^All that Nky has to do is put up the necessary right-of-way.  There most likely wouldn't be any stops (maybe 1) in Nky, it would essential be a line from CVG to Downtown...from there you could use the potential streetcar system and/or a quick cab ride or TANK trip across the river if you are heading to one of the Nky river cities.  Most likely though you are heading to Downtown Cincinnati.

 

I would also say that with the growing economic clout of Nky that these types of things aren't too far fetched.  Corporex, IRS, Toyota, Fidelity, Columbia Sussex, etc...These are companies that you can't simply ignore; Nky is starting to get some serious clout...and that can really be a great thing for the City/State of Cincinnati.

The airport is actually much farther from downtown Cincinnati than it seems, any line reaching it would be about 10 miles and so quite a large investment.  The one interesting possibility I can think of is sharing trackage with a Lawrenceburg commuter line on the north side of the river with a rail-only bridge near Anderson Ferry.  Such a line would only need two miles of dedicated trackage although it would involve not only a bridge but a difficult climb up to the Airport.  Running a maximum 4 trains per hour per direction, the bridge could be single-tracked but the climb would probably have to be double-tracked in order to allow operating flexibility.  Extensions south toward the Turfway Park area could happen and the overall distance would be roughly the same as the I-75 alignment, however the airport itself is 2x2 miles and a tunnel of at least 2,000ft. would be needed to get out from underneath the airport to those suburbs.  Time-wise the Ohio River alignment has an advantage since there would be very few stops, maybe Anderson Ferry Rd., Delhi, and Lower Price Hill so travel time to downtown would stay under 30 minutes.  And it would be very scenic and impressive to visitors!     

 

However the problem raised by such a shared-trackage configuration is that vehicles on the airport spur would have to be able to sustain a crash (the primary reason why light rail needs dedicated track separate from streetcars and commuter rail) with whatever commuter equipment being used on the Lawrenceburg commuter line.  Between that and the bizarre Milford-Xavier line, we could be setting ourselves up for a very motley fleet of vehicles.  I'll mention it again, if the state government would wake up, we could be setting up statewide standards so that new transit systems around the state could go in together on orders for vehicles, spare parts, staff training, etc.     

 

 

So with the eastern corridor project, I am confused on what is being built. Will both the freeway and rail be built? As much as I hate to say it, build the freeway and relocate the rail plan for downtown to the north.  The northern suburbs will continue to out pace the east side and also has existing rail lines that could be looked at.  Also, what is the cost difference of using diesel commuter trains vs. electric light rail trains?

The Oasis Line is a stalking horse for a bulked-up Interstate-ready bridge over the Little Miami River. My guess is, the bridge will someday get built, but the Oasis Line rail probably never will be built.

 

The order of things ought to be: built the rail line from Downtown to UC to Xavier to, say, Terrace Park, never crossing the Little Miami. Then and only then - if traffic is still a problem - think about building the freeway.

 

Last night, the leader of the Eastern Corridor Project was telling me that rising gas prices -- he says they are going to $6-8 per gallon -- will make the Oasis Line really vital someday. And I responded, "Really? If that's the case, why are you fueling it with petroleum?" He was speechless.

 

Electrification of rail lines is not particularly expensive in the scheme of things, maybe $1-2 million per mile. Many rail lines around the world are now being electrified.

 

The Oasis Line is a stalking horse for a bulked-up Interstate-ready bridge over the Little Miami River. My guess is, the bridge will someday get built, but the Oasis Line rail probably never will be built.

 

I have heard this before too...The rail and bike portions of the Eastern Corridor project are simply there to try to appease the many environmentalists that are livid about this proposal.  Not only is it a glorified highway project, but the rail component uses diesel fuel and bridges for both rail and highway will have to cross the Little Miami River.  Talk to someone from the Sierra Club and hear what they have to say about traversing the Little Miami...especially with the polluting train and automobiles.

 

The river is a natural gem, and is in remarkably good shape.  This plan trounces all over it, with little regard for anything aside from building another roadway connection.

 

My thoughts are that if you want to build a road project, sell it as one.  Don't dress it up like some great multi-modal plan that it isn't.  Not to mention the other components are a complete waste of money (as we have addressed already).  Go ahead and build a road out through Milford, don't scare people away from rail transit with this shoddy plan...but maybe that is there goal. :|

Precisely.

