OGDEN -- The great Ogden streetcar debate is set to heat up again. The Ogden City Council will hold a special fact-finding work session tonight to discuss the viability of a streetcar project in the city.Here's the full SE story:
The meeting will be held in the council chambers at the Ogden Municipal Building, 2549 Washington Blvd., immediately following the city's regular council meeting, which begins at 6 p.m.
For the highly detail-oriented among us, we provide a separate announcement from the Ogden City Council staff, and tonight's work session packet:
- Fact Finding Work Session Scheduled To Discuss Ogden Streetcar Project
- 01/10 City Council Work Session Packet
Update 1/10/12 6:25 p.m.: Dan S. is now live blogging from the City Council Chambers (wethinks).
Update 1/11/12 7:30 a.m.: The Standard carries the post council work session story:
OGDEN -- The likelihood of securing federal funding remains one of the biggest issues in bringing a streetcar system to Ogden.At a special work session held after Tuesday night's Ogden City Council meeting, an independent consultant hired by the city said while the federal funding landscape is unpredictable, the Ogden project would stack up well against other projects around the nation competing for the same funding.Read the full story here:
8 comments:
It will be interesting to see how Mayor Caldwell works with the Council. These early meeting may set the tone for his tenure...
RDA meeting (preceding work session) is currently in progress. McConkie seems to think we have all night but there are some interesting tidbits about the state of various RDA projects, especially the Earnshaw building.
Parking lease agreement for Earnshaw Building approved unanimously.
Five speakers are scheduled to speak for ten minutes each. First guy, council's consultant, took half an hour including lots of questions. UTA guy is up now and took five minutes to get through his first slide. It's gonna be a long night.
Quick summary before I call it a night.
The council's consultant spoke first and indicated that the federal funding situation is uncertain but by no means hopeless; if the local community can reach a strong consensus on a transit project, then it makes sense to be as ready as possible to seek federal funding.UTA then gave a presentation that wasn't much different from what they were saying a year ago: Insinuating that a streetcar on Harrison isn't technically feasible due to constraints that come from UDOT.
WSU's representative spoke next and said that they're doing everything they can to embrace transit because future growth of the campus won't be possible otherwise. They want a better transit connection to downtown Ogden.
I spoke next on behalf of the Sierra Club, saying that the real goal is to make Ogden's central city a more desirable place to live and that transit is one essential part of that (but just one part). We already have a some very successful bus routes and we need to be careful that any new transit project doesn't disrupt the existing system.
Finally, Shalae Larsen spoke on behalf of the Trolley District, emphasizing Ogden's history, the unique opportunities for transit-oriented development in the east-central neighborhood, and the importance of making Harrison Blvd. a connection between the east and west parts of the city, rather than a barrier between them.
The council then took public comments, and about ten folks got up to speak for three minutes each. Some spoke on tangential issues, but in general the speakers tended to support the streetcar concept and an alignment along 25th Street and Harrison Blvd.
Mayor Caldwell sat and listened to the whole thing, not saying a word. There were plenty of others listening from the audience, and in general I sensed a desire to give the streetcar idea another serious look to see if we can make it work.
Many thanks for this helpful and interesting summary. The Standard write-up was good as far as it went, but I suspect Mitch Shaw left after consultant Arrington spoke. Very good to hear what the others said. If you can, those additional "tidbits" about the building-formerly-known-as-Earnshaw would be well-received.
Thanks, Dan. Once again your summary is more informative & balanced than the SubStandard-Exaggerator.
Some dissonance?
How many of the people who support programs such as this (which cannot be executed without federal funding) vote straight party tickets, complain about earmarks, bemoan the federal deficit, demonize pork-barrel projects, believe they are victims of high tax rates, etc.?
I guess it's unprincipled only when the other guy benefits.
Post a Comment