9 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

More likely would be a Detroit-Toledo-Columbus line - to connect the NW with the state capital. 

Sure! Lets do that too!

28 minutes ago, westerninterloper said:

There's a last mile problem for Columbus, Cincinnati, Indy and Detroit without robust urban public transportation.

 

That "last mile problem" exists with flying, but doesn't seem to be much of an issue. People take ubers, park at the airport, or have friends/family drop them off. In Columbus, assuming the train station would be downtown, the "last mile problem" would actually be much smaller when taking the train as opposed to taking a flight. 

6 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

That "last mile problem" exists with flying, but doesn't seem to be much of an issue. People take ubers, park at the airport, or have friends/family drop them off. In Columbus, assuming the train station would be downtown, the "last mile problem" would actually be much smaller when taking the train as opposed to taking a flight. 

 

I agree, but the alternative for most people to taking a train from Cleveland, Detroit, or Cincinnati to Columbus is not flying, it's driving. And driving solves the last mile problem, is probably faster, and probably cheaper. If you are coming in from New York, Florida, Utah, etc, you likely aren't going to take a train. So we really need to beef up our intracity transportation systems ASAP so that intercity rail is competitive with driving.

Register for today's Columbus Metropolitan Club event:

Trains and Transit, Past and Future

https://columbusmetroclub.org/event/trains-and-transit-past-and-future/

_______

 

Some media coverage of yesterday's Ohio media roundtable

 

 

AND

 

 

And

 

 

38 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

I agree, but the alternative for most people to taking a train from Cleveland, Detroit, or Cincinnati to Columbus is not flying, it's driving. And driving solves the last mile problem, is probably faster, and probably cheaper. If you are coming in from New York, Florida, Utah, etc, you likely aren't going to take a train. So we really need to beef up our intracity transportation systems ASAP so that intercity rail is competitive with driving.

 

Agreed. But, of note, the Route 49 bus in Cincinnati connects Union Terminal to downtown. It's a 5 minute ride from the train station to the FC Cincinnati Stadium/Music Hall and a 10 minute ride to Fountain Square. It would be easy to beef up the frequency on that route or make a free circulator between Union Terminal and Fountain Square.

23 minutes ago, ryanlammi said:

 

I agree, but the alternative for most people to taking a train from Cleveland, Detroit, or Cincinnati to Columbus is not flying, it's driving. And driving solves the last mile problem, is probably faster, and probably cheaper. If you are coming in from New York, Florida, Utah, etc, you likely aren't going to take a train. So we really need to beef up our intracity transportation systems ASAP so that intercity rail is competitive with driving.

 

That's why I'm suggesting that a route that would get you directly to Chicago from Columbus would be much more much more valuable for Columbus than the 3C route. The 3C route is usefully for Cincy and Cleveland between the drive time between the two cities is just about long enough to make the train worthwhile. I'm not opposed to the 3C route at all, I'm just hoping that it will help bring about some more useful routes for Columbus.

11 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

That's why I'm suggesting that a route that would get you directly to Chicago from Columbus would be much more much more valuable for Columbus than the 3C route. The 3C route is usefully for Cincy and Cleveland between the drive time between the two cities is just about long enough to make the train worthwhile. I'm not opposed to the 3C route at all, I'm just hoping that it will help bring about some more useful routes for Columbus.

 

The amount of travel between Columbus and Chicago is small compared to 3C travel. According to the USDOT, Columbus-Chicago did not make its top 100 travel markets. When CLE-COL, CLE-CIN, and COL-CIN markets were combined, it was the 10th busiest travel market. That's why 3C is an Amtrak priority corridor and COL-CHI was not on its 35 desired routes for expansion.

Columbusites really don't think about Chicago that much. It seems really far away for some reason whereas both Cincinnati and Cleveland think about it way more.

6 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

The amount of travel between Columbus and Chicago is small compared to 3C travel. According to the USDOT, Columbus-Chicago did not make its top 100 travel markets. When CLE-COL, CLE-CIN, and COL-CIN markets were combined, it was the 10th busiest travel market. That's why 3C is an Amtrak priority corridor and COL-CHI was not on its 35 desired routes for expansion.

