2 minutes ago, taestell said:

I have no idea, I'm just going off of DOTE's statement that the water main can't be located under the sidewalk because you can't have manholes in the sidewalk, which is clearly false.

 

You should attend one of the liberty street project community meetings w/ the DOTE repersenatives and show them photographic evidence that they are stating lies and fake news. 

I think the real reason is that they prefer to have mains under asphalt vs concrete as it makes repairs much easier.  Regarding a manhole for a water main, outside of some very very unique circumstances they don't really exist.

I just google image search "manhole in sidewalk" and there are plenty of examples. I refuse to let that be the reason they do not put liberty on a diet.

Not saying you can't put a manhole on the sidewalk, I'm saying you don't put a manhole to a water main.  A water main is typically surrounded by a fill material and not really accessed except for repairs.  

On 1/17/2019 at 2:27 PM, taestell said:

Except that for the Liberty Street project, City Council did pass a legally binding ordinance providing the funding and directing the admin to move forward with the project. I don't think a similar ordinance exists for the bike plan.

 

At this point, is a lawsuit against the city needed? 

22 hours ago, Traveler Joe said:

Not saying you can't put a manhole on the sidewalk, I'm saying you don't put a manhole to a water main.  A water main is typically surrounded by a fill material and not really accessed except for repairs.  

 

"Manhole" is definitely not the right terminology to use here, but I believe I have seen some sort of cover/access point labeled "water" in streets and sidewalks in various cities. It might just be for access to a valve or something. Whatever the case, it does not explain DOTE's claim that a water main can not be located under a sidewalk.

1 minute ago, taestell said:

 

"Manhole" is definitely not the right terminology to use here, but I believe I have seen some sort of cover/access point labeled "water" in streets and sidewalks in various cities. It might just be for access to a valve or something. Whatever the case, it does not explain DOTE's claim that a water main can not be located under a sidewalk.

 

Agreed 100%.  It really is about access and repair and the fact that they would much rather go through asphalt vs concrete when making repairs.

If anyone attends the liberty street diet meeting with ODOT tonight please keep us updated with what's bring discussed!

Matthew Andrews from DOTE presented to the OTR Community Council last night. Not a ton has changed since the last time options were presented. There's still the 5 lane option (which was overwhelmingly preferred in the last round of public input), 7 lane option with bumpouts, and 2 versions with bike lanes. And based on the few people who spoke last night at the Community Council,  the community perspective seems to also not have changed: everybody who spoke said that the whole point of the project is the narrow the street and make it safer for pedestrians. Of the options presented, only the 5-lane option does that. The 7 lane option with bumpouts and the options with bike lanes maintain the same width of the current right of way.

 

A couple other things that were mentioned by DOTE:

• City Council has already allocated funds, including sufficient funds to move the water main. If one of the cheaper options is pursued, the excess funds would be available to help support other future projects in OTR (though the DOTE folks weren't clear on the process for choosing in the future...  I think it'd be up to City Council). 
• With the 5-lane option, the water main would end up being under/near the "tree strip" between the sidewalk and the road, which would be hard to maintain/repair and let the trees grow.
• With the 5-lane option, on-street parking would not be allowed during FCC games. Interestingly, this would actually be the *best* option for moving vehicles since the other options all have some permanent on-street parking, and those parallel parking spaces create "friction" that would slow traffic. 

So... long story short, the 5-lane option still seems like by far the best option since it a) narrows the right of way, b) creates developable usable space on the southern side, c) allows for smoothest flow of traffic during game days, d) allows for future flexibility since the hours of the curbside parking could be adjusted (ideally in the future, the curbside lane would have 24/7 onstreet parking).

 

There will be another public input session on March 12th at the Woodward Theater at 6pm Following that, DOTE is hoping to get Pendleton and OTR community councils to vote during ther March meetings. DOTE will then take the results from those 3 votes back to City Council and the administration for them to make their final decision. If a decision can be made this spring, DOTE can finish drawings this summer put it out to bid and then begin construction in early 2020 and finish by the end of 2020. If it gets delayed much longer, construction will get pushed into 2021.

