Honolulu is considering light rail right now. The mayor and governor both support it.

 

Ann Arbor is considering streetcars.

Cambridge has hardly any green space or parking lots.  That said it's also fairly monotonous in appearance and probably the aluminum siding capital of the world.  The typical three floor, 6 unit apartment building is awarded just 6 parking street parking permits and 6 visitor permits.  They chalk the tires of cars with the visitor permits and ticket them if they're not moved every 24 hours.  If they come around again with the ticket under the wiper they tow the car.  This means you can get away with having two cars per apartment but the one person has to move their car and ends up getting a few $20 tickets per month no matter how hard they try to avoid them.  They also immediately tow any car parked on a residential street with no visitor pass.  They also clean the streets twice a month which is an excuse to two a few hundred more cars.  On street cleaning days you have to basically drive completely out of the city. They wouldn't be able to pull off such a hostile policy toward cars if not for having two of the world's top five universities within city limits.  Oh yeah, and a subway line heading right down the main drag.           

 

 

Ummm, I dunno about all that :)  I lived there for quite a while and parked illegally all the time.  While that may be the stated policy, Cambridge police and parking hardly have the time to enforce that draconian of a policy over the whole city.  There are well known enforcement zones during different periods in different parts of the city, and its pretty easy to avoid.  Yes there is subway line through the center area, it hardly serves all of Cambridge.  Cambridge proper is actually better served by the buses in the area because there is only one line that really hits most of Cambridge (Red Line).  Dunno about the aluminum sidign capital either.  Plenty of old brick houses, etc.  Yeah, its got more than its fair share of bland 3 unit buildings, it also has its fair share of giant 70s 10 - 15 story giant block apartment buildings, converted lofts, etc.  I would hardly call cambridge monotonous in appearance.

 

Has rail served Cambridge?  Yeah, but not nearly as well as the core of Boston proper.  (Green line being the most effective IMO).  Buses actually serve ALL of Cambridge better than the Red Line.  Although, that said, the Red Line serves the big commercial areas quite well (Mass Ave corridor).  Have I got hundreds in tickets in Cambridge, well yeah, but thats just a fact of life with a car anywhere in Boston.  For the most part, it was cheaper to get the ticket than go to the garages in the Downtown area.  Just my 2c.  I actually don't consider Cambridge the most walkable of cities really.  If you are talking about any of the Squares, well yeah, thats walkable.  But the rest of Cambridge is one way residential streets lined with the typical 3 unit buildings (for the most part, with the above architectural exceptions)

 

Just my 2c on Cambridge anyhoo... Don't quite see how Cambridge fits on that list to be honest. 

 

Edit - Hardly any green space in Cambridge - totally agree, thats a big downside.  Only places I can really think of are along the river, small parks near the Square...

Well I got tons of tickets because I had one of those visitor passes for a few months while living there, that's why I know about it.  I also got a ticket once riding my bike the wrong way on a one-way.  And from where the Harvard area blurs into Central Square, it's all aluminum siding from that point east to MIT. 

 

>Yes there is subway line through the center area, it hardly serves all of Cambridge. 

 

It doesn't serve all of Cambridge because there's that "peninsula" part that follows that southward dip in the river and Sommerville doesn't have T service (although the green line is apparently going to be extended from Lechmere).  The overall layout of Cambridge looks simple on a map but it's pretty tough to learn on street level. 

 

The city copped all kinds of attitude toward Harvard, as though Harvard were some kind of burden.  When seeing burnt-out hippies fistfight in the public library gets routine, you know you're in a weird place.  Generally the townies had no sense of humor, bad manners, and wore dingy clothes.  I always heard that Cambridge city council meetings were hilarious but I never went to one.  I'm sure everyone thought they were a big deal.             

 

Heh, gov't in Cambridge is wack wack wack, but its MA politics as usual really.  Different breed of politician out there :) (and thats not a complement)

 

Its real tough terrain to learn on the ground.  If you didn't grow up there, you will NEVER know all the back roads, alleys, etc.  As far as the bike tickets go, I've got one of those here too (who knew you had to have lights?)

 

Cambridge is a weird place.  Lots of cool stuff there if you go explore it (bicycle is best).  Still not as walkable as say a D.C., or Portland...

 

 

http://www.lexingtondda.com/assets/Public_Mtg_022308.pdf

Lexington (KY) is planning on mass transit improvements. I've been to a few meetings where streetcars are proposed. The link above gives some alternatives and cost estimates for each.

