^How many of those firsts have occured in the last 70 years?

>We are the biggest city in the country to have a pre WWII building as our tallest (until QCS),

 

Seriously?  That's a bad thing? 

 

>the subway never became a reality after starting construction,

 

Because the project was under the pseudo-control of the state.  State law dictated how much money we could borrow for the subway project, and when prices inflated due to events in Europe, we were unable to borrow more money without another bond issue approved by the people.  This was not possible in 1920, when construction began, because city finances were thrown into disarray by Prohibition. The failure of not one but two bond issues to build Central Parkway in 1921 and 1923 discouraged the Rapid Transit Commission from putting another subway bond issue on the ballot.  Second, the state passed an excise tax on streetcar companies in 1927, cutting further into Cincinnati Traction's declining revenues, keeping it from being able to buy subway cars and lay rail.  This whole situation was a follow up to the Ohio Supreme Court's ruling against the revision of the Traction Company's lease that would have allowed it to operate the rapid transit line.  Third, the federal government, for reasons that will never be known, funded Chicago's two subway lines during the depression but built roads here instead of finishing our subway line.  Fourth, the federal government built the Wright-Lockland Highway on the canal north of the subway in 1942 when it could have laid tracks on the existing subway line and extended it up to the Wright Aeronautical Plant.  This move doomed the subway because it put the finished parts of the Rapid Transit Loop on a collision course with I-75. 

 

>the Banks has taken forever to start construction

 

Again, the Banks garages are a county project.  It has always been their responsibility, per the lease they agreed to with the Bengals back in 1996.  The park gets funding from other sources from the garages, and has had it lined up for some time, but couldn't start because the land it will occupy needs to be dedicated to surface parking until the garages are built, per the Bengals lease.  For whatever reason this is way too complicated for people to understand. 

 

 

 

 

 

Go to every city's newspaper website forum and you'll notice something similar -- everybody seems to think their city is the slowest and that so many projects never even happen.

 

Somewhat related..... I saw a great bumper sticker this morning:

 

"Dreams are criticized by those who have given up on their own dreams."

If only to respond to Baltimore, Cincinnati managed to avoid building the cheap Festival Marketplace that many cities did that were second-rate copies of Inner Harbor. I would add that DT Cincinnati was looking great through the recession of 90-91 when the bottom dropped out. Bicentennial Commons/Sawyer Point gave the city one of the best front lawns in the country. We fixed up Fountain Square and made a decent public space into one of the best. The Backstage district has taken its time to get rolling but seems poised to deliver on its promises. The DT library expanded and continues to be one of the best in the country. We did actually build two stadiums. We fixed one of the worst urban expressways in the country and laid the groundwork for future development (Cbus is still stuck with theirs and the plans for its 'fix' don't look as nice as Cincy's).

 

There are excuses that can be made about rail, but yeah it should been done at some point.

 

Again, the Banks garages are a county project. It has always been their responsibility, per the lease they agreed to with the Bengals back in 1996. The park gets funding from other sources from the garages, and has had it lined up for some time, but couldn't start because the land it will occupy needs to be dedicated to surface parking until the garages are built, per the Bengals lease. For whatever reason this is way too complicated for people to understand.

 

 

I'm not saying just the city or the county or whatever is slow to the game, but just the region as a whole.  Even looking at other things, such as retail, our region is slow to the game.  We just opened our first Nordstrom (Cleveland, Columbus, Indy all had them well before), Ikea just opened a few years ago (Pittsburgh had one for years), and we still don't have a legitimate lifestyle center.  Not saying all these things are someone's fault, or that there weren't reasons for why Cincinnati missed the boat on some things (like the subway) but as a region, Cincinnati is usually slow to trends or to embrace new developments IMO.

 

And on the point of Carew being our tallest for so long, I am definitely not saying that Carew is a bad building, or unfit to be our tallest.  I'm just saying that major developments (such as the tallest building in the city) occur on a less frequent basis here than elsewhere. The Terminal Tower in Cleveland, Wrigley building in Chicago, LA City Hall, all are beautiful buildings, worthy of being the tallest in the city.  However, these other cities accepted new, taller buildings and grew taller.  Even as QCS is being built, there is a sentiment that Carew should retain its title as tallest.  There's a definite resistence to change in Cincinnati, and it's one of the things that has kept local culture so strong, but also one of the things that drives me crazy about the city.

