March 25, 200817 yr My other question is, is a streetcar basically the same thing as the Euclid Cooridor project in Cleveland with trains? www.cincystreetcar.com ^That should answer most of your questions and catch you up to speed on what is being proposed in Cincinnati.
March 25, 200817 yr Author What is the difference between "streetcar" and "BRT"? Is there any talk of doing BRT versus streetcar? BRT= bus Streetcar= Rail BRT wouldn't make much sense in the study area. Phase one of the streetcar end to end is about two miles (4 miles total) with about 9 stops along the route (18 stops total). Streetcars are circulators, not major commuting tools
March 25, 200817 yr Here's an interesting blog post on BRT: ...This is the dream of every road warrior that wants to build a busway instead of a rail line. The idea that they can co-opt the line for cars is always in the back of their minds.... full post here: http://theoverheadwire.blogspot.com/2008/02/any-type-of-rubber-tire-can-go-on.html
March 25, 200817 yr Author The lesson: Start Small Extensive streetcar line won't work, says project planner 'Ridership drops will be cataclysmic' if line is extended beyond a mile By DAVID PENDERED The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 03/25/08 The urban planner who helped inspired Atlanta Mayor Shirley Franklin to support a proposed streetcar system along Peachtree Street said today the project should be downsized. Andres Duany said at a meeting of the Midtown Alliance the current proposal is too long to be economically viable. Duany supported a mile-line route in Midtown that a task force appointed by the mayor expanded to include downtown Atlanta and tourist destinations east and west of the central business district. "It's the only part of the streetcar that's going to work," Duany said of his initial proposal. "The rest will give the streetcar a bad name because it doesn't work. Ridership drops will be cataclysmic." Atlanta City Councilman Kwanza Hall, who represents the area, said after Duany's remarks that he would support scaling down the project to get it started. "It's more important that we have a solid first step with the Peachtree Streetcar that creates one transit piece, with MARTA and the Beltline," Hall said. The Beltline is a proposed 22-mile loop of transit and trails around intown Atlanta. Atlanta's plan for Beltline funding was derailed by a recent state Supreme Court ruling. In 2002, Duany energized the streetcar debate in Atlanta by saying a streetcar system is the best way to spark development along Midtown's Miracle Mile, the stretch of Peachtree from the Woodruff Arts Center to the Fox Theatre. The current streetcar plan would cost about $190 million. Atlanta would pay nearly $50 million of that amount. Atlanta's share could come from the sale of bonds discussed at City Hall to support development.
March 25, 200817 yr It should be noted that Atlanta doesn't have this problem of not being able to get things done. They are also one of the major YP magnets in the US.
March 25, 200817 yr BTW, here is the link to a copy of Qualls' most recent motion (For those who have yet to see it) http://thebellwetherdaily.blogspot.com/2008/03/cincinnati-city-council-streetcar.html
March 25, 200817 yr I find the "phase" language to be confusing, and a point where those in opposition to the project can continue to generate confusion. "Downtown Circulator", "Uptown Connector", and "Uptown Circulator" are all confusing. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but Qualls and Cranley, in their "Phase 1", forsee the established OTR alignment and then a "connector" presumably to the McMillan/Calhoun area. Then "Phase 2" would be the "Uptown Circulator", presumably extensions to either or both the Ludlow Ave. area and the Zoo. If what I'm reading is correct, and say the so-called "Uptown Connector" costs $50 million, then suddenly the cost of "the streetcar" will balloon to say $140 million and be out of the reach of the tentative funding plan. Listening to the radio yesterday I heard a caller say "I heard them say $102 million, then 180 million, well what is it?". Obviously all this phase mumbo-jumbo will be effective in confusing the public, which already has no idea what the plan is.
March 25, 200817 yr The other problem, besides cost, with including the "connector" in the first phase is until the Uptown alignment study is completed, how do you know where to put it?
March 25, 200817 yr A back of the hand list of the problems I have with Qualls' latest motion. A few high level concepts from the motion Phase 1 - CBD/OTR circulator + Uptown Connector Line (or "finger") Phase 2 - Uptown circulator 1) It requires building the uptown connector (or "finger") as part of the first phase. The problem with this is that it adds quite a good bit of money to the roughly 102 million dollar budget that the administration has already set forward in a few iterations. Basically, coming up with another big chunk of money means back to the drawing board on the pots of money to pull from. Wash, rinse, repeat, vomit. All said, OK, so if we have to build the connector to get buy in, I am not really that opposed to it in principal, but I would rather see the connector funded as a separate project, with its own budget to get approved. The connector does not run through a TIF district, its money, well will have to come from elsewhere. 2) It requires the study of one of three options for the uptown connector while the engineering and design of the downtown circulator is being completed. It gives the three options for the uptown connector as Sycamore, Vine, and Clifton. The only one that would work of those three is Vine. At this stage of study of the uptown link, I don't think its prudent to forclose any options for the uptown connector. 3) Requires presentation of new financing plan (including added cost of the uptown connector) to the adminstration and council by May 1. Tight date, and then the arguing starts all over again about the new (much larger) budget. 4) The motion requires several things to be in place prior to the construction of phase 1 (which you would imagine, but read on) a) MOUs to participate in phase 1 - well ok, yeah, that makes sense, can't build it until you have the private dollars lined up, great b) MOUs to participate in phase 2 - oh, so we have to get MOU's to participate in the completely unknown and unplanned as yet uptown circulator prior to any construction on phase 1... Hmmmm, so basically we have to have a finance plan for all of phase 1, and phase 2, and full buy in from uptown as well as downtown private parties before beginning phase 1... I don't think I like that. Its asking too much to begin the first part of the system. c) Prioritize the use of SIDs... Well OK, fine, thats all well and good. Getting buyin from the required amount of frontage holders along the proposed SID area is no easy task (I mean you do have to ask all the property owners to voluntarily take an assessment... not the best bargaining position unless the return is great). But fine, make them a priority... but oh no, wait. d) If a SID IS part of the proposed funding, it must be in place prior to the construction of that phase. Well, lets see, where will a SID be most likely necessary to budget in.... Hmmm, Oh yeah, the area with no TIF district, the uptown connector "finger." Hmmm, so that means you have to have the SID in place before construction of "phase 1" which includes the CBD/OTR circulator. Hmmm, well yeah, there's a 2 - 3 year process to get full buyin along a completely unknown as of yet route.... 5) It does deal with contingency financing if there are no federal dollars for phase 2. It requires 2 contingency plans, and neither of those plans can rely primarily city capital funds. Further, these plans have to be in place prior to any construction. In other words, no phase 1 construction until both MOUs are in place to cover phase 2, and financing for phase 2 is fully fleshed out - and if phase 2 plans for federal dollars, the contingencies can't touch city capital - seems a difficult contingency to figure out a plan for. Also seems strange to plan for the contingency of a lack of federal funds, for an uptown circulator, that isn't planned, etc, etc. 6) Requires that an operations and maintenance finance plan be presented. This plan cannot rely at all on city operations budget and cannot rely primarily on the city capital budget. In other words, come up with a finance plan such that the system is fully self supporting with regards to operating cost and maintenance out of the box. No ramp up time, no nothing. Craziness. What rail system has done this? Can I count increased property values and tax base to offset the operating costs? No? I can go on and on... the last bits were also a bit lame Fare rate - no lower than Metro Zone 1. Zone 1 is huge, so as a consumer, I should pay the same rate to ride the bus which I can take all throughout zone 1, as for a small area circulator? Seems silly to limit it in that way. Alternatives analysis must "demonstrate the integration and connectivity of the preferred alignments to current and <b>future</b> transit service..." OK, so now I am supposed to get out the crystal ball and predict where there will be light rail in the future... HAHAHAHAH OK, I'm done. Lets hope Bortz does better.
