^ You're probably right about that. In that case, they may still be reviewing proposals and negotiating with bidders right now. Given the sums of money involved and the controversial nature of the project, I can understand why they'd be keeping mum until contracts have been signed.

I NEVER said to run it from Clifton to the base of the hill.  Where do you get this stuff?  Right now, there are not enough residents in OTR, and certainly not enough patrons for businesses to spend $100 million on a loop through OTR.  I guess you guys think its would make sense to drive downtown, park at Fountain Square or even the banks, then ride the streetcar to Findlay Market.  I don't. 

 

Build the streetcar to Clifton and back, development will occur along its path, then extend it east, west, and a loop around OTR and downtown.  That would get my support.

 

UO has a few thousand members.  that's not enough votes to carry anything, let alone vote Leslie Ghiz out of office.

I guess you guys think its would make sense to drive downtown, park at Fountain Square or even the banks, then ride the streetcar to Findlay Market. I don't.

That proposition may not make sense to you, but what about someone who works downtown (such as myself) parking at their normal place and taking the street car to Enzo's or Tucker's for lunch, or to do some shopping at Findlay market? That seems very plausible.

 

^^I think everyone's confusion is based on OTR existing BETWEEN Clifton and Downtown.  How do you propose getting from Clifton to Downtown without going through OTR?

 

 

That's my point, it travels through OTR without making OTR the destination.

I guess you guys think its would make sense to drive downtown, park at Fountain Square or even the banks, then ride the streetcar to Findlay Market.  I don't. 

 

Well, the idea is that the streetcar makes it more attractive to actually live in OTR/downtown/Clifton, as opposed to making parking lots more attractive to people driving in from somewhere else.  That might happen for events like Taste of Cincinnati or Oktoberfest, but I think that's a side benefit, not a goal.

That's my point, it travels through OTR without making OTR the destination.

 

Personally, I've never thought of OTR as a destination.  If you get on a streetcar in Clifton, then Fountain Square, GACP. and PBS might be destinations.  If you get on one at Third Street, then Music Hall or Findlay Market might be destinations.  Yes, they happen to be in OTR.  The way I see it, the current proposal does travel through OTR without making it a destination, since the line goes all the way to UC.

I guess you guys think its would make sense to drive downtown, park at Fountain Square or even the banks, then ride the streetcar to Findlay Market. I don't.

 

Well, the idea is that the streetcar makes it more attractive to actually live in OTR/downtown/Clifton, as opposed to making parking lots more attractive to people driving in from somewhere else. That might happen for events like Taste of Cincinnati or Oktoberfest, but I think that's a side benefit, not a goal.

 

Hotel guests could probably find this useful if going to Music Hall.  Maybe some of the hotels can recommend taking the streetcar to Findlay Market. 

 

How does the current plan make anywhere in OTR any more of a destiniation than say either of the stadiums, the Arronoff, UC, Uptown, or anything else along the line? I'm just trying to understand your logic so don't take this as being rude, but do you not want it to stop in OTR?

 

The great thing about a streetcar is that it is a circulator and stops are less of destinations than a subway. True, development will probably occur more heavily next to the stops, but there are much more frequent stops so you have more pockets of develpment than with a subway (if that makes any sence).

 

Also this is being used as a tool to get the maximum return on investment. Right now OTR has the most potential for a large return on investment.

Right now, there are not enough residents in OTR, and certainly not enough patrons for businesses to spend $100 million on a loop through OTR.

 

Queens Boulevard, NYC at the time the Flushing subway was opened:

 

The same location later:

^The problem with most heavy and light rail lines is that since they tend to follow existing railroad right-of-ways or travel in the median of expressways, they become park-and-rides quite soon after leaving a downtown area.  As a result existing neighborhood business districts are not reinforced.  This is the problem with Cleveland's red line.  To build a true subway system that places stations directly beneath existing business districts costs insane amounts of money.  The Boston Red Line through Cambridge does this, and the effect is obvious, whereas south of Boston it follows a rail right-of-way and there isn't much going on around the stations. 

