anyone if there is an abandoned subway thread? 

thomasbw, that whole story was very positvie and made it sound like its happening.

^crossed fingers^

thomasbw, that whole story was very positvie and made it sound like its happening.

^crossed fingers^

 

 

I watched it and thought the same thing ... overall pretty positive. I didn't understand why they didn't show vid feed of modern streetcars instead of old-school trollies though.

Has anyone here shot WLWT an e-mail (or a phone call) to get those guys to stop showing ridiculous file photos or video of old trolleys?  This has got to be the fifth or sixth time that I've heard local media painting them to be a throwback model.

 

Aside from that, I am glad that the issue is getting positive news coverage now.  I would like the approach of those viewer polls to be tweaked though, so as to get a more educated response.

Here's a link for anyone else that missed it last night:

 

http://www.wlwt.com/video/16590970/index.html

Has anyone here shot WLWT an e-mail (or a phone call) to get those guys to stop showing ridiculous file photos or video of old trolleys?  This has got to be the fifth or sixth time that I've heard local media painting them to be a throwback model.

 

Aside from that, I am glad that the issue is getting positive news coverage now.  I would like the approach of those viewer polls to be tweaked though, so as to get a more educated response.

 

What old trolleys??

 

The video, which appears to be stock video (at 26 seconds) of the Tampa Street car line.  At 26 seconds its at the convention center toward the end its in Ybor city.

I was basing it off the previous post.  Old trolley footage has been used for modern streetcar stories in local media many times before. 

 

The link to this story hadn't been posted yet.

Letter to the editor in today's Enquirer:

 

The time is right to bring light rail to Cincinnati

 

I have to disagree with the letter writer's rebuttal on light rail in Cincinnati ("Disagrees with light rail argument," June 10). Here are my arguments for light rail:

 

The cities that already have light rail are increasing service due to demand because of gas prices.

 

Property compared to those cities that have already built light rail is relatively cheap here, making this the best time to acquire property to do so.

 

With a sluggish job market, building the infrastructure for light rail will create many jobs in the area.

 

If Cincinnati wants to compete for businesses against other cities, light rail is an absolute necessity.

 

When will the residents of this region decide that if they want to make a future for area, they are going to have to be willing move forward?

 

John Ashley

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080613/EDIT0202/806130363/1022/EDIT

LOL!    TaDa!!

 

 

Gas prices accelerate need for Cincinnati, region to rethink mass transit

 

http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2008/06/16/story2.html?b=1213588800^1650345

God, I love the picture they chose to use.  It's an article about the area's need for a better mass transit system from buses to light rail, and the bus in their picture has an ad on it that says "JOB + DOWN PAYMENT = CAR".  That's freaking hilarious.

How ironic is that?    I had to wipe my monitor off of the MD, I had been drinking.

From what I could read, I was pleased with Mallory and Qualls' views.

God, I love the picture they chose to use.  It's an article about the area's need for a better mass transit system from buses to light rail, and the bus in their picture has an ad on it that says "JOB + DOWN PAYMENT = CAR".  That's freaking hilarious.

 

LOL I hate that jingle.

It's just pathetic that an area as populous and dense as ours doesn't have LRT yet ... unacceptable.

^ All four Cincinnati-area TV stations have had video of Portland's modern streetcars for at least a month.

 

Channel 9 uses it.

It's just pathetic that an area as populous and dense as ours doesn't have LRT yet ... unacceptable.

 

I totally agree.  I've always said that $5 gas would be the tipping point, but I'm really hoping that $4 gas will be enough.

It's just pathetic that an area as populous and dense as ours doesn't have LRT yet ... unacceptable.

 

I totally agree. I've always said that $5 gas would be the tipping point, but I'm really hoping that $4 gas will be enough.

 

Jimmy, sadly I don't even think that $5 would make or break the deal. Like the majority on here, I struggle with wanting gas prices to increase (especially since I recently purchased a hybrid ;) )

I don't necessarily want gas prices to increase, but I believe they're going to whether we like it or not.  I'm just hoping that Cincy can get out in front of this now.  We've already wasted too much time.

