Eigth and State

I think you are mistaken. Duke is a very powerful organization. It's funny that you used the word "powerless" because ironically, regardless of the utility relocation issue, the Cincinnati Streetcar project is absolutely dependent on Duke for electric power, unless Mayor Mallory wants to build his own plant.

The first three cpmments posted on that article are these: 1. Who pays? It all boils down to the taxpayer! Anytime there's a stymie concerning who pays for what, the taxpayer always pays. 2. I am a taxpayer. Mayor Mallory, no compromise please. 3. Duke Energy, no compromise please.

What's nice for bicyclists is that most of the automobile traffic uses a parallel route, Columbia Parkway, for higher speed. I rode from downtown to Lunken Airport and back once and can't remember any problem with the route, and I would say that it's safer than the average road. The Ohio River Way is trying to construct a separate bike path connecting the existing one to downtown, but I think it's unnecessary.

To keep urban forum posters busy. :) Just kidding. Probably it came about because the traditional definition of "cities" as the area within municipal boundaries didn't make sense anymore. No one wanted to see their city "shrinking" when it was just spreading out into the suburbs at a lower density. Could it also be that "new" cities don't have as much vacant, unused, or abandoned land use as old cities?

Uhh, sure it can. The design just has to be more urban and less suburban shopping mall. To clarify why the stop cannot be at the front door, shoppers taking the streetcar will exit the store with their groceries, and stand in front of the front door waiting for the streetcar, blocking the exit for other customers. This is especially important when fire exits are considered. The streetcar should stop some distance from the front door to make room for all the queueing. He will if he thinks it is in his best interest to do so. Stating that the developer will not spend his own money to accomodate the streetcar is equivalent to saying that the developer doesn't support the streetcar. If the streetcar route were to follow Jefferson, it should be in a private right-of-way, with rapid running, 35 mph or more, with no more than one stop, and function more like "light rail" or a historic interurban. This is one of the few stretches where it makes sense to increase speed, and might even be faster than driving. In fact, I have been toying with the idea of building a section between the zoo and McMillan street first instead of the Over-the-Rhine loop.

Dont forget about riders carrying groceries waiting for the streetcar. The area around the front door of a supermarket is congested already. The layout is designed to keep traffic moving. The last thing that a grocery store wants there is to make the front door a bus stop, or streetcar stop, as the case may be. Realistically, it will be very difficult for Kroger to design the site the way they want it, and then add a streetcar line. The streetcar line has to be designed integral with the rest of the site, and the streetcar stop CANNOT be at the front door. For historical perspective, take a look at old maps. Both Vine Street and Auburn Avenue met at Short Vine. You can still see the diagonal street pattern today if you ignore the Kroger site and look at Vine and Auburn. Both streets had streetcars.

One of my buddies told me, "Sure, I'd take public transit, even if it took 10 minutes longer, if it came to my street and had a stop at my job." The typical commute today is from suburb to suburb. Only a small proportion of drivers could switch to transit if they wanted to. Sure, every driver wishes that he drove less. Driving is no fun anymore. But just because someone says that he wants more transit doesn't mean that he will actually use it. I think that drivers will drive as long as they can. When drivers can't afford to drive anymore, then they will stop driving. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will take transit, either. They may just stop travelling altogether.

^Not exactly. He favors "light rail," but not "trollies." Both are fixed rail transit. In his mind, there must be some distinction, and this distinction is important.

There was a distinction between horse cars, cable cars, and trolley cars while all three technologies were in existence. Eventually, two of those three became obsolete, leaving only trolley cars.

I don't know what he had in mind, but it is interesting that he seems to be in favor of "light rail" but not "trollies." I think it's important that he makes a distinction, and says that one is good and one is bad. I would be interested to know why he thinks "trollies" are bad. It could be for a reason that will surprise us all.

We've gone through this before, but the proposed Cincinnati Streetcar will (most likely) not be a "trolley" because it will draw power using a pantograph and not a "trawler." So, technically, Mr. Daughterly is not opposed to the proposed Cincinnati streetcar, judging by his own language.

The current highway system is unsustainable in the long run. Might as well get used to the idea.

The trend is the opposite. Ohio used to have corner stores in every neighborhood, but they are disappearing. That's exactly what it is. Christopher Alexander in his book "A pattern language" says that the minimum density to support a grocery store is about 1000 people living within walking distance. Where in Ohio can you find that kind of density? Not very many places. Today, it's all about parking. Now, a grocery store needs to have 1000 people living within driving distance, and it also needs enough parking spaces to store those cars. This is of course exclusive of some of the old neighborhoods that somehow survived the automobile era, and a few new urban neighborhoods. Today's corner grocery stores are at the corner of the interstate and the state highway.

I feel like I am the only one on this board that is not unrealistically optimistic. The streetcar project is NOT easy; at least not as easy as it's made out to be on this board. One of the issues is that Duke wants 8 feet. I'm sorry, but I don't think that accusing Duke of being unreasonable is going to make this issue go away.

