Toledo to Columbus?

I have. I sent one to their editor.

 

For Immediate Release Contact: Jack Shaner

January 28, 2009 (614) 487-7506  (office)

(614) 446-1693  (cell)

[email protected]

 

 

OEC Calls on Strickland to Propose “Green-Print” to Invest in Green Collar Jobs in Budget Bills, Forthcoming Jobs Plan

 

Eco group also praises proposal to restore passenger rail service linking Ohio’s 3-C Corridor:  Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati

 

Columbus, OH – On the heels of today’s State of the State address, the Ohio Environmental Council is calling on Gov. Strickland to prioritize investments in green collar jobs in the state’s operating and transportation budgets and a separate jobs package.  The budgets and jobs bill are expected to be unveiled in the coming weeks.

 

“The timing is perfect for Ohio to invest in a big green-print for green-collar jobs that can put people to work, improve our economic competitiveness, and protect the environment,” said Jack Shaner, Deputy Director of the Ohio Environmental Council.

 

The OEC is hoping that Strickland will include incentives in his forthcoming proposals to make Ohio a dominant center for innovation in high-growth technologies that promote clean energy, biotechnology, efficient transportation, pollution control, and land and water conservation.

 

“Like a smart investor, Ohio should diversify its business portfolio by investing in the sustained growth that can come with clean, green technologies,” said Shaner.  “We also can help ourselves and reverse the ‘brain drain’ by making Ohio a more attractive place to live and work by protecting our natural assets—our parks, preserves, and forests.”

 

Green collar jobs commonly include jobs designing, building, and installing:

- Energy-efficient products, including appliances, hybrid cars, and insulation

- Clean energy systems, including wind turbines, solar panels, and biofuels

- Distributed generation of electric power through rooftop solar panels; landfill, wastewater, and animal waste bio-digesters; and factory combined heat & power

- Biotechnologies that use plant-based polymers in place of petroleum

- Upgraded transportation networks, including more multi-modal intersections of public transit and passenger rail and of water, rail, truck, and air freight delivery

- Land and water conservation projects, including wastewater treatment system upgrades, soil erosion prevention, and wetland and forest restoration

- more -

During his State of the State address today, Strickland promised to introduce a jobs stimulus package “in the coming months.”  He said the package will include an expansion of Ohio’s high-tech Third Frontier program, regulatory reform, streamlining measures to assure that Ohio gets its share of federal stimulus funds and can put them to work quickly, and additional investments that will create jobs.

 

Strickland also committed to restoring passenger rail service between Cleveland, Columbus, and Cincinnati, absent for 40 years.  The Governor called it the “first step” toward a rail system linking neighborhoods and cities within Ohio.

 

“Restoring passenger rail is the perfect start of a big green-print for Ohio.  It will build jobs, give travelers more options, and save energy.  This is the sort of long-term investment strategy that can leverage all of Ohio’s assets, economic and environmental, alike,” said Shaner.

 

The “3-C” corridor of Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati is the backbone of an ambitious proposal to upgrade passenger and freight rail infrastructure in Ohio, called the Ohio Hub Plan.  The plan calls for a transportation network linking more than a dozen Ohio cities with daily passenger service with trains reaching 110 mph.  According to a study by the Ohio Rail Development Commission, the Ohio Hub would create 16,700 permanent jobs (equivalent to more than 500,000 person years of work) and produce a benefit/cost ratio of 1.8/1.

The OEC’ sounded one warning about Strickland’s brief mention to include “regulatory reform” in his jobs package.

 

“Any regulatory reform that looks only at a factory’s costs of complying with government standards without factoring in the benefits to the neighboring community’s health and safety is false, one-sided reform.  We trust the Governor will insist on protecting human health and safety,” said Shaner.

-end- 

 

 

The mission of the Ohio Environmental Council (OEC) is to secure healthy air, land, and water for all who call Ohio home.  The OEC is Ohio’s leading advocate for fresh air, clean water, and sustainable land use.  The OEC has a 40-year history of innovation, pragmatism, and success.  Using legislative initiatives, legal action, scientific principles, and statewide partnerships, the OEC secures a healthier environment for Ohio’s families and communities.  For more information, visit www.theOEC.org.

