^ Because the people who live in Downtown, Uptown and OTR, and the people staying in hotels won't use it????  Your argument dumbfounds me.

Make it part of a comprehensive regional rail system and thats another story.

 

Riiiiiight. Are you really expecting us to believe that Bill Cunningham would support light rail? Don't insult my intelligence.

Jus

Cunningham bashes anything progessive.

 

Not fair, Cunningham at least has the guts to stand up and speak his mind.  He realizes the ridiculousness of $200MM for a trolley to ferry people from the non-existant banks to Findlay Market.  Any system that requires the majority of its riders to DRIVE downtown to get to it is a waste.  Make it part of a comprehensive regional rail system and thats another story.

 

The primary purpose of the streetcar is to serve as a pedestrian circulator downtown. The majority of those pedestrian trips will originate inside of the streetcar service area. People that use cars to get to downtown will more than likely use cars to get to their destination. The primary mode of transportation for people who access downtown from outside the service area of the streetcar will be cars, and no one is arguing that. But, it's quite reasonable to assume that once downtown the people in these trips might use the streetcar to reach a new destination, such their favorite lunch place 5 or six blocks away that normally they would not have time or are too lazy to walk to. After all, the primary purpose of a streetcar is not to commute people into or out of a work center, but to circulate the people already there.

 

The Cincinnati Streetcar Feasibility Study, published by the engineering firm HDR and validated by the UC Economics Department, states that in the 2010 base year 59% of the streetcar trips would originate from with in the service area. By 2015 that percentage jumps to 67%. It is also noted that these estimations are based on conservative variables. Such Bias Constant Variables such as the price of gas have fluctuated wildly since the study was completed, and it's not unreasonable to think that gas prices will continue this wild fluctuation once the economy recovers. I don't see any reference in the study of the majority of streetcar trips originating outside of the service area. If there is a study that states otherwise I would love to see it. Transportation Demand Forecasting is a rather interesting subject and I'd love to review any alternative analysis on this project.

 

Lastly, let's talk about the Banks. The streetcar study's analysis area is much larger than the small area known as The Banks Project. It extends the length of the basin, and development is expected along the entire length of the streetcar corridor in the event the streetcar is built. Also, the non-existent Banks is a improper to say. Sure, you can't see the progress of the project, but you have to construct the piles to support the project. These piles, located on the flood plain alluvium of the Ohio River, must be deep. It's likely that bedrock is 40, 50, 60 or more feet below grade and as such piles to support the parking garages and structures above the garages will have to be deep, and more than likely those piles will extend all the way to the bedrock to prevent uneven land subsidence caused by the structure's load on the weak soil. Sure, it may not look like progress, but it's better to do it right the first time than have a scenario where uneven subsidence causes a massive effort after construction to keep the structures stable (see Kansai International Airport). The truth is that the Banks Project is very real right now, and come June 1, the structures will be on their way up. Quite the magical moment for Cincinnati if you ask me.

Daryl Parks of 700 WLW loves to scream "the banks project doesn't exist yet" but it's undeniable now with a tower crane in position.  He also recently conceded that "downtown was packed" on a recent visit, but he and the station he runs still want downtown to fail because it allows them to keep pouring gas on suburban fear.  Also, because the station has moved to Kenwood from Mt. Adams, they think they're somehow keeping a better eye on the "city" than if they were back within its boundaries.  And somehow Mr. Parks' commuting between Anderson Twp and Kenwood makes him an authority on all matters downtown.  He's not a Cincinnati native and neither is Scott Sloan or Mike McConnell.  Cunningham is and he wasn't anti-city until the past decade when Parks took the helm.  And Cunningham isn't actually anti-city but his on-air persona is.  And remember 700WLW has far more listeners than the Enquirer has readers and it's not about to go out of business like the Enquirer will in 3 or 4 years.  But the prospect of 10-20% of commuters transition from cars to mass transit (or even car pooling) is a major threat to its business model.   

 

 

 

Jus

 

The primary purpose of the streetcar is to serve as a pedestrian circulator downtown. The majority of those pedestrian trips will originate inside of the streetcar service area. 

 

I don't think this idea is stressed enough.  I worked for years near Union Station in Washington, and would Metro to other offices, lunches, and shopping several times a week.  While I Metro'd to work, even those that drove would use the Metro as a downtown circulator. 

