Cincinnati Photo of the Day
Lost on the #33 bus
Originally uploaded by dynamist.
I have a question for the streetcar evangelists: Why aren’t you campaigning for comparatively inexpensive improvements to the city’s bus system? Some basics that are missing and sorely needed:
- Signs at stops, to let you know that a) it’s a stop and b) what stop it is
- Schedules at stops
- Route details at stops
Some kind of coherent, regular announcement of where the bus is - on a display screen or out loud - would also be incredibly helpful.
Unless you already know Cincinnati well, the Metro system is pretty user-hostile. For a city that supposedly wants to make newcomers feel right at home, you wouldn’t know it for the lack of thought put into the otherwise splendid bus services.
(I jumped on the 33 bus instead of the 32, ended up in Western Hills when I just needed to go to Price Hill. An hour and a half - and one transfer - later, I was at my intended destination.)
Filed under: Life
NB I ended up all the way in Western Hills because the bus driver told me, after I asked him if we’d gone past Grand Avenue (we just had), to stay on. In his words, “It’s too far to walk now. We’ll be back at Grand Avenue in ten to fifteen minutes.” I have no idea why he told me that; nor did the driver of the number 10 bus I hopped onto 30 minutes later, who eventually brought me to my destination. “He’s kinda new,” was the only explanation offered.
Well, as a former urban planner (I repented and saw the light - new profession now, btw), the deal is that cities put money into streetcars for the very same reasons they get boners over publicly subsidized sports arenas and convention centers. This can be best summarized as in politico propaganda as “a tool to spur private development and increase property values along the streetcar lines as well as add to economic vitality and residential density.” They have little to do with the cost effective and efficiency equation of moving people. Although cities often “package” the justification of building them as such, which is total B.S.
If you look at the history of streetcars in the U.S. They have always been about increasing real estate values for the wealthy and middle class. Thus the famous early streetcar suburbs (such as the one I am from: Cleveland Heights, O-H-I-O).
Of course out here in Portland, Oregon we have a streetcar now, and yes the overall assessment that along the lines property values have increased dramatically.
But from a policy perspective that is due to a whole bunch of other reasons, not because of one magic (and very expensive streetcar line).
Not sure what is behind the whole Streetcar justification and planning reasons in your city, but you are certainly right to question the cost benefit. Many cities (like Detroit) have invested massive amounts of public money in small dinky “people movers” ( Detroit’s infamously failed skytrain that circles the deserted area around their convention center) that do nothing to serve local residents, spur development in blighted areas, or create living wage job impact and business growth.
Although from an aesthetic perspective I like Portland’s streetcar. It’s cute, and clean, and I ride it all the time downtown. It is however kind of slow and yes, sigh, it was a very expensive project paid for by taxpayers and private business fees.
Lizzie, thank you for that insight. We are certainly being sold hard on how Portland’s streetcar has totally revitalized the city. Interesting to hear your side, especially as a former urban planner.
I was at a Young Republican meeting a few weeks ago and the speaker (Peter Bronson) was making fun of the streetcar idea, and suggesting buses made more sense, etc. There was a VERY indignant young woman who kept getting agitated and who finally said “bbbb…. but no one takes THE BUS.” She was this urban hipster wanna be. So pathetic. Why she was at our meeting, I have no idea (actually I think her Dad is running for something). I wanted to yell at her “What makes you think the streetcar scene is going to be so much better than a bus?” I mean, like they’re going to be Starbucks on Ropes or something. No they’re not, it’s still going to be public freaking transportation.
When people like that say “No one takes the bus,” what they mean is, “People like me don’t take the bus. Poor, black people take the bus.” I’ve had this conversation so many times with people who claim to be tolerant, inclusive, not racist, etc. They refuse to take the bus with “those people.” I mean, if “no one takes the bus,” how come there were about ten people standing on the 33 I was riding yesterday?
I don’t know why the bigots think they deserve their own form of public transportation, but I’m sure they’ll grow tired of it as soon as “those people” start riding it, too.
“Unless you already know Cincinnati well, the Metro system is pretty user-hostile. For a city that supposedly wants to make newcomers feel right at home, you wouldn’t know it for the lack of thought put into the otherwise splendid bus services.”
Completely agree with you. I’ve been pretty frustrated with trying to navigate it. And that is really too bad. I hate all the vehicles on the highways, one person to a car (make that an SUV).
God, Jackie, I should come to your next Cincinnati Salon and give a presentation on Portland’s streetcar - both the positives and the negatives of it. I worked for the City for over 7 years in the agency that helped fund the streetcar and I actually did quite a bit of the post-development analysis along the line. Portland’s streetcar does work. That is, it set out to do exactly what they planned for it to do: Boost development and property values along the lines and bring more pedestrians and residents into pedestrian oriented retail and residential planned districts.