"Green-print"?? Oh boy.... I embarassed to admit I like it.

I thought the 3-C corrider would be high speed rail and a following phase would to be to connect Toledo with Columbus and even Cleveland? What is the difference between the  Amtrak rail that exist presently in Ohio.

Plus the Dayton Union Station site has pedestrian underpasses below the tracks to the old stairwells, since capped. My read from railroad track charts are that the underpasses are still there (ie: they haven't been filled in). The underpasses will probably need major renovations, and they could also be used to link station-area development on the north and south sides of the right of way.

 

Yes, the underpass is still there, but totally gutted out.  It was more than a pedestrian underpass, as I think they had baggage and maybe REA stuff there, maybe even wating areas and that cafetria ColDayMan posted a pix of.  The issue with the union station we see pix of..the quasi-italianate structure with the tower...was that it became undersized for the growth in train traffic during the 1920s, and was "expanded" under the grade seperation (which was built at the very end of the 1920s or early 1930s). 

 

All this was torn out, the walls torn out and the area just looks like an exceptionally wide viaduct.

 

This could still be used if they wanted to rebuild a station at that site. 

http://flickr.com/photos/22294052@N05/sets/72157603797921357/

 

How different does it look today? 

 

All the stuff on top is gone.  The area on the ground floor, underneath the tracks is gone, they tore it all out, no walls, nothing.  You can see clear through to the other side.  It was being used by the homeless as an encampent so they put chain link around the open space.

 

 

Well, the three towers made it look like a prison, anyway. 

 

The most important thing right behind actually transporting people is making each station on the route a hub of economic activity.  Some would argue it's the most important.  Make the value of the system greater than the intrinsic value of the transportation service.  That's my 0.02€, anyway. 

I'm excited about this! Finally, OH stepping up to the plate.

The Dayton station situation is typical of the approach to transportation in this country. The intermodal facility was built without much consideration of any passenger rail needs, while a vacant site, which has room to grow is abandoned.

 

I find it very ironic that the platforms of DUT were demolished about the time the intermodal hub was either planned or built. They could have had a great facility, but chose not to. What were they thinking???

 

I think Dayton would be better to redevelop the Dayton Union Station site, since it has room to expand. The location near the present intermodal hub is a bottleneck unsuited to a stop that might handle a dozen or more passenger trains daily, to say nothing of freights.

 

Redevelop DUT and have it anchor the redevelopment of the downtown area.

Stop!  You're making sense!  :roll:

I thought the 3-C corrider would be high speed rail and a following phase would to be to connect Toledo with Columbus and even Cleveland? What is the difference between the Amtrak rail that exist presently in Ohio.

 

Nope. The reason is that no high-speed rail service was built where no passenger rail service had existed before. High-speed rail isn't created; it is evolved, like learning to walk before you run. Evolution is necessary for building the ridership market, the political constituency  and the connecting transportation.

 

California is doing it the right way (the same way Europe, Japan and now China did it). It improved and expanded Amtrak services in the 1970s and 80s. Then it passed a $2 billion bond issue for a major upgrade and expansion of passenger rail and public transportation. Now there is a strong market, a hungry politicial constituency and a spiderweb of connecting transportation necessary to support the big ($40 billion) investment necessary to construct the high-speed rail line.

 

That is what is envisioned for the Ohio Hub System. But you've got to start somewhere and it has to be something that the state can lift politically and financially.

Stop!  You're making sense!  :roll:

 

Deal with it!!! ha ha

I agree Dayton needs something more substantive than a couple of bleak landings with a skywalk to a parking garage.  For reference for Clevelanders, imagine if CSU had built a transportation center back in the 70s, thats what this thing looks like.

The intermodal facility was built without much consideration of any passenger rail needs, while a vacant site, which has room to grow is abandoned.

 

I find it very ironic that the platforms of DUT were demolished about the time the intermodal hub was either planned or built. They could have had a great facility, but chose not to. What were they thinking???

 

 

The concept for a station as part of the parking garaged dates to the 1960s, to this plan, which would have tied the station into downtown via a skywalk system:

 

 

 

 

 

Needless to say he skywalk system was never built, and the convention center expanded into an area that looked like it would have been part of the station

 

The transporation center garage (with a greyhound and trailways station on the ground floor and a "heliport" on top) was built in the very early 1970s.  But Union Station continued to be used until Amtrak discontinued service.  The station say abandoned fro another 10 years or so until it was finally removed.  So there was a 20 or more year gap between when the garage was built or concieved as a transporation center and the demolition of the last parts of Union Station.

 

I should point out Union Station was demolished in stages.  The old early 1900s italianate station, waiting room and clocktower was demolished in the 1950s or 1960s.  The under-track part of Union Station continued to be used (with a new entrance) through th 1960s and during the Amtrak era.

 

I dont think this 3C system is going to generate a lot or riders, so this two platform thing is probably good enough. 

 

You all are thinking of this as some sort of European system.  The situation there is quite a bit different.  Ohio is a dying state, decreasing in population and population being fairly dispersed, so the situation here is different than Europe, or even California.

 

I suspect there are a lot more people carless in California who used regional transit systems, plus the state is just more populous and in some ways even desner than Ohio.  The large immigrant population also means there is less bias against using transit.  Though California is losing people, its losing white people, who are the ones least likely to use transit.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I dont think this 3C system is going to generate a lot or riders, so this two platform thing is probably good enough.

 

 

I think it may surprise you how many people will ride. But it would be a mistake for any city on the route to just put in platforms and not plan for future expansion of service... which, if you read the quote from the Governor's speech, is the intent.

Ohio isn't losing population.  It gained 6,000 over the past few years.

Noozer is right. The Ohio Hub plan at full buildout calls for at least eight round trips daily for 3-C trains. That's 16 trains calling at Dayton every day and that's just for one route. What happens is there's a Cincinnati-Dayton-Toledo-Detroit route and/or east-west service? Now we are talking doubling or tripling service. That's anywhere from 32 to 48 daily trains, way more than the two track station near the convention center could hope to handle.

 

That diagram of the convention center and the transportation center from the 1960's is instructive. They could have built a connection from the convention center west to DUT, but chose not to. Was there a solid reason for that or was there a feeling the DUT was outmoded and that what they were going to build would be "new?"

 

 

Assuming this is the former station, the area can only improve, wouldn't you say? 

Ohio isn't losing population.  It gained 6,000 over the past few years.

 

woo hoo.

 

Assuming this is the former station, the area can only improve, wouldn't you say?

 

Yes thats the area.  Mostly Sinclair CC and some social welfare housing and the Salvation Army.  It would be pretty easy to rebuild the station under the tracks (similar situation as with the parking garage as there already is a "roof".  Realistically that will probably be what they end up doing since the platform space is there already as is the holes down to the ground floor.

 

The transportation center concept came out of an era of declining passenger rail, so they were probably anticipating Railpax, later to become Amtrak, with limited service.  Hence the two platforms and smaller station. Why the replacement station at that location.  The convention center was driving a parking reqt, as was planned hotel, and the bus terminals were being consolidated, so the shared parking concept probably drove the location, as well as having intercity transport in one location.

 

 

 

The other part of starting with basic service and building up is that we get a sense of what parts of the system actually get use. The last thing Ohio needs to do is invest in a rail system that acts like Ohio 32 - an underused road that was supposed to bring economic growth to a backward part of the state. There may be connections that develop over time. I do think Ohioans will use rail more than some may think. The state is pretty interconnected with institutions of higher ed and the like and the resulting marriages.

I thought the 3-C corrider would be high speed rail and a following phase would to be to connect Toledo with Columbus and even Cleveland? What is the difference between the  Amtrak rail that exist presently in Ohio.

 

Nope. The reason is that no high-speed rail service was built where no passenger rail service had existed before. High-speed rail isn't created; it is evolved, like learning to walk before you run. Evolution is necessary for building the ridership market, the political constituency  and the connecting transportation.

