We were at a store out in the 'burbs over the weekend and wanted to pick up some food afterwards.  Our three year old daughter wanted to know why we were getting back in the car.  "Why don't we just walk over there" to get something to eat she asked.  I had to explain to her that we were in the suburbs and had to drive (she wasn't too happy).  It seems like the value of walkable cities is something even a three year old can understand so long as they were exposed enough to it to realize how flippin' awesome it is.

Did the streetcar advance the cause for true Cincinnati rapid transit or hamper it?

 

I would say the jury's still out. All the current issues we are still experiencing with the streetcar would be easily fixable with suppportive leadership. But the needs of the bus system are taking center stage now.

 

The ball is in the court of Cincy progressive rail and transit advocates, because you know the powers that be are feeling: "We gave them their little trolley, what more do they want?"

Did the streetcar advance the cause for true Cincinnati rapid transit or hamper it?

 

I would say the jury's still out. All the current issues we are still experiencing with the streetcar would be easily fixable with suppportive leadership. But the needs of the bus system are taking center stage now.

 

The ball is in the court of Cincy progressive rail and transit advocates, because you know the powers that be are feeling: "We gave them their little trolley, what more do they want?"

 

Only in the sense that it's time to get people elected who unequivocally support transit to public office.

 

Did you know the streetcar was shut down yesterday for a race, the route of which did not even cross the tracks?

 

When leaders with a desk and an office getting paid full time are making decisions like this, what chance does an "advocate" even have?

Unfortunately the focus in the near term is merely stabilizing our existing bus system. Due to lack of support from the state and county, the city is left funding the bus system that serves our entire region. The focus is merely on "getting people to jobs", not building a good quality system that people actually want to use.

We were at a store out in the 'burbs over the weekend and wanted to pick up some food afterwards.  Our three year old daughter wanted to know why we were getting back in the car.  "Why don't we just walk over there" to get something to eat she asked.  I had to explain to her that we were in the suburbs and had to drive (she wasn't too happy).  It seems like the value of walkable cities is something even a three year old can understand so long as they were exposed enough to it to realize how flippin' awesome it is.

 

Great post! My son is the same way! ... It's all about bicycling and parks to him. He'd rather go to Smale Riverfront park than Main Event in West Chester.

Unfortunately the focus in the near term is merely stabilizing our existing bus system. Due to lack of support from the state and county, the city is left funding the bus system that serves our entire region. The focus is merely on "getting people to jobs", not building a good quality system that people actually want to use.

 

If Cincinnati/Hamilton County raised our local taxes to Columbus/Franklin County levels, we could fund a huge bus system and a real subway/light rail system.  Columbus/Franklin County (plus several outer counties) fund COTA with a .5% sales tax.  Meanwhile, the Columbus city earnings tax is 2.5%. 

 

So if we were to raise our local taxes to Columbus levels and applied all of that to transit, we would have a 1/2 cent county sales tax + a .6% city earnings tax, bringing the total city earnings tax up to 2.5%. 

 

So if the county sales tax were split 50/50 between bus and rail (as was the plan under Metro Moves), buses would get $30 million and rail would get $30 million.  Meanwhile, upping the city earnings tax would triple the amount the city contributes to SORTA. 

 

So if we did what I just described, taxes applied to SORTA would jump from about $50 million per year to over $200 million per year.  That's enough to fund tons of buses and construction of multiple rail lines -- up to a $5 billion system if we get a federal matches. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Right, and many of the Cincinnati residents who complain that they are "taxed to death" are completely unaware that nearby cities are taxed higher than us, like your Columbus example. If you choose to live in a city, you need to fund the services that cities need to function. In other states, there are suburban areas that have higher quality and higher frequency bus transit than Hamilton County.

All of the NKY cities pay 2.5% (Covington, Newport, etc.).  If Cincinnati merely increased its earnings tax .4 to 2.5%, we could do a big-time transit system within the city limits.  Increase bus spending but only within the city limits.  Build a rail transit system but only within city limits.  Change the zoning so that all of the neighborhood business districts served by transit can come back to life. 

