hohum

Ignorance is stunning, is it not? There isn't enough time in the day to correct all the misconceptions and outright falsehoods in some of those comments.

Hi all, Well I just thought I would unveil the very very VERY beta version of a project I have been putting together for an gmaps powered interactive map of the Cincinnati metro bus system. For those of you who have tried to use the SORTA website to figure out bus routes, you know how horrible it is. I've been wanting to play with the google maps API for a long time, and this presented the perfect opportunity to put together something which will hopefully be useful. Y'all can check it out here - http://www.cogitatio.net/cincymetro/ I only have a few bus routes in the database as of right now, but I have built an interactive tool to add routes and stops if anyone feels so inclined (PM me) - it takes about 45 minutes to add a route and all of its stops to the database. To try out the app, you'll see a listing of routes on the left hand side of the page, if you check the box by a route, it will show up as an overlay on the map. If you enter an address and a walking radius on the right side of the page, it will select and show all bus routes that have stops within that walking radius. Things that are coming - schedule information at each stop, commenting ability on routes and stops, and a pretty UI (I haven't styled the page up yet, its just in "get it working" mode) Anyhow, take a look, and on a different note, come to the Cincy finance meeting on the streetcars today! Cheers, Christopher St. Pierre

Sure it doesn't need to be said again, I am all for due diligence, I just don't want to see the project derailed. I really like the investment per block of imact as rough gauge bang for buck. This is the type of number that really helps, at least when arguing on "anecdotal" terms with the "just say no" detractors. Most of em would have have a hard time saying that fountain square hasn't been a success. I just want to thank Councilman Bortz for chiming in again, gives me a much clearer picture of where things stand.

Indeed, welcome! You will definitely be a much appreciated voice on these matters when you are able to chime in. After a good night's rest, I am of the opinion that the most important thing we can do is to show up at Monday's meeting. Doing so certainly involves some personal sacrifice for me (missing some work and the associated pay, and missing a class and the associated portion of the class participation grade), but showing up on Monday is my top priority right now. Edit - I think we all know that there is a lot of real work to be done to make this a reality, but when we read Qualls motion, we were are all disappointed with the tactic to say the least. I think the best thing we can do is bring a massive showing of political will to the table and illustrate that the residents of this fine city want to see progress, and progress NOW! This is more important than it was a week ago and is more pressing the more news and FUD that is spread. COME TO MONDAY'S MEETING!!!!

That said, I still am trying to wrap my brain around why? I can understand Cranley, I still don't get Qualls... And I really only want to understand to best deflate the deflection... I've got the plan, and thats useful. If I really understood the motivation, well that would also be useful.

This is very good to know. Thanks, it definitely puts matters in a different light.

I really don't think he is alluding to any conspiracy, merely politics as usual. His take is clearly that of a businessman who understands negotiations, and or the effects of interests groups on politics... No conspiracy, just reminding us to consider the interests that are behind this move. Nothing happens for nothing.

I've really heard nothing about uptown interests, in the news or otherwise. To me the one fear I would have is that because we've heard nothing they have been working back channels. Does Zimpher have that much clout? I don't know. As far as downtown interests working against the streetcar, I have heard about the Kroger CEO working against the project, but more on political philosophy grounds (if you can call the O'Toole nonsense that). Why do I fear the uptown interests working behind the scenes? I just don't know how strong or how deep their pull is... I don't really fear the posturing for higher office because it is unlikely to really sway the other council members, that can be overcome by a real showing of political will -- IMO anyhow.

After I typed that last post, that was my thought too... If thats the case, then its done. Uptown in phase 1, or CBD/OTR with guaranteed financing for uptown... either one, not going to happen... That is definitely my fear.

This is from my understanding and perspective, downtown interests have been an active supporters, as have many independent business interests in the gateway quarter. 3CDC has given both nods of support, while at the same time expressing concern over possible losses to their interests through TIF funding - more a "its a good idea, but make sure it doesn't hurt us" perspective - what you would expect from a business interest such as 3CDC. Uptown, not sure about any major support from uptown.

I think the question of "where she wants it linked to" can't be the real answer. Here's my thinking, she has to know that if she pushes for uptown right away, with all of the restrictions on financing, that it won't happen. Either that, or she is disconnected with reality (which I don't think she is). Reading her proposal, it doesn't seem like "uptown right away" is the gist of it, its really more "lots of studies, then financing for everything, with no city money." That said, I don't think that we can say a change in the downtown loop is enough to overcome what she has put forward as requirements. That is too little to ask in terms of change when weighed against what she is holding out as leverage... I wish I knew how to find out her key contributors... That might lend some light into proposed route changes that this motion may be leverage for...

I was afraid of that, but it was indeed sarcasm. I repeat, what does Qualls want? That is what we CHIEFLY need to know. There are a few possibilities 1) a different route 2) stop the project 3) a truly grand transportation project other suggestions? Then the next question is why does she want that? A few possibilities 1) Currying political favor (perhaps seizing upon what was an obvious leverage lynchpin to control the process?) 2) ...?

Man, how old are you, you sound so jaded ;) Who hurt you Michael? ;) Seriously though, if this is "leverage" and not just an attempt to stop it cold, we need to know what Qualls wants.

You are right, it is politics. The one thing I want to know is what she wants to leverage with this, and I still can't figure it out.

OK, I've now read her "motion" No proposed routes, no talk of eliminating the loop. Key proposals 1) many, many, many more studies - i.e. stall and delay 2) much bigger plan involving the full uptown link and giant regional bus system expansion - i.e. stall and delay 3) no start until all of the funding for all of the above is in place - i.e. end this plan right now 4) no specifics on streetcar costs - i.e. no basis to say that this "plan" is better or worse 5) no consideration for what original study found - i.e. no care for studies already completed, its all about stall and delay. short answer - this is a shoot the whole thing in the foot motion, and it is CLEARLY such on its face. This isn't good intentions, this isn't fiscal responsibility. This is a motion to stop the streetcar (and a whole lot of other progress) right now to save city capital funds for ? Frankly, it offers nothing to "compare" the results of the existing study to.

Still downloading her motion, couldn't get it all before I left the school. It will be read shortly.

Don't know her proposed route yet, still trying to gather as much information as I can. However, its not the route that is important, its the timing of what she has done... Seriously, I don't think anyone will be arguing this issue "on the fly" - although right now there is certainly quite a lot of speculation.

So what is their answer to this? We had better study it then before we sink 100 mil into anything. The answer to this is that we already completed a study, a third party study, which included input from the important stakeholders. That study came to the conclusion that the best option was to do the CBD/OTR loop.

A streetcar can not be successful if there is no streetcar. You have a competing plan, what are you going to do about it. Just say, I expected more, I am so disapointed? That doesn't overcome the competing plan, that doesn't get you a streetcar any faster, that doesn't get you anywhere. If I am not mistaken, everyone here (except possibly UncleRando) who says this is going to be at the meeting on the 25th arguing why Qualls plan makes no sense. THAT is what we are going to do.

100 percent agreed. It shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what key ideals can make a streetcar successful. Namely, the ideal is to concentrate people in a given area, not to move people from point A to point B. This is what brings development, this is what can be the spark to improve an area of our city in dire need. This is what can bring new people to the area. A direct line minimizes the effective development area - 2 blocks on either side of the direct route vs a potential 8 block wide swath served by a loop. Effectively halving the potential development area at the same time increasing the costs by inevitably slowing down the building of the line (which directly results in increased costs due to time value of money). Can anyone really say that the costs of this proposed direct link have REALLY been studied? How can anyone say with a straight face that this proposed new line will cost $100 mil without doing a study to figure out that cost? Its ludicrous, and irresponsible. I expected a lot more, a WHOLE LOT more...

I am not sure that there is a complete answer here. All we can do is point to the study, the potential impact, and whether or not following through on one of the proposed routes in the study precludes later funding for a route uptown. From what we've discussed so far today, I don't think anything about the current proposed routes precludes a link to uptown (there being at least a few viable routes up the hills). Further, there is at least a reasonable argument that by working to affect the greatest change in the greatest area we can spur the greatest amount of development. Are these THE answers, I don't think there are absolute answers. Is this a good argument? I think so. Good enough? Time will tell. Edit - I don't know what route 3CDC would prefer, the only thing I know is that 3CDC wants to make sure that any line doesn't cut off their funding sources, and frankly, that does need to be considered. As skeptical as I was about 3CDC, they've come a long way.

Agreed. What matters most is to get this past the 25th. Gotta get this funded, ready to go, and we can debate which proposed route is better till we are blue in the face if financing is in place... I want the streetcar to go uptown, I want there to be an OTR loop to spur development there. These routes aren't mutually exclusive. Financing them together makes it more than twice as hard to accomplish. Thats the bottom line. (in my sometimes not so humble opinion)

And I am saying that from my viewpoint, there is simply a greater physical area that can be developed with that western loop - while still not being too far away from the development already happening in the east. I don't know any more that what I can see in the studies and exploring the area... so, again, anecdotal, and not related to actual development contracts, etc.... I have no interest along the proposed route, I just want the greatest development bang for the buck.

AMEN! Although I do find it laughable when people won't go if they can't park in the lot... There is tons of on street around there, usually you can even get a spot directly across from the entrance by the Col. Del. Ray (my personal fav). To be honest, what keeps me away from the market on Saturday is the insane crowds and the inability to shop in any way efficiently unless you get there really early.

The colors are everything. People will walk a few blocks to take a streetcar, but not much more. The shaded areas take this into consideration by representing the area where increased development is highly likely (according to the study). I think its easy to see from that map where the greatest possible area of development is, and realistically, the best benefit we can get from the streetcar is the increased development/redevelopment. Forget the route, think about the maximal development surface area :) PS - I agree, Findlay is crucial.