Someone wanted to know what the chances were that the streetcar system wouldn't be expanded after the downtown loop has been built.

 

No one can answer that question with certainty, but we can look to what has happened in other cities.

 

Since 1980, twenty-two North American cities have built modern light rail or streetcar systems from scratch. They had no rail on the ground where the first project started. I'm excluding "new" vintage streetcar systems serving tourist areas of cities like Tampa and Little Rock because they're special purpose enterprises not serving a variety of uses.

 

Here are the cities:

 

1) Baltimore

2) Buffalo

3) Calgary

4) Camden/Trenton

5) Charlotte

6) Dallas

7) Denver

8)          Edmonton

9) Houston

10) Los Angeles

11) Minneapolis

12) Northern New Jersey

13) Pittsburgh

14) Portland

15) Sacramento

16) St. Louis

17) Salt lake City

18) San Diego

19) San Francisco

20) San Jose

21) Seattle

22) Tacoma

 

Sorry, I hit the wrong key and posted early. I dunno how the emoticon got in there.

 

Anyway, of all these cities, only Buffalo is saying that it's not going to build any more rail, which probably says more about Buffalo than it does about modern light rail or streetcars.

 

Many of these cities, with starter lines that are only twenty years or so old, are now in their third or fourth builds.

 

I visited all the modern streetcar systems in the Pacific Northwest last week. Portland started with 2.4 miles. Now, after three extensions, they're going to build another three-mile loop. Tacoma has a 1.6 mile downtown streetcar; now they're talking about a three-mile extension to a university and hospital area atop the mountain overlooking they city. Seattle built 1.3 miles in an area that has the scale of our Brewery District; now they're talking about five year lines to other neighborhoods.

 

Once you get the first line open, skeptics often become strong supporters and opponents having trouble preying on the doubts of people who don't have any idea of what a modern streetcar is. And elected officials are suddenly motivated to find the money. Happens everywhere. Except in Buffalo.

 

Hopefully this works out better than your idea of having Duke energy front some of the cost.  Remember that, when they came out the next day and said that was ridiculous and they hadn't been consulted? What happens if the gamble doesn't suceed, what then? What if we don't get the federal money and the economic development doesn't arise? Does the city declare bankruptcy?

 

Worst case scenario would be that zero economic development occurs as a result of the streetcar line (very unlikely).  But should that be the case the city would be out the capital money it pledged to the project ($30M).  But with that $30M the city will still have a new 4 mile long streetcar route in the center city without any of the projected economic development.  This is hardly something that will "bankrupt" the city.

 

This is very similar to Fountain Square.  There was no guarantee that economic development would occur as a result of the city putting up $4M to leverage a capital improvement project.  That $4M calculated risk paid off big time with a slew of private investment following, lots of new jobs, and people into the city core.  But if nothing happened then the city would have paid $4M for the capital improvements to Fountain Square and its parking garage.

 

In other words the feasibility study didn't set the alignment in stone and it wasn't the end all be all. It calls, like qualls motion, for further study of the issue.

 

Time is money...and it is one of the most important factors in economic development.

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

Let's compare the investment in Fountain Square ($40 million total, if I remember right) with the initial phase of the streetcar.  If you use the streetcar's three block zone of influence, Fountain Square has a development impact of 36 blocks for $40M.  By comparison, the $100M streetcar has a development footprint of roughly 120 blocks.  The Fountain Square project fixed a leaking parking garage, moved the fountain (again!) and gave a big TV to 36 city blocks (with minimal residential potential).  The streetcar will bring about 120 blocks within reasonable "walking distance" of existing and potential commercial and residential destinations all along the proposed route.  It seems to me that this is a "no brainer".

>We do have a history of not completing projects.  All kidding aside, Cincinnati needs to get rid of that image.

