how green is cincinnati?

8/8/2019 How Green is Cincinnati?

1/13

Te purpose o this study is to analyze the actions being taken by the city o Cincinnati, Ohio to reduce over-all greenhouse gas emissions through sustainable urban growth and social development policies. Lookingbeyond the surace goals o a municipal Climate Action Plan (CAP) released by city council in 2008, this

report will oer context in the orm o a brie history o Cincinnatis historic development and energy con-sumption patterns, with a particular ocus on transportation and its intrinsic inuences on city lie. Stateand ederal policies will be scrutinized and laid out to give a clear picture o how much public and privatemoney is currently being spent on projects that vary rom packaging redesigns to building retrots to entire-ly new transit corridors and much wider implications or urban revival. Finally, I will ocus on the revival oOver-the-Rhine as a thriving and densely settled urban district, emphasizing the importance o this inner cityre-densication and oering ideas or why this area is integral to Cincinnatis overall climate change strategy.

by Michael James Casey, November 29, 2010

Te initial growth o Cincinnati was naturally cat-

alyzed by the Ohio River, a major tributary o theMississippi and vital link to the nascent east coastcities o the United States. One o the countrys rstinland boomtowns, it began lie as Losantiville in1788, only to be renamed Cincinnati (a name thattraces back to the Roman legend Cincinnatus) two

years later. In 1789 the layout o the city was plot-ted with a regular grid o 400 x 400 blocks running

parallel and perpendicular to the Ohio River. Whilecommercial and civic unctions were kept close tothe riverront, the northern connes o this settle-

ment grid was oered to new settlers on the basisthat they construct a substantial home on theirown plot15. Accessed rom the east by riverboats,the town grew at a steady rate until completion othe Miami & Erie canal in 1827, at which pointgrowth accelerated rapidly. Between 1831 and1841, Cincinnatis population doubled to 50,000

people, and nearly hal were German immigrants.

1

History

Te majority settled in the area north o Downtown,

now separated by the Miami & Erie canal. Home-sick German transplants started reerring to thecanal as the Rhine river, thus giving the neighbor-hood its unique name o Over-the-Rhine (OR).

By the second hal o the 19th century, Germanentrepreneurs had built a robust brewery industryalong the banks o the canal, with beer halls andshops lining the neighborhoods main north-southstreets, all o which provided the necessary capi-tal or Over-the-Rhine to become a vibrant cul-

tural district. Tis rise in the neighborhoods socialimportance to Cincinnati would soon bemaniested in its architecture. Between 1855 and1891, almost all o the wooden structures in theneighborhood were razed and replaced with substan-tial stone, brick, and cast iron buildings15that housedactories, breweries, beer halls, hospitals, liveries,saloons, and the surviving centerpiece, Music Hall.

How green is Cincinnati?

I the world comes to an end, I want tobe in Cincinnati. Eerything comes thereten years later.

- Will Rogers


2/13

2

replaced with interstates that utilized the same right-o-ways that the city had acquired or the subway

project. About two miles o tunnels and three stationsstill remain intact under the streets o downtown.

Te lack o public support or Cincinna-tis subway system points to the automobilesdictation o 20th century American settlement pat-terns. Not only did auto-oriented development con-tribute to the demise o the subway, by the 1950s

Tese halcyon decades give OR its lasting architec-tural character, as the bustling success o breweries,beer halls and shops along the north-south streetsgenerated jobs and the construction o a dense resi-dential district along the east-west blocks. Te 362-

acre (1/2 sq. mile) concentration and variation othis urban abric o brick row houses is reminiscento other immigrant neighborhoods built in the sameera, such as New Yorks Greenwich Village or LowerEast Side10. At its peak in 1891, ORs original grid

plan had encouraged the development o a denselysettled urban abric. Lots only averaged 100, leav-ing hal o the blocks to be urther developed in therear with alleyway access15. Tis dense concentrationo compact row houses and apartment buildingshoused a peak population o over 45,000 people.

In 1889, the rst Cincinnati streetcars were opened,complete with inclines that connected the river ba-sin districts o Downtown, Over-the-Rhine andthe West End to new suburbs being developed onthe steep surrounding hillsides o Mt. Adams, Mt.Auburn, and Price Hill. Aer decades o high rid-ership rates or these systems, in 1917 Cincinnati

voters took the next step and approved the construc-tion o a subway system to loop under downtown

and link to emerging suburbs to the north, east,and west. o accommodate a thriving turn-o-thecentury population and important position in thenations economic development, Cincinnatis sub-

way system was modeled aer those seen in Boston,New York, and Philadelphia. Te stagnant Miami-Erie canal served as the starting point or construc-tion o the subways downtown loop, being easilydrained and replaced with concrete subway tunnels.

