Thursday, May 01, 2008

Trolley Buses for Emerald City?

Boss Godfrey looks into fake trolley buses

Another fascinating Scott Schwebke story in Sunday's Standard-Examiner , under the headline "Trolley buses in Ogden?" It was only a couple of days ago that gentle reader "Fly on the Wall" hinted in a lower comments thread that Boss Godfrey was interested in "trolley buses" for downtown Ogden; and lo and behold... we suddenly find a story on the subject spashed all over the front page of our home-town newspaper. From here on out, we suggest that we all pay much closer attention to the revelations of reader Fly, just as Ace Reporter Schwebke apparently did. We incorporate Mr. Schwebke's lead paragraphs below:
OGDEN — Mayor Matthew Godfrey plans to ask the Weber Area Council of Governments to recommend the use of money from a quarter-cent sales tax to purchase a pair of trolley-style buses to serve downtown.
Voters in November approved the tax that’s expected to generate about $9 million annually for transit and transportation infrastructure in Weber County, said Douglas S. Larsen, the county’s chief deputy assessor.
Godfrey is hopeful the Weber Area Council of Governments, which is responsible for recommending which projects are funded, will request that some of those proceeds be used to buy two rubberized trolleys from the Utah Transit Authority.
As encouraging as it is to learn that our esteemed mayor is actually considering forms of public transit that don't involve gondolas, Ace Reporter Schwebke's article leaves a few questions unanswered. This morning's story cries out for a further definition of terms, we believe. When Godfrey refers to "rubberized trolleys," is he referring to something like this?


The above illustration, gleaned from this Wikipedia article, portrays what most folks would consider to be a "rubberized trolley bus," we think. This form of urban conveyance has proven popular in cities across the globe. Powered by electicity, these vehicles don't belch reeking diesel exhaust, and would be ideal in a downtown loop such as the one discussed in this morning's article. On the other hand, the above vehicles require overhead electrical wiring, an expensive infrastructure item not mentioned anywhere in today's Ace Reporter Schwebke story. And our readers will also note some special terminology: "Trolley-style buses."

It's upon these clues that we're going to take a wild guess it's another form of trolley bus that Boss Godfrey is thinking about:


The above vehicle, a diesel-powered, bus chassis-mounted contraption, manufactured by a company called Cable Car Classics, of Healdsburg, California, is right up Godfrey's alley, we think. In those comunities where these vehicles drive the streets, they are affectionately known by locals as "faux trolleys." Given Boss Godfrey's well known preference for anything and everything "fake," (rockclimbing, iceclimbing, skydiving, surfing, Tyrolian Ski resorts, etc,) we're going to go out on a limb and suggest that it's the latter vehicle which truly suits Godfrey's fancy. Imagine a couple of these, festooned with ski company decals and Ogden City logos rolling around the downtown Ogden streets. Imagine commissioning one of these beauties by the hour for your kid's wedding, baby shower or bar-mitzvah. It doesn't get any better than that, does it?

So what about it gentle readers? Is Godfrey finally getting serious about downtown public transit; or is he merely chasing another Godfreyesque lame gimmick?

Update 5/1/08 1:03 p.m. MT: Due to the popularity of this article, which was originally published on Sunday, 4/27/08, we're re-publishing it with today's date. The farther down the front page an article progresses, the less comment traffic it generates. We don't intend to let that happen in this instance. Our apologies go out to our email subscibers, who will have a deja vu experience when this article appears in their email inboxes for a second go-round. Sorry email subscribers... this cannot be helped.

And while we're at it with this re-posting, we link this fine article from the Transit In Utah blog, which adds further "grist to the mill," re our original topic.

99 comments:

Anonymous said...

The Toonerville Trolley Bus is coming to Ogden, or so the Mayor hopes, according to a Standard Examiner front page article this morning.

Recently, Weber County voters passed a transportation tax, and Mayor Godfrey plans to ask that Ogden's slice of the transportation money be spent to buy two buses tricked out like trolley cars, to ferry passengers from the Front Runner Terminal to the Junction and maybe [if any businesses ever open there besides the one [1] that has opened there since it all began six years ago], to the Ogden River Project area too.

The Mayor is again, apparently, shooting from the hip, speaking without fear and without research. He wants to buy the buses through UTA, he says, but UTA had not heard word one about the idea until the Standard Examiner called to ask about the Mayor's proposal. The UTA rep's reaction was more or less "He wants to buy what from us? First we've heard of it." And so the UTA rep could not provide information about cost or how long delivery might take or anything else.

A fellow Republican on the Weber County Commission likes the idea, but so far, that seems to be about it. That's good enough for Godfrey, apparently.

The transportation tax was fought through with great difficulty, and the Mayor wants to squander Ogden's project on Toonerville Trolley Buses for tourists to ride downtown. Incredible.

This is such a bizarre suggestion for using the transportation tax money, that we need to think for a bit about why Hizzonah may have proposed it. What other use might the money have been put to, if not to buy Toonerville Trolley Buses for downtown Ogden? Well, perhaps the money might have been used to help fund the alternatives analysis and environmental impact statements necessary to get federal funding for the BRT or real trolley line between downtown and WSU and McKay-Ded the Wasatch Front Regional Council study identified as the best next transit project for Ogden.

But that can't be allowed to happen, you see. The Mayor has been straining every nerve to prevent that happening for the last three years. He's refused to move on it, despite urging from the Council. He's proposed that the UTA transit study money the city has access to be used to fund yet another study of transit corridors, in hopes that it might conclude another route would be better. And why? To save the proposed real trolley or BRT route for his gondola fixation.

And so, to prevent... oh, the horror!... transportation money approved by the taxpayers from actually going to improve public transit in Ogden over the route he covets for his gondolas, the Mayor without so much as a phone call to UTA first, wants Weber County to spend about $600,000 on two busses tarted up to look like trolleys. [Mr. Paterson estimated the Toonerville Trolley Buses Ogden wants run "about $300,000 each."]

Leadership, Godfrey style.

If it wasn't our money he wants to squander, and if it wouldn't delay real public transit from improving over the route the professionals say most needs it and that would result in the most benefit for city residents, Godfrey's suggestion would almost be funny. Almost.

Anonymous said...

Godfrey just put his foot in his mouth.

It doesn't even matter whether we think these faux trolley buses would be a good way to spend the 1/4 cent transportation sales tax. According to the law that authorized the new tax, the revenue can be spent only on a "regionally significant transportation facility" which, if a transit project, must be a "fixed guideway" and "part of the regional transportation plan of the area metropolitan planning organization". Utah Code 59-12-1703(4).

A tourist bus making little loops around downtown might be a good idea, but it certainly is not a "regionally significant transportation facility." Nor it is a fixed guideway, which is defined as "rail" or a "separate right-of-way for the use of public transit" (i.e., bus rapid transit with an exclusive lane). Utah Code 59-12-1702(4). And this project is most definitely not part of our MPO's current Regional Transportation Plan.

You'd think the mayor would do a little checking around before announcing a proposal like this to the press. But apparently not.

Anonymous said...

Dan:

You wrote: You'd think the mayor would do a little checking around before announcing a proposal like this to the press.

Why in the world would you think that? Shooting from the hip, without fear and without research, has been his style all along. Think of the Peterson Proposal in all its attendant parts [like the gondola], launched with much ballyhoo but without anything remotely resembling a feasibility study to support it. And the mall redevelopment, launched with grand assurances that it was such a compelling and sure to succeed project that there would be no trouble selling the construction bonds without the city's agreeing to be responsible for the payments if the project failed to generate enough revenue. He clearly didn't do much checking or research there since it turned out the bonds could not be sold without out Ogden city's guarantee of payment. And getting the Council to approve selling the Shupe property to a company that, it turned out, didn't want to buy it. And demanding fast approval of a plan St. Anne approved to move it out of downtown, except St. Anne's in fact didn't want to go. And rushing to announce a big downtown hotel development that depended on leasing 275 parking spaces to the builders that it turned out the city didn't have. And he opposed having the city get the facts first about necessary water and sewage projects, and funding options first, before going ahead with fund raising and repair work. [It was the Council that insisted on facts first, policy second.]