On 2/26/2019 at 12:25 PM, jwulsin said:

If one of the cheaper options is pursued, the excess funds would be available to help support other future projects in OTR (though the DOTE folks weren't clear on the process for choosing in the future...  I think it'd be up to City Council).

 

I am extremely skeptical of the claim that OTR would get to "keep" the leftover money if a cheaper option is chosen for Liberty Street. The community councils should only agree to that if they get it in writing that the leftover money will be used for specific traffic calming projects in the neighborhood, i.e. new bumpouts at every intersection on Walnut and Vine, similar to what was recently done on Main Street.

The neighborhood shouldn't sacrifice a good plan for future projects. Liberty road diet is probably the most important public improvement the neighborhood can get.

I apologize in advance if this has already been addressed, but if the original design (freeing up space on the south side) was implemented, would the city own those newly developable parcels?  So the mayor's complaints about the water main being too expensive to move could just be offset by selling these new highly desirable parcels correct? 

 

I'd rather have that money from the sales to "help support future projects" rather then crossing our fingers that DOTE actually assigns that saved money to other projects.

Edited March 1, 20196 yr by 10albersa

Just now, 10albersa said:

I apologize in advance if this has already been addressed, but if the original design (freeing up space on the south side) was implemented, would the city own those newly developable parcels?  So the mayor's complaints about the water main being too expensive to move could just be offset by selling these new highly desirable parcels correct? 

 

I'd rather have that money from the sales "help support future projects" rather then crossing our fingers that DOTE actually assigns that saved money to other projects.

DOTE explained that the City (through City Council and the Mayor's office) would have to decide what to do with those city-owned parcels... but yes, presumably they would sell those parcels to the adjacent property owners. It's not clear at what price, or if/how they could compel the adjacent property owners to buy the parcels. I think the main upside for the city (and the neighborhood) is not in the one-time payment, but in the new, improved value of those parcels, which would increase the taxable base and the ability to support neighborhood amenities, especially when "unbuildable" lots become buildable again (like these parcels between Vine and Republic). All together those parcels add up to roughly an acre.

 

It's hard to know the true market value of that land, and not all of the newly enlarged parcels would actually be buildable. But just for a rough, back-of-the-envelope comparison, a 2,200 sq ft empty lot on Mulberry recently sold for $67,000. Using that as a basis, all of the empty parcels along Liberty would be worth ~$1.2 million. This is not exact, of course. But gives a rough sense of the value. I don't think the City will be able to force adjacent buyers to pay that kind of money, so I don't think the city would immediately re-coup the $800k cost due to moving the water main. But if you look a life-time analysis of the property tax revenues (and the fact that the narrower street will be cheaper to maintain), and all properties north of Liberty will benefit from a narrowed street, I definitely think the narrow street option the best financial option for the City.

 

I don't think it's realistic to expect that the properties would be sold at market rates. Most likely the city will offer to sell them to the adjacent property owner for $1. Because on its own, what is a developer going to do with a 20' × 50' parallelogram of land? Especially in the case of the SE corner of Liberty and Vine. Crossroad Health Center is already built to face the corner of that intersection, and they have said that they don't have much interest in buying that new land. So what does the city do, auction it off to the highest bidder? And then someone builds a new building there that blocks the front of Crossroad?

37 minutes ago, taestell said:

I don't think it's realistic to expect that the properties would be sold at market rates. Most likely the city will offer to sell them to the adjacent property owner for $1. Because on its own, what is a developer going to do with a 20' × 50' parallelogram of land? Especially in the case of the SE corner of Liberty and Vine. Crossroad Health Center is already built to face the corner of that intersection, and they have said that they don't have much interest in buying that new land. So what does the city do, auction it off to the highest bidder? And then someone builds a new building there that blocks the front of Crossroad?

 

Yes, I believe this is the case. The land will be given back to the adjacent parcels. 

http://www.wvxu.org/post/council-majority-liberty-street-road-diet-needs-move-forward

 

So if a council majority is saying the design process meetings should discontinue, and they should focus on implementing the approved 5 lane design, then what would be the next process? Would city council vote to approve the funding for the current 5 lane design? And would that mean instead of the proposed 2020 start date (due to the current community design input sessions..again...) would be pushed back earlier to maybe late summer/fall 2019 instead? I just want this to be over already...

