French town with historically correct proportions.  With most new buildings built in a historic style, they get the proportions completely wrong.  Why can Hollywood set designers hit it spot-on but architects can't even come close? 

Because recreating an old building or buildings when you have no worries about anything beyond a facade allows you to do whatever you want. If those same people were asked to design a functioning building everything would more than likely go to crap during the design and revision process.

Offline jmecklenborg

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 5782
    • http://www.cincinnati-transit.net
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1873 on: July 10, 2014, 01:24:08 PM »
In Saving Private Ryan they blow up a cardboard French town with historically correct proportions.  With most new buildings built in a historic style, they get the proportions completely wrong.  Why can Hollywood set designers hit it spot-on but architects can't even come close? 

Because recreating an old building or buildings when you have no worries about anything beyond a facade allows you to do whatever you want. If those same people were asked to design a functioning building everything would more than likely go to crap during the design and revision process.

Just copy what works.  There are innumerable things going on behind similar facades.  What's going on inside doesn't matter to the streetscape.  The streetscape is a shared concerned.  Average buildings located near outstanding buildings are elevated in value by their proximity.  Outstanding buildings surrounded by crap are brought down.  When something swings for the fences and misses and falls over (i.e. the Vontz Center) it just pisses people off and undermines the credibility of whoever is associated with it. 

Online IAGuy39

  • 367'-PNC Bank
  • **
  • Posts: 97
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1874 on: July 11, 2014, 09:23:11 AM »
Personally, I really like the infill apartment building on Walnut and I believe Mercer?  Travis Estall had a photograph on instagram of it the other day but I am not entirely sure of the exact address (I would link but maybe Travis would want to)?

Anyways, I think it looks really nice and compliments the other buildings around it nicely.  Once the neighborhood continues to develop it will blend in seamlessly, in my opinion.





Here's the building at Mercer and Walnut:



While it doesn't try to emulate the surrounding buildings (which is good), I think the architecture is kind of "meh" and is pretty much the same as USquare/The Banks/The Gantry. I actually prefer the new building at Mercer and Vine, which I think succeeds by using so much glass and not having a "patchwork" effect that is common on so much of this CR-style architecture.

I guess more than anything, I like the "rust color" of the building.  Maybe not so much the actual design, but I think the color is neat and overall scale is good.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 09:23:50 AM by IAGuy39 »

Offline Jimmy_James

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Posts: 1822
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1875 on: July 11, 2014, 09:53:02 AM »
I generally agree that faux historic is a bad idea, but contemporary can be even worse sometimes.  I absolutely despise 978 Hatch St: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.109172,-84.495713,3a,75y,343.23h,86.58t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGlzottZRjajm5dpyzOA-7w!2e0

This is one of my least favorite buildings in Mt Adams, as well.  There's a beautiful 1890-1900 era house in there somewhere, just waiting for someone to dismantle the hideous "renovation" that was performed decades ago.
« Last Edit: July 11, 2014, 09:53:20 AM by Jimmy_James »
"It is not a trolley."  -Milton Dohoney, Cincinnati City Manager

Online neilworms

  • 574'-Carew Tower
  • ****
  • Posts: 447
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1876 on: July 11, 2014, 11:02:08 AM »
Quote
While it doesn't try to emulate the surrounding buildings (which is good), I think the architecture is kind of "meh" and is pretty much the same as USquare/The Banks/The Gantry. I actually prefer the new building at Mercer and Vine, which I think succeeds by using so much glass and not having a "patchwork" effect that is common on so much of this CR-style architecture.

I'm not a fan either, but it is a step above those other buildings.  I think the biggest problem here is the awkward windows.

Offline jjakucyk

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1402
    • Cincinnati Traction History
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1877 on: July 11, 2014, 11:58:24 AM »
I generally agree that faux historic is a bad idea, but contemporary can be even worse sometimes.  I absolutely despise 978 Hatch St: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.109172,-84.495713,3a,75y,343.23h,86.58t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sGlzottZRjajm5dpyzOA-7w!2e0

This is one of my least favorite buildings in Mt Adams, as well.  There's a beautiful 1890-1900 era house in there somewhere, just waiting for someone to dismantle the hideous "renovation" that was performed decades ago.

That's a project of David Niland.  It has some nice spaces inside near the back where the site drops off and the first floor ends up a whole story above grade.  Being a Niland project it's white white white and more white, which gets tiring after a while.  He said that leaving the old cornice on the front was "tongue-in-cheek gesture" to the original house.  To me it's a fuck-you to the original house and to the street.  Either embrace the original and work with it, or get rid of it altogether.  In this case it just doesn't work.  The overall materiality and detailing on the exterior is also not good, which is typical of his work.  Because of that Niland's houses need constant repainting, and they still end up streaky and grungy after a short time.  What's disappointing is that the overall design (ignoring the cornice) almost works with the appropriate verticality of the building and site.  You can see it on the side, in the original 2nd story window, and even in that chimney-like whoop-de-do on the far right, but the proportions of that boxout addition in the front are all wrong and ruin it. 

