Very interesting town hall meeting at the Clifton Cultural Arts Center tonight. There were a lot of attendees, so fortunately there are still a lot of people involved in the pro-streetcar movement.

 

Probably the most interesting speaker was Pete Witte. As you all likely know, he is pushing for the Western Hills Viaduct to be able to support rail transit in the future. However, I learned that he is also actively pushing for one or two streetcar circulator routes in the west side. This idea reinforces the fact streetcars are for primarily for getting people around within urban neighborhoods, not necessarily for getting people between different neighborhoods. Although it probably wouldn't happen this way, we could build a separate streetcar loop in these west side neighborhoods and it would be successful, even if it didn't connect to the downtown/OTR loop. As a real world example, look at Seattle's streetcar system. Phase 1 was built in a neighborhood north of downtown. Phase 2 is being built in a neighborhood  east of downtown and does not connect to Phase 1. An eventual Phase 3 will connect them via Downtown.

 

I was glad that Kevin Flynn attended and is taking the pro-streetcar movement seriously. However I was disappointed by his comments that the streetcar project must pay for itself (through fare box revenue and a SID in OTR) in order to be considered "successful". First of all, the project is already using TIF funding, meaning that property tax generated from additional development in the neighborhood is being used to pay for the streetcar. Secondly, downtown and OTR generate over 50% of the city's income tax revenue; I don't understand why it is unreasonable to use general fund to pay for streetcar operations in these neighborhoods. Thirdly, no other transportation project is held to this standard; how will the Western Hills Viaduct "pay for itself"?

 

Very prescient.

Alright, one more idea, for now.  Pretty crazy but here goes. Wasson Way light rail to Xavier.  Then, streetcar down Woodburn (or combo Woodburn/Montgomery) to Woodburn and McMillan.  (connecting to the streetcar line on McMillan like in my uptown map.)  Then, find a way to tunnel or bridge your way down across Columbia Parkway to the river and use the beginning of the Oasis line light rail to get to the Riverfront Transit Center.  (A bridge would be spectacular view.)  I can't really see any locations for a bridge/tunnel that jump out at me in that area, but that theoretical point on the streetcar line is just so close the river on the map. 

 

If you want go that route, you could take Victory Parkway to Eden Park Dr to Martin Dr (which goes underneath Columbia Parkway already) to Adams Crossing to Pete Rose Way and then drive it into the RTC.  That's probably the easiest way to do that route, and it would add a stop to Twin Lakes, Eden Park, the very bottom part of Mt Adams, and the Riverfront parks...but I keep asking myself "Why?"  There's so much less potential for ROI in taking that route over Gilbert.

^ You will never be able to route a streetcar through Eden Park. Never in a million years. I think you'd even have a problem getting it on Victory Parkway.

^ You will never be able to route a streetcar through Eden Park. Never in a million years. I think you'd even have a problem getting it on Victory Parkway.

 

I wouldn't say "never in a million years."  Who knows, maybe we'll get some insane federal mandate to build streetcars to all parks if Greenpeace comes into some big money and decides to lobby Congress.  Anything's possible.  But you're right...with the current political framework, it's not even worth considering.

I wouldn't say "never in a million years."

 

I wouldn't even say "never in a hundred years. Who knows what could happen in that time? All but a handful of automobiles eliminated, due to depletion of petroleum? Breakdown of the entire automobile culture? Mass abandonment in the suburbs? Breakdown of our political system and replacement with something completely different? Even the sale of Eden Park? Maybe a war or two?

 

Look at photos from 1914 and compare to today. A lot of things can change in a hundred years. Just sayin'.

Alright, one more idea, for now.  Pretty crazy but here goes. Wasson Way light rail to Xavier.  Then, streetcar down Woodburn (or combo Woodburn/Montgomery) to Woodburn and McMillan.  (connecting to the streetcar line on McMillan like in my uptown map.)  Then, find a way to tunnel or bridge your way down across Columbia Parkway to the river and use the beginning of the Oasis line light rail to get to the Riverfront Transit Center.  (A bridge would be spectacular view.)  I can't really see any locations for a bridge/tunnel that jump out at me in that area, but that theoretical point on the streetcar line is just so close the river on the map. 

 

If you want go that route, you could take Victory Parkway to Eden Park Dr to Martin Dr (which goes underneath Columbia Parkway already) to Adams Crossing to Pete Rose Way and then drive it into the RTC.  That's probably the easiest way to do that route, and it would add a stop to Twin Lakes, Eden Park, the very bottom part of Mt Adams, and the Riverfront parks...but I keep asking myself "Why?"  There's so much less potential for ROI in taking that route over Gilbert.

 

I was thinking you would want to make the time spent as a streetcar as short as possible to save time for the Wasson Way commuters.  After looking at the map again, it looks like you could spur out from Woodburn onto Taft backtracking east for a half mile to Collins Ave. which travels directly underneath Columbia Parkway and ends at the Oasis tracks, completely avoiding the need for a super expensive bridge or tunnel I had mentioned. 