Right, and many of the Cincinnati residents who complain that they are "taxed to death" are completely unaware that nearby cities are taxed higher than us, like your Columbus example. If you choose to live in a city, you need to fund the services that cities need to function. In other states, there are suburban areas that have higher quality and higher frequency bus transit than Hamilton County.

 

Columbus' high taxation levels get pointed out by the media every once in a while. People just shrug their shoulders. Meanwhile in Cincinnati, taxation is constantly discussed as the subrbanites cook up napalm in preparation for any sign of an increase. The Columbus residents are just happy that they don't live in Stryker anymore and have jobs.

Change the zoning so that all of the neighborhood business districts served by transit can come back to life. 

 

NIMBY's.  They think "commercial creep" in any form will end civilization as we know it. 

It seems like it's time that the State's big cities, esp the Big 3, unite to put pressure on the State to increase subsidy for transit operating expenses.  I don't know what the situation in Cincy is, but in Cleveland RTA's brass uses the excuse that, because it's in the red, it can't expend time or funds to plan for potential future expansion ... and by expansion, I mean rail expansion -- Cleveland RTA has shown success and a proclivity to expand BRT, especially when it comes at the expense of rail expansion proposals.

Nice blog post comparing Cincinnati subway stations with the Boston stations they were modeled after:

http://queencitydiscovery.blogspot.com/2017/07/what-couldve-been-cincinnati-subway-and.html#more

Cincinnati area forumers:

 

OKI (Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Regional Council of Governments) is doing a survey about transportation priorities in the region. Please take a few moments to leave your feedback and upvote the other comments you agree with.

 

https://poll.cityzenapp.us/1921

While driving on I-75 this morning I saw a waterworks crew bringing what appeared to be a replacement section of water main pipe off a truck and into the tunnel.  It was of course the 48" diameter but was probably only 3 feet long.  I have no idea how they were planning to get it to the spot where they need it.  There is an old rusted gantry crane in the tunnel that was used to assemble the pipe but they can only transfer pipe sections from the open tube to the tube with the pipe at the stations, where the gaps are wider. 

It's been 15 years since MetroMoves—the most recent ambitious regional transit plan—was rejected by Hamilton County voters.

 

Here's an article jmecklenborg[/member] wrote 5 years ago (for the 10th anniversary), in case you'd like to remind yourself of what Cincinnati could've had today if it passed.

Somebody did a new urban exploration video of the subway:

 

I laughed out loud when I saw this:

 

I'm pretty sure this was directed at me, personally.  I know a guy at Adriatico's who told me when he was living in Brighton that one night the hatch door opened and some guys he didn't know invited him down into the subway. I thought the story was way too far-fetched so I think he painted this to prove he was there without naming names!

 

 

But Cranley does not favor completing the subway.

 

“We don’t have any money for the subway. I don’t think that’s going anywhere,” Cranley said.

 

 

https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2018/02/14/cranley-appointee-could-face-major-opposition-at.html

 

I couldn't find a good thread to put this story in, but it is a "future rail plan" of sorts:

 

Passenger train linking Madeira, Loveland, Oakley? It's possible. Maybe even likely.

 

https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2018/03/22/passenger-train-linking-madeira-loveland-oakley-its-possible-maybe-even-likely/447666002/

 

The Cincinnati Railway Co. may institute passenger train service between Oakley, Madeira and Loveland on Friday and Saturday nights.

 

The company already operates the Cincinnati Dinner Train, which travels from its base in Bond Hill to the downtown Cincinnati riverfront and back every Saturday evening in March through December.

 

 

^That's pretty cool.

More exaggeraed reporting from Cincinnati.com on this one. There is the possibility of a handful of special excursions this summer. There is no talk about a regular excursion service. Details are still being worked out with the railroad ownership. Nothing has been publically announced, but you can check out a sneak preview of what is being planned on https://www.ohiorailexperience.com/. Please note that this schedule is not final and things can change.

This could be cool. But wish it would be transit instead of leisure tourism.

I saw this map on Reddit and thought it was worth a laugh. Someone made a pretend transit map connecting all the greater Cincinnati Taco Bells. It's amazing how well Taco bell locations match up with potential transit stations.

 

When do we begin construction?!  :P

If the orange line isn't called the Doritos Locos line, it will be a travesty of justice.

The NUMTOTs have gone too far.

The Bell better be funding that purple line themselves.

I just went to the Springfield-East Taco Bell 20 minutes ago.  Saw the #78 Metro driver walking around in Tri-County Mall, too. 

The NUMTOTs have gone too far.

 

what is a NUMTOT?

^

New Urbanist Memes for Transit-Oriented Teens

^ That's.....a....thing? Transit-Oriented Teens?! LOL so I guess this is me realizing I'm old and out of touch.

^ That's.....a....thing? Transit-Oriented Teens?! LOL so I guess this is me realizing I'm old and out of touch.

 

It's very much a thing (teens interested in transit and the lifestyle that it entails) but in general NUMTOT is a meme group at heart and most of it is nonsense themed to transit (such as Taco Bell transit maps). It's wonderfully entertaining though.

Nice.

I saw this map on Reddit and thought it was worth a laugh. Someone made a pretend transit map connecting all the greater Cincinnati Taco Bells. It's amazing how well Taco bell locations match up with potential transit stations.

 

 

On a serious note, how hard/reasonable would it be for some of the largest job providers in the area to pretty much underwrite the system for corporate sponsorships. For example UC & UC Health could have Busses or LRT painted their colors, P&G or Kroger could paint one in their colors, CVG could sponsor a line, etc.

 

I know it wont cure all the transit ills, but if you get the businesses who will be the largest benefactors to provide the money to get a better system started, and they can show the ROI and benefit to their company for doing so, maybe it could work. It would be like 3CDC tackling the transit system. Yes, there would be a very corporatized system but it is the tradeoff to have something that serves the region much better and gets people who need it too and from jobs in a more efficient manner.

Corporations in Cincinnati have shown zero interest in improving non-car transportation options in the city. All talk, no action.

^ Universities and hospitals could lead the way. Heck UC has over a billion dollar endowment, a Light Rail line connecting people to the Clifton job hub center would strongly be in their interest to help fund, and it is not like they haven't shown that they know how to raise such money. Same with Xavier to a lesser extent.

Corporations in Cincinnati have shown zero interest in improving non-car transportation options in the city. All talk, no action.

 

Even for the Regional Chamber, transit is a talking point rather than a true goal it seems.

^ Universities and hospitals could lead the way. Heck UC has over a billion dollar endowment, a Light Rail line connecting people to the Clifton job hub center would strongly be in their interest to help fund, and it is not like they haven't shown that they know how to raise such money. Same with Xavier to a lesser extent.

 

 

$1 billion doesn't buy much transit infrastructure.  And people shouldn't be so shocked by that statement given the fact that most commercial airliners built by Boeing and Airbus sell for $200-400 million.  But people just compare the price of large public works to a car or a house or something they're familiar with. 

 

To really make a change in how Cincinnati functions it's going to take at least $10 billion.  That's how much it would cost, at minimum, to build 20-30 miles of rail transit that includes grade separation from downtown north through uptown and an Ohio River bridge or tunnel.  A continuous 5-6 mile subway tunnel from Covington at about Pike St. north to Downtown, UC, Hospitals, then on the surface on the abandoned rail ROW to Xavier, then another subway 2~ mile subway under Montgomery Rd. in Norwood would be the spine for a network that would really change things. 

^ Who are the key providers in the area who could directly benefit from the transit (as more potential employees could use it) and have the heft to do something about it?

UC, Xavier, Childrens, UC Health, Christ Hosp, NIOSH, Kroger, P&G, 5/3, NKU, CVG, Citibank, City of Cincy, Covington, Newport, etc.