 

How much of that travel from Columbus to Cleveland or Columbus to Cincinnati will be willing to switch to a train given the train's current speed? Part of the reason there is so much travel between the cities is because it's an extremely easy drive. If you want the train to be successful and a useful alternative, which I do, it needs to be extremely convenient. Unfortunately, with average speeds around 60mph and 2-3 stops, along with the fact that you have to buy a ticket, get to/from the train station, and adhere to the train's schedule as opposed to your own schedule, it's going to be difficult to pry people away from their cars.

 

Again, I'm fully supportive of the 3C route. It will be great to get trains back to Columbus and connect Ohio's major cities. I'm simply being realistic and stating that it's going to be difficult to move people away from their cars with this route, specifically in Columbus. The 3C route will be very useful for Cincinnati-Cleveland travelers, but Columbus would be able to find a lot more use in various other routes. 

 

14 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

Columbusites really don't think about Chicago that much. It seems really far away for some reason whereas both Cincinnati and Cleveland think about it way more.

 

This is quite the opposite of my experience.  

 

 

Amtrak expects to get about 380,000 (first year) to 500,000 (after trains are sped up above 79 mph) 3C riders or 9-12 percent of the 3C travel market (4 million person trips per year).

 

 

 

 

7 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

 

 

 

This is quite the opposite of my experience.  

 

 

 

 

Of course what I'm saying is anecdotal. And what you're saying is too. But KJP gave the numbers.

1 minute ago, GCrites80s said:

 

 

 

Of course what I'm saying is anecdotal. And what you're saying is too. But KJP gave the numbers.

 

Yes, cities that are only 90 minutes away from each other obviously have a lot more travel between them than cities that are a 6 hour drive apart from each other. 

4 minutes ago, KJP said:

Amtrak expects to get about 380,000 (first year) to 500,000 (after trains are sped up above 79 mph) 3C riders or 9-12 percent of the 3C travel market (4 million person trips per year).

 

 

 

 

That's great, if they can accomplish that. I'm selfishly speaking from the Columbus point of view though. Much of that travel will be the Cincinnati-Cleveland crowd as the ROI from taking the train is much greater than the ROI from taking the train from Columbus-Cleveland or Columbus-Cincinnati. Again, my point is I'm really hoping for much more attractive routes from Columbus in the future. That's all. I'm not anti-train. I'm not anti-3C. I simply want Amtrak/Columbus to use this as the first step toward getting train service in Columbus up to the level that it should be for a metro area with a population closing in on 2.5 million people.

3 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Yes, cities that are only 90 minutes away from each other obviously have a lot more travel between them than cities that are a 6 hour drive apart from each other. 

 

Which is why tapping just 10 percent of that market would instantly make 3C one of Amtrak's most successful new routes. Young people demand it. Old people need it. The rest of Ohioans will probably wait until the speed increases to 110 mph or more. And that's OK.

 

1 minute ago, cbussoccer said:

 

That's great, if they can accomplish that. I'm selfishly speaking from the Columbus point of view though. Much of that travel will be the Cincinnati-Cleveland crowd as the ROI from taking the train is much greater than the ROI from taking the train from Columbus-Cleveland or Columbus-Cincinnati. Again, my point is I'm really hoping for much more attractive routes from Columbus in the future. That's all. I'm not anti-train. I'm not anti-3C. I simply want Amtrak/Columbus to use this as the first step toward getting train service in Columbus up to the level that it should be for a metro area with a population closing in on 2.5 million people.

 

Then let's get trains to the places where Columbus people are traveling to the most. This is from USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics......

 

Columbus-Cleveland: 1,890,126

Columbus-Cincinnati: 1,375,511

Cleveland-Cincinnati: 672,136

Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. These things take time.

1 minute ago, KJP said:

Then let's get trains to the places where Columbus people are traveling to the most. This is from USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics......

 

Columbus-Cleveland: 1,890,126

Columbus-Cincinnati: 1,375,511

Cleveland-Cincinnati: 672,136

 

Nobody is denying that a lot of people travel between those cities. I make many trips each year between those cities, so I'm well aware. I'm simply stating that, in its currently planned form, it's going to be difficult to move many of those travelers (specifically, Columbus travelers) from cars to trains because of how easy the drive is. 

 

And again, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE 3C ROUTE. I think it will be great for Ohio. I don't know how many more times I need to say that before you understand you don't need to evangelize me on the subject. I simply believe there are more attractive routes that could be added for Columbus in the future, and I sincerely hope they come to fruition. That's all. 

This train vs. car business always assumes that everyone is from a demographic that drives. We had this discussion on here many times last time around.

