The crossover at the end of the line is cheaper and works well in compact space (like 80 feet below Times Square on the 7 train as you mentioned) but a loop might be plausable for the end of an uptown spur, if the line ends at the Zoo.  The simple crossover works really well though, just requires a bit more concentration by drivers and signals.

 

It seems like it'd be more efficient to run two seperate lines, with the station at Findlay market where people switch.  Of couse it would be easier for passangers to not switch trains...

No, you don't want people changing trains.  People would transfer between a Findlay Market > UC aerial tram to the streetcar as they do in Portland, but the expense of such a tram is unclear, and it obviously cannot be extended.  Portland's aerial tram went way over budget because its upper station was built as part of a hospital expansion on a hillside even more precarious than Christ Hospital's.  I think our costs would be a lot lower here as long as the thing  touches down on a normal piece of turf. 

Stub tracks with an island platform and a crossover is ideal for long subway or light rail trains, where you need space for more than one train to do its layover. Having a straight platform also avoids ADA issues with excessive gaps between the platform edge and train doors. NYCTA just went through considerable expense to replace the old South Ferry loop station with parallel stub tracks.

 

For streetcars, though, the loop might make sense if more than one streetcar can layover on the loop, and if the platform gap issues are resolved. I think the modern Skoda streetcars have built-in wheelchair ramps anyway. Turnaround time is a bit faster on a loop because the operator doesn't need to switch ends, but that's a moot point if there's a scheduled layover.

 

Straight stub tracks have the advantage of being easier to construct and maintain (sharp curves put huge physical strains on the rails and can cause loud squealing if not properly lubricated), and they also allow the line to be easily extended in the future if needed.

The crossover at the end of the line is cheaper and works well in compact space (like 80 feet below Times Square on the 7 train as you mentioned) but a loop might be plausable for the end of an uptown spur, if the line ends at the Zoo.  The simple crossover works really well though, just requires a bit more concentration by drivers and signals.

 

It seems like it'd be more efficient to run two seperate lines, with the station at Findlay market where people switch.  Of couse it would be easier for passangers to not switch trains...

 

No, you don't want people changing trains.  People would transfer between a Findlay Market > UC aerial tram to the streetcar...

 

Maybe I missed something, but I don't think he was talking about an aerial tram.  I actually like the idea of trains that go from Findlay Market to uptown and separate ones from Findlay Market to the river.  For instance, if I take the streetcar from the Banks to Findlay to do some shopping, why would I want to ride all the way to the Zoo before going back to the Banks?

For instance, if I take the streetcar from the Banks to Findlay to do some shopping, why would I want to ride all the way to the Zoo before going back to the Banks?

 

:?

Who says you'd have to ride all the way to the Zoo in order to head downtown from Findlay? Simply grab a streetcar that's already headed downtown on its return trip from the Zoo.

 

For instance, if I take the streetcar from the Banks to Findlay to do some shopping, why would I want to ride all the way to the Zoo before going back to the Banks?

 

At Findlay Market you will be able to board both northbound and southbound trains. 

 

You will be able to board northbound and southbound trains anywhere.

 

The only case I know of where passengers are forced to change trains to travel on the same "line" is Boston's red line, where the Mattapan PPC trolley line is mapped as being part of the red line subway, when it was built decades before the red line was extended to it.   

 

Look at the gap in the red line's stripe:

 

Heh.... That's an old map. It still shows the "E" branch of the Green Line going to Forest Hills.

 

Philadelphia also has a similar issue where passengers must change trains to continue their trips, although the different modes aren't shown on maps as being part of the same "line". At the far west end of the Market Street 'L', which is a heavy-rail subway/elevated line, passengers make a transfer to the Norristown light rail line or one of two streetcars serving Media or Sharon Hill.

 

As in Boston, it's a legacy from when different parts of the system were built at different times. For a new-start system such as the Cincinnati streetcar, there's no reason there shouldn't be a one-seat ride in both directions from the Zoo to the Banks.

