^ People and buildings naturally retreat from wide unpleasant highway-like streets, so it's no surprise that UC turns a mostly blank wall to Jefferson and to MLK as well.  Sadly, most people look at this as a reason to write-off those streets, to say they're bad so we might just as well embrace the badness.  Instead we should be working above and beyond to make make them better, because they need so much more help, but that's "too hard" for most.

 

This article explains very succinctly why creating a pleasant, walkable environment with walking-friendly transit like the streetcar is key to creating "places" and eliminating "non-places."  As pretty as the trees on the west side of Jefferson might be, it's still mostly "non-place."

 

Green space is a new invention. What's it for? Green Space was invented to make our other Non-Places less horrible. It basically doesn't exist in the Traditional City.

 

One of the basic problems with Non-Place is that it's contagious. When you start introducing Non-Places into a city design, you tend to add more and more Non-Places to try to fix the problems caused by the original Non-Places. If you have two Places next to each other, like an apartment building and a store, then you can easily walk from the apartment building to the store. If you put a big roadway in between, now you can no longer walk. You need a car. Now the apartment building needs a parking lot. Now the store needs a parking lot. Now the roadway needs to get bigger because of all the people driving from the apartment to the store. Now you need to surround the apartment building with grass (or better yet, a row of trees) to add a little buffer between the apartment building and the noisy roadway, because who wants to live next to a roaring highway? Then, you need to surround all the parking spaces with more grass and shrubbery, so that you aren't left with acres of burning asphalt. Then, the apartment building and the store are now so far from each other that you decide you need a freeway system. Then, because you have to drive the on/off ramps at 50 miles per hour, they need to have an enormous radius, and then they need to be surrounded by more green space and probably a cinder block wall so that people can tolerate the endless noise of a major freeway. Then, your city fills up with gasoline stations, car dealers, mechanics, auto parts stores, and all the paraphernalia needed to maintain all this transportation infrastructure. It is quite possible that your portion of Space to Non-Space in the city will fall below 10%. Essentially, the only Spaces left will be building interiors and a few parks (minus their parking lots).

 

 

On the topic of non-places is this excellent podcast from 99% Invisible- http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-60-names-vs-the-nothing/

 

"New Public Sites is an investigation into some of the invisible sites and overlooked features of our everyday public spaces. These are the liminal spaces within cities that are not traditionally framed as “public space” because, quite frankly, they are often ugly and unpleasant, the leftover scraps of urban design centered on the automobile. By giving these places succinct, fun and poetic names and leading people on playful walking tours, Graham Coreil-Allen says we can help start a discourse about our public spaces and how we want to envision them for the future. You can download a pdf of the New Public Sites book here."

 

Also if you don't listen to 99% Invisible, you should. It's amazing.

^^^ Hope you weren't thinking of me as someone who's "written-off" Jefferson. Like I said:

 

"I don't think Jefferson should stay highway-like. It should get cycletracks and a nice median. But not a streetcar."

 

I think a streetcar on Short Vine could help a lot with transforming Jefferson. My reasons for favoring Short Vine are not that Jefferson is hopelessly a highway. The primary ones are:

 

1) Serving Corryville better, transforming the neighborhood.

 

2) Smooth connection with Vine on the north side of MLK & reconnecting Vine (for some traffic), undoing a planning error and patching a hole in the city's fabric. Harmony with history. Bringing a streetcar back to a street made from streetcars.

 

3) Turning University Plaza into a streetcar village.

 

4) Making the existing commercial corridor on Short Vine look sexy and appealing. (Now this is something Jefferson probably couldn't achieve (not on the same level of a cozy, narrowish, dense urban commercial street like Short Vine), and if it could it would be so many years out that the effect on the area/neighborhood/city would not be so starkly transformational. In fact I think it's more likely more quickly w/ the wow-factor on Short Vine spilling over to Jefferson.)

 

I think those are the main points, I'll come back if I think of more. But the thrust here is that they are positive points for Short Vine, not negative points for Jefferson, which I think can and should be improved, regardless of where track is laid. Just like you said.

^ No not you, it's just the general paradigm.

