Development News (Cincinnati, Loveland, Brooklyn: commuter, sunny, pickup)

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by TomJones123

New York is just New York. In all the sophistication you will usually find a whole lot of glaring ignorance. Really, you find it anywhere. How many misconceptions could we cover regarding life in NYC from people who have never lived there?

I only used NYC as an example because wealthy people there tend to be extremely wealthy to well to do people in Cincinnati. Yet, many of those people use the subway. My entire point was the idea that mass transit is for the poor, and people that are well off, or better off, flaunt their status through automobile ownership.

Apparently, that is a more popular point of view on these forum boards than I thought.

Ignorance abounds everywhere. Hell, some people in KC thought I was a New Yorker when I first moved there. I don't have a NYC accent. I don't have the classic New England accent found in many areas of that region either.

Not every person of status drives an expensive car. Many New Englanders shun ostentation. Father's of a couple of my friends (while living in the Hartford area) drove ordinary cars like a Chevy and Ford Escort to work. One of those guys was the CEO of Exxon for many years in the 60's and 70's and the other was the Corporate Comptroller for the AETNA Insurance company. The guy from Exxon would drive to the train station in Waterbury and catch the train to Manhattan every day and then return home in the same manner. 120 mile commute each way, every day! Rail could make that possible in Ohio if the cities were tied in from Cleveland to Columbus to Dayton and Cincinnati.

[neilworms2]

I only used NYC as an example because wealthy people there tend to be extremely wealthy to well to do people in Cincinnati. Yet, many of those people use the subway. My entire point was the idea that mass transit is for the poor, and people that are well off, or better off, flaunt their status through automobile ownership.

Apparently, that is a more popular point of view on these forum boards than I thought.

I completely support your view on this regarding transit, just don't blanket the entire Midwest in one statement . Its partially why I posted the photos of Rham Emanuel riding the Chicago L to work. Which also btw negates the comment someone else made earlier about people needing cars if they have guards, Emanuel has guards, but he prefers for them to be hidden in the mass of people on the train, does make him at least seem on the surface a bit more down to earth, no?

Stigma will go down also as urban parts of the city gentrify and faster buses are implimented. For an intercity example look at Megabus vs Greyhound.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by neilworms2

just don't blanket the entire Midwest in one statement .

I would say that Chicago is the exception. Other exceptions I am aware of are Cleveland and Saint Louis. But overall, what I stated is the predominant attitude in the mid-west. There are likely other exceptions, but I would say it's the norm out here. And to be clear there were three things I mentioned relating to Brill's point of view in the statement he made.

- midwest
- redneck
- automobile centered

Originally Posted by kjbrill

You are definitely right. Wealthy people in the US are not going to use rapid transit, anymore then they will buy expensive condos in OTR which lack parking facilities for their expensive cars. It is the simple equation of the Haves and Haves Not. But see that equation has driven the world's economy for several decades, maybe a couple of centuries now. If you feel you can turn it into something more attuned to the common good - GOOD LUCK!

My point is that wealthy people do use rapid transit, and do so in the US. But they do so in more cosmopolitan cities such as Boston, Philly, Chicago, and NYC. Relating mass transit to haves and have nots is classism, and likely a few other isms as well.


And in all of this I am now an east coast snob..

Anyway, I think you guys have crafted a strawman to attack. So I pointed out an uncomfortable fact that the mid-west tends to be more backwards compared to other more progressive areas of the country. It's both part of it's charm, and something that holds it back. Discuss that and not east coast snobbery. If any of you actually knew me you would find there is nothing snobbish about me at all.

[natininja]

I could go on and on about NYC snobbery, which is mostly an expression of provincialism. (My bet is WILWRadio hasn't experienced it so much because he is from an area that actually exists as a normal place in NYers' worlds, due to proximity.)

