Categories
News Politics Transportation

Potential ballot proposal a serious roadblock to Cincinnati’s future

Advocates for job growth, economic development, alternative transportation and Cincinnati’s future have stepped up to the plate once again. What seemed like a grand-slam finish to beginning the first steps to rail transit in the city is now contested and seemingly up for debate. Again.

Despite clear indication from the voters, the city, and (at one time) the state and federal level that the Cincinnati Streetcar project was a positive contribution to changing Cincinnati for the better, there are those who would rewrite the rule books. The first vote was not enough. It is time for another.

A small but persistent group is at it again, collecting signatures to put yet another proposal on the ballot for the fall election.

This petition, however, would prevent ANY rail transportation systems to be funded or built until 2020. A ten-year ban would force Cincinnati to miss out on an entire generation of building infrastructure, in a time when gas prices are certainly not getting any cheaper, and Cincinnatians will be desperate for options to get around.

“Nothing even remotely like this has ever been proposed in any American city. In a era of rising energy prices, Cincinnati would be handcuffing its flexibility to develop alternative means of getting citizens to work and doing the everyday things of life,” says local transit authority and activist John Schneider. “And since regional rail lines wouldn’t be able to connect within the city limits, this has serious regional implications too.”

Cincinnatians for Progress has broken down the exact language of the ballot proposal, to demonstrate how much is at stake:

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–
What it says:
: “The City shall not spend or appropriate any money on the design, engineering, construction or operation of a Streetcar System, or any portion thereof.”
What it means: This phrase prevents the city from spending any money on anything related to preparing any kind of passenger rail transit in Cincinnati.

What it says: “Further, the City shall not incur any indebtedness or contractual obligations for the purpose of financing, designing, engineering, construction or operating of a Streetcar System, or any portion thereof.”
What it means: This language would make it impossible to accept federal grants, to issue bonds, to enter into public-private partnerships for passenger rail. Even private investment in a rail system in the city limits would be illegal.

What it says: “This Amendment applies from the date it is certified to the Charter, and will continue in effect until December 31, 2020.”
What it means: The arbitrary 10-year ban on preparation is designed to force new transit planning to start from square one in 2021. Because permanent infrastructure requires many years to develop, this language would guarantee Cincinnati sees no rail-based transit for a generation.

What it says: “For purposes of this Amendment, the term ‘Streetcar System’ means a system of passenger vehicles operated on rails constructed primarily in existing public rights of way …”
What it means: The term “streetcar system” in this amendment would ban all rail that runs in on Cincinnati streets or rights-of-way. That would prevent commuter rail and streetcars alike; even restoring the city’s historic inclines would be outlawed.

What it says: “…The term ‘City’ includes without limitation the City, the Manager, the Mayor, the Council, and the City’s various boards, commissions, agencies and departments …”
What it means: Under this language, even Cincinnati’s Metro system could not consider taking advantage of future national and regional funding programs.

What it says: “…The term ‘money’ means any money from any source whatsoever….”
What it means: This language would not only lock out local, state and federal funds, but make it illegal for corporations, non-profits and individuals to pay for rail-based transit.

———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————-

Says CFP co-chair Mark Schmidt: “[The ballot proposal is] the laziest piece of legislation ever written and an insult to the people of Cincinnati… especially those public servants who play by the rules and commit themselves to the slow and steady process of making this a more perfect union through the hard work of collaboration and compromise.”

The deadline to file a ballot with enough signatures is August 10th. If the measure succeeds, there is a tough road ahead to ensure that this debilitating piece of legislation does not get past.

Readers, please don’t give up. Not everyone supports the streetcar plan in its current form- this is not about the streetcar. We are tired and frustrated at the ways the realities of the situation have unfolded. It’s not fair. It’s not right.

It’s not over.

If you’ve been waiting to get involved, to help out with a cause you believe in, Cincinnatians for Progress could use your support. Sign up to volunteer, donate (time or money) to ensure our great city a chance at the future.

At the very least, continue to educate yourself and help inform others. We will see a day in Cincinnati where the economy is improved, jobs have been created, tax and population base in the city is up, and citizens are not chained to their cars in order to get where they need to go.