^ No not you, it's just the general paradigm.

 

I was referring to jwulsin. My original "^^" had to be amended to a "^^^" when I saw thomasbw had snuck in a comment while I was reading yours/composing mine.

On the topic of non-places is this excellent podcast from 99% Invisible- http://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-60-names-vs-the-nothing/

 

"New Public Sites is an investigation into some of the invisible sites and overlooked features of our everyday public spaces. These are the liminal spaces within cities that are not traditionally framed as public space because, quite frankly, they are often ugly and unpleasant, the leftover scraps of urban design centered on the automobile. By giving these places succinct, fun and poetic names and leading people on playful walking tours, Graham Coreil-Allen says we can help start a discourse about our public spaces and how we want to envision them for the future. You can download a pdf of the New Public Sites book here."

 

Also if you don't listen to 99% Invisible, you should. It's amazing.

 

The term "non-space" existed by the 1990s, when I first heard it.  I'm not sure who coined it but it might have been an artist or art critic, as photographs of automobile-oriented non-spaces have been popular photographic subjects since the 1960s and 1970s (Ed Ruscha, Dan Graham, Bill Owens, etc.) and the first person to focus a lot of attention on photographing the American automobile landscape was Walker Evans, beginning in the late 1920s. 

 

While everyone is having fun drawing lines on maps, check out this slide showing three "conceptual uptown shuttle routes": http://bizj.us/x32hb/i/7

 

It seems a little bizarre (most likely intentional) that they didn't include Phase Two of the streetcar in this plan. That would provide their major north/south backbone and connection to downtown. If they want to run an additional east-west shuttle that runs between other destinations and connects people to the streetcar stops, that's great.

 

This also reinforces my idea that middle class citizens love transit when you call it a "shuttle".

This also reinforces my idea that middle class citizens love transit when you call it a "shuttle".

 

And it looks like this:

 

Well, I do enjoy drawing lines on maps, so much so I did a new map based off several recent comments and the Business Courier article.  I think of this one as “three fingers and a thumb.”  Streetcar proceeds up Vine St. forest route. I drew in the idea to cross Vine and use Inwood Park for a McMillan/Taft underpass to University Plaza, although that could be pretty costly proposition.  Large transfer Station at University Plaza to four different lines.  Orange line goes west and covers UC on two sides, as well as Clifton Heights and and Clifton.  Green line goes straight up Short Vine to the Zoo.  (Although I have previously argued for Jefferson to provide a better connection to UC, I think if you can build additional lines to cover UC on its south and west sides, that’s a pretty good connection.  The dilemma with the initial uptown extension is that additional streetcar lines may be years into the future, if they come at all.) The blue and red lines share track and head east on a reconfigured two directional Taft.  The red line heads up Burnet Ave. and hits up the additional medical and other points of interest mentioned in comments in that area as well as passing pretty close to the re-envisioned Reading/MLK intersection shown in the article.  The blue line continues east on Taft to cover Walnut Hills (possibly connecting all the way to Xavier?)  In summary, this would be a more elaborate system that covers more places, but would require more comprehensive planning and money to get built. 

^ IMO we should also be thinking about BRT and LRT and Metro+ routes, and how they would integrate. Reading and MLK are both BRT candidates (I would favor streetcar/LRT tracks on MLK in the long term (this separated ROW could also be used for buses), hooking up with 71 LRT, while I think Reading is ideal for BRT). Also, Gilbert could get some streetcar and/or BRT/M+ lovin'.

None of this is getting done in this current political climate. Were going to have to wait until 2017. All the swing votes are in a "wait and see" approach with phase 1 and there's no way council would have the necessary votes to overrule a cranley veto

^ IMO we should also be thinking about BRT and LRT and Metro+ routes, and how they would integrate. Reading and MLK are both BRT candidates (I would favor streetcar/LRT tracks on MLK in the long term (this separated ROW could also be used for buses), hooking up with 71 LRT, while I think Reading is ideal for BRT). Also, Gilbert could get some streetcar and/or BRT/M+ lovin'.