 

I admit I don't understand the feasibility and logistics of making continuous travel possible over those different lines, that streetcars might not be meant to be used in this way, and how this would work if there was a traffic jam of Woodburn.  I was just thinking a commute where you travel 10 minutes on Wasson Way, spend 15 minutes to traverse Woodburn corridor as streetcar, and then 10 minutes to downtown on Oasis wouldn't be bad, especially on a smooth ride with Wifi.  And especially if your employer was located near the Riverfront Transit Center (hopefully looking at you, GE?)  Also, perhaps your significant other could use a streetcar that stayed on Woodburn to the Mcmillan corridor to UC or the hospitals for their commute.

I would think that in a million years we could probably figure out teleportation (or at least a #@^! flying car)

not much of a report on last night's meeting

http://www.local12.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/streetcar-supporters-explore-taking-uptown-12491.shtml

I now see the light regarding loops.  The loop up by the hospital I had in the previous map would have been two miles and seven minutes with no traffic.  This configuration is 1.3 miles and also avoids traveling on MLK altogether.  I also incorporated the two-way McMillan rerouting suggestions for the east-west line, and left the turnaround as TBD in Walnut Hills.  I added a star for another streetcar transfer stop on Vine, roughly where the nice new bustop for Metro is now.

Personally it seems to me that Taft/Calhoun is a better route for the Streetcar going both ways, primarily because Taft hits Reading at grade whereas McMillan is on a bridge high above it.  Also, at that same Taft & Reading intersection you have tennis courts and that awesome but severely underutilized park, and you're a block away from the old Vernon Manor hotel, as well as walking distance to Children's Oak Street campus.  McMillan is far more cut off from all those things at that area.

 

Finally, if you're concerned about "covering" UC as you say below, the fact that Taft/Calhoun is immediately adjacent to the campus, whereas McMillan isn't, should be something of a factor.

 

In regards to Jefferson vs. Short Vine, in my opinion Jefferson is the way to go.  If Short Vine was chosen, I don’t think one stop in the southeast corner of campus would be enough to say you “covered” UC.  That corner of campus always felt very remote when I was a student there.  Giving UC as much coverage as possible is key to bringing them on as a large stakeholder in the project invested in its success.  There are several residence halls along Jefferson and a straight pathway to the ERC and to the UC “MainStreet” area including Tangeman University Center that would all benefit from proximity to the streetcar.  I also think that Jefferson is close enough to the new developments on Short Vine to cater to those as well.

Here I have to say that Short Vine is a far superior choice to Jefferson.  The one block difference doesn't really seem to effect most UC students presently.  Also, Jefferson is already built like a mini-highway, and a bunch of cars are still going to be moving through the area, so it strikes me as being potentially more effective to give them that road that has been rebuilt seven times over expressly in their image.  Finally, the Short Vine route reconnects the original main artery of the City, and the route could actually be extended off Vine north of MLK by routing it on those useless frontage along the School of Nursing and VA Hospital.

 

I was glad that Kevin Flynn attended and is taking the pro-streetcar movement seriously. However I was disappointed by his comments that the streetcar project must pay for itself (through fare box revenue and a SID in OTR) in order to be considered "successful". First of all, the project is already using TIF funding, meaning that property tax generated from additional development in the neighborhood is being used to pay for the streetcar. Secondly, downtown and OTR generate over 50% of the city's income tax revenue; I don't understand why it is unreasonable to use general fund to pay for streetcar operations in these neighborhoods. Thirdly, no other transportation project is held to this standard; how will the Western Hills Viaduct "pay for itself"?

While I fully support your indignation, the most egregious thing to me is that Council, if it actually cared about having the operating costs paid as much as they say, could have the Streetcar "pay for itself" tomorrow.  There are any number of ways that have been suggested by plenty of folks that would tie the directly effected properties to paying for the operating costs of the route.  Paying for the costs through property taxes is the most efficient, equitable and most encouraging means toward increasing density.  The fact that these clowns keep acting as if this is some problem on the level of complexity of splitting the atom is really the most insulting thing about it.

PAlexander:  Take a look at the map again, I preserved the loop on the one way streets directly south of campus so a westbound streetcar would still be adjacent to it.  (There is a split at Auburn Ave.)  In regards to the Taft and Reading intersection, agree those things are nice, but you can't hit everything.  Also there is traffic coming in from the interstate onto Taft there.  On the Short Vine vs. Jefferson issue, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I actually think the faster speeds of Jefferson would be a plus to get people to the emploment centers faster (connecting to the major instituitions being the the stated purpose of the uptown streetcar.) North of MLK, I don't really understand your point, but I'm not sure what routing off road there buys you in any case.

^ I hear the Vine Street merchants don't want it on Vine.

^Martino's probably doesn't want it. They wanted to tear down the whole businesses district several years ago. I bet Taste of Belgium wants the streetcar to pass their second storefront. I can't imagine why Bogart's wouldn't want it.

