natininja

Missed opportunity not tying the I-75 expansion to subway activation & LRT.

The author said "sprawling urban landscape." Small buses, are, in fact, appropriate for urban areas They are not well suited to sprawling suburban landscape. For a given seating capacity, large vehicles are less expensive to operate, because fewer drivers are required. However, larger vehicles are more expensive to use, because more stops means slower travel times. Would you rather take a large bus that stops 20 times per mile, or a small one that stops twice per mile? An effective transit network balances the cost to build and operate with the cost to use. Here is a photo of small buses serving an urban area. The red vehicles are buses; each one is operated by one driver and has a capacity of 12 people. There are three of them captured in this photo. For comparison, Cincinnati's first cable car route, the Walnut Hills Cable Railway, used vehicles operated by a crew of two, and carried 12 passengers each. Headway was 6 minutes, with extra cars for a headway of 2 minutes at rush hour! At that frequency, it makes no sense to own an automobile. It's possible that's what the author meant, but I don't believe he was thinking with such nuance or sophistication. Keep in mind that "urban sprawl" and "suburban sprawl" mean exactly the same thing. "Urban areas," as termed by the US Census Bureau, include a lot of suburban sprawl, too. It's not at all clear from the context that "sprawling urban landscape" means urban in the sense of high-density, mixed-use spaces. I have a feeling the buses in that picture are used because of the small area they take up (as well as consequently smaller turning radii), rather than their fast pick-up (which would be the primary driver behind the swiftness of smaller vehicles). In that regard, they'd be less suitable for a sprawling urban area than a hyper-dense urban area, where road space is at a huge premium.

And the call for many "small buses...as well as vans to meet the need of a sprawling urban landscape" is completely tone-deaf for two reasons: 1) Operating expenses would be completely ridiculous for such a network. Driver salaries are the biggest operating expense of the streetcar; if operating large-capacity vehicles in the most densely populated part of the metro is a concern, operating small-capacity vehicles through "sprawling" areas is ludicrous. 2) This completely ignores the feedback loop of transportation and land-use. Rail transit promotes a less-sprawling use of land, which is in turn cheaper to serve with transit (and all other public services). Building for sprawl, and then trying to build a transit system to serve the sprawl, is a fiscal nightmare. "Insanely expensive," in the author's words.

In the case of Cranley, that would be the former (sooner).

MadTree is expanding into the Dayton market in January. http://www.ohio.com/blogs/the-beer-blog/the-beer-blog-1.273124/madtree-expanding-into-dayton-market-1.454800 Rhinegeist is going to start canning in January. https://cincinnati.com/blogs/newintown/2013/12/23/rhinegeist-to-start-canning-in-january/ I haven't had Rhinegeist yet, so I'm happy they will be canning as that ups my chances. I expected MadTree's expansion, as their beer is definitely high quality, especially relative to most Ohio brewers. Look for them to hit the rest of the state in short order.

I understand the urge to want to make the criminals feel the pain they inflict on others. But shouldn't the ultimate goal be preventing such crimes from occurring in the first place? The American tough-on-crime style has only resulted in expensive, overcrowded prisons and horrific recidivism rates. If there were studies backing up the theory that this "scare them straight" tactic worked, I'd be all for it, but I don't think there are. And whatever emotional satisfaction we get from punishing the a-holes does not make up for failing public policy.

Easy to say that. But rail is is step backward as you have to run on their schedule, making it the exact mass control the supporters object to. If you do not want to be government controlled, why in the world would you advocate this? Oh, lets see because you are doing something as an urban advocate that is environmentally great. Great for your advocacy, but don't expect everyone else to agree. This coming from the guy who wants to see bicycle licenses. Cycling is all about bootstrap-power, freedom, self-reliance, personal responsibility, etc., until you start throwing up red tape. Bicycles are a libertarian's dream compared to automobiles.

^ I figure COAST is looking to capitalize on streetcar proponents' dissatisfaction w/ Cranley to open up all future mayors, and current (and future) streetcar-supporting councilmembers, to recall. It's pretty hilarious how Luken and COAST have turned on Cranley.

Welcome to UO. Wish I could comment on the MegaRail thing, but I cannot. You are spot-on about highway construction and fossil fuel consumption. My hat goes off to you for making such a large personal sacrifice to stand up for your beliefs about fracking.

"The majority," in this case, is just a bunch of minorities cobbled together. Even Wal-Mart workers have cars, so it's obvious underemployment is not, in itself, the sole factor. We also have to look beyond Cincinnati/Ohio to see the whole impact of the back-to-the-city movement. The fact that it's resulting in so much change in urban Ohio is actually a testament to the fact that it's a major cultural force. Most of the people interested in such a lifestyle were not first looking toward Ohio. Not even Ohioans. What do you think the "brain drain" is about? A lot of it is about the sub-par urban living product Ohio's had to offer for many years. My Facebook feed is filled with high school classmates from Cincinnati who moved to NYC, Chicago, Boston, Portland, Austin, Seattle, DC, and Minneapolis. There is even one city (not a neighborhood or a borough (thinking Brooklyn here) but an entire city), Portland OR, which can attribute its entire reputation as a rising star to embracing the idea that urban living is an in-demand product. This phenomenon has been growing since the '90s, and shows no sign of slowing down. Is it really doubtful that a movement big enough to make an entire American city would have enough impact to influence a statistic like vehicle miles traveled? Surely not.