1050 days until streetcars are operational in Cincinnati

It's just pathetic that an area as populous and dense as ours doesn't have LRT yet ... unacceptable.

 

I totally agree.  I've always said that $5 gas would be the tipping point, but I'm really hoping that $4 gas will be enough.

 

Jimmy, sadly I don't even think that $5 would make or break the deal. Like the majority on here, I struggle with wanting gas prices to increase (especially since I recently purchased a hybrid ;) )

 

Yeah but I hate how once prices go back down, people get more comfortable and policymakers become apathetic about long term solutions. People think in relative terms,unfortunately. So if gas prices are 4 dollars per gallon and they drop to 3.60, people think "wow, great, gas has gone down! Maybe I should keep my low mpg SUV!" My mom's friend is a journalist who writes mostly political stuff and he was telling me when he first graduated in the late 70s people got too comfortable after the gas shortage. I guess we can expect the same thing to happen after this wave but it seems like we ARE looking for more long term solutions than we did back then.

 

Question for the older folks on here: Were cities considering streetcar proposals during the 70s gas shortage era?

 

Kinda scary though because he did say they were looking to develop electric cars back then. We all know how that came to fruition!

    "Were cities considering streetcar proposals during the 70's gas shortage era?"

 

    Cincinnati considered exclusive guideway transit in the 1970's. I have a really neat study on it, which incidently, I salvaged out of a garbage can. They recommended, among other things, using the C&O railraod right of way to connect downtown to the West Side - at a time when the C&O was still operating! They also recomended using the subway. There were three branches of light rail proposed: downtown to Covington, downtown to Cheviot, and downtown to Norwood. The Norwood line would have used the subway to Hopple Street, then run in the street up MLK Drive past UC, picking up the old CL&N right of way to Norwood.

 

    There were some pretty extensive opinion surveys as to whether people preferred above ground, at grade, or below grade vehicles, a traditional look or a futuristic look, and things like that.

 

  The study also included a healthy bus component.

 

    Alas, it was never followed, and my copy was found in a garbage can! Not only has the freight traffic on the C&O been abandoned, but the entire right-of-way has been abandoned! (There are some remnants left.) The U.C. area has been redeveloped beyond anyone's dreams in 1976, and Over-the-Rhine had nearly emptied out before the recent renewed interest.

 

    So, do you wonder why people are cynical about Cincinnati not being able to get things done?

 

    The study was labeled "Exclusive Guideway Transit, Element of the Long Range OKI Transportation Plan", 1976. It is 276 pages long. It has some maps, but many, many charts of projected ridership, cost estimates, and so on. Again, I salvaged my copy from a garbage can!

 

 

 

1050 days until streetcars are operational in Cincinnati

There should be a countdown somewhere, maybe on the Cincinnati Streetcar site.

That abandonment (and sell off to developers) of the C&O line through the westside was the biggest rail blunder in the region.  It could have served such a benefit to transportation from Westwood, P-hill, Green, etc.

1050 days until streetcars are operational in Cincinnati

There should be a countdown somewhere, maybe on the Cincinnati Streetcar site.

at the 1000 day mark there will be

1050 days until streetcars are operational in Cincinnati

There should be a countdown somewhere, maybe on the Cincinnati Streetcar site.

at the 1000 day mark there will be

Sweet.

^You might be able to get Newport's Millenium Tower digital clock...it's still on the side of the building but hasn't been getting much use...

I like that idea!      A countdown clock on Fountain Square.

Hi - I thought the city council voted to approve street cars already.  Was that just a symbolic move?  The WLWT video made it sound like they still don't have the money.

 

Bring back the subway, baby! :)

 

They still DON'T have the money.  City Council voted to approve streetcars, but that doesn't mean the money exists for construction.  Any project like this requires approval from the city.  Council gave the go-ahead for the city manager to find private funding sources.  That's the reason for the wait.

 

Please read earlier posts to gain insight on the issue.

 

Oh, and the subway will continue to exist as urban caverns.  Don't hold your breath.