 

Beside the people who live or work in downtown Cincinnati using the streetcar, I can see people driving downtown and parking around Fountain Square and using the streetcar to get to an "expanded" downtown.  Far more then would walk to, or get back in their car at Fountain Square, and drive up to the places served by the streetcar.

The primary mode of transportation for people who access downtown from outside the service area of the streetcar will be cars, and no one is arguing that. But, it's quite reasonable to assume that once downtown the people in these trips might use the streetcar to reach a new destination, such their favorite lunch place 5 or six blocks away that normally they would not have time or are too lazy to walk to. After all, the primary purpose of a streetcar is not to commute people into or out of a work center, but to circulate the people already there.

 

This argument is exactly why I think Cincinnati should make the streetcar free, at least within designated zones or blocks (like Portland's).  If I were on my lunch break downtown, I'd just walk or go somewhere closer, rather than pay $1+ each way to ride the streetcar 5 blocks.  But if it were free, sure, I'd ride it to go even 2 or 3 blocks, if I happened to see the train coming.

 

Beside the people who live or work in downtown Cincinnati using the streetcar, I can see people driving downtown and parking around Fountain Square and using the streetcar to get to an "expanded" downtown.  Far more then would walk to, or get back in their car at Fountain Square, and drive up to the places served by the streetcar.

 

I just don't see that happening if there is a fare for the ride.  People are far more likely to just park close to where they want to go, and stay in that general vincinity.  People really do start adding costs up in their mind, and I can't imagine that many will want to throw streetcar fares on top of their parking expense. 

 

If those fares were free, it would make downtown Cincinnati seem so much smaller (in a good way).  It's so easy in Portland to hop on that streetcar downtown and ride to anywhere on the line.  If you see a shop or restaurant that looks interesting along the way, you can just get off the train and check it out, without worrying about spending another ~$1.50 when you get back on to proceed to your final destination.  Their free streetcar loop makes errand running via mass transit realistic, and really makes exploring the city enjoyable in a way that doing the same in Cincinnati just isn't.  If you want people to actually park downtown and ride this streetcar, you've got to find another way to fund operation besides fares. 

 

All of that aside, I think that the streetcar will make downtown and OTR more viable neighborhoods, with or without fares.  Even if people don't drive in from the suburbs to use it, having a rail system/loop like that would make living in OTR/downtown much more realistic.  I can totally imagine having a condo downtown, leaving my car parked for weeks, and just using the streetcar all the time.

^ In a perfect world:

 

* You could buy a yearly or monthly pass to ride as much as you want, whenever.

 

* You could buy a streetcar ticket at any parking meter along the route and get a discounted rate for the streetcar if you bought time on the parking meter.

 

I don't think Bill Cunningham is as big of an opponent as many think he is. In his private, off-air moments, he could be described as a supporter.

I don't think Bill Cunningham is as big of an opponent as many think he is. In his private, off-air moments, he could be described as a supporter.

 

I don't give a crap what he does in his private, off-air moments. When he's on-air he continually bashes the city and shows a STRONG anti-city and anti-mass transit bias.  Like somebody mentioned before, now that he's syndicated he has a lot more job security. He could be using that to spread some positive views if he truly held them. He's either a coward or you're mistaken.

^ I'm not mistaken, nor is he a coward. He's an entertainer. He talks about what he knows. And he plays to his audience. It's as simple as that.

 

I'm not defending him.

He realizes the ridiculousness of $200MM for a trolley to ferry people from the non-existant banks to Findlay Market.  Any system that requires the majority of its riders to DRIVE downtown to get to it is a waste.  Make it part of a comprehensive regional rail system and thats another story.

 

If you're going to cite the $200m figure then relate it to the $200m route.

 

$102m - Downtown/OTR Circulator

$28m - Uptown Connector

$55m - Clifton Heights/Avondale Circulator (too the Zoo)

 

This totals $185m (not $200m) and brings you from the Cincinnati riverfront, through Downtown/OTR, up the hill into Uptown, past the university/hospitals, and all the way to the zoo.  If you want to round up an inflated number then fine, but at least use the inflated route that goes with that number.