March 25, 200817 yr ...right the alignment of the "connector" would be contingent upon the "uptown circulator" alignment(s), meaning the whole thing would have to be more or less completely planned. That said Clifton versus Vine versus Sycamore is something that does need to be studied by experts, it's not something that anyone here can more than speculate about. I see this study picking Sycamore as the preferred alignment as the ultimate stall tactic because it would mean the tentative Findlay Market alignment which has already been studied would have to be tossed and everything re-studied, unless one line would terminate at Findlay Market and the other head up Sycamore. Having the Findlay Market line turn southeast down McMicken St. to Liberty and the base of the Sycamore Hill makes no sense, it would essentially back-track. Crossing over to Sycamore via Mulberry would be tough given Mulberry's steep climb between Vine and Rice and that's a dangerous part of Vine. Not having the uptown line travel past Findlay Market on its way downtown I think would be a major mistake.
March 25, 200817 yr Not having the uptown line travel past Findlay Market on its way downtown I think would be a major mistake. I couldn't agree with this any more...to not run the streetcar to Findlay Market would be a MAJOR...MAJOR mistake.
March 25, 200817 yr Councilmember Qualls doesn't seem to realize that a new generation has come of age during her extended absence to get a degree, and during that time the idea of living downtown has become a desirable option for larger numbers of YPs as well as middle-class suburban empty nesters. The days of downtown living being attractive to eccentrics-only are gone. As a long-time downtown resident, I can attest to the fact that one of the first things out of the mouths of the uninitiated is, "BUT WHERE DO YOU GET GROCERIES???" This question is often posed in breathless, panicked tones. Don't ask me why, but it's a fact. Anyone who thinks Findlay Market isn't a worthy destination doesn't know what they're talking about -- they're totally ignorant about the subject. The Streetcar will undoubtedly cause an increase in customers and therefore eventually help make the market more user friendly, besides securing the investment the City has already made. I'm counting on it, and tired of waiting for it. The pedantic politician and her obstructionist colleague need to get out of the way and let the majority opinion prevail. They are thwarting democracy.
March 25, 200817 yr Feel free to post your comments here: http://www.urbancincy.com/2008/03/challenge-for-those-who-demand-better.html Often times there are lurkers from outside the UrbanOhio realm that visit/comment on my site. Many google "700 WlW" and get my post(s) blasting them as one of the top responses. They then visit the site and post silly comments all over the place. Feel free to light up the comments with what you all think.
March 25, 200817 yr Here's the generic response given to my letter to Roxy The only motion on the streetcar that was on the Finance Committee agenda yesterday was the compromise motion written by Councilmember Qualls two weeks ago in conjunction with John Cranley, Chris Bortz, David Crowley, and the Mayor (see attachment). The motion was placed on the agenda by Councilmember Qualls last Friday. Councilmember Qualls intended to vote on the streetcar yesterday. There is a new motion written by Councilmember Bortz that has not been introduced. Councilmember Bortz asked that the Qualls motion be held yesterday until the next Finance Committee meeting in two weeks. The Bortz motion will probably be introduced at that time. The only difference between Councilmembers at this point is how much of a guarantee is given that the Uptown Circulator will be built. I think we’re getting very close to a point where there is agreement. Councilmembers will be meeting on this issue later this week. There will be a streetcar agreement soon. Ron Wahl Assistant to Councilmember Roxanne Qualls
March 25, 200817 yr I would guess that the response will be "I am not stalling the project, see, I presented a spit polished version of my old motion. I'm trying to move forward, and its a good thing that Cranley signed on to it. Its councilman Bortz and the Vice Mayor who are stalling, they wouldn't vote on my motion" Just a guess :) Heh, indeed
March 26, 200817 yr After taking part in some discussions and now catching my breath to watch you knuckleheads moan about Ms. Qualls I have come to the conclusion that there is exactly 92 people who actually support the Streetcars. About 13 of them post on this forum, and the other 79 are relatives of the 13 that post on this forum. I have to hand it to you, you have fooled at least 5 Council members that there is broad "City-Wide" support. When actually no one that lives outside of OTR thinks this is a good idea. In fact if I were a betting man I see NAACP coming out against this. I see COAST coming out against this. I see middle class residents trying to raise families in neighborhoods of this city being against this. One of the underlying problems is you collectively can't figure out if it is about transportation or about development. Mr. Bortz says development. The lemmings on this forum say transportation. Serious question: Will disabled individuals get vouchers to ride this system? Are streetcars friendly to those with physical challenges?
