MORPC keen on streetcars

By: Walker

17 Comments

• 

  Anne November 30, 2006 3:54 pm

  I am hoping they can do everything. Streetcars can be added in in the future. If they mess up the caps…I dunno how easy those would be to put in later on?
• 

  gramarye November 30, 2006 4:37 pm

  I’m surprised at MORPC’s priorities here, too. Of course, setting the caps on a lower burner might be simply to defuse tensions caused by different visions until perhaps a more unified vision for them can be worked out among the various parties involved.

  One single streetcar line that will only affect a small part of one county, albeit an important part of the dominant county in the area, seems odd to be so high on the priority list of an entity whose area of responsibility is eight counties, seven of which are still very, very flat.

  Rickenbacker would be my highest priority there, because of the sheer number of both direct and indirect jobs, and real estate development (an entire new suburb could grow up around that place), on the line there.

  The reconstruction of the 70/71 split (not just the caps) would be the next priority for me.
• 

  Brewmaster November 30, 2006 5:07 pm

  It’s also the “Hot Topic” on the dispatch website today…

  http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=229961

  Whoever wrote this…just know that I’m giving you a standing ovation!

  Contrary to popular belief (mostly held by suburbanites) there is indeed a large downtown population who would draw infinitely greater benefit from being able to hop on a street car to get around downtown (G.V.-Brewery District-Downtown-Arena District-S.N) instead of firing up the ol’ gas guzzling, environment killing, money sucking war machine every time they need to go somewhere. Of course I can understand this suburbanite mentality, because the only time they walk anywhere is to get from the house to the garage. The caps serve no greater benefit than cosmetic. That’s some mighty expensive make-up.

  Great response all around.
• 

  Walker November 30, 2006 5:46 pm

  I try to refrain from reading those things. It’s full of people blabbering some of the most uninformed nonsense you can find. I guess I’m just too used to the CU where even when people disagree they have GOOD REASONS for disagreeing. Not crap like:

  Who really cares – downtown Columbus is basically dead anyway.
• 

  Columbusite November 30, 2006 6:29 pm

  Parts of downtown are dead because people like that don’t live in the city and don’t want to be a part of it and then they complain about the fact that there’s not much there. It’s their fault, not the city’s.
• 

  Columbusite November 30, 2006 6:31 pm

  One more thing, why can’t we have both? Just put off the German Village/Brewery District extension until the caps are done and go ahead with a northern route. Is this not so very blatantly obvioous?
• 

  Brewmaster November 30, 2006 6:48 pm

  Columbusite wrote One more thing, why can’t we have both? Just put off the German Village/Brewery District extension until the caps are done and go ahead with a northern route. Is this not so very blatantly obvioous?

  The impression that I got is that there’s not enough money to do them both. It’s not a constructability thing.

  I hear what Anne and Councilwoman O’Shaugnessy are saying about the one shot we have to cap the freeways, but they’ll have nowhere near the impact of a streetcar line (and this is coming from someone who would benefit from them both).

  Consider this…ODOT is allocating enough money to narrow the gap created by the split. They’ll be changing the sloped retaining walls to vertical (that should just about cut it in half), and they’ll have enough money for one or two discretionary caps. Slap one on High St. and a courtesy one on the East side to prevent the OTE nazis from bitching about everything. I’d rather have this scenario with a streetcar, rather than having everything capped.
• 

  Columbusite November 30, 2006 8:33 pm

  I don’t want to be in my mid 30′s by the time the 1st streetcar line is up and I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one. Let’s wait until we get support for light rail so that we can phase out the split and fill the gap up with solid ground for a light rail line. I think they could secure enough funding without the federal government and still have the caps, but if I had to choose, I’ll take the streetcar please. Here’s a list of potential funding sources for inital startup costs and operational costs. http://downtowncolumbus.com/publications/DCSWGrev-Potential%20Funding%20Sources.pdf

  Something will hopefully be done for the east side neighborhoods, since they’re feeling neglected and are not happy about it.
• 

  Walker November 30, 2006 11:29 pm

  Columbusite wrote Parts of downtown are dead because people like that don’t live in the city and don’t want to be a part of it and then they complain about the fact that there’s not much there. It’s their fault, not the city’s.

  Parts of downtown are dead because it’s been a business district for decades. Parts of any downtown area in any city are dead at night after the workforce clears out at 5PM.

  The districts immediately surrounding downtown on the other hand are typically more kicking than your average suburban strip mall, and those are the people who could benefit from a streetcar line to connect their neighborhoods together.
• 

  Columbusite December 1, 2006 7:36 pm

  Walker wrote
  

  Columbusite wrote Parts of downtown are dead because people like that don’t live in the city and don’t want to be a part of it and then they complain about the fact that there’s not much there. It’s their fault, not the city’s.

  Parts of downtown are dead because it’s been a business district for decades. Parts of any downtown area in any city are dead at night after the workforce clears out at 5PM.

