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!

 

Seriously? I used to live in car-free in Chicago and now I live car-free in Cincinnati. I'll take Cincinnati's buses over Chicago's any day.

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.

 

This!  :clap:

 

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.

 

This is absolutely a cultural issue more than anything. Metro does a fantastic job with what it has...which is the worst funding per capita of any system in the country. Despite the pocket change it gets, Metro runs an efficient, clean, and easy to use operation.

 

The most notable problem is access to transit in the suburbs. It's terrible...but that's because the suburbs aren't paying for Metro. It's funded entirely by the city. The connections we do have are practically charity.

 

The only way for us to expand the service out to the burbs is to embrace the system we have in the city in order to make the suburbs want the service.

 

Still, as mentioned earlier, I love car-free here and I love it. Metro's always working on ways to make riding the bus easier and most efficient. (This is probably a good time to mention that I work for Metro. I'm not posting as an employee right now though. I'm posting as a car-free, daily transit riding millennial that views it as a lifestyle and has found Cincinnati to be a great place to live it.)

 

Metro's stored value cards are my absolute favorite payment method of any system I've ridden. Not only are they thinner and easier to store than contact less cards, they show you the remaining balance and allow you to pay fares for friends and family that's are riding with. It's wonderful!

 

Metro's realtime data being shared with third party apps allows us to choose what apps we want to use. I LOVE Transit App. Even beyond that, Metro decided to release realtime bus locations so you can see exactly where the bus is. (Most systems just give a calculated location based on the bus's realtime distance from a time point. Our realtime data is WAY more useful than in Chicago or New York.)

 

Improved connections by adding realtime displays at high capacity stops. Even though we all want a grid system...it's just not possible in a city laid out like Cincinnati. What we have instead are routes that get funneled into high-capacity corridors. Metro has been working to make sure these locations get upgraded amenities. The Uptoan Transit District project added a bunch of very nice shelters at important points all over Uptown. Walnut Hills is about to get a similar project. Northside and Oakley are both getting upgraded transit centers soon too. (Those are both very busy transfer points.)  We also have Government Square which I honestly believe is one of the best downtown transit centers in the country. It's beautifully integrated into the city, providing a well-lit, feature rich connection from everywhere in the city to the exact heart of the city.

 

Is the system flawless? Far from it. But there's really no reason for people to say "I ride transit in X city because it's a 'transit city' but I won't ride it in Cincinnati."  There's nothing inherently wrong with it. Just ride and enjoy!

 

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!

 

Seriously? I used to live in car-free in Chicago and now I live car-free in Cincinnati. I'll take Cincinnati's buses over Chicago's any day.

 

Fix two things about Cincinnati's buses and they would be better than Chicago's - 1) More frequently running lines that go more places 2) More diverse crowds of people who ride it.  #2 is an easy fix, and may help eventually bring about #1.  Also, MetroPlus is a wonderful addition but I wish it ran on weekends...  here's hoping the region is smart enough to vote for the future levee which will expand that system.  Its not as good as rail, but you have to walk before you run.

 

Metro's stored value cards are my absolute favorite payment method of any system I've ridden. Not only are they thinner and easier to store than contact less cards, they show you the remaining balance and allow you to pay fares for friends and family that's are riding with. It's wonderful!

 

These cards wear down a lot easier and are harder to use - the plastic rfid cards allow for faster boarding - Metro is using outdated technology here - this is another place for improvement, but at the very least they have these now and aren't using tokens/cash plus they have day passes for dirt cheap now.

 

Metro's realtime data being shared with third party apps allows us to choose what apps we want to use. I LOVE Transit App. Even beyond that, Metro decided to release realtime bus locations so you can see exactly where the bus is. (Most systems just give a calculated location based on the bus's realtime distance from a time point. Our realtime data is WAY more useful than in Chicago or New York.)

 

Great feature, but Chicago does do the same.  You can see where the bus of your choice physically is by looking at chicagobustracker.com

 

Transit is a fantastic app, and is particularly useful in Cincy where multiple low frequency routes run close to each other but not on the same street - this way you can more easily plan which one to take (look at route 20  or 27 in Northside to downtown vs the more frequent 17/19 - 20 and 27 are faster routes but don't run as frequently with this you can choose accordingly and walk a couple blocks to those routes if they are convient and save a few mins on your trip).  I love how transit app actually shows all routes near you (I use it just about every day in Chicago as I can take two routes (I'm off a rare diagonal bus line) to get to work.

