Author: Randy A. Simes

Randy is an award-winning urban planner who founded UrbanCincy in May 2007. He grew up on Cincinnati’s west side in Covedale, and graduated from the University of Cincinnati’s nationally acclaimed School of Planning in June 2009. In addition to maintaining ownership and serving as the managing editor for UrbanCincy, Randy has worked professionally as a planning consultant throughout the United States, Korea and the Middle East. After brief stints in Atlanta and Chicago, he currently lives in the Daechi neighborhood of Seoul’s Gangnam district.

Categories
Up To Speed

What happens when urban farms get too big?

What happens when urban farms get too big?.

Urban farms are all the rage nowadays. Cities across North America have been incorporating them into the cityscape to fill the void left behind by shuttered industry, or abandoned housing. While the benefits seem to have been fully vetted, is there a risk to allowing urban farms to grow too large? More from Grist:

More than a few environmentalists have argued that urban farms must remain small or risk suburbanizing the city. One of the most prominent is Kaid Benfield, a smart-growth guru with the Natural Resources Defense Council. Benfield worries that urban farming, if practiced on a large scale, will dilute the walkability and density that defines cities.

“I support the growing of food in cities, and have even done it myself,” Benfield cautions. But it should be done in ways that support urbanism and not displace it…I’m not sure we’re talking about a city any more if we’re going to have fields of 20 acres and more.” By seeding large farms in the city, he says, “we risk locking in long-term environmental problems in terms of not having a healthy urban core. Central cities are starting to revive.”

One problem is that most of the best para-urban land (or land just outside cities) — which was once seen as ideal for growing food without huge transportation costs — has already been swallowed up by suburban development.

Categories
Up To Speed

The value proposition of large urban trees

The value proposition of large urban trees.

We all know the intrinsic value of trees. They’re beautiful, consume carbon dioxide, provide shade, and help keep us cool. But new research finds that large trees (those over 77 centimeters in diameter) provide even greater benefits to humans than do small trees (those less than 8 centimeters in diameter). More from Next American City:

When we talk about street trees and the urban forest, sometimes we miss an essential truth: Not all street trees are created equal. Mature trees are an order of magnitude more valuable to us than young, small ones.

There is no shortage of scientific evidence supporting the incredible benefits that mature trees provide to urban neighborhoods. Yet many local policies seem to focus only on the quantity of trees being planted rather than the quality…Planting a million trees is great. But planting even 500,000 in conditions that allow them to survive, thrive and mature is exponentially greater.

Categories
Up To Speed

What does the decline of the nuclear family mean for America’s cities?

What does the decline of the nuclear family mean for America’s cities?.

What has long been considered to be the traditional family household in America is changing. People are living longer, young individuals are putting off marriage, women are increasingly becoming dominant in the workforce, and same-sex couples are taking a more prominent role in our society. These changes mean a variety of things socially, but it also means that our types of housing are and need to continue to change. More from Urbanophile:

As affluent people who choose to remain childless remain in more urban areas, and those who choose to have kids live in suburban ones, we’ll have legitimate matters of interest driving them apart politically. In a piece called “Geographies in Conflict” I noted how different economic geographies in the same physical space is an inherent conflict. Red states and blue states don’t just have different political points of views. They increasingly do different things. If you are Texas and are in the business of energy, chemicals, logistics, and manufacturing, the things that you need to be successful are very different from a Silicon Valley or Manhattan, which specialize in ultra-high end, high value service industries. The conflicts are as much a product of legitimate self-interest as political philosophy.

I think we’ll see similar conflicts between the needs, wants, and desires of the childless urban population and those of the suburban families with kids. It’s kind of nice to do your shopping daily on foot or by bicycle at the local market and such when you don’t have three kids to buy for and haul around with you. Bloomberg’s proposed micro-apartments in New York are an example of a market designed to cater to singles, not families. It’s not a matter of one being good and another bad. It’s merely that singles (or childless married couples) and people with children have very different priorities and concerns in life.

Categories
Arts & Entertainment Development Transportation

New time-lapse video captures movement of people and machines in Cincinnati

Friend of UrbanCincy and regular URBANexchange attendee, Andrew Stahlke, has produced a new time-lapse video of Cincinnati.

The video showcases construction work at the $400 million Horseshoe Casino, Little Miami Scenic Trail, Eden Park Overlook, boats on the Ohio River, circus training at Burnett Woods, freight activity at the Queensgate Railyards, construction of the new $66.5 million Waldvogel Viaduct, fans at Great American Ball Park, and many other scenes from around Cincinnati.

