I'm not a member of Coast, but anytime I present an arguement against the streetcar, I get the same type of response from Living in Gin.

 

You don't present reasoned arguments against the streetcar; you throw juvenile potshots at passenger rail and anybody who supports it while offering no alternatives in return. You've also admitted to committing ballot fraud on COAST's behalf. Having "Premium Member" after your name doesn't make you any less of a troll.

Maybe, but then I'm not even sure 3CDC will be selling spots if they get it built.

I will not say absolutely yes or no, but I believe you will see a portion of that garage being set aside for just that. Every other garage that the city has does this and I do not see where this one would be any different.  As for the distance, SCPA is further away and Music Hall is not always operational, I think you will see they will be looking to maximize the garage usage by renting spaces. 

 

What street if you don't mind me asking.

    I'm not a member of Coast, but anytime I present an arguement against the streetcar, I get the same type of response from Living in Gin.

 

 

You don't present reasoned arguments against the streetcar; you throw juvenile potshots at passenger rail and anybody who supports it while offering no alternatives in return. You've also admitted to committing ballot fraud on COAST's behalf. Having "Premium Member" after your name doesn't make you any less of a troll.

 

Being a premium troll has its benefits! You can spew "whatever"  without the risk of the Mod kicking you to the curb. $$$

 

Coast was deceptive and can never be trusted. I talked with someone yesterday who had signed the petition, he was against this streetcar project but NOT the 3C rail plan. 

^Mike, I wouldn't put that info out in a public forum.  I tried to PM you, but your mailbox is apparently full.

I have a mailbox?!?! 

I think the streetcar will be instrumental to the success of the new Washington Park garage. It will have a lot of parking spaces during the day when downtown workers could park there for less and ride the streetcar to their jobs south of Central Parkway.

I'm not a member of Coast, but anytime I present an arguement against the streetcar, I get the same type of response from Living in Gin.

 

You don't present reasoned arguments against the streetcar; you throw juvenile potshots at passenger rail and anybody who supports it while offering no alternatives in return. You've also admitted to committing ballot fraud on COAST's behalf. Having "Premium Member" after your name doesn't make you any less of a troll.

 

That's exactly the type of response I am talking about.  I have given what I consider the "average" citizen's response to the money being proposed, and the type of service a streetcar will provide.  The only evidence and proof I have gotten is that "it works in other cities".  I have said time and time again, if the streetcar was tied into an entire rail system it would be worthwhile.  Other than the attitude that one has to start somewhere, I still see no real benefit.

 

As far as voter fraud, I have never admitted to it.  Many like you have accused me of it, but all I said was that I would make one of my rental properties my legal residence for the upcoming election.  How is that fraud?  Many of our city leaders do the same thing.  I think our mayor did that just prior to his election.  I think many of the police officers have rental units within the city.  Anyone checking the actual time living there?  I don't think there is a legal requirement.

 

Some of you take far too seriously what you read on here.  In most cases, you are preaching to the choir.  It is not UO forumers that you have to convince.  My saying I would vote for it should be meaningless to you.

 

LIG, for what its worth, your attitude, in my opinion, is what is bad for UO.  You haven't lived here since you were 11, yet you claim to know what is best for the city and its residents.  You have no respect for anyone's opinion.

 

I want special colored stars for being a Premium Troll.

 

I think the streetcar will be instrumental to the success of the new Washington Park garage.

I agree, and the development of the garage and everything else by 3CDC strengthens the argument for the streetcar.  I would rather see that worded that the development of things such as the garage and all the other developments are what will be instrumental in the success of the streetcar.  One is questionable, the other is not.

I think the streetcar will be instrumental to the success of the new Washington Park garage. It will have a lot of parking spaces during the day when downtown workers could park there for less and ride the streetcar to their jobs south of Central Parkway.

 

The garage and streetcar support each other. 

 

The streetcar increases the functionality of the garage by extending range of those who park there and by applying downward pressure on the demand for parking spaces per residential unit, increasing the number of units the same number of spots can support. 