Who says 8 feet is ridiculous? Not Duke. "I've never heard of an unprovoked bear attack. But it's the bear, not you, who decides when he's provoked. Let's say, for example, that you want to be nice to a bear, so you start feeding him hotdogs. And some time later you decide to stop feeding him hotdogs and save some for yourself. The bear might consider that a serious provocation. He might insist on eating the rest, and he would use whatever force he thought necessary to get them." - Henry Heatwole

Ohio Revised Code 4501.01 specifically excludes streetcars from the definition of "motor vehicle." Ohio Revised Code 4905.03 A (10) explicitly states that streetcar companies are utilities. I don't know how this issue is going to play out, but I think it is very serious. There are still more utilities that we haven't heard from yet, at least publicly, and I think they are waiting to see what happens with Duke before they do anything.

It is in the Ohio Revised Code.

Some thoughts: The brick pavement under the asphalt may not be all in good condition, especially if there has been utility work where the brick street was cut and not restored. There may also be old streetcar rails. Brick pavement is noisier than asphalt pavement. Most road noise comes from the contact between automobile tires and the pavement. Brick pavement is tough on bicycles. Bicycle riders may start riding on the sidewalk for the smoother ride, though riding on the sidewalk is illegal in Ohio. Automobiles tend to drive more slowly on brick pavement. While many consider this a good thing, it may slow down traffic on busy streets, and require signals to be adjusted. Brick avement can facilitate drainage because some of the rain water seeps between the bricks, alleiviating the need for storm sewers and reducing combined sewer overflows. Brick pavement cost more to build, but last longer than asphalt pavement.

I haven't been to Duluth, and this is just a guess, but, Could these visitors to Duluth be European visitors who came to the U.S.A. to shop at the Mall of America?

In general, waterparks suffer from high operation and maintenance costs. The Beach Waterpark was fun while it lasted. Surf Cincinnati didn't last as long. We still have Sunlight Pool. The new Great Wolf Lodge has a completely different business model, where they don't sell general admission, but combine the waterpark with a hotel package. In the background, the child and teenage demographic is declining in population.

I another thread I suggested a new street connecting downtown to Mt. Adams. Perhaps an extension of 7th street could work. The new street should not intersect with any of the highway ramps and should pass over all of that mess on a new bridge. The new street should be fairly narrow and be pedestrian and bicycle friendly. It should reduce travel times for pedestrians, bicyclists, transit riders, and drivers. The Portland tram only has two gondolas that carry 30 passengers each? Wow. I had no idea. I was imagining more vehicles with a higher frequency, not quite as many as a ski lift or theme park skyway, but at least a more steady flow of passengers. Imagine a bus load of passengers entering Mt. Adams every 10 minutes or so. It's hard to imagine that much demand. Once again, I would like to bring up the typical patterns for most transit systems. Overall, the traffic on just about any transit system is divided by trip purpose something like this: 60% between home and work or school. 30% between home and shopping. 10% everything else put together. I have read so many times on this board: "Wouldn't it be great to be able to travel between The Banks and Findlay Market? Between the Stadium and the Casino? Between Downtown Cincinnati and the bars in Mt. Adams? Between Downtown and the Airport?" Yes, it would be great to travel to those places. Unfortunately, as a transit operator, we would be chasing the 10% of traffic, not the other 90%. I just don't see that much traffic between Downtown and Mt. Adams. Or, put it this way: there are other potential lines with more traffic. The 1976 Exclusive Guideway Plan proposed a new transit line from Downtown with branches in three directions: Covington, Cheviot, and Norwood. Hardly any mention was made of stadiums, casinos, bars and restaurants, or any other entertainment district. It was all about commuting from home to work. I think the Mt. Adams Tram underscores the recent tendency for transport to entertainment districts with postcard views instead of the more boring commute to work or school.

^I was thinking single-track, with one lane of street in each direction. Even if it was double track, 4 lanes, it still wouldn't need to be as wide as the above photo, which is excessive.

I was toying with the idea of a rail line from Xavier on the Hyde Park Branch to Erie, then along Erie to the Murray Avenue line to Mariemont. Meanwhile, the railroad from Erie to Clare could be used as a bike trail to connect to the Little Miami Bike Trail. I also think that the Wasson Line could become a boulevard, or pair of one-way streets, on either side of a rail line, which may not necessarily have to be in a subway. It would be nice to grade-separate the main crossings, though.

Who is saying that peak oil is a reason not to expand domestic fossil fuel exploration? Not me. Most arguments against more fossil fuel production that I have seen are focused on environmental factors, such as prevent mountaintop removal, protecting wildlife, preventing spills in the Gulf, or just preserving national parks and forests in their natural condition.

Naw, older drivers are getting tired of all the rules. Younger people can't remember the good old days. I can give example of situations where it takes LONGER to drive the same distance today than it did just 10 years ago. The thing that frustrates me most about driving is the effect of "You can't get there from here." No left turn, inability to park in one business and walk to the one next door (parking for customers only; all others will be towed), lack of parking altogether, walking across a sea of parking lots, inability to window-shop while driving, inability to cross the highway (either walking or driving,) excessive speed bumps, long stoplights, or too many stoplights, and, well, you get the idea. Too much of this defeats the purpose of driving. A lot of older folks say that driving used to be a pleasure, but now it's just a hassle. The relative utility of driving has decreased. If there's any good news, the number of fatalities has dropped from a high in the 1950's or 1960's, even with increasing miles driven.