The VUE

[jack]

The ground level rendering shows 2-way traffic on Rosalind. I know there's been rumor of turning Orange back to a 2-way street, but haven't heard anything like that for Rosalind. Am I missing something here?

Ideally both would be converted. Rosalind would be converted to offset Orange Ave conversion.

[bulldogger]

I wonder how they would deal with the area at Lake Lucerne where the road splits on the small causeway. I don't see it happening.

[orlandonative]

A couple of new renderings from the VUE website:

Did anyone notice the orientation of this building in the picture is completely off?

[jack]

I wonder how they would deal with the area at Lake Lucerne where the road splits on the small causeway. I don't see it happening.

The change would happen north of Central Blvd. South Orange is too narrow because of the Lymmo Lane

[prahaboheme]

I've been saying it for a long time, Rosalind needs to be a two-way. With the right redevelopment, this could be our Ocean Drive (as close as we are going to get with Lake Eola) lined with dense restaurantretail establishment from Anderson to Robinson. Wishful thinking, but between the Vue, TT, CP3 and the PAC, the potential is there.

[cwetteland]

The change would happen north of Central Blvd. South Orange is too narrow because of the Lymmo Lane

Experts who have studied the traffic patterns say that Lymmo lanes are not at all an effective use of the space. They recommend two way traffic and have the Lymmo us the same lanes as other cars. I have to agree, to have a whole lane (and in some places two) for a bus that passes only every 5 or 10 minutes is an awful waist of space.

[prahaboheme]

Experts who have studied the traffic patterns say that Lymmo lanes are not at all an effective use of the space. They recommend two way traffic and have the Lymmo us the same lanes as other cars. I have to agree, to have a whole lane (and in some places two) for a bus that passes only every 5 or 10 minutes is an awful waist of space.

Agreed, instead they should be putting in more onstreet parking also.

[Jaybee]

Lymmo (BRT) lanes a waste of space? Traffic experts claiming that there should be two-way of Orange? What planet did I land on? The whole idea of Bus Rapid Transit (which, by the way, is predicated by the federal grants that allowed the Lymmo in the first place), is that the transit has it's own exclusive lane to BYPASS traffic, so that it's actually faster to get around in Downtown on transit than by car. It's not simply a waste of space. And yes, transit would be much less effective if it was required to travel with the rest of the traffic.

Let's be clear; I'm a big advocate of two-way traffic in Downtown Orlando, but since when is there enough room between South Street and Robinson (on Orange) to allow two-way traffic. At best, we might get one lane in each direction and a center turn lane. I doubt that's what anyone has in mind. Besides, the traffic on Orange has to go somewhere, it just doesn't evaporate (it goes into the sensitive neighborhoods around downtown).

[GRS328]

Dumb question, but I'm not downtown during the day enough have an accurate perception - does Lymmo get good ridership during traditional business hours?

[Jaybee]

It gets quite a bit a people who ride it that actually work downtown. The larger question is, do we want any type of transit in the Downtown, or should we just be giving up everything to automobiles. By the sounds of everyone's posts, I guess it's the latter - -

I guess we shouldn't allow any more high-rises in Downtown either, since we'd want to remove the transit, since we have given up the hope of a multi-modal, dense and urban downtown that would support transit (mind you, the current Lymmo is far from ideal).

[cwetteland]

Besides, the traffic on Orange has to go somewhere, it just doesn't evaporate (it goes into the sensitive neighborhoods around downtown).

"I think Orange/Rosalind Avenue two-way could be a good idea." Jaybee

I don't understand the question about where the traffic on Orange will go. If you move half the N-bound traffic from Rosilind to Orange and half the S-bound traffic from Orange to Rosalind, there is no net loss or net gain on either. There are a lot of traffic issues to be solved. But IMO two-way traffic on both Orange and Rosalind is more compatible with the "live and work" CBD we are trying to create.

I like the idea of free mass transit downtown, I want to keep Lymmo; but I don't think the BRT lanes make efficient use of the space, and just because the Fed funded the lanes, doesn't make it smart.

[bulldogger]

I don't understand the question about where the traffic on Orange will go. If you move half the N-bound traffic from Rosilind to Orange and half the S-bound traffic from Orange to Rosalind, there is no net loss or net gain on either. There are a lot of traffic issues to be solved. But IMO two-way traffic on both Orange and Rosalind is more compatible with the "live and work" CBD we are trying to create.

There are 3 lanes of traffic on both of those streets. Half of the traffic from each? Half of 3 is 1.5, so does that mean 1 or 2 lanes??? Unless of course you want to get rid of the sidewalks on Orange and Rosalind, I don't see where you get more roadway.

I have been living and working downtown for the better part of a decade and have been playing in the downtown area for close to 15 years. I think the Lymmo is one of the best things to happen to downtown in this time. I use a bike for transportation along with the Lymmo when I'm just walking and it is much faster than when I use my car. I personally cannot wait till we have an east-west BRT for the TP and bowl areas and and a north-south BRT to go to the hospitals and into Uptown.

Two-way traffic on Orange would make the gridlock even worse than it is now. Have you been on Edgewater??? That place is aweful to get through. It used to be tolerable to go through College Park, but not anymore. And someone else mentioned two-way traffic just from the north end of Orange after Central. What? Do you work for an auto insurance company? Can you say accidents?

[prahaboheme]

It gets quite a bit a people who ride it that actually work downtown. The larger question is, do we want any type of transit in the Downtown, or should we just be giving up everything to automobiles. By the sounds of everyone's posts, I guess it's the latter - -

I guess we shouldn't allow any more high-rises in Downtown either, since we'd want to remove the transit, since we have given up the hope of a multi-modal, dense and urban downtown that would support transit (mind you, the current Lymmo is far from ideal).

dramatic...lets be real here, most high density cities do not have dedicated bus lanes (the silver line in boston is a slight exception though eventually it will turn to lightrail), especially lanes that squabble up in some instances more than half the road (ie. Magnolia). I am a proponent of an intermodal transit system in our city, but an effective one (commuter rail, lightrail, hell even streetcar). If the rest of the world can share lanes with buses downtown, so too can Orlando.

As for Orange going two-way, that would be a big mistake. Like I mentioned before, Rosalind seems better suited for the transition.

[pomegranate]

Whats with the poor guy sitting on the balcony by himself. If I owned that top floor unit, I better have a flock of ladies up there with me.

We've gone from "You wanna see my record collection?"...... to, "You wanna see the view from my condo balcony?"

[Tim3167]

Well the funny thing is that if I'm not mistaken, the family on the next balcony over is on this guy's bedroom balcony. Makes the story even more interesting...

[RedStar25]

Maybe he has bad Gas?

[bic]

1-25-06

[depechecureguyorl]

^ I'm actually beginning to see the bldg from I-4! This project is coming along nicely!!!

[cameronm]

^ I'm actually beginning to see the bldg from I-4! This project is coming along nicely!!!

I see the cranes but not the building from I-4.

[B-Fin]

If you really look for it you can see it on I-4 from a few angles. Can't wait till it's easily visible.

[bande_originale]

Lymmo (BRT) lanes a waste of space? Traffic experts claiming that there should be two-way of Orange? What planet did I land on? The whole idea of Bus Rapid Transit (which, by the way, is predicated by the federal grants that allowed the Lymmo in the first place), is that the transit has it's own exclusive lane to BYPASS traffic, so that it's actually faster to get around in Downtown on transit than by car. It's not simply a waste of space. And yes, transit would be much less effective if it was required to travel with the rest of the traffic.

Let's be clear; I'm a big advocate of two-way traffic in Downtown Orlando, but since when is there enough room between South Street and Robinson (on Orange) to allow two-way traffic. At best, we might get one lane in each direction and a center turn lane. I doubt that's what anyone has in mind. Besides, the traffic on Orange has to go somewhere, it just doesn't evaporate (it goes into the sensitive neighborhoods around downtown).

I suppose ideally Lymmo would be operating at more than 10 minute off-peak headways, and people wouldn't shrug their shoulders when they see the lanes sitting unused.

But you have to admit it isn't really any faster to get around on Lymmo because the buses don't have signal preemption. They don't seem to have a lot of priority, either: they sit and wait through the timed signal phases, even with no cross-street traffic (Jefferson and Magnolia is routinely the worst example I see of this).

Why would you need a center turn lane on Orange? With a few exceptions, there are no curb cuts between Colonial and South. If it's simply a reversible turn lane (e.g. northbound left turns from Orange to Jefferson become southbound left turns from Orange to Washington), why not build it as such, with short planted medians (that could offer pedestrian refuge for mid-block crossings) to separate the two left-turn stacks?

I don't really see what is lost by reverting both parts of the couplet to two-way traffic, except that both streets would need to be closed more often as building construction impedes movement on at least one full lane. Downtown traffic would be rerouted through "sensitive neighborhoods?" Like Garland Avenue? If you're thinking Lake Eola Heights and Thornton Park, Summerlin, Amelia, and Livingston already have hefty volumes during peak hour: motorists perceive traffic problems as much more severe on Robinson, Rosalind, and the streets engineered for speed and unimpeded flow; regardless of the character of the neighborhood, they use parallel streets anyway.

Edited: I should also add that drivers occasionally stop mid-block to iron out bunching of multiple buses and even out the flow. I understand why: if you keep going you’ll have very uneven distribution of riders, as all passengers waiting at stops will get on the first bus and the trailing buses won’t pick up anyone, thus making them completely redundant (Lymmo buses can’t pass one another to let a ‘trailing’ bus become the ‘leader’ bus because of the dedicated lanes). At the same time, if the drivers were to pull to a stop to wait and smooth out the flow, they would trigger the bus signal when they don’t need to. But drivers will offer no explanation and don’t offer to let passengers alight. The result is that people feel trapped by transit—granted, they would have no more freedom in cars looking for parking, but it’s the psychological effect on people already suspicious of transit that is the problem. I (think I) understand why things happen the way they do; imagine the frustration of riders who have no idea why the hell the bus is just sitting there.

[bande_originale]

I've been saying it for a long time, Rosalind needs to be a two-way. With the right redevelopment, this could be our Ocean Drive (as close as we are going to get with Lake Eola) lined with dense restaurantretail establishment from Anderson to Robinson. Wishful thinking, but between the Vue, TT, CP3 and the PAC, the potential is there.

Just don't forget the dead zone you have with the Metropolitan. Unless it's considered fashionable to peer into an underground parking level and smell oil and exhaust fumes.

[JFW657]

I get the heebie-jeebies just looking at those close-up renderings of the upper floors. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would want to live that high up. I would think that about five or six floors up would be enough to get a nice view of the surrounding skyline. I would never even go out on the balcony if I lived on one of those upper floors. But then again I'm 100% chicken. Cluck cluck.

[JRS1]

Imagine living in the JHC in Chicago. High anxiety, anyone?

[firemick]

Well, I think it's open to interpretation. I believe they are saying 36 because of the use of the roof as a deck for the penthouse owners.

Some new renderings added to the Vue site!

Penthouse 4

Terrace Twilight

North East

Retail Day