When you have a person in charge of the Executive Branch who is hellbent on doing what they want to do, it is extremely hard for the Legislative Branch to restrain them.

So based off tweets from various council members it sounds like the 5 lane configuration of the liberty St diet will have 6 votes and be passed to move forward on Wednesday (rather than more pointless public input meeting)...Not sure what this means for the start date? Hopefully later this summer perhaps?

 

I've also lost all respect for the owners of Taft Ale House. The owners have publicly criticized the residental permit parking, and the 5 lane configuration of liberty street. They even proclaimed that the anchor closed because of the permit parking, and that otr businesses will go the same route. Shame on him, especially when he knows and the whole otr business community knows the anchor has been on the solid decline with there menu quality for a solid year now, and that the otr resturaunt competition has become only more populated and intense in recent years.

 

It honestly sounds like there owners live in Mason and are a far cry of being true urbanists..which is ultimately quite unfortunate. At least the founder of rheingeist lives in otr and has been a good ambassador for progressing urban ideology. 

Edited March 12, 20196 yr by troeros

Yeah, I think we're done with the Taft Ale House as well.  With so many other places to go I'm not sure why we'd go there again.

56 minutes ago, troeros said:

Hopefully later this summer perhaps?

 

No way construction starts before Spring of 2020 with the way the administration is dragging its feet on this project.

44 minutes ago, bfwissel said:

Yeah, I think we're done with the Taft Ale House as well.  With so many other places to go I'm not sure why we'd go there again.

 

IMO they seem a bit ignorant, considering they have FC Cincy games coming up, Reds games, etc. they should have continued success there. Maybe THEY should work to figure out a way to make it easier for customers like signage at their door or online, and offer Valet for the cost of parking plus a dollar or two. Then if they are hurting for money charge slightly more on their food.

FYI, another meeting about Liberty Street is happening tonight:

 

 

What's the point of attending that meeting if Council is going to be voting on a motion instructing the administration to follow through with the 5-lane option? What's the point of the city paying DOTE staff to attend this meeting? What a farce.

44 minutes ago, brian korte said:

What's the point of attending that meeting if Council is going to be voting on a motion instructing the administration to follow through with the 5-lane option? What's the point of the city paying DOTE staff to attend this meeting? What a farce.

 

The city administration wants to build the 7 lane option and they're going to keep going back to the community over and over and over, trying to grind them down until they agree to it. It sounds like they already got Pendleton to agree.

 

I wish the people getting bent out of shape about the city's recent $110k legal settlement would get equally outraged about the amount of time and money spent as a result of our current administration dragging out this project. I would bet that city employees have spent thousands, if not tens of thousands, of hours since the inception of this project, working on the designs and attending all of the public meetings and community council meetings that have already been held. It's easily a quarter million dollars in employees' time at the very least.

8 hours ago, taestell said:

FYI, another meeting about Liberty Street is happening tonight:

 

 

Was anybody able to attend? I couldn’t make it, but curious how it went. 

I could not attend, but I saw some Twitter posts about it. Apparently everyone in attendance was in favor of the five lane option.

Last night's meeting was a joke with a phony "vote." I feel bad for the city's transportation guy who becomes a punching bag for community concern.

1) Not a single city councilperson was there

2) No representatives from FCC

3) Owner of the Senate et all frustrated that they only found out about this meeting a half an hour before it happened

- which shifted part of the focus of the vitriol to the city's community engagement efforts

4) History of the project was presented and it appeared as if they were showing a presentation that hadn't been updated in some time because the presentation referred to cycle track options that are no longer part of the project. 

5) They presented 3 reasons why, after a tremendous amount of community engagement, and funding secured for the project, why the project was being reconsidered.