  Exactly my point, it’s because of people like that that we have the downtowns we do today.
• 

  gramarye December 1, 2006 10:51 pm

  Even in NYC, however, you have that, and there a tremendous premium there on using every inch of space efficiently.

  Columbus does still have land amid the banking towers where residential developments could come in, and indeed have begun to do so, but we’re still likely to see the larger share come in in the areas where incoming residents will have more to do after 5: Short North, GV, Arena District, etc.
• 

  Columbusite December 3, 2006 12:32 am

  Once the streetcars are up, those’ll be the places most people will go to, although there hasn’t been much new development going on in German Village. And let’s not forget that the Arena District is downtown, albeit a small portion on the edge. One thing I’m wondering about though is what effect the streetcars will have on downtown restaurants. Many are not noteworthy and giving downtown workers the option to eat in the Short North and German Village will mean they’ll take it. Just being the closest place isn’t going to cut it and I think that will mean we’ll see a number of higher quality restaurants downtown.
• 

  ezekiel December 8, 2006 8:43 pm

  Someone said, “One more thing, why can’t we have both? Just put off the German Village/Brewery District extension until the caps are done and go ahead with a northern route. Is this not so very blatantly obvioous?”

  Totally obvious. Why should the street cars go to the southern end of the world (Frankfort St) but only just peek into the beginning of the northside action? There are 50,000 students plus an equal number of commute-friendly residents surrounding campus.

  I suggest that the streetcar ending at Buttles is little more than an expensive downtown shuttle. When it runs too infrequently to be useful, everyone will just walk the half-mile they wanted to ride. How many people want to travel from one point to another on High St downtown–but farther than 1/4 mile and less than the mile it travels? Seems pretty useless.

  The number 2 COTA bus line on North High should be replaced by the streetcar. Then east-west bus lines can drop off bus passengers on High Street to transfer to the High Street “Spine” Streetcar line.

  It would also help if the streetcar line went to commuter parking lots so downtown events don’t require downtown parking.

  MORPC needs a long-range plan. The current streetcar is just the beginning of a vibrant future for a fast-growing number of urban pedestrians.
• 

  gramarye December 9, 2006 2:32 pm

  I still wonder about the High St. line. Specifically, is it big enough for *two* tracks, one in each direction? I might be able to see one lane replaced with a streetcar track, but two would probably be a bit much for the rest of the commuters to handle. For some of that proposed distance, 3rd/Summit/4th are viable alternate routes (and faster, in many cases), but not for the entire stretch. I know there’s been noise about leaving the streetcar lanes also open to auto traffic, but I think that would prove difficult to manage over the long term.
• 

  Walker December 10, 2006 9:25 am

  gramarye wrote I still wonder about the High St. line. Specifically, is it big enough for *two* tracks, one in each direction? I might be able to see one lane replaced with a streetcar track, but two would probably be a bit much for the rest of the commuters to handle. For some of that proposed distance, 3rd/Summit/4th are viable alternate routes (and faster, in many cases), but not for the entire stretch. I know there’s been noise about leaving the streetcar lanes also open to auto traffic, but I think that would prove difficult to manage over the long term.

  Streetcar tracks don’t have to use a lane exclusively. They can be built into the street and share a lane with cars just like busses do.

  Alternatively, they could get rid of any parking on High. With a streetcar line and multiple parking garages along the track, it really wouldn’t be missed. Even in the Short North, the parking on High is served by just a small fraction of the population, as there’s parking on tons of sidestreets through there.
• 

  gramarye December 10, 2006 1:37 pm

  Walker: I was already assuming that parking on high, where currently permitted, would be eliminated, but there are actually stretches there where there is no parking (or only parking at specified times).

  I know that, in theory, streetcars and cars can share the same lane, but as I said: “I know there’s been noise about leaving the streetcar lanes also open to auto traffic, but I think that would prove difficult to manage over the long term.” Sharing lanes could allow for traffic even more snarly than we see today, and would definitely cut down the speed of the streetcars; it would also become less utilitarian the more streetcars were actually deployed. (If you’ve got four streetcars running on a given route, it’s less of a hassle to share with cars than if there are sixteen.)

  I would actually be all for getting rid of parking on High right now. As you note, there are very few beneficiaries, and as soon as we get some garages finished down some of the lesser-used side streets, they will be superfluous on any day save Gallery Hop.
• 

  Walker December 11, 2006 1:44 pm

  City supports caps, streetcars and hub

  Friday, December 08, 2006

  The Nov. 30 Dispatch article “MORPC keen on streetcars” has caused some confusion, leaving the impression with some that the city is not supporting important projects such as the I-70/71 caps or the Advanced Logistics Hub at Rickenbacker Airport. Nothing could be further from the truth.

  At no time has Mayor Michael B. Coleman or the city endorsed, proposed or even considered a projectvs.-project mentality, as some have interpreted from the story.

  We support both of these important economic-development projects, as well as streetcars for our Downtown, because they will bring jobs, connectivity and economic development for the entire region.

  HENRY GUZMAN

  Director Columbus Department of Public Service

  READ MORE