5 minutes ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

2 questions:

 

1) What is the most optimistic timeline that somebody in Columbus could take a train to Chicago or Cleveland, assuming everything went perfectly according to plan?

 

2) What is the most realistic timeline(or will it happen at all)?

3C+D best case is probably 6 years; Chi-Ft Wayne-Lima-Cbus-Pitt longer. And a LOT still has to happen. Current funding structure requires 20% local match for the capital from the state or local entities. 

Amtrak has also offered to fund the operating costs in the first few years as the market is developed. Very different from the last time when the state had to pay 100 percent. 

4 hours ago, KJP said:

BREAKING: BROWN ANNOUNCES FIRST STEP IN EXPANDING AMTRAK IN OHIO

The Federal Railroad Administration Chooses Four Ohio Routes as Priorities for Expansion; Brown Has Long Fought to Expand Amtrak Service in Ohio, Worked to Include Provisions in Infrastructure Bill to Make Expansion Possible

https://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/sherrod-brown-announces-first-step-expanding-amtrak-ohio

 

3 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Additional details:

Sen Brown: Passenger rail corridors that will receive funding for planning include:
- 3C+D (Cle-Columbus-Dayton-Cincy)
- Cle-Toledo-Detroit
- Chi-Ft Wayne-Lima-Columbus-Pitt
- Daily Cardinal (Chi-Indy-Cincy-DC-NYC) (up from 3x weekly)
 

https://x.com/sensherrodbrown/status/1732124697028948111?s=46&t=7i2eCUyWNZMfcPIb8zesTg
 

 

 

 

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

Amtrak expansions to Cleveland win funding
By Ken Prendergast / December 5, 2023
 

U.S. Senator Sherrod Brown announced today that the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has selected four key routes in Ohio as priorities for Amtrak expansion and directed $500,000 to draw up construction-ready plans for each. Once those plans are finalized, then those routes would be eligible to apply for federal construction funding.

 

MORE:

https://neo-trans.blog/2023/12/05/amtrak-expansions-to-cleveland-win-funding/

 

This all merits being  back at the top of the thread page. 😀

Ohio Chosen for Amtrak Expansion

 

The Federal Railroad Administration announced today that four routes in Ohio have been selected as priorities for Amtrak expansion. The news was broken by US Senator Sherrod Brown, who issued a press release earlier today.

 

“Today’s announcement is a great first step toward expanding Amtrak in Ohio,” said Brown. “Good Amtrak service shouldn’t be a privilege only for people on the coasts. These new routes would expand opportunity, help grow businesses and create jobs, and connect communities in Ohio and across the Midwest.”

 

More below:

https://columbusunderground.com/ohio-chosen-for-amtrak-expansion-bw1/

 

3 hours ago, TH3BUDDHA said:

1) What is the most optimistic timeline that somebody in Columbus could take a train to Chicago or Cleveland, assuming everything went perfectly according to plan?

Are you asking how long the train ride would be? 
 

I looked at some various locations and went with Waterloo Indiana to Chicago, which is about 180 miles or so, and a train ride was 3 hours and 15 minutes give or take. Cleveland is about 143 miles from Columbus. So I would think, depending on number of stops, it would take 3 hours or so. 
 

Edited December 6, 20231 yr by VintageLife
Forgot the time difference to Chicago

29 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Are you asking how long the train ride would be? 
 

I looked at some various locations and went with Waterloo Indiana to Chicago, which is about 180 miles or so, and a train ride was 3 hours and 15 minutes give or take. Cleveland is about 143 miles from Columbus. So I would think, depending on number of stops, it would take 3 hours or so. 
 

No, I was asking about timeline for implementation.

@VintageLife Cle-Col is 136 rail miles. Planning in 2010 showed a trip time of 2:15 downtown to downtown. Less for trips to/from suburban stops. All of it productive time. Could be reduced with additional investment, such as upgrading the lightly used 58-mile segment from Galion-Columbus to 110 mph.

 

Some additional info...

 

 

 

Here's a cool map. Although if you look closely, you can see the blue lines are in lots more places than they first seem

 

 

7 hours ago, KJP said:

@VintageLife Cle-Col is 136 rail miles. Planning in 2010 showed a trip time of 2:15 downtown to downtown. Less for trips to/from suburban stops. All of it productive time. Could be reduced with additional investment, such as upgrading the lightly used 58-mile segment from Galion-Columbus to 110 mph.