 

These modern streetcar lines can, by contrast, be built directly to and through existing business districts at minimal expense.  They have much more frequent stops than light rail, and so the development is continuous along the line.  The Portland streetcar has attracted continuous development for miles.  There are maybe two surface parking lots and zero vacant buildings downtown and in the Pearl District.  This wouldn't have happened if the streetcar was instead as a subway with stations placed every 15 blocks. 

 

New York maintains continuous business districts between subway stations because the population density is so great.  And it's no coincidence that the last areas of Manhattan to be gentrified, The Lower East Side and Chelsea, remained dumps for so long due to their lack of subway access. 

 

 

 

^ That highlights the need for a two-tiered approach to transit in Cincinnati: Surface streetcars to serve as neighborhood circulators and feeders into light rail and/or subway, and light rail and/or subway to connect more distant neighborhoods and suburbs to the downtown core.

 

Subways in NYC have much more frequent stops than more modern metro systems (think DC Metro, BART, or MARTA), but we also have express trains that bypass many local stations. So you have local trains serving as neighborhood circulators, and express trains providing for longer-distance transit (and commuter trains serving the 'burbs). While neighborhoods tends to grow up along the entire route of a subway line, transfer nodes between express and local lines tend to see even more dense development.

How do you propose getting from Clifton to downtown without going through OTR? Via Hyde Park Square?

 

Easy. After the first line is underway from The Banks to Findlay Market, start a second line that travels through or around Broadway Commons to Gilbert Avenue to William Howard Taft to Hughes Corner. Drive it sometime. It doesn't take any longer, and the uphill leg is actually about three minutes faster than reversing directions around Findlay Market and going up Vine Street. Plus there are many more large, flat development sites and ultra high-quality building shells along Gilbert and east of UC.

 

The Findlay Market line should eventually be extended through the West End and Camp Washington to Northside.

 

The Gilbert to Hughes Corner line could easily be extended to Hyde Park, Avondale and Clifton/Ludlow.

 

And another line should be built between Price Hill and Columbia Tusculum.

 

When it's all done in about twenty years, we'll have three interwoven streetcar lines connecting almost half of Cincinnati's neighborhoods. Plus a loop through Northern Kentucky. Light rail would pick up many of the rest.

 

That's why the opponents need to stop the first streetcar line. Once the first one is built and succeeds, there will be huge interest in other lines throughout Cincinnati's close-in neighborhoods.

 

We posted at the same time. 

 

Nice shots, I have also seen shots of the elevated lines heading through farmland in the Bronx.  Just imagine if immigration had started due to a war or other factor, and those elevated lines would have remained lonely for decades.  Of course politically-motivated interstates and state highways are allowed to not attract development without criticism.

 

Leslie Ghiz just appeared on Bill Cunningham's show but she didn't talk too much about her giving up her support for the streetcar.

 

Doesn't the proposed light rail system have a ROW between Gilbert and I-71, using the abandoned railroad tracks adjacent to the freeway? I think the route up Vine Street makes more sense in terms of spurring development in OTR, although that certainly doesn't preclude having additional lines along other routes throughout the city. I wouldn't want to see the first phase of the light rail system criticized for being redundant to an already-running streetcar line, though.

 

I don't like the idea of the streetcar reversing or requiring a transfer at Findlay Market; the ride from UC to downtown needs to be a one-seat ride, preferably facing the same direction the entire way.

 

Among my fantasy streetcar routes is along MLK and Erie Avenues serving UC, Hyde Park Square, Mt. Lookout Square, and Columbia Tusculum (roughly along the present-day #24 Metro route), and another line through my hometown of Fort Thomas, KY along Ft. Thomas Avenue and Alexandria Parkway, connecting Fort Thomas to downtown Newport and NKU.

 

That's why the opponents need to stop the first streetcar line. Once the first one is built and succeeds, there will be huge interest in other lines throughout Cincinnati's close-in neighborhoods.

 

You hit the nail on the head. Right now, the cries of outrage are along the following lines:

 

"It's a choo-choo train to nowhere!"

"Nobody will ride it! It's a boondoggle"

"It will only attract homeless people and people with dark skin!"

 

Once the first line is up and running, the cries of outrage will shift to:

 

"The streetcars are too crowded! We need more frequent service!"

"It doesn't run late enough into the evening!"

