A Quick Thought on Metro

Cincinnati's bus system, Metro, is facing budget cuts. A lot is out there right now about this, but there are threats of route cuts, reductions, layoffs, fare increases, and any number of other awfulnesses which threaten to cripple the already mediocre single public transit option in the city. This, amongst talks of adding a streetcar with, seemingly, the best outcome being gentrification and business development in downtown and Over-the-Rhine.

Laura's Carbon Footprint said it best: Metro is a social justice issue. "Each of us, as part of this society, is intrinsically linked to people that are dependant on the bus, whether we know the individuals or not," she writes, far more eloquent than I could ever hope to be.

Years ago, I read about the Bus Riders' Union in LA and did a pretty extensive research study on them. I'm not going to write about it here -- I do have a 15 page research project, including pictures, if you're that interested -- but I'll share the history from the above linked website:

The BRU/SDP was initiated in 1992 as the Strategy Center's Transportation Policy Group and soon began organizing bus riders in the "Billions for Buses" campaign to confront and defeat the transit racism reflected in the policies of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA). In 1994, the BRU led popular protests against a massive fare hike and obtained a temporary restraining order to stop the MTA in its tracks. The BRU then sued the MTA for violating the civil rights of transit dependent bus riders.

In 1994, the Labor/Community Strategy Center and Bus Riders Union, along with the Korean Immigrant Workers Advocates and Southern Christian Leadership Conference, represented by the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, brought suit against the Los Angeles MTA, charging them with violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act which prohibits government agencies that receive any federal funds from distributing those funds in a racially discriminatory manner. The Strategy Center, BRU, and NAACP LDF charged the MTA with establishing a separate and unequal mass transit system-a dilapidated, overcrowded bus system for 400,000 overwhelmingly Latino, Black, and Asian/Pacific Islander bus riders (at that time, estimated at 81% people of color, but on most of the worst inner-city lines it was essentially 100% people of color).

When the MTA signed the civil rights Consent Decree in late 1996, the BRU took up a formidable obligation-to represent the civil rights of 400,000 daily bus riders in Los Angeles County-88% of whom are, more than 50% of whom have annual family incomes under $12,000 and 57% of whom are women.

Since then, we have written a new chapter in the civil rights and environmental justice movement: a grassroots group wins a well-known civil rights suit, but then has the guts and commitment to enforce its provisions for a decade to build a clean-fuel, world-class mass transportation system in the most air polluted and auto-dominated city in the U.S.

I'm just saying. The similarities could be eerie. And, when we consider the streetcar, perhaps we should look less at the success story of Portland, and look, instead, at the failures of LA.

I've been an exclusive bus rider for a year, and I cannot stomach or live on any less service than they currently provide. And I am not the only one.

Save the environment. Improve your health. Help the city. Ride a bus.

Chris Finney and the CCV?

Thanks to Back2Stonewall.com on this one...

6/20/97 Citizens for Community Values letter to Cincinnati city councilman Phil Heimlich - Free Legal Forms
Scroll down to the bottom and you'll see an interesting name on the list of the Board of Directors...

Chris Finney was a board member of CCV in 1997? Did we know that? I mean, I guess it makes sense, especially if he played the pivotal role in Article XII that we know that he did. Still... sketchy, sketchy, sketchy.

Increasingly, I don't like this guy, but I can't seem to put a finger on why. :-)

On a related note, I'm not a big fan of the Streetcar, but I have to say that I'm not sure I like the company I'm in.

On an unrelated note, my community events calendar needs some unbelievable updating. I have about 10 emails of upcoming events, and I'm not feeling up to it this evening. Apologies to all who have sent me links and events over the last few days. To the UC college students who sent me a link this week about an event on the 22nd -- I cannot find your email! Please please please re-send!!!! Yours was actually the reason I went looking this evening. 

More Streetcar-ness

I'm confused, I thought this was already happening, this streetcar thing? Are we still fighting over the need to build an entertainment-driven fixed bus line (in place of improving current public transit -- oh, did I mention that Cincinnati Metro may soon be getting a GPS system together?)? I thought it was all said and done.

Apparently not.

*yawn* I'm really bored of the debate. It seems everyone wants it to happen, except the people that currently use public transit or who represent people that use public transit, but, you know, so long as you can go round and round on a repeating loop, I'm sure it will be fabulous.

Don't start expanding the roads yet until we get the first tracks laid down.

All in all, I really am a wait and see kinda girl.

PS And before you start screaming at me -- like last time -- let me point this out: I'm semi-informed and still don't know what the hell is going on, outside of random "education sessions" and the occasional council drama.