First, skyscrapers are typically built by companies, not cities.  There was never any effort by the city to keep anyone from building anything taller, and Cincinnati city plans are filled with conceptual drawings of taller buildings on various lots.  There was never any vote of the people, never any vote of council.  Fountain Square West was panned *because the design was bad*, and it was.  But the reason it wasn't built was mostly because of the aforementioned 1991 recession. 

 

We threw $50 million in incentives at Nordstrom to build downtown at 5th & Race, even demolished a 14-story building and a parking garage to clear the lot.  Then they pulled out of the bargain, as I remember, a few days before Thanksgiving 2000, both here AND IN DOWNTOWN PITTSBURGH.   

 

And how is there a "resistance to change" when all the things dmerkowitz mentioned happened, we are getting a casino, and so many still want Over-the-Rhine bulldozed? 

 

 

Again, the Banks garages are a county project. It has always been their responsibility, per the lease they agreed to with the Bengals back in 1996. The park gets funding from other sources from the garages, and has had it lined up for some time, but couldn't start because the land it will occupy needs to be dedicated to surface parking until the garages are built, per the Bengals lease. For whatever reason this is way too complicated for people to understand.

 

 

I'm not saying just the city or the county or whatever is slow to the game, but just the region as a whole. Even looking at other things, such as retail, our region is slow to the game. We just opened our first Nordstrom (Cleveland, Columbus, Indy all had them well before), Ikea just opened a few years ago (Pittsburgh had one for years), and we still don't have a legitimate lifestyle center. Not saying all these things are someone's fault, or that there weren't reasons for why Cincinnati missed the boat on some things (like the subway) but as a region, Cincinnati is usually slow to trends or to embrace new developments IMO.

 

And on the point of Carew being our tallest for so long, I am definitely not saying that Carew is a bad building, or unfit to be our tallest. I'm just saying that major developments (such as the tallest building in the city) occur on a less frequent basis here than elsewhere. The Terminal Tower in Cleveland, Wrigley building in Chicago, LA City Hall, all are beautiful buildings, worthy of being the tallest in the city. However, these other cities accepted new, taller buildings and grew taller. Even as QCS is being built, there is a sentiment that Carew should retain its title as tallest. There's a definite resistence to change in Cincinnati, and it's one of the things that has kept local culture so strong, but also one of the things that drives me crazy about the city.

Why are you contradicting yourself? Saying Cleveland,Indy and Columbus have had a Nordstrom? We have it now and a IKEA. Those sames town are saying why we have the IKEA and they don't? Im sure those town would like our F500 companies but they don't have them.

 

  "There was never any effort by the city to keep anyone from building anything taller"

 

  Yes there was. There was a city ordinance that kept any building from being taller than the Carew Tower. The ordinance has expired.

 

  There were also ordinances to keep interurbans away from downtown, one to keep the Suspension Bridge from lining up with Vine Street, and all kinds of other nonsense. Sometimes government is used to stifle the competition.

 

  The real reason why the Carew Tower has been our tallest for so long is that it was built extraordinarly tall for the economy at the time.  New York's Empire State was similar.

  Yes there was. There was a city ordinance that kept any building from being taller than the Carew Tower. The ordinance has expired.

 

Please show me some proof of this.  The only thing I have ever seen from several old downtown plans is that the downtown skyline should "maintain its pyramid shape with an apex at Fountain Square" (or something along those lines).

 

Here are the pages from the Cincinnati 2000 Plan (done in the 80s)

 

 

There were also ordinances to keep interurbans away from downtown...

 

Not that I've ever heard of.  There were certainly many efforts to do so, such as the Cincinnati Traction Company's excessively high rental fees to the interurbans for using their tracks, or using their political connections to block the Ohio Electric/Cincinnati & Lake Erie concerns from using the canal towpath to reach downtown.  The choice of track gauge for the street railway predates the interurbans and was more to prevent steam railroads from trying to use them.  While the reality of the subway turned out to be fairly anti-interurban, it was a moot point by the time construction was underway as many were going out of business in the 1920s.  Still, the plans for it were very much for the benefit of the interurbans, and it was political cronyism that turned it into something else, not anything that was codified into law.

 

Not that it makes the situation any better of course.  The good-old-boy network here is HUGE, and even without legal backing, they can significantly affect what goes on here just with political clout.  This goes along with the building height situation downtown.  Even if there was no ordinance (though I've heard there was too), there's a "you'll never work in this town again" attitude that could very easily chop the head off of taller buildings. 