But it is only one teeny-tiny portion of the “Portland Urban Planning Wunderkind” myth that is rampant in planning circles around the U.S. I think there is a tendency to block this reality out in other cities who want to get the results of our city, but do not take into account all the other things that go along with it (and the negative tradeoffs as well such as inflated housing costs and gentrification). Oregon has strong state urban sprawl laws and 20 years of strong planning and urban development funding in the downtown and central city area, thus creating more density in the urban core. It already has a strong regional public transportation system, strong pedestrian oriented residential and retail districts in and near downtown, and does not have the large amount of inner city blight and associated problems that cities like Cincinnati have had festering since the 1960s. (and before you Cincinnati pride folks get all up in arms - I love your city. I do. Plus I’m from Ohio, but that’s the reality of Ohio and many other US cities). In addition Oregon, and Portland in particular, iare experiencing a large influx of college educated (read middle class) residents while most mid-western cities are losing jobs and population. No streetcar in the world is going to address Cincinnati’s issues without all the other planning (especially on the state and regional levels) that go along with it.
In addition, what people might be forgetting (but that you so clearly pointed out) are the costs of the streetcar and the trade offs involved in funding priorities. The streetcar is not cheap. It doesn’t move many people (nor was it ever really designed to) in a way that will address urban gridlock and car dependency. Should your city focus on basic services or investment into small but expensive unfounded economic and development tools? We have that eternal question in Portland as well.
Lizzie, I wish you could come here and speak to the salon! I’d love that.
So many people say “But *I* don’t take the bus.” I wish I could take the bus! There is a bus that goes in the general area of my office in Mason (I live downtown), but there are a couple of problems:
1. Really inconvenient bus schedule. I would end up getting to work at around 7:45, and I wouldn’t end up getting home until at least 7. There are only two or three buses in the morning or the afternoon.
2. Really unsafe stops. My bus stop in the morning is fine– a couple of blocks away from my place, well-marked (for the Metro), etc. The stop in Mason? On Mason-Montgomery Road, no good markings, no crosswalk, four lanes of traffic– you get the idea. It’s unsafe.
So I carpool.
I’ve had those same questions for years. I worked in the PNC Bank building at 4th & Vine for a couple years in high school and I never understood why the schedules weren’t posted near stops. It would only make sense. The ‘express’ bus left at 4:55, not 5:05 or 5:10, so if I wanted the (crowded, but) fast ride home, I had to duck out of work 10 minutes early. And really, how much technology would be required for a bus (driver or automated system) announce the approaching stops. Sadly, I don’t think there are many transit systems in the world that truly offer the virgin passenger much of any guidance. (Maybe in London… I could ask a Tube employee how to get anywhere and they were always helpful… If I only knew which side of the station to get on the train!)
Maybe if the transit systems were privately owned and funded they would be more equipped to make improvements. As romantic as “Streetcars” sound, we really don’t need another government funded bureaucracy. By the way, Newport on the Levee has done just fine with their riverfront using a simple bus system and privately owned Taxis.
Jackie, I’m not sure if you are aware, but that sign is hanging on the side of the Blue Note at West 8th and Overlook in Price Hill. I think it’s the only bar in Price Hill with a “college night.”
I second that idea, Lizzie. It would be great if you came and spoke.
I once rode the bus everyday, however very few of us continue to do so once we have a car available. Buses are not competitive with cars. However, people with cars available will sometimes take rail. I really don’t think it has anything to do with race as the above comments suggest, but has more to do with the quality of the service and the ease of understanding the schedules.
Hmmm, not sure when I’ll be in Ohio next, but if it’s in the next few months, lets talk. No reason I can’t take a detour from Cleveland to come to one of your salons…I’d be honored to actually.
Julie, those two issues are the sort of thing a private bus company would never allow to become a deterrent to people taking the bus. But the Metro has no competition, is so heavily subsidized that it’s not as if what customers want really comes into play.
We talked at the Cincinnati Salon in March about this, and I really wish the city would allow a private bus company to compete with it. Let them take the risk of trying out different routes and schedules, and making the system easier to navigate. The government has no business being involved in transportation like this.
Mike: Yes, that’s why I’m wondering why the streetcar evangelists are so loud about that and not improvements to the bus system.
John: Yep, I saw the Blue Note sign in front - must check it out sometime!
Lizzie, that’s great! We’ll email.
Buses can rarely compete with cars riders. The Bust Rapid Transit (BRT) in Bogata is one that apparently does. The CRT has stops that are similar to train stops with digital readers locating the next bus, pass purchase machines, elevated level entries and some dedicated right-of-way. Even with all these options, the ride is still less comfortable than a car or train.
