RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
The 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
- Rmoiii: Where are the photo's of the current construction going on in the short nor
- cheap: i highly recommend the Millersport sweet corn festival of course,the cor
- Jimmy Mak: Thanks for the write-up! Just to clarify - this is the third year we've do
- Briana Henry: Well, eventually they plan to add more bands from the region...gotta start
- bucki12: I like the business model, but the internet sales part seems like something
Top Stories
- Grandview Yard Seeks Retail Anchors for Next Phase of Development33
- Studio 35 Re-Opening is a Revelation17
- Attn: Columbus Creatives!14
- Philanthropy Friday: Bicentennial Towers 14
- More Downtown Public Artwork Coming to Scioto Mile11
- The Short North's Summer of Construction11
- Liberty Place Adding Over 200 New Apartment Units to The Brewery District11
- Columbus Ranks #22 on List of Best Large Cities for Jobs in 201210
- The Hudson Street Market Renovates, Faces Construction Woes10
- Wonder Bread Lofts will be Home to Mixed-Use Redevelopment10
Streetcars to get public hearing next week
By: lazyfish
Related Posts:
COTA does.
Not late night and not regularly.
The Mayor has indicated late night hours and 5-7 minute wait times.
And again, why can’t we have a competent COTA and a rail?
Correct me if I’m wrong…but aren’t galleries (besides the non-profit ones) also businesses?
Yes, they certainly are. I should have made a distinction between types of businesses.
I might be wrong, but art galleries don’t really depend on foot-traffic and passersby to keep themselves in business like clothing, and shoe stores do. People who want to purchase art from a gallery don’t have many other alternative places to go to in the city, so if they want art, they would have likely had end up in the Short North for their purchases – that is, before most moved out. If a streetcar adversely affects an apparel store, then its because there are plenty of other clothing stores to choose from – with art galleries it isn’t so simple. Therefore, I don’t think art galleries would be as hurt by the streetcar. And anyways, I think all types of businesses would benefit from a streetcar.
I furthermore didn’t classify art galleries into the same category as clothing stores because art galleries are also cultural hotspots. I think their contribution to the Short North has been much greater than most of the new stores there today. The Short North, after all, is a designated Art’s District because of them, despite the fact that most of the art has since moved out.
COTA does.
Not late night and not regularly.
The Mayor has indicated late night hours and 5-7 minute wait times.
And again, why can’t we have a competent COTA and a rail?
I definitely agree, streetcar or not, something needs to be done about late night wait times. I would be way more likely to ride the bus if I wasn’t concerned about getting stranded at a bus stop late at night for 20 minutes.
COTA does.
Not late night and not regularly.
The Mayor has indicated late night hours and 5-7 minute wait times.
And again, why can’t we have a competent COTA and a rail?
We can and should, but I don’t think “the bus doesn’t run late enough” is a good reason to spend $100 Million on a streetcar. I think there are plenty of other good reasons and we should focus on the arguments that make sense. If all we need is later hours on the #2, by all means extend the hours of service. It would save a lot of money.
As an aside, I just found this article about free trolley-bus service in Scottsdale. Maybe we should try a free bus version of the streetcar and see how it does. I guess this isn’t all that different than the old COTA Link though, which wasn’t all that popular.
Wow. You’re out of your ****ing mind. Do you live down here? Because 75 percent of the business owners do. So I would be careful before you start talking about what is, or isn’t, good for our residents.
Are the majority of residents business owners. I didn’t realize that I would have to get so nit-picky with wording, but I’ll clarify myself. Whatever benefits the MAJORITY of residents is what I would support. Some residents, who are not nearly in the majority, are store owners and as stated before, have their own biases in favor of their stores. So for shop owners, any adverse effects to their shops would be fought against with tooth and nail. But as residents, I still think its in their favor to have a streetcar line. Again, when the streetcar goes in, wouldn’t it likely benefit them though?
As for your bit of advice at the end of your rant, I don’t claim to speak for all SN residents, but I’m pretty sure most would agree with me that better transit would benefit their standards of living. I also think that most would agree that vacant storefronts would soon be filled in by something else, especially if those residents are convinced of all the development potential associated with these streetcars.
No, I don’t live right in the SN, but I do live very close by – that doesn’t mean I’m out of touch.
You can’t just take a ratio of residents who are business owners to those who aren’t to determine how those specific businesses departures would effect the neighborhood.
And this isn’t solving a transportation problem.
khanra – i definitely didn’t intend to label you as a whacko. my point was just that in this debate soundbites and blurbs are being constantly pinched and used to define a whole argument. so i just wanted that to stay within the context of your point, and not be attributed to the entire ‘supporter’ camp.