 

I don't give a crap what he does in his private, off-air moments. When he's on-air he continually bashes the city and shows a STRONG anti-city and anti-mass transit bias.  Like somebody mentioned before, now that he's syndicated he has a lot more job security. He could be using that to spread some positive views if he truly held them. He's either a coward or you're mistaken.

 

Yeah, in your world, there is no crime, Downtown is a wonderful place to hang out, the city's money is spent wisely, the Banks is just an opportunity waiting to happen, millions will ride a streetcar to nowhere, blah, blah, blah........

 

As Cunningham says, the Banks would have been built 10 years ago, if anyone with any intelligence thought it was viable.  Doesnt mean it isn't now, but realistically, it wasn't then!

 

I don't give a crap what he does in his private, off-air moments. When he's on-air he continually bashes the city and shows a STRONG anti-city and anti-mass transit bias.  Like somebody mentioned before, now that he's syndicated he has a lot more job security. He could be using that to spread some positive views if he truly held them. He's either a coward or you're mistaken.

 

Yeah, in your world, there is no crime, Downtown is a wonderful place to hang out, the city's money is spent wisely, the Banks is just an opportunity waiting to happen, millions will ride a streetcar to nowhere, blah, blah, blah........

 

As Cunningham says, the Banks would have been built 10 years ago, if anyone with any intelligence thought it was viable.  Doesnt mean it isn't now, but realistically, it wasn't then!

 

The Banks is a perfect example of the problems with not having a City-County unified government.  We have to put aside parochial differences in the County and projects like the Banks would be able to happen quicker.  But who is in the way of such progressive actions: conservative suburbanites who want nothing to do with the City.  So blame the suburbanites.  Its usually their fault anyway. 

Yeah, in your world, there is no crime, Downtown is a wonderful place to hang out, the city's money is spent wisely, the Banks is just an opportunity waiting to happen, millions will ride a streetcar to nowhere, blah, blah, blah........

 

As Cunningham says, the Banks would have been built 10 years ago, if anyone with any intelligence thought it was viable.  Doesnt mean it isn't now, but realistically, it wasn't then!

 

Remind us all again why you post on an urban-centered message board?

I forgot, would the fares be monitored on the honors system. When I was in San Diego this summer I used their light rail (called the Trolley) for a week and only had my ticket checked by a cop once. BTW: San Diego's system is great but it could be improved if the trains ran to Balboa Park and the airport terminal

Because I want a strong successful downtown, and like Cunningham, I don't think its being done in the right way.  I also don't think the taxes I pay to the city are being spent wisely.

 

How about you?  What is your connection to the city of Cincinnati, the County of Hamilton, or the state of Ohio?

Because I want a strong successful downtown, and like Cunningham, I don't think its being done in the right way. I also don't think the taxes I pay to the city are being spent wisely.

 

How about you? What is your connection to the city of Cincinnati, the County of Hamilton, or the state of Ohio?

 

Born and raised in Price Hill and Delhi. I also have a strong desire to see the city of Cincinnati do well. I fail to realize how you think this is spending your tax dollars poorly? It's an investment, validated by UC Economics Dept, that has a positive ROI for the city. It's a simple as that.

 

How would you spend them?

As Cunningham says, the Banks would have been built 10 years ago, if anyone with any intelligence thought it was viable. Doesnt mean it isn't now, but realistically, it wasn't then!

 

I don't think anyone would expect private companies to build the massive amount of garages required to lift the development out of the flood plain, it would have been built 10 years ago if the city/county could agree on and fund a public infrastructure project.

^ In a perfect world:

 

* You could buy a yearly or monthly pass to ride as much as you want, whenever.

 

* You could buy a streetcar ticket at any parking meter along the route and get a discounted rate for the streetcar if you bought time on the parking meter.

 

I like both of those options quite a bit.  Also, I like the idea of paying once for a given time period (1-4 hours, all day, etc). 

 

Yeah, in your world, there is no crime, Downtown is a wonderful place to hang out, the city's money is spent wisely, the Banks is just an opportunity waiting to happen, millions will ride a streetcar to nowhere, blah, blah, blah........

