Page 1 of 15 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 144
  1. #1
    All-Conference Kahns Krazy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    9,680

    Where is the outrage, again.

    First off, let me say, I am pro bike path, and particularly pro Wasson Way as it benefits me disproportionately.

    http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news...sale/28293887/

    The city is buying the right of way for $11m+ and construction will be over $7m. With overruns and delays, this is easily a $20m+ project, which covers somewhere between 4 and 7 miles (there are conflicting numbers in different places). That is not cheap. The economic impact studies are vague. Other than "a bike trail would be nice", I have no idea what criteria were used to determine that this is the next best project for the city to pursue. I'm sure it's just a total coincidence that our mayor lives within a mile of this.

    But I continue to be amazed at the way capital projects are randomly evaluated and executed in this city. There has been an ongoing debate over the clifton grocery store and a proposed $550K recoverable loan. Ultimately that project was denied. The highly publicized Mahogany's investment was a total disaster. The "Kennedy Connector" was a new $35 million project that was supposed to open up new development. I walked it the other day. Unless they are developing dirt, there's not much going on over there. In fact, the spinning place that was right over there actually relocated out. Mad Tree is crushing it, but they are on commercial property that has been in use for years.

    The mess that is I 75 and the bridge to connect Cincinnati state to the westside is destined to be a battle and a disaster. Finishing the bike path connection to downtown from the eastside continues to be a fight. There's also been some sort of transportation thing on rails downtown, but I haven't heard much about it. Potholes go unfilled while bike lanes get installed on Delta Avenue.

    This town seems to just throw dice to decide what projects move forward, and the media is just as random in the positions it takes on those projects.
    "Give a toast to my brother, hug your family, and do everything possible to live the life you dream of. God Bless."
    -Matt McCormick

  2. #2
    Supporting Member PM Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,526
    You have about 1/3rd of this story correct. I don't blame you, it's the freaking media, they never get the whole story. First, the city agreed to that price, but the city is not going to be spending that amount. Not anywhere close to it. Between the TIGER Grant application for the feds and the private investment (that is supposed to cover the Norwood section) the city has an initial investment of about 500k, and won't have to pay their amount fully until mid 2017, so it's dissipated over 3 years. Again, the TIGER grant is going to cover a huge amount of this investment. It is very competitive to get those grants, but Cincy has put themselves in a great position to lock it down. (TIGER grants are a 500 million dollar discretionary spending system from the Transportation Dept, the streetcar got nearly 11 million from it) The article is flat out wrong about matching funds from the city. That's not how it works. The city can say "we are investing 10 million over 10 years on the project, and TIGER funds would cover up front 10 million, but on paper that's "matching funds".

    Also, this isn't just a "bike path", it's the city locking down the right of way if (or when) light rail will come to the east side of town. It's a 35 foot wide right of way, that may potentially include multi use, which is pedestrian, bike, and light rail.

    Also, the Wasson Way project predates Cranley by about almost a decade. This has been in the works for that long, and this is the week where it all comes to fruition (TIGER grant this week too).

    Aaaand....I don't want to overstate this, but changing the abandoned rail over to an actual path lowers crime in the area, allows for a police presence (there are numerous homeless camps down there, I've been to them quite a few times) and increases property value on the line.

    Yeah, I'm pretty invested in this. Sue me.

    Oh, and just an observation. I hear about people complaining about cyclists on the road all the time. All the time. Well, here is the alternative, where I (among other cyclists) can jump on a bike trail at Xavier and go all the way through to the Little Miami Trail up to Cbus, and still there is push back. I don't get it.
    Last edited by PM Thor; 06-01-2015 at 05:33 PM.

  3. #3
    Sophomore OH.X.MI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Hudson
    Posts
    617
    Regardless of whether funding is coming from the City of the Federal government. These bike paths are a colossal waste of government money. I'm not an street car supporter at all. But at least the street car will be capable of use more than the 5 months a year people use bike paths in this city (we have a little thing called snow and freezing rain October - April). And at least the street car has the potential to generate revenue and foster development.

    Thor, I understand the City trying to have some foresight for the possibility of a light rail and I think that would be great. But honestly does anyone expect that to happen? And ya, no one likes crime or homelessness, I just don't see a bike path fixing that. Central Parkway has a nice new bike path and I still see homeless people / drug use there everyday. I don't buy it for a second that the bike path really spruced up CUF. The cost benefit for bike paths simply does not add up. It's a disproportionate amount of money to spend on a project that benefits a minuscule portion of the City's population.

    I also fully understand that this project pre-dates Cranley. The problem I have, and I think most people have, with Cranley is his inconsistency. If you want to curtail government spending on public projects stand by that. Don't go full in on your pet projects and then bash the ones you don't like.
    Mom and Papa told me "Son, you gotta go to school; only way to make the fam'ly proud."
    I paid no attention, left my books at home, rather play my music real loud.

  4. #4
    Supporting Member PM Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,526
    But you simply don't know what you are talking about when it comes to biking in Cincy. Cranley has effectively killed ALL new bike lanes in the city. All of it. He has gone all in on the paths. I would think that would appeal to drivers.