 

Some additional info...

 

 

 

Thank you! So it would only be about 10 more minutes than driving? That is incredible and would be so much more enjoyable. 

49 minutes ago, VintageLife said:

Thank you! So it would only be about 10 more minutes than driving? That is incredible and would be so much more enjoyable. 

 

Possibly. If the plan is to invest less, it would be slower. If the plan is to invest more, it will be faster. Provide input to planning once it gets underway. Tell the planning team what's important to you. 

2 hours ago, VintageLife said:

Thank you! So it would only be about 10 more minutes than driving? That is incredible and would be so much more enjoyable. 

 

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

Possibly. If the plan is to invest less, it would be slower. If the plan is to invest more, it will be faster. Provide input to planning once it gets underway. Tell the planning team what's important to you. 

One nice thing about rail is that we can always make subsequent investments to improve speed, frequency, and/or reliability. Examples include both Michigan-Chicago and St. Louis-Chicago now having extended sections with 110 mph service. The point being, even if the initial Ohio service is slower than driving, later investments could make it faster than driving.

 

Also really important to remember - the service doesn’t have to be perfect for every person for every trip to be useful and successful. Keep this in mind when someone says, “I would never use that - I’d rather drive.” For comparison, I’ll never use the Portsmouth highway bypass and Ohio spent a boatload of money on that.

56 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

One nice thing about rail is that we can always make subsequent investments to improve speed, frequency, and/or reliability. Examples include both Michigan-Chicago and St. Louis-Chicago now having extended sections with 110 mph service. The point being, even if the initial Ohio service is slower than driving, later investments could make it faster than driving.

 

Also really important to remember - the service doesn’t have to be perfect for every person for every trip to be useful and successful. Keep this in mind when someone says, “I would never use that - I’d rather drive.” For comparison, I’ll never use the Portsmouth highway bypass and Ohio spent a boatload of money on that.

Yeah that’s exactly what makes this so good. Thats also why it’s sad that we didn’t get this back when Kasich was here. The lines could be getting an update now instead of just starting. 
 

Edited December 6, 20231 yr by VintageLife

Amtrak names priority Ohio routes, including through Columbus, and lands federal funding

 

Ohio transportation advocates are celebrating as the federal government has identified four Ohio routes as "priorities for Amtrak expansion," according to a release from U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown.

 

The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Federal Railroad Administration will provide $500,000 each to the four corridors, Brown announced Tuesday. Those funds come from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law; the corridors are also slated to "receive priority in future funding competitions," according to Brown.

 

The four routes include two that pass through Central Ohio: the Cleveland-Columbus-Cincinnati-Dayton Corridor (3C+D) and the Midwest Connect (Chicago-Fort Wayne-Columbus-Pittsburgh), according to the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission.

 

More below:

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2023/12/06/ohio-amtrak-routes-land-federal-funds.html

 

Some context for the Midwest Connect route:

 

This would be awesome for Newark.  Not necessarily going to Columbus...but for going to Pittsburgh AND Chicago!!!  The historic train station in Newark is a landmark and was restored in the last decade .  It would be incredible to see traffic coming and going through Newark again!!

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 6, 20231 yr by OhioFinest

The view from Meeshigen

 

 

Sharing my reply to a post on Facebook asking when the trains will start running ...

 

Funding for the Service Development Plan will be made available in 2024, with the SDP including public involvement taking about a year. That will provide guidance on what route, market, service level and projects (extra tracks, stations, signal systems, locomotive/rail car availability) need to be undertaken to achieve the desired service level that the market and public sector will support. With additional planning funding in hand, those projects will then subjected to environmental screening and preliminary engineering over one to two years to determine and be eligible for needed federal construction funds. When construction funding is secured, final design, permitting and construction can begin. Final design and permitting may take another year. Construction can take one to five years followed by service start-up. The average time it takes for a transportation project in the USA to go from idea to ribbon cutting is 10 years. Since existing rights of way are to be used and little/if any property needs to be acquired, that can help shorten the timeframe to less than 10 years -- assuming all funding for each step is secured in the desired timeframe.

