Omaha Streetcar Discussion

[skinzfan23]

That seems way too confusing. Why does the route loop so much, and also confusing it has a separate smaller loop.

[Garrett]

That seems way too confusing. Why does the route loop so much, and also confusing it has a separate smaller loop.

The Bricktown Loop is just a weekend thing for their nightlife/entertainment district. I'm curious what impacts it has on the rest of the "network" when its in operation as well.

[Dusty]

OKC's streetcar is one of the worst designed and performing lines in the country. The loops are nonsensical imo and it ends up not covering a lot of linear space. It only covers 1.2 miles of space north-to-south, compared to 2.4 miles of coverage Omaha will have with the starter line, and possibly up to 3 miles with the UNMC expansion.

Rookie planners! They should have hired us nerds to plan it for them. LOL!

[Dusty]

Yeah one of the biggest "flaws" on the starter line is that it's a couplet for part of the run. It's only single block at least, so around 400 feet or less than a 2 minute walk, but still not ideal. For some regional comparisons, OKC's couplet runs on streets that are between 600 and 900 feet apart, and makes an even bigger loop at its northern end. Kansas City's is basically entirely linear except for the small loop in the River Market area. Refer to my post on the top of Page 94 to see more comparisons.

And yes, 2-way reconversions are definitely in vogue right now. The city is currently studying turning much of the downtown street system back to two way streets, and I think its a missed opportunity to not have the streetcar be part of that.

I wouldn't call it a flaw, but a bad design can lose the function they are supposed to serve. They serve the purpose of dispersing congestion to create a better flow. The problem is Omaha is not congested enough on Farnam to warrant a couplet. Do you see hordes of people filling up the sidewalks down here? Or backups of any sort? Well... we better create a couplet to spread this congestion out a little!

BUT if a ton of people come down to downtown, the pedestrian volume could majorly increase. It's important the lines are within walking distance so you can quickly change directions. The intention is to push the flow up and down the street and connect destinations on the way.

[Garrett]

Yeah one of the biggest "flaws" on the starter line is that it's a couplet for part of the run. It's only single block at least, so around 400 feet or less than a 2 minute walk, but still not ideal. For some regional comparisons, OKC's couplet runs on streets that are between 600 and 900 feet apart, and makes an even bigger loop at its northern end. Kansas City's is basically entirely linear except for the small loop in the River Market area. Refer to my post on the top of Page 94 to see more comparisons.

And yes, 2-way reconversions are definitely in vogue right now. The city is currently studying turning much of the downtown street system back to two way streets, and I think its a missed opportunity to not have the streetcar be part of that.

I wouldn't call it a flaw, but a bad design can lose the function they are supposed to serve. They serve the purpose of dispersing congestion to create a better flow. The problem is Omaha is not congested enough on Farnam to warrant a couplet. Do you see hordes of people filling up the sidewalks down here? Or backups of any sort? Well... we better create a couplet to spread this congestion out a little!

BUT if a ton of people come down to downtown, the pedestrian volume could majorly increase. It's important the lines are within walking distance so you can quickly change directions. The intention is to push the flow up and down the street and connect destinations on the way.

I don’t think it’s a major flaw, just a minor one. Harney and Farnam are close enough where the walk is short, and it’s still fairly linear overall.

I’m a bit confused about your point on congestion. What are you trying to say there? Are you saying there isn’t enough traffic on Farnam to warrant it being the only street the streetcar runs on?

[Dusty]

You can put a streetcar down any street that has the density to support it. Or enough land to develop to bring the density. What we have is an issue of 2 modes fighting over the Farnam corridor. The streetcar needs more space in order to be efficient to stay on Farnam. This would involve taking away car lanes. By taking away lanes, cars could back up and create congestion. This is under the assumption car flow remains the same even after the streetcar is built. In order you keep the same carrying capacity you have to push one of the modes to a nearby corridor to balance it out.