And now this. I'm not surprised at all that he never bothered to check and see if his Toonerville Trolley Bus idea fit the terms of the tax or not.

Can you imagine what it must be like for serious development and planning people to work for him? Knowing that at any moment, another Matthew Godfrey Special, some shoot from the hip la-la-land idea the he wants implemented immediately, if not sooner, will arrive on their desks? Be enough to drive a teetotaler to Duffy's Tavern, or the local equivalent.

Anonymous said...

The problem with a bus like this is that it has a sense of non-permanence. It also does not have a right of way over cars.

So a person thinking about moving downtown and living a largely car-free lifestyle would not feel entirely confident this trolley would survive the next budget round. That's one advantage Trax has - it looks like it will be there for a long time. Another is that Trax always has the right of way. It gets you around traffic instead of stuck in it.

With gasoline wholesale currently over $3.50 a gallon, downtowns with transit, shops, and things to do could become more popular as time goes by.

I like the idea of a downtown transit loop system. The trolley bus is better than nothing.

I see this as a idea that is not exclusive of those that qualify under Dan S's comments. The problem with Godfrey is, you never know what he's really up to. People rightfully tend to assume there is some nefarious motive, based on the mayor's history.

Anonymous said...

Curm, you mentioned those lost parking spaces, again. I'm suprized you haven't seen this major miscalculation regarding the icecicle. Catlin's research has determined that the user demographic targeted for this folly prefers to sleep in their vehicles. The area around the future urban high adventure icecicle, monument to stupidity #2, lacks severely in the parking department.
It could have been in the icecicle portion of lying little matty's vision that a portion of the river project would be a giant parking lot by the river, with a couple of tables for the climbers to use preparing their dehydrated food preparations, some restrooms, and they could use the river for bathing. This trolley bus thing would provide free transportation to the icecicle and back.

Anonymous said...

Danny: How intriguing, your suggestion that a person might think "about moving downtown and living a largely car-free lifestyle." It is already possible. Many Union Square residents are there precisely for that reason. I realize this is not and never will be in step with the predominant Utah mindset, and that the mere mention of Union Square sets off howls of indignation from folks who haven't given much thought to what it actually takes to restore a downtown. However, I submit that a car-free lifestyle is, in our polluted twenty-first century existence, a patriotic act, and hats off to those who do it.

Anonymous said...

danny... you're right. The trolley wouldn't have the right of way. With the disastrous overpopulation of Ogden and the bumper-to-bumper traffic jams in town, who could think "trolley-buses" are a solution to Ogden's traffic problem? I know that I've had to sit in traffic for at least 3 to 5 minutes along Wash Blvd. INTOLERABLE!!! OUTRAGEOUS!!! Trolley-buses won't solve that problem at all!!!

I would be very surprised if Godfrey and his cohorts would go with the streetcar (Option 1 in original post) because they may deem the necessary wiring an eye-sore. Also, anyone who's spent anytime around them can attest to the fact that giant sparks can sometimes be generated by trolley's changing wires and turning corners. That would freak out the average Ogden passer-by. Option 1 is probably not the one Godfrey and his EVIL empire are proposing. MMMHHHHEWWAAA!!!

Anonymous said...

What is it with this overly-endowed forehead that he thinks his transit imperatives are somehow more key than those that are covered by the regional transit authority.

This jerk suffers from a severe self importance complex.

These faux trolleys are deployed for tourist traps and serve to circulate the clueless gawker from souvenir shop to gallery to feedbag. Real commuters and those who desire to progress to a car-free lifestyle would prefer the permanence of a fixed guideway system.

Can his forehead be so empty to not grasp the property value benefits of a streetcar through town. Why do we have so many of these neo-con know-it-all's running the show. The decision making style of our local moron mirrors that in the White House. Just charge ahead on any given day with whatever suits your fancy. Damn the better judgment and the sensibility of real experts like UTA. Why do we have a regional authority if our leader won't defer to them on matters within their scope.

Anonymous said...

Count my votr as one for the counterfeit trolley. It's a perfect fit for the Godfrey counterfeit "high adventure" theme park concept. The man's a genius, I tell you! Vote Godfrey in 2011!

Anonymous said...

Tec, Tec, Tec.... you overlook in your analysis a crucial factor: the need to preserve for the People of Ogden the transit route from downtown to WSU for the Gondola that will make us all rich, skyrocket the value of all our homes, cure warts, end the heartbreak of psoriasis and so much more. Surely you can see that....

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

anon,

There are several on this blog, if not most, who have stated minimal opposition to Peterson's plans to be included in a streetcar line.

Godfrey has skewed the issues so that even a "compromise" like a streetcar instead of gondola is not acceptable to him. I am ok with Peterson building a mountain gondola if he can swing it. It would fit in nicely with the streetcar line to the top of 36th. The WSU loop you mention is also fine. Now get Godfrey on board. What Godfrey is missing is that a streetcar line would ENHANCE OR GUARANTEE Peterson's success. A town gondola would doom all of it including the gondola and any future transit for Ogden. Hurray for foreheads. What a jackass.

RudiZink said...

Just a reminder... the "anonymous Handle" is banned on Weber County Forum.

Anonymous said...

Rudi, You didn't have to delete his posts. Maybe rename. They were constructive posts.

Anonymous, Rudi and the rest of us would appreciate you take a moment to develop a clever screen name. Pick anything but pick something. It really helps sort out the conversation instead of talking to several indistinguishable anonymi...

Anonymous said...

Rudi,

The deletion may discourage a newcomer who may have missed the anonymous rule.

This particular anonymous seems to be hinting his idea is something new and that maybe he is thinking he is talking to a bunch of naysayers who oppose everything. Not sure on that though but I sensed that, though.

I'll assure the poster again that the Kent Jorgensen alternative idea has been positively discussed repeatedly by myself, Curm, and others.

It also fits in nicely with a future MOGC reconfiguration. Why is the mayor trying to accomplish the same overall plan but is stuck on the gondola as the town link.

What a jackass.

I am getting a bit like Jason W. in name calling but I think the time has long passed civility. Godfrey, after all, has a great disdain for thinkers in the community and their positive alternatives. His disregard for his neighbors and fellow citizens deserve the harshest of assessments.

RudiZink said...

Hate to break it to ya's Tec... but I gets very tired of deleteting the posts of one single Godfreyite who refuses to post under a discrete, identifiable psuedonym.

My guess is that this guy is the genetically-defective short man with the hairplugs -- (the one who got kicked out of the Marine Corps(e).)

The WCF comments posting rules will continue to be vigorously enforced here, until further notice.

We offer no apologies for this.

-Rudi

Bob Geiger said...

You may be surprised at Mayor Godfrey's view on this issue. The issue of the streetcar has been one of "cost", and the Mayor seems convinced that the cost structure of a streetcar won't work for Ogden.

However, the best way to find that out it to go for it. Which I think we should do.

Certainly any transit focused system in that corridor would have to analyze and address as many of the current and future transit needs of that corridor as possible. Including Chris Petersen's project.

I'm all for the streetcar as I am certain that it will facilitate Chris Petersen's efforts in Malan's Basin, which are apparenlty moving forward to some degree as there were several private helicopters working in and out of there all weekend.

Bob Geiger said...

It is my assessment that the council and the Mayor should get going on the reality of federal funding for the streetcar, show if there are any local "matching fund" issues, illustrate the solution to such "mathing fund" challenges if they exist, and press on.

If, in the end, it is clear that a streetcar is financially feasible, let's go for it. If, in the end, it is not feasible, then we need to start looking at the next best solutions.

All the while we'll be moving forward towar linking the intermodal hub with the mountain and the university, which is a discussion that is paramount to Ogden's future.

What do you think about puting Amy Wicks directly in charge of acquire the information and financial packages associated with the street car? I think that would be good at this point.

