Even if the ride were free and there was no advertising, the total operating expenses of the streetcar would be covered by the increased property tax receipts of just a few hundred rehabbed buildings.  That's the whole point, growing the tax base instead of just dividing up the pie further.  You have to spend money to make money, and this is a very small expenditure for a lot of gain.

 

  "Growing the tax base instead of just dividing up the pie further..."

 

  Hamilton County is losing population. Ohio as a whole is projected to peak in population in 2018. Growing the tax base does of the city as a whole does not look promising. If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero. I am not comfortable with this approach.

 

  Now IF the city built the streetcar AND abandoned some suburban street somewhere else along with all of the associated maintenance costs, then it might pay off, but I don't expect the city to consolidate by abandoning infrastructure in other places.

 

"Growing the tax base instead of just dividing up the pie further..."

 

  Hamilton County is losing population. Ohio as a whole is projected to peak in population in 2018. Growing the tax base does of the city as a whole does not look promising. If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero. I am not comfortable with this approach.

 

  Now IF the city built the streetcar AND abandoned some suburban street somewhere else along with all of the associated maintenance costs, then it might pay off, but I don't expect the city to consolidate by abandoning infrastructure in other places.

 

I would not overlook the potential of in-migration from other states. Indeed, one of Ohio's only advantages over other states is its built environment, since we can't control the weather or the topography. So let's focus on our built environment in new and creative ways.

XUMelanie and I once again made the drive along Central Parkway and Ezzard Charles to get to I-75N and found the route to be full of opportunities.  Even if you don't want to waste the resources to run a streetcar from Broadway Commons (casino) to Union Terminal (future 3C station, 3 museums, Omnimax) there seems to be plenty of development potential.  There are plenty of surface parking lots on Central Parkway (particularly in the northwest of the CBD); there is quite a bit a space still available in and around City West; and there has been talk of development just before reaching Union Terminal.  I know there are other areas that may be a bit better, but why again shouldn't this route be a phase 2 or 3?  Which routes (map?) would yield a better ROI?

>special part about the streetcar is the public exposure and scrutiny that the route configuration receives

 

This is a great point.  I certainly never noticed Henry St. before any of this, but dozens of people have now at some point made the effort on their own time to look at it and the other specific streets involved. 

 

>Which routes (map?) would yield a better ROI?

 

I'll say again I think a phase II should be still in the downtown/otr area.  Extend up Walnut/Main to McMicken past Central Parkway and down from Washington Park to the riverfront on Race and Elm, connecting with the Phase I trackage across the riverfront and at the Schwartz's point intersection. 

 

"Growing the tax base instead of just dividing up the pie further..."

 

  Hamilton County is losing population. Ohio as a whole is projected to peak in population in 2018. Growing the tax base does of the city as a whole does not look promising. If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero. I am not comfortable with this approach.

 

I agree that you should not discount migration from neighboring states, and even tourism.  Also, migration of kids tired of the distant suburbs is fine with me as well.

 

All projections, like the ones you cited, are based on history, and that's why really successful people don't pay too much attention to them, because they're the ones writing history.  The streetcar is, if nothing else, a symbol of history breaking for Cincinnati, at least for many people.  It signifies a measure of optimism that should not be discounted.

 

"Growing the tax base instead of just dividing up the pie further..."

 

Hamilton County is losing population. Ohio as a whole is projected to peak in population in 2018. Growing the tax base does of the city as a whole does not look promising. If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero. I am not comfortable with this approach.

 

Now IF the city built the streetcar AND abandoned some suburban street somewhere else along with all of the associated maintenance costs, then it might pay off, but I don't expect the city to consolidate by abandoning infrastructure in other places.

 

I would not overlook the potential of in-migration from other states. Indeed, one of Ohio's only advantages over other states is its built environment, since we can't control the weather or the topography. So let's focus on our built environment in new and creative ways.

 

I'm still here in Milwaukee waiting until there are rails in the ground to move to Ohio.  ;)

 

If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero.

I'm not so sure about that. While it's true there would be no population gain, there would likely be an economic gain for Cincinnati were this to happen. The reason is, much of the Westwood resident's spending probably takes place outside the city limits, whereas a city resident, especially one content to drive little or not at all, will buy goods locally and focus his or her spending power within the city, probably within a half mile of the streetcar line.

