gotta love it!!!!

 

Excellent schools and public services will bring people to Cincinnati. An amusement park ride to the bar district will only add to list of things that make Cincinnati laughable.

 

Transportation is a public service.  Since Mr. Lahr doesn't mention any public service that he feels needs improvement aside from the public schools, it seems that he has no idea that none of the proposed money for the streetcar can be spent on the public schools.  I think the quality of Cincinnati Public Schools has been hashed out on different threads.  This guy you are quoting isn't particularly insightful.  I don't understand his statement, "The magnet schools; how much is that worth when enrollment is limited? Do you really expect people to move here to gamble on getting their children into those programs?"  Aren't the enrollments of private schools limited as well?  I don't think that assuming that public schools exist solely as a safety net for the private schools is a correct assumption.  And if it were, than it wouldn't be an issue.  See, if public education is a default good, like say, public roads, than in order to live and work and comply with the law, one would have to pay the costs that the default good imposes (be it a crappy education or a car and gas and insurance and licenses and fees or the public bus system).  I doubt it is people who have to take the bus to work that are complaining about the costs streetcar.  It is those who make enough discretionary income to choose between the bus system, which is wholly public, and the public/private public road and automobile system, who for some reason wish to limit the choices of others, and the range of public services the City offers.

^

well put.

 

I am also about to be a young professional in May after graduation. I am looking at other cities, but i really want to be in Cincinnati provided that things like the streetcar happen. I want the Streetcar, The Banks, The revitalization of Over The Rhine, a great entertainment district on Main St., redevelopment of Broadway Commons, a new Arena, and other thing that keep Cincinnati from being an elite place to live.

To say that improved schools over improved transit will attract YPs is simply laughable.  If you actually talk to young people out there and ask them the things that they desire in a potential community - schools will be one of the last on their list.

This gets at the whole Kotkin versus Florida battle. Are cities better off investing in young professionals or families? Their interests can be the same but often aren't. YP's want streetcars, families want good schools. YP's like excitement (thriving scene), families prefer a child oriented culture that hides from view some of the darker/exciting aspect of human society.

 

A good city has room for both. I don't want to live in a YP haven because those places tend to get stale pretty quickly as they have to change with the whim of each new generation. I also don't want to live in an anodyne 'family' place (which actually do right now and now I know I really don't) which lacks energy and a tolerance for difference. A good city also has the elderly who carry their long memories with them of how things 'used to be' for better or ill and give a place a past and a future.

 

I'll throw in the fact this place would have a diversity of classes (obviously with a dynamic economy in which the lower levels have opportunities for productive employment and hope for their future and that of their children). It would also have the wealthy who pay for so much of what the middle classes uses. The middle class should be the foundation of the town.

 

How does this fit with streetcar/trolley? Everyone has an interest in using public transportation. Boomers need to realize that we aren't going to let them drive forever (and neither are their children going to drive them around) and they are going to need public transit system to allow them maintain their mobility as they approach senility or movement to Florida whichever comes first. The trolley allows for the intensification of development in the historic core. Families could once again afford to live in the core and the displacement of non-productive groups would decrease the sense of disorder. The elderly (read empty-nesters) could thrive and those YPs could get home after a evening of bacchanalian festivities without endangering the rest of society.

 

I love cars more than most, but they are the most fun to drive when you have the road alone to yourself. I don't like to drive to do mundane things like going to work. I'd rather read the newspaper and get more sleep. The trolley won't solve that but it would be a start. 

To say that improved schools over improved transit will attract YPs is simply laughable.  If you actually talk to young people out there and ask them the things that they desire in a potential community - schools will be one of the last on their list.

 

But as these young professionals get older, and decide to "buy" instead of rent, property values begin to move towards the top of the list.  Good schools have a lot to do with property values.  There is a reason your family lives in Green Township and you went to Oak Hills High, not Western Hills High.

Quote from: jmecklenborg on January 07, 2008, 10:30:22 PM

Supporting the city doesn't have anything to do with supporting the public schools.

 

^Yeah, I guess you are right.  The schools don't mean anything.

 

They don't if you're Catholic like me, or if you don't have children.  There are a lot of people out there that don't care about the public schools, regardless of how good they might be.  From what I understand CPS aren't that bad, but I know first hand that we have no rail of any kind, and that impacts my life greatly every day. 

 

 

To say that improved schools over improved transit will attract YPs is simply laughable.  If you actually talk to young people out there and ask them the things that they desire in a potential community - schools will be one of the last on their list.

 

I'm a YP, and it wasn't even present on my list.

 

 

Excellent schools and public services will bring people to Cincinnati. An amusement park ride to the bar district will only add to list of things that make Cincinnati laughable.

 

gotta love it!!!!

 

No you don't.  It's a ridiculous assertion that only serves to reveal that the author is a fool.  Is the NYC Subway an amusement park ride?  How about Chicago's "L"?  Why is it that all world class cities have rail, yet somehow Cincinnatians seem to think it's a joke?  What's laughable is that we consider ourselves to be a great city, yet we have one of the most inadequate mass transit systems in the country.

To say that improved schools over improved transit will attract YPs is simply laughable. If you actually talk to young people out there and ask them the things that they desire in a potential community - schools will be one of the last on their list.

Green hills might pull people from the urban core when they want to settle down, but it won't pull anyone from outside the metro.

 

if our young people are drawn to the urban core of portland, seattle, et al. they might return to the cincinnati suburbs to raise a family, but there is an equally strong or better chance they will end up in a suburb of their adopted city

 

But as these young professionals get older, and decide to "buy" instead of rent, property values begin to move towards the top of the list. Good schools have a lot to do with property values. There is a reason your family lives in Green Township and you went to Oak Hills High, not Western Hills High.