Between 1920-1927, workers dug over 7 miles o

additional tunnels and built several undergroundstations in downtown Cincinnati, only to give upon the project when public bonds ran out. An ero-sion o public support and zero remaining undsor construction le Cincinnatis subway as thenations largest transit system to be abandonedbeore seeing a single customer. Within most othe suburban tunnel routes were demolished and

Te above map is dated 1841, and shows Cincinnatis emerg-ing neighborhood patterns, with Downtown and OR at center.

View o the Miami-Erie canal, which provided a ital source o

growth to the city in the era beore railroads and automobiles.

Cross-section o a typical subway tunnel and platorms.


3/13

3

expansion o the vast I-75 corridor was also respon-sible or destroying the historically black West Endneighborhood and displacing tens o thousandso people rom their homes. Many o these ami-lies settled in adjacent Over-the-Rhine, which bythen had been largely abandoned or the suburbs

by the newly middle or upper class descendants othe neighborhoods original German immigrants.

Starting in the 1940s, Over-the-Rhine also becamea haven or many itinerant Appalachian residents,

who were drawn to the neighborhoods cheap rents,quality buildings, and proximity to actory jobs14.Eventually most these new residents cycled outto the suburbs or other midwestern cities, accom-modating a sustained inux o Arican Americansrom the Deep South and other Cincinnati neigh-borhoods. By 1980, the area was mired in pervasive

violence, drug use, and poverty. Social services be-came a growth industry, introduced in the hopes oalleviating this widespread destitution but mostly

perpetuating it14. Slum conditions were reinorcedby ederal housing policies which allowed landlordsto reap generous tax credits or renting units to low-income residents, with the stipulation that unsightlymetal bars be afxed to ground oor doors and win-dows14. Due to a combination o white ight and

no compensating oreign immigration,17

the neigh-borhood rapidly lost density in the 1980s and 90s.

Although much o Over-the-Rhines original build-ing stock was lost or deteriorating by the 1990s,the areas architectural character and aordablerents drew a substantial amount o middle classartists and hipsters to the area. Te presence o thesenew bohemians resulted in the arrival o night-clubs and specialty shops along Main St., which hadhistorically hosted the neighborhoods most suc-

cessul commercial and social environments15. Tesepockets o gentrication gradually spread outwardrom the Main St. district, and at the height othe nineties OR revival, young downtown o-ce and restaurant workers placed down paymentson uture apartments that still had garbage piledon the oor and pigeons nesting in the walls.13.Uneasy relations between the old destitute and

A camera ash illuminates part o the 1920s subwaytunnels as they appear today, remarkably well presered.

Urban blight, as seen above in this 1990s shot o Oer-the- Rhines northern connes, close to Findlay Market. Tese scenes o boarded windows and crumbling brick acadeshae stigmatized the inner-city neighborhood or decades.

Tis historic photo shows subway construction progress alongthe ormer site o the Miami-Erie Canal, now Central Pkwy.


4/13

4

Recycling

In January o 1984 the major utilities involved inthe project, CG&E, Dayton Power & Light Co.,and Columbus & Southern Ohio Electric Co.,became the rst in the nations history to convert anearly operational nuclear power plant into a coal-red unit8. Te projects initial cost o $240 mil-

lion ballooned with the additional $1.7 billioncost o coal conversion, $600 million o which wasused or pollution control devices7. In addition,2,000 people lost their jobs when nuclear-related

work ceased and the plants conversion began.

Addressing public ears over the saety o the shod-dily built nuclear plant, Cincinnati mayor ArnoldBortz said at the time that the issues o saety oZimmer as a nuclear plant can be put behind us. I

think the decision is a victory or common sense

8

.Operational as a 1,300 megawatt coal-red plant by1991, the story o the Zimmer power station showshow engineering shortcomings among local contrac-tors and a disregard or quality oversight resultedin a much more environmentally destructive andexpensive power station than originally intended.