 

These people will also buy more services from vendors inside the city limits.

 

My wife and I are perfect examples. What we don't buy on eBay, we buy from vendors in Downtown and OTR almost exclusively.

 

So I think the gravitational pull of Cincinnati residents back to the center, even if it doesn't result in population growth, probably results in net new economic activity.

 

Plus, consider what happens to the old house in Westwood. With higher fuel prices, it might well be reoccupied by someone who would might have otherwise lived in Green Township, say.

 

This discussion is at the heart of the streetcar debate. The streetcar's great, but it is more fundamentally part of a plan to densify the city and capture more of the spending of people who hold well-paying jobs in Downtown and Uptown. Sure, we get their taxes now. But we need their spending too. And, perhaps more importantly, their civic engagement.

 

 

Going to UT - The 3C is only expecting a few runs a day. Maybe 5 by the time it gets to UT. A streetcar sounds awfully expensive for that.

Fares - there was talk here (I think) of buying time instead of entry. Was that ever officially suggested? Is anybody considering it now? I really think it is the way to go. Otherwise people will not get off. They will just go from point A to B and not stop along the way (and support businesses along the way).

I know my riding habits on Metro are a lot different when I have a pass as opposed to al carte fares.

^ I'm sure you'll be buying a fare ticket or pass that enables you to ride for specified time, whether it's a couple of hours, a day, a week, a month or maybe even a year. It won't be "per ride."

Est. Annual Operating Expense: $3.5 million

 

At $1.75 Fare:

   First-Year Est. Annual Fare Revenue: $1,657,884

   Fifth-Year Est. Annual Fare Revenue: $2,256,712

The HDR Feasibility Study recognized advertising, charter serves, and special events as other revenue sources but did not analyze the actual dollar amount. Minus fares, the city only needs to make up for $1,842,116 in the first year, and $1,243,288 after the fifth year.

 

**I did these calculations using the numbers listed on the HDR feasibility site and included the rider data for 5 home bengals games and 81 home Reds games.

 

First Year

Fare Avg Daily Riders Special Event Rides Annual Riders Revenue

$0.00 5550         48550                     2074300 $0.00

$0.25 5088         48550                     1905488 $476,371.88

$0.50 4600         48550                     1727550 $863,775.00

$0.75 4163         48550                     1567863 $1,175,896.88

$1.00 3700         48550                     1399050 $1,399,050.00

$1.25 3288         48550                     1248488 $1,560,609.38

$1.50 2850         48550                       1088800 $1,633,200.00

$1.75 2463         48550                     947363 $1,657,884.38

$2.00 2050         48550                     796800 $1,593,600.00

 

Fifth Year

$0.00 7900         48550                     2932050 $0.00

$0.25 7100         48550                     2640050 $660,012.50

$0.50 6350         48550                     2366300 $1,183,150.00

$0.75 5650         48550                     2110800 $1,583,100.00

$1.00 5000         48550                     1873550 $1,873,550.00

$1.25 4450         48550                     1672800 $2,091,000.00

$1.50 3850         48550                     1453800 $2,180,700.00

$1.75 3400         48550                     1289550 $2,256,712.50

$2.00 2900         48550                     1107050 $2,214,100.00

 

Those ridership numbers are for the downtown section only but you are using the operating expense for Uptown and Downtown (and the operating expense you are using might be high, in the most recent memo Dohoney sent out they revised it downward to $3 million).

 

If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero.

I'm not so sure about that. While it's true there would be no population gain, there would likely be an economic gain for Cincinnati were this to happen. The reason is, much of the Westwood resident's spending probably takes place outside the city limits, whereas a city resident, especially one content to drive little or not at all, will buy goods locally and focus his or her spending power within the city, probably within a half mile of the streetcar line.

 

These people will also buy more services from vendors inside the city limits.

 

My wife and I are perfect examples. What we don't buy on eBay, we buy from vendors in Downtown and OTR almost exclusively.

 

So I think the gravitational pull of Cincinnati residents back to the center, even if it doesn't result in population growth, probably results in net new economic activity.