 

The garage helps the streetcar by providing another access point for the streetcar for those who will take an automobile into the area and circulate using the streetcar.  It also helps by providing lower cost event parking for events farther south along the streetcar line.

http://209.51.133.155/cms/index.php/news_releases/more/cincinnati_anti_rail_ballot_issue_is_sad_and_unthoughtful/

 

Cincinnati anti-rail ballot issue is "sad" and "disappointing"

Two talented board members are added in other board action

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — Aug. 10, 2009

Contact:  Ken Prendergast

All Aboard Ohio Executive Director

(216) 288-4883

[email protected]

 

At its regular meeting Aug. 8, All Aboard Ohio's Board of Directors unanimously passed a resolution that put the nonprofit educational organization on record of opposing an as-yet un-numbered City Charter amendment to appear on the Nov. 3, 2009 ballot in the City of Cincinnati. The ballot issue, if passed, would require all expenditures by the City of Cincinnati for the construction or improvement of rail passenger service to be first subject to a public vote.

 

In its resolution, the association noted the high cost of owning a car, the large number of households in Cincinnati which do not have any cars, the inaccessibility of available jobs that are mostly in the suburbs, the region's high ozone pollution due primarily from an overdependence on cars and trucks, the impacts of mobile-source pollution on scaring away manufacturing jobs, and the superior ability of all types of passenger rail (streetcar, light-rail, commuter rail, and intercity rail) to address these issues. Specifically, the board resolved that:

 

"The board opposes the proposed City Charter amendment as it is punitive and discriminatory against a city-building mode of transport like passenger rail service while other modes of travel that siphoned jobs, residents and wealth from the city will continue to be funded by taxpayers in the City of Cincinnati."

 

All Aboard Ohio President Bill Hutchison said these facts should be noted by the Southwestern Ohio Green Party and the Cincinnati chapter of the NAACP which circulated petitions to place the City Charter amendment on the ballot.

 

"This is very sad to see this happening," Hutchison said. "They're really not thinking this through. Passenger rail has a strong record of bringing economic vitality and environmental quality to urban centers throughout the world. For groups who claim to want these characteristics for Cincinnati yet seek an anti-rail charter amendment is very disappointing."

 

The All Aboard Ohio board said passage of the charter amendment will create a barrier to investing in rail passenger and rail transit services that have brought billions of dollars in new investment, created jobs and enhanced livability in over three dozen cities and metropolitan areas across the United States in the past three decades.

 

The Board of Directors of All Aboard Ohio believes that "if the proposed amendment is approved at a time when federal and state of Ohio transportation policies and Amtrak are committed to improving and expanding the nation's intercity rail passenger network Cincinnati may be reducing its opportunity for growth of rail service and placing the present limited Amtrak service to the city at risk."

 

A copy of the resolution is available HERE:

http://members.cox.net/ohiohsr/Resolution%20-%20Cincinnati%20anti-rail.pdf

 

In other action, the Board of Directors of All Aboard Ohio voted unanimously to appoint two new board members: Judi Craig, vice president and area manager of Parsons Brinckerhoff in Cincinnati; and Ronald Sheck Ph.D., a retired transportation planner and public policy researcher living in Toledo.

 

Craig manages the Cincinnati-area operations of PB, a international engineering, planning, program and construction management organization. She is currently serving as Project Manager for the Ohio Rail Development Commission's Cleveland - Columbus - Cincinnati (3-C) Corridor "Quick Start" Environmental Assessment. Previously she served for 15 years with the Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments (OKI), most recently as director of corridor studies where she oversaw the I-71 Light Rail Corridor study and the I-75 North South Transportation Initiative. She also established the Regional Ozone Coalition.

 

Among his many experiences, Sheck was urban rail program manager for the Washington State Department of Transportation, president of Transit Solutions in Seattle and in Tampa, Florida, research program director at the Center for Urban Transportation Research at the University of South Florida, director of Transportation Programs at the New Mexico State Highway and Transportation Department, and an associate professor of Geography at the Ohio State University as well at New Mexico State University.

 

"These are both extremely talented and experienced people to have on our board," Hutchison said. "I am thankful they have offered their skills and experiences to us, and I look forward to their contributions to All Aboard Ohio."

 

END

^

 

Thanks for weighing-in, Ken. People are definitely starting to understand what this is all about. Today, I've had a number of people mention Sunday's Enquirer editorial against the COAST Charter Amendment. They had no idea before they read it.

 

 

 

 

I have said time and time again, if the streetcar was tied into an entire rail system it would be worthwhile.

 

Yet you signed a petition that would make it nearly impossible for Cincinnati to build any form of rail system.  I agree that you take a lot of heat on this board and I'm not trying to contribute to that, but your claim to support a comprehensive passenger rail system has virtually no merit when you openly support amending the city charter in such an unnecessary and counterproductive way.

