I thought I remembered seeing some talk on here recently about BRT on line going up I-71, anyone have any idea if this is still being pursued? BRT to the Transit Center would seem like a no brainer.

 

Also, anyone know if they plan on making any improvements to the RTC once the streetcar is built?

 

In the past couple years they've removed all the benches and stuff near the "subway-like" entrances. The "digital" signs that inform you to check a Metro schedule are no longer working. Since the streetcar will stop right by the RTC it seems like they'd want to polish that up a little.

^ Metro is planning a BRT line from DT, to UC/Medical Campus, then cutting over to Gilbert via MLK and taking 22/3 north to Kenwood. They have already purchased the new buses and hope to start the BRT service in 2013. It is being called a form of BRT "lite" which means fewer stops, some signal priority, but not designated lanes. The officially branding will be called "Metro Plus".

 

Actually using the RTC would be kind of expensive because they would need to turn on the HVAC. Right now private companies rent the tunnel (staging equipment for Paul McCartney, team buses for Bengals/Reds games, etc). They pay the cost to turn on the HVAC and it is only on when it is used.

 

I don't see the RTC being used for public transportation until there is major congestion at Government Square that is causing delays or light rail comes into play. I would love for the city to start using it, but it doesn't seem right just yet with only the streetcar and a single "BRT lite" route.

There is actually no such thing as a BRT anywhere in the US, since "rapid transit" means full grade separation.  The only cities with a significant amount of dedicated bus-only infrastructure are Boston, Seattle, Cleveland, and Pittsbugh.  Pittsburgh built its "busways" a decade before the term BRT came into usage, which is why people don't look to what they have built as a BRT model.  Seattle's downtown bus tunnel is now shared with light rail, and Boston's silver line bus tunnel was built to eventually be converted to rail as well.  Cleveland's "BRT" has no grade separation whatsoever, neither does a similar bus lane plan for Nashville.   

 

The big problem with the transit center is that no highway ramps lead directly into it.  In fact it probably takes buses longer to get into the transit center from the interstates than it does to reach Government Square. 

 

 

I think Eugene has the best BRT in the country.

"BRT" seems to have become a buzzword that gets thrown around pretty casually without much understanding of what it really means. As Jake mentions, true BRT service barely exists in the US. Here in Los Angeles, the Orange Line has a dedicated busway but intersects cross streets at grade, and the Silver Line shares HOV lanes on the freeways with carpool traffic (with a few short dedicated segments / ramps on the I-10 corridor).

 

What SORTA is proposing seems to be more of a limited-stop service, similar to the Rapid bus service here in LA and a fairly routine feature of most major transit systems, but not true BRT. And what often gets called "BRT" in other cities is merely a glorified express bus service. My biggest issue with BRT is that it often gets touted as a substitute for light rail, but I don't get the impression SORTA's proposal is geared that way.

Smitherman was just reelected for 2 years as NAACP/Tea Party President...

Smitherman was just reelected for 2 years as NAACP/Tea Party President...

 

I know I asked this before but does anone know if Smitherman supported Obama>?  Given his alliance with coast, I am very surious...he is a mystery to me.

He supported Obama

He seems to vote Democrip in all the primaries but his dedication is to himself more than anyone/anything else.

An opportunist - no mystery at all.

Quick little dig by the Enquirer:

 

http://news.cincinnati.com/progal/?avis=ab&dato=20121128&kategori=ent09&lopenr=1128001&ref=ph/what-550m-actually-spends-like&pagerestricted=1

 

"Powerball: What $550M actually Spends Like"

 

WAYS TO GET AROUND:

$110 million for Cincinnati's new streetcar system.  Debate later as to whether it was a wise investment

 

The poster city for BRT is Curitiba, Brazil. The Curitiba system has at-grade crossings, but separate bus lanes with long stretches without any crossings. The Curitiba system also has pre-paid fares and raised platforms, like a subway, and exceptionally long articulated buses that resemble trains.

 

They claim that the Curitiba system cost $200,000 per mile to build vs. $90 million for a subway.

 

A key to its success is that travel times by BRT are FASTER than by private automobile. Therefore, there is an incentive to take the BRT instead of driving.

 

 

 

A key to its success is that travel times by BRT are FASTER than by private automobile. Therefore, there is an incentive to take the BRT instead of driving.

 

 

 

Public transit is not about racing.

 

A key to its success is that travel times by BRT are FASTER than by private automobile. Therefore, there is an incentive to take the BRT instead of driving.

 

 

Public transit is not about racing.

 

Maybe not, but the more advantages the better.  Speed is one of the biggest disadvantages to public transit, which negates the other benefits for most people.  Besides, in highly congested cities being able to go say 15 mph instead of the prevailing 10 mph isn't exactly "racing."   

 

Public transit is not about racing.