 

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.

 

This!  :clap:

 

If you look at the results of the survey Metro ran a few months ago, most people agreed with statements like "funding public transportation is important because it allows low income people to get to jobs" but fewer agreed with statements like "I would consider taking the bus to work." (I don't remember the exact wording, but it backs up the idea that most people in Cincinnati view public transportation only as a social welfare program.)

 

Metro has been trying to advertise to professionals for the past several years, with campaigns that show people choosing to ride the bus and giving their reasons why. I would be curious to know how much this has attracted new "riders of choice".

 

The streetcar is absolutely going to be a huge factor in getting Cincinnatians excited about transit. There will be a lot of suburbanites who come downtown and ride the streetcar and start asking questions about why we can't extend it to their neighborhood. The impact of the streetcar will be much greater than what SORTA could do with a pro-bus advertising campaign.

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!

 

Seriously? I used to live in car-free in Chicago and now I live car-free in Cincinnati. I'll take Cincinnati's buses over Chicago's any day.

 

This sentiment does not magically make Cincinnati's peak headways as frequent as Chicago's.

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?

 

OCtoCincy it sounds like you're working on some kind of project. Have you read "Human Transit" by Jarrett Walker? It's a clear, highly readable, insightful book about the principles behind transit systems.  I really enjoyed it.

Changing the culture is a good first step

John Schneider and others have come up with a new (ok, not very new, but he has a pretty picture and detailed explanation) idea on getting rail transit in Cincinnati out of the basin and into uptown. It involves continuing the current streetcar tracks north on Main and Walnut, merging onto Main by the Rothenberg school, and then tunneling northward. An open-air stop would be just north of Christ, near the old Glencoe / Little Bethlehem area (at Valencia). The tracks would then tunnel further north under Inwood, McMillan, and Taft before daylighting in the Jefferson median around University. From there it would most likely follow MLK to the abandoned Blue Ash line which runs to Xavier.

 

The following is my analysis:

 

Pros:

 

- offers quick service from uptown to the basin

- touches major employers and dense, walkable neighborhoods

- touches areas ripe for dense redevelopment

- really increases frequency of train arrivals / departures in CBD due to combining of "Uptown" and "Findlay Market" lines

- avoids mess of multiple intersections in basin along vine, and at top of the hill

 

Cons:

 

- not sure I like the Mt Auburn stop location. Currently emerges into a field, and is downhill from Christ / Auburn Ave. Measured distance from Auburn to east end of Valencia is ~900ft. Would there be an really long escalator from Auburn?

- service, once in CBD, will be slow unless given signal priority and maybe even eliminate certain existing stops

- obviously, since this is only theoretical, there is no consideration being given to externalities, such as surrounding land use. Biggest red flag is current redesign of Corryville kroger, which would be about a quarter of a mile away, and is absolutely suburban in layout. Another red flag would be the crossing of 71 on MLK... do current construction plans take light rail into account at all?

 

If anyone else can think of anything, let me know. https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=1677702245798897&id=100006774138073&substory_index=0

This is the wrong way to go about this & leads to VERY easy criticism.  No one cared HOW the MLK bridge is designed, what roads were moved, widened etc.  No one cares how wide or what the Brent Spence Bridge is gonna look like. Half the people calling for a new bridge don't even know that the old bridge still stays.  They just know they want a new bridge and so does everyone else.

 

The plan for MLK was just to say "we need an MLK exit!! We need an MLK exit!" then when you get everyone on board saying yup, it makes sense to have an exit at MLK, it makes sense, only weird people don't agree.  THEN you say, ok, here's how you get it and everyone goes, well if that's how we get it then great.

 

Starting backwards, by debating how to get up the hill is the wrong tactic.  Start by getting everyone in uptown on board with having a streetcar.  Once every group is saying we want it, we want it, we want it- then you say: ok, here's how we do it.

 

Starting by arguing vehemently on the tunnel is just going to turn people off and scare them away.  Groups should do community meetings in Corryville with businesses.  Presentations at UC, etc.

 

Everything else just comes across as infighting and a distraction and easy criticism.

This is the wrong way to go about this & leads to VERY easy criticism.  No one cared HOW the MLK bridge is designed, what roads were moved, widened etc.  No one cares how wide or what the Brent Spence Bridge is gonna look like. Half the people calling for a new bridge don't even know that the old bridge still stays.  They just know they want a new bridge and so does everyone else.

 

The plan for MLK was just to say "we need an MLK exit!! We need an MLK exit!" then when you get everyone on board saying yup, it makes sense to have an exit at MLK, it makes sense, only weird people don't agree.  THEN you say, ok, here's how you get it and everyone goes, well if that's how we get it then great.

 

Starting backwards, by debating how to get up the hill is the wrong tactic.  Start by getting everyone in uptown on board with having a streetcar.  Once every group is saying we want it, we want it, we want it- then you say: ok, here's how we do it.

 

Starting by arguing vehemently on the tunnel is just going to turn people off and scare them away.  Groups should do community meetings in Corryville with businesses.  Presentations at UC, etc.

 

Everything else just comes across as infighting and a distraction and easy criticism.

 

I disagree.  The reason is there is a right and wrong way to design transit. It shouldn't be done by committee.  Look at all the Facebook comments saying "I think the streetcar should go here," or "I think it should go here." A lot of people say they want something, but may not understand what is  they really want or why they want it.  Now take that up to an institutional and neighborhood council level and you could end up have a long, meandering route that doesn't perform well as transit as a result and doesn’t compete with the automobile.

 

The tunnel provides a straight-as-an-arrow line to Christ Hospital and UC and thus fulfills Jarrett Walker's principle of "being  on the way." But this also implies there will be winners and losers from institutions and business districts that aren’t on the way.  I hate to pick on the Zoo, but think of the value to the entire region if we built a mixed traffic streetcar to the Zoo.  It wouldn't change anything very much and would probably have low ridership especially in the winter months.  However the tunnel idea enables a rail line serving Uptown and beyond, providing travel at speeds that are competitive with buses and even private cars.  And once speed is increased you can have increased frequency over longer distances with the same number of trains. 

 

I think we should optimize our transit for maximum ridership and would love to leave things up to professional design engineers.  Then present plans to Uptown institutions once the benfits have been calculated. As it is, I think John's thought about this just about more than anyone else and his idea should be the first one studied when we invite the pros to town. 

 

I don't think OctoCincy is saying that it should be done by committee, with some meandering route.  I think his point is that we should create the desire for the streetcar to extend to the UC area, and get everyone on board; then when that happens, you bring out this plan.  Once a plan is in place, there is plenty of ammunition for critics, as opposed to a goal of "let's extend something here." 

My experience in proposing and leading campaigns to build a billion dollars of big capital projects for Cincinnati over the last twenty years is that you first need to put a line on the map and start a conversation. People will react to it, criticize it, improve it and ultimately support it or turn it down. But you have to start somewhere.

 

I see nothing coming out of the Uptown stakeholder groups that makes me think anyone there is working on the idea of getting rail there and beyond.

 

So I am.

To be fair, past proposals of putting lines on a map has also involved 99% of those projects failing, with this streetcar being the only exception. 

 

Focusing on a tunnel has already lost a large number of supporters.  I've had many people tell me "this tunnel talk is scaring away the people you need". 

 

This is a simple case of you can't see the forest through the trees.  People who want a second phase should get the uptown community to understand what a streetcar through uptown will be like.  How it can help them, etc.  Then, as I said, when they are banging down the doors demanding it (LTE's weekly from different stakeholders in uptown all calling for a connection, etc.).  THEN you say, ok, here's how we do it.  Until there are a dozen LTE's saying, now is the time for an uptown streetcar, etc. (not talking about tunnels, just talking about connectivity and mobility), I don't believe it helps anyone to battle over this street vs. this tunnel.

 

Look at all the Facebook comments saying "I think the streetcar should go here," or "I think it should go here." A lot of people say they want something, but may not understand what is  they really want or why they want it.

 

That is exactly what this tunnel talk is.  It's people saying "I think it should go here"

So the circa-1998 deep tunnel would have had a station deep beneath Auburn Ave. (left) whereas John Schneider's newer plan would daylight a lower tunnel to the right of this photo.  The hospital complex could be accessed via an elevator "tower" such as the one that exists on the Hudson-Bergen line in Hoboken, NJ.  The line then would enter a second short tunnel under Inwood Park and the area occupied by CVS near Vine & McMillan/Calhoun. 

My experience in proposing and leading campaigns to build a billion dollars of big capital projects for Cincinnati over the last twenty years is that you first need to put a line on the map and start a conversation. People will react to it, criticize it, improve it and ultimately support it or turn it down. But you have to start somewhere.

 

I see nothing coming out of the Uptown stakeholder groups that makes me think anyone there is working on the idea of getting rail there and beyond.

 

So I am.

 

John, do you have a feel on why they're not working on anything related to transit? Do they just want to avoid the political hot potato? Or do they truly not see the benefits at this point?

 

My feeling is that many of the Uptown institutions threw their weight behind the MLK interchange and they're completely focused on that right now.

I like John's plan a lot.  Not only does it extend the streetcar to much needed areas in the basin, it provides quick, economical transportation to uptown that is car competitive.

 

Big projects like this are truly transformational and would be huge for downtown, OTR and the uptown area.  Maybe now with the current administration this is no possible but, once the first leg opens next year, more people will start to see the benefits, including key people uptown.  Think how much better their recruiting of top talent will be if they have a direct connection to downtown and OTR for living and entertainment areas. 

 

All it takes is the right people to get in charge.  This isn't something that is impossible.  Then you think, the administration is pulling a huge roadway and fleet fixture now, the police are getting big upgrades in staffing and possibly vehicles?  It seems we get all these done in the Cranley years and move on to bigger and better things once he is out.  I think by that time, the new influx of residents and companies in downtown and OTR will have a much bigger say in the politics of Cincinnati and the region in general.

 

People who want a second phase should get the uptown community to understand what a streetcar through uptown will be like.  How it can help them, etc. 

 

This is the issue- what the streetcar will be like Uptown is fully dependent upon what the plan is.  It boils down to an access vs. mobility argument.  Let me reiterate that I fully believe in the merits of the downtown circulator streetcar.  But I think it's legitimate to say a mixed traffic streetcar has the potential to be slow, (although certainly faster than walking,) especially if something is blocking the track.  The counter argument to this is that the purpose of the streetcar is not to be fast but to provide access.  The streetcar provides access to a densely packed route, with a wide variety of uses along it (employment, entertainment, stores, etc.) and allows city dwellers to meet their daily needs just as well as a suburbanite driving great distances on a highway. 

 

My concept for Cinculators (which uses the Vine St. alignment) pushes the access concept to the extreme.  ( http://bit.ly/1L8RCnp ) It ups the frequency to a vehicle coming by every 10 minutes or less and expands the destinations served by connecting to frequent bus routes at University Plaza. But to travel any further beyond those Uptown neighborhoods in a reasonable amount of time, speed simply must be increased. By increasing speed you are providing the mobility to bridge the established distances between Downtown/OTR, Uptown institutions, and neighborhoods beyond.  That's what a tunnel to Uptown, providing grade separation from local roads, would do. (It would also be a good idea to have dedicated lanes on Uptown's arterial streets.)   

 

 

Focusing on a tunnel has already lost a large number of supporters.  I've had many people tell me "this tunnel talk is scaring away the people you need". 

 

 

The folks you mention need to realize the tunnel is probably the most effective way to increase speed, and fully understand the tradeoff they are making by taking it off the table. 

 

My experience in proposing and leading campaigns to build a billion dollars of big capital projects for Cincinnati over the last twenty years is that you first need to put a line on the map and start a conversation. People will react to it, criticize it, improve it and ultimately support it or turn it down. But you have to start somewhere.

 

I see nothing coming out of the Uptown stakeholder groups that makes me think anyone there is working on the idea of getting rail there and beyond.

 

So I am.

 

John, do you have a feel on why they're not working on anything related to transit? Do they just want to avoid the political hot potato? Or do they truly not see the benefits at this point?

 

My feeling is that many of the Uptown institutions threw their weight behind the MLK interchange and they're completely focused on that right now.

 

I can easily imagine that if UC were to go all-in on bringing the streetcar to Uptown right now, Governor Kasich would be very vindictive when it comes to UC's next capital request. Also, if they have taken the time to analyze it, I can imagine UC's planners concluding that the Vine Street route offers inferior service to MetroPlus, so why get behind it?

