RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubeThe Dispatch wrote
COLUMBUS City Council meeting – Streetcars to get public hearing next week
Tuesday, April 22, 2008 3:06 AM
By Robert Vitale
Columbus City Council members complained last week that they’ve been left out of the loop on Mayor Michael B. Coleman’s streetcar plan.
Last night, they made the loop bigger.
The council will host its first public hearing next week on the $103 million proposal to build a 2.8-mile rail line between Downtown and Ohio State University. The council’s decision came in an impromptu debate at the end of the weekly meeting.
The day and time haven’t been firmed up, but Councilwoman Maryellen O’Shaughnessy said she wants the session to take place before the council votes on Coleman’s proposed 2008 capital budget.
That budget, which includes a $2 million request to begin design and engineering work for the streetcar line, is scheduled for council action on May 5.
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
Streetcars to get public hearing next week
By: lazyfish
Related Posts:
Oh yeah, that reminds me. Can we get a commitment in writing here from those folks who said in that other thread that they would leave Columbus if we can’t have rail?
Just asking.
WHEWWW!!!
It always takes me forever to catch up with these threads, and I’m a slow reader to begin with… :lol:
Welcome back, greenhouse. Come back Columbuzz.
I agree with Surber that we should find common ground. It would help to move the debate forward and clear the air. I think most agree that Columbus needs to:
a) spur in-fill development
b) increase alternative transportation options
c) support existing businesses
d) foster economic growth
e) follow fiscally responsible paths
It seems many people are simply against the plan as it now stands and are for streetcars and rail in Columbus in some form. With all these things in mind, we should focus our discussions on how to influence the city’s course so that people who agree on the broader goals above can come together on this plan. In other words, without consensus, compromise and trust between all parties, this project could be doomed to failure, in the worst case. More likely, it would simply result in a less than optimal solution which leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth and delays what should be an inevitable mass transit system in Columbus. Nobody wants that. Let’s be constructive.
I’m curious to see what kind of constructive solutions to people’s concerns we can come up with. I believe discussions of alternative, parallel streets for the primary N-S corridor are a good place to start. There are a bunch of passionate, smart people on CU who should pull in the same direction (once we figure out what that is) and not go at each other.
Cheers! :)
It always takes me forever to catch up with these threads, and I’m a slow reader to begin with… :lol:
Welcome back, greenhouse. Come back Columbuzz.
I agree with Surber that we should find common ground. It would help to move the debate forward and clear the air. I think most agree that Columbus needs to:
a) spur in-fill development
b) increase alternative transportation options
c) support existing businesses
d) foster economic growth
e) follow fiscally responsible paths
It seems many people are simply against the plan as it now stands and are for streetcars and rail in Columbus in some form. With all these things in mind, we should focus our discussions on how to influence the city’s course so that people who agree on the broader goals above can come together on this plan. In other words, without consensus, compromise and trust between all parties, this project could be doomed to failure, in the worst case. More likely, it would simply result in a less than optimal solution which leaves a bad taste in everyone’s mouth and delays what should be an inevitable mass transit system in Columbus. Nobody wants that. Let’s be constructive.
I’m curious to see what kind of constructive solutions to people’s concerns we can come up with. I believe discussions of alternative, parallel streets for the primary N-S corridor are a good place to start. There are a bunch of passionate, smart people on CU who should pull in the same direction (once we figure out what that is) and not go at each other.
Cheers! :)
Thank you UncommonSense, I know my post was one of the last ones to read…..glad you made it :) And I agree with you completely. What is our common strength on here? We have a large number of people who care about this city. Also, nearly everyone on here is rational and seems willing to compromise. If we were to step up at the next Council meeting with a plan instead of just a gripe and maybe a couple thousand (that might be a lot) signatures backing it, I think we can all get what we want. Some points I’ve seen with some possible answers:
1) everyone wants to be connected and have easy access
– go with the starter line now but have a 5 year plan to expand based on public outcry. The larger plan does need to be there though.
2) disrupt business as little as possible
– tough, but I think do-able. We def. need to find out from other cities how long traffic was diverted in front of existing businesses. Maybe that’s why Portland ran it through some undeveloped land as to not hurt the existing businesses?
3) have this compliment cota and how is this different
– need to do a better job at showing why this will be better for downtown than the current bus system. I think the info. for this is out there, but needs to be shown in a different way
etc. (I’ll stop as this could get very long, but you get my point)
One I thing I agreed with from the forum was the need to create more than just service industry, minimum wage jobs. There is a need to create viable, living wage jobs in our urban city to better the communities.