So what is your take on the Regional Transportation Act.

Is the city already thinking about how to best tie in Metro and the streetcar?

Or is this discussed in another thread?

You're asking me?

Anybody. I'm throwing it out there wondering what it all means.

Oh, and the subway will continue to exist as urban caverns.  Don't hold your breath.

 

Maybe not.  Councilman Bortz has been quoted (in either the Enquire or the Business Courier) as a proponent of using those tunnels in a future light rail plan.  I think it was in an article regarding what is to be done with them because they can't just exist on their own.  The city has to spend money to either maintain them or fill them in.

I think they said it would cost $115 or $119 million to get them up and operable (that doesn't include the trains). As gas prices continue to rise this number sounds smaller and smaller

Well, I was referring to the foreseeable future.  Pardon.  Plus, even if we do get light rail, I see it as being an extension of the streetcar system.  Most of the subway tunnels exist near downtown, which will already be served by streetcar service.  Using the old subway tunnels would cost an exorbitant sum of money, and I would see it as redundant and not very cost-effective.  Of course my opinion may change in a decade or two.

 

 

^ Yeah, but the city already has to pay to maintain those tunnels.  I'll try to dig up the exact figures, but I seem to remember thinking that the cost of maintaining or filling in the tunnels wasn't that much cheaper than fixing them up for use, plus you don't get anything out of those options.  Of course, that assumes that we'd have a light rail system, which is the ultimate flaw of this argument.  Still, with $4 gas...

Who decides whether the tunnel are to be filled and sealed anyway?  Perhaps it's just been a dead issue lately with the promise of a better tomorrow.  I'm fine with that too, and I hope they can use them for something transit-oriented (rather than utility caverns for wi-fi and water.  I'm just wondering if they *should* fill them in already, and think about digging tunnels at a later time, when light rail *is* a reality and there's a need for it. 

 

The existing station platforms are relatively short by today's standards.  As with any transit system, the location of stations is dependent on density and the areas that would be best served.  Would the station locations chosen in the 1920's still benefit us the same way, or would we deliberately create TOD around these existing sites?  Who knows.

Who decides whether the tunnel are to be filled and sealed anyway? Perhaps it's just been a dead issue lately with the promise of a better tomorrow. I'm fine with that too, and I hope they can use them for something transit-oriented (rather than utility caverns for wi-fi and water. I'm just wondering if they *should* fill them in already, and think about digging tunnels at a later time, when light rail *is* a reality and there's a need for it.

 

It's generally cheaper to maintain the tunnels as is than to fill them in.  There's a massive water main in part of the tunnels that City needs to have access to as well.  My understanding is that the 2.2 miles of subway tunnel under Central Parkway is in essence, a 2.2 mile bridge, and is maintained as such.

The existing station platforms are relatively short by today's standards.  As with any transit system, the location of stations is dependent on density and the areas that would be best served.  Would the station locations chosen in the 1920's still benefit us the same way, or would we deliberately create TOD around these existing sites?  Who knows.

 

I'm not sure if they'd actually use the platforms.  It's possible that they're just viewing the tunnels as right-of-way, bypassing the platforms altogether, as a way to get some trains through town quickly and without destroying existing structures.  Tough to say with no light rail plan on the books. 

Okay, here's the article we were referring to.  It's a little old and it's been in this thread before, but for the purposes of the current discussion:

 

Report: Keep city's tunnels intact

BY GREGORY KORTE | [email protected]

E-mail | Print | digg us! | del.icio.us!

 

Cincinnati should maintain the subway tunnels it abandoned 80 years ago – if only because it would cost much more to fill them in, according to city engineers.

 

The engineers’ study released today is the most comprehensive analysis of the subway in decades, and was supposed to answer some long-term questions about the ill-fated project’s future.

 

The study said it would cost about $100.5 million to make the tunnels useable for modern transit cars. Filling in the tunnels would cost about $19.6 million.

 

 

 

Either way, the city would have to spend another $13.5 million to relocate a 52-inch water main placed in the southbound tunnel in 1959 – a project so big it could require a region-wide water rate increase.

