I guess what's frustrating is that it DOES seem like a zero sum game in our metro region.  We have a relatively slowly, mostly organically growing population leading to "sprawl without growth."  But maybe that's because we've been complacent and avoided making big investments like light rail...

 

Yeah but it's really reaching a turning point. I haven't done a morning commute into Cincinnati in years. This morning it took me 1 hour and 10 minutes to get from Milford to Pill Hill, door to door. I was speechless. I do not know how much more our region can grow with its existing interstate-only transportation system, honestly.

FWIW, Boston regional transit serves some pretty low-density, squiggly suburbs like Framingham and Stoughton, which are physically identical to many little Ohio towns and some of our older suburbs.  When examining regional transit and what might work in Cincinnati, Boston is the best example I can think of for comparison.  Beantown is a little more sprawled, but not by much.  It's a selling point for the region and very attractive to middle class families to be able to live in a bedroom community and be within a 5 minute drive of a train that can get you downtown, avoiding that hour and ten minute traffic jam that Civvik went through and of course not seeking or paying for parking.  Just because a family chooses to be suburban doesn't mean they should be cut off from the vitality and economy of the core.

Has anyone done a thought experiment about what cincinnati's subway system would look like it the original line had been built in the 20s, and then additional lines been added through the years? Are there drawings floating around about this? I'd be interested to know!

This website does not permit direct linking, but I found this pretty interesting video on how the precast sections of tunnel lining are created for modern bored tunnels. 

 

Click on "Precast Yard Video":

http://www.portofmiamitunnel.com/project-overview/project-videos/

 

It's easy to see from this video why short tunnels don't make much sense but longer tunnels (or multiple tunnels) can have a much lower per-foot construction costs.  A facility like this has to be created no matter how long or short a tunnel.  If Cincinnati were to build an extensive subway system with 10+ miles of bored tunnel, a facility like this could provide steady work for 5-10 years. 

 

John Schneider has a big idea, and it’s worth hearing him out

Jul 24, 2015, 6:00am EDT

Chris Wetterich

Staff reporter and columnist

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

In John Schneider's vision, light rail would whisk residents from Uptown, Hyde Park, Elmwood Place, Blue Ash, Mariemont and other communities through tunnels in Mount Auburn to the streetcar line.

 

MORE (REQUIRES SUBSCRIPTION):

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2015/07/24/john-schneider-has-a-big-idea-and-it-s-worth.html?ana

John Schneider has a big idea, and it’s worth hearing him out

Jul 24, 2015, 6:00am EDT

Chris Wetterich

Staff reporter and columnist

Cincinnati Business Courier

 

In John Schneider's vision, light rail would whisk residents from Uptown, Hyde Park, Elmwood Place, Blue Ash, Mariemont and other communities through tunnels in Mount Auburn to the streetcar line.

 

MORE (REQUIRES SUBSCRIPTION):

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/print-edition/2015/07/24/john-schneider-has-a-big-idea-and-it-s-worth.html?ana

 

I really wanted to read this article, but I don't have the required subscription to the biz J.

I'm on board with this. The first light rail line in Cincinnati is going to connect Downtown and Uptown as the two "must haves." It is going to need the grade separation between the two provided by the tunnel otherwise it is going to be slower than molasses. Then hopefully uptown you can get dedicated lanes and priority signaling on Jefferson and MLK until it gets over to the I-71 ROW. The "University Station" development near Xavier will be appropriately named because you could have I-71 and Wasson lines converging near there. Even if the Wasson line remains a bike trail for many years that would still be awesome because you could ride your bike right onto a train headed downtown.

 

We should be able to build a tunnel. In Portland John showed us the Robertson Tunnel used by the MAX blue and red lines. It's a long tunnel with a deep station with elevator to their Washington Park which is a large kind of pastoral place that contains the Zoo and Japanese Garden. The line then goes off to Portland's west side which I'm sure is nice but isn't as important to their region as Uptown is to ours. If they can do that there's no reason we can't connect our two MAIN activity centers with a tunnel and a station at Christ Hospital which would have far more activity than Portland's station in the middle of the park.

When I told the former director of OKI, Jim Duane, that I didn't see any way of getting rail to UC without a tunnel, he shrugged his shoulders and said, "Hey, we live in a city of hills and valleys, so we're bound to have some tunnels and bridges."

The tunnel is the key.

Two thoughts:

 

-Do you think the whiz bang architectural renderings that are possible now will make this easier to market than in the past?

 

-The Enquirer should jump on board so they have something to write about for the next 15 years.

At least three things have changed since 2002. First, we're about to open a modern streetcar, much of which is built to light rail specs. Also, Uptown is repopulating, and the institutions are expanding -- compared to 2002 when the continued existence of Christ Hospital was in doubt. And finally, there's just this wave of demand for close-in neighborhoods like Lower Mt. Auburn that was just getting started here in 2002. We definitely have the wind at our backs.

At least three things have changed since 2002. First, we're about to open a modern streetcar, much of which is built to light rail specs. Also, Uptown is repopulating, and the institutions are expanding -- compared to 2002 when the continued existence of Christ Hospital was in doubt. And finally, there's just this wave of demand for close-in neighborhoods like Lower Mt. Auburn that was just getting started here in 2002. We definitely have the wind at our backs.

 

Fortunately, many more things that those three have changed.

What is more likely in the near future? Streetcar to Uptown or an LRT proposal?

Depends on who is willing to step up and lead such an effort. If City Council swings back to a pro-streetcar majority in 2017, they could vote to study an uptown extension of the streetcar. An LRT plan would need a champion and it's not clear who that would be. Perhaps as the success of the streetcar becomes clear, business leaders and heads of uptown institutions will come together and push for a regional rail plan.

LRT is much better than a streetcar if it can be done in a regional plan as John proposes. The streetcar is a nice start in OTR, but uptown is better served by light rail.

LRT is much better than a streetcar if it can be done in a regional plan as John proposes. The streetcar is a nice start in OTR, but uptown is better served by light rail.

 

I do not like to say what is better, but yes LRT can show great results and is desperately needed.  The whole region will be much better off if we had LRT, even if it just starts in the city's core.  I just hope that the rest of the streetcar route doesn't get pushed aside to start working on LRT.  I think they need to be worked on in tandem.  The streetcar will have a much larger impact going into the uptown area than what is currently being completed.  They are both important projects and I hope we don't lose sight of that.

 

I also haven't heard anything regarding what NKY is doing to initiate a connection loop into the Cincinnati streetcar.  Are there any leaders or pro streetcar groups in NKY (Covington, Newport or vicinity) getting anything talked about or trying to get anything pushed through?       

Nothing more is likely to happen until there are some champions outside of the usual suspects, such as myself, Ryan, John, et al. And these champions will have to be from outside the core. We've gone about as far as we can go with advocacy while 'pushing' out from the center. There will have to be some individuals pulling. I suppose there is more likelihood of that after September 2016 when people can see what it actually is. However, under the assumption that we'll have a Cranley administration in place until 2021 means another 6 years on pause. People are still afraid of his repercussions. And if the discussion is just starting in 2021, then you can maybe get streetcar Uptown in a reasonable amount of time. Through the woods west of Vine would then be a best case scenario. Then maybe concurrently you start building support for the tunnel concept and plan on an extension of the tracks north on Main. So that ultimately you'd have the circulator through UC with the light rail connection going through the job center at the hospitals and then connecting to Wasson and 71 or Reading Rd.

I still don't see the need to build in the woods. It devastates the ability for redevelopment between Findlay Market and McMillan. And I've never had to slow down on the Vine Street hill. I take it every day. Bypassing traffic is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist there. Give the streetcar signal priority at McMillan, Calhoun/Taft, Clifton, and McMicken and you're fine. I think a quick tunnel under McMillan and Taft would be great if there was funding. But even with the forest alignment you would have to cross that jumble, so it isn't saving anything over the Vine route. The lack of visibility in the woods would hurt ridership and confuse people. And I imagine the cost of stabilizing the hillside and site work would be very high. Also, the cost of acquiring land to go through the woods. It just seems like an unnecessary complication to a project.

The only problem that the "Forest Route" solves is the doubling-back issue. Which is not a big deal for streetcar service, but if the downtown streetcar tracks are also used as the basis for regional LRT, it needs to be addressed.

Starting at 12th, I'd continue the tracks north on Main and Walnut to Clifton and Main and Mulberry. And then into a tunnel that rises at 6.3% to a street-level stop behind The Christ Hospital. Then north on Rice to a short tunnel under Inwood Park to Hollister and Vine to Jefferson.

 

You could be more ambitious and extend the tunnel all the way to Jefferson around Daniels and run further north to a "University" stop at University and Jefferson.

 

A streetcar could easily do all of this. The tunnel is relatively straight. It would be a fast, comfortable trip.

 

Light rail might require a shallower tunnel, maybe as shallow of 5%. That would put the Christ station underground, something I'd like to avoid.

 

You might be able to daylight a streetcar or light rail alignment on the Recreation Commission land north of Hollister before diving under McMillan and Calhoun/Taft to Jefferson and Daniels.

 

Pretty sure a bridge will be required to get rail out of Uptown along MLK to the Blue Ash Line. It could be a pretty fast line, as these things go because a lot of it is grade-separated.

 

Cincinnatians often get behind big ideas if they solve a problem and are useful. This would be.

The only problem that the "Forest Route" solves is the doubling-back issue. Which is not a big deal for streetcar service, but if the downtown streetcar tracks are also used as the basis for regional LRT, it needs to be addressed.

 

It also avoids the mess of the Vine/McMicken/Findlay intersection completely, and most of the electric conduit and other utilities under Vine Street.  Plus concerns have been raised that Vine is only 36' curb-to-curb rather than the more typical 40', making it quite a squeeze especially at curves and for any two-way transit in general.  None of these things are insurmountable, they just make it harder and more expensive to deal with. 

Light rail might require a shallower tunnel, maybe as shallow of 5%. That would put the Christ station underground, something I'd like to avoid.

 

Assuming we stick with CAF rolling stock wouldn't a light rail vehicle just be a streetcar with extra segments added? Then the choice between streetcar and light rail (which affects how to build tunnel and track) would just be a matter of planning for demand, if we think a streetcar-sized vehicle will become full at peak travel times.

 

Something we should plan for is driverless train vehicles. Much easier to do than an driverless car which everyone says is just around the corner (I personally highly doubt this and think it's a chimera for anti transit folks.) The Canada line in Vancouver is driverless although it's completely grade separated. My thinking is if you don't have to pay driver cost, instead of having a long train with many segments you can just run many streetcar size trains at high frequency. Maybe every two minutes at peak would ensure everyone gets a spot on the train. Then you save $ on tunnel and track construction costs because it allows tighter turn radii and steeper grades.

 

In order to be driverless it needs to be completely grade seperated.

In order to be driverless it needs to be completely grade seperated.

 

Today that's the case. But how are driverless cars just around the corner when non grade separated driverless trains are not? There are infinitely less variables to control when you have a vehicle running on track. Whereas a driverless car almost requires sentient artificial intelligence. I think that goes to the power of automobile domination that driverless cars get all the press while we never hear about projects on better, smarter transit vehicles and systems. It's because high tech transit would truly challenge the status quo while driverless cars reassure everyone "Please continue your wasteful land use patterns, burning of natural resources, and de facto racial and economic segregation and everything will turn out fine."

In order to be driverless it needs to be completely grade seperated.

 

Today that's the case. But how are driverless cars just around the corner when non grade separated driverless trains are not? There are infinitely less variables to control when you have a vehicle running on track. Whereas a driverless car almost requires sentient artificial intelligence. I think that goes to the power of automobile domination that driverless cars get all the press while we never hear about projects on better, smarter transit vehicles and systems. It's because high tech transit would truly challenge the status quo while driverless cars reassure everyone "Please continue your wasteful land use patterns, burning of natural resources, and de facto racial and economic segregation and everything will turn out fine."

 

Driverless cars (in the way you're imagining them) are not right around the corner. There will always need to be a licensed driver behind the wheel to take control of the vehicle if there is a malfunction.

In order to be driverless it needs to be completely grade seperated.

 

Today that's the case. But how are driverless cars just around the corner when non grade separated driverless trains are not? There are infinitely less variables to control when you have a vehicle running on track. Whereas a driverless car almost requires sentient artificial intelligence. I think that goes to the power of automobile domination that driverless cars get all the press while we never hear about projects on better, smarter transit vehicles and systems. It's because high tech transit would truly challenge the status quo while driverless cars reassure everyone "Please continue your wasteful land use patterns, burning of natural resources, and de facto racial and economic segregation and everything will turn out fine."