You will be able to board northbound and southbound trains anywhere.

 

I guess that is true.  I forgot that the loop is only a block or two wide, so you'd have the ability to grab a train anywhere.  Duh!

I do think if you had two loops -- Uptown and Downtown -- and time-coordinated transfers at Findlay Market, then you'd ensure the continued revival of OTR in general and Findlay in particular as far as the eye can see. I mean, think back to the old streetcar transfer points at Knowlton's Corner and Peebles Corner. They were some of the most vibrant areas of the city.

 

What you'd lose is a one-seat ride from Downtown to Uptown. But the streetcar is an economic development tool as much as a transportation tool. So for those wanting a one-seat ride, the buses are still there. And I think a lot of people would build-in a stop at Findlay once or twice a week for grocery shopping -- and eventually other kinds of shopping -- and so there would be no real inconvenience.

 

Think how we all use our cars for shopping. Every day, we make a series of loop trips in our cars -- called "chain-linked trips" in transit lingo. We go to Kroger, then Walgreens, then the hardware store, then wherever in sequential order. This would be no different, really.

The nice thing about the streetcar is that service patterns can be changed in accordance with demand as needed, even if the physical routes remain fixed. If enough people want a one-seat ride from downtown to UC, such service can be instituted without building additional infrastructure (except maybe a couple extra switches, depending on how the tracks are configured). If it's determined that the Banks-Findlay segment has enough ridership to justify more frequent service than the Findlay-Zoo segment, then some streetcars can do their layover at Findlay and head back downtown, while other streetcars go the full route.

^

Excellent point!

The 2007 feasibility study, which only studied a riverfront to McMicken line, called for purchasing six streetcars, with four in operation at most times.  I never heard how many more would be needed to run up to UC, but my guess would be two.  Anyway, headways could be increased downtown if one streetcar turns around at Findlay Market, if a need is seen for that.     

 

 

^

I think they're now looking at eight streetcars, with two of them as spares.

 

  I would like to express thanks to all on this board but especially John and Jake for taking the time to explain things.

 

    The reason why I have repeated myself is because I was asked to. A few weeks ago Rando asked specifically what my choice of route was. The other day LIG did.

 

    I am sorry that the CL&N route hasn't attracted as much attention. Granted, there are some drawbacks. I'm not to concerned about the tunnel, as it could be run in both directions safely with proper signals with only a minor loss in operations efficiency. I realize that a portion of right-of-way has been lost at the Baldwin Complex - a short segment of elevated rail may be required. The biggest benefit of the CL&N route is that it has an overall easy alignment with very few conflicts - and much of the land is already owned by Sorta.

 

    Out of the $26 million per mile commonly cited as the cost of a streetcar route, much of that goes to cost of construction in a street. The cost of open rail in a private right of way is about $1 million per mile. The benefit to cost ratio may be just as good or better.

 

    "Before long, it will be running across the L&N bridge."

 

    The L&N bridge lines up reasonably well with the CL&N route. If there is a way to snake the route through the Eggleston Avenue area, one continuous line from Newport to the McMillan Street underpass would be possible.

 

    "Basicly, there will be one mile of non-revenue track."

 

    Is this all that bad? What if the streetcar goes all the way from Schwartz's Point to McMillan without any stops? The distribution of fares along the route doens't matter as much as the total fare collected at the end of the day.  Queen City Metro operates some express routes that are always full. I've seen 20 people get on at one suburban stop, and then everyone gets off downtown. I'd say that this is definitely preferred over a bus that stops 20 times to pick up 20 people over the course of 10 miles. 

 

    Jake - I don't know how Portland does it, but in Cincinnati working around utilities is not as easy as simply keeping the track foundation shallow. The utility companies will resist any streetcar line over their utilities because it prevents access. A perpendicular crossing is not too bad, but what if the streetcar line is directly on top of a utility line? If there is a watermain break, the water works will have to shut down the streetcar line, remove the tracks and track foundation, uncover their utility and make the repair, and rebuild everything. The water works does not want to take liability for the streetcar, and they do not want to spend the money to repair the streetcar. Not to mention, the whole streetcar line would be out of service, unless they construct some temporary track around the problem.

