2 hours ago, ColDayMan said:

I heavily disagree with the density schtick.  Metro Columbus has the second highest population density in the Midwest behind Chicago. St. Louis, Charlotte, Minneapolis, Houston, and Norfolk-Virginia Beach are all metropolitan areas with recent-ish LRT systems built and Metro Columbus is denser than all of them.  Don't EVEN let me bring up the various streetcar systems that are in cities far less densely populated.  If "the feds" are giving money to extend Charlotte's LRT line to the next AutoZone off I-485, I don't see a reason why Columbus couldn't push harder OR go the corporate route and get help from the five F500 companies that already exist.  On top of THAT, there are already established rail corridors they could use for a commuter rail-lite thing along existing freight traffic.

 

BRT is fine but let's not pretend Columbus couldn't get rail tomorrow if it really wanted to, even without help from the state/ODOT.  It could, but it doesn't want it right now. Ohio State alone could fund a sprinter streetcar route from campus to German Village.

I don’t disagree, I’m just saying that the feds wouldn’t give large amounts of money to help fund light rail. The city took the current smart option that included a ton of funding from the feds. The density is there, in certain areas, but from what I read on another post it isn’t in the right areas according to the feds. I would guess that is part of why there is so much focus and money going into increasing the downtown density. 
 

I agree that OSU could have their own and I really wish they would invest in that. Especially with west campus and the plans they have to grow that. They could easily add some light rail and be the leader for the city. I have a feeling the majority of the decision makers don’t want it, sadly. 

Edited September 12, 2024Sep 12 by VintageLife

The terrible old zoning code really hurt our density.

54 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

I don’t disagree, I’m just saying that the feds wouldn’t give large amounts of money to help fund light rail. The city took the current smart option that included a ton of funding from the feds. The density is there, in certain areas, but from what I read on another post it isn’t in the right areas according to the feds. I would guess that is part of why there is so much focus and money going into increasing the downtown density. 
 

I agree that OSU could have their own and I really wish they would invest in that. Especially with west campus and the plans they have to grow that. They could easily add some light rail and be the leader for the city. I have a feeling the majority of the decision makers don’t want it, sadly. 

 

I'd really be interested to see any kind of report on the density requirements- and necessary density location- for federal funding. I've not found anything, but I keep seeing this claim. Columbus has more density than Cincinnati and and will eventually pass Cleveland despite being 3x larger in area. It has the highest density neighborhoods in the state and density greater than 5K ppsm exists all the way out to the city boundaries in many cases. 

COTA and at least two members of City Council are very much under the impression that we can't get federal funding at current density. I don't know how to figure out how that is dileniated. 

11 minutes ago, GCrites said:

COTA and at least two members of City Council are very much under the impression that we can't get federal funding at current density. I don't know how to figure out how that is dileniated. 

 

I've heard that at those meetings, etc but I just don't understand that versus Charlotte, St. Louis, and Houston getting LRT expansions with less population density.  Even Kansas City, the least dense metro in the Midwest, is getting a streetcar expansion to a 1920's Spanish-style Easton.  I guess I just need the receipts on this one regarding the density-issue.

 

But again, Brightline it (i.e. AEP helps build it and call it "the PowerLink") or leverage OSU to do something.  Hell, even add one of those Austin commuter rail cars to the line from the Airport to downtown for a start. 

In other words, I'd like to see what the bar is, how the other cities got it and what their numbers are. And if they got federal funding, state funding, issued bonds, created TIFs, sales taxes, private sector investments, more.

I doubt there is a strict requirement for density but it is a competitive grant. I think COTA and MORPC are stating that the region would not be competitive and are using "density" as a shorthand, or scapegoat, depending on your perspective. I also got to think that the lack of any FTA project in Columbus puts them at a big disadvantage. I guess they also could be lying and actually don't want/think that a sales tax levy of the necessary size would actually get approved by voters or they have some reason that they want a quicker win.