Now you have couplet for the streetcar to boost efficiency of this line while maintaining the same car flow on Farnam. They are building a streetcar, but not willing to cut back on car lanes. This also explains the street running model. The don't want to inconvenience the car driver. They are being very cautious to not be disruptive. If the car traffic goes down, they could upgrade the streetcar to be protected lane from cars. As of right now, they are playing it safe.

What am trying to say is the so called congestion or car traffic is being overinflated so they don't have to hear all the complaints of taking a car lane away. They could have converted Farnam in to 2-way and ran the streetcar down the center. It would of sent a loud message that this corridor will be transit-oriented with car access. People would be taking the streetcar more serious that it's a form of transportation. You would see a modal shift of people using the train verses their car. The car volume drops resulting in capacity to be balanced, not congested.

The added bonus of the couplet is you have a bigger spread of economic development. The radius of the infill will bring in more density and money for the city.

BUT the city is stilling looking it with a suburban mindset to building an urban streetcar. This is the biggest flaw. Not willing to cut back car lanes to support it. Treating the streetcar as an accessorial to the streetscape. The messaging of the streetcar is creating the opposition. The city keeps pushing "drive downtown and park and ride". Yes...park in one of the city owned garages where they can make money to fund more unnecessary garages. Plus, if everyone drives to downtown, less is riding the bus. If everyone if driving downtown, they are keeping Farnam full of cars so that can't take away car lanes. We are creating the car traffic by design verses changing the streetscape to give people mobility options. This is also where the novelty train term comes from...an attraction to drive downtown for.

[Trips1]

I really do not believe that it will cut down on traffic. As a part-time rideshare driver I believe I have a unique perspective. I would estimate that less than 5% of the rides I give would use the Streetcar. Of the 14 rides this Friday night (5PM - 11 PM) that started or ended along the line, here is there starting/ending point.

Ralston Arena - 1
West Omaha (144th to 181st St) - 5
La Vista - 1
UNO - 1
Regency - 1
Eppley - 1
Atlas Apartments - 3
33rd and Leavenworth - 1

I believe that the state law is written so that Uber and Lyft have to provide this type of information to the state. If would be interesting to see how many rides start and end within the streetcar zone.

[Athomsfere]

I really do not believe that it will cut down on traffic. As a part-time rideshare driver I believe I have a unique perspective. I would estimate that less than 5% of the rides I give would use the Streetcar. Of the 14 rides this Friday night (5PM - 11 PM) that started or ended along the line, here is there starting/ending point.

Ralston Arena - 1
West Omaha (144th to 181st St) - 5
La Vista - 1
UNO - 1
Regency - 1
Eppley - 1
Atlas Apartments - 3
33rd and Leavenworth - 1

I believe that the state law is written so that Uber and Lyft have to provide this type of information to the state. If would be interesting to see how many rides start and end within the streetcar zone.

It's likely also safe to say there is some built in selection bias there.

People who live in the area and currently bike, walk, scooter, or drive in a pinch around but would take the steetcar or use the streetcar to extend their reach of comfort.

When I lived in Blackstone I would have LOVED the streetcar to get me and my bike to the Riverfront to knockout my route around Lake Manawa. Or when someone wanted to meet in the OM I would have taken it rather than drive.

When I lived downtown I would have loved the streetcar to get me to MTC for the gym in the winter. Or Blackstone anytime. I could even then take a Lime to Rathskeller!

[Louie]

There is also the goal of increased development, and in turn residential population along the streetcar route.

[Athomsfere]

There is also the goal of increased development, and in turn residential population along the streetcar route.

Absolutely, and as it becomes less novel and new, more and more people taking it at least sometimes because it feels easier. Tourists that stay on the line so that they can not worry about driving to stuff etc.

[Dusty]

I know when I stay at a hotel, I would rather walk across the street to a restaurant versus getting in my car and driving 3-4 blocks away. The proximity of places within walking distance makes it convenient.

The streetcar will be the same. Why walk all the way back to your car so you can drive halfway across the city for something else? Way easier to ride the line and support one of the venues down the street.

[ita]

On the topic of city owned parking garages being built along the streetcar route, I have always been slightly confused why the city is so bent on building new ones when one of the issues brought up that the streetcar is supposed to address is the sea of unused/underutilized parking in the urban core. I don't know if anyone from the City or other proponents have said this, but the more I think about it, I think the City is trying to do something under the radar. The City is able to build these garages with construction bonds and TIF from new projects. As such, parking rates in city garages are subsidized and are/will be lower than adjacent privately owned parking lots or garages. My thought is this, the City is building parking garages in droves to effectively push owners of private garages or lots near the streetcar route to either develop their properties for better uses or sell to someone who will. The City is going to make it less profitable for all these parking lot and garage owners to keep their properties as parking facilities by undercutting them in parking rates. Just a thought.

[Garrett]

On the topic of city owned parking garages being built along the streetcar route, I have always been slightly confused why the city is so bent on building new ones when one of the issues brought up that the streetcar is supposed to address is the sea of unused/underutilized parking in the urban core. I don't know if anyone from the City or other proponents have said this, but the more I think about it, I think the City is trying to do something under the radar. The City is able to build these garages with construction bonds and TIF from new projects. As such, parking rates in city garages are subsidized and are/will be lower than adjacent privately owned parking lots or garages. My thought is this, the City is building parking garages in droves to effectively push owners of private garages or lots near the streetcar route to either develop their properties for better uses or sell to someone who will. The City is going to make it less profitable for all these parking lot and garage owners to keep their properties as parking facilities by undercutting them in parking rates. Just a thought.

Yeah it has at times been puzzling, but if it achieves the goal you describe, that's a win.

[GenX]

On the topic of city owned parking garages being built along the streetcar route, I have always been slightly confused why the city is so bent on building new ones when one of the issues brought up that the streetcar is supposed to address is the sea of unused/underutilized parking in the urban core. I don't know if anyone from the City or other proponents have said this, but the more I think about it, I think the City is trying to do something under the radar. The City is able to build these garages with construction bonds and TIF from new projects. As such, parking rates in city garages are subsidized and are/will be lower than adjacent privately owned parking lots or garages. My thought is this, the City is building parking garages in droves to effectively push owners of private garages or lots near the streetcar route to either develop their properties for better uses or sell to someone who will. The City is going to make it less profitable for all these parking lot and garage owners to keep their properties as parking facilities by undercutting them in parking rates. Just a thought.

Yeah it has at times been puzzling, but if it achieves the goal you describe, that's a win.

According to the mayor, parking garages are cash cows for the city. I believe that is a large portion of the reason.

[Garrett]

On the topic of city owned parking garages being built along the streetcar route, I have always been slightly confused why the city is so bent on building new ones when one of the issues brought up that the streetcar is supposed to address is the sea of unused/underutilized parking in the urban core. I don't know if anyone from the City or other proponents have said this, but the more I think about it, I think the City is trying to do something under the radar. The City is able to build these garages with construction bonds and TIF from new projects. As such, parking rates in city garages are subsidized and are/will be lower than adjacent privately owned parking lots or garages. My thought is this, the City is building parking garages in droves to effectively push owners of private garages or lots near the streetcar route to either develop their properties for better uses or sell to someone who will. The City is going to make it less profitable for all these parking lot and garage owners to keep their properties as parking facilities by undercutting them in parking rates. Just a thought.

Yeah it has at times been puzzling, but if it achieves the goal you describe, that's a win.

According to the mayor, parking garages are cash cows for the city. I believe that is a large portion of the reason.

I’d love to see those numbers, because especially if the city is allowing a certain amount of free parking, I’m not sure what the cash flow is like on a multi million dollar parking garage

[Athomsfere]

On the topic of city owned parking garages being built along the streetcar route, I have always been slightly confused why the city is so bent on building new ones when one of the issues brought up that the streetcar is supposed to address is the sea of unused/underutilized parking in the urban core.

I've always sort of assumed this was 2 things:

Trying to 5x the population while removing parking lots. That's a good move / goal.