 

It's only an image.  Show me well-researched proof that that Cincinnati has an exceptional number of unfinished and proposed but never-built projects as compared to peer cities and I'll change my mind.  Until then you're just buying into media superstition.  The local media certainly hasn't hounded Northern Kentucky for the outrageous Millennium Tower proposal (well, there's always the year 3000 coming up), the failure of Covington Landing, the ill-conceived Purple People Bridge Climb, or "struggling" (to use one of their words) Newport-on-the-Levee. 

 

And to challenge Ms. Qualls' remark that "we don't want another subway", she should perhaps study up on that matter.  The subway project was enormous by comparison to this streetcar proposal.  It used an enormous amount of steel and concrete, the price of which inflated wildly during and following WWI.  The bond issue approved by city voters in 1916 did not and could not have predicted that inflationary event.  If the vote had been in 1915 instead of 1916, subway construction most likely would have been underway before the U.S. entered the war and so completing it afterward would have posed less of a financial obstacle.   

 

By comparison the streetcar proposal will use relatively little steel and concrete and so will not be as susceptible to price fluctuations. There will not be drawn-out eminent domain battles or damage to existing properties due to tunneling.  The greatest variable might be the streetcars themselves, due to the weakening of the U.S. dollar.  When Portland ordered its first streetcars from Skoda in 1999 or 2000, the dollar was stronger than the Euro.  Perhaps in two years the U.S. dollar will strengthen and the price of the vehicles will go down.   

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I did my math right,  :?  that is about 1 million bucks for about .9 city squares for the Fountain Square project.  For the street car project about 1 million per 1.2 city squares.  I hope this makes some sense.  The investment ratio of money to that of a city square is in favor of a street car line when compared to Fountain Square.

Someone wanted to know what the chances were that the streetcar system wouldn't be expanded after the downtown loop has been built.

 

I was that someone.  My question is are there people on council that do not know this and are there people in the Uptown Consortium that do not know this?

 

John,

 

I would really like to know your take on why this came out from Qualls, what was the motivation?

 

 

 

"We don't want another subway". Well, hopefully there's not another Depression to stop the streetcars.

Sure it doesn't need to be said again, I am all for due diligence, I just don't want to see the project derailed.  I really like the investment per block of imact as rough gauge bang for buck.  This is the type of number that really helps, at least when arguing on "anecdotal" terms with the "just say no" detractors.  Most of em would have have a hard time saying that fountain square hasn't been a success.

 

I just want to thank Councilman Bortz for chiming in again, gives me a much clearer picture of where things stand.

We do have a history of not completing projects.  All kidding aside, Cincinnati needs to get rid of that image.

 

I don't think this is a fair or accurate statement, particularly in comparison to other cities.

 

First, I didn't come out with the idea that Duke would be a funding partner.  I was asked to explain what was meant by public/private partnership vs. private contribution and I offered Duke as an example of the former.  Duke will calculate the expected power usage (about $250,000/year for Downtown/OTR) and they will determine what they would be willing to pay to buy that new revenue stream (other gas and electric customers will also be added to the area as vacant buildings are occupied over time in part because of the streetcar).  Power companies are generally interested in adding customers, and they invest in infrastructure to do so.  The Public gets the benefit of upfront capital support and the Private Partner gets the benefit of a fixed revenue stream.  I can't control the way the story is written.

 

What's interesting is that the old streetcar system, around the turn of the 20th century was owned by CG&E (possibly still called the Cincinnati Gas & Coke Company, you can see their old headquarters at the SW corner of 4th and Plum).  The president of the company, Andrew Hickenlooper, fiercely defended the company's monopoly versus attempts by the Edison Company from making inroads into the market: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_hickenlooper

 

John,

 

I would really like to know your take on why this came out from Qualls, what was the motivation?

 

 

 

 

She has told people that the streetcar is a "toy train."  It's not, of course, but I believe she feels it's a distraction from building a regional rail system. And she was really the one who got the ball rolling on the several studies of light rail corridors that began with OKI's 1993 Transportation Plan. So I suspect she thinks it's a step backwards.