Debating off of sound bits and blurbs just isn’t a great way to discuss ideas. If someone reads only one line of my argument without paying attention to anything else at all, then they’re going to come up with stuff that is way out of line with what I was saying. Any besides, I never wanted to be the spokesman of the “streetcar supporters who care about business,” though I think most would agree with my points that this streetcar would be beneficial overall, that the SN would be much better because of it, and that any businesses that go under would be replaced afterwards. They might not, however, support my thoughts on the impact of new businesses on the SN.
COTA does.
Not late night and not regularly.
The Mayor has indicated late night hours and 5-7 minute wait times.
And again, why can’t we have a competent COTA and a rail?
I definitely agree, streetcar or not, something needs to be done about late night wait times. I would be way more likely to ride the bus if I wasn’t concerned about getting stranded at a bus stop late at night for 20 minutes.
Many on my staff regularly ride COTA and complain of 45 minute wait times on Friday and Saturday nights. For servers carrying cash on them, it is scary to wait and wait and a bus never comes. Also, we employ a lot of young women who have reported sexual harrassment and threats at the darker, less populated bus stops. Since Betty’s opened, we have had four reported assaults on workers waiting for buses on weekend nights. My staff is my family and their safety is paramount, many of them do not drive cars and leave parking spaces for all of you. They are here to serve you and suburbia and they work very hard every single day, they deserve a safe trip home.
I believe COTA can be improved and a reliable public rail would allow more eyes on the street for safety.
What has proposed for parking solutions at the ends of the Streetcar liine?
Everyone is talking about alleviating parking in the short north and downtown but all the suburban dwellers who drive into town to be “entertained and shop” will still need to park somewhere if they’re going to use the streetcar as their “last mile” form of transportation.
In addition to the previously-mentioned garages near the ends of the proposed line under construction, keep in mind that one needn’t necessarily park at the very ends of the line. In fact, I’m betting that would be most people’s last choice unless they had business to take care of near where they parked.
Speaking as an erstwhile exurbanite and one who has hitherto been able to come downtown primarily for special events, my first choice was usually the Arena District garages when I needed a garage. If there’s no event going on at Nationwide or the GCCC, those garages will basically always have space available and they’re only 1-2 blocks from High.
I believe COTA can be improved and a reliable public rail would allow more eyes on the street for safety.
Those are all good arguments for more frequent bus service, better lighting, more police, and security cameras on buses and the street. The only argument you made that supports the streetcar in my opinion is that economic development brought by the streetcar could put more eyes on the street. In my opinion, economic development is the main reason to build the streetcar. We could improve public transportation in an already well-served corridor for far less money.
And this isn’t solving a transportation problem.
What I said is that the streetcar would benefit the quality of life (well, of non-business owners) of the residents in that area. I also think that I didn’t try to determine the effect of the departure of those stores on the neighborhood.
What I do think is that those stores will be replaced if they don’t survive through construction. I also said that those stores haven’t shaped the Short North in the same manner as other businesses (art galleries) – not that the area would benefit or suffer from the departure of current stores.
I made no specific connection between the departure of stores and effects on the neighborhood. I don’t think its a good thing if they leave – they are part of the neighborhood, but I think other priorities take precedence over them, i.e. the majority of residents.
And yes, this doesn’t SOLVE the transport problem. That would require billions of dollars. I also don’t know if anyone has ever claimed that this was a solution to all our problems. Instead, this will HELP the situation, and will encourage the use of rail. After residents are familiarized with rail and its benefits, they would probably be less likely to vote down commuter rail.
Thats a benefits that increased bus service will not provide. This streetcar is a starter line for something bigger, not a be all and end all. In the sense that it will familiarize people with rail, it is indeed solving a transportation problem – the fear of funding public transit!
There are a lot of business owners who live and work in the Short North, myself included. Anecdotally, I’ve found that those business owners and many residents of the SN are indifferent or against the streetcar. Many of the supporters (again, anecdotally) tend to be just beyond the areas, which will be serviced by the initial starter route.
In order for this project to fly (I hope it does), I believe some modifications to the existing proposal would help win over a core consensus directly here in this area. I’m hopeful and confident that the city will listen and do just that.
I am, once again, going to refer you to a research study I came across relating to increasing ridership on public transit.
I quote
-”…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.”
[url]http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_123.pdf[/url]
To further discuss, the study basically finds that every concern voiced by Liz’s employees are not just individually applicable, but universally applicable… i.e. That those exact concerns have been found to create a statistically significant bias against riding public transit. The study finds that it is possible to offset that bias; however, in order to offset that bias, it is necessary to create a SUITE OF SERVICES that enhance the transit riding experience.
The study also finds that linking compact neighborhoods with restaurants and nightlife is a good strategy, since most people want access to those amenities.
The study also finds that focusing on populations most likely to ride transit is a good idea. Who are those populations, you ask? Well, the study defines them: essentially it identifies adults with no children as the most likely target audience for transit, either single young folks, or single or married empty-nesters.