Tanks partially to the Zimmer station, Ohio is oneo 25 states that rely on coal or over 50% o theirelectricity generation. Te lack o a ederal emissions

regulatory program precludes the success o low-car-bon alternatives, whose cost simply cannot compete

with traditional and conveniently acquired resourceslike coal4. Although the citys climate action plan callson regional utility conglomerate Duke Energy toreduce the carbon intensity o its power generation

portolio by 60-80%, this is mere encouragementrom municipal government. Comprehensive climatechange legislation at the ederal level is needed tomake any o these ambitious reduction goals a reality.

Diverting landll input through recycling and reuseo waste is a major component o any municipal cli-mate strategy. Cincinnati has already put in motion aseries o incentives to increase the number o residents

who utilize their curbside recycling program, whichis currently estimated to be 40% o the citys house-

new creative classes in Over-the-Rhine wouldsoon come to dene the neighborhoods identity.

We will return to the recent history o OR at the endo the report, raming its redevelopment as an im-

portant component o the citys uture sustain-ability initiatives. Te ollowing section oers an

explanation o Cincinnatis utility energy port-olio, recycling eorts, and climate action plan.

Due to Cincinnatis downstream proximity tothe Appalachian mountain range and major min-ing states o Pennsylvania and West Virginia, coalhas and continues to be the dominant source outility energy or the area. Barges carry over 3

million tons every year

8

to the the Zimmer Pow-er Station in Moscow, a small town located onthe Ohio River 30 miles east o downtown.

Te construction o this plant was a long-delayed anddebated process that stretched over several decades.Planning began in the late 1960s and constructioncommenced in 1972 on what was to have been an800 megawatt nuclear station7. But as early as 1974,

workers began ling complaints that the qualitycontrols or the plants construction were inad-

equate8. Although construction proceeded to a point o 97% completion, by 1981 the NuclearRegulatory commission ned the Cincinnati Gas& Electric (CG&E) utility $200,000 or their man-agement and saety shortcomings, ordering a haltto all but saety related work the ollowing year8.

Utility Energy

Aerial iew o the power station in Moscow. An Ohio Rierbarge can be clearly seen at center, along with a massie coal

storage pit to the right, and nuclear style cooling tower at le.


5/13

5

holds4. Spending $3.8 million o stimulus grants inaddition to public bonds (and ringing in at $41.65each), the rst o 100,000 larger recycling cartsare being introduced to selected city neighbor-hoods, to supplement the typical 18 gallon bins6.

In her bookEmerald Cities, Joan Fitzgerald has sug-gested that we must not only reduce the waste go-ing to landlls as a necessary environmental end initsel, we also need to view waste as an economic

opportunity. In this vain, Cincinnatis increase incurbside pickup capacity is being coupled with theintroduction o a popular incentives system calledRecycleBank. Tis private company partners withlocal and national businesses to reward house-holds with points, the amount o which is deter-mined by the overall weight o recycling pickups.A market-driven, volume based incentive program,RecycleBank will initially give Cincinnati $1 back orevery ton recycled, and will double to $2/ton oncerecycling rates surpass an annual rate o 13,000 tons6.

RecycleBank has ound success in a growing list oneighborhoods within cities such as Philadelphiaand Chicago, but Cincinnati represents their larg-est municipal partner thus ar in the midwest region.Te company predicts an increase in the recyclingdiversion rate to 37% (40,000 tons/year)4, but thisincentives system is not without aws. Instead o ad-

vocating or less consumption overall, RecycleBankis rewarding people or increasing the amount omaterials they put through energy intensive recyclingstreams. While there is no doubt to the benet o re-ducing landll-bound waste, incentivizing recyclingthrough coupons and discounts that enable more con-sumption conjures the mental image o a dog chasingits own tail. Despite these inherent shortcomings, theRecycleBank program is an important part o thelarger eort to bring energy and ecological aware-ness into mainstream discourse in the community.

Representing another instance o a private company promoting efciency measures, Cincinnatislargest employer and worlds leading consumer

product manuacturer Proctor & Gamble (P&G)has recently announced a plan to drastically elimi-nate waste rom its production and packaging pro-

cesses. Setting ambitious long-term targets withdecade timerames, the company plans to run 30%o each o their worldwide plants on renewableenergy resources by 2020, with eventual goals o100% recyclable packaging and renewable energy16.P&G is even partnering with RecycleBank to ad-

vance consumer environmental awareness, pilotinga rst o its kind eort to reward consumers orlearning and blogging about sustainability topics5.argeting the 70% o the population they deem

as willing to be more sustainable but lacking theknowledge base, P&G is the rst corporation toadd a social media component to their RecycleBank

partnership5. Although these eorts by private cor- porations are admirable, they ail to question thesystemic problems o consumption that our soci-ety is acing and urther highlight the absence onational leadership on an environmental agenda.

