Just as everything in this picture (in Lakewood, OH) was built by a stockholder-owned syndicate that in turn built, owned, managed, and operated streetcars, electric utilities and real estate. Even the street pavement between the rails was owned and maintained by the streetcar syndicates! So just about everything you see here is owned and operated by the private sector (I'm certain that large sections of Cincinnati were similarly developed by streetcar syndicates).....

 

 

Rural interests funded by unknown backers brought suit against these syndicates throughout the nation and were ultimately forced by several Supreme Court decisions to split off into separate corporate units. Many of the utility companies still exist today. The streetcars were either acquired by municipalities or by new conglomerates financed by GM, Standard Oil, Phillips Petroleum, Firestone Tire, Mack (made buses then) and other players. Since then, roads were built by government, to suburbs subsidized by government, burning oil subsidized by government and whose trade routes are protected by government. So if you want to know why transit is government funded -- the motto "if you can't beat 'em (fairly), join 'em" certainly applies.

Still to this day it's amazing how much misinformation there is around the streetcar. Just reading on the other site and it took everything I had not to chime in.  According to them, panhandlers will be overtaking the streetcar.  Never mine the fact that there will be fares.

 

http://csnbbs.com/thread-668191.html

 

 

You can't force people to recognize their own ignorance, or to experience their entire city and gain a greater awareness of it. Some people just like to be afraid or want everything to be the same. That's their right. And to enjoy that right, they can stay in their suburban settings locked in their houses and cars. But don't prevent those of us who love cities from designing them and enjoying them the way we want to. It's awfully oppressive for suburbanites to deny us our pursuit of happiness.

 

The only thing I object to is that the urbanists in their pursuit of happiness want to deny all of us suburbanities our own pursuit of happiness. Far as I am concerned, let the greater majority in numbers prevail.

 

Sarcasm? Or does he really mean this?

Random Questions:

 

1) Does anyone remember that picture of the subway first being built out to Brooklyn and the headline in the paper was something like "Train to Brooklyn? Who would ever go there".  Then the article went on to talk about farmland in brooklyn or something.

 

2) Does anyone have the picture of the map Boston's first subway line and how small it was? 

 

I thought I remembered seeing both of those pics posted here

^^The picture KJP posted was taken right near where I grew up, and I still remember what Lakewood looked like when Madison and Detroit Ave. had the streetcars.  The streetcar pictured was designed by Peter Witt, and was considered revolutionary at the time because the center section is low-floor which increased accessibility and speeded up boarding and unloading.  I think Boston was the first US. city to have a subway, I didn't post it but may have the original route map and pic., will look. 

 

Privately-owned interurban streetcars and trains originally ran through rural areas around many cities and gave rise to the first suburbs referred to as "streetcar suburbs."  So streetcars did have hand in initiating the original suburbs, but these were far more dense than today's suburbs, which went viral as soon as autos were introduced...and went even more viral when Ike initiated the Federally funded interstate highway program.  FHA had a hand in creating our suburbs and a lot of other Federal programs and agencies did too.

Still to this day it's amazing how much misinformation there is around the streetcar. Just reading on the other site and it took everything I had not to chime in.  According to them, panhandlers will be overtaking the streetcar.  Never mine the fact that there will be fares.

 

http://csnbbs.com/thread-668191.html

 

 

You can't force people to recognize their own ignorance, or to experience their entire city and gain a greater awareness of it. Some people just like to be afraid or want everything to be the same. That's their right. And to enjoy that right, they can stay in their suburban settings locked in their houses and cars. But don't prevent those of us who love cities from designing them and enjoying them the way we want to. It's awfully oppressive for suburbanites to deny us our pursuit of happiness.

 

The only thing I object to is that the urbanists in their pursuit of happiness want to deny all of us suburbanities our own pursuit of happiness. Far as I am concerned, let the greater majority in numbers prevail.