Is it the same argument the Monmouth Street merchants in Newport used back in the 1930s, that it would interfere too much with automobile traffic?  Except that they lost so much more foot traffic when the streetcar was rerouted than they every got from drivers.  (Yes I know I brought this up a number of pages back).  Since Short Vine is so isolated from any through automobile traffic, they should be clamoring to have the streetcar run through there.  I guess these are the same kinds of people who want the city to cut down the street trees because they block their signs. 

A quick aside... A Portland-based software developer put together a tool to help him find a home using three open databases. What were his criteria for finding his "perfect home" in Portland?

 

• Walking distance to a grocery store: Living across the street from a grocery store has spoiled me.
  
• Walking distance to a rail stop: This will allow me to get to other locations in the city without a car relatively quickly. One could argue the bus system is just as good, but I would argue that it isn’t and I much prefer rail.
  

 

People simply prefer rail over buses and will go as far as to buy a home near a rail station so that they don't have to rely on buses.

Love the revised map. Going through the under / through woods there seems like the most feasible option for getting up the hill, it's almost perfect for transit.

 

For what it's worth, UC had a deal up to about 2009 with Metro that cost somewhere around $300k on behalf of the University / student fees that provided free rides to all students on the bus system. Ridership was through the roof but it got cut during some poor financial years. If you were able to sell the University on free student ridership cards, that would go a long way.

Should be an interesting meeting.  Punch and pie would be great.....cookies too!!

^ I hear the Vine Street merchants don't want it on Vine.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=18957.24115#ixzz33gjaWYXy

 

Very strange considering that the whole way that commercial district developed was due to a streetcar line running through it historically.  I've ridden the Muni through San Francisco and one thing that really struck me about it was how visable it made all the commercial districts it rode through - that entire setup was designed for a streetcar.

^ I hear the Vine Street merchants don't want it on Vine.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=18957.24115#ixzz33gjaWYXy

 

Very strange considering that the whole way that commercial district developed was due to a streetcar line running through it historically.  I've ridden the Muni through San Francisco and one thing that really struck me about it was how visable it made all the commercial districts it rode through - that entire setup was designed for a streetcar.

 

Two major streetcar lines converged there.  Lines from Vine and Auburn converged in a triangular intersection at Corry St.  They diverged where the UC power plant is now, with one line continuing north on Vine and the other on Jefferson Ave. to Clifton.  It's very rare in American cities for the physical layout to enable situations like this. 

 

PAlexander:  Take a look at the map again, I preserved the loop on the one way streets directly south of campus so a westbound streetcar would still be adjacent to it.  (There is a split at Auburn Ave.)

Yeah, I saw that.  I just don't think it's worth splitting between streets at that point, particularly given the extreme difference in grade between McMillan & Taft/Calhoun that occurs around Vine Street.

 

In regards to the Taft and Reading intersection, agree those things are nice, but you can't hit everything.  Also there is traffic coming in from the interstate onto Taft there.

Certainly, but there's traffic going on to the interstate at McMillan, so it's a wash unless you have a reason to prefer one to the other.  The reason I'd say Taft is preferable is because of the public institutions & major employers that are closer to Taft than to McMillan: UC / Cincinnati School Board Building / that park / Vernon Manor campus / Children's Oak Street campus / Walnut Hills Public Library / Alms Hotel / Blue Cross & Blue Shield versus Christ Hospital / Hamilton County Building that's near Highland / Union Institute / St. Ursula School.  That's my count, anyway.

 

On the Short Vine vs. Jefferson issue, we'll just have to agree to disagree.  I actually think the faster speeds of Jefferson would be a plus to get people to the emploment centers faster (connecting to the major instituitions being the the stated purpose of the uptown streetcar.) North of MLK, I don't really understand your point, but I'm not sure what routing off road there buys you in any case.

Obviously we want the travel times to be as fast as possible, but I see, and I believe reasonably, that the Streetcar, being a circulator (even if it isn't circulating in this specific situation) is designed to increase density and support a auto-free lifestyle.  Nobody who can afford it who is concerned about getting from downtown to Clifton as fast as possible is going to choose the Streetcar over a car, but there will be plenty of people who will take going a little slower on that route so that they don't have to own a car.  Even if I accept your premise that the Jefferson route is quicker than one through University Plaza & Short Vine (which I don't except for the purpose of this argument) I doubt whatever resulting decrease in speed will cause the person who will ditch their car once the Streetcar is in place will go back to the car because of that.

 

 

^ I hear the Vine Street merchants don't want it on Vine.

 

Read more: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=18957.24115#ixzz33gjaWYXy

 

Very strange considering that the whole way that commercial district developed was due to a streetcar line running through it historically.  I've ridden the Muni through San Francisco and one thing that really struck me about it was how visable it made all the commercial districts it rode through - that entire setup was designed for a streetcar.

 

Two major streetcar lines converged there.  Lines from Vine and Auburn converged in a triangular intersection at Corry St.  They diverged where the UC power plant is now, with one line continuing north on Vine and the other on Jefferson Ave. to Clifton.  It's very rare in American cities for the physical layout to enable situations like this. 

