RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubeThe Dispatch wrote
Request for streetcar design is shelved
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
BY ROBERT VITALE
Bowing to criticism from council members who’ve complained about being left out of the debate and responding to concerns of residents and businesses, Mayor Michael B. Coleman removed a request to begin design of a High Street route and acknowledged he has more selling to do.
In a memo to Council President Michael C. Mentel pitching his $103 million idea as a catalyst for economic development, Coleman said, “While these issues are clear to me, our public needs more information.”
Council kept $2 million in the 2008 capital-spending plan that Coleman had requested for design and engineering of a 2.8-mile streetcar line from Downtown to Ohio State University. But it took the streetcar label off the money at the mayor’s request.
Councilman Kevin L. Boyce said last night’s decision to remove streetcar references from the $1.1 billion capital budget shouldn’t be interpreted as a rejection of the mayor’s plan. Leaving in $2 million without an earmark shouldn’t be interpreted as an endorsement, either, he said.
Comments
- Andrew Hall: Fantastic photography. The picture in front of the chalkboard captures the
- Eliza Ho: Looking forward to try both TILL and Glaze! This interview educates my sens
- James: We went tonight for Valentines. It was absolutely sublime. The house wine,
- howatzer: When's happy hour?
- Down the Lane: @mbeaumont,@SJT, @Mercurius, @drew thanks for all the love and support! @J
Top Stories
- ODOT Seeks Feedback on Downtown Bridge and Street Designs34
- Dublin Grows Upward: The Bridge Street Corridor Calls for Urban Development29
- TILL Dynamic Fare Takes Culinary Standards to the Next Level14
- Edwards Companies Converting Born Brewery Building into Apartments11
- At Home: In Harrison West10
- 89 Fish & Grill Opens Downtown10
- Oval Brewing Company Looking to Kickstart New Beer Business7
- Specials to Make Your Valentine's Day Special6
- Tomorrow's Antiques Opening Soon in The Short North6
- Columbus Ranked as 21st Most Lesbianish City in the US5
Local Entrepreneurial News
- Business branding, design is best left to the pros
- Camelot Cellars hosts unique events designed to support local charities
- CCAD MindShop incubator to help creatives succeed in business
- Ballroom at Oakhurst relaunches with help from Two Caterers
- Weiland’s Gourmet Market in business for more than 50 years
Request for Streetcar design is put on hold
By: Walker
Related Posts:
Cars need roads.
I realize that we must inform the bikers and tree-huggers of this fact before any more discourse can continue.
Bikers, BTW….you do not have the “right” to the roads…you have the privilege of being allowed on the roads.
If you start to act out against automobiles, you may lose that privilege.
Werd.
Those ideas are incorrect and devoid of thought. Sprawl is the exception where cars are king, since one is totally dependent on them in that environment. The city is not and should not go any further down this route. I know I wouldn’t bike down Broad around 270 even though I enjoy the legal right to do so in this state. You can move to a state where bikes don’t have that right. Love it or leave it! And I didn’t know that entropy only works if you’re high, that’s interesting logic. Now go back under your bridge.
How far should one be expected to ride a bike? I live only 5 minutes from downtown, but I wouldn’t consider biking into work. I would be sweaty, I would have wrinkled clothes, how could I go to a meeting across town… For the most part, cars are not going away. Do you grocery shop on your bike? Like every other day? How do you carry stuff? Cars are not about sprawl, they’re about getting places. Plus, I’m almost 40. I’ll be damned if I’m riding a bike everywhere.
By your reckoning, everybody should live within biking distance of downtown.
Bikers, BTW….you do not have the “right” to the roads…you have the privilege of being allowed on the roads.
If you start to act out against automobiles, you may lose that privilege.
Werd.
What are you referring to? Your own made-up little rules?
Lay off the bong, dood.
yeah, bikes are SUPPOSSED to be on the road. Nothing I hate more than trying to navigate a sidewalk with bikers riding on it.
Just wanted to sneak in and out real quick before someone turns what I say into something else completely different.
I addressed this marcomm plan a while ago and mentioned that I haven’t heard anything about where that budget is and how much it’s going to cost to market the streetcar and educate the public.
Over a month ago.
By your reckoning, everybody should live within biking distance of downtown.
Preface: I’m trying to be genuinely helpful with this post, not argumentative.
I understand that not everyone wants to bike anywhere, but there are ways around most of the issues you raised.
1. I think most people could reasonably walk for trips less than a mile and ride a bike for most trips between 1 and 3 miles.
2. I don’t think most people would sweat too much on a five-minute ride (depending on weather), but this can be worked out by showering at a bike station (if Columbus had one) or a health club when you get to work. I would like to see more employers include showers for employees for this purpose.
3. I don’t have too many problems with wrinkled clothes on bike trips of even up to an hour, but you could keep clothes in your office if it’s an issue.