As far as the EC roadway bridge, I contend that we build that one and REMOVE the Existing Newtown Road Bridge. Net no new bridges over the river

Another part to the environmental impacts threatening the Little Miami with this project is the construction.  While you would net zero new bridges with that idea, the amount of construction equipment and disruption caused would surely hurt the natural beauty/setting of the Little Miami River.

And you know, the really funny part of this is, there's a perfectly good railroad bridge over the Little Miami just below the bluffs of Mariemont. Right now, from what I understand, it mainly carries transmission parts between the Ford plants in Batavia and Sharonville. The former will close soon, and so it's probably available someday soon -- at least for daytime use. So there's really no really to build a bulked-up bridge that carries rail and cars and trucks. When you bring this up to the Eastern Corridor planners, they respond, "Yeah, we know."

>lly great guy (he now runs Dayton's system) figured out a way to serve both Florence and the airport on the same alignment by entering the airport through the golf course thats, what?, I guess, SE of the airport property. It was maybe a mile or so longer and you did have to tunnel under one of the runways, but everyone was kind of intrigued by it. But then the 2002 vote in Ohio happened, and it never received any more advanced planning, officially at least.

 

I can't see a golf course anywhere near the aiport on the google aerial images.  It's possible it was there in the 90's but got sold off.  Anyway the good news is that these airport tunnels tend to be the cheapest per-foot tunnel there are.  Construction of the Minneapolis airport light rail tunnel apparently went smoothly.  However when there is only one station beyond such a tunnel, no matter how comparatively cheap, the cost-benefit is low. 

 

>The Oasis Line is a 10 mph line right now over most of its length. All you have there is ROW. There's no signaling to meet passenger standards, no park and rides, no stations, no shops and yards, and the viability of some structures are in doubt. Some sections flood, and so they have to be elevated. Trust me, if Todd Portune could get the price down to $100 million, he'd do it. By the way, I think the $400+ million was in 2004 dollars and not adjusted for the year of expenditure like we've done for the streetcar.

 

Are there any plans to run intercity rail on the Oasis Line?  To me this is the only justification for what sounds like a full-scale reconstruction of the line but that doesn't make any sense since the Transit Center can already be reached via the tracks that used to run where Longworth Hall's parking lot is now.  In other words intercity rail from Columbus or points east travels about the same distance coming down the B&O tracks and entering the transit center through the west as it would traveling the Oasis line and entering the transit center through the east. 

 

Whatever needs to be rebuilt on the Oasis line could be done much more cheaply if streetcar or light rail equipment was used, and as I mentioned a few months ago on this thread if there are only two trains per hour per direction they could get away with some single-track sections.  But still the Wasson Rd. alignment makes much more sense.  I took some pictures of it in the winter that I'll put up soon. 

 

 

Jake, you're making too much sense. Accordingly, you are disqualified for any kind of government work.

The Oasis Line is a 10 mph line right now over most of its length

 

I commute along eastern/Columbia out to milford and have to say this rail line is a joke, it's not needed.  Make it a rails to trails and call it a day. 

The Oasis Line is a 10 mph line right now over most of its length

 

I commute along eastern/Columbia out to milford and have to say this rail line is a joke, it's not needed.  Make it a rails to trails and call it a day. 

 

Write letters to The Enquirer and neighborhood weeklies.

Anybody know who wrote this? They have obviously done their homework:

http://connectourdots.wordpress.com/2007/07/10/eastern-corridor-terrible-idea-2/

 

I was wondering the same thing

 

I commute along eastern/Columbia out to milford and have to say this rail line is a joke, it's not needed.  Make it a rails to trails and call it a day.

 

In all honesty, that is really probably the best use for that rail line...but in the mean time they are taking up rail ROW's left and right where they could actually be useful.

Here are some shots of the Wasson Rd. line I took back in January:

 

At Paxton:

 

Marburg overpass looking west:

 

The Marburg Ave. overpass, looks like this could be double-tracked easily:

 

The Erie Ave. overpass, obviously would have to be rebuilt for double-tracking:

 

Descent down through Ault Park:

 

A bridge in Ault Park (didn't know this was here until I walked the line):

 

Same bridge:

 

Large bridge over Red Bank Rd., there's another over U.S. 50 just out of sight (didn't attempt to walk across this thing with the snow on it).  Also the tracks visible here head up to the B&O line in Norwood and interchange with the Wasson Rd. line about two miles east of here:

 

Obviously there are some significant double-tracking issues surrounding use of this line.  There are a total of four single-track railroad bridges (two pictured) between the Little Miami and Hyde Park, all of which are in the space of about one mile.  Perhaps initial service could get away with single-tracking in this section.   

 

 

Nice.

By the way, I wonder how the cost of adding four single-track bridges across these short valleys compares to the cost of a bridge that has to be elevated above the flood plain across the entire Little Miami River Valley.

Double tracking isn't really necessary. You would need siding for trains to idle on while one blazed by, but that is sufficient until demand warrants double-tracking. In Baltimore, one line was single-tracked with siding for many years after opening, and was just recently expanded into a double-track setup after there was much congestion.

^This is good to know.  I think it is important that when we build any public transit we do so with the intention that it will be used heavily in the future.  Jake, do you have any pictures of the Wasson line from Edwards on through Xavier?

 

I think the Oasis up the river onto the Wasson line is a pretty good ROW for a light rail line.  Of course, we'll have to re-route the potheads and mountain bikers who use that bridge in Ault Park.

Nice photos Jake.

>nder how the cost of adding four single-track bridges across these short valleys compares to the cost of a bridge that has to be elevated above the flood plain across the entire Little Miami River Valley.

 

I realized looking back on this that I forgot another single-track bridge, the bridge over I-71.  On the aerial photos you can see another one in a neighborhood crossing a residential side street so I guess there are 6 single track bridges between the Little Miami and Xavier.  The CL&N overpass over Victory Parkway is a double-track bridge, leftover from when the line served BASF and several industries right around Xavier.  However the CL&N I-71 bridge is single-track as is the tunnel near Bethesda Hospital (on the opposite side of I-71) and the underpass beneath McMillan St.  There would also be a problematic at-grade section near Blair Ave. because several businesses have overtaken the ROW with their parking lots. 

 

As baffling as the Milford>Xavier line is, extending it to MLK with a transfer to buses or a streetcar line is still a bit clumsy especially since the CL&N line switches to the east side of I-71 just north of MLK and buses would have to wind from the line's terminus up onto MLK.  And having a dedicated bus that makes that shuttle run every day all day is expensive, negating some of the cost benefit for rail, especially since it would take more than one bus to move a full train of passengers.  An extension west down MLK to the medical center and UC would attract some ridership, but by that time it's so close to downtown it turns into a situation nearly as frustrating as the original subway stopping just north of the business district. 

 

I've got some more photos but it's not complete, I don't have the section between Montgomery Rd. and Madison Ave.

 

Of course, we'll have to re-route the potheads and mountain bikers who use that bridge in Ault Park.

 

I think an approaching train would do the trick all by itself!

The meeting materials from the July 9th Oasis Riverfront Rail Transit Meeting have been posted online:

 

Background

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/RR%20Public%20Meeting%20-%20Station%201%20-%20Background.pdf

 

Alternatives

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/RR%20Public%20Meeting%20-%20Station%202%20-%20Alternatives.pdf

 

Evaluation Summary

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/RR%20Public%20Meeting%20-%20Station%203%20-%20Evaluation%20Summary.pdf

 

Next Steps

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/RR%20Public%20Meeting%20-%20Station%204%20-%20Next%20Steps.pdf

 

Handout

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/Riverfront%20Rail%20Public%20Meeting%20Handout%207-9-07.pdf

 

Comment Sheet

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/dist8/planning/pdfs/Riverfront%20Rail%20Public%20Meeting%20Comment%20Sheet%207-9-07.pdf

 

Um, in evaluation summary, it mentions One River Plaza as a property that needs to be displaced.  Since it isn't built, does the developer make changes to accommodate the rail line, or does the rail line move?

 

Overall, I am disappointed in the length of the line (1.4 miles), but I do like the look of the trains.

i just have a bad feeling that this will be a huge flop and will turn people off to transit for the future

For fun I drew out an idea I have for getting to Mt. Adams, retracing part of the single-track line that used to travel between the incline and the Art Museum on Ida St., then crossed Eden Park Dr. on a pretty crazy little stone bridge which was probably demolished around 1950.  One of the buses, I believe it might be the #1, still traces this route and turns around at Rookwood Pottery.   

 

 

This line would take Mt. Adams-bound people through Broadway Commons and then pick up some riders on weekdays from the various offices at Gilbert & Eden Park Dr.  Connecting with a downtown line to the riverfront, the halfway point on this line would be roughly right around Liberty St. meaning the line could be single-tracked uphill from there assuming just two streetcars operated on it although a passing siding or two would be wise north of that point.  Also the line would probably get away with terminating at the Playhouse at the Park and shorten the out-and-back single track portion, reducing the likelihood of a vehicle getting stranded by the traffic congestion that clogs that area on the weekends.   

 

Also, here's a ridiculous alternative for the Oasis line, a 4 mile tunnel crossing beneath the Ohio River twice:

I think Cincinnatians have long given too much credence to geographic explanations for the city's decline especially in the late 19th century. However, it is clear that it is much more expensive to build a rail system in a city with hills than it would be in a flat city, especially those laid out with wide boulevards. I actually think the crazy two tunnel plan makes a heck of lot more sense than snaking it along the river and it would actually make a worthwhile project. But there isn't enough tax dollars in the world that will build something like that outside of LA.

 

 

^Well the big advantage of those type of bored tunnels is that the trains can travel very fast through them and typically at much shallower grades resulting in much less vehicle wear as compared to surface running through hilly terrain.  The LA red line has a 2~ mile bored tunnel under the Hollywood Hills where the trains apparently hit 70mph.  I'd be surprised if any vehicles traveling on a rebuilt Oasis line could exceed 45mph and it certainly wouldn't average that with stops.  And of course the real long-term cost advantage of big up-front capital expendetitures is that by increasing speed, at some point an entire train or even two fewer are needed to carry the same number of people meaning a huge cost savings over the 100-200 year lifespan of bored tunnels.  As is to run just one streetcar, LRV, or subway train 16 hours a day requires two full-time drivers, a pair of pt weekend drivers, and one or two more pt people to cover those people while on breaks each day.  Obviously people float around on their schedules but inevitably some people are just sitting around the breakroom for large amounts of time every day. 

 

Also it's not being well-publicized but apparently there is 1.5 miles of light rail subway with two stations under construction in Los Angeles as we speak. 

 

That proposal is ridiculous, because you'll never see anyone tunnel under the Ohio River.  It's a big river and all, but not wide enough to warrant the costs of a tunnel.  A bridge is a much more likely alternative.

>That proposal is ridiculous, because you'll never see anyone tunnel under the Ohio River.  It's a big river and all, but not wide enough to warrant the costs of a tunnel.  A bridge is a much more likely alternative.

 

 

Actually a transit tunnel is not so far-fetched...the Suspension Bridge and the IRS combine to form a broad area where no bridge can be built, which is why light rail proposals have headed west to a new bridge adjacent to the Clay Wade Bailey bridge.  The problem is that this alignment involves several thousand feet of street running on 2nd & 3rd St. and then it touches down in Covington a bit west of the action.  But with the TANK buses apparently wearing at the Suspension Bridge, at some point a change will be needed, and a light rail tunnel with a stop near the NK transit center under the big parking garage could tunnel under the Ohio River directly across to downtown Cincinnati without marring the sight lines of the Suspension Bridge.  The only big problem with a tunnel heading directly between the TANK bus terminal and the Government Square terminal is that there probably no room for a station on the Cincinnati riverfront south of FWW.     

 

 

The only big problem with a tunnel heading directly between the TANK bus terminal and the Government Square terminal is that there probably no room for a station on the Cincinnati riverfront south of FWW.

 

That would definately seem to be a problem. However, if we have streetcars serving that area south of FWW, then people could use the connection at Gov Square to get there. Even walking, it isn't that far.

Dixie Terminal?  Not south of FWW but so tempting, with possible entrances on both 4th and 3rd Streets.