OK… what am I getting at here? Well… I think the findings of this study suggest that we could throw huge amounts of money at COTA, and it wouldn’t overcome the intrinsic bias that many people in the population will carry (rightfully or wrongfully) about public transit. That until a SUITE of SERVICES is offered, the bias against public transit will prevent many people from utilizing it. Many of those types of services have already been suggested on these threads– things like automated gps systems to give real time arrival information, better online trip planning, longer hours, more frequent trips– however, I firmly believe that, lacking any VISIBLE change in the public transit system, we could have the best bus system in the WORLD, and people wouldn’t ride it.
But with the additions of a visible change– a streetcar– that will change public perception. The study proved that attitudes toward public transit change when confidence in the system rises, and confidence rises when the types of concerns that Liz raised are addressed *in a visible way.* Moreover, this proposal is one that links the most likely populations of mass transit riders– OSU students, nightlife revelers, empty nesters in GV, etc.
I say we put money into public transit that the public will actually use.
I am, once again, going to refer you to a research study I came across relating to increasing ridership on public transit.
I quote
-”…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.”
[url]http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_123.pdf[/url]
To further discuss, the study basically finds that every concern voiced by Liz’s employees are not just individually applicable, but universally applicable… i.e. That those exact concerns have been found to create a statistically significant bias against riding public transit. The study finds that it is possible to offset that bias; however, in order to offset that bias, it is necessary to create a SUITE OF SERVICES that enhance the transit riding experience.
The study also finds that linking compact neighborhoods with restaurants and nightlife is a good strategy, since most people want access to those amenities.
The study also finds that focusing on populations most likely to ride transit is a good idea. Who are those populations, you ask? Well, the study defines them: essentially it identifies adults with no children as the most likely target audience for transit, either single young folks, or single or married empty-nesters.
OK… what am I getting at here? Well… I think the findings of this study suggest that we could throw huge amounts of money at COTA, and it wouldn’t overcome the intrinsic bias that many people in the population will carry (rightfully or wrongfully) about public transit. That until a SUITE of SERVICES is offered, the bias against public transit will prevent many people from utilizing it. Many of those types of services have already been suggested on these threads– things like automated gps systems to give real time arrival information, better online trip planning, longer hours, more frequent trips– however, I firmly believe that, lacking any VISIBLE change in the public transit system, we could have the best bus system in the WORLD, and people wouldn’t ride it.
But with the additions of a visible change– a streetcar– that will change public perception. The study proved that attitudes toward public transit change when confidence in the system rises, and confidence rises when the types of concerns that Liz raised are addressed *in a visible way.* Moreover, this proposal is one that links the most likely populations of mass transit riders– OSU students, nightlife revelers, empty nesters in GV, etc.
I say we put money into public transit that the public will actually use.
to this i would add the graph from Salt Lake City (the jpg was too big so I reference the article):
[url]http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_slc001.htm[/url]
The article is from lightrailnow, which is obviously biased. But the data is from the FTA.
Source: Federal Transit Administration, NTDB data, 1996-2001]
In 1999 SLC put in 15 miles of LRT track (admittedly more than Columbus and LRT not streetcar) connecting the University of Utah to downtown and the Delta Center and convention center. On the graph you can see that bus ridership was declining prior to 1999. After the LRT route was added, total bus and LRT ridership rose 18.5% from 1996 and 23% in the first 2-year period of TRAX. Ridership has grown annually since 2001, and new LRT tracks have been laid and more are coming.
Rail transit can create a wider positive perception about public transit, which strengthens both.
But with the additions of a visible change– a streetcar– that will change public perception. The study proved that attitudes toward public transit change when confidence in the system rises, and confidence rises when the types of concerns that Liz raised are addressed *in a visible way.* Moreover, this proposal is one that links the most likely populations of mass transit riders– OSU students, nightlife revelers, empty nesters in GV, etc.
I say we put money into public transit that the public will actually use.
Dont rip on me too bad, but I agree because me and 99% of my friends are the people this study is talking about. I’m not saying I will never ride a bus, but if it came down to it, I’d prob. grab a cab. I will, however, ride a streetcar. Also, I have never heard people say they want to move to a city because of their amazing bus system. I have heard people say they want to move to Chicago because of the rail transit options. One other point, when I first went to Chicago I wasn’t nearly as intimidated to ride the L as I was to take a bus. Nearly each stop for the L had a worker I could talk to and ask questions. I dont see that with a bus. Also, dont get me wrong, I think we still need buses; I just think each brings something different to the table.
But with the additions of a visible change– a streetcar– that will change public perception. The study proved that attitudes toward public transit change when confidence in the system rises, and confidence rises when the types of concerns that Liz raised are addressed *in a visible way.* Moreover, this proposal is one that links the most likely populations of mass transit riders– OSU students, nightlife revelers, empty nesters in GV, etc.