True, this route will do a lot of good for the people for whom driving isn't an option.

 

That said, I can't be the only person thinking this, but I have a hard time seeing the 3C route enticing too many people who own cars (and don't have any particular interest in trains/urbanism) with a five and a half hour journey time from Cleveland to Cincinnati. That simply isn't comparable to the drive time. The slide suggests it's a 4:20 drive, I remember it as 4, Google says it's about 3:45, and I know people who have done it in 3:30.

 

At a near two hour travel time difference, plus the time between when a hypothetical person wants to leave and when the train is scheduled to leave (not to mention the last mile problem), I'm saddened to say I think most people with options will still continue to drive this route most of the time. 

 

Moving to the target time will certainly help, but I sadly still think the route will need to be closer 4 hours (and frequent) if it wants to take a substantial chunk out of driving portion of the transport pie between these cities.

Edited May 19, 20214 yr by Ethan
Grammar

If you want to challenge yourself to get from Cincinnati to Cleveland in 4 hours every time, fine. Sounds like a single man's game.

I'm sure @ColDayManhas done it in 3 hours.

I always wind up behind a bunch of semis and other commercial traffic micropassing each other on 71.

2 minutes ago, GCrites80s said:

If you want to challenge yourself to get from Cincinnati to Cleveland in 4 hours every time, fine. Sounds like a single man's game.

 

Google maps estimates the drive from downtown Cleveland to downtown Cincinnati to take 3:48. That's assuming you drive the speed limit the entire way. 

 

Now, let's say you live in a northern suburb of Cincy, like Loveland, and you need to visit family in a southern suburb of Cleveland, like Macedonia. You are only looking at a 3:30 hour drive. If you want to take a train, you have a 30 minute drive from Loveland to the train station in downtown Cincinnati. You probably want to make sure you get there at least 20 minutes early so you get parked and get to the platform on time. Then, you have 5:30 train ride (or supposedly a 4:55 train ride in the future). Once you get off the train, you have another 30 minute drive from downtown Cleveland to Macedonia. What could have been a 3:48 drive at whatever time of day works best for you has now turned into a 6-7 hour ordeal centered around whatever the train schedule happens to be. 

 

This is the type of scenario the trains are going to have to compete with for many of the existing travelers between the cities. 

 

Why would someone buy a minivan when a Hellcat is available? Yet people still buy minivans.

1 hour ago, Ethan said:

 

1 hour ago, Ethan said:

That said, I can't be the only person thinking this, but I have a hard time seeing the 3C route enticing too many people who own cars (and don't have any particular interest in trains/urbanism) with a five and a half hour journey time from Cleveland to Cincinnati.

 

 

You've got to get people to try the train for the first time; it sells itself.  My usual trip is Wash DC - New York; I used to drive it but now the train is the clear winner. The train trip is so relaxing, compared to I-95 or flying.  The "Chinese" bus is super cheap but hours-long traffic delays are common. (The Chinese bus is no longer actually Chinese-owned but people still call it that,)

 

My only complaint about the trains is they are now so fast, even the non-Acela regionals, that you can no longer read the station names along the way.

46 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Nobody is denying that a lot of people travel between those cities. I make many trips each year between those cities, so I'm well aware. I'm simply stating that, in its currently planned form, it's going to be difficult to move many of those travelers (specifically, Columbus travelers) from cars to trains because of how easy the drive is. 

 

And again, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE 3C ROUTE. I think it will be great for Ohio. I don't know how many more times I need to say that before you understand you don't need to evangelize me on the subject. I simply believe there are more attractive routes that could be added for Columbus in the future, and I sincerely hope they come to fruition. That's all. 

 

I'm not trying to evangelize you. In fact, I think you're basic premise is correct. For example, if 8-9% of COL-CLE and COL-CIN travelers use the train and 20% of CLE-CIN choose the train, then that achieves Amtrak's first-year ridership projection of just under 400,000 trips. Yes, Amtrak is probably going to get a greater share of the CLE-CIN market. But because it is a smaller travel market, more people will take the train in the busier COL-CLE and COL-CIN segments.

 

 

Unfortunately, the only Ohio city/non-Ohio city pairs that ranked in the top 100 city-pair travel markets were Cincinnati-Indianapolis (1,029,824), Cleveland-Detroit (987,179) and Cleveland-Pittsburgh (716,468). No Chicago routes were in the top 100 for any Ohio city, although a few may have fallen just out of the top 100.