 

Those reasons were 1. that there is a 20 year old water main under the south side of Liberty that would be too close for comfort to the foundations of new buildings on the south side of Liberty. Cost to move that is $800,000. When asked if the cost to move was part of an existing budget to replace outdated water mains, they responded by saying that water mains should last 100 years, so this one is still spry. 2. FC Cincinnati 3. The OTR residential parking plan. The Liberty Street Road Diet would remove 77 24-hour parking spaces. The 5 lane plan would include around 77 7pm-7am parking spaces and still some 24-hour parking on the north side of Liberty at the base of Prospect Hill (included within that 77). The 7 lane plan would include around 66 24-hour parking spaces and bump outs at the intersections. I read over some emails among neighbors that Jeff Pastor is the needed Yes vote. In a last ditch effort to make the 7-lane plan appeal to emotion, Cranley suggested that they've learned from Northside that 24-hour parking makes safer streets. So, in what I can imagine not being what Cranley expected when he made his statement, council moved forward a motion to explore a 5-lane option with 24-hour parking, haha. All of that was paraphrased from my neighbors' emails. If some details of the actual scenario differ, please accommodate for that. 

 

Everyone I talked to was enthusiastically for the 5-lane proposal. I did see an elderly couple leave without speaking up or speaking to anyone else, and at least the wife had the 7-lane proposal checked on their voting sheet. Speaking of the voting sheet. Attached below. If you are a property owner, resident, or business owner, you might as well print it out and send it in with your vote. I appeal to you to vote for the 5-lane option, and I don't understand how you could justify spending all this money to re-do Liberty Street without reclaiming any new property from the south of the street, which is what the 7-lane option does. 

Edited March 13, 20196 yr by Chas Wiederhold

Did Pastor end up voting no today?

4 minutes ago, jjakucyk said:

Did Pastor end up voting no today?

 

He voted against it today. He tried to make a motion to stall it and that failed.

Here's the motion that was passed with 5 votes today. Remember that motion carries less legal weight than an ordinance, and City Council had already passed an ordinance with 6 votes (a veto-proof majority) directing the administration to move forward with the road diet several months ago. So the only purpose of today's motion was to say "do the thing we already told you to do."

 

 

Some fun numbers:

 

83 recommendations for the 5 Lanes Option

72 from the three surrounding neighborhoods, 3 from outside the neighborhoods – Westwood, Oakley and Mt lookout and 8 e-mails

32 recommendations for the 7 Lane option

4 recommendations with no address or an unknown address

3 recommendations with half the ballot filled in but no Option was chosen

 

Also, i'm now hearing that this project has to go to the planning commission because of changes to the ROW. 

1 hour ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

Some fun numbers:

 

83 recommendations for the 5 Lanes Option

72 from the three surrounding neighborhoods, 3 from outside the neighborhoods – Westwood, Oakley and Mt lookout and 8 e-mails

32 recommendations for the 7 Lane option

4 recommendations with no address or an unknown address

3 recommendations with half the ballot filled in but no Option was chosen

 

Also, i'm now hearing that this project has to go to the planning commission because of changes to the ROW. 

 

So basically... 

@jjakucykno I think you misunderstand- 83 5 lane votes of which 72 were from people from Liberty adjacent neighborhoods 8 were emails and 3 were from people from other neighborhoods. ( I know because I was the Westwood vote!) they wanted a record of everyone’s address because they might end up weighing the votes differently ( with residents counting more I would think.)

Edited March 14, 20196 yr by thebillshark

I see, I thought "surrounding neighborhoods" meant like Mt. Auburn, Fairview, etc.  Still, 32 for the 7-lane option (basically do-nothing) is discouraging.  

12 hours ago, jjakucyk said:

I see, I thought "surrounding neighborhoods" meant like Mt. Auburn, Fairview, etc.  Still, 32 for the 7-lane option (basically do-nothing) is discouraging.  

 

I imagine many of those 7-lane votes are coming from business owners. There is a rift between the residential community and the business community in Over-the-Rhine. It seems absurd that the priorities of both don't align, but the business community can't imagine a world without free parking for their customers and employees and the residential community (specifically property owners, more than renters) can't imagine a world without tight restrictions on parking.

 

Frustrating for someone who lives in the neighborhood so that they don't have to own a car.