 

Except Kjbrill, American suburbs owe their entire existence to federal subsidies.  The FHA enabled 30-year fully amortized mortgages, enabled the mass-production of housing in the peculiarly American subdivision form by assuming the builder's risk.  This started as a make-work New Deal program in 1936 and it's still around, 75 years later, wildly perverting the housing market and wildly perverting the country's culture.  People really want to believe that suburbs are "capitalism" and cities are "subsidized", but the reality is everything built up until the 1930s is what largely unmitigated capitalism looked like.  Many 2-family and 4-families, relatively few free-standing houses, hardly any with more than two bedrooms.

 

This was subsidized by the FHA -- its construction, its mortgages, and everyone enjoys a mortgage write-off:

 

This is what capitalism looks like:

 

 

And our gas tax is 18 cents. It can't even pay for road maintenance. Where does that hole get plugged? Income tax.

 

In Norway it's $5. What does that pay for? Road maintenance.

 

Oh, that and FREE COLLEGE TUITION FOR THE WHOLE COUNTRY.

Random Questions:

 

1) Does anyone remember that picture of the subway first being built out to Brooklyn and the headline in the paper was something like "Train to Brooklyn? Who would ever go there".  Then the article went on to talk about farmland in brooklyn or something.

 

I don't remember a newspaper article attached to it, but I remember this picture of the 7 line being built through Queens (Rawson St/33rd Street station):

 

 

I used to live a few stops East of there, the density is very similar to what OTR should be. I don't think I ever had a seat on the 7 train at the spot pictured above, even at odd times.

This week in screenshots:

 

 

Cranley comparing himself to John F. Kennedy:

 

 

Raised? 3 times?

 

 

 

wtf.  I thought you were joking.  Mayor John Cranley is really on cincinnati.com's comment section attacking streetcar supporters

I assumed the "Mayor Cranley" bashing streetcar supporting company Coffee Emporium for being a Starbucks wannabe/clone/leech on either Twitter or Facebook was just a fake profile, but maybe not? 

I assumed the "Mayor Cranley" bashing streetcar supporting company Coffee Emporium for being a Starbucks wannabe/clone/leech on either Twitter or Facebook was just a fake profile, but maybe not?

 

Oh its real and its not spectacular

Random Questions:

 

1) Does anyone remember that picture of the subway first being built out to Brooklyn and the headline in the paper was something like "Train to Brooklyn? Who would ever go there".  Then the article went on to talk about farmland in brooklyn or something.

 

I don't remember a newspaper article attached to it, but I remember this picture of the 7 lines being built through Queens (Rawson St/33rd Street station):

 

I used to live a few stops East of there, the density is very similar to what OTR should be. I don't think I ever had a seat on the 7 train at the spot pictured above, even at odd times.

 

I've been looking for more photos like that for a long time! Thank you!

 

I have a couple from Cleveland.....

 

This is the Cleveland Railway Co. (a stockholder-owned streetcar system carrying 400 million riders per year) extending the double-track Mayfield Road streetcar from Lee Road to Oakwood Drive in Cleveland Heights in 1929. This is at Ivydale Road, looking east. If anyone knows about Cleveland Heights today, it is a relatively dense, walkable streetcar suburb. Note the rural landscape surrounding this scene that was about to change with the coming of the streetcar....

 

 

 

Same view but in 2013....

 

 

 

And over in Shaker Heights, another Cleveland streetcar suburb, we have the Lynnfield station on the Van Aken line in 1922 (line was built in 1920). The rail line and the surrounding city were built by companies owned by the Van Sweringen brothers (read about their history in the Shaker Rapid 100 years thread I started today here in the mass transit section):

 

 

 

Today, this is the route of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's Blue Line, lined with high-density apartment buildings near stations and fine estates between the stations....