Unfortunately we are still an American city, and one located in the Midwest. We appease the suburbanites and regional tourism with parking. Garages are better than lots at least.

The city just isn't really all in on multi modal. And I don't know how we could undo 80 years of bad design in one or two decades, even if we were.

[halgy]

IMO, the goal isn't to remove parking spots (at least not right now), but instead to remove surface parking lots.

Parking lots generate very little property tax. If the city can replace 4 blocks of parking with 1 block of parking garage, that means 3 more blocks of development. Even if they city only breaks even on the parking, they'll make way more in increased property tax from the new development.

Plus, getting rid of surface parking makes dense and walkable development possible to build, which in turn leads to less car dependance. We need to have a bunch of garages to start, but hopefully in the near future we can build new developments without building new parking, because the existing parking is sufficient.

[Trips1]

You are correct in that people might be walking or biking vs taking a rideshare, and that is a market for the streetcar.

I will give multiple rides to people here for Berkshire that walked from the Old Market to Midtown only to discover it is not that easy. A 2-mile walk in some cities is not bad but in downtown Omaha is very difficult.

In other news, Tesla predicts that their autonomous cabs will be available across the US by the end of 2026. They are starting in Austin, in June of this year.

[TitosBuritoBarn]

In other news, Tesla predicts that their autonomous cabs will be available across the US by the end of 2026. They are starting in Austin, in June of this year.

I'd bet a pretty penny that they will not. Tesla has never delivered a new model on-time and I'm pretty sure there is a lot of political hurdles to jump through to operate autonomous vehicles in most places. Even if they do, their product is not much different than Waymo's who has yet to cause any significant transportation "disruption." I think the only difference is that you won't have a driver cancel your ride because it's too short, too far, not where they want to go, etc.

[Athomsfere]

In other news, Tesla predicts that their autonomous cabs will be available across the US by the end of 2026. They are starting in Austin, in June of this year.

I'd bet a pretty penny that they will not. Tesla has never delivered a new model on-time and I'm pretty sure there is a lot of political hurdles to jump through to operate autonomous vehicles in most places. Even if they do, their product is not much different than Waymo's who has yet to cause any significant transportation "disruption." I think the only difference is that you won't have a driver cancel your ride because it's too short, too far, not where they want to go, etc.

The political hurdles might be the easiest to overcome.

That FSD is truly ready, without killing people walking their bike is another question.

I don't think they can release it this year, but when they eventually do I'm sure it will won't be ready. But I wouldn't put it past Texas to let a billionaire release a half ready technology as long as it only kills the working class.

[Mapguy]

The more I think about it, the more im confused why the city didn't just make Harney and Farnam two way streets and put the streetcar purely on farnam?

Not replacing the Harney bridge would have saved 10 million. Also not using Harney would preserve the bike lanes they created.

Im not saying a couplet doesn't work. It works for the ORBT. I just think it's a missed opportunity for 2 streets that really don't have much traffic. All of the one way streets are un-needed except perhaps Dodge and Douglas.

[Brad]

Not replacing the Harney bridge would have saved 10 million.

The Harney Street Bridge needed to be replaced in the next few years anyways.

[Dusty]

Building parking garages and offering free parking to drive private garages to redevelop. That would be quite the devious plan. LOL! We already have way too many garages downtown as it is. Besides, making money with garages is more of a long game. You will spend the first 10-15 years just paying bond. You really don't make money until the bond is paid off.

Garages can be great revenue generators to charge drivers a convenience to park. But I'm not a fan of building a parking garage empire. One garage funds the next one in a cycle that never ends. This becomes an addiction where you need people to be dependent on the car to keep the garage empire thriving. Doesn't help when you have Woodbury pushing the city with statements like" If you don't invest heavily in car parking, then the city dies". This is entirely not true and is an antiquated mindset of the 1960's to urban planning.