 

17 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Google maps estimates the drive from downtown Cleveland to downtown Cincinnati to take 3:48. That's assuming you drive the speed limit the entire way. 

 

Now, let's say you live in a northern suburb of Cincy, like Loveland, and you need to visit family in a southern suburb of Cleveland, like Macedonia. You are only looking at a 3:30 hour drive. If you want to take a train, you have a 30 minute drive from Loveland to the train station in downtown Cincinnati. You probably want to make sure you get there at least 20 minutes early so you get parked and get to the platform on time. Then, you have 5:30 train ride (or supposedly a 4:55 train ride in the future). Once you get off the train, you have another 30 minute drive from downtown Cleveland to Macedonia. What could have been a 3:48 drive at whatever time of day works best for you has now turned into a 6-7 hour ordeal centered around whatever the train schedule happens to be. 

 

This is the type of scenario the trains are going to have to compete with for many of the existing travelers between the cities. 

 

 

 

That's the type of scenario that Amtrak competes with everywhere, especially in the Midwest. And Amtrak still gets the ridership even with trains that aren't as fast or as reliable as they could be with additional infrastructure investment.

Why are we talking about the last mile problem like its unsolvable? 

 

One would think that as Amtrak routes are improved in these cities and ridership improves, demand for public transit within the cities will increase, so cities will be pressured to improve their public transit systems. With a multi-modal system developed alongside a new central Amtrak station I think it would be a big lift for any city's transit system...

27 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

Google maps estimates the drive from downtown Cleveland to downtown Cincinnati to take 3:48. That's assuming you drive the speed limit the entire way. 

 

 

Google maps actually uses real time traffic speeds based on cell phone data. So it doesn't assume you drive the speed limit, it assumes you drive the average speed that people are currently traveling. For a stretch as long as Cincy to Cleveland that is most definitely over the speed limit. It also doesn't take into account stops. I drive Cincy to Cleveland a lot and I've never done it in 3:48. It ranges between 4 and 5 depending on time of day, traffic, and number of stops along the way.

9 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Unfortunately, the only Ohio city/non-Ohio city pairs that ranked in the top 100 city-pair travel markets were Cincinnati-Indianapolis (1,029,824), Cleveland-Detroit (987,179) and Cleveland-Pittsburgh (716,468). No Chicago routes were in the top 100 for any Ohio city, although a few may have fallen just out of the top 100.

 

 

Is there a link to the entire list of top 100 pairs?

Also speaking from the Columbus point of view and huge fan of trains since childhood, I'm extremely excited this could finally be happening. The route itself is absolutely needed, I despised whenever I had to make the Cincy-to-Cleveland drive for work a few years back. I 100% agree that at minimum, 3C+D is an important starting point for building service in the region, and there will no doubt be plenty of people using from Columbus who wouldn't otherwise want (or be able) to make the drive. 

That said, I'm not too sure how often we'll personally use it. It would be super cool (and I think our son would absolutely love) taking the train to spend the day at Union Terminal. That whole trip would suddenly be something special, and I really can't wait to be able to do so. The rest of our Cincinnati-area trips will probably remain driving trips, since most of our family is in Clermont County.

 

I do think for Columbus, the 3C+D route would have a lot of added value as long as there are some reasonably well timed trains to make transferring to east coast trains practical. Chicago is probably a little tricker, since transferring on either end is probably going to add a lot of time over the current travel options. I don't doubt the accuracy of the numbers KJP posted - but having made the Columbus to Chicago trip a bunch of times over the last decade or so, I wonder if the low numbers are somewhat of a chicken-and-egg problem. It's a short enough flight that the overhead and hassle of flying feels silly. In addition to just having a car in Chicago being a pain, there also isn't an especially great driving route (via Indy, Ft Wayne, Toledo are all annoying for various reasons).

I'm very hopeful 3C+D both happens to begin with, and is successful enough to help move forward the proposals to connect Columbus and Chicago directly.

Indeed, people tend to solve the issue a lot quicker when more than 4 people get out of a vehicle in the same spot multiple times a day.

Found this stat the most interesting with the relaunch of this conversation:

 

“Columbus is the largest metro area in the country without Amtrak service.”
 

https://www.cleveland.com/travel/2021/05/amtrak-leaders-pitch-new-cleveland-columbus-dayton-cincinnati-route-its-our-goal-to-get-this-done.html

Edited May 19, 20214 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

Today's Columbus Metropolitan Club luncheon about trains & transit....