Wish list totals $30 million

BY JESSICA BROWN | CINCINNATI ENQUIRER

March 5, 2008

 

CINCINNATI - Twenty-two community projects in Hamilton County are being submitted to the General Assembly to vie for a chunk of state capital bill funding.

 

The projects, [glow=yellow,2,300]which include Cincinnati’s streetcars[/glow], Art Museum renovations, a zoo exhibit, a bike trail and jails, total nearly $30 million.

 

They were selected from of an original list of 38 projects totaling $144 million.

are there any potential names for the streetcar system?  Queen City Carriage--slogan--Ride the Queen!!

 

almost as good as the S.L.U.T. in Seattle...

Cincinnati Uptown Neighborhood Transit

The system might end up just being the Cincinnati Streetcar System...but the cars might be named and painted with their own unique concept.

Cincinnati Uptown Neighborhood Transit  <---nice! :-D

 

 

http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/gov/

 

 

City Manager: I Found $800,000

 

In a memo to the mayor and city council members, City Manager Milton Dohoney outlines the funds from which he has collected the $800,000 needed to study the next step in the streetcar project - the route to Uptown. The study's necessary before moving on to asking for money to fund the project.

 

The monies are "no longer needed for their original intended purposes," the memo says, and will be earmarked for the new Uptown Streetcar Alternatives Analysis/Environmental Assessment Study. The list was developed, it says, after discussions with and suggestions from representatives from affected departments. Some of the funds are leftover from previous years, as far back as 2002.

 

Some of the amounts are small, like 40 cents from something called the "Comm/Ind. Revolving Loan Fund" and $102.42 from Defibrillator Replacement 2005. The biggest amount: $213,378.91 from the street improvement bond fund for Columbia Parkway, Celestial to Bains.

 

Read the whole list, plus the city's total list of capital projects, here.

 

posted by Jane Prendergast at 3/06/2008 03:07:00 PM   5 comments links to this post

 

Sounds pretty good to me...good work Dohoney.

Cincinnati Uptown Neighborhood Transit  <---nice! :-D

 

 

I wonder how it would compare to riding the South Lake Union Trolley

Did anyone else catch the Randal "The Tool" O'Toole on WLW?  I listened online (since I am still in VA) via the link on http://natilife.blogspot.com/.  Cos you know, light rail and streetcars are the same thing doncha know.  And the answer must be to spend billions on new highways... *cough*

 

Serious props to Bortz for handling himself so well. 

 

Oh, and all you urban planners, did you know that you are "liberal fascists?"... <-- quote from O'Toole's blog.

 

I found it especially humerous that he quotes "rising house prices" as a negative.  Especially when home prices are falling in cities all over the country, with some high percentage of folks underwater on mortgages.  Worst housing market since just post WWII, and Portland isn't seeing that effect.  And thats a bad thing?  I mean come on...

 

Oh, and all you urban planners, did you know that you are "liberal fascists?"... <-- quote from O'Toole's blog.

 

Yes I am aware of this...I should probably add it to my Facebook profile.

Re: O'toole:  Mike McConnell introduced him as a Portland resident, but while he was on the radio I googled his name and his Wikipedia page says he lives a 4.5 hour drive from Portland.

Oh, and all you urban planners, did you know that you are "liberal fascists?"... <-- quote from O'Toole's blog.

 

Yes I am aware of this...I should probably add it to my Facebook profile.

 

I agree, Urban Planners tend to lean towards the left.  We HAVE to be, especially if the job is in the public sector.  Urban Planners have to worry about the Quality of Life for EVERYONE.  Yes, it does lean towards socialism (liberalism), but that is part of the profession.  To pass the AICP Code of Ethics test, you have to be a bit more liberal on your thoughts.  Good Great planners have to think OUTSIDE the box, which is hard for the conservative mind frame to do so.  Liberal Fascist, sure thats part of the job.

And people wonder why so many urban plans sit gathering dust. ^

^lack of funding and SUV's, people love their gas guzzling SUV's

I agree, Urban Planners tend to lean towards the left.  We HAVE to be, especially if the job is in the public sector.  Urban Planners have to worry about the Quality of Life for EVERYONE.  Yes, it does lean towards socialism (liberalism), but that is part of the profession.  To pass the AICP Code of Ethics test, you have to be a bit more liberal on your thoughts.  Good Great planners have to think OUTSIDE the box, which is hard for the conservative mind frame to do so.  Liberal Fascist, sure thats part of the job.