 

Of the 37 Small Start projects listed by the FTA, all but 4 are BRT, with only 1 of those being commuter rail. That tells me right there that they are playing it safe, with something they are confident they can get federal funding for. It has a project cost cap of $400 million with less than $150 million per award and it looks like they will be asking for $149.9 million for West Broad Street, with a total project cost of $340 million.

Yeah I had found it in an article during the early stages but I can’t remember what report it was. I’ll have to go back and try to find it again. 

This article isn’t a perfect explanation, but seems to be a good reasoning behind the decisions. I am posting a few of the points 
 

Transportation expert discusses LinkUs' choice of bus rapid transit over light rail

 

Rail is very expensive to build. It takes a long time and you need a certain level of population density to make it viable. We're not quite there yet in Columbus. We might be in the future, but right now, we don't really have the densities to support it.

Bus rapid transit gives you a light rail experience without the rails. You get, like, 80% of the benefits of light rail with a quarter of the cost.

 

With the money COTA wants to spend on LinkUs, we're going to get several BRT spokes as opposed to just one light rail line. The LinkUs initiative is not just talking about BRT. They're talking about system-wide improvements in service frequency ... about building new sidewalks and bike trails to feed the BRT stations and help improve bus service.

 

If it were just light rail, they would only be getting that one thing then, right? Rather than all of those other aspects. 

 

That's exactly right ... We're going to get much more high-quality public transit for our money and time than we would if we went for light rail.

2 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

This article isn’t a perfect explanation, but seems to be a good reasoning behind the decisions. I am posting a few of the points 
 

Transportation expert discusses LinkUs' choice of bus rapid transit over light rail

 

Rail is very expensive to build. It takes a long time and you need a certain level of population density to make it viable. We're not quite there yet in Columbus. We might be in the future, but right now, we don't really have the densities to support it.

Bus rapid transit gives you a light rail experience without the rails. You get, like, 80% of the benefits of light rail with a quarter of the cost.

 

With the money COTA wants to spend on LinkUs, we're going to get several BRT spokes as opposed to just one light rail line. The LinkUs initiative is not just talking about BRT. They're talking about system-wide improvements in service frequency ... about building new sidewalks and bike trails to feed the BRT stations and help improve bus service.

 

If it were just light rail, they would only be getting that one thing then, right? Rather than all of those other aspects. 

 

That's exactly right ... We're going to get much more high-quality public transit for our money and time than we would if we went for light rail.

 

I'm totally in support of them pursuing BRT. It gets us the most bang for our buck (assuming they implement real BRT). Bringing a few BRT lines online will be far more impactful, at this point, than just one light rail line. Once we are up and running with BRT, I think bringing light rail or even commuter rail on board will be much more doable both from a funding and usability standpoint. 

2 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

This article isn’t a perfect explanation, but seems to be a good reasoning behind the decisions. I am posting a few of the points 
 

Transportation expert discusses LinkUs' choice of bus rapid transit over light rail

 

Rail is very expensive to build. It takes a long time and you need a certain level of population density to make it viable. We're not quite there yet in Columbus. We might be in the future, but right now, we don't really have the densities to support it.

Bus rapid transit gives you a light rail experience without the rails. You get, like, 80% of the benefits of light rail with a quarter of the cost.

 

With the money COTA wants to spend on LinkUs, we're going to get several BRT spokes as opposed to just one light rail line. The LinkUs initiative is not just talking about BRT. They're talking about system-wide improvements in service frequency ... about building new sidewalks and bike trails to feed the BRT stations and help improve bus service.

 

If it were just light rail, they would only be getting that one thing then, right? Rather than all of those other aspects. 

 

That's exactly right ... We're going to get much more high-quality public transit for our money and time than we would if we went for light rail.

This makes me think that they picked a sales tax figure that they think they can pass and worked backwards from that, while also wanting something that hits as much of the region as possible, for political viability.