 

      This is even more of an issue when you consider all the new development that is supposed to occur. Suppose a developer wants to connect to the water main, which is now buried under the streetcar tracks. What do you do?

 

    The solution is to relocate all of the utilities away from the streetcar rails. Those streets are already congested with utilities, and ironically, the old streetcar rails.

 

    Paul Brown Stadium was originally supposed to be located one block west of where it was built. The change was made because of existing underground utilities.

 

      The streetcar feasibilty study estimated $15 million for utility relocation.

 

      Again, it's not a show stopper, but utilities are easily underestimated.

 

      I rode the bus regularly for 5 years. I was traveling between the U.C. area and a point in the suburbs. Frustratingly, my bus bypassed the U.C. area in favor of an express route on I-75 to downtown during rush hours, which was just the time I needed it. I grew weary of waits up to an hour long at Knowlton's Corner to catch the 17 to U.C. After I while, I discovered a trick: by taking the express bus downtown, I could transfer to another bus to U.C., avoiding the crowded 17 and the long wait at Knowlton's Corner. In fact, sometimes I wouldn't even have to switch buses! Anyway, I took a lot of rides between U.C. and downtown. I didn't want to go downtown at all, but it was the more convenient transfer point.

 

      I met a lot of folks on the bus. One thing that suprised me was the number of folks who shopped at Findley Market and downtown department stores because it was easier for them to get there than to go to the suburban stores. Many of these people lived within a mile or two of Northgate Mall and suburban grocery stores, but since they didn't have cars, it was easier to ride the bus 12 miles downtown than to walk 2 miles. So, a surprising number of Findley Market shoppers actually live in places such as Colerain Township, and they aren't shopping at Findley Market by choice.

 

      Speaking of Findley, have you ever noticed that Queen City Metro does NOT allow transfers at Findley? At least they didn't use to; I don't know how it works now. I think the reasoning was this: Queen City Metro's policy is that transfers are used to connect two routes into one long trip. It is NOT their policy to allow riders to transfer in the same direction, or to make many stops on one fare. If you want to do that, you have to pay more than once. Therefore, making lots of stops on one circulator is going to cost more than one fare. Raising the price discourages riders. If I want to stop at three stops along the streetcar line, I am going to have to pay 3 fares. (Assuming that Metro's policy is followed.) A chain-linked trip is VERY different in transit than it is in a car.

 

    A route planner at Metro told me that his single biggest hassle is folks who want to stop and transfer in the same direction without paying again.

 

  "The only case I know of where passengers are forced to change trains to travel on the same "line" is Boston's red line."

 

    Cincinnati had at least two. The Cincinnati, Lawrenceurg and Aurora interuban transfered with the Cincinnati Street Railway at Fernbank this way, and so did one of the east side interurbans that I can't remember the name of.

 

    Finally, I am not stopping anyone from building the OTR loop. Go ahead and build it. I just enjoy the discussion. Cheers to all.

 

   

 

     

Therefore, making lots of stops on one circulator is going to cost more than one fare. Raising the price discourages riders. If I want to stop at three stops along the streetcar line, I am going to have to pay 3 fares. (Assuming that Metro's policy is followed.) A chain-linked trip is VERY different in transit than it is in a car.

 

I think it's a pretty safe assumption that the streetcar will operate under a Proof-of-Payment (POP) system, which is typical for many light rail and streetcar lines. NYC is even considering using it for buses, as it speeds up the boarding process and relieves the driver of having to collect fares. (A couple of bus lines already use it, as part of a pilot program.)