 

A problem with LRT's running on MLK is the dip at Eden Avenue where a multi-car light rail train would "bottom-out" there, requiring a fairly long bridge over that intersection. And apparently, in additon to the cost, planner- and architect-types at UC and the medical campus objected to such a structure. Maybe Stetson Square weighed-in on it .... can't recall. But the topography of MLK is problematic for light rail. Maybe technology has overcome this, I dunno. As I recall, though, it was a daunting problem. Also a problem, icing on MLK, which brings traffic to a half there some days. Rail would fare even worse with ice conditions than cars. I think it has to go to Erkenbrecker and find a way out through Avondale to the east. David Cole and I spent several hours one Sunday a few years ago trying to figure this out, and we weren't smart enough.

^ People and buildings naturally retreat from wide unpleasant highway-like streets, so it's no surprise that UC turns a mostly blank wall to Jefferson and to MLK as well.  Sadly, most people look at this as a reason to write-off those streets, to say they're bad so we might just as well embrace the badness.  Instead we should be working above and beyond to make make them better, because they need so much more help, but that's "too hard" for most.

 

Agreed, but the main problem isn't MLK's or Jefferson's car carrying capacity, rather it is the present design aesthetic (combined with the building codes), or lack thereof, that acts as a metastatizing suburban cancer on all new construction.  There are plenty of wide urban boulevards that have plenty of walkers and cafe sitters: Michigan Avenue, Passeig de Gracia, Fifth Avenue, etc.  The big problem with MLK & Jefferson is that the frontage sucks and is almost purposefully dead.

 

Still think the Streetcar should still run down Short Vine and if it goes into UC, goes via University to Brookline/Burnet Woods to Ludlow. 

^ IMO we should also be thinking about BRT and LRT and Metro+ routes, and how they would integrate. Reading and MLK are both BRT candidates (I would favor streetcar/LRT tracks on MLK in the long term (this separated ROW could also be used for buses), hooking up with 71 LRT, while I think Reading is ideal for BRT). Also, Gilbert could get some streetcar and/or BRT/M+ lovin'.

 

A problem with LRT's running on MLK is the dip at Eden Avenue where a multi-car light rail train would "bottom-out" there, requiring a fairly long bridge over that intersection. And apparently, in additon to the cost, planner- and architect-types at UC and the medical campus objected to such a structure. Maybe Stetson Square weighed-in on it .... can't recall. But the topography of MLK is problematic for light rail. Maybe technology has overcome this, I dunno. As I recall, though, it was a daunting problem. Also a problem, icing on MLK, which brings traffic to a half there some days. Rail would fare even worse with ice conditions than cars. I think it has to go to Erkenbrecker and find a way out through Avondale to the east. David Cole and I spent several hours one Sunday a few years ago trying to figure this out, and we weren't smart enough.

 

I talked to the guy at Parsons-Brinkerhoff who worked on the preliminary engineering and he said that they considered passing under MLK/Vine, bridging Eden, then underpasses paralleling MLK beneath Highland and Burnett.  The problem was that doing all that got relatively close to the cost of simply continuing the Mt. Auburn Tunnel as a bored tunnel from Jefferson at Corry to MLK at Reading.

 

 

^ IMO we should also be thinking about BRT and LRT and Metro+ routes, and how they would integrate. Reading and MLK are both BRT candidates (I would favor streetcar/LRT tracks on MLK in the long term (this separated ROW could also be used for buses), hooking up with 71 LRT, while I think Reading is ideal for BRT). Also, Gilbert could get some streetcar and/or BRT/M+ lovin'.

 

A problem with LRT's running on MLK is the dip at Eden Avenue where a multi-car light rail train would "bottom-out" there, requiring a fairly long bridge over that intersection. And apparently, in additon to the cost, planner- and architect-types at UC and the medical campus objected to such a structure. Maybe Stetson Square weighed-in on it .... can't recall. But the topography of MLK is problematic for light rail. Maybe technology has overcome this, I dunno. As I recall, though, it was a daunting problem. Also a problem, icing on MLK, which brings traffic to a half there some days. Rail would fare even worse with ice conditions than cars. I think it has to go to Erkenbrecker and find a way out through Avondale to the east. David Cole and I spent several hours one Sunday a few years ago trying to figure this out, and we weren't smart enough.

 

Hmm. I am inclined to think it may not be worth pursuing until the will is there to do something like jmeck describes. Unless someone can do some serious map voodoo, like cutting through the Zoo over to Forest. (Who knows, the Zoo might dig it as they'd surely get a stop.) If it is something that would stand up on its own as a quality streetcar line that would integrate well with a more ideal LRT line in the future, it could be worthwhile. Winding LRT through residential streets is just too much of a compromise without further justification.

 

BRT on MLK might be a better stop-gap approach to a nice light rail line that doesn't cut too many corners. Get some dedicated ROW w/o tackling the big issues in the first stage. Buses could continue to use the LRT's ROW after tracks are installed.

^ IMO we should also be thinking about BRT and LRT and Metro+ routes, and how they would integrate. Reading and MLK are both BRT candidates (I would favor streetcar/LRT tracks on MLK in the long term (this separated ROW could also be used for buses), hooking up with 71 LRT, while I think Reading is ideal for BRT). Also, Gilbert could get some streetcar and/or BRT/M+ lovin'.

 

A problem with LRT's running on MLK is the dip at Eden Avenue where a multi-car light rail train would "bottom-out" there, requiring a fairly long bridge over that intersection. And apparently, in additon to the cost, planner- and architect-types at UC and the medical campus objected to such a structure. Maybe Stetson Square weighed-in on it .... can't recall. But the topography of MLK is problematic for light rail. Maybe technology has overcome this, I dunno. As I recall, though, it was a daunting problem. Also a problem, icing on MLK, which brings traffic to a half there some days. Rail would fare even worse with ice conditions than cars. I think it has to go to Erkenbrecker and find a way out through Avondale to the east. David Cole and I spent several hours one Sunday a few years ago trying to figure this out, and we weren't smart enough.

 

I talked to the guy at Parsons-Brinkerhoff who worked on the preliminary engineering and he said that they considered passing under MLK/Vine, bridging Eden, then underpasses paralleling MLK beneath Highland and Burnett.  The problem was that doing all that got relatively close to the cost of simply continuing the Mt. Auburn Tunnel as a bored tunnel from Jefferson at Corry to MLK at Reading.

 

 

 

Could you explain the Mt. Auburn Tunnel (what would it do, what would it carry, etc.?)  Is it something Parsons-Brinkerhoff already has a design for, or something they've looked at, at least preliminarily?

Yeah it was a 1-mile double-track rail tunnel to be constructed with a tunnel boring machine between the top of Main St. (near Rothenberg School) and Jefferson Ave. near UC's sports bubble.  It was to have had one station under Auburn Ave in front of Christ Hospital. It was studied around 1998-2000 and they went so far as to do test borings, although nobody seems to have saved the photos of the borings that were published on OKI's website at the time.

 

Here is a cross-section graphic, you can see the PB logo:

 

These sorts of tunnels are built around the world all the time but are rare in the US due to the federal funding process.  Seattle's Capitol Hill Tunnel and Portland's westside MAX tunnel are similar to what the Mt. Auburn tunnel or any similar tunnel in Cincinnati would look like. 

 

ANALYSIS: Why the streetcar isn’t in Uptown’s master plan

Chris Wetterich - Staff reporter - Cincinnati Business Courier

 

One thing that caught my attention in Uptown’s master plan to develop the area near the Martin Luther King Jr. Drive/Interstate 71 interchange, which is set to begin construction this summer, was the lack of any expansion for the streetcar.

 

Beth Robinson, CEO of the Uptown Consortium, said the group still supports the streetcar project. The consortium is the community development organization that led the creation of the plan and is sort of an Uptown version of the Cincinnati Center City Development Corp. (3CDC), which has led Over-the-Rhine’s redevelopment.

 

“We’ve always been supporters of the streetcar. We see the value of connecting Uptown and Downtown, the two employment centers,” Robinson said. “There was an old plan to bring it up Vine Street, and of course you know what happened there. But there was never any layout of what happened once it got to Uptown.”