 

 

Quote from: jmecklenborg on January 07, 2008, 10:30:22 PM

Supporting the city doesn't have anything to do with supporting the public schools.

 

^Yeah, I guess you are right.  The schools don't mean anything.

 

They don't if you're Catholic like me, or if you don't have children.  There are a lot of people out there that don't care about the public schools, regardless of how good they might be.  From what I understand CPS aren't that bad, but I know first hand that we have no rail of any kind, and that impacts my life greatly every day. 

 

 

To say that improved schools over improved transit will attract YPs is simply laughable.  If you actually talk to young people out there and ask them the things that they desire in a potential community - schools will be one of the last on their list.

 

I'm a YP, and it wasn't even present on my list.

 

 

Excellent schools and public services will bring people to Cincinnati. An amusement park ride to the bar district will only add to list of things that make Cincinnati laughable.

 

gotta love it!!!!

 

No you don't.  It's a ridiculous assertion that only serves to reveal that the author is a fool.  Is the NYC Subway an amusement park ride?  How about Chicago's "L"?  Why is it that all world class cities have rail, yet somehow Cincinnatians seem to think it's a joke?  What's laughable is that we consider ourselves to be a great city, yet we have one of the most inadequate mass transit systems in the country.

 

Many Catholics don't use the public schools, but the quality of the schools affects their property values.  A key reason as to why my home is across the street from the portion of Green Township that is within the city's school district.  The difference in value is incredible.  It wasn't on my list when I was a renter and happily lived within the city limits.

 

As far as comparing Cincinnati Trolley to the New York Subway or the Chicago "L",  good job!!  :wink2:

 

NY Subway:          842 total miles

Chicago "L":          222 total miles

Cincinnati Trolley:  3.9 total miles

 

 

^ Schools aren't the only thing that affect property value.  There are many factors, schools being simply one of them.  Another is access is mass transit stations, but we don't any of that here.  And I'm not a renter.  I'm a home owner.   I happily live in the city and I hope that I always will. 

 

 

"As far as comparing Cincinnati Trolley to the New York Subway or the Chicago "L",  good job!!"

 

It's called a first step.  Look into it.  I'd happily build light rail that would cover the whole region, but your buddies in Hamilton County ruined that when they voted it down a couple of years back.  (Did you vote on that issue, and if so, which way?)  The streetcar is a possibility NOW, so that is what I'm focused on.  I do hope that it will spur the development of a more comprehensive system, which this region desperately needs, but right now we have to be realistic and focus on what kind of rail upgrade is actually possible in the next few years.  Thanks for your snarky reply pointing out the obvious differences between the streetcar and a fully formed rail system, though.  I say that something is better than nothing, and if we need to start small, then so be it.

 

What exactly is your opposition to the streetcar rooted in anyway?  I've seen you make a lot of negative posts, but I haven't seen you outline what you think the downside is.  So let's say for a second that you are correct and this streetcar gets built and it doesn't deliver what we are all hoping.  What's so tragic about that?  Is it just the $$$ that's upsetting you?

1)  Thank you, I just wanted someone to agree that good schools are a factor.  Never said they were the only one.

 

2)  I voted for the light rail.

 

3)  I would rather we talked about the whole system, not some little trip around downtown.  I don't have "anything" against it, I just think there are so many things that are hurting downtown, that this isn't going to solve them.  Why do we have to start out small?  Doesn't do much good if it doesn't reach UC or the hospital areas.

 

4) you are the one who brought up NY and chicago, and mocked the writers assertion that this was an amusement ride by comparing it to NY subway.  Nice try.

^ And keep in mind that the economists who studied Cincinnati's Streetcar project estimated a 2.7:1 Benefit/Cost Ratio -- with all future benefits reduced to Present Value and then compared to the project's costs.

 

This is like showing up at the bank when it opens in the morning, opening a new account by depositing $1.00 in it and then returning at 5:00p to withdraw $2.70.

 

People who don't understand the Cincinnati Streetcar may view the project as risky, but the risk/reward ratio is quite favorable.

3)  I would rather we talked about the whole system, not some little trip around downtown.  I don't have "anything" against it, I just think there are so many things that are hurting downtown, that this isn't going to solve them.  Why do we have to start out small?  Doesn't do much good if it doesn't reach UC or the hospital areas.

 

How can we talk about the whole system when people like you won't have an honest discussion about the first step?

 

gotta love it!!!!

 

Excellent schools and public services will bring people to Cincinnati. An amusement park ride to the bar district will only add to list of things that make Cincinnati laughable.

1)  Thank you, I just wanted someone to agree that good schools are a factor.  Never said they were the only one.

 

2)  I voted for the light rail.

 

3)  I would rather we talked about the whole system, not some little trip around downtown.  I don't have "anything" against it, I just think there are so many things that are hurting downtown, that this isn't going to solve them.  Why do we have to start out small?  Doesn't do much good if it doesn't reach UC or the hospital areas.

 

4) you are the one who brought up NY and chicago, and mocked the writers assertion that this was an amusement ride by comparing it to NY subway.  Nice try.

 

 

1) Okay.  Obviously they're a factor.  I think we all realize that, but some of us think that rail is more important.

 

2) Glad to hear that.

 

3) It is definitely going to reach UC and the hospital.  That's Phase 1B.  But it won't happen at all without Phase 1!  It's also going to connect to the Museum Center and West End in Phase 2, and to NKY in Phase 3.  I would vastly prefer a more comprehensive system as well, but that's not on the table anymore.  We have to be realistic here.  The streetcar will aid in the revitalization of downtown, and start us on the path to something better.

