Wednesday, May 21, 2008

Ogden Public Transit Update: Informative Editorial in This Morning's Standard-Examiner

The Std-Ex brings its readers up to speed on the current Ogden City public transit planning posture

Well-crafted and informative editorial in today's Standard-Examiner, summarizing the current posture of the streetcar option in Ogden city's public transit planning process. Today's editorial hits all the important high points:

1) "It wasn’t 'Kumbaya,' but it was close";
2) The administration and council "still disagree about which route transit should take, but they do agree that a streetcar is their vehicle of preference";
3) Both the administration and city council "take a dim view of bus-rapid-transit."
4) "Nary a mention of a gondola — although Godfrey did say, maybe cryptically or maybe not, that if the streetcar turns out to be too expensive, it would be time to look at 'other options.'";
5) The sudden arrival of Boss Godfrey within the pro-streetcar camp is "good news for Ogden."

Although much of the analysis in this morning's editorial will no doubt have a deju vu feel for our regular Weber County Forum readers, we're happy to see the Std-Ex editorializing on the subject, and going the extra mile to inform its general readership about the current status of public transit planning in Ogden.

So how about it, gentle readers? Is there anything either we or the Standard-Examiner left out?

Don't all chime in at once.

12 comments:

Jason W. said...

The Gondola Examiner took a half-assed swipe at its endorsed midget moron mayor of OTown, Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey, writing that the three-year delay caused by His Delusional Forehead's THE GONDOLA obsession certainly hasn't been without its expense. Maybe the Editorial Board members of The Gondola Examiner have allowed their heads to seep a mite out of their asses and are beginning to realize what a crock of shit THE GONDOLA and the castle in the hills, built without a sewer and guarded by magical dwarves, as envisioned by the Thorazine-addled, vest-wearing dumbass and leader of his own Famed Squirrel Patrol, Wayne Peterson. But I doubt it: Their pre-election house editorial postulated about "the future of THE GONDOLA;" the Davis County resident who edits the page wrote of Wayne's "impressive" so-called proposal that was never proposed; they "support THE URBAN GONDOLA;" they endorsed Lying Little Matty Gondola Godfrey and his gargantuan forehead, a divining rod that tells him community salvation lies only within the acrid and rape-friendly confines of cars for THE GONDOLA to nowhere; I would wager that the Editorial Board members of The Gondola Examiner still cling to the same childish belief that Wayne Peterson and his Famed Squirrel Patrol are going to build something in Malan's Basin some day, connected via THE GONDOLA, because they've been led to such a naive and ridiculous idea by bona fide Squirrel Patroller Lee Carter and his idiot Chamber of Gondola buddy and haberdasher, tie-salesman extraordinaire, Dave Hardman. And please alert the community saviors and transit-minded Geigers who nontheless love, love, love, love, love GONDOLAs -- at the expense of their very safety -- that the old U&I furniture building on Wall is selling 10-pound bags of onions for only $10.

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

dan s. said...

The editorial covers the main points, and I admire the S-E for mentioning the elephant in the room (the gondola).

As in the earlier article, the emphasis on the remaining dispute over alignment shows a misunderstanding of the process. It simply doesn't matter, at this stage, who prefers which alignment. The alternatives analysis process must consider (at least briefly) all possible alignments and the final report must explain why the preferred alignment was chosen over other possible alternatives. Furthermore, the reasons given for choosing the preferred alignment have to be good ones--not simply "the mayor wanted this alignment" or "the council wanted that alignment".

Of course, part of me wishes that the editorial had come down harder on Godfrey for delaying nearly three years before finally agreeing to move forward. Tactically, though, I suppose there's something to be said for going easy on him, letting him save face (more or less), since he's still mayor and he could still change his mind and stall the process once again if he wanted to.

Jason W. said...

The Gondola Examiner also failed to write about the little bird who sings the song of hope, only in Ogden. And its editorial was bereft of references to a Wolfgang Puck restaurant, or the fact that the entire THE GONDOLA scheme was predicated on $14 million worth of decal sponsorships at $35K per.

