February 5, 201510 yr I've often thought that an L-shaped route which followed the current #2 bus alignment would work well, taking High to Downtown, and then going out Main to Capital University as an anchor on the other end. Main was historically much more of a commercial/mixed-use street than Broad was on the East side, and is already quite healthy and densifying in the Bexley area. That sounds like a great route, but it also seems like a pretty long route. The longer the better in my opinion, but I would think the longer a first phase is the harder it would be to sell.
February 5, 201510 yr I've often thought that an L-shaped route which followed the current #2 bus alignment would work well, taking High to Downtown, and then going out Main to Capital University as an anchor on the other end. Main was historically much more of a commercial/mixed-use street than Broad was on the East side, and is already quite healthy and densifying in the Bexley area. That sounds like a great route, but it also seems like a pretty long route. The longer the better in my opinion, but I would think the longer a first phase is the harder it would be to sell. ^ I dunno about that. A frequent criticism of Cincinnati's route was that it was too short. It wan't, really; it's about average for a first phase. But the opponents really worked that angle. Of course, when MetroMoves was on the Hamilton County ballot in 2002 -- sixty miles of LRT and streetcar -- the same opponents said it was too ambitious.
February 5, 201510 yr I've often thought that an L-shaped route which followed the current #2 bus alignment would work well, taking High to Downtown, and then going out Main to Capital University as an anchor on the other end. Main was historically much more of a commercial/mixed-use street than Broad was on the East side, and is already quite healthy and densifying in the Bexley area. That sounds like a great route, but it also seems like a pretty long route. The longer the better in my opinion, but I would think the longer a first phase is the harder it would be to sell. ^ I dunno about that. A frequent criticism of Cincinnati's route was that it was too short. It wan't, really; it's about average for a first phase. But the opponents really worked that angle. Of course, when MetroMoves was on the Hamilton County ballot in 2002 -- sixty miles of LRT and streetcar -- the same opponents said it was too ambitious. Yeah, I suppose there is a large group of streetcar opponents who will find something to criticize about any plan. The streetcar could print money but they would complain that track might damage their car's tires or something else completely made up.
February 6, 201510 yr I've often thought that an L-shaped route which followed the current #2 bus alignment would work well, taking High to Downtown, and then going out Main to Capital University as an anchor on the other end. Main was historically much more of a commercial/mixed-use street than Broad was on the East side, and is already quite healthy and densifying in the Bexley area. That sounds like a great route, but it also seems like a pretty long route. The longer the better in my opinion, but I would think the longer a first phase is the harder it would be to sell. ^ I dunno about that. A frequent criticism of Cincinnati's route was that it was too short. It wan't, really; it's about average for a first phase. But the opponents really worked that angle. Of course, when MetroMoves was on the Hamilton County ballot in 2002 -- sixty miles of LRT and streetcar -- the same opponents said it was too ambitious. Yeah, I suppose there is a large group of streetcar opponents who will find something to criticize about any plan. The streetcar could print money but they would complain that track might damage their car's tires or something else completely made up. ^ Whatever the plan is, they will always want a different plan.
