^I believe (I hope) that is the second stop in Cleveland, with the first being the Amtrak station downtown.  It would have been nice if the train could connect directly to the airport, but this is good none-the-less for the city and the state.

Does anyone know how many miles of rail each state is getting and how fast?

 

Chris Matthews on Hardball quoted the NYT as saying Florida's Tampa-Orlando train will go 168mph.

Summary of Corridor Investments

 

Tampa - Orlando: This investment will initiate the development of the Tampa to Orlando segment, with speeds reaching 168mph and 16 round trips per day on brand new track dedicated solely to high-speed rail. Trip time between the two cities on the new line will be less than one hour, compared to around 90 minutes by car. This project will create jobs and generate economic activity as 84 miles of track are constructed, stations are built or enhanced, and equipment is purchased. Completion of this phase is anticipated in 2014.

 

http://dscriber.com/plugins/content/external_links/frameset.php?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whitehouse.gov%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2Frail_florida.pdf

 

Again, is this just message board speculation or is it now official?

 

Is what speculation?  That Ohio has been given stimulus money for the 3-C?  No, it's not speculation.  It's official.

 

 

I was referring to the possibility of Cincinnati being cut from the 3-C plans. 

 

Thanks Rando and KJP for clearing that up.

40 mph?  Why would someone go on a train that wont giet them there faster than driving?  Im sure there are just as many people who want to be efficient with their time than there are people who cant afford to drive/want to help the environment.

 

As for Cleveland, why is the rail commencing at W. 150/Puritas?  I envisioned a nice little terminal area downtown, where other routes can stem from.  WHen i think of rail, i think termini in Rome, or St. Pancras in London (obviously Cleveland doesnt compare to those), but still it enhances the foot traffic and crowds.  W. 150 and puritas?

 

I agree, the terminus at 150 & Puritas doesnt' make much sense.  Might as well move it a few stops back and make it at Brookpark road with a shuttle back & forth from the airport?

 

As excited as I was about this, it's really starting to bog down.

 

Can someone explain why NC gets more money for a single line from Charlotte to Raleigh (2 cities) than Ohio got for a longer distance connecting 4 cities?

And for those not all that familiar with Cincinnati's distrust for Columbus and the mindset of a Cincinnati city-state...please see the major op-ed by Cincinnati Business Courier publisher Doug Bolton today: http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/02/01/editorial1.html.

Charlotte to Raleigh = young and vibrant and 3 C = Stale  There's likely a little more political will there as well.  I could deal with a scaled down project because something could grow but unless these lines terminate at subways these locations are awful.  Can someone explain why cities that once could handle terminal stations near their downtowns can't any longer.

40 mph?  Why would someone go on a train that wont giet them there faster than driving?  Im sure there are just as many people who want to be efficient with their time than there are people who cant afford to drive/want to help the environment.

 

As for Cleveland, why is the rail commencing at W. 150/Puritas?  I envisioned a nice little terminal area downtown, where other routes can stem from.  WHen i think of rail, i think termini in Rome, or St. Pancras in London (obviously Cleveland doesnt compare to those), but still it enhances the foot traffic and crowds.  W. 150 and puritas?

 

I agree, the terminus at 150 & Puritas doesnt' make much sense.  Might as well move it a few stops back and make it at Brookpark road with a shuttle back & forth from the airport?

 

As excited as I was about this, it's really starting to bog down.

 

Can someone explain why NC gets more money for a single line from Charlotte to Raleigh (2 cities) than Ohio got for a longer distance connecting 4 cities?

 

So the Cincy leg was expected to go into downtown but not Clevelands? 

 

Can someone explain why NC gets more money for a single line from Charlotte to Raleigh (2 cities) than Ohio got for a longer distance connecting 4 cities?

More state matching funds.

 

Can someone explain why cities that once could handle terminal stations near their downtowns can't any longer.

Infrastructure for passenger rail has been removed, and freight rail is in the way now.

