If it does encourage the flurry of investments then maybe 3CDC could step aside eventually and let the market of private investors take over the remodeling and expenses of the buildings.   (Not to say 3CDC hasn't done a good job, but ultimately they SHOULD be able to move on to other areas surrounding OTR.)

What are the next steps here as far as moving towards approval?  It seems the "powers that be" are pretty much on board with this project so what happens next?  Are their formal votes and if so who is voting? Does the public have a say in this process (other than who they elect)?  When is the financing being arranged?  Now or later? In NY, there was a West Side Stadium project, which seemed to have several green lights with all the financing in place.  There was tremendous buzz th Bloomberg and Pataki on board yet at the 11th hour, a city councilman had veto power and squashed the whole thing. Is this possible? What are the risks of this not happening?

 

There is no public vote...City Council will eventually have to approve the funding for it, but so far the Finance Committee has approved it unanimously.  I would take this as a positive sign that this will continue to blow through formal votes.  There are two iffys on council as to whether they will vote for it or not, and those two could possibly even turn for the good if it appears like something they have to do for their re-election campaigns.

 

I'm pretty sure no one on council has the authority to veto this (or any) movement.  However, the could request to table the final vote until after the elections for some loopy reason, but that motion would have to be voted on by the council members present.  I doubt that this would happen, but crazier things have happened.

Think it makes sense, some time before the November 6th City Council election, to publish a list of council candidates who support the streetcar plan that's now on the table?

 

I have a list of ten, maybe eleven, so far.

Yes that should definitely happen.

OK, I'll put one up later today for editing by the group.

Here is an idea I've been chewing on for a possible Uptown Route.  Instead of simply looping around the mega-block of Main Campus, why not cut right through it on UC's Main Street.  The line would then be great for accessing UC Football and/or Basketball games, it would be right in the face of UC students and it would play right into UC|21's goals of creating a vibrant 24 hour campus.  In addition to that, it would be tremendously more enjoyable of a ride through campus than along the mega-streets that surround it.

 

 

Now that I've been looking at this, the second route (green line) doesn't look like it would be worth the extra costs incurred for that length of a line.  I was trying to connect Ludlow into the route, but I just don't think it would make sense unless it was a line that went all the way down to Northside (thus adding more incentive for the line).

Is there a way to enter the campus from Calhoun -- a road that that still goes through the campus from south to north?

There is really no N/S connection across campus that could work engineering wise.  From Calhoun there is a large elevation drop off, the only possibility could be that access road in between Panera Bread and Corryville Catholic.  You could also access from Jefferson near the Edwards Center.

My guess is, too winding for streetcars.

just have the green line make a left where it hits the blue line at vine street and cut out the left hand blue line south of goodman.

Here are the people who support the Cincinnati Streetcar plan now on the table. They made the list by voting for it in the Economic Development Committee on October 16th or writing in support of it. Hope I haven't missed anyone. Please feel free to perfect the list, but give a reason.

 

LIST OF CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES WHO SUPPORT THE STREETCAR PLAN:

 

Jeff Berding

 

Chris Bortz - safe to say we wouldn't be anywhere without him

 

David Crowley

 

John Eby

 

Leslie Ghiz - maybe

 

Greg Harris

 

Joan Kaup

 

Mitch Painter

 

Roxanne Qualls

 

Cecil Thomas

 

George Zamary

Berding Bortz Eby Harris Kaup are the strongest supporters I have talked to in that group D- 2 C-2 R-1

 

 

I haven't heard anything from Bates, Winburn (and Malone)

Berding Bortz Eby Harris Kaup are the strongest supporters I have talked to in that group D- 2 C-2 R-1

 

 

I haven't heard anything from Bates, Winburn (and Malone)

 

 

Neither Bates nor Winburn supported the streetcar plan when interviewed by Dan Hurley on Newsmakers today.

and Malone will do whatever Winburn does...

To get decent ridership, you have to get onto the Ludlow district. What about taking it through Burnett Woods and along Brookline down Clifton to Middleton, up Middleton to Ludlow (or some variation there of). I'd move back to Cincy for that path (I wish). The 51 used to have a similar path when it was still the neighborhood circulator.