March 26, 200817 yr >Serious question: Will disabled individuals get vouchers to ride this system? Are streetcars friendly to those with physical challenges? It's been on this video for a year now:
March 26, 200817 yr "When actually no one that lives outside of OTR thinks this is a good idea." What part of town are you from? Will disabled get vouchers to ride? Why would this matter to you?
March 26, 200817 yr I live in California. No the neighborhood south of Mt. Washington. A forgotten part of this city, an area that doesn't get over the top subsidy from City leaders. Where do you live? Let's see you support streetcars you must live in OTR.
March 26, 200817 yr Why do you care if I want to protect the rights and freedom to move around for those with disabilities. Does it matter why I care?
March 26, 200817 yr I live in California. No the neighborhood south of Mt. Washington. A forgotten part of this city, an area that doesn't get over the top subsidy from City leaders. Where do you live? Let's see you support streetcars you must live in OTR. No, not OTR. Hey okiehigh were you one of the Oak Hills grads arrested partying in Milan Indiana over the weekend? I hope they had a designated driver. If only we had real mass transportation beyond the core. Can't say that I was, although it sounded like they all had a memerable night. Don't Hate though!!! You can't blame them for trying to have a little fun!
March 26, 200817 yr Negative on CBD, I am still on the Westside. Why do you care if I want to protect the rights and freedom to move around for those with disabilities. Does it matter why I care? No, just curious as to why you would ask that question above all the other hurdles? I'm not being critical here, just wondering.
March 26, 200817 yr I ask the question because I have friends who fight and struggle to get around this town, because transportation needs lack so significantly. I think the disabled will come out against the streetcar plan also, because it only benefits the few.
March 26, 200817 yr ^Yea opinions are like a$$holes, but this is not the thread for it. I ask the question because I have friends who fight and struggle to get around this town, because transportation needs lack so significantly. I think the disabled will come out against the streetcar plan also, because it only benefits the few. So why wouldn't you be for any type of "Transportation Reform", if you will? Any project like this would be required to conform to ADA standards. And, I don't know if I understand your "Lack" of handicap access comments around town. Metro has ADA buses.
March 26, 200817 yr Will disabled get vouchers to ride? Why would they get vouchers? Do the disabled currently get to ride the Metro for free?
March 26, 200817 yr What do we know about the area where the Portland streetcar currently runs BEFORE it was built? Comparable to CBD, OTR, Uptown? How are the areas/ridership different? There are a lot of differences between Portland/Cincinnati, both good and bad. What should be expected from the investment in the Cincinnati Streetcar System? All serious questions that might have been answered earlier in this thread. Thanks in advance if you have the answers.
March 26, 200817 yr What should be expected from the investment in the Cincinnati Streetcar System? INFILL - Pure and simple! IMO, This will give the city leverage to compete with suburbs. It would be a catalyst in which nobody or no study can 100% know the True effects. Each development like this, has different outcomes in every city, BUT most have similar enough results in turning areas (blighted in OTR's case) into something better. I don't think this can hurt and I DO believe it is worth the investment. If successful, it could start spreading to inner suburbs by demands from that neighborhood's residents. I believe this is a crucial turning point for the city. It's make or break time. Do we want a 21st Century city or not?
