seanian

UC and the hospitals would both benefit from a streetcar line. So many people don't want to take the bus, even when it's just between Uptown to/from Downtown. I'm one of those people. Students at UC I'm sure would love to know they had a rail transportation option. Not having to try to figure out what bus is running at what time, etc... When I think of taking a bus anywhere in Cincinnati, I think of those old math questions you used to get in grade school. If a train/bus left Chattanooga at 8:48 AM going 50 MPH, and another train/bus left..........blah, blah, blah. That is what comes to mind when thinking about riding a bus. Rail is not that way, especially a streetcar coming through going the same route continually. It could an added selling point for UC and Xavier (if it reached both), with students knowing just by getting on the streetcar that they could get to so many places of interest in the city.

Cincinnati's streetcar has so much going for it. It goes through so many areas; Findlay Market, Music Hall, Washington Park, Fountain Square, etc..., and it also has the ability to add so much more along the route; more population, businesses, office, etc... The same goes if it is extended Uptown. There is so much good that is going to come out of it. Having said that, I hope it works for Kentucky too and I like that they want to connect it all together. I like the idea that they want to connect Newport and Covington, they are the huge centers and should be connected. I thought not connecting them would miss the boat, so to speak. For Newport there is the Aquarium, NOTL, the new residential going up and the bell. Covington has MainStrasse, the Convention center, hotels, offices and other potential around RiverCenter. There is also other future potential for Newport and Covington; Ovation in Newport and the area around the IRS in Covington. Then there is the potential for much more residential being built along the line and eventually trying to connect the other areas a little farther south so bring life to what is there and bring in new development. Just by hitting these areas in the beginning still allows for a lot of growth by building new residential and business in NKY. It could have a huge effect. Then after they get the first phase in, they can venture farther south to help bring up the neighborhoods, but the major areas need to be connected first. I also have a question regarding the connection point in Cincinnati. I noticed it connects only in one direction at the Riverfront Transit Center. Why wouldn't both incoming and outgoing connect into the Transit Center? If other rail transit is setup at a later date (let's hope not too much later), I would think that people would want an access point. instead of coming across the bridge and then having to get off at the street stop and then having to walk over to the transit center. If the entire Cincinnati and NKY system is connected that would be great, but I think the stops should be in the transit center or at least directly next to steps going into the transit center.

This concerns me- it seems like we have a window of opportunity to secure a right of way to the north of MLK Drive but it may be closing quickly with the planned developments for that area. Has anyone talked to the Uptown Consortium about this possibility? I would hope that the Uptown Consortium gets involved with this in a big way as the future of the Uptown area would benefit. I think that the Uptown Consortium also needs to put pressure on city council since the mayor is non-rail and if they can get the ear of enough of them, things can get done. A group like the Uptown Consortium should be able to get their attention. Securing right of way should not be a huge task.

A few things confuse my about this route. I'm not sure why it would travel a section up along the Interstate. Anything traveling along Interstates would be higher speed light rail which things like streetcars can feed. Things like street cars shouldn't be traveling along an Interstate canyon. I agree with getting to Xavier, but not going up a section of Interstate. Then there is the opportunity to have the zoo along the route which it misses. It comes very close, but just misses it. That is a missed opportunity.

The section set for the HQ is roughly the same size as what great american sits on. And it actually looks like it would be a cool place for a tall tower as well.

Actually if you would read the article from the CBC which is listed and mentioned in this thread, the portion that was set aside for MLS is being taken over for the Bengals as you stated so they can have more room while it's not in use, but it also states that the Bengals would have to give back the same amount of space if professional soccer made it's way to the stadium. Now regarding MLS only allowing soccer specific stadiums is not true. Plenty of teams already play in football stadiums and the new stadium being built for the new Atlanta team will house MLB, NFL and MLS all under one roof. That price you mention of $250 million for soccer specific stadiums is also missing the mark. Montreal's was $40 million, Toyota Stadium in Texas $80 million, Columbus Crew Stadium $28.5 million and the not yet built LA stadium $150 million. These are all stadiums that have just recently been built or are going to be built. I didn't look up any others, but you can see there is really no consensus on how much it does cost to build these stadiums, but they are not high price tags as far as stadiums go.