 

 

 

8 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Google maps actually uses real time traffic speeds based on cell phone data. So it doesn't assume you drive the speed limit, it assumes you drive the average speed that people are currently traveling. For a stretch as long as Cincy to Cleveland that is most definitely over the speed limit. It also doesn't take into account stops. I drive Cincy to Cleveland a lot and I've never done it in 3:48. It ranges between 4 and 5 depending on time of day, traffic, and number of stops along the way.

 

So you are driving slower than the flow of traffic? That seems like a poor strategy. Also, if Google Maps generally says 3:45-4:15, but you make it in 4-5 with a few stops, Google Maps seems fairly accurate to me. It's still about 2 hours faster than the train based on the current plan, which is a significant difference.

 

16 minutes ago, DEPACincy said:

 

Is there a link to the entire list of top 100 pairs?

 

I have a PDF of USDOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 2000 – Person-trips between metros and another with Ohio data updated to 2010. So if I used only the 2000 data, this is how Ohio compares in the Midwest.....

 

Cleveland Columbus 1,800,126

Chicago Detroit 1,614,286

Detroit Grand Rapids 1,411,112

Cincinnati Columbus 1,310,511

Chicago Indianapolis 1,176,242

Chicago Milwaukee 1,115,713

Chicago St. Louis 1,095,190

Cincinnati Indianapolis 1,029,824

Cleveland Detroit 987,179

Kansas City St. Louis 920,066

Chicago Minneapolis 892,108

Chicago Madison WI 819,542

Cleveland Pittsburgh 716,468

Cincinnati Cleveland 640,136

 

Here are the top 10 nationally

 

1 Los Angeles San Diego 10,466,883 
2 Las Vegas Los Angeles 9,120,296 
3 New York Philadelphia 8,476,339 
4 New York Washington DC 7,773,377 
5 Los Angeles San Francisco 7,049,954 
6 Sacramento San Francisco 5,337,613 
7 Philadelphia Washington DC 4,678,680 
   Cleveland Cincinnati 3,750,772 rank if COL-CLE, COL-CIN, CIN-CLE combined 
8 Dallas Houston 3,097,228 
9 Portland Seattle 2,605,223 
10 Norfolk Washington DC 2,590,212 
 

18 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

So you are driving slower than the flow of traffic? That seems like a poor strategy. Also, if Google Maps generally says 3:45-4:15, but you make it in 4-5 with a few stops, Google Maps seems fairly accurate to me. It's still about 2 hours faster than the train based on the current plan, which is a significant difference.

 

The "goal" travel time listed is just for the first year.  A lot of improvements need to be made along the route to get faster travel times, and if people do take the train in the numbers expected then that will justify additional expenditures to speed up the trip. 

 

With the train making stops along the way, it will never be as fast as an aggressive driver pushing the speed limit and never stopping. But the driver won't be able to sip a cocktail or watch a movie or take a nap or fill out a spreadsheet along the way -- and that will make train travel a better alternative for some.  Plus we have an aging population that won't be in a hurry to drive I-71 in the winter and plenty of young people who won't want to own a car in the first place.  (I had a young colleague recently ask me why he should buy a car that depreciates and requires maintenance when he can just Uber around town or rent a much nicer car for a vacation.)  As KJP noted, even if just a fraction of the current drivers were to switch to the train, Amtrak would hit their projected numbers.  Based on Illinois's and Michigan's experience, I think we might be surprised at how successful this could be.

 

Just think of how much less traffic that will mean for those who choose to continue to drive!

28 minutes ago, cbussoccer said:

 

So you are driving slower than the flow of traffic? That seems like a poor strategy. Also, if Google Maps generally says 3:45-4:15, but you make it in 4-5 with a few stops, Google Maps seems fairly accurate to me. It's still about 2 hours faster than the train based on the current plan, which is a significant difference.

 

 

No, I usually drive 8 miles over the limit. Some people drive slower, some drive a lot faster. I wasn't disputing Google's accuracy. Just letting you know it doesn't use the speed limit. And I usually stop twice for bathroom/lunch/gas breaks. So yeah that's about right.

 

I will say though, one huge benefit of the train is that you can just go to sleep or zone out. I used to take trains on the Northeast Corridor daily and I always caught a few zzzz's on my way home.