 

4) Not even sure where to begin on number 4.  Rail opponents laugh at the streetcar because it is too small, yet they won't fund anything bigger.  A region of more than 2 million people needs better transit than we currently offer.  I guarantee that the author of that article wouldn't fund a system like Denver is working on, so the option that Leahr leaves the reader with is that we do absolutely nothing, which sounds exactly like the stagnant Cincinnati of the 80s/90s that everyone complains about.  We need to look at other cities that we aspire to be a little more like, and then implement some of the things that we are lacking.  Rail is a glaring omission.  We can't be Chicago or NYC, and I would never want us to, but we can learn a little something about how we can make Cincinnati better and more attractive.

 

 

3)  I would rather we talked about the whole system, not some little trip around downtown.  I don't have "anything" against it, I just think there are so many things that are hurting downtown, that this isn't going to solve them.  Why do we have to start out small?  Doesn't do much good if it doesn't reach UC or the hospital areas.

 

 

I agree that rail NEEDS to reach UC, but we can't simply scratch the current plan.  We should begin construction and then study the extension at the same time.  Is that too much to ask? 

 

And for the whole property value debate, I'm really at a loss.  The more I listen to American's debate this, the more I realize how stupid we really are.  Why the hell would you buy property in an area that's already peaking when you could invest in an area with lower property values.  It's called buying low, and it's done on Wall Street every day.  People like to argue that it takes too much work to turn a neighborhood around, when really it takes nothing at all.  Just a little pride and solicitation.  That's it. 

 

This streetcar is built on a belief in the potential of Over-the-Rhine.  This neighborhood IS going places, and the sooner people get on board the better.  I'm buying there ASAP.  And just wait, 10 years from now OTR will be a destination.  I won't let anything other than that happen.  Hell, I already have about 20-30 people here in Milwaukee seriously considering the neighborhood.

   This is ridiculous,  I am a young professional in MILWAUKEE.  And one of the prime reasons I'm looking at moving to Cincinnati is this streetcar.  I can guarantee that I am not the only one.  Cincinnati is set up to be the greatest city in the Midwest.  I couldn't imagine a more perfect setting.  But the only thing holding me back and potentially many others is a lack of rail. 

 

I need YOU to believe in Cincinnati, I sure do.

 

I am in the same boat as you are. I am a native Cincinnatian but have been away for four years for school and will be away at least another two years for school. I would love nothing more than to be able to move back to Cincinnati in particular downtown or OTR after I graduate (assuming I am able to get a job there). However, I don't know if it will be feasible financially all things considered without a streetcar and hopefully other forms of public transportation. If the streetcar plan stalls and fades away, I will be forced to look at other cities or perhaps some of the inner ring of suburban neighborhoods in Cincinnati. So hopefully in a few years I can move into a downtown or OTR residence at the time of the streetcar and the first few phases of the Banks...

 

Hey, I'll be traveling to Milwaukee for a weekend this summer and maybe sometime I could ask you a few questions about where to stay, eat, play, etc.?

Anyone really been thinking about Phase 1B? I have, a lot.

 

I believe that it should start at Clifton and Ludlow, go from there to either Clifton Heights or Corryville via Clifton or Jefferson/Vine, use the Taft/McMillan pair to get to Peebles Corner and then Gilbert to the CBD, maybe going through Broadway Commons along the way.

 

My logic is, the streetcar is a circulator, not line-haul corridor-level transportation like the Vine and Clifton buses. Its route could literally be a circle if that's what you wanted it to do. I'm guessing that Uptown residents and workers want to be connected to other Uptown destinations in addition to Downtown. The streetcar is a much better ride than the bus, so if it's a little longer, it's no big deal. Plus, I'm not sure it's even that much longer, time-wise. There's very little friction on Taft and McMillan east of I-71, and Gilbert's a breeze. Entering on the east side of the CBD puts it closer to the center of employment.

 

Here's the Portland Streetcar map. As you can see, it's hardly a straight line. In fact, the next phase of the Portland Streetcar will loop east across the Willamette River to make a circle. See: http://www.portlandstreetcar.org/map/map_printable1.pdf

 

Consider all the Uptown destinations that could be connected through the wasteland of West Walnut Hills to Eden Park/Mt. Adams and to Broadway Commons, the next big site for development after The Banks. There are great sites and lots of building shells east of I-71. That's the only direction the university/hospital community can grow. Coupled with a grid-restoration plan to bridge the I-71 trench, it could open that whole area for redevelopment just as surely as the new Fort Washington Way is making The Banks possible.

 

I'm pretty confident that the Phase 1A is going to happen and that we need to be focusing more on what 1B should look like.

 

Just thinking out loud ...

And for the whole property value debate, I'm really at a loss.  The more I listen to American's debate this, the more I realize how stupid we really are.  Why the hell would you buy property in an area that's already peaking when you could invest in an area with lower property values.  It's called buying low, and it's done on Wall Street every day.  People like to argue that it takes too much work to turn a neighborhood around, when really it takes nothing at all.  Just a little pride and solicitation.  That's it. 

 

Honestly, the best way is to go over comparable sales in an area and do some research on where the neighborhood has been and where it is going.  Any of the things that affect home value could be the most important, based on your own needs.  That's why I think it's silly for people to obsess over school districts.  The truest indicator of a home's value is what neighboring houses sell for, because those sales reflect all of the aspects of the neighborhood, not just one.