 

And people wonder why so many urban plans sit gathering dust. ^

 

Yeah.  Hey, lostincincinnati, was the quoted post sarcastic?  I couldn't tell.  Liberalism and socialism aren't the same thing in the slightest.  And liberal fascist doesn't make any sense at least if you are trying to speak seriously.

 

I realize there are a lot of planners on this forum, but before we go an canonize planners, let's keep in mind that a whole lot falls under the heading "planning" and that really, there is always a plan for urban development, the real question is what problem the plan addresses and promotes.

Is there a more intellectually dishonest person than Randal O'Toole? About the only thing he said in the WLW interview that is indisputably true is that Portland opened its first light rail line in 1986. But we're building a streetcar, right? He didn't have much to say about that. Here are some things he said that are easy to shoot down:

 

"Voters defeated light rail the last time."

 

* Voters in the City of Portland have never voted down a rail project. Sure some suburban projects have lost at the ballot box, and a plan to get Oregon voters to pay for regional rail in Portland was defeated, but light rail and streetcars are widely supported in the City of Portland.

 

"Portland's transit ridership is declining." 

 

* This is also untrue. Here are the last ten years of Portland transit ridership statistics: http://trimet.org/pdfs/ridership/busmaxstat.pdf  Look at "Originating Rides" and "Boarding Rides" especially for "Rail" at the bottom of Page 1 - it's up every year for the past ten years. And by any other measure of performance -- weekend use, revenue collected, fare recovery ratio (what passengers pay as a share of actual costs), and declining subsidies, rail is doing extremely well. I don't know how O'Toole can say what he says with a straight face. About the only thing he could hang his hat on is the fact that passenger miles on buses are less than they were ten years ago, but this is a logical outcome of Portland's strategy to repopulate the city along rail lines. Look at the statistics and then read the quote again to understand its cleverness.

 

"Transit in Portland only serves 1% of travel." Or was it 2%? I forget. He seems to change the number from time-to-time. This why it's good to tell the truth -- so you don't have to remember what you said the last time.

 

* Here's how O'Toole comes up with this. He takes the number of transit trips that occur every day in the relatively small area of the region where extensive transit service exists and then divides it by the total number of trips of all kinds that occur in the 600-square mile Portland region. This denominator of this fraction -- X/Y where "Y" is the denominator, for those of us who've forgotten -- thus includes trucks on Portland's freeways, soccer dads taking kids to a game, the cable guy on a service call, police vehicles, anything on wheels -- trips that would never occur on transit. The effect is that transit's contribution -- represented by the numerator, "X" -- appears to be relatively small compared to the huge, super-regional tally of daily trips of every type, whether transit-competitive or not. Let me bring this a little closer to home. Our region's highest regional transportation priority is a $3 billion replacement of the Brent Spence Bridge. But the Brent Spence carries only about 2% of our region's vehicular trips every day. By O'Toole's reasoning, we shouldn't replace it. Or what about Columbia Parkway, which carries less than half of 1% of daily trips here -- should we not have built it seventy years ago? I wonder how people living in Mount Washington or Mount Lookout feel about that. The truth is, almost every component of our vast regional transportation system, by itself, carries a small percentage of overall regional traffic. This is true in almost any city in America.

 

"Traffic is terrible in Portland, and they're trying to make it worse." Or something like that.

 

* This doesn't even pass the laugh test. Portland is a hugely congested city? Really? Some California, Texas and Florida cities, maybe. Atlanta, Washington D.C., maybe. But Portland is about Number 30 on the list of our nation's most congested cities shown -- see here: http://mobility.tamu.edu/ums/congestion_data/tables/national/table_1.pdf.  If you have too much time on your hands, you might want to page through the tables of the Urban Mobility Report, for there are some surprises. My guess is that somewhere in there, O'Toole finds justification for his vague but heroic suggestion that Portland, Oregon is somehow more congested than, say, Midtown Manhattan. But this is what Randal O'Toole does -- he finds an obscure measure, draws sweeping conclusions from it, and then cleverly uses it to influence the decisions of elected officials who have no reason to believe otherwise.

 

"All the economic development along the streetcar line is just simply result of all these subsidies they're giving to developers there." 