 

She understands that the core needs to maintain its status as the center of regional employment. Since only a few of the 150,000 or so people who work in Uptown and Downtown actually live there, you've got to have a means of moving them from their homes to these jobs. Plus a means of moving people without cars who live in those areas to better jobs in the suburbs. As highways further congest and the price of fuel and parking rises, this will become even more important.

 

The problem is, we're still very much a car-centric city, and the demand for regional transportation choices has not risen to the point where people are willing to tax themselves to provide alternatives.

 

So, another strategy is to get greater utility from what you already have working for you. There's clearly a market for people who are tired of spending so much of their time and money in highway economy. Many of them work in our region's two largest employment centers and would be quite content with the idea of living, working, shopping for groceries, living complete lives, in a small radius of travel. Some of the money they used to spend on travel will be redirected into the housing economy.

 

Unfortunately, I don't think Roxanne has ever bought this argument. She's very democratic in her approach to mobility -- provide choices for everyone. So am I at heart, but I recognize that too few people really want those choices right now. That will change over time, and the streetcar will be a good illustration of how good the alternatives are. But for now, we need to provide a really good alternative for Cincinnatians who are early-adopters wanting to break free from the car culture. And by that, I don't mean they hate cars. They just understand that accommodating cars them in the urban environment is costly and enables disposable income to leak out of the center-city economy.

 

Charlie Hales, the former elected official from Portland who is leading Cincinnati's streetcar study, once said to me, "You know, John, a lot of cities spend all their transportation money trying to figure out how to move people through there cities as fast as possible. Portland spends a fair amount of its money that way too. But we spend some of enabling people to stay in one place if that's what they want to do."

 

Hence, the Portland Streetcar. I'm not sure that Roxanne has ever understood this logic.

I'm not sure that Roxanne has ever understood this logic

So what does this ultimately mean?  If she sees this is a distraction from building a regional rail system, has she been successful in convincing other members of council this as well, demonstrated by the number of signatures she was able to get on her counter proposal?

 

 

^ Maybe she'll tell us on Monday.

 

 

I think the what if question is certainly a legitimate one but I tend to agree with Chris that this is a risk worth taking.  How much more expensive will this project be to do in 4 years?

 

the plan already factors in inflation up to 2010, after that we can expect 5.1 million in inflation per year. 

>We do have a history of not completing projects.  All kidding aside, Cincinnati needs to get rid of that image.

 

It's only an image.  Show me well-researched proof that that Cincinnati has an exceptional number of unfinished and proposed but never-built projects as compared to peer cities and I'll change my mind.  Until then you're just buying into media superstition.  The local media certainly hasn't hounded Northern Kentucky for the outrageous Millennium Tower proposal (well, there's always the year 3000 coming up), the failure of Covington Landing, the ill-conceived Purple People Bridge Climb, or "struggling" (to use one of their words) Newport-on-the-Levee. 

 

I don't necessarily disagree with this factually, but perception is very important.  If Cincinnati is perceived to be a joke (in terms of progress) on a national level, it will be more difficult to attract outside investors for new and exciting projects.  Likewise, if a perception of impending failure is prevelant in the minds of Cincinnati voters, they're much more likely to view a big ticket item like Light Rail as a boondoggle instead of seeing it's economic and transformative advantages.  Fountain Square was a good start, but we need a few more of these big projects like The Banks and The Cincinnati Streetcar to come online so that people can see for themselves that things are improving here.

 

/edit: Thank God Newport didn't go through with that Millenium Tower.

We do have a history of not completing projects.  All kidding aside, Cincinnati needs to get rid of that image.

 

I don't think this is a fair or accurate statement, particularly in comparison to other cities.

 

First, I didn't come out with the idea that Duke would be a funding partner.  I was asked to explain what was meant by public/private partnership vs. private contribution and I offered Duke as an example of the former.  Duke will calculate the expected power usage (about $250,000/year for Downtown/OTR) and they will determine what they would be willing to pay to buy that new revenue stream (other gas and electric customers will also be added to the area as vacant buildings are occupied over time in part because of the streetcar).  Power companies are generally interested in adding customers, and they invest in infrastructure to do so.  The Public gets the benefit of upfront capital support and the Private Partner gets the benefit of a fixed revenue stream.  I can't control the way the story is written.