 

Driverless cars (in the way you're imagining them) are not right around the corner. There will always need to be a licensed driver behind the wheel to take control of the vehicle if there is a malfunction.

 

I would tend to agree but that's not what's being presented to the public. Especially by anti transit lobbyists and politicians.

Bill's right on the chimera of driverless cars bring touted as eliminating the need for transit. An influential member of the business/civic community liked my idea for the Mt. Auburn tunnel(s) but said a colleague of his believes that driverless cars mean transit will no longer be needed.

 

I asked him to ask his friend where all of these driverless cars would be stored in downtown and uptown in order to be summoned magically at 5:05p every evening to take people home.

The future of course is transit and driverless cars. Transit and cars are not direct substitutes for one another. I think this is one of the prime misconceptions that drove us to the place we are today.

How much will it cost to ride in driverless cars?  Nobody knows, but I'd bet it will be significantly more expensive than riding the bus.  And there will probably be a 2-tiered pricing system where people pay a premium to ride in a car by themselves and drive directly to a destination whereas a cheaper service will do something like what Uber Pool and Lyft Line do today. 

I think the future is in the Internet and drones. I will never have to leave my chair, so we should stop investing in all land-based public rights of way except those used for Internet traffic.

 

I asked him to ask his friend where all of these driverless cars would be stored in downtown and uptown in order to be summoned magically at 5:05p every evening to take people home.

 

Where are they stored now? In parking garages, surface lots, and on-street parking.

^ Sure, that's right -- for the current auto commuters, but you'd need many more spaces for the self-driving cars of former transit users

 

Why would transit users switch to cars? Transit is cheap and convenient, if you happen to live on a bus line and work downtown.

The legal conundrum created by self driving cars is almost intractable 

 

Why would transit users switch to cars? Transit is cheap and convenient, if you happen to live on a bus line and work downtown.

 

That's the point. Some people are saying that self driving cars will eventually replace transit...or rather, that we don't need to invest in transit because self-driving cars are just around the corner.

^ Sure, that's right -- for the current auto commuters, but you'd need many more spaces for the self-driving cars of former transit users

 

Buses and trains could conceivably be eliminated in small cities but it's never going to work as a 100% replacement, or even a 25% replacement in the world's biggest and most congested cities like New York, Hong Kong, etc.  I'd like to see some computer modeling though on how many cars it will take to create acceptable wait times for suburb-to-suburb commutes.  So now we have 1 car per commuter, and that car sits there all day and all night (is inactive about 22 hours per day) but will it take more or fewer cars to enable wait times for cars under 5 minutes for planned and spontaneous trips?

The legal conundrum created by self driving cars is almost intractable 

 

Imagine if the inverse were reality; cars had always been automated in some form and we were now facing 100% human drivers, starting at age 16.

 

Why would transit users switch to cars? Transit is cheap and convenient, if you happen to live on a bus line and work downtown.

 

That's the point. Some people are saying that self driving cars will eventually replace transit...or rather, that we don't need to invest in transit because self-driving cars are just around the corner.

 

If self driving cars are just around the corner... why do those same anti-transit advocates think we need to invest in wider freeways and more parking garages? Won't self driving cars fix all of that too?

LET'S TALK BUSES:

 

How many people on here take Metro or TANK on a slightly regular basis?  As in, 3 times a month or more? Which routes in general are you using.  What aspects of either system do you think are the "low hanging fruit" that could be improved fairly easily?

My biggest beef is that our drivers simply do not have the get-up-and-go that bus drivers in bigger cities have. When you get on a bus in Chicago or Seattle, they shut the door and get a move on it. In Cincinnati, the buses loiter at each stop while people take their time getting on, counting out their change, finding a seat. I have seen all sorts of stories from more frequent bus riders about drivers who just pull over the bus and get off to grab some fast food, or run into a business to use the restroom, as if the bus is their personal minivan that just happens to be carrying some passengers along. I'm not sure how you fix this attitude.

My biggest beef is that our drivers simply do not have the get-up-and-go that bus drivers in bigger cities have. When you get on a bus in Chicago or Seattle, they shut the door and get a move on it. In Cincinnati, the buses loiter at each stop while people take their time getting on, counting out their change, finding a seat. I have seen all sorts of stories from more frequent bus riders about drivers who just pull over the bus and get off to grab some fast food, or run into a business to use the restroom, as if the bus is their personal minivan that just happens to be carrying some passengers along. I'm not sure how you fix this attitude.

 

Rail rapid transit is a start.  It tends to vitalize buses and up the ante in terms of their on-time demands.

I agree that there are some "lag time" issues.  A major part of fixing that during boarding is to allow All-door boarding like SFMTA has implemented on all buses.  It has the ability to cut stop time in half. (which during rush hour around government square can save an entire minute at certain stops)  Now, the big fear is that fare evasion will increase as there isn't someone directly watching the rear door for payments.  SFTMA has seen no increase in fare evasion during their trial period and believe the benefits of the speedier system far outweigh any minor fare evasion they aren't catching.

 

That being said, it's expensive as you need to install a second reader in the back.  Another option would be cash only must go to the front, while passes could go to a reader in the back. The driver needs to then just hear one beep per person walking through, etc.

LET'S TALK BUSES:

 

How many people on here take Metro or TANK on a slightly regular basis?  As in, 3 times a month or more? Which routes in general are you using.  What aspects of either system do you think are the "low hanging fruit" that could be improved fairly easily?

 

I live in Mt. Adams, and take the 1 sometimes when I'm going downtown.  My biggest complaint with it BY FAR is the frequency.  Monday-Friday the bus comes every ~35 minutes (if it's running on time), and on weekends it's something like every 1:10-1:20?  That is barely workable from a point of view of car competitiveness, and with the rise of Uber and Lyft, I now struggle to justify taking the bus. It's also the only bus that serves the neighborhood, meaning a trip to Clifton would require going downtown or to Peebles Corner (terminus of the 1) and transferring busses.  Not going to do that. I don't know how anyone outside of downtown/OTR could actually depend on the bus for mobility and access within the city and region. 

I've had the fast food thing happen and I'm not even a frequent rider. Frustrating, but isn't it done to keep the bus on schedule if it's running fast? Does that speak more to a route or schedule that's not set up to be efficient?

That is part of it.  Metro routes have some of the most frequent stops I can find in any comparable transit system.  There are countless parts of the City where the bus stops every single block.  It's maddening and a very poor design that is not used to the extent we use it by most systems.

That is part of it.  Metro routes have some of the most frequent stops I can find in any comparable transit system.  There are countless parts of the City where the bus stops every single block.  It's maddening and a very poor design that is not used to the extent we use it by most systems.

 

But how often are all those stops used?  Yes it's annoying when people are lazy and pull the chain for the very next stop, but in reality many of them are still skipped.  When a route becomes heavily used enough for it to become a problem, then it's time to reevaluate the stop spacing, but otherwise it's one concession to convenience for an otherwise infrequent service.   

 

I think the lingering to stay on schedule thing is less a function of the efficiency of the route and more the likelihood that there could be delays from traffic.  A route that is more subject to traffic delays, detours, school boardings, etc., will need more padding built into its schedule and could then end up with more dwell time on free-flowing days.  The trouble comes when trying to maintain consistent headways even though the schedule needs less padding at certain times of the day compared to others.  If you tailor each run to the conditions however, you're faced with the possibility of frequently readjusting the schedule or having buses be late, and the time between buses becomes seemingly random and difficult to remember.  Of course this is only a problem when buses are run so infrequently that you need a schedule in the first place. 

My biggest beef is that our drivers simply do not have the get-up-and-go that bus drivers in bigger cities have. When you get on a bus in Chicago or Seattle, they shut the door and get a move on it. In Cincinnati, the buses loiter at each stop while people take their time getting on, counting out their change, finding a seat. I have seen all sorts of stories from more frequent bus riders about drivers who just pull over the bus and get off to grab some fast food, or run into a business to use the restroom, as if the bus is their personal minivan that just happens to be carrying some passengers along. I'm not sure how you fix this attitude.