Chris Quinn's cleveland.com podcast today continues to fault the 3C+D proposal for being too slow over Cleveland to Cincinnati.  He choses to ignore the fact that most trips will probably be to and from Columbus. The Columbus trip times will be fairly competitive, assuming a reasonably on-time operation.

6 hours ago, Dougal said:

Chris Quinn's cleveland.com podcast today continues to fault the 3C+D proposal for being too slow over Cleveland to Cincinnati.  He choses to ignore the fact that most trips will probably be to and from Columbus. The Columbus trip times will be fairly competitive, assuming a reasonably on-time operation.

This has been and will continue to be a critique of the proposal, so I think we should all be prepared to answer it. Some thoughts:

- I like starting with “You know, I used to think that too - that the train has to be faster than the car. But then I spent time learning about transportation system and what has worked well for other intercity rail services. While obviously ridership is higher when it’s faster, that type of service takes a LOT of capital investment. And it turns out that even service that is slower than driving can still be successful, serving many people and giving us transportation options that are safer and more comfortable that allow the travelers to be productive. Consider:

- 3C&D will be pretty similar to the service on North Carolina when it started, which was successful from the beginning (and Ohio has more population along the route and bigger downtown cores to serve). NC has continued to invest in the service, and now the Federal government has announced a big investment that will reduce the travel time between Richmond and Raleigh by an hour!

- Something like 250,000 colleges students live along the 3C&D route - wouldn’t be nice to not have to burn 8+ hour round trip every time your kid wants to get dropped off at the University of Cincinnati (or any school along the line)?

- Once it’s established, additional investment can improve speed, frequency, and reliability. 
- 10% of American adults rarely (4%) or never (6%) drive (according to Gallup poll from a couple years ago)

- Ohio has an aging population: people need safer alternatives to driving, especially as they age. 

Those are good bullet points but I'll add the one that would be huge for me (who would love to use the train to travel for work) which is that time spent on a train can be productive while driving with a laptop answering emails or working on anything visual is dangerous if not impossible.

 

On the opposite end, if you are traveling for leisure for a weekend concert or something to another Ohio city, driving isn't leisurely it's an active form of travel requiring your attention and inducing stress where train travel you just lay back and veg out. 

On 12/7/2023 at 10:20 AM, KJP said:

Sharing my reply to a post on Facebook asking when the trains will start running ...

 

Funding for the Service Development Plan will be made available in 2024, with the SDP including public involvement taking about a year. That will provide guidance on what route, market, service level and projects (extra tracks, stations, signal systems, locomotive/rail car availability) need to be undertaken to achieve the desired service level that the market and public sector will support. With additional planning funding in hand, those projects will then subjected to environmental screening and preliminary engineering over one to two years to determine and be eligible for needed federal construction funds. When construction funding is secured, final design, permitting and construction can begin. Final design and permitting may take another year. Construction can take one to five years followed by service start-up. The average time it takes for a transportation project in the USA to go from idea to ribbon cutting is 10 years. Since existing rights of way are to be used and little/if any property needs to be acquired, that can help shorten the timeframe to less than 10 years -- assuming all funding for each step is secured in the desired timeframe.

Didn't we already do this?  I thought that a route study was done and the returned/refused federal funding in the last go-round was for operation startup.  If so, can this new study timeline be sped up by referencing the previous 3C+D study? 

29 minutes ago, Foraker said:

Didn't we already do this?  I thought that a route study was done and the returned/refused federal funding in the last go-round was for operation startup.  If so, can this new study timeline be sped up by referencing the previous 3C+D study? 

The study will absolutely reference and use the work that was previously done. As @KJP has pointed out, studies like this have a shelf life, so a new service plan has to be created. But it will build upon previous studies. Ken’s timing estimates already factor that in. 

8 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Ken’s timing estimates already factor that in. 