 

 

 

And the transit-oriented development in Shaker Heights isn't done. In fact, one of the largest TOD projects is about to begin in 2014. A suburban strip mall around the Warrensville station at the east end of the Blue Line will be demolished and a street grid built in its place. This also includes a short extension of the Blue Line to a new intermodal terminal on the southeast side of the new Van Aken District....

 

http://shakeronline.com/departments/planning/van-aken

 

 

 

This week in screenshots:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I am shocked beyond belief that evil Communists could have forced Cincinnatians by the hundreds to go out against their will into the cold and dark of December to collect signatures for the Charter Amendment!

 

Boy, this letter to the editor shows how far off the deep end some people's thinking has gone. No wonder it has been so hard to engage some streetcar opponents in an open-minded debate.

Next up: crossing Liberty.

 

I felt it was time to update the Cincinnati Streetcars and SORTA Wikipedia pages, given the project's approval by the new council.

I added a diagram which includes station stops and links to nearby attractions. Enjoy.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_streetcars#Modern_streetcar_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Ohio_Regional_Transit_Authority#Streetcar_route

Next up: crossing Liberty.

 

 

Communism on the march!

I felt it was time to update the Cincinnati Streetcars and SORTA Wikipedia pages, given the project's approval by the new council.

I added a diagram which includes station stops and links to nearby attractions. Enjoy.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cincinnati_streetcars#Modern_streetcar_system

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Ohio_Regional_Transit_Authority#Streetcar_route

 

Great idea...

Might I add my two cents...

 

We need to continue this momentum and strike while the iron is hot.  All the media minus hate radio ,  6 members of council, fta, sorta,  and big time companies/non profits all want this to succeed.  Now is the time to start figuring out the exact details and funding costs of the uptown route. Everything is on our side right now and, as we all know, that can change in a heartbeat

 

-kasich and the state legislators are going to be concerned with getting elected.  Cranley will have less help from them trying to meddle with the project

-coast,  Westside coalition, smitherman and the rest are publicly admitting defeat... But as we all know,  their egos will not allow them to quit

-supporters are fired up and the contact of 11,000 are immediately on file.  Engage them and use their passion to continue to outreach to other neighborhoods (particularly African American ones). 

 

There is no doubt in my mind coast, smitherman and Cranley have a plan to collect signatures for preventing future phases somehow.  We need to be ready for that.

 

Everyone is fired up and on the same page against the  CAVEmen(citizens against virtually everything ).  Prominent media, businesses, feds,  supporters.... It's time to get a detailed plan with facts and figures up the hill and  try to secure more fed funding imo

^I should know this but I've been out of the planning profession for a few years; what does the city's land use plan show for the area around the proposed MLK interchange?  Is it to be high-density residential/commercial Transit Oriented Development?  If so, any chance of a single federal transportation grant for both uptown connector and MLK interchange that has these two components functionally and politically linked as more/less the same project?  Seems like the Vine St. route up to the zoo could easily incorporate an east spur over to the point where MLK and I-71 intersect.  Is there already a concept plan for development around the interchange?  What about a streetcar terminal and park-'n-ride lot, surrounded with high density TOD?

^That's a great idea...time to organize this 11,000 member red army, lol :)

 

More seriously, though, this Uptown extension and MLK/I-71 spur are REALLY important. The uptown extension will be far less expensive than the OTR/DT loop and will connect to UC (30,000+ students) and the hospitals (big job center). The MLK/I-71 extension to the new interchange is an interesting mix between the suburban-oriented project (interchange) and urban oriented one (streetcar). The MLK streetcar spur could thus appeal to suburban commuters and could introduce a VALUABLE opportunity for TOD. It could also improve job accessibility from Walnut Hills to Uptown or Downtown, making the project far more appealing to the communities nearby.

 

It would also be great to introduce some sort of eastside metro transit center at the new interchange (better than the westside one on Glenway) that would one day serve as a bus hub, I-71 LRT station, and streetcar layover. These improvements all could lead to transformative changes in transit.