 

Cont

The @CityofCincy twitter account just posted this picture with the caption: "New signs going along Streetcar track - always cross bicycles at right-angles or your bike tire could get stuck! pic.twitter.com/INwo4Gnnf2"

 

^Hilarious sign, but is it even necessary?  Do we need similar signs with a bike hitting an open car door now?

I think this is a legitimate sign worth putting up. Unfamiliar riders might not know.

 

In designated bike lanes with street parking I don't think it would be a bad idea to warn riders (and drivers) about getting "doored". Maybe putting stickers on parking meters near heavily used bike lanes just as a friendly reminder would be nice. Keeping people thinking about it like those "watch for motorcycles" bumper stickers.

I have to admit it's a pretty funny sign. 

 

Oh come on.  Boston has had streetcars continuously for the past 100 years and has none of these signs. 

^ When it's so common and has always been there then you don't need signs to remind people of what they already know.  Streetcar tracks AND cycling are both fairly uncommon in Cincinnati comparatively. 

I was riding around on the tracks with 700 x 38 tires  & had no problem.

Anybody test a Segway?

I'd say it's a self-correcting problem. No need for signage.

I was at The Banks the other day. We all know that the streets are elevated on top of a parking garage. I noticed that some of the expansion joints in the street are much wider and deeper than the streetcar rails. The expansion joints are at right angles to the street, though.

Are you guys serious?  Have you been to Portland? There are hundreds of those exact same signs. Atlanta is putting them up too. When you add a new piece of infrastructure that can catch your tire and throw you to the ground, putting up signage is smart. The city is spending $150K on studies to try to reduce the massive umber of cyclist/track accidents.

^ Yeah, I think we really need these.

 

Are you guys serious?  Have you been to Portland? There are hundreds of those exact same signs. Atlanta is putting them up too. When you add a new piece of infrastructure that can catch your tire and throw you to the ground, putting up signage is smart.

 

Let's not stop there -- obviously we need signs warning us about running into sign posts. 

Are you guys serious?  Have you been to Portland? There are hundreds of those exact same signs. Atlanta is putting them up too. When you add a new piece of infrastructure that can catch your tire and throw you to the ground, putting up signage is smart. The city is spending $150K on studies to try to reduce the massive umber of cyclist/track accidents.

 

When I was in Portland I took a bike and attempted to get my wheels stuck in the tracks. And I succeed, but it was more difficult than I thought it would be to do so. 

 

If you cross at a 45 degree angle you'll be fine. Its something to be aware of, but once you know what you are doing its not a problem.

 

Portland has in-street running streetcars and light rail and it also has the highest bike ridership in the nation--they can easily co-exist. I remember at one point I was cycling, a car as next to me as was a bus and light rail crossed us. That's a complete street right there (also they had those cool Portland wate rfountains on the sidewalk).

Are you guys serious?  Have you been to Portland? There are hundreds of those exact same signs. Atlanta is putting them up too. When you add a new piece of infrastructure that can catch your tire and throw you to the ground, putting up signage is smart. The city is spending $150K on studies to try to reduce the massive umber of cyclist/track accidents.

 

Many times and I've never noticed them (see my profile picture).  If they want to put them up, fine.  I just think that these unnecessarily make the streetcar seem dangerous.  Storm drain grates can present the same type of problem; not a big deal.   

The only times I had scares with streetcar rails as a bike commuter in San Francisco was when it was wet outside.  I found "slippery when wet" to be more of a hazard than getting a wheel stuck in the rails. My opinion on the real problem, though, and the reason for the signs:  a litigious public.

^ Correct.

I'd like some "Don't Forget to Breathe" signs.

The only times I had scares with streetcar rails as a bike commuter in San Francisco was when it was wet outside.  I found "slippery when wet" to be more of a hazard than getting a wheel stuck in the rails. My opinion on the real problem, though, and the reason for the signs:  a litigious public.

 

The most famous bicyclist of the early 1990s was Puck from MTV's Real Word III San Francisco.  I remember them showing some impressive footage of this guy bombing the city's insane hills and I don't think the city's various streetcar and cable car tracks were much of a worry for him. 