 

Actually, downtown is a wonderful place to hang out.  I was there just last night, and I enjoyed myself quite a bit.  And although no one but you said anything about crime, I don't feel any less safe downtown than I do in any other bar district.  My only complaint about going downtown is that it seems to be the only place that I get panhandled.  Also, I don't quite understand what your problem with The Banks is.  If you just don't like the project, that's fine.  But it's under construction already.  A year ago, you would've had a point, but the thing is obviously being built now, so referring to it as "nonexistant" and "an opportunity waiting to happen" is the height of ridiculousness.  Clearly, it's in progress.

Quick question:

 

Has anyone seriously addressed the possibility of running a single-tracked bi-directional streetcar? In other words, you would have one single track running from downtown all the way to uptown. You'd need double-tracked spots for passing and it would need to take up a parking lane so it can be divided from traffic.

 

Obviously, that's not the ideal system, but that's basically what Tampa did. Considering that people are trying to kill the proposal with cost complaints, it would seem like a viable option.

 

Here are photos of what Tampa did. You can see the single track bi-direction line, along with a double-tracked segement for passing.

 

Wouldn't this work for Cincy if cutting the budget really is necessary?

And just to clarify, the reason I'm asking about the single-tracking is because of the huge potential cost savings. It's only a little over 2.5 lane-miles from the Banks through OTR and to the edge of UC.

 

While not ideal, that still represents a system that goes to basically the same places for well under $100 million (under $63 million based on the $25mil per lane mile, which I still think seems oddly high).

^ One reason it's so high is that the city built-in huge contingencies for each line item and then an overall contingency for the whole project. I note with interest that a phase of The Banks garage construction -- basically steel and concrete like the streetcar's running track -- came in at about 60% of estimates.

 

Single-tracking really won't work for a serious urban transportation system you can depend on. You need to have turnbacks on parallel streets in case part of the line gets shut down by an accident. Tampa's is more tourist-oriented, though a fair amount of housing has unexpectedly developed nearby.

 

This totals $185m (not $200m) and brings you from the Cincinnati riverfront, through Downtown/OTR, up the hill into Uptown, past the university/hospitals, and all the way to the zoo. 

 

Is this your best arguement randy?  I'd say being within 10% is pretty close!

Because I want a strong successful downtown, and like Cunningham, I don't think its being done in the right way. I also don't think the taxes I pay to the city are being spent wisely.

 

How about you? What is your connection to the city of Cincinnati, the County of Hamilton, or the state of Ohio?

 

Don't you live in West Chester or some northern neighborhood?  The last people we are building this for are the Cunninghams of Kenwood or the people who don't pay taxes in the city.  If you work in the city and commute to any of these neighborhoods then I assume you sit in traffic on a regular basis on 71 or 75.    How could anyone deny that we need to get the ball rolling on transit OTHER than the MONEY PITS we call the automobile?

 

This totals $185m (not $200m) and brings you from the Cincinnati riverfront, through Downtown/OTR, up the hill into Uptown, past the university/hospitals, and all the way to the zoo.

 

Is this your best arguement randy? I'd say being within 10% is pretty close!

 

I think you missed the part where he said that it's a $185 million project stretching from The Banks to The Zoo.

 

Not a $200 million project stretching from The Banks to Findlay Market.

 

This totals $185m (not $200m) and brings you from the Cincinnati riverfront, through Downtown/OTR, up the hill into Uptown, past the university/hospitals, and all the way to the zoo.

 

Is this your best arguement randy? I'd say being within 10% is pretty close!

 

 

That's a pretty strong argument in my opinion!     

I still can't believe all the outrage at spending $185 million on a new mode of mass transit between the two largest business centers in the metro because some believe it is a waste of taxpayer money---but yet these same people are okay with subsidizing miles and miles of new and expanded highways to nowhere in the name of growth using taxpayer money.  What am I missing here???

Just to be fair to DanB, I think he's stated before in this thread that he supports light rail, but not streetcars.  Personally, I think they serve different functions and both will be necessary if Cincinnati hopes to grow over the next 25 years.  I don't see any problem with starting on a streetcar system for city neighborhoods and eventually tying in light rail when the politcal/economic climate is right for it.

 

I still can't believe all the outrage at spending $185 million on a new mode of mass transit between the two largest business centers in the metro because some believe it is a waste of taxpayer money---but yet these same people are okay with subsidizing miles and miles of new and expanded highways to nowhere in the name of growth using taxpayer money.  What am I missing here???