This is a little off of this particular discussion point but...

 

Why aren't the developers of the Oasis Line looking to create a better route?  We have already mentioned various alternatives (to the one proposed) that are better to serve Downtown to Milford.  But why not extend the line west and connect:

 

Western Suburbs - Downtown - Eastern Suburbs

 

That would seem to make some sense and offer some more value to the potential line.  Delhi and the Western Suburbs are very inaccessible right now, and would seem to benefit as equally as residents to the east.

>That proposal is ridiculous, because you'll never see anyone tunnel under the Ohio River.  It's a big river and all, but not wide enough to warrant the costs of a tunnel.  A bridge is a much more likely alternative.

 

 

I remembered that there is in fact already a major tunnel under the Ohio River, it is near Coney Island carrying water from the weird castle-looking structure on the Kentucky side under the river to the Cincinnati Waterworks.  It was built in the 1880's or 1890's by hand.  Back in the good old days they would get 500 guys fresh off the boat from Ireland, hand them pick axes, and go at it until they got it finished, with 3 or 4 guys dying per week from accidents.  This tunnel has something like a 12 foot diameter and is lined with bricks, obviously there are no photos of it because it's filled with water.  There are also a number of other major hand-dug water tunnels in the city, one leading from the Eden Park reservoir to downtown Cincinnati and I believe another one out by the waterworks.     

 

But a new bridge between the Clay Wade Bailey and the Suspension Bridge is never going to happen unless the IRS picks up and leaves.  There was a proposal for a Race St. bridge in the 90's and it was reportedly shot down by the IRS and its security concerns. 

 

The one significant physical barrier for a tunnel under the river is actually the piles supporting the trench walls of Fort Washington Way and the center median piles for the as of yet unbuilt decking.  Presumably these go down 20 or 30 feet beneath the level of the roadway and so a tunnel would either have to be dug in the bedrock beneath the piles or a "bridge" would have to be built so that a tunnel could travel a few feet beneath the expressway.  The big disadvantage of the deep tunnel is that a station near Government Square would be quite deep because of the hill between 3rd and 4th St. and mean the subway would have to rise at a relatively steep grade to meet with the old subway at Central Parkway or to surface.  In the 600-800 feet between the piles on the south side of 3rd St. and where the Government Square station platforms would be built there would be space for the line to rise about 15 feet.  That means the platforms would be at least 50 feet below the surface.  With a mezzanine 15~ feet above the platforms the overall depth of the station would be broken into two escalators so probably wouldn't seem too deep.  There definitely are a lot of stations around the country that are deeper than that.     

 

Another alternative using a bridge next to the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge would be to have the line surface between 3rd & 4th and then travel elevated above the Fort Washington Way median (and obviously above Vine, Race, and Elm) west to the new bridge.  This way new buildings above FWW could hide the line a bit.  I've always thought street running on 2nd & 3rd was a really bad idea, especially during gridlock after major events.             

 

 

The Clermont County Transportation Improvement District study:

 

Cincinnati-Portsmouth Rail Line Evaluation

http://www.tid.clermontcountyohio.gov/CPLRailLineEvaluationReport.pdf

 

(Not sure if this is the right thread to post this in, feel free to move)

PREDICTION: This is setting the table for a "finding" that the new multi-modal, freeway-ready bridge over the Little Miami at Newtown must now also accomodate freight rail; and furthermore, that the the Norfolk Southern property (a part of which is the Wasson Line) must now be preserved for freight, thus closing off the only viable alignment for rapid transit in the Eastern Corridor.

 

Watch.

The whole Eastern Corridor Plan is shaddy...and I really can't believe that it has gotten this far.

Is anything going on with the Eastern Corridor project?  The newest press release on the site is from 2004.

It mostly died with the failure of the MetroMoves plan, though it lives on in the bridge over the Little Miami River.

A diesel light rail line recently opened in California.  I always wondered what diesel LRV's looked like, and it's sort-of been proposed for the Oasis line, so here's a photo:

 

Also, in response to the 18 month-old posts on this thread, the Loveland Bike Trail has been extended through Terrace Park for about a year now.  It leaves the Little Miami ROW at the Newtown bridge, crosses the river on its own new bridge, and is planned to extend to Lunken Airport well south of the river.  This means the Little Miami ROW is still technically available through Merriemont and east to Newtown Rd., although it's unclear how it could be used.   