To be fair, only two of the 3C metro areas are growing in population, and it ain't the upstate one. However, I think they could be growing more quickly (as could Cleveland) if we all had quick, convenient and affordable rail services within and between our cities. Sacramento is growing even faster. It has a growing, higher-usage transit system with bus services focused around trunk-line light-rail corridors and connected with frequent (30 trains a day) to/from the Bay Area at average speeds initially of 39 mph but since raised to an average of 45 mph that carry 1.6 million passengers a year (or 3x what 3C was projected to carry). And it has Amtrak services from the state capital to Fresno and Bakersfield in the San Joaquin Valley, east into the Sierra Nevada mountains and beyond to Reno, Salt Lake City, Denver and Chicago; north to Northern California, Portland and Seattle; and south to San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara and Los Angeles. Unlike Columbus, Sacramento is a very rail-connected city both within its metro area and to the entire state and beyond. Here is one issue with current rail. You mentioned some of the connected areas of California and I do know people that live in San Luis Obispo. I can tell you that it takes about 3-1/2 hours to drive from San Luis Obispo down to LA. My friends thought they would try rail down to LA and if I remember correctly it took them somewhere between 8-10 hours by train. They never took rail again. Rail will never be what it could be if that is the best it can do when it comes to being a transportation service. Rail goes slow and it makes too many stops. When you fly somewhere, your plane doesn't land in every city along it's route. When a person drives to a destination, you don't make frequent stops. San Luis Obispo to LA is a direct drive by car down 101 and you have no need for stops. Unless you are one of those annoying passengers or drivers that drink coffee, then you'll have to add several stops for constant restroom breaks, lol. My point being is that for rail to work, it needs to have minimal stops. Streetcars and buses are expected to make frequent stops as they are very local. LRT is expected to go farther distances and with farther distances for stops. Rail should be similar to air travel and should not be stopping at every village along the way. Could you imagine lifting off on an airplane flight and after you hit 30 feet in the air your plane comes back down to pick up more people. It would make you feel like you are getting nowhere. I might be exaggerating a bit, but not by much. Therefore rail needs to be high speed rail between major metro areas, not the molasses express. I am all for rail travel, not fail travel.

That's too funny. I used to hate to go to Northgate Mall and when they opened Forest Fair I actually liked it for its openness, although it never did start out totally filled. I was just happy not to be in Northgate. Then the stores it did have started to disappear because of the light foot traffic and I'm sure being so close to Tri-County didn't help. I good analogy for Forest Fair Mall would be like going to Colorado for a fun filled ski adventure and realize you just arrived in the middle of summer. I then realized that I preferred going to the large Lazarus store downtown just before it closed. I think they had Christmas in the basement level for 10 months out of the year. then when the Macy's opened up downtown I started going there and Tower Place downtown until Tower Place closed. I wish some of the stores that were located in Tower Place mall would've relocated/reopened in downtown. I still go to Macy's downtown, but wish there were more major department stores besides just Macy's and Saks downtown. The Saks downtown is actually small for a department store. What I don't get downtown I visit strip malls in the area. I haven't been to a suburban mall since the early 90's and I have no desire to go to any of them again.

Then if this is true, US Bank arena should consider trying to get an NBA team instead of thinking college basketball. I think that UC needs to keep the teams in the uptown area. That is where it's major fan base is located. I'm thinking they really aren't very mobile people. Didn't somebody say that attendance for UC football went down when they had to play at PBS? If so, wouldn't the same thing happen with college basketball if played in US Bank Arena?

Not sure why Cincinnati's CSA doesn't include Dayton's MSA yet, but they have grown together. A CSA is just a combination of MSA's (Micropolitan and Metropolitan areas that are tied together) and Cincinnati and Dayton do fit this bill, but it's just a matter of any day now that they will be officially considered combined. When you look at the MSA's in the US for Ohio; Cincinnati is #28, Cleveland is #29 and Columbus at #32. If Cincinnati and Dayton would be considered a CSA as it should be and compare it to Cleveland's CSA, the two would be very comparable in population. That is why I said earlier that the Cincinnati and Cleveland metros are comparable. The two areas should mirror each other in what they could support. I think it would be totally awesome if both Cincinnati and Cleveland were able to have professional soccer teams. There are people out there that do like soccer that currently don't go to MLB, NFL or NBA games or would like it to be added to their options. There is a whole untapped marked and I think that people would support it. Ohio needs more than one professional soccer team and this would really create some great rivalry. Sports love rivalry and this type of rivalry would only help propel the popularity.

I read that article when it came out and didn't believe its analysis. Cleveland which has a similar sized market has MLB, NFL and the NBA. You have those people that just love sports and go to them all, but then you have people where the professional teams probably pull from different crowds. I don't particularly care for football and basketball, but I do go to baseball games and would go to soccer. You have people that I'm sure would only go to basketball games and couldn't care less for football or baseball, etc..., but then you have people that overlap. My point being that I'm sure there is a market for the soccer enthusiast in Cincinnati as well as MLB, NFL and the NBA.

I realized that the county allowed the Bengals to expand into the space reserved for a professional soccer team, but I didn't know that the Bengals would have to give up comparable space if a professional soccer team did come. I never hear of any news that anybody is attempting to bring a professional soccer team to the riverfront.

Too bad there isn't enough space to enlarge it for soccer. It wouldn't require much more seating, but since no soccer has come to Paul Brown Stadium then we could always have soccer in the US Bank Arena. My understanding is that professional soccer fields are the same size as professional football fields. In the US, soccer requires much less seating 18,000 to 25,000. I read that Seattle blocks off everything except for the 18-20 thousand seats near the field and has banners pulled down for advertisement, etc so you can't see the other empty seats making the stadium look full. I grew up with soccer as well as many other people and it is becoming increasingly more popular as a professional sport in the US. From my understanding the Cincinnati metro is the second highest in the US for people and families involved in soccer. This way you can have the large concerts etc... and have a major sports team for the arena. Not sure if there is enough space there, but it could be looked at more closely as an option.

I do not like to say what is better, but yes LRT can show great results and is desperately needed. The whole region will be much better off if we had LRT, even if it just starts in the city's core. I just hope that the rest of the streetcar route doesn't get pushed aside to start working on LRT. I think they need to be worked on in tandem. The streetcar will have a much larger impact going into the uptown area than what is currently being completed. They are both important projects and I hope we don't lose sight of that. I also haven't heard anything regarding what NKY is doing to initiate a connection loop into the Cincinnati streetcar. Are there any leaders or pro streetcar groups in NKY (Covington, Newport or vicinity) getting anything talked about or trying to get anything pushed through?

I really wanted to read this article, but I don't have the required subscription to the biz J.

Recently I heard about what a group (Dayton Together) in Dayton Ohio is trying to accomplish by combining Montgomery County and the city of Dayton together to make one regional government and would make Dayton have over half a million population. The purpose would be to increase its image as being a larger city and to save on services. It is my understanding that the cities that are currently in the county would stay as they are, but all of the townships and villages would be taken. I'm mentioning this because there used to be talks of combing the areas of Northern Kentucky and making it one municipality. Has there been any traction on that recently? IMO I would think that making at least the counties of Boone, Kenton and Campbell Counties as one large municipality of Covington. Our perhaps going even further and take some areas of the counties south of there too. That would give Northern Kentucky that muscle that Dayton Ohio is looking to accomplish. Combining all of those services would also be great for the area and should lower the cost to residents of Northern Kentucky.

I was looking at that map on the website: http://cincyeasternbypass.com and the bypass just looks really out of the way. It doesn't look like it would save anybody any drive time heading north. It looks like it would be easier to just have I-71 head NE over I-75 instead of being combined as 71/75 and have it connect in with I-471 which would actually get renamed as part of I-71 since it would no longer be a bypass. People going up I-71 would stay on I-71. Although that would add a lot of traffic to the Big Mac bridge and that could cause another issue and the existing I-471 section that is currently there would probably have to have at least another lane added to that section. Then there is the issue of why there isn't a bridge just north of the airport. The airport is practically right next to the Ohio river. There could be a new section of Interstate that could go just as far as crossing the river or have an entirely new section that could go the entire length from the airport and head up to the I-74/I275 area. That way that would feed a lot of local west side drivers off of I-75. There is no doubt that a new bridge needs to be built, but these two options I'm sure would take a lot of that traffic off of the BS bridge so it doesn't take on so much of the Ohio river crossing traffic. Also while looking at the map of the area, it makes me wonder why 32 between I-275 and just East of Batavia doesn't have all of those lights removed and overpasses put in to make that area more functional. I thought this was supposed to be done. It's been a while, but every time I would have to drive through there it just amazes me that was not done correctly in the beginning.

I just read an article and it said that they will make sure that projects that have already been promised money like the $25M for Music Hall will be safe. They said they will change the proposal so they don't lose the money that was promised, but no new money will be issued after July for new projects. They didn't want to slow down the existing projects and it would force owners to sue the state because they were promised credits they didn't receive.

I hope you are right and these developers and stakeholders hold the Senate accountable for their idiocy. They shouldn't be able to take back something they already awarded. It just seems like it would be illegal, I don't care that they are the senate. I don't agree with what they are doing, and if anything, the deal made with music hall for the tax credits should be grandfathered in. The people in our government need to be held accountable for their actions. As people in office are held to a higher standard, so should their actions be held to that higher standard.

Very much agree, I'm glad it was Cincinnati's gain. Also with other buildings stepping up their game or using them for something else. Downtown needed the QCS shakeup.

That is not true. The only institution that looks at what a buildings value is based on tenant occupancy are banks when it comes to borrowing for a loan because they want to see that the building has a current flow of income, but it doesn't change the value of the property. I have owned apartment buildings and my family and friends still own apartment buildings and trust me when I say they have tried to get their taxes lowered because of low occupancy when there was a slump and it doesn't work that way. The city will not lower you taxes just because you have issues renting to people or because you're not making enough income on you buildings. Now when a building is converted from office to living space yes there is a different tax structure. But the gains that the new office building bring in far out weighs that variance. We would never be allowed growth and our downtown market would be stagnant because of hanging on to something much smaller. If Great American pulled 1000 out of that building, but in turn put 2000 in the new tower only filling it 1/2 way, then that means you probably pulled another 2000 or so from other areas. All of those areas that QCS pulled from get back filled with tenants that do not require or want to pay the sq ft price that QCS charges. There are always people coming into the market to fill what somebody else left.

No, your tax liability for the building doesn't get reduced because a tenant leaves. Also, why would you think the buildings are worth less?

I can't say that I know the exact specifics on this project and if the $54M is amortized over 30 years, but even with knowing what we do you are focusing on only one aspect of this project. This building is generating a lot more than that $54 million that it's not receiving or wouldn't have received without this building. This is done all the time.

This happens all of the time across the region and across the country, this project is nothing special when it comes to that, but after the tax break is realized, the city does benefit greatly. People seem to focus on the one negative impact instead of weighing in the pro's as well. It was stated from an economic development study, that stated the annual economic impact of the high-rise would be $1.66 billion. The study was conducted by the University of Cincinnati’s Economics Center for Education and Research, and concluded that the building would generate or retain 8,655 jobs worth a total of $388 million annually and that its three-year construction would contribute $715 million to the local economy, as well as 5,388 jobs worth $3.7 million in wages. Upon completion, the tower would contribute $7.7 million in annual tax revenues.