Somehow I do not believe calling people ignorant will win proponents and influence anyone except to go out of their way to put up hurdles.

well in the safe confines of urban ohio, i iam going to call most of the enquirer remarks ignorant.  I didn't read one that went against the streetcar due to actual reason and understanding of the project.  If I were face to face with them, I wouldnt say they were ignorant but try to actually tell them why the streetcar is a good idea.  If, after I explain to them why it would be beneficial, and they still dont like it, well..... :shoot:

Rando, dmerkow;  I think if it came up from the basin on W Clifton, and crossed straight across Calhoun and McMillan onto UC property around the Law School and the Classics library, and ran right in front of McMicken Hall, that would get you close enough to the front-center of campus, and would help you avoid the congestion at the Clifton/Calhoun/McMillan intersection. I don't think running right through the center of campus is realistic.  There is just too much stuff going on there to jog around.

Somehow I do not believe calling people ignorant will win proponents and influence anyone except to go out of their way to put up hurdles.

 

I don't know that there is any other word for it.  Atlas is right, if you read through the comments left on the Enquirer's forum, there is very little informed, rational thought being put forth from streetcar opponents.  In fact, most of it appears to be people who read the title of the story online, and then fired off statements that are totally contrary to the plan as outlined in the story, which they would have been aware of, had they bothered to actually read it.  So they may not even qualifiy as opponents of the streetcar, because I would expect opponents to have at least invested the time to read a short newspaper article.  The silver lining here is that very little serious, organized opposition is being put forth, so we probably don't have too much to worry about until something like that materializes.

I don't think running right through the center of campus is realistic.  There is just too much stuff going on there to jog around.

 

I think that is what makes this particular line so appealing.  It is a pedestrian only campus and you would have people meandering across the tracks when it isn't there.  This happens with European streetcars quite a bit from my understanding.  I just think it offers more to travel to and additional ridership by running through UC's Main Street as opposed to all the way down to Clifton/MLK intersection then east on MLK.  There really isn't a lot going on, on that corner of campus and very little is oriented to the streets on that corner.

Leslie Ghiz - maybe

Figures....  She would never get my vote even if she was as prostreetcar as Bortz

Based on the following post in the Enquirer's "Today at the Forum Section", I'm inclined to list Leslie Ghiz as a streetcar supporter.

 

"Ghiz on Streetcars

 

Concerns about the City looking into having streetcars are legitimate. However, I agree with other candidates and members of council when I say that we should not react to the price. Everyone out there needs to realize that the options of how to fund streetcars are open. An example of how we could do it was presented by the administration. Its proposal in no way is written in stone. The Economic Development Committee simply gave the administration the go ahead to continue exploring and figuring out how to best manage the price tag for it. As of October 2007, that price tag is $102 million. However, it will go up as we wait to start the project.

 

My first question is always "how much will this cost?" In this instance, I have seen the type of economic development a streetcar system can generate, and I am in support of doing this. However, we must be cautious of where we get the money to do it. We need to lobby our State officials to get more than $10 million from them. We need to work with the private sector to get them to help us fund it. We need to work to see that the city's $25 million capital investment can be lowered. If we realize that this will be too costly to the city in the sense of loss of services to our citizens, we have put the project on the back burner. I do not think that is the case. I am certain if we work diligently (now, not in a few weeks or years), we can find a way to make this happen with little to no impact on our City coffers. But, every day council waits to act is a day that the overall cost goes up.

 

The committee on Tuesday was trying not to slow the process. Just because we passed a concept does not mean tracks will be laid tomorrow. We have a long way to go, but if we drag our feet on this, we will be doing a disservice to everyone."

Peter Bronson article today in the Enquirer ripping the Streetcar initiative:

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071023/COL05/710230400/-1/columnists

Jim Tarbell called me this morning to say that since Bronson's against it, he's sure we're on the right track here.

I can't say that's really an article against the streetcar. It's more just a showcase for Bronson's ADHD.

 

Let's see, streetcars, Chad Johnson, Jesus, the Rockies. Yep, that's a cogent argument.

I get the feeling he just dictates his columns  and then never goes back to re-read them

Ok, I need 1 more council member to vote for.  I promised Cole I would vote for her since she came out against closing the Collins ave steps, and Thomas ONLY because he came out for the streetcars.

 

Bortz, Crowley,Kaup,Qualls,Cole,Berding,Thomas and Harris.  I need 1 more. Who that is prostreetcar has the best chance of winning that I didn't list.  Thanks! 

^Why not just vote for eight rather than all nine?

I usually keep it around 3 or 4.

Cincinnati's system definitely makes it more difficult to be an informed voter that is familiar with all the candidates' platforms.

Streetcar idea works for young professionals

BY RANDY A. SIMES | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER - GUEST EDITORIAL

October 24, 2007

 

I am by definition a young professional, part of the creative class, and I am enrolled at the University of Cincinnati's College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning.

 

As you may know, Cincinnati is not exactly a hotbed for the creative class and has struggled to retain/attract young professionals.

 

As a creative person, it can be difficult to make it work here over a place like Chicago, New York or Atlanta, but it seems as though people are afraid to even try at times. We need to continue to prioritize the arts and place new emphasis on things like mass transit.

 

This is a very important issue to many young people and in particular the creative class. If we fail at creating a city with these elements, then we will fail at attracting that ever-important young professional.

 

Aside from bus service, Cincinnati offers no transit options. The cities that do a great job at attracting this demographic have much more, and we are falling further behind the likes of Seattle, Portland, Austin, Atlanta, Chicago and Baltimore.

 

Cincinnati is now looking to build a streetcar system. This is a great first step at creating a wide-reaching transit system.

 

I would argue that Cincinnati has an edge over many of these other cities in terms of arts, geographic features and affordability, but we simply cannot rest on our laurels.

 

I know I can not speak for every young person out there, but I say this: Please make the effort to keep us around for our sake and the sake of our community.

 

If you are not a young professional, would you prefer your child to live in Cincinnati or Seattle?

 

Streetcars are not the only answer, but they are the opportunity we have the chance to capitalize on right now.

 

Randy A. Simes is a student in the University of Cincinnati's College of Design, Architecture, Art and Planning.

Congrats Randy... they actually published something worthwhile!

Nice article. Lets hope the right people listen and donate the funds needed.

hehe, youre famous.

 

"Ghiz on Streetcars

 

 

If you ghiz on streetcars, I am not riding them.

 

Based on the following post in the Enquirer's "Today at the Forum Section", I'm inclined to list Leslie Ghiz as a streetcar supporter.

 

 

Yea, I like Ghiz too.

^You must be doing something wrong then...haha, but back on topic.

 

Streetcars receive green light from committee

BY JESSICA NOLL | DOWNTOWNER

October 24, 2007

 

DOWNTOWN -  Kenosha, Wis., has it. Portland, Ore., has it. Little Rock, Ark., has it. Tampa, Fla., has it. And Cincinnati, Ohio, wants it. It is the talk of the town. It is the highly anticipated streetcar, and it now has a plan, a financial plan.

That's great news.  In March, I'm moving overseas for 2 years and I can't wait to come back if all this (streetcars, banks, OTR) actaully happens.

HDR's study states that Cincinnati can expect a $4.1 billion return on the investment made into the streetcar system.

 

typo?

Nice to have a champion on Cincinnati City Council:

 

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/forum/2007/10/bortz-on-streetcars-cure-for-naysaying.asp#comments

Streetcar plan gets council push

BY JANE PRENDERGAST | [email protected]

Efforts to bring streetcars to Cincinnati pushed forward Wednesday, but not without some questions about the $100 million cost, and whether it should be a priority for the financially strapped city.

 

City Council members voted 8-1 to tell the administration to keep moving on its financial research. A report on the costs and possible funding sources is due to council’s finance committee in a month.

 

But the chairman of that committee, John Cranley, voted against the resolution. He said he was concerned about casting a positive vote because he felt doing so would indicate he agreed with the financing proposal outlined last week. That proposal calls for, among other things, using $25 million from city capital funds, which he said could also be used to pave streets, and using $11 million from the sale of the Blue Ash Airport. He said that money already has been promised to neighborhoods.