Eastern Corridor project gives commuters options

BY STEVE KEMME | [email protected]

 

 

The agency overseeing a proposed long-term expansion of bus, rail, bicycle and highway transportation along the eastern corridor of Hamilton County into Clermont County has authorized studies to be conducted that will reduce the number of route alternatives.

 

The Hamilton County Transportation Improvement District (TID) agreed this week to allow the county to negotiate contracts for these studies with ENRAN, the project consultant.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080521/NEWS01/805210345/1056/COL02

I find it funny that no one had the forsight to see how gas prices were going to be and that the price of gas would FAR outweigh the tax increases proposed for the eastern corridor. Driving just really isnt an option for alot of people anymore. I quit my job in Fairfield, sold my car and walk to work now (I HATE DRIVING), but let me tell you, it was a bitch to find a job in the central city. While avoiding the TONS of far out jobs on bus lines with a bunch of transfers and without reliability or even no bus service in the area at all. On an extreme personal note, getting rid of my car was one of the most freeing experiences I have had.

Fairfield is terrible, it has virtually no bus service.  In fact I don't believe there's any bus service to Hamilton and Butler County has absolutely zero bus service outside of Middletown's meager 4 or 5 buses.  And ironically if you want to ride any of Metro's exurban "job connection" expresses (Blue Ash, Union Center, etc.), the best place to live is downtown since that's where all of them originate (at ridiculously early hours too, btw).  It's basically impossible to ride most of them if you don't live downtown, AND you have to work regular hours.  The bus portion of the Metro Moves plan would have greatly expanded suburb > suburb mass transit.   

 

The larger problem is still the stigma that is attached to buses and alternative commutes such as bicycles.  When your boss comes right out and says riding the bus is bad for your image and future with the company (as happened to me awhile back), there's a major cultural problem.  Meanwhile at one of the places I used to work at,one of the managers was ridiculed regularly by the boys in the warehouse for driving a small car and then a hybrid...now everyone's mad because he's commuting for less than they are as if he's somehow plotted this whole high gas price think himself.   

does anybody have news on this/ its possibly my favorite cincinnati project and info is sparse only occuring every six months or so always about  "studies to further the planning"  :cry: I want digging darnit :evil:

I haven't heard much, and it almost seems like the website has been left for dead - http://www.easterncorridor.org/

 

But just for fun, here is the most recent plan I could find:

^ Not going to happen.

What's not going to happen?  The whole Eastern Corridor project?

^ The diesel-powered commuter rail along Cincinnati's riverfront won't be built. The numbers simply aren't there -- not even close. The Wasson Line connecting downtown, uptown, Xavier and Hyde Park and Oakley and on the Milford has a chance.

 

The new highway bridge over the Little Miami is probably a goner. Federal money for bridges -- what little there is -- will be first be going to replace existing facilities that are structurally deficient, next to replace ones like the Brent Spence that have few structural problems but are obsolete and then, and only then, to major new projects. I suspect a new Eastern Corridor bridge would be far down on that list.

 

I'm guessing that within ten years we'll see an electric streetcar along the Ohio River from The Banks to Lunken -- there linking to intercity rail to Columbus and Cleveland.

John, I've heard you mention that approach before, I wonder if jmeck might map that out.

I remember from working in eastgate while living downtown for a few months that almost all traffic coming and going from 471 eventually meets up in the eastgate/milford area. it wasn't uncommon for an entire group of cars to ride close all the way there or back almost every day. I always got the impression that this project was to address this and give people an alternative to sitting in the traffic jam that occurs on the big mac bridge at peak times. shoot, I'd have taken a train instead of putting up with that headache. and the cincinnati portsmouth rail study found that while a cinti-portsmouth line wasnt useful the numbers did infact support a need in the cincinnati metro area. if I have to go with numbers I'm going with the dept. of transportations as most reliable. the eastern corridor study found the same thing after all. so why are they still talking and not acting? my bets on money. under fundeing of rail initiatives strikes again.  :shoot: