Eigth and State

^ I understand multipliers. Every dollar spent on Metro Moves includes some multiplier. But every dollar NOT spent on Metro Moves is one dollar spent on something else, which also includes a multipler. The question is still the *best* use of that dollar, including consideration of the muliplier effect. I also understand your argument about keeping money local. I don't advocate taxing Ohioans for the purpose of constructing light rail in Seattle. How did that policy ever come to exist, anyway? It wasn't my idea.

The details of the financing arrangements matter little. The important thing is that every dollar spent on Metro Moves represents one dollar that could have been spent on something else. At the time of Metro Moves, a round number of $2 billion cost was advertised, so that's what I used. The more important question is whether or not Metro Moves would have been the *best* use of that dollar. Everyone has a pet project or an idea, but no one ever agrees on the *best* use. Also, the results of an election do not determine the *best* use, but just the most popular choice on the ballot. I will give you that federal grants completely distort the situation. If Cincinnati gets a matching grant on rail but not on, say, schools, then it skews the decision on the *best* use of that dollar toward rail and not toward schools. Now, back to the question on whether Over-the-Rhine would be more redeveloped now, I admit that I just don't know. You can't perform an experiment and then turn back the clock like on SimCity and try something else. Maybe it would be better, and maybe not. All I'm saying is that cities and their economies are extremely complicated and they are impossible to model, so your guess is as good as mine. Addition of a light rail line is no guarantee of a positive net benefit in a specific place, because the overall economy may be a more important factor in development than location of a specific line or station, and while construction of a light rail line hopefully will improve access (a positive benefit) if it is accompanied by a big tax, than that tax must be considered as a disbenefit. One of my former wmployeers specifically located in a suburban area of Butler County instead of downtown Cincinnati or any incorporated area of Hamilton County to avoid city payroll taxes.

^Not neccesarily. I'm thinking that growth has to do more with the local economy than with the transportation network. The economy influences HOW MUCH growth there is, and the transportation network influences WHERE the development is. Metro Moves itself would have cost $2billion, removing that money from other potential projects including redevelopment of OTR.

^My dad used to say, "The Democrats are right about some things, and the Republicans are right about some things. But both Democrats and Republicans are wrong about most things." In any case, politicians and political hopefuls tend to be lawyers more than anything else. Filing lawsuits is what they do.

"The City" is a term that means different things to different people. Most on this board use "The City" to refer to the City of Cincinnati Municipality, aka the City Proper. In wider use, "The City" can mean anything from the Cincinnati Metro area, anyplace with a Cincinnati mailing address, or even a more limited definition such as Downtown Cincinnati, which itself means different things to different people. Some think that "Downtown" reaches as far north as St. Bernard! For those that don't follow urban issues and government, all of the local governments and even the state and federal government run together. This is a topic for another thread, but the controversy in the West Side is partly due to the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority, which is not part of the Cincinnati Municipality at all, but is a Hamilton County agency that manages funds from Housing and Urban Development (HUD), to provide and maintain housing for low-income families. Since the CMHA has the same name "Cincinnati" in it's title, people who don't know any better think that the CMHA is the same group of people trying to build the streetcar. The controversy on the West Side is that Green Township has filed a lawsuit to block CMHA from aquiring property in Green Township. CMHA has been tasked with providing 32 public housing units in Green Township, after a HUD investigation found that a CMHA board chairman had blocked CMHA from acquiring properties in Green Township. What a mess! The other day I thought about sitting down and compliing a list of all the local governments and agencies just to get them straight in my own mind, but the task is overwhelming. Even the City of Cincinnati has 26 different departments, which don't necessarily cooperate with each other. Plus there's the Cincinanti Public Schools, the Public Library of Cincinnati and Hamilton County, The Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce, and 100 other institutions with the name "Cincinnati." Just look at the headline above: "City strikes deal with Water Works." But the Cincinnati Water Works is one of the divisions of the City of Cincinnati Municipality! No wonder people are confused.