As to which business, who knows?
I have a feeling that part of those studies doesn’t take into consideration well enough which came first, the economic development or the streetcar. Obviously you want to put the streetcar in a good location that already has been somewhat developed, so doesn’t it seem to reason that development would continue in that area with or without the added streetcar. I’m not saying that it would have no impact, but to attribute the entire impact to the streetcar is far from the truth.
I needed to quote the two above comments because they seem to illustrate a basic problem within this discussion. From how I interpret these comments, Greenhouse fears that the promises of downtown redevelopment will not occur even if the streetcar project is implemented. CBJTiger argues that the city is placing the streetcar into a corridor in where development was already going to happen, whether the public transit was installed or not.
Could you guys figure out what argument you are using, so that I can appropriately discuss?
[url]http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_123.pdf[/url]
This is a study of the Transportation Research Board. I believe the summary of the study on pages 131, 132, and 133 should be enlightening to many of the readers of this thread. I think it addresses many of the concerns voiced here.
Some of the items that I gleaned from this report [I added the bold]:
-”market mass transit to the sectors of the population most likely to use it.”
-”…it will be difficult to significantly change beliefs about riding public transit with public policy messages alone. More emphasis will need to be placed on supplementing messages with a suite of services that enhance the transit riding experience.”
-”Some features of a Compact Neighborhood were of greater importantance to this sample of respondents than other features. The most important belief was that it would be easier to get to stores, restaurants, libraries, and other activities if one were living in a Compact Neighborhood.”
-”Individuals who have never used public transportation or who use it rarely tend not to consider public transportation as a viable alternative for their transportation needs.”
I think that the results of the research indicate that creating a reliable suite of transit options will increase ridership of mass transit overall. It recommends marketing mass transit to those riders most likely to use mass transit. I think these findings support the idea that creating a starter line for Columbus linking the neighborhoods most likely to use public transportation is a good public policy decision.
edited for formatting errors
Just asking.
Unless something significant happens on my end. Sure thing. It’d probably be around 2015 though.
I have a feeling that part of those studies doesn’t take into consideration well enough which came first, the economic development or the streetcar. Obviously you want to put the streetcar in a good location that already has been somewhat developed, so doesn’t it seem to reason that development would continue in that area with or without the added streetcar. I’m not saying that it would have no impact, but to attribute the entire impact to the streetcar is far from the truth.
I needed to quote the two above comments because they seem to illustrate a basic problem within this discussion. From how I interpret these comments, Greenhouse fears that the promises of downtown redevelopment will not occur even if the streetcar project is implemented. CBJTiger argues that the city is placing the streetcar into a corridor in where development was already going to happen, whether the public transit was installed or not.
Could you guys figure out what argument you are using, so that I can appropriately discuss?
I’m not really arguing. I’m asking a question.
Just asking.
Unless something significant happens on my end. Sure thing. It’d probably be around 2015 though.
I wasn’t being totally serious. I don’t want any of you folks to go anywhere.
So….
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
Broad St is hardly “the middle of a desert” as Coremodels put it. In fact it’s the most traveled stret in Columbus and also the one with the greatest opportunity to change blight to bright if the streetcar is the guaranteed boon you all claim it to be.
And so to the rest of you who claimed you want the streetcar for the sake of Columbus’ economic development: congrats! You’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Sure, you dressed it up with your studies and alleged civic-minded altruism…but you really wanted a drunken ride from Betty’s to whatever new bar opened up on the track.
So while you agonize over the loss of your bar-hopping toy train, remember that it is likely that being transparent and disrespectful of those who merely questioned it is what did you in. The public gives you a voice, so when you wish to be heard, please try to avoid:
“Old coot”"
“Moron”
Grow up CU clique. You’ll accomplish nothing until you do.
^^ I’d like one that is easily accessible by college students and can frequently be used by them as well (especially since I am one and could see a huge benefit of connecting a line that could hook up everywhere from downtown north).
I have lots of “ideas” as to why college students should have an easy access and developed route to downtown, but none of them are beyond an actual “hunch” and I don’t use those to make formal arguments.
I’m neither a liar or a hypocrite, I just prefer that my development be pipelined in to the next generation of College educated people who could possibly call Columbus home.
I would be happy with light rail anywhere in this city. I would actually probably be happier with the heavy rail coming first, using the existing right of ways and building up a commuter network to the suburbs. As the North Corridor project showed, that isn’t going to happen in this town. At least not yet.
I think High Street is a better location for a starter line because of the number of things connected. All provided that the issues of redundancy with COTA are addressed along that stretch. High St also serves as a jumping off point for future rail projects. Many have stated that they like the idea of using existing rail lines, that are connected to the suburbs, as commuter routes. Most of these come into the convention center. So if we build up a track along Broad, how do we then jump to commuter rail, if there is nothing to move people (unless COTA changes drastically) along that corridor?
High provides a greater chance for ridership, which increases the likelihood of success. Even if those numbers are bar hoppers and tourists, as long as it generates revenue and meets or succeed a benchmark that is laid out, we could claim success and begin the next phase.
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
I would totally get behind a Broad st line. Perhaps up broad and down Main.
I do think the high st line makes sense too, but dammit we SHOULD build both and keep going. Extend the high line to groveport, the broad line E to W to both ends…run a line from high down goodale and up northwest blvd through arlington (so I can ride without having to take the 5 bus to high!), run one in from hillard on cemetary/fishinger up north broadway from a P&R at kenny rd over to lindon. Dont forget Morse rd, dublin-granville, hamilton rd connected to the broad line, Central ave also connected to the broad line (now THAT is an area that needs better mass tranist).
at this point I refer y’all to the “fantasy columbus metro map” thread over in the general section.
You’re mischaracterizing our arguments. No one ever said that you could put a streetcar anywhere and development would follow like magic. Placement matters. It matters a lot. The reason the High St. line is the best has nothing to do with bar-hopping; I haven’t stayed out that late more than three nights in the last six months. I’ve also been explicitly arguing *against* greenhouse in this and other threads on the notion that what we really need is COTA service into the post-bar hours rather than a streetcar in the primetime hours. The streetcar would be perfectly fine if its hours ran no later than the existing COTA hours (though hopefully more frequently during the late evening).
Keep in mind that the streetcar is meant as a people circulator, not a commuter system.
If I thought there were any credible evidence that Broad St. line would actually see more use than a High St. line, I’d be all for starting the line on Broad. I see no such evidence, so I don’t support changing the plan. It’s that simple. Accusations of hypocrisy are baseless, mean-spirited, and unproductive.
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
I would totally get behind a Broad st line. Perhaps up broad and down Main.
I mean broad AND main, not one train for both. Sorry.
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
Broad St is hardly “the middle of a desert” as Coremodels put it. In fact it’s the most traveled stret in Columbus and also the one with the greatest opportunity to change blight to bright if the streetcar is the guaranteed boon you all claim it to be.
“Old coot”"
.
Anyone who speaks wistfully of the Sensenbrenner era should be called an old coot, regardless of what position they take on anything. Maybe recent Columbus arrivals don’t have any idea on this. And it was purely a throwaway line with further substantive comments which get ignored. Hell, years from now I fully expect to be called an old coot when I speak wistfully of the Coleman era.
I said in an older thread that a Broad Steet line was a better idea and it is – in an ideal world. We don’t have that ideal world. Any sort of tax-funded proposal will go down as will anything that requires state approval/funds. The Broad Street corridor just doesn’t generate income from alternate sources like High Street does. And it does take some anchoring to spur development so as is, Broad Street lacks those anchors like the Convention Center and OSU. Down the road, a HS line will make a Broad St line more viable.
The High Street line is not the best possible line in some Platonic fashion. It is the best line that can be done given all the constraints.
A.
If it’s going to happen, and I have to choose an either/or, I guess the high street line is the one I’d choose. It DOES connect OSU students, who will add to the ridership numbers they’ll need. That’s the one population they can count on as a group. Everything else is pretty scattershot when you look at it, as far as locked-in groups of people outside lunch hour, but OSU is a captive audience and probably fewer of them have cars. Going down Broad would not pass any such captive audience. I really like the 3rd/4th street ideas as this would be an actual loop and I feel like it wouldn’t disrupt the regular traffic flow. Hell, if the rail went down 3rd & 4th, I might even get behind it. I wouldn’t be mad about the buses for those streets going away. I feel like the #2 has too far a reach beyond the rail route and has such a high ridership that making changes to it, outside of improvements, would not be a good idea.
Now, I WOULD like to see that 3rd & 4th street loop (hell, you could run that all the way to Hudson and you get to hit the residential at the end, along with all the residential (more students) on 3rd & 4th) meet up with a line on Broad, with the Broad Street line hitting fewer stops, almost like a Broad Express that would run from Bexley to Mt Carmel. Imagine all those $Bexley$ residents having easy access to the SN. This is what I call moving people and it’s something I could easily get behind.
