natininja

You've found the D-word trap. You are now a real UO'er. +1 lol

I'm late to the party. Found the site in 2009, during the first streetcar ballot battle. I guess through Google? Not really sure, but photo threads were definitely something that drew me in, in addition to insider streetcar info.

^^^ They just have drains, and people come around with trucks and hose them down. From the outside, so it's a quick clean up process. Of course, they don't help for dookie. (Or, notably, for women!) For those, you've gotta go into a business. Businesses are happy to let people off the streets use their facilities, because they all charge 50 cents. I think the not-for-women thing is probably why these won't fly in America. Though the Dutch did invent the "portable penis" disposable funnel, allowing women to use urinals (and presumably pissoirs). Edit: There are also event pissoirs, which are put up on parade routes as well as being standard weekend street furniture in entertainment districts: Spatially economical, they serve four dudes (or chicks with portable penises, lol) at once. I think they call them piss-crosses.

I am disappoint.

Speaking of NYC pizza, I like John's on Bleecker Street near 6th Ave.

^ I get that, though I admit I sort of forgot the details of why the route was chosen since it was basically settled. But it's a two-sided coin. On the one hand, there are riders to consider. If the streetcar serves to replace the Uptown-to-Downtown segment of some bus routes, which it certainly has the potential to do, having to meander through OTR reduces the quality of service to riders. On the other hand, it increases development potential and arguably makes for a better pedestrian accelerator in the basin since it connects a different set of amenities. It also connects to more (developable) flatland with the jog to the west, since the taper of the hillside truncates the walkable/developable land to the east. Your assertion that those blocks between Elm and Race would be neglected without the streetcar is plausible but not as certain as you state it. But the fact that Vine will develop regardless is indisputable IMO, so it's a reasonable argument. Re: CVG Notice I did not advocate for light rail to CVG, but for the Hamilton County portion of this line. That means from Downtown up 71.

I apologize for taking us off topic. Thanks for the analysis, Eighth and State. And for the clarification about the PUCO board. Apparently there are rumblings about Duke and the city coming to an agreement. I hope this is the case.

What makes sense here is what is popular, or what is statistically likely to work best to achieve stated goals. Maybe the lure of rail over bus is not "logical", but it is factual. It's the planner's job to understand what people will ride (or what will spur investment, etc.), not to make judgments about whether or not it makes sense for people to have those inclinations. "Sense" be damned. Those judgments are what would be unethical: trying to force your own sense of what people should want upon the public. I think we have to rely on the developers understanding what is appealing about the neighborhood, and seeing a development that is harmonious with those appeals as potentially more successful than a lesser quality development. Also, this is what we have zoning laws and review boards for. Not that this system is perfect, by any means. But I think if you are worrying about the "disposability" of development on all these hypotheticals, you're getting beyond what a transit planner can really do. Regardless of the reasons a developer chooses to invest in a certain location, this disposability factor will always be an issue: they're always looking to make the quickest bucks possible. I definitely see the downtown streetcar loop as a small but significant portion of a larger system. It's not a light rail system, and that's fine. It's a pedestrian accelerator for getting around downtown, and not so much out of it. Remember all the 3C critics complaining about how you wouldn't be able to get anywhere upon arrival in the city? Though the streetcar doesn't go to Union Terminal, it helps answer the question of how you get around when you arrive in Cincinnati without a car. It connects a lot of things. And it's not a bus, which 3C riders would be less attracted to. I get the sense you've never visited Amsterdam. We've had this discussion before in this thread. I am very experienced with cycling around, next to, over, etc., streetcar tracks in an urban environment, and I am thoroughly unswayed by the concerns you express. Seriously, there are too many cities with streetcars and insanely high bike mode share providing counterarguments to these concerns. While it's definitely possible to wipe out on streetcar tracks, it's empirically not a practical concern. I think it is hard to say if a Vine Street route would be better. Since this partial route has to serve as the flagship for rail transit's possibilities, there is a lot of pressure to make it work as a stand-alone line. I certainly see the argument that a more direct route is better as a piece of a streetcar system, but I think a linear line going up and down Vine or up and down Vine/Race would seem too simplistic standing alone. You would cut down on the number of things directly or near-directly served, and without any turns there would be this feeling of "that's it??" for people giving it a test ride. If the route were built with the idea of it being the best possible piece of a larger route, but the partial route failed to feel substantial on its own, the extensions might not happen. I wish someone would start collecting signatures to put a county transit tax on the ballot to build HamCo's segment of airport-to-Kings Island light rail. Would be nice if some polling or even focus groups could be done to figure out things people like and words people respond to. Take a card out of Chris Finney's deck and fill the ballot language with buzzwords that sell.

I'm happy to be corrected. Still, it's good news. The question is how good.

^ I do.

I said that because there were a few posts after mine but no one mentioned it. The media doesn't seem to notice, either, as it hasn't been reported on. Maybe Sunday? Monday? Maybe never.