7 minutes ago, Chas Wiederhold said:

 

I imagine many of those 7-lane votes are coming from business owners. There is a rift between the residential community and the business community in Over-the-Rhine. It seems absurd that the priorities of both don't align, but the business community can't imagine a world without free parking for their customers and employees and the residential community (specifically property owners, more than renters) can't imagine a world without tight restrictions on parking.

 

Frustrating for someone who lives in the neighborhood so that they don't have to own a car.

 

I think a more accurate description is:

the business community can't imagine a world without free parking for their customers and employees and the residential community can't imagine a world without tight restrictions on parking free parking for themselves.

 

This is what it really boils down to. Obviously the community settled for a permit system that does cost some money, but it vastly subsidizes that cost from what it should be to guarantee unlimited access to available parking right outside your house.

4 hours ago, ryanlammi said:

 

I think a more accurate description is:

the business community can't imagine a world without free parking for their customers and employees and the residential community can't imagine a world without tight restrictions on parking free parking for themselves.

 

This is what it really boils down to. Obviously the community settled for a permit system that does cost some money, but it vastly subsidizes that cost from what it should be to guarantee unlimited access to available parking right outside your house.

 

I would happily pay $60 for a parking permit if I were allowed, but because I do not own a car, there is no facility for me to do so. Anytime I've expressed this to community members, my situation is not considered worth the debate or I am told "if you let people who don't own cars to have parking passes, then what stops them from letting their friends or family use that pass for FC Cincinnati or the CSO or a Bengals game." I guess nothing... but I'm still a resident without a parking pass.

Real talk, when will we ever be able to really push for a robust rapid public transit system that connects many of the urban neighborhoods, and the suburbs?

 

Parking in OTR is already bad. It's only get worse, especially as more of OTR gets redeveloped, gentrification of further urban core neighborhoods, population increase in the urban core/inner ring suburbs...More people, more cars, less and less accessible parking....At some point, this concept of, "easy" parking will get worse and worse. At some point, there is going to be have some legit conversations about a rapid transit system to alleviate this issue. 

16 minutes ago, troeros said:

Real talk, when will we ever be able to really push for a robust rapid public transit system that connects many of the urban neighborhoods, and the suburbs?

 

Parking in OTR is already bad. It's only get worse, especially as more of OTR gets redeveloped, gentrification of further urban core neighborhoods, population increase in the urban core/inner ring suburbs...More people, more cars, less and less accessible parking....At some point, this concept of, "easy" parking will get worse and worse. At some point, there is going to be have some legit conversations about a rapid transit system to alleviate this issue. 

Post Cranley for sure, and God forbid .....a Mayor Smitherman. Vote Vote Vote people!!!

 

I don't think people realize that Smitherman has wanted to be Mayor of Cincinnati more than anyone here has wanted to be anything in their lives.  He has worked unceasingly toward this end for the past 20 years.  The guy is absolutely, positively, out-of-control cold-blooded insane.  He's a bad, bad dude. 

8 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

I don't think people realize that Smitherman has wanted to be Mayor of Cincinnati more than anyone here has wanted to be anything in their lives.  He has worked unceasingly toward this end for the past 20 years.  The guy is absolutely, positively, out-of-control cold-blooded insane.  He's a bad, bad dude. 

 

Spill the details for the non-natives. Those are some strong accusations.

18 hours ago, troeros said:

Real talk, when will we ever be able to really push for a robust rapid public transit system that connects many of the urban neighborhoods, and the suburbs?

 

Parking in OTR is already bad. It's only get worse, especially as more of OTR gets redeveloped, gentrification of further urban core neighborhoods, population increase in the urban core/inner ring suburbs...More people, more cars, less and less accessible parking....At some point, this concept of, "easy" parking will get worse and worse. At some point, there is going to be have some legit conversations about a rapid transit system to alleviate this issue. 

 

At this point in time I have no faith that Cincinnati will ever build the type of transit system that it actually needs (something like the MetroMoves plan with multiple subway/light rail lines in addition to a massive improvement to our bus system). Our city, county, state, and federal governments are all so anti-transit right now, it's going to take a huge shift at all levels of government. To make things worse, you now have the tech bros and libertarians saying that we don't need to build transit because self-driving cars and e-scooters are the future, and unfortunately many politicians on both sides are buying in to that way of thinking. So I think the best we can hope for is some bus improvements and 1 or 2 BRT routes.