Bob Geiger said...

Rudi-

Who told you I was kicked out of the Marine Corps?

Quit making things up.

Bob Geiger said...

Rudi-

I think that it is funny that you have to fabricate a rap sheet for me in order to compensate for the inch-thick batch of legal documents that clearly display your
disregard for truth, fairness and the law.

Surely you'll drop this post, claim I it was "vulgar" and dismiss all my ideas.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

Then please talk to your friend the mayor and tell him to quit getting in the way of the streetcar proposal. The next major step is an "alternatives analysis" that would narrow down the route and the mode (streetcar or BRT) and include plenty of opportunity for public involvement. This process should have begun in fall 2005, so we've now wasted almost three years. And there are smaller steps that could be taken even before we start the full-blown alternatives analysis. Yet whenever the city council suggests taking the next step, the mayor's response is "you don't really want to do that".

Bob Geiger said...

Dan S.

I talked to him yesterday about it. He certainly didn't dismiss it in our conversation.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

You said yourself that the mayor seems convinced that the cost of a streetcar (to WSU and McKay-Dee) would be prohibitive.

I'm obviously not as up to date on his opinions as you are, so I hope he is no longer convinced of this.

In case you need some ammunition to help him come around, here are some statistics:

Estimated capital cost of streetcar (made in 2005, with 30% contingency margin): $101 million

Estimated annual operating cost of streetcar: $2.6 million

Percentage of operating cost that would be covered by fare revenue and elimination of redundant bus service: about 50%

Official WFRC estimate of revenue to be generated by the new transportation sales tax in Weber County between now and 2030: $363 million

Percentage of this revenue that WFRC expects to be spent on transit: 40%

Percentage of federal match for capital costs of eligible transit projects: 50-80%

Ok, Bob, those are the figures we have at this time. Of course, there's quite a range of uncertainty in many respects, but as I put the numbers together in various combinations, it sure looks to me like we can pay for the streetcar. So let's make it happen!

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

Oops, sorry about the duplicate post. Delete it for me, with you, Rudi?

Anonymous said...

Tec:

Two points. First, you wrote: I'll assure the poster again that the Kent Jorgensen alternative idea has been positively discussed repeatedly by myself, Curm, and others.

Yup. Exactly right.

Second, you wrote: I think the time has long passed for civility. No, it hasn't. Not if you want to be effective with the as yet un-commited or un-informed, many of whom tend to immediately tune out angry name-calling rants from either side of an issue. If the persuadable-undecideds are your target audience... and they should be... the name calling screeds aren't helping.

I know, I know, there are some here who would argue that any who remain undecided on these issues at this point are "brain dead knuckle-dragging morons incapable of thought." But if you think that, then there's no point in engaging in public discussion at all, since you reduce the entire electorate to three unchanging and unchangeable cohorts: [a]fully committed Godfreyistas {b}fully committed anti-Godfreyistas [c] the unreachable brain dead. If that is in fact the case, discussion is pointless.

Needless to say, I disagree.

RudiZink said...

LOL! Little Bob Geiger! lookit what the cat DRAGGED in!

A query for our gentle readers:

Shall your blogmeister just ban him from the board... yet again...?

or let him stay, and hang himself from his own petard?

Anonymous said...

Rudi:

If you want WCF to be a genuine forum for discussion of public policy matters, you ought to be encouraging those with views different from those generally expressed here to visit and take part, not banning them.

Well, you asked....

Anonymous said...

Curm,

Fair enough, I'll back off the name calling for now. Especially since Bob joined the conversation and hints that he may be able to forward the issue.

If Bob thinks he can get some attention to this streetcar issue I'm ok with that. Maybe the mayor is coming around. I'd say three cheers of that is the case.

Bob, you could be the hero on this one if you were to be the streetcar advocate at any cost instead of being prepared to dismiss it on the cost issue. It will cost...plenty. but it is solid dedicated infrastructure that has far more tourist and local utility than a stupid town gondola.

Rudi, give Bob a chance if he truly is interested in this streecar initiative. This is too important an issue.

Bob, have at it if you are sincere in having a streetcar serve our foothill. You could park the yellow truck for days at a time.

b geiger said...

Tec Johnson,

I can imagine the possiblities if you can.

I'll spread this thought around some more and see what I can do with regard to broader promotion of this idea.

As for Bob Geiger - I think the idea has merit, but I'll not support it at "all cost".

You may think that I supported the gondola at "all cost". But I do not. For me, the transition of the golf course into a private golf course and residential area was a cost that I was willing to pay. It didn't require a tax increase on Ogden citizens, and Chris Petersen was willing to pay the operating cost of the gondola. To me, this was not an "all cost" scenario. Because some people consider the current golf course as necessary as their heart, I can see how they might thing that I was willing to give away the first born of Ogden to see a Gondola in our city...but that simply isn't the case.

Let's just take it one step at a time. I've always been interested in investigating the idea of a streetcar in order to ascertain just what the costs are. Then, after learning the costs, we'll all be able to better assess that system as a possible solution.

Who knows, when the our state capital is filled with Democratic senators and congressmen, there may be a whole pot of federal money they for us to use. Our wonderful town may as well try to be the biggest beneficiary of them all.

Let's see where the street car facts take us. Let me talk to some folks over the next couple of weeks.

b geiger said...

Sorry it took me a moment to respond. Rudi doesn't like me much so he fools with my postings.

Thanks for the open-objective sentiment Curm.

Anonymous said...

Oh dear: We now have "bob geiger" and "b geiger". Which of them, if either, is the real Bob Geiger? I'm confused.

But you oughta let both of 'em stay, Rudi.

Anonymous said...

b-

Sounds like you want Rudi to ban you once again.

Look: It's just not appropriate for anyone on this blog to engage in these kinds of personal attacks. Just because Rudi started it doesn't mean you have to escalate the fight. Let's get off the subject of Rudi's past, and yours, and get back to the issues at hand.

Bob Geiger said...

Ya-

You might get more that 2 postings per thread.

Bob Geiger said...

Dan-

As per the example of so many - I had not idea that personal attacks were off limits here.

Never the less, I agree--On with the business.

Anonymous said...

I vote allow the piacular fellow, because he makes me pee my pants and cry when he screams at me or headbutts my friends, and, as you all know, I like it when I can "engage" in high-adventure urination and weeping. I so cherish those moments! I also agree that any time a private helicopter flies in THE SKI above Malan's Basin, it's carrying a Patagonia-vest-wearing, Thorazine-addled douche named Wayne, ready to spend hundreds of millions on a castle without sewers and built without roads, who loves, loves, loves GONDOLAS, and who is reconnoitering the area and scouting possible squirrel populations. The Famed Squirrel Patrol lives!

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

RudiZink said...

"I had not idea that personal attacks were off limits here."

From the WCF comments Policy

"We will remove posts in the following instances:

... 2) The post contains flaming, name calling, derogatory or obscene language, or gratuitous personal attacks, particularly if directed against other readers.

Now that you've been admitted back into the fold, Bob, you'd do well to bone up on our posting policy.

I'm happy to welcome you back on a probationary basis; but please try to conform to our board rules.

Thanks in advance.

Anonymous said...

Rudi,

Ya gotta admit, though, that the enforcement of that rule is a bit spotty on this blog. If you really banned name calling and derogatory language, you'd have to delete an awful lot of comments by Jason, Bill C., and the like.

I agree, though, that personal attacks against another participant (or the blogmeister himself) are on another level and should be especially discouraged.

By the way, what's up with item 1 on the list? Is this post a violation of it?

Anonymous said...

It's nice to hear from Bobby G.

He brings a useful perspective and entertaining agitation.

It's also nice, Bobby, that since your transmission was torn out on the gondola idea, you've decided to come by and make nice.

But I am surprised your daddy is letting you, since the Jap bosses told you to keep a lower profile.

Nonetheless, I would offer to Rudi that anytime Bobby, Rupert, or any of those nincompoops post it only makes it funner.