 

I don't think that they're "okay with it", but rather that they "don't think about it".  After all, when was the last time you saw a story in The Enquirer referencing millions of dollars for a routine road project and City Councilmen demanding to know how we pay for it?  People just accept that and move on because it isn't news.  But rail in Cincinnati?  That's something many of us have never seen and is a good way for some reporters, councilmen, and 700WLW's shock jocks to get some "cheap heat" by throwing around words like boondoggle while totally ignoring the studies and comparisons to similar projects around the country.

 

Agreed Jimmy----I was hoping people who had not previously considered all the wasted tax money we spend on highway expansion would start considering today.  You certainly don't hear calls to take the money being used on the future I-75 improvements and widening through the city and use them on the neighborhoods.  I could argue that I-75 just needs to be resurfaced and those hundreds of millions saved should be used to fight crime.

^ It would be one thing if that's all Cincinnati had to worry about -- who pays for the new highways. The more fundamental issue isn't on the supply side but on the demand side.

 

The widening of I-75 through Hamilton County over the next ten to fifteen years will cause further decapitalization of the core county as businesses and residents move even further out.

 

Add-in the dimunition of property values due to the extra noise from the doubling of trucks we're going to get on I-75 in the next twenty years plus the added incidence and cost of health problems due to the microparticulates from their diesel engiines, and I suspect that the widening of I-75 dwarfs the cost of the Cincinnati Streetcar many, many times over.

 

To me, even if building freeways were costless, their construction is almost always a net loss for the core city and county.

 

The streetcar is just one strategy to try to even up the terms of trade under which our city labors.

Widening I-75 is a bad idea for all the reasons that John mentioned.

 

 

Widening I-75 is a bad idea for all the reasons that John mentioned.

 

 

 

Unfortunately, the general public can't see beyond the delay they experience in their cars. They don't care what the Cost-Benefit Analysis says, just that their commute is terrible and they want something done about that now, regardless of the ultimate benefit. Perhaps laws could be passed that force transportation projects to be ranked mostly on their Cost-Benefit Ratio, and all projects to require an economic analysis such as the one the streetcar was subjected to. The Dutch have done a pretty good job using the Cost-Benefit ratio to determine the scale of flood protection necessary somewhere, and as such money is allocated in a way that reflects the ratio. Perhaps transportation can be prioritized in a similar fashion.

Jimmy_James: "I don't think that they're "okay with it", but rather that they "don't think about it".  "

 

One of the reasons people don't complain (or think) about the money spent on highways, is that they don't see it as being "their" money - it comes from that magical federal pot of money (or at least 80% of it does).  It's going to be spent somewhere, it might as well be here.

 

That and there is a whole bureacracy dedicated to building highways - the Ohio Department of Highways...I mean Transportation.

 

Eighth and State:  re C-B analysis - The revised TRAC criteria get closer to this.  That and the 21st Century Transportation Priorities Task Force was encouraging...up until Strickland said no way to the gas tax that would pay for it.

Did anyone catch the 12 Newsmakers interview with Greg Harris this morning? I was wondering if any good press was given to the Streetcar Proposal.

This totals $185m (not $200m) and brings you from the Cincinnati riverfront, through Downtown/OTR, up the hill into Uptown, past the university/hospitals, and all the way to the zoo. 

 

Is this your best arguement randy?  I'd say being within 10% is pretty close!

 

Well heck if that's the case then I'm gonna start saying that the system is only $170m and run from the Nky riverfront all the way to Xavier.  It's a choice opponents are making to cite $200m when there is no $200m plan on the table right now.  What has been approved is $130m, but if you're going to use the higher number then at least be consistent and use the larger route that corresponds with that number.

Hamilton County is taking too long to get heavy rail off of the ground.  This is a major issue.

^Dude, Hamilton County isn't doing ANYTHING!  The city is the only one trying to get ANY sort of rail started. 

Hamilton County is taking too long to get heavy rail off of the ground.  This is a major issue.

 

Care to elaborate?

Interstates are built using mostly federal funds because they are exactly that - they aren't limited to geographical areas.  A highway like I-75 is more important for it's freight shipments than it's commuter role, in the eyes of the feds.