March 26, 200817 yr After taking part in some discussions and now catching my breath to watch you knuckleheads moan about Ms. Qualls I have come to the conclusion that there is exactly 92 people who actually support the Streetcars. About 13 of them post on this forum, and the other 79 are relatives of the 13 that post on this forum. I have to hand it to you, you have fooled at least 5 Council members that there is broad "City-Wide" support. When actually no one that lives outside of OTR thinks this is a good idea. In fact if I were a betting man I see NAACP coming out against this. I see COAST coming out against this. I see middle class residents trying to raise families in neighborhoods of this city being against this. One of the underlying problems is you collectively can't figure out if it is about transportation or about development. Mr. Bortz says development. The lemmings on this forum say transportation. Serious question: Will disabled individuals get vouchers to ride this system? Are streetcars friendly to those with physical challenges? Well, I'm originally from the suburbs and now I don't even live in Cincinnati for 8 months out of the year, and I am very much for the project. Why don't you spend some time going through the last 110 pages of this thread and educate yourself a little before you start talking about what you don't know. A healthy OTR is a cause everyone should get behind because it is a great neighborhood worth our money after years of neglect. Plus, a healthy OTR equals a healthy CBD, which equals a healthy and vibrant area for out of towners and suburbanites to visit, because, yes the streetcar does spur development. Also, streetcars have shown time and time again to be a spark to spur further transit investments, so yes, it helps transit too. Though I don't transit helping you out in California much anyways. I guess all the recent rain has you marina dwellers on edge these days...
March 26, 200817 yr Author Cincinnati Streetcar-- analysis paralysis By Guest Columnist Brad Thomas The Finance Committee of City Council failed to take any action on the streetcar plan at its meeting on Monday, March 24. Back in October, City Council passed a motion out of the Economic Development Committee to endorse constructing a modern streetcar system in the city of Cincinnati. The vote was 8-1 with only Councilman Cranley voting against. In the five months that have passed since this resolution was approved, the Finance Committee, chaired by John Cranley, has failed to implement the funding strategy outlined by the city administration. Despite the city administration responding timely to every request made by the Finance Committee and its chair, the financing plan still has not been approved. At this last meeting, Councilwoman Qualls reintroduced a motion that mandated all funding be in place for the uptown and downtown line before any construction could begin and placed unnecessary constraints on the city's ability to find alternative sources of funding for the streetcar project. Only Councilman Cranley co-signed the motion. This motion would have irrevocably tied the fate of the downtown loop to the uptown loop, and likely delayed the entire project for four years or more. Not only would this motion have delayed the project, but it would have made receiving federal funds incredibly difficult without an existing local investment in place. Mayor Mark Mallory, Vice-Mayor David Crowley and Councilman Bortz have been working tirelessly to forge a broad consensus on council to ensure near unanimous consent on the streetcar. However, there remain some members of council, including Cranley, Monzel, and Qualls, who have stated publicly that they support the streetcar, although their actions have consistently demonstrated otherwise. Despite these delays, a solid, working majority exists on council. A consensus exists to build the system as currently planned. Now the Mayor and Council need to give the City Administration the tools they need to make the Cincinnati Streetcar a reality. Brad Thomas is the founder of Cincystreetcar.com. From the 3/26 Pulse Do you think some City Council members are beating around the bush with moving the streetcar plans forward? Or, do you believe the streetcar should not be built in Cincinnati? send you letters to the editor to [email protected]
March 26, 200817 yr Author Will disabled get vouchers to ride? Why would they get vouchers? Do the disabled currently get to ride the Metro for free? they would probably pay the reduced fare (fair?) deal rate of 1/2 standard fare.
March 26, 200817 yr Author I ask the question because I have friends who fight and struggle to get around this town, because transportation needs lack so significantly. I think the disabled will come out against the streetcar plan also, because it only benefits the few. metro's daily ridership is about 80,000 a day in a four county region who's population is well over 1 million. 160,000 vehicles use the brent spence bridge per day in a metro area with a population well over 2 million. If the only concern on a new project is 'how does it benefit me?' we are never going to get anywhere.
March 26, 200817 yr Author the Cincinnati climate protection plan is now at version 2.0; of the Transportation recommendations, only the regional light rail plan would result in greater C02 reductions than the streetcar. http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/cmgr/downloads/cmgr_pdf18280.pdf the Cincinnati Streetcar is on pages 43-45
March 26, 200817 yr I saw John Cranley tonight at Jefferson Hall in NEWPORT of all places. Randy, you got my exclusive phone call about the situation. I'll have more about the evening once I go to bed and sleep off some of the beer. Sorry Randy, no spy photos on my cell phone.....I'll post more later.