My experience in proposing and leading campaigns to build a billion dollars of big capital projects for Cincinnati over the last twenty years is that you first need to put a line on the map and start a conversation. People will react to it, criticize it, improve it and ultimately support it or turn it down. But you have to start somewhere.

 

I see nothing coming out of the Uptown stakeholder groups that makes me think anyone there is working on the idea of getting rail there and beyond.

 

So I am.

 

John, do you have a feel on why they're not working on anything related to transit? Do they just want to avoid the political hot potato? Or do they truly not see the benefits at this point?

 

My feeling is that many of the Uptown institutions threw their weight behind the MLK interchange and they're completely focused on that right now.

 

I can easily imagine that if UC were to go all-in on bringing the streetcar to Uptown right now, Governor Kasich would be very vindictive when it comes to UC's next capital request. Also, if they have taken the time to analyze it, I can imagine UC's planners concluding that the Vine Street route offers inferior service to MetroPlus, so why get behind it?

 

I've been saying this for three years now. If I'm downtown and trying to get to the corner of McMillan & Vine, and my options are Streetcar, MetroPlus or local bus service...streetcar is by far my last option. That winding route is ridiculous.

^But people often walk past bus lines to get to streetcar or subway lines in those cities that have large rail networks.  They walk past the bus lines because they don't know that they exist and if they do because they don't know where they go.  In Boston people often ride the T into Downtown Boston and then back out on another branch rather than ride any number of very frequent crosstown bus routes. 

This plan promises at least $50 million in cost savings over doing the longer tunnel under Auburn Ave. with a deep station.  That route is preferable, since it creates access to a much larger neighborhood area than this proposed tunnel surfacing, but the savings are so significant that they will enable construction of a longer line for the same amount of money. 

My experience in proposing and leading campaigns to build a billion dollars of big capital projects for Cincinnati over the last twenty years is that you first need to put a line on the map and start a conversation. People will react to it, criticize it, improve it and ultimately support it or turn it down. But you have to start somewhere.

 

I see nothing coming out of the Uptown stakeholder groups that makes me think anyone there is working on the idea of getting rail there and beyond.

 

So I am.

 

John, do you have a feel on why they're not working on anything related to transit? Do they just want to avoid the political hot potato? Or do they truly not see the benefits at this point?

 

My feeling is that many of the Uptown institutions threw their weight behind the MLK interchange and they're completely focused on that right now.

 

I can easily imagine that if UC were to go all-in on bringing the streetcar to Uptown right now, Governor Kasich would be very vindictive when it comes to UC's next capital request. Also, if they have taken the time to analyze it, I can imagine UC's planners concluding that the Vine Street route offers inferior service to MetroPlus, so why get behind it?

 

I've been saying this for three years now. If I'm downtown and trying to get to the corner of McMillan & Vine, and my options are Streetcar, MetroPlus or local bus service...streetcar is by far my last option. That winding route is ridiculous.

 

Wouldn't you save money taking the streetcar through? If you were making a round trip within two hours it'd be $1 vs. $3.50, right? I do like the circulator fare structure. I could see using the streetcar to fetch Krishna takeout or something since the price would be comparable to an Uptown parking meter (that may or may not be available.)

 

I definitely think the streetcar is worth extending to UC, be it mixed traffic up Vine St. or tunnel. UC is just too big of an employment center and activity hub to leave out. A streetcar connection to such a strong node could help drive residential demand in OTR/West End. The Vine St. Double-back is Ok for just getting up the hill to UC. It's where the streetcar goes after that that is worth debating and worth evaluating the layout of the whole system for including the effect of the double-back.

^ Rail to UC will be a 100-year investment with modernizations over that term. You probably wouldn't want to make a decision on that investment based on the currently projected fare structure. In any case, I would expect fares to reach equilibrium between rail and bus for short trips.