 

Plus, consider what happens to the old house in Westwood. With higher fuel prices, it might well be reoccupied by someone who would might have otherwise lived in Green Township, say.

 

This discussion is at the heart of the streetcar debate. The streetcar's great, but it is more fundamentally part of a plan to densify the city and capture more of the spending of people who hold well-paying jobs in Downtown and Uptown. Sure, we get their taxes now. But we need their spending too. And, perhaps more importantly, their civic engagement.

 

 

 

Indeed, great points.  I'd just reemphasize John's point that these issues are the center of debate, and more than that, issues like the operating expenses are a ruse drummed up by detractors.

 

Also, as a slight addition to John's points, everything he mentions will also entice a greater variety of retail opportunities in the core, further reducing my need to venture out for purchases (for example, until recently, I had to venture out with my car to get to a pet store or a vet).

 

I just pulled those numbers straight from the HDR study. If they've lowered the annual operating costs, even better. And if that doesn't include ridership data for the Uptown section, even better.

 

All this means is that the required subsidy won't be as expensive as many are painting it to be.

We'll get a firmer picture of all of this when they finalize the operating plan. 

^ I wouldn't count on much ridership from Uptown until they extend the network to Ludlow, the Zoo or Children's -- wherever the final destinations are. I mean, how much ridership would we get out of the CBD if the streetcar never made it south of Central Parkway? Clifton to McMillan is, by far, the best chance of generating some Phase 1 revenue from Uptown -- if they can make the grade.

Hamilton County is losing population. Ohio as a whole is projected to peak in population in 2018. Growing the tax base does of the city as a whole does not look promising. If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net gain is zero. I am not comfortable with this approach.

 

   Now IF the city built the streetcar AND abandoned some suburban street somewhere else along with all of the associated maintenance costs, then it might pay off, but I don't expect the city to consolidate by abandoning infrastructure in other places.

 

I wouldn't make the assumption that all people moving to downtown and OTR are just relocating from another part of the city.  There are several people living in my building that moved here from other cities and states.  Even some of the locals moved here from outside of Hamilton County.

^ I wouldn't count on much ridership from Uptown until they extend the network to Ludlow, the Zoo or Children's -- wherever the final destinations are. I mean, how much ridership would we get out of the CBD if the streetcar never made it south of Central Parkway? Clifton to McMillan is, by far, the best chance of generating some Phase 1 revenue from Uptown -- if they can make the grade.

 

If the Kroger at the new University Plaza is of a good quality, you'll have ridership there, also there will be the Town Properties development across from Old St. George as well

>Even some of the locals moved here from outside of Hamilton County.

 

I know of hard-core Cincinnati suburbanites who have sold their cars after moving to East Coast cities and raise their kids in the in-town neighborhoods. One of my friends who was raised in West Chester is raising kids in Manhattan, it took another over a year to sell his 1970's house in Loveland after moving with his wife and daughter to Beacon Hill in Boston. He used to drive to 5/3 downtown but now walks to work every morning or takes the subway to Logan Airport.     

 

I never expected them of all people to transition like that, so there's no telling how many people like that are lurking along I-275.  Obviously a move to OTR would not be so exotic for anyone relocating from the East Coast. 

XUMelanie and I once again made the drive along Central Parkway and Ezzard Charles to get to I-75N and found the route to be full of opportunities.  Even if you don't want to waste the resources to run a streetcar from Broadway Commons (casino) to Union Terminal (future 3C station, 3 museums, Omnimax) there seems to be plenty of development potential.  There are plenty of surface parking lots on Central Parkway (particularly in the northwest of the CBD); there is quite a bit a space still available in and around City West; and there has been talk of development just before reaching Union Terminal.  I know there are other areas that may be a bit better, but why again shouldn't this route be a phase 2 or 3?  Which routes (map?) would yield a better ROI?