THE SKI IS BEAUTIFUL BLUE

Jason W. Fan said...

Don't kid yourselves, People. Godfrey IS NOT within the "pro-gondola camp", as Rudi suggests.

Godfrey's half hearted endorsement of an Alteratives Analysis is just the first step all right. It's the first step toward Godfrey's killing off anything but what our board Hunter S. Thompson charactor, none other than Jason W., refers to as "The Gondola!

Just my two bits. Despite what some people say about Jason W's alleged "hedonism," my take is that it's people like Jason who propel the American "Jackhammers of Change."

Keisha said...

I propose a cage fight bout between Rudi and Matt Godfrey some time in the summer.

This would be highly entertaining for the citizens of Ogden.

I told you so said...

Would not work. The mayor would get rudi in a head lock and then call the police and the fight would be over.

beaver said...

Fan:

Or in Jason's case–"Jackasses of Change."

By the way, no need to use "alleged" when referring to Jason's hedonism. As a journalist, he would assure you that truth is the one sure defense against libel.

Hail Critchlow!

Tec Jonson said...

Great screed, Jason W.

Since the SE leaves out the history of where we stand today, it is a fine public service that you keep warm in the minds of the local illiterati just why our leadership have not discussed streetcars until now. Keep hammering these wiseguys. They deserve no less than public accountability for the misleadership of the last 3 years.

Tec Jonson said...

BRT is a non-starter as an alternative.This option has been floated by the automotive industry because is uses automotive/bus technology instead of rail technology. BRT relies on rubber tires, traditional drivetrains, concrete guideways and more relics from the auto era that assures their replacement parts stream. The same people that bring you freeways and and land hogging cloverleafs are now pushing this version of "transit" It's bogus and has no wide acceptance outside of the industry thinktanks.

Curmudgeon said...

Tec:
BRT has a role to play, and can work, but not I think in the circumstances downtown to wsu/McKay Dee. It can work if its major role is to carry commuters from outside a city, rapidly, into a city and then, from that point on, to operate to distribute riders to various destinations, and then doing the reverse at day's end. The advantages of BRT operations are pretty much wiped out over a short run with numerous stops such as downtown to WSU would involve. The time saving would be minimal over conventional bus operations. The [relative] permanence of the station platforms and occasional reserved turning lanes would confer, I guess, some greater sense of permanence, but nothing like rail would do. BRT has its place, but downtown to WSU/McKay Dee is not it I think.

disgusted said...

brt can be operated in dedicated lanes with coorodinated traffic lights to the brt scheduled movements.
brt can be powered by overhead electric and be very environmentally friendly.
brt can make stops only at specific assigned locations rather than each corner.
brt can climb hills better than street cars. such as the science building at wsc or thru sullivans hollow on monroe.
brt can make tighter turns thus allowing it to go into more places. such as to the front door of the hospital or up to the front of wsc.
brt initial cost is lower.

Curmudgeon said...

Disgusted:

The advantage of point one is eliminated, or largely so, by the shortness of the proposed run.
As to point 3, I don't know if you ride Ogden buses much, but they absolutely do NOT "stop at every corner." BRT would presumably stop at fewer places, but each reduction reduces as well rider access.
BRT initial cost is indeed lower. But I haven't seen anything convincing yet that indicates it would be more successful drawing riders than rail, and I've seen a lot to suggest that rail absolutely generates a great deal more transit-related development than BRT is likely to.
It has its uses, but does not seem to be a good solution for the downtown-WSU-McKay Dee Hospital route. The projections I saw suggested it would make a difference, on average, of four, maybe five minutes over the downtown to WSU route over conventional existing bus service. That would not make it appreciably more attractive, I think, to riders than the existing service and would not therefor justify the costs involved unless there were other benefits that would make it worth while. Based on what I've seen so far, I think the council and mayor are right in not being terribly interested in a BRT option over that route.

Post a Comment

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