With assistance rom the ICLEI (Local Govern-ments or Sustainability), Cincinnati released a com-

prehensive Climate Action Plan in 2008, oeringan ambitious agenda o ideas or reducing the citysgreenhouse gas portolio, including detailed consid-erations and timetables or implementation. Tis200+ page document is organized into six categoriesthat represent a broad array o energy and resourceconsumption topics: building energy, transporta-tion, waste, land use, advocacy, and ood resources.

Utilizing a soware model developed by ICLEI,Cincinnati was able to determine its greenhousegas emissions inventory. Te results indicatedthat the city produces 25.5 tons o carbon annu-ally per capita, slightly above the national average o24.54. A chart on the next page breaks down thesegreenhouse gas emissions by source. Mitigation goalsare ambitious yet easible, aiming or an 8% reduc-

Te Green Cincinnati Plan


6/13

6

ransportation

loans (air sealing, insulation and HVAC up-grades, solar water/photovoltaic systems, to namea ew) and provide low-inerest loans that wouldallow homeowners to install these technologies4.

Tis program would complement the existing Ham-

ilton County Home Improvement Program (HIP),which allows Cincinnati residents to borrow moneyor repairing and remodeling their homes or rental

properties at an interest rate 3% below the lowestbank oers, on ve year terms and with a maximumo $50,00019. Tese loans are only granted i propertytaxes are current and the homes assessed value is be-low $350,000. Originally implemented in 2002 andreinstated in 2008, the HIP program has distributedover 2,300 individual loans in the past eight years20.

Representing a quarter o the nations greenhousegas inventory18, transportation plays a signicantand highly evident role in climate change. For thesereasons, transportation implementation strategiesare the main eature o many municipal climateaction plans. As Joan Fitzgerald says, cities canmake the most positive emissions impact by re-ducing vehicles miles traveled [and] increasing

public transportation and other non-automobileoptions1. Beyond mere improvements in vehicle e-ciency, a public transit system anticipates the nexthal century o peak oil adaptation and has positiveimplications or entire cities and economies. Cur-rently, Cincinnatis only orm o mass transit isthe Metro bus system, operated by the SouthernOhio Regional ransit Authority (SORA). GreenCincinnati calls or greater interconnectivity be-tween outlying suburbs through the addition obus routes running east-west and entirely outside o

the radial downtown paths, as well as more neigh-borhood shuttles and limited stop express routes4.Although the expansion o bus routes is a

worthy goal, taxpayers have deeated pastmass transit proposals in 2002, due mainlyto a hal-cent sales tax increase or unding.Te plan also aims to raise the rate o area resi-dents (16% in 2008) who participate in RideShare

tion to the 2006 CO2 equivalent amount o 8.5Mtons by 2012, with that amount increasing to 40%

within two decades and 84% by mid-century4.

Quantitatively addressing the problem o building

energy consumption, the plan calls or over $20 mil-lion in energy retrots or all city-owned buildings.Considering that the city only owns a ew dozen

properties, these eorts are just a small raction othe overall building energy picture. With about 200new homes built annually, the city planning agencyand local home builders association encourage (butdo not require) all new residential construction tomeet Energy Star standards4. A multi-layered mar-keting plan and enhanced website portolio are themain educational strategies recommended by the

plan, along with vague outlines or the creation ogreen schools and efciency technology training

programs modeled aer successul energy and environmental literacy initiatives in Boulder, Colo-rado4. Te extent to which the Green Cincinnati

plan suggests efciency education programs as thestarting point or sustainability targets underlinesthe pervasive skepticism o environmental causesamong the area population. Beyond these retrotsto city-owned property, the plan does not proposeany actual efciency upgrade programs, but pointsto public education on efciency topics as an impor-tant part o the climate change adaptation process.