I ran the Mt. Auburn tunnel concept through my spreadsheet thingy…

 

I plotted out John and Jules' concept of a streetcar extension north along Main and Walnut streets, crossing Liberty (with a stop) and entering a Mt. Auburn tunnel at the foot of the hill in the vicinity of Mulberry.  The tunnel daylights for a Christ Hospital stop (probably involving some kind of plaza/elevator infrastructure to access the hospital itself) and re-enters the tunnel.  The tunnel comes up for good in the vicinity of Jefferson and Corry.  I don’t have a clear concept of how this would happen, but on my map I added a stop here (differing from John's map,) to put a stop closer to Clifton Heights.  The route continues on Jefferson and MLK with stops at University Ave., the University/Children's/VA Hospital Campus, and at Reading Rd. where Uptown Consortium is assembling properties for a research/biotech hub.  My assumption is for dedicated transit lanes in this corridor.  At the MLK interchange itself, the tracks would make a left hand turn and follow the highway north, mostly using the existing rail right of way west of the highway (the PRR/CL&N ROW- thanks jjakucyk[/member] .)  It would mostly have dedicated right of way through this corridor, but some building demo/rearrangement of streets may be required to make that happen.  I envision a stop at Blair Ct. in Avondale, with a new bridge extending over I-71 to connect directly to Walnut Hills High School, and also some Transit Oriented Development along the tracks & highway in this corridor.  The final stop (for now) would be at Xavier University by the University Station development, serving Norwood and Evanston. 

 

As far as route times go, a word of caution. The most important variable in these calculations is miles per hour speed averages.  These I estimated doing some cursory internet research on bus and streetcar averages, and should be considered wild guesses at best (not very scientific for being the most important variable.)  That being said,  I came up with about a 24 minute travel time end to end from the Great American Ballpark to Xavier. With five vehicles running, I came up the minimum obtainable headway of a vehicle coming by every 10 minutes.

 

 

 

I ran the Mt. Auburn tunnel concept through my spreadsheet thingy…

 

I plotted out John and Jules' concept of a streetcar extension north along Main and Walnut streets, crossing Liberty (with a stop) and entering a Mt. Auburn tunnel at the foot of the hill in the vicinity of Mulberry.  The tunnel daylights for a Christ Hospital stop (probably involving some kind of plaza/elevator infrastructure to access the hospital itself) and re-enters the tunnel.  The tunnel comes up for good in the vicinity of Jefferson and Corry.  I don’t have a clear concept of how this would happen, but on my map I added a stop here (differing from John's map,) to put a stop closer to Clifton Heights.  The route continues on Jefferson and MLK with stops at University Ave., the University/Children's/VA Hospital Campus, and at Reading Rd. where Uptown Consortium is assembling properties for a research/biotech hub.  My assumption is for dedicated transit lanes in this corridor.  At the MLK interchange itself, the tracks would make a left hand turn and follow the highway north, mostly using the existing rail right of way west of the highway (the PRR/CL&N ROW- thanks jjakucyk[/member] .)  It would mostly have dedicated right of way through this corridor, but some building demo/rearrangement of streets may be required to make that happen.  I envision a stop at Blair Ct. in Avondale, with a new bridge extending over I-71 to connect directly to Walnut Hills High School, and also some Transit Oriented Development along the tracks & highway in this corridor.  The final stop (for now) would be at Xavier University by the University Station development, serving Norwood and Evanston. 

 

As far as route times go, a word of caution. The most important variable in these calculations is miles per hour speed averages.  These I estimated doing some cursory internet research on bus and streetcar averages, and should be considered wild guesses at best (not very scientific for being the most important variable.)  That being said,  I came up with about a 24 minute travel time end to end from the Great American Ballpark to Xavier. With five vehicles running, I came up the minimum obtainable headway of a vehicle coming by every 10 minutes.

 

 

 

I like this route a lot. My only thing is that I'd prefer it to be built as a light rail line rather than "streetcar". Which luckily for us, the difference is mostly semantics. Longer trains and longer stops, but with the streets it's following doesn't it lend itself to be that?

^yup. Cincinnati Streetcar posted a video on Facebook of a nine segment Urbos 3 train:

 

 

We may not need that but it would be neat to have the ability to add a segment or two :)

I ran the Mt. Auburn tunnel concept through my spreadsheet thingy…

 

