dean

You don't even know what I mean when I say "subsidy," so what are you talking about? It seems you keep referring to subsidizing the line. I'm talking about development coincidental to the line. Just write down the number, please. Why do you keep playing games? Is this a joke?

It is clearly not mass transit. It is a circulator, at last in its current incarnation. If expanded all the way through three phases to the zoo, it would cover 8 miles. That said, however, it is certainly the first step in what could be a mass transit system. Maybe if we took the 800 million dollars that the Dean's comrade Chris Smitherman wants to spend on widening I-75, add it to the current proposal, then we really would have some semblance of mass transit. If we're going to govern by ballot box, why doesn't the Dean put the I-75 widening project on the ballot as well? Incidentally, the whole subsidies argument is a weak red herring designed to muddle the issue. Do we really want to go down that road? If so, what are the subsidies for the beloved bio-fuels which will supposedly supply the fuel for these imaginary trolley trucks? Like I said, it's a red herring. To bypass it, assume the trolley-trucks and streetcars both have available the same economic subsidies. Which will spur more economic development? If the Dean has read the studies, then he knows the answer to this question. You are not making any sense. Why would you talk about subsidies to the bio-fuel industry? I have said nothing about King Coal and his massive government subsidies. I also have not said the streetcar itself (or the trolleys themselves) are subsidized. I'm talking about the development that happens near the route. Get it?

The fixed subway systems of which you speak also have an exclusive right of way. So it's not even the same species as the Cincinnati streetcar, in the middle of traffic.

No problem, it's also obvious that you're picking and choosing which points to address and which points to leave unanswered. Give me a numbered list of questions, devoid of the other stuff, and I will answer as best I can.

I don't think anyone can show me development near a streetcar that was not also caused by massive government subsidies. Dean, you just lost me there. I have lived in a number of places where development followed "a fixed rail system" without any other massive subsidy. Granted, there's some vagary with massive (how much is that?) and some argument with caused (couldn't any development in downtown be said to be caused by stadium subsidies?) Care to clarify that statement? What do you really mean? Name the places, and the types of fixed rail systems, that brought development with no subsidy. Certainly Portland is not one of these places, even though it is frequently cited by the streetcar advocates. Pardon me if I don't address every point by everyone here. I'm on limited time and, well, I'm a bit outnumbered!

How is a bus system environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable? Could Metro currently be described in this way? If not, what is the alternative? Cities need mass transit to survive. The three characteristics you've mentioned are certainly noble goals that should be striven for, but they are not the primary point of mass transit. Is the streetcar plan a mass transit plan? I'll take your ridiculous question as evidence that you can't answer my legitmate questions. Either that, or you don't like the answers that you would have to provide. Just to be polite, I'll answer your question, though you dodged mine. Yes, clearly the streetcar plan is part of a mass transit plan. Phase I may be just downtown and OTR, but it's been well documented that future phases will tie in Clifton, the West End, NKY, and beyond. If you don't think that the Streetcar plan is mass transit, please explain how your biodiesel bus proposal differs in such a way that it would be considered mass transit, whereas the Streetcar would not. It is not a ridiculous question. When Chris Bortz went before OKI, he said the streetcar is "not a transit plan." He called it a "development plan," and characterized it as NOT a transit plan. So, I think the streetcar advocates need to make a decision about what kind of plan this is. Now, what is the purpose of transit? Is it to meet people where they are, and to take them where they want to go? If so, how does a tire trolley fail? If trends change, it is not stuck in the same location.

How is a bus system environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable? Could Metro currently be described in this way? If not, what is the alternative? Cities need mass transit to survive. The three characteristics you've mentioned are certainly noble goals that should be striven for, but they are not the primary point of mass transit. Is the streetcar plan a mass transit plan?

Also, Cincinnatus, just explain to me how the streetcar is environmentally, economically, and socially sustainable, considering all the examples I have already provided. If you are right, I will change my position. Right now, I don't think you are right.

Two key words for you: Jeff Berding.

It's simple... the city builds the building and rents it out to Via Vite.... Really? Then why did 3CDC build the building and keep the rent?

I'm not sure where the whole homeless person anecdote is going... What does the projected lost revenue have to do with anything? The city doesn't take that loss, 3CDC does. They pay $500,000, what they always paid - 3CDC covers everything beyond that. And 3CDC gave the city $7.5M for the revenue rights. Paint and lights were badly needed. So was the security system, waterproofing, elevator renovation and payment system. The restaurant, added retail, square redesign, fountain restoration were all added bonuses I guess. Most probably couldn't tell ya what the old rates were... they never had much of a reason to park there until all the new entertainment and cultural venues went up. Those that did park under the old rates (if there was an increase) realize the cost is offset by the benefits renovation. But either way, $.50 an hour seems like a steal to me. I'm happy to talk FSQ garage details. What do you mean, "The City doesn't take that loss, 3CDC does." That is a totally uninformed statement. 3CDC bought the garage revenues from the City for 40 years. That means that any money the City would have earned into the parking system from 3CDC disappears, and it's profit for 3CDC. Get it? If you need to understand more about the impact of this move, read this. You used to be able to park for a buck for a good long while. Now it tends to start at four. As for the new "destination locations," well, keep an eye on Oceanaire and the Brazilian Steakhouse. See what their futures hold. As for Via Vite, tons of questions exist on that front -- primarily, how to you build a restaurant on PUBLIC SPACE. Maybe you don't value that concept -- of public space -- but I do.