 

Basically, you buy a ticket through a vending machine on the platform, and have it validated (time-stamped) when you board the car. The ticket is then good for unlimited rides within a certain period of time, say, 2 hours. Enforcement is the honor system, backed up with random spot checks by uniformed officers and stiff fines for fare evasion. Portland also has a "fareless square" zone downtown, within which all rides are free... Cincinnati may consider something similar.

 

Under such a system, you can hop on and hop off as often as you want within that 2-hour window. Transfers between the streetcar and buses will need to be worked out with SORTA and TANK.

I can answer the question about utility relocation.

 

First, the path of the streetcar -- which lane it travels in -- was probably selected in part to avoid utilities.

 

We're not going to be moving water mains and electrical vaults on a wholesale basis like you might do for LRT. But, for sure, the first thing they will do is move any manholes in the path of the train. A lot of that kind of work is pretty routine and can start well before any trackway construction starts.

 

Last time we were in Portland, we met with Stacy and Witbeck, the constructor of the Cincinnati Streetcar. Someone brought up the question of relocating water mains. They will assume that vacant sites will eventually have new buildings on them. Accordingly, they will install sleeves under the trackway at several points adjacent to those properties if water or electric service has to cross the path of the train. So when the building goes up, it would just involve piping or wiring through the sleeve to the site.

 

And, the slab is structural. So, if an existing building had to pull in new water, electric or gas service, the area under the slab could be trenched overnight and the new utility service installed when the streetcar is not running.

 

I think we're OK on this.

 

  Just wondering:

 

    I rode the streetcar in Germany. They had a system where you purchase tickets from a vending machine at stops, and then you have your ticket validated by another machine in the vehicle. It seemed to work well, except that I don't speak German and couldn't read the directions, but that's another story.

 

    I have seen all kinds of mischief on metro buses. I've seen children under age 10 illegally selling transfers for $0.50 each. I've seen people open the back door on a crowded bus to let people on without paying. I've seen all kinds of arguments with the driver over fares.

 

    It's hard to imagine an honor based system. I guess you will always have someone to abuse the system, but gee, we have a lot of troublemakers.

 

    I guess the theory is that the streetcar will attract the choice riders and the proportion of troublemakers will go down. I don't mean to say that only a bunch of smelly old bums ride transit, but I wonder how our current clientele compares with other cities.

 

      Portland has a significantly higher average income than we do, so I have to assume that they started with a more honorable crowd.

^

Oh, I dunno about that. But fare policy and fare collection are to me are among the biggest issues yet to be settled.

 

Last time I checked total family income in the Portland region was almost identical to Cincinnati's.

 

  Out of the $26 million per mile commonly cited as the cost of a streetcar route, much of that goes to cost of construction in a street. The cost of open rail in a private right of way is about $1 million per mile.

 

 

$26 million per mile?

 

From the HDR Study:

 

"The Feasibility Study cost estimate incorporates a total of

4.7 miles of track in order to accommodate additional

track needed to access the streetcar storage yard and

maintenance/operations facility "

 

"Guideway and Track $24 M

Power, Systems & Signals $14 M

Vehicles and Maintenance Facility $25 M

Design, Mgt, Soft Costs $13 M

Contingencies & Finance Costs $8 M"

 

Looks more like $5-6 million per mile to me.

 

Things would be greatly simplified if SORTA and TANK catch up to the 1970's and implement a stored-value farecard system similar to that used in Chicago, NYC, Boston, and... Hell, almost everywhere else. Transfers would be a piece of cake, bus drivers wouldn't need to deal with nearly as many cash transactions, and the kids selling fake transfers would have to find another hobby. The stored-value farecard could be used either as a pay-per-ride card, or as a daily/weekly/weekend/monthly pass with unlimited rides, and it would be compatible with the streetcar's POP fare system.

 

As for troublemakers, it's all about effective law enforcement. Here in NYC, we have the subways run by the MTA, and the PATH system run by the Port Authority. Both systems serve the same city and attract pretty much the same demographics. But the MTA subways are generally filthy dens of lawlessness, while PATH trains and stations are generally safe and spotless. The MTA even has full-time station agents in every station, while most PATH stations are unmanned. The difference? The Port Authority has plenty of well-trained cops, and they maintain a strict zero-tolerance policy towards littering, panhandling, food and drink, troublemaking, etc. Same with the Washington Metro system. It doesn't take much for people to get the message as to what they can get away with, and they conduct themselves accordingly.