If they go with rail, they get one streetcar on High Street or maybe one commuter line out to one suburb. That's something that's harder to get countywide support from, regardless of the price tag.

I see excuses, not facts, in that article (I read it yesterday). We all know rail is more expensive than BRT but we all know rail is also more successful than BRT, overall.  Thus, all the rail expansions from Brightline to Charlotte to KC to the Second Avenue subway. BRT is supposed to compliment rail, not be the current end game.

 

Ironically, that same professor's university could easily get it done but doesn't.

And FYI, I'm not opposed to them pursuing BRT lines along Broad, Olentangy, Linden, or the Sea Dragon at the Columbus Zoo and I do 100% support LinkUS - All I'm saying is that if Columbus wanted to be serious about rail, there are other avenues it could pick and there are PLENTY here unlike metropolitan areas with less resources, more political pressure, and more boundaries.

I think it is what Dev said, they don’t think they would have community support if it was just one line, that most likely would only support more wealthy people, so they went with the more widespread option. 
 

if they get this implemented and the density continues downtown, I don’t see why light rail wouldn’t happen along broad st first and then a line up high. The other BRT lines would be a great support system. 

I'm also wondering how much of the massive attacks Kasich did on rail is coloring their political calculation. Obviously it's been awhile but I'm not trusting the General Assembly to not step in and sabotage any project they try, like what happened in Indianapolis. Ohio isn't that irrational but there's still been too many cases of pre-emption to think that it could be possible.

 

To that end, all of these decisions could wind up changing if 3CDC 3C+D actually moves forward, as well as the redistricting measure this year. Some of the commuter rail projects moving forward in other states is because the state's are buying up rail RoW and you gotta think that a less corrupt General Assembly would actually see those examples as something to consider.

Edited September 13, 2024Sep 13 by Dev

I think you mean 3C+D rather than 3CDC. I mean, I wouldn't mind if 3CDC paid for it all...

I think Columbus is going the long way to getting rail transit, probably because they have to.

 

Those old enough to remember previous attempts to fund rail transit in Columbus might recall general sentiments about passenger rail (as horribly wrong as they might be):

 

1. Rail is an antiquated form of transit.

2. If it doesn't serve me, I don't want it.

3. Let users (fares) pay for it.

 

BRT is a more incremental, palatable step towards getting the better transit the community deserves and the proposal as it stands abates the misinformation still held by a lot of the populace. 

 

The situation in Columbus reminds me of the TransMilenio in Bogota. Talked about for decades, bus transit installed, shows it works, becomes overcrowded, city ends up building rail transit anyways.

Lolol I knew that looked weird as I was typing it out

22 hours ago, Dev said:

I doubt there is a strict requirement for density but it is a competitive grant. I think COTA and MORPC are stating that the region would not be competitive and are using "density" as a shorthand, or scapegoat, depending on your perspective. I also got to think that the lack of any FTA project in Columbus puts them at a big disadvantage. I guess they also could be lying and actually don't want/think that a sales tax levy of the necessary size would actually get approved by voters or they have some reason that they want a quicker win.

 

Of the 37 Small Start projects listed by the FTA, all but 4 are BRT, with only 1 of those being commuter rail. That tells me right there that they are playing it safe, with something they are confident they can get federal funding for. It has a project cost cap of $400 million with less than $150 million per award and it looks like they will be asking for $149.9 million for West Broad Street, with a total project cost of $340 million.

 

It's really amazing to me how expensive such transit projects are in the US. $340 million for like 8 miles for BRT is insane to me, especially when it can be done so much more cheaply in other countries. We just don't know how to do these things efficiently, anymore.

1 minute ago, jonoh81 said:

 

It's really amazing to me how expensive such transit projects are in the US. $340 million for like 8 miles for BRT is insane to me, especially when it can be done so much more cheaply in other countries. We just don't know how to do these things efficiently, anymore.

What's worse is that construction costs rising faster than inflation has been a known issue since at least the 1960's when there were congressional hearings about it. Hopefully the recent report helps bring it back into the forefront.

The '80s monorail was presented at $40M.

6 minutes ago, GCrites said:

The '80s monorail was presented at $40M.

 

If I remember correctly, there was also an 8-line rail system proposal in the late 1980s-early 1990s, and I believe the cost for that was maybe $500 million at the time. Obviously it would be higher now with inflation adjustment, but still. COTA and MORPC, quite frankly, have been continuously dropping the ball on this issue for decades because the leadership has never been serious about rail- or for that matter- expanding transit beyond the standard bus. I feel like they've been dragging their feet on even BRT, because the CMax didn't have to be as crappy as it was. There were already numerous examples of good BRT to copy from at the time. It's always been the safe and "good enough" philosophy rather than "doing it right the first time". 

Edited September 13, 2024Sep 13 by jonoh81

I've been going to a lot of meetings regarding LinkUS. CDM has been to a few of them as well. We're getting close to vote time on Issue 47, the COTA sales tax levy that would fund LinkUS. Tonight I attended a panel discussion featuring Monica Tellez-Fowler (CEO of COTA), Shannon Hardin (President of City Council) and Councilmember Lourdes Borroso de Padilla (head of Council's Transportation Committee). Things to note about LinkUS and Issue 47:

 

- 0.5% sales tax increase from 0.5% to 1.0% -- in-line with Cleveland's 1.0% and Cincinnati's 0.8%. So our current local funding is significantly less than peer cities and is why we don't have rail and full BRT (Cincinnati's BRT is currently being implemented). Without local support the Feds are much less likely to be involved and we can see that with the other 2Cs' federal funding level as compared to ours.

 

- Federal funding WILL be available if Issue 47 passes. It will be $6.8B local funding and $1.2B(possibly more) federal. If the Feds don't see local funding the matches don't come.

 

- Issue 47 funds not only BRT, but last-mile bike and pedestrian infrastructure plus better service for non-BRT COTA lines. Buses currently stop running at 11:30PM and therefore cannot fully serve our plentiful blue-collar jobs. An upgrade to 24 hour service is part of the plan.

 

- LinkUS also includes provisions for the possibility of light rail once the initial 3 BRT lines (West Broad, The Northwestern from 161 to DT and East Main). Initially favored first is light rail from the Convention Center to CMH to be integrated with the 3C+D and Chicago-Pittsburgh Amtrak lines. Later BRT phases include Southeast to Rickenbacker and an East Broad line. This is a lot of money and Columbus has fantastic existing rail corridors that would require far less capital investment than new ROW.

 

- LinkUS is to integrate with ZoneIN to help get us to the density level for more federal funding. Without ZoneIN everything would be much less effective in getting us the economic development we seek along the BRT corridors. ZoneIN worked with LinkUS extensively to make sure the most can be made of the corridors.

 

- It is important to note that this election is for residents of the current COTA service area rather than being on a city or county level. That increases its chance of passing as opposed to being on the county level where non-service-area could start rattling sabres. Businesses not located in the service area would not collect the increased tax, adding a TIF-like feature. Currently Issue 47 is polling at 55-56% pass.

 

I know there were at least a few UO members that wanted to attend tonight's meeting but couldn't due to scheduling conflicts. If you have any questions I or other UO members will do our best to answer them. Be sure to vote YES on Issue 47 and tell people you know to as well!

 

Important links:

https://linkuscolumbus.com/

https://transitcolumbus.org/

 

If you are curious about what cities receive which kinds of transit funding and how much start poking around here:

https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/ntd-data?field_data_categories_target_id[2531]=2531&field_product_type_target_id=1016&year=all&combine=

 

 

Edited October 9, 2024Oct 9 by GCrites

Also note that for the first time in a very long time the private sector approves as confirmed by the panel. The private sector had worked hard to block public transit and rail investment in this city for over 70 years. It was them. Without local funding the Feds sit out unless you get the Olympics or something (cough, Salt Lake City cough) and the private sector was effective enough at preventing local money from being used for it.