"It needs to be extended to my neighborhood!"

 

People like Smitherman, The Dean™, and the COAST crowd will continue to throw potshots, but by that time they will have lost all credibility and have become completely marginalized. That's why they're fighting: It's not just about the streetcar; it's about them preserving their political clout in the city. Cincinnati is finally ready to move into the future without these clowns, but they're fighting tooth-and-nail to maintain the status quo.

 

 

Doesn't the proposed light rail system have a ROW between Gilbert and I-71, using the abandoned railroad tracks adjacent to the freeway? I think the route up Vine Street makes more sense in terms of spurring development in OTR, although that certainly doesn't preclude having additional lines along other routes throughout the city. I wouldn't want to see the first phase of the light rail system criticized for being redundant to an already-running streetcar line, though.

 

 

The Gilbert Avenue section could be built to light rail standards for eventual conversion to light rail. It would be cheap light rail because there aren't that many utility connections to deal with going up Gilbert. And you've got a lot of running room.

 

But light rail would best serve UC through a tunnel from downtown to Jefferson and Corry Street, with the UC station at Jefferson and University. Eight minutes from Fountain Square to UC compared to probably 25 minutes going up Vine Street by streetcar to the same place. It would change our city in a big way.

John's plan sounds fantastic, but I do see where Dan is coming from. If the initial push was a direct from the basin to the Hilltop (UC most importantly), then it already connects places where people are at every single day of the week, pretty much year round. In contrast, the Basin first connects lots of destinations that either aren't in full use (The Banks, and most of OTR) or are relatively infrequently in use (Music Hall, Findlay Market, the Stadia). I actually find the Gilbert path to UC as the best investment to start rather than the OTR circulator.

 

That or we skip roads and go with three arial trams (Mt. Adams, UC, Price Hill).

Aerial trams don't have the intermediate stations the way a streetcar line does, although I could see having a tram from a streetcar or light rail station at Broadway Commons to the top of Mt. Adams.

 

I worry that Gilbert is too far east to serve UC very well... Since we're talking hypothetical scenarios, what about bringing it up Reading Road? It wouldn't be able to connect directly to McMillan, but it could swing over to campus via Taft or MLK.

Reading doesn't have very many developable sites.  Gilbert gets you Walnut Hills and the Baldwin complex.  Peebles corner explodes with development when the line gets there. 

 

If you want an aerial tram, run it from Findlay Market to Hughes high school and have it connect with the streetcars on the Downtown/OTR loop.

While it is unfortunate that Leslie Ghiz decided to tow the party line and oppose the streetcars, she at least did say she was "totally opposed" to COAST's anti-rail ammendment:  "It's a bad idea,'' Ghiz said. ""Your recourse, if you don't like what city council does, is to not elect us."

 

^And it's always possible that she means what she says, and that she thinks the current economic downturn isn't the appropriate climate in which to launch a new rail project.  I totally disagree, but it is a valid opinion.

Like I said, this is going to cost her in the upcoming election.  I suspect it was a political move to bring the streetcar into her debate about the City funding EMUs for the County, but I think she is already noticing that it was the wrong move to make.  She has already gotten a ton of criticism and you can pretty much guarantee that any support she had amongst moderate Democrats is now gone.

Ms. Ghiz may be under pressure from the Nowhere Men to withdraw her support for the streetcar.  I've voted for her in the past but there are other candidates to chose from who have the vision to see that economic development will help our city prosper and that better transit is long overdue. 

 

Nowhere Men are modern-day versions of Nattering Nabobs of Negativism.  For whatever reason they harbor ill will towards our city and fail to show appreciation for its many assets.  Why else would anyone say Downtown, Clifton and various points along the proposed streetcar alignment are "nowhere", when they're home to most of the cultural, educational and entertainment venues of our entire region?  If the Nowhere Men don't want to ride the choo choo train, so be it.  There'll be more room for the rest of us to visit the many wonderful attractions along its route.

 

As the lyrics say, "He's as blind as he can be, just sees what he wants to see".  To any and all Nowhere Men, I hope you find happiness someday.  In the meantime, maybe Prozac could help.

^ Right. Suburbs are the real nowhere.