March 9, 201510 yr I think the ideal rail transit system for American cities that don't currently have them is light rail that runs in mixed traffic in the urban core and dedicated ROW once it gets out into surrounding neighborhoods. And I wish we'd just call them "trams" like Europe instead of making a somewhat arbitrary distinction between "streetcars" and "light rail". A Seattle-style system (light rail that's completely grade separated & streetcars running in mixed traffic) is really nice as well, but prohibitively expensive in states like Ohio that refuse to invest in transit. Yes, building trams instead of two different systems seems like a good idea. But just have in mind, that unsufficient separation from other transit modes leads to problems like car accidents, congestions, lower reliability etc. of both modes. I can show you a map of tram network in Prague (I live there), which shows, where there is separated ROW for trams and where the trams ride in mixed traffic. In general, we have exactly what you've described. Mixed traffic in the center and separated ROWs in the outskirts - trams with separated ROW were primarily built after 1930. (see map below). But we're constantly trying to get rid of those red places. It's sometimes slow process and even in city with majority people travelling by mass transit there is a car lobby (they think they defend "freedom to drive anywhere by car" at the expense of lot of other people taking mass transit) , but we have got a lot of successes behind us in separating tram (and even bus lately) ROW and calming/diverting car traffic, where it's not possible to separate it. With separated ROW it's also much easier to make a priority for trams/buses at crossroads with lights. (We have 70% traffic lights with tram priority) But I know, you've got much different situation here (but I have to pinpoint, that Prague has almost the same population, as Columbus urban area), but even then I actually wish, that America had more inspiration from for example succesful French tram systems, which are newly built and are in fact really a combination of light rail and streetcars. They fulfill primary function of mass transit => to transport people between places, but they also bring important change to urban environment and spur development and regeneration. To do both purposes, they have to be separated from traffic on most of places, so that they are faster, than bus they replace. French actually think (and we in Prague too), that lowering number of lanes because of tram doesn't do any harm, because lot of people previously driving or going by bus will still go there but they'll take a tram, so no bussinesses will be harmed. I think, that it's not a disadvantage for High street in Columbus, that's it's already well developed. But streetcar/light rail/tram have to bring some new quallity, otherwise it's pointless to exchange mixed traffic buses for mixed traffic streetcars. From what I've seen, High street is wide enough almost everwhere to retain parking on both sides, one lane in each direction for cars and there still can be separated ROW for streetcar in the middle of the road. So no need to eradicate cars because of streetcar. But I really don't get, why you built all the highways crossing all Columbus, if you didn't want to calm traffic in densely populated places like High street a little bit - make it more human. Explanation of Prague tram network map: Dark green - separated ROW, Light green - mixed traffic without any problems - low car intensities, yellow - mixed traffic, where there are sometimes problems with parked cars and/or congestions from time to time, red - mixed traffic - there are often congestions severely innfluencing tram system reliability sorry if it's too offtopic :-)
March 18, 201510 yr More information, including a project schedule and details on upcoming public meetings, is available at www.columbus.gov/connectcolumbus. New Thoroughfare Plan Will Tackle Street Layout, Bike Lanes, Light Rail and More By Brent Warren, Columbus Underground March 14, 2015 - 10:50 am The City of Columbus is moving forward with their Multimodal Thoroughfare Plan, and they are hoping that you have some opinions to share about how you get around (or would like to get around) the city. The first of three “Vision and Goals” meetings is scheduled for the end of March and a website has been set up to start gathering input, but that’s just the beginning – a “Plan Van” will be making stops at festivals and neighborhoods all over the city starting this summer, and future meetings will look to the public to generate new ideas for transportation projects, and for help in evaluating those projects. The plan – which was originally referred to as a Complete Streets plan and is now being marketed under the name Connect Columbus – will classify all of the larger streets in the city, providing recommendations for how different types of streets should be laid out. The overall focus of the plan, though, will be on balancing the needs of drivers with those of cyclists, pedestrians, and transit users. Topics like the bus network, future light rail corridors or streetcar routes, and protected bike lanes are all on the table. “We’re at a crossroads,” said Rick Tilton, Assistant Director of the Department of Public Service. “Because of the changing culture in Columbus, and in light of how the city’s population is changing, we need to be smart about how we spend money ... we don’t want to be just a car city.” The timing of the process will line up with two other initiatives; COTA’s Next Generation campaign will be looking at the future of transit in the region, and the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission’s Metropolitan Transit Plan will be setting goals and priorities for the whole regional transportation network. The city will be working in conjunction with COTA and MORPC to ensure that the three plans complement each other. The Connect Columbus process is expected to last at least 18 months. MORE: http://www.columbusunderground.com/new-thoroughfare-plan-will-tackle-street-layout-bike-lanes-light-rail-and-more-bw1