 

It's completely ridiculous that they wouldn't want it. It's an ideal location for the streetcar to extend through. An effort should be made to educate them. Jefferson is a gajillion times worse of a spot.

 

Here I have to say that Short Vine is a far superior choice to Jefferson.  The one block difference doesn't really seem to effect most UC students presently.  Also, Jefferson is already built like a mini-highway, and a bunch of cars are still going to be moving through the area, so it strikes me as being potentially more effective to give them that road that has been rebuilt seven times over expressly in their image.  Finally, the Short Vine route reconnects the original main artery of the City, and the route could actually be extended off Vine north of MLK by routing it on those useless frontage along the School of Nursing and VA Hospital.

 

I don't think Jefferson should stay highway-like. It should get cycletracks and a nice median. But not a streetcar.

 

Allowing campus to eat up half of the walkshed of the streetcar is asinine. I'd go so far as to say bringing the streetcar west of Vine, until it's past MLK, is a waste. If the hospitals, UC, and HUC want to kick in some funds to bring the streetcar over to Clifton Ave., so be it, but if they don't want it then it's not worth doing. Clifton Heights/Fairview can be served by the Conklin Steps stop plus University Plaza stop.

 

I also don't think going straight to the Zoo is the best way to go, at least not right away. Here's how I imagine lines coming together, at a University Plaza station. Two things I strongly believe would be a missed opportunity: (1) Taking Jefferson over Short Vine, (2) Not utilizing University Plaza for a TOD/transit hub.

 

 

The blue line uses Jskinner's idea, which I like very much.

Even though I mentioned what I did about vine, I actually still support it on Jefferson, its only about a 2 block walk to vine and seriously the width of jefferson won't be so bad if there are two streetcar tracks in the middle.  It would be like crossing a one way street.  Plus there is something to be said about the speed increase.  Also the university would be better served and it would be a closer circulator to people wanting to get onto intercity buses at the university.

I'm not concerned about the walk to Vine, but more the walk to Eden or Bellevue. Also the visibility of the commercial district which you mentioned and I believe is important.

 

I don't think you gain much speed using Jefferson. I'd like to see the options modeled, though.

If it were possible (financially) to bypass the McMillan/Calhoun intersection by tunneling under them, going via Short Vine would save time over taking Jefferson and crossing those streets at grade.

 

Imagine if the OTR portion of the streetcar took Central Parkway instead of Race/Elm. Sure the streetcar would be faster, but I don't think the economic impact would be nearly as high. This is a similar justification for using Short Vine instead of Jefferson. Jefferson just isn't a desirable street that's ever going to be pedestrian friendly. I think they need to do more to calm the street, but it's never going to have a pedestrian feeling no matter how many bike lanes, large trees, and crosswalks they add.

Allowing campus to eat up half of the walkshed of the streetcar is asinine.

 

Are you really eating it up? Or are you lining it up with a popular destination where the primary mode of transport is already walking?

 

 

Imagine if the OTR portion of the streetcar took Central Parkway instead of Race/Elm.

 

I don't think the situation is analogous- there is no University of Brighton with 23,000 students along Central Parkway.

 

If the streetcar makes it to uptown, there needs to be buy-in for it. Prez Ono needs to be able to show this off to prospective freshmen and grad students.  I don't think just one stop in the very corner of campus would do the trick (I think that would be the missed opportunity.)  Just as OTR=streetcar in people's minds, make UC=streetcar.

If it were possible (financially) to bypass the McMillan/Calhoun intersection by tunneling under them, going via Short Vine would save time over taking Jefferson and crossing those streets at grade.

 

I still don't think it would be that different, assuming you cut through University Plaza.

 

Are you really eating it up? Or are you lining it up with a popular destination where the primary mode of transport is already walking?

 

You are eating it up. The university is already well-served by buses, and fixed rails will not create economic development on campus-owned property (remember also UC does not pay taxes!). Without economic development, you sacrifice ROI. Corryville needs revitalization that can result from fixed-rail transit. The change there would be far bigger and far more economically impactful than with a route abutting campus.

^ This is an interesting discussion.

 

We need to distinguish between economic benefits (which disregard taxes since they are transfer payments) and economic impacts (which value taxes and wages). Most economists prefer to express the worth of investments according to their benefits whether they pay taxes or not. I wouldn't discount UC simply because it doesn't pay taxes. The more it grows, the more students and employees it will have, and they will spend more money on housing and entertainment.

 

Rail opponents like Randal O'Toole dismiss any public investment along a rail line, saying it is not worthy simply because the private market did not create it. That's wrong.

^ This is an interesting discussion.

 

We need to distinguish between economic benefits (which disregard taxes since they are transfer payments) and economic impacts (which value taxes and wages). Most economists prefer to express the worth of investments according to their benefits whether they pay taxes or not. I wouldn't discount UC simply because it doesn't pay taxes. The more it grows, the more students and employees it will have, and they will spend more money on housing and entertainment.

 

Rail opponents like Randal O'Toole dismiss any public investment along a rail line, saying it is not worthy simply because the private market did not create it. That's wrong.

 

Furthermore, there are payroll taxes that result from the expansion of an otherwise tax-exempt university. There may also be spin-off private-sector jobs having offices or otherwise working inside the university in R&D partnerships, or in work-study programs, or technology clustering just across the street from campus properties. And all of those payrolls comprise a measurable and potentially significant taxbase that drives innovation and economic development. And as we've seen in other cities, transit, biking and walking are preferred modes of the creative class because driving takes up too much mental bandwidth. :-D

^ This is an interesting discussion.

 

We need to distinguish between economic benefits (which disregard taxes since they are transfer payments) and economic impacts (which value taxes and wages). Most economists prefer to express the worth of investments according to their benefits whether they pay taxes or not. I wouldn't discount UC simply because it doesn't pay taxes. The more it grows, the more students and employees it will have, and they will spend more money on housing and entertainment.

 

Rail opponents like Randal O'Toole dismiss any public investment along a rail line, saying it is not worthy simply because the private market did not create it. That's wrong.

 

Furthermore, there are payroll taxes that result from the expansion of an otherwise tax-exempt university. There may also be spin-off private-sector jobs having offices or otherwise working inside the university in R&D partnerships, or in work-study programs, or technology clustering just across the street from campus properties. And all of those payrolls comprise a measurable and potentially significant taxbase that drives innovation and economic development. And as we've seen in other cities, transit, biking and walking are preferred modes of the creative class because driving takes up too much mental bandwidth. :-D

 

UC and other schools and non-profits are exempt from property tax, and sometimes county and state sales tax, but not the city earnings tax.  Despite what COAST says, Cincinnati's city property tax is quite low and just a fraction of the total county, public school, and special services (zoo, MRDD, etc.) property tax a property owner typically pays. 

 

John Schneider, thanks for the clarification in terminology.

 

Don't get me wrong, I think it's very important to connect to UC. (Heck, I'm suggesting making a streetcar Government Square across the street from the Edwards Center!) I just think covering the east side of campus is enough, at least to begin with. It's the side with the most on-campus housing and the side with the most potential for transformation. We should also keep in mind that the Bearcat Shuttle (as well as metro buses) will respond to and integrate with the streetcar. I imagine there would be quite a high frequency from (e.g.) the One Stop Center, DAAP, and the Greek Village to University Plaza if it became a streetcar hub.

 

If we're going to go closer to campus (Jefferson) or extend along the south of campus, we have to ask if we're getting the best bang for the buck. The scope, scale, and kind (notably the kind that pays property taxes) of development (the economic impact ;)) that would occur in dense Corryville would be more transformational (or at least more reliably so...in my estimation) than saturating UC with walkshed.

 

At least have UC ask for it rather than bending over backwards to throw them bones. After all, they're the ones who would have to decide the extent to which the streetcar would impact their development strategies.

^ This is an interesting discussion.

 

We need to distinguish between economic benefits (which disregard taxes since they are transfer payments) and economic impacts (which value taxes and wages). Most economists prefer to express the worth of investments according to their benefits whether they pay taxes or not. I wouldn't discount UC simply because it doesn't pay taxes. The more it grows, the more students and employees it will have, and they will spend more money on housing and entertainment.

 

Rail opponents like Randal O'Toole dismiss any public investment along a rail line, saying it is not worthy simply because the private market did not create it. That's wrong.

 

Furthermore, there are payroll taxes that result from the expansion of an otherwise tax-exempt university. There may also be spin-off private-sector jobs having offices or otherwise working inside the university in R&D partnerships, or in work-study programs, or technology clustering just across the street from campus properties. And all of those payrolls comprise a measurable and potentially significant taxbase that drives innovation and economic development. And as we've seen in other cities, transit, biking and walking are preferred modes of the creative class because driving takes up too much mental bandwidth. :-D

 

UC and other schools and non-profits are exempt from property tax, and sometimes county and state sales tax, but not the city earnings tax.  Despite what COAST says, Cincinnati's city property tax is quite low and just a fraction of the total county, public school, and special services (zoo, MRDD, etc.) property tax a property owner typically pays. 

 

 

It's not like I've suggested skipping UC.

 

BTW any resemblance between what I've said and what Randall O'Toole or COAST says is purely coincidental. I categorically deny any affiliation!

After all, they're the ones who would have to decide the extent to which the streetcar would impact their development strategies.

 

Okay, excuse me while I argue with myself. This is true, but UC doesn't have to do anything in order for streetcar access to influence people's decisions to attend or seek employment at UC.

 

Still, I think it's overly speculative to say that impact will exceed the benefit of development focused in the Corryville neighborhood. I also think you lose a lot of elegance and efficiency in the system overall by forfeiting the chance to create a UC-adjacent transit center (at University Plaza). And you can always add more track if it looks like a greater impact could be leveraged, but once the track is laid, (for all intents and purposes) that is that.

Uh oh. The Natininja fembot is malfunctioning.

^ This is an interesting discussion.