 

“I like streetcars,” Cranley said. “I’d like to see them in Cincinnati. But the issue is $100 million and balancing the needs of the entire city.”

 

He also thinks that the first phase of the streetcar plan should connect downtown with Uptown, the area around the University of Cincinnati and the hospitals.

Now we know.

and knowing is half the battle

I guess we should start a list of who is against the streetcar and put Cranely at the top.  I get a kick how he says the City does not have $100M and then suggest his preferred 1st phase be a loop from downtown-UC-hospitals. What would that cost Mr. Cranley....$250M??  He knows this proposal would not fly therefore it is another way for saying he is against it.

 

 

I think that connecting uptown and downtown would be far more beneficial than running a street car exclusively downtown. UC shuttles run on my street every 15 minutes to all sides of UC and if it's not empty, there's one person on them, even during peak hours. When I ride the bus downtown, I rarely see people get on downtown and get off in another section of downtown. However, consider the importance of a route like the 17. I think 250m would be a much wiser investment than the $100m route. I am still in favor of the current plan I would just prefer it expanded. However, I'm not sure which route is easier to sell.

Cranley just lost my vote.

...the extension to the UC area is problematic so far as how much it would interfere with the #17 and other Clifton Ave. buses (#18, #24? going by memory).  Or as I suggested some time ago, a four mile light rail line using the subway and a streetcar line down Ludlow Ave. to Knowlton's corner would almost totally eliminate downtown-bound buses from Knowlton's corner and Clifton Ave. buses.  As-is the number of buses coming down Clifton Ave. even during off-peak hours is pretty impressive.  So when studying an uptown extension, the question is will the streetcar eventually extend to Northside and if so would a multi-phase extension be more expensive from an operations standpoint than simply doing it all at once?  I suppose it's a good problem to have, but Good Samaritan Hospital and the Hebrew Union College are only a short distance from UC, which are only a short distance from the Ludlow Ave. business district, which is just up the hill from Cincinnati State, which is just across the highway from Northside.  People will almost always choose to ride the streetcar instead of the bus, so the streetcar will increasingly cut into bus ridership with every additional foot it runs down Clifton Ave.  Meanwhile dozens of buses per hour will continue to travel that same route, not collecting the inbound ridership they did previously.  Perhaps the buses could run express from the uptown terminus of the streetcar but they'd still have to stop at traffic lights.     

 

 

I think the 17 should bypass Clifton and, at Northside, continue downtown along Central Parkway. A streetcar originating in Northside could distribute passengers to Clifton Ludlow, Clifton Heights, Corryville and Peebles Corner. Could tie-in nicely with light rail coming up Gilbert to Xavier.

When I ride the bus downtown, I rarely see people get on downtown and get off in another section of downtown.

 

really?  When I ride the 17 I have seen the bus leave gov't square full and get to UC half empty

I think that connecting uptown and downtown would be far more beneficial than running a street car exclusively downtown. UC shuttles run on my street every 15 minutes to all sides of UC and if it's not empty, there's one person on them, even during peak hours. When I ride the bus downtown, I rarely see people get on downtown and get off in another section of downtown. However, consider the importance of a route like the 17. I think 250m would be a much wiser investment than the $100m route. I am still in favor of the current plan I would just prefer it expanded. However, I'm not sure which route is easier to sell.

 

I think everyone agrees that is makes a LOT of sense to connect to Uptown eventually.  The problem is that we are working on securing $100M and that is a task enough in and of itself...lets not go too far and try to do something that is financially unfeasible from the get-go.  The bottom line is that you can't build Rome in a day...these things take time especially when you consider finances, budget constraints, politics, etc.  This is a GREAT first step...and once we get our feet wet with this we have to continue to look for expansions of this...as has been mentioned.

When I ride the bus downtown, I rarely see people get on downtown and get off in another section of downtown. .

 

Exactly! Your right, but people WILL DO that with the streetcar. Cincinnati has to realize how much the streetcar opens up the downtown radius.  This permanent loop will have an enormous impact on where and how people live, work and play. Think of the loop as a circular flow of cash, empowering the entire urban core to participate in the 24 hour city.