In this new era, I find myself in 5-7 Zoom/Teams/WebEx meetings a day.

 

Being able to tap into WiFi during the workday while on a train would maintain and increase productivity.  
 

This is one major behavioral difference since the first time the 3C was proposed. 

Edited May 19, 20214 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

On 5/17/2021 at 6:14 PM, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

Oh wait, I was only looking at 3C&D. Yeah, they really need to add either Hudson or Macedonia (aka “Northeast Akron suburbs”, ha) plus something closer to Youngstown. At least both Hamilton and Oxford are on there. 

 

 

On 5/18/2021 at 1:14 PM, audidave said:

I can see Hudson being a very viable option as the city is contemplating what to do with the land directly next to their tracks. They have the First and Main walking pedestrian village right there and probably 30-40 acres of undeveloped land next to the tracks.   Voters turned down a plan to put in apartment complexes there the past year.  Hudson would be a perfect stop. 

Macedonia has built up their areas next to the tracks in the past 5 years with a veterans park and apartment complexes and it really isn’t as accessible anymore as commercial property has backed up against the tracks or major roads run along side it.  Macedonia is just sprawling suburbia that isn’t very walkable. 

 

  

 

Is Hudson even on this line?  Those tracks don't appear to be the tracks on the map @KJP posted.  This is not an extra stop on a planned line you're suggesting, this is a whole separate branch line.

 

 

On 5/18/2021 at 1:46 PM, GCrites80s said:

They thought that bypassing small towns with faster highways would fix things instead! The other factor is that it's very hard for cities without rail transit to have more than a few solid blocks of good urbanism which obviously retains young people better than cheap suburbs. Cheap suburbs might be good at snatching over-35s, especially if they have walkable cores, but a 26 doesn't care.

 

Inter-city rail transit won't add that much more, especially because most successful stops will be in the small areas of those small towns that are already urbanized, making them even more attractive but not necessarily materially expanding the land subject to such development forms.  In fact, in many such towns, a rail line  (freight, of course, more often than not) forms the obvious boundary outside of the small downtown walkable area and the more typical single-use lower-income neighborhood development.  If I were building out the tiny walkable core of Mt. Vernon, for example, the obvious boundaries of that development would be the train tracks west of downtown and the Kokosing River to the south.

 

6 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

 

A Chicago-Indy(or Ft Wayne)-Columbus-Pittsburgh-East Coast route would be much more valuable for Columbus than the 3C route. I'm fully supportive of the 3C route, but I think Columbus residents would get much more value from the ability to take a train directly to Chicago. Columbus is almost too close to Cleveland and Cincinnati to get much value from the 3C, generally speaking. 

 

Regardless, getting Amtrak back to Columbus is the most important thing for Columbus at this point. Once the 3C route gets up and running, we can worry about adding some more useful routes. 

 

Perhaps.  But for one thing, Cincinnati and Cleveland are not quite so close to each other, even if Columbus is somewhat closer to either of them.  (EDIT: And I see one of your later posts on this thread said something similar.)

 

In addition, there is a lot of intrastate traffic from both of those cities to Columbus, more so than from Columbus to Chicago, and I think the goal of this line will be for semi-regular trips, not periodic excursions.  Think OSU students regularly going home to Cincinnati and Cleveland for Thanksgiving, Christmas, and spring break, as well as to Columbus at the start of the school year and home at the end.

 

On a train, if you suddenly feel the call of nature, you can get out of your seat and go relieve yourself and the vehicle keeps moving.  Attempting this while driving a car is a more daunting prospect.

 

3 hours ago, cbussoccer said:

 

How much of that travel from Columbus to Cleveland or Columbus to Cincinnati will be willing to switch to a train given the train's current speed? Part of the reason there is so much travel between the cities is because it's an extremely easy drive. If you want the train to be successful and a useful alternative, which I do, it needs to be extremely convenient. Unfortunately, with average speeds around 60mph and 2-3 stops, along with the fact that you have to buy a ticket, get to/from the train station, and adhere to the train's schedule as opposed to your own schedule, it's going to be difficult to pry people away from their cars.

 

It would be hard to pry me away from my car, but a lot of people traveling from northeast Ohio to Columbus are not me, and the question is whether there's a critical mass of those others.  I'm not really traveling from Cleveland, I'm traveling from Akron, and I'm not really traveling to Columbus, I'm traveling to Dublin and Newark.  Some of those trips are also with a family of 5, which means 5x the tickets when traveling by train but barely any additional marginal cost when taking the minivan.

