thebillshark

This is a plan for a light rail line. Useful transit has to value someone's time and to do that it must maintain a higher average speed when traveling over longer distances. This gets the streetcar/light rail vehicle (the same CAF Urbos 3 trains we've already bought) out of mixed traffic ASAP by going though the tunnel. After that, route design is a trade off of planning worthwhile stops and still connecting things with a straight non-winding route. As the zoo is not "on the way" but instead would require a detour that would probably travel through slower mixed traffic streets slowing down overall times I don't think it makes sense to go there. Also the zoo is not the high value destination it appears to be because it's not going to drive high ridership on cold January days like today and that's the case for 4 winter months out of the year as well. That being said if it was "on the way" then by all means put a stop there. My thinking is this would have to have dedicated lanes on Jefferson and MLK even. The average speed must be kept high to still be useful traveling in between neighborhoods, not just within them. (Within a neighborhood, like the downtown streetcar, a different set of principles apply, you're trying to provide "access" with a high frequency circulator.) Maintaining a higher speed is critical if we ever go "beyond Xavier" as well (along Wasson Way or up I-71) so we simply can't have large portions of the line be slower moving mixed traffic streetcar.

I'm against releasing Burfict just cause I don't want to play against him! Could you imagine if he was released and picked up by the Steelers? Worse case scenario! Football is a random game and we're close. I think we just try again next year honestly.

The chaos in Cleveland compared to our consistently making the playoffs year after year is exhibit A in the case for NOT firing Marvin. The truth is football is a fickle game, folks have trouble reconciling that with the emotional investment they put into it.

Well this whole fixed amount of property tax issue is bizarre and any attempt to address it will no doubt be portrayed as an attempt to raise taxes. Kind of the way I thought about the parks levy was, that was Cranley's attempt to "claw back" more property tax revenue without addressing this issue directly.

Don't forget about Southgate House revival too. Sounds like publicly subsidized competition for private enterprise to me. The only place it would make sense is "Lot 23" and I don't know if it would fit there. http://www.urbancincy.com/2015/05/project-officials-ready-to-move-forward-with-next-phase-of-the-banks/ Another idea straight from Cranley... He sure does shoot from the hip huh?

^ I heard that the Wizard of Oz (novel) was some kind of allegory for the Gold Standard or William Jennings Bryan or some 1800's political thing no one remembers anymore.

Whole bunch of NKY streetcar discussion on Facebook this weekend. I made a map of the ucgrady[/member] route to go with the table from last week. I want to take a look at some other variations soon too.

What an incredibly dumb, dumb, dumb article. There exactly is one presidential candidate flirting with fascism this year, and there nothing "progressive", "Millenial", or "social justice warrior" about him. I think the author probably subliminally compared Kilo Ren to Adam Driver's character in "When We Were Young." (I did too when I saw Star Wars last night.)

http://www.cincinnati.com/story/money/2016/01/01/big-developments-2016/77952638/ According to this there are 800 parking spots being built at Newport in the Levee, 925 parking spots at Fourth and Race, and then there are 500 at Eighth and Sycamore and 690 coming online with the Banks phase 3. You'd hope that all this parking would discourage demand for the surface lots so they get developed. But I have my doubts since lots are easy to enter and exit and they are evenly distributed around town. Cincinnati may not be catching the population numbers from the Millenial back to the city movement but by golly there will be a place to park.

Well we certainly need a solid plan/engineering study before we can do that. Maybe Haile Foundation could fund a study of the city won't? I think it would be smart to ask for a very specific amount if it ever goes to the ballot like Union Terminal did. For that we would have to be pretty far along in the process and know what we could get from the Feds etc. We're kind of stuck in a chicken and egg scenario. Or one of these: Bill: Ted, while I agree that, in time, our band will be most triumphant, the truth is, Wyld Stallyns will never be a super-band until we get Eddie Van Halen on guitar. Ted: Yes, Bill, but.... I do not believe we will get Eddie Van Halen before we have a triumphant video. Bill: Ted, it's pointless to have a triumphant video before we have decent instruments. Ted: Well, how can we have decent instruments if we don't really even know how to play? Bill: That is why we need Eddie Van Halen! Ted: And that is why we need a triumphant video! Both: [think for a second] EXCELLENT! (guitar riff)

Without this stop, I'd be worried about Clifton Heights being underserved. It's a dense neighborhood where parking is difficult and lots of people are inclined to use transit. In fact, if this stop has to be underground anyways I would move it further south towards Jefferson & Calhoun intersection or on Vine in between Calhoun & McMillan.

^^ I think it would be neat if you could take your beer from the Findlay Market beer garden to any other open part of the market like you suggested. But otherwise I don't think an open container district (specifically thinking of the kind where you would get a "to go" drink in a special cup from a bar) is necessary for OTR. I think it could exacerbate some social tensions, such as a panhandler asking a suburbanite or tourist for the rest of his beer, the suburbanite or tourist responding really nastily, etc. Plus it goes against some of the upscale branding of Vine Street etc. In the end i don't think it would provide a big economic boost either way- not in the way narrowing Liberty Street or performing the upcoming renovations of Ziegler Park would.

You'd almost have to be a pro athlete to afford that

Alright I'll say it. AJ McCarron looks a little like jmecklenborg[/member] ?

I really like that idea Jimmy_James[/member] . You'd be trading off some speed/time and adding distance but you'd be gaining a lot in return. The Government Square connection to Cincinnati's bus system would be huge. Also that would be serving western downtown and the convention center, in fact connecting Cincinnati's convention center with NKY's convention center (which has expansion potential if the IRS site were ever redeveloped) which would open interesting possibilities. The old Dixie terminal was on Fourth Street. Maybe all this stuff has been figured out for us a long time ago after all.

I analyzed some times for ucgrady[/member] 's NKY streetcar alignment. I estimated the streetcar loops in Covington and Newport at 8 mph, (about what slower bus route would be to account for its mixed traffic nature.) For the Covington route, I estimated the bridge crossing and 2nd/3rd St Ohio-side portion to be 12 mph, to factor in if dedicated lanes and/or signal priority could be obtained. I didn’t make this distinction for the Newport route, since the Ohio side portion of that one would involve navigating complicated streets around US Bank Arena. This table shows what the headways could be if ran as 2 separate Covington and Newport routes, but also what it could be as a one-seat single ride in the "NKY Total" row. Running as a single NKY route would obviously save transfer time for Covington<->Newport travelers, but may also present a risk for problems in one part of the system spreading to affect the whole thing and streetcar bunching. What this means is: A Newport (Newport on the Levee)to Cincinnati (Vine St. OTR) bound traveler could ride Newport Streetcar 8 minutes, spend 6 minutes transferring to Cincinnati streetcar, ride Cincinnati streetcar 7 minutes for a total of a 21 minute trip A Covington (Mainstrasse) to Newport (Newport on the Levee) bound traveler could ride the NKY streetcar 14.5 minutes for the total trip A Cincinnati (Findlay Market) to Covington (Pike Street) bound traveler could ride the Cincinnati Streetcar 11.5 minutes, spend 6 minutes transferring to Covington streetcar, ride the Covington streetcar for 12.5 minutes for a total of a 30 minute trip I assumed a 12 minute frequency and then took half of that for the (average) transfer times. I think these times are feasible for these types of trips. Not as fast as an Uber but less expensive, not as fast as a personal vehicle but you don’t have to worry about time and money for parking on both ends of them. My only suggestion for ucgrady[/member]'s route would be to go deeper into Covington (like 20th street if the streetcar can fit under the railroad bridge at 17th.)

Surprised about the PPB not being able to handle streetcar loads. It seems to me I've seen a 70's era color photograph of a big old train rolling up Eggleston Ave from the bridge. The Eggleston/4th St Newport streetcar alignments above represent a trade off to ucgrady[/member] 's alignment where the Cincinnati, Covington, and Newport streetcars all meet at a certain point. The Eggleston alignment would be extremely useful for a specific user that needs to reach upper downtown Cincinnati from Newport, they could do it in 15 minutes. However in the alignment where they all meet at the Banks greatly expands the total territory (adding Covington) that could be reached by a general user from Newport via streetcar in 30 minutes lets say. For this reason and to maintain the simplicity of the system (three lines all meeting at a single point) I would be in favor of the alignment where they meet at the Banks.

This may still be feasible if you had some service track not regularly used for the route to connect from the main Cincinnati loop to the Kentucky loop. The streetcars could use it once going to Kentucky loop in the morning and once coming home at night.

I think there should be additional Ohio side stops built out for either. For example, one near Paul Brown for the Covington route. One down near US Bank Arena for the Newport route (maybe closer to Sawyer Point if the PPB is used.) So Ohio should help with the cost of that.

I wonder with the redo of Liberty Street, if we get 20' of development space, if there will be room for a parking structure in the open space/cell phone store area bounded by Race, Elm, and Liberty. I would prefer something underground (perhaps even extending underneath Pleasant Street) and I don't think I would support a parking garage structure above ground there in between the prime OTR streetcar stops. I agree with your sentiments about the Greater Cincinnati economy jmicha[/member] . In all honesty I don't expect the streetcar to reduce parking demand by 50%, at least not right away, but the thing is I consider the parking minimums for new development to be an artificial distortion on the market anyway, one particularly toxic to a historic area like OTR that grew up before the automobile. So I like that the reduced parking requirements along the streetcar route lets us test what the market will bear re:reduced parking.

I know you're (most likely) kidding, but I just want to mention I think a gondola should only be considered when one end is completely isolated, i.e. there's no other adjacent place to go from there that would be easily served by another transit mode. I think the only place in the region that fits the bill is Mt. Adams. It's bounded to the south by the river, and every place to the north and east of it is more easily accessible via other routes.

If you could have dedicated lanes and perhaps signal priority for added speed on Second and Third in Cincinnati per ucgrady[/member] 's alignment, I don't understand the need to sell the public on the expense of constructing a new bridge. If we could complete a project to Covington or Newport for something like $50- $100 million each, wouldn't that be a worthwhile goal, and more achievable? The only advantage to a new transit bridge as described that I can see is if they are eventually going to completely rework the Cincinnati-side approaches to the Clay Wade Bailey (for BSB project) and/or the Taylor Southgate (to completely bury I-71 between FWW and Lytle Tunnel somehow.)

It's good to think in terms of nodes. You need to connect at least two strong economic nodes (in terms of jobs or dense population) in order to drive ridership (strong nodes in the "city of today", not the city that could be.) Then it's ideal to connect some weaker nodes that could develop over time from the connection to the strong nodes. Finally some portions of the line will just be traversing distance between nodes, which is really at the root of what transportation is. But hopefully in those portions (such as over the bridge) you can travel at a higher average speed.

I'd wish they get on that, it would be an extremely valuable complement to our system raising its usefulness and value, and be a lot less complicated than some of the expansion plans we have on the Ohio side of the the river.

That's a really good idea, I could see a plaza with a lot of "flex space" that could become the centerpiece of festivals, markets, etc.