 

For now, city engineers recommend maintaining the tunnels at a cost of about $2.6 million over the next five years.

 

“We can’t just continue to pour money into these,” said Martha Kelly, a principal engineer for Cincinnati. “The subway is nearing the end of its 100-year design life. So we do need to make a decision on the future of rapid transit.”

 

The subway’s twin tunnels extend 2.2 miles along Central Parkway from Walnut Street to a point north of the Western Hills viaduct. The exit holes are still visible to motorists from I-75 south.

 

The tunnels are made of 100 concrete sections that were cast in place when the subway was built in the 1920s. Those sections are still in fair shape, but some of the joints between them have deteriorated.

 

“It didn’t go anywhere, but it was built well,” said Councilman Chris Bortz, chairman of the Economic Development Committee, which received the report.

The report recommends replacing 10 joints at a cost of $3 million.

 

That work requires excavating the tunnel – not unlike doing basement work to a house, said Richard Szekeresh, the city’s acting principal engineer.

 

Over the decades, the abandoned subway has become a touchstone of Cincinnati mythology, inspiring ghost stories, folk songs, schemes and dreams.

 

Dozens of plans – all unsuccessful – have been drawn up to turn the tunnels into a night club, a winery, an underground shopping mall and a parking garage.

 

The study left open a glimmer of hope for the tunnels, which could be used as part of a light rail line that would follow I-75 up the Mill Creek Valley.

 

For many years, it was assumed the Plum Street bend wouldn’t allow trains to make the turn as the subway cars leave downtown.

 

Not so, said the report.

 

But there are significant challenges to making the tunnels work.

 

There are no tracks or utilities, and new electrical, signal and ventilation systems would have to be designed. Emergency walkways would have to be added. Three new stations – at Race Street, Liberty Street and Brighton Corner – would have to be built, at a cost of $4.5 million each.

 

The 33-year-old pedestrian bridge linking WCET and Music Hall would have to be removed, because its pier footer is blocking the southbound tunnel.

 

The $114 million cost doesn’t include the subway cars themselves – nor the maintenance yard and control center that would have to be a part of any larger light rail plan.

 

But it would give the city a significant head start over building the tunnels from scratch: The report estimated the replacement value of the tunnels at $50.5 million.

That’s important because the federal government could consider part of that as part of the city’s matching funds, if the region ever decided to revisit the light rail issue.

 

As of now, light rail is not part of the region’s long-term transportation plan. It was formally scrapped after Hamilton County voters voted against a sales tax to help fund an ambitious 60-mile, $2.6 billion system.

 

The city report, titled “Cincinnati Subway Conversion Study,” didn’t take a position on the much larger question about whether the region needs a mass transit system. It recommended more study about whether it’s feasible to connect the subway tunnels to the riverfront via Walnut Street, or along Reading Road out to the I-71 corridor.

 

It’s also unclear how the subway would fit in with a proposed $102 million streetcar system linking the riverfront to Over-the-Rhine.

 

Although the $2.6 million in subway repairs isn’t budgeted – and will have to come from money already allocated for street repairs, housing and other needs – Bortz said it was a “no brainer” to protect the city’s investment.

 

“It’s certainly a cautionary tale,” said Bortz, a Charterite who is also a champion of the streetcar plan. “Here we go again with these incredible assets that are lying fallow. “We keep recognizing its potential, and maybe we’re getting closer to grabbing that potential.”

That's a great article.  Thanks so much for that.  I'm guessing that was written last year, based on its streetcar system cost estimation?

Sorry.  I thought it had a date on it.  The article is from 12/08/07. 

 

My take on it is that $20 million to fill in the tunnels is a complete waste of money.  Yes, $100 million is expensive, but at least you get a return on your investment.  The real trick is getting light rail on the drawing board.  My favorite part of this scenario is that it would remove the abandoned subway system from the top of the list of "Cincinnati embarrassments" that critics routinely cite, possibly even lending credence to the idea that Cincy is reinventing itself and capitalizing on opportunities that it missed in the past.