 

What's interesting is that the old streetcar system, around the turn of the 20th century was owned by CG&E (possibly still called the Cincinnati Gas & Coke Company, you can see their old headquarters at the SW corner of 4th and Plum).  The president of the company, Andrew Hickenlooper, fiercely defended the company's monopoly versus attempts by the Edison Company from making inroads into the market: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_hickenlooper

 

Boss Cox's Cincinnati goes into this issue in more detail than you really need, but the book might be good for those thinking about why the hilltops (Uptown) don't necessarily have the same interests as the basin.

 

to Qualls: As one who is not completely convinced that downtown = the city, I think she makes a strong point, but I can see OTR, CUF, Corryville, et al. have the potential with a streetcar to be redeveloped along the lines of its historic density rather than the post-car/decline condition it currently is in. However, that is a gamble and a tough one to make when Price Hill, Westwood, College Hill, and Mt. Airy are having their own issues that wouldn't remotely be addressed by the streetcar unless you can see the tax revenues from a vibrant downtown allowing the city to invest more in the neighborhoods that most people live in.

A city-wide streetcar system I think would completely remake this city (for the better) in ways that I don't think many can even imagine.  Think about streetcars running all through Price Hill, Westwood, Cheviot maybe and others on the Westside.  How about Walnut Hills, Mt. Washington, Mariemont, or even Norwood.  This is waaay down the road, but I can hardly even fathem the transformation that would occur for these neighborhoods.

 

Combine this with a regional light rail system that synchs up with the streetcar routes and you truly have something amazing.

^ I agree!

 

^YES

A city-wide streetcar system I think would completely remake this city (for the better) in ways that I don't think many can even imagine.  Think about streetcars running all through Price Hill, Westwood, Cheviot maybe and others on the Westside.  How about Walnut Hills, Mt. Washington, Mariemont, or even Norwood.  This is waaay down the road, but I can hardly even fathem the transformation that would occur for these neighborhoods.

 

I've always assumed that our older neighborhoods like OTR and Covington fell into disrepair because expressways opened up development in areas with larger lots and the parking demanded by the automobile age.  What hadn't occured to me until recently was that these dense urban neighborhoods grew up around and depended upon a streetcar system that no longer exists.  So the automobile not only made it easier to live outside the city, it also made it more difficult to actually live within the city.  Maybe the key to revitalizing these types of neighborhoods really is as simple as putting back what was taken away.  Getting to Rando's point, I love the idea of the streetcar running all over this city again, through the dense neighborhoods and maybe even to some of the inner-ring suburbs.  Whether or not it is attainable is anyone's guess, but I'd sure like to see it happen.  Light rail would be great too, but personally, I could live happily with just the streetcars.

A city-wide streetcar system I think would completely remake this city (for the better) in ways that I don't think many can even imagine.  Think about streetcars running all through Price Hill, Westwood, Cheviot maybe and others on the Westside.  How about Walnut Hills, Mt. Washington, Mariemont, or even Norwood.  This is waaay down the road, but I can hardly even fathem the transformation that would occur for these neighborhoods.

 

I've always assumed that our older neighborhoods like OTR and Covington fell into disrepair because expressways opened up development in areas with larger lots and the parking demanded by the automobile age.  What hadn't occured to me until recently was that these dense urban neighborhoods grew up around and depended upon a streetcar system that no longer exists.  So the automobile not only made it easier to live outside the city, it also made it more difficult to actually live within the city.  Maybe the key to revitalizing these types of neighborhoods really is as simple as putting back what was taken away.  Getting to Rando's point, I love the idea of the streetcar running all over this city again, through the dense neighborhoods and maybe even to some of the inner-ring suburbs.  Whether or not it is attainable is anyone's guess, but I'd sure like to see it happen.  Light rail would be great too, but personally, I could live happily with just the streetcars.