Someone posted something along the lines of "people won't drive in from the suburbs and take the streetcar to Findlay Market, blah, blah, negative, pissy ... " and they're right, of course.

 

But a lot of Cincinnatians, wherever they live, are going to be interested in the following proposition: Drive any of four freeways that converge on our region's best interchange, Fort Washington Way, and park in a brand-new garage for a third of what parking goes for around Fountain Square during the weekday. And then hop on the streetcar that comes around every few minutes to get to your job up in town.  In a few years, several thousand people will be doing this every day. They will have better parking, and they will save a lot of money. And we'll free-up for higher-and-better uses some of the 90+ acres of downtown land now used for surface parking.

 

I can also imagine Music Hall patrons parking cheaply at Fountain Square, having dinner there, and then taking the streetcar to a concert, then returning to downtown for a drink afterwards.

 

And I'm sure some Reds fans - the city estimates up to 2,000 per game -- will park cheaply or for free in Over-the-Rhine and jump on the streetcar to go to GABP. Then go back to OTR bars after the game.

 

And for those who can't get the "streetcar to nowhere" idea out of their minds, our continuously improving Findlay Market will at last be recognized for what it is -- downtown's once and future grocery store.

 

And that's just the Downtown/Over-the-Rhine story. When you add-in the eight other neighborhoods served in Phase One of the Cincinnati Streetcar, the streetcar contacts well over 50% of our city's jobs and 20% of its residents.

Curious...From the word "Go", how long could we say it typically takes to rehab one of the many vacant buildings in OTR?  So when funding is secured and the streetcar is a go, could we assume that much of the lots along the route would be finished before the loop is even complete?

Like I said, this is going to cost her in the upcoming election.

 

I forgave her the last election only due to her support of the streetcar. This is the same lady who led the closure of the Collins Ave steps.

Curious...From the word "Go", how long could we say it typically takes to rehab one of the many vacant buildings in OTR?  So when funding is secured and the streetcar is a go, could we assume that much of the lots along the route would be finished before the loop is even complete?

 

I believe alot of the current development in OTR is based on the idea that the Streetcar will be built.  I'm not saying that development will completely stop if the Streetcar is canned (It's still one of our city's coolest neighborhoods), just that alot of it may not have happened in the first place if the Streetcar wasn't proposed.  So, to answer your question, the real "Go" was at the beginning of the proposal.  When construction starts, that'll just be like taking it to the next level.

Most any investment you're seeing in northwest OTR is already streetcar spurred.  Some might be able to sustain themselves even without a streetcar, but I would suspect that most will not.  North of Liberty and west of Vine just doesn't get redeveloped, in my opinion, without streetcar service.  It's just not doable.

^ As many have said, without a Streetcar, it's not doable without mass building teardowns to add parking.  And that would be a disaster.

From today's Bill Cunningham broadcast:

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vuPLyGGReoI

Most any investment you're seeing in northwest OTR is already streetcar spurred.

Really? Enlighten me. Who exactly?

 

North of Liberty and west of Vine just doesn't get redeveloped, in my opinion, without streetcar service. It's just not doable

It is statements like this that are infuriating to me. You throw the Brewery Dist. under the proverbial bus to everyone in efforts to push your own cause. The CityLink campaign did the same thing to the West End. What do you tell developers when your project doesn't happen? I have a bit more faith in all of OTR than you do, with or without a streetcar and am not willing to say that the viability is solely dependent on a streetcar.

 

This is not how you sell this thing. When you have someone like me and many others here in OTR that want in the worst way to be for it but have to defend the areas inevitable viability from constant statements like this, you are making a mistake.

just that alot of it may not have happened in the first place if the Streetcar wasn't proposed.

Come on people, are you just here to fool yourselves or do you really expect others to believe this? This just is not the case at all. What development that is in place now was streetcar proposal driven? The streetcar would not have even been entertained if it weren't for the development and if you would put it to the people that way, that the streetcar is a protection of your investment both in the CBD and OTR then perhaps you would get somewhere but that train may have already sailed. To say that OTR's development is thanks to your proposal is just laughable and finds no basis in reality.  The frustrations here never stop..........