Stahlke is currently enrolled in the Masters of Community Planning program at the University of Cincinnati, and originally studied civil engineering at Case Western University.

The video, entitled Paths and Nodes: Cincinnati, attempts to capture the life of the city as people and machines move about, and was shot in early fall 2012. It is a nearly three minutes in length, and features music from Little People.

Categories
Business Development Transportation

Cincinnati City Leaders to Move Forward with Ohio’s First Bike Sharing System

A new study, prepared by Alta Planning + Design, has determined how and where a bicycle sharing system could be implemented in Cincinnati in a way that will compliment its expanding Bicycle Transportation Program.

The recently released report was called for by city leaders in May 2012, and identifies a 35-station, 350-bike system that would be built over two phases in Downtown, Over-the-Rhine, Pendleton, Clifton Heights, Corryville, Clifton, Avondale and the West End.

“We went into this study wanting the public to be a big part of the process. They contributed more than 300 suggestions for stations and cast nearly 2,000 votes,” said Michael Moore, Director of the Department of Transportation & Engineering (DOTE). “Thanks to all their input, this study helps ensure bike share is relevant and useful to the residents and commuters in the downtown neighborhoods.”


Several neighborhoods throughout the city were determined as potential areas to be included in a future Cincinnati bike share system. Map provided by Alta Planning + Design.

City officials also say that locations throughout northern Kentucky’s river cities were also popular, and would make for a logical expansion in the future should system arrangements be achieved.

According to the report, the 35 station locations were identified through public input and through a variety of suitability factors that include population density, percentage of residents between the ages of 20 and 40, employment density, mixture of uses and entertainment destinations, connectivity with existing and planned transit networks, and the terrain in the immediate area.

“In general, there are enough positive indicators to suggest that bike sharing is feasible in Cincinnati,” Alta Planning + Design wrote in the 49-page report. “There are no fatal flaws, although a smaller dependency on visitors and ordinances restricting advertising would need to be overcome to make the system financially viable.”

The financial viability of the project is particularly important in Cincinnati’s case as city officials have determined that a privately owned and operated system would be the best business model for Cincinnati.

Alta Planning + Design estimates that the potential 35-station system, spread throughout Downtown and Uptown, would cost approximately $2 million to construct and nearly $200,000 to operate annually. While user fees are expected to sustain a portion of the annual operating costs, system operators will most likely need a variance to city law to allow for advertising on the stations, as is commonplace for bike sharing systems throughout the world.

     
More than 2,000 responses helped determine public support for potential station locations [LEFT]. The initial system would be built out over two phases in Downtown and Uptown [RIGHT]. Maps provided by Alta Planning + Design.

“As of now we do not intend to invest any public funds in the system, other than in-kind assistance with marketing and station siting,” explained DOTE Senior City Planner Melissa McVay, who recently sat down to discuss Cincinnati’s bike culture on Episode #8 of The UrbanCincy Podcast.

Annual membership fees and hourly rates would be determined by the eventual company selected to operate the system, and would be contingent upon how much money could be raised through advertising and local sponsorships.

In addition to drilling into local details and demographics pertinent to a potential Cincinnati bike sharing system, the feasibility study also compared Cincinnati to other cities throughout North America that have operational bike sharing systems.

Through that analysis it was found that Cincinnati’s system would be smaller than those in Miami, Boston, Washington D.C., Montreal and Toronto, but that it would be larger than systems in San Antonio, Des Moines and Chattanooga. Cincinnati’s system is also anticipated to have a more favorable trip comparison, for the first year of operation, than both Minneapolis and Denver.

The report also estimates that Cincinnati’s system would attract 105,000 trips in its first year of operations, with that growing to 305,000 in year five once both Downtown and Uptown regions are operating, with approximately 25 percent of trips replacing a vehicle trip.

“We want Cincinnatians to be able to incorporate cycling into their daily routine, and a bike share program will help with that,” Moore explained. “Bike share helps introduce citizens to active transportation, it reduces the number of short auto trips in the urban core, and it promotes sustainable transportation options.”

The City of Cincinnati is expected to issue a request for proposals, within the next month, that will call for bids from an operator of the planned system. If all goes according to plan the Midwest’s sixth, and Ohio’s first, bike share system could become functional as early as the operator’s ability to acquire funding.