The next and final LinkUS panel discussion is scheduled for Tuesday October 22 from 5:30PM-7PM at Seventh Son Brewing on 4th.

Link-Us gave a presentation to the Clintonville Area Commission. The question was asked why High St., possibly the densest corridor in the City, doesn't have more robust transit. The answer was a little weak, but they did mention that #2 frequency could increase as the result of this vote. There should be busses running every 10 minutes - that way we can rely on transit. With 10 minute headways I would be more likely to take the bus to work. 

 

It's always bugged me that the northwest BRT is going up Olentangy. The 1/4 mile catchment area population on some of the stops is very low. There are a few large employment areas but who is going to walk to a BRT stop at Henderson and Olentangy? I get that future TOD will fill that void but I still feel Link-Us is ignoring High St.

After looking how transit expansions were funded initially in our peer cities one source moves to the top and that's sales taxes. After the sales tax passes then come the federal funds. In order to see the highest possibility of passage the service area funded by the sales tax generally needs to be large rather than a smaller starter line that serves a core area. So the emphasis is on the BRT, bike, pedestrian and general funding aspects of the plan. If too much emphasis was placed on High Street (which some would argue already has too much emphasis on it as a part of town as compared to every other part) the further a voter lived from it the less likely they would be to vote for it. But nothing is being ruled out since there will be a lot of funding with the sales tax. And a lot of the rail solutions will be easier to implement once we get over this hump of "No local match, no money from the Feds because you're not dense enough" business.

 

Cincinnati scraped together money from a bunch of different sources and faced massive resistance since going to the voters would be harder -- their sales tax was already high to build Paul Brown Stadium.

Edited October 10, 2024Oct 10 by GCrites

11 hours ago, Pablo said:

Link-Us gave a presentation to the Clintonville Area Commission. The question was asked why High St., possibly the densest corridor in the City, doesn't have more robust transit. The answer was a little weak, but they did mention that #2 frequency could increase as the result of this vote. There should be busses running every 10 minutes - that way we can rely on transit. With 10 minute headways I would be more likely to take the bus to work. 

 

It's always bugged me that the northwest BRT is going up Olentangy. The 1/4 mile catchment area population on some of the stops is very low. There are a few large employment areas but who is going to walk to a BRT stop at Henderson and Olentangy? I get that future TOD will fill that void but I still feel Link-Us is ignoring High St.

High Street is a whole other alignment. The Olentangy route is the "northwest" alternative which terminates at OU's Dublin campus. I can't find their corridor analysis at the moment but taking High Street to get to Dublin would probably add in too much time, reducing the estimated ridership. All the maps they do have available show something running on High Street just continuing north to Crosswoods. I also imagine that making the pitch that the stroad that is Olentangy needs to lose lanes for a dedicated bus lane is way easier than trying to remove parking on High Street for a BAT lane, which probably would get watered down to mixed traffic. I would not be surprised if certain local governments made it clear in private that they would not support a BRT project.

Edited October 10, 2024Oct 10 by Dev

9 hours ago, Dev said:

High Street is a whole other alignment. The Olentangy route is the "northwest" alternative which terminates at OU's Dublin campus. I can't find their corridor analysis at the moment but taking High Street to get to Dublin would probably add in too much time, reducing the estimated ridership. All the maps they do have available show something running on High Street just continuing north to Crosswoods. I also imagine that making the pitch that the stroad that is Olentangy needs to lose lanes for a dedicated bus lane is way easier than trying to remove parking on High Street for a BAT lane, which probably would get watered down to mixed traffic. I would not be surprised if certain local governments made it clear in private that they would not support a BRT project.

 

I guess the only solution for High St. is a subway  😃

10 minutes ago, Pablo said:

 

I guess the only solution for High St. is a subway  😃

I was thinking a streetcar from OSU to...Schiller Park(?) but that'll do too!

