natininja

:cry: Maybe one of the local start-ups could make a 3D printer algorithm for those guys.

I'm entitled to a congestion-free rush hour commute, because freight.

I find it pretty interesting, but I'd be more interested if it involved Southwest Ohio. :) I find it encouraging that it provides a blueprint to bypass state BS.

^^ Cranley wants 3CDC to review the situation. Which I guess is what's going on.

He's running out of deals/contracts to break from the Mallory admin, so hopefully he comes up w/ some (positive) ideas of his own soon.

The steps can easily be rebulit as part of the tunnel portal, no problem there. Litterbugs are pretty much destroying the area now. Go have a look. Okay, good... I was getting worked up for a second :) Annnnd that illustrates my point, since those people could easily be gone one day soon, instantly increasing traffic on the steps. A lot easier to get rid of negative behavior than to bring back the steps.

"Hardly ever get used" sounds similar to the argument for rails-to-trails in a ROW ripe for LRT. Point being, they might not be well-used now, but they could be an integral link in the future. I'm obviously all for the streetcar, but I don't like an alignment that destroys the pedestrian connection from Bellevue Park to Findlay Market. IMO destroying a pedestrian path would be counterproductive to the streetcar's primary objectives.

Their wins have almost all come as the final game of a series, which makes me wonder if it is a change in opponents' pitching line-ups (i.e. to second-string starters) making Reds hitting possible.

We're talking about a 1400-acre "New Urbanist" mixed-use greenfield development which happens to be going next to a retirement community.

^ New Urbanism is a viable way for retrofitting suburbs to be more sustainable, but I agree there should at the very least be a transit link to the regional center or it's not really New Urbanism. Pretty much for the reason kjbrill stated: there's no job access without an automobile.

Maybe they spelled it correctly behind the television.

Can you provide a link? I could imagine it possibly being good for a retirement community. It sounds like the area is pretty remote, and many older folks either don't drive or drive but shouldn't (based on their physical aptitudes). Putting some stores, restaurants, and entertainment options near the community and making it unnecessary to drive in order to access such amenities may not be so bad. Not that I am saying we need to spread out development any more than we already have in the region, but specifically in terms of effects on the retirement community I could see it as being beneficial. One of the big problems with the auto-centric development model is giving elderly folks unnecessary anxiety about losing their independence if they can no longer drive. (And, beyond mere anxiety/psychological problems, real logistical problems for families and (especially) elderly folks without someone to take them shopping/etc.) I personally have experience with caring for elderly people who lost their abilities to drive and basically lived on an island for the rest of their lives, whereas if they lived somewhere more accommodating (like a New Urbanist development) they could have bought one of those electric scooters and lived a significantly more independent and socially rich life for several extra years.

Millennials born in the early '80s always fall between the cracks in these generational generalizations. I remember the damn '80s. I remember epic playground arguments over the bizarre dichotomy of Ninja Turtles vs. New Kids on the Block. I remember the "more than meets the eye" kid in GCrites80s's avatar. Teddy Ruxpin, Dukes of Hazzard, young Madonna, black Michael Jackson.

Wouldn't hold my breath for it, but it's supposed to happen. A private group wanted the city to give the building to them (or sell it for a dollar or whatever) so they would invest and fix it up. That was controversial, and I think the resolution was that council agreed to a 99 year lease. Something like that. But a schedule for renovations is so far elusive. Someone else probably knows more, remembers better, or will bother finding the relevant articles.

Sherman, I was just commenting on the politics of it. The fact is NKY voters generally support the anti-toll amendment, and I don't think the rest of the state wants to see the whole bill go up in flames due to an NKY-exclusive issue. Basically, it seems like Beshear vetoed the bill to appease a few business hotshots. It doesn't matter that tolling is the only way to get it built, when voters don't seem to care about or believe that fact.

Didn't see that coming. I thought the Enquirer was yelling at clouds with their editorial. NKY folks, aside from business leaders, are against tolls. People in the rest of the state a) probably want the option to use PPPs ASAP, b) are probably happy to see NKY not build a major project which competes for state money, and c) can't possibly appreciate whiny NKYians holding up legislation that affects the whole state. In short, the only people who wanted the veto was a small group of Cincinnati-area business folks. I guess those people have enough money to influence Beshear's actions. Interesting.

Imus is like a boring Howard Stern. Cunningham is like a playful Rush Limbaugh.

^ Lot 23 will be part of the park, just like Lot 20 already is. That doesn't mean it will be all green space, as Moerlein is on Lot 20.

I'm sure the Banks developers would be very flexible for GE, so the apartments might move. Some are speculating that GE might have something to do with the delay in starting Phase II. I certainly hope that's the case (assuming GE doesn't just hold everything up then pick somewhere else).

The park already exists north of Mehring Way (see: Moerlein Lager House; Schmidlapp Event Lawn; steps and water features). Edit: Isn't the carousel scheduled to go in the block jwulsin highlighted? They've already done significant work there as part of the park. Edit2: Actually, I think the carousel is in the small space between that "block" and the Roebling bridge, but still...that will be contiguous w/ the park space colored purple in the top image.

Kaisch seems like a pretty stand-up guy. He's a shoo-in to beat Kasich in November.

Seems like something to talk to your community council about changing.

Quimbob, the main advantage of dedicated infrastructure for bikes is that it makes people who otherwise wouldn't take a trip by bike consider doing it. (Also, parents are more willing to let kids take trips by bike, which can greatly increase their mobility and quality of life.) I know you're a vehicular cycling advocate, but the fault with that approach is you fail to achieve the safety-in-numbers critical mass. Assuming a static number of cyclists, vehicular cycling is probably safer. But since dedicated infrastructure increases cycling modeshare, it makes for a safer cycling environment. Also it can be used for road diets/traffic calming (which the engineer quoted in the BizCourier piece notes is true of the proposed Central Parkway plan).

He probably heard a group of NIMBYs complaining about bike lanes, and determined it was probably a consensus opinion among his base. Or a policy advisor reported said experience & analysis. We desperately need a goddamn permanent city manager. It seems like Cranley is trying to do that job, in addition to what he was elected to do, and he hasn't the aptitude for it (to put it lightly).

Wait, what?? I thought he campaigned on building bike infrastructure. Especially including dedicated lanes and cycletracks. And I thought he backed that project specifically?? I viewed it as one of the consolation prizes of him being elected. Not to mention his support of the bike share, and riding anywhere but the streets (aside from the limited network of shared use paths) being illegal.