Mike, I just spent many years living in a city where buses compete extremely well with cars. But they’ve also bothered to make sure riders can find out basic information - such as where the freaking stops are - rather easily.
As a streetcar “evangelist” (absolutely hate the religious connotation, but what better way to label pro-public transit folks as extremists) I concur with Lizzy, as a whole it is an inefficient people mover. However, it is a great way to concentrate investment in an area that was devastated by federal transportation policy over the past 50 years.
Streetcars cannot compete with cars in cost benefit due to the massive infrastructure built (and rebult and rebuilt again) for them. However, if we ever decide to move away from this type of infrastructure subsidy, we better have a strong inner-city as the suburban car culture is economically unsustainable without it. We need to find a way to invest in our urban cores, which already have the amenities we need instead of constantly paying to increase sprawl.
Sean, in my industry (tech/web), “evangelist” is a pretty common term - heck, it’s even found in many job titles. It’s not a derogatory phrase, and I often describe myself in professional terms as a social media evangelist. So…no ulterior motives on my part.
Sean F: “However, it is a great way to concentrate investment in an area that was devastated by federal transportation policy over the past 50 years.”
A streetcar CAN be, but is not always. My points were that Portland’s success with the streetcar and the development around it, has to do with much, much more than the streetcar itself, and this point keeps getting lost in many of the messages I hear about the Cincinnati streetcar where some like to use Portland’s streetcar as a “successful” example that is in direct relation to Cincinnati. Specifically, the main differences are that Portland’s development was already in bloom in the downtown and subsequent areas along the street car line long before the streetcar itself was even thought of. This is due 30 years of urban renewal and other investment (such as comprehensive public transportation investment for the region including 2 lightrail lines that run through three counties.) investment and intense planning in the State, the metro region and the City and a continuing influx of higher level wage earners into the central city which caused massive gentrification and development to occur years ago, not after the streetcar was built. This is why it should be very very carefully thought out and argued about in Cincinnati - there will be little benefit to your city overall without these other things both in the short and long term. My other point was that people in Cincinnati need to be very careful about buying into something and expecting it to cure everything or even anything in your central city. Portland didn’t save its inner city overnight, and it certainly had much much less to do with the streetcar than I’ve recently read in the Cincinnati daily newspaper. (Seriously I almost spit up my coffee when I read that article that all but made the Portland streetcar sound like it saved our downtown! Give me a break).
My points to Jackie were the same as yours regarding the transportation benefit. The problem is that many cities are not clearly getting their message across about the benefits and barriers to streetcar development and instead are billing them as a singular magic panacea to both spur private investment in small geographic areas that need a whole bunch more help and incentive for private investment and residential growth than a little choo-choo train. I’ve also heard the justification over and over again that they will assist with large scale transportation issues in Cincinatti, and this is simply not true.
My main point was that cities like Cincinnati need to address other issues as well (such as larger transportation issues in the region, comprehensive growth planning in the larger metropolitan area, lack of basic city services and amenities such as quality public schools, and etc.) and overall density growth in the city to meet goals they think a streetcar might meet. I think streetcars can be a terrific enhancement in the public and private development tool toolbox, but should not be the main attempt at catalytic development for an area or city. Thus the streetcar has been an enhancement to already successful development shift in the City of Portland, but not because of the streetcar. Cincinnati needs to understand this, otherwise the streetcar there really runs the strong risk of being a very expensive train to nowhere.
Oh and I agree with you that, “We need to find a way to invest in our urban cores, which already have the amenities we need instead of constantly paying to increase sprawl”
Starting with a strong public transportation system that benefits and makes it easier for a large segment of the population to not use their cars (such as a strong bus system) might be a logical choice in this equation.
I am a “streetcar evangelist” and while I yearn for rail alternatives in this city…I also yearn for the improvement of our bus system. I personally think that those concrete bus pads (at bus stops) should have been equipped with sensors (similar to those at traffic lights that signal them to change). That would have then enabled a sort of tracking system that could have been linked to a real-time arrival type network. This could be combined with solar-powered kiosks at main bus stops indicating the real-time arrival of the next bus. Maps and better signage would also be key.
What I don’t understand is why “streetcar evangelists” are often then generalized as being opposed to the bus system. I take the bus all the time, but I still understand the effect of a streetcar system.
While Lizzy Caston consistently reminds everyone of her Urban Planner past, I’d like to point out that the fact of her being a Planner before doesn’t necessarily make her an expert on the topic. I am an acting Urban Planner and support the project with every bone in my body. I also know many Urban Planners not only in Cincinnati, but also Atlanta (where I’m currently working). Atlanta is also working on their own streetcar line along Peachtree.
While many like to criticize streetcars as being government waste…I’d like to contend otherwise. I respect your educated opinions to think otherwise…I just simply would like you to respect the educated opinions of those who think differently from you on the topic. Cheers.
Randy, why do you take disagreement as disrespect? And who is generalizing streetcar evangelists as anti-bus? Maybe you’re reading a different blog than this one…
(Also, just out of interest: I thought you were an urban planning student at UC, Randy. Did I get that wrong?)
Lizzy Caston is someone with years of urban planning experience who is also a Portland resident and very familiar with how that project has worked. I would expect her views to be accorded the same level of credibility - if not more - as those who visit Portland and come back to Cincinnati bearing The Good News.
The problem is that I am consistently seeing Portland held up as applicable comparison and model to Cincinnati’s streetcar in both the quantitative investment and ROI analysis and in the socio-economic model of how much the streetcar will cost and the tertiary development, economic, transportation, and “livability” benefits it will generate. This is coming directly from the streetcar group itself who are basing their proposal and costs on Portland’s model that may or may not be applicable to your city.
There are major problems with this comparison that are not being discussed. This thus makes the Cincinnati vulnerable to not being able to meet financial obligations and overall development and other planning goals with this streetcar. It is only fair to vested stakeholders, such as the citizens who will be paying for the streetcar through public money, the public decision makers allocating funds, and those residents that already live and have businesses in that community to have a full picture of the actual benefits and ongoing costs of Portland streetcar, the trade-offs and risks, and in which ways it has meet goals and where it is and is not working well, and why.
It is absolutely crucial for Cincinnati to understand both the baseline of economics of Portland within the past 30 years and current ongoing trends that have allowed our streetcar to A) be built and B) continue to work and C) areas along the streetcar line in Portland that are not performing as well as assumed and are requiring additional public subsidies (such as the South Waterfront area in Portland where the streetcar is located that is NOT experiencing the kind of growth and development as projected and where the city is now being asked to provide an additional funds to subsidize transportation and development in the tens-of-millions of dollars for the district due to initial projections being off, a stagnant condo market, lack of employment center growth, and rising steel and construction costs). This is extremely relevant to decision makers in Cincinnati who may run up against the same issues, especially if the whole model is being based on Portland in the first place. The streetcar has been an enhancement to 30 years worth of massive public investment and planning in the downtown Portland area and already successful ROI through 20+ years of Tax Increment Financing, existing private investment, the Metro Urban Growth boundary, strong transportation planning throughout the region (including strong multi-model transportation systems such as our Tri-met bus system and MAX lightrail), and larger economic forces. This is the missing information that is not being discussed in the Portland-Cincinnati comparison.
Once again, my points are not IF the streetcar is a good thing, but given the risks and costs, if it will meet Cincinnati’s goals without these other factors that Portland has had, and the potential risks to your city if they do not.
Secondly, I worked as the GIS Coordinator, then the Coordinator of Research and Data Services, then as a Senior Project Coordinator for the urban renewal agency (PDC) that helps fund the streetcar and the urban renewal districts it runs through from 1999-2006. My work included analysis in at least a dozen reports, including the majority of Geographic Informations Systems data and findings that track of all development and property values, as well as public investment along the streetcar lines and within the Urban Renewal areas where the lines are located. Projects I have worked on have been presented to the Portland Planning Commission, Portland City Council, the Portland Department of Transportation, and the Portland Development Commission, to name a few. In addition, I have worked on several specific real estate development projects in the downtown “streetcar analysis zone” on both the planning and financial side in public property acquisitions, feasibility studies, and subsequent public RFPs for developers. Since 2001, and continuing after I left in 2006, my staff works yearly to produce information that tracks public investment along the lines and withing the streetcar analysis zones in order to look at the overall ongoing costs and results of the the public investment our agency made in these geographic areas. But hey, those are just details.
Yet, outside of this, it brings me back to my main question and the one I will once again repeat: Portland is a great model for downtown revitalization, certainly. But is Portland’s streetcar model applicable to Cincinnati?
It is true that both sides of the streetcar debate look to Portland too often to justify or demonize the issue. Portland is the only American city that has any sort of history with modern streetcar use (Tacoma and Seattle, although successful, haven’t been up long enough to analyze results), so it has been used as the prerequisite case study.
Cincinnati is different than Portland, and although we should certainly keep in mind the thing that allowed Portland to revitalize, we have to pay attention to our own political realities. Just recently, Cincinnati’s bus system finally was able to raise their rate from $1 to $1.50, and people were up in arms. Maybe with this money, the bus system can start catching up to others in the area and country. Also, Cincinnati’s LRT and expanded bus system proposal was defeated by a 2 to 1 margin in the county (although it did win in the city) in 2002. The idea in Cincinnati is to introduce rail transit where we can (and right now that is only with streetcar), and try to change the minds of people who think it is an outdated mode of transportation. Viva la multimodal!