I plotted out John and Jules' concept of a streetcar extension north along Main and Walnut streets, crossing Liberty (with a stop) and entering a Mt. Auburn tunnel at the foot of the hill in the vicinity of Mulberry.  The tunnel daylights for a Christ Hospital stop (probably involving some kind of plaza/elevator infrastructure to access the hospital itself) and re-enters the tunnel.  The tunnel comes up for good in the vicinity of Jefferson and Corry.  I don’t have a clear concept of how this would happen, but on my map I added a stop here (differing from John's map,) to put a stop closer to Clifton Heights.  The route continues on Jefferson and MLK with stops at University Ave., the University/Children's/VA Hospital Campus, and at Reading Rd. where Uptown Consortium is assembling properties for a research/biotech hub.  My assumption is for dedicated transit lanes in this corridor.  At the MLK interchange itself, the tracks would make a left hand turn and follow the highway north, mostly using the existing rail right of way west of the highway (the PRR/CL&N ROW- thanks jjakucyk[/member] .)  It would mostly have dedicated right of way through this corridor, but some building demo/rearrangement of streets may be required to make that happen.  I envision a stop at Blair Ct. in Avondale, with a new bridge extending over I-71 to connect directly to Walnut Hills High School, and also some Transit Oriented Development along the tracks & highway in this corridor.  The final stop (for now) would be at Xavier University by the University Station development, serving Norwood and Evanston. 

 

As far as route times go, a word of caution. The most important variable in these calculations is miles per hour speed averages.  These I estimated doing some cursory internet research on bus and streetcar averages, and should be considered wild guesses at best (not very scientific for being the most important variable.)  That being said,  I came up with about a 24 minute travel time end to end from the Great American Ballpark to Xavier. With five vehicles running, I came up the minimum obtainable headway of a vehicle coming by every 10 minutes.

 

 

 

I like this route a lot. My only thing is that I'd prefer it to be built as a light rail line rather than "streetcar". Which luckily for us, the difference is mostly semantics. Longer trains and longer stops, but with the streets it's following doesn't it lend itself to be that?

 

Dunno know about the stop at Corry. It would be forty or so feet underground and very expensive.

I've long been intrigued by Cincinnati's subway tunnels and I really want to try to get on one of the tours that the Museum Center conducts. It's hard to find any definitive information online about how to get tickets, so I thought I'd throw that out here to ask for suggestions. Has anyone here done the tour that has a tip on how to best get tickets for the event?

I believe the tours are every spring. Tickets typical go for sale in late winter/early spring.

 

This year's tour was on May 9th. http://www.cincymuseum.org/programs/heritage#subway

I heard from someone at the city that they aren't going to do the tours anymore.  But that might be bad information, or at least not permanent. 

 

Michael Moore at the city's transportation & engineering dept is pretty annoyed by the continual interest in the tunnels.  He told me that they've been contacted by several "cities of the underground" type cable shows after the year and they turn down their filming requests every time. 

I heard from someone at the city that they aren't going to do the tours anymore.  But that might be bad information, or at least not permanent. 

 

Michael Moore at the city's transportation & engineering dept is pretty annoyed by the continual interest in the tunnels.  He told me that they've been contacted by several "cities of the underground" type cable shows after the year and they turn down their filming requests every time. 

 

I've always wondered why I've never seen the tunnels on any of those shows. Seems like they'd be perfect subject matter. Besides your book and website, it's hard to find good, comprehensive info about them.

 

Did Moore indicate what the reasoning for his annoyance is?

I'll let you guys have at it with the tunnel tours.  The only time I prefer being in subway tunnels is when I'm sitting on a train zipping through them or waiting for a train on a station platform.  Large enclosed dark spaces like these freak me out.  Even Jake's photos make me queasy.  However like most on this board, I just hope someday Cincy puts these tunnels to the use they were built for, meaning not for tours, storage, electrical conduits and the like.

I heard from someone at the city that they aren't going to do the tours anymore.  But that might be bad information, or at least not permanent. 

 

Michael Moore at the city's transportation & engineering dept is pretty annoyed by the continual interest in the tunnels.  He told me that they've been contacted by several "cities of the underground" type cable shows after the year and they turn down their filming requests every time. 

 

I've always wondered why I've never seen the tunnels on any of those shows. Seems like they'd be perfect subject matter. Besides your book and website, it's hard to find good, comprehensive info about them.

 

Did Moore indicate what the reasoning for his annoyance is?

 

Maybe they think the show would encourage people to try to sneak in and see it for themselves. I have a section of my webpage with about 20 subway pictures and I get a few emails every month from people asking me for instructions on how to get into the tunnels. Just seeing the images isn't enough, people see them and it makes them want to go take a look. That said, given how much interest there seems to be on sneaking into them, they do a very good job of keeping them locked up.