^

When I first started in the real estate business, I worked for a developer who was involved in many downtown projects, here and around the country. His view was that Cincinnati was the most closed market he'd ever tried to work in -- almost cartel-like. He told me that for a long period starting in the Fifties and continuing at least through the Seventies that there was a sort of system, orginally promoted by the Emery interests (Carew Tower) and later the Galbreath interests (Fountain Square tower, US Bank Center, Fountain West for a time) to ensure that new office buildings were properly sequenced into the leasing market. That is, you couldn't just acquire land, get it rezoned and start construction without passing through a sort of peer-review process, which effectively closed the market to outsiders.

 

You literally had to go before what was then the equilvalent of the CBC and make your case and gain the right to bring a new building on-line. The guy I worked for tried to buck the system and was shut down. When Duke came to town with access to unlimited capital and started throwing up towers all over the place, usually without any pre-leasing whatsoever, it broke up the old-boys network which was sort of dying-off anyway.

 

Between the Carew Tower's opening during the Depression and the opening of Provident Tower at Fourth and Vine in 1964, there wasn't a single new office building of significant size constructed in downtown Cincinnati -- over thirty years.

Between the Carew Tower's opening during the Depression and the opening of Provident Tower at Fourth and Vine in 1964, there wasn't a single new office building of significant size constructed in downtown Cincinnati -- over thirty years.

 

It was almost as bad in Cleveland -- After Terminal Tower opened in 1930, there wasn't a single new office tower built downtown until Cleveland Electric Illuminating built 55 Public Square in 1956.

 

Again, the Banks garages are a county project. It has always been their responsibility, per the lease they agreed to with the Bengals back in 1996. The park gets funding from other sources from the garages, and has had it lined up for some time, but couldn't start because the land it will occupy needs to be dedicated to surface parking until the garages are built, per the Bengals lease. For whatever reason this is way too complicated for people to understand.

 

 

I'm not saying just the city or the county or whatever is slow to the game, but just the region as a whole. Even looking at other things, such as retail, our region is slow to the game. We just opened our first Nordstrom (Cleveland, Columbus, Indy all had them well before), Ikea just opened a few years ago (Pittsburgh had one for years), and we still don't have a legitimate lifestyle center. Not saying all these things are someone's fault, or that there weren't reasons for why Cincinnati missed the boat on some things (like the subway) but as a region, Cincinnati is usually slow to trends or to embrace new developments IMO.

 

And on the point of Carew being our tallest for so long, I am definitely not saying that Carew is a bad building, or unfit to be our tallest. I'm just saying that major developments (such as the tallest building in the city) occur on a less frequent basis here than elsewhere. The Terminal Tower in Cleveland, Wrigley building in Chicago, LA City Hall, all are beautiful buildings, worthy of being the tallest in the city. However, these other cities accepted new, taller buildings and grew taller. Even as QCS is being built, there is a sentiment that Carew should retain its title as tallest. There's a definite resistence to change in Cincinnati, and it's one of the things that has kept local culture so strong, but also one of the things that drives me crazy about the city.

 

You said it.  It's enough to drive anybody crazy, but it's what has kept Cincinnati strong through the years.  Slow and Steady makes the recessions a lot more bearable than in Boom and Bust cities.  And it's definitely what puts Cincinnati on the map culturally.

 

As for the streetcar...the plan is still alive and well.  It's progressing at a decent speed.  And, as with just about anything else, Cincinnati will get theirs as soon as it's been proven nationally that we're headed in that direction.  It's a life of moderation.

Moved the Mark Twain comments to the Off-Topic thread:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,439.0.html

In honor of St. Patrick's Day, the Dublin LUAS passing by the Guinness Brewery:

some more Dublin:

Did someone post something about "moderation?" On St. Patrick's Day?

Here's another Bockfest Parade picture

Gonna' happen.

Some good news, here is the newest SORTA Board Member:

http://cincystreetcar.wordpress.com/2010/03/18/cincystreetcar-com-co-founder-appointed-to-sorta-board/

^Fantastic!  Plus, last week a birdie told me the State grant looked good. hell yeah!

Yes, look here in the newly released ODOT draft TRAC listing....

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Pages/Default.aspx

 

Note the high ranking (84) the streetcar project got. The CUT/fourth main was also included in the same listing on page 4.

 

"New Projects with TRAC Funding Commitment"

 

Cincinnati Streetcar - Phase I

 

2010

 

$15.0 Million

 

I love how the streetcar gets stretched differently on the shirts of those two.

