One other note.

 

The digital, former “estimated arrival time” screens now just continuously rotate with “streetcar arrives every 12-15 minutes.” Would be great if they announced that the line was closed/open. Living near a station, the operators seem inconsistent with the “hours of operation.”  So many times I’ve seen people waiting at a station only to have an operator pass by as “closing” time nears, or, stop at the station and announce over the loud speaker that “the connector is closed.”

 

 

Edited April 21, 20232 yr by Gordon Bombay

On 4/21/2023 at 7:02 PM, Gordon Bombay said:

One other note.

 

The digital, former “estimated arrival time” screens now just continuously rotate with “streetcar arrives every 12-15 minutes.” Would be great if they announced that the line was closed/open. Living near a station, the operators seem inconsistent with the “hours of operation.”  So many times I’ve seen people waiting at a station only to have an operator pass by as “closing” time nears, or, stop at the station and announce over the loud speaker that “the connector is closed.”

The city just applied for a grant from the FTA that should most, if not all, of these problems: 

 

Quote

ORDINANCE submitted by Sheryl M. M. Long, City Manager, on 3/29/2023, AUTHORIZING the City Manager to apply for grant resources in an amount up to $500,000 from the Federal Transit Administration under the Areas of Persistent Poverty Grant Program (ALN 20.505) for the purpose of providing resources for improvements and upgrades to streetcar technology, station information displays, and transit management software.

 

I wonder how much it would take to turn the streetcar lanes into bus/streetcar only lanes? I know the streetcar doesn't always ride the curb so it might not work but I think dedicated lanes would really improve service.

 

2 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I wonder how much it would take to turn the streetcar lanes into bus/streetcar only lanes? I know the streetcar doesn't always ride the curb so it might not work but I think dedicated lanes would really improve service.

 

Main Street north of 2nd seems like a no-brainer for this. The tracks run along the east sidewalk and 3rd and 4th streets are one way westbound so there's no need for right turn lanes. 5th Street is one way EB but there's already a dedicated right turn lane east of the lane the streetcar runs in, so you could maintain a streetcar only lane with a gap for access to the right turn lane, which along with priority signals could make the trip from 2nd to 6th much easier.

1 hour ago, dnymck said:

Main Street north of 2nd seems like a no-brainer for this. The tracks run along the east sidewalk and 3rd and 4th streets are one way westbound so there's no need for right turn lanes. 5th Street is one way EB but there's already a dedicated right turn lane east of the lane the streetcar runs in, so you could maintain a streetcar only lane with a gap for access to the right turn lane, which along with priority signals could make the trip from 2nd to 6th much easier.

 

The block between 2nd and 3rd has a streetcar only lane, and then there's a small section north of 5th. So really just need to add it between 3rd and 5th for this to happen.

Bizarre - our sister system in Kansas City appears to be doing everything right EXCEPT closing the station right next to Union Station, right next to the event.  I don't understand this, as the streetcars have to turn around at Union Station.  So these huge crowds are going to see empty streetcars pull up to the event and have to turn around with nobody on them.  

 

Here is the temporary southern terminus of the KC streetcar during the NFL Draft - as you can see, there is no way for the streetcars to reverse direction at this point without traveling all the way south to the event:

https://www.google.com/maps/search/kansas+city+union+station/@39.0904094,-94.5839093,101m/data=!3m1!1e3

 

 

On 4/23/2023 at 12:04 PM, Dev said:

The city just applied for a grant from the FTA that should most, if not all, of these problems: 

 

 

This is great news, thanks @Dev!

Huge ridership in Kansas City for the draft:

 

KC's extension is u/c and could not be used during the draft, so this is still the original system that opened around 2016. 

 

Unlike ours, both tracks travel on the same street throughout, with the exception of the northern turnaround, which encircles an area in a single-track configuration similar to the Blue Line in Long Beach, CA. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On 4/21/2023 at 6:57 PM, Gordon Bombay said:

Streetcar stations now have these QR codes for “arrival times.” The website loads about as fast as an Urban Ohio topic that’s trying to load a bunch of @KJP embedded tweets. 
 

When it does load, it takes you to this URL: https://bustracker.go-metro.com/hiwire?.a=iNextBusResults&StopId=2853781

 

Which is not mobile friendly, doesn’t show the line itself, and has the “scheduled” and “estimated” arrival times on the left. In fairness, it was accurate at least. 
 