 

IF they are directly on the line, could these groups cobble together maybe 1/3 of the cost to get the ball moving on it. THen you can supplement from potential available grants and maybe then talk about a sales tax or something to plug the holes.

Kroger and Fifth Third are both directly served by the streetcar line and neither company's CEO so much as said a positive word about it.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

What would make sense from a sponsorship perspective is a tourist destination ala Findlay Market or the Zoo sponsoring a line.  Unfortunately these organizations don't have a fraction of the resources that a corporation would have, and they would not be in financial positions to sponsor.

 

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces.

 

And both could be rectified if the thing just had people on it. To get people on it, it needs to run better.

 

But the city has no interest in running it relatively well and SORTA is under the dubious assumption that if they maintain a distance from it, they'll avoid the negativity and draw goodwill for a levy (that they can't seem to ever put together).

 

SORTA should develop a new operating plan (tweaked hours, better frequency, and highlighting of key uses/connections with existing buses), but they won't.

 

They are having a two year anniversary party, though, and there's a coloring contest!

 

So what's the plan? It seems some of the most ardent supporters of the project have gone quiet or been overshadowed by those who's voices aren't the best for speaking on the issue. Are people worried that there's just no political will?

 

Where's Landsmann, PG, and especially Seelbach?

Detroit’s Qline and Florida’s BrightLine are the only completed examples, I believe. Texas is working toward a privately funded high speed rail also.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

What would make sense from a sponsorship perspective is a tourist destination ala Findlay Market or the Zoo sponsoring a line.  Unfortunately these organizations don't have a fraction of the resources that a corporation would have, and they would not be in financial positions to sponsor.

 

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

 

Places like Findlay Market are too small. Also, really P&G would not be a great fit because most of their employees would not likely use the public transportation to get to and from work.

 

You want places that have a lot of employees/customers/etc. coming there during the day. Where the average employee earns in the 60k or less range and would benefit from having public transportation nearby and accessible. It should serve the suburbs to bring people to the job centers. To me, hospitals, airports, universities,  Citi or Fidelity who have a large campus of employees.

People don't take buses because they don't go where people need them at the right times. If you make it convenient, people will use it. The companies that want it the most may be willing to kick in to pay for it, however, we have to offer them something more than just a thank you for donating, they need to get the sponsorship of the line or other benefits.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

What would make sense from a sponsorship perspective is a tourist destination ala Findlay Market or the Zoo sponsoring a line.  Unfortunately these organizations don't have a fraction of the resources that a corporation would have, and they would not be in financial positions to sponsor.

 

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

 

Also, really P&G would not be a great fit because most of their employees would not likely use the public transportation to get to and from work.

 

You want places that have a lot of employees/customers/etc. coming there during the day. Where the average employee earns in the 60k or less range and would benefit from having public transportation nearby and accessible. It should serve the suburbs to bring people to the job centers. To me, hospitals, airports, universities,  Citi or Fidelity who have a large campus of employees.

 

 

I don't think this is true at all. In Philadelphia, their regional rail system has 132,000 daily riders. Those riders have, on average, higher incomes and more education than the region as a whole. They tend to be highly-educated white collar workers. When Comcast built their second skyscraper next door to their main HQ they included an underground connection to the rail station because they know that their employees value that amenity. We're not talking about buses here, the demographics are completely different.

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

 

There are transit systems in other parts of the world that are privately funded. But the reason is because the same company that runs the transit also develops the land along the transit lines. So...basically like back in the day when American streetcar lines were privately owned.

 

In America virtually every form of transportation loses money so there is no reason for a private company to build and operate it. I think Florida's new HSR line might be an exception, as I believe it was built and is being operated by a private company. But I haven't looked into the details, so I don't know if they're actually getting subsidies from the state or feds and really operating more like a P3.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

I'm talking about before the streetcar opened. Any of the major corporations downtown could have said "this is going to be great for our city, increase the amount of residents and businesses in the urban core..." but none of them did, except for Cincinnati Bell. They should have supported the streetcar for the same reason they created 3CDC. If they want to attract top talent they need to have a thriving urban core and make sure there are quality urban living options for their employees.