Personally I would rather see a service upgrade on the train lines that already serve Cincinnati.  We already have trains going to Chicago and DC, and if those could be made high speed, and with more regular service, I would take that any day over a train to Columbus and Cleveland.  I mean, how many people actually travel between the 3C's anway? There might be a decent amount between Cincinnati and Columbus, and Columbus and Cleveland, but I can't see there being a ton of demand for people going to Cincinnati from Cleveland or vice versa.

Ok, but what would be the point of having a train between Cincy to Columbus and a separate one between CLE and Columbus? It isn't like you can't ride the train half way.

So the Cincy leg was expected to go into downtown but not Clevelands? 

 

My understanding all along was that Cleveland would have 2 stops.  One downtown at the Amtrak station and one near the airport at W150 and Puritas.  I'm assuming they added the second stop to connect the train line to the Rapid and airport since Waterfront Line service is sporadic.

So it would commence downtown for Cleveland...  Thatsw what I thought before.

Congratulations KJP!

^Interesting.  I didnt see the amtrak stop.  However, not to continue to harp...but we know the current situation of our amtrak station and its hardly inviting.  There is just good land in the flats...i wish Wolstein would get in on  a small terminal that goes to that property and is near the future casino.  In my opinion, they just need to start tying more projects together.

KJP maybe you can help me with this.... I have been reading up about high speed rail systems proposed throughout different regions in the USA and the one in Ohio is by far the slowest. Why is this?

 

...I should say the rail system in the midwest appears to be the slowest.

 

Ours is the only one starting from scratch. Like I've said before, all new rail services start modestly.

 

If our system is the only one starting from scratch then why are we receiving the least amount of funding? The Florida line is getting 1.25 billion which is fine they have a larger population and more tourism, but Madison to Milwaukee is getting 800 million...really?

In my opinion, they just need to start tying more projects together.

Tying projects together? The Amshack is right next to the convention center, and if rebuilt, might end up connected to it.

Wow, a number of you folks are talking yourselves into a state of mind that is not based on reality....

 

+++ Trains are proposed to go to downtown Cleveland, stopping at an upgraded and expanded Amtrak station. A SW Cleveland station has been proposed since the 1980s.

 

+++ Trains are proposed to stop at a new station built in downtown Columbus at the Convention Center, putting the stop right on High Street (does it get any better than that? Don't think so).

 

+++ Trains are proposed to stop at a Main Street station in downtown Dayton, next to the convention center. Can't do much better than that, either.

 

+++ The only glitch is Cincinnati where geography and 50 years of decisions by private railroads to eliminate and consolidate their infrastructure present challenges for getting a passenger train station at/near downtown. Of course, anything can be overcome if there is enough money, but there is never enough money.

 

SPEED:  As for the speed of the train, I encourage you all to calculate the average train speeds of other new-start state-sponsored train services around the country. Then look at where they are now.

Well that would be nice, if rebuilt.  However, that is hardly the epicenter of the downtown area.  If i get off a train at the amtrak station, and i am a visitor, my first impression is...well, weak.

Question for the über rail nerds (no offense, I'm a nerd too, but in other ways).  Did the removal of the railyard along the Licking River just south of I-275 in Kenton County contribute to this congestion near CUT? 

 

Which is why the North Coast Transportation Center needs to be built. Another example of how much work we have to do in this city, state and nation.

 

This nation, and especially this state, is so far behind the rest of the world when it comes to rail transportation that it will take us 25-50 years to catch up if we keep spending $8 billion per year on rail. We could probably catch up to the world in 20 years if we spent $100 billion per year...

 

Bob Hagan, chair of the Ohio House of Representatives Transportation Committee went on a tour of Spain rail services last year. OK, we're talking Spain... Not the UK, not Japan, not Germany. But, Spain. It wasn't what he saw in Spain that made him so angry and depressed. It was returning to the U.S. and realizing how much work we still have to do.