 

It will be important to capitalize on these ideas now. I think if there is enough local political will, Cincinnati could draw a ton of transit and transportation funding from Washington. Now we just need to hope for a culture change (not necessarily a partisan one) in Columbus...and in HamCo for that matter...

^ I totally agree on moving forward quickly with the uptown segment. I wouldn't worry a bit about what the opposition is doing or not doing.

 

I'm sure there are people working on this. Seems to me that it's good to focus on getting Santa Ono engaged. He responds to student wishes. Any UC students out there who want to organize early in January let me know; I'll gladly take on an appropriate Faculty role.

^We should be back in the Feds good graces now.  We will have more/less the same federal DOT for another 3 years.  Are TIGER grants still around?  Are we still eligible? Can MLK interchange and uptown MLK streetcar spur/terminal be incorporated into the same grant and the same project.

^We should be back in the Feds good graces now.  We will have more/less the same federal DOT for another 3 years.  Are TIGER grants still around?  Are we still eligible? Can MLK interchange and uptown MLK streetcar spur/terminal be incorporated into the same grant and the same project.

I'm guessing EVERYBODY is going to want very firm assurances/commitments from Ctanley now that they have seen the boy in action and his willingness to just throw it all away halfway thru a project.

I think it would be a good idea to revisit the TIF plan that was advanced a short while back for an initial segment (wherever that may be). This could possibly be done independently of the city to avoid any possible hijinks. In any event, I agree that the time to move is NOW.

^Yeah! TIFs/SIDs approved Kansas City-style! I love it :)

I thought this map might be helpful for clarifying our ideas. http://a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/754/23/original.jpg

You know, Cranley might have known all along that it wasn't a good idea to stop the streetcar. He may have just used a front of streetcar opposition to collect suburban money and get the help of BOAST, the NAATP, other TPers, WLW and the Enquirer. Then all of the hullaballo in the past month was his Bush Sr. moment of having to explain that Congress wouldn't allow Bush to keep his "Read my lips... no new taxes" promise. I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of the organizations I listed above feel the same way too.

Also, on the funding front, with respect to a special improvement district, or SID.

 

Cranley dismissed this idea for the initial alignment. He did that because an address can not be part of more than one SID, and the CBD is already included in a SID (DCI). Even if the DCI SID did not want to add a tax for the streetcar (which is far from certain, so far as I know), that doesn't mean that OTR and uptown residents would not support a new streetcar SID, if it meant developing connectivity to uptown. Same goes for anywhere else the streetcar may go.

 

the benefits from a streetcar SID tax on any one property increase with the scale of the streetcar system.  At the same time, the operating costs per mile decrease with the scale of the system. These two factors mean to me that a SID tax is a reasonable way to offset a portion of future operating costs, and should be a part of any conversation about extending the system.

 

Congratulations to you all!  Your efforts make me proud to be an Ohioan and I'm looking forward to visiting and using the streetcar. 

 

Please continue your efforts to expand the understanding of the importance of Transit in Ohio cities.

I'd like to see a tunnel to a transit village hub (an Uptown Government Square plus mixed-use TOD) at University Plaza.

Times article is up:

 

Cincinnati Streetcar Plan Pits Desire for Growth Against Fiscal Restraint

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/23/us/cincinnati-streetcar-plan-pits-desire-for-growth-against-fiscal-restraint.html

 

Edit: With all the time they took on it, I was expecting a bit more detail. Especially more history. No mention Issues 9 and 48? No mention of the Tea Party-NAACP alliance? They seem to have missed the most intriguing parts of the story.

A few of my thoughts on future extensions/system expansion:

 

1. I really think that after we start extending the streetcar into uptown and beyond, we need to stop thinking about the routes in terms of "loops" and "spurs." We should try to build rail lines that work together to form an efficient system, the same way a metro system would. This would make it a lot easier for someone looking at a map to figure out where they're going.

 

2. I am fine with the route currently being built, as it covers a lot of downtown and connects most of our major downtown attractions. However, I hope that any future extensions are built on two way streets where both directions run next to each other. The streetcar tracks could run in the center two lanes, in grassy medians, or next to the curb on either side of the street.

 

3. Once we start building light rail to connect to the inner-ring and outer suburbs, I think we should try to keep it as grade separated as possible. I just don't like the idea of longer trains running in mixed traffic, especially downtown/Over-the-Rhine. This would increase speeds and reduce congestion on the streets. The light rail lines could use the same or similar articulated rolling stock as the streetcar, and would all converge in the subway tunnel under Central Parkway or the Riverfront Transit Center.

A few of my thoughts on future extensions/system expansion:

 

1. I really think that after we start extending the streetcar into uptown and beyond, we need to stop thinking about the routes in terms of "loops" and "spurs." We should try to build rail lines that work together to form an efficient system, the same way a metro system would. This would make it a lot easier for someone looking at a map to figure out where they're going.

 

2. I am fine with the route currently being built, as it covers a lot of downtown and connects most of our major downtown attractions. However, I hope that any future extensions are built on two way streets where both directions run next to each other. The streetcar tracks could run in the center two lanes, in grassy medians, or next to the curb on either side of the street.

 

Does anyone know which were the best-performing streetcar lines in Cincinnati before abandonment?

 

(I don't suppose there are very many people left who remember that far back, so posing this question might be a tough call.)

 

Reintroducing one or two of the old Cincinnati Street Railway's best-performing and highest-ridership streetcar routes should be how to go about extending our starter line to more areas of the city, provided they'd make sense today.

Believe it or not the busiest line was the East End route 27 that ran out Riverside Drive and Eastern Avenue.  There's a peculiar situation with geographically constrained linear corridors that create extremely high ridership.  Because they're highly linear they obviously lend themselves well to fixed transit, since everything is within a very short walk of the transit line.  What boosts ridership so much compared to a non-linear area is that nearly all destinations are too far to walk to.  So it's in one sense highly transit oriented, but at the same time not very walkable.  In this particular case, with the river and Little Miami/Pennsylvania railroad, there was also a great mix of industrial and commercial uses, along with residential.  So there were lots of residents, lots of jobs, and most of them were just out of walking distance from one another. 

 

Would the East End be a good place to introduce fixed transit today?  I have my doubts.  It's been so ravaged by flooding and the usual post-war depopulation that what's left is mostly depressed residences.  I can't see there being a whole lot of demand for travel strictly within those neighborhoods.  The flooding issue is something that holds it back from the kind of intense redevelopment that it would need to be really successful.  There's also the possibility of the Eastern Corridor rail project going forward, and if that does happen then any streetcar or light rail line through that same area would be lambasted for duplicating service.  There's definitely room for discussion, and it has a ton more potential than a similar route west on River Road, but there's much better low-hanging fruit to pick first. 

 

Aside from that, the other big one was route 78 to Lockland.  That was a straight shot out Vine Street to Anthony Wayne and a loop through downtown Lockland.  It cut through the heart of the metro, serving both highly residential and highly industrial areas with many commercial business districts along the way.  The only trouble with going much past the zoo is dealing with St. Bernard and Elmwood Place.  I don't see St. Bernard being particularly interested, plus the Ivorydale area is kind of an undevelopable black hole, but Elmwood Place and Carthage are perfectly set up for transit. 

 

Those are the only two I can think of that were mentioned specifically as being heavy-haul routes.  I think route 15 Clark Street was also fairly busy, which zig-zagged through the West End and then struck out Spring Grove Avenue to Chester Park (between Clifton and Mitchell Avenues), but I have no data to back that up, I just recall it being mentioned a lot.  Once again though, it traversed a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial areas, all of quite high density.  I don't think the industrial areas are nearly as important transit-wise today, because even in areas that still have a lot of businesses, they just don't employ that many people anymore. 