I'm glad that that is reducing the time required to update the study, but this is disappointing.  :-)

 

One thing that would really help speed up rail and transit construction and drive down costs is to waive some of the study requirements if a previous study was done in the past 25 years or if the project is going to use existing RoW

If a study (and it's really a plan to determine what is needed to build something, not whether it should be built) was done more than five years ago, the feds won't accept it. Since there was a plan done 13 years ago, that's good news. It is still valid to serve as a roadmap to identify what has changed since. But a lot has changed, unfortunately. Freight traffic is down a bit due to market changes as well as railroads consolidating freight trains into longer consists which, while occupying less mainline track per movement, will require the construction of longer passing sidings. CSX's use of the middle portion of the route, from Galion to Columbus (58 miles), is virtually nil. That's actually a big opportunity. This portion could be turned into a high-speed section (110 mph) but will require follow-on preliminary engineering and environmental impact work. Most of the rest of the 3C&D Corridor and other passenger rail corridors with moderately to heavily traveled freight segments have been upgraded with Positive Train Control signals which can allow passenger speeds to be increased above 79 mph (although probably only to 90 in mixed traffic) if crossing gate timings are increased. And, of course, the cost of everything has gone up a lot -- especially in the infrastructure world. What cost $400 million in 2010 will cost upwards of $600 million in 2025.

I can't find great numbers online- is there any idea how many Cleveland-Columbus vehicle trips there are in a day/week/year? Really struggling with origin destination numbers. 

 

Bibb RT Sherrod's post and folks can't get over how much easier train travel is vs driving, go figure.

3 hours ago, KJP said:

If a study (and it's really a plan to determine what is needed to build something, not whether it should be built) was done more than five years ago, the feds won't accept it. Since there was a plan done 13 years ago, that's good news. It is still valid to serve as a roadmap to identify what has changed since. But a lot has changed, unfortunately. Freight traffic is down a bit due to market changes as well as railroads consolidating freight trains into longer consists which, while occupying less mainline track per movement, will require the construction of longer passing sidings. CSX's use of the middle portion of the route, from Galion to Columbus (58 miles), is virtually nil. That's actually a big opportunity. This portion could be turned into a high-speed section (110 mph) but will require follow-on preliminary engineering and environmental impact work. Most of the rest of the 3C&D Corridor and other passenger rail corridors with moderately to heavily traveled freight segments have been upgraded with Positive Train Control signals which can allow passenger speeds to be increased above 79 mph (although probably only to 90 in mixed traffic) if crossing gate timings are increased. And, of course, the cost of everything has gone up a lot -- especially in the infrastructure world. What cost $400 million in 2010 will cost upwards of $600 million in 2025.

 

Is this type of analysis going to be in this feasibility study or will that have to wait until the SDP? What I'm thinking is that we, as advocates, need specific details so we can start getting organized to build momentum for the best version we can get.

Cleveland-Sandusky-Toledo-Detroit-Pontiac Amtrak service. The proposed stations are: 
•Cleveland, OH 
•Cleveland Hopkins Airport, OH (NEW) 
•Elyria, OH 
•Sandusky, OH 
•Toledo, OH 
•Detroit Metro Airport, MI (NEW) 
•Detroit, MI
•Royal Oak, MI
•Troy, MI
•Pontiac, MI

 

 

https://www.wxyz.com/news/proposed-train-route-would-connect-detroit-to-toledo-cleveland-add-dtw-stop

On 12/8/2023 at 2:32 PM, GISguy said:

I can't find great numbers online- is there any idea how many Cleveland-Columbus vehicle trips there are in a day/week/year? Really struggling with origin destination numbers. 

 

Bibb RT Sherrod's post and folks can't get over how much easier train travel is vs driving, go figure.

 

I saw some OD numbers and it was over 2 million annual Cleveland - Columbus and over 2 million Columbus - Cincy trips as well, if I remember correctly. Cincy - Dayton trips were like 35 million. Of course, Butler County and Montgomery County border each other so some of those are very short trips. 

The last data I saw for intercity travel was from 1995. I posted it February in this thread....

 

 

On 2/21/2023 at 12:27 PM, KJP said:

It's funny how the perception is that there's more travel between the 3Cs and Chicago than there is among the 3Cs. The 3C corridor is one of the most heavily traveled in the nation.

 

I haven't seen updated Bureau of Transportation Statistics data on travel between city pairs since 1995, but this is what it was back then....