McConnell spent a few minutes on the ballot initiative today.  I'll post what he said below

 

Mike McConnell today said......

 

"It essentially says my 'way or the highway'.  And this is what bugs me about the entire movement and I have to ask myself "Who do you think you are?" We have a whole body of people who give input, pro and con, on issues on whether it not it makes sense to build streetcars. Coast and NAACP think they are special. They suggest a ballot iniative that suggests everything has to run through them. If this were to pass, the public, which does not hold the hearing; the public that does not do the economic impact studies; the public that does not look around to see where rail services have or have not worked well. They, according to the new ballot initiative, will be making this decision. Who do you think you are to deny the process that the founding fathers put in place?"

 

Podcast for today, hour 1, 17-20 minute mark

That's exactly the type of response I am talking about.  I have given what I consider the "average" citizen's response to the money being proposed, and the type of service a streetcar will provide.  The only evidence and proof I have gotten is that "it works in other cities".  I have said time and time again, if the streetcar was tied into an entire rail system it would be worthwhile.  Other than the attitude that one has to start somewhere, I still see no real benefit.

 

You don't give the "average" citizen's response; you give the response of somebody who can't be bothered to lean the basic facts of what's being debated. (And if that is indeed the "average" citizen's response, than that's a sad commentary on how well-informed our electorate is.) The fact that you keep repeating the same COAST talking points even after they've been thoroughly discredited is a sad commentary on your own critical thinking skills.

 

And the streetcar is designed to become part of an overall regional rail system. The 2002 MetroMoves proposal included the streetcar segment largely as it is currently planned. So yes, one has to start somewhere in order to get regional rail, and that "somewhere" is the streetcar because that's what is currently within the city's power to build at this time.

 

LIG, for what its worth, your attitude, in my opinion, is what is bad for UO.

 

You just don't like it when people call you out on your bullsh!t. You're happy to dish out abuse, but then you throw a temper tantrum when somebody dishes it back. You're like the schoolyard bully who runs crying to the teacher when the new kid shows up and clocks him in the mouth.

 

You haven't lived here since you were 11, yet you claim to know what is best for the city and its residents.

 

Ah, the old "You don't live here so you can't possibly know anything about Cincinnati" argument. That's the sort of parochial attitude I'd expect to find from some inbred Archie Bunker type who hasn't stepped outside of Westwood for 20 years. As if the laws of physics are different in Cincinnati, or as if there's something special about Cincinnati's drinking water that means accepted principles of sustainable urban planning don't apply there. How many generations of my kids need to graduate from Seton High School before their opinion is worth listening to? Cincinnati is unique in many ways, but it's not that unique, and people with far more expertise than you or I have carefully studied the issue and concluded that the streetcar is a sound investment in the city's future.

 

I deal with transit design for a living, and I've lived in enough cities to see firsthand what works and what doesn't work. I ride public transit everyday, and I've spent a fair amount of volunteer hours helping restore and operate vintage rolling stock at a couple museums, so I think I've earned the right to comment on Cincinnati's streetcar proposal. I'm certainly not the only participant in this thread who doesn't have a 513 area code. If somebody has something intelligent to say about Cincinnati or New York or any other city, I don't really give a rat's ass how far back their family tree goes in that given city, or if they've even lived there at all.

 

But if you want to get into a pissing contest about who has the purest Cincinnati pedigree, go right ahead. My family history in Cincinnati goes back to when German was the dominate language in Over-the-Rhine. That soap you sell comes out of machines that were designed, built, and maintained by my maternal grandfather. His father co-founded the company that makes the baseball bats used by the Reds and every other major-league ball club. My paternal grandfather spent his career laying underground phone cables for Cincinnati Bell, and was responsible for every underground phone line in the city by the time he retired. My father spent his early medical career treating Johnny Bench and Marge Schott for various orthopedic problems. My mother, my grandmothers, and various other aunts and uncles and cousins have all done their own part over the years to make Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky a better region.

 

They all had different backgrounds and different political leanings, but they all felt obligated to leave behind a better city for their children, even if they didn't live long enough to see the fruits of their effort. But I don't expect you to understand why I take it very personally when COAST comes along and tries to destroy everything they've done, and turn my hometown into a burned-out, dysfunctional shell of a city. COAST isn't interested in building a better city; their entire ideology is: "I've got mine, screw you." They build themselves up by tearing down what other people work hard to build. They are the vultures who feed off the rotting corpse of a dead city.

 

As for me, I'm hoping to move back to Cincinnati next year and spend my career making a positive impact on Cincinnati's transit infrastructure and built environment, and I think my time spent living and working elsewhere -- by choice or not -- has given me a valuable perspective in my life and in my vocation. The fact that you'd use my life experience as an insult says far more about you than it does about me.

 

You have no respect for anyone's opinion.

 

I have no respect for your opinion. I manage to get along pretty well with everybody else around here, even when I disagree with them.

Guys, there will be no pissing contest because any further tit-for-tats will be deleted. Let's keep it civil and on-topic to the streetcar discussion. Thanks.

 

Mike McConnell today said......

 

"It essentially says my 'way or the highway'. And this is what bugs me about the entire movement and I have to ask myself "Who do you think you are?" We have a whole body of people who give input, pro and con, on issues on whether it not it makes sense to build streetcars. Coast and NAACP think they are special. They suggest a ballot iniative that suggests everything has to run through them. If this were to pass, the public, which does not hold the hearing; the public that does not do the economic impact studies; the public that does not look around to see where rail services have or have not worked well. They, according to the new ballot initiative, will be making this decision. Who do you think you are to deny the process that the founding fathers put in place?"

 

Podcast for today, hour 1, 17-20 minute mark

 

He makes a good point which i've been trying to push along too.  Pro-streetcar or anti-streetcar, it doesn't matter, don't vote for a piece of legislation that is terribly written and purposely adds red tape and inefficiency to a government that is already full of red tape and inefficiencies. 

  Ha! You guys crack me up sometimes.

 

  For the record, I am NOT a member of COAST. I don't even live in the City of Cincinnati.

 

  I have said before that I am NOT opposed to the streetcar, though I am skeptical of the supposed benefits that it will bring, and the OTR loop would not have been my first choice in routing.

 

  Cheers.  :lol:

I have said before that I am NOT opposed to the streetcar, though I am skeptical of the supposed benefits that it will bring, and the OTR loop would not have been my first choice in routing.

 

What would have been your first choice of routing? (I'm not asking to pick a fight; I'm genuinely curious.)

 

Sometimes I wonder if the proposed loop linking downtown Cincinnati with Newport and Covington would have been more politically palatable, although it would raise a number of logistical issues with the river crossings and having to cross municipal and state boundaries.

 

A more direct straight shot up Vine Street to UC (and back downtown on Race) might also be an easier sell to the public, and would still provide similar benefits to OTR. The route as planned does seem a bit roundabout, if it's meant to serve as a connector between Uptown and Downtown.

Jimmy,  FWIW, I know I may have said it, but I never signed Coast's petition.  It was sarcasm, an attempt at humor.  I'm not that backward.  In many ways I agree exactly with what 8th said above, and I am slightly more happy than he because of the UC loop.

 

For the other person, the west side just happens to be where I live now, is not where I am from, and encouraged my children to leave the area, unlike many others.  I did read a put down from you towards an architecture student because he didn't have his degree yet.  Not very respectful.

 

 

It wasn't a put-down; he claimed to be an architect, and the information contained in his signature contradicted that claim. I merely pointed that out. Like him, I'm also in the process of pursuing my educational credentials to become a licensed architect, and I've worked long enough and hard enough on that goal to want the title "Architect" to actually mean something when I earn it. It gets tossed around far too casually these days.

would have been more politically palatable

I could have put a whole host of things in front of that and therein lies the problem.  The PR on this, outside of those on this forum has not been the best and down right off putting at times.  I believe this could have been sold much differently from day 1 and still have come out with the same product at the end but to treat those who either do not understand the concept or even those who outright disagree with contempt is not the way to get anything done in this city or any other for that matter.  Poor salesmanship is what is the going to hinder you more than anything.

Ok, lets just agree we both want good things for Cincinnati.

Deal.

 

    Since you asked, I would like to see the Metro Bus routes improved first before a streetcar is built. I think that the former CL&N route, with a terminal next to P&G or near the Taft Museum, and extending toward Norwood, could be the spine of the system. I don't think that the Vine street route would be bad if it went straight up Vine without all of that looping through OTR west of Vine. I would also consider a McMicken/ Calhoun loop, a Fourth Street line, a Boathouse/Longworth shuttle, a U.C. east/west shuttle, or maybe a circulator in the U.C. area.