 

I don't know if it's as simple as putting back what was taken away (I'm sure you know that too), but I think you've hit the nail on the head that any city is developed around a transportation "logic" be it walking, auto, or streetcar.  You take away that transportation, or mess it up by over accomodating some other system (mostly cars), and suddenly the layout of the city functions poorly because you can't quickly and easily travel about it in the way you are supposed to.

Perfect worlding:

 

The primary Metro lines that serve the main axial corridors are shifted back to streetcars (I'm thinking of the 4 (Montgomery Road), the 17 (Hamilton Ave among other roads) and so on). These were nearly all streetcar lines in the first place.

 

A series of limited stop light rail lines that serve commuters with major hubs in downtown, Blue Ash, the airport, etc.. These focus on speed with limited stops (and big parking garages in the residential dominated areas).

 

Intercity rail to Dayton, Cbus, and maybe places in KY and IN depending.

 

Paid for in terms of money and space by slowing reducing the capacity of the highway system as people reorganize the space according to benefits of a strong mass transit system.

 

Finally, high quality roads that are in excellent shape to serve all the other mobility the region needs. However, the system would basically stay at current levels or even shrink which means each generation of investment makes the roads more pleasant to travel on rather than just bigger to get the growing usage (unless everyone flocks to Cindaynati because of our rocking mass transit system.

 

It's Saturday night and I should be working on a dissertation.

I'd like to thank you all for the kind welcome to this forum.  I have found that it is not always a pleasant thing to blog. 

 

I can not speak to anyone's motivation as it relates to the streetcar, or any other issue for that matter.  I can only deal directly with what they tell me.  Some folks have displayed concern that a streetcar plan that does not guarantee the connection to Uptown is tantamount to failure.  To that I can only reply that the plan has always been to get to Uptown.  The challenge is related to time and money. 

 

As for time, in my opinion, the sooner the better.

 

As for money, the TIF sources in Uptown can't sustain the same ask as those downtown.  The remaining proceeds from the Blue Ash airport sale are committed elsewhere.  And the City Capital Budget can not sustain another $25M hit.  That leaves State and Federal sources to cover what would amount to a gap of about $50M (based on the very early assessment that the Uptown loop would cost $83M and that the sources listed above are covering about 60% of the Downtown/OTR loop).  I believe that Federal funds will be available when we need them.  Not everyone agrees.  To that I have suggested that we figure out a Plan B funding scenario that looks to the city's parking fund for support (similar to the financing of Fountain Square).  The revenue from the Fountain Square garage supported over $40M in debt. 

 

Some are concerned that the streetcar will dry up resources that are needed to continue to advance the redevelopment of OTR.  To that I have suggested that we do not use either of the two TIF districts that run through OTR (the East and West Downtown TIF districts) but rather focus only on using the Riverfront TIF (which is not being used to support The Banks). 

 

In short, I am just trying to deal with each argument in turn.  If I thought the concerns that have been raised were without merit, I would not be spending time trying to find solutions. 

 

There are some out there that just think streetcars are a gigantic waste of money.  I leave the convincing of those folks to people like Mr. Schneider.  He is a better salesman than I.

 

There are also those who are simply trying to delay the process perhaps in hopes that it will die on the vine.  All we can do there is just try to keep the ball rolling and keep communication lines open.  It seems to me that there are a lot of people out there that think streetcars are a good idea.  I don't think that is the result of mass hysteria.  I think momentum will continue to build thanks to those who are working hard to move it forward.

 

I will check this forum from time to time both as a resource and to offer my own thoughts where appropriate.  Please don't hesitate to throw your thoughts and questions to me directly if you like.  My email address is [email protected]  I do get a lot of emails, but I promise to get back to you within a week. 

>I don't necessarily disagree with this factually, but perception is very important.  If Cincinnati is perceived to be a joke (in terms of progress) on a national level, it will be more difficult to attract outside investors for new and exciting projects.

