PAlexander

This stuff happens in every city in every country in the world. It's not a function of size.

I can personally confirm this statement regarding "mountain bike 90's" vs "road bike present". I don't ride any more but I road a mountain bike all through the 90's and the only time I ever wiped out was the one time I stupidly thought I could just ease my way up a curb approaching it parallel rather than head on.

Yes. Pretty sure Hong Kong does this.

^I don't know why you would hug the hill like that rather than take it through the West End.

I asked him that very question several years ago, whether he used the T at Harvard. He said he did and it was great. I followed up about the streetcar and he just claimed that the two were totally different without making any specific distinctions.

If he'd hadnt had came out for the streetcar early like he did there's be no way we could have built the momentum to change the minds of Mann and Flynn IMO. Also I think the notion that he flip flopped is somewhat incorrect. During that 2013 he didn't make any strong statements one way or the other. If you can fault him for anything it's for not being a strong pro streetcar voice throughout because he still would have been elected by a wide margin. Sittenfeld's streetcar position was purely political. He was essentially opposed to it when he first ran because there was a substantial block of voters who hated the streetcar so much and he clearly decided that it was important for them to support him. But once he got on council he could have cared less about it, except perhaps to bait Mallory a bit. The only constituency Sittenfeld isn't going to piss off is the wealthy donor class, which he's essentially a part of. Sittenfeld's position on the Streetcar was cynical. But at least he voted to keep it instead of shutting it down. Mann's position on the streetcar was idiotic. He was against it during the campaign, then said he needed to study the issue (but of course that's what he should have done before beginning his campaign, or maybe at least during his campaign), voted for a pause that both cost the City $1 million dollars and removed the tie-breaking vote from Mann's own control. Every choice he made during that time was flat-out stupid until he finally voted for it. Kevin Flynn's positions were also dumb, but at least he had the excuse of being a newbie politician. Mann had been a mayor and a congressman. How a guy like that manages to remove himself from being a tie-breaking vote on an issue of critical importance while at the same time wasting $1,000,000 to figure out if we should waste millions more is beyond me. Lost total respect for him during that debacle.

If this project goes forward I really hope the City tries to get it built with no parking. It's right on the Streetcar line in heart of downtown. Doing something like that is far more important than getting the streetcar up the hill. The rendering looks like the ground for levels will be parking garage though.

I think a two-way Main Street is a great idea. First of all because it should slow down traffic. Secondly, now that we have the streetcar in place, it's time the City starts doing all the ancillary things to make the whole purpose of the streetcar more likely to happen. That purpose is to densify the areas adjacent to streetcar service. And if we change the orientation on the street, maybe we make it more bike friendly or even try removing vehicular traffic from it altogether. I'm not saying all these thing are ideal or even desired, but the City needs to get serious about doing all it can to densify the core and get people moving around the Center City without having to use cars. They can use cars to get there, but we should be making it more convenient not to move around in them once you're there.

I think we all have experienced several times that when driving just because you know where you're going doesn't mean you're always paying close attention to how to get there.

I definitely think that a UC law school would be better built somewhere closer to one of the many empty lots near the County Courthouse. Nevertheless, I don't know why the law school couldn't use one of the the lots across from PBS (3 or 19, I can't clearly read the numbers). That way they can have a low rise building, and entire lot with a private quad or lawn, and Lot 24 could be used for something better. Or build on 19 and ask the City to keep Lot 21 clear.

^There's no way PG runs for Mayor.

^He was appointed at first. The electorate shifts more than you think, and cares less about the issues Cranley promotes than he thinks. But at least when he runs in the City, he does utilize that base. He could still rely on it without making some of the choices he does cause its mostly signaling.

There's always been this part of Cranley that seems frozen in 2001. It's kind of understandable, given that was the time he first held office and he underwent a pretty traumatic experience within about three months. But it's sort of weird how that period is kind of like the baseline of politics for him and so his refrains are always, "100 new cops, no new taxes," etc. The City is a far different place now, particularly when it comes to voter turnout.

Well, it almost did happen. The bridge was fully funded 20 years ago. I suspect the money was shifted away because there has been an effort to keep sensible crossings from connecting Ohio and Kentucky for 150 years. The suspension bridge was purposefully thrown out of alignment with the street grid in order to increase its cost. The bridge company was forced to buy expensive riverfront real estate for its approaches instead of it simply lining up with public right-of-ways. The KY Transportation Cabinet banned TANK's buses from the bridge back around 2010 which has forced them to use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge for every route, adding about two miles to every round trip. It also hurt the utility of the TANK transit center in the parking garage right next to the Suspension Bridge. The continued lack of cooperation between Ohio and Kentucky is happening because DT Cincinnati interests don't want Covington or Newport to compete for Class A office tenants. The recent completion of Queen City Square created a glut of office space in Cincinnati and a subsequent migration of tenants from the River Center towers to Cincinnati. This loss of earnings tax revenue has been devastating for Covington. The old FWW had a direct exit ramp to The Suspension Bridge, which made the River Center towers a lot more accessible. I don't think it's any accident that access to the bridge was "hidden" from the expressway off ramps during the rebuild, or that a new bridge at Race St. was scuttled. That's interesting, and makes a lot of sense. In all honestly, the rationing of office space in downtown Cincinnati had some positive effects, even if it was meant to benefit a select group of private landowners. If we were able to get the right parking/transit/right-sizing street mix, we probably wouldn't have these situations where one big project can destroy the economic viability of a bunch of older but perfectly serviceable buildings. I don't think a direct streetcar connection between Cincinnati and Covington is all that important. The benefit for Cincinnati if it contributed to a Northern Kentucky Streetcar loop would be to re-densify NKY. That would the best plan for NKY as well. Newport is never going to be a major employment area. The only areas that actually make sense for Covington to have dense office towers are either right next to 75 on the river (which is basically a wasteland on the river right now) or that warehouse area north of the Fidelity campus. The present Rivercenter development is pretty bad; it looks awful compared to the original buildings, and it cuts off the rest of downtown Covington from the Riverfront. There could easily be a bus that goes from a streetcar stop at 5th and Main in Covington that only makes short runs across the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge and back on Second Street in Cincinnati. There's no reason to put track that far west in Cincinnati because there's no development opportunity there. Maybe a bridge from Main Street in Covington to Central Avenue in Cincinnati would work, but any further west than that is a waste.

There's only so much development money to go around, fellas.

Great point. I think it makes good sense for Cincinnati to help out with the cost of taking it over the river, so long as we get some input on the alignment through Newport to Covington (which seems to have to go on 4th & 5th in both cities). After that, everyone can add to the service on their own.

^^The Newport section of this route is moronic. The streetcar clearly needs to come from the bridge straight up York and then branch off toward Covington one way on 4th and the other way on 5th. The reason the Cincinnati Streetcar will be so successful is because it does a great job of connecting important institutions (Findlay Market, Music Hall, Washington Park, Hamilton County Courthouse, U.S. Courthouse, the Ballpark) with plenty of developable lots. By taking an immediate left after the bridge, the Newport route misses going by the Campbell County Courthouse and the World Peace Bell (which, while sort of silly, has the potential to be the Fountain Square of Newport). The key thing is to make sure these routes go by both the Campbell County Courthouse and the Kenton County Courthouse. Those are major employment anchors that are never going to move on a whim like a corporate headquarters (such as Omnicare) or an entertainment district might. They are critical for ensuring the success of the system. While the best route would certainly penetrate further south into Kentucky before going Covington, I believe that simply getting the system into Kentucky over the right bridge (and the Taylor-Southgate Bridge is the bridge that makes the most sense) creates buy in from these communities to the very idea of transit, which is frankly the most important thing. Once the system is in place and in use, Covington and Newport can separately build out their networks south to connect other areas.

I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with the colors either. We are saying the same thing, that we would have preferred that the new team used something that had ties to the city itself, which is why I suggested red and white, or, to change it a bit, claret and white. It's not a weird desire to have a team that builds its brand on the name "Cincinnati" should have some brand similarity, right? That's why I brought up the colors; maybe a crown instead of a lion/griffon? Columbus' city colors are red and yellow (as far as I can tell from their flag. They have some sky blue as well on their city crest). The Columbus Crew aren't putting OSU as part of their branding, whereas they do use the name of the City of Columbus.

I think it's kind of cool that the Bengals copied the Browns given the situation around Paul Brown at the time. Imho, between the name, the lion/griffon and the colors, this franchise is pretty generic.

Well, those colors are still lame. I also hate how U.S. teams are using FC, as if we call it football and not soccer.

I don't know why these guys chose those colors, or what the lion/griffon has to do with anything. While they don't look bad, I think they should have gone with a red & white scheme. Classic Cincinnati colors. Or if they wanted to get away from that, they could have done a socceresque modification of Cincinnati colors, such as claret (instead of red) and white. One thing I do respect about Pittsburgh sports is that all their sports teams wear the city's colors (which originate in the Pitt family arms: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_of_Chatham). If these guys are looking for a soccer specific stadium, they should try to do something at the old Spinney Field site. If there was a way to co-ordinate redeveloped housing in the LPH area, it could be a really cool project.

^John really is the king of dickish jokes that fall flat at Council meetings. He'll do it to anyone, including regular folks who just want to present their two minutes of public comment. I don't think he can help himself. It's really quite amazing.

Take it up Highland and then have it go east & west off McMillan.

I know John Schneider prefers going up Gilbert to going up Vine, but what about going up Clifton? Are there the same issues as with going up Vine?

Too bad we are dealing with these four year Council terms. We've had nothing but silliness from the four Cranleyite members of Council regarding the Streetcar over these past two years; and a new election this year had the possibility of removing one of them (likely Amy Murray) for a veto-proof majority.