+++ The only glitch is Cincinnati where geography and 50 years of decisions by private railroads to eliminate and consolidate their infrastructure present challenges for getting a passenger train station at/near downtown. Of course, anything can be overcome if there is enough money, but there is never enough money.

 

Which is why some of us are concerned that 2010's "temporary" terminus in Sharonville will end up looking very permanent as the years go by.

Well that would be nice, if rebuilt. However, that is hardly the epicenter of the downtown area. If i get off a train at the amtrak station, and i am a visitor, my first impression is...well, weak.

Well then what do you consider the "epicenter of downtown", and how do you propose to get a train there. Keep in mind that Tower City isn't an option for reasons that have been discussed repeatedly throughout this thread. I think that it is a matter of perspective: My office is close to there, so to me it seems like the heart of downtown. Also consider that the Rock Hall, Science Center, Browns Stadium, and the Convention Center are right next to it, so for visitors to the city it will seem like a somewhat logical choice.

I'm almost to the point where I wonder if we just wouldn't be better off just constructing half of the route to its maximum potential. Get it up and runnig at full speed and show people how convenient, efficient, and sensible it is when done properly. Once they're hooked drum up the money for the second leg.

 

As much as I want Cincinnati included, Cleveland to Columbus first makes more sense due to the existing infracstructure and overall more positive attitude towards trains/mass transit that RTA has already established.

 

Meanwhile, Cincinnati gets the streetcar up and running to familiarize people with rail transit. The massive construction coming to I-75 in the next decade through Cincinnati, and the ensured headaches it will cause, could also politically be spun to get people to think more favorably of rail in SW Ohio.

 

Yes. 

 

We got thrown a curveball and now it's time to adjust.  The first question is whether we're allowed to alter our plan in light of the reduced funding, and question 1-A is whether we've done an alternative cost study on a more serious upgrade for Cle-Cbus.  You know, something that would allow for speeds we could actually sell someone.  This rollout is a one shot deal in terms of PR, so why risk alienating the entire state with bad service?  The northern leg would likely have higher ridership at first anyway, since people here are already comfortable with the concept.  We need good numbers and good reviews, good word of mouth.  We're not building an amusement park ride.  If the product, at any stage, is not practical to use it won't help our cause a whole lot.   

Well that would be nice, if rebuilt. However, that is hardly the epicenter of the downtown area. If i get off a train at the amtrak station, and i am a visitor, my first impression is...well, weak.

Well then what do you consider the "epicenter of downtown", and how do you propose to get a train there. Keep in mind that Tower City isn't an option for reasons that have been discussed repeatedly throughout this thread. I think that it is a matter of perspective: My office is close to there, so to me it seems like the heart of downtown. Also consider that the Rock Hall, Science Center, Browns Stadium, and the Convention Center are right next to it, so for visitors to the city it will seem like a somewhat logical choice.

 

I laid it out earlier.  If they want to keep it where it is fine, but clean things up.  Make a walkable terminal area.  European terminals are excellent and make an area really busy.  I would suggest adding it down in the flats where we are trying to rivatilize the area, already.  I think it would be a great addition.  Have a terminal wherre people can get take away meals for either the trip or after the get off the train.  Have a casino and new riverside park right near there.  Have RTA ride their trolley's right down outside of the terminal so people can get up the hill if they need to.  I dont know, just dreamin'.

Toledo - Columbus is most definitely in the plan. It will be part of the five-route Ohio Hub environment assessment to begin this spring.

 

Here's an example of something I'm working on...

 

________________

 

 

Portland, ME to Boston, MA – The Downeaster

 

2002 – Service began operations

 

Service frequency – 4 daily round trips

Stations – 7

Route length – 116 miles

Travel time – 2 hours, 45 minutes

Average train speed – 42 mph

First-year ridership – 291,794

 

TODAY

 

Service frequency – 5 daily round trips

Stations – 10

Route length – 116 miles

Travel time – 2 hours, 25 minutes

Average train speed – 48 mph

2009 ridership – 458,116

 

Please note this photo of the Portland, ME Transportation Center. Not a very walkable station site, and it is not within walking distance of downtown Portland (GoogleEarth it sometime). Yet people are filling the trains (it does have nine other stations)....