I have been so missing hearing from all of you, especially Gtrain Wilkerson.

Give us your opinion! I for one, really want to hear it. I really, on the level, do.

Anonymous said...

Danny,

I agree that all those you mentioned are welcome. Hopefully they have some progressive viewpoints from the past. It would be sad to have them characterizing their neighbors as naysayers all over again when we have spent months on this blog discussing so many alternatives.

Maybe they have realized that the ice tower is the final straw and the obvious nonsense has reached critical mass. It's pretty hard outside of the close Godfrey fold and Jeff Lowe to support such a excessive and questionably engineered attraction for so few.

Anonymous said...

Maybe some of these past Godfreyites have been around the block a little in the past year and noticed still not a single urban gondola anywhere in the world or maybe they had the time to visit great cities like Portland or Seattle, two cities that have an adventure reputation or at least an outdoor sports product industry. Those cities have no gondolas but lots of new streetcar action and the TOD to match. Pretty inspiring.

Anonymous said...

Hear ye, hear ye,

I propose a moratorium on all name-calling and deragatory fore-head comments (it could happen to anyone.) That includes referring to Japanese as Japs, since World War II ended a long time ago.

We could, possibly, elevate the discussion so that opposing viewpoints could be discussed rationally. Who knows, some of us might even learn something new. Does that sound reasonable or what?

Anonymous said...

A little new and not so new streetcar news. Bob, please forward these links to the commander in chief if he can pull his head out of the fudge long enough to read them. When can Ogden get in on the fun????


Toronto

Seattle

Seattle ponders more streetcars

Atlanta

Cincinnati



NYC 1894

Anonymous said...

caddy,

I agree on the that unfortunate japanese characterization comment from Danny. Danny, you got to drop that one. It's pretty ugly, especially since we may owe them the apology for our overwhelmingly inappropriate response to Pearl Harbor killing several hundred thousand innocent Japanese using two atomic bombs. I haven't heard people use that term since the early sixties. And then it was kids with ignorant fathers who used it and passed it on. Surely you don't fall to that level.

Anonymous said...

Hate to break it to you dude, the intermodal hub, mountain and University will not be connected by a streetcar. The intermodal hub, university and hospital yes, there will bee no fixed track up 36th to the mountain. The inclusion of mountain in a discussion of mass transit, and past recollection give me pause, and question to your sincerity.
Dan, I don't flame, saying no to stupidity does not make one a naysayer, calling a liar a liar is not name calling, it's simply calling a spade a spade. Sleeping dogs and fleas, leopards spots, 1200 jobs, half a billion dollars invested, it's just , and still, a geiger geiger geiger.

Anonymous said...

Your right Bill. I was just giving hope to Bob. We both know a resort or even mountain gondola will never be built. There is simply not enough ski acreage or buildable land for Peterson's dream. These days the cost of any resort construction is getting more expensive by day. He should have hired those construction helicopters when fuel was a third of today's cost. To say the cost of an exotic project will be exorbitant is an extreme understatement. If there are choppers buzzing Malan's Basin, Peterson is simply flying in other fool's to see his dream but I doubt seriously he has anything of substance cooking. He may be courting buyers for all we know which is the more likely scenario. Cut and run.

Anonymous said...

Listen,

What happened to the whole point of the discussion? It started out with talking about busses made to look like trolleys. If anyone remembers, SLC, our neighbors to the south, had these running for years, with not much success. TRAX WORKS, THOUGH! As for the real streetcars, the WFRC, which, by the way, a member of the Weber County Commission sits on, HAS a recommended plan for mass transit for our city. The studies have been done, the plans agreed upon, and still nothing happens....

Here's the bottom line....I, and I'm sure I'm not alone, live in Ogden and work in SLC. Gas is headed for $4 a gallon. We have the train, which in Europe is a great way to get around. What we need is effective mass transit through the rest of our city for the people that LIVE here to get around effectively!

The master plans are done, the studies are done, and federal funding isn't going to be around much longer. If anyone is reading this and you have sway with Mayor McMunchkin, it's time to call that chip in. Maybe you can reason with him when all other reason has failed, or maybe you can get some value from that campaign contribution the rest of us couldn't get when we tried to get rid of him and get the city to start pursuing some mass transit from one business district in town to the other, and maybe even branch out into some of the neighborhoods of Ogden.

Let's quit worrying about stupid ideas like climbing icicles or broken down Disneyland ideas like the people mover whose time has come and gone, and start focusing on ideas like how to get the taxpayers of Ogden TO and FROM WORK, and to make the water pleasant to drink without having to worry about the spring runoff flooding every basement on 36th street.

As for the name calling---either you're for responsible representative government, or you're a self-serving asshole who doesn't give a damn about anything except what you want for Ogden, public opinion be damned. Don't like the treatment you're getting on the blog? Then change the behavior. My opinion is that the folks on here have a genuine interest in the COMMUNITY! Maybe not always in agreement, but civil in disagreement, arguing on points, not personality. If people are calling you out, you more than likely deserve it. (And, thank goodness, people like Jason W, who is my favorite for just letting it go!)

Deed, not word,is how people are judged. So, Mr. Geiger, and the rest of the wonderful people that brought us 4 more years of the mayor, put up or shut the hell up! Learn from the experts what works and let's get busy getting real transportation solutions built!

Anonymous said...

Dale:

Two points. First, you wrote: We have the train, which in Europe is a great way to get around. What we need is effective mass transit through the rest of our city for the people that LIVE here to get around effectively!

Absolutely; couldn't agree more.

But then you wrote: As for the name calling---either you're for responsible representative government, or you're a self-serving asshole who doesn't give a damn about anything except what you want for Ogden, public opinion be damned.

The trouble with that, Dale, is that very often people do not agree on what the "responsible" thing to do is, on what the best thing for Ogden would be. Kind of arrogant, seems to me, to insist that anyone who doesn't agree with you is a "self serving asshole." About as arrogant as assuming, as I think you do, that your ideas on all this [with which I agree] necessarily represent the majority view or public opinion. Be nice if it did, but it's an assumption at this point. Recall that Hizzonah was re- elected, so I'm not really confident that that assumption is valid. If we can educate the public, it may become valid, but not yet.

Most of the Council members, I think, try, most of the time, to do a good job, to vote on matters that come before them in ways they think will benefit Ogden. They just don't always agree about whether a "yea" or "nay" vote would be best. People you disagree with about public policy are not necessarily "irresponsible self-serving assholes" merely because they disagree with you. Or me.

Most of the Council members can be lobbied. Which means can have their views changed if you can show them that a particular policy they've been favoring is not a good idea. But you won't get very far starting out letting them know you think they're assholes straight out of the gate.

I've seen them successfully lobbied...yes, even ones often denounced here as Godfrey lackeys. If a Council members says for example "I think this is a good idea for Ogden because it will only cost us X dollars. Worth the expenditure," then you can sometimes change his or her vote by saying "If I can show you, convince you, that it will actually cost twice what you think it will cost, would that change your opinion?" If he says "yes" --- and sometimes they do --- you then have a reasonable shot at changing a vote, you know what you have to do to change that vote, provided you can back up your claim. Lobbying does work, and not just by buying dinners and golf trips.

But approach the Councilman whose vote you hope to change with "Now look here, you irresponsible self-serving asshole...." and you're dead in the water before the conversation starts.

You've reached sound conclusions about what would be best for Ogden down the road, Dale. Let me respectfully suggest you put some thought into how best to convince those with the authority to make the decisions that you're right.

Anonymous said...

Curm,

I think Dale is just expressing the extreme frustration that I expressed a few posts previous. The nonsense has reached it's zenith with the icetower while our transit plans languish all the while gas rose over 10% last month alone. If anyone thinks fuel prices will subside you have another thing coming. Godfrey is likely one of these dreamers. To propose an energy hog like a year round outdoor frozen tower in a desert is the epitome of a callous asshole. This especially in the light of crucial transit needs that this same individual has successfully derailed by his own egomaniacal priorities.