If you actually care about accessibility for the disabled, that's yet another reason why you should support streetcars and not more buses. Buses have steps and the disabled must ask if they can be "accomodated", which requires the bus to lower or a platform to rise, and often people need to be shuffled around inside to free up specific seats. On a streetcar, there's a handicap symbol that you can press getting on or off that activates a tiny ramp. It takes no longer for them to board than anyone else and they don't have to ask permission to ride the system. Score one for human diginity. It is my understanding that the newer buses are built to accommodate wheelchairs. They don't have steps, include ramps, and can actually lower themselves while stopped.

I don't think anyone can show me development near a streetcar that was not also caused by massive government subsidies. Given their presence, one cannot attribute causality to the streetcar. If anything, it indicates that massive subsidies spur development.

There is no poison here. You say "if." Well, that "if" is not reality. Nor does it appear to be anytime soon.

Read the link. It is about one of many homeless people who ride the streetcar for free to get heat in the Winter. With his pit bull. I know all about the 3CDC deal. Do you? Can you tell me the projected lost revenue from the parking garage over the terms of the 30-40 year loan? Can you tell me how much the City still pays yearly to upkeep the garage from which they see no income? As for renovation, all they did to the garage was slap up some paint and some lights. And made it so you pay a machine instead. It's the same garage. Same layout. If anything, less people work there. Four bucks, huh? What were the old rates, anyway?

jmd00, If not for the petition drive, there would be no need to "convince" anyone one way or another. The petition has raised the very real possibility that this goes on the ballot. Only with broad community support will it pass. (It should have broad community support anyway.) Before I can ask your other question, tell me the dollar amounts involved, and on what it will be spent. I'd tell you what I heard of you, but I'm trying to keep this civil.

Also, if not for my YouTube videos at FSQ, 3CDC would have never made the garage, and the square, more handicapped accessible. Our work on that was a benefit to the whole City. (You're welcome.)

More vindictive writing from a streetcar advocate. I wonder if the moderators will delete your comment. The truth is that the public STILL does not know the full details of lost revenue from that boondoggle. The fact that you might like movie night, or the jumbotron, or the new square, has nothing to do with HOW we got to that point -- and further if that was the best way to do it. Do people like the programming? Fine. Is the best way to provide it by forfeiting all that money to a private corporation so they could jack up parking rates and capture them as additional revenue during their own events? I don't know about that. (I'm sure someone will take that "I don't know" and tell me I should have done my research. What a joke!)

I never heard of you till just now, either. It seems clear, however, that most of your are John Schneider fans. So you love what he says. There is no changing it. You love his slideshow. I'll go out on a limb and guess you don't want to see pictures of homeless people and their pit bulls squatting on the Portland Streetcar. http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/contents/comments/drop_inn_or_the_streetcar/

No one else felt like walking into a room of streetcar advocates to debate in an environment of people who mostly already have their minds made up, only to have UC replay the event with their spin. However, I think a point to this petition drive is to foster open discussion and debate. So I agreed. Instead of criticizng me for taking time from my life to come, perhaps you should find out why Jim Uber invited me. It's not like I muscled my way in, or something.

You are taking most of my phrases out of context. If I say, for example, that I don't know why people won't ride something that goes from where they are, to where they need to be -- that is not because I did not research; rather, it is because I am using logical reasoning to indicate that there is no good reason to think what the advocates think. It is illogical. It is unknowable! Schneider was unprepared, for example, to discuss CO2 emissions of BTUs per passenger mile for both coal and gas. I presented a logical argument. However, your mind is already made up. There is nothing we can say to persuade you. Concidentally, I had a few people talk to me after the debate. They said they still support streetcars, but that I won the debate. Whatever. A tire trolley service with closed circuit downtown loops would provide for this need. Why the prejudice against tires? According to two people who talked to me after the event (streetcar advocates), they said it is because poor people ride buses. Do you agree with this classism and racism? Should tax dollar subsidize such snobbery?

That reminds me when I heard Chris Bortz on the Buzz, saying to save money he and some friends would get a pick up truck to remove all the bus stop benches with ads. Yeah, right. Let's get real. If you would help dig out your neighbors relying on streetcar mass transit, while not helping a bus (just snapping photos, perhaps, to make a point later), then that shows more about you than anything. Really? What's that add to the yearly operating costs? The driver said he couldn't swerve. That was why I posted it. I don't speak for a coalition. I have said I support improved mass transit. That's why I support a painted line bio-fuel tire trolley on downtown closed circuits. Why do you pretend I have not said that repeatedly, in a variety of places? That does not even make sense. You are showing yourself as petty and vindictive.

I almost posted the picture of an accident with a streetcar that caused a death, but perhaps just a direct link would have more taste: http://www.citynews.ca/news/news_24238.aspx

Also, while we're having fun with photos, here are some more: I primarily object to Schneider's slideshow because I don't believe in argument by photography. If you found this post irritating, you now understand my point.

OK. Someone got a picture of a bus with snow trouble. Great. They could send out another bus. What about when a streetcar gets stuck? Also, closed circuit tire trolleys would be part of "improved mass transit." We do not have intracity closed downtown circuits like that, so it would be an "improvement." If it has less emissions, it is an environmentally friendly improvement. If it saves money, it is an economic improvement. And, if it has the flexibility to meet people where they are, taking them where they need to be, over time as trends change, then it is a social improvement.