The redevelopment of OTR will happen with or without a Streetcar.  But at a certain point, you hit some walls.  You can only bring so many residents (and their cars) back to currently vacant buildings in OTR without having to demolish other historic buildings to make way for parking.  The farther north you go, the buildings become less desirable (if a Streetcar doesn't exist), because you reduce the possibility of walking to anything downtown.

 

 

Most any investment you're seeing in northwest OTR is already streetcar spurred.

Really?  Enlighten me. Who exactly?

From this week's Soapbox - Rookwood Pottery's Christopher Rose:

 

“I chose this location so that we could be right on the streetcar line.  If you want to start looking at a return on investment, for the streetcar, then you can look at us.  We’re going in here with the streetcar in mind,” says Rose.

back to currently vacant buildings in OTR without having to demolish other historic buildings to make way for parking.

Like they had to do with 14th and Vine or the Gateway Building.  Do you realize how many vacant lots we have?

 

 

From this week's Soapbox - Rookwood Pottery's Christopher Rose:

From todays Michael Redmond, neighbor and friend of Chris Rose:

Chris is towing the community line the same way I would if interviewed.  Chris had eyed several locations in OTR dating back several years and I am telling you, in all reality, that was not why his decision was made.  Chris did the same thing in City Beat about 7 years ago when trying to get streetlights on Mulberry.  Don't be fooled by your own hype.

The farther north you go, the buildings become less desirable (if a Streetcar doesn't exist), because you reduce the possibility of walking to anything downtown.

I live about as far north as you can get in OTR.  I did not purchase because of a streetcar nor did my neighbors.  I can and occasionally do walk downtown but certainly prefer the drive in one of my two cars that I park in front of my palatial estate that I call the Taj MaHOLLY.  If you are specifically talking about the Brewery Dist. then I argue that the buildings become less desirable because of the type of buildings that are there.  The KD Lamp building does not become any more easy to develop because of a streetcar.

  North of Liberty and west of Vine just doesn't get redeveloped, in my opinion, without streetcar service.  It's just not doable

It is statements like this that are infuriating to me.  You throw the Brewery Dist. under the proverbial bus to everyone in efforts to push your own cause.  The CityLink campaign did the same thing to the West End.  What do you tell developers when your project doesn't happen?  I have a bit more faith in all of OTR than you do, with or without a streetcar and am not willing to say that the viability is solely dependent on a streetcar.

 

People like Chris Rose, Bryon Martin, Mike Morgan and Steve Hampton are some of the streetcar's most enthusiastic supporters.  I'm not throwing anyone under the bus.  In fact I'm repeating many of the sentiments and direct quotes from those very people.

 

I know that you're of the opinion that Over-the-Rhine can be completely redeveloped in a sustainable way by just continuing to subsidize development with taxpayer dollars.  We have a fundamental disagreement on that for not only what the purpose of public dollars are, but also the realities of access and functionality of areas like northwest OTR.  They're incredibly inaccessible and I'm certainly not the first person to say that.  Not sure why you're making it out to be something unique that the great streetcar conspirators are using for their own gain.

 

You know me Michael.  I'm a student, an academic and a passionate born/raised Cincinnatian.  I only want what is best for our center city and I've spent many sleepless nights trying to make that happen without getting paid.  I put everything I have out there for this neighborhood and our city and have nothing to get out of it in return...it's true passion.  So please quit with the accusations of what my motives are when you know full well what they are.

With the exception of Byron (who bought the building I wanted to buy before Mulberry) none of them made their decision based on the streetcar.

 

I only want what is best for our center city and I've spent many sleepless nights trying to make that happen without getting paid.  I put everything I have out there for this neighborhood and our city and have nothing to get out of it in return...it's true passion.  So please quit with the accusations of what my motives are when you know full well what they are.

I too am one of those people who live, eat and breathe OTR.  My "accusations" are not to your motives, but to your tactics.  We both would like to see the same thing.  I too want a streetcar.  At the same time it is hard for me to jump on the bandwagon when misinformation about development, both past, present and future are all attributed to the streetcar.  I will still be here after we do or do not get one and I don't want to have a harder time trying to explain to someone why OTR especially north of Liberty is still a worthwhile investment just because we didn't lay track.