 

#    Metro Area #1    Metro Area #2    Person Trips
            
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

8    Dallas    Houston    3,097,228
9    Portland    Seattle    2,605,223
10    Norfolk    Washington DC    2,590,212

 

11    Los Angeles    Phoenix    2,472,665
12    San Diego    San Francisco    2,415,188
13    Dallas    San Antonio    2,286,587
14    Las Vegas    San Diego    2,213,871
15    Boston    New York    2,121,134
16    Albany    New York    2,073,199
17    Harrisburg    Philadelphia    2,060,693
18    Los Angeles    Santa Barbara    2,036,605
19    Austin    Houston    2,032,380
20    Lakeland    Sarasota    1,940,000
            
21    Atlanta    Nashville    1,893,454
22    Phoenix    Tucson    1,811,036
23    Austin    Dallas    1,805,389
24    Cleveland    Columbus    1,800,126
25    Houston    San Antonio    1,744,368
26    Miami    New York    1,712,677
27    Reno    San Francisco    1,704,123
28    Eugene    Portland    1,666,301
29    Los Angeles    Sacramento    1,631,660
30    Chicago    Detroit    1,614,286
 

31    Beaumont    Houston    1,450,625
32    Detroit    Grand Rapids    1,411,112
33    Corpus Christi    San Antonio    1,392,317
34    Oklahoma City    Tulsa    1,344,266
35    Richmond    Washington DC    1,327,046
36    Cincinnati    Columbus    1,310,511
37    Hartford    New York    1,285,033
38    Los Angeles    New York    1,257,041
39    Atlanta    Birmingham    1,219,047
40    Pittsburgh    Washington DC    1,196,211

 

49    Cincinnati    Indianapolis    1,029,824

 

51     Cleveland    Detroit    987,179

 

80    Cleveland    Pittsburgh    716,468

 

93    Cincinnati    Cleveland    640,136 (Knowing how they operate, I fully expect the anti-rail cabal to use only this 3-C city-pair as a reason why there shouldn't be train service!)

 

** Cleveland - Columbus - Cincinnati    3,750,772   (if CLE-COL, COL-CIN, and CLE-CIN were added together, but doesn't include Dayton which didn't make it into the top 100 city pair markets)

 

Not a single Ohio city to Chicago city-pair made it into the top 100 intercity travel markets. I realize that was 28 years ago, but I think most of these city-pair rankings still hold true.

 

I’m going to quote the full post because those intra-thread links never work well for me. 

8 hours ago, KJP said:

The last data I saw for intercity travel was from 1995. I posted it February in this thread....

 

 

But the question is, would there be more traffic by rail, between the three C's, my guess is there will be more rail traffic to Chicago from the three C's. Much of the three C's I-71 traffic is to points South or Southwest, not necessarily among the three C's. That's the question that Amtrak will be most interested in because Amtrak will be competing against I-71.

9 minutes ago, vulcana said:

But the question is, would there be more traffic by rail, between the three C's, my guess is there will be more rail traffic to Chicago from the three C's. Much of the three C's I-71 traffic is to points South or Southwest, not necessarily among the three C's. That's the question that Amtrak will be most interested in because Amtrak will be competing against I-71.

That statement is incorrect - the VAST majority of the traffic on I-71 in Ohio is between Ohio’s cities. That’s the whole point of the data Ken posted that I quoted. “Not a single Ohio city to Chicago city-pair made it into the top 100 intercity travel markets.” Meanwhile, CLE-Columbus alone had 1.8M annual trips in 1995 (#24 intercity travel market), and at that time the highway was only 4 lanes instead of the current 6. 

12 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Cleveland-Sandusky-Toledo-Detroit-Pontiac Amtrak service. The proposed stations are: 
•Cleveland, OH 
•Cleveland Hopkins Airport, OH (NEW) 
•Elyria, OH 
•Sandusky, OH 
•Toledo, OH 
•Detroit Metro Airport, MI (NEW) 
•Detroit, MI
•Royal Oak, MI
•Troy, MI
•Pontiac, MI

 

 

https://www.wxyz.com/news/proposed-train-route-would-connect-detroit-to-toledo-cleveland-add-dtw-stop

 

It seems odd to me there's no stop in Monroe, MI - between Toledo and DTW... is there a particular reason for that? 

53 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

That statement is incorrect - the VAST majority of the traffic on I-71 in Ohio is between Ohio’s cities. That’s the whole point of the data Ken posted that I quoted. “Not a single Ohio city to Chicago city-pair made it into the top 100 intercity travel markets.” Meanwhile, CLE-Columbus alone had 1.8M annual trips in 1995 (#24 intercity travel market), and at that time the highway was only 4 lanes instead of the current 6. 

