John Schneider

Looks like a freeway in the works to me. Sooner or later.

For now.

^ Google "I-74" and "Cincinnati" and see what turns up. This is what the Eastern Corridor plan is really all about.

Just imagine how extending I-74 to Wilmington N.C. from where it ends today will depopulate the east side of Cincinnati. I do not believe this will happen. It could, but Clermont County is a bastion of Appalachian culture. I speculate that suburban pioneers into Warren county had a neutral opinion of the local school districts and culture. Most established east side Cincinnatians have a negative opinion of most school districts in Clermont county. If you don't believe the groundwork for bringing I-74 through Cincinnati is being laid right now, do these three things: 1. Drive the Red Bank "Expressway" and notice how far back the new buildings have been sited from the current right-of-way. 2. Review some zoning maps to see the ghost of a grade-separated interchange footprint that city traffic engineers are trying to reserve land for at Madison Road and the Red Bank Expressway. 2. Get a Rand McNally Atlas and see the pieces of I-74 starting to appear on the map of North Carolina.

Just imagine how extending I-74 to Wilmington N.C. from where it ends today will depopulate the east side of Cincinnati.

^ Dan, the scale of the rail system you're proposing above would require a tax increase, and right now, no one has the appetite for that. With growing highway congestion and higher fuel prices, that's bound to change at some point. With respect to neighborhoods outside the initial alignment, be mindful that the city has plans, but no timetable, to expand the streetcar network over time. The map is on the city's web site. But even if that were never to happen (and I'm sure it will), downtown and uptown are the engines of our city. They have 54% of the jobs and produce 70% of our city's tax revenues. Reinvigorating them is a strategic move to generate more wealth than can be used for improvements throughout the city.

^ You didn't. I just thought it was good to get Tom Luken's M.O. out to everyone on this list, because he'll be back again and again. Any of us may encounter him, and it's good to know what to expect.

Tom Luken's a former mayor and congressman. He's been in the public arena for many years and can take care of himself. It's part of his game to appear folksy and unsophisticated -- "a man of the people." On the subject of rail in Cincinnati, Luken leaps at any chance to appear anywhere, anytime to talk about an issue about which he has little understanding. He approaches these the subject not in the spirit of wanting to inform the public or present alternatives but to cast aspersions on firms and people who have worked hard on these projects for many years. I see no reason to give him an open field to do that.

I am not connected with either PB or HDR, though I have friends who work there. HDR did the feasibility study. It was conducted mostly by their staffs in Portland and Washington. PB brought a local knowledge of street conditions and local traffic issues. I know that with respect to the economics of the project -- which seems to be Luken's main complaint -- that work was done entirely by HDR out of their Washington office. I don't know the exact contract status of either PB or HDR now. I'm not sure either are under contract because until a few days ago, there was no money appropriated by the city to pay them. These firms partner on some projects and compete against each other on others. It kind of depends on which company has knowledge of the particular project, has people available and is competent to do it. I'm unaware of the cabal Luken hints at. Luken has some sort of vendetta against PB. He brought up the issue of the Big Dig repeatedly during the Issue 9 campaign and was repeatedly reminded that it happened over a period of 10-20 years ago and had nothing to do with anything here. Luken was not wrong in asking these questions. He was not wrong the first, or the second or the tenth time he's asked them. The answers are all of public record. But having heard the answers, he continues to ask them dramatically in front of unknowing audiences to create doubt and suspicion. I called him on it.

I dunno, my wife thought it was pretty amusing. It's about twenty minutes, I think.

Here's the podcast: http://danieljohnsonjr.com/spjpod/2010/05/cincinnati-streetcar-debate/

^ Neither did anyone else in the audience.

Dan, I wasn't calling you a clown, and I'm sorry that you took it that way. I was referring to "the clowns who write-in to the Enquirer about the Cincinnati Streetcar, wanting the city to paint a stripe down the street and run gussied-up truck-trolleys on them "to see if it works" before installing rails and stringing overhead wires." Nevertheless, your comments on this forum convinces me that you are simply opposed to rail in whatever form that's possible to build in Cincinnati and in Ohio and that no evidence to the contrary will ever change your mind.

I debated Tom Luken on the subject of the streetcar yesterday. Here was his closing statement: "When you eat a pork chop, who do you think wins -- you or the pork chop?" Such are are the views of our loyal opposition.

^ So DanB says this plan fails because it's not high-speed rail. Why am I thinking that if we were building high-speed from the get-go - like Florida is building between Tampa and Orlando -- DanB would be complaining that the cost is way too high? He be insisting that we should be starting with a more conservative rail plan "to see if it works" before spending all that money. This reminds me of the clowns who write-in to the Enquirer about the Cincinnati Streetcar, wanting the city to paint a stripe down the street and run gussied-up truck-trolleys on them "to see if it works" before installing rails and stringing overhead wires. Remember, with rail opponents, whatever the plan is, they will always want a different plan. Nothing will ever satisfy them.

^ I think Jake's right. Township government is all about having no government at all. So the only evidence of activist government the suburban residents see is generally what Cincinnati does or doesn't do. And from that conditioning, they come to believe that Cincinnati decides everything for the region. So that's probably part of their complaint.

There's a difference between something like the Cincinnati Streetcar that you ride every day and something you might ride once a year, like a shuttle bus to the train station. Lots of people, for instance, prefer a certain kind of car, wouldn't drive anything else. But while they're on vacation, they will happily accept a rental car they wouldn't never own as their principal car becuase it may be cheaper, larger, or, say, a convertible. You get that, right?

^ I'm a streetcar supporter and ride a bus every day. Another straw-man argument, Dan?

In the print edition of today's Saturday Enquirer, 36 of it 68 pages have ads for cars, including the 16-page "Cars.com" section, which today has as many pages as the main "A" news section. The Enquirer needs to sell ad space, and I want it to remain viable. And car-advertising is one of the few ad markets where it still dominates. But I wonder if this explains, in part, the Enquirer's editorial opposition to the car-competitive Cincinnati Streetcar.

^ Excellent!

Just got a note from someone in Portland who talks to everyone about everything related to streetcar projects all around the country. He thinks Cincinnati is looking really good for Fed funds.

The Columbus Dispatch strikes again!

^ Can't imagine these vehicles passing through Cincinnati's East End within a few feet of homes on their way to Sawyer Point. I mean, look at the separation and fencing-off you see in the first frame of the two videos. They would be totally out-of-scale with the urban fabric there.

^ I doubt that it makes any difference whether Sawyer Point is closer to Fountain Square than CUT is. Neither location is walkable to the center of the city if you've got luggage. A cab or bus would be required in either case. For me, it kind of fundamental. We need to do this right. And to me, that means putting all our efforts and resources into getting the permanent station built at CUT. I don't think it's just the NIMBY's on Riverside Drive who oppose Sawyer Point. There are lots of people who live all over the region who know that CUT is our train station, and they logically want to see all inter-city service concentrated there.

FYI, Michael Earl Patton is trying to be a rail planner on the Beacon site again.