4. How does anyone that rides transit to work get to meetings across town? You can take transit again, take a cab, rent a car, car-share, borrow a car, or just don’t bike on the days you have meetings.
5. I usually don’t do my major weekly grocery shopping trip by bike, but I do pick up little things just by using a back-pack or pannier bags. You could get one of those baskets on the front of a bike or attached to a bike rack.
If you’re interested in biking, which it doesn’t sound like you are, set a goal to do it just once per week. I find that Friday is good because it’s casual clothes day in most offices.
One final thing, I think I’ll take a stab at what I think she was getting at, which is, I agree, all the more reason that education needs to occur about the project.
I think she believes:
Cost of parking downtown right now at meters = $x
Parking in garages and “park and ride” kind of lots = $x+y
Just a hunch, but I think she believes that the city will be pushing everyone to park in their lots and/or garages at a higher rate than what you would pay at a meter (because meters aren’t 24 hours, while garages are, and also, because they’re in key areas, generally cost more).
Right or wrong it doesn’t matter, it’s what she believes and I’m sure many others believe as well. That’s a negative and it would need to be overcome in a satisfactory way for her and the others that believe in that particular issue. Hence, more education and marketing regarding the streetcar. That means more money to do that. And where does that come from?
It would be nice if all of these businesses and developers that are clamoring so hard for it and would gain the most from it would pony up those education and marketing expenses. But it’s not cheap…
I have a serious question.
Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?
I have a serious question.
Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?
Slower moving traffic would certainly be a good thing for pedestrian safety. More traffic would probably be good for commerce, until it becomes congested. Congestion would waste time and money for drivers, buses, streetcars, and possibly bikes (although they would probably just go between cars). Congestion also increases fuel waste and emissions, which is bad for the environment.
I have a theory about congestion leading to less courteous drivers too and a sort of general regional anger like that caused by the underground river of slime in Ghostbusters 2, but I can’t prove it.
I have a serious question.
Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?
Slower moving traffic would certainly be a good thing for pedestrian safety. More traffic would probably be good for commerce, until it becomes congested. Congestion would waste time and money for drivers, buses, streetcars, and possibly bikes (although they would probably just go between cars). Congestion also increases fuel waste and emissions, which is bad for the environment.
I have a theory about congestion leading to less courteous drivers too and a sort of general regional anger like that caused by the underground river of slime in Ghostbusters 2, but I can’t prove it.
But, wouldn’t more congestion on the roads lead a rational person to avoid driving there if they weren’t intending on stopping there?
I mean, you have to lack a significant amount of common sense if you can’t figure out that if you’re not stopping somewhere on high, 3rd/4th is the way to go.
Also, +2 pts for Ghostbusters 2 slime reference.
But, wouldn’t more congestion on the roads lead a rational person to avoid driving there if they weren’t intending on stopping there?
I mean, you have to lack a significant amount of common sense if you can’t figure out that if you’re not stopping somewhere on high, 3rd/4th is the way to go.
Also, +2 pts for Ghostbusters 2 slime reference.
Ah, the Yogi Berra “Nobody goes there anymore…it’s too crowded” theory.
I think you’re right. People will divert to alternate routes, assuming that they are traveling through on High Street and not to or from a destination on High Street. I would guess that most of the traffic on High is not actually through traffic, but I could be wrong.
Of course we’re both assuming people are rational. I can’t figure out why people choose to battle the same predictable congestion in the same places every single day. I guess it’s the best option for them.
Nevertheless, I’m not convinced that the streetcar would actually increase congestion. Too bad there’s no engineering study to help us understand.
I would think so.
Our transit engineers in this city over the past 50 years have done a great job of making our downtown streets capable of moving as high of a volume of automobiles as quickly as possible between point A (downtown) and point B (the suburbs).
Tthat is a good thing if we want our downtown to be easy to get in and out of between 8am and 5pm, but I was under the impression that most people (at least on CU) want to see our downtown become more than a place just to work a first shift job.
I’m not asking for a 24/7 gridlock, nor do I believe the Streetcar line would cause that. Would slowing things down just a few notches really make that big of negative impact on the quality of life in Columbus?
Several thoughts from quickly reading through:
On biking to work:
I ride 5 miles to downtown, iron my clothes and roll them carefully into a back pack and do just fine. I shower before I go, give my self enough time to set and cool off at work and eat breakfast. Once the sweat dries, I change (with little to no wrinkles), wet my hair and comb it and splash some water on my face. I work in a fairly professional setting and work extensively with the public.
For those still selling the false argument that our streets were built for the car, please message me and I will show you some great photos at my work that disprove this. I have a great one of the 1880′s-1890′s, downtown columbus with a horse drawn trolley. Columbus was founded in 1812, hard to believe we had no infrastructure at all until the car came around.
I would think so.