 

It is according to the Federal Transit Administration's New Starts funding criteria.

No, public transit is not about racing, but it IS about travel times and a lot of other factors.

 

"The problem with public transit is that it is too slow."  - Wendel Cox.

 

(I agree with Wendell Cox on this point.)

 

 

So the PUCO hearing/decision about Duke is coming next week apparently according to _OAST.  Smitherman and COAST plan to make a huge spectacle out of it.

 

I assume their gameplan is to get local and state politicians to lean on Duke and delay the project as long as possible so costs rise until the city effectively gives up OR stall it until next november and hope they get the politicians they want elected to city council/mayor

 

The poster city for BRT is Curitiba, Brazil. The Curitiba system has at-grade crossings, but separate bus lanes with long stretches without any crossings. The Curitiba system also has pre-paid fares and raised platforms, like a subway, and exceptionally long articulated buses that resemble trains.

 

They claim that the Curitiba system cost $200,000 per mile to build vs. $90 million for a subway.

 

A key to its success is that travel times by BRT are FASTER than by private automobile. Therefore, there is an incentive to take the BRT instead of driving.

 

 

 

Isn't Curitaba building a new light rail line? Seems I heard this a while back.

Ottawa, Ontario put all its chips into BRT, and now scrambling to build light rail because their BRT system is quickly reaching capacity. This highlights the problem of building transit infrastructure on the cheap to meet today's needs, at the expense of meeting future needs. Lots of cities end up regretting under-building their rail transit systems, but I can't think of a single city that regrets over-building.

Ottawa, Ontario put all its chips into BRT, and now scrambling to build light rail because their BRT system is quickly reaching capacity. This highlights the problem of building transit infrastructure on the cheap to meet today's needs, at the expense of meeting future needs. Lots of cities end up regretting under-building their rail transit systems, but I can't think of a single city that regrets over-building.

 

Yes, and downtown Ottawa literally stinks in the summertime because of all the diesel exhaust from the buses using the busways. By the way, busways are not the same as BRT. They are often confused.

So the PUCO hearing/decision about Duke is coming next week apparently according to _OAST.  Smitherman and COAST plan to make a huge spectacle out of it.

 

I assume their gameplan is to get local and state politicians to lean on Duke and delay the project as long as possible so costs rise until the city effectively gives up OR stall it until next november and hope they get the politicians they want elected to city council/mayor

 

Isn't that essentially what the opponents of the subway did to block its construction? Oh, Cincinnati...

Ottawa, Ontario put all its chips into BRT, and now scrambling to build light rail because their BRT system is quickly reaching capacity. This highlights the problem of building transit infrastructure on the cheap to meet today's needs, at the expense of meeting future needs. Lots of cities end up regretting under-building their rail transit systems, but I can't think of a single city that regrets over-building.

 

Maybe Buffalo? Their subway seems to have had minimal effect on economic development.

Ottawa, Ontario put all its chips into BRT, and now scrambling to build light rail because their BRT system is quickly reaching capacity. This highlights the problem of building transit infrastructure on the cheap to meet today's needs, at the expense of meeting future needs. Lots of cities end up regretting under-building their rail transit systems, but I can't think of a single city that regrets over-building.

 

That's true. However, but at least when a light rail or BRT system is put into place, the right-of-way has been secured and can be upgraded to a higher-capacity mode of transportation in the future.

Ouch. They are blaming the streetcar for the downgrading of it's credit from AAA to AA.

BizJournal is...

S&P gives Cincinnati debt a negative outlook

Business Courier by Dan Monk, Senior Staff Reporter

Date: Thursday, November 29, 2012, 3:05pm EST

 

Standard & Poor’s has attached a negative outlook to its debt rating for the city of Cincinnati, City Manager Milton Dohoney informed city council in a memo Thursday.

 

The ratings change followed S&P review of a $33 million bond issue that the city is planning for its streetcar project and $20 million refinancing issue planned for the week of Dec. 3.

 

A bit more at http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2012/11/29/sp-gives-cincinnati-debt-a-negative.html.

^ I don't really understand what they are saying. One line read "The ratings change followed S&P review of a $33 million bond issue... and $20 million refinancing issue planned for the week of Dec 3."

 

Then it says "Both S&P and Moody’s gave the city their second-highest ratings on the debt. both unchanged from prior ratings. Moody’s classified its ratings outlook as stable, while S&P said it might change its outlook if the city doesn’t resolve a “structural imbalance” in its 2013 and 2014 budgets."

 

So did they lower it or is it the same as before?  :wtf:

^ I don't really understand what they are saying. One line read "The ratings change followed S&P review of a $33 million bond issue... and $20 million refinancing issue planned for the week of Dec 3."