John ,

 

what about this route

 

nortside -> up ludlow -> jeferson -> goodman -> eden ave -> oak st -> reading rd -> sycamore st ->

w 5th -> back up broadway st ?

 

 

John ,

 

what about this route

 

nortside -> up ludlow -> jeferson -> goodman -> eden ave -> oak st -> reading rd -> sycamore st ->

w 5th -> back up broadway st ?

 

 

I see a couple of problems:

 

* I doubt the traffic engineers would ever let two directions of streetcar travel be on Ludlow. I think Northside gets served better by light rail coming up Central Parkway to Spring Grove.

 

* Not a lot of density or developable sites on Oak Street until you get to Reading Road. The Eden to Oak section would be dead money, I'm afraid.

 

* Unless the southern freeway access to Uptown is changed, Reading Road is just too busy to put streetcars on it. There is a plan to add a fifth -- fifth! -- lane to Reading Road Between Elsinore and Victory Parkway, and that might help. But that's one reason I favor Gilbert. Gilbert has more density too.

 

* The traffic engineers won't give up more than two north/south streets to rail. So if the first leg uses Main and Walnut, I suspect Sycamore and Broadway might be out. Better to approach Downtown on an east/west axis via Central Parkway through Broadway Commons or Seventh and Eighth, which are problems because they're freeway entries and exits.

 

If it's determined that the uptown streetcar needs to serve the medical center rather than the south frame of Uptown, then I'd just use MLK to Gilbert.

DanB, your argument, and in fact the whole suburban land value argument is irrelevent.  Why?  The average person under 50 will live for decades after retirement, requiring millions of dollars to not work for those decades.  The twenty or thirty or forty thousand dollars in property value one house might gain over an identical one a half mile away means nothing when retirement homes cost $5,000 per month per person.  That's $10,000/mo for a married 85 year-old couple.  So your whole silly suburban game pays for 3 or 4 months of semi-comatose TV watching and checkers playing and sing-alongs in a low-rise retirement community. 

 

I'm 29 and well aware it will require *millions* of dollars to retire at age 65, 401k's and other liquid investments average a much higher rate of return than any but the luckiest piece of property.  The primary reason to buy a home is to avoid throwing away earnings in rent, there should be little expectation of making money on the property.  If my family owns just one car instead of two between ages 30 and 65, hundreds of thousands of dollars will be saved which can be invested in mutual funds that average over 10%.  Much more than will be made on a Green Township ranch, that's for sure. 

DanB, your argument, and in fact the whole suburban land value argument is irrelevent.  Why?  The average person under 50 will live for decades after retirement, requiring millions of dollars to not work for those decades.  The twenty or thirty or forty thousand dollars in property value one house might gain over an identical one a half mile away means nothing when retirement homes cost $5,000 per month per person.  That's $10,000/mo for a married 85 year-old couple.  So your whole silly suburban game pays for 3 or 4 months of semi-comatose TV watching and checkers playing and sing-alongs in a low-rise retirement community. 

 

I'm 29 and well aware it will require *millions* of dollars to retire at age 65, 401k's and other liquid investments average a much higher rate of return than any but the luckiest piece of property.  The primary reason to buy a home is to avoid throwing away earnings in rent, there should be little expectation of making money on the property.  If my family owns just one car instead of two between ages 30 and 65, hundreds of thousands of dollars will be saved which can be invested in mutual funds that average over 10%.  Much more than will be made on a Green Township ranch, that's for sure. 

 

In your attempt to be both insulting AND clever, you miss the entire point.  The reason an intelligent investor is concerned about property values, is the ability to move these properties when the time comes, either by necessity or personal desire.  It is not to necessarily make money, although by avoiding "throwing away earnings" as you stated, one would make money in the process.  Someone as astute as you has heard about the 3 most important rules about real estate.  Location, location, location.  Its the difference between buying a home on a busy street vs. an identical one around the corner on a side street.  The busy street makes it more difficult to sell.  I'm sure that any real estate investor reading your post will chuckle at your assertion that there is no expectation to make money in real estate. 

 

Who said anything about using my home to fund my retirement?  I was talking about schools, and attracting families to the city.

Who said anything about using my home to fund my retirement?  I was talking about schools, and attracting families to the city.

 

Good schools are never a bad thing to have.  I just think that they attract people from within the region to relocate locally, whereas improving our rail system will attract people from outside the region.  We're talking about improving the perception of the Cincinnati area in the minds of young professionals from across the country that are considering taking a job in the area, and having rail transit that connects the CBD with major residential areas will do exactly that.  Improving the schools won't have much affect on these people, because Cincinnati Public Schools aren't notoriously bad and YPs that are fresh out of college rarely have children already, and will be looking for a way to get a foot in the door in a new city.  Rail accomplishes that, because it removes the burden of car ownership and provides a quick and non-threatening way for newcomers to tour the city.

>although by avoiding "throwing away earnings" as you stated, one would make money in the process. 

 

Money spent on a second car is, in a situation where it isn't truly needed, money wasted in a way similar to renting versus owning a property.  A big part of the financial problem in America today is people fixated on making more money instead of spending less.  Mass transit is about spending less.   

 

 

>The busy street makes it more difficult to sell.

 

Ironically, because of the very vehicle which made the suburbs possible.  Take a cruise down Auburn Ave., Hamilton Ave. or Belmont Ave. in College Hill, or several other major city avenues where grand 19th century mansions were built in the day of the horse & buggy (and streetcar) but were abandoned when automobiles commandeered the streets and filled the area with a steady wash of noise. 