Yeah the buses will really be able to carry a lot of speed on Olentangy with signal prioritization (which LinkUS will have!)

Workforce leaders weigh in on why LinkUs is crucial for growth

 

Transportation is a fundamental workforce issue, said Columbus State Community College President David Harrison.

 

Amid Central Ohio's predicted job growth with large-scale industries like Intel, Honda, Microsoft, Amazon and more – plus a workforce shortage and an anticipated population uptick – the need for mass rapid public transit is higher than ever, leaders say.

 

"Giving people direct access, from a transportation standpoint, to current and emerging jobs is something that’s a priority," Harrison told Columbus Business First.

 

In less than one week, Central Ohio voters will decide on Issue 47, which would double COTA's portion of the sales tax from 0.5% to 1%. If passed, the tax will generate $6 billion – most of the $8 billion needed for the LinkUs long-term mobility plan – to achieve more equitable access to transit across the region.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/10/31/linkus-workforce-growth-upskill.html

 

 

Sales tax set to go up in central Ohio after voters give green light to COTA levy

 

"Local sales tax is set to increase by a half percent after a Central Ohio Transit Authority sales tax levy passed Tuesday night.

 

The levy will bring in an estimated $6.2 billion by 2050. COTA says it will use that money to make the LinkUS plan a reality and increase service by 45%, build the region's first rapid bus lines and fund more than 500 miles of sidewalks, bike paths and trails by 2050.

 

27.5% of the levy proceeds, about $60 million per year, would go toward what the ballot calls "transit-supportive infrastructure" like sidewalks, bike paths and trails. The Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission has announced the first 83 projects that would be built by 2030."

 

The measure (with over 95% reporting) was passing 57%-43%

 

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/politics/elections/local/2024/11/05/election-results-2024-cota-tax-levy-bus-transportation-linkus-ohio/75797832007/

 

 

This was passed to leverage federal funding in addition to the tax. Will any federal transit funding exist once Elon is done gutting the government?

12 minutes ago, Pablo said:

This was passed to leverage federal funding in addition to the tax. Will any federal transit funding exist once Elon is done gutting the government?

Yeah that’s exactly what I was thinking. It’s awesome this passed, but I don’t see the federal funding happening 

Agreed. Such a shame that a path towards better transportation in Columbus and Franklin County finally passes and it's ultimately doomed to fail now that the Federal portion is all but guaranteed to disappear. 

Is this the right place for this? I kinda wish the transportation forum wasn't so....hidden? Idk I always want to talk transit and forget to come here, lol.

 

One of the few good bits of news from yesterday: LinkUS levy passed!

 

https://www.axios.com/local/columbus/2024/11/06/ohio-linkus-plan-election-results-pass

 

 

COTA Levy to Fund Big Transit Investments Passes

 

The $8 billion LinkUS initiative is officially moving forward with the passage of Issue 47 last night.

 

Voters within the Central Ohio Transit Authority’s service area (all of Franklin County and small parts of several surrounding counties) approved a half-percent sales tax increase that will fund significant investments in transit and transportation-related infrastructure.

 

COTA has worked with the City of Columbus, the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), and the Franklin County Board of Commissioners over the past several years to come up with the plan, which calls for three new Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridors with dedicated transit lanes to be constructed before 2030, along with eight new COTA/Plus micromobility zones, dozens of new bus shelters and a 40% increase in service hours system-wide (including 24-hour service on some lines).

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/cota-levy-to-fund-big-transit-investments-passes-bw1/

 

COTA's LinkUs levy passes, leaders talk next steps

 

Mobility leaders say the passage of Issue 47 allows the region to be more proactive, rather than reactive, regarding transportation.

 

The issue – which passed Tuesday with 57% approval – will double COTA's portion of the sales tax from 0.5% to 1%. The tax will generate $6 billion throughout the next 25 years – most of the $8 billion needed to fund the LinkUs long-term mobility plan which aims to create more equitable access to transit across the region.