 

* This is a straw-man argument. Nobody ever said that the Cincinnati Streetcar would end development subsidies here. Dan Deering, Michael Moose and I have made a pretty good case that in the areas served by the streetcar, it could reduce the need for parking subsidies with salutary benefits for downtown businesses and public safety. In Portland, the subsidies for property development are going hand-in-hand with streetcar development to encourage green buildings, street-level retail and affordable housing. Fully 20% of the housing units in Portland's new Pearl District -- recently honored as the most livable new neighborhood in the United States -- are affordable housing units, which surprises everyone when they go there and see it. By the way, some Portlanders think their city is starting to wean itself from development subsidies. The best evidence: Texas developer Trammell Crow is building a streetcar-served, high-rise rental apartment building on Portland's waterfront, and it is not getting a penny of subsidy. But here's the really funny thing: Three weeks ago, several of us had dinner in Portland with one of the largest developers there, a guy with more than a billion dollars worth of new projects along the streetcar line. We asked him how he answered Randal O'Toole's criticisms. He looked at us in a puzzled way and asked, "Who is Randal O'Toole?" My take is, O'Toole could never get away with saying what he says about Portland in Portland, so he gets on the air in cities whose residents who no reason to believe otherwise.

 

Oh, and the gratuitous comment about the sex scandal that has taken down the leader of Portland's so-called "light rail mafia?" It's true, it was an ugly chapter in Portland's history. What O'Toole doesn't tell you is that it happened 25 years ago, but that it just recently came to light.

 

Question: Who pays Randal O'Toole to campaign across the country against a balanced transportation system? I mean, I wouldn't presume to advise O'Toole's 2,000-person town on whether to add a third stoplight or not. But here's some food for thought: economist Joe Cortright has determined that Portlanders drive about 20% fewer miles each year than citizens of comparably sized American cities. Who benefits if this trend spreads to other cities? And who doesn't?

 

I thougth Chris Bortz did a great job of answering O'Toole. He was informed with specific facts to rebut him. You just have to respond quickly to these guys, or else people receive their message as the truth.

 

Assuming Cincinnatians listened to the entire segment, this was one for our side.

>thougth Chris Bortz did a great job of answering O'Toole. He was informed with specific facts to rebut him. You just have to respond quickly to these guys, or else people receive their message as the truth.

 

It's a characteristic of the medium that hesitation and a stuttered answer is a failed response.  Talk radio hosts can easily shape their comments and questions as to elicit hesitatinon.  And when hesitation is followed by an answer that sounds negative then they've won, no matter what the facts are.  What this all means is John Cranley would be a highly successful talk radio host.   

 

Thanks for posting the link to the segment.  O'Toole's remarks about the unreliability of transit lines like the Washington Metro were ridiculous, as though expressways never experience traffic jams.

Great points John... Good to have the facts and figures since I am sure I will hear all of O'Tooles FUD recycled and rehashed "talking points" style in the upcoming daysm

^

Thanks John. Im going to have to email that to my mother who was swayed by O'Toole's comments on the subsidies. The funny thing is my mom is for rail, but doesn't know enough to make an informed decision so O'Toole was able to trick her into believing what he had to say.I guess this is the challenge for City Council to quiet all the doubters.

The longer O'Toole talked, the more unconvincing (IMO anyway) he was because it became obvious he's opposed to public transit per se.  He didn't have a good thing to say about ANY system, and continually made the case that, for the money these systems cost, X number of roads, highways, lanes, etc. could be constructed.  I guess the CATO Institute is, to put it politely, selective in their Libertarian causes when it comes to opposing government funding. 

 

It was the first time I'd ever heard him speak and I was surprised at how unsophisticated he sounded, and how obvious his agenda is.  I know nothing about any sex scandal but interjected the way it was, it seemed like sensational pandering to the lowest among talk radio audiences -- certainly not anything germane to the discussion.

 

Again, IMO, he's not persuasive but merely serves to affirm the opinions of those already inclined to oppose transit. 

One thing the CATO Institute does that I think is admirable, is they make available free pocket-sized US Constitution booklets.  They're very handy for when our many of our elected officials run out of TP as the pages easily tear out and are just the right size.

 

 

Did anyone ask him about where he thinks gas needs to go before cars become an undesirable mode? That... would have been a great question. Where is his research that shows that investment in roads will provide the necessary benefits in the future? If they were done, what was assumed for the price of gas?

 

Good lord, a man placing his faith blindly in roads, when the lifeblood of this infrastructure is being ever scarce. Such bold recommendations to pimp Highways when there is so much uncertainty now in the benefits.

Congratulations Cincinnati streetcar for achieving the coveted 100-Page Thread Award!

 

And with $3.40/gasoline a reality, where does O'Toole stand? It's clear he doesn't support mass-transit in general, so how does he think that regionally, Cincinnati can survive solely on reliance with the automobile?

 

And with $3.40/gasoline a reality, where does O'Toole stand?