In the most simple terms I will break down the scenario of how an urban area can be redeveloped.  The situation is that urban redevelopment projects are complex and require additional funding as a result.  So here are the options...

 

1. [*]You bridge that financing gap with public dollars that essentially go straight to a developer to make their bottom line work.

[*]You take public dollars and make it so the gap is smaller and requires less if any public subsidy for private developers.

 

In the end if you go with option 1, you have a redeveloped area done with a lot of public money, but no public ownership (i.e. the condo sales from the Gateway Quarter aren't directly going back to City coffers - the public).  If you go with option 2, you have a redeveloped area with at least some form of public ownership in the form of new infrastructure.

 

If we're trying to get to the same end result which one is more reasonable and ethical to use is a personal choice.  We just happen to have different stances.

With the exception of Byron (who bought the building I wanted to buy before Mulberry) none of them made their decision based on the streetcar.

 

While they may not have initially purchased their properties based on the streetcar, they are now claiming that the streetcar is what makes the redevelopment of their properties feasible.  These are not my words, I'm repeating theirs.

I would direct you back to my comment above as you are not comprehending what I have been trying to tell you.

I will still be here after we do or do not get one and I don't want to have a harder time trying to explain to someone why OTR especially north of Liberty is still a worthwhile investment just because we didn't lay track.

 

And here is the difference...you're in the business of "selling" places where people want to live.  I'm in the business of "creating" those place where people want to live.

 

There's a reason people aren't buying at Clyffside and they are in the Gateway Quarter...it's accessibility.  Accessibility to services, functions and lifestyle.  That exists in the Gateway thanks to its proximity to the CBD and Main Street, to a lesser extent, that made it possible to build off of that success.

 

There is nothing up by Clyffside or Findlay Market.  By creating a connection via a streetcar you then tap those places into the Gateway, CBD and the riverfront.  Without this it becomes much more difficult to make a car-free lifestyle happen...which is what we're trying to accomplish in OTR correct?

While they may not have initially purchased their properties based on the streetcar, they are now claiming that the streetcar is what makes the redevelopment of their properties feasible.

Who?  Mike's?  what does he own there?  Steve Hampton, who doesn't live on the line to begin with and is about as far away from it as I am?  We are all supporters, we all want to see it happen but this is BS that their redevelopment has anything to do with the Streetcar.  Is Steve going to stop on his property because of no streetcar?  Did he even know anything about the streetcar when he purchased on McMicken?

 

While they may not have initially purchased their properties based on the streetcar, they are now claiming that the streetcar is what makes the redevelopment of their properties feasible.

Who?  Mike's?  what does he own there?  Steve Hampton, who doesn't live on the line to begin with and is about as far away from it as I am?  We are all supporters, we all want to see it happen but this is BS that their redevelopment has anything to do with the Streetcar.  Is Steve going to stop on his property because of no streetcar?  Did he even know anything about the streetcar when he purchased on McMicken?

 

People have been pouring money into OTR for many decades and you know this.  Why is money different now from ten years ago.  What is going to make it sustainable for more than a decade?  I don't have all the answers and I don't think anyone does, but I don't think that we can expect to continue to do the same things and expect different results.

Are you saying that the massive development effort is the same now as it was over the past decades?

Are you saying that the massive development effort is the same now as it was over the past decades?

 

What is happening now in the northwestern portions of OTR (Brewery District and what not) is no different. People are doing their best to make urban redevelopment projects work there and they just aren't (see Clyffside or Metal Blast or previous owner of the Moerlein residence/office or Findlay Market buildings). The people are investing good money with good ideas, but it just ain't working...now why is that? Why is the Gateway Quarter so damn successful and northwest OTR not?  Hell for that matter why are the north/south streets in the Gateway Quarter so damn successful and the east/west not nearly as much?

 

I don't think it's because the people doing the investing are any better or worse, because the people up in the Brewery District and Findlay Market area are incredible people. At some point you just have to realize that it's not the product that's failing, it's the functionality.

Clyffside- Dwayne Donohoo. No significant financial backing. Failed

Metal Blast-Denny Dellinger. No financial backing at all. Forclosed

Moerlein residence-Karen Dominee. She rehabbed it and that was all she was planning on doing. Sold or rented, I will ask.

office-Investor/architect who lives in Fla. Purchased it because he like the facade.