Te plans most promising proposal or wide-spread residential efciency upgrades is the cre-ation o a Utility Lending Institution, a govern-ment-backed entity that would identiy abouta dozen home energy upgrades that qualiy or

Building Retrofts

source: Green Cincinnati Plan, 2008

commercial/industrial buildings 40.7%

transportation 26.6%

residential 18.6 %

industrial 15.6 %

Cincinnati greenhouse gas inventory


7/13

7

programs or their work commutes, in additionto the introduction o car sharing services likeZipcar. Improved options or bicycling are also pro-

posed in the orm o an Ohio River rail, which would connect an existing trail loop in theeastern suburbs to Downtown and the Riverront.

While buses, car sharing, and bicycling are alllegitimate aspects o a citys uture growth goals,the most critical goal or Cincinnatis long-termsustainability eorts is to re-densiy the citys innercore as a transit-oriented district, catalyzed by astreetcar system that is currently in the earliest

phases o conception.

Te Cincinnati Streetcar is a multi-phased masstransit system that has great implications or the citysuture. It will become the centerpiece o the SORAsystem when operations begin in 2013, providing anew link between Cincinnatis inner city districts.Citing the success o streetcars in generating urbanrenewal within a growing list o American cities(Portland, Memphis, and Charlotte among them),city council has approved the rst phase o thestreetcar system. It will consist o a circulator looprunning between the Riverront, central business

district, and northern connes o Over-the-Rhine.Depending on the success o this initial circulatorloop, a second phase may ascend Mt. Auburn andlink into the University o Cincinnatis campus, con-necting the citys two largest employment centers

with a dedicated public transit corridor. CincinnatiMayor Mark Mallory, the majority o City Coun-cil, and many area residents are eagerly awaitingconstruction o the $128 million system. Empow-ering the city government in their implementationo the streetcar system are three private sponsors:

Cincinnati Center City Development Corpora-tion (3CDC), stakeholders or Te Banks riverrontredevelopment, and Duke Energy corporation.

Te success o Portlands decade-old streetcar sys-tem has been evidence enough to convince Cincinn-tians o the projects benet. As Fitzgerald explains,streetcars are easy to add [and] can t the scale and

Streetcar System

Rendering o the proposed streetcar, with the Cincinnati PublicLibrary and Kroger company headquarters in the background.

Te Phase I streetcar route will permanently link Cincinnatisredeeloping Rierfont and the Banks with the downtown busi-ness district and historically dense Oer-the-Rhine neighborhood.


8/13

8

rom an initial estimate o $3.5 million in 20079.More than just an urban circulator, the streetcarsystem will become an economic developmentengine or Downtown and especially Over-the-Rhine. In a easibility study released in 2007 by theOmaha-based architecture, engineering, and con-

sulting rm HDR, transit access is cited as a crucialmeans o stimulating demand or residential unitsin the vicinity o the line and near major stops 11.Te study claims that over a 35 year period romthe start o streetcar operations, Cincinnati willsee a huge economic return on the streetcarinvestment in the orm o higher property val-ues, renovations and reconstruction o hous-ings units, new businesses, and a growing incomeand property tax revenue rom the new jobs and

residents that will call Over-the-Rhine home

11

.Te city o Cincinnati is anticipating a wide rangeo civic and economic development benets result-ing rom the streetcars construction. Along theline itsel, the city hopes to redevelop up to 1,135new housing units in 90 acres o vacant or under-utilized properties and 92 acres o underutilizedsurace parking, and an additional 10,000 housingunits and 7.4 million square eet o ofce and retailspace within a three block range o the system10. o

help ensure this urban revival and re-densication,the city will seek to establish a transit-oriented zon-ing classication or the Downtown and Over-the-Rhine districts, a critical step in reducing parkingdemands and maximizing the streetcars abilityto catalyze development within its service area9.

trafc patterns o existing neighborhoods... and tendto stimulate development along broader swaths[than light rail stops]. Despite these positive long-term benets, Cincinnatis streetcar detractorsstill criticize the projects capital cost, questioningthe wisdom o such a project during a recession.

