Will it transform OTR into Times Square in Manhattan? No.

And thank God for that. If we're going to compare OTR to Manhattan neighborhoods, then the Lower East Side would be the most apt comparison.

 

Will it increase city revenues so much that the city can finally get out of it's budget woes? No.

Maybe not, but it will make the budget woes less severe than they would otherwise be.

 

Will it result in millions of tourists flocking to OTR? No.

Times Square can keep its flocks of tourists. Healthy cities need real neighborhoods, not tourist traps.

 

Will thousands of residents give up their cars and move to OTR? No.

I'd settle for a few hundred to start. And they all don't need to give up their cars; the streetcar just means they more choices and drive fewer miles.

 

The Streetcar, in my opinion, will result in a modest improvement for a modest cost. It's not going to transform Cincinnati into some urban utopia.

 

It will take much more than one streetcar line to transform Cincinnati into an urban utopia. But it's a necessary step in that direction.

Also, does anyone know how much money the pro-streetcar side of things has raised versus the anti-streetcar one.  And how's voter registration going for this especially in the black neighborhoods in the city like Bond Hill and Roselawn (traditionally high voter turnout areas).

Focusing first on the streetcar.... Failure to build a streetcar alone would not result in the failure of Cincinnati. I do think it would result in its diminishment in comparison to other cities around the nation. If your city is standing still while other cities are progressing, your city is actually going backwards.

 

But this City Charter amendment is, of course, about more than just a streetcar. I have yet to meet a sustainable major city which completely lacks a passenger rail system. My contention about Cincinnati's future is not dependent on whether a streetcar is built but on whether any quality passenger rail system is present.

>P&G will no longer be able to get the best and brightest because they will laugh at our lack of a trolley!!

 

Look, working for P&G has a stigma attached to it if you're from here and you're going to have a helluva time trying to get a 27 year-old to move from New York City to work for them here.  Imagine how dumb the recruiter's going to feel taking some New York person up to their Center Hill Dr. complex in Finneytown -- it's downtown or nothing for recruiting out-of-town talent, and downtown needs to be kicking ass if we're to have any chance. 

 

>Where do you come up with this stuff?  So many feel embarrassed?  Show me the statistics!

 

The statistics are in the number of friends from high school and college who are still in Cincinnati, which is close to zero. Dozens are in New York, Boston, Washington, and Chicago. They're never moving back, and if they did, they'd never live in the suburbs. 

 

>I agree, a vibrant OTR is priceless, but if it is be revitalized, it can be done without a streetcar. 

 

Where are the cars going to park?  There are there not enough vacant lots in OTR to provide surface parking for every building still standing.  The city will have to tear down buildings for garages, and COAST will complain about the city building those garages.  It's already happening -- the Venus Lounge building in the 1300 block of Vine will be demolished this year for a new garage. 

 

>Go buy yourself a building and rehab it.

 

Welcome to 100 years ago, DanB.  The OTR buildings are huge compared to Northside, Prospect Hill, and the Mt. Adams buildings that have been rehabbed in recent decades. Buying, renovating, and renting a 10-15 unit apartment building is an exponentially bigger job than buying a 1880's row house in Newport for you and your fish tank.  Almost nobody qualifies for the loan necessary to buy and renovate those big buildings. The parking and the size of the buildings are central to the whole dilemma -- reduce the parking burden with high quality public transportation and it simplifies the situation.     

 

 

There is no talent. If their was, we would not be in this whole mess we are now in this great country of ours. The people on NYC is no more special than the people that live in OTR.

'Poison Pill' amendment is about less, not 'more'

Editorial: Cincinnati Rail Proposal

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?Dato=20090808&Kategori=EDIT01&Lopenr=908090343&Ref=AR

 

A funny thing happened to Cincinnati on the way to the streetcar - funny, but certainly not amusing.

 

A proposed city charter amendment on this November's ballot has not only altered the debate over the city's plan for a $185 million, riverfront-to-Uptown fixed-rail streetcar route, it has all but obliterated it. It has sucked the air out of any substantive discussion about such a system's actual merits.

 

Instead, public debate - no doubt as the amendment's creators, avowed streetcar foes, intended - has focused on an acrimonious disagreement about what its wording actually means and what its effect would be:

 

Is it about the streetcar?

 

Or is it about more than the streetcar?

Yes, hell has officially froze over.

 

Big props to the Enquirer Editorial Board (it feels so wrong to say that...)