 

ETA: Kids selling fake transfers? Things could be worse.  :-o

"Last time I checked total family income in the Portland region was almost identical to Cincinnati's."

 

www.city-data.com

 

Portland

2008 population: 557,706

Population change since 2000: +5.4%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $47,143

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $28,305

 

Cincinnati

2008 populaton: 333,336

Population change since 2000: +0.6%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $33,006

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $23,960

 

 

"Things would be greatly simplified if SORTA and TANK catch up to the 1970's..."

 

Don't you think this would be a good idea to do now, whether or not the streetcar gets built? What is stopping TANK and SORTA from making the improvements?

Probably lack of funds, lack of will, or both. And yeah, it should be done regardless of what happens with the streetcar.

 

If/when it does happen, I hope TANK and SORTA have the foresight to cooperate and adopt the same system, and make the farecards operable on both agencies.

Don't you think this would be a good idea to do now, whether or not the streetcar gets built? What is stopping TANK and SORTA from making the improvements?

 

Money.  This is something I've spoken to people at Metro about and it is something they have been wanting to do...it would also present the opportunity to greatly simplify the UC*Metro partnership.  I'm not as familiar with TANK, but like I said, Metro would like to do a lot of things and without a larger pool of money coming in those things won't happen.

Don't you think this would be a good idea to do now, whether or not the streetcar gets built? What is stopping TANK and SORTA from making the improvements?

 

Money.  This is something I've spoken to people at Metro about and it is something they have been wanting to do...it would also present the opportunity to greatly simplify the UC*Metro partnership.

 

That's true, but it is also true that they need to find the money for this, as well as other quality of service related improvements, else ridership will not improve and that portion of their budget will not grow.  I'm not sure of the funding restrictions, but I would have put a priority on making the broad implementation of an RFID farecard system sound as much as possible like a capital expense fundable by stimulus funds, and go sell it.  I would have wanted that done before using those funds to purchase new buses.

 

New buses are a necessity, but in the short run nobody will notice, whereas a modern farecard/fob system would instantly change the face of METRO to every rider, and make it seem like they are part of the 21st century, and actively wanting to make the experience of riding METRO as convenient as possible for their customers.

 

This has been reinforced for me this summer, since I'm spending it in Seoul, which has extensive public mass transit in terms of subways, buses (of various types), and high speed rail connections.  I REALLY hope that the streetcar can do better than the fare system put into place in Portland, which I found unnecessarily clumsy.

 

Here, as in many other areas served by great transit systems, I purchase a small fob (or use an activated credit card), which I swipe at the front door of the bus or the subway turnstile on entry, and again at the back door of the bus or the subway turnstile on exit.  Each time I'm told how much money it charged and how much I have left (in the case of a fob -- the credit card method doesn't need that).  Each time the reader beeps to tell me it worked (and to tell the driver that I paid), plus it says something in Korean like "welcome" or "transferring".  Women routinely just pass their purse by the reader, which is conveniently at waist height, and get on board nearly as quickly as just walking on.  I get what amounts to a 10 cent discount for using it compared to using cash.  Unlimited transfers between buses going the same way are free within 30 minutes of your exit swipe.  Transfers between subway lines are also free, and between buses and subway it costs about 10 cents, again if within 30 minutes. 

 

I can recharge these things ALMOST ANYWHERE, cause undoubtedly there is a percentage taken by whomever is doing it.  Personally I go to a 50 square foot cigarette shop, hand over a 50,000 won note (about $50), and get enough rides on my fob for about a month.  I can also use the money on my fob for lots of other things, notably taxis.  It really ends up being more of a general alternative to cash, and I'm sure that some organization is making money on each transaction (or at least paying for the system).