 

When I was 20, unmarried, childless, and trying to get to OSU instead of the burbs, though, the "last mile" wasn't a problem to be solved, it was a problem to be avoided, because parking on campus and then getting to the dorm was its own ridiculous escapade (hello and sod off, WC5 tag!).  If I could have arrived downtown (around Nationwide Arena where those tracks are) and taken a cab (no such thing as Uber and Lyft in those days) to campus, that would have been a win.

 

2 hours ago, GCrites80s said:

micropassing

 

I learned a new word today and I hate it.

  

1 hour ago, GCrites80s said:

Why would someone buy a minivan when a Hellcat is available? Yet people still buy minivans.

 

We have a minivan and a Tesla.  The minivan is to teach the kids that life is about the journey and enjoying the ride; the Tesla is for when Dad actually has places to be and doesn't have time or patience for the soporific bubble of lies in which we ensconce our children.

 

2 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

 

Is Hudson even on this line?  Those tracks don't appear to be the tracks on the map @KJP posted.  This is not an extra stop on a planned line you're suggesting, this is a whole separate branch line.

 

 

 

Hudson isn't on the 3C line. But it is on the Cleveland-Pittsburgh line that Amtrak is proposing to add additional service (I think it's just one additional train a day, but it will be in the daytime).

2 hours ago, KJP said:

Today's Columbus Metropolitan Club luncheon about trains & transit....

 

 

 

Just finished listening to this.  Interesting conversation.  Overall a great conversation.  Liked the comparisons potential of the Pacific NW line being a similar distance (OR-WA-BC) and how Michigan is continuing to expand and speed up their rail (if you want to motivate an Ohioian... tell them Michigan is doing it better).

 

It was very Columbus-focused (as you might expect being a Columbus forum), but by that I mean there was zero mention / knowledge of Cleveland or Cincinnati... or the other cities that would be connected.
 

“Columbus” was interchangeably used as meaning the same thing as “Ohio,” especially in terms of public perception and practically.   So much so, dare I say the panelists were not aware of Cleveland’s rapid transit light rail, heavy rail, and BRT... or Cincinnati’s Streetcar. 

For example, was brought up many times how COTA needs improvement; however, zero mention that similar models may exist in Cleveland or Cincinnati (and other nearby mid-sized cities) that could be emulated... or at least could be used when riders got to their destination. 
 

And of course, we have so much TOD potential across all our cities.

Edited May 19, 20214 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

11 minutes ago, Gramarye said:

 

 

Is Hudson even on this line?  Those tracks don't appear to be the tracks on the map @KJP posted.  This is not an extra stop on a planned line you're suggesting, this is a whole separate branch line.

 

 

 

Inter-city rail transit won't add that much more, especially because most successful stops will be in the small areas of those small towns that are already urbanized, making them even more attractive but not necessarily materially expanding the land subject to such development forms.  In fact, in many such towns, a rail line  (freight, of course, more often than not) forms the obvious boundary outside of the small downtown walkable area and the more typical single-use lower-income neighborhood development.  If I were building out the tiny walkable core of Mt. Vernon, for example, the obvious boundaries of that development would be the train tracks west of downtown and the Kokosing River to the south.

 

 

Perhaps.  But for one thing, Cincinnati and Cleveland are not quite so close to each other, even if Columbus is somewhat closer to either of them.  (EDIT: And I see one of your later posts on this thread said something similar.)

 

In addition, there is a lot of intrastate traffic from both of those cities to Columbus, more so than from Columbus to Chicago, and I think the goal of this line will be for semi-regular trips, not periodic excursions.  Think OSU students regularly going home to Cincinnati and Cleveland for Thanksgiving, Christmas, and spring break, as well as to Columbus at the start of the school year and home at the end.

 

On a train, if you suddenly feel the call of nature, you can get out of your seat and go relieve yourself and the vehicle keeps moving.  Attempting this while driving a car is a more daunting prospect.

 

 

It would be hard to pry me away from my car, but a lot of people traveling from northeast Ohio to Columbus are not me, and the question is whether there's a critical mass of those others.  I'm not really traveling from Cleveland, I'm traveling from Akron, and I'm not really traveling to Columbus, I'm traveling to Dublin and Newark.  Some of those trips are also with a family of 5, which means 5x the tickets when traveling by train but barely any additional marginal cost when taking the minivan.