March 26, 200817 yr I ask the question because I have friends who fight and struggle to get around this town, because transportation needs lack so significantly. I think the disabled will come out against the streetcar plan also, because it only benefits the few. Why would a disabled person "come out against" streetcars since streetcars are perfectly barrier-free and offer a high level of comfort and ease of use for disabled persons -- far superior to buses? See for yourself: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xL7QEQuRqq0
March 26, 200817 yr Portland looks like an amazingly clean city. The infrastructure appears to be very well maintained. I suppose it's because that area was recently developed but it's still fun to look at. New sidewalks, freshly painted lines (even with bike lanes!) nice looking street car. The intersecting curves of the street car track and painted lines on the street almost look like a work of art.
March 26, 200817 yr I ask the question because I have friends who fight and struggle to get around this town, because transportation needs lack so significantly. I think the disabled will come out against the streetcar plan also, because it only benefits the few. Why would a disabled person "come out against" streetcars since streetcars are perfectly barrier-free and offer a high level of comfort and ease of use for disabled persons -- far superior to buses? See for yourself: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=xL7QEQuRqq0 Great video ... In case you're looking for it, it starts at about the 2:00 mark and goes on for a couple of minutes. I really can't see why anyone would ever bring up being handicapped and having issues in riding a streetcar? The loading/unloading process is very quick and easy (multiple doors and wider than that of a bus). On top of that, in one of the scenes in the video you see 3 or 4 motorized wheelchairs. Can you imagine this on a METRO? lol. I noticed that the people in wheelchairs also unloaded and loaded pretty much just as quickly as the pedestrians on foot, something else you will not see with a bus.
March 26, 200817 yr Where do you live? Let's see you support streetcars you must live in OTR. I live in Pleasant Ridge and whole-heartedly support the streetcar. I think that anyone that lives in the inner-ring suburbs would be likely to support the streetcar because it will still benefit them now when going downtown or to OTR (where I work), in addition to the fact that getting a successful rail system started will be more likely to spur larger rail options in the future that could reach to all of Cincinnati's neighborhoods. PR was originally a streetcar suburb, and I hope to see it return to that status eventually.
March 26, 200817 yr After taking part in some discussions and now catching my breath to watch you knuckleheads moan about Ms. Qualls I have come to the conclusion that there is exactly 92 people who actually support the Streetcars. About 13 of them post on this forum, and the other 79 are relatives of the 13 that post on this forum. I have to hand it to you, you have fooled at least 5 Council members that there is broad "City-Wide" support. When actually no one that lives outside of OTR thinks this is a good idea. I don't post here often, but thought I'd point out that I live in Madisonville and SUPPORT the streetcar. Nearly everyone I know supports it as well.
March 26, 200817 yr There certainly are some haters on the cincinnati.com streetcar blog. If anyone would care to try to persuade them, the link follows (though, that site is so ploarized, it's probably not worth the effort): http://frontier.cincinnati.com/blogs/gov/2008/03/two-more-weeks-before-streetcar-vote.asp#links
March 26, 200817 yr Where do you live? Let's see you support streetcars you must live in OTR. I don't live in OTR, but I do recognize that Cincinnati is squandering a major asset in both dense housing and architectural significance by allowing OTR to languish for so long. I live in Newport and I support the plan to bring streetcars back to Cincinnati. I also hope that eventually it will come back over to this side of the river and link up the KY riverfront as it once did. It's no wonder that neighborhoods like OTR, Newport, and Covington became so run down in the late 20th century. These were dense urban neighborhoods that grew up around extensive streetcar systems. Once they ripped all of that rail out of the ground and made cars more necessary, living comfortably in these neighborhoods became more challenging that it had once been. The streetcars are an important step towards revitalizing these neighborhoods, by allowing families to live easily with less cars. It isn't just transit OR development; it's both. Also, even the KY inner ring suburbs of Park Hills, Fort Wright, and Fort Mitchell were once linked via streetcar. I'm not sure if the system would ever be that expansive again, but I'm open to the possibility.
Create an account or sign in to comment