In short. Curm, We demand quick action and the time is now. If government has any leadership at all it is needed immediatly on transit.

Anonymous said...

Curmudgeon,

Point taken.

Anonymous said...

Did I miss something? When was the resolution signed stating that Bob Geiger is now the official spokesman for the City Administration?

I'm still leary of the new found love.

Bob Geiger said...

Tec Johnson and Bill C-

Why would you dismiss a discussion of the mountain when it comes to transit in the WSU corridor? After all, WSU is on the mountain and is tangential to our famed trails, our golf course, the Mt. Ogden Park, and our mountains.

For the past 2 years, the trails, the mountain and the golf course have be hilighted as Ogden's most important public/recreational assets. It is in the Mount Ogden Community plan. The community plan clearly defines the Mt. Ogden Park and Golf Course as key community assets, not just for the Mt. Ogden community, but for all of Ogden and beyond. The trail system has also been so declared. There is a lot of public discussion and testimony that has extended the value of these assets well beyond Ogden's boarders.

Certainly it would be important to include transit considerations for Ogden's important recreational assets--especially the publicly funded ones.

But again, first things first. Let's finalize the actual cost structure of the streetcar and consider Ogden's ability to manage it.

Then, let's have civic discussion regarding what a WSU transit corridor should consider when it comes to transit. It would not be inconceiveable that the corridor should include service to significant, publicly funded recreational assets such as the trails, park, golf course and such.

For me to discuss the Streetcar in the context of its service to all Ogdenites, including those who use Mt. Ogden Park, the Golf Course and the trails is not insincere.

For you to discuss Streetcar transit, and then to dismiss its use for the many, many Ogdenites and others that you always reference as users of the trails, golf course and parks is seemingly insincere. Afterall, aren't we talking about public transit here? Servicing public use of public assets in, and near, the WSU corridor should be part of the pure public transit discussion for the downtown to WSU corridor.

Bob Geiger said...

I am very sincere. Linking the downtown to Ogden's major assets is very, very important to me and many. It seems important to you and important almost everyone in Ogden. It will be hard to dismiss the trails and the park and the golf course as unimportant assets given the considerable amount of discussion had on these topics over the past 2 years. And why would we want to dismiss these assets when it comes to a discussion of public transit? They should be front and center.

A historic looking streetcar the incorporates some of Ogden's amazing heritage, servicing transit from downtown the the the Mountain, WSU and the hospital could be an amazing solution.

Let's look at it from all angles and get moving. Sincerely.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

Sure, it'd be great to have better public transit to our east bench parks and trailheads. But popular though those trailheads are, they don't hold a candle to McKay-Dee Hospital (and environs) in terms of the number of visitors per day. Unfortunately, rail transit works only where there is reasonably high-density development. I realize that you're an advocate of putting a much higher-density development at the top of 36th Street--but our first priority should be where the need already exists--not where it is speculative.

Of course, there's already a bus that goes to the top of 36th Street. That's a lot better than nothing, but I'm afraid it's all we'll have in the foreseeable future.

Bob Geiger said...

As evidence of my sincerity, here is one of the comments from the digital discusssion that is currently underway. You would probably be very surprised at who made this comment---just some brainstorming right now, so don't bear down on every sentence and every comment. It is just a discussion. You can see though, that the idea isn't met with disdain or immediate dismissal and that the streetcar is seen as a "facilitator".

I agree Bob 100%. The streetcar numbers that i have seen (courtesy of UTA - Kent Jorgensen) paint a slightly dismal picture, with a 10 year funding timeline. If it is feasible, and realistic in the next 4-5 years, then it would just help the advancement of the mountain gondola....... Honestly - i dont think they (the Gondola & the Street Car) are mutually exclusive - and in fact, the partnership of the two would be amazing. Just look at the ridership on the FrontRunner so far - they can't even squeeze people on the train! (OK, i know its the free days, but my bet is that it continues.) Public transportation is a huge, "green" thing - and i would be jumping on a streetcar as fast as a gondola............

Anonymous said...

This is all predicated on the fantastic idea that Wayne Peterson and his Famed Squirrel Patrol will someday, eventually -- in the face of logic, physics, market economics, a national recession, common sense, brains -- build something in Malan's Basin; wasn't April 2008 the timeline for thousands of Japanese tourists to leave SLC International, ride TRAX to FrontRunner, take same train to OTown, then board the golden and gilded GONDOLA to a resort without a sewer, but with a Wolfgang Puck onion emporium?

Don't buy it; Is THE MOUNTAIN GONDOLA feasible? No, because Wayne cannot build anything on his property, and Holding's company is planning A TRAM or GONDOLA from his development in upper Mountain Green (hotels, tennis, golf, spas) to Snowbasin.

There will never be any development on this side of the mountain. To continue to cling to such a belief is ludicrous.

But then again, Wayne Peterson's "project" was "on the books" to start in 2006, right?

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

Bob,

I've been saying for years that Chris Peterson is better off with a streetcar than with a gondola. But in the hypothetical event that he ever actually builds anything in Malan's Basin (which, as Jason says, he won't), I'm afraid he'll have to provide his own gondola connection across WSU to the streetcar station on Harrison--or rely on a bus.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

Dan puts it best and he is most informed on the UTA and WFRC recommendations. Clearly MacKay Dee and WSU collectively produce the most potential ridership. When a streetcar is built all the existing bus routes will be reconfigured to eliminate redundancy. WSU and UTA already run busses up and around the U so the trails and the golf course would continue to be well served. Don't forget that Peterson's thing is not even in conceptual stages and the Hospital and WSU are functioning today. It would be a reach to suggest that we should configure a transit system around a possibility. An extension could be built up 36th at a later date but it would be served well by circulator routes that branch from the heavy infrastructure of the streetcar line.

Many people in attempting to envision public transit begin to worry about effectiveness of transit that may not go directly to each and every destination. This is unnecessary fretting. Making connections is the nature of public transit. We will get used to it. I personally like the planning that goes into my various journeys that will include transit connections. Letting go of the car allows so much freedom.

Anyway Bob, I wasn't discounting serving the higher foothill, it just isn't in the current recommendations for a good reason. I can live with it. Let's get on with it instead of mucking it all up in over-analysis. I'll trust the transit experts.

As for a gondola and a streetcar not being mutually exclusive...just think about the nonsense of that statement. One will cost 25-30 million and the other 100 million. Either way the substantial investment requires exclusivity over a single route. Let's stay on task, as the school teachers say to the ritalin deficient.

Bob Geiger said...

Tec Johnson,

When it came to "mutual exclusivity", I think the person was referencing that a streetcar from downtown to WSU does not preclude Chris from pursuing his Gondola into Malan's Basin. I don't think that the person was talking aboout a streetcar and a urban gondola in the same corridor to create transit redundancy.

As for Chris Petersen's project, let's not worry about that. Let's just worry about the general downtown to WSU corridor.

1) Let's look at the actual financials that materialize after a thorough investigation of the streetcar, and assess them.

2) If #1 looks good, then lets talk about the transit needs that the streetcar should service in that corridor.

3) After assessing the transit needs of that corridor, lets then discuss ways for the streetcar to service those needs. There are many ways to skin a cat.

You may be right that Chris Petersen will never build anything in Malan's basin. In that case, simply dismiss that part of the discussion. There will be those who will not dismiss that part of the discussion though as I am fairly certain that if a mass transit rail stop were a stone's through away from the top of the WSU campus and the edge of Chris Petersen's land, the discussions to date would already be different.

Who knows where the discussion may take us? But, let's have it I say.

Anonymous said...

"A historic looking streetcar ... could be an amazing solution."

No; a modern streetcar, not a cutesy amusement park ride!

Anonymous said...

Bob G. mentions "linking downtown with Ogden's major assets."

Let us not lose sight of the fact that downtown is one of Ogden's major assets; perhaps THE major asset.

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute, you can't get to the golf course from the top of 36th st. The clubhouse is on Darling and Constitution Way.
Please don't talk like you're concerned about Taxpayers and viability then propose lying little matty's nuclear option for the golf course, which includes moving the clubhouse to the top of 36th st. Since 2004 you guys have tried to justify selling the couse for the benefit of the poor taxpayer, now you are proposing more than $10 million and total destruction of what Golf Digest considers one of the BEST tracks around. The only reason being this way Peterson would get a cushy lease and foothold on the public dime.
The course was designed with the current clubhouse location in mind, moving it would greatly reduce the walkability, and discourage many that now walk from doing so. I know, I walk it.
All the other reasons stated for moving the clubhouse have nothing to do with golf, a multiuse facility serving as a base for a gondola or a place for wedding receptions is not a step in any direction if increasing rounds played is your objective. For that matter, how could any sane individual connect a public golf course with mass transit. Hiking trails and mass transit don't seem that related either.

Anonymous said...

Bob,

I've heard the mayor make the mutual exclusivity statement and I'll stick to my understanding.

Anyway it is a moot point and if indeed the statement was meant as you say then I agree. Like Dan, I think a streetcar would enhance Chris's plans to a much greater degree than a town gondola. I woulod rather not even get into the town gondola thing as I have typed myself silly and researched it to no end and it is a stupid idea period. I am so glad you are interested in the streetcar. Your several points seem a little over analyzing the thing but that is left to UTA not us. Imagine if they build it that in 25 or 30 years there will be a corridor of upscale redevelopment along the route through town. If you looked at those links I posted yesterday, it isn't hard to see what a positive impact that would have on Ogden. I forgot to post a link to a brand new Hybrid streetcar from Japan. This is cutting edge technology and we need to get on board. The streetcar would be the pride of the community and thousands of people will pay a premium to live within walking distance of the route which just happens to go through the part of the city most in need of fresh homeowners and redevelopment.

Anonymous said...

Bill,

I'll have to slightly disagree with you. If we get the streetcar built it will open the door to a lot of positive redevelopment which could include the reconfiguration. It's a lot of money, and like Peterson's plan's, not likely in today's financial climate. The streetcar and it's corridor will benefit from a greater density as it is redeveloped. It's a long way out and the tax base will need to grow to support it. It would be fairly natural for the clubhouse to be on 36th if it were to get busier in a decade maybe. We still have yet to see the effect of gas prices on all the activities we have taken for granted so I imagine an entirely different picture on leisure facilities in the future. It's just plain getting too expensive to service so much what we have taken for granted in public facilities.

Right now we are lucky enough to have UTA in on this and we should just get it built with a little fuss as possible.

Anonymous said...

Tec, the course needs no reconfiguration nor should the club house be moved. The golf course has nothing to do with mass transit and the location is the centerpiece of the Mt. Ogden community. Quiet peace and solitude are the desired setting, not bells whistles trafic and multi use clandestine gondola terminals.
Why would we want to destroy the beautiful challenging track we have now? The desire behind the redesign is to create another so so hum dum boring course like El Monte, the Barn, Ben Lomand and Riverside. That's enough boring foo foo tracks, why would we make the one good track in our area boring also? That's a step backwards.

Anonymous said...

Tec,

Sorry, I don't follow you. How does a streetcar benefit the golf course? And why does relocating the clubhouse make sense if the course gets busier? Golfers aren't going to ride public transit carrying their clubs, and there's very little room for a parking lot above the top of 36th.

Anonymous said...

I hope the board eggheads are on point: Lying Little Bobby Geiger has been playing you for fools; if he knows where you work, he is likely printing out your posts and shoving them in your employers' faces. Ha! Whattta douche! Yeah, Rudi, I voted for a pass, but I regret that: ban the hairplug prick: he's doing the devil's work and he knows it. It is and always will be: Geiger, Geiger, Geiger, Geiger, Geiger, Geiger...

Anonymous said...

Wow! Bob is a tough guy! Bob Geiger! Marine Captain! Is he going to kill me? Man, is he tough! Gotta sniper rifle, douche?

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

Dan,

I guess you're right. I was trying to accommodate the conversation.

Bill,

you are also correct on the config.

I'm completely satisfied with the course's playability. I asked my dad who plays regularly at 90. His opinion is like most we hear, that courses of this type are undesirable for guys who like to drive the long ball. It seems to me silly. So many golfers are sucked into the long ball mentality. But that's the game today. I prefer to be challenged to the max and losing balls is part of the fun. The same mentality can be seen in skiers who judge a mountain by the amount of groomed terrain. I judge a mountain by the total of ungroomed terrain and wild features like cliffs, chutes, forested areas. It's sickening the clearcutting that goes on to satisfy the weekend cruisers.

Anyway let's get the damn streetcar. I'm sick of discussing it.

Bob Geiger said...

Bill C-

Don't worry about the future of the Golf Course so much. Just focus on the streetcar. I agree. If the golf course is perfect the way it is, its future is fine. Like Tec Johnson alluded to, many people prefer a tougher course. We need to advertise that fact so that more people with a preference for a harder course can come pay for golf at Mt. Ogden and cover its debt and operating costs.

Again, though, no worries. The golf course will either carry its own water or it won't, and with your expertise on the matter, you should feel pretty comfortable that at the end of the day, the golf course will be fine the way it is.

Lets look at a streetcar between downtown to WSU.

Bob Geiger said...

Tec Johnson,

You don't need to appologize or back down from being accomodating. I know the peer pressure to do so can overwhelming here, but you don't "need" to retreat from an accomodating discussion. Retreating from accomodating discussions is how we end up polarized.

I'm not going to retreat from an accomodating discussion because I think that an accomodating discussion is important.

The streetcar can facilitate many things and there is no need to retreat from its ability to accomodate servicing recreation on the mountain. Unless, the real reason for proposing a streetcar is to serve as a "block" to servicing transit to public recreation on the mountain.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bob Geiger said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bob Geiger said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Bob Geiger said...

Jason,

CNTRL, SHIFT, SHIFT, SPACE, CONTRL

It's the code for getting 1,000 lives and superhuman strength. My son learned it the other day playing Mario Brothers. You've already mastered the the digital lie and cyber swearing. Hit the ESCAPE key, and you can through a virtual punch at me.

Anonymous said...

Short-deck:

Thanks for the tip, buddy! But I don't play computer games. Tell me how to hit a high fade from a sidehill lie, though, and we're in business. Remember,

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Anonymous said...

Probably pointless message to whoever is logging on as Bob Geiger and to Jason:

Seems to me recess on the playground ended for you guys, or should have, decades ago. Any chance we might get back on the topic of the thread? Any hope at all? Especially in light of UTA's announcing they want to increase rates on buses, TRAX and Frontrunner... the day before it goes into full service? This would raise the price of a one-way TRAX or bus ride to $2.00. Within a city, if you have an alternative, like driving, that makes a city bus trip over two hours [i.e. outside the free transfer/return window] highly un-economical. Even for one person, much less two. [A two person bus trip in SLC to say go down town, shop, have lunch, go home, would come to $8.] A one person take the bus to work and home trip comes to $4 a day, or $80 a month. Great if you have no alternative transit, absolutely not worth it if you do.
If one of the goals is to get people out of cars, and onto the buses and trains, raising fares is not the way to go.

Just for the sake of discussion, and maybe getting us off hair plugs and computer games as surrogates for real life and similar enthralling topics, I wonder if a fare free zone would work for downtown Ogden, much like the downtown fare free zone in SLC for TRAX. Would that provide some of the downtown "shuttle" service Hizzonah hopes to provide via Toonerville Trolley Bus shuttles? Is that a good idea for downtown Ogden? Just an idea....

Anonymous said...

I'm with you, Curm, Jason and Bob ought to take it outside.

If indeed you are Bob, I am delighted you have an interest in getting the streetcar built.

Getting Matthew on board is just a matter of creating momentum in the conversation. Hopefully your dad is in the spirit and maybe John Patterson. The time is right with the fuel prices.