 

Obviously I'm not a developer or anything.  But the issue is not so much would this area be improved by a streetcar connection and are there re-developable properties in the area, because basically you could answer "Yes" to that question for almost any neighborhood in the City.  What you would want to do is to continue the system the way it is being planned now- to connect high concentrations of businesses with relatively underpopulated urban neighborhoods.  The fact is the places you're going to want to branch off to go to other neighborhoods is either from the Zoo past Children's through Avondale to Xavier (following a general Erkenbrecher > Blair Avenue > Woodburn Ave route) or Short Vine to DeSales Corner route via University & then Lincoln and then rerouting.  Adding a Main/Walnut line through OTR to Vine, or sending a new line up Gilbert, all of these routes add the same sort of value as western route, except that they give the ability to connect to Hyde Park and Oakley and the Madison Avenue corridor as laid out in the Economic Development plan whereas the western routes take you nowhere and through relatively sparesly populated areas.

 

^ I wouldn't count on much ridership from Uptown until they extend the network to Ludlow, the Zoo or Children's -- wherever the final destinations are. I mean, how much ridership would we get out of the CBD if the streetcar never made it south of Central Parkway? Clifton to McMillan is, by far, the best chance of generating some Phase 1 revenue from Uptown -- if they can make the grade.

 

"If they can make the grade?"  Maybe you should swing up to Seattle next time you're in Portland to see some of the grades their system handles on a regular basis.  For someone so bullish on the Streetcar you have a remarkable tendency to make these comments that undermine it's technical feasibility.  Your prefered route wasn't chosen.  Be a grown-up about it and move on. 

LincolnKennedy, that's inappropriate. John Schneider knows more about streetcars than probably anyone else here at UO. He has taken locals on streetcar tours to Seattle as well as Portland. He knows what's realistic and what's not, and doesn't want to over-promise anything for Cincinnati -- including where it can go and where it might not be to go so easily. The worst thing in the world for Cincinnati is to have a streetcar that can't "get it up" the hill.

 

So if anyone is being grown up and realistic about the streetcar, it's John Schneider. Not only should you take some lessons from him, but you owe him an apology for your comment.

bfwissel and I went to Portland back in January on one of John's streetcar tours.  He made a side trip to Seattle after the trip.

No, we can't just run a bus- http://cincinnati.com/blogs/opinionati/2010/07/15/metro-or-streetcar/

 

  "If a resident moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine, the net population gain is zero."

 

    I agree with you that a resident that moves from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine will also move his shopping destinations from Westwood to Over-the-Rhine. However, this is bad for Westwood.

 

  The population trends are not in favor of Cincinnati right now. Sure, Over-the-Rhine and downtown are looking up, but the inner-ring suburbs are hurting. As of right now, Ohio has very little net immigration, either foreign or domestic. Portland has a lot of development around the streetcar line, but they also have high foreign immigration. This, I think, it what makes the difference between the proposed Cincinnati streetcar and the Portland streetcar.

   

    I know that a lot of folks on this board think that the streetcar will attract new residents. I think that the streetcar AND JOBS will attract new residents. As of right now, the job situation is moving in the wrong direction.

   

 

As of right now, the job situation is moving in the wrong direction.

 

As it is in the entire rest of the country.  http://cohort11.americanobserver.net/latoyaegwuekwe/multimediafinal.html

Seattle's South Lake Union Trolley follows a virtually flat alignment from Westlake Center north to the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. The only slope anywhere in the system is the short spur that runs east off the mainline up to the car barn, and the streetcars run empty on that track. There is no similarity to the route planned for Cincinnati's first streetcar line.

 

Seattle rarely has snow at sea level. Perhaps never. And there are few deciduous trees to gum up the rails in the fall and winter.

 

LK must be confusing Seattle's electric buses with its streetcar.

 

 

I know that a lot of folks on this board think that the streetcar will attract new residents. I think that the streetcar AND JOBS will attract new residents. As of right now, the job situation is moving in the wrong direction.

 

Jeez, Eighth, give me something to disagree on!

 

I have to say, emphatically, that you are misrepresenting my statement about population effects, and I'm willing to accept the blame for that.  I don't think the streetcar will attract new residents, anymore than I think I can ride a bike without a chain.  But there is something that happens when you put a frame, wheels, handlebars, seat, and chain together.

 

Why is it so difficult to either explain or think about the city and its infrastructure as a complex system of moving interacting parts?  Has evolution left us so inept at developing intuition about those sorts of systems, that we have to devolve everything into its components?  Is a city a streetcar, a street, a car, a water line, a sewer, a building, a job, a store, a person, or all of those things together?  The answer is obvious; maybe we just like to argue, and win.

 

  Naw, if I was as optimistic as the rest, we wouldn't have anything to discuss.

 

  Although the pace of expansion is slowing, the Cincinnati metro is still expanding outward. Back in the 1840's, the Cincinnati metro was expanding, but since we had very strong foreign immigration, the density in the center didn't decline. In fact, it increased.

 

    Today, not only is the metro expanding, but we also have a barely growing, almost stagnant population. If current trends continue, in a few years we will have a declining population.

 

    Will Cincinnati, as a metro, began dismantling the infrastructure on the outer periphery, encouraging more concentration of population in the core? Probably not. In fact, I expect them to continue expanding.

 

    This is not a good trend for the streetcar. In my humble opinion, the streetcar will bring a higher rate of return in Portland, or Austin, or Shenzhen, China than it will in Cincinnati. However, that's not the question. The question is whether or not the streetcar will be good for Cincinnati.

 

    I do, in fact, think it will be good, but only moderately so. I think it would do better if the Cincinnati metro stopped expanding infrastructure to the outer periphery. Even better, if the Cincinnati metro could solve so many other problems such as poorly performing schools, crime, high taxes, and so on, then the streetcar would have a better chance of success.

 

    It will also have a better chance of success if it is FAST, and does not zig-zag all over the place.

 

    Cities are enormously complicated. If cities could be represented by a mathematical equation, then we could model the streetcar and see what happens before we actually build it. Of course, we cannot. Yet, everyone seems to have a model in his head, and some models are calibrated different than others.

 

    Do I think that the streetcar is going to induce all the young people of the world to move to Over-the-Rhine? No.  I think that some folks on this board are just overly optimistic. But that's okay, because it gives us something to talk about.

 

    Cheers.  :-)

I think the streetcar will attract new residents. I mean, shit, why wouldn't it? And it wouldn't be a good investment if it didn't.

 

We can be cautious, or even pessimistic. But let's not patronize a notion that is so pessimistic that it works against everyone's goals.

 

  The key word in "new residents" is "new."

 

  Change in population = births - deaths + immigrants - emigrants.

 

    In Ohio, births per year are decreasing, deaths are increasing, and numbers of immigrants and emigrants are about equal. Ohio population is nearly stagnant.

 

    The streetcar is not going to produce new people. It has to attract them. That means that they have to move from somewhere else. If the streetcar manages to attract young families, then all the better because young families produce more people.

 

    So, where are these people going to come from? Here are some possibilities.

 

    1. Foreign Immigration. Quite frankly, this is where Portland has us beat. In the 1840's, Cincinnati attracted a lot of foreign immigrants. Today, most foreigners settle in New York, Miami, Chicago, LA., etc. Ohio is not known as a big immigration state.  I can't imagine the streetcar attracting foreigners. Maybe an agressive advertising campaign in foreign countries might...

 

    2. Domestic Immigration. The national trend is to move south and west. Cincinnati gets about an equal number of immigrants from Cleveland, Pittsburgh, Buffalo, and New York as Cincinnati loses to Atlanta, Phoenix, LA, etc. So, it's not a net gain. It's not just weather, either. A lot of jobs have also moved south and west. How can we get our Domestic Immigration up? Advertising, maybe.

 

    3. Suburban transplants. Shifting 200,000 people from the Cincinnati metro suburbs to Over-the-Rhine and surrounding neighborhoods would certainly bring life back to the streets. Unfortunately, it will shift the blight to other parts of the metro area. It won't really save us anything in terms of infrastructure unless we actually dismantle the suburban infrastructure. I don't expect that to happen.

 

    4. Natural increase. Well, take a look at Mt. Adams, which is perhaps the most successful neighborhood in Cincinnati. There are hardly any kids. Mt. Adams has to import people to maintain it's population.

 

    Ok, so maybe the streetcar will be so visible, and so "cool," that people will want to live here. In that way, the streetcar functions as advertising. Well, that's the same propaganda that the stadiums, the freedom center, the aronoff center, and other things were based on. Again, downtown and Over-the-Rhine are looking up, but it didn't help Cincinnati overall.

 

  So, Civvik, where do you think the new residents will come from? Your choices are foreign immigration, domestic immigration, suburban transplants, and natural increase.