That guy is an @#%#@ for not allowing that kind of publicity for Cincy. Does he want the city to remain a backwater?

 

I don't blame the city for wanting to reduce the amount of publicity surrounding the subway tunnels. After all, we have had years of transit opponents saying, "look at the subway tunnels, the city can't do anything right, rail will never work here." And then you have other people saying things like, "why don't the streetcars use the subway?" because they don't fundamentally understand the different purposes of different kinds of transit. Ultimately, I don't see what Cincinnati has to gain by allowing the subway tunnels to be featured on low-budget cable shows that will definitely not do a good job of telling the actual history of the tunnels.

I don't blame the city for wanting to reduce the amount of publicity surrounding the subway tunnels. After all, we have had years of transit opponents saying, "look at the subway tunnels, the city can't do anything right, rail will never work here." And then you have other people saying things like, "why don't the streetcars use the subway?" because they don't fundamentally understand the different purposes of different kinds of transit. Ultimately, I don't see what Cincinnati has to gain by allowing the subway tunnels to be featured on low-budget cable shows that will definitely not do a good job of telling the actual history of the tunnels.

 

 

Or how bout making them an income producing tour?

The city only gives four tours per year because they have to take special precautions with the water main that is located in one of the tunnels. I don't think they can realistically do anything more often than that.

Who typically guides the tours?

Uncle Deadly!

 

Cincinnati had so many unique things that it's afraid to sell it should start doing so - tons of economic development is being lost due to this. It's stupid you got something unique sell it!

 

Cincy is to happy with a dysfunctional status quo. Selling the subway and beer tunnels the way the much less interesting Seattle underground is sold would give dividends!

 

If the culture of Cincy acknowledged anything past west chester as worthwhile then culturally and economically it would be in a way better place than it is!

 

I always thought that the city could shut people up by giving quick, cheap, and dirty tours of the dead-end tunnels that end at Hopple Street. They aren't locked up, there aren't any stations, but there is about 300'-0" or so of tunnel that simple dead ends. It wouldn't require shutting down the water main, and there'd be virtually no liability because there's no climbing involved. It actually wouldn't be difficult to create a small park there and leave them open permanently (they currently aren't sealed at all, you just have to walk down a gravel drive from Hopple to get there).

Who typically guides the tours?

 

I don't blame the city for wanting to reduce the amount of publicity surrounding the subway tunnels. After all, we have had years of transit opponents saying, "look at the subway tunnels, the city can't do anything right, rail will never work here." And then you have other people saying things like, "why don't the streetcars use the subway?" because they don't fundamentally understand the different purposes of different kinds of transit. Ultimately, I don't see what Cincinnati has to gain by allowing the subway tunnels to be featured on low-budget cable shows that will definitely not do a good job of telling the actual history of the tunnels.

 

Love your posts but I disagree in this case.  Completely different audiences for what we are talking about here.  I think it would be good pub for the city.

Anyone who lives or works in the Greater Cincinnati area: Please take a moment and complete OKI's transportation priorities survey. We will not get better transportation policy in Greater Cincinnati until OKI repeatedly hears from the public that we support better transit, complete streets, and maintenance and safety improvements for our existing highway infrastructure rather than endless road and highway expansion.

 

http://2040.oki.org/

^Seconded.  I took that survey a few weeks ago.  I was a little disconcerted that some of the questions seemed to imply that the author thinks the options for the future are either car-free or (more likely) car-dependent.  I mentioned in the comments that Cincinnati should be striving to become a car-light city, where a family can survive easily with 1 car instead of 2-3 cars.  I'd love to go car free, but that's not going to be realistic for most people in the region for quite some time, given our built environment and current state of transit.

Conversely, I do live car free in this city and was annoyed by questions that assumed I currently do own a car.

OKI seems to do a lot of surveys. I think it's because everything time they do one, they are surprised by the numbers of responses they get requesting better transit, improved walkability, complete streets, etc. They are so stuck in their highway-only way of thinking that they think, "this must've been a fluke", and they do another survey a few months later. We need to keep the pressure on them, keep responding to these surveys, and then hold them accountable if they ignore the results.

Pretty sure that OKI only does these surveys because either ODOT or the Feds require them as a condition of getting funds. Also pretty sure there is no interest in higher-level public transportation at OKI.