 

 

What I've gleaned from having lived in 7~ different cities and towns in my life is that places that are at their historical peak right now have much more confidence even if the place isn't very big and doesn't have strong assets.  But beyond that, places create the very criteria by which they judge themselves.  Southern cities judge themselves by self-created criteria that assure their perpetual infallibility.  I went to college in Tennessee and the sort of debates we're having right now on this forum which in many ways mimic real conversations that happen around Cincinnati simply don't happen down there.  Conversation there is structured as to prevent self-loathing.  Everything is great all the time down there, end of story.  Police corruption, racially-motivated incidents, and other things that are automatically HUGE news here are just swept under the rug down there and the sun comes up tomorrow.  Go Vols.         

 

Meanwhile too many members of the local media in Cincinnati are here as career stepping stones or got stuck here for family reasons, had bad luck, or because they just aren't good enough.  And they're bitter about that.  And natives have allowed these clowns to construct the very language of this city's self-examinations.  Thanks to them to speak with any optimism is to fight the negativity and falsehoods that are understood as fact.  None of them are doing their homework on this mass transit issue, none of them really care.       

 

 

>Fountain Square was a good start, but we need a few more of these big projects like The Banks and The Cincinnati Streetcar to come online so that people can see for themselves that things are improving here.

 

Well things are terrific already.  We live in the best large country in the world, in one of its best cities.  However negativity and fear sell much better up here than in other areas, and that could change with an attitude 180 on the part of the people with the loudest voices and penstrokes.

A city-wide streetcar system I think would completely remake this city (for the better) in ways that I don't think many can even imagine.  Think about streetcars running all through Price Hill, Westwood, Cheviot maybe and others on the Westside.  How about Walnut Hills, Mt. Washington, Mariemont, or even Norwood.  This is waaay down the road, but I can hardly even fathem the transformation that would occur for these neighborhoods.

 

Combine this with a regional light rail system that synchs up with the streetcar routes and you truly have something amazing.

 

I think we need to remember that the Streetcar project, the one that is right in front of us, the one that is being reviewed and debated currently, is designed to increase housing opportunities in and maintain the position of largest employment zone of the area in which it is designed to operate, Dowtown-OTR-UC-Clifton.  This goal is a worthwhile goal in and of itself, no matter what may or may not come afterward.  We are doing two things- 1)reinvesting in an area that has not gathered much investment in the past 30 years (OTR in particular, but really the entire area in terms of housing) and 2) addressing the changed circumstances of employment versus housing as it exist today.  When you have Blue Ash or Mason or West Chester as both a large employment zone and a large large residential zone, it becomes imperative that our large employment zone have ready and immediate access to a residential area.  This is about competition with other local employment zones, and it is designed to address and reflect the current 'reverse commute' reality of today.

 

Boss Cox's Cincinnati goes into this issue in more detail than you really need, but the book might be good for those thinking about why the hilltops (Uptown) don't necessarily have the same interests as the basin.

 

to Qualls: As one who is not completely convinced that downtown = the City, I think she makes a strong point, but I can see OTR, CUF, Corryville, et al. have the potential with a streetcar to be redeveloped along the lines of its historic density rather than the post-car/decline condition it currently is in. However, that is a gamble and a tough one to make when Price Hill, Westwood, College Hill, and Mt. Airy are having their own issues that wouldn't remotely be addressed by the streetcar unless you can see the tax revenues from a vibrant downtown allowing the city to invest more in the neighborhoods that most people live in.

 

I pretty much took everything in that post above from Boss Cox's Cincinnati.  I think that people in other neighborhoods are willing to admit that revitalizing those older, denser, historic neighborhoods in line with their 19th century layout is a proper goal for the City to address now.  It is the job of responsible politicians to explain to people why these things need to be addressed, and how it effects their neighborhoods as well.  I also think you assume that parochial neighborhood interests are stronger than general sentiment for the City.  I don't think they are necessarily in opposition to each other.