If i read this correctly the city could possibly use the $50.5 million of the value of the tunnels for our investment and have the feds match that. that gives us $101 million so we are looking at what about $30 million to have an opperable subway system? Obviously i know its not as easy as that. We would have to come up with design and cost proposals get it on the transit agenda and get it approved by the feds, but doesnt that seem like something we should pursue?

Well, who knows what the cost of the actual light rail system would be.  I believe you're correct about the match, though.  But those tracks have to go somewhere after they leave the tunnel, and that's where the high cost is.  But yes, I definitely think it's something we should pursue.

If i read this correctly the city could possibly use the $50.5 million of the value of the tunnels for our investment and have the feds match that. that gives us $101 million so we are looking at what about $30 million to have an opperable subway system? Obviously i know its not as easy as that. We would have to come up with design and cost proposals get it on the transit agenda and get it approved by the feds, but doesnt that seem like something we should pursue?

 

Are you sure about that $30 million tag?  I don't think you could do much of anything in terms of transit for $30 million.  I was thinking more like $3 billion.

I thought the feds closed the loophole that allowed localities to "donate" old infrastructure to a transit project and count that as a local match.  That's what St. Louis did when it contributed a bridge to its light rail project, which is why the terminus was one stop on the far side of the river.  My understanding is that the feds look skeptically today at local participation that doesn't involve green money.

 

Here's the problem with the subway tunnels:

 

* You wouldn't use them for the Central Valley LRT (I-75) to, say, Tri-County. It's more direct to use the Northeast Corridor (I-71) line to Xavier and branch north and a little west from there to the Mill Creek Valley. The old Idlewild railyard -- love the name -- at Xavier could also serve the Eastern Corridor along the Wasson Line.

 

* So that leaves the tunnels to be used only by the Western Corridor aliong I-74 to Green Township via, say, Northside. Looking at the votes from 2002, I really wonder how soon Green Township is going to want that service.

 

So I'm not for filling them in. I just don't see a use for them anytime soon. Plus, I think transit is usually more city-friendly when it runs at the surface. But times change. We'll see.

This is probably a stupid question but I'll ask our rail experts anyway. I was at Xavier for an interview a couple weeks ago and noticed some rail lines that were abandoned crossing Dana Ave (I think). Are these just old industrial spurs or ROW saved for LRT?

^Yeah, that would be the place where in an ideal setup three suburban lines would converge and then head south toward UC and downtown.  One would be the I-75 line, one the I-71 line (using the CL&N ROW), and a line to Milford via the still active Wasson Rd. railroad. 

 

As for the west side light rail, I never saw any projected ridership for the I-74 line however such a line would inherently operate as commuter rail and would do nothing to enhance business districts.  I also never saw any indication of how the line was to have been routed through Northside, if at all. 

 

The problem with the C&O ROW is that it completely avoids Price Hill and all points south of the Glenway Crossing Shopping center (the former railroad yard).  I believe the point of these rail projects should be make old parts of the city more desireable to live and work and while that routing would be much better than nothing it was not ideal.  Also rail on the Glenway or Warsaw hills heading up from the base of the 8th St. Viaduct aren't viable nor is rail on most of Glenway between Price Hill and the C&O ROW.  Some major tunneling would be necessary to reach Price Hill from the basin...it would be approximately 4 miles between the bottom of the 8th St. Viaduct and the point where what remains of the the C&O ROW can be reached and the line could surface permanently at Glenway Crossing.  The I-74 line came nowhere close...literally 8-10 miles away from Price Hill. 

 

That said, the Price Hill area is one of the most fascinating areas of the city from a purely physical perspective, the street layout is bizarre, with 8th St. and Liberty St. making cameos and overall the most "Pittsburghish" area of the city.  I think with some big investment it being the next Mt. Adams or Mt. Auburn is not too much of a stretch, there are many very interesting streetscapes and individual buildings. Have to wonder if Cranley were so anti-rail if it were currently being proposed right under his beloved incline district.   

This could be some good streetcar advertising material