I think a line going up Gilbert from the casino to McMillan and then east on McMillan and up Woodburn would be the next logical new line. IMO this is correct, in terms of shared right-of-way streetcars. It might be a tough sell, though, due to a lack of major employers up that way. Flyboy41 is probably onto something as having it be planned to connect to the Wasson line -- though actually using the Wasson line would probably have to be part of a future phase. Uptown is a more high-profile target, with lots of employers, and better potential for future expansion, particularly if the tracks are given a separate right-of-way. People say they want light rail? Let's build a dual-use lightrail/streetcar tunnel from OTR to UC/Corryville. Someone made an interesting point up-thread, saying future streetcar phases should be run exclusively with both directions on the same street. I don't know if I would make a blanket statement like that, but I think it should be done sparingly and only with great consideration. Not just because it's easier or it matches the current one-way flow of traffic (thinking about Taft/McMillan here). One thing we should learn from the streetcar debate is that higher ROI doesn't necessarily mean more politically palatable. People also consider travel time, which is something more tangible to grasp. Is the Western Hills Viaduct reconstruction figuring in the potential for light rail? I could see a proposed train to the west side helping to activate the Central Parkway tunnel.

At least one of those swing voters emphasized repeatedly that, while making his decision, he was factoring in that some people were telling him the Uptown extension was necessary for success of the downtown segment. While I believe the studies of the downtown segment show that to be false, his vote to go forward may very well indicate he wants to go forward with the extension. Regardless, if advocates for anything sit back self-satisfied after a victory, no movements ever really move forward. Part of the justification for the narrowly focused streetcar in many people's minds was that it was the beginning of a much larger system. On the other hand, many people said they opposed the streetcar because they felt it covered too little space. There's a hell of a lot more support for an expansive rail network than would be indicated by Cranley squeaking in with 16% of the vote.

Times article is up: Cincinnati Streetcar Plan Pits Desire for Growth Against Fiscal Restraint http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/23/us/cincinnati-streetcar-plan-pits-desire-for-growth-against-fiscal-restraint.html Edit: With all the time they took on it, I was expecting a bit more detail. Especially more history. No mention Issues 9 and 48? No mention of the Tea Party-NAACP alliance? They seem to have missed the most intriguing parts of the story.

I root for the Browns unless they are playing against the Bengals.

The vast majority of funding for local roads doesn't come from user fees, and none of the funding for sidewalks does. Throwing up a bunch of red tape for cyclists would be anti-environment, anti-poor, anti-public health, pro-congestion, and a whole bunch of other negative things.

I'd like to see a tunnel to a transit village hub (an Uptown Government Square plus mixed-use TOD) at University Plaza.

U mad, Hoss? (sorry if that ain't the right lingo) Tastes bitter doesn't it? :) Not as bitter as a losing season.

ummmm...because in the clip that I cited, the caller--from Cincinnati--mentioned the streetcar as a news item pertinent to the show's theme of news items. I'm sorry I had the temerity to inject what (at least I thought) was a little levity (sprinkled with a little lighthearted commentary regarding the cultural/political milieu of the state of Ohio) into this very, very serious discussion of the Cincinnati Streetcar, especially as an outsider from the opposite end of the state no longer even living in Ohio. While begging your indulgences, I assure you I will this will not happen again. Everyone have a nice evening :-) You're right. I apologize. After listening to the whole segment, I forgot the streetcar was mentioned, since it was rather insignificant.

He's just trolling. He's bitter that the Browns aren't successful and the Bengals are.

^^^^ I think she is secretly from Cleveland, judging by how she says "eeanswer" at 24:29. Why is this in the streetcsr thread?

No it doesn't. You can recognize there are pros and cons to both ways. Recognizing that commitment to long-term investments is harder with shorter election cycles is not a statement that campaigning is bad. It also tells us that when politicians are in campaign mode it is advantageous to play fast and loose with the facts. The greater amount of time politicians spend campaigning while in office is likely to be proportional to a decrease in the significance of the role of facts in informing their policy decisions.

I wonder how many Tweets were made today regarding the streetcar.

Enquirer advocates for Uptown extension & beyond in the final paragraph of their editorial: Finally, there will be a streetcar Who knows what they will say, though, when specifics are outlined.

They were waiting. Hope to see it over the weekend. Maybe it'll make the Sunday Times.

Great name for the foundation!