 

We need to distinguish between economic benefits (which disregard taxes since they are transfer payments) and economic impacts (which value taxes and wages). Most economists prefer to express the worth of investments according to their benefits whether they pay taxes or not. I wouldn't discount UC simply because it doesn't pay taxes. The more it grows, the more students and employees it will have, and they will spend more money on housing and entertainment.

 

Rail opponents like Randal O'Toole dismiss any public investment along a rail line, saying it is not worthy simply because the private market did not create it. That's wrong.

Those are some good points, though I think we need to keep in mind how big UC's actual campus is and how, once you have to walk through it, walking two extra blocks isn't that big of a deal.  Like I said before, lots of students are walking there from east of Vine right now, and the University is obviously going to axe student parking before faculty or admin parking.  If you're going to "connect" UC to the Streetcar line, the best way is through the campus via University or Lincoln and thence north on Brookline through Burnet Woods to Ludlow where the new Clifton Public Library will be (Boss Cox Mansion), as suggested ages ago by jmecklenborg on this thread.  The difference between walking from Jefferson through campus or from Vine through campus is meager compared the the distance between walking from the Michael Graves Engineering building through campus, given that the Engineering building is nearly in the middle of UC's campus.

 

 

Keep in mind that a lot of the middle managers at UC are middle-aged white guys from the west side and similar demographics that don't care about transit at all. The only way UC is going to publicly come out in support of the streetcar is if it comes from the top down (Is Santa Ono willing to spend his political capital on the streetcar project?) or from the bottom up (a huge number of students rallying and pushing UC to support it).

There was a weird surge of public pressure for Ono to publicly support the streetcar in December. I tweeted at him, and he responded with a message saying "I met the Mayor today with the CBC and we discussed the importance of public transport to Clifton". I honestly think he believes in the streetcar, but wasn't willing to publicly ask Cranley or council to support it. I wouldn't be surprised if he did tell officials behind closed doors that he was supportive of the project, though. Hopefully he is outspoken once the first phase is operating.

Based on conversations my friend has had with him, it certainly seems like he's very much in favor of getting the streetcar up to Clifton. He knows the benefits to the city and his student body and legitimately cares about retaining Cincinnatians after they graduate.

There was a weird surge of public pressure for Ono to publicly support the streetcar in December. I tweeted at him, and he responded with a message saying "I met the Mayor today with the CBC and we discussed the importance of public transport to Clifton". I honestly think he believes in the streetcar, but wasn't willing to publicly ask Cranley or council to support it. I wouldn't be surprised if he did tell officials behind closed doors that he was supportive of the project, though. Hopefully he is outspoken once the first phase is operating.

 

Ono is in a tough situation.  700wlw & Smitherman politicized the streetcar to such extremes that even taking a stand on one side or the other creates massive controversy.  Imagine the news cycles(& AM radio) if Ono was to support the streetcar today.  Imagine the amount of hate and vitriol would be spewed at him.  I know I've said it before but its worth repeating. Ono tweeted, then quickly deleted, in 2011 for city council & leaders to 'have courage' regarding the streetcar vote.  Im sure he knows the benefits the streetcar would have going through his campus.

 

Thankfully the hostility is going down now since the election & since its being built.  Cooler heads are starting to prevail.  Now the argument isn't 'if the streetcar is built', its 'when will the streetcar reach my neighborhood'. 

 

This whole debate has never been solely about the streetcar. The streetcar is just the surface. Remember, the streetcar was a REPUBLICAN idea first and foremost before AM radio & traditional media muddied up the debate for revenue. This is Old Cincinnati(we've always done it this way) vs New Cincinnati(Washington Park, Fountain Square Renovation).  This is New age media vs old traditional media & a lot of other pent up political battles. 

 

It comes down to what it has always comes down to in this region.  Politics.  Who's political will is stronger.  Is it Cranley/Smitherman/Winburn/Murray/AM radio/COAST/Kuhl etc or is it Schneider/Simpson/Messer/Seelbach/Young/etc?  I think we all are getting a clearer answer to that question as time progresses

sorry to go off the main thread but it's about Luken, Mallory, Tillery, Reece, Terhar, Winkler & more.

During the Mallory admin, it seemed like there was always some kind of NAACP/COAST fire to put out. That's the guerilla strategy people in occupied territory use. Since Cranky got in you notice it's gotten really quiet?

Notice all the people gone? Another guerilla strategy when they take over.

It's politics & political power. Nobody is screaming about selling off city assets or giving away a parking garage now. The screamers didn't care then, they don't care now, they were just making noise.

sorry to go off the main thread but it's about Luken, Mallory, Tillery, Reece, Terhar, Winkler & more.

During the Mallory admin, it seemed like there was always some kind of NAACP/COAST fire to put out. That's the guerilla strategy people in occupied territory use. Since Cranky got in you notice it's gotten really quiet?

Notice all the people gone? Another guerilla strategy when they take over.

It's politics & political power. Nobody is screaming about selling off city assets or giving away a parking garage now. The screamers didn't care then, they don't care now, they were just making noise.

 

I suspect that the big money was out to get Mallory from day 1.  David Pepper was their guy just like Cranley is their guy.  Perhaps if Pepper had been elected in 2005 the streetcar project would have been carried out relatively smoothly. 

 

Suddenly it's okay to take from the pension fund to plug the budget hole, then add a bunch of earmarks for pet projects. And the fiscal responsibility bell-ringers are nowhere in sight. And WLW is worried only about "bike welfare".

This whole debate has never been solely about the streetcar. The streetcar is just the surface. Remember, the streetcar was a REPUBLICAN idea first and foremost before AM radio & traditional media muddied up the debate for revenue. This is Old Cincinnati(we've always done it this way) vs New Cincinnati(Washington Park, Fountain Square Renovation).  This is New age media vs old traditional media & a lot of other pent up political battles. 

 

You absolutely nailed it here.  Other conservative towns haven't had this level of fighting over transit issues either.  Cincinnati's old guard likes the broken status quo.  For Cincinnati's sake, I just hope Cranley is only a 1 term mayor.

Also we are suffering with only one newspaper.  These clowns only need to convince (pay off?) one newspaper to drive TV and radio in their favor.  Look at how The Enquirer is completely ignoring the stuff going on with Josh Mandel right now while the Cleveland Plain-Dealer is taking him to the mat.  Just like how the Joe Deters corruption story was big news around the state but nobody from Cincinnati has even heard of that scandal. 

^-I think the whole fight has been a result of new media giving people different perspectives that they otherwise wouldn't be exposed to.  When I lived down there I felt like my views had zero voice in the mainstream, it seemed like the city was overall happy to be unhappy driving down a road towards complete ruin.  Yes things were happening but it wasn't at the level things are at now.  (This was from 2003-2007).

 

I still remember when MetroMoves failed and people I knew were talking about how it was terrible because the trains every 5 mins would hold up traffic, ugh.

Walking two extra blocks isn't that big of a deal

 

I disagree. Pedestrians are very sensitive to distance, especially if the route is uncomfortable. Crossing Jefferson is probably the equivalent of several hundred feet of walking on a walking path.

 

 

 

sorry to go off the main thread but it's about Luken, Mallory, Tillery, Reece, Terhar, Winkler & more.

During the Mallory admin, it seemed like there was always some kind of NAACP/COAST fire to put out. That's the guerilla strategy people in occupied territory use. Since Cranky got in you notice it's gotten really quiet?

Notice all the people gone? Another guerilla strategy when they take over.

It's politics & political power. Nobody is screaming about selling off city assets or giving away a parking garage now. The screamers didn't care then, they don't care now, they were just making noise.

This is basically right (I said as much regarding the "structurally balanced budget" over at the Mayor John Cranley thread), but I do think a real corner has been turned, now that the Streetcar is being built.  The big way Mallory & Qualls failed was not by failing to recognize the hostility of the opposition (although Mallory certainly didn't see Cranley's latent hostility for some reason; not sure how you can't figure that out after working with the guy nearly every day for four years), but by failing to engage the population at large.  The single biggest danger to the Streetcar project wasn't CO@ST's direct actions but how long the project seemed to take.  Phase 1a should have started as soon as possible as Phase 1, leaving Phase 1b to be Phase 2.  People needed to see it in action to really get behind it, and once they had the money to do the first loop they should have done it because it complemented all the other projects that were going on and it would have made the big picture a lot clearer to everyone.  That was the big mistake that Mallory & Qualls made.

 

What's telling is how people perceive the potential success of the Streetcar is the status of the surrounding neighborhood; now that the development in OTR is so noticeable, people have more of a sense of how the Streetcar will be successful.  That's why Pete Witte and these Price Hill activists are now on board.  They are in OTR, seeing right before their eyes that if you firebomb an area with redevelopment money, it'll get fixed up.  That's why they want transit access across the Western Hills Viaduct, because they want the institutional redevelopment money to head west, rather than toward Walnut Hills.  They know that if they don't get their neighborhood aligned with the new trends in redevelopment, they're at much greater risk to becoming the South Side of Chicago.  They're previous attitude was one of bluster, that the City needed them more than they needed the City.  They've finally gotten smart and realized that although they might have strong personal and kinship ties to Delhi and Green Township, land is immobile.

Walking two extra blocks isn't that big of a deal

I disagree. Pedestrians are very sensitive to distance, especially if the route is uncomfortable. Crossing Jefferson is probably the equivalent of several hundred feet of walking on a walking path.

 

No offense man, but you're completely ignoring the argument.  I didn't ever say "pedestrians", I said "students".  Go up their and look around, and you can see they aren't sensitive to distance, otherwise you wouldn't have so much student housing basically in every cardinal direction from UC.  The other thing I said is that person who wants to ditch his car entirely for public transit once you have a comprehensive system that goes from the Zoo to the Riverfront is not going to be the type of person who cares about two extra blocks on his walk.

sorry to go off the main thread but it's about Luken, Mallory, Tillery, Reece, Terhar, Winkler & more.

During the Mallory admin, it seemed like there was always some kind of NAACP/COAST fire to put out. That's the guerilla strategy people in occupied territory use. Since Cranky got in you notice it's gotten really quiet?

Notice all the people gone? Another guerilla strategy when they take over.

It's politics & political power. Nobody is screaming about selling off city assets or giving away a parking garage now. The screamers didn't care then, they don't care now, they were just making noise.

 

I suspect that the big money was out to get Mallory from day 1.  David Pepper was their guy just like Cranley is their guy.  Perhaps if Pepper had been elected in 2005 the streetcar project would have been carried out relatively smoothly. 

 

 

Although he never used the word streetcar, in the 2005 Mayoral debate David Pepper said something like (and I'm paraphrasing here as it was a decade ago) "we need 21st century transportation to run from the banks and connect to UC up the hill"

This whole debate has never been solely about the streetcar. The streetcar is just the surface. Remember, the streetcar was a REPUBLICAN idea first and foremost before AM radio & traditional media muddied up the debate for revenue. This is Old Cincinnati(we've always done it this way) vs New Cincinnati(Washington Park, Fountain Square Renovation).  This is New age media vs old traditional media & a lot of other pent up political battles. 

 

You absolutely nailed it here.  Other conservative towns haven't had this level of fighting over transit issues either.  Cincinnati's old guard likes the broken status quo.  For Cincinnati's sake, I just hope Cranley is only a 1 term mayor.

 

I beg to differ here. Cincinnati has seen some of the worst of it, but right now there is a hellacious fight going on in San Antonio that's probably going to go to the ballot. The City of Milwaukee has been fighting over rail with the county that dominates it for more years than we have. It took Phoenix five tries before they voted for light rail; Kansas City - seven before they gave up and decided to build a modern streetcar. Indianapolis is probably the most anti-transit city in the nation; the state legislature there just authorized them to have a local transit vote but stipulated that they can't even consider building rail. Houston fought over rail for years, and Congressman Culbertson there has been kind enough to insert language in the Federal transportation bill to prohibit more rail money from going to Houston.

 

Our opponents are particularly nasty (and thankfully ineffective) but only by a matter of degree.

sorry to go off the main thread but it's about Luken, Mallory, Tillery, Reece, Terhar, Winkler & more.

During the Mallory admin, it seemed like there was always some kind of NAACP/COAST fire to put out. That's the guerilla strategy people in occupied territory use. Since Cranky got in you notice it's gotten really quiet?

Notice all the people gone? Another guerilla strategy when they take over.

It's politics & political power. Nobody is screaming about selling off city assets or giving away a parking garage now. The screamers didn't care then, they don't care now, they were just making noise.

 

I suspect that the big money was out to get Mallory from day 1.  David Pepper was their guy just like Cranley is their guy.  Perhaps if Pepper had been elected in 2005 the streetcar project would have been carried out relatively smoothly. 

 

 

Although he never used the word streetcar, in the 2005 Mayoral debate David Pepper said something like (and I'm paraphrasing here as it was a decade ago) "we need 21st century transportation to run from the banks and connect to UC up the hill"

 

David Pepper worked diligently behind the scenes to kill support for MetroMoves in the business community. He is not a friend of higher-level transportation.

Walking two extra blocks isn't that big of a deal

 

I disagree. Pedestrians are very sensitive to distance, especially if the route is uncomfortable. Crossing Jefferson is probably the equivalent of several hundred feet of walking on a walking path.

 

I used to walk about .6 miles to the el every morning and didn't have a problem, what's more important is viability and usefulness of service day to day.

I don't have a strong preference whether the streetcar route follows Jefferson versus Short Vine through Corryville... but I hope that regardless of the streetcar route, that Jefferson continues to get upgraded to make it more inviting and pedestrian friendly. Some of the talk here sounds like folks have already given up all hope for Jefferson to be a nice, walkable street.

 

The western side of Jefferson has perhaps the city's nicest row of shade trees, with large mature trees on both sides of the walkway. The eastern side of Jefferson also has nice trees. South of Daniels, they planted trees in the median in 2011. I'd like to see the landscaped median continue north to MLK. The new Metro stations improve the streetscape significantly, with nice use of high quality granite and glass, giving a sense of durability and permanence. Once those trees in the median grow taller, Jefferson has the potential to be a beautiful promenade. Narrowing the lanes slightly to discourage speeding would make it feel much less like a thoroughfare and could probably allow for enough space for bike lanes.

 

It's frustrating that UC has designed their buildings along Jefferson to face "away" from the street. Because Jefferson is probably the side of campus most visitors enter from for events (athletics and CCM), it's a missed opportunity to make a strong impression. But despite the buildings' current configurations, I still feel there's hope for UC to better landscape the area between the walkway and their buildings.

 

So... long story short... regardless of whether the streetcar is routed along Jefferson, I hope folks here continue to advocate for improving Jefferson into a nice, walkable street.  I think this is especially true if the streetcar goes along Short Vine, since so many people will have to walk across Jefferson.