UC/Kroger/P&G, etc. should at least look at making a BRT Line from the new MLK Innovation Center to Kroger and P&G.

 

They also would be smart to look to extend that out into Hyde Park / Oakley / Mt. Lookout and also Northside and the Rest of Clifton. Moving as Jake has mentioned before on MLK and down Jefferson and down Vine Street or Auburn Avenue.

 

Invest in relatively low cost (for P&G and Kroger) infrastructure and 4-6 buses to make it happen. Along the way invest in Infrastructure downtown to connect a combined stop with the Bell Connector.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

What would make sense from a sponsorship perspective is a tourist destination ala Findlay Market or the Zoo sponsoring a line.  Unfortunately these organizations don't have a fraction of the resources that a corporation would have, and they would not be in financial positions to sponsor.

 

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

 

Also, really P&G would not be a great fit because most of their employees would not likely use the public transportation to get to and from work.

 

You want places that have a lot of employees/customers/etc. coming there during the day. Where the average employee earns in the 60k or less range and would benefit from having public transportation nearby and accessible. It should serve the suburbs to bring people to the job centers. To me, hospitals, airports, universities,  Citi or Fidelity who have a large campus of employees.

 

 

I don't think this is true at all. In Philadelphia, their regional rail system has 132,000 daily riders. Those riders have, on average, higher incomes and more education than the region as a whole. They tend to be highly-educated white collar workers. When Comcast built their second skyscraper next door to their main HQ they included an underground connection to the rail station because they know that their employees value that amenity. We're not talking about buses here, the demographics are completely different.

 

Busses have to play a big part of the transportation in any system. Rail can only get close to so many people. Busses need to fill the gap. The key is a system that actually can get people too and from their place of employment efficiently both well to do or poor. If you serve the people who need transportation as their only option first, then the rest will follow.

The streetcar right now is seen as a 'loser' due to the low ridership and constant media hit pieces. I can understand why corporations wouldn't want to attach their name to it when it is still largely seen as a novelty rather than real transit. Due to its limited scope, and the limitations inherent in mixed traffic streetcars, I don't think most companies would view the streetcar as a viable commuting option for their employees, so the connection to sponsorship would be seen as tenuous.

 

What would make sense from a sponsorship perspective is a tourist destination ala Findlay Market or the Zoo sponsoring a line.  Unfortunately these organizations don't have a fraction of the resources that a corporation would have, and they would not be in financial positions to sponsor.

 

Just curious, are there any American examples of privately funded/sponsored mass transit? I don't mean back in the day when streetcar lines were privately owned and constructed by real estate companies, like what happened in Cleveland's Shaker Square, but a contemporary example. I can't think of anything off the top of my head.

 

Also, really P&G would not be a great fit because most of their employees would not likely use the public transportation to get to and from work.

 

You want places that have a lot of employees/customers/etc. coming there during the day. Where the average employee earns in the 60k or less range and would benefit from having public transportation nearby and accessible. It should serve the suburbs to bring people to the job centers. To me, hospitals, airports, universities,  Citi or Fidelity who have a large campus of employees.

 

 

I don't think this is true at all. In Philadelphia, their regional rail system has 132,000 daily riders. Those riders have, on average, higher incomes and more education than the region as a whole. They tend to be highly-educated white collar workers. When Comcast built their second skyscraper next door to their main HQ they included an underground connection to the rail station because they know that their employees value that amenity. We're not talking about buses here, the demographics are completely different.

 

Busses have to play a big part of the transportation in any system. Rail can only get close to so many people. Busses need to fill the gap. The key is a system that actually can get people too and from their place of employment efficiently both well to do or poor. If you serve the people who need transportation as their only option first, then the rest will follow.

 

Of course, I 100% agree buses have a big role to play, but the discussion was specifically about getting corporations to sponsor a rapid transit line.

And while rail can't get close to everyone, many can and do get close to rail. Others feed into rail on coordinated bus connections and dedicated bike infrastructure.