Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
*Please do us a favor and try to read through everyone's post. The point or issue may have already been addressed. A lot of us are repeating ourselves over and over.
Thank you!
But, if you are not agreed with, just post the same material and embellish it. That is the modern political way. Speak loud enough and long enough and someone will believe you. Seems to me this post has already outlived its usefulness.
But, if you are not agreed with, just post the same material and embellish it. That is the modern political way. Speak loud enough and long enough and someone will believe you. Seems to me this post has already outlived its usefulness.
No disrespect intended, KJ - I'm not making excuses for Cincy Rise who won't accept yes for an answer - but how does the above contribute to the dialogue?
But, if you are not agreed with, just post the same material and embellish it. That is the modern political way. Speak loud enough and long enough and someone will believe you. Seems to me this post has already outlived its usefulness.
Agreed--tried to give you rep points but the computer wont let me..
Three of every four dollars of PERCEIVED benefit of a rail system come from theoretical development benefit, i.e. the increased value of property around the rail line and increased taxes from the increased value. I am an owner of a little of that property and I don't believe it. Predictions to the contrary are just that. Its just like UC's study that Paul Brown Stadium would revitalize downtown and attract all those young progressives who claim to want these amenities. BS.
And, I don't want to ride on a train anywhere. I don't know anyone who would like to do so. If I was graduating from law school today, I might like to live in the city and take a bus or a downtown shuttle a few blocks from home to an office tower, but that's it. Sitting on a commuter train with hundreds of strangers and dozens of weirdos isn't even on the list of things I'm willing to do at 6pm every day. One of the best reasons to live in Cincinnati is because you don't have to get on a train from work and then get on a bus and then walk 2 blocks to get home. I rode the trolley every day as a youth, the bus every day as an adult and trains in most major cities I've visited. Romance about this all you want, this isn't Bavaria. Trains and indeed all public transportation, are often crowded, too hot (or cold) dirty, smelly, irritating, and in some places dangerous. Cincinnati has plenty of affordable places to live where a commuter will not experience traffic jams, can park at both ends of his trip, and will spend no more than 15 minutes on the whole commute.
Infrastucture moneys are better spent making our neighborhoods cleaner, safer, and more attractive. Not squandering them on expensive toys for politicians and urban planners (who are almost always wrong about these things).
Three of every four dollars of PERCEIVED benefit of a rail system come from theoretical development benefit, i.e. the increased value of property around the rail line and increased taxes from the increased value. I am an owner of a little of that property and I don't believe it. Predictions to the contrary are just that. Its just like UC's study that Paul Brown Stadium would revitalize downtown and attract all those young progressives who claim to want these amenities. BS.
Wilson, please post this study from UC. I haven't seen it.
We touched on this just the other day ... Stadiums are poor ways of spurring economic development. People come, sit in their designated seats and leave.
Younger professionals and middle-aged advocates aren't imagining this ... we've seen it with our own eyes... not that hard to do when one can drive just a couple of hours to experience.
Quote:
And, I don't want to ride on a train anywhere. I don't know anyone who would like to do so.
First of all, you live in Mt. Lookout ... sure, it will eventually make its way to your neck of the woods, but how is this effect your property?
Second, I don't think I have a single peer that thinks this is a bad idea. A couple have questioned it at first, but are now turned on to the idea.
Quote:
I might like to live in the city and take a bus or a downtown shuttle a few blocks from home to an office tower, but that's it. Sitting on a commuter train with hundreds of strangers and dozens of weirdos isn't even on the list of things I'm willing to do at 6pm every day.
Seriously, if this is your best argument - then maybe I am wasting my time. Weirdos are on busses, streetcars, walmarts, etc.
Quote:
Infrastucture moneys are better spent making our neighborhoods cleaner, safer, and more attractive. Not squandering them on expensive toys for politicians and urban planners (who are almost always wrong about these things).
By creating development, you are making the neighborhood safer. It's been posted on here before, but studies show more eyes on the street are a larger crime preventer than police cruisers.
I'll get around to addressing your comments eventually. But in answer to your only real question, here is the link to the stadium study which was pure fraud. Hundreds of articles have criticized this study which was touted at the time in exactly the same manner as the light rail studies.
Bus routes with fancy stops still do not equate to permanent routes. Developers want something permanent.
Bigger investment in routes makes changing routes much less desirable to the city (or transit system owner).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincy-Rise
The express lane is a great idea, except that its pros do not come close to lightrails pros. One is, here we go ... now we go back to adding another lane ... two is a bus is limited to length and size. Cars can be added or taken away from streetcars/lightrail depending on traffic or events.
What's so bad about adding a bus lane? From my understanding, a high end estimate for a highway lane is around $20M dollars/mile. The very lowest estimates for light rail lines come in at around the same. I think that if you're looking for apples-to-apples bang for your buck, an express bus lane is pretty darn good.
To your second point, you can add additional buses to a route just like you can add additional cars to a light rail.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cincy-Rise
And to top things off, we are giving people options ... something that they currently do not have (or are extremely limited to). For instance, I cannot ride the bus to work and back ... I have tried and because of where I work, there are no options for me.