Times article is up:

 

Cincinnati Streetcar Plan Pits Desire for Growth Against Fiscal Restraint

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/23/us/cincinnati-streetcar-plan-pits-desire-for-growth-against-fiscal-restraint.html

 

Edit: With all the time they took on it, I was expecting a bit more detail. Especially more history. No mention Issues 9 and 48? No mention of the Tea Party-NAACP alliance? They seem to have missed the most intriguing parts of the story.

 

Ditto.  Not a comprehensive account.  I guess the NYT didn't want to devote very much space to the story.  At least it identified two of the [sore] losers, Cranley and Smitherman.

A few of my thoughts on future extensions/system expansion:

 

1. I really think that after we start extending the streetcar into uptown and beyond, we need to stop thinking about the routes in terms of "loops" and "spurs." We should try to build rail lines that work together to form an efficient system, the same way a metro system would. This would make it a lot easier for someone looking at a map to figure out where they're going.

 

2. I am fine with the route currently being built, as it covers a lot of downtown and connects most of our major downtown attractions. However, I hope that any future extensions are built on two way streets where both directions run next to each other. The streetcar tracks could run in the center two lanes, in grassy medians, or next to the curb on either side of the street.

 

3. Once we start building light rail to connect to the inner-ring and outer suburbs, I think we should try to keep it as grade separated as possible. I just don't like the idea of longer trains running in mixed traffic, especially downtown/Over-the-Rhine. This would increase speeds and reduce congestion on the streets. The light rail lines could use the same or similar articulated rolling stock as the streetcar, and would all converge in the subway tunnel under Central Parkway or the Riverfront Transit Center.

 

Given the current political climate, there's no foreseeable way in which either the city or the county raises taxes to pay for construction and operation of additional segments.  The city will continue to be eligible for small federal grants, but it's unlikely that Cranley will allow them to be pursued, unless he is somehow influenced to change course. 

 

Look back to the first 20 or 30 pages of this thread and you will see that every streetcar expansion scenario conceivable was already discussed 5 years ago, including various street-running versus grade separation alternatives. 

 

Keep in mind that counter-intuitively the highest ROI lines built since 2000 have been the cheaper, slower in-street light rail and streetcar lines, not higher speed grade separated lines. 

 

I find it ironical we are only a week removed from a vote which could have stopped the streetcar completely. If two council members would not have changed their mind it would have been stopped. Several people, while glad to see the downtown loop completed have expressed they still have concerns how it is going to be paid for, particularly the opeating costs the city is committed to for 25 years.

 

Others are in such euphoria they are immediately clamoring to begin construction of the uptown segment. They also want to jump in and start talking of eastern corridor, etc construction, saying the time is hot. Must not have seen the same fight I did. These are about as rediculous as Cranley saying he had a mandate to stop it. Going ahead on the slimest of margins is not exactly a green light to start expanding what is not even completed, not by a long shot.

Schedule set to restart work on Cincinnati's streetcar

Erin Caproni Digital Producer- Cincinnati Business Courier

 

 

Work on Cincinnati's streetcar will begin again this week after City Council voted 6-3 to allow the project to continue.

 

On Thursday, another set of rails will be delivered on Elm Street. That will require a road closure from 11 a.m. to 4 p.m.

 

The installation of rails will be underway again on Friday, as crews restart their jobs north of Findlay Market.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/morning_call/2013/12/schedule-set-to-restart-work-on.html

Wouldn't a line connecting to the casino - up Gilbert - and connecting to the current Wasson line be conceivable? I know there's not a ton of room on the Wasson line, but the S-Line streetcar here in Salt Lake City is linear with passing sidings. What I'm imagining is being able to board somewhere around Oakley and ride past Rookwood commons, past Xavier, then connect to a line down the middle of Gilbert Ave to go down hill.