Well things are terrific already.  We live in the best large country in the world, in one of its best cities.  However negativity and fear sell much better up here than in other areas, and that could change with an attitude 180 on the part of the people with the loudest voices and penstrokes.

 

I didn't mean to imply that things weren't good here now.  Just that there's certainly room for improvement, and that Cincinnati's perception by those in the region is below where it should be.  It pains me to hear how this city is viewed by long term residents, particularly those who have moved on to Chicago, LA, etc.  It's tragic, because we've got a great city on our hands here, but we can't seem to market it to our own populace.

^Doesn't the large increase in downtown residents in the past 10 years sort of contradict this statement?

 

People on this forum who say that "Cincinnati doesn't know how to market itself" or "Residents and people who were born here are always so negative about the City" strike me as being absurd and self-involved.  This hasn't been my experience in the slightest.  A man who lives in Pleasant Ridge with a wife and two kids who doesn't care about the streetcar or believe in all importance of catering to young professionals or the so-called creative class isn't by definition anti-city, particularly when he's paying full property taxes and the payroll tax.  I understand this isn't necessarily what you, Jimmy_James, are talking about, but this attitude seems representative of some of the forumers here, and it strikes me as more than a little silly and clouded.

 

People on this forum who say that "Cincinnati doesn't know how to market itself" or "Residents and people who were born here are always so negative about the City" strike me as being absurd and self-involved.  This hasn't been my experience in the slightest.  A man who lives in Pleasant Ridge with a wife and two kids who doesn't care about the streetcar or believe in all importance of catering to young professionals or the so-called creative class isn't by definition anti-city, particularly when he's paying full property taxes and the payroll tax.  I understand this isn't necessarily what you, Jimmy_James, are talking about, but this attitude seems representative of some of the forumers here, and it strikes me as more than a little silly and clouded.

 

This post alone may get me to never use the "T" word again!  Thank you.  Complaining because you want things to improve is much better than pretending in the south that everything is fine!

What's the "T" word?

^Doesn't the large increase in downtown residents in the past 10 years sort of contradict this statement?

 

People on this forum who say that "Cincinnati doesn't know how to market itself" or "Residents and people who were born here are always so negative about the City" strike me as being absurd and self-involved.  This hasn't been my experience in the slightest.  A man who lives in Pleasant Ridge with a wife and two kids who doesn't care about the streetcar or believe in all importance of catering to young professionals or the so-called creative class isn't by definition anti-city, particularly when he's paying full property taxes and the payroll tax.  I understand this isn't necessarily what you, Jimmy_James, are talking about, but this attitude seems representative of some of the forumers here, and it strikes me as more than a little silly and clouded.

 

Just because this hasn't been your experience doesn't make it absurd or self-involved.  My experience with this city is apparently different than yours, but it doesnt make my opinion based on those experiences absurd.  Get off your high horse.

>This hasn't been my experience in the slightest.

 

This is my constant experience.  If people ask me where I live, I get looks of disbelief.  They're convinced that there are several muggings and car break-ins every night on every block.  I've been told point blank that my bus and bicycle riding is bad for my image.   

 

The city and those who choose to live in it instead of a Blue Ash apartment complex are under constant attack by suburban residents.  The negativity is expressed with an energy you wish could be focussed somewhere productive.  The opinions are almost verbatim repetitions of what they're hit with daily by TV news and the radio.  It doesn't matter what the facts are, whatever is on TV or the radio is what people are going to believe.  People don't go out to see things for themselves and wouldn't trust their own eyes if TV says something different.  John Cranley couldn't even walk out of City Hall to answer his own walking from Findlay Market to Fountain Square question.

 

 

Just because this hasn't been your experience doesn't make it absurd or self-involved.  My experience with this city is apparently different than yours, but it doesn't make my opinion based on those experiences absurd.  Get off your high horse.

