LincolnKennedy

^Hook, line & sinker.

I think jmeck is just emphasizing that having the Streetcar on Vine is far more important than any potential impact on cyclists, a non-trivial if redundant and perhaps generally accepted point. If he's expressing any hostility it seems to me that it's toward the idea that cyclist need or even want separate lanes. I'm sympathetic to that position, mostly because I don't think it's particularly hard to watch out for stuff as a cyclist, and because the bicycle lanes that do exist in Cincinnati are terrible and pointless (the recently added bike lanes between the 71 interchange and Madison Road on Dana are a perfect example). That being said, I'm not sure what sort of grade is ideal for bikes or what, but there is certainly a ROW of two that could potentially be redeveloped for bikes- the old incline ROWs and Ohio Avenue Steps. Not sure if it would work, or what would be done to make it work (particularly getting across Clifton Avenue) but those things are there. Of course, cyclists could always travel from Clifton downtown by taking McMillan to Gilbert and then Gilbert downtown. I hear the grade on Gilbert is even more comfortable than on Vine Street.

^I'm still waiting to hear what issues Kasich is going to run on that actually bear on the conscience of voters. Blame Strickland for the economy strikes me as being about all they've got, but the fact that every Republican candidate is saying the same thing- cut spending, but they're generally not willing to say what programs they will cut, I don't see how that beats, "I saved the schools."

Then since we've got hills in our relevant business areas, I guess going up Vine is just the way we've got to get it done here.

Meant to say, plan new sewer construction. I've got to actually proofread my comments to your posts because I can't assume anything.

What do they do with them then?

For a guy who posts frequently and often quotes other people's posts, you seem to have an extremely strange habit of missing the point. You'd been complaining about what the City does to drive people to leave, to the point of building them their own sewer lines. I mention that the City doesn't run the sewers, and now you're answering my snide rhetorical question? Jeff answered you, but it seemed pretty obvious that he was referring to the pollution as bleak and not the subject of municipal sewer systems. This is an urban nerd forum, after all.

I'm interested in hearing opposing analysis.

^Strickland is a fundraising machine, and if he can start polling consistently above 50% before September, I think he'll have it in the bag. He's going to be talking about investing in education, and he's going to have the record to prove that he's serious about it. I think it's a great platform to run on when people are short cash and realizing what a deal the public schools (both grade school and colleges) are. What's Kasich got? "No New Trains!"? I just don't see him with any issues that are going to attract people, and I think that federalizing the gubernatorial election simply isn't going to work. In addition, given what we've seen in the Congressional by-elections (almost all Dem wins except Mass Senate) and gubernatorial elections since 2008 (nearly all Republican wins despite Obama campaigning in states he just won) it strikes me that attempts to attach to President to these elections for non-federal offices haven't make a whit of difference one way or the other.

Bikes are fine and all, but certainly don't deserve priority routing versus mass transit, particularly with regard to getting up hills. I rode a bike as my primary mode of transportation between the ages of 7 & 18, and it never seemed that hard to avoid shit in the street that will make you crash, and I always considered it my responsibility to avoid such hazards. Free transit up and down the hill with a bike seems like a reasonable solution.

Excellent point. I'm pretty sure that the practice of annexing based on water supply was outlawed as a result of Columbus' actions, not Cincinnati's. A lot of HamCo suburban cities have their own water companies (for example, Indian Hill and Wyoming) and they pay a lot more for it. I suspect the other older towns had their own water facilities as well but the poorer ones eventually sold theirs off to CWW or merged with other suburban water companies. Guesses all, not original research. So did you see any mention of the City of Cincinnati's sewer expansion policy in all that?

Good job figuring out how to look these things up. Now figure out exactly how the sewer district decides to expand, and then we can talk about that.

MSD is owned by the County and the County has a contract with the City to operated the district. It took five seconds to look that up on the web. So the City, despite what you consistently claim, isn't doing any of this extension.

I'm pretty sure that Hamilton County is losing people, but that the City of Cincinnati is gaining people. If the rest of incorporated Hamilton County accounts for the losses, it is merely a factor that our federal and state led regime still favors greenfield development over redevelopment, and consequently the only greenfield areas in HamCo are also in townships.