 

Be diligent, Metro has a twitter account make sure all instances are reported to them, they at least provide acknowledgement from what I've seen if there is an issue.  I feel extremely pushy and rude when I ride metro because I'm used to a faster paced culture.  Probably the thing that bugs me the most are the break stops where the bus will idle if it gets ahead of schedule - I'm not used to that and oftentimes will take advantage of those to just get off the bus if its close to my destination.

 

That is part of it.  Metro routes have some of the most frequent stops I can find in any comparable transit system.  There are countless parts of the City where the bus stops every single block.  It's maddening and a very poor design that is not used to the extent we use it by most systems.

 

Its still better than Chicago's buses, and for the most part when I've ridden, many stops are skipped - here in Chicago there is a stop every block and oftentimes 1 person gets off on the 3 lesser stops and then groups of people get off at the main drag, its kind of maddening as those 3 extra people probably should just get off at the main drag, though it helps that Chicago has such a strict grid system for such a setup to work.  I'm generally in support of consolidated stops for that reason so long as they are still within reasonable walking distance (and BRT for express routes too).

LET'S TALK BUSES:

 

How many people on here take Metro or TANK on a slightly regular basis?  As in, 3 times a month or more? Which routes in general are you using.  What aspects of either system do you think are the "low hanging fruit" that could be improved fairly easily?

 

The bus was my primary mode of transportation in Chicago. I do not bother with buses in cities like Cincinnati. The community does not treat it as a serious mode of transportation, so neither do I.

 

PS: This thread is for rail, not buses. Don't let the convo stray too far or it'll get moved!

LET'S TALK BUSES:

 

How many people on here take Metro or TANK on a slightly regular basis?  As in, 3 times a month or more? Which routes in general are you using.  What aspects of either system do you think are the "low hanging fruit" that could be improved fairly easily?

 

I do not bother with buses in cities like Cincinnati. The community does not treat it as a serious mode of transportation, so neither do I.

 

 

^ That's because too many people in power here regard public transportation as a social program, not serious transportation.

 

LET'S TALK BUSES:

 

How many people on here take Metro or TANK on a slightly regular basis?  As in, 3 times a month or more? Which routes in general are you using.  What aspects of either system do you think are the "low hanging fruit" that could be improved fairly easily?

 

The bus was my primary mode of transportation in Chicago. I do not bother with buses in cities like Cincinnati. The community does not treat it as a serious mode of transportation, so neither do I.

 

On the flip side changing the culture starts at the grassroots.  Much of Cincy doesn't have great transit, I'll agree wholeheartedly, but if you live in a neighborhood that at least has something usable and are going to a neighborhood that has the same, lets say from by the university to downtown then take advantage of it.  The more people like you who ride what exists the more transit is considered a normal thing that normal people use and not something for the destitute and poor.  Perhaps the end result will be cultural change.  It will take time.  This is part of the reason why I consider the frequent transit map Nate Wessel made, as well real time bus tracker information to be important steps towards normalizing the idea of transit being transportation and not a social program.

 

Cincinnati's backwards attitude towards transit is a problem, particularly for a city that is as urban as it is.  You solve a problem by attacking it on all sides and IMO this is one of the biggest problems the city has - the streetcar is a great way to normalize transit usage, but you need to really drive home that point and that's the responsibility of everyone who supports a change in culture and as urbanists I'm sure all of us WANT the culture to change.

 

Also as I've mentioned earlier in this thread, speak up if you have a problem with how buses are being operated, I give props to Metro for at least having an active social media presence.  The more people with standards who ride transit speak up the better the system will get on a day to day operational basis.  Real reform will take money and investment (as well as less backwards leadership) but you should at least work towards a goal of making Cincy a more transit friendly city and everyone has to start somewhere.

 

I do my part, I use metro when I'm in Cincy when it makes sense for me.  With Uber/Lyft and bikeshare I can get everywhere I'd like to pretty much when I'm in town without needing a car.  When I do it I get an incredible feeling that I am making a difference and fighting against a culture that I hate with a passion.

 

PS: This thread is for rail, not buses. Don't let the convo stray too far or it'll get moved!

 

The on topic police strike again!  Any conversation about the future of transit being brighter in an area where transit isn't taken seriously is going to include some form of bus transportation.  You can't build rail everywhere even Europe and Japan do have buses.  If you are so rigid in your conversation all it takes is a simple change to the topic name from rail to just mass transportation then OMG we are on topic ;)