Comatose comic by Nick Sweeney.

Categories
Development News Opinion Politics Transportation

Replacement of Cincinnati’s infamous Brent Spence Bridge gets political

Since the late 1990s, most government agencies have posted their reports and meeting minutes online. But more than a decade into the Internet era, it is clear that most citizens never familiarize themselves with the materials on these websites. This unfortunate situation has allowed politicians and corporations to continue constructing and perpetuating narratives with no factual basis.

An example of our present dilemma is the conversation – or rather lack thereof – surrounding the Brent Spence Bridge Replacement/Rehabilitation Project, the Cincinnati area’s largest public works project in a generation. After years of inattention by the local media, the $3-plus billion project recently returned to the news after 42 year-old Westwood resident Abdoulaye Yattara, a native of Mali, West Africa, was killed in a fall from the bridge on June 24.


One alternative for an auxillary Brent Spence Bridge.

A flurry of talk radio folderol filled area airwaves during the weekend following the accident. The feature common to all of these conversations was that the public, and even most media figures, were unaware that planning has been underway for the Replacement/Rehabilitation project since 2002, an official website with project plans has been online since around 2005, and that most major decisions concerning the bridge’s design have already been made.

The failure of the local media to inform the public reached new lows on July 6, when the Cincinnati Enquirer’s “Bridging the gap of safety and need” cover story insinuated [PDF] that the existing Brent Spence Bridge will be demolished and replaced when in fact the decision to rehabilitate it after a new bridge is built next to it was made in 2006.

But this omission was not a fluke – on Bill Cunningham’s July 8 radio show, Cincinnati City Councilman Wayne Lippert was asked what the future held for the existing Brent Spence Bridge. The particular way he dodged the question functioned much like the Enquirer’s July 6 report – casual listeners were left to believe that the existing bridge will be replaced.

Politicization of the Bridge Project
Taking advantage of what the public doesn’t know and what the media fails to report, elected officials with no direct involvement with the project, especially Republicans with Tea Party leanings such as Councilman Lippert, have positioned themselves as common sense watchdogs. In a stunning contradiction of Tea Party principals, they have accused “government” of delaying taxpayer spending on a bridge project about which even the most basic details are unknown by the public.

Our local media, rather than working to debunk myths regarding the bridge project, is working in tandem with politicians to advance them. On July 8 the Cincinnati Enquirer ran yet another pro-bridge editorial that cut-and-pasted often-heard bridge talking points. Most absurd is the perpetuation of the idea that the Brent Spence Bridge occupies a special place in the national transportation network, and as such, the Replacement/Rehabilitation Project should be directly funded by the Federal Government.


Cincinnati’s infamous Brent Spence Bridge

The sober fact is that the Brent Spence Bridge, like most urban interstate bridges, primarily serves local commuters and delivery trucks. For fifteen years after its construction it was the region’s only interstate highway crossing. But between 1977 and 1979, three other interstate highway bridges opened nearby, providing numerous alternative routes through the Cincinnati area for long-distance travelers. Mid-1980s modifications to the bridge and the early 1990s reconstruction of the bridge’s hillside approach in Covington were responses to increased commuting from new Northern Kentucky suburbs, not an increase in long-distance travel.

Emergency Shoulders
The circumstances of the death of Mr. Yatarra were caused by the bridge’s lack of emergency shoulders. Certainly, such shoulders are an asset, but according to this article, 12% of deaths on America’s Interstate Highway System occur on emergency shoulders. Full paved shoulders are extremely expensive to build and maintain, which is why they were a rarity in Cincinnati and elsewhere before passage of the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956.

Many of our nation’s famous bridges and tunnels built before its enactment still lack emergency shoulders. Some built since, such as our Brent Spence and I-471 Daniel Carter Beard Bridges have had their emergency shoulders restriped as travel lanes. With the simple act of painting dashed lines instead of a solid white stripe, each of these bridges were automatically classified as “functionally obsolete”. The insinuations of this term have been endlessly exploited by the highway lobby and the politicians they fund.

A desire for failure?
When planning for a new bridge began, the public was led to believe that the end product would unsnarl traffic, become a new symbol for the region, and be free to travel across. Ten years on, it is apparent that the project will likely be none of those things.

What is astonishing is that the same politicians and media figures who have relentlessly attacked Cincinnati’s modern streetcar project by refusing to engage facts are the same ones inventing and perpetuating myths in support of the Brent Spence Bridge Rehabilitation/Reconstruction Project.

Whereas they commonly claim the streetcar project “needs further study”, the Brent Spence Bridge apparently needs less. Whereas the streetcar will be subject to a second ballot issue this fall, they argue that the Brent Spence should receive a Federal award covering its entire cost and construction should be underway by this time next year.

Why have Lippert and other area officials, most of whom have no direct say in the bridge project’s affairs, suddenly concocted a round of free press? The answer, it appears, is that next year when the final bridge design is announced, these same characters will exploit the public’s disappointment in their broad anti-government narrative. The retention of the existing Brent Spence, the ho-hum design of the new bridge, and the specter of tolls will be blamed on a soup of high union wages, the national debt, social welfare programs, ObamaCare, and other government “spending”.

Categories
Business Development News Opinion

Oakley gets development fit for the suburbs with new Millworks plan

The abandoned Millworks site in Oakley has inspired urban enthusiasts for almost a decade. The thoughts of injecting new life into an former industrial space in the heart of some of the city’s most vibrant neighborhoods was truly something to get excited about.

The vision first laid out in the early part of the new millenium included hundreds of residential units, a movie theater, hotel, offices and what was to become the second location Jungle Jim’s. The best part about all of it is that the Millworks redevelopment would have done so while also maintaining the gritty industrial past of the site. As details finally emerge today of a new Millworks redevelopment, the reality is looking much different.

Today the plan calls for a $120 million development (less than half of the originally proposed $300 million plan in 2005) that will include 350,000 square feet of retail, 250,000 square feet of offices, 300 apartments and a 55,000 square-foot movie theater. While much of the development’s original components are still there, the plan has taken a decidedly suburban turn not unlike what happened at the Center of Cincinnati just around the corner.


Proposed Millworks redevelopment in 2005 [LEFT] compared to current Oakley Station site plan [RIGHT].

Gone is the idea of preserving the site’s industrial aesthetic. Gone is the idea of creating a unique urban infill project. Gone is Jungle Jim’s. And most importantly, gone is the true long-lasting investment in Oakley.

With the signing of Cinemark NextGen, the development seems to now be more real than ever. Work has already begun on removing asbestos from buildings on the 74-acre site so that demolition can follow for more than one million square feet of former industrial buildings that used to house Cincinnati Milacron, Ceco Environmental, Factory Power Company and Unova Industrial Automation. Worse yet, the city of Cincinnati is working to get project developers $3 million in Clean Ohio Revitalization funds and an additional $9.9 million in tax increment financing to pay for infrastructure work surrounding the project.

The controversial Center of Cincinnati development turned on a dime from an exciting urban infill project meant to inject new office, retail and residential space into the area just north of the Millworks site, into a cookie-cutter suburban big-box development.

At the time Vandercar, the same developers behind the Millworks redevelopment, said that market forces would no longer allow them to do such a project and charged Mayor Luken’s administration to rid the city of its Planning Department that had made an issue of the development’s dramatic, last-minute change. Vandercar won that battle and then city manager Valerie Lemmie decided to move forward and infamously shutter Cincinnati’s Planning Department.

The victory was only short-lived for Vandercar, however. The developer was part of a team that was promptly eliminated from contention to build The Banks, and Mayor Mark Mallory and City Manager Milton Dohoney have since restored Cincinnati’s planning dignity. So while much has changed, it appears as though the outcome may be the same for Oakley.

Oakley is the geographic population center for the 2.1 million person Cincinnati region, and is located along I-71, near the Norwood Lateral, and potential future light rail corridors. Each metropolitan region tends to have several dense commercial centers. Cincinnati currently has Downtown, Uptown and Kenwood, and the greater Oakely area should be the fourth.