So your example is that you are assuming that this company decided to leave because of some city rule that says that your firm had to do business with a minority owned firm? I don't understand your example and it seems illegal unless the firm was receiving contracts from the City government. [quote author=Eighth and State link=topic=18957.msg489477#msg489477 The second example is another firm where I worked. This firm was a new startup, and located in a strip mall in a suburban location in a township. When they outgrew their rented space, they moved to a larger rented space in a suburban commercial park. In their employee manual, they specifically pointed out that they chose a location that did not have an earnings tax. This firm employed 60 people. Jeff Jacucyk already laid out all the ways in which people can enjoy City of Cincinnati services without paying for them. Your second example is one where the business is locating in a township simply to avoid paying any municipal taxes. As I said before, this arrangement exists solely as a result of the post-War state and federal largesse and planning priorities, and this largesse, particularly on the state side, is slowly coming to an end. The reason there as so many little municipalities in HamCo & Cuyahoga County is because these places were settled at a time when the only way to pay for local public goods was through incorporation. [quote author=Eighth and State link=topic=18957.msg489477#msg489477 "Good luck getting rid of that and keeping core services at the levels people want them." Townships are doing quite well without the earnings tax. Why can't the City of Cincinnati? No, they aren't doing very well. Lakota School District, in West Chester township, just put up a school levy that got crushed. I understand that schools are funded differently than other typical municipal services, but this is the type of situation that is going to emerge in the suburbs more and more frequently. The City has a property tax rate that I believe exists within a limit defined by the county. The majority of property taxes generally go to pay for school systems, regardless of which district you live in. But the City definitely has a property tax, otherwise they wouldn't be able to abate properties as an incentive for corporations or new construction, and they wouldn't be able to vote on that rollback they do every year (the county has a rollback as well).

^How easy do you think it is to get large employers to simply move into the City? Do you have any examples of this and can you show how this was a result of the 'pro-business' policies you listed above? Also, the earnings tax is the only thing you listed that is unique to the City. Good luck getting rid of that and keeping core services at the levels people want them. The gravy train of state and federal subsidized greenfield development is slowly disintegrating. I'd say your analysis is deviating from the clearly recognizable trends.

The two possible replacement will vote for the streetcar.

^Actually, I think more people get it than it seems. It's just the noisy few who choose to ignore the facts, and their view gets reported as the view of 'the people'. Obviously more people voted in the election on Issue 9 than participated in this poll, and the serious opponents (Smitherman and Finney) trying to use legal means to stop the streetcar have largely given up, realizing that being anti-streetcar really isn't a political winner. I suppose The Enquirer is trying to scare Council into not acting, and that hasn't been too successful. To be honest I really can't understand why they have taken this story as far as they have. It's over if we get the federal grant, and they can't be stupid enough to think they can influence that.

Given the fact that the bonds are backed by City tax revenue, the largest portion of which is provided by the payroll tax, which effects all workers and residents at the same rate (it is not graduated), wouldn't the people with a lower income actually be footing more of the bill relative to their income than wealthier folks?

dmerkow's got a pretty good point, and I think the key to making sure they don't get a tired look quickly is simply darker metal, or maybe ceramic, which would possibly allow for some interplay with our Rookwood heritage. I actually think that it's a mistake to worry about keeping rain (or even sun) of people as the point of the 'shelter'. It should be an entryway, and one that encourages speed. There are some things where you actually buy the ticket and put the ticket in before you get on the bus (in Curitiba, Brazil I believe) and I'm under the impression it really speeds things up.

Yeah, I was also disappointed that they got rid of the proposed animatronic statue of Timothy Dalton.

What's the evidence that inflation is rising?

And also the massive parking garages right across the street, and the southern end of the Streetcar line (why it is currently planned to go one block south of 2nd Street I don't understand). Buses have a great approach to the area from both 71 and 75. Once you get the Streetcar up and running you might be able to eliminate most buses from running through downtown and OTR as well. Move TANK (and maybe even Megabus) there from 4th Street. Hell, you might even want to see if Greyhound will move to the RTC from their present site. You could even add direct non-stop and separately marked buses between FWW and UT when the rail comes there, as well as a direct, no stop bus to the Airport if it is warranted.

There's any number of things you could do with it, but I would leave it as a public space without programming, to differentiate it from FS. Also, it would probably be oneof the most prominent Streetcar stops.

They should move the Government Square bus depot there.