In a pair o memos released this summer by citymanager Milton Dohoney Jr. the various sources ounding or the streetcar project are outlined. As oAugust, $114.5 million o the total $128 million cap-ital cost had been identied, though not guaranteed.In May 2010, city council approved the sale o $64million in public bonds to be repaid rom city capital,tax increment nancing revenues, and proceeds romthe sale o surplus city property. Te sources or bond

repayments are dedicated to the streetcar system, andcannot be used in the general municipal und10. TeOhio Kentucky and Indiana regional council o gov-ernments (OKI) approved $4 million in congestionmitigation/air quality unding. Ohio DO also ap-

proved $15 million or the projects utility relocationcosts. In addition, the city provided $2.6 million,earned rom the sale o streetlights to Duke Energy,and $775,000 to cover pre-construction activities10.

o pay or the construction and operation o the

system, the city has cobbled together unding romall levels o government. o date, Cincinnati hasreceived $25 million in ederal money, throughthe ederal transit administrations urban circula-tor grant program, a part o the U.S. Department oransportations livability initiative9. Cincinnatihas also applied or an additional $35 million romIGER II, a program that allocates $600 millionor nationwide inrastructure investments. At thestate level, the city applied or $35 million rom theOhio Department o ransportations ransporta-tion Review Advisory Council (RAC) programor Phase I unding, as well as $7.75 million orPhase II . Te results o these IGER II and RACunding applications is expected in December2010. Te city cannot spend any o this capital untilit creates an environmental assessment document9.Te current projection or annual system opera-tion and maintenance costs is $3 million, down Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory at a streetcar press conerence.


9/13

9

Te environmental costs and benets o the street-car are also explained in the Green Cincinnati plan,

which predicts that over 30 years the system can re-duce VM by 128,000,000, saving 4,231 tons o CO2

per year directly rom operation and over 17,000 tonsevery year rom the denser settlement patterns that

will result. O course the streetcars themselves willrequire energy to operate, with Duke Energy estimat-ing that the 7.9 mile route will use over 2.36 millionkWh o electricity annually. For every kilowatt houro energy needed, 1.9 lbs. o CO2 are generated byDuke Energy, meaning the entire system will be re-sponsible or 2,248 tons o CO2 emissions per year.

Tere are a wide variety o unding sources orthe previously discussed eorts at emissionsmitigation. Te ollowing is a breakdown o the

public money that is being spent on these pro-grams, starting with the ederal programs andthen ocusing down to state and local policies.

Enacted by President Barack Obama in responsethe national nancial crisis, the American Recov-ery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), or the stimulus

bill, provided a total o over $512 million dollarsto the state o Ohio or renewable energy deploy-ment and housing assistance2. Tese stimulus undsare utilized in conjunction with state programsthat pay to weatherize low-income households, as-sist businesses with efciency investments, andimplement solar panel projects or individual com-munities. Te Ohio Energy Efciency and Con-servation Block Grant grants an additional $15million dollars to local county and municipal gov-ernments to cover energy improvements that werenot directly allocated by the ederal government2.

With a population o almost 12 million people,Ohio accounts or over $45 billion annually inenergy spending, placing it h in the nation ortotal energy spending2. O all the states that havebeen aected by the Great Recession, Ohios prob-lems are particularly acute. With an extensive

Funding

manuacturing base that resulted rom the proxim-ity to the big three American automakers, thiscrucial sector o Ohios economy has struggled tocope with the decades-long decline o those auto-mobile companies and resulting loss o skilled and

well-paid manuacturing jobs throughout the region

o help catalyze a partial transormation o thismanuacturing inrastructure rom automobile

parts to clean energy technologies, the DeployingRenewable Energy in Ohio initiative invests over$42 million o state energy program unds intothe states struggling manuacturing industries2.Te Ohio Energy Gateway und is a private-public

partnership that will expand access to capital togrow and sustain the uel cell, solar, wind, and en-

ergy storage industries in Ohio, utilizing $30 mil-lion rom the state energy program and $10 mil-lion rom the Ohio Bipartisan Job Stimulus Plan2.

At the municipal level, there are a number o -nancial incentives that encourage home and busi-ness owners to improve building perormance.Te city o Cincinnati currently oers 100% prop-erty tax abatements or commercial and residen-tial buildings that are constructed or renovated tomeet LEED standards, set orth by the U.S. Green

Building Council (USGBC). Enacted in Decem-ber 2007, these tax discounts are available or anybuilding within city limits and do not require ademonstration o nancial need. Tey last 15 yearsor new constructions, 12 years on renovations,and designate commercial buildings as any struc-ture with our or more individual residential units20.

In the absence o comprehensive national climatechange legislation, the municipal government oCincinnati and many other American cities havedraed Climate Action Plans. Although the GreenCincinnati plan charts an ambitious course or re-ducing energy consumption and greenhouse gasemissions, the real measure o the citys sustainability

will be how it actually goes about implementing these plans in the near uture. Until that progress is evi-dent, Cincinnatis sustainability initiatives are weakin comparison to cities like Portland and Seattle.