 

California is doing it the right way (the same way Europe, Japan and now China did it). It improved and expanded Amtrak services in the 1970s and 80s. Then it passed a $2 billion bond issue for a major upgrade and expansion of passenger rail and public transportation. Now there is a strong market, a hungry politicial constituency and a spiderweb of connecting transportation necessary to support the big ($40 billion) investment necessary to construct the high-speed rail line.

 

That is what is envisioned for the Ohio Hub System. But you've got to start somewhere and it has to be something that the state can lift politically and financially.

 

I don't know enough about the subject to disagree, but it seems like some of those examples would have "evolved" because they were keeping up with then-current technology.  I've always thought that you should build whatever type of system is most advanced (within reason, I'm not pushing for maglev here).  That way the system has the longest possible lifetime before needing to be revamped.  Wouldn't adding ~60mph trains at this point be something like buying a VCR before deciding to pull the trigger on a new DVD/BluRay player?

Not if the VHS costs $100 million, requires little additional electrical capacity and the neighbors don't find it to be too intrusive, versus the $20 billion BluRay player that requires a whole new electrical grid, needs an addition built on to your house that intrudes onto adjoining properties and needs to get through multiple layers and many years of federal planning and regulations before you can put a shovel in the ground.

 

One is not easily substituted for another, especially when we have no idea what the rail market is like in Ohio.

 

Furthermore, there is a hierarchy of service that people seek in passenger rail services. They are presented below in order of preference/priority:

 

1. Low fares

2. Frequency of departures

3. Reliability

4. Speed

 

This is why the nation's second and third busiest passenger rail routes (Pacific Surfliner and Capitol Corridor, both in California) are attracting substantial ridership. Each route offers low fares, more than 10 trains in each direction each day and are often more than 90 percent on time.

 

But the Capitol Corridor trains average a mere 50 mph and the Pacific Surfliner about 45 mph. Both corridors are bursting at the seams with ridership. Now the only way to meaningfully increase ridership is to add trains, and the only way to add trains is to make some significant investments in right of way capacity. So if you have to spend that much, why not build a new right of way. And if you have to build a new right of way, why not make it high-speed?

 

California now knows people will ride trains, even at low average speeds. Ohio doesn't know.

Story originally published in The Hannah Report on January 29, 2009

 

Rail Development Commission Takes Next Step in Passenger Rail

 

In one line of his State of the State address, Gov. Ted Strickland said that his administration wants to bring a passenger rail service link to Ohio’s three largest cities for the first time in 40 years.

 

“This will be a first step toward a rail system that links neighborhoods within a city, and cities within our state,” he said in his address.

 

.....

A well-done piece, IMHO....

 

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/01/30/copy/RAILROAD.ART_ART_01-30-09_B1_6CCO2LE.html?sid=101

 

Passenger trains could roll next year

Friday,  January 30, 2009 3:17 AM

By James Nash

 

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

3-Corridor fast facts

• The route closed in 1971.

• Columbus is the second-largest city in the U.S. without a passenger rail service.

• $100 million from the federal stimulus package could be used to help pay for it.

• Ohio could also qualify for 80/20 federal and state funding under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act.

_________

 

It's been so long since people could catch a train in Columbus and debark in Cleveland a couple of hours later that most Ohioans probably regard the notion as a Cold War memory, like TV dinners in metal trays.

 

Now it's time to thaw out the idea, advocates say.

 

....

 

 

[email protected]

There is very little chance that passenger trains will roll by 2010. Funding does not exist, in spite of the optimism for federal stimulus funds; routes are not established; equipment is not purchased, much less specified; and the freight railroads have not yet begun their overt opposition. It is curious why leadership would make such ambitious claims, given the risk for failure.

Progress is farther ahead on a couple of fronts than you realize, especially in terms of route analysis and discussions with freight railroads. Ohio Hub planning the last few years has already gotten the ORDC's teeth into a lot of this.

 

If your goal is to get trains running by the end of 2010 and you don't get trains going until early 2011, or even mid 2011, is that necessarily failure?

I think the timing comes down to variables such as how far along in the environmental process they were as part of the earlier studies, ROW (if any) that will be required, and improvements that will need to be constructed.  A lot of this may have been handled in the Ohio Hub studies, but if any ROW is required for stations, improved trackage, etc., then that could alter the timeline.  A lot of these questions will be answered once Amtrak/ORDC finishes the study. 

 

I'd agree that the timeline seems aggressive, but I get the impression that this is something the Strickland Administration would like to get done within this upcoming budget.  I could be mistaken, but the New Mexico RailRunner project (study to operation) was done within a two-year time frame.

There is one more variable and perhaps the most important one of all: Strickland's re-election vote is in late 2010.

 

Getting an Ohio passenger rail service up and running in Strickland's first term was discussed by the ODOT transition team exactly two years ago.

I see Akron-Canton is an alternative route for the 3-C corrider. I'm assuming this is the case-it being the alternative to the Mansfield route- is because it would take longer to get where you're going with the added stops. It's kind of pointless the have high speed rail if the train had to stop in every county along its route. I saw on the Ohio Hub site that there is a possibility for Akron-Canton to have their own separate commuter rail to go into Cleveland. Whatever the case I feel these two cities need to be in the game somewhere.

Here are the route options Amtrak is looking at for the 3-C Corridor Amtrak "starter" service at the north half of the corridor. Most of the railroad tracks and signals for each route option are in excellent condition. Yet each route has its advantages and disavantages (these are my own personal observations -- they do not represent any official positions)....

 

 

Direct Route:

 

Advantages - Could potentially be the fastest route, have the least operating cost, offers air-rail link at Hopkins, offers Galion station on the west side of Mansfield.

 

Disadvantages - Heavy freight traffic north of Greenwich (midway between Shelby and Grafton) and especially north of Berea, may require long sections of additional track, CSX is less friendly to hosting passenger trains than NS, lack of enroute population.

 

 

Akron Route:

 

Advantages - Would serve the greatest population, opens up passenger rail line between Akron and Cleveland for future commuter rail, offers Galion station on the west side of Mansfield.

 

Disadvantages - May have higher operating costs than direct route, likely to be the slowest route option, heavy freight traffic east of Greenwich (just north of Shelby) and especially north of Hudson, may require long sections of additional track, section between Akron and Hudson has been out of service for two decades and will require complete rebuilding of right of way from the sub-ballast up to offer highway-competitive speeds, significant community opposition expected from Silver Lake, CSX is less friendly to hosting passenger trains than NS.

 

 

 

Bellevue Route:

 

Advantages - Could potentially be the second fastest route, have the second-least operating cost, could offer service to Elyria/Lorain County Transportation Center, offers air-rail link at Hopkins unless routing via Lorain/Lakewood is selected to avoid freight congestion, provides service accessible to Northwest Ohio at Bellevue, could have a bus link to Sandusky tourist sites, NS is more friendly to hosting passenger trains than CSX.

 

Disadvantages - Heavy freight traffic in the vicinity of Bellevue and especially east of Vermilion (about 15 miles west of Elyria) also routing via Lorain/Lakewood is possible to avoid freight congestion, may require long sections of additional track, lack of enroute population west/south of Lorain County.

 

^Nice job KJP!  Of the three, I like the Firelands route the best.  The first one is obvious I suppose.  The second one twists around way too much and just seems unlikely/expensive.  The Firelands route adds bonus of trips to Cedar Point and gets people going through a part of Ohio most people rarely see.  Not sure whether that is good or bad..  It also looks like it would be a faster route since its mainly steering clear of highways and city interference.  I think a Hopkins link is crucial. An Oakwood(Dayton) resident could hop on the trolley with luggage to be dropped off at the train station to go to Hopkins to fly to France. Its not quite MTS 1 seat ride but a 2 seat ride from Dayton isn't bad..

Yeah, these are great maps. 

 

Wasnt there some sort of operation issues between Daytona & Ciny, particularly in Cincy, with congested freight operations in the Queensgate yard and approaches?