 

  I am very happy that we are talking about a small scale streetcar and not some grand scheme such as Metro Moves, but I think when the uptown connection was added to the OTR loop it made the project unbuildable.

 

    I would caution that rail in a street is MUCH more expensive than open track in both construction costs and operations and every efflort should be made to separate the rail vehicles from cars, either on a private right of way or a street without much automobile traffic. 

I'm a little curious about how the proposed route was decided upon as well. If I had to guess, it seems like they wanted to provide direct service to Music Hall and Findlay Market, and then added the Uptown connection as an afterthought.

 

Now that a professional team has been assembled to plan and build the streetcar, I wonder if the proposed routing is subject to revision. Making the route more straightforward would reduce the length of the line a bit, and shave a few bucks off the price tag in the process.

 

If the inbound trip to downtown was via Race Street, the streetcar would still provide direct service to Findlay Market, and be only a block away from Music Hall (with a newly-renovated Washington Park in the middle).

 

  As I understand it, a consulting firm picked the OTR loop based on developable properties. Then, under pressure to include U.C., the "phase 2" extension to U.C. was sort of tacked on the the OTR loop.

 

 

I would caution that rail in a street is MUCH more expensive than open track in both construction costs and operations and every efflort should be made to separate the rail vehicles from cars, either on a private right of way or a street without much automobile traffic. 

 

That depends on what gets factored into the cost. If a new private right-of-way needs to be built -- especially if it's on an elevated viaduct or in a subway -- then the costs skyrocket. If the ROW is already available, such as an abandoned railroad line, then it's much less expensive to adapt it for transit use. The big cost advantage to city streets is that they're already public property.

 

For a regional rail system that extends into the suburbs, I would agree that fully grade-separated tracks are the ideal solution. If there's no feasible way to avoid street-running segments, then those segments should be kept to a minimum. Aside from cost, street-running trains are slower and are more subject to accidents with other vehicles. Longer light rail trains are also more disruptive to other traffic than short streetcars.

 

Speed is less of an issue for streetcars, since the riders are typically going shorter distances within the neighborhood. Streetcars have lighter axle loads than light rail or subway trains, so the tracks can be built on fairly shallow (and therefore less expensive) foundations.

 

    Even for a streetcar speed is important, and it's not just the running speed but the mean route speed. If the streetcar is stopped at a red light, you are paying for a vehicle that is not moving and a driver that is not doing anything. Plus, the faster the vehicle is, the fewer of them you need to cover the same route. And since faster transport saves time, you will attract more riders or be able to charge a higher price.

 

    The worse thing you can do is make your streetcar stop for automobiles. At the minimum, the street traffic patterns should be reworked to give priority to streetcars. Ideally, the streetcars will not have to stop at all.

 

    The proposed OTR loop crosses itself, which I was never happy about. One streetcar will have to stop for another.

 

    It may not seem like much, but a single stop for a traffic will be mulitplied thousands of times over the course of a year. That's unnecesary operations cost including wear on the brakes.

 

   

 

  Yes, city streets are already public property, but at the same time they are already also congested with utilities, including old streetcar rails.

 

    In OTR in particular, the old rails ran down the center of the street. The utilities, in order to avoid the rails, are often located at the curbs.

 

    Utilities are a big deal. They are not a show stopper, but they will add cost and scheduling constraints.

As I understand it, a consulting firm picked the OTR loop based on developable properties. Then, under pressure to include U.C., the "phase 2" extension to U.C. was sort of tacked on the the OTR loop.

 

I would argue that's a backwards approach. The main priority should be to make the streetcar an attractive transit option, which means getting from Point A to Point B without unnecessary detours. If that happens, then development along the streetcar route will follow naturally.

 

It's not as if Vine and Race are lacking in developable properties, and the streetcar's immediate benefits would extend at least a block in either direction from the line. So even if the streetcar runs in a straight line up Vine and down Race, you'd have a zone from  Elm to Walnut that's within a block of the streetcar. That still covers a pretty huge chunk of OTR. As that central chunk develops, the peripheral areas will become more desirable in time.

 

Utilities are a big deal. They are not a show stopper, but they will add cost and scheduling constraints.

 

True. That's why deep-bore subway tunnels are a good thing. :)

Re:  The Proposed Route

 

From the HDR study http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/city/downloads/city_pdf17754.pdf

 

"To assess the feasibility of construction and operation of a streetcar in downtown Cincinnati, and to analyze the viability of the associated investment, it was first necessary for the project team to identify a single feasible alignment for study. The alignment selected for the purpose of this study is not necessarily the alignment that would ultimately be implemented for design and construction. The study alignment is considered to be representative of the range of feasible streetcar routes in the study area. All feasible alignments will be re-examined in a later phase of study to determine the final alignment that would ultimately be constructed."

^ Gotcha. So the route hasn't necessarily been carved in stone at this point.

His father co-founded the company that makes the baseball bats used by the Reds and every other major-league ball club

....so you have a Louisville connection , too?

 

I'm concerned that this charter amendment could really queer the deal for 3-C.  Is there any chance using the amendement to oppose 3-C could be up for a court challenge? 

I never lived there, but I still have some extended family down there. My great-grandfather was the Hillerich in Hillerich & Bradsby. (Alas, the family fortune went down a different branch of the tree.)

Seriously, this is getting irritating. The two people who in the four years this thread has been active have needed things repeated to them repeatedly are DanB and 8th & State.

 

>Utilities are a big deal.

 

No kidding.  That's the advantage of modern streetcar over light rail -- the lower axle weight means modern streetcar can be built on a 12" concrete pad that does not affect subsurface utilities whatsoever, because they are deeper.  Light rail requires a deeper pad, therefore utilities need to be rebuilt deeper or somewhere else. This matter is central to the cost-savings of the whole modern streetcar mode. Also, modern streetcar tracks can be installed on a block within a week, causing minimal disruption to businesses. Light rail is replacing what would have been built as heavy rail and modern streetcar is replacing a lot of what would have previously been built as light rail.   

 

>I think that the former CL&N route,

 

Okay -- the CL&N route has been studied since 1927.  I read 1927 Beeler Report myself 10 years ago in the Historical Society Library.  It's not usable now for the same reasons as then -- the single track tunnels and it doesn't go close to business districts. It's actually worse now that it parallels I-71 through the densest part. 

 

>with a terminal next to P&G or near the Taft Museum,

 

Seriously? 

 

 

>I don't think that the Vine street route would be bad if it went straight up Vine without all of that looping through OTR west of Vine.

 

The argument there is for mental mapping purposes alone. There simply no reason to avoid serving Findlay Market directly when it's so close. Also, 2-ways on these streets is dumb when they can be built on parallel one-way streets.  It works very well in Portland because it leaves two lanes of on-street parking and one lane for cars to pass streetcars stopped at stations.   

 

 

>I would also consider a McMicken/ Calhoun loop, a Fourth Street line, a Boathouse/Longworth shuttle, a U.C. east/west shuttle, or maybe a circulator in the U.C. area.

 

Okay, you seriously are not getting it. You sound like John Cranley just throwing out random ideas wondering aloud "why haven't we studied this?". It convinces people new to the discussion that you're thinking "outside the box". 

 

Also, exclusive ROW is bad news in city propers, because it deflects station activity away from established business districts. You *always* want a rail line going through *every inch* of business districts along its route, even if that means going slowly on the surface.  The defunct subway really messed up when it saved money by building a station at the top of the Ludlow Viaduct instead of at the bottom through Northside.  CL&N's the same scenario --  rail should be built on Gilbert, not a few blocks away and in a wooded trench next to the interstate.

 

Surface running is why Houston's light rail and Portland's streetcar are huge ridership successes. The St. Louis light rail line has a downtown subway, but its grade separated run between downtown and Forest Park suffers because it follows a rail route which means stations are in odd spots. Sure, it helps out suburban travel times, but it does not help the city it travels through as much as it could.  The streetcar is being built in the city for the city, not for the benefit of Blue Ash commuters.       

 

Here's why the streetcar follows the path it does.

 

When Dan Deering and Michael Moose originally proposed what has become the Cincinnati Streetcar, they envisioned it as a three-legged system including a streetcar operating from the Banks to Findlay Market on Elm and Race, an aerial tram or an incline up to Ohio Avenue, and then a series of minibuses operating on Ohio Avenue to McMillan and beyond. It was pretty awkward -- a three-seat ride to go maybe 2.5 miles.

 

From the get-go, everyone wanted to leave Findlay in the mix. It's on a steady upward trajectory, and it seems like it's going to be downtown's supermarket for as far as anyone can see. Plus, there are amazing vacant factory buildings north and west of it, so you can introduce a lot of new housing without having to displace anyone. Having Music Hall on Elm served to solidify this thinking.