10/13

10

Tis is not the rst recent attempt at reviving Over-the-Rhine. In the 1990s, the installation o a highspeed ber optic data line under Main St. enableda promising inux o internet entrepreneurs to es-tablish businesses and live in the neighborhood.Tis new Digital Rhine is described by redevel-

opment manager Jim Moll in a New York imesarticle rom March o 2001: Tese young peoplelove being near the Main St. entertainment district.Tey love the architecture its whats attracting themto the area O the internet startups, he says thecompanies themselves are younger and more eclec-tic and want to be in an urban environment where

people are able to network easily with their peers12.

Just over a month aer this article was published,the atal shooting o an unarmed 19 year old blackman in OR by Cincinnati Police resulted in threedays o civil unrest that made national headlines.Crowds roamed the streets in protests that soonescalated into looting and arson o numerous busi-nesses, necessitating the deployment o riot con-trol ofcers and a citywide curew or several days.

In the wake o the riots o April 2001, demandor apartments disappeared, galleries closed, andbusinesses had to relocate because customers re-

used to drive into the area. Not only did the cre-ative classes leave, but many residents who hadinked thirty year ederal housing contracts backin the 1960s received portable vouchers that en-abled them to also vacate the neighborhood. Teriots set the neighborhood back a decade, leav-ing 500 o the neighborhoods 1,200 buildings

vacant and bringing property values to a new low13.

Te most promising o Cincinnatis emissionsmitigation eorts by ar is the streetcar system,and no other neighborhood stands to benet asmuch rom the project as Over-the-Rhine. Sincethe riots o 2001, the citys corporate powers havebeen orced to take a vested interest in the neigh-borhoods revival, in order to protect their in-terests in the adjacent central business district.

3CDC was created in 2003 with an initial $80 mil-

lion raised by the citys corporate leaders, and is thedriving orce behind Over-the-Rhines current waveo gentrication. Between 2005-2006, 3CDC in-

vested $27 million in the neighborhood, buying over100 buildings and vacant lots and completing 28new condominiums along Vine St., with plans or atleast 70 more. 3CDC is trying to create a ew revital-ized patches o critical mass, in the hope that theseareas can create positive momentum on their own14.

o supplement Music Hall, major arts organizations

like the Art Academy o Cincinnati, ArtsWave (or-merly the Fine Arts Fund), and the School or Cre-ative and Perorming Arts have all relocated rom oth-er neighborhoods to help establish Over-the-Rhinesemerging artistic identity. Tese institutions, whichact as anchors or smaller arts groups, and the avail-ability o renovated housing stock has been steadilydrawing new people and investment in the area13.

Over-the-Rhine Renewal

A street air set against a backdrop o restored 19th centurybuildings in the newly branded Gateway Arts District, 2010.

One o many acant storefonts and apartment units, 2006.


11/13

11

Te streetcar system is arguably the most crucialcomponent o this latest attempt to revive Over-the-Rhine. Te long term reductions in VM that

will result rom this revitalization represents the

most signicant contribution to the citys emissionsmitigation eorts. Once it is operational, the street-car will catalyze redevelopment along its environsand promote denser urban settlement patterns. Teother critical requirement or the streetcars suc-cess is jobs, which will provide a reason or moreand more people to use the system. However, ex-isting white collar and service jobs that result romgentrication will not be sufcient enough to jumpstart the citys revival and justiy these streetcars.

Te act that this latest wave o gentrication inOver-the-Rhine is backed by the citys corpo-rate elite gives it a good chance at success. But tosustain the districts revival over the long term,Over-the-Rhine should capitalize on its survivingbrewery and warehouse inrastructure and prox-imity to the universitys world-class knowledgebase to develop new clean energy industries.

Tese medium to highly skilled jobs inmanuacturing, installation, and scientic researchcould bring a whole new employment base to the area,simultaneously improving the districts density

and energy perormance. oledo provides a suc-cessul template. Tis northern Ohio city hasrecently adapted its existing but underutilized glassmanuacturing acilities to produce photovoltaicsolar panels or a number o new energy companies1.

Tough notable strides in planning and implemen-tation have been made in the past ew years, themajor goals o Cincinnatis sustainability agendaare still only in their earliest stages o realization.