 

>I'm sure that any real estate investor reading your post will chuckle at your assertion that there is no expectation to make money in real estate. 

 

The average family owning a home doesn't have the time, energy, and discipline to consistently make money in real estate.  Everyone seems to think they have some edge in understanding the whims of the market, but I know enough to know that I can't expect to make serious money in the short-term or long-term without investing serious time and effort.  And if disciplined records were kept, what would the hourly rate of pay be for a property that makes whatever amount of money? 

 

A key reason as to why my home is across the street from the portion of Green Township that is within the city's school district.  The difference in value is incredible.  It wasn't on my list when I was a renter and happily lived within the city limits.

 

Would you be willing to provide a link to both homes on the county auditor's website, so we can see the difference in assessed value?  Because I'm skeptical that similar homes on similar parcels of land, directly across the street from one another but in different school districts vary that much in value.

 

Property values are assessed by the county by a combination of similar sales prices and whatever rubric individual assessors have to guide their inspections.  There is no direct correlation between being in a "good" school district or not, though one can assume that if such an influence exerts itself, it does through the purchase price of similar sales.  DanB, have you ever noticed how you use lots of cliches and vague words to advance your argument?  "Location, location, location", you say, and then you point to how people don't want to live on busy streets.  But people do want businesses and apartments on busy streets, which is why those old mansions on Reading Road or Auburn Avenue, or homes near Hyde Park Square get converted into offices and apartments.  Successful real estate investment, like any other business, requires that ones projected returns end up being more than ones initial costs, over time.  So building a big apartment building in a field would probably be a bad investment, just as build a subdivision complete with cul-de-sacs and swimming pools at Broadway Commons probably wouldn't work either. 

 

Also, you keep harping on the idea that "good" city schools (without defining "good") is the factor that makes a city desirable.  I don't see any specific evidence anywhere in the county that this is the case, nor have you provide any.  Comparisons between Mariemont and Cincinnati (for example, or Green Township, which I am less familiar with) are ridiculous.  A village of less than 5,000 residents and a city of over 300,000 residents don't compare on any level.  Additionally, the highest property values per square foot in the region are all in the City of Cincinnati- downtown, Mt. Adams, Hyde Park, Clifton- these neighborhoods are consistently in demand and are competitive with any similarly sized areas in the region.

Anyone really been thinking about Phase 1B? I have, a lot.

 

I believe that it should start at Clifton and Ludlow, go from there to either Clifton Heights or Corryville via Clifton or Jefferson/Vine, use the Taft/McMillan pair to get to Peebles Corner and then Gilbert to the CBD, maybe going through Broadway Commons along the way.

 

My logic is, the streetcar is a circulator, not line-haul corridor-level transportation like the Vine and Clifton buses. Its route could literally be a circle if that's what you wanted it to do. I'm guessing that Uptown residents and workers want to be connected to other Uptown destinations in addition to Downtown. The streetcar is a much better ride than the bus, so if it's a little longer, it's no big deal. Plus, I'm not sure it's even that much longer, time-wise. There's very little friction on Taft and McMillan east of I-71, and Gilbert's a breeze. Entering on the east side of the CBD puts it closer to the center of employment.

 

This is the exact same route for Phase B that I was arguing for privately with other members of this forum (although I would bring the route down Gilbert to Reading crossing at Elsinore, rather than through the Broadway Commons area).  The advantage that this route has, I believe, is that if the economic stimulus of the streetcar can work for Over-The-Rhine, then why shouldn't it work for the areas it would pass through in Walnut Hills as well, which are quite similar to OTR in appearance and density.  In addition, if it made sense, the circulator could later be easily connected in later phases to the Madison Road business corridor that was suggested in the GO recommendations.

I am still reluctant to consider the Gilbert route to get to Clifton. It definitely would be better for OTR if the cars travelling down Race Street had all the UC ridership. I am concerned that the Findlay Market loop will be seen as a dead-end if it doesn't go up the hill.

 

Also, can we keep the school and property value discussion out of this thread?

Mayor Mallorys State of the City speech is tonight.  Let's hope he mentions OTR development and streetcars.

I am concerned that the Findlay Market loop will be seen as a dead-end if it doesn't go up the hill.

 

 

The peevish side of me wants to say, "Well, the streetcar has to dead-end somewhere."

 

But Findlay needn't be the end of the streetcar line if it doesn't go up Vine or Clifton. it could travel northwest along McMicken to Central Parkway -- a sort of linear Pearl District. At Central Parkway, it would intersect with light rail going to Northside and eventually to Tri-County. Or if the suburbs aren't ready to bite on LRT, the streetcar could continue on Central Parkway all the way to Northside. There are so many sites between Mohawk and Central State, it's unbelievable. And the streetcar might actually better exploit these values than LRT would. And I suspect a lot of Downtown-destined Northside and College Hill residents wouldn't mind bypassing Clifton Hill.

 

Getting back to Findlay, no one's been talking about this, but I'd like to see some of the inbound Race Street buses turned back at Findlay and those passengers transferred to the streetcar at Findlay, which would become a hub again, like Peebles Corner and Knowlton's Corner once were.

 

The benefit for Findlay merchants would be that some people would do some shopping at the interchange from the bus to the streetcar or the streetcar to the bus. The benefit for Metro would be that it could keep some of its buses out of downtown traffic -- saving $75 per hour operating costs -- and instead send those buses deeper into the suburbs and/or offer more frequent service. In a perfect world, Metro would pass some of its savings on to the operator of the Cincinnati Streetcar.