 

South of Central Parkway, it got more complicated. One driver of the decision were the bridges over Fort Washington Way. The Main and Walnut Street bridges had already been designed to carry light rail. Using them avoided a $5 million rebuild cost for each. Plus interrupting traffic on I-71.

 

It also seemed to make sense to bracket Government Square, since the bus to streetcar connections can be made easily there. Also, almost all of our city's major office buildings are within a two-block radius centered at Fifth and Walnut. Since the most likely suspects to live in Over-the-Rhine were deemed to be downtown office workers, making this an important destination made a lot of sense.

 

Also the riverfront's more active side is to the east. Together, the Great American Ball Park and U.S. Bank Arena have twenty times as many event dates as PBS has. The Aronoff is to the east, as is the Library.

 

In one of the meetings, someone said it should be on Elm to serve the Convention Center with door-to-door service. Dan Lincoln, who leads the Convention and Visitor's Bureau, jumped into this conversation and said something like, "Hey, don't build this for conventioneers. They need stuff to do. They'll find the streetcar. Build this for Cincinnatians."

 

The crossover from the Main/Walnut pair to the Elm/Race pair took a while to resolve. At first, both directions were destined to run on Central Parkway. Rick Pender, development director for the Opera, suggested putting at least one direction on 12Th Street because it felt more like a streetcar street, while Central Parkway seemed more appropriate to host light rail. Personally, I hope both directions end up on 12Th Street, but that decision really doesn't have to be made yet.

 

One nice thing I hear they're thinking about: inbound streetcars will lay-over on Race Street in the curb lane next to Findlay Market. Like end-of-the-line airport service, a streetcar would always remain there for the comfort of shoppers until the next one came around the corner. Then the first streetcar would depart and its successor would lay-over. I dunno how this fits with balancing the operating budget, but it sounds really good to me.

 

Vine Street's out. With two-way traffic and a Kroger store that's often a bottleneck, it would present tremendous operational problems. Plus, there aren't many undeveloped sites on Vine Street south of Central Parkway.

 

If you go to the city's web site and look at the "hot maps" showing the areas which are one, two and three blocks from the alignment, you'll see that all of the CBD and most of OTR is within three blocks of the route. It gets to within three blocks of most of the Banks, Broadway Commons, and the Brewery District -- places that, so far, have been regarded as a little out of the swim of things.

 

I can't explain the merits of going up Vine Street to Uptown. Nor can anyone else, it seems. To me, knowing how streetcars are supposed to work, it's inexplicable.

Thanks for the back story, John. I figured Government Square was the anchor point for the southern part of the line, but I didn't know about some of the other issues.

 

What sort of grade does the Vine Street hill have? My best guess is that it's about 7.5% (400 vertical feet per mile). According to this page, the maximum allowable grade for the Skoda streetcars is 9%, which means they should be able to handle the hill.

 

I think running the streetcar Uptown is a good idea, although I have mixed feelings about whether it's a good idea to do it as part of the first phase or not. Maybe that's the price for getting UC to throw their support behind the project... If so, maybe they could throw some money behind it as well.

With Vine Street, it's not only the vertical, it's the horizontal too. Basically, you have one mile of non-revenue track with a service area of a half-block or so on each side. I doubt there's a single 100' section of Vine Street that's flat enough to enable a stop there.

 

I'm hoping the Uptown Alternatives Analysis comes up with something better. And it probably will.

 

>One nice thing I hear they're thinking about: inbound streetcars will lay-over on Race Street in the curb lane next to Findlay Market. Like end-of-the-line airport service, a streetcar would always remain there for the comfort of shoppers until the next one came around the corner.

 

Yeah, that's a fantastic element of the plan.  If you are shopping at Findlay Market, the streetcar will sit there for around five minutes, meaning you have plenty of time to secure anything you have bought.  It gets wild in the big city subways when people bring on awkward stuff.

 

John I agree about 12th.  It's already a great street and duel-directions there wouldn't impede through-traffic since there isn't any and never will be. Also, I think it fits better in the mind than Central Parkway, since they are such different streets.  I think there's an argument for the parkway, since the streetcar will be more visible. Either way is fine.

 

I went out jogging about a week ago from UC down across the river and across Newport's flood wall.  All those people will be able to see the streetcar at The Banks.  If it waits there like it will at Findlay Market, it will advertise itself to all of Covington and Newport all day long. 