March 30, 201510 yr From http://www.columbus.gov/ConnectColumbus/ Vision and Goals Meetings: A series of open houses, workshops and community events will be held, focusing on three themes: Vision and Goals; Generating New Project Ideas; and Evaluation of Projects. Residents will be asked to comment on projects, community goals and policies relating to public transit, driving, cycling and walking in Columbus. The schedule for the first meetings on the plan’s Vision and Goals include: Date: Tuesday, March 31, 2015 Christ Memorial Baptist Church 3330 East Livingston Avenue Time: 6pm to 8pm Date: Wednesday, April 1, 2015 Columbus Urban League 788 Mount Vernon Avenue Times: 10am-2pm and 6pm -8pm Date: Thursday, April 2, 2015 Downtown High School 364 S. Fourth Street Time: 6pm to 8pm
April 10, 201510 yr Interview: Jeffrey Tumlin on the Future of Transportation in Columbus By Brent Warren, Columbus Underground April 9, 2015 - 8:00 am Columbus Underground readers have likely noticed the name Nelson Nygaard popping up with some regularity in recent months. The transportation planning firm recently worked on the Short North Parking Study, and is currently taking the lead on two major transportation initiatives in Columbus – the city’s multimodal thoroughfare plan (Connect Columbus), and COTA’s upcoming NextGen project. CU recently spoke with Jeffrey Tumlin, Principal and Director of Strategy for Nelson Nygaard, in advance of his keynote speech at the Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission’s State of the Region luncheon. Tumlin touched on a number of subjects, including the nature of his firm’s work, the economic upside of bike lanes, and why he thinks Columbus is especially well-positioned to make big changes to its transportation network. MORE: http://www.columbusunderground.com/interview-jeffrey-tumlin-on-the-future-of-transportation-in-columbus-bw1
April 10, 201510 yr Interesting article. Lots of hedging (which makes perfect sense) in advance of any recommendations.
May 5, 201510 yr A voters guide for all mayoral and city council candidates running in today's primary election, prepared by the local transit advocacy group Transit Columbus: http://www.transitcolumbus.org/voter-guide/
May 5, 201510 yr Columbus is considering removing many of the buses from High Street. You know a great way to reduce the number of buses in an urban area? Replace them with trains that carry 4x as many people as a bus.
July 14, 20159 yr Columbus to study 2-mile light rail subway beneath High St. in Short North: http://www.columbusunderground.com/underground-light-rail-idea-presented-as-connect-columbus-initiative-continues-bw1
July 15, 20159 yr If it's a subway, how is it considered light rail? Wouldn't that be heavy rail? Maybe it's just a case of the author not knowing the terminology. Otherwise this is kind of a fairy tale. Cut and cover on high street? $1.1 billion? Glad people are dreaming though.
July 15, 20159 yr Light rail often operates in subways. See Pittsburgh, Buffalo, Boston Green Line, San Francisco Muni, Seattle, LA Blue and Gold lines, etc. Literally look at the weight of the rail and the cars. This Columbus subway would have to generate a ton of ridership to get a recommendation from the Federal Transit Administration. A surface route would probably get recommended. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 15, 20159 yr Gotcha. I know platform and train style often differs but I thought grade separation was the main difference between light and heavy.
July 15, 20159 yr Gotcha. I know platform and train style often differs but I thought grade separation was the main difference between light and heavy. Nope. Grade separation has nothing to do with it actually. There are Heavy Rail systems at grave and Light Rail system above and below grade.
July 15, 20159 yr Gotcha. I know platform and train style often differs but I thought grade separation was the main difference between light and heavy. Nope. Grade separation has nothing to do with it actually. There are Heavy Rail systems at grave and Light Rail system above and below grade. Actually, in many ways mu2010 is correct. Most heavy rail system are totally grade-separated from street traffic while LRTs are not. There are a (very) few exceptions, and those are all in Chicago, to my knowledge, where the outer ends of the HRT Brown and Purple lines actually drop down off their elevated structures and have protected street-grade crossings, which is highly unusual because the hazardous, electrified 3rd rail is down on the ground, close to pedestrians. But most light rail systems (which almost always have caternary wire (power) systems ... except Philly's Norristown Route 100, which is neither, or both, fish nor foul, which some consider a 3rd rail-using, high platform LRT... go figure!) have some or frequent grade crossings and even stop for traffic lights in places. Our (Shaker) Blue and Green lines are more typical LRTs because they are low-platform boarding and cross many streets although they have significant grade separation too.... Then therre are all-high platform boarding LRTs, like those in LA (which actually have many sections that ride in the street mingling with auto traffic like streetcars and St. Louis, where cars cross streets at protected crossings; or Pittsburgh where the LRT is both high and low platform boarding... So really, one of the most reliable distinctions between heavy and light rail systems is the grade separation aspect ... except in small parts of Chicago.
