natininja

Your metric of success, or whatever, via refrigerator is silly. You can buy one downtown, via fiber optic cables. This is also the future of the suburbs. Been to Borders in Springdale lately?

He slept through Cincinnati, which is easily the urban highlight of the whole trip. Well, I can't speak of the Chicago end, but winding through NKY, across the river, and through the core of Cincy is undeniably epic. Feels like you're entering a great 19th century metropolis. In the 19th century.

The point of planning is to think in the long term. So, yes, we do that. Perhaps if your generation had been better at doing that, we wouldn't currently face so many problems. Many of us here recognize that the current and historical way of funding infrastructure is unsustainable and therefore must be replaced with a new, sustainable model. We hope and suspect that as roads which are too expensive to maintain and access to cheap gasoline disappears people will begin to see the inherent value in rail transit. If people didn't think of such things, there would currently be no streetcar coming to fruition, and there never would have been a Metro Moves ballot initiative. You can deride Metro Moves as being akin to a stadium tax, but others do not see the comparison. In fact, there are many municipalities which have passed such measures with much success and satisfaction. I don't think any of us fall to recognize there are great obstacles to funding any of the projects we discuss. Many of the funding problems rail projects face are also becoming problems for road projects. I'll leave you with this article which is food for thought on funding problems which relate to all our infrastructure in this country: http://www.governing.com/columns/eco-engines/gov-why-does-our-infrastructure-resemble-third-world.html Reflect on what these issues mean for our collective pocketbooks when dollars are spent to build new infrastructure to serve greenfield suburbs instead of repairing preexisting infrastructure or upgrading the preexisting built environment. Note the extent to which socialist policy and subsidy have been integral to the establishment of such communities.

It would be very nice to see a residential component to this, but I would be even more happy to see what OC describes. Why residential developments are so slow to show up downtown boggles my mind, as the demand is demonstrated over and over.

I see a lot being gained in Cincinnati these days, but not so much in the outer neighborhoods. Northside, CUF, OTR, and Downtown have a lot of good stuff going on, in particular. Actually, considering the economic downturn, I'd say Cincinnati is doing amazingly well.

The skywalk is still largely intact. Guess you haven't been downtown lately to actually know how many businesses are or are not there. Perhaps some businesses left in part because the skywalk took foot traffic of the street. It's easier to keep one story of businesses thriving than two stories (street level businesses and skywalk level businesses). Welcome to Urban Ohio. I recognize you from my time lurking on the city data forum. Hopefully you find what you're looking for here but be warned that the majority of us support the streetcar and do not take kindly to Mason type development areas. Just to save you any frustration! ;-)

It's also a matter of making the park more inviting. I've driven past that portion of prospect park and there's nothing pulling you into the park, particularly with the density of trees there. By contrast, Washington Park is and will be much more open. Seeing what's in the park versus a wall of vehicles in the foreground will make the park much more inviting. Not to mention the horrific problem with double parking in that part of Brooklyn, which if that were to develop in OTR, we'd be talking about a completely different scenario.

Your huddled masses yearning for mass transit! :wink:

Ths thread has been epically derailed.

My question is why are we building $40,000 a space parking and eliminating existing parking? Because the new spaces improve the environment by getting cars out of view and out of the way, while the old ones did not. Also, the new spaces pull in more money. I'll say it again: you guys should reserve your judgment. See what the park is like without rows of cars uglying up the view. See how much of a shortage in parking there really is. Weigh out the pros and cons. Then decide how you feel about the "loading" lanes. It would be easier to convert them back into parking lanes from loading lanes than it will be to convert them into anything else once they are established parking lanes for the "new" park.

We Are Lebron (Official Youtube Release!)

^^ They are NOT reducing the amount of parking spaces, though. They are increasing the amount. And parking out-of-sight is better than parking in-sight. And, yes, I have been to all the cities you've mentioned. ^^^ While I see the value in a line of cars for creating a safety buffer, the idea that they add aesthetic value is ridiculous. But aesthetics are subjective, so I will...try to be tolerant of your opinion. I don't think a street full of cars feels lively, though. For that, you need a street/sidewalk full of people.

I still have two Intellivisions.

It seems to me they are not expanding the sidewalk or the park or anything because they want to try this out and see what the impact is on parking in general. It's not like there isn't a net gain of parking in the area with what they are doing. Aesthetic benefits are real benefits and carry real value. Too many people here are dismissing that, many with the selfish desire to have what is essentially subsidized housing for their car. I understand the idea of paying for the "rent" through (property and sales) taxes, but this penalizes those who choose not to drive, as they must contribute to your car's rent as well. Frankly, I'd rather reward those who choose not to drive rather than penalize them. This goes doubly for people who can't afford a car. I do agree there could be more value captured if the lanes were made into something new and not an empty "loading" area. I also recognize the legitimacy of issues like removing a buffer for pedestrians and contributing to faster overall vehicle speeds. My hope is this is a temporary trial, and after it is demonstrated that there is little or no negative impact, or that negative impact is offset, that the space will be claimed as an extension of the park, complete with landscaped buffers and trees to give pedestrians peace of mind and give pause to lead-footed motorists. (Making the streets two-way would also be a big help. Speed tables, brick paving, and other traffic calming techniques should likewise be considered. I know Main already has brick paving, so that's already a step in the right direction.) Frankly, at the very least, I think you guys should be more open minded about this. After everything is completed, and you've seen the results of 3CDC's plans for the space, then you can form more legitimate complaints. With the way they are going about this, keeping the space as part of the street, there will be plenty of opportunity to do this. Unlike if they were planning to extend the sidewalk, in which there would be more of a "too late" time component to complaining after the fact.

^ That timeline sounds extremely optimistic.

I've only ever known one person from Cincinnati who said "warsher" (a west sider). Is it really that common? Like Griff on the Cincinnati Blog said, this mostly seems to apply to suburban or exurban folk.

^ Dahoney and Mallory don't want to give Boris and Natasha too much time to concoct a dastardly plot!

Gas guzzler!!!! ;)

You guys are blowing my mind.

Toshiba Thrive. Got a 16GB refurbished for $279. It's a little on the bulky side but it has full-sized USB and HDMI ports and a full-sized SD card slot (as well as a miini-USB port). Overall, I am satisfied with the purchase. Great for reading on my commute or in a chair at home, and I don't carry a laptop around nearly as much.

Didn't the funding get the ax along with all ODOT's other delays?

I recently bought a new laptop and I was seriously considering a Mac. But, despite my open mind, I could not shake the idea of getting ripped off by the price premium. Same thing with the new tablet I got. Couldn't justify the price of an iPad. I would feel like I was buying into conspicuous consumption. If the price premium meant better worker conditions, I might consider it worthwhile. But that's obviously not the case. The closed ecosystem doesn't help, either. Even for email and simple things, it's nice to have more choice.

If all you want to do is check email and Facebook, why on earth would you buy something top-of-the-line?

Sorry, didn't mean to derail the thread again.

That is only possible for a verrry small range of projects. If anyone but airline passengers benefit from the infrastructure, PFCs cannot be used. End of story. So they might be used for a station at the airport, but it's highly doubtful they could be used for laying any track. And there can be no park & ride or anything at such a station. Airport customers only. Edit: Actually, I see a potential trap here. If tracks were laid going to the airport with the use of PFCs, it would then be impossible under federal law to extend the tracks elsewhere, as they would no longer dead end at the airport, which would allow non-airline customers to use the track. Similarly, no stops would be able to be added along tracks funded with PFCs.