Instead of championing “pro-growth” policies at all costs, Cincinnati’s leaders should act with long-term interests in mind and get the best end product for its people. Unfortunately, the status quo appears to be more in line with appeasing developers, like Vandercar, that go after low-hanging fruit, rather than demanding that investments in Cincinnati get the best return.

Categories
News Politics Transportation

Special hearing geared to test supporters of Cincinnati’s streetcar plan

Three Republican members of Cincinnati City Council have requested a special meeting to review the Cincinnati Streetcar project, in order to get further clarification from city administrators about the project in its revised form.

Council members Charlie Winburn, Wayne Lippert and Amy Murray have requested the meeting. Despite previous opposition to the original plan, the council members now want clarification on the new route that will not initially connect Downtown and Uptown.

Lippert admitted that the original plan had great economic implications, and is now voicing concerns about the reduced route. This new view contradicts other Republican members of Council who expressed their doubts about the original plan’s economic impact.

At a press conference last week, Mayor Mallory emphasized that the revised version of the streetcar route is a phased implementation, with the line reverting back to its original state once there is more funding in place. The governor’s office pulled all state funding for the project, and even this week the federal government passed over Ohio when reallocating two billion dollars from another high speed rail project. This move was presumably due to Kasich returning money for the 3C Corridor project at the beginning of 2011.

The meeting will be held at 6pm in Council Chambers at City Hall (map). There will be an open comment period, and any available streetcar supporters are strongly encouraged to come early, fill out a comment card, and give a short, prepared statement explaining why they are in favor of the project.

Streetcar supporters march in the 2010 Bockfest Parade. Photo by Sherman Cahal.

Categories
Development News Politics Transportation

Cincinnati to break ground on smaller streetcar starter route this fall

Today Cincinnati Mayor Mark Mallory and City Manager Milton Dohoney announced that the city will push forward with its modern streetcar project even with recent setbacks. The announcement included the debut of a new shortened phase one routing that will run from Fifth Street in the Central Business District to Henry Street in Over-the-Rhine just north of Findlay Market.

The 3.1-mile route will cost $95 million to build and $2.5 million annually to operate. City leaders currently have a total of $99.5 million to build the line, and have conservatively identified $4.1 million to operate the line annually. City leaders say that this will mean no money will be needed from the City’s General Fund for operations.

While some supporters have expressed discontent over the shortened Cincinnati Streetcar route, Mayor Mallory emphasized that the long-term vision has not changed.

“The vision for the project remains the same. We are going to build a streetcar that connected Downtown to Uptown, and then we are going to build out into the neighborhoods,” explained Mallory. “We are going to get started with the funding that we have in hand, but we must move forward in order to attract jobs and residents to our region.”

Project officials say that the shortened line will operate 18 hours a day, seven days a week and will utilize five streetcars instead of the original seven planned for the longer route. The shortened route, city leaders say, was chosen based on its unique ability to maximize economic investment.

“Over-the-Rhine and portions of the downtown area have some 500 vacant buildings, and it is where you have the bulk of the 95 acres of what today is surface parking,” City Manager Dohoney told the audience. “The explosiveness of the development potential rests in the area that we’re covering.”

City officials also announced that they are exploring the idea of running the streetcars on battery power instead of electricity. This technology is currently being examined for Washington D.C.’s modern streetcar system where concerns have come up over the use of overhead electric wires. Cincinnati officials believe that such a move would also reduce costs upfront and long-term.

The city says that it expects to break ground on the modern streetcar system this fall, and will simultaneously work to raise additional funds to build the system’s extension to uptown, and reconnect with The Banks to the south which in and of itself costs an additional $9 million.

“Clearly there is a need to expand the tax base. No one wants to pay more taxes, so we must find a proactive step to take to expand the existing tax base,” City Manager Dohoney explained. “A streetcar is one such tool to do that. There are people that have issues with this project, and there are folks that are responsible for moving this city forward. We are unapologetic advocates.”