 

I think it's hilarious that people consider 3.40 high. Gas should be taxed to the point where it's over 5. Markets will adjust and the trucking industry will convert to hybrid.  :whip:

Thanks for the stats, John. I thought it was hilarious that every time McConnell would come back from a break he would give the traffic report, I 75 Northbound into Butler County is a parking lot, cops all over I 71 then O'Toole would proceed to bash public transportation... :roll:

I think the traffic reports illustrate the institutional bias of the medium.  they make their money from people in their cars who want to avoid traffic.  how often do most people listen to the radio at home compared to in their car?

Question: Who pays Randal O'Toole to campaign across the country against a balanced transportation system? I mean, I wouldn't presume to advise O'Toole's 2,000-person town on whether to add a third stoplight or not.

 

Here's who pays his bills:

http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_lrt_2007-01a.htm

 

Some background on O'Toole:

http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2005-01.htm

 

More O'Toole:

http://www.lightrailnow.org/myths/m_por_2007-10a.htm

 

And with $3.40/gasoline a reality, where does O'Toole stand?

 

I think it's hilarious that people consider 3.40 high. Gas should be taxed to the point where it's over 5. Markets will adjust and the trucking industry will convert to hybrid.  :whip:

 

I agree.  Sometimes I dream of what would happen if the gov't would suddenly stop subsidizing gasoline.  People would finally realize the true cost of their fuel consumptions, and hey!  We'd have a bunch of free cash to spend on a descent rail system.

>so how does he think that regionally, Cincinnati can survive solely on reliance with the automobile?

 

Because according to O'Toole buses carry more people than subways.

 

 

>how often do most people listen to the radio at home compared to in their car?

 

The whole story on snow is how it impairs driving.  Without driving there wouldn't even be a story.  My grandfather had one cancelled day of school in 8 years of gradeschool since everyone walked. 

 

 

Also, I wrote this email this morning to 700 WLW.  They were having some conversation about price gouging by some guy running a corner store in Over-the-Rhine.  Parks says "well if you're down there you can't get to Kroger".  The called said "well there's actually a Kroger right across the street".  Parks goes "There is?". 

 

From: "Jake Mecklenborg" <[email protected]>  Subject: Vine St. Kroger

To: [email protected]

 

That Kroger has been on Vine St. in Over-the-Rhine for at least 40 years.  That you've never seen it shows you don't know anything about the neighborhood that you and your staff rag on relentlessly.  It also shows how little you know about the streetcar proposal. 

 

Warren County is reportedly running out of salt.  Geesh, if it was the City of Cincinnati then it would be just one more indication of how stupid the city obviously is.

 

Jake Mecklenborg

 

Oil is now officially as expensive as it has ever been. It finally broke through the inflation-adjusted amounts from 1980. I support the streetcar, but gas prices isn't a very good argument for a circulator streetcar in the basin. Oil prices are a great argument for walking.

If there are two people out there that are undeniably biased and unworthy of any sort of serious consideration, they are O'Toole and Wendell Cox.  I'm not surprised WLW sought him out (or if he he came crying to them, same difference) but the only purpose he serves in any debate is to strengthen the argument for those who care enough to know the facts.

 

It was the first time I'd ever heard him speak and I was surprised at how unsophisticated he sounded, and how obvious his agenda is.  I know nothing about any sex scandal but interjected the way it was, it seemed like sensational pandering to the lowest among talk radio audiences -- certainly not anything germane to the discussion.

 

I agree, I would have figured he'd be more articulate... guess it lends to his overall disposition.  :roll:

 

 

Thanks for the stats, John. I thought it was hilarious that every time McConnell would come back from a break he would give the traffic report, I 75 Northbound into Butler County is a parking lot, cops all over I 71 then O'Toole would proceed to bash public transportation... :roll:

 

I thought the same thing at the time and laughed out loud at the radio.

 

And to his argument about upkeep... does anyone else notice the extensive potholes on I-71 (particularly around the Taft Rd. entrance ramp)?  It's like swiss cheese!  Seems to me that happens just about every year.  You can't tell me that you're going to have to repair rails every year.  And who honestly expects transit to never break down or require maintenance?  Utterly ridiculous.

 

PS - Bortz is the man!

 

I agree.  Sometimes I dream of what would happen if the gov't would suddenly stop subsidizing gasoline.  People would finally realize the true cost of their fuel consumptions, and hey!  We'd have a bunch of free cash to spend on a descent rail system.