If you look at this long-term, and get out your Magic 8-ball (thanks, Core, I like that), you could imagine a time when 3rd & 4th become the main downtown corridors either way, since the promised development would grow around teh lines (so they say) and THEN, you might be able to make High more pedestrian friendly.
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
Broad St is hardly “the middle of a desert” as Coremodels put it. In fact it’s the most traveled stret in Columbus and also the one with the greatest opportunity to change blight to bright if the streetcar is the guaranteed boon you all claim it to be.
“Old coot”"
.
Anyone who speaks wistfully of the Sensenbrenner era should be called an old coot, regardless of what position they take on anything. Maybe recent Columbus arrivals don’t have any idea on this. And it was purely a throwaway line with further substantive comments which get ignored. Hell, years from now I fully expect to be called an old coot when I speak wistfully of the Coleman era.
I said in an older thread that a Broad Steet line was a better idea and it is – in an ideal world. We don’t have that ideal world. Any sort of tax-funded proposal will go down as will anything that requires state approval/funds. The Broad Street corridor just doesn’t generate income from alternate sources like High Street does. And it does take some anchoring to spur development so as is, Broad Street lacks those anchors like the Convention Center and OSU. Down the road, a HS line will make a Broad St line more viable.
The High Street line is not the best possible line in some Platonic fashion. It is the best line that can be done given all the constraints.
A.
I’d be happy to call you an old coot now if you want. It’ll be like practice.
I like the general idea of that, but I think people underestimate just how far Bexley is from downtown, let alone the Short North. Streetcars just aren’t that fast. (I know you said you’re thinking an express line, but keep in mind that the cost per mile means that you really need to get serious use out of every mile of track to make these things work at maximum effectiveness.) It’s about 4.7 miles from the Bexley Drexel (just picking an arbitrary spot to call “Bexley”) to High & Buttles (doing likewise for someplace to call “The Short North”). The entire proposed line for High is 2.8 miles.
I’ll call back the point that planners have identified something like 36 underdeveloped acres along the proposed route. That’s a solid number because it leaves room for development, but not too much; it’s a digestible amount of real estate. Along a Bexley-Short North line, you’d be looking at many times that. That may be more than is manageable. That would make our streetcar system larger than Portland’s. The risk of biting off more than one can chew has to be a pragmatic consideration here.
If I take the gloves off I can see that there are only 2 posters who would support a Broad St. streetcar instead of a High St streetcar.
Broad St is hardly “the middle of a desert” as Coremodels put it. In fact it’s the most traveled stret in Columbus and also the one with the greatest opportunity to change blight to bright if the streetcar is the guaranteed boon you all claim it to be.
And so to the rest of you who claimed you want the streetcar for the sake of Columbus’ economic development: congrats! You’re either a liar or a hypocrite. Sure, you dressed it up with your studies and alleged civic-minded altruism…but you really wanted a drunken ride from Betty’s to whatever new bar opened up on the track.
So while you agonize over the loss of your bar-hopping toy train, remember that it is likely that being transparent and disrespectful of those who merely questioned it is what did you in. The public gives you a voice, so when you wish to be heard, please try to avoid:
“Old coot”"
“Moron”
Grow up CU clique. You’ll accomplish nothing until you do.
BCOZ – your “A” simply never equals your “B”
Can you please explain how someone saying –
“I think a High Street Line is a better starter line because it will produce desired economic development concurrent with sustained ridership”
equals
“I only want to use it to bar hop.”
Not to mention that your data set includes 2-3 people. Your self-serving (il)logic fails to make anyone a liar or a hyprocrite. Nobody denies that impact and breadth of the economic benefits actually depend on where the route is proposed. This actually makes people realistic by relying on successful past examples to predict and replicate success.
While I agree that ‘coot’ and ‘moron’ haven’t done anything to help justify the streetcar, I also have to give you credit for persistence. You’ve repeatedly humored yourself with your bar hop rationale and have refused to let it go. All the while accusing others of mind reading and word twisting.
Anyone could use the Broad line to bar hop as well – start at the Carabar, hit up BOMA, hop off for Surly Girl, Due Amici, maybe the Ringside. I guess that is what you really want to do?
And one final thing, on prior pages you and others have continually stated there are better ways to achieve economic development. Here’s a refresher of your own post:
Please put back on the gloves and come forth with one idea we can all discuss the merits of. And if it is something like more garages – acknowledge that:
a. it’s already being done at a minimum cost of 30+ million
b. produce any cost/benefit data that justifies the further expenditure
Oh, and at this point the streetcar is still very much on the table. So there is no agonizing.