If the city wants more support for the streetcar, they need to take a multi-modal approach. They should be unbiased on how you travel downtown. You can drive and park in a garage, you can ride transit from start to finish, you can ride a bike or walk. Once you are in the Farnam/Harney corridor, you can ride the rails to district hop or work a direction. The city needs to diversify how they raise money to subsidize city services. Yes, parking garages is one stream of revenue. They can also be building mixed-use transit centers as well. Making money on concessions, rent, or profit sharing of sales in the transit center. They can build bike cages/lockers around dense transit stops. People ride to nearest stop where they lock up their bike before boarding transit. The city can charge rates to members wanting short term storage.

Opposers keep saying "You expect me to drive downtown to ride the streetcar!!!" This proves that not everyone wants to drive. They want choices so give them choices and make money on all of it.

[halgy]

They can also be building mixed-use transit centers as well. Making money on concessions, rent, or profit sharing of sales in the transit center.

I took a trip to Tokyo last fall. The public transit itself was obviously fantastic, but one of the things I enjoyed the most were the shops at the stations. Most stations were basically shopping malls, and even the smaller ones had a few shops. It made it really easy to get what I needed. It would be amazing to have something like that along the streetcar.

[MetcalfeHarrison]

The more I think about it, the more im confused why the city didn't just make Harney and Farnam two way streets and put the streetcar purely on farnam?

Not replacing the Harney bridge would have saved 10 million. Also not using Harney would preserve the bike lanes they created.

Im not saying a couplet doesn't work. It works for the ORBT. I just think it's a missed opportunity for 2 streets that really don't have much traffic. All of the one way streets are un-needed except perhaps Dodge and Douglas.

I think it initially was to capture more area in the streetcar TIF district as you end up getting an extra block to the south through the couplet area. The first study they did showed enough development to pay for everything but now that it is actually happening the development is well above initial projections so I wonder if they wish they would have just stayed on Farnam the whole way.
It turns into a situation where if they would have proposed the Farnam-only route they wouldn't have shown enough funds coming in to get approval, but it would have been the better route long-term. So really it's a question of whether a slightly worse route is better than no route at all and I think it is already showing it will be.

[Athomsfere]

They can also be building mixed-use transit centers as well. Making money on concessions, rent, or profit sharing of sales in the transit center.

I took a trip to Tokyo last fall. The public transit itself was obviously fantastic, but one of the things I enjoyed the most were the shops at the stations. Most stations were basically shopping malls, and even the smaller ones had a few shops. It made it really easy to get what I needed. It would be amazing to have something like that along the streetcar.

This is why I always complain about American TODs and needing to kill the NA transit station.

Its actually how crazy how integrated many of these stations are with their neighborhood. Ueno and Kanazawa always stick out to me. But even some not as amazing ones in cities like the Japanese Omaha's are better than what we get almost anywhere in the USA. The closest might be the Chicago Pedway, dialed up to 11 with exits strait to the platforms instead off just hotels and offices.

[almighty_tuna]

The closest might be the Chicago Pedway, dialed up to 11 with exits strait to the platforms instead off just hotels and offices.

I'll never forget the first time I experienced the Pedway. Had to get from the Aon Center to O'Hare in something stupid like 30 or 45 min at 5pm. A local I was working with had me follow him, and as someone who had no idea at the time where I was being ushered through, it was ah-maz-ing.

[Dusty]

I'm sure opening week of the streetcar will be a zoo. Tons of people all walking around looking lost. Follow that cluster of people at the train stop. Like sheep following the crowd. LOL!

[ita]

Building parking garages and offering free parking to drive private garages to redevelop. That would be quite the devious plan. LOL! We already have way too many garages downtown as it is. Besides, making money with garages is more of a long game. You will spend the first 10-15 years just paying bond. You really don't make money until the bond is paid off.

Garages can be great revenue generators to charge drivers a convenience to park. But I'm not a fan of building a parking garage empire. One garage funds the next one in a cycle that never ends. This becomes an addiction where you need people to be dependent on the car to keep the garage empire thriving. Doesn't help when you have Woodbury pushing the city with statements like" If you don't invest heavily in car parking, then the city dies". This is entirely not true and is an antiquated mindset of the 1960's to urban planning.