 

 

Queensgate Yard is the poster child for rail bottlenecks.  It makes adding passenger service into Cincinnati Union Station very difficult.

I think a Hopkins stop is crucial too.  One of the major goals of the Ohio Hub is intermodal connections.  I'm not sure the state would want an Ohio Hub route that doesn't ultimately serve Hopkins.  As busy as Berea still is, freight traffic is noticeably down.  I drive down Front Street every day, and often twice per day.  I can sometimes now go a full week without getting stopped by a train.  If nothing else, that buys a little extra time to expand capacity through the area. 

 

Regarding Queensgate:  what are the options for increasing capacity and by how much?

It may almost take finding a way to re-route some of the freight traffic that flows through.  Tough thing to do, as the yard is like a funnel with the narrow end crossing the Ohio River.  It's going to take some creative thinking on both rail traffic flow and infrastructure.

There is a disused track on the west side of the Mill Creek which bypasses CUT and would travel either to a terminus at the unused Transit Center under 2nd St. or to the Longworth Hall parking lot.  This track originally diverged from the B&O in Ivorydale, traveled directly through Spring Grove Cemetery, and through Northside.  That section was abandoned and cut off by I-74.  They could still use the rest of it as a downtown approach with a 1/4 mile of new trackage diverging from the B&O triple track yard throat near I-74.  It actually traveled under the Ohio River bridge approaches along the riverfront, so it would be more or less grade separated for most of the four mile approach.     

It would take a detailed engineering study to figure this one out. First off, do we want to use CUT or go to the riverfront? If we decide on the former, what to do with the NS intermodal yard? Do we need to move it to make way for a new concourse? And if so, where does NS go? To Sharonville yard? IS CUT the best choice? It's still some distance from downtown proper.

 

You could add new tracks south of Sharonville yard and run them down the west side of Queensgate into the Longworth Hall area. What will that cost? what about freight operations? What about flooding at the Longworth site?

 

Lots of questions... :?

NEW TOPIC CREATED -- 3-C CORRIDOR PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT!

 

Given the news of recent days, weeks and months, the 3-C Corridor is a bonafide project and deserves its own thread. For news of others routes in the Ohio Hub system, please see:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1414.0.html

 

NEW TOPIC CREATED -- 3-C CORRIDOR PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT!

 

This thread will remain a place for discussion of general Ohio Hub system planning and news about the Ohio Rail Development Commission. For news of the 3-C Corridor, which is the centerpiece of the planned Ohio Hub system, please see:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18328.0.html

NEW TOPIC CREATED -- 3-C CORRIDOR PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT!

 

Given the news of recent days, weeks and months, the 3-C Corridor is a bonafide project and deserves its own thread. For news of others routes in the Ohio Hub system, please see:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1414.0.html

 

 

Wooo bona fide!

Columbus Metropolitan Club will have a lunchtime forum Feb. 18 on rail in Ohio. Speakers will be Chester Jourdan (Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission), Gene Krebs (Greater Ohio), Bill Lhota (Central Ohio Transit Authority) and Bill Habig (Transportation Matters).

You read it here first! (CMC Program Committee just approved it by e-mail 5 minutes ago.)

"This track originally diverged from the B&O in Ivorydale..."

 

If I'm not mistaken, the track on the west side of the Mill Creek was originally part of the Cincinnati, Hamilton, and Dayton Railroad, which was the first line between those cities. It eventually became part of the B&O, and eventually CSX. It is now known as the Cincinnati Industrial Track, and is still in use, though lightly used. I don't think there has been a train north of the Western Hills Viaduct in several years, but I saw one crossing Gest Street last year.

 

    Like Jake said it does not connect to Cincinnati Union Terminal, but it DOES go almost to the transit center under second street. The transit center may not be as pretty as Union Terminal but it is within walking distance of the Central Business District.

 

    In Cohen's book "The Railroad and the City" he argues that as far as passengers are concerned, Cincinnati Union Terminal was not really an operational improvement over what was there before. All of the former stations were closer to the central business district.