 

And let me share a lingering doubt. On a vehicle where 80% of the passengers are standing, I'm a little worried about the streetcar passengers' comfort on the twisting Vine Street Hill. I used to ride those buses a lot, and you never wanted to be standing on it. Try it, you'll see what I mean. Food for thought.

I share your doubts about Vine Street Hill.  Not only is it twisting, but the housing development there is ugly and there is not much room for expansion.  Vine on the hill is already congested with traffic, and the 5 points intersection at McMicken is a huge time waster. 

^ And the Clifton Hill, which would otherwise be more desirable, has slopes in excess of 9%, which can be a problem for streetcars.

 

Which begs the question, "How come? Streetcars used to go up and down Clifton."

 

The answer is, modern streetcars are much larger, three times as large, which is the source of their efficiency - the cost of a driver is spread over 130 passengers at full load.

 

But they weigh a lot more than the old wood-sided streetcars we used to have here. Theoretically, you could super-size the electric motors to climb steeper grades, but then you have to drag around even more dead weight over the balance of the flat-land route.

 

We do a straight, short 9% grade on the Portland trips when the streetcar goes down to the waterfront. It's a good place to make a judgment on this question. One of the reasons I take people there.

On these longer runs, I'm not sure you can go with the all standing style circulator-style that seems perfect for Phase I. It needs to be more like a traditional 'trolley'. I could a half/half situation, all standing in front or back with seats on the other side. I also prefer the Gilbert orientation. The key for long term growth of railed transit is to get Phase II to act as a great circulator/core commuter line.

 

For those who think these circulator lines aren't so good, the Metro has slowly eliminated nearly all its circulator routes (people wonder why ridership is down). The system used to have a bunch of them (the 51 in Clifton comes to mind). The streetcar would catch a lot of those folks who have been abandoned by the 'Tro.

Mayor Mallorys State of the City speech is tonight.  Let's hope he mentions OTR development and streetcars.

 

Not only that, I hope he mentions the need for a more extensive public transportation system (rail) before the sprawl/traffic gets more out of hand.  Cincinnati needs to think ahead of the time for once instead of waiting for the problem to occur then dealing with it.  I realize it didn't pass before, but given the state of our city and rising gas prices as well as increased traffic, i think people are starting to take notice.  start small in an area that will appreciate and use it(from hyde park to downtown or something) and then build on that success

On these longer runs, I'm not sure you can go with the all standing style circulator-style that seems perfect for Phase I. It needs to be more like a traditional 'trolley'. I could a half/half situation, all standing in front or back with seats on the other side.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think that they're planning on an "all standing" configuration for the cars.  I thought we were getting essentially the same cars that Portland uses, and they have seats in all of their cars (at least the ones I've been in) for anyone that prefers to sit.  They definitely have less seating per square foot than a bus, but most people choose to stand anyway because the car is so spacious and the ride is so much better.

^ Probably 30 of 130 max. capacity passengers would have seats.

>I share your doubts about Vine Street Hill.  Not only is it twisting, but the housing development there is ugly and there is not much room for expansion.  Vine on the hill is already congested with traffic, and the 5 points intersection at McMicken is a huge time waster.

 

I disagree...first, Vine is not a very busy street between Clifton and McMillan St., even during rush hour.  All of the hill climbing streets are side streets compared to Reading, even Gilbert doesn't seem to get much rush hour traffic.

Second, there has actually been some redevelopment of properties on Vine itself recently, also there are many apartments and empty lots on Loth St., which parallels it for a good distance.  There is also the entire Rice St. sub-area, which is tucked in the shadow of the Christ Hospital parking garage.  This whole area is not too far of a walk from Vine and would be helped if a staircase were built between the Rice St. bend and Vine.  The famous abandoned row houses are a fair distance, over 1,000ft., from Vine, but I'd bet a resident would take the streetcar every time over walking uphill and waiting for the infrequent #24 on Auburn Ave.       

 

The specter of the streetcar entering the subway at Findlay and running underground "express" for about a mile to Marshall Ave., then on the surface to Cinti State and Northside could help it as a more serious alternative to Knowlton's corner buses.  Central Parkway gets little traffic north of Hopple so in-street running or running in the grass on the west side seems totally doable. 

 

 

from the daily bellwether

 

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 01, 2008

 

Cincinnati Street Car Boosters: Have They Studied Cleveland's $70 Million Waterfront Line?

CINCINNATI (TDB) -- The 2.2-mile Waterfront Line is a light-rail loop built with state funds in 1996 that connects Cleveland's downtown to the Flats and Lake Erie waterfront. By 2002, ridership was so sparse that trips were cut. Cleveland's RTA director called it "a transportation manager's nightmare." Now, streetcar boosters in Cincinnati are pushing a $102 million plan for a loop from the Ohio River to Over-the-Rhine. They say: Look at Portland, Oregon. Nothing seems to be mentioned about Cleveland's experience. Some supporters in Cincinanti appear to be angry that anyone would even dare question the wisdom of putting streetcars back on the tracks.

 

[uPDATE: 2:57 PM 2/2/08 -- At the Cincinnati Beacon today there is more about streetcars, along with a sensible suggestion for an experiment. The test: Paint lines on the street matching the width of tracks and run a trolley on the path to see if people ride it. "With a painted line, people can physically see the route -- as with a streetcar line. And Metro already has some buses designed to look like trolley cars . . . Would there be substantive ridership?"]