July 15, 20159 yr That's only a perception, not a distinguishing characteristic. The difference between light rail and heavy rail isn't based on one's opinion. There are specific definitions for each, and grade separation isn't one of them. ______ Heavy Rail is a mode of transit service (also called metro, subway, rapid transit, or rapid rail) operating on an electric railway with the capacity for a heavy volume of traffic. It is characterized by high speed and rapid acceleration passenger rail cars operating singly or in multi-car trains on fixed rails; separate rights-of-way from which all other vehicular and foot traffic are excluded; sophisticated signaling, and high platform loading. Light Rail is a mode of transit service (also called streetcar, tramway, or trolley) operating passenger rail cars singly (or in short, usually two-car or three-car, trains) on fixed rails in right-of-way that is often separated from other traffic for part or much of the way. Light rail vehicles are typically driven electrically with power being drawn from an overhead electric line via a trolley or a pantograph; driven by an operator on board the vehicle; and may have either high platform loading or low level boarding using steps. From: http://www.apta.com/resources/statistics/Pages/glossary.aspx _______ What is the Difference Between Light and Heavy Rail? •LRT vehicles are smaller and slower than subways, but travel faster and carry more passengers than streetcars or buses. •Subways are larger and longer – a subway train can hold up to 1500 passengers (in ‘crush’ conditions). An LRT can hold 255 people in each vehicle, and it can be linked into a train of two or more cars. •Like a subway, LRT vehicles can be boarded through all doors at ground level, making them wheelchair accessible and reducing loading time. •Subways get their power from an electrified rail below the train – this requires larger stations, more infrastructure and safety separation. •LRT can run aboveground at street level, like streetcars, however they operate in separate lanes, meaning they are not affected by car and truck traffic. •LRT can also run underground, like subways through tunnels to avoid conflicting with roadways. •LRT stops are planned to be about 500 metres apart, but closer than subway stops. From: http://designlightrail.com/lightrailcompare/ "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 25, 20159 yr Charlotte to Columbus: Investing in Transit Key to Growth By Brent Warren, Columbus Underground August 24, 2015 - 8:00 am Charlotte, North Carolina opened its first light rail line in November of 2007, a nine-mile stretch of rail extending south from downtown on which ridership soon soared. Work is now underway on extending that line another 12 miles to the north – connecting downtown to the University of North Carolina at Charlotte – while work on phase one of a downtown streetcar line just wrapped up this summer. Previous to those improvements, Charlotte also completed a large expansion of its bus network. Paving the way for all of this transit investment was the approval of a half-cent sales tax by Charlotte voters in 1998. That vote provided the funding to implement a wide-ranging vision – laid out in the 2025 Integrated Land Use and Transit Plan – that also includes additional light rail, streetcar, and Bus Rapid Transit lines that have yet to be built. Bob Morgan, President and CEO of the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce, was invited by the Central Ohio Transit Authority to share the story of how his city came to embrace transit as a key investment in its future. Morgan gave the keynote speech at at COTA’s annual luncheon, held on August 20th at the Hyatt Regency. Columbus Underground had a chance to sit down with Morgan after his speech to get his take on Charlotte’s journey; from a car-centric place where transit was seen as a frill best left for bigger cities, to a community that fully supports its trains – and the increased density and urbanity that comes with them. Q & A at http://www.columbusunderground.com/charlotte-to-columbus-investing-in-transit-key-to-growth-bw1
August 25, 20159 yr When Charlotte tells you to get on board with trains...it's time you get on board with trains. "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
August 25, 20159 yr Let me know when another media outlet in Central Ohio covers this story. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 26, 20159 yr When Charlotte tells you to get on board with trains...it's time you get on board with trains. I hear ya!