Instead of going on about that, I'll post something about...get this...Cincinnati Development:

Three more downtown buildings to house apartments

A Columbus developer is converting three historic buildings on 7th Street into apartments.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by natininja

Instead of going on about that, I'll post something about...get this...Cincinnati Development:

Three more downtown buildings to house apartments

A Columbus developer is converting three historic buildings on 7th Street into apartments.

Yes, please get us back on track. And that's really cool. And being right across from Shillito Place Lofts it should def. kick up the vibrancy in the immediate area.

[American Luxury]

Originally Posted by natininja

^ It's relevant. Your argument would work if people were proposing a massive underground subway system for Cincinnati, but no one is proposing that.

People do not have to use mass transit in NYC. Have you seen how many cars are on the road? Granted, if everyone drove, it wouldn't work. But as things are it's a possibility. I've driven in NYC a lot of times -- totally doable, especially if you're familiar with the street network.

The mass transit systems proposed for Cincinnati are for a Cincinnati-sized city. Comparisons are relevant.

I never said mass transit can't work. I said NYC is an irrelevant comparison, which it is. You even just admitted that if everyone drove, it wouldn't work.

[WILWRadio]

Actually people in NYC really do have to rely upon mass transit to get around. No places to park. And those that are available usually cost an arm and another part of my anatomy that I'd dearly love to keep intact.

Cincinnati does not have a parking problem from what I've seen. Even downtown seems to have a fair number of spaces available. If that changes, then perhaps you will see more willingness from area people to use mass transit.

Does the city of Cincinnati require that a certain number of parking spaces be included in the larger office developments in some areas of the city? Some cities do have parking space requirements if it means adding a lot of new cars into a given business district.

[motorman]

^ Unlike much of the meandering recent discussion, Metro*Plus and the 7th-St. apts. fall under "Cincinnati Development," and a lot can be said about both. Right now I've feel strongly about the growing enthusiasm for our new bus service and what I feel Metro must insist be this route's primary purpose in order to distinguish it from other routes.

Metro*Plus isn't just an assemblage of modern, unique-looking coaches, but primarily a quick connector between Cincinnati's two major employment centers of downtown and the UC/hospital district combined with a rapid ride all the way out to Kenwood and its businesses (and not having to rely on I-71, like the AM/PM express buses).

Yes, everyone's welcome to ride it, but passengers simply must understand and accept that it's a highly limited-stop bus--and both the company and its drivers must insist that it remain so. (absolutely no exceptions for those riders who want to turn Metro*Plus into just a revamped #4/#51--which many of them have sadly discovered it's not)

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by American Luxury

I never said mass transit can't work. I said NYC is an irrelevant comparison, which it is. You even just admitted that if everyone drove, it wouldn't work.

Here read what I said again.

Originally Posted by TomJones123

Cincinnati would do well to take a page from NYC when it comes to transit. If nothing can be learned city to city between Cincinnati and NYC then why have educators in NYC chosen Cincinnati as a model for public schools? The idea that NYC has more people, therefore, nothing can be learned between the two cities doesn't hold water. Obviously, anything learned between any two cities would require adaptation to meet the needs of that specific city.

Why would NYC condescend to stick it's nose into what has worked well at Oyler School in Lower Price Hill if NYC and Cincy are such an irrelevant comparison?

Oh, wait, silly me. That only works when it's schools, not transit. Now that makes sense.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

Actually people in NYC really do have to rely upon mass transit to get around. No places to park. And those that are available usually cost an arm and another part of my anatomy that I'd dearly love to keep intact.

As much as you and I usually agree, you are not even close on this one. As an example, in Manhattan Avenues run north and south and streets east and west. On most any street you can park for free if you follow the signage. A lot of people drive in NYC. One of my jobs, many years ago, I used to drive my boss's work van everyday from Brooklyn into the city for work. Parking was available and doable. If you own a car in NYC you have to be prepared for some very exorbitant prices for insurance, and as you noted, if you can afford the luxury of a garage then you may want to pay for it. But rest assured, a **** load of people drive there.