 

It's hard to overstate the benefits of implementing this type of fare system, in my opinion, in terms of making riding any form of transit and transferring between them almost effortless.  I hope that we won't be satisfied with less.  Having experienced this, I can't understand the logic of spending the funds to install the rugged weatherproof ticket machines on the street like Portland has done.  The little grimy device that is used to recharge mine at the cigarette store is the size of a credit card reader and I don't know why it would be any more expensive.

 

I guess the main problem with this sort of system is that people have to pay, and that implies needing to have a way for people to purchase the fobs or cards or whatever the various forms they take.  But I'd rather that every UDF or grocery or small storefront be enlisted to sell transit cards (for a small profit they would keep) and make them so routine that people normally will have 5 of them in their junk drawers.  You could pay for a very small number of more expensive outdoor places where the cards could be purchased (like at Fountain square), but I'd keep those to a minimum and mainly for out of towners.  I got mine for free (loaded with $10) from the Lotte department store, as a purchase incentive.  I'd imagine that convention goers would normally be given a transit fob in their welcome package, emblazoned with the conference logo and those of all of its sponsors, and loaded with an initial $5 of transit money, enough for maybe two round trips to uptown and back.

 

>So when the building goes up, it would just involve piping or wiring through the sleeve to the site.

 

And there's certainly been no shortage of new construction in Portland. I didn't see any stretch of streetcar trackbed that looks like it's been ripped up and replaced since the line was originally constructed.  I did see some bad-looking concrete around some of the 1986 light rail trackwork near the turnaround loop. It looks like it went through one too many freeze-thaw cycles and started cracking up. I don't know why that happened there and nowhere else. The rest of the 1986 trackwork still looked good from what I saw. 

 

A lot of people don't respect the fact that Portland has figured all this out. They took a huge gamble when they built the modern streetcar because so much of the technology differed from old streetcars, and nobody knew if running the tracks on parallel one-way streets was really going to work.

 

As for fare cheats -- why is it that people care so much about fare cheats on public transportation (kids jumping the turnstiles, etc.) but don't blink at risking a ticket in a metered space? Then they get all upset if they do get a ticket. Parking meters are essentially an "honors" system.   

 

The other thing is is costs money to collect fares and costs money to collect parking revenue.  People like COAST will kick and scream if one or two people are hired to patrol the streetcars for fare cheats, but don't seem to mind that the city employs dozens to staff city parking garage booths, meter maids, and police officers to write parking tickets. 

 

Well, in the parking space situation, you may have lost revenue, but the cost to maintain the space itself is nil.  In the fare cheat situation, lost revenue would not be available to make repairs or upgrades to the system to keep it maintained.  If a car has enough non fare passengers that it prevents fare paying customers from getting on, then that is additional lost revenue.  You really can't see the difference between the 2?

Been lurking this thread for only a short while so apologies for my question in advance.  I was up in on Calhoun and McMillan a week or so ago and noticed some of the asphalt ground down which exposed tracks turning from McM to W.Clifton. 

 

How extensive is the existence of old lines still buried under modern paved streets?

Would any of these still be viably used due to gauge(?) or delapidation?

Could the city be proactive in scouting this to use for a wider network?

If used, could these "rehabbed/reclaimed" lines be used as any type of federal match?

 

Again, I'm sure my questions have been answered but...248 pages...

 

Thanks!

The old streetcar tracks can't be used for several reasons.  First, they're broad gauge instead of standard gauge, meaning one track would have to be moved over.  Second, the tracks aren't in good shape throughout.  Third, the tracks cannot support the increased weight of modern streetcars (modern streetcars hold many more people, and it's the weight of the passengers more than the cars themselves that will overload old tracks).  Fourth, old streetcar tracks usually ran down the middle of the street, whereas new ones run closer to the curb.

 

People used to load streetcars out in the middle of the street, which became a major problem when auto traffic grew.  With modern streetcars, they are able to load on the curb. 

 

The only significant federal match is the unused subway, valued around $100 million, or perhaps the L&N bridge, which would be much less. 

Well, in the parking space situation, you may have lost revenue, but the cost to maintain the space itself is nil.  In the fare cheat situation, lost revenue would not be available to make repairs or upgrades to the system to keep it maintained.  If a car has enough non fare passengers that it prevents fare paying customers from getting on, then that is additional lost revenue.  You really can't see the difference between the 2?

 

True, but with any fare system there will be people who find a way around it.  The people in charge need to find a way to set up a fare system that works well while minimizing cheating, and not get too caught up in the idea of totally eliminating it, which is nearly impossible.  At some point, it's cheaper just to get 95% of passengers to pay than it is to force the extra 5% to do so.  Also, parking spaces don't attract development, they follow it, whereas rail does attract development.  So you could argue that the fare cheats are less of a problem than people who don't feed parking meters, because at least the rail system is contributing to an increase in city taxes from new development and higher property values.

 

I agree with the others who have stated that they'd like to see Metro introduce a fare card, particularly one that the would provide a 2 hour window where you wouldn't necessarily have to pay again if you reboard.  Also, I'd love to see TANK and Metro merge, to further simplify the system(s), but I'm sure that will never happen.

"Last time I checked total family income in the Portland region was almost identical to Cincinnati's."

 

www.city-data.com

 

Portland

2008 population: 557,706

Population change since 2000: +5.4%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $47,143

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $28,305

 

Cincinnati

2008 populaton: 333,336

Population change since 2000: +0.6%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $33,006

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $23,960

 

 

 

So in response to a statement about "regions", you state city data.  If you look (from your source, www.city-data.com)  at a more regional perspective (Hamilton County & Multnomah County) you'll see that "family income in the Portland region was almost identical to Cincinnati's."

 

Hamilton    $48,416

Multnomah $48,883

 

 

Eigth and State,

 

  You should know better!

 

It would be interesting to see the same kind of city numbers but from before streetcar and/or light rail went in in Portland. 

 

 

"Fact checking and research still come hard for local special interest group."

http://caast-usa.blogspot.com/2009/08/more-lies-from-good-folks-at-coast.html

 

Ugh, I have a feeling this is gonna be a nasty fight come election season. Grab some popcorn folks, this one's getting interesting!

I have an important question (maybe John Senhauser/jmeck/shermen) could help me out with this info???

 

I just spoke with a State Rep whose district includes West End. He mentioned there are cobblestones and streetcar rails already under the pavement in all of OTR's streets. (Like in front of Music Hall.) Can these rails be reused??? Do we need to tear out the existing cobblestones? How much would that cost? Tearing out the cobblestones could provide jobs and employment opportunity...The State Rep told me he doesnt want to get construction underway, then have to deal with the headaches of added costs of tearing out existing infrastructure. Are these things considered in the current plan?

The question regarding the existing rails was just answered six posts ago:

 

The old streetcar tracks can't be used for several reasons.  First, they're broad gauge instead of standard gauge, meaning one track would have to be moved over.  Second, the tracks aren't in good shape throughout.  Third, the tracks cannot support the increased weight of modern streetcars (modern streetcars hold many more people, and it's the weight of the passengers more than the cars themselves that will overload old tracks).  Fourth, old streetcar tracks usually ran down the middle of the street, whereas new ones run closer to the curb.

 

People used to load streetcars out in the middle of the street, which became a major problem when auto traffic grew.  With modern streetcars, they are able to load on the curb.

 

The existing rails will likely remain in place except in specific areas where they conflict with the new tracks.

Third, the tracks cannot support the increased weight of modern streetcars (modern streetcars hold many more people, and it's the weight of the passengers more than the cars themselves that will overload old tracks). 

 

Plus, Americans are a lot fatter than they used to be.  :-P

I figured I would add my two cents on the utilities question. I used to install underground utilities for a living.

 

All utilities in the right of way have a minimum depth. The shallowest is at 18 inches. This should not be a problem for the streetcar since it has been said they will only need to excavate 12 inches for the rails. However, with that being said utilities have the distinct ability to show up exactly where they're not supposed to be. This is very true in the downtown area, it gets pretty crazy down there!

 

As far as installing future utilities perpendicularly under the streetcar, it is a minor operation. Utilities have to constantly be ran under existing infrastructure. While the streetcar is in operation you can either use a boring mahine or a mole machine to go under the tracks. When the streetcar is not operating overnight you can tunnel under the tracks as someone mentioned previously. All the aforementioned operations will then be filled in with CDF(Controlled Density Fill) which sets up like concrete very quickly and prevents settling. This is how every right of way excavation has to be filled in the city of Cincinnati currently.

They are planning to remove the rails from the center of Elm Street in front of Music Hall and move them to the one side, but leave the parking.

 

They want to keep the cobblestones there.

bbrown.... good info !

I had this cartoon emailed to me today

Apparently there is some talk coming out of City Hall that Cincinnati is thinking about selling its railroad, the Cincinnati Southern. What I found most interesting is that the Enquirer was wrong about the CS back in the day.

 

  "In June 1869, Cincinnati voters overwhelmingly approved $10 million in bonds for the railway. Over the next decade, voters twice approved measures providing another $8 million, the second time only after an initial defeat drew a promise from trustees that no more money would be needed to finish what The Enquirer called "our white elephant." (emphasis mine). http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20090814/NEWS01/908150345/1055/NEWS/Sell+or+keep+city+railroad?

 

The Enquirer was wrong about a railroad then, and now they've been hit or miss on the streetcar and rail transit issue. The more things change...well, you know the rest.

"Last time I checked total family income in the Portland region was almost identical to Cincinnati's."

 

www.city-data.com

 

Portland

2008 population: 557,706

Population change since 2000: +5.4%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $47,143

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $28,305

 

Cincinnati

2008 populaton: 333,336

Population change since 2000: +0.6%

Estimated median household income in 2007: $33,006

Estimated per capita income in 2007: $23,960

 

 

 

I've said this before, and I really think it's an important point that no one really talks about.  Portland's demographics are very different than Cincinnati's. It's generally a richer, whiter, and safer city than Cincy, so expecting results similar to Portland is disingenuous, IMO.

God, I miss Borgman...

The comic in Brad's post isn't showing up for me.  Here it is again:

 

 

I've said this before, and I really think it's an important point that no one really talks about.  Portland's demographics are very different than Cincinnati's. It's generally a richer, whiter, and safer city than Cincy, so expecting results similar to Portland is disingenuous, IMO.

 

 

Richer?  Multnomah County's household income is $48,883, Hamilton County's is $48,416

          Multnomah County's poverty rate is 15.2, Hamilton County's is 12.8

 

 

http://www.city-data.com/county/Multnomah_County-OR.html

 

 

 

BTW,  I don't think people are expecting identical results;  we're expecting results in the range of the feasibilty study which factored in demographics.

 

 

 

 

 

^

Just so everyone knows, and you can go through the math on your own, the economists hired by the city estimate that the Cincinnati Streetcar will produce about 20% of the net benefits that Portland had achieved. They have heavily discounted the effect of the streetcar here with respect to Portland's experience. But that still results in a 2.7 to 1.0 Benefit/Cost ratio.

 

Last time I was in Portland, we learned that the development along the streetcar lline now equals 140 times the cost of their streetcar.

 

 

140 times? If that was the case wouldn't they build a 4 billion dollar system and gain 560 billion in development?

^

Law of Diminishing Returns, mainly.

 

Having said that, Portland is now planning and gaining consensus for about 50 miles of new streetcar lines to be built over 20 years in the flat areas of town.

Love the Nick Sweeney cartoon! That bowl of "do nothing" is a dish best served cold and it takes a little bitch to eat it.