Rush doesn't suffer from an overabundance of self-righteousness? Are we talking about the same guy?

This!

Found this site which indexes free and open source GIS programs: http://www.opensourcegis.org/

I don't know about websites. I know there are some open source or community mapping sites, but not sure how easy it is to load census data. You could try a free GIS program, e.g. Quantum GIS: http://www.qgis.org/en/about-qgis.html You could buy a license for Telestrian: http://www.telestrian.com/ Telestrian was created by an UrbanOhio member, arenn.

No one cares about the PUCO thing? Isn't that an at least temporary clearing of the primary source of delay of the project? There had been murmurings about Duke moving forward with things. PUCO is probably the reason, ja? I thought it was big news.

Is this for casino parking?

I am not very familiar with these things, and a lot of this is industry or legal mumbo jumbo to me. However, the way I read it: PUCO has rejected Duke's proposal to have the city pay for the streetcar or (alternatively) charge city residents a fee for utility relocation. I don't know if Duke can just submit another plan, addressing PUCO's concerns, or if this is the final word for Duke's liability for relocation with regards to this project. Either way, it is good news. You can read the list of reasons PUCO rejected the proposal here: http://www.scribd.com/fullscreen/119004561?access_key=key-prjvl6aa5yl6pt4au66 Bottom of page 32 of the PDF; page 21 of the document. Funny how one of PUCO's complaints is that the proposal is too broad -- that they might use the rider to escape liability for many different sorts of transit projects since the term is ambiguous. (Remind anyone of other streetcar opponents' also-failed tactics?) Possible expansion of a transit system outside municipal boundaries is another concern they address -- why would Cincinnati residents cover the tab for a system extending outside the borders? Duke's proposal might wind up with this happening. They also bring up economic, social, and environmental benefits of projects which can extend beyond borders. It seems to me this could be the nail in the coffin for any fix Duke might add to their language, and I find it very encouraging that PUCO included it in their review. It's really a trump card against the whole concept of concentrating the cost burden (in this case on Cincinnatians). It's progressive thinking (from PUCO???), and it's the argument I think people on UrbanOhio would be most likely to use. Interested to hear from anyone who understands where things go from here, or who can interpret the document better than me. Also interested to hear from Eight and State.

Interesting theory. Makes me wonder why you think right-wing comedians don't take off in popularity. And why don't these sacred cows hinder the likes of Stewart and Colbert?

What does a Brown look like? Like this: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/af/Paul_Brown%2C_American_football_head_coach.png I'm also a young-ish browns fan, but I don't want to say anything other than the current uniform, or any of the slight variations of the past. Here's your new mascot. You can have him. Free of charge!

I agree. A mascot/logo please!!! When I ask myself what a Brown is, I don't like the answer! Give me something else to picture! Also, I like the metallic helmets.

bike756, I disagree. It connects a ton of amenities with rail transit, which is preferable by choice riders to bus transit. It is a huge compliment to the walkability of the basin. When extended Uptown it will be a huge compliment to the bikeability of the urban core. (Walk bike on, walk bike off...unlike buses which may even have full racks.) I realize it's not ideal because the route meanders, but it connects a lot of dots with only one major blip in the path (around Central Parkway). You can complain about the oneway streets, but a) buses are also subject to them, and b) if you are not on a tight schedule or you are mobility-impaired, you can just ride the thing around the top or bottom of the loop anyway. For people looking to retire and grow old downtown it would be a godsend. For tourists it's an easy-to-read way of seeing a large portion of the sights. Your view of rail's impermanence is way off-base. There are a ton of abandoned tracks, but those tracks were only abandoned over a long stretch of time. Developers are only concerned with the time period in which it takes them to turn a profit. The chances of newly laid tracks being abandoned in that time window are very, very low. Even if you personally disagree, I think you would be in a small minority and the perception of investors, not you, is what counts.

I thought my post was primarily about the Browns, but if it was a problem I apologize. I do hope Weeden improves. I'm not sold on him, and it sounds like many of you aren't, either. But you never know, I guess. It's hard to be a good team without a good quarterback. I would give an example, but it's not Browns related...oh, hell...I'm talking about the Cincinnati Bearcats. They have a good, balanced team but two mediocre QB's. Spoils everything. If Weeden's not the guy, he needs to be replaced ASAP. Can we all rejoice that the Steelers suck?

Unlocked...does this mean Bengals fans are invited back in?? :evil:

cincySAL, I thought you were inferring there was some good reason to think the city should not order the cars. I guess you sort of are, since you say having them sit around is a waste of money. (I think that depends on how the financing works -- when is the money allocated such that interest starts to accrue? When the cars are ordered or some prior date when the money is transferred to the city's hands regardless of orders?) I know the cars take a long while from order to delivery, so I would speculate that ordering them now is meant to ensure everything is ready to go once the tracks are finished (whenever that is -- there seems to be uncertainty). Jake's answer seems to be reasonable, as does Ram23's -- it's standard procedure. The scrutiny is the unique thing.