 

Look, working for P&G has a stigma attached to it if you're from here and you're going to have a helluva time trying to get a 27 year-old to move from New York City to work for them here.  Imagine how dumb the recruiter's going to feel taking some New York person up to their Center Hill Dr. complex in Finneytown -- it's downtown or nothing for recruiting out-of-town talent, and downtown needs to be kicking ass if we're to have any chance.  

 

 

You really have no clue.  P&G recruits very little in Cincinnati.  These young people are coming from all over the country to work in both the technical centers and downtown.  I'm not talking about administrative jobs, or lab assistant jobs, but the highly technical engineering, marketing, and chemistry graduates.  Lack of a streetcar is not keeping people from moving here.

^

 

Dan's right, so far as he goes. I've had P&G neighbors who worked in the suburbs, but they chose to live downtown.

Great editorial by the Equirer. (Did I just say that?) You don't need to be a streetcar supporter to realize how dangerous this charter amendment is.

COAST is right about one thing: any loophole in the charter amendment would be used by streetcar proponents to try to undermine a negative election results.  It's the way of the world.  Ironclad language is the only way to guarantee results.  I don't think this amendment is a good idea, but let's be real here.

 

>hese young people are coming from all over the country to work in both the technical centers and downtown.

 

How then do you explain the Gillette buyout -- that so few moved from Boston to here is said to have been the turning point for P&G, what got them behind Over-the-Rhine and the streetcar?

 

I'm not sure of the point you are making, but it is clear you really don't understand how P&G operates.  I am talking new hires, not buyout personell.  Every time P&G buys a company, the first thing they say is that the new operations will remain in the original city.  Then slowly, they shift the management and technical people to Cincinnati.  It may take years, but sometimes it happens much faster.  P&G likes to promote from within, and rarely hires anyone from another company.  They like to mold their people in their own image.  People from the buyout companies are usually offered the opportunity to stay with P&G, and many stay for a few years, but eventually most of them leave.  They just don't fit in with the culture.  Many of them like to stay in the previous location, as you say, Boston for example.  Not because they are from there, or because Boston might have better transit, but because they have established a life there with their children and/or families, and they don't want to leave.

 

Believe me, those from Gillette, who P&G wanted to come to Cincinnati, came.  P&G has a vested interest in downtown, I understand that.  I have no doubt P&G thinks a streetcar and a vital OTR are important.  I know you think I am being paid to be against it, but I'm not.  I think it would be good also, I just don't agree with most of the reasons posted here.

 

In regards to your comments about buying and rehabbing properties, how will those investments be any different when a streetcar is in place?  Do you not think that many of those properties on the line are already owned by people waiting to reap the benefits of the streetcar?  I don't understand why you think it is so difficult to get a group together to buy property and begin your own rehab.

Hell has frozen over.

 

The Cincinnati Enquirer still does not support the streetcar, but it does support an overall regional rail plan or is at least against the charter amendment.

>n regards to your comments about buying and rehabbing properties, how will those investments be any different when a streetcar is in place?

 

As has been stated here repeatedly, banks require condo projects in Cincinnati to have 1.8 parking spaces per unit.  Banks require condo projects along Portland's streetcar route to have 1.3 parking spaces per unit. That's a deal maker or breaker for projects large and small here and there. 

 

 

> don't understand why you think it is so difficult to get a group together to buy property and begin your own rehab.

 

I already am a sole proprietor in something unrelated to the matter at hand and my time and energies are focussed on that.

Speaking of parking requirements...

 

Free Parking Isn't Free

 

By Seth Zeren

 

When does a Prius have the same environmental impact as a Hummer? The 95 percent of the time it’s parked.

 

Most people don't spend time thinking about parking spaces unless they're looking for one. But these 9' by 18' rectangles of urban real estate have a vast impact on North American communities. They affect the economy, land use patterns, the design of cities and even individual lifestyles.

 

Read More

 

    Independent of what the banks say, Cincinnati has a zoning code that requires minimum number of parking spaces, making some properties practically undevelopable, even in pedestrian oriented areas. Cincinnati needs an overhaul of the zoning code.

 

Agreed. The streetcar is important to the development of OTR, but it's not the only step that needs to be taken by the city.

True, but independent of what the zoning says, banks still have loan standards for such things. Cincinnati could easily adopt a TOD overlay for such things.

The Enquirer did come down against the anti-streetcar/rail crowd after all.  Will their editorial carry any weight.

Well, it's still prominent on their front page after all this time, and it's going to be a prominent issue in print. They are spot on about their Tampa assessment, as well.

I wonder how much of a chance this amendment has of passing now that the Enquirer and Business Courier have made their positions clear and exposed how dangerous it is.

Independent of what the banks say, Cincinnati has a zoning code that requires minimum number of parking spaces, making some properties practically undevelopable, even in pedestrian oriented areas. Cincinnati needs an overhaul of the zoning code.

 

Yes, but fortunately there is some flexibility for these sites via Variances that can reduce parking requirements if a hardship is present for the developer (meaning no where to build parking, or it would be cost-prohibitive).

 

I have been an advocate for parking maximums.  This would allow for the market to dictate how much parking is needed, but only to a certain extent.  This would prevent Wal-Mart from going in and creating a massive parking lot that they really never intend to use, but hope to use for seasonal sales space to avoid paying taxes on it.

Developers have no time to mess around with variances.

 

I don't know why everone thinks that Wal*mart builds enormous parking lots, much bigger than what they need. In all of the development plans I have seen, the developer tries to build the minimum required by the zoning, or even less.

 

In the plans I've reviewed from big-boxers like Wal-Mart, Target, etc I have never had an issue with them wanting to do less than the requirement.  In some of the cities where I have written cases we had regulations that required impervious paving for anything over a certain number...and when that happens the places that really want the extra parking do it.  But yes, Wal-Mart is notorious at doing this.

 

  You required impervious paving?

I'm sorry, I meant pervious paving.

Developers have no time to mess around with variances.

 

Some of my clients must not have gotten that memo. They'll bend over backwards to get a variance if it means they can squeeze another rentable square foot out of their property.

I know some people have been wondering whether or not the Cincinnati Enquirer ran the editorial piece in the sunday print edition...the answer is YES they did...and how. On the front piece of the "Sunday Forum" they ran a large headline "On Opposite Tracks" and outlined the dangers of the proposed charter amendment. The front page outlined exactly what the amendment would do, who supports it and who doesn't. It also included a graphic of the "Chicago Hub High Speed Network" and pointed out how this referendum could potentially exclude Cincinnati from that. The front also had quotes from Mayor Mallory, Councilman Bortz, Ellen Van Der Horst, Christopher Finney and Christopher Smitherman. On the very next page they ran the editorial followed by an outline of the streetcar plan and an article on the effects of streetcars in Tampa, Memphis, Seattle and Portland.

 

Props to the Enquirer, I know some like to hate on it but they did a pretty fair job reporting on the ballot issue and laid it out plain and clear in the sunday print edition. I just hope they keep up this kind of exposure come election time!

Eighth (or Eigth) and State actually is a member of COAST.

^Oh, greaaaaat. *rolls eyes*

Just as we write letters and blog comments that rag on the Enquirer when they offer opinions we disagree with, I hope many of you are also thanking them for their thoughtful editorial.

 

Praise and push......

Just as we write letters and blog comments that rag on the Enquirer when they offer opinions we disagree with, I hope many of you are also thanking them for their thoughtful editorial.

 

Praise and push......

 

Perhaps some people rag on the Enquirer for not supporting their personal views, I know that many like myself lack appreciation for the paper because of their inadequate coverage of key issues right here in the city.

 

I don't think anyone who wants their local paper to adequately cover an issue was disappointed with the editorial in Sunday's edition.  Of course, I'm speaking about pro-streetcar/rail people, but it was certainly a long overdue piece that balancecd the scales, so to speak.  So it's not really about appeasing one interest group but showing all the items on the menu.  (Not just the dishes for stiffs...)

^Oh, greaaaaat. *rolls eyes*

 

What's wrong with that? It's great to have a variety of diverse opinions on this forum, and if he is a member of COAST, so what?

Diverse opinions are one thing, but this man-crush on COAST is getting a little out of hand. It's not the beliefs and opinions of these people that have everybody up in arms (though I find them to be short-sighted and provincial), it's their tactics. The same tactics that some have gushed over in this thread previously - standing outside of bars to get intoxicated people to sign their 'trolley petition,' not mentioning to these same people that if you actually support the street car then you shouldn't sign, raising holy hell whenever the city wants to invest in it's own future, even tricking their political allies (NAACP and turning the issue they care about into one that fits COASTs agenda, streetcar to rail), etc...etc...

 

Anybody who makes a living in this great metro area of ours should be trying to shout down these people whenever and wherever they show up. Their agenda will have lasting harm on our economy and, if successful, will turn Cincinnati into a backwater. There is absolutely nothing to admire about them.

I found something to admire about COAST, and it would be something that the pro-streetcar advocates should take note of because COAST is running a damn successful campaign against the streetcar movement. That said, if anyone is a member of COAST, I don't really care although I do care if others specifically lash out against a specific forumer for being in that organization (or related organizations). That would be completely unacceptable.

I agree with Sherman. As much as I loathe COAST and everything they stand for, there's no need for a witch hunt against UO members who might be COASTers.

 

I've met Eighth & State, and he's a good guy. I don't agree with much he says here, but he takes the time to present cogent arguments for his point of view, and he's always respectful of other forum members.

While not a member of COAST, I generally align with them politically.  It's my opinion (and many others I know that share similar beliefs) that the streetcar (and rail transit in general) is important infrastructure, and one of the things a government should provide. 

 

I’m just saying this to highlight the breadth of support for the streetcar I have seen personally.  There may turn out to be many more supporters in Cincinnati than we expected there to be.

 

...In regards to your comments about buying and rehabbing properties, how will those investments be any different when a streetcar is in place?  Do you not think that many of those properties on the line are already owned by people waiting to reap the benefits of the streetcar?  I don't understand why you think it is so difficult to get a group together to buy property and begin your own rehab.

 

I personally rehabbed a building in OTR between 1999-2004.  We have no off-street parking and none is available.  All tenants must park on the street.

 

I've been seriously considering a second rehab, and the building I am considering has been vacant 30 years and has no parking available.  The parking issue is definitely giving me reservations because it means lower rents.  If I was sure the streetcar was going to happen, then I would have no reservations. 

The parking issue is definitely giving me reservations because it means lower rents.

Why not piggy back off the 600 space garage that will be built in the park?  Places like the Gramercy were made viable in part because of the city garages, why aren't you?  I would think that if you timed your redevelopment of the building with the development of the garage, your rents would be fine.

While not a member of COAST, I generally align with them politically.  It's my opinion (and many others I know that share similar beliefs) that the streetcar (and rail transit in general) is important infrastructure, and one of the things a government should provide. 

 

For what it's worth, I also match that description perfectly.  I agree that many conservatives view the providing of infrastructure as one of the main priorities of any government, and I pray that you are correct about the number of streetcar supporters in Cincinnati.

The garage is not even close to being funded.

So you do not think that 3CDC will be placing the garage at the north of the park then? Keep in mind that garage is much closer to being built than the streetcar at this point. My money is on the garage and when it comes to redevelopment planning for Mike then I believe he should take that into consideration...don't you?  Why turn a blind eye to alternatives even when it may or may not be the alternative you personally want. 

I agree with Sherman. As much as I loathe COAST and everything they stand for, there's no need for a witch hunt against UO members who might be COASTers.

 

I've met Eighth & State, and he's a good guy. I don't agree with much he says here, but he takes the time to present cogent arguments for his point of view, and he's always respectful of other forum members.

 

Absolutely, and if COAST in general was as reasonable and thoughtful as 8th & St, then we would be having a much more civilized debate. Unfortunately, as the Enquirer pointed out, the slick wording they put in the charter amendment all but destroyed any chance of having a meaningful debate about the streetcar.

^ No argument there. A debate with a typical COAST member is like trying to reason with a shit-flinging howler monkey.

^ No argument there. A debate with a typical COAST member is like trying to reason with a sh!t-flinging howler monkey.

 

If you really think your side of the debate as more sense, that's the type of thing you shouldn't say..

So you do not think that 3CDC will be placing the garage at the north of the park then?  Keep in mind that garage is much closer to being built than the streetcar at this point.  My money is on the garage and when it comes to redevelopment planning for Mike then I believe he should take that into consideration...don't you?  Why turn a blind eye to alternatives even when it may or may not be the alternative you personally want. 

 

The garage and the streetcar both work together.  If you have a demand for two spots per unit, that means a 600 spot garage can support 300 units; drop that to 1.5 per unit, then the same $17 million(?) garage can support 450.  Drop it to one and you have the same investment supporting twice the residential development--600 units.

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.

They work together and independently as well when deciding whether or not a residential project is viable. I am saying that Mike needs to take both into account on deciding whether to, or not to develop his other property. The streetcar ALONE should not necessarily be treated as a go or no go proposition when other alternatives may present themselves.

The parking issue is definitely giving me reservations because it means lower rents.

Why not piggy back off the 600 space garage that will be built in the park?  Places like the Gramercy were made viable in part because of the city garages, why aren't you?  I would think that if you timed your redevelopment of the building with the development of the garage, your rents would be fine.

 

The second building I am looking at is 3 blocks from the park.  Even being close to the park with my first building, though, I'm not sure people want to park underground then walk 100 yards to their front door.  Maybe, but then I'm not even sure 3CDC will be selling spots if they get it built.  Seems like they need all the spots for Music Hall/SCPA.