^If you are from a generation that remember Cincinnati in her former glory and have watched your entire life as the City declined, it might behoove you to think of that decline as inevitable, that way it's not your fault.  But if you are of a younger generation with no memory of the Cincinnati that was but a sense of pride in your City, then you have a different view.  You want to make the City a better place to live and the policies that were being pursued weren't working, so it's time to try something new.

By 2020 OTR will have 10,000 new residents (I really believe that).  Most will be conceived on the streetcar.

"....it's time to try something new."

 

Maybe you mean try something different, as good urban design is not a new concept. But you didn't answer the question of where the new residents are going to come from.

 

  "Most will be conceived on the streetcar."

 

    Well I may not agree with you, but at least it's an honest answer to the question!  :fight:

Even if the population game were in fact zero-sum, which I'm not convinced it is, that doesn't mean the project is not worth doing.  Projects like the streetcar are a way for urban neighborhoods to better differentiate themselves and compete against more sprawl.  It may not stop greenfield developments along the fringe, and it certainly won't lead to their abandonment, but it should help reduce the demand for more outward growth.  Also, even if net growth of the whole region is zero, it's still better for everyone to be densifying existing neighborhoods that can absorb that growth.  While the infrastructure out on the fringe may not be abandoned, it will be less burdened by excessive use, so that new sewage treatment plant won't be needed in Mason, the new water main wouldn't be needed to West Chester, the Lakota schools wouldn't need expanding, and I-75 wouldn't need widening. 

 

I do agree whole-heartedly with the notion that what we need are jobs, and that the streetcar itself won't create more than a small handful on its own.  However, the jobs vs. neighborhoods situation isn't entirely one-way.  Cincinnati is actually in a great position in this respect for the streetcar and a redeveloped Over-the-Rhine to have a huge impact on the city.  We have a strangely high number of very large and powerful companies for a city of our size.  These companies, most notably P&G and Macy's, have a much harder time attracting and retaining the talented employees they need than they would in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, or San Francisco.  They can only attract the type of employees they need based on the job itself.  The city isn't a selling point, and in fact it's a detriment to those who might otherwise consider working there, with the possible exception of Mt. Adams.  With the streetcar and a revitalized OTR, they can really wow potential recruits with a neighborhood that could very well be mistaken for Greenwich Village or SoHo. 

 

That's a great way to keep these companies here, and quite frankly I'm disappointed that they're not doing more to help the project along.  P&G alone could bankroll the entire streetcar project with just 3 weeks worth of their corporate profits.  If they got together with Macy's, Kroger, 5/3, Convergys, Chiquita, Scripps, and the other giants in town they easily pick up the remainder of the project's funding with pocket change.  I'd like to see them offering free passes for their employees who decide to live along the line, or to help get them better loans to rehab buildings in OTR.  Instead they seem to just want more parking garages, which only costs them and everyone more money, in both the short AND long term. 

LincolnKennedy, that's inappropriate. John Schneider knows more about streetcars than probably anyone else here at UO. He has taken locals on streetcar tours to Seattle as well as Portland. He knows what's realistic and what's not, and doesn't want to over-promise anything for Cincinnati -- including where it can go and where it might not be to go so easily. The worst thing in the world for Cincinnati is to have a streetcar that can't "get it up" the hill.

 

So if anyone is being grown up and realistic about the streetcar, it's John Schneider. Not only should you take some lessons from him, but you owe him an apology for your comment.

 

KJP, I'm perfectly familiar with all John has done to get the Streetcar to Cincinnati.  That's why I'm baffled as to why he would undermine with his comments both the technology and the choice of route that was advertised before the public voted , let's just say "around" the measure.  Good thing folks on this forum have all pretty much made up their minds on this, and that the process is already in motion.

 

Seattle rarely has snow at sea level. Perhaps never. And there are few deciduous trees to gum up the rails in the fall and winter.

 

LK must be confusing Seattle's electric buses with its streetcar.

 

I'm not so much confusing Seattle's electric buses with its streetcar so much as I'm confused as to why the ride on an electric bus going up a 45 degree hill is to be considered perfectly comfortable, but not comfortable with other technologies.  Since I take John' opinion seriously I'm curious if the technology is so potentially inadequate, why was it promoted in the first place, particularly if a suitable substitute was available. 