I don't disagree, but I also think that it's likely the case that adding rail to Chicago will increase the number of total trips between the cities, in a way that I don't expect for the three C's. I expect the 3C&D line to take some percentage of the cars of the road depending on the level of service, whereas I would expect quality rail service to Chicago to result in Ohioans taking more trips to Chicago. 

59 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

That statement is incorrect - the VAST majority of the traffic on I-71 in Ohio is between Ohio’s cities. That’s the whole point of the data Ken posted that I quoted. “Not a single Ohio city to Chicago city-pair made it into the top 100 intercity travel markets.” Meanwhile, CLE-Columbus alone had 1.8M annual trips in 1995 (#24 intercity travel market), and at that time the highway was only 4 lanes instead of the current 6. 

Once again you are validating the power of I-71, 

 

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

That statement is incorrect - the VAST majority of the traffic on I-71 in Ohio is between Ohio’s cities. That’s the whole point of the data Ken posted that I quoted. “Not a single Ohio city to Chicago city-pair made it into the top 100 intercity travel markets.” Meanwhile, CLE-Columbus alone had 1.8M annual trips in 1995 (#24 intercity travel market), and at that time the highway was only 4 lanes instead of the current 6. 

No one said the VAST majority of traffic to points south, but there is a large amount of I-71 traffic to southern and southwest states. Competing with i-71 traffic to these three cities, with a diversion to Dayton by RAIL it will be a challenge, if it becomes a reality, otherwise it would already exist. Your own numbers reveal the popularity of I-71. And say what you will, but there is a lot of travel between Ohio cities and Chicago, and it ranks with the top cities out of state.

Will any of the 3C runs stop near Mansfield?

28 minutes ago, vulcana said:

Once again you are validating the power of I-71,

 

Incidentally, I-71 between Cincinnati and Columbus is really just a "Dayton Bypass".  The distance between DT Cincinnati and DT Columbus via the direct I-71 is only a little bit shorter (about 17~ miles) than driving between the two downtowns via I-75 and I-70.

 

 

1 hour ago, vulcana said:

Once again you are validating the power of I-71, 

 

No one said the VAST majority of traffic to points south, but there is a large amount of I-71 traffic to southern and southwest states. Competing with i-71 traffic to these three cities, with a diversion to Dayton by RAIL it will be a challenge, if it becomes a reality, otherwise it would already exist. Your own numbers reveal the popularity of I-71. And say what you will, but there is a lot of travel between Ohio cities and Chicago, and it ranks with the top cities out of state.

 

Most traffic on I-71 in Ohio is in the metro areas and for travel wholly within each metro area. In the rural secttions, car travel is mostly short distance (ie: 10-40 miles, from one small town to another). In 2010, the 3C studies showed that the travel between the core cities of Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati was something like 3,000 a day and the trains would attract nearly half of that. Development of passenger rail typically helps boost the economies of the core cities and thus boosts the travel between them.

 

1 hour ago, urb-a-saurus said:

Will any of the 3C runs stop near Mansfield?

 

Crestline has been suggested recently by Amtrak as a Mansfield-area stop while Galion was proposed by the state in the 2010 effort. 

1 hour ago, KJP said:

 

Most traffic on I-71 in Ohio is in the metro areas and for travel wholly within each metro area. In the rural secttions, car travel is mostly short distance (ie: 10-40 miles, from one small town to another). In 2010, the 3C studies showed that the travel between the core cities of Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati was something like 3,000 a day and the trains would attract nearly half of that. Development of passenger rail typically helps boost the economies of the core cities and thus boosts the travel between them.

 

 

Crestline has been suggested recently by Amtrak as a Mansfield-area stop while Galion was proposed by the state in the 2010 effort. 

It looks like Delaware will be getting a stop as well. I was told from the Hilliard city engineer that they are currently more likely to get the station than Dublin would as well. If so, the line would extend from Delaware to the convention center, than through Franklinton to Hilliard/Grove City area, then to London, then towards Dayton.

20 minutes ago, columbus17 said:

I was told from the Hilliard city engineer that they are currently more likely to get the station than Dublin would as well. If so, the line would extend from Delaware to the convention center, than through Franklinton to Hilliard/Grove City area, then to London, then towards Dayton.

I would think that Hilliard and Dublin are candidates for the Chicago-bound Midwest Connect, not 3C+D.

