hohum

Some more numbers - she says portland population served as 12,902 (NO FREAKING CLUE where that number comes from), but you can get a good estimate from the portland district populations. Three districts served by initial portland plan Pearl District - 1113 Downtown Population - 9965 Not fair to include all of northwest district, only a very small portion is served by the streetcar even figurint 25% (which is a generous assumption), you get 25% of 11455, or say 2863 TOTAL 13941 Thats somewhere near what her number is, but still.. I used to read the beacon for a good laugh, but this is beyond haha, Its plain irresponsible...

Just took another look at that Cheryl person's "analysis"... and *cough* it seems to me it is fundamentally flawed in one very key way - the number of residents she quotes for the "streetcar area" is off by a factor of twoTHREE. She says 3189 (the 2000 census number for CBD only), and leaves out the numbers for OTR (*cough* the other key service area for the plan). If you add in the 7638 from OTR (according to 2000 census), you have a figure that is MUCH closer to portlands density, and roughly equivalent to the ration of our overall city sizes. (10,829 (sum of CBD and OTR)) That umm, is what we should be highlighting as COMPLETELY off base about that *report*

When you think of Chicago, what comes to mind? When you think of New York, and on the flip side Detroit or any other major city, what comes to mind? It is the downtowns, not the suburbs. The same is true for Cincinnati. If we want to leave a great taste in some ones mouth when visiting our city then we need to put our best foot forward in the urban core. That will get you more business, and more people saying Cincinnati is a place I would love to live. That is what benefits everyone, Citywide. hopefully this doesn't get screwed up since I am posting from my blackberry, but... I agree with you entirely, the tax base argument is easier to quantify and explain how it benefits the whole city. The making people want to live here is a definite upside, but harder to quantify without proof that that is what will happen. In otherwords, I can point to numbers to argue tax base (which is the direct result of more people wanting to live live there). Its hard to quantify desire to live someplace other than in terms of real growth. Edit - apparrently cell phone vpn/remote desktop actually works... cool

http://blogs.citybeat.com/porkopolis/2008/02/streetcar-appro.html February 26, 2008 Streetcar Approval Process Criticized Cincinnati City Councilman John Cranley's action Monday to postpone any decision on a proposed streetcar project until March 10 was Mayor Mark Mallory's request, so Mallory can try to negotiate a compromise that will yield a unanimous council vote. Cranley told CityBeat today that Mallory made the request Feb. 20 during a private meeting held in his office that was attended by Cranley, Vice Mayor David Crowley, council members Chris Bortz and Roxanne Qualls and City Manager Milton Dohoney Jr. Cranley wanted to publicly clarify his action to deflect any possible criticism that he was delaying the project. Although skeptical about some aspects of the streetcar plan, Cranley said he wouldn't use his power as Finance Committee chairman to block a vote when a council majority is ready to have one. But Cranley noted that decisions to designate a loop through downtown and Over-the-Rhine as the system’s first phase and to spend $170,000 on a feasibility study of the route were made by city staffers without getting approval from the entire city council, possibly overstepping the staffers’ authority. Those decisions were based on discussions held in city council’s Economic Development Committee, but the committee never forwarded a motion for council action, he added. “I’m not trying to nail anyone against the wall for it, but we need to make sure important decisions like that come before council in the future,” Cranley said. “It’s our job to decide on things like that.” He and Qualls have questioned whether the first phase of any streetcar system should be built in the uptown area, near the University of Cincinnati and several local hospitals. Dohoney said Monday that any uptown link probably would have to be built after the downtown/OTR loop because the feasibility study for downtown already was done. Meanwhile, a city councilman’s staffer has done calculations to show how long the streetcar system would have to operate each day and how many riders it would need to meet fare projections. The feasibility study estimated the system’s operating cost at $2.3 million annually and said about half that amount — or $1.15 million — would come from fares. A spreadsheet prepared by Brad Beckett, Councilman Chris Monzel’s chief of staff, indicated several possible scenarios under which the system would generate that amount of revenue. If the fare were $1 and the system operated 14 hours per day six days a week, it would need an average of 264 riders per hour to meet the threshold, the spreadsheet indicated. If the fare were $1 and the system operated 14 hours per say seven days a week, it would need an average of 226 riders per hour. Other scenarios calculated included one in which the system operated five days a week and another in which the fare was $2. Monzel hasn’t yet decided whether to support the downtown/OTR loop but wants to study a possible uptown route as the first phase, as well as expanding other transit options. For the past few months, city council has debated a proposal to build a streetcar system, which supporters say would spark redevelopment of vacant or underutilized parcels within a 2-mile radius of the route. The 3.9-mile zig-zag loop would link Findlay Market to Great American Ball Park, with several stops along the way. Estimated cost to build the downtown/OTR loop is $102 million; cost to build the uptown loop is $82 million.

listing of current and proposed streetcar/lightrail systems - http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2007-04a.htm Louisville is trying to revive a light rail plan (not streetcar) as far as I can figure. Edit - John might have more insight into what local groups are working on down there that hasn't yet hit the media...

Oh Jebus, I didn't know that letter was from "him"

I have no intention of dismissing the neighborhood argument in a condescending manner. I think it can be rationally stated that looking at only the direct benefits of the streetcar to local neighborhoods neglects the big picture. The indirect benefits are not negligible. Increased tax base helps us all. Whether you want to live in a suburb, or live in downtown/OTR, everyone benefits from improving the urban core of the city. Its not just who will ride the streetcar.

Bah humbug, OK, so now I have to write a letter to the editor too...

heh, so much for editors :)

CityBeat updated their article to reflect the actual presented TIF figures. Hooray for CityBeat :)

majority wins, Cranley practically said that he won't be in the majority (ie, a guaranteed no vote), but we all knew that. I am thinking the next big thing is to show up at the next meeting. Also, keep spreading the word. At least, those are my plans. I am sure John Schneider or others can pipe up with what else we can do to keep it moving forward.

don't know if this has been linked yet - http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080226/NEWS01/802260353/1077/COL02 Suprisingly, the enquirer is more accurate on the facts (where the TIF money comes from and how much of it) and the quotes than the CityBeat article....

I just spoke with someone from Metro at the meeting and the after party today :) Just added the 39 Route... Any requests for the next route? I am sure to be bored in payment systems tomorrow!

Yes, UC

Real time bus info would be really nifty. I will say I got some insight today into why this isn't used by SORTA. Tis OK, this can work as a grassroots effort. Hopefully I can get a really nice version working in relatively short order, just gotta get the bus route data in :)

OH, also gotta love this garbage { this is not news } Streetcar Math: Funny numbers from the boondoggle Monday, February 25, 2008 New numbers show the sustainability of the Cincinnati Streetcar Proposal based on population densities and daily ridership totals that do not make any sense. Analyst Cheryl Crowell, who spoke before Tuesday’s Finance Committee Meeting at City Hall, wonders how Cincinnati’s system, at the same size as Portland’s, is going to cost about half the amount as Portland’s to operate yearly—especially since the Cincinnati plan estimates 4,600 average daily riders, when Portland’s 2007 average daily count was 2,763 with twice the population density. (from where else of course - and if you can't guess... heh) For those who weren't there, about 30+ people spoke to council, only 2 were vaguely negative, this Cheryl Crowell was one of them, and I don't quite know how they get to call her an "analyst" Anyhow, back on point, gotta love how the 2700 number was thrown around by Cranley even though the number is *cough* nearly 4 times that. (from a more reputable source) Portland Streetcar ridership, initially projected to be 3,500 passenger-trips a day, was reportedly exceeding 9,800 by the fall of 2007 – growing at about 17% a year.

I enjoyed John's speech, it was very well done (but I was more interested in the perspectives I had not yet heard) I really dug Julie Faye's points - twas well said. I also really liked the architects and developers who spoke, certainly lent a degree of credibility.

I think my perspective after the meeting today - cautiously optimistic. But I predict MANY MORE POLITICAL MOVES in the coming weeks :)

I was a bit disappointed with the way Dohoney seemed at times unprepared for Cranley's questions, but this is from the perspective of a law student, who is used to crafting such questions engineered to elicit specific responses. (You could almost see Dohoney thinking about how to answer the question in such a way to not answer the way Cranley was leading) Edit - that said, I was pleased that he didn't stray and his closing statements were spot on.

wow, thats crap reporting

I think the good news on the "more studies" bit is that the administration got to say that many of the studies that Qualls was asking for were included in the original price tag (engineering studies, eviro studies, etc) Further, I think there was some understanding from the part of council that in order for the administration to go forward and get MOU's from private funding sources, he needs some commitment from council.

Chris from Boston, talked about MBTA, trying to bring Boston folks out here...

Thats not my impression of what the vote will be in two weeks... Great turnout, went very well I think According to a friend "probably the best speech of councilman Thomas' career" Very positive crowd, fairly massive showing of political will (from perspective) Got to say my two cents, well worth it.

I'm sure this thread will be LIT UP after the meeting... certainly no worries there!

Heh, i can almost hear their brains pop from that statement... Must be priceless.