 

Is it inadequte or not?  Do we really have no evidence that it is capable of climbing up Vine Street?

  "Is it inadequte or not?  Do we really have no evidence that it is capable of climbing up Vine Street?"

 

    According to the manufacturers, whether it be Siemens, Skoda, Bombardier, etc., most of the streetcar models will be able to negotiate the Vine Street grade.

 

    That said, a more level route would be desireable, and John thinks that a Vine Street route will lead to operation problems.

 

    There are a fairly limited number of route choices: Clifton, Vine, Gilbert, the former CL&N, or a new incline. Of these, Vine is simply the most direct route between downtown and U.C.

I still think that the Clifton route would make the most sense.  Alot of UC students live along that street and once you reach the top you're right in the center of a lot of retail space, UC, all of the up coming retail development down by Urban Outfitters.

To me, the Vine route seems dead.  You get to the top of that hill and all you get is a very busy intersection, CVS, and an old, ugly shopping center. 

For walkability sake I think it needs to go up Clifton.  I ride the 17 from downtown frequently (which goes up Clifton) to work at Good Sam and I really think that route would do a lot better.

 

As far as the grade and the curve in the road, we'll just have to leave that up to the engineers to decide.  I'm sure its a much more complicated decision than we can speculate about here.

Also, by the way, I'm going to San Francisco the first week in Sept. for a little vacation and I can't wait to check out their streetcars.  I hope to be able to get some pictures of their Cincinnati Streetcar.  They also have a nice streetcar museum that I hope to check out too.

I'll be posting pics here when I get back

Do I think that the streetcar is going to induce all the young people of the world to move to Over-the-Rhine? No.  I think that some folks on this board are just overly optimistic. But that's okay, because it gives us something to talk about.

 

(I'm really responding to several of your posts here, but I thought I'd spare everyone a huge block of text and just go with the quote above.)

 

After reading your posts today, I think that we're talking about different things when we discuss the streetcar attracting new residents.  It sounds like you're arguing that we're wrong in thinking that the streetcar itself will attract new residents.  But when we (or at least I) think about the streetcar pulling in new people, I don't believe that people would be coming because they love trains or want to ride a streetcar around.  I think that when people consider moving to a new city, they make a list in their mind: available housing, cost of living, crime rate, pro sports, mass transit, etc. 

 

Consider the hypothetical example of someone from a rail-dependent city like Chicago who is considering taking a job in Cincinnati.  Cincy isn't their home town, it isn't their dream city, but it's where the job is, so they start doing their homework on the area to see if it is a place that they'd want to live.  They look around, mentally going through their checklist.  Then they get to our transit system, "No rail, that's a huge pain in the rear".  Maybe they decide to come anyway, or maybe they turn the offer down, staying in Chicago or moving to another city like Portland.  That's what we don't know; How many people are we not getting, that might have moved here otherwise?  What is our joke of a mass transit system costing us?  But if that same person sees a streetcar loop under construction, with a more extensive system on the drawing board, and light rail being given serious thought, they might say "well, I could live in that neighborhood now, and if the rest of that system happens, possibly other neighborhoods later". 

 

I think this is what at least some of us are referring to.  The streetcar probably won't entice people to move to Cincinnati, but it might be a checkmark in + column when a potential new resident is weighing the pros and cons of the area. 

Good point Jimmy.  You could argue that a big reason Cincinnati/Hamilton County/Ohio/the Midwest aren't growing in population is because we're not offering the things that would entice people to move here.  This is a good way to start changing that. 

^Yeah.  We can't have Phoenix's climate, Chicago's lake (in the summer), or Portland's picturesque mountain views.  But we can have a transit system that helps us maximize our own potential.  There's also something to be said for a city/region that looks 10, 20, 30 years out and plans accordingly.  I've never thought that Cincinnati did that very well, but it looks like things might be changing.  Building, operating, and maintaining an adequate transit system is part of that planning we've lacked until recently. 

This thread is edging into different subjects. Keep this focused on the streetcar project.