57 minutes ago, Dev said:

I would think that Hilliard and Dublin are candidates for the Chicago-bound Midwest Connect, not 3C+D.

 

Correct. Hilliard and Dublin are on the route from Columbus to Chicago. Delaware is on the route from Columbus to Cleveland. 

11 minutes ago, KJP said:

 

Correct. Hilliard and Dublin are on the route from Columbus to Chicago. Delaware is on the route from Columbus to Cleveland. 

I don't get why London isn't included in the path. They are insane to turn down the economic boom that would come from a station. It's right in the middle of Springfield and Hilliard - makes perfect sense to include a stop.

It will be interesting to see how much support for any expanded Cardinal operations between Indy and Cincinnati comes from the statehouse in Indianapolis.  Prior high speed rail corridor had been identified  along the CIND through Lawrenceburg and not along the  CSX Indianapolis sub in Crawfordsville on the current Cardinal route.   While the later could serve Oxford and possibly Hamilton the former would nearly bypass most of the Ohio except Cincinnati but would avoid the congestion along the CSX/NS Millcreek Corridor access to Union Terminal would not be direct.   It will be interesting to see if Union Terminal could support both increase Cardinal operations and 3C&D with the current single platform and staging from the CSX mainline track.  If I remember correctly the prior plan for the 3C&D used the Oasis Corridor on the east side with station near the Boat House but raise concern from those living along the line in the East End. 

On 12/9/2023 at 10:14 PM, Boomerang_Brian said:

Cleveland-Sandusky-Toledo-Detroit-Pontiac Amtrak service. The proposed stations are: 
•Cleveland, OH 
•Cleveland Hopkins Airport, OH (NEW) 
•Elyria, OH 
•Sandusky, OH 
•Toledo, OH 
•Detroit Metro Airport, MI (NEW) 
•Detroit, MI
•Royal Oak, MI
•Troy, MI
•Pontiac, MI

 

 

https://www.wxyz.com/news/proposed-train-route-would-connect-detroit-to-toledo-cleveland-add-dtw-stop

The article claims a "just over" 3 hour trip time from Detroit to Cleveland. That's very competitive with driving, which is just under three hours without stops or traffic. With all the focus on 3C+D, this may be slipping under the radar. 

14 hours ago, NW24HX said:

 

It seems odd to me there's no stop in Monroe, MI - between Toledo and DTW... is there a particular reason for that? 

 

I don't understand that either. If I was in charge, I'd have Monroe as a station stop.

 

8 hours ago, columbus17 said:

I don't get why London isn't included in the path. They are insane to turn down the economic boom that would come from a station. It's right in the middle of Springfield and Hilliard - makes perfect sense to include a stop.

 

The 3C&D route doesn't go through Hilliard. And while is on the 3C&D route, I've never heard of London be considered for a station stop by Amtrak or the state. 

 

47 minutes ago, Ethan said:

The article claims a "just over" 3 hour trip time from Detroit to Cleveland. That's very competitive with driving, which is just under three hours without stops or traffic. I With all the focus on 3C+D, this may be slipping under the radar. 

 

I love the CLE-TOL-CLE Corridor. I'd love it even more if it originated in PIT.

5 hours ago, KJP said:

I love the CLE-TOL-CLE Corridor. I'd love it even more if it originated in PIT.

I was thinking extending to Buffalo since it is better served than Pitt. Buffalo would give more frequent NYC service, plus Toronto and Niagara Falls, plus all of upstate NY. 

Sound of Ideas is covering the proposed Amtrak Routes in Ohio starting at 9a. 

 

Amtrak's proposed expansion in Ohio has some transit advocates excited

By Drew Maziasz

Published December 11, 2023

 

GUESTS:

- Erin Rosiello, Volunteer Chair, All Aboard Ohio

- Justin Bibb, Mayor of Cleveland

- Andrew Limbong, Arts Desk Reporter, NPR

- Drew Maziasz, Coordinating Producer, Ideastream Public Media

It would have been nice if KY had proposed a CIN-LOU line. That way you could run 3C trains through CUT.

 

2 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

I was thinking extending to Buffalo since it is better served than Pitt. Buffalo would give more frequent NYC service, plus Toronto and Niagara Falls, plus all of upstate NY. 

It’s bonkers that right now you can’t take a train from Cleveland to Toronto.