The other option is to use the existing Transit app, which is great for regular users/frequent bus riders, but confusing for casual riders and first time users. Not to mention, takes time to download (and set up an account for) if you don’t already have it.

 

None of this would matter if the actual, digital “estimated arrival screens” at the stations themselves…

 

1) Were still in use

2) Ever worked properly in the first place

And still, those things wouldn’t have to be relied upon if the streetcar just operated on decent frequency and had signal optimization, etc. 

 

But hey, we’re only coming up on the 7th year of operation so maybe this city will get it right one day. 

This was a stopgap pilot project I came up with that had a budget of exactly $0.00. Had to rely entirely on pre-existing assets and free printing from Decal Impressions.

 

There are definite shortcomings, but again, budget was zero dollars. 

Edited May 2, 20232 yr by thomasbw
typo

On 4/26/2023 at 1:32 PM, dnymck said:

Main Street north of 2nd seems like a no-brainer for this. The tracks run along the east sidewalk and 3rd and 4th streets are one way westbound so there's no need for right turn lanes. 5th Street is one way EB but there's already a dedicated right turn lane east of the lane the streetcar runs in, so you could maintain a streetcar only lane with a gap for access to the right turn lane, which along with priority signals could make the trip from 2nd to 6th much easier.

Walnut from Central Parkway to 3rd as well. Would also double as BRT lanes. 

On 4/26/2023 at 11:15 AM, JaceTheAce41 said:

I wonder how much it would take to turn the streetcar lanes into bus/streetcar only lanes? I know the streetcar doesn't always ride the curb so it might not work but I think dedicated lanes would really improve service.

 

With Metro having announced their BRT routing, it seems like a no brainer. On Walnut, you essentially have to put the BRT lane on the streetcar tracks (Aronoff bump out prevents you from doing the far left lane and streetcar platforms prevent the far right). 

 

If they did a bus/transit only lane the entire length of Walnut, that would make a lot of sense. 

 

Edited May 2, 20232 yr by thomasbw
updated graphic, forgot to change Walnut south of liberty from BAT one side to BAT both sides

9 hours ago, thomasbw said:

This was a stopgap pilot project I came up with that had a budget of exactly $0.00. Had to rely entirely on pre-existing assets and free printing from Decal Impressions.

 

There are definite shortcomings, but again, budget was zero dollars. 

Totally understand that and truly appreciate the effort, but my point was more so that this thing is seven years in and still having issues similar to year one. Even with major improvements overall, it’s still frustrating to see the city continue to rely on things like “stopgap pilot projects” after all this time. 
 

Thankfully, it seems like a more permanent solution is on the way. 

Edited May 2, 20232 yr by Gordon Bombay

^agreed on both counts

First Saturday in June had ridership of 6,366. That's the highest ridership day since Blink. 

It kind of bothers me that city council isn't talking about expansion. 

7 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

It kind of bothers me that city council isn't talking about expansion. 

In the biennial budget, Over-The-Rhine Community Council, used one of their Community Budget Request submissions to ask for an extension to Mohawk:

 

Quote

Fund a feasibility study on the concept of extending the existing streetcar system northward on Elm Street, turning left on McMicken Avenue, continuing to at least Mohawk Place before reversing 
directions, and returning down Race Street to reconnect with the existing line. This will enable future extensions towards the West End, Camp Washington/Northside, and the westside of the city. This will use existing excess transformer capacity of the current system and minimize risks by using a relatively flat and short route. This will unlock economic development potential of the northern tip of OTR (and potentially further) while minimizing the investment needed for the next phase. Both the Over the Rhine Community Council and the Mohawk Neighborhood CDC are in support of studying this extension.

This request was denied by DOTE & DCED stating:
 

Quote

There is no funding available in the current budget for a streetcar expansion feasibility study. The cost of a study far exceeds the current resources available. Since the original feasibility study was completed over 10 years ago, a more comprehensive feasibility study would be needed. A new study should include a larger geography and account for changes that have occurred throughout the City since the original study was conducted.

This seems a tad disingenuous. Pay for a feasibility study out of one, or a combination of, the 3 TIF districts it currently runs through. They have a combined balance of over $25 million and to out-source it would cost like what, tens of thousands of dollars?

13 hours ago, Dev said:

This seems a tad disingenuous. Pay for a feasibility study out of one, or a combination of, the 3 TIF districts it currently runs through. They have a combined balance of over $25 million and to out-source it would cost like what, tens of thousands of dollars?