 

"The fact we are now able to proceed with a vision and are able to implement what we were hoping for is huge for us," said Sandy Doyle-Ahern, chair of the LinkUs workforce stakeholder group and EMH&T president.

 

The tax increase will go into effect in January and COTA will start collecting funds in the spring.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2024/11/06/linkus-passage-cota-next-steps-levy.html

 

2025 to Bring New Sales Tax, New Bus Service, Work on BRT Line

 

After voters approved a half-percent sales tax increase in November to fund the $8 billion LinkUS initiative, 2025 is shaping up to be a significant year for the Central Ohio Transit Authority. The changes will not start happening right away, though.

 

The sales tax does not go into effect until April 1, so COTA will not start collecting that extra revenue until after that time. Also, planning for COTA’s January service changes was already underway before the election, so riders will not see a large uptick in service when those changes begin on January 6.

 

What they will see are some changes to lines Downtown due to the recent conversion of Front Street to two-way traffic, and an increase in service on the CMAX (the Cleveland Avenue line will now run every 15 minutes every day, including weekends).

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/2025-to-bring-new-sales-tax-new-bus-service-work-on-brt-line-bw1/

 

What Will Bus Rapid Transit Mean for the Hilltop, Franklinton & Downtown?

 

Last November, Central Ohio voters approved a half-percent sales tax increase to fund significant new investments in transit and transportation-related infrastructure. A signature part of the $8 billion plan – known as LinkUS – is a new network of Bus Rapid Transit corridors, and work is scheduled to start on the first of of those later this year.

 

That first corridor will run along a nine-mile stretch of Broad Street, extending west from Washington Avenue Downtown to Rockbrook Crossing Avenue in Prairie Township. Plans call for new, larger buses that will run on a frequent schedule and have signal priority at intersections. Also planned are new station platforms, bike infrastructure, improved crosswalks and landscaping along the entire route. For a little over half of the route – the portion within Downtown, Franklinton and most of the Hilltop – buses will run in their own dedicated lanes, with stations located in the middle of the street.

 

The Central Ohio Transit Authority confirmed that the West Broad BRT line is still projected to be completed by 2028. Utility relocations and other prep work will start later this year, starting at the western end of the line and gradually moving toward Downtown. Traffic will continue to flow in both directions along the corridor, though, with only a section of the street having to be closed at any given time. Construction of the stations and roadway would then start in 2026.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/what-will-bus-rapid-transit-mean-for-the-hilltop-franklinton-amp-downtown-bw1/

 

 

1 hour ago, ColDayMan said:

What Will Bus Rapid Transit Mean for the Hilltop, Franklinton & Downtown?

 

Last November, Central Ohio voters approved a half-percent sales tax increase to fund significant new investments in transit and transportation-related infrastructure. A signature part of the $8 billion plan – known as LinkUS – is a new network of Bus Rapid Transit corridors, and work is scheduled to start on the first of of those later this year.

 

That first corridor will run along a nine-mile stretch of Broad Street, extending west from Washington Avenue Downtown to Rockbrook Crossing Avenue in Prairie Township. Plans call for new, larger buses that will run on a frequent schedule and have signal priority at intersections. Also planned are new station platforms, bike infrastructure, improved crosswalks and landscaping along the entire route. For a little over half of the route – the portion within Downtown, Franklinton and most of the Hilltop – buses will run in their own dedicated lanes, with stations located in the middle of the street.

 

The Central Ohio Transit Authority confirmed that the West Broad BRT line is still projected to be completed by 2028. Utility relocations and other prep work will start later this year, starting at the western end of the line and gradually moving toward Downtown. Traffic will continue to flow in both directions along the corridor, though, with only a section of the street having to be closed at any given time. Construction of the stations and roadway would then start in 2026.