August 26, 20159 yr BTW - the Q & A at Columbus Underground with the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce CEO was interesting in how the business community led the push for light rail in Charlotte. (i.e. expanded transit = expanded growth) That's a message I've thought Central Ohio could get behind. But even with a successful transit system, it seems there will always be detractors. As evidenced by this exchange in the CU comments section at http://www.columbusunderground.com/charlotte-to-columbus-investing-in-transit-key-to-growth-bw1: Charlotte_Transplant - August 24, 2015 at 2:17 pm"I’m from Columbus and have lived in Charlotte going on 12 years. I will tell you that this project was immediately over budget (alot) before the first track was laid and it’s been a big burden on the Mecklenburg County tax payer. For starters, the ridership didn’t sore. What did sore was crime from gang members on the platforms, the tax burden and the budget for the trains. I know this is considered part of “modern” growth but this train has been a boondoggle from day one!" heresthecasey - August 24, 2015 at 2:39 pm"C’mon dude – *soar" Charlotte_Transplant - August 24, 2015 at 2:57 pm"No I meant “sore” as in a sore on the taxpayers arse! They weren’t honest about anything on the Charlotte rail system!"
August 26, 20159 yr Just because someone has an opinion doesn't mean he earned it. Yes, costs were above projections but so was ridership. It converted many skeptics and caused them to fight attempts to repeal transit funding and instead carry out transit expansion. There are rail and transit haters in every city, even in Boston, Portland, NYC, just like there are car haters everywhere too. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 26, 20159 yr When Charlotte tells you to get on board with trains...it's time you get on board with trains. Charlotte blows!
August 26, 20159 yr Not light-rail, but Charlotte rail transit.... Mass Transit @MassTransitmag 8m8 minutes ago NC: Charlotte's #Streetcar Ridership Tops Projection http://www.MassTransitmag.com/12107444 "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 26, 20159 yr Just because someone has an opinion doesn't mean he earned it. Yes, costs were above projections but so was ridership. It converted many skeptics and caused them to fight attempts to repeal transit funding and instead carry out transit expansion. There are rail and transit haters in every city, even in Boston, Portland, NYC, just like there are car haters everywhere too. Didn't mean to imply that "Charlotte Transplant" had earned his opinion or was even correct. Just thought his comical comment and reply over at CU would be entertaining to our UO readers.
September 29, 20159 yr X-posting this from the general COTA thread, COTA has an online survey available now, along with ideas/proposals for enhanced bus service and new rail/brt corridors. Fill it out and let them know what should be prioritized! (And don't forget to mention in the comments on each route if you have a preference for rail!) :wink: Survey and more information here: http://www.cota.com/nextgen Detailed map of possible rail or brt corridors: http://www.cota.com/COTA/media/PDF/NextGen/NG_Potential-HCT-Corridors-min.pdf Just for fun, my top 5 were: 1) N High St 2) Downtown-CMH-Easton 3) East Main 4) West Broad 5) Newark Connection
October 5, 20159 yr Also posted in the COTA thread, but relevant to this thread (and the previous post): COTA Looking for Help in Picking Best Corridors for Light Rail or Streetcars October 5, 2015 8:00 am There is no shortage of opinions in Columbus about whether rail should be a part of our future transit network, and the Central Ohio Transit Authority, with it’s ongoing NextGen process, is very methodically working toward an official recommendation on that front. However, before any decisions are made about what type of “premium transit” is best for Columbus — light rail, streetcar, bus rapid transit, or something else — COTA wants to be sure that there is agreement about where it should go. To that end, phase two of NextGen is underway, with a series of pubic meetings and a survey on COTA’s website asking for opinions about future investment — and for help in narrowing down a list of 26 potential “high capacity transit corridors.” Consultant Thomas Wittmann, Principal at Nelson Nygaard, explained the concept at a recent public meeting. “High capacity transit moves people more efficiently and cost-effectively than by bus,” he said, adding that such systems, “work best when they complement the underlying system, and when that system is strong.” MORE: http://www.columbusunderground.com/light-rail-or-streetcars-in-columbus-bw1
