natininja

Here's Portune's associated puff piece in the Enquirer: Transit plan key to the future http://news.cincinnati.com/comments/article/20140211/EDIT02/302110016/OPINION-Transit-plan-key-future I hope MetroMoves is part of the regional plan he's referring to. At least he wasn't too aggressive with his subtle jabs at the streetcar. I don't understand the guy. I don't get why he's so gung-ho about the Eastern Corridor. I don't know what to take seriously. My (short-term) wishlist for things they should address at the summit: - Mt. Auburn tunnel - Hoosier State extension (probably including a 4th main into Union Terminal) - Preserving transit right-of-way on Brent Spence and Western Hills Viaduct

Or he's just trying to not look like an anti-rail zealot whilst being an anti-rail zealot.

^ Used to be able to avoid it just by avoiding the RPG genre. No longer! Grumblegrumblegrumble

It's a non-story. Enquirer is back to trolling for streetcar clicks. Showing again why they came out in force to keep the project alive -- it's the biggest cash-cow they've got.

She knows that streetcars are light rail, right? And that the tracks we're building can serve any kind of light rail train? Grade-separating the next phase would make this abundantly clear, weakening many opposition taking-points. We've destroyed countless opposition talking points over the years. It doesn't matter. They just keep on making up new ones At least it would respond to the vocal contingent that claims to be pro-LRT but skeptical of the streetcar. If enough of them are honest, allying them with the already strong pro-streetcar base should make for a potent political force. Plus we need a bold vision to keep motivational momentum. We are constantly at risk of waning morale. I certainly feel battle fatigue, and I've only been participating from afar. Grade-separated access to Uptown is something to get excited about; battling over Duke's oil-suspended powerline sounds So. Yawn. Inducing. (I know that might turn out to be nothing, but I think it helps illustrate my point.)

She knows that streetcars are light rail, right? And that the tracks we're building can serve any kind of light rail train? Grade-separating the next phase would make this abundantly clear, weakening many opposition taking-points.

C-Dawg, I just don't agree with your interpretation of what the essence of a hipster is. Maybe your conception is accurate for what hipsters have devolved into, but originally the phenomenon was fundamentally anti-capitalist, expressed via pro-consumerist irony. Living on a shoestring was the ideal, which is exactly why Williamsburg became the place to go: it was dirt-effing-cheap. Hipsters have practically become synonymous with gentrifiers over the past decade-plus for this reason. Discovering a forgotten neighborhood was like discovering an unknown band -- it is the underlying authenticity, the true nature behind the fake (ironic) embrace of trucker hats, redneck beards, pop-culture worship, etc. That said, the movement has long outlived its own authenticity or relevance. By 2006 (perhaps a couple/few years earlier), the idea stopped being at all original, which was essential to its nature. Without originality, it became a parody of itself (which I guess was the point to begin with, but the intent behind the irony was lost). So you might accurately portray the current state of affairs, but when you say Midwestern hipsters aren't real hipsters, I beg to differ. They are closer to the original concept than the Silicon Valley hipsters you describe. The Rust Belt has a lot more potential to hold the new Williamsburg than anywhere in the Bay Area. The Bay Area is terminally top-40s pop; Toledo is an undiscovered garage band.

^ Good to see the Provost of Cincinnati has made a return. (comments section)

^ Thanks for the clarification. If stops are added, do you expect segments of rail to be replaced, or larger station bump-outs (despite the snow plow, etc. problems)?

Those bends make it so there is no need for retractable accessibility ramps. First streetcar system in the country to have the feature.

If a rack is too popular, I'm sure they could extend it with more bike slots or add another rack next to it. Not being able to park where you want to is probably a bigger concern. But if it works in other cities, why wouldn't it work in at least the flatter parts of Cincy?

You misled a lot of people here with your "I'm an industry insider, I know better than all of you!" stuff, so you should probably go ahead and eat some humble pie and not make any more predictions for a while.

1) The streetcar is a pedestrian accelerator. The bike share...same sort of thing. 2) Its use is limited in the basin (on the Ohio side), which is why it needs to be expanded to NKY ASAP. 3) It doesn't matter if current cyclists are biking up hills or not. Suppose they are. The more casual riders to which the a bike share will mainly appeal will not be riding up hills. At least that's my educated guess.

Quimbob... you don't have to maintain the bikes, don't have to worry about what to do with the bike if you switch modes while you're out, don't have to carry a lock around, have a newish/reliable bike with no worry of theft, don't have to store a bike at your residence, etc... There are a lot of advantages. There are also disadvantages. But they seem to get use in other cities, so apparently there's a sizable number of people who think the advantages win out. I think they should keep it DT/OTR only, until NKY is also on board. Then if the service is popular enough, expand outside the basin. I think the hills make the logistics of operating too widely too much for an untested system. If NKY is slow to get on board, then a few stations in the West End, Camp Washington, Northside, Columbia-Tusculum, and the East End would be the most sensible Ohio-side expansion locations. These systems attract casual riders, who I suspect will be unlikely to bike uphill and return the bikes, which probably means paying a lot extra in operating costs to shuffle the bikes around. They should also consider offering some incentives for returning bikes from a lower elevation to a higher one, like discounted memberships. Could be a way to keep down the impact on operating costs. It would be worth looking at the impact of hills on San Francisco's, and other similarly steep cities', bike shares.

The Enquirer has another article about the bike share. Sounds like it is on pace to be rolled out this summer. Bike sharing rolls into Cincinnati

Well you're special.

Holy parking, Batman.

Indianapolis has one of the nicer airport facilities I've been to. It's been a while, so I can't remember specifics, but I remember thinking it was really nice when I was there.

Waaaaat. Whoa. And I thought Indianapolis was going places, with their Cultural Trail and whatnot. I imagine this will pass without much problem. Jeebus save us if Ohio tries to emulate this.

Is the Save-a-Lot in Northside gone?

I'm not sure I agree that black churches subscribe to a stricter reading of scripture, but regardless from my point of view, church attendance and bible mindedness tend to go hand in hand with poverty. this is because people in poverty are more likely to retain a spirit of humility than those who aren't. You're basically calling nonreligious people arrogant. Isn't it humble to think you don't have access to the knowledge of whatever the higher purpose of life might be? Or to imagine yourself to be insignificant in the grand scheme, as opposed to being someone that some all-powerful being actually gives a sh!t about?

Because we are discussing differences between the cities, and blacks are common between them. Cleveland does have a larger percentage of blacks, and I actually started to mention it in one of my posts, but I decided to focus on starker differences and deleted that part of my post. Cincinnati really doesn't have any Puerto Ricans to speak of, which is a real contrast. There are plenty parts of (metro) Cincy with a big Jewish presence (especially suburbs like Amberly Village, Blue Ash, Wyoming), though they've left their mark (at least historically) on city neighborhoods, too, especially in the Reading Road corridor). The vast, vast majority are Reform Jews, though, so I guess you can argue they don't count, or that they would contribute to a lower ranking of Bible-mindedness. But I think Hebrew Union College is a significant institution in the local theological landscape. Probably the most significant institution, actually, as it's globally significant. Reform Jews might be liberal, but it wouldn't make sense to say the folks at HUC aren't Bible-minded. Thank you for your reasonable, non-hotheaded reply (I knew common sense would quickly return!). I guess my point was that since this was a survey of "Bible-mindedness" and the Black church (or maybe Black churches, so as not to paint with too broad a brush) generally adheres to a more stricter reading of Scripture than white mainstream (especially liberal) churches, and since the black population is so large in Ohio's big cities (subsequently representing a large chunk of the respondents in each city who are indeed Bible-minded); then it seemed odd that they would not have been included in the discussions (at least up until now) of this survey. Thank you for you clarification. I agree, the AA community is a major contributor to "Bible-mindedness" (I'm getting tired of that word) in all of Ohio's cities. Toledo has a relatively low proportion of blacks, which may contribute to its low rank in that study.

Because we are discussing differences between the cities, and blacks are common between them. Cleveland does have a larger percentage of blacks, and I actually started to mention it in one of my posts, but I decided to focus on starker differences and deleted that part of my post. Cincinnati really doesn't have any Puerto Ricans to speak of, which is a real contrast. There are plenty parts of (metro) Cincy with a big Jewish presence (especially suburbs like Amberly Village, Blue Ash, Wyoming), though they've left their mark (at least historically) on city neighborhoods, too, especially in the Reading Road corridor). The vast, vast majority are Reform Jews, though, so I guess you can argue they don't count, or that they would contribute to a lower ranking of Bible-mindedness. But I think Hebrew Union College is a significant institution in the local theological landscape. Probably the most significant institution, actually, as it's globally significant. Reform Jews might be liberal, but it wouldn't make sense to say the folks at HUC aren't Bible-minded.

Running on the street is ideal, but what you're overlooking is that the portion of the streetcar driving development is the stop, not the vehicle or the tracks (though the tracks do ensure that the stops are unlikely to disappear in the near future). The stop is where people disembark and may pop into a nearby store, restaurant, bar, etc. The streetcar can run up Vine Street's hill with no problem, but it can't stop/unload/restart effectively on the hill. I'm sure it can stop and restart in traffic, but it's not worth the increased maintenance costs that would be associated with the extra strain on the vehicles generated by scheduled mid-hill stops. So basically, you have two options, running up the hill with no scheduled stops or running through a tunnel. Neither spurs development along that portion of Vine Street because the passengers can't get off in the middle of the hill, so the increase in redevelopment value along that section of track is negligible. That leaves you to choose between a tunnel and on-street-running based on price, time to build, efficiency, and expansion potential. Good post. IMO, expansion potential should be weighed the highest, because we are building for the future. This relates to the other factors you mentioned in these ways: Price - A segment with less expansion potential, while cheaper up front, may be more expensive in the long term. Tracks on Vine are useful for a streetcar and a streetcar only. A tunnel has many more potential uses. If we decide we want those uses in the future, the tracks up Vine become redundant and all money invested in them is wasted. Time to build - Compared to the life of the infrastructure, the extra time to build a tunnel is negligible. Efficiency - Um, yeah. jmeck estimated 10+ min for running up Vine Street and 2-3 for going through the tunnel (the high estimate was for including a stop under Mt. Auburn). No question a tunnel wins this one. And with greater efficiency comes greater expansion potential; it also guides where the tunnel should go (Mt. Auburn is a diversion, but would be a good site for a stop -- even if that's not part of initial construction). Another thing we should consider is potential ROI. That's practically limitless for a segment with the expansion potential provided by a tunnel, but very limited by a long, inefficient street segment without stops.

According to the Daily Beast list, you could have a pretty small Jewish population with a lot of kosher restaurants and rank high. So I'm not sure it's very definitive. (Especially since Reform Jews rarely keep kosher.) If you're counting kosher restaurants, surely you should give big points for the Hebrew Union College. Anyway, the list gives Cleveland's Jewish population as 2.9%, while the site I linked to has it at 2.41%. So I'd think that both are using the same level of study, probably MSA, and the .49% difference is probably statistical noise (religious affiliation is a difficult thing to measure). At any rate, aside from NYC and Miami, I don't think Jews have a huge impact on the religious culture of any major American cities. They're just too small in number.