I say we put money into public transit that the public will actually use.
Dont rip on me too bad, but I agree because me and 99% of my friends are the people this study is talking about. I’m not saying I will never ride a bus, but if it came down to it, I’d prob. grab a cab. I will, however, ride a streetcar. Also, I have never heard people say they want to move to a city because of their amazing bus system. I have heard people say they want to move to Chicago because of the rail transit options. One other point, when I first went to Chicago I wasn’t nearly as intimidated to ride the L as I was to take a bus. Nearly each stop for the L had a worker I could talk to and ask questions. I dont see that with a bus. Also, dont get me wrong, I think we still need buses; I just think each brings something different to the table.
Street cars aren’t gonna have stations are they? Doubtful. Just stops….just like a bus.
I am, once again, going to refer you to a research study I came across relating to increasing ridership on public transit.
I quote
-”…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.”
[url]http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/tcrp/tcrp_rpt_123.pdf[/url]
To further discuss, the study basically finds that every concern voiced by Liz’s employees are not just individually applicable, but universally applicable… i.e. That those exact concerns have been found to create a statistically significant bias against riding public transit. The study finds that it is possible to offset that bias; however, in order to offset that bias, it is necessary to create a SUITE OF SERVICES that enhance the transit riding experience.
The study also finds that linking compact neighborhoods with restaurants and nightlife is a good strategy, since most people want access to those amenities.
The study also finds that focusing on populations most likely to ride transit is a good idea. Who are those populations, you ask? Well, the study defines them: essentially it identifies adults with no children as the most likely target audience for transit, either single young folks, or single or married empty-nesters.
OK… what am I getting at here? Well… I think the findings of this study suggest that we could throw huge amounts of money at COTA, and it wouldn’t overcome the intrinsic bias that many people in the population will carry (rightfully or wrongfully) about public transit. That until a SUITE of SERVICES is offered, the bias against public transit will prevent many people from utilizing it. Many of those types of services have already been suggested on these threads– things like automated gps systems to give real time arrival information, better online trip planning, longer hours, more frequent trips– however, I firmly believe that, lacking any VISIBLE change in the public transit system, we could have the best bus system in the WORLD, and people wouldn’t ride it.
But with the additions of a visible change– a streetcar– that will change public perception. The study proved that attitudes toward public transit change when confidence in the system rises, and confidence rises when the types of concerns that Liz raised are addressed *in a visible way.* Moreover, this proposal is one that links the most likely populations of mass transit riders– OSU students, nightlife revelers, empty nesters in GV, etc.
I say we put money into public transit that the public will actually use.
I’m all for enhancing the transit-riding experience, including with visible changes to vehicles and stations, but I don’t agree that this can’t be done with buses. A “suite of services” could include better bus options, not just rail. I would refer you to Part B of this paper:
http://www.trb.org/news/blurb_detail.asp?ID=2572
The report identified five main sources of increased ridership:
• Service adjustments;
• Fare and pricing adaptations;
• Market and information initiatives;
• Planning orientation (community- and customer-based approaches); and
• Service coordination, consolidation, and market segmentation.
For example, Metro-Dade Transit Agency in Miami experienced a 9.6% increase in ridership between 1991 and 1993. This was attributed to increasing “customer service orientation” (walkways, shelters, safer pedestrian access, new benches, etc.) and use of mini-buses to provide more “cost effective and comfortable service,” as well as limited stop services, special events to attract first-time riders, and improved bus-rail transfers and rail feeders.”
I would also note that the CBRT document (see page 208 of 301) shows over a dozen cities where ridership has increased by improving bus services, sometimes with just minor improvement to bus speeds.
I’m not trying to argue against the streetcar. I just don’t think transportation is the best reason for building it. I consider it a development tool that happens to have some transportation benefits.
Street cars aren’t gonna have stations are they? Doubtful. Just stops….just like a bus.
This is from the unofficial website:
I would think there would be stops and also major stations. This might be one of the reasons our price point is higher than some people expected.
Street cars aren’t gonna have stations are they? Doubtful. Just stops….just like a bus.
This is from the unofficial website:
I would think there would be stops and also major stations. This might be one of the reasons our price point is higher than some people expected.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume that the use “station” here means STOP. Since this thing is being run at grade-level and in mixed traffic, there really isn’t anywhere to put a station, at least IMHO.
I’m gonna go out on a limb and assume that the use “station” here means STOP. Since this thing is being run at grade-level and in mixed traffic, there really isn’t anywhere to put a station, at least IMHO.
You might be right, but I’m thinking if this is run anything like other rail systems I’ve been on you first buy your ticket at a large STOP and then ride. This takes the lost time element out of paying when it rolls up. I kind of invision it working like that, but at this point I doubt this has been decided. I do think having a larger station that included a resteraunt/retail could be pretty nice and convienient.