If the city wants more support for the streetcar, they need to take a multi-modal approach. They should be unbiased on how you travel downtown. You can drive and park in a garage, you can ride transit from start to finish, you can ride a bike or walk. Once you are in the Farnam/Harney corridor, you can ride the rails to district hop or work a direction. The city needs to diversify how they raise money to subsidize city services. Yes, parking garages is one stream of revenue. They can also be building mixed-use transit centers as well. Making money on concessions, rent, or profit sharing of sales in the transit center. They can build bike cages/lockers around dense transit stops. People ride to nearest stop where they lock up their bike before boarding transit. The city can charge rates to members wanting short term storage.

Opposers keep saying "You expect me to drive downtown to ride the streetcar!!!" This proves that not everyone wants to drive. They want choices so give them choices and make money on all of it.

I like the bike garage idea. I know B-Cycle is prevalent, but bike parking/storage for personal bikes would be great addition to the streetcar infrastructure.

As far as the City buildings garages to push out other private parking infrastructure, I don't think it's devious. The City isn't using imminent domain or something, but doing something to maximize its investment in the urban core. I would like to think that if left to the free market, ie. the City does not build garages along the line, that parking lot and garage owners would be incentivized enough by the mere existence of the streetcar route to sell or develop their properties. The City is creating an even bigger incentive by introducing competition. Anyway, I don't think the City would ever come out and say that's why they are building garages and that's why when they talk about it in public, it doesn't ever sit right.

[Dusty]

I like the bike garage idea. I know B-Cycle is prevalent, but bike parking/storage for personal bikes would be great addition to the streetcar infrastructure.

As far as the City buildings garages to push out other private parking infrastructure, I don't think it's devious. The City isn't using imminent domain or something, but doing something to maximize its investment in the urban core. I would like to think that if left to the free market, ie. the City does not build garages along the line, that parking lot and garage owners would be incentivized enough by the mere existence of the streetcar route to sell or develop their properties. The City is creating an even bigger incentive by introducing competition. Anyway, I don't think the City would ever come out and say that's why they are building garages and that's why when they talk about it in public, it doesn't ever sit right.

My comment about the city undercutting the private garages as a devious plan was meant to be a joke. But yes...adding more garages will bring more competition. This will put pressure on the private garages to consider redeveloping which is a good thing. I would rather have city owned garages so we can use the funds to help subsidize other city services. You bring up a good point....if you don't increase pressure/competition, what incentive do private garages have to redevelop along the streetcar line? They would most likely keep doing business as usual.

As for improved bike storage/transit centers, I was referring to city wide, not the streetcar route itself. Bike storage would create first/last mile connections to strengthen transit. This makes it easier for the people that don't want to mess with driving/parking in downtown with a car. The more mode options, the more people coming downtown to ride the streetcar.

As for bike parking along streetcar line, we would have to change how the Parking dept functions. They are 100% about car parking. A year ago I called them and they told me personal bicycles were not allowed in city owned garages for liability reasons. Not sure if this clause is still in place, but poor excuse for not being accommodating to cyclists. They could easily convert a section for bike storage. Cyclists could enter a separate entrance, so they don't mix with cars in the garage. If build it in a cage or separate bike storage room, you can charge to park.

Also, the city is building the bikeway right next to the streetcar line. I can't ride the streetcar if I don't have any safe place to park/lock my bike.

[Athomsfere]

I like the bike garage idea. I know B-Cycle is prevalent, but bike parking/storage for personal bikes would be great addition to the streetcar infrastructure.

As I'm sure you remember this has been something I have been advocating for years too.

The thing is though: I don't actually know how to make it work here. Not here in Omaha, but the USA.

Bikes are often targeted for theft and vandalism. In Japan my bike had basically a locked brake that I could pedal and overcome, and yet that was more than enough to keep it safe anywhere.

Amsterdam simple locks on a city bike appears to be enough.