 

I moved a block of messages regarding population and sprawl over to:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3213.0.html

 

The streetcar does not need to attract new residents to the region in order to be successful. To think so is colonial economic thinking from 1775. There are several ways that a streetcar will financially benefit Cincinnati and its residents, without an arguement on migration patterns.

 

First would be actual capital expenditure of the $128 million to build it and the economic activity (multiplier effect) that the wages and new business that this money would spur.

 

Next is the reason that transit is now public, increases in property values can be captured by the city but not by private companies. These increased property taxes will help all city residents by helping the solvency of both the city and the school system.

 

The third reason is somewhat more esoteric in its explanation. Transit is a cheaper option then owning a car. This means a couple with one car instead of two is saving some (x) amount of money each year. That money is either spent or saved, or more likely, both. Spending the money means more money for businesses (hopefully local), these businesses will hire more workers and those workers might just want to live in OTR. Saving means increased money supply, so 5/3 or whomever can lend cheaply to people looking to start their own business, say, in OTR. This process repeats itself continuously. And all of this business, will be captured by various local, state, and federal taxes. Remember, not all spending is equal, $1 towards transportation may yield less utility to you than $1 towards a Reds game.

 

Fourth, if the City of Cincinnati were a business then quality transportation would probably have never left. Density and transit creates all sorts of cost savings for a city, from garbage collection to street paving. The more tax paying residents per foot of street, the better.

 

None of the stuff I've said above is new, but what I can't get over is how much arguing there has been about needing people from outside of the metro to move to OTR in order for it to prosper. I thought I would just rehash the economic reasons about why streetcars make sense, without the colonial limited amount of wealth/people/whatever hoopla that has everyone distracted.

^Those are salient points.

 

Further I would add that playing semantics with "attracting new residents" is simply that. You can victimize Westwood for losing residents to Over the Rhine. Or victimize Silverton for losing to Cincinnati. Or you could look holistically at the county and victimize Warren for losing to Hamilton. Or Dayton MSA losing to Cincinnati MSA, or Wisconsin losing to Ohio. Etc. There is no totally rational place to stop, once you move beyond the statement "the streetcar will attract new residents to its service area." Aside from natural increase, someone is going to leave somewhere, and someone else will have to take their place!

^^ Salient points yes, and the third is the most important in my opinion.  It argues that the streetcar will repopulate and reinvigorate OTR as a neighborhood.  Those people do need to come from somewhere.  When you have a city like Cincinnati, which has been on the downslide for some time, it is more natural for people to assume that any growth must come at our own expense, in some sense.

 

Personally, I think that one effect of the streetcar will be that, over time, we'll keep more of our own young population after college.  They'll choose to live in OTR and, hopefully in time, raise families there.

^ Jim's right. Many Cincinnatians suffer from a scarcity mentality -- if someone gains, then someone must necesarily lose. It has held us back for many years.

 

  The U.S. Census projects that Ohio will peak in population in 2018 and decline thereafter. This projection is based on the age-cohort method. This is a VERY powerful projection, and it goes against the general consensus.

 

  Hamilton County peaked in population in 1970. I have talked about this with government officials, and the responce is typically, "Huh? Hamilton County is declining?"

 

    Utah has a growing population. Salt Lake City also has light rail. "Look at all the new development around the light rail line!" say light rail proponents. But this doesn't mean that the light rail CAUSED the new development. One could just as easily say that the new development raised enough revenue to be able to afford light rail. Incidently, Utah has both a high birth rate and a high domestic immigration rate. I had the pleasure to visit Utah and the domestic immigration was very visible, as nearly everyone that I talked to was not a Utah native. Other than being very clean and having excessively wide streets, downtown Salt Lake City did not look all that different from Cincinnati.

 

   

Congratulations on the streetcar Cincinnati. Now comes the hard part.

The U.S. Census projects that Ohio will peak in population in 2018 and decline thereafter. This projection is based on the age-cohort method. This is a VERY powerful projection, and it goes against the general consensus.

We'll see what the water situation is like in America in 2018.  We may be one of the few states with plentiful fresh water.

 

  The U.S. Census projects that Ohio will peak in population in 2018 and decline thereafter. This projection is based on the age-cohort method. This is a VERY powerful projection, and it goes against the general consensus

 

 

It sounds like you have given up, fortunately we haven't.