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/what-will-bus-rapid-transit-mean-for-the-hilltop-franklinton-amp-downtown-bw1/

 

 

Love that they are collaborating on the bike lane. If it follows the rendering at high and broad it would be a protected lane, which would be amazing. 

I'm so excited for (hopefully) true BRT lines. I was recently in Curitiba, Brazil which is famous for its BRT lines, and it's really incredible what they have down there. It's truly like rail transit on rubber tires. If we actually build this correctly, I really think it will take us to the next level and might actually make it more likely that we end up with some form of rail transit within the next couple decades. 

 

Is Columbus too small for light rail? In Europe many cities that size would have multiple rail lines and even in Canada you have cities smaller than Columbus w/ light rail: Calgary, Edmonton, and recently Kitchener/Waterloo for example.

11 hours ago, Philly215jawns said:

Is Columbus too small for light rail? In Europe many cities that size would have multiple rail lines and even in Canada you have cities smaller than Columbus w/ light rail: Calgary, Edmonton, and recently Kitchener/Waterloo for example.

 

Uh, no, Columbus isn't too small for LRT.  And those European and Canadian examples exist because their country(ies) value transit, unlike this one.

Yeah, compare Columbus to Calgary's populations. Columbus is actually denser and more urban but Calgary is able to build 2 LRT lines and still keep expanding.

On 3/28/2025 at 4:44 PM, cbussoccer said:

I'm so excited for (hopefully) true BRT lines. I was recently in Curitiba, Brazil which is famous for its BRT lines, and it's really incredible what they have down there. It's truly like rail transit on rubber tires. If we actually build this correctly, I really think it will take us to the next level and might actually make it more likely that we end up with some form of rail transit within the next couple decades. 

 

Email MORPC and tell them to check out Curitiba and their BRT. They always mention Indianapolis as an example and I’ve seen what they have and it doesn’t seem like the best thing to model after. 

Design work on COTA's first bus rapid transit line nears finish, construction to begin in 2026

Design work on COTA's first bus rapid transit line stemming from the the $8 billion LinkUs initiative is nearly complete, and the transit provider says utility work and other pre-construction activities could start as soon as the fall.

The Central Ohio Transit Authority expects construction on the West Broad Corridor – the first of three planned BRT lines – to start in early 2026, eyeing a fourth quarter 2028 opening. The line runs over 9 miles from downtown to the Prairie Township Community Center, with dedicated bus lanes covering the majority of the corridor.

So far, $20.2 million has been spent on the West Broad Corridor, according to a recent LinkUs progress report. The transit authority projects an additional $350 million will be spent on the line.

In January, COTA's board of trustees approved an $18.44 million contract with architecture and engineering firm Aecom to complete the design of the West Broad Corridor.

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2025/05/27/cota-linkus-brt-first-line-update.html

On 3/30/2025 at 12:02 AM, ColDayMan said:

 

Uh, no, Columbus isn't too small for LRT.  And those European and Canadian examples exist because their country(ies) value transit, unlike this one.

disagree. it’s much more because ohio and local politicians and residents don’t value serious public transit.

to get a starter passenger rail line from downtown to the airport, which columbus desperately needs to do first and foremost, cota or somebody needs to rally local support and management and then actually apply for funding.

i dont believe columbus, cota or any politicians or agencies have ever gotten that far.

as yet of course …

otoh for now i can totally understand building out the far flung brt lines vs going for starter rail. its apples and oranges. there is only so much money and 8 billy is already a big ask. the dedicated brt lines infrastructure are a great idea and the best bang for the buck(eye). 👍

8 hours ago, mrnyc said:

disagree. it’s much more because ohio and local politicians and residents don’t value serious public transit.

to get a starter passenger rail line from downtown to the airport, which columbus desperately needs to do first and foremost, cota or somebody needs to rally local support and management and then actually apply for funding.

i dont believe columbus, cota or any politicians or agencies have ever gotten that far.

So it seems you...agree?