In the US anywhere from the coastal cities to here bikes get stolen at any opportunity it seems. And if the bike can't be stolen, people steal the seats, wheels and tires, or whatever isn't within the chain.

I've heard of peoples bikes stolen from the MTC garage, and the cameras / security can't see what you would think was a high traffic area.

I had a bike stolen downtown from a secured garage...


If you hire a decent staff to watch the garage, the cost to operate the garage goes up fairly significantly. And you'd obviously need something more hands on than one person at a desk I think.

If you went to a valet system, I fear people would also skip it.

I think we'd have to Tokyo levels and build the vending machine garages. Put your bike on the thing, magic happens, you get the bike back when you prove to the machine you put the bike in.

[skinzfan23]

The Harney bridge demolition is being postponed for a 2nd time, this time due to weather

[MadJack]

Eric Miller has an interesting article in Grow Omaha about how our modern street care will be similar/different than our historic system: https://growomaha.com/history-repeating ... n-project/

[skinzfan23]

The Harney bridge demolition is being postponed for a 2nd time, this time due to weather

By the way, they did an amazing job with this. The hwy was already open southbound at 7pm on sunday night.

[skinzfan23]

Wow, McDonell is hellbent on getting the streetcar cancelled. Stothert just released a statement saying that it will be much more costly to taxpayers to cancel the streetcar and that developers will probably sue the city.

Is there any chance that if elected McDonnell will be able to cancel it?

[iamjacobm]

Wow, McDonell is hellbent on getting the streetcar cancelled. Stothert just released a statement saying that it will be much more costly to taxpayers to cancel the streetcar and that developers will probably sue the city.

Is there any chance that if elected McDonnell will be able to cancel it?

I know for most liberal leaning people Stothert isn't their ideal mayor, but they would be wise to vote for her this election.

[Ben]

Is there any chance that if elected McDonnell will be able to cancel it?

Could he? Yes, but there would certainly be huge penalties, probably equaling almost half of the project budget. The cars are already ordered, much of the infrastructure work has already happened, heck, we just tore down a bridge last week for this project.

I know this is a gross oversimplification of things, but about the thing saved would be the labor from here on out - physically building the stations and laying the track.

Regardless of your stance towards the streetcar, its more fiscally irresponsible to pay 50% to get nothing....

[Stan]

Wow, McDonell is hellbent on getting the streetcar cancelled. Stothert just released a statement saying that it will be much more costly to taxpayers to cancel the streetcar and that developers will probably sue the city.

Is there any chance that if elected McDonnell will be able to cancel it?

I know for most liberal leaning people Stothert isn't their ideal mayor, but they would be wise to vote for her this election.

It seems that both Jasmine Harris and McDonnell would prefer to kill the streetcar project while Ewing understands it's too far along.

McDonnell isn't winning any liberal leaning people with his statement on the "DEI hire". I could actually see more Republicans moving towards him over Stothert while Democrats will split on Ewing and Harris with Ewing going against Stothert for the general.

[Garrett]

Wow, McDonell is hellbent on getting the streetcar cancelled. Stothert just released a statement saying that it will be much more costly to taxpayers to cancel the streetcar and that developers will probably sue the city.

Is there any chance that if elected McDonnell will be able to cancel it?

I know for most liberal leaning people Stothert isn't their ideal mayor, but they would be wise to vote for her this election.

It seems that both Jasmine Harris and McDonnell would prefer to kill the streetcar project while Ewing understands it's too far along.

McDonnell isn't winning any liberal leaning people with his statement on the "DEI hire". I could actually see more Republicans moving towards him over Stothert while Democrats will split on Ewing and Harris with Ewing going against Stothert for the general.

Yeah that's what I'm seeing right now. I think there's a chance it could end up being Ewing vs McDonnell as well depending on how things shape out, but Ewing vs Stothert would be my prediction.

[skinzfan23]

I just hope that they keep plugging along and get more work done. I have thought about this added amenity to Omaha for the past 20 years and don't want to see it fail now that we are so close.