 

But Democratic City Councilman John Cranley -- who is asking the hard questions -- probably knows something about what happened in Cleveland. Ridership plummeted by nearly 40 percent after two years. The Flats didn't grow -- in fact, it faded out as an entertainment district. Cranley has some Cleveland ties; his roommate at John Carroll University there was Joe Cimperman, a Dem Cleveland councilman who represents the city's downtown ward. This year, Cimperman is challenging U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich in the OH-10 primary, and actually has a chance of knocking him off on March 4.

 

Cincinnati's envisioned streetcars are not quite the same as Cleveland's RAPID, but they both are designed to haul passengers on rails. In Cincinnati, boosters point to Portland, Ore., where they say the downtown streetcars helped trigger $2 billion in residential and commercial development along a 4.2 mile loop. In Cleveland, despite initial hopes, that hasn't happened 11 years later. By January 2002, The Plain Dealer's Rich Exner found a third fewer trains were running on the line than at the start. He also found Norman Krumholz, Cleveland's former planning director and a professor at Cleveland State University, who said:

 

"Nobody should be surprised that it is not carrying many passengers. It doesn't go through any areas of very dense residential development. It doesn't go through any areas of high-density employment. What RTA has got to do is try to urge the city to build more housing close to the line, develop more opportunities close to the line."

 

In contrast, the State of Ohio's 1997 transportation system report was rosy about the Waterfront Line and its prospect for making Cleveland grow:

 

"The Waterfront Line provides a wide range of economic and environmental benefits. The rail line's potential to move people from one downtown destination to another is advancing some long-delayed development projects, increasing property values along the route and creating new opportunities for urban development. Since its opening, developers have completed or announced plans for new development. New apartments, restaurants and other buildings have already opened and plans for a new hotel are underay. Many older buildings in the old warehouse district are also scheduled for major renovation."

 

But five years later, the Waterfront Line was called the city's "transportation manager's nightmare." Rather than 785,000 riders, it was down to 471,000.

 

http://thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com/2008/02/cincinnati-street-car-boosters-have.html

 

from the Cincinnati Bacon

http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/content/print/more_on_the_boondoggle_streetcars_fizzle_in_cleveland/

 

The Cincinnati Beacon

More on the Boondoggle:  Streetcars Fizzle in Cleveland

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

 

A few months ago, Michael Earl Patton published this analysis of the boondoggle called the Cincinnati Streetcar proposal.  And this week, Bill Sloat over at The Daily Bellwether posted this piece, highlighting how a similar streetcar line just up the interstate in Cleveland has turned from a creative-class pipe-dream into a “nightmare.”

 

Sloat introduces his item by getting right to the point:

 

The 2.2-mile Waterfront Line is a light-rail loop built with state funds in 1996 that connects Cleveland’s downtown to the Flats and Lake Erie waterfront. By 2002, ridership was so sparse that trips were cut. Cleveland’s RTA director called it “a transportation manager’s nightmare.” Now, streetcar boosters in Cincinnati are pushing a $102 million plan for a loop from the Ohio River to Over-the-Rhine. They say: Look at Portland, Oregon. Nothing seems to be mentioned about Cleveland’s experience.

In Patton’s piece on the boondoggle, he indicates why Portland fails on all counts as an adequate model for Cincinnati:

 

Portland is known for its restrictions on sprawl. Even before the streetcar, Portland was praised for increasing its urban density because of Urban Growth Boundaries, beyond which housing development was tightly restricted.  So people built new housing in Portland because there were few other options.

 

(...)

 

[T]ens of thousands of people were already coming to Portland, looking for a place to live.  They did not come to Portland because of the streetcar—they had been coming for years before the streetcar line was completed in 2001.  At best one can claim that they came to the area served by the streetcar line instead of some other area.  But they probably would have come to Portland in any event.

 

Cincinnati is different.  It is losing population.  More people are leaving than coming.  There are plenty of places on the market for newcomers.

 

In conversations with Patton, he has shared a perfectly reasonable idea that the politicians will probably never have the good sense to try:  painted lines on the street.

 

With a painted line, people can physically see the route—as with a streetcar line.  And Metro already has some busses designed to look like trolley-cars.  Why not paint a sample route, and run the trolley buses over it for a few months?  Would there be substantive ridership?  And if not, why bother spending all this money, with the risk of finding ourselves amidst a Cleveland nightmare?

 

 

 

 

 

 

More from the Beacon

http://www.cincinnatibeacon.com/index.php/content/comments/city_council_should_implement_painted_line_streetcar_usability_study/

 

The Cincinnati Beacon

City Council should implement painted-line streetcar usability study

Sunday, February 03, 2008

Posted by The Dean of Cincinnati

 

Before City Council sinks $100 million dollars into a streetcar line, they should implement a virtually no-cost painted line usability study.  This would be a cost-effective way to gauge initial ridership, and the results could bolster the arguments either for or against the plan—based on how many people utilize the line.

 

That’s why I just sent the following to these email addresses:  [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

 

Letter:

 

Dear Mayor Mallory and City Council:

 

Before spending $100 million on a streetcar line, why not do a “painted line study.” Just paint a line on the road for the proposed route, and run the trolley-buses along it.  See how many people jump on the line.

 

Either way, the information gathered would make for more responsible decision making.

 

Respectfully,

 

The Dean of Cincinnati

 

 

 

That didn't convince about much of anything other than to keep ignoring the Beacon like I had been before.

^YEA!

I'm glad I've never read it! That's just dumb.

The beacon failed to mention that ridership of the Cleveland RTA's rail lines has increased every year for the past 5 and is up, IIRC 8% over last year.

Cincinnati needs to think ahead of the time for once instead of waiting for the problem to occur then dealing with it.