While Curm makes an obvious case that the economics of transit at the current fuel price is still iffy, wait til the day we have gas rationing. Rationed fuel at any price will force people to look at the transit option. UTA sells a monthly all access pass for 149. Maybe they should look at yearly or quarterly passes at discount as an incentive.

Anonymous said...

Bob, don't worry, I haven't necessarily retreated, I have had the same discussions with Dan and Bill several times in the past and I overlooked some of the realities that thay have presented and that I forgot. Honestly, I'm open for anything that is well planned and integrates transit.

Anonymous said...

This transit imperative cannot be overstated. Our profligate consumption of oil and every other natural resource is unsustainable and needs to be prioritized if we are to survive as a species.

We, as Americans, can now be happy to have the blood of a million Iraqis on our hands so that our government can assure we have a steady supply of oil at whatever price. We are willing to use our impressive and loyal military to assure we will never stand in a gas line or be rationed. A bit childish. Let's get on with transit.

Godfrey, please slide off the frozen rod and jump on the streetcar bandwagon. It'll be a bit more comfortable.

Anonymous said...

Tec:

You wrote: UTA sells a monthly all access pass for 149. Maybe they should look at yearly or quarterly passes at discount as an incentive.

Had an interesting conversation this AM at GFC about this very thing with a casual acquaintance [works in an Ogden industrial plant]. He wondered about the same thing... a longer term than one month pass on UTA. Even a yearly pass, at some kind of discount [say for at 11 time the monthly rate]. The UTA gets the money up front; you don't have to make sure you buy a pass every month right in time so you're not paying the daily fee to ride to where you can get a pass on the first of the month; UTA will inevitably pick up some money for services not rendered [e.g. someone with a pass leaves on a vacation, etc.]; it would be a convenience to some regular riders, and save them a few bucks; and once people have the passes, their tendency to choose transit over their cars would increase because "I already paid for the pass." [Having a bus pass in my pocket has put me on the buses way more often than I would be if the pass was not there. Yes, mine is employer-provided, but the same logic would prevail when I am no longer working and buying a pass on my own.]

Seems an idea worth chewing over at least.

Anonymous said...

Good news: UTA "fare free" zone extended to include the Frontrunner TRAX station and all new stops on that line. Excellent decision. More information here.

Anonymous said...

20 posts on the 3 more current blog entries and 84 when involves transit. This has been a trend since the beginning of the whole transit or gondola misadventure. Even when talking about Peterson's plans the undercurrent has been transit because it involved a hope to link downtown to the foothil with transit. That should tell the mayor something about the community interest in transit. It's exciting and will get people very involved as it will affect a good portion of the city. It will put Ogden on the map the way he hoped a gondola might except it's the real deal. Get with it Matt. Your lagging while you look for an easy out of your 2 year stall. Don't worry, we know your a politician. Just do the right thing and you might see some credit due from even your harshest critics. Don't make us wait for another election to get transit rolling. Your political future could hinge on this very initiative. Get transit on a hot burner and cut a few years off the lead time. The train is here, everyone is in a transit kind of mood.

Anonymous said...

Tec, if transit is the crux of the biscuit, let's not allow lying little matty and minions to convalute and confuse the issue as only they can. East of Harrison for a fixed rail system is so far if ever down the road, it doesn't belong in the current discussion.
There is no commercial growth potential east of Harrison within the City limits. Nothing to justify mass transit at all. There is a current need and justification along Harrison. Lying little matty and ilk ought to accept the fact that there's no way they're going to funnel public money to wayne peterson's vest, he's going to sink or swim on his own, as it should be.

Bob Geiger said...

Bill C-

23rd Street is all residential, as is Harrison all the way to WSU.

If private businesses adjacent to the Hospital such as Smith's Food King, Hollywood Video, The Treasure Basket, Einstiens Bagels, etc are sufficient destinations for a $100 million transit system, then so should be the trail systems, golf course and Mt. Ogden Park Complex that is adjacent to WSU.

I haven't heard anyone say that Hollywood Video is the most important public asset in our community, but I have heard many say that the trail systems, Park, Golf course and such are. It has been said over and over again.

Fine, take Chris Petersen out of it. Trails, Golf Course, Park, etc have been deemed the golden destinations for public activity in our town and therefore deserve to at least be in the conversation.

I don't need to convince you, its just a matter of fact. At this point, there is no way to roll back time and minimize the vast, deep and constant discussion that these locations are the prime destinations for recreational and leisure activity in our town.

And, should Chris Petersen come into the conversation while the Street Car takes shape, it would be a tough arguement that Einstiens Bagels, the Treasure Basket, Smith's Foodking and the Hospital are important to service with transit while WSU the trail systems, the golf course, the Mt. Ogden Park complex and a Malan's Basin resort are not important to serice with transit.

Bill Crichlow can protest that we shouldn't even be discussing this, but it is my feeling that it will get a great deal of discussion and focus. Afterall, no one has said that Smith's Foodking is why they live in Ogden and the key to Ogden's future. Everyone has said that Mountain activity is why they live in Ogden and the key to Ogden's future. Both pro-Gondola folks and anti-Gondola folks have made that very clear.

Oh well, no need to talk about it any further. It will be what it will be. I'm talking up considering the Streetcar wherever I go.

Bob Geiger said...

Bill C-

I just spoke with State personnel responsible for coordinating transit issues, and proposed the scenario of a Streetcar proposal and how that would look. They said that there certainly would be no transit service discussions suppressed along the route and that transit service discussions critical to the community and to key economic development issues would definitely be on the table.

They agreed that a discussion regarding service of the trails, parks and golf course would be warranted and that certainly a discussion about transit service to a Malan's Basin resort would also be warranted.

Anonymous said...

BG:

You wrote: They agreed that a discussion regarding service of the trails, parks and golf course would be warranted and that certainly a discussion about transit service to a Malan's Basin resort would also be warranted.

If... if... a resort appears in Malan's Basin and shows signs of drawing significant numbers, then it will be time to discuss expensive transit investment serving the base of its private up-mountain gondola. [I'd point out that there is no public transit from Ogden to Snow Basin, which is an already well established, large ski resort.] Seven buses an hour already pass the presumed location of the base station for a Malan's Basin resort in each direction. To be discussing now allocating millions in transit funds to run a trolley line up to the base of a gondola that doesn't yet exit servicing a resort not in Ogden that doesn't yet exist, the proponent of which seems so far not to have the funding necessary to build it, and that might, if built, or might not draw significant numbers is... well, I'll be polite: premature.

There is ample bus service now --- seven an hour in each direction, five of which go to the Frontrunner station --- to service whatever Mr. Peterson builds in Malan's Basin. If and when it exists and succeeds, then improved transit services might well merit discussion. But not until then.

Oh, and by the way, Harrison Blvd is not "residential all the way to WSU" from 23rd Street. You need to get out more. Ride the buses some. Look around.

Bob Geiger said...

Curm-

If the current busses and their stops is used as a barometer for the need for further transit stops and nodes for a streetcar, then the whole discussion should stop now as the busses running from downtown to WSU are empty.

If the potentiality of things is used as the baraometer for the need for further transit stops and nodes for a streetcar, then the discussion should remain wide open given the potentiality of a Malan's basin resort and the actuality of public use of the trail, park and golf course--so declared by everyone in Ogden.

Bob Geiger said...

All-

The issue is getting a streetcar not opposing Chris Petersen, so no need to take too much offense to my statements about Chris.

I am offering a way to help facilitate more and more momentum for the realization of a streetcar.

If Chris's project is never going to happen, then just smile at my comments and encourage me as I will be facilitating your desires for a streetcar.

It is my understanding that the Streetcar is not meant to block or derail Chris Petersen. So why worry too much if some get more excited about a street car if they foolishly believe that it will help achieve a beautiful mountain resort in Malan's Basin connected to our city.

In the end you get a streetcar.

Anonymous said...

BG:

You wrote:
If the current busses and their stops is used as a barometer for the need for further transit stops and nodes for a streetcar, then the whole discussion should stop now as the busses running from downtown to WSU are empty.


