John Schneider

Here's the kind of stuff Cheryl Crowell has developed in Clermont County. Does this seem like desirable product for OTR or Downtown?: http://www.thecrowellco.com/ Ms. Crowell tesified that the Portland Streetcar carried only 2,700 riders per day. More like four times that. See: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=pORTLAND+sTREETCAR+2007+RIDERSHIP&btnG=Google+Search Ms. Crowell's main conceptual problem is converting operating statistics from "track miles" to "route miles". Cheryl, give me a call at 579-1300, and I'll help you through the calculation.

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080225/NEWS01/802250320/-1/CINCI

It's on. Be your best tomorrow. Talk about what the Cincinnati Streetcar would mean to you specifically. How would it change your life?

Found this on another blog: "Earlier today, I saw an Associated Press story entitled, "$1.2 billion stealth bomber crashes, burns." I took one look at that headline and thought, "$1.2 billion, that's almost what they spend every year on Amtrak!" I did a little checking and found out that Amtrak's annual budget for 2006 was $1.3 billion. I thought how come they spend $1.2 billion on one bomber but they claim they can't spend $1.3 billion to provide the nation with passenger service?"

^ Maybe she'll tell us on Monday.

She has told people that the streetcar is a "toy train." It's not, of course, but I believe she feels it's a distraction from building a regional rail system. And she was really the one who got the ball rolling on the several studies of light rail corridors that began with OKI's 1993 Transportation Plan. So I suspect she thinks it's a step backwards. She understands that the core needs to maintain its status as the center of regional employment. Since only a few of the 150,000 or so people who work in Uptown and Downtown actually live there, you've got to have a means of moving them from their homes to these jobs. Plus a means of moving people without cars who live in those areas to better jobs in the suburbs. As highways further congest and the price of fuel and parking rises, this will become even more important. The problem is, we're still very much a car-centric city, and the demand for regional transportation choices has not risen to the point where people are willing to tax themselves to provide alternatives. So, another strategy is to get greater utility from what you already have working for you. There's clearly a market for people who are tired of spending so much of their time and money in highway economy. Many of them work in our region's two largest employment centers and would be quite content with the idea of living, working, shopping for groceries, living complete lives, in a small radius of travel. Some of the money they used to spend on travel will be redirected into the housing economy. Unfortunately, I don't think Roxanne has ever bought this argument. She's very democratic in her approach to mobility -- provide choices for everyone. So am I at heart, but I recognize that too few people really want those choices right now. That will change over time, and the streetcar will be a good illustration of how good the alternatives are. But for now, we need to provide a really good alternative for Cincinnatians who are early-adopters wanting to break free from the car culture. And by that, I don't mean they hate cars. They just understand that accommodating cars them in the urban environment is costly and enables disposable income to leak out of the center-city economy. Charlie Hales, the former elected official from Portland who is leading Cincinnati's streetcar study, once said to me, "You know, John, a lot of cities spend all their transportation money trying to figure out how to move people through there cities as fast as possible. Portland spends a fair amount of its money that way too. But we spend some of enabling people to stay in one place if that's what they want to do." Hence, the Portland Streetcar. I'm not sure that Roxanne has ever understood this logic.

^ Fountain Square's a great example. Never thought of that.

Sorry, I hit the wrong key and posted early. I dunno how the emoticon got in there. Anyway, of all these cities, only Buffalo is saying that it's not going to build any more rail, which probably says more about Buffalo than it does about modern light rail or streetcars. Many of these cities, with starter lines that are only twenty years or so old, are now in their third or fourth builds. I visited all the modern streetcar systems in the Pacific Northwest last week. Portland started with 2.4 miles. Now, after three extensions, they're going to build another three-mile loop. Tacoma has a 1.6 mile downtown streetcar; now they're talking about a three-mile extension to a university and hospital area atop the mountain overlooking they city. Seattle built 1.3 miles in an area that has the scale of our Brewery District; now they're talking about five year lines to other neighborhoods. Once you get the first line open, skeptics often become strong supporters and opponents having trouble preying on the doubts of people who don't have any idea of what a modern streetcar is. And elected officials are suddenly motivated to find the money. Happens everywhere. Except in Buffalo.

Someone wanted to know what the chances were that the streetcar system wouldn't be expanded after the downtown loop has been built. No one can answer that question with certainty, but we can look to what has happened in other cities. Since 1980, twenty-two North American cities have built modern light rail or streetcar systems from scratch. They had no rail on the ground where the first project started. I'm excluding "new" vintage streetcar systems serving tourist areas of cities like Tampa and Little Rock because they're special purpose enterprises not serving a variety of uses. Here are the cities: 1) Baltimore 2) Buffalo 3) Calgary 4) Camden/Trenton 5) Charlotte 6) Dallas 7) Denver 8) Edmonton 9) Houston 10) Los Angeles 11) Minneapolis 12) Northern New Jersey 13) Pittsburgh 14) Portland 15) Sacramento 16) St. Louis 17) Salt lake City 18) San Diego 19) San Francisco 20) San Jose 21) Seattle 22) Tacoma

Also: http://blogs.citybeat.com/porkopolis/2008/02/council-tweaks.html http://cincinnati.blogspot.com/

Thursday, February 21, 2008 "Mallory: Miscommunication on Streetcars" Mayor Mark Mallory, in an interview Thursday with Margaret McGurk, said he thinks a more detailed streetcar plan and financing program to be announced at Monday's finance committee meeting will allay any council concerns about streetcars. Re Roxanne Qualls' resolution that seeks more research about streetcars: "I think there has been some miscommunication, perhaps some misunderstanding among some council members." He reiterated the point that expansion to Uptown has always been integral to the plan. Her motion drew six signatures, a majority of the nine council members. As for competition for TIF financing between streetcars and 3CDC, he said: "We prioritize what 3CDC is doing." The city can build the streetcars and support 3CDC at the same time. "We can't separate these things out anyway." (Meaning the streetcars need development, development needs the streetcars.) "Transportation development done right is an economic development driver." "Big things can be done. This city has a history of doing big things." posted by Jane Prendergast at 2/21/2008 07:24:00 PM 0 comments links to this post http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/gov/

A note from Chris Bortz on the Cincinnati Streetcar: "Today there were productive conversations with members of Council, the Mayor and key members of the administration regarding streetcars in Cincinnati. Everyone is looking forward to the presentation in Finance Committee on Monday to hear the administration's financing recommendations, suggestions for how we might take the next steps in the process, and collect citizen input. We will not take legislative action on Monday. After Council has had an opportunity to digest the information presented, the Mayor and members of Council will work together to draft a motion that defines expectations about the scope of the plan, financing strategies, issues related to integration of transportation networks, and other critical path tasks that must be accomplished to continue moving forward with a comprehensive streetcar system connecting Uptown and Downtown through Over-the-Rhine within a time frame that is both compressed and achievable. There is firm commitment that Council and the Mayor will work quickly to keep the ball moving on this exciting project." Chris Bortz

Nancy Zimpher has, in fact, written a letter to city officials stating the she understands the importance of completing the downtown loop first with local funds before undertaking the uptown loop. I assume that this letter will be introduced on Monday. In the thoughts I've read here today -- they've been great in their energy, passion and truly original thinking -- Nancy Zimpher has been the MacGuffin of the story. Keep your eye on the ball: the insistence that the streetcar go to uptown in the first build is simply a way of deflecting energy from an achievable plan without seeming to oppose the idea of a streetcar in principle. By the way, a four-mile end-to-end loop from The Banks to, say, the Cincinnati Zoo, would be the longest first phase of a modern streetcar project ever built in the United States. Portland started with 2.4 miles, Tacoma with 1.6 niles, Seattle with 1.3 miles. Just the facts.

Interesting first-time post. John Cranley once told me that he favored going straight up Sycamore Hill to Uptown. Someone rides a bike up Sycamore Hill?

That reminds me of the idiot that calls Queens Tower in East Price Hill downtown in the citybeat real estate classifieds. Interesting observation, that. Harry Davidow used to own the Queen's Tower.

Off to Portland with another streetcar tour for five days. If you hear anything interesting about the streetcar, please email me = [email protected]. I'd keep talking among your friends and get commitments to attend on the 25th. Sound like a long afternoon. But then, the party afterwards could be especially good. Thanks.

^ There need to be more stories like this.

^ I'd say more like 3rd and goal. But it's an away-game, the scoreboard's on the blink, and time's being kept on the field. On the other hand, we've got one hell of a ground-game.

City Manager Milton Dohoney on "Newsmakers" this morning, talking about the financing of the Cincinnati Streetcar: "We're not there yet."

Mayor Mallory clarifies position on streetcars: http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/gov/2008/02/mallory-on-streetcars.asp#comments

Nice as it would be, I doubt you could ever get through the UC campus. The University of Minnesota was threatening to kill the whole Central Line project between Minneapolis and St. Paul because the transit agency wanted to do that. It's still not settled. Transit agencies also tried to build LRT through the San Diego State and Arizona State campuses, and I don't think they ever succeeded. The main reason for opposition always seems to be the disturbuance of scientific equipment on the campus, but I've felt that universities simply don't want anyone else in control of the physical development of the their campuses. Not that most of them have done such a good job with that. Airports mostly keep LRT away from their campuses too. They have a million reasons, but the one they never give is, to me, the most obvious one - they don't want to lose parking revenue. And the airlines don't push for the connections either, because if parking revenue goes down, there will be pressure on landing fees -- maybe averagng $250 per landing now at major airports -- will go up. I love all the maps that appear here. Makes me think.

^ Um, no.

^ Don't worry about the funding. They've got it figured out.

I-71, I-74, I-471, I-275

^ 97 acres of vacant parking lots in the CBD and OTR