 

They should probably say something like "Cross tracks at 90 degree angle" (or somehow imply that). Though I like the funny graphic.

EXCLUSIVE: SORTA asks for federal funds to operate streetcar

Chris Wetterich - Staff reporter - Cincinnati Business Courier

 

The Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority has asked for $5 million in federal funding to operate Cincinnati’s streetcar in its second two years of operation.

 

The agency, which operates the Metro bus system and plans to operate the streetcar, has submitted an application to the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments asking for funding typically given to projects that improve air quality or reduce traffic congestion.

 

The funds would be used during the 2018 and 2019 fiscal years, the second and third year of the streetcar’s operation.

 

Cont

What does  its second two years of operation mean? Year 3 of operation?

the Hale foundation was going to fund the first year

The Hale Foundation is offering assistance the first 10 years and won't be giving Metro the funding in a lump sum.  By law, Cincinnati can't ask for any federal assistance in operating the streetcar for the first year (whether that clock starts with the testing phase or revenue service, I'm not sure) so Metro is being a little sneaky by asking for money and promising not to spend it until the second and third years of operation.

A picture of the Rhinegeist streetcar stop under construction at the end of May:

 

 

I have lots of more recent photos I'll be posting soon. Construction is rapidly proceeding on 12th Street right now. See my streetcar gallery on Flickr for more.

Thanks for your ongoing updates!

I went to Rhinegeist last night. Man are they going to get a ton of business when the streetcar opens. That stop literally at their doorstep is going to be huge for them (and anything else that pops up in that area in the coming years).

 

I like the look of the stops. Being slightly elevated gives them that slight separation necessary to elevate (no pun intended) them above a typical bus stop. The one by Washington Park looks especially nice.

I doubt most Cincinnatians have any idea how nice Cincinnati's streetcar will be. Won't see Tucson's until next month, but it's def better than the ones in the Pacific NW. Ride quality will be the real test.

I went to Rhinegeist last night. Man are they going to get a ton of business when the streetcar opens. That stop literally at their doorstep is going to be huge for them (and anything else that pops up in that area in the coming years).

 

I like the look of the stops. Being slightly elevated gives them that slight separation necessary to elevate (no pun intended) them above a typical bus stop. The one by Washington Park looks especially nice.

 

I really do love the streetcar stops. They've made them all site specific. The Washington Park stop is especially beautiful and it looks like the Central Parkway stop will look great in that median (despite that horribly ugly turn-in before turning on Walnut) but even the other stops on Elm have been built with trees in mind. I'm thoroughly impressed with the quality design that was out into our streetcar. Definitely worthy of the Queen.

I doubt most Cincinnatians have any idea how nice Cincinnati's streetcar will be. Won't see Tucson's until next month, but it's def better than the ones in the Pacific NW. Ride quality will be the real test.

 

What is that will make the Cincinnati streetcar's ride better? Are we using newer/better rail technology than they used in the Pacific NW?

^ Yes, wheels operate more independently, for one thing. Wheels actually turn into the turns. By ride quality, I meant the trackway as much as anything. It's a little twisty.

I doubt most Cincinnatians have any idea how nice Cincinnati's streetcar will be. Won't see Tucson's until next month, but it's def better than the ones in the Pacific NW. Ride quality will be the real test.

 

What is that will make the Cincinnati streetcar's ride better? Are we using newer/better rail technology than they used in the Pacific NW?

 

Yes.  I am not an expert on the streetcars themselves, but I have been told that the CAF low-floor cars vastly improved over the Skoda sort-of-low-floor cars in Portland and Seattle, not as though those are bad in any way.  One feature I know of is that lubricant is automatically injected onto the steel wheels at every curve in order to eliminate squealing. 

Yes.  I am not an expert on the streetcars themselves, but I have been told that the CAF low-floor cars vastly improved over the Skoda sort-of-low-floor cars in Portland and Seattle, not as though those are bad in any way.  One feature I know of is that lubricant is automatically injected onto the steel wheels at every curve in order to eliminate squealing.

 

That is great to hear!