On a side note, the greenest grass I have ever seen was in the top floor of that building. Also a church went in there and removed a structual wall that blew out the side walls of the building. Ask Byron if I am wrong, and also ask if he mows that second floor or does he just go for the prairie look. :wink:

 

Contrast any of these (good people, but none developers) to 3CDC.

At some point you just have to realize that it's not the product that's failing, it's the functionality.

It was the failing of the development both in functionality of the building in Metal Blasts case and the product type relative to other availabilities in the area, not just Gateway.

 

Good chat...gotta go. 

So you're saying the if 3CDC were to buy a bunch of stuff up in that area that it would all of a sudden be a success?  I'll go to my other scenario of why the focus on the edge of OTR closest to the CBD?  Why focus on the north/south streets instead of east/west?

 

It's all about function and programming.  In the end society revolves around moving people and goods.  It's how we as human beings have always spatially arranged ourselves over time, and it will always hold true because we aren't asexual and we can not make our own food.  We rely on external factors that we can manipulate through the means of transportation.

I'll go to my other scenario of why the focus on the edge of OTR closest to the CBD? Why focus on the north/south streets instead of east/west?

First, look at the reasoning that they started at 12 and Vine. That was one of the toughest corners in OTR, period. They decided to do a straight shot up Vine and move outward in development. They purchased multiple properties on multiple streets but remember, they still do not own everything and therefor do not have a say on particular properties. But nor did they start on all North south streets either. Only now are they hitting Elm, Main on 3, Walnut nothing yet.

But lets take 12th. Tender Mercies, 1132 Bar, CPS, and going eastward the Art Academy and I believe Terry Lee's building is not owned by 3CDC either.

The point is, they own more on Vine, north of 12th and wanted to have the greatest impact as quickly as possible. They weren't building around the streetcar.

 

So you're saying the if 3CDC were to buy a bunch of stuff up in that area that it would all of a sudden be a success?

As development pushes North and others begin and push west, yes it becomes more viable. But you are saying that if you lay track it would be now? If Gateway didn't exist yet there was a streetcar, would it then be a success?

^

 

The economists who studied the Cincinnati Streetcar estimated that, by 2025, there would be 2,290 units of new housing produced in OTR and Downtown due to the presence of the streetcar that would not otherwise occur. And it estimates new commerical space that would be added at an average rate of 148,000 SF per year over what would othewise happen.

 

I do think Randy is right. Gateway succeeds because it is walkable, focused and subsidized. The Brewery District has no such backing, and it's just too far away from employment centers to make it without the streetcar or a huge investment in parking infrastructure.

 

I doubt quality and extensive redevelopment will occur north of Liberty Street without the streetcar. I will be happily surprised if it does.

The economists who studied the Cincinnati Streetcar estimated that, by 2025, there would be 2,290 units of new housing produced in OTR and Downtown due to the presence of the streetcar that would not otherwise occur. And it estimates new commerical space that would be added at an average rate of 148,000 SF per year over what would othewise happen.

Well we have new units going in every single day without the presence of a streetcar. Just one time I would like to see someone have to put their neck on the line for some of these statements. How does that economist derive 2,290 units and 148,000 of comm? Numbers sound so impressive when they aren't rounded off so could you point me to that study.  That didn't happen to be a study funded by the streetcar proponents was it?

 

I do think Randy is right. Gateway succeeds because it is walkable, focused and subsidized

Gateway succeeds because it doesn't just give a transportational link, it gives a development link. Why didn't 3CDC start with 14th and Vine? It had to link the development, there was no difference in the walkability, no difference in any mode of transportation yet why is 14th and Vine viable today and not two years ago? The same is true with the Brewery Dist except you are dealing with a whole different type of building that does not lend itself well to residential rehab. A streetcar does not overcome that. What do you do to a KD Lamp, a Hussman, or John Donaldson's building next to Hussman? There is building after building up there that are functionally obsolescent and unless your economist above sees major industry moving back into the heart of the Brewery Dist, I would challenge his findings.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf17763.pdf