 

I think a line going up Gilbert from the casino to McMillan and then east on McMillan and up Woodburn would be the next logical new line.

I find it ironical we are only a week removed from a vote which could have stopped the streetcar completely. If two council members would not have changed their mind it would have been stopped. Several people, while glad to see the downtown loop completed have expressed they still have concerns how it is going to be paid for, particularly the opeating costs the city is committed to for 25 years.

 

Others are in such euphoria they are immediately clamoring to begin construction of the uptown segment. They also want to jump in and start talking of eastern corridor, etc construction, saying the time is hot. Must not have seen the same fight I did. These are about as rediculous as Cranley saying he had a mandate to stop it. Going ahead on the slimest of margins is not exactly a green light to start expanding what is not even completed, not by a long shot.

 

At least one of those swing voters emphasized repeatedly that, while making his decision, he was factoring in that some people were telling him the Uptown extension was necessary for success of the downtown segment. While I believe the studies of the downtown segment show that to be false, his vote to go forward may very well indicate he wants to go forward with the extension.

 

Regardless, if advocates for anything sit back self-satisfied after a victory, no movements ever really move forward. Part of the justification for the narrowly focused streetcar in many people's minds was that it was the beginning of a much larger system. On the other hand, many people said they opposed the streetcar because they felt it covered too little space.  There's a hell of a lot more support for an expansive rail network than would be indicated by Cranley squeaking in with 16% of the vote.

I've been told they plan a different route.  COAST is going to begin a charter amendment for recalls.  then they plan to basically collect signatures to recall everyone they disagree with in special elections that have even smaller turnout.

I think the Uptown Connector could be funded without needing an additional tax source. I've been told that Cincinnati is in a good position receive federal funding for the next phase, and if UC or the Uptown Consortium were to step up and provide some of the funding, it would require very little capital funding from the city.

I remember in the 1980s there was a vocal group in Virginia opposing an extension of the Washington Metro into their area, yet nothing they did could stop it. So finally when opening day neared, the opponents threatened to lay down in front of the first train.

 

That caused one high-profile rail supporter (ie: mayor, county commissioner, etc) to declare "If ever there was a time to say 'full speed ahead' it's now!"

From one of the largest rail industry publications.....

 

Friday, December 20, 2013

Cincinnati Streetcar suppliers: Thank the advocates

Written by  Douglas John Bowen

 

Christmas came early to Cincinnati streetcar advocates this year of 2013, on Dec. 19, to be precise.

 

And various rail suppliers and contractors also are breathing a “cautious” sigh of relief following the city’s tortured decision to press on with its streetcar project. Those suppliers can – and should – thank the rail advocates who kept the project alive.

 

In fact, in the months ahead, industry suppliers, at least in the passenger rail sector and certainly when it comes to streetcars and light rail transit, might heed the Cincinnati turmoil as an object lesson of just whom to trust.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/blogs/doug-bowen/cincinnati-streetcar-suppliers-thank-the-advocates.html

I have moved talk of 700 WLW to the appropriate thread (The Official 700 WLW Sucks Thread!).

 

I have also moved talk of future regional rail to the appropriate thread (Beyond the Streetcar: The Future of Rail Transit in Cincinnati).

 

I am going to try to keep this thread strictly about the streetcar (streetcar extensions to Uptown, Walnut Hills, etc too) but other light rail projects (like county support) into the other thread. If you could help by posting in the appropriate threads it would make my life easier too. I understand some of these things are related, but it really clutters the streetcar thread and leaves others that are more relevant feeling unloved.

 

Cheers.

I think the Uptown Connector could be funded without needing an additional tax source. I've been told that Cincinnati is in a good position receive federal funding for the next phase, and if UC or the Uptown Consortium were to step up and provide some of the funding, it would require very little capital funding from the city.