 

Saying "strike me as being absurd and self-involved" means exactly what it says- my opinion is that it is absurd and self-involved.  "Me" is the direct object, "strike" is the action, and "as" is a word that compares the subject, in this case the opinions of certain people, to something similar, which, in our example, is absurdity and self-involvement.  There was nothing prescriptive in the statement, nothing that "made" those opinions absurd or self-involved.  I'm pretty sure that sentence is in passive construction, which is encouraged to defuse confrontation and deplored in college essays.  And since neither "absurd" nor "self-involved" are swear words, or at least aren't commonly regarded as such, there is nothing unmannerly about them.  Your choice to take them offensively or to ascribe them to your notions is something you are welcome to do, and which my words shall not effect (nor shall they effect your opinions), unless you choose that they do so. 

 

And now I've got to get back on my high horse and go print some shit out.

giddy up.

 

    I can verify Jake's statement that it takes 30 minutes to walk from U.C. to fountain square. I've done it. It would be even faster if not for all of the street crossings. Figure 3 to 4 miles per hour for a fast walk with no traffic.

 

 

 

 

It's on. Be your best tomorrow.

 

Talk about what the Cincinnati Streetcar would mean to you specifically. How would it change your life?

It's on. Be your best tomorrow.

 

Talk about what the Cincinnati Streetcar would mean to you specifically. How would it change your life?

 

The administration is going to sell the facts and figures, the citizen need to talk about the intangible aspects. 

 

I would like to thank all of you who have been working and advocating for this project over the last year. 

 

Together we can move Cincinnati closer to its fullest potential.

Good luck everyone!

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

Nice video of what the proposed route would look like from the streetcar:

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/AB/20080224/VIDEO/80221012/

Dear all,

 

I just read the reader comments about the Street Car, ugh.  Suburbia and there opinions, same as always...

 

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/comments/threadView.asp?page=1&threadid=177

Ignorance is stunning, is it not?

 

There isn't enough time in the day to correct all the misconceptions and outright falsehoods in some of those comments.

 

 

I actually enjoy talking to ignorant suburbarbarianites.  It is so much fun to see their faces when I say how much better it is living the OTR life than where I grew up in Montgomery in the suburbs.  :lol:  Let's lay some tracks already!

Heh, i can almost hear their brains pop from that statement... Must be priceless.

I was tempted to check out the reader comments, but I decided this time not to ruin my morning.  From what I'm seeing here, it looks like that was the right call.  Unfortunately, I'm stuck at work and won't be able to make it to the meeting today (:x), so if someone could post something about it after it is over, I'd appreciate it.  Thanks!

I'm sure this thread will be LIT UP after the meeting... certainly no worries there!

 

Meanwhile too many members of the local media in Cincinnati are here as career stepping stones or got stuck here for family reasons, had bad luck, or because they just aren't good enough.  And they're bitter about that.  And natives have allowed these clowns to construct the very language of this city's self-examinations. 

 

OT, but:  This is why Jonathan Hawgood is a breath of fresh...he loves this city and it shows in his broadcasts.

 

 

I'm up in the catbird seat here with jmeck and Maximillian.

 

We're starting out with the Manager and Mr Moore explaining the alignment and bribing things up to speed. Dohoney mentioned that he felt that 2010 is not feasible. 

 

82 mil for Uptown loop.

 

Now taking about delaying capital projects. Propose to use general operating debt so that no existing projects are delayed. 

 

TIF funding. Recommend using southern TIF (downtown South, or riverfront, district 2) so that OTR funds not tapped.

I think projections are around 50 mil from southern district tif through 2033.

 

Now talking about other uptown districts, if needed.

 

On to Blue Ash airport. Use 1 mil per year to pay down general debt bonds.

 

No private investment yet sought. Go after following conceptual approval.

 

Moore explains that starting in basin would make extensions more attractive federally. Dohoney encourages starting asap. If Uptown is in, they need to engage soon.

 

Manager requesting accepting of city capital, TIF, Blue Ash funds, money for future study.

Now public input time.