 

I think we need to save some of that free cash for a system that goes UP HILL also!

I recieved a response from Mr. Parks.  How foolish of me -- when he said on his program he didn't know there was a Kroger in Over-the-Rhine he actually meant he knew it was there and in fact he'd been in there.  For what he didn't explain. 

 

 

Parks, Darryl" <[email protected]> 

To: "Jake Mecklenborg" <[email protected]>

 

 

Jake,

 

I know it's there.  I also said to the caller, "We didn't think of that when we were scripting the storyline."  I've also been in that Kroger. 

 

As far as salt in Cincinnati.  They are running low as well.  And no one is stupid for running low on salt.  It's been used a lot this winter (along with the beet juice).

 

Thanks for listening.  Stay warm and safe.

 

Darryl Parks

700WLW

I think it's hilarious that people consider 3.40 high. Gas should be taxed to the point where it's over 5. Markets will adjust and the trucking industry will convert to hybrid.  :whip:

 

The problem I see with letting fuel pricing drive demand is that the prices of commodities that are transported by truck will rise dramatically. Affluent (and overextended) people will gripe to high heaven and demand that the government intervene, but they'll continue to solo commute from sprawl-burbia in their Navigators and Escalades. They won't feel the effects enough to change their habits for quite a while.

 

The people who will suffer soonest and most from higher prices of food and fuel are the people who now are barely getting by, and who already spend a disproportionate amount of their meager income getting to and from stores and low-wage jobs far from where they live and accessed with difficulty or not at all by public transportation.

 

Five-dollar gasoline will give rise to complaining from rich people, but not much change in their consumption habits. It will be crippling for poor people.

^Agreed with the post above this is more of a poverty laced issue because as long as gas ticks up slowly people's responses will be moderate; people will grow complacent with their situation but not dramatically changed.  However, with the situation that we have right now with housing and job growth being hit at the same time as spikes in gas prices that will result in longer term change.

Streetcars are just good infrastructure policy for the country as a whole.

^Streetcars are just good infrastructure policy for the country as a whole.

 

Amen!

I think it's hilarious that people consider 3.40 high. Gas should be taxed to the point where it's over 5. Markets will adjust and the trucking industry will convert to hybrid.  :whip:

 

The problem I see with letting fuel pricing drive demand is that the prices of commodities that are transported by truck will rise dramatically. Affluent (and overextended) people will gripe to high heaven and demand that the government intervene, but they'll continue to solo commute from sprawl-burbia in their Navigators and Escalades. They won't feel the effects enough to change their habits for quite a while.

 

The people who will suffer soonest and most from higher prices of food and fuel are the people who now are barely getting by, and who already spend a disproportionate amount of their meager income getting to and from stores and low-wage jobs far from where they live and accessed with difficulty or not at all by public transportation.

 

Five-dollar gasoline will give rise to complaining from rich people, but not much change in their consumption habits. It will be crippling for poor people.

 

Good point. One I overlooked.

 

Do any currently running streetcars use photovoltaic panels on top of them? Is it being considered for the Streetcar here, in Cincinnati?

^ The solar array you'd need would be huge compared to the remaining surface area atop the streetcar not occupied by the air conditioning and propulsion systems.

 

The only rail system that relies principally on renewable sources of energy is Calgary's light rail system, which is energized by electricity generated from wind turbines situated on the plains around Calgary. They started working on this several years ago, and I think the entire system is now powered by the turbines. I'm sure there must be backup fossil-fueled power too.

The only rail system that relies principally on renewable sources of energy is Calgary's light rail system, which is energized by electricity generated from wind turbines situated on the plains around Calgary. They started working on this several years ago, and I think the entire system is now powered by the turbines. I'm sure there must be backup fossil-fueled power too.

 

I was thinking that at one time, at least, San Francisco's streetcars and trolley buses were powered by electricity generated at O'Shaughnessy Dam in Hetch Hetchy Valley. I don't know if that's still the case or if it ever was, or if it extends to the Muni and/or Bart rail systems.

Streetcar supporters,

 

Please attend the finance committee meeting tomorrow at 1 pm. 

 

 

 

I will definitely be there, probably will have to leave early though, depending on how long it lasts.  I have class at 3:30 (and can't miss another one :))

Are they actually going to vote on funding today?  If so, what is the over/under on number of pages in this thread by midnight tonight?  ;)

 

 

Not to be entirely ignorant, but is there a streetcar system in Cinci?  It seems crazy you guys have managed to create 100 forum pages and I see an article several pages earlier talking about the potential of still funding one.