 

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=131081&nseq=12

They definitely need to be working on how to get good, serviceable downtown stations in all three C-cities stat.  These cities are the main drivers of the state's economy, cities with strong core's perform better economically than those with hollow cores, and our legacy costs and new relative distance to high-growth countries make it impossible for Ohio to compete against Southern and Western states at greenfield development.

 

The problem is, there's no "they" working on this.  No one is tasked to find a way to make up this shortfall.  And unfortunately no politician in Cincy is going to pick up the baton on this.  While I don't think there will be a major backlash against any politician, there is a big problem with us saying "good enough" instead of working hard to complete the system.  The system works like it is supposed to when it is complete.

^Good call.  Exactly.  They have the funding to make this right and they need to get it done now while the opportunity exists.  We dont want to look back in 70 years and talk about how this was ill-planned and did not serve the city well. 

SPEED:  As for the speed of the train, I encourage you all to calculate the average train speeds of other new-start state-sponsored train services around the country. Then look at where they are now.

 

Okay. Here is one that I've cited before:

 

Music City Star between Nashville and Lebanon, TN. Slow-speed commuter rail, sponsored by the state, and receiving far fewer riders than projected. Had the possibility of default. State bailed them out and extensions to other suburbs have been shelved for the moment.

 

Yeah, commuter rail, but rail nonetheless. It is slow, on a shared freight line and relatively pricey.

I'd rather get this right in small steps and win a lot of converts/supporters instead of half-assing it and watching it die on the vine.

I'd rather get this right in small steps and win a lot of converts/supporters instead of half-assing it and watching it die on the vine.

 

I agree.  I'm a huge rail advocate and anytime I bring this up to any of my friends, universally they say "why the F would I take the train to columbus when I can drive there in less time?"

 

Informing them why they should take the train, even if it is slower, is pointless.  You need to give people an alternative that provides them some level of increased convienence over the current choice.  Things people will look at is TIME and COST.  Time - this train set up increases travel time.  Cost - people will compare it to a tank of gas and say "equal, if not more...plus I have to pay for transit once I get there".

 

Again - right or wrong, that's the way it is and don't think you're going to change the culture of transportation throughout the state by any other means aside from addressing these 2 points.  "Selling" the public that their trip to Columbus costs more than the gas involved in in order to get them to ride the train is a complete waste of time, at least in the short term.

 

Improve TIME and IMMEDIATE OUT OF POCKET COST and you'll get tons of supporters.  Until then, people will keep driving.  If the state of Ohio changed its transportation spending to flip around what it currently pays for roads to trains the public wouldn't know a change was even made.  They would just see it costs less to take the train now and they would start doing that without knowing why.

Has anyone talked about a "sharing" of public transportation passes in these cities.  I'm a daily Cleveland commuter with a monthly pass.  It would be nice if I could pay regular price for my train ticket, take the train to Columbus, and still have my monthly transit pass be valid in the destination city.

 

Maybe its too much wishful thinking, but some way to facilitate travelers transportation in the destination city would be a good idea.  It might help people be less leery about not having their cars.  Maybe add a one day pass for a reduced cost on to the price of the ticket.

As for Cleveland, why is the rail commencing at W. 150/Puritas?  I envisioned a nice little terminal area downtown, where other routes can stem from.  WHen i think of rail, i think termini in Rome, or St. Pancras in London (obviously Cleveland doesnt compare to those), but still it enhances the foot traffic and crowds.  W. 150 and puritas?

 

It's not commencing there.  It's just a suburban stop so there will be an intermodal connection to the airport.  It will commence at Lakefront Station. 