We've gone through this before, and Jake also provided some insight, but since you asked, Yes, the City has failed to take into account the legal interplay between the proposed streetcar and existing utilities. I'm not here to blame anyone; mistakes are made, and we move on. I have been saying all along that the feasibility study from 2007 paid very little attention to utilities, and that feasibility study set the tone for the whole project. The problems are not insurmountable. They can be solved, given enough money. But trying to pass the cost on to someone else is not always a successful strategy. Like Jake said, many of the historic streetcars were there first before any utilities. Cincinnati's historic streetcars, starting with horse-drawn streetcars, got their start in the 1860's era. Cincinnati didn't start building sewers in earnest until the 1870's, though there are some older than that (and still in service!) Plus, back then, nobody cared too much about access like they do now, traffic speeds including streetcars were much less, and it wasn't necessarily a problem to build a manhole between the tracks. More people died in accidents back then, too, which is not acceptable today. But there's more. Cincinnati's streets today contain: Water mains, sometimes more than one. Gas mains, sometimes more than one. Sewers, usually combined in downtown and Over-the-Rhine Electric, either underground or overhead Telephone, either underground or overhead Cable TV, either underground or overhead Fiber optic lines from up to 5 different communications companies. Cooling water lines (for air conditioners) in the CBD "Services," or branch lines serving individual buildings, for all of the aforementioned utilities. Lots of abandoned stuff, including old streetcar rails, that gets in the way. Abandoned stuff can usually be removed at some cost. Various undergound tunnels connecting the basements of buildings across the street, air-conditioning equipment, occasional coal chutes, the subway tunnels, and other miscellaneous stuff. Also, you can't just dig right next to a building, especially the older ones, without expensive shoring which also takes up space. So, the point is that the streets are already congested with utilities. Moving the sewer, or any other utility, is an option, but there isn't always space availble to relocate it. All of this stuff in the street simply didn't exist in 1920, though some of it did. Downtown Cincinnati and Over-the-Rhine is one of the toughest areas to work in. If a streetcar was proposed in, say, Northland Avenue in Springdale, it wouldn't cost nearly as much to build, because there is both more room in a wider street and fewer utilities. Also, most construction work today is done by machine rather than by hand labor like it was in 1920. If the utilities are so congested as to require hand labor, that increases the cost. I'll add this detail just to demonstrate the complexity: the Ohio EPA controls installation of new sewers in Ohio. (Again, Cincinnati can't just do anything it wants!) One of their rules is that they want sewers and water mains to be separated by 10 feet horizontally, in order to protect public health from cross-contamination. Sometimes the street is so congested that you just don't have 10 feet. The Ohio EPA will make exceptions under certain conditions, and there are certainly lots of situations out there that pre-date this rule, but this is an example of another possible conflict and yet another group of people that could hinder this project, not because they are opposed to the streetcar, but because they are doing their job. And yes, the Ohio EPA has been known to shut down entire projects. This wasn't an issue at all with Cincinnati's historic streetcars, because the EPA didn't exist back then. I agree with you that this kind of work is routine, though it's more difficult than the typical construction project, and that the commissioners are playing politics (after all, that's their job). Whether or not it should be a rubber stamp approval is a matter for debate. It's not really a surprise that the commissioners didn't approve the funding for the streetcar project, since most of their support comes from the suburbs. Also, they just cut ~$20 million from the annual budget of MSD. I hope I answered your question, and for the regular forumers, sorry about the repetition.

"But Cincinnati isn't Portland!" The similarities in metro population, density, etc. are striking. I like the graph of the 20 tallest buildings. Still, there are some important differences: 1. Portland has a high foreign immigration rate and growing population while Cincinnati does not. 2. Portland has a state government that favors cities including transit while Cincinnati does not. 3. Portland has had transit for 25 years now, and Cincinnati has not. This is something that Cincinnati cannot change, because it is not possible to turn back the clock and build a streetcar in 1985. Portland's streetcar opened in 2001, having already had transit in operation for 15 years! Imagine if Cincinnati today had light rail from, say, Norwood to Downtown Cincinnati and Covington, with a branch to Westwood, and THEN tried to build a streetcar from downtown to Over-the-Rhine! We would then have a ridership base with lots of riders already downtown, contractors with experience with rail, some kind of experience with funding and operation, and all of that. (Rail from Norwood to downtown Cincinnati and Covington with a branch to Westwood was proposed in 1976.) I've been to Portland. I went there on business in 1999. I wanted to see the light rail, but never got a chance. We drove straight from the airport to a restaurant, which happened to be located in the middle of a sea of parking lots. Disappointing... But no, I am not meaning to knock Cincinnati. If Portland has streetcars, I am happy for them, and I want to know how they did it. I want to know why Portland has streetcars and Cincinnati does not, so that I might be able to do something about it. It's interesting that their light rail came first. I'm looking at a system map, photos, and stats right now and it looks like a significant portion of the total system is open right-of-way (not in a street) and diesel-powered (no overhead wire.) There are also portions that are electric and run in a street, obviously. Seattle, on the other hand, isn't even in the same league. It's like comparing Cincinnati to Chicago. Seattle can afford a $2 billion project.