January 27, 20169 yr City Council president: It's time to talk about mass transit again By Tom Knox, Reporter - Columbus Business First Updated: January 27, 2016, 2:45pm EST The president of Columbus City Council wants to restart discussions to bring a mass-transit option to Central Ohio after years of stalled efforts. A new transportation system could be a major – albeit expensive – part of the solution in dealing with a population projected to grow by 500,000 by 2050. The conversation has failed to advance in the last decade although several have tried, including the Central Ohio Transit Agency, a mayoral task force and even an Ohio State University student group. Now City Council President Zach Klein says it's time to renew the conversation. MORE: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/01/27/city-council-president-its-time-to-talk-about-mass.html
June 25, 20168 yr Very unfortunate comments by the CEO of the Columbus chamber.... With Focus on New Technologies, is Push for Rail in Columbus Losing Steam? June 25, 2016 9:00 am Brent Warren Ask anyone involved in Columbus’ successful Smart City bid, and they will say that it was an extraordinary group effort – the region’s business, political and institutional leaders “stacked hands” to demonstrate a level of support for actually carrying out the high-tech ideas laid out in the application that was unmatched by any other city. Nothing demonstrated that support better than the $90 million in additional funds pledged to the effort by the Columbus Partnership, an organization made up of the CEO’s of the largest and most influential corporations in the region. It’s the type of unbridled support from the private sector that transit advocates have long complained has been missing whenever the topic of light rail or streetcars comes up in Columbus. (To put that $90 million figure in perspective, when former Mayor Michael Coleman proposed a streetcar ten years ago to link OSU with downtown, the estimated cost for the project was just over $100 million, and Cincinnati’s soon-to-open streetcar line will cost $102 million). MORE: http://www.columbusunderground.com/with-focus-on-new-technologies-is-push-for-rail-in-columbus-losing-steam-bw1#comment-141743 "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 14, 20168 yr Cross-posted from the 'Columbus: Smart Cities Grant' thread: Columbus will 'leap-frog' light rail as transportation option after Smart City Challenge win By Tom Knox, Reporter - Columbus Business First July 14, 2016, 7:33am EDT A wave of new transportation technology is coming to Columbus after the city won the federal Smart City Challenge. The grant money will usher in driverless cars but could end the idea of rail as a mass-transit option. “The City of Columbus plans to leap-frog fixed rail” by using new modes of transportation, Columbus says in the U.S. Department of Transportation application. The city last month won a $40 million grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, besting cities like San Francisco and Portland, Oregon (who already have rail options). Those cities are also larger and attract far more visitors to their cores. The fact that Columbus is without rail might actually have helped its case in the smart-city competition, as it is the test case for new transportation methods that could scale to similar cities. Columbus is the biggest city in the U.S. to not offer rail service – something like light rail, streetcars, monorail – as a mass transportation option. Occasionally city leaders, like City Council President Zach Klein, murmur about finally figuring out whether the city needs it or not. Questions surrounding who would pay for rail, how far it traverses and if rail is necessary for a spread-out city like Columbus typically dominate the discussion. The Smart City application appears to put any hopes of light rail to rest, at least for the next four years of the implementation phase. MORE: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/07/14/columbus-will-leap-frog-lightrail-as.html
July 14, 20168 yr ^ So the City is wondering who will pay for light rail. Fair enough. But the question remains, who is going to pay for the smart car transition?
July 14, 20168 yr Ugh. :roll: "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
July 14, 20168 yr ^^I agree with the skeptics in both articles: Columbus seems, in essence, whistling past the graveyard, just another rationalization to not build rail. Can't we get past this and have our cities pony up, like Cincinnati, and build rail? People riding in their individual automobiles will not make for walkable neighborhoods, regardless of the far-off fanciful technologies discussed. The talk of light rail allegedly being a 'technology of the past' is merely a self-fulfilling prophecy. To date, there has not been an urban transportation mode that is as effective in spawning Smart Growth: creating density, mix-use development, walkability and, overall, sustainability, not even the much ballyhooed BRT, although BRT is clearly a step up from regular buses. As one guy in the article noted, the type of development smart cities seek is TOD: transit oriented development, not DOT: Development oriented transit. Too many of our cities, especially Columbus, but Cleveland and Cincy, too, have way too much DOT ... it comes in the form of strip malls, big box stores and cull-de-sac, single use residential areas ... or in other words: sprawl.
July 14, 20168 yr We sure could use the kind of motivation seen in Cincinnati. Can't we get past this and have our cities pony up, like Cincinnati, and build rail? As a life long Cincinnatian, this may be the first time I've ever heard quotes like this. Sad, but I guess that's a good sign for the future. Hopefully Columbus will follow suit after Cincinnati's streetcar is running for a year or two. Good luck guys.
July 14, 20168 yr ^ Doubt the future's gonna turn out this way. Often when a city or state begins to talk seriously about rail, some magic gadget appears that would make higher-level public transportation unnecessary. In Cincinnati, we lost two years on the trail to developing the streetcar because a developer insisted we study PRT. Support for California High-Speed Rail is somewhat being undermined today by the prospect of the Hyper-Loop. Some people are saying that Uber and Lyft will destroy city transit systems except in the largest cities. Even without being put under the same microscope that light rail and modern streetcars are subjected to, these schemes seldom seem to pan out.
July 14, 20168 yr Cross-posted from the 'Columbus: Smart Cities Grant' thread: Columbus will 'leap-frog' light rail as transportation option after Smart City Challenge win By Tom Knox, Reporter - Columbus Business First July 14, 2016, 7:33am EDT A wave of new transportation technology is coming to Columbus after the city won the federal Smart City Challenge. The grant money will usher in driverless cars but could end the idea of rail as a mass-transit option. “The City of Columbus plans to leap-frog fixed rail” by using new modes of transportation, Columbus says in the U.S. Department of Transportation application. The city last month won a $40 million grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation, besting cities like San Francisco and Portland, Oregon (who already have rail options). Those cities are also larger and attract far more visitors to their cores. The fact that Columbus is without rail might actually have helped its case in the smart-city competition, as it is the test case for new transportation methods that could scale to similar cities. Columbus is the biggest city in the U.S. to not offer rail service – something like light rail, streetcars, monorail – as a mass transportation option. Occasionally city leaders, like City Council President Zach Klein, murmur about finally figuring out whether the city needs it or not. Questions surrounding who would pay for rail, how far it traverses and if rail is necessary for a spread-out city like Columbus typically dominate the discussion. The Smart City application appears to put any hopes of light rail to rest, at least for the next four years of the implementation phase. MORE: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/07/14/columbus-will-leap-frog-lightrail-as.html This just makes me so angry. These people are completely clueless and they will ensure that Columbus remains largely unwalkable and without the kind of transit alternatives that would make it less car dependent. Instead, they want to make sure that it is ONLY cars. I can't state enough how awful this is.
July 14, 20168 yr The focus on driverless cars cutting down on traffic congestion seems misplaced. They can bunch up closer and increase capacity, but only if you have a huge percentage of the cars on the road that are driverless or a dedicated or grade seperated ROW.
July 14, 20168 yr ^ Doubt the future's gonna turn out this way. Often when a city or state begins to talk seriously about rail, some magic gadget appears that would make higher-level public transportation unnecessary. In Cincinnati, we lost two years on the trail to developing the streetcar because a developer insisted we study PRT. Support for California High-Speed Rail is somewhat being undermined today by the prospect of the Hyper-Loop. Some people are saying that Uber and Lyft will destroy city transit systems except in the largest cities. Even without being put under the same microscope that light rail and modern streetcars are subjected to, these schemes seldom seem to pan out. We sure could use a YOU here. It's not you personally's job to do it here of course, but it was you and people like you that made the difference down there. We don't have anyone like that.
July 14, 20168 yr The focus on driverless cars cutting down on traffic congestion seems misplaced. They can bunch up closer and increase capacity, but only if you have a huge percentage of the cars on the road that are driverless or a dedicated or grade seperated ROW. And have more than one person in them.
July 14, 20168 yr ^ Doubt the future's gonna turn out this way. Often when a city or state begins to talk seriously about rail, some magic gadget appears that would make higher-level public transportation unnecessary. In Cincinnati, we lost two years on the trail to developing the streetcar because a developer insisted we study PRT. Support for California High-Speed Rail is somewhat being undermined today by the prospect of the Hyper-Loop. Some people are saying that Uber and Lyft will destroy city transit systems except in the largest cities. Even without being put under the same microscope that light rail and modern streetcars are subjected to, these schemes seldom seem to pan out. We sure could use a YOU here. It's not you personally's job to do it here of course, but it was you and people like you that made the difference down there. We don't have anyone like that. ^ I'd just keep your powder dry. The history of bringing rail back to America's cities is pretty much start-and-stop. When the current thinking peters out, eyes will turn to rail again, especially with one of the nation's best streetcar projects a 100 miles away. In that environment, when, like Winston Churchill said, "You can count on America to do the right thing -- after it has exhausted every other alternative," -- in that environment, your champion will probably step forward. Happens in every city, it seems.
July 14, 20168 yr The big questions, of course, are who will own the driverless cars (transit agencies? for-profit global conglomerates?), will they be subsidized by taxpayers, how much will they cost to ride, and will we be forced to ride in small cars with strangers? Will female riders be forced to ride with as many as 3 male strangers? Also, with regards to congestion, if driverless cars replace public transportation, then there will not only be more cars on the road because of all of the car trips saved by public transportation, but people will take many more frivolous trips. Also, the current system with Uber and Lyft charges riders after every ride, but a more insidious billing method would be to create a payroll deduction and then charge rides against that "voucher". If someone doesn't use up the value of what they put in, then they lose it.
July 14, 20168 yr The big questions, of course, are who will own the driverless cars (transit agencies? for-profit global conglomerates?), will they be subsidized by taxpayers, how much will they cost to ride, and will we be forced to ride in small cars with strangers? Will female riders be forced to ride with as many as 3 male strangers? The techies would probably say that a guy watching 12 monitors at one time in an office park 1500 miles away fed from cameras in the cars would suffice.
July 18, 20168 yr Transit Columbus starts petition urging city not to leave light rail behind A Columbus transit group has started a petition urging the city to include light rail and other mass transit in its future plans. Transit Columbus wants local leaders not to rely too much on driverless cars and other technologies in its Smart City Challenge bid. The city beat out six other cities, including Austin, Texas, and San Francisco, for the federal transportation grant. More below: http://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/news/2016/07/18/transit-columbus-starts-petition-urging-city-not.html "You don't just walk into a bar and mix it up by calling a girl fat" - buildingcincinnati speaking about new forumers
July 18, 20168 yr Looks to me like some "business leaders" hijacked this grant in order to divert city money to stuff they can make money off of. Also, don't discount the possibility that Uber is now actively lobbying against streetcars and light rail.
July 21, 20168 yr Looks to me like some "business leaders" hijacked this grant in order to divert city money to stuff they can make money off of. Also, don't discount the possibility that Uber is now actively lobbying against streetcars and light rail. What makes you think that about Uber? I agree that Columbus is just delaying the inevitable. It will elect to do LRT, once it becomes prohibitively expensive, after being left behind by Cincy, Cleveland, Indy, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. Generally Columbus is overly enthralled by auto-oriented infill. I think generally the city is comprised of decently walkable pockets, but they are all disconnected. There is a real opportunity to connect each of these pockets (strengthening weaker areas like between OSU and the Short North) with mass transit that acts as a "pedestrian-extender." High Street and US 23 alone have a dozen or so walkable nodes.
Create an account or sign in to comment