 

I don't believe UC has any buiness getting involved in any streetcar funding. Where is their revenue stream for that - student fees? They already continually up tuition rates driving the students into ever larger student loans. It would be nice to have a money tree but I haven't seen any growing around here recently.

 

As for all the surveys saying a large percentage of people are all for increased public transportation, people are for a lot of things until you ask them to pay for it.

 

How about having Cincinnati apply for an additional federal grant and actually secure one prior to declaring how the Uptown Connector can be funded. I believe with the debacle over Phase I the Feds are going to be very uneasy with believing Cincinnati can hold the course on anything.

I think UC could offer vocal support for the uptown extension even if they can't offer financial support. The Uptown Consortium is completely within its right to support the streetcar financially. Their whole purpose is to help develop the Uptown area.

So, what's the final financial toll of Mayor Crancels attempt to halt the streetcar? 

^That likely won't be known for a little while. I assume it will be known once construction has started back up at full speed.

I think the Uptown Connector could be funded without needing an additional tax source. I've been told that Cincinnati is in a good position receive federal funding for the next phase, and if UC or the Uptown Consortium were to step up and provide some of the funding, it would require very little capital funding from the city.

 

I don't believe UC has any buiness getting involved in any streetcar funding. Where is their revenue stream for that - student fees? They already continually up tuition rates driving the students into ever larger student loans. It would be nice to have a money tree but I haven't seen any growing around here recently.

 

As for all the surveys saying a large percentage of people are all for increased public transportation, people are for a lot of things until you ask them to pay for it.

 

How about having Cincinnati apply for an additional federal grant and actually secure one prior to declaring how the Uptown Connector can be funded. I believe with the debacle over Phase I the Feds are going to be very uneasy with believing Cincinnati can hold the course on anything.

 

UC already spends money providing their own shuttle routes and subsidizing Metro passes for students, faculty, and staff. So they are already in the transportation business. If the streetcar took students from campus down to OTR and the CBD, UC could stop running their "Greater Cincinnati Night Time" shuttle altogether.

Wouldn't a line connecting to the casino - up Gilbert - and connecting to the current Wasson line be conceivable? I know there's not a ton of room on the Wasson line, but the S-Line streetcar here in Salt Lake City is linear with passing sidings. What I'm imagining is being able to board somewhere around Oakley and ride past Rookwood commons, past Xavier, then connect to a line down the middle of Gilbert Ave to go down hill.

 

I think a line going up Gilbert from the casino to McMillan and then east on McMillan and up Woodburn would be the next logical new line.

 

IMO this is correct, in terms of shared right-of-way streetcars. It might be a tough sell, though, due to a lack of major employers up that way. Flyboy41 is probably onto something as having it be planned to connect to the Wasson line -- though actually using the Wasson line would probably have to be part of a future phase.

 

Uptown is a more high-profile target, with lots of employers, and better potential for future expansion, particularly if the tracks are given a separate right-of-way. People say they want light rail? Let's build a dual-use lightrail/streetcar tunnel from OTR to UC/Corryville.

 

Someone made an interesting point up-thread, saying future streetcar phases should be run exclusively with both directions on the same street. I don't know if I would make a blanket statement like that, but I think it should be done sparingly and only with great consideration. Not just because it's easier or it matches the current one-way flow of traffic (thinking about Taft/McMillan here). One thing we should learn from the streetcar debate is that higher ROI doesn't necessarily mean more politically palatable. People also consider travel time, which is something more tangible to grasp.

 

Is the Western Hills Viaduct reconstruction figuring in the potential for light rail? I could see a proposed train to the west side helping to activate the Central Parkway tunnel.

I think UC could offer vocal support for the uptown extension even if they can't offer financial support. The Uptown Consortium is completely within its right to support the streetcar financially. Their whole purpose is to help develop the Uptown area.

 

UC has a nice endowment they can tap into. If I am not mistaken, they used some of the endowment to finance some of the development on Calhoun 10-15 years ago.