I repeat, you need to get out more. Ride the buses. The only way you could claim that the buses from downtown to WSU "are empty," is if you do not ride them. The 603, UTA tells me, is one of the most ridden routes it runs. I've been on it when people were standing. I ride the buses almost daily [today, and it's just noon, I've ridden four of them, three different routes [612N, 603-- N and S -- and 625S]. None were empty. Or even close.]

Second: bus routes are relatively inexpensive to establish or alter. The existing seven buses could be routed a block off their current routes to service a gondola base with virtually no significant public investment. Not so for trolley tracks, and to discuss the large investment involved in rail transit to serve a resort that does not exist, and if ever built, may not draw enough customers to justify rail service specifically to service it, seems to me, still, way premature.

Furthermore, you cannot judge the ridership of a bus route by looking at the occasional bus at one point on its route. During rush hours, ridership will be generally higher. About mid morning or mid afternoon, less so. When WSU is not in session, loads will be way lighter. The 55 going south from WSU during the term sometimes has standing room only. On days WSU is closed, few riders mid afternoon.

And as I've noted before, I've ridden the 603 from downtown to WSU. Over the course of the route to WSU [and that's not its complete route], more 20 people boarded or left [I think the count, and I was counting, was 23], though there were never more than eight or nine on the bus at any one time, and at one point, there were only four or five of us. People get on. People get off. It's called public transit.

You need to get out more. Ride the buses to work. Regularly. Use the public buses to get around Ogden some. Look around.

Anonymous said...

I'm pleased as punch. This showdown between Curm and Bob Geiger is something I'd shell out good loot to watch.

In this corner, we have Bob Geiger, the most extreme demagogue in all of Ogden. In that corner, Mr. Curmudgeon, Ogden's most extreme rational thinker.

Can anyone spell "Inherit the Wind"?

Something's gotta give.

Anonymous said...

MM:

You wrote: Mr. Curmudgeon, Ogden's most extreme rational thinker.

Thanks, but you do realize I am waiting, with absolute fanatical confidence, for the Brooklyn Dodgers to emerge from the BMT and return to their people and to a re-built Ebbitts Field, don't you? [For yea verily I say unto you, it is written, if we re-build it, They will come!] So "extreme rational thinker" may not be quite the right term....

Bob Geiger said...

Curm-

You are right. Let's just get a transit system from downtown to WSU. I'm not opposed to a street car.

Anonymous said...

Since, in general, we seem to be discussing urban design and transit-related development, perhaps this isn't too far off the topic. SE has this morning a story on Layton's plans for developing its downtown area around the Frontrunner station. [There is a pic in the print SE, and the same pic appears in the SE's on line "News Roundup May 1" video on its free page, link here.], showing [I think] the proximity of the station to central downtown.

Which had me wondering, yet again, about the decision not to have the Frontrunner come into the old Union Station in downtown Ogden, but instead to locate it on a bare new platform about a hundred yards or so to the north. [SE reported earlier this week that people were going to Union Station trying to board the Frontrunner, assuming, reasonably, that it was the train station. Clearly they were not with it enough to know that "Intermodal Hub" is newspeak for "train station" in these parts.]

Anyway, walking around this morning in the cold, snow and wind, it occurred to me that the Frontrunner platform in Ogden has no windbreak to the west at all, just the UP yards, and none to the east [parking lot]. Cold blue northers are going to rake that platform in the winter months [sometimes with rain and sleet included] with nothing but a g-string [so to speak] of a plexiglass panel or two for cover.

Making Union Station the train stop would have provided comfortable cover for those waiting for trains in all weathers, and all seasons, not to mention letting passengers off right at the foot of Historic 25th Street. Instead, now they detrain in a parking lot, facing as yet un-renovated buildings across Wall to the east, the site of a future Wal-Mart to the north, and acres of decrepit boarded up homes and vacant lots in the Lesham City area of Ogden to the NE. Comparing that to what Layton has planned as its Frontrunner gateway, I wonder again at the wisdom of moving the station out into the bare and barren spot it occupies now. Even Mayor Godfrey apparently thinks the platform is so isolated from Historic 25th Street that we need Toonerville Trolley Bus shuttles to haul train riders to Ogden's downtown historic gem and rapidly revitalizing street. [Yes, Mayor Godfrey, some good things are happening on 25th Street, and some of them came on your watch.]

I presume serious considerations informed the decision to have Frontrunner bypass Union Station, like access to parking. There is virtually none of any substance at Union Station, certainly not to include commuter traffic. Still, I wonder if some design solution couldn't have been found. I think, for example, of small shops that might have found a home at a living Union Station, where commuters could grab coffee and a donut, or more, waiting for the train of a sleety cold morning, or pick up deli or cooked entrees to take home, coming off the train as they do in SF at the ferry terminals. The wine bar there seems to be popular too, with commuters and tourists. Of course, SF is not laboring under the commercial dead weight of Utah's liquor laws. Still, have to wonder how "Trackers Wine Bar" or "The Gandy Dancer Wine Bar" might have done as part of a revitalized, living, commuter rail station at Union Station. I just can't see much of that sort, or any sort, developing around the current Frontrunner platform. The nearest commercial property, at its nothing much at the moment to look at, seems to be a big parking lot and busy street away from where passengers detrain.

I think we may have missed an opportunity here. Maybe there are things I'm overlooking, engineering reasons perhaps, etc. Be interesting to know that. Anyone better informed than I am about such matters -- a very large group --- let me know.

Anonymous said...

BG:

Can I tease you just a little further south? From WSU to McKay-Dee hospital? The figures on number of discrete visits to McKay-Dee in a typical year is huge. Something [working from memory here, so don't hold me to it exactly] like 400K visits a year [patients, staff, volunteers, vendors and patient visitors]. I think anticipated McKay-Dee traffic figured significantly into the WFRC's conclusion that that route [downtown, WSU, McKay Dee]] was the one most likely to generate significant passenger traffic.

As for a Malan's resort: Mr. Peterson owns Malan's Basin. He has a right to develop his property [consistent with County and FS watershed and other regulations] as he thinks will best serve his interests, provided he can finance that development. Since we seem to be carving out... however gingerly... areas about which we agree [or at least do not disagree], I thought I'd throw that into the mix.

Bob Geiger said...

Curm-

I agree with you regarding Chris Petersen.

At this point, I also see no problem with the streetcar going to the Hospital. The issue is going to be the financing of this $101 million project. If the federal and local funds materialize in such a way that it is reasonble to Ogdenites, I'll be all for it. And...You won't find me out there trying to undermine any public support that may arrise...no matter what the cost is. If the cost is too steep for me, I'll simply express my views quietly. I'm pretty certain that if the cost is too high, Bob Geiger's comments on the matter will be of little influence or value anyway....so why squawk.

I'll be interested to see what the city of Ogden will embrace, and I'm certainly open to considering trax that go as far south as the Hospital.

As I said, I'll not oppose an exprensive streetcar that is acceptable to Ogdenites, and I'll certainly champion a streetcar that is federally funded or does not require a crazy tax hike or something like that. And to be consistent, I'd even consider selling the golf course to a developer who will donate the funds to the streetcar project and cover its operating costs if that's what it took. I'd especially do so if the developer was willing to sign a development agreement that kept the golf course, improved the trails, etc.

Let's just see where this takes us.

You don't have to persuade me to consider going a bit further south. I'm open to consideration.

Anonymous said...

It seems he just can't untie the golf course from the discussion of mass transit.
If the City needs to dump a major drain on it's finances the most logical one would be dump that rec center. We subsidize that more per month than the golf course loses in a year. Note, it takes two months if we add interest compounded on interest with depreciation and extra heavey special administrative overhead supposedly owed to the City by, ITSELF.
It's like groung hog day, golden gondolas and giant fake icecicles.
Curm, what was it Yogi said?( Dejavu all over again).

Post a Comment

© 2005 - 2014 Weber County Forum™ -- All Rights Reserved