Allright, just for fun, and before someone says "They do it in Portland," I took the time to look up the state laws pertaining to streetcars in Oregon. I didn't find anything establishing rights between different utilities, though in Oregon streetcars are NOT considered utilities as they are in Ohio. But guess what else I found? Excerpts from Chapter 309 - Mass Transportation: (bold is mine.) "...Net proceeds from the operation of the state lottery for the support of the Westside corridor light rail project, as provided in ORS 391.130, is an appropriate use of state lottery funds..." Wow! Imagine that! The lottery as a source of funding for transit! "There is established in the State Treasury, separate and distinct from the General Fund, the Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund. All moneys in the Elderly and Disabled Special Transportation Fund are appropriated continuously to the Department of Transportation for payment of the department’s administrative costs of the program and payment to mass transit districts..." More funding for ADA compliance for tansit! "The States of Oregon and Washington establish by way of this interstate compact an independent, separate regional authority, which is an instrumentality of both of the signatory parties hereto, known as Columbia River Light Rail Transit Authority..." Two states cooperating to build transit across the river! It took an interstate compact, which needs approval by Congress. "The Authority has the power too...acquire, maintain, control, and convey easements, licenses, and other limited property rights for the purpose of constructing the South North light rail transit line." Build it in a private right-of way to avoid utilities. "The State Treasurer is authorized to issue lottery bonds pursuant to ORS 286A.560 to 286A.585, in an amount not to exceed net proceeds of $1,600,000..." Funding from the state lottery! "The property of the Oregon Mass Transportation Financing Authority shall be exempt from all taxation in the State of Oregon." It's not fair that railways pay property taxes but highways don't. Not in the state of Oregon! So, there is a MAJOR difference between Cincinnati and Portland, other than things already mentioned on this forum: Portland's state of Oregon supports transit, directly, with actual funding and property tax policy! I guess we already knew that, but it's neat to see it written into state law. I didn't know transit in Portland is supported by the lottery, that Oregon specifically provides for transit as ADA compliance, and that transit has a state property tax advantage. Paper infrastructure (laws, policies, etc.) is just as important, and sometimes lasts just as long or longer, as physical infrastructure. Ohio's paper infrastructure relating to streetcars dates back to the historic streetcars. The State of Ohio allows them, but does not provide for them. The State of Oregon specifically favors transit, and backs it up with funding. Speaking of Oregon, Railfan and Railroad magazine has an article about Portland, with a good description of the various lines from a user's point of view. I have learned so much from this board. :-)

^It doesn't take an attorney to read the Ohio Revised Code. Reading the laws BEFORE going to court can save a lot of time.

The Metropolitan Sewer District is funded by Hamilton County and operated by the City of Cincinnati. MSD employees are city employees. (This arrangement which has been in place since 1968 has not worked particularly well, but that's another story.) So, if MSD sued the city in court, the city would be suing itself. Hopefully, the good people at the city will work out a solution before going to court and being told by a judge to work it out and stop wasting his time. If the same thing happened between the streetcar and a Duke utility, and the City tried to force Duke to move it's utility without any compensation and it went to court, the court would probably favor Duke. Traditionally, use of the public right-of-way by utilities is allocated on a first come, first served basis. I hope that the sewer issue will be worked out. My point is simply that the city can't just force everyone else out of the right-of-way just because it's the city. The city doesn't own the public right-of-way in the same way that a homeowner owns a house. Utilities have a certain legal right to occupy the public right-of-way under state law. In Ohio, a streetcar is considered a utility and has the same legal standing as any other utility, regardless of whether the operator of that utility is also the city. This works in both directions. MSD cannot legally block the streetcar, and the streetcar cannot legally force out the sewer, as long as they are compatible. If there is a conflict, MSD has the advantage because the sewer was there first. Well, there IS a conflict, because the proposed tracks will phsically intersect with the sewer manholes. The traditional burden of conflict resolution is on the streetcar, not MSD.

Not quite. Use of public streets in Ohio is governed by Ohio state law. Cincinnati can only do what it wants with her streets as long as it is permitted under the Ohio Revised Code. In Ohio, streetcars are considered utilities and have the same legal status as other utilities. It is also explicitly stated that utilities must be treated equally. One utility cannot block another one as long as they are physically compatible.

The Waldvogel Viaduct, I think, has a certain industrial beauty, composed of classic structural steel and concrete. It's also an example of early automobile era highway engineering, kind of a time warp. I don't disagree with the replacement project, but I'm kind of sad to see it go. The hinges on the portal frames are interesting. Imagine incorporating a model of this complicated structure into an HO model railroad layout - it would steal the show. Modern bridges, though much better in terms of safety and maintenance, are boring by comparison. The Waldvogel Viaduct is almost human in scale. I can imagine workers in 1940 placing rivets one at a time. The approaches to the Main Avenue Bridge in Cleveland are similar. Thanks for the photos.

^At least Sears has been in the same location, and under the same name, for what, at least 50 years? In a day when the average retail concept has a life span of 15 years, it's nice to see that stability.

The building extending over the sidewalk in photo#4 looks like something out of medieval Europe or Asia. It is an example of something not often seen in Ohio. Ink, I don't always comment on your threads but I want to say thanks for posting. I have been able to see things that I would not have been able to see otherwise. You have a good eye for these small towns, and I am always happy to open a new Ink thread.

^I was told that a resume should fill up one page, no more and no less. For my first job interview, I listed experience cutting grass, and my interviewer actually asked about it and seemed interested. I wouldn't think of putting that on a resume today because I don't have room. I had a more recent interview where the interviewer pretty much ignored all my work experience, and instead asked where I went to high school and talked about high school football. If he even read my resume, he didn't show it.

^The wall running down the center at ground level is part of the flood levee. In photo 7, the slanted slot receives a gate which is supposed to hold the Ohio River out of the Mill Creek Valley.

I am impressed that you are looking at long-term operating costs. 60% of transit use is from home to work, 30% is from home to shopping, and 10% is everything else. There would probably be a good number of commuters who take the train to their jobs at the airport. The number of people taking light rail to a flight might be comparatively small. Also, if there are stops in downtown Cincinnati, Covington, Ft. Mitchell and Ft. Wright, then a good percentage of the expected ridership probably won't go to the airport at all. Finally, airports make money on parking revenue. Any potential riders that take the train instead of driving might actually cost the airport money if the ticket tax is only a dollar.

These are some of the most cleiar Carew Tower Observation Deck photos I have seen. Thanks for posting! I am delighted that the horizon line can still be seen through the lattice on Queen City Square. I suspect that this wasn't intended, but a happy coincidence. Another happy coincidence is the way that the CG&E building is reflected in the glass of 312 Walnut, the downward perspective view of the Central Trust Tower, and the way that the Ohio River is partly hidden from view but still makes an appearance in the west. All of these things and more enhance the Carew Tower experience.

Thanks for that.

Just to be clear, this is one reason why people are so excited about the overhead wire. This is an example of equipment used for regular maintenance of sewers. There is a solution: get a smaller truck.

I'll give you that. They are an issue to the MSD and Water Works. I'm just reporting the news. I know that and you know that, but MSD and Water Works crews don't know that. The difference is that firefighters have specific training for working around electric wires. Other city crews do not. It's probably fear of the unknown more than anything. We are working with human nature here. This is what conflict resolution is all about. If you can't solve a problem, then work around it. No no no, not even close. Three Gorges Dam: $22.5 billion Burj Dubai: $20 billion (entire development) Cincinnati Streetcar: ~$100 million Sorry. No harm intended. :oops: Thanks for running out and taking those photos. I knew the Waldvogel Viaduct project was underway, and didn't mean to imply otherwise. Work on relocating the railroad was started years ago.

These are not nonsense concerns. These are real issues. There's been a lot of controversy between the City of Cincinnati and Hamilton County over the MSD ever since the MSD was formed in 1968. The streetcar is just adding to a longstanding grudge match. If the City had simply come in with the cash and volunteered to pay for the required sewer work, I don't think there would even be an issue. Instead, the city came in with an attitude that MSD (and Water Works, for that matter) would pay for the required utility work. MSD is trying to protect its ratepayers, and so is water works. As for the overhead wire, if you don't think it's an issue, talk to the appropriate people at Duke. People can and do get eletrocuted. I personally saw a man get electrocuted from a 20,000 volt overhead wire, and it's not pretty, so this is kind of a personal issue for me. That said, I am confident that some clever engineer can devise some way to reduce the risk. Something that's missing in this discussion is the human factor. As I said before, there is a fear of the unknown. The streetcar proponents have a very hard job selling this project IN CINCINNATI because there is no recent experience with streetcars IN CINCINNATI, despite our fascinating history. We have potential conflicts between the streetcar rails and existing fiber optic lines. This is something new, and there is no precedent for it. The technical solution obviously is to relocate the fiber optic lines, but who is going to pay for it, the City or the utility? That's a political, rather than technical question. Whatever happens in Portland does not apply here, because these issues are governed by state law, which varies between states. Resolving of the political questions can be just as difficult, or more so, than the technical ones, and the political questions are what is causing trouble now. You underestimate the difficulty of this project. Around 1995, the City of Cincinnati department of Traffic and Engineering announced that the top priortiy transportation project was replacement of the Waldvogel Viaduct. It has still not been replaced. What's the hangup? The project involves a lot of people from different departments in city government, state government, and railroads, all with their own agendas. Sometimes one single person can hold up a project, and the only way to work around it is wait for that person to retire or die. I'm not saying that's the way it should be, but that's the way it is. In the case of the Waldvogel Viaduct, the city had completed construction drawings only to have them rejected by ODOT, and the city had to start over from the beginning. This stuff happens. The streetcar project could very well take 10 years. Taking 2007 as the starting point, 10 years puts the opening date in 2017. To put that in perspective, there are other infrastructure projects in Cincinnati in the works right now that are scheduled for opening in 2017. This is actually normal for a project of this magnitude. That all said, it is not fair to blame COAST, WLW, or the Enquirer for all the opposition. Conflict is normal in large construction projects. Sometimes the conflict get resolved and the project gets built, and sometimes it doesn't. If you think I'm making this up, go out and try to get a building permit for something. You might be amazed at how hard it is, and how something that seems so simple or so silly can become such an issue. It's easier to build projects in cities with growing economies that are flush with cash than in cities with depressed or stagnant economies that struggle with budget problems. It all comes down to money.

The Business Courier put X at $6 million for required sewer work. By your formula, the City is trying to steal $3 million from the Hamilton County rate payers. People tend to resist having things stolen from them; hence the conflict. I'm surprised that the source of this conflict is not better understood on this board. The County Commissioners are not intentionally trying to impede the streetcar project; they are just trying to protect their own budget, in the way that anyone would. It's pretty clear that the streetcar does NOT have widespread support outside of the core, and the County Commissioners are protecting their self-interest as politicians as well. Voters weren't given a chance to vote directly on the new sewers in Green Township, but they elected the County Commissioners, namely Bedinghaus, Dowlin, and Guckenberger, who approved the new sewers in Green Township in 1993. Wait, I take that back: Bedinghaus wasn't elected, he was appointed when Steve Chabot moved on to Congress. The overhead wire is a huge concern. In the event of a sewer collapse, there is a risk that excavation equipment used to repair the sewer will come in contact with the overhead wire. There is also the question of who will pay for repairs, which will undoubtedly be more expensive with a streetcar than without one. Historically, excavation was done by hand with shovels. It's hard to find a contractor willing to dig by hand today, and probably not easy to find one willing to operate equipment under the wire. By the way, the historic streetcar rails in Madison Road were a major factor in design of the watermain alignment. Potential utiliy and streetcar rail conflicts are not to be taken lightly, and the streetcar rails in Madison haven't even been used in 60 years! Utilities do not with to mess around with streetcar rails if they can be avoided. Or alternatively, constructing dedicated rights-of-way for streetcars. (But then we would probably call it light rail instead of a streetcar.) Traditionally, utilities take an informal ownership of "lanes" in a street, and it is not considered good practice to construct a utility vertically on top of another one. The reason for this is because the higher (less deep) utility will prevent access to the lower (deeper) utility. Building a utility on top of another one is considered rude and shows an unwillingness to cooperate. It is no surprise that the streetcar project has led to a lot of animosity between the city and utilities. Earlier in this thread I pointed out the difficulty of constructing streetcar rails in a street, as opposed to constructing streetcar rails in a private right-of-way. New track in a graded right-of-way costs about $1 million per mile. Thus, it can be assumed that new track in a street will start at $1 million per mile and only go up from there depending on the the cost to deal with the utilities. Another way to present this is that the city could get a lot more miles of track for $100 million if the track is in a graded right-of-way and not in a street. I realize that we don't just have graded right-of-ways with desired routes laying around, though. My point is that utilities are a major project concern, not just an excuse to delay the project. The COAST folks may be jumping at the opportunity to cause trouble, but the utility issues were there from the start. First one in Cincinnati in 60 years, which is long enough to lose any local experience with streetcars. Might as well have been thought of yesterday. Many sewers in Cincinnati - indeed, many utilities - were built around the streetcar rails, since the rails were there first. But yes, I agree that there were also many instances of streetcar rails built on top of utilities. Again, maybe in other cities, and maybe in Cincinnati prior to 1951, but practically no one in Cincinnati has that experience. The lack of experience with streetcars - indeed, the lack of experience with any kind of passenger rail - is probably part of the reason for so much opposition. It's the fear of the unknown. Does Cleveland have as much fear? You might not believe this, but there's a generation of Cincinnatians who have never been on a train of any kind, unless you count the zoo train. If you think that's neat, you should see the temporary cribwork that elevated streetcar rails above Ohio river flood waters. All of that temporary construction is labor-intensive, and is probably more expensive today than in 1944. Historically, Cincinnati had a fleet of trucks and qualified people to drive around and troubleshoot streetcar problems. One of my favorites is a temporary track that elevated the streetcar rails over a fire hose. The team of troubleshooters also pushed trackless trollies back on route whenever one lost contact with the overhead wires. In 1930, the cost of these trucks could be spread over many miles of revenue track, and 300,000 daily riders, using an economy of scale. It's much harder financially to be prepared for emergencies when the system is so small. Do we need to add a couple of trucks, temporay track, and qualified people to stand by in case of emergency to the project cost estimate? I rode one of those in Germany. It was automated (driverless.) Granted, sky-trains are ugly and detract from the pedestrian experience on the street below, but consider the benefits: 1. Lack of utility conflicts 2. Not impeded by traffic, nor impedes traffic 3. No need to pay a driver on automated systems, which is a major operation cost savings. 4. Less expensive than a subway in most cases. Interesting that from the photo it appears that the wheel and track system is practically the same as any other railway, the only difference being that the track is suspended above the street and the vehicle is suspended from the wheels. Thanks for posting.

I know a guy that tried it. He lived in Dayton and worked in Cincinnati. After about two months of those long drives he gave it up and quit his job. He liked his job but the long commute ruined it for him. I know another guy who did the opposite, living in Cincinnati and working in Dayton for many years, but he lived in the northwest suburbs and didn't go through Sharonville.

I'm not sure whether this comment was directed at me or not, but I should say again that I'm not opposed to the streetcar. Here's where I stand: 1. I am skeptical on whether or not it will actually get built. It is not uncommon for projects to be postponed indefinitely, especially if the political situation changes or if there's a funding issue. That said, I think now that it has a better chance of being built than I used to think. 2. In the event that it does get built, I am skeptical on whether it will result in redevelopment of Over-the-Rhine like it is supposed to. The lack of a streetcar is not the only factor holding back potential development. 3. This project has not been run particularly well so far, as typical construction projects go. The biggest single problem in my opinion is that there has not been a viable funding plan. I consider the current funding plan risky, counting on funds from sources that may not materialize, etc, and even at that I think that the anticipated funding was not enough. Thanks everyone for tolerating me on this board. I wish the best for Cincinnati. And thanks everyone for the comments. I enjoy them. Special thanks to Jake for posting photos and for sharing so much original research.