I learned that 3CDC is actually a very small organization that has the power to move around very large sums of money for the projects it embarks on. I discovered that the renovations on the city have only recently been made and that if it weren’t for 3CDC, things would have gone unkempt and the city would have looked much different. I think the work itself is outstanding, I do not mind having nice buildings to look at, original architecture, and a long list of restaurants from which to choose from; however, I do feel like sometimes things feel a little out of place. Cincinnati’s downtown is an area where residents have lived for a long time and they have a strong attachment to the city’s culture and history.
The fact that 3CDC has invested so much into restoring historical landmarks and making sure that the integrity of the buildings remains intact is amazing and I applaud their work for the community. However, at some point during Brandi’s presentation, I started to feel a little ambivalent towards the whole renovation process because she mentioned all of this buying of future land and completing of projects and she even pointed out the tough cases of owners not willing to part with their property. I am aware that “across the country cities are actively promoting downtown convention centers as an economic growth strategy” (Palin pg. 235), which is why all the talk of renovation began to sound more businesslike and the reasons financially based instead of for the good of the community and because they wanted to help residents as best as they can.
Brandi’s dismissal of the subject of affordable housing was upsetting; she seemed to indicate that cost was not an issue when it comes to making housing available simply because of the luxurious nature of the flats as it pertains to the rest of the city. However, I think she is only trying to remake the city in order to drive away current residents and to attract the young couples more willing to spend their money and work a weakly job. I thought this at Washington Park as well because the park is very nice and fun and functional, but I don’t think it fits with the surrounding neighborhoods too well. Why would an old community need that a park, unless it was meant to attract newcomers and their children to the area? This is the much dreaded gentrification process, because the focus is no longer on restoring the community’s status but in renovating the community by replacing the people living in it with more favorable ones.
Besides the remodeling, I like that 3CDC does try to cut down its costs on the city projects through the use of good management, I also like that they invest in the city programs as well. The Drop Inn Center could use a little help and as it turns out, 3CDC is doing a complete project on the homeless and the housing they need. I think 3CDC has good ideas, and I understand that “the decay of central cities, their fiscal insolvency and the flight to the suburbs all are inevitable and necessary consequences of a capitalist economic system” (Palin pg. 232). I just wish they would think a bit more about how the older population is reacting to all their changes and future plans.
The fact that 3CDC has invested so much into restoring historical landmarks and making sure that the integrity of the buildings remains intact is amazing and I applaud their work for the community. However, at some point during Brandi’s presentation, I started to feel a little ambivalent towards the whole renovation process because she mentioned all of this buying of future land and completing of projects and she even pointed out the tough cases of owners not willing to part with their property. I am aware that “across the country cities are actively promoting downtown convention centers as an economic growth strategy” (Palin pg. 235), which is why all the talk of renovation began to sound more businesslike and the reasons financially based instead of for the good of the community and because they wanted to help residents as best as they can.
Brandi’s dismissal of the subject of affordable housing was upsetting; she seemed to indicate that cost was not an issue when it comes to making housing available simply because of the luxurious nature of the flats as it pertains to the rest of the city. However, I think she is only trying to remake the city in order to drive away current residents and to attract the young couples more willing to spend their money and work a weakly job. I thought this at Washington Park as well because the park is very nice and fun and functional, but I don’t think it fits with the surrounding neighborhoods too well. Why would an old community need that a park, unless it was meant to attract newcomers and their children to the area? This is the much dreaded gentrification process, because the focus is no longer on restoring the community’s status but in renovating the community by replacing the people living in it with more favorable ones.
Besides the remodeling, I like that 3CDC does try to cut down its costs on the city projects through the use of good management, I also like that they invest in the city programs as well. The Drop Inn Center could use a little help and as it turns out, 3CDC is doing a complete project on the homeless and the housing they need. I think 3CDC has good ideas, and I understand that “the decay of central cities, their fiscal insolvency and the flight to the suburbs all are inevitable and necessary consequences of a capitalist economic system” (Palin pg. 232). I just wish they would think a bit more about how the older population is reacting to all their changes and future plans.