"Selling" the public that their trip to Columbus costs more than the gas involved in in order to get them to ride the train is a complete waste of time, at least in the short term.

 

Improve TIME and IMMEDIATE OUT OF POCKET COST and you'll get tons of supporters.  Until then, people will keep driving.  If the state of Ohio changed its transportation spending to flip around what it currently pays for roads to trains the public wouldn't know a change was even made.  They would just see it costs less to take the train now and they would start doing that without knowing why.

 

Ohio is no different from any other state that has done this.  In the other states, the corridors take longer than driving and cost more than an equivalent amount of gas.  It's not a requirement for success.  Those other corridors have been and continue to be successful. 

 

Has anyone talked about a "sharing" of public transportation passes in these cities.  I'm a daily Cleveland commuter with a monthly pass.  It would be nice if I could pay regular price for my train ticket, take the train to Columbus, and still have my monthly transit pass be valid in the destination city.

 

Maybe its too much wishful thinking, but some way to facilitate travelers transportation in the destination city would be a good idea.  It might help people be less leery about not having their cars.  Maybe add a one day pass for a reduced cost on to the price of the ticket.

 

I like that idea, but here's the problem

 

Monthly pass prices

COTA: $55

GCRTA: $85

SORTA: $70

GDRTA: $55

 

 

Let's step back here.  I-75 is about to get torn up and completely rebuilt between I-275 and Northern Kentucky, a distance of over 15 miles.  There exists the obvious opportunity to build a new rail line of two or more tracks down the center of the rebuilt expressway.  These rails could carry both intercity high speed trains AND local commuter trains to the Riverfront Transit Center.  Instead this 4th main will only serve intercity trains, not commuter trains. 

 

Now there is a right-of-way being preserved for light rail along the route, but it is not suitable for larger intercity trains, and light rail is not a good choice for long distance commuter trains like the ones that could make good use of the corridor and -- cough -- eliminate the need for the widening of the highway. 

Some thoughts:

 

I like the idea of moving all the money to connect Columbus to Cleveland or even Dayton to Cleveland, leaving Sharonville out of the picture for now.  If that becomes a well oiled machine, and Cincinnati gets the Streetcar, I think people would be more likely to fund the Cincinnati connection.  But I really don't think we can change the plan this late in the game...so

 

If we build out the plan as is to Sharonville (NOT A BAD PLAN) and make Sharonville the gateway to Cincy for the next decade (or hopefully less) then Cincinnati should get on board and fund some Zipcars.  People could jump off the train, rent a car, and accomplish all they need to in Cincy for the day before returning home.  I use Zipcars on a regular basis and it's a shame that there are none in Ohio.  Go to Zipcar.com and check out the car locations for Pittsburgh.  It's incredible.

 

Also, is the station set on Kemper Rd?  There's not much room for a parking lot there.  Wouldn't Sharon Rd make a lot more sense?

Let's step back here.  I-75 is about to get torn up and completely rebuilt between I-275 and Northern Kentucky, a distance of over 15 miles.  There exists the obvious opportunity to build a new rail line of two or more tracks down the center of the rebuilt expressway.  These rails could carry both intercity high speed trains AND local commuter trains to the Riverfront Transit Center.  Instead this 4th main will only serve intercity trains, not commuter trains. 

 

I'm pretty sure the design phase is well past implementing anything like that.  They are preserving a light rail ROW along side the highway, but that's about it. 

 

You do bring up a good point though.  The impending nightmare of I-75 construction would be a good bargaining point for completing the passenger line to CUT.  A commuter rail line could use the same tracks as the intercity to take people between CUT (or preferably Longworth Hall) and a park-and-ride station in Sharonville.  At the very least, it makes the argument for terminating intercity trains in Sharonville that much harder to swallow with the road connection to downtown being messed up.

Has anyone talked about a "sharing" of public transportation passes in these cities. I'm a daily Cleveland commuter with a monthly pass. It would be nice if I could pay regular price for my train ticket, take the train to Columbus, and still have my monthly transit pass be valid in the destination city.