 

I'm all for federal funds going towards rail on a regional or national scale (an extension of the Acela NE corridor, for example, to Chicago/midwest, and down to Atlanta/southeast), but I think streetcar funds should probably come from local sources.  This is just my opinion, of course, and based on my belief that I'd rather pay more taxes to my local government and less to my federal, but that's a whole other discussion.

Did anyone catch the 12 Newsmakers interview with Greg Harris this morning? I was wondering if any good press was given to the Streetcar Proposal.

 

Harris was strong on the streetcar this morning on Newsmakers.

http://www.local12.com/mediacenter/[email protected]&navCatId=86

Interstates are built using mostly federal funds because they are exactly that - they aren't limited to geographical areas. A highway like I-75 is more important for it's freight shipments than it's commuter role, in the eyes of the feds.

 

I'm all for federal funds going towards rail on a regional or national scale (an extension of the Acela NE corridor, for example, to Chicago/midwest, and down to Atlanta/southeast), but I think streetcar funds should probably come from local sources. This is just my opinion, of course, and based on my belief that I'd rather pay more taxes to my local government and less to my federal, but that's a whole other discussion.

 

Then the feds should spend nothing to widen I-75 to accomodate the commuters of our metro area based on the assertion that I-75 is more important for freight transportation.  If the cars stayed off the interstate, then there would be plenty of room for the trucks without widening the road. 

 

Shouldn't only local funds be used to subsidize the commuter routes under your model?

 

My point is there are some severe inequalities in the current transportation infrastructure and how that infrastructure is funded.  All metro areas should be looking at a multi-modal transportation system that creates a sustainable transportation infrastructure benefiting all its citizens.  Streetcars in Cincinnati would at least move us closer to that concept. 

 

 

 

 

^ It would be one thing if that's all Cincinnati had to worry about -- who pays for the new highways. The more fundamental issue isn't on the supply side but on the demand side.

 

The widening of I-75 through Hamilton County over the next ten to fifteen years will cause further decapitalization of the core county as businesses and residents move even further out.

 

Add-in the dimunition of property values due to the extra noise from the doubling of trucks we're going to get on I-75 in the next twenty years plus the added incidence and cost of health problems due to the microparticulates from their diesel engiines, and I suspect that the widening of I-75 dwarfs the cost of the Cincinnati Streetcar many, many times over.

 

To me, even if building freeways were costless, their construction is almost always a net loss for the core city and county.

 

The streetcar is just one strategy to try to even up the terms of trade under which our city labors.

 

What about Mt. Storm? There would be a lot of road blocks in the way of the effort to cut into that land since park space is well protected.

^The Cincinnati Park Board is generally on board with the I-75 plans that would cut into the hill/park.  They have asked for several things in return that have made the whole thing worthwhile.

Ah I see. I was wondering about that. Thanks for clearing it up.

Hamilton County is taking too long to get heavy rail off of the ground.  This is a major issue.

 

Care to elaborate?

 

In a nutshell...

 

http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/commuterrail.html

 

The tracks are well-located, even for today's priorities.  The trains are expensive, but what isn't?  SORTA is supposed to be forward-thinking now that it's officially a real regional authority, but what exactly is Hamilton County saying to Montgomery County to keep high-speed rail in Southern Ohio a non-story?  Dayton doesn't have a motive to discourage the kind of investment that could come from passenger rail to Cincinnati.  Also, think about some of the cities that have accomplished at least one line of passenger rail.  You can't just get behind and be content to stay behind.

I think this speaks for itself....

 

Cut and paste this ^ and send it to every "elected" you know.

^^Cool graph.  Is there an article or story that goes along with that?

It appeared at:

 

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/1-20-09

 

Also please note the blog item before it at...

 

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/marc-lefkowitz/statewide-passenger-rail-building-speed

I think this speaks for itself....

 

 

Yes, it clearly does.  Abd it says most Americans are idiots.

 

I agree that we should spend much more on public transportation, while trying to maintain the current level of spending on our roads (which isn't even enough to keep the ones we have from crumbling).  But 22% of transportation on bike and foot traffic?  Do they want a completely enclosed, heated bikway connecting cities or something?  A mile of bike/walking path - even a nice one - is worth pennies to the dollar of a highway, let alone a rail.

 

I'd also like to state transportation and infrastructure are one of very, very, very few things I think the government should spend MORE money on.