    It's not a waste of money because you can't fathom the idea of people using it during months where YOU wouldn't use it. I bike about 9 months of the year. The Cincy Cycle Club and Queen City Bike host rides almost every other day for 9 months of the year. I walk with my wifey and dogs every week of the year. I'm absolutely sure the trail would be used all year, especially true in an urban setting. Your argument is like saying highways are useless when it snows because you go 10 MPH during a snowstorm. Of course it's not effective in bad conditions. Plus, after the startup costs, a trails maintenance is really small. There is no need to send a salt truck down a bike trail.

    I do understand your concern about wasting money though. But when it comes to federal money, it's either use it or lose it. Either Cincy gets the money or someone else does, and denying the grant won't change that the money is still going to be spent. I'm actually surprised you don't understand this.

    Also, Cranley isn't picking and choosing here. The city was invested in this before him. He's just worried about further spending on a project out of the general fund, which the Wasson Way is quite literally zero. Meanwhile no one knows exactly how much it will cost for operational funds for the streetcar. It's comparing apples to oranges really.

  5. #5
    Sophomore OH.X.MI's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    The Hudson
    Posts
    617
    Two points. First, I understand you will use probably use the path and other avid bikers will. I personally cannot justify anyone spending 11 million dollars to further a hobby for a few hundred, maybe a thousand, people. That's not meant to be an insult - its just a pure economic efficiency argument. Comparing a bike path, that people use for personal enjoyment, is not the same roads. I'm surprised you don't understand that. I wonder what 11 million could do for CPS - I bet it could pay for a few college scholarships.

    Second, though you may disagree with this, and that's fair, I take issue with the use it or lose it mentality. That fact is that government money shouldn't be spent on stuff like this in the first place. I'm not against all public works projects at all. They just need to make economic sense and provide a true utility to the majority of the public. The bike path just doesn't do that in my opinion.
    Mom and Papa told me "Son, you gotta go to school; only way to make the fam'ly proud."
    I paid no attention, left my books at home, rather play my music real loud.

  6. #6
    Supporting Member PM Thor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,526
    Your entire premise is wrong. It's not a hobby, it's a mode of transport, and yeah, people use bike paths as a mode of transport. I do. I go to the grocery and other mundane events on my bike. Is that a hobby? You think only bikers will use the trail? Not in the least. Go to the Wasson Way Project FB page and see who is supporting it. Very few bikers are there....(just glanced, 1200 people liked their last post, I suspect a small portion are cyclists)

    You argue that the government shouldn't invest in alternative transport, so does that apply to rail work? How about bus routes? Or how about streetcar stuff? Economic efficiency? I guess the government shouldn't take care of any of the state or national parks then, or childrens programs, or education either...but since the majority of the public doesn't use them, I guess the government shouldn't invest in those programs....but here is just one study showing how economically paths and greenways pay back pretty efficiently, and quickly. http://www.carolinathreadtrail.org/w...r-communities/

    This trail will be a boon for the locals economically. Just ask those businesses on the Little Miami Trail. Danas is on this new trail. Are you against Danas? I think you are. How dare you sir.

    Second, the upkeep of bike paths compared to roads is negligible. Cars, trucks, heavy equipment beat the crap out of roads. The maintenance on roads is a thousand fold compared to bike paths. Example, one average single car outweighs 133 bike rides by double. This doesn't even account for trucks or busses.

    You think that a bike trail is only for bikers as a hobby, well, you are flat out wrong. No offense, but do a little research. Bike trails not only rejuvenate an area, they economically impact the line. It's proven fact.
    Last edited by PM Thor; 06-01-2015 at 11:23 PM.

  7. #7
    All-Conference XUFan09's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Posts
    6,935
    Trying to characterize what is becoming a mode of transport for more and more people as just a "hobby" is silly.

  8. #8
    Supporting Member 94GRAD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Dana's
    Posts
    2,194
    Big fan of the Wasson Way Project
    Mama always told me, stupid is as stupid does. @danagardens

  9. #9
    Supporting Member muskienick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    NCH, OH
    Posts
    1,909
    Furthermore, even if no one used bike paths for transportation, the investment of these funds, regardless of the source, is also an investment in preventive-healthcare. Where bike paths are available, people will use them. Where they are not available, many will not exercise using bikes due to safety reasons relating to dealing with auto traffic. The more folks who exercise on a regular basis, the more they are likely to stay healthy or improve their health. That is a money-saving factor in itself.

  10. #10
    Supporting Member fellahmuskie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    914
    I'm obviously an outlier, but I live in Mt Adams without a car and do all my grocery shopping by bike. Bike infrastructure in Cincinnati is terrible, mostly because of the hills, but if we want to attract more young, college-educated talent to the city, improving bike infrastructure needs to be emphasized.
    I'm glad Cranley appears to get that.

    Let me also add that I think developing rail (including the streetcar) is mostly a waste of money and that we should focus on protecting and improving our interstates (which are a great asset) rather than spend billions on a new system of transportation.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •