PAlexander

^Agreed. Plus, what should be happening first is all new construction within 3 blocks of either side of the streetcar should be without parking, and empty parking lots in that area should get built on as soon as possible. The problem with the focus on Phase 2 is the same as it has always been- people can't imagine the future without seeing it first. That's why those trips to Portland were organized. There's much less animosity to the streetcar now that it exist. The thing that is needed next is people seeing, "Oh, the densities that are so charming in other cities that I might visit, like New York, or Paris, or even a small European city like Florence, are achievable here so long as there is a good public transit network." The route to Clifton is less important than increasing density around the existing line.

Thanks for the answer. It's hard to tell from the maps. It seemed like that part of the route wasn't getting close to even small downtowns like Mansfield and a more easternly orientation would service more small cities. But I understand the access for ridership tradeoffs.

This is really the problem. Partly because of the Cranley administration, but honestly I don't think some of the Streetcar's biggest advocates on council even really have this down. There should have been and should be a concentrated effort at densifying the route. That means new construction without any parking. I'm sorry but there's no getting around it. The biggest disappointment to me regarding the streetcar is that new development of single family residences on the west side of Elm Street north of 15th Street (or thereabouts). Such a missed opportunity for dense housing that would be streetcar focused. The route had been known for over a decade. There's simply no excuse for allowing the same car dependent development anywhere near the route. The only parking within three blocks of the streetcar should be parking facilities that are city owned.

Sorry to jump in here, but I was just curious why the north central part of the 3C corridor route was chosen, rather than a different more eastern orientation from Columbus to Cleveland. Does anyone know?

Not just this but the conversion of parking lots along the present line (and there are plenty) would do much to increase ridership. The biggest key to the success of the streetcar is new construction that doesn't have dedicated parking.

I wonder how much the project would cost if they didn't have to connect it to I-75?

^Seems like this would be a relatively easy fix. I'm sure the present system works well, but there's something about making the major downtown bus depot a place where it is is immediately adjacent to the streetcar and a huge parking garage that would be a great way to get people to really begin to understand how all these things tie together.

I only knew about Old Red Bank because I remember when it used to connect. I didn't even know about Hetzel street. Yeah, your plan is far superior to what they are actually doing.

I'm talking about the part of Red Bank Road (old Red Bank) that is south-southeast of the MedPace building. It's not a solution to the problem, it's just designed to give the MedPace people who are going south or south east an alternate route, even if just for a bit. Would have cost a lot less than $7 million. But anyone going north onto the highway is going to stuck regardless because of the design of the the highway access ramp.

Trust me, I'm traveling through those intersections at those times. You're right, the back-ups are basically going to happen, given the topography. My problem with this "fix" is that it doesn't really do anything. You avoid the Madison & Red Bank Expressway intersection but still have to go through the Duck Creek and Red Bank Expressway intersection. In my opinion, if they just re-connected Old Red Bank, it would do a similar thing but cheaper. There's really no fix that's going to get MedPace people who are trying to get onto 71 without going through that bottleneck. But if you reconnected Red Bank Road so that the Med Pace people going south go avoid Red Bank Expressway til they got to Brotherton, you'd at least be adding a route that would people off of Red Bank Expressway for a bit. It would certainly have cost less than $7 million.

I'm pretty sure there are strict rules on what CPS can do with their properties, and that they can't just sell it to the highest bidder or developer. Regardless, this project should have simply been killed. This will have little to no effect reducing traffic congestion there. I actually think it is likely to increase it. What causes traffic problems in the area in the first place is the fact that there is essentially no alternate routes to take. You can basically just go on Red Bank Expressway and Madison Road. The first point anyone can get off those main roads and onto another route is Stewart. They should have just reconnected old Red Bank Road both from Madison to Duck Creek and, more importantly, in the area next to MedPace. That way people could leave MedPace without having to even get through that intersection. It would have had the additional benefit of having to move that UDF, which I realize is in a prominent location but is a problem for all the people who are entering and exiting the gas station right at that interseciton.

This is such a waste of money.

I think the biggest concern regarding the streetcar's success isn't internet commentary, but rather that we've gone about as far as we can with dumb luck. It sounds harsh to say, but this project is one of the best there is nationwide in part because, even though there wasn't a central authority overseeing everything, the way it worked out (and I recognize that many of the people involved were aware of this and that it was part of the plan) with the Findlay Market rebuild by the City in the early 2000s at the northern end of the line; the Banks redevelopment starting in earnest in the mid to late 2000s at the southern end of the line; and the Washington Park redevelopment (finished early 2010s) holding the middle of the line together. Findlay Market was the City, the Banks a joint City/County development, and Washington Park was 3CDC. Anyway, I'm less concerned about taking the system up the hill than I am about the City not leading small development to enhance the present system- I'm mostly talking about making sure surface parking lots adjacent to the system start getting developed, and without additional parking. Getting more people onto the system by removing structural incentives for car use, while at the same time increasing structural preferences for more people to live within the streetcars range, and for those people to use the streetcar, coupled with buses and redbike (and perhaps cabs/Uber) as their primary method of transportation, should really be what we are focused on.

^This is really over the top. Come on.

This was the biggest mistake that was made. Say what you will about the desirability of having the uptown connector, the delay that came from extending the project allowed for consensus to break down and for so many attempts to sabotage the project.

Well half-billion is obviously just a guess, but I will reserve judgement until I see an actual plan that lays out the cost of the tunnel and the overall plan. I don't think you can sell Cincinnati on building a tunnel unless you also convince them to build multiple lines that branch off at the north end and serve different neighborhoods. And that seems like a "Metro Moves Lite" plan that we'd need to take to the voters. I agree that even while the streetcar will be successful, and seen as being successful, the tunnel may still be politically unrealistic, particularly with this current environment. Obviously there is the 1B route, but there had been talk on this thread years ago about a Gilbert route. If that's still viable, it strikes me that once the streetcar is up and running, the next extension should go to the neighborhood that is willing to create a SID which will help fund operations through a special property assessment.

So you get angry at people who make a plausible case that this gentleman is land-banking at the expense of actually rehabbing the properties he is purchasing. You claim these criticism are not based on fact, but then say that while you could actually explain what is going on you choose not to. There is no reason anyone should respect an opinion based on some sort of hidden facts that you insist are true but require everyone to take on faith. Referencing the court case regarding the collapsed building is a smart and objective way to defend your friend from what you claim are incorrect assumptions. So if you want to be taken seriously you need to back up your claims that other people are purposefully being untruthful. Do you get that claiming strangers are purposefully trying to defame your friend is the same type of unsubstantiated claim you say they are making against your friend?

Honestly, I don't think these things are mutually exclusive. But I do think that transit should always be considered in concert with redevelopment. The technologies available need to complement what is trying to be done. The bus system and the Redbike system strike me as the two main ways to guarantee access. Sort of a basic way for every citizen in the City to get around. No section of the City should be cut off from transportation access, and these are the two ways to make sure there is a basic level of equality. The streetcar system is about recreating density. Naturally it is going to be limited to the Basin and Central hills area. I think expansion of the system should be based around higher property taxes for affected properties, if that is possible. Finally, a faster, grade separated light rail type line would be about both redevelopment around the line (like they do with rail lines in Asia) and alternatives to the highways for quick access around and through the City. All these different systems have to be able to interact well with one another. Can people take bicycles on the Streetcar?

Agreed. I always thought the Banks location for the law school was forced. That massive parking lot at 12th, Sycamore & Elliot Street is one of any number of better possible locations in the Basin.

The Basin is essentially all the flat area that is surrounded by the adjacent hills. So Pendleton, Downtown, OTR, the West End, Queensgate, Lower Price Hill (the last two were all part of the West End at some point). It's called the Basin because the hills surround it like a wash basin, I believe. Geographically Camp Washington is a northern extension of it but I don't believe it is typically considered to be a part of it when the term is used.

I just think it is funny how this story attributes things to Cranley's term as Mayor that are questionably linked at best. Cranley became Mayor in December of 2013? The U.S. economy was in much better shape at that point. So this "adding jobs", fixing fiscal problems success that he takes credit for seems like it would have happened regardless. He certainly didn't have anything to do with getting GE to locate on the Banks; if anything, that should be attributed to the Mallory years, when the Banks plan that had been around since the mid-90's started being constructed. Cranley definitely got the pension deal done, and he definitely got a lot of new money in this budget to lots of neighborhoods. Maybe he and his office have helped improve the way the City administration works, I've heard that tossed around. But the fiscal health of the City largely depends on the broader economy. If anything Cranley just lucked out with good timing.

Can you explain what was shrewd about it? I thought he lost that point. Honestly curious about what you're saying.

Yeah, it looks a shade or two lighter orange than the University of Texas burnt orange color. That's a surprisingly underrated and underutilized color.

^This is an interesting story in that Flynn seems to be more Cranley than Cranley regarding the Streetcar in this case. Refinancing the revenue-specific bonds into general obligation bonds is a (very technical) increase of the burden of the Streetcar. It's also clearly the right thing to do, because the TIF bonds give the administration more flexibility. Sort of amusing.