Our transit engineers in this city over the past 50 years have done a great job of making our downtown streets capable of moving as high of a volume of automobiles as quickly as possible between point A (downtown) and point B (the suburbs).
Tthat is a good thing if we want our downtown to be easy to get in and out of between 8am and 5pm, but I was under the impression that most people (at least on CU) want to see our downtown become more than a place just to work a first shift job.
I’m not asking for a 24/7 gridlock, nor do I believe the Streetcar line would cause that. Would slowing things down just a few notches really make that big of negative impact on the quality of life in Columbus?
this is why the 5 lane one ways are being changed to 2 ways eventually, but they have been doing the smaller streets first
we also have a density issue which is part of the deal when accommodating the car, X amount of parking per square foot of office space is a rule not violated often, it’s one of the building requirements
we have more parking space and road than office space and living space, this is a big problem
I have a serious question.
Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?
totally bad. High is our major road and traffic should flow.
I have a serious question.
Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?
Slower moving traffic would certainly be a good thing for pedestrian safety. More traffic would probably be good for commerce, until it becomes congested. Congestion would waste time and money for drivers, buses, streetcars, and possibly bikes (although they would probably just go between cars). Congestion also increases fuel waste and emissions, which is bad for the environment.
I have a theory about congestion leading to less courteous drivers too and a sort of general regional anger like that caused by the underground river of slime in Ghostbusters 2, but I can’t prove it.
But, wouldn’t more congestion on the roads lead a rational person to avoid driving there if they weren’t intending on stopping there?
I mean, you have to lack a significant amount of common sense if you can’t figure out that if you’re not stopping somewhere on high, 3rd/4th is the way to go.
Also, +2 pts for Ghostbusters 2 slime reference.
Hopefully, this is a catch-all. Some people LIKE to drive. Some people HAVE to drive. Moving traffic away from High Street could potentially cause problems for High Street business owners. That’s what front windows are for.
wow…back to back posts stating…
1. Increased traffic on High St. would be bad.
2. Decreased traffic on High St. would be bad.
But, wouldn’t more congestion on the roads lead a rational person to avoid driving there if they weren’t intending on stopping there?
I mean, you have to lack a significant amount of common sense if you can’t figure out that if you’re not stopping somewhere on high, 3rd/4th is the way to go.
Also, +2 pts for Ghostbusters 2 slime reference.
Ah, the Yogi Berra “Nobody goes there anymore…it’s too crowded” theory.
I think you’re right. People will divert to alternate routes, assuming that they are traveling through on High Street and not to or from a destination on High Street. I would guess that most of the traffic on High is not actually through traffic, but I could be wrong.
Of course we’re both assuming people are rational. I can’t figure out why people choose to battle the same predictable congestion in the same places every single day. I guess it’s the best option for them.
Nevertheless, I’m not convinced that the streetcar would actually increase congestion. Too bad there’s no engineering study to help us understand.
The streetcar removes a whole lane. If they’re truly going to put in the middle, you lose the turn lane, where there is one. PLUS, and this is the big one for me, with the streetcar conductor controlling the lights, flow of car traffic becomes an issue. I also wonder about the timing from yellow to red when this happens. Does the lag time become shorter? If not, you’ve got conductors changing teh lights before they even get near the light. What if it JUST changed to green?
I’m sure this has been posted once or 200 times…but it shares the road with traffic.
1. Increased traffic on High St. would be bad.
2. Decreased traffic on High St. would be bad.
I’m pretty sure that I was talking about the congestion and increased traffic caused by the congestion (I’m talking congestion/traffic) that would be bad. I don’t remember saying anywhere about less traffic being bad, unless you’re talking about me saying that taking the traffic away would be bad for businesses. Yeah, it would. I’m neither for increasing teh traffic nor decreasing. I think there’s a pretty good flow now, I think teh streetcar will make it bad due to the rail placement. Now, if they would widen the streets for a new lane, that would be great, but it would also affect every business on teh street.
Ah, yet another fine example of Core paraphrasing and dumbing down, thereby totally distorting/missing the point. Consistency is a good thing.
Are you even aware of how self-contradictory you are getting?
By design traffic which flows isn’t seeing any windows.
A.
question: “Would increased (and slower moving) automobile traffic on High Street be a bad thing?”
answer: “totally bad. High is our major road and traffic should flow.”
question: “wouldn’t more congestion on the roads lead a rational person to avoid driving there if they weren’t intending on stopping there? “
answer: “Moving traffic away from High Street could potentially cause problems for High Street business owners. That’s what front windows are for.”
Sorry, this reads to me as 100% contradictory. More, slower moving traffic is more likely to benefit the High Street business owners…after all, that’s what front windows are for…but you also state that more, slower moving traffic is bad in the first post.
Again, I read your posts as contrarian regardless of topic and defeatist like it’s an artform.