 

When I was 20, unmarried, childless, and trying to get to OSU instead of the burbs, though, the "last mile" wasn't a problem to be solved, it was a problem to be avoided, because parking on campus and then getting to the dorm was its own ridiculous escapade (hello and sod off, WC5 tag!).  If I could have arrived downtown (around Nationwide Arena where those tracks are) and taken a cab (no such thing as Uber and Lyft in those days) to campus, that would have been a win.

 

 

I learned a new word today and I hate it.

  

 

We have a minivan and a Tesla.  The minivan is to teach the kids that life is about the journey and enjoying the ride; the Tesla is for when Dad actually has places to be and doesn't have time or patience for the soporific bubble of lies in which we ensconce our children.

 

 

In reference to the small-town bypasses I meant highway bypasses. I should have been more clear. The Hellcat vs. minivan quip was more rhetorical in this case vis a vis comparing practicality and speed. Sort of like how Glorious PC Gaming Master Race people cannot fathom how someone would buy a Nintendo Switch.

I understand why it's not being considered but if Ohio wanted a higher-speed line for the 3Cs I would think the old B&O line from CIN-CLB would be a good option for Amtrak to buy and lease back to the Indiana & Ohio. Sure, it doesn't connect to Dayton, but Amtrak could upgrade the tracks and not have to worry about the freight frequency that it would on other ROW.

 

Here also is the link to the Amtrak Ohio Roundtable discussion on Tuesday with Amtrak's CEO and President....

 

 

^Weird that something like that would have privacy on.

No biggie. Just click on it.

 

AND

 

 

MODERATOR NOTE:  Moved this article and the opinion piece in the next post over to this thread after posting in the wrong thread.

 

Talk of Amtrak routes connecting Ohio cities picks up steam, with two routes through Columbus

 

The push for Amtrak service connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati continued Tuesday, as officials boosted it as an economic development tool for the state while filling a transportation gap.  But it's still unclear if and when the state would hop aboard.

 

Earlier this year, Amtrak published a map of potential new routes nationwide, including one showing a new route between the four cities. ... The expansion would be part of President Joe Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure package. About $80 billion of that would upgrade and expand Amtrak's rail service nationwide by more than 30 routes and as many as 20 million passengers by 2035.

 

MORE:  https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/2021/05/19/ohio-mayors-other-officials-push-amtrak-routes-through-columbus/5145539001/

Edited May 24, 20214 yr by Columbo

Opinion piece published in today's Columbus Dispatch written by Stu Nicholson - a Columbus resident who is Executive Director of All Aboard Ohio:

 

Opinion: Amtrak plan important for central Ohio

 

If there was any doubt about Amtrak’s desire for self-funded passenger service expansion plans for Ohio that include a Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati route, that was erased by Amtrak’s own top executives.  CEO William Flynn and President Stephen Gardner hosted a roundtable discussion May 18 with the mayors of Dayton, Cleveland and Crestline plus Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission Executive Director William Murdock.

 

Flynn and Gardner stated often that Ohio’s so-called 3C&D corridor “exemplifies” the kind of rail corridor that “fits our model,” and it’s a priority project for them once Congress approves funding for a 15-year series of new service and expansions in existing Amtrak corridors.  Hopefully, we will see Congress act soon and favorably.

 

This is important to Columbus and central Ohio.  The 3C&D corridor would add passenger rail to Ohio’s most densely populated and heavily traveled region with six trains per day (three north, three south) at 79 mph.

( . . . )

MORPC's Murdock also pitched Columbus as a passenger rail hub by telling Amtrak’s Flynn and Gardner of MORPC plans for an east-west corridor connecting Chicago, Columbus and Pittsburgh.  Amtrak’s executives were seen taking notes on this, even though it is not yet part of their Amtrak Connects US plan.

 

MORE:  https://www.dispatch.com/story/opinion/columns/guest/2021/05/24/stu-nicholson-amtrak-plan-imporant-central-ohio/5195413001/

Are there any early hints as to Dewine's feelings on this plan?  

3 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Are there any early hints as to Dewine's feelings on this plan?  

 

He hasn't formed an opinion until he hears from Amtrak what the state would be expected to spend to support the route after the state fully takes over in the sixth year.