 

Maybe its too much wishful thinking, but some way to facilitate travelers transportation in the destination city would be a good idea. It might help people be less leery about not having their cars. Maybe add a one day pass for a reduced cost on to the price of the ticket.

 

I like that idea, but here's the problem

 

Monthly pass prices

COTA: $55

GCRTA: $85

SORTA: $70

GDRTA: $55

 

 

 

True, I could see some people trying to scam the system by buying the cheaper passes and use them in a place that is more expensive.  Maybe offering one or two discounted all day passes per train ticket would be better.

 

If we build out the plan as is to Sharonville (NOT A BAD PLAN) and make Sharonville the gateway to Cincy for the next decade (or hopefully less) then Cincinnati should get on board and fund some Zipcars. People could jump off the train, rent a car, and accomplish all they need to in Cincy for the day before returning home. I use Zipcars on a regular basis and it's a shame that there are none in Ohio. Go to Zipcar.com and check out the car locations for Pittsburgh. It's incredible.

 

There is something similar called CityWheels in Cleveland: http://www.mycitywheels.com/

If we build out the plan as is to Sharonville (NOT A BAD PLAN) and make Sharonville the gateway to Cincy for the next decade (or hopefully less) then Cincinnati should get on board and fund some Zipcars.  People could jump off the train, rent a car, and accomplish all they need to in Cincy for the day before returning home.  I use Zipcars on a regular basis and it's a shame that there are none in Ohio.  Go to Zipcar.com and check out the car locations for Pittsburgh.  It's incredible.

 

At the very minimum, there should be a decent bus connection from downtown to the Sharonville 3C station. And in this case, "decent" means high-capacity express buses with ample luggage racks, that are scheduled to coordinate with train arrivals and departures. There's no point in having a bus connection if people are forced to wait 30 minutes for an overcrowded bus to show up, and then crawl down Reading Road and stop every two blocks to pick up more passengers.

 

In the long term, though, I agree with Jake. It's a shame that a new mainline rail connection to CUT isn't being considered as part of the I-75 project, in addition to the light rail ROW. Ohio is missing a once-in-a-generation opportunity to kill two birds with one stone.

You folks in Cincinnati are proposing some very good ideas.  If you want them to happen, you need to organize, organize, organize down there. 

this sounds like a job for Cincinnatians for Progress

 

  Wow - I miss one day and come back to 10 pages of 3-C.

 

  I-74 was constructed with a bridge over the former CH&D in Northside. The railroad had been abandoned for many years when I-74 was rehabilitated in the 1990's. At that time, the bridge was removed instead of replaced. However, the new fill settled, leading to a very bumpy ride for an interstate, and that portion of the pavement had to be rebuilt.

 

    Yes, the closure of the Latonia Yard (I think that's what it was called) contributed to congestion in the Mill Creek. The same goes for the Pennsylvania Undercliff yard, and some others. Railroad economics at the time favored consolidation of operations.

 

    A passenger line from Sharonville to Cleveland is not as good as a line from Downtown Cincinnati to Cleveland, but it is better than no line at all.

 

    Cincinnati people have themselves to blame for lack of a downtown stop, because the NIMBY's along Eastern Avenue opposed any new rail activity on the Oasis line.

 

    The Cardinal line from Chicago to Washington through Cincinnati is a joke. The ridership in Cincinnati is very low. Sometimes the train is 10 hours late, or cancelled. Upgrading to high speed is not likely due to congestion from freight trains.

 

    Cheers.

The problem is, there's no "they" working on this.  No one is tasked to find a way to make up this shortfall. 

 

Not true. ODOT/ORDC are working on this. And I heard an interesting statistic today:  The original 3C application cost of $564 million had a 30 percent contingency in it. The $400 million awarded represents 71 percent of the $564 million.

