The Durrës Regional Archaeological Project (DRAP) was a intensive surface survey field project centered around the modern town of Durrës, Albania.
This collection represents all of the raw data collected from the project, whether born analog or born digital.
A conversation between two friends who are not musicians and whose personal histories could hardly be more different. Through a series of conversations we explored those journeys, compared and contrasted our stories, and discussed just why this music affects us so deeply. We discussed specific musicians in terms of whether we liked, did not like, or were indifferent to their music, and why we either agreed or not. In these conversations we posed various questions to each other, hoping to discover and articulate certain essences that we might share. One thing we agreed upon up front is that we are neither musicians nor music critics. In fact, we’re not convinced that the field of music criticism is even a valid endeavor. Music description and personal reaction, however, is another matter. In our conversations we tried to describe our reactions to specific musicians and “schools” of music, without labeling the music as “good” or “lousy”. You will see that this doesn’t prevent us from disagreeing and disagreeing in spirited fashion, while always trying to focus on why our personal reaction is what it is.
Parallel Projections investigates two types of postindustrial site: the architectural and the agricultural; it conflates (projections of and into) spaces as means of making visceral our intellectual comprehension of the
relationships between materiality, surface, place and history. Parallel Projections is not meant for specific
places but for specific kinds of spaces: defunct industrial buildings, abandoned urban edifices, and mechanized
natural landscapes. The authors, living in places (Iowa and Ohio) that have both been radically altered by scalar
economic shifts, adapt alien (guest) project components to their native (host) contexts. Both types of spaces, host
and guest, as spaces of urban and rural abandonment, share surfaces that are compelling palimpsests. These
surfaces are encrusted with nearly-obliterated histories, emptied by changes in production methods and habits
of occupation and revealed by ghost texts. In opposition to the idea that these sites should be whitewashed and redrawn, the authors see them as grounds for new layers that can receive projections of phenomena from other postindustrial sites and as repositories for material evidence that deepens, rather than erases, the evidence of their
This document details our process for creating a service catalog for UC Libraries Research and Data Services and our efforts towards offering data science services. In this document, we identify our gaps in knowledge and expertise while making recommendations for filling these gaps.
Cincinnati has one of the lowest home ownership rates in the country for cities of comparable size. Several other cities with low rates of home ownership in 1970 have managed to increase their rates two to four percent over the past 25 years, but the home ownership rate in Cincinnati has been stable over that period at 38 percent.
The best explanation for Cincinnati’s low home ownership rate is that the topography of the city encouraged dense development involving multiple-unit structures up until World War II. When the highway programs of the post-war period opened up the suburbs to development, the city was already built-out and could not compete for new single-unit construction that the federal government was subsidizing on a massive scale.
In the last 50 years, the Hamilton County suburbs have gained 140,000 owners while the number of owners in the city has decreased by 1,000. As a result, the home ownership rate in the Cincinnati metropolitan area is greater than the national rate for areas of comparable size (63 percent versus 61 percent) while the rate in the city is far less than the national rate.
The City of Cincinnati faces a number of challenges in any effort to increase its home ownership rate. Government programs in other cities typically produce dozens of units a year, not the hundreds of units that Cincinnati needs to produce. In order to achieve even a modest increase in home ownership, the city will have to alter market forces in the direction of increased supply of housing suitable for owner-occupancy and increased demand for home ownership.
In order to increase its rate of home ownership to 41 percent by the year 2010, the City of Cincinnati needs to adopt a four-part strategy:
Increase the Supply of Units
The market cannot produce new units on its own. The city needs to assemble and prepare sites in order to reduce the additional costs associated with building in the city as opposed to the suburbs. City Hall must continue to eliminate barriers to development and provide new services to builders. Cincinnati will not be able to increase the number of middle-class owners without creating new neighborhood areas with the appropriate mix of amenities. At the lower end of the owner-market, the city needs to move aggressively to convert abandoned structures into units people will want to buy and rehabilitate.
Help Renters Become Owners
While converting renters to owners is an essential component of an overall strategy, the City of Cincinnati must recognize that not everyone can be an owner and target its resources appropriately. The city does not have unlimited funds to change the cost equation of owning a home and will, therefore, have to learn from other cities how to work with lending institutions to increase the flow of dollars under Community Reinvestment Act initiatives. Other cities have had some limited success with programs to convert people renting duplex and condo units into owners. The city needs to increase the availability, extent and quality of education and counseling programs.
Attract New Households to the City
The city has to market its neighborhoods, and in some cases, smaller areas within neighborhoods. This will require market research, training programs for Realtors, investments in street furniture, increased services, publications extolling city neighborhoods, and programs comparable to the Living in Cleveland program. The city needs to start working cooperatively with the Cincinnati Public Schools. Specific market niches in which the city can hope to compete very successfully include the empty nesters, the gay and lesbian community, first time buyers, and people interested in downtown living.
Maintain the Existing Pool of Owners
About 75 percent of the time a home owner in Cincinnati sells and buys another home in the Cincinnati area, the home purchased will be in the suburbs. The city must create opportunities for the home seller to move up without moving out of the city.
In addition to the above strategies, which involve the central city market, the City of Cincinnati needs to actively promote strategies that will help slow the rate of suburbanization and that will create low income housing opportunities in the suburbs. If suburbanization continues at the current rate, and if the city continues to be the governmental unit with de facto responsibility for low income housing, there is every reason to wonder if there is anything that the city can do to increase its rate of home ownership.