 

Herein lies the problem.  If we can get the streetcar project approved, then I think it will send the all-important message to YPs and DINKs and other desireables that this is a great place to live and good things are coming!

 

 

why not do a “painted line study.” Just paint a line on the road for the proposed route, and run the trolley-buses along it.  See how many people jump on the line.

 

 

A painted line study?  Are you serious??? 

 

1)  Painted line.  Yes.  A developer will see that experimental painted line and think, wow, this is a city that can get things done.  I want to invest MY millions here.

 

2)  No one will ride a f-ing trolley bus.  That's the point.

 

 

The beacon failed to mention that ridership of the Cleveland RTA's rail lines has increased every year for the past 5 and is up, IIRC 8% over last year.

 

thats because the Beacon isn't a news agency.  they claim to be 'media activists' which is just like being a journalist but without any responsibility or accountability.

I saw some old Rail on liberty today just east of Sycamore from gas line maintenance. Oddly the rail was about 4- 5 ft underneath the current roadway.  Could the Modern streetcar climb Liberty Hill?  Or is the grade to steep?

SOME STREETCAR FACTS:

 

Besides Portland, there are only two other modern streetcar systems in North American -- Seattle and Tacoma. I'd ignore the cutesy vintage streetcars that serve tourist areas in some cities, for they're not serious transportation.

 

In Cincinnati, we're talking about comfortable, car-competitive transportation that you can depend on.

 

Tacoma opened a 1.6 mile end-to-end system on August 22, 2003. In the third quarter of 2007, it carried an average of 3,030 passengers each weekday. The Tacoma Link system is a streetcar that runs in light rail configuration in its own lane rather than in mixed traffic, so it's a little different from what we're talking about here. It's ridership averages 1,894 weekday passengers per route mile.

 

Seattle opened a 1.3 mile end-to-end system on December 12, 2007 that connects Downtown with South Lake Union neighborhood. It's carrying about 950 passengers per day, or 730 weekday passengers per route mile. City officials are very happy with the first month's results and are talking about expanding the system to serve five more Seattle neighborhoods.

 

Cincinnati plans a 2.0 mile end-to-end system that would commence operation in 2010 or 2011. The median value Opening Year ridership is estimated to be 4,850 passengers per weekday, or about 2,450 per route mile.

 

Unlike Tacoma and Seattle's streetcar projects, the Cincinnati project will serve the core of regional employment, areas of high public investment such as The Banks, and major sports and cultural attractions, so you'd expect ridership to be higher.

 

Cincinnati, with 3,880 people per square mile is considerably denser than Seattle (3,225 persons per square mile) and Tacoma (1,619). Cincinnati's density is equal to Portland's, which has strong urban growth controls. Essentially, Cincinnati has natural population density without an Urban Growth Boundary. Few people are aware of this fact.

 

^  The article mentioned that "five years later that ridership is down"....but the projects mentioned in the article haven't broken ground yet!!  The flats East bank project are slated to start in the near future and will bring a mix use area of business and residential..along with that will be a definite increase in ridership.  I love how these people will spin an article the way THEY want it to be rather than to put facts out there for people to make decisions on. 

 

And yes...the Cleveland RTA rail ridership IS up for the past year!  Eacy quater is consistantly goes up.  Why not present that to the people Cincy so they can see it DOES work!

The Cleveland Flats Light Rail project teaches a good lesson: when you build higher-level transit to serve a bunch of bars and infrequent seasonal sporting events, it's not serious transportation, and the ridership will fall as soon as the novelty wears off.

 

This is very much unlike Cincinnati's streetcar project.

Monday, February 4, 2008 - 8:14 PM EST

Streetcars, work force Mallory's priorities for Cincinnati

Business Courier of Cincinnati

 

Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory, in his 2008 "state of the city" address, identified the creation of a streetcar system and a new work-force development effort as two of the first that should be implemented from the Go Cincinnati Growth and Opportunities initiative.

 

That's the economic development blueprint that 200 community and business leaders spent more than a year to develop. It was released on Jan. 22 and consisted of 14 recommendations aimed at growing jobs, new investment and tax revenue in the city of Cincinnati.

 

In his address at Cincinnati's Playhouse in the Park Monday evening, Mallory identified four recommendations that, he said, "I think we should advance right away."

 

Those are the development of "a streetcar system that connects downtown to uptown," the creation of a "business retention and expansion program" to attract investment to Cincinnati, forming an advisory council to review city processes and regulations and the development of new workers in nine key business sectors identified in the Go Cincinnati report. Those sectors included life sciences, chemicals, professional and technical services, aerospace, insurance and banking.

 

"I've asked Kathy Merchant of the Greater Cincinnati Foundation to develop a plan to prepare our work force, so that our workers are ready to fill those jobs," Mallory said.

 

The mayor said he would appoint an implementation team to work on all aspects of the Go Cincinnati plan, including those not identified as his top priorities.

 

Those other initiatives included the development of a full interchange on Interstate 71, providing access to the uptown neighborhoods surrounding the University of Cincinnati and focusing development initiatives in three new target areas: Madison Road, Seymour and Reading roads and the Queensgate/South Mill Creek corridors.

 

 

State of the City: On the move

BY JANE PRENDERGAST | [email protected]

Cincinnati is strong and "on the move," Mayor Mark Mallory declared in his State of the City speech, and that will continue with these ideas: $2 million next year for youth jobs; new help for struggling public schools; and a streetcar line from downtown to Uptown.

 

Mallory unveiled those plans, among others, during the annual address, his third. Many of the themes - putting youth to work, public safety and neighborhood redevelopment - have become common ones since he took office in late 2005