I saw this, yet in the operating budget, there are expenses of $85k and $52k to hire consultants for studies to redesign Paddock Road in Bond Hill and to look at the Northside Connector SUP. So maybe they just don't want to do it.

 

Also FWIW, every TIF expense has to be approved by City Council and any over $50k requires a Public Engagement session.

52 minutes ago, Dev said:

any over $50k requires a Public Engagement session.

 

Back in 2007 or '08, John Cranley voted to approve money to study the streetcar.  

 

Right now it's obvious that Pureval seeks higher office (or appointment) and doesn't want anything to happen that will require him to actually take a stand on something.  

19 minutes ago, Lazarus said:

Right now it's obvious that Pureval seeks higher office (or appointment) and doesn't want anything to happen that will require him to actually take a stand on something

That's probably true, but City Council has been leading the urbanist charge during this term, why can't they help push for a study?

6 minutes ago, 10albersa said:

That's probably true, but City Council has been leading the urbanist charge during this term, why can't they help push for a study?

 

 

It's an election year.  

April 23 Stats

https://www.fox19.com/2023/06/21/cincinnati-could-add-second-streetcar-loop-connecting-uptown-neighborhoods/

Every time I see how much better the streetcar is doing, I have a nice chuckle on Cranley's behalf. 

After reading that article, Liz Keating can kick rocks. Voters saved the streetcar twice, and most want it expanded. 

 

Potholes!

2 hours ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

After reading that article, Liz Keating can kick rocks. Voters saved the streetcar twice, and most want it expanded. 

 

Meh, she said she’s open to it if private backers can match the federal grants available.  I agree that UC and Uptown Consortium should have some skin in the game for an uptown extension.
 

The Mohawk extension should be much cheaper, but likely wouldn’t have major private backers.

On 6/7/2023 at 9:00 AM, 10albersa said:

That's probably true, but City Council has been leading the urbanist charge during this term, why can't they help push for a study?

 

On 6/7/2023 at 9:06 AM, Lazarus said:

 

 

It's an election year.  

 

14 hours ago, ucnum1 said:

https://www.fox19.com/2023/06/21/cincinnati-could-add-second-streetcar-loop-connecting-uptown-neighborhoods/

 

Good to see council has been working on getting a study funded in the shadows (until now).

Does anyone remember where the Duke line is under Vine st? (as in which lane it's under)

 

Conceivably, you could do BRT/Streetcar lanes that don't conflict with the power line

Caught a Reds game while I was in town yesterday, and the streetcar was standing room only throughout the part of the day I was in the area. As soon as the Reds fans filtered out of the area, the FC Cincinnati fans descended. 

 

And making it free was genius, not because the $1 matters, but because of the convenience. Makes it a no brainer to jump on if it is coming past while you are near a stop. The ticket machines were terribly slow. 

Edited June 22, 20231 yr by greenville2

56 minutes ago, thomasbw said:

Does anyone remember where the Duke line is under Vine st? (as in which lane it's under)

 

Conceivably, you could do BRT/Streetcar lanes that don't conflict with the power line

According to John Deatrick in a 2017 article "There is a way to deal with the Duke lines without moving them, Deatrick said. The city could use a dialectic membrane in the trench of the streetcar track. That would prevent stray current from reaching the tracks themselves and causing a safety issue. A similar system was used during the Fort Washington Way overhaul for bridges that went over that highway, he said."

46 minutes ago, ucgrady said:

According to John Deatrick in a 2017 article "There is a way to deal with the Duke lines without moving them, Deatrick said. The city could use a dialectic membrane in the trench of the streetcar track. That would prevent stray current from reaching the tracks themselves and causing a safety issue. A similar system was used during the Fort Washington Way overhaul for bridges that went over that highway, he said."

 

We really need leadership and studies to determine possible routes, costs, and funding sources. We need more tools at our disposal to fund expansion.

I'm curious what an uptown loop would look like. Wasn't one originally planned? 

23 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I'm curious what an uptown loop would look like. Wasn't one originally planned? 

Well, if we're going roughly off of the original uptown study, it'll look something like the below. (Up McMicken-McMillan-Calhoun and back) Link

Per the fox19 article, Green and Orange are ruled out.

 

This would align with what is pushed in the Fox19 article and what John Schneider's been pushing for.  Get the low hanging fruit by continuing up McMicken. The downside being you'll miss the Reading/MLK development area (or it would be a really long ride). From there you have 3 branch opportunities: Western Hills Viaduct, Northside, and Uptown.