With some creative planning, the right nancial

resources, and strong political leadership, Cincinnaticould convert its available stock o empty commer-cial and industrial buildings in OR into the base oa new clean energy industry. As the rest o the regionand country changes its policies and industries tomeet the challenges o energy adaptation in the 21stcentury, Cincinnati can no longer aord to beten years behind the times.

An aerial iew o Oer-the-Rhines northern connes shows some o the neighborhoods suriing 19th century character. Te high numbero acant buildings and lots along the impending streetcar line represents a great opportunity or inner city redeelopment and densication.


12/13

12

1. Joan Fitzgerald, Emerald Cities: Urban Sustainability and Economic Development (New York: Oxord Uni-versity Press, 2010),117, 148, 157.

2. Lisa Pat McDaniel - Director o Ohio Dept. o Development, Impact o Recovery on Clean Energy Indus-try (paper presented as testimony to the House Select Energy Independence and Global Warming Committee,

Washington D.C., March 3, 2010), 2-5.

3. Ellen Bassett, Vivek Shandas, Innovation and Climate Action Planning: Perspectives rom Municipal Plans,Journal o the American Planning Association Vol. 76, no. 4 (2010), 435-447.

4. City o Cincinnati Ofce o Environmental Quality, Te Green Cincinnati Climate Action Plan. Version 4.0(2008), 11-202.

5. Ne, Jack. P&G, Recycle Bank join in Cincinnati Waste & Recycling News, October 11, 2010. Accessed No-vember 18, 2010.

6. Jane Prendergast. Giant Recycling Carts on the Way, Te Cincinnati Enquirer, August 30, 2010.

7. im Sansbury, Coal Conversion Plan in Motion at CG&E, Journal o Commerce (1987): 7A. Accessed Oc-tober 4, 2010.

8. Nearly completed nuclear plant will be converted to burn coal Te New York imes, January 22, 1984, Section1, Pt. 1, Pg. 1, Column 5. National Desk.

9. Milton Dohoney Jr., Cincinnati Streetcar Project Update - July/August 2010 (paper presented to CincinnatiCity Council, Cincinnati, Ohio, August 2, 2010).

10. Milton Dohoney Jr., Cincinnati Streetcar Project Update - June 2010 (presented to Cincinnati City Coun-cil, Cincinnati, Ohio, June 21, 2010), 2-5.

11. George Vredeveld Ph.D, Je Rexhaussen, Irem G. Yelnecki, et al. An Assessment o the Cincinnati StreetcarStudy University o Cincinnati Center or the City. Accessed November 1, 2010, 2-4.

12. John Eckberg, Decayed Cincinnati Area gets High ech Revival, Te New York imes, March 4, 2001. Sec-

tion 11, Pg. 7, Column 1. Real Estate Desk.

13. Christopher Maag, In Cincinnati, Lie Breathes Anew in Riot-scarred Area Te New York imes, November25, 2006. Section A, Pg. 10, Column 1. National Desk

14. Christopher Swope, Over the Rhine Again: in a historic Cincinnati neighborhood, will new investment endyears o rustrating neglect?Preseration: the magazine o the National rust or Historic Preseration,Volume 59,Issue 2 (2007), 30-34. Accessed November 8, 2010.

Reerences


13/13

15. Brenda C. Scheer, Daniel Ferdelman. Inner-city destruction and survival: the case o Over-the-Rhine, Cin-cinnati Urban Morphology, Volume 5, Issue 1, (2001), 15-27. Accessed November 10, 2010

16. Dan Sewell, P&G sets new environmental goals, Te Associated Press, September 28, 2010. Accessed Septem-ber 29, 2010.

17. William Fulton, Rol Pendall, Mai Nguyen, Alicia Harrison. Who Sprawls Most? How Growth PatternsDier Across the U.S. Brookings Institution Center on Urban & Metropolitan Policy, July 2001. Accessed Sep-tember 11, 2010.

18. Emil Frankel, Tomas R. Menzies Jr., Why Focus on ransportation or Emissions Reduction? R News,May-June 2010. (publication o Bipartisan ransportation Policy Center, Washington D.C.) Accessed October18, 2010.

19. Hamilton County Website, http://www.hamilton-co.org/hc/deault.asp

20. Dsire Solar Policy Inormation - North Carolina State University, http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incen-tive.cm?Incentive_Code=OH31F&re=1&ee=1

13

how green is cincinnati?

Documents