PPS I don't think I'm so much against it as I am, just go ahead and build the damn thing and stop wasting my time with it -- you know, kind of like the Banks. Just do it. Stop creating plans, and build something. If it works, great; if it doesn't, I'm sure we'll blame it on someone and not a single person will think to say "you know we didn't consider the existing public transit needs in the city," but we as a city have thrown a lot more money at worse projects, so, what is there to lose?

OHIO/CINNKY: Why I don't support the Cincy Streetcar (Part 3 of a Series)

Two quick things before we begin this evening...

1) It is true, Connect Our Dots is a pro-streetcar blog, but some of their criticisms (granted, from 2007) could have come from me. Ta da:

The issue here is that transit funding is hard to come by, especially when citizens don’t want it. If we want the Cincinnati region to get on the transit bandwagon (or railcar, more appropriately) we need to show a big transit success story. Because the Eastern Corridor line runs through so few neighborhoods and would have such low ridership, it would be hard to market as an astounding success. In fact, at such a high cost ($411 million plus $19m per year) it would be an easy target for transit critics of why we shouldn’t do more transit projects.

2) I am a supporter of public transit. I am happy to hear about this.

So let's continue this charade, shall we?

Part I: Why I don't support the streetcar
Section 4: "Busses aren't cool"
One of the lasting lessons from GEO 451 -- arguably the only lesson I took from there -- was my nerdy professor proudly stating that "busses aren't cool." People don't want to ride them. They're dirty, they reek of other people, they are slow, and don't have that "hip" feeling that a train does. It's much cooler to be able to take the tube or the subway and just hop wherever we're going real quick in a sterile environment where we can pretend, even if for a moment, that we're in New York.

LA suffered from this. Tried to take millions of dollars away from the bus system to fund a suburban train system that was barely used. That's when we got the highly effective Bus Riders Union.

Brasilia knew it was a problem before and so they sought to "cool up" the bus system they had there, and we got this:

And, btw, they have a highly successful bus system.

My point is this: we're just trying to build something that feels cool and looks cool so that we can fall further into the "look how big a city we are" mode. Well, sad to say, a lot of major cities in this country do not have a public transit system outside of busses and are doing fine, and at a faster rate than us.

This is not the end-all, be-all of economic development, and just because we're not "cool enough" to say "oh yea, just jump on the streetcar to get there" to tourists, doesn't mean we aren't cool.

Section 5: Traffic Congestion
The streetcar will cause congestion, and I'm gonna bet some parking problems. Just because they are on a set track doesn't mean that they aren't going to be getting in the way of cars.

Drive down Elm Street, where are those cars parked along the street gonna go? The street is packed as it is.

Section 6: Where is the plan for the suburbs?
Even if I grant that the system will cause some transportation benefit to the downtown area... we're a suburban city. There's a lot of people out there. In fact, lets even grant that it increases the population (read: white, middle class population) of the downtown region. How does that help the burbs -- even as close as St. Bernard, Western Hills, Mt. Adams, Avondale... not to say such out there burbs as Fairfield, Hamilton, West Chester, Springdale, Lebanon, etc. etc. etc. In the end, aren't those the people we are trying to attract back to the city??? Well, hell, aren't we trying to attract somebody back downtown... which we've started to do, which I think is admirable.

How many people commute into the city every day? If we desire so much to clear up traffic congestion or encourage people to spend some time (and money) downtown, then don't we want to *ahem* throw a bone out that direction. Their usage, at the moment, would be severely limited by major events (games, fireworks, etc) when the whole system will be filled by the sheer numbers of people trying to use it.

Even the current plans for "spurs" don't account for a lot of the burbs, and certainly not anytime soon. And the idea of "park-and-ride" is not even part of the equation.

Section 7: "It will bring people to shopping and dining downtown"
No, no it won't. I'm sorry, people can't afford the goods downtown, or the restaurants. We should, maybe acknowledge that there is some benefit to, say, Meijer's or Target in the world (or even Walmart -- COUGHCOUGH) because that's where people can get the majority of what they need easily. The current plan seems to acknowledge that development in the city is disjointed and doesn't seem to be responding to any centralized plan (or is reacting to the lack of centralized plan). Thus, we must connect, and connect quickly!!!!

Part II: Suggestions for Improving the Bus System
Section 3: Create greater suburban access
At the moment, there's only a handful of busses that make it out to Butler County, and more (bus still few) that make it to Springdale. For people who use the bus as their primary form of transportation, how do they go shopping? How do they take advantage of other parts of the city -- still rightfully considered "Cincinnati," btw. More importantly, if it is lower class people who use the bus, and there is no industry, per se, downtown, wouldn't it make sense to improve the busses even as far out as, say, outer Kenwood (along Reed Hartman there are very few busses that make it out to Ethicon Endo-Surgeries, for example).

In addition, in order to "bring the region back to Cincinnati," there should be busses that run more regularly to places like Fairfield (Jungle Jim's anyone???), or Hamilton (one, downtown), or Oxford (for the students to come down and party), or Middletown (uh... I don't know anything out there either), or West Chester. And not just centered around the work schedule. Saturdays, Saturdays, Saturdays. The Metro has a plan for you to buy tickets out those directions, but they run few and far between, and I can't imagine -- especially in Clermont or other rural areas -- that they are really, really accessible.

Thus: advertise. Create a bus station. And tell people it's there.

And make the fare cheaper.

Section 4: Integrate TANK and Metro
There, I said it. We are one metro region, even if we don't like to admit it. Of course, I'm also a big fan of regional governance, but that's just me.

Make them one system. TANK has some great things about it. And have a bus that just runs the Newport-on-the-Levee to Govt. Square route (and, once its built, the Banks). Every 15 minutes. On the weekend and in the evenings.

I have nothing else to say about this except that your Metro card won't get you to the airport.

Section 5: Actively seek out corporate bus passes
My employer allows me the opportunity to ride the bus -- FOR FREE -- because our Student Senate approved a contract with Metro that a UC ID will get you on the busses and let you ride around and around and around for free. I'm lucky in that way. Does any other organization in the city offer this?

What would be the effect if, suddenly, Kroger's or P&G or Great American made a similar agreement...? Would you significantly alter your mode of travel if they said "here, this is free."

Metro should actively seek the corporations to do this. They pay one big lump sum (I think, I'm not a financial guy) and their employees can ride for free. Maybe throw in a little advertisement to sweeten the deal. Actually, if current trends and moods toward the busses hold out, my guess is that Metro will get a lot of money and no one will ride. :-)

Part I: Why I don't support the streetcar...
8-23: Section 1: It doesn't serve enough people
8-25: Section 2: It's an "economic development tool"
8-25: Section 3: It's going to take too long
8-26: Section 4: Busses Aren't Cool
8-26: Section 5: Traffic Congestion
8-26: Section 6: Where is the plan for the suburbs?
NEXT: "Well, that was cool..." and we never see you again
NEXT: It's not a long term solution to our transit issues

Part II: Suggested changes to the Metro
8-23: Section 1: Improve intra-neighborhood service
8-25: Section 2: Improve the technology
8-26: Section 3: Create greater suburban access
8-26: Section 4: Integrate TANK and Metro
8-26: Section 5: Actively seek out corporate bus passes
NEXT: More professional bus drivers
NEXT: Increase midday service

OHIO/CINNKY: Why I don't support the Cincy Streetcar (Part 2)

The last one generated a lot of interest and a lot of comments, so maybe I will keep doing this as planned.

Part I: Why I don't support the Streetcar
Section 2: It's an "economic development tool"
I'm actually going to grant this argument. It has been used very effectively in other cities as a great tool of economic development. The plan for the city, though, seems to be "tool for gentrification." As with the tearing down of the West End projects, what happens to all of the residents in these locations? They get pushed out. Great. Where do they go? Northside, Mt. Healthy, Price Hill, etc. No wonder there's no interest in sending it out west, and there's just been a discussion of Northern Kentucky and serious interest in an east side route. That's where the "target population" is, even if they don't use them.

It doesn't even yet serve the University of Cincinnati (or any of the other local universities), arguably one of the biggest benefactors from a streetcar system, nor have there been any plans, it seems, to extend it up that way. Who, exactly, is being served on McMicken if your initial argument is all about economic development?

Besides, doesn't it seem a little insulting for the city to invest so much time and energy into a small public transportation tool for the sole purpose of generating economic development, and not investing that same money in a far more comprehensive PT system, meanwhile actually planning to push people out of their own neighborhoods and not providing a more effective and thorough transportation alternative for them?

But, you're right, it will bring a lot of development. And, quick note, I'm not a big fan of "trickle down" anything.

Part 3: It's going to take too long
How long will it take to put in "Part A" of the streetcar plan? More importantly, how long will it take for the whole program to be built once the first street gets torn up??? Uh-huh. Can you imagine huge swaths of 12th Street, Walnut, McMicken, Elm, and Race for a couple of months, or maybe up to a year while we do all this. Granted, it's going to take some adjustment for everyone while it goes in and I appreciate this. However...

And, having discussed the problems already inherent in Part A's route, how long before it becomes useful to more people? How long before it spreads out and winds out into other neighborhoods?

In the meantime, there is no plan.

Part II: Suggestions to improve the current Metro plan...
Section 2: Improve the technology
This one is very simple: make it so that we know exactly where busses are at all times. Simple answer: GPS and the ability to check this via Blackberry. My sister just moved to Chicago and she says she can check the location of the bus she is waiting for just by clicking on her Blackberry. Columbus, even, as I've mentioned before, has GPS on every bus and you can check online at any given point to see where the bus you're waiting for is. COTA (Cbus), I've been reminded by a reader, even is hooked into Google so that you can simply type in where you are going and where you are and you can get the whole map of how to do it. Google may be taking over the world, but it's better than the current website...

Speaking of which, the current website is a joke. There are a couple of things that need to happen to it to make it useful:

1) Make it mobile-ready, so, at the very least, we can check schedules from our phones.
2) For some reason, if you click to far into the website -- like, I don't know, checking a route -- suddenly the whole thing freezes up and you have to back out and start over. You need a better coding system.
3) Your "starting points" don't compute. My stop is on Purcell and Bassett. I can type in "Purcell and Bassett" as my starting point and the website still keeps flashing back River Road as a possible starting point for my trip. What? Also, I live on Elberon... it is really hard to get down to River Road, there's got to be a GIS program somewhere that acknowledges that.
4) Make a feature that allows you to say "I want to be here at X time," so that you can back-plan your schedule, rather than wildly entering starting times and seeing what comes up closer.
5) Add a feature that allows readers to enter a location and find out what busses serve that specific location.
6) Do something about your mapping. That shit is crazy.

Also, is it possible to make busses wi-fi? Did I hear somewhere that TANK -- Northern Kentucky's bus system -- is wi-fi compatible??? TANK also has televisions on some of their busses. Granted, they only play one channel, but it would be nice to see the news playing as I come into work every day.

---------

And a quick note... you're right, CityKin, public transportation is not just for poor or disadvantaged people. However, they are the ones who have supported public transit in Cincinnati for years, not because they want to but because they have to. I think we should take their needs into account. Because, unlike most people (you know, the people we're trying to attract to public transit via the streetcars), it is a need, rather than just a want. In my head, I see some geeks at City Hall sitting around and thinking, "God, wouldn't it be cool if we had a streetcar..."

I also found this blog, which is no longer running but is still posted, that seems to agree with me in some senses.

---------

Parts in this Series:
Part I: Why I don't support the streetcar...
8-23: Section 1: It doesn't serve enough people
8-25: Section 2: It's an "economic development tool"
8-25: Section 3: It's going to take too long
8-26: Section 4: Busses Aren't Cool
8-26: Section 5: Traffic Congestion
8-26: Section 6: Where is the plan for the suburbs?

Part II: Suggested changes to the Metro
8-23: Section 1: Improve intra-neighborhood service
8-25: Section 2: Improve the technology
8-26: Section 3: Create greater suburban access
8-26: Section 4: Integrate TANK and Metro
8-26: Section 5: Actively seek out corporate bus passes

OHIO/CINNKY: Why I don't support the Cincy Streetcar... (Part 1 of a Series)

I have briefly mentioned (that's not the only time, but it's the first in a series) this in the past, but I'm going to start talking about two things in a series:

1) Why I don't support the Cincinnati Streetcar
2) Suggestions I have to improve the Cincinnati Metro System

So let's begin...

Part I: Why I don't support the Cincinnati Streetcar
Section 1: It doesn't serve enough people, and looks more like a tourist item than a functional public transportation tool

This is the current plan for the streetcar per the Cincinnati Streetcar website...



I have altered the dimensions a little bit so that it's a little more readable.

Do you see yourself on that map? Now, my guess is this: if you're a blogger, you're probably on the map or pretty close to it -- because bloggers occupy the class of citizen known as the "middle class," usually urbane, and overwhelmingly college educated. (Also, I'm fairly familiar now with the downtown and city bloggers -- this is excepting the wonderful suburban bloggers we have -- that I get the impression I know where most of you live, or close enough.)

Let me ask you this question: are those the people currently using the Cincinnati Metro?

No. The grand majority of people who use the public transit in the city are people who cannot afford private transportation, or whose financial or social position makes a car unavailable. They need to serve those communities first and best. An argument will be made "but it goes through Over-the-Rhine and Clifton." That's fine, except you're ignoring that Over-the-Rhine is gentrifying faster than it knows what to do with itself, and Clifton has always been a home for students first and everyone else second.

The streetcar is not serving other major areas that see high traffic... including Clifton Avenue, Ludlow/Hamilton Ave's, Queensgate, Price Hill, Reading Road, Bond Hill, Avondale, etc.

Rather, it's choosing those neighborhoods that are, or will soon be, "tourist friendly" because of their up-and-coming status. The very fact that the map highlights connections to restaurants and arts venues only reinforces the tourism focus.

If the streetcar is going to be an effective local tool, then it should go after those people who need the public transit the most, not those people for whom public transit merely represents a cheaper alternative. Granted, there is a great need to broaden the alternatives for everyone in the city, but why are we placing our bets on people who do not currently use the system and not on people who could really, really use a more reliable form of transit -- ie, a fixed market rather than a speculative one.

My concern is that the current populations that will be served by this route will use it once, think "well that's neat," or use it just a couple of times a year, and the poor lonely thing is going to go round and round and round and be all empty.

Some other bloggers joked with me at the Blogger's Convention that I don't like it just because it doesn't stop at my front door. That's partially true, and I'll admit I'm kind of pissed that there's no service on that system that helps me at all. But I'll expand my own frustration out a little bit: except for entertainment purposes alone, who does it serve?

Think for a minute: let's say you are going to use it for work on a park-and-ride type system, where would you park?

Part II: Possible improvements to existing infrastructure
Section 1: Improve intra-neighborhood service

This is another one of those "Oh, Barry's just pissed because it doesn't stop at his front door" moments, probably. But I just wanted to point this out, as I think it's a real problem.

Example 1: I currently live on Elberon Ave. My bus stop is uphill about 3 or 4 blocks -- fine. However, to get to Glenway Avenue or Warsaw, I have to either walk the addition 10-15 blocks to jump on the 33, or take the 10/32 up to W. 8th, walk past Kroger, and then jump on the 33. Or I could simply take the 10 (I think) all the way out where they would drop me off at Sears. Strange.

Example 2: I am moving to Warner Street in Clifton Heights, near Hughes High School. My bus stop will be 3-4 blocks uphill (dammit!) on the corner of Clifton and McMillan -- fine. In order to get down McMillan, I either have to hoof it, or get to Vine Street to take the 46. Because there's no bus that goes from Hughes High School all the way down McMillan Avenue. Doesn't that seem strange?

Example 3: I was at a party on Chase Avenue in Northside. Way down Chase. Way, way down chase. It was the middle of the day, and it was time for me to go home. I asked my friends: what's the closest busstop to here? Their response was to pick up their keys and say Come on, I'll drive you up. Eh? What? You'll drive me to the busstop... seems like it defeats the whole purpose, doesn't it?

My point is this? I know there is a smattering of intra-neighborhood busses -- I've noticed the 133 near my casa -- but these need to be dramatically improved, advertised, posted (the 231 that drops off at Christ Hospital isn't even listed on the busstop sign), and expanded so that people can use the system more than just as a get from work to home and back. Some people use the system as their exclusive form of transportation, and the need for them to get around more effectively to do their daily errands should be key to the interest of the operators.

UPDATE: And make these intra-neighborhood busses cheaper than $1.50... perhaps $1.50 for the trip out and a trip back, perhaps, so that it would be $0.75 one way trip.

------

Now, before we go on. Let's break down the economy just a little bit, or at least my philosophy of the economy. There are three primary groups of organizations that should be considered as "playing a role:" the government, the non-profit sector, and the for-profit sector. The for-profit sector, obv., should theoretically always run in the black. The non-profit sector, in theory, should always hover around a zero-sum game when it comes to their finances. Meanwhile, the government, and its programs, have the flexibility for it to run in the red. Why? Because their main sources of revenue are not attached to its services. The government fills a need where the private sector cannot effectively or efficiently. So don't argue that "those routes won't be profitable!!!!" DUH! They're not supposed to be. I think we're going to get a rude wake-up call when we realize the streetcar won't be profitable, either. Government services (and public transit, almost universally in the world, are government services) are supposed to provide service to the public, notprofit for the government.

I think, if we viewed our public transit plan through that lens, we will be far more successful in this endeavor.

Next Week:Part I: Why I don't support the streetcar...
8-23: Section 1: It doesn't serve enough people
8-25: Section 2: It's an "economic development tool"
8-25: Section 3: It's going to take too long
8-26: Section 4: Busses Aren't Cool
8-26: Section 5: Traffic Congestion
8-26: Section 6: Where is the plan for the suburbs?

Part II: Suggested changes to the Metro
8-23: Section 1: Improve intra-neighborhood service
8-25: Section 2: Improve the technology
8-26: Section 3: Create greater suburban access
8-26: Section 4: Integrate TANK and Metro
8-26: Section 5: Actively seek out corporate bus passes