 

Things people will look at is TIME and COST.  Time - this train set up increases travel time.  Cost - people will compare it to a tank of gas and say "equal, if not more...plus I have to pay for transit once I get there".

 

Very true. According to CalTrans the top four issues for prospective rail travelers:  1. Cost; 2. Reliability; 3. Frequency of service; 4. Speed. But only those on expense accounts or those who have read the AAA's report on the true cost of driving understand how much it really costs to drive.

 

Has anyone talked about a "sharing" of public transportation passes in these cities.

 

Funny you should mention that. One of our board members is director of OHERN.... http://www.ohern.org/  While the idea is geared to college students, it could be used by everyone.

 

 

this sounds like a job for Cincinnatians for Progress

 

John Schneider noted that CFP wants to get involved in this. So see the message I posted yesterday. I realize it probably got buried in the avalanche, but All Aboard Ohio holds regular local meetings in Cincinnati and Dayton. The next one is....

 

FEBRUARY 3rd—7:30-8:30 p.m.—All Aboard Ohio SOUTHWEST Local Meeting—Riverside Council Chambers, 1791 Harshman Road, Riverside, OH. Topics: Brainstorm tangible and realistic goals that Southwest Ohioans can meet this year. Contact All Aboard Ohio board member Jim Wellman at Home - 937-233-8333 or Cell - 937-416-1819, or contact Ryan Korchinski at Work - 937-222-3611 or Cell - 937-470-1736.

 

Other meetings are posted at www.allaboardohio.org

^

Riverside is going to be the second Dayton area station, located across from the Air Force museum.  The Riverside politicos are really pumped about this line coming through. 

 

 

The problem is, there's no "they" working on this. No one is tasked to find a way to make up this shortfall.

 

Not true. ODOT/ORDC are working on this. And I heard an interesting statistic today: The original 3C application cost of $564 million had a 30 percent contingency in it. The $400 million awarded represents 71 percent of the $564 million.

 

I was talking about local political leadership, not civil service leadership.  I'm clearly just a dilettante when it comes to this subject, but it strikes me that jmeck's points about the I-75 rebuild speak directly to the problem on having to rely on folks who are tasked to implement policy rather than a politician or group of politicians who are actively pursuing the region's interest. 

 

The fact that we are presented with a problem (a route to get high-speed rail from Sharonville to Cincinnati Union Terminal) that could very likely be solved by a scheduled change to a project (I-75 widening) that will arguably do nothing to change the underlying cause of that project, while the change could theoretically fix both exemplifies what folks find frustrating about government.  The fact that the state can't connect to CUT at this time is actually a positive thing if it would result in a change to the I-75 widening.  But unfortunately it probably won't do that.

 

Problem:  Too many vehicles on I-75 at certain times of the day.

Solution1: Disincentivize least economic vehicles to take the highway at those times.

Solution2: Increase size of oft-jammed highway, while at the same time taking taxable

land off property rolls forever.

 

Swish!

I hate to say this, but as a Daytonian. . .I was looking forward to riding the train down to cincy and taking advantage of the games and all that is to offer in the city center.. .however, if the train ends in sharonville, there is absolutely no reason for me to ride it down there and I think that's going to be the case for a lot of people. . .sorry, that's just my opinion. . no one is going to want to hop on a bus for an additional 15 mile ride into the city after being on the train.  :-(

 

It needs to go into the city core for this initial phase. I realize there are roadblocks, but they can be overcome.

Things people will look at is TIME and COST. Time - this train set up increases travel time. Cost - people will compare it to a tank of gas and say "equal, if not more...plus I have to pay for transit once I get there".

 

Very true. According to CalTrans the top four issues for prospective rail travelers: 1. Cost; 2. Reliability; 3. Frequency of service; 4. Speed. But only those on expense accounts or those who have read the AAA's report on the true cost of driving understand how much it really costs to drive.

 

First, congrats on getting this funding.  I really hope it works.