Why not lobby for a bus route near your house then? It would be a lot less expensive than adding a light rail near your house.
I've ridden the current bus system to work before and it sucks. It takes twice as long as driving, and when I get to the stop nearest to my office, there are no sidewalks. I have no confidence that adding a light rail would be any better.
The reason that so many people take public transportation in Chicago and New York is because the parking is prohibitively expensive. Cincinnati doesn't have that problem. Even still, wealthier people tend to take their own vehicles unless their commute on public transit is very short in cities with the best public transit. In general, driving yourself places is better than waiting for a bus, or train, or rocket ship to take you on your daily commute. Public transit cannot take you exactly where you want to go exactly when you want to go there in the same way a personal vehicle can. That's why having your own vehicle is more desirable.
That's not to say that there's not a market for public transit. Mass transit could be cheaper than driving your own vehicle. But, in order for it to be cheaper... it has to be cheaper. So... spending upwards of $50M/mile (or $100M/mile, or $120M/mile, or $179M/mile... who knows?) on construction doesn't help you keep your fare price down much. Thats not even considering the cost of maintaining the rails. My understanding is that light rail systems - rails, cars, electrical facilities, stations, etc - must be replaced, rebuilt or rehabilitated roughly every 30 years, which costs a pretty penny. I've seen estimates that Cincinnati's proposed light rail system could cost $15.50/rider/one-way ride.
On the New York Times Freakonomics blog, Eric Morris (a transportation scholar at UCLA) describes the new Orange Line in Los Angeles as a “providing virtually all the amenities of a rail line at a fraction of the cost.” It's a real option that really should be considered.
I need to do more research, but if the projected benefits of a streetcar or LTR system are theoretical gains in property values, increased taxes, etc. I agree - BS.
One of the most trying times in my life was a business trip to Chicago. The weather was horrible. Decided to forgo my rental car, which was not there due to problems with returns. Decided I would be smart and take the subway downtown, in the middle of the night. About half-way through the trip I was looking for any way to get off the thing. Spotted a stop with a taxi close by. Took a chance, hailed the taxi, and finally got to my hotel.
Like wilson1010, I do not wish to have to ride a train or a bus. Having said that, I will have to comment during my several dozen business trips to Japan I rode the public transport there many times. Why do I think there is a big difference? For one, the Japanese are packed like sardines on the livable land mass (Japan is 70% steep, unbuildable, volcanic mountains). If they did not exhibit at least the basic civilities to each other, they would be killing each other on a daily basis. It is a case of pure survival. They do enjoy the fact they are a vast majority Japanese, the percent of foreigners being quite low. It is certainly not a melting pot.
I, for one, do not believe we can keep paving every square inch of this country ad-infinitum. There have been statements about the cost/mile of highway construction. These are just $$$ statements. How about the cost related to other factors, reduced land mass, etc? Seems to me years ago the original Interstates were originally built out of concrete, and served for quite awhile. Now it appears to be all out of asphalt (takes OIL doesn't it?). Of course concrete must set up and cure, asphalt is an instant fix (if you don't count durability, load bearing properties, etc.). If you don't believe me, just look at the mess on I-75 North of Cincinnati this weekend. Huge delays, closing several lanes of the highway to repair humongous potholes and today stripping and replacing a long section of road as it deteriorated due to the lane expansion in that area. Make you one bet - the sections with the huge potholes are not concrete, and what they are repairing it with it not either.
Expediency, not durability, seems to be the name of the game. Obviously it is a problem to close part of a 5-lane Interstate to let concrete cure. So we will continue to pay for expediency.
Light Rail and Streetcars and Commuter Rail , will help your city grow. Rail increases your property values , and gives a different option of Transport. Rail also is faster then buses , depending on what they are powered by. Starter cities like Cincinnati will probably go for Commuter Diesel Trains which are slow in acceleration , but are the same in top speed in a commuter sense. But if you kept building up a network like Denver , Minneapolis , Charlotte ,and Seattle, eventually they will build an Electric Line , usually on the highest demanded route. Coming form a state where public Transit is at excellent standards in 80% of the state. I can tell you , that Rail is easier to use as a commute, you don't have to worry about getting a speeding ticket. Most Trains are comfortable , some here even have wifi and Cafes on broad. Eventually if High Speed Rail , as the Govt puts it to you makes its way down to Cincinnati, this with help people get around more easily. Those of you who say it won't work are dead wrong , becuz people these days are getting tired of spending money commuting by car in many Urban areas and want a train. Theres no excuse for a city of your size not to have a small LRT /Streetcar network by now. For what i see ,via maps and density charts , your city needs 3 light rail lines and 5 commuter lines , commuter lines can extend outwards form the city center by 60 miles. By 2030 most of the Northeast will have restored Rail service and we will have Light Rail in Streetcars in almost all the Medium-Major Cities form Virgina to Maine. The Question is with you guys have a network the size of ours? And i have faith in you guys over there , that you can get it done, don't let the critics win.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $53,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