Offline OCtoCincy

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1878 on: July 11, 2014, 03:21:36 PM »
The announced budget of $8 million was absolutely insane.

The renovation of the church at 12th & Elm, to be a music venue/wedding venue is $4.5 million.  I've been told the interior is in pretty decent shape, unlike 15th & race which was bare walls.

Offline OCtoCincy

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1879 on: July 11, 2014, 03:24:59 PM »
New single family home construction now underway at 1428 Elm St.

Brick work began yesterday:

This building looks amazing in terms of its quality of the brick and its accuracy in design and scale.  Honestly, if you were just riding the streetcar up elm and glanced over you could think it was historic at first.  Also, I've been told a nearly identical building will be placed immediately to the south.  Two massive new single families. Very interesting. 

Offline Cygnus

  • Bringer of Balance
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1687
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1880 on: July 12, 2014, 02:17:51 AM »
Excellent! I was hoping the vacant lot next door would be developed.
"It's just fate, as usual, keeping it's bargain and screwing us in the fine print..." - John Crichton

Offline OCtoCincy

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1300
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1881 on: July 14, 2014, 12:39:57 PM »
Next door is actually two vacant lots.  One 3CDC got control of and that will be the next building (immediately adjacent).  The third lot (adjacent to the next southern most building), is tied up in some bankruptcy court and so, while they are using it for staging, no one owns it yet.  Potentially, it could become a third home at some time in the future.

Offline Jimmy_James

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Posts: 1822
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1882 on: July 14, 2014, 01:05:29 PM »
... Being a Niland project it's white white white and more white, which gets tiring after a while.  He said that leaving the old cornice on the front was "tongue-in-cheek gesture" to the original house.  To me it's a fuck-you to the original house and to the street.  Either embrace the original and work with it, or get rid of it altogether.  ...

Wait... was this done recently?  I always assumed that some idiot did this back in the 60s.  Totally agree with you about it being an F-U to the structure and the whole neighborhood.  (Sorry for being off topic in an OTR thread.)
"It is not a trolley."  -Milton Dohoney, Cincinnati City Manager

Offline jjakucyk

  • 947'-Key Tower
  • ********
  • Posts: 1402
    • Cincinnati Traction History
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1883 on: July 14, 2014, 01:17:49 PM »
^ I'm not sure when he did it, but it could very well have been in the 60s, though I'd guess more like the 70s or 80s. 

Online taestell

  • 1450'-Willis Tower
  • *********
  • Posts: 1736
    • UrbanCincy
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1884 on: July 18, 2014, 12:21:01 PM »
Construction kicks off for Taft's Ale House in OTR

Over-the-Rhine's rich brewing history marks another milestone Friday as construction begins on Taft's Ale House transforming an abandoned, historic church building and recalling a famous family's past.

The new three-level brewpub will be housed in the old St. Paul's German Evangelical Protestant Church at 1429 Race St. and include a brewery, three bars and full-service restaurant seating 300.

An official groundbreaking is at 11 a.m. today. It's expected to open this fall.

Cont

July 9, 2014:

Offline thomasbw

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 2762
    • www.cincystreetcar.tumblr.com

Online IAGuy39

  • 367'-PNC Bank
  • **
  • Posts: 97
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1886 on: July 18, 2014, 01:40:42 PM »
I don't think this has been posted:

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/gentrification-cities-ranked-recession-post-boom

And the actual study:

http://www.clevelandfed.org/research/trends/2014/0714/01regeco.cfm

"Another interesting case is Cincinnati, which barely changed in income ranking from 2000 to 2007 but has increased at a pace similar to Denver or Washington during the 2007 to 2010 period."
« Last Edit: July 18, 2014, 01:41:11 PM by IAGuy39 »

Offline natininja

  • 2717'-Burj Khalifa
  • **********
  • Posts: 4958
Re: Cincinnati: Over-the-Rhine: Development and News
« Reply #1887 on: July 18, 2014, 02:36:03 PM »
^ That study is very interesting. Development in OTR probably couldn't explain Cincinnati's numbers, as it examined how the census tracts of the city compare with the census tracts of the metro. I doubt a shift in the couple tracts that make up OTR could have such a big effect. So what's going on here? I suspect the suburbs are getting poorer. But it seems like other city neighborhoods must be getting wealthier, too.

Quote
We selected a set of 59 large cities, all of which had a population above 250,000 in the year 2000 and the largest population of their respective metropolitan area (many metro areas include more than one city). Then we ranked the census tracts of each metropolitan area by the average income of residents in the tracts. The rankings are percentiles, running from 1 to 100. Finally, we took the mean of these rankings for the tracts that are located in the largest city of the metropolitan area (referred to as the principal city in the charts below). This mean gives a sense of where the tracts of the largest city as a whole fall in the income distribution of the metropolitan area.
CINCINNATI: European charm at Midwest prices!