 

Re:the expense account/AAA bottom line number of $0.52/mile.  This isn't the appropriate number for this calculation, since it includes a bunch of costs that don't vary with how many miles you drive, like insurance and finance costs.  The marginal cost of driving is about $0.14/mile, which means the cost for a single passenger is about the same rail vs. car.  If you have more than one person going, a car is much cheaper.  Additionally, while in our dream world everyone would arrive and then walk or take public transportation to their destination, the reality is many won't and in some cases practially speaking, can't, b/c there's no mass transit connection available.  So, they're stuck with the added expense of a rental car or a taxi.  Add to this being beholden to the train schedule itself and slower service (and potentially extra time getting from the station to your house that having your own car could shorten) and for many people the currently planned offering is just going to be unappealing.

 

While I hope you're right, KJP, that it starts modestly, but grows, I worry that a half a loaf will be worse than none at all. Even if it does attract some riders it seems like there are many, many more people who would be interested in rail if it offered advantages over driving.  But, right now, about the only advantage the rail seems to provide is the ability to get something done while you travel instead of having to pay attention to the road.  On every other important dimension it will just seem inferior, turning off many riders, and keeping it from reaching its full potential.

 

 

One thing that might help get trains to CUT is addressing in a different way the fundamental operating problems that require the additional capital outlay between Sharonville and CUT in the first place.  The issue is congestion of southbound freight trains waiting to get into and through the Queensgate and Gest Street yards.  There are two aspects to this problem, actual physical capacity, and operational efficiency and priority.  The money required to add the 4th main addresses the physical capacity issue only, because operations are supposedly sacrosanct. 

 

The problem with the Cardinal and the 3-C corridor and pretty much all Amtrak operations is that freight trains have priority.  This is an absurd situation.  Ok, so freight trains don't necessarily have schedules, but the passenger trains do.  So why can't CSX and Norfolk Southern work their freight trains around the schedule of the passenger trains?  It seems to me they simply don't want to be bothered.  Mainline railroads managed to schedule fast passenger trains along with freight trains 100 years ago, there's no reason we can't do it today, especially with the advanced centralized control and signaling systems we have today on freight routes.  It's sad to see passenger travel subjugated so severely for freight.  It's similar to how light rail and streetcar proposals (including Cincinnati's) are hindered for fear of adversely impacting automobile traffic.  If we really believe in these projects, we need to stop making concessions that are so out of line with their goals, even if it means stepping on a few toes to make sure they are done right.

 

Now, I'm not saying that the 4th main won't still be necessary.  But I'll bet in the meantime passenger trains could be at least tolerably accommodated at CUT without one if some simple procedural changes were made.  Set a definite schedule, work with the parent railroads to get it figured out, and give priority to the passenger trains in this particular corridor.  I find it very difficult to believe that a 3-track approach doesn't have enough capacity to let passenger trains that aren't 100 cars long and don't need to be split apart upon entering the yards squeeze through.  As busy as it may be, I rarely see more than one train on the tracks either coming or going.  Since the passenger trains aren't destined for the yards anyway, and the bypass tracks are the ones that skirt CUT, it seems that if they can just get them past the yard throat then it's smooth sailing.  They say a little planning goes a long way, well here a little scheduling and coordination could probably do the same until that 4th track is built.

I want Cincinnati included into this plan as much as anyone but politically speaking, the only way the majority of Ohio's citizens will buy this is if it is seen as a drastic improvement over current travel times.

^Completely agreed.

 

As it stands now, the biggest winner in this announcement will be taxi services near each station since there are no forms of transportation in place that regularly reach the major populations of each region, partly because populations in these regions are decentralized aka sprawled out.  This all rests on the supposition that there will in fact be sufficient numbers of regular riders on these rather mediocre trains.

This video from Soapbox Media should give y'all a better feeling of how Cincinnatians feel about rail and 3C:

 

This articles expresses the interests of Cincinnati well too: http://news.cincinnati.com/article/20091127/EDIT03/911290315/360View--Bobby-Maly