 

Then it says "Both S&P and Moody’s gave the city their second-highest ratings on the debt. both unchanged from prior ratings. Moody’s classified its ratings outlook as stable, while S&P said it might change its outlook if the city doesn’t resolve a “structural imbalance” in its 2013 and 2014 budgets."

 

So did they lower it or is it the same as before?  :wtf:

 

It's the same as before, but with a "negative outlook." Which I believe is just them saying "we're concerned, for reasons X, Y, and Z, that the situation may deteriorate to the point that we'll lower the actual rating." It's sort of like if you've had a couple of great months with your girlfriend and think "man, I could marry this woman"--girlfriend with a positive outlook (vs. if you had a bad couple of months and think "I may need to break up at some point"--girlfriend with a negative outlook. In either case, she's still a 'girlfriend' until the status has been officially changed.)

 

That's my mostly uneducated thought.

I always thought the bond for the streetcar was 60 million. Is this a new bond on Dec 3rd or the old one?

Keep in mind that Standard & Poors is the same outfit that said all those subprime mortage-backed securities in the early 2000's were as good as gold. Their credibility leaves a lot to be desired.

This highlights the problem of building transit infrastructure on the cheap...

 

6 of 8 of Cincinnat's Ohio River Bridges have been substantially upgraded. Nearly all of the arterial roads have been upgraded from trails to 4-lane or more highways. I-75 and I-71 have been substantially widened. It is normal for transportation facilities to be constructed and subsequently widened.

 

It doesn't always happen that way, though. Passenger traffic at Cincinnati's Union Terminal never reached it's design capacity, except maybe in the WWII years. The Cincinnati Transit Center is underutilised. The Greater Cincinnati airport is underutilized, especially since the new runway opened.

 

There are two good reasons to start small and plan to upgrade later:

1. If the traffic doesn't materialize, the sunk cost is minimized.

2. Revenues from early operation can help pay for capital cost of improvements.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing improved bus service morph into rail service. Some clever street design could open up exclusive bus lanes, perhaps at the expense of general traffic lanes. If it is effective, the bus lanes could become rail lanes later, or perhaps be replaced with parallel rail routes in a new alignment.

 

Folks on this board have poo-pood the idea of trolley buses instead of streetcars. "Never send a bus to do a train's job," etc. Yet, if the trolley buses had been initiated along the proposed streetcar route in 2010, we could have had nearly two years of operation history by this point. If the buses had been a flop, then maybe the streetcar will be a flop, too. But if the buses had been successful, then maybe the streetcar will be successful, too.

 

What if the trolley buses were operating today, and they were packed? That would be better evidence of possible success than any projection, and better publicity than any ballot result.

 

"A living dog is better than a dead lion." I say that a real bus that operates on the street is better than a streetcar idea that never gets built. 

 

 

^Sorry, 5 of 8 Ohio River bridges have been substantially upgraded.

^Obviously we need to review this again: Trolley Buses are *not* infrastructure and do *not* promote economic development. The TANK/NKY trolley bus has been running for a decade now and yet Covington's riverfront is completely devoid of any development, and the Newport Levee is still half vacant.

The Greater Cincinnati airport is underutilized, especially since the new runway opened.

This has more to do with letting a certain airline have the run of the place over anything else.

 

Just sayin'.

The Greater Cincinnati airport is underutilized, especially since the new runway opened.

This has more to do with letting a certain airline have the run of the place over anything else.

 

Just sayin'.

 

Bingo Matt. Plus after the Delta/Northwest merger the airline no longer needed a large hub at CVG. Delta's large hubs in Detroit and Atlanta made CVG largely redundant. The Kenton County Airport Board put all its proverbial eggs in one basket vis–à–vis Delta, and most of those eggs are now broken.

^Obviously we need to review this again: Trolley Buses are *not* infrastructure and do *not* promote economic development. The TANK/NKY trolley bus has been running for a decade now and yet Covington's riverfront is completely devoid of any development, and the Newport Levee is still half vacant.

 

Trolley buses did absolutely nothing here in Columbus.

^Obviously we need to review this again: Trolley Buses are *not* infrastructure and do *not* promote economic development. The TANK/NKY trolley bus has been running for a decade now and yet Covington's riverfront is completely devoid of any development, and the Newport Levee is still half vacant.

 

Trolley buses did absolutely nothing here in Columbus.

 

I lived in Columbus for 18 years and never saw anything in the media or elsewhere that would indicate that trolleybuses did anything to promote development.

Dayton has electric trolley buses and we all know everyone wants to be just like Dayton. Oh wait, no, everyone wants to be like Portland. Portland must have a helluva trolley bus system.

In 2010 the United States Congress passed, and President Obama signed, the Dodd-Frank Act.  Dodd-Frank has done and is in process of doing many things.  One of those things was to effectively discredit the bond rating agencies because, as Living in