 

It'll torment NK leaders, and before long it'll be running across the L&N bridge. The bridge from downtown Cincinnati, then split between Saratoga and Monmouth south to the start of the hill would be huge for Newport. 

having it sit at Findlay Market for an extra 5 minutes, maybe we'll get excited.

 

They are saying Findlay Market will be the beginning and end of the downtown circulator. Just like the end of the line at a subway, the cars wait for a period of time before leaving the station. It's not extending the wait time to sit there. You can't run the cars back to back otherwise you end up with primarily empty cars. By waiting at findlay market you don't have people rushing to get on with all of their groceries.

 

And Dan, try not being so negative all the time. You might find out that you enjoy life much more that way.

Would cars coming to/from Uptown still have to do the five-minute layover at Findlay? I recognize the need for a layover for streetcars at the ends of their routes and I agree that Findlay is an ideal spot for that to happen, but I worry that having to sit and wait a few minutes (in addition to going a couple blocks out of the way) would be a disincentive for people using the streetcar to travel between UC and downtown.

Again, this thread had to be cleaned up because of tit-for-tat replies between two posters. Let me make it clear: any post that contains personal tirades against a specific poster, especially in this thread as heated and lengthy as it is, will be removed. Thanks, and let's keep it on topic and sane.

Thanks for taking care of those posts.  When the insult sat there overnight, I felt the need to respond.

Special thanks to John Schneider for debating the anti-rail amendment with COAST last night at the Downtown Residents Council meeting!  I believe a measure at the end of the meeting condemning the anti-rail amendment passed unanimously (with a few abstentions).  I've outlined some of my takeaways from the event below.

 

1) The COAST representative seemed to be very poorly educated on the issue (didn't understand the impact of requiring a ballot initiative on all rail improvements, didn't know much factually on past/current/future transit plans and was constantly being corrected (e.g. didn't even know what NAACP stood for - Smitherman should be proud).

2) John did a great job providing a wealth of detail on the issue with specifics that directly contradicted the generalities presented by COAST.

3) The COAST representative specifically stated that this amendment has always been about requiring a vote on all passenger rail transit in direct opposition to their stated position on their website that it is about the streetcar "boondoggle".  He claimed that The Enquirer knew this all along and is just pretending they didn't know it was about rail in general.

4) Towards the end some jerk started shouting down the COAST representative claiming some vast conspiracy on COAST's part.  This made the whole pro-rail group look bad.  We need to be better about condemning such stupidity and lack of civility.

Would cars coming to/from Uptown still have to do the five-minute layover at Findlay? I recognize the need for a layover for streetcars at the ends of their routes and I agree that Findlay is an ideal spot for that to happen, but I worry that having to sit and wait a few minutes (in addition to going a couple blocks out of the way) would be a disincentive for people using the streetcar to travel between UC and downtown.

 

I worry about that as well, but I think having a streetcar sitting at Findlay Market is a great idea.  I still don't quite understand how the route will work with the uptown "spur" anyway.  I've never really been clear on if each train will cover the entire route or if there will be uptown and downtown trains with routes that meet near Findlay Market.

If the line is only built to Findlay Market, that's where the end of the line will be and so that's where the layover spot will be.  If it's built to Calhoun St., then the layover spot will be there. Some subway lines operate with turnaround loops but most sit at the end station for a few minutes.  Trains come to either platform and there's usually some sign that points to one platform or the other.  NY's #7 does this and it's pretty common at airport stations like MARTA and Portland MAX.

 

Cincinnati is still dotted with streetcar turnaround loops. The #1 had a turnaround that backed up to the zoo's Rhino exhibit, the #51 has one at the end of Fairview Ave. that is still uses. 

Aren't the streetcars built with an operator's cab at each end? If so couldn't you just have the operator go to the other end of the vehicle when it's time to turn around? Also, if a switch is needed to put the streetcar in a different lane, you could build one off the street at the end of the uptown spur. I could just be talking out of my butt though since I'm still a little ignorant about some aspects of the project.

Yeah, they are duel-cab vehicles. The driver just walks to the other end to reverse directions where there is another set of controls. It's kind of neat to watch how the lights change colors from a trio of headlights to a trio of red taillights. This is how Seattle's line works, because their line presently terminates on 2-way streets at both ends.

But it's easier just to have the track route run as a loop when you're running on parallel one-way streets, as is the case in Portland, and that's the plan here. A turnaround loop is tentatively planned for the top of the run in an odd wedge of land where the Prime Time night club used to be opposite the CVS.