Yes, look here in the newly released ODOT draft TRAC listing....

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Pages/Default.aspx

 

Note the high ranking (84) the streetcar project got. The CUT/fourth main was also included in the same listing on page 4.

 

 

The highest scoring project in the state.

Cincinnati lands $15M streetcar grant

By Barry M. Horstman, Cincinnati Enquirer, March 19, 2010

 

Cincinnati’s proposed streetcar system has been recommended for a $15 million Ohio grant that local officials hope could jump start the project and open the door to further state and federal funding.

 

In the first outside money committed to the $128 million project, the Ohio Transportation Review Advisory Council (TRAC) included $15 million for the streetcar system among recommendations for $103.2 million in new state transportation plans announced Friday.

There's nothing they can do right away when this money comes in, right?

^

 

They can use the money to complete the environmental document, to complete the engineering on the project and to start moving utilities in the path of the streetcar. All of these things would have taken most of a year to complete, and so this keeps us on track. So to speak.

Will they do that stuff, prior to receiving a guarantee for the rest of the funding? IIRC, council voted to set some money aside which would be used to complete some studies, so they would use it when funding was guaranteed. Without total funding guaranteed, will they do any of the stuff you mentioned?

 

I guess they won't have this money until summer, anyway, and perhaps by then we will know about the federal funds, so the point might be moot. Although, they might look at using the funds they recently set aside. And it's not necessarily the case that the next federal grants will be announced before this $15m comes along.

A lot of the utilities they have to move are over 100 years old. The way I look at it, it's all part of the process of repopulating downtown and OTR. They will definitely finish the environmental planning and engineering now.

 

Once the funding gap gets to $10 million, money will come off the sidelines. With that happening and if we win a Federal Urban Circulator grant in June, done deal.

 

From here, I can kinda squint and see the finish line in sight.

So I guess they will have to figure out how they're going to get up the hill with the engineering studies. I would really love to see the Bellevue Incline brought back! Seems unlikely, however.

Check out funiculars. Angels Flight funicular in LA. There are many types. Some slow. Some fast. Maybe you can find some ideas for Cincinatti.

A lot of the utilities they have to move are over 100 years old. The way I look at it, it's all part of the process of repopulating downtown and OTR. They will definitely finish the environmental planning and engineering now.

 

Once the funding gap gets to $10 million, money will come off the sidelines. With that happening and if we win a Federal Urban Circulator grant in June, done deal.

 

From here, I can kinda squint and see the finish line in sight.

 

I sure do hope you're right!  This is so exciting for Cincinnati.  Any idea when we'd here about the Fed. Circulator grants?  If we get word of those funds say in the next few months, could we possibly start seeing track laid by the end of the year or is that too optimistic?

Could they amend the bill they passed a few weeks ago for the federal funding?

There won't be any track laid for awhile, maybe another year. They will start on Elm in front of Music Hall, do the OTR section first and finish at the Great American Ball Park.

Check out funiculars. Angels Flight funicular in LA. There are many types. Some slow. Some fast. Maybe you can find some ideas for Cincinatti.

I was thinking along the lines of Pittsburgh's Duquesne Incline (though more modern, of course).

 

 

I suppose making it flat like that is out of the question, though, with a modern streetcar's length. That may put the whole concept out of the question, but I really think it's worth pursuing. It would be functional, a historic tribute, and aesthetically awesome.

The problem with an incline like the Duguesne is that you'd then be looking at a three-seat ride from UC to downtown. May as well take the bus at that point. Cincinnati's original inclines allowed the streetcars to travel directly onto a platform and ride to the top of the hill where they'd continue their journey, but you'd have to build a fairly massive structure to lift the modern Skoda streetcars. The best way to get the streetcar from the basin to Uptown is have it simply travel up the hill as planned (and which is feasible according to Skoda's specifications; engineers will make the final call), or travel through the hill via a tunnel.

The problem with an incline like the Duguesne is that you'd then be looking at a three-seat ride from UC to downtown. May as well take the bus at that point. Cincinnati's original inclines allowed the streetcars to travel directly onto a platform and ride to the top of the hill where they'd continue their journey, but you'd have to build a fairly massive structure to lift the modern Skoda streetcars. The best way to get the streetcar from the basin to Uptown is have it simply travel up the hill as planned (and which is feasible according to Skoda's specifications; engineers will make the final call), or travel through the hill via a tunnel.

Yeah, I realize that's a problem (see my edit). It would be nice to get those views, if it were feasible. Bellevue Hill Park could really benefit, too.

 

A tunnel would be nice, as well. I think either one of those would also better serve the University than just shooting up Vine. A tunnel sounds even more expensive than an incline, though. Of course, it could be a good investment regarding future light rail. I am not optimistic, however, for anything but the planned route up Vine.

 

However they do it, I cannot wait to see it built! :D

It would be great if they could build a new Bellevue incline with a platform long enough to handle modern streetcars, though that would preclude attaching a trailer in times of high demand, etc.  Another challenge, though probably not a big one, would be to keep the cars powered during the climb.  While the three inclines that did support streetcars (Fairview, Bellevue, and Mt. Adams) did have overhead trolley wires, they weren't connected to power until it was docked at either the top or the bottom.  While not as big a big deal back in the day, the loss of lights and heating/air conditioning would be a bit unnerving.  I'm sure they could do it though.   

 

  The old inclines had to be counter-balanced, with one streetcar going up at the same time another one was going down. This would add operational complexity and travel time, since one car would probably be waiting for the other. It also required cross-overs at each end of the incline, so that the incline wouldn't have to travel empty.

 

    I won't say it's not do-able, but an incline would not be preferred.

 

 

 

  Figure at least a year and probably two or three for design. Just preparing a map of the existing utilities will typically take half a year or more.

^

They have been saying an opening by September 2012, and I haven't heard anything different.

I don't think a modern incline would have to be counter-balanced as you describe.  An elevator functions with its own counterweight running down a track parallel to the car, and there's no reason why the same couldn't be built into a modern incline with the counterweight traveling on a track just below the running rails.  In fact with pulleys the counterweight wouldn't have to move too far.  All of the inclines were built before elevators or right around when the first ones appeared, and it's unclear to me why they didn't think of it at the time. 

 

The one big argument I have against an incline is that since the modern streetcars are so much longer that the sight of the car on a much bigger platform would be a pretty significant part of the cityscape.  Also the platform would probably have to be wider to allow people to stand outside of the streetcar in case it caught on fire or the incline stalled.  The bottom line is an incline built today would look much different than an old one, and people might not like the look.   

 

if we are going to do an incline, do a historic one to the incline district of East Price Hill/Lower Price hill and have the Streetcar line that connects union terminal to downtown swing over a little farther to link to the incline. 

 

I rode all around that area yesterday and there is tremendous potential for redevelopment of EPH and LPH.  Especially the Incline Square district around queen's tower.  great views and plenty of empty lots to build on.  a real functioning incline would be great for Price Hill.

The print edition of the Sunday Enquirer published no opinion or letters in opposition to the $15 Million State grant. This is good.

 

On the other hand, there are 332 Comments to Barry Horstman's Friday article on the grant. We're definitely winning the argument here. Brad Thomas figures we're down to about half a dozen regular dead-enders who post under different names in opposition to the project. They're some sick puppies.

 

See for yourself (link fixed now):

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20100319/NEWS0108/303190057/Cincinnati-lands-15M-streetcar-grant

if we are going to do an incline, do a historic one to the incline district of East Price Hill/Lower Price hill and have the Streetcar line that connects union terminal to downtown swing over a little farther to link to the incline.

 

I rode all around that area yesterday and there is tremendous potential for redevelopment of EPH and LPH. Especially the Incline Square district around queen's tower. great views and plenty of empty lots to build on. a real functioning incline would be great for Price Hill.

 

Agree 100%

"They have been saying an opening by September 2012, and I haven't heard anything different."

 

  Who is? Is there some kind of official plan behind the scenes that I am not aware of?

 

    That's just 2.5 years for mapping, design, relocation of utilities, right of way acquisition, construction, testing, and then opening. That is a very agressive schedule. Has an official schedule been published?

 

   

^

 

City of Cincinnati

 

  ^Is there an official plan by the City of Cincinnati? May I see it? Is there actually a schedule?

There is no schedule yet. With headways as frequent as a streetcar, a schedule isn't as important as operating hours and frequency.

 

Is there an "official plan?"  Let me caveat that question by saying that there is never an "official plan" of anything, only more and more specific iterations of some general idea, even well into engineering.

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf16341.pdf

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/noncms/projects/streetcar/ProjectTeamprofile.pdf

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf17754.pdf

 

http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf17769.pdf