Yeah the tech bros will squash future light rail for sure, and the public at-large will eat that up. 

 

The "Why do we need to spend millions on trains, when self-driving cars can take us wherever we want?" narrative will take hold once these are more of a reality.  All the while ignoring the fact that road construction/maintenance vastly out-spends of light rail transit.  Not to mention the ability to move massive amounts of people within a small amount of space. 

 

Populations will only get larger, and automated vehicles don't solve congestion issues, we'd have to continually widen highways to account for continually growing population #'s and subsequently, increasing # of space-inefficient cars.

 

At this point, I'll take BRT and highway bus lanes as well.  I don't want to have to drive to get downtown, I don't want to be on a bus for 50 minutes to get there, and I'm sure as hell not paying $30 to Uber there.

 

EDIT: oh, and snow/inclement weather is a whole 'nother issue.

Edited March 15, 20196 yr by 10albersa

FWIW, the Mt. Auburn Community Council voted unanimously on Tuesday to back the 5-lane option after a presentation from DOTE. Probably 40ish members in attendance. No one dissented.

Cranley is now trying to take away the funding for the Liberty Street Road Diet and redirect it into a new fund for "Pendleton Neighborhood Improvements", making them ineligible to be used for the Liberty Street project.

 

 

Remember how DOTE said that if we choose a cheaper option for Liberty Street (i.e. building the 7 lane option instead of the 5 lane option), it would free up extra money for other street improvement projects? Then remember how Pendleton strangely voted in favor of the 7 lane option, while OTR and Mt. Auburn continued supporting the 5 lane option? And then today the mayor unexpectedly introduces a motion redirecting the Liberty Street funding to "Pendleton Neighborhood Improvements".

 

There is a pretty clear line between these things. "Hey Pendleton, if you agree to the 7 lane option we'll redirect that extra money to your neighborhood..." This is what Cranley does best--pit neighborhoods against each other and let them fight it out. The level of corruption and back room dealing in this administration is absolutely insane.

 

John Cranley is such a d*ck. 

 

And Pendleton technically only intersects with Liberty at the northbound lane of Sycamore so they should have much less of a say in this anyway. 

Edited April 1, 20196 yr by BigDipper 80

I also can't even imagine how it would be possible to spend an additional $2.7 million on streetscape projects in Pendleton. Almost all of the mixed-use streets in Pendleton were just redone about 5 years ago, with totally new sidewalks, bump-outs, traffic calming bumps, fresh asphalt, and even utility burial on three blocks of 12th and one block of Pendleton Street.

47 minutes ago, taestell said:

Remember how DOTE said that if we choose a cheaper option for Liberty Street (i.e. building the 7 lane option instead of the 5 lane option), it would free up extra money for other street improvement projects? Then remember how Pendleton strangely voted in favor of the 7 lane option, while OTR and Mt. Auburn continued supporting the 5 lane option? And then today the mayor unexpectedly introduces a motion redirecting the Liberty Street funding to "Pendleton Neighborhood Improvements".

 

There is a pretty clear line between these things. "Hey Pendleton, if you agree to the 7 lane option we'll redirect that extra money to your neighborhood..." This is what Cranley does best--pit neighborhoods against each other and let them fight it out. The level of corruption and back room dealing in this administration is absolutely insane.

 

Yep, he's been planning this, check out the quote from the citybeat article a few weeks back. "Cranley says that both Chatfield College — at the west end of Over-the-Rhine, and Pendleton Community Council, which is to the east of the neighborhood — say they haven't been engaged and don't support the plan over concerns about parking". He also mentions that the possibly expanded right of way could be used for homeless encampments in order to stir up the suburban folk despite the fact that they are illegal now. What an embarrassment of a city leader. https://www.citybeat.com/news/blog/21059617/council-passes-liberty-street-road-diet-again

 

How did the committee vote go? I know it failed, but I'm curious who was on the committee and how they voted.