 

    If the rest of the system could be taken care of, this track would be a pretty easy entry to downtown Cincinnati. There is one railroad crossing, however, right at the Mill Creek bridge.

 

    Jake - good call!

Is there room in the transit center for intercity passenger rail?

 

Don't they use that for buses during Reds and Bengals games?

 

Also I thought that is where they planned to bring rail transit from the Eastern Corridor in the future.

 

Has anybody been looking at how that could all work together. 

 

It seams like the riverfront transit center would be the best location close to the CBD if you could make the connections and it worked with everything else planned on the riverfront.

 

KJP, why are the tracks mostly in place between Akron and Hudson? I noted that a bike/pedestrian path parallels some of the track, but it's quite obvious that the line is abandoned.

Is there room in the transit center for intercity passenger rail?

 

 

The city looked at that site as one of the potential locations for a downtown train station. I don't recall why the transit center was rejected but it was rejected. The Longworth Hall site was the favored option to come out of the study.

 

KJP, why are the tracks mostly in place between Akron and Hudson? I noted that a bike/pedestrian path parallels some of the track, but it's quite obvious that the line is abandoned.

 

Akron Metro Regional Transit Authority owns the right of way and wanted to keep the tracks in place it so, in the short term, they could lease it to an Adrian, Michigan dinner train operator and, in the long term, for future commuter rail between Cleveland and Akron.

 

You would need to fix up the tracks to run a dinner train at 10 mph over the eight miles between Cuyahoga Falls and Hudson (and back). But to run a passenger train at 60-79 mph over this line, you would have rebuild that line from the sub-ballast up. You're talking probably an investment of $40 million which should include restoring this line, the former Akron Secondary track, all the way to the CSX interlocking called AY at Arlington Street. That would allow passenger trains to avoid the hill on CSX tracks between Akron and Cuyahoga Falls where CSX freights sometime stall.

Set your VCRs/DVRs or get online at www.wkyc.com at 7 p.m. tonight!

 

NBC affilliate Channel 3 is covering various aspects of economic development in Greater Cleveland and Ohio. I'm told that tonight's segment is scheduled to be on the 3-C Corridor and passenger rail.

 

My fingers are crossed that the program will run as scheduled and that the appropriate information will be presented fairly and accurately.

"This track originally diverged from the B&O in Ivorydale..."

...

  Like Jake said it does not connect to Cincinnati Union Terminal, but it DOES go almost to the transit center under second street. The transit center may not be as pretty as Union Terminal but it is within walking distance of the Central Business District.

 

  If the rest of the system could be taken care of, this track would be a pretty easy entry to downtown Cincinnati. There is one railroad crossing, however, right at the Mill Creek bridge.

I don't think you would want to cross through Northside though.  It went right through a congested area.  Some of it has been built on (with a self storage units), and it had a surface crossing right at the Cincinnati Can project at Hamilton and Blue Rock.

http://www.daytondailynews.com/search/content/oh/story/opinions/columns/2009/02/04/ddn020409cummings.html

 

James Cummings: Get on board '3-C' rail system

By James Cummings

 

Staff Writer

 

Wednesday, February 04, 2009

 

Jim Wellman says his excitement about passenger rail service returning to the Dayton area "goes beyond words."

 

Wellman, a recently retired CSX railroad conductor, is deputy mayor of Riverside and a board member of the passenger rail advocacy group All Aboard Ohio.

 

Momentum seems to be building behind the idea of a "3-C" passenger rail system to link Ohio's three largest cities — Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati — with service to Dayton and the National Museum of the U.S. Airforce in Riverside. Among other positive signs, Gov. Ted Strickland endorsed the 3-C idea in his recent State of the State address.

 

...

 

 

Contact this reporter at (937) 225-2395 or [email protected].

 

3-C Corridor Summit

 

What: All Aboard Ohio Southwest Region conference

When: 10 a.m., Saturday, Feb. 21

Where: Riverside City Hall, 1791 Harshman Road, Riverside

Information: www.allaboardohio.org