They'd also be tantalizingly close to the unused subway tunnels under Central Pkwy as well. Although I don't know if there's really a utility to those in these route configurations.

 

Edited June 22, 20231 yr by 10albersa

that purple route would probably be a 25 minute ride to Findlay Market. I don't think it would get much use. You could argue it would have the greatest potential for redevelopment. But I would never take the route from Uptown to Downtown on that. It would be a 40 minute ride to the Banks.

The purple route does seem to be a bit out of the way. I'd advocate for a line going up Gilbert then looping somewhere near UC and back down Gilbert. A loop route is a bad idea if I'm being honest as it takes away some of the utility of the line. A linear route would be better.

The more I look at it, the more I like Highland/Auburn Ave route. It unlocks some of the huge potential of Mt Auburn, goes by Christ Hospital and a lot of housing, to UC/Kroger/Short Vine and then could go to MLK and branch from there. Too bad Sycamore is too steep because that's so direct.

 

I think Calhoun and McMillan are too congested. 

 

There should also be a route through Mohawk to the West End or Camp or whatever but McMicken to Uptown doesn't make sense as others have said.

The advantage of the purple route is how close it comes to lots of UC housing. The new Deacon development, and all the houses lining Flora, Victor, Chickasaw, etc. That's a population that seems like it would really use the line, and reduce the need for students to all have cars and find parking in the neighborhood.

13 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

The purple route does seem to be a bit out of the way. I'd advocate for a line going up Gilbert then looping somewhere near UC and back down Gilbert. A loop route is a bad idea if I'm being honest as it takes away some of the utility of the line. A linear route would be better.

I agree that it's a long ride.  If the goal is to link downtown to uptown in the quickest way possible, it has to be Vine. But SORTA is about to have their BRT routes fully designed in a few months.  Whatever solution for Vine St there would have to have the streetcar in mind and I doubt it will when it releases. So if we do a Vine St extension, streetcar construction could be blocking that BRT route for a year or so.

 

7 minutes ago, oudd said:

The advantage of the purple route is how close it comes to lots of UC housing. The new Deacon development, and all the houses lining Flora, Victor, Chickasaw, etc. That's a population that seems like it would really use the line, and reduce the need for students to all have cars and find parking in the neighborhood.

This is one of the few silver linings to the purple line.

Edited June 22, 20231 yr by 10albersa

Here we go again. 

 

There are huge drawbacks to all of the routes on existing streets.  Way slower and limited (or even zero) potential for new development. 

 

Hopefully the strategy is that UC & the hospitals plan to pay for a streetcar line connecting their two campuses, and that the city is tapped to build a tunnel (or tunnels) to connect the existing line with what they propose. 

 

Vine St. is a bad idea.  It's not possible for it to work well.  The circuitous path to/from the existing tracks, then through the 5-way intersection, is going to take 5+ minutes to go a very short distance.  The top is similarly bad - traffic is often pseudo-gridlocked on ordinary days and becomes completely gridlocked during large events. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I agree that the best expansion route is a Mt. Auburn tunnel. The route was studied 20+ years ago:

 

A Business Courier article from 1999: (https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/1999/02/22/story5.html)

 

Relevant passages from 2001 study (source: https://www.oki.org/studies-plans/i-71-corridor-deis/):

 

Note that John says a Christ Hospital alignment might have a lower cost than the 2001 route.

 

 

My speculation is that this tunnel could also be built to support the Metro BRT lines. Pittsburgh has a tunnel that supports both streetcars and busses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Washington_Transit_Tunnel

 

The tunnels could look something like this:

It's true that a single tunnel could be used for both, however, a streetcar-only tunnel wouldn't need exhaust fans for diesel fumes. 

 

Which raises the specter of using battery-powered buses and battery-powered streetcars, which I don't like, because it would mean we'd have two separate types of streetcars. 

 

In England, they use the phrase "captive" to describe trains that are able to travel on sections of a shared line but not on various branches. 

 

The existing streetcars would be "captive" to the existing line and the ones with the battery capability (likely they'd raise and lower a pantograph at either end of the battery section) would be captive to the new section. 

That's a good point about diesel busses requiring extra infrastructure for ventilation. Why would including busses in the tunnel require battery-powered streetcars though? Couldn't electric catenaries still be constructed? 

22 minutes ago, carnevalem said:

I agree that the best expansion route is a Mt. Auburn tunnel. The route was studied 20+ years ago:

 

A Business Courier article from 1999: (https://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/1999/02/22/story5.html)

 

Relevant passages from 2001 study (source: https://www.oki.org/studies-plans/i-71-corridor-deis/):

 

Note that John says a Christ Hospital alignment might have a lower cost than the 2001 route.

 

 

My speculation is that this tunnel could also be built to support the Metro BRT lines. Pittsburgh has a tunnel that supports both streetcars and busses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mount_Washington_Transit_Tunnel

 

The tunnels could look something like this:

 

If you're going to this level of expense then it needs to be built as a full-on Light Rail Transit line. We can keep calling it the "streetcar" just like San Diego calls its LRT system the "trolley". Also, if you're building tunnels, just go ahead and connect to the existing subway tunnels.

Overhead wire for BRT. Problem solved. 

3 minutes ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

 

If you're going to this level of expense then it needs to be built as a full-on Light Rail Transit line. We can keep calling it the "streetcar" just like San Diego calls its LRT system the "trolley". Also, if you're building tunnels, just go ahead and connect to the existing subway tunnels.

 

The streetcar would essentially become a hybrid system - with street running (streetcar) downtown and grade separation (light rail) between Liberty and at least Calhoun. The topography north of Calhoun is pretty weird, but it might be possible to use a combination of tunnels and elevated rail along Jefferson to remain grade separated to MLK and maybe beyond. At that point, the streetcar would be faster than driving between Uptown and OTR.

I looked a little deeper into the Pittsburgh tunnel. According to Pittsburgh Regional Transit, it is the "only tunnel in the United States shared by bus and rail services." 3 light rail lines (Blue, Red, and Silver, which is their entire light rail system) and 10 bus lines use the tunnel.

 

The tunnel has electric catenary streetcars and diesel busses, as can be seen in this video:

 

This fan site says ventilation was added in 1975 to support busses, previously it was streetcar only.

https://www.brooklineconnection.com/history/Trolleys/TransitTunnel.html#14

 

The electric and ventilation systems were just updated for $14.1 million.

https://www.rideprt.org/siteassets/inside-the-pa/media-center/press-releases/2022/11102022mtwash.pdf

26 minutes ago, carnevalem said:

I looked a little deeper into the Pittsburgh tunnel. According to Pittsburgh Regional Transit, it is the "only tunnel in the United States shared by bus and rail services." 3 light rail lines (Blue, Red, and Silver, which is their entire light rail system) and 10 bus lines use the tunnel.

 

 

 

The circa-1990 Seattle Transit Tunnel was bus-only for about 20 years (overhead wire), then ran buses and light rail mixed until the light rail system was expanded northward, after which the buses were kicked out of the tunnel.  

 

The Boston T just scrapped its electric trolleybuses that operated in the Harvard Square Tunnel and replaced them with diesel-electric hybrids:

https://www.wgbh.org/news/local-news/2022/03/11/cambridge-trackless-trolleys-to-retire-this-weekend-as-the-technology-nears-extinction

 

The article does note that the Boston Silverline BRT, which has its own dedicated tunnel, still operates via overhead wire in the tunnel.  But it's unlikely that such a strategy will be repeated. 

 

We've all seen how easily our streetcar is able to climb the Main St. hill between 3rd and 4th.  I'm skeptical that a battery-powered streetcar has as much power for climbing.  Any tunnel connecting OTR and UC is going to have at least a 3% grade.  There are also many short, steep grades near UC and Corryville, depending on the route, so my sense is that it's wisest to retain overhead wire for the entire streetcar system. 

 

 

 

 

I wonder if there's a way to incorporate an S-curve to get up the hill. In SLC the TRAX red line runs on 400S then takes an S-curve to get up the hill to the University which moves the line a block to the south. I've seen 6 car trains run on that line on gamedays. Any streetcar expansion should have dedicated lanes that are possibly shared with BRT.

It would be nice if a line could take the underground route through Mt Auburn with shallow underground station at the current Uptown Rentals site on Short Vine between Charlton and Daniels and then surface north of the college of medicine with a stop at Vine and Shields to accommodate the Medical Campus and the Zoo. It would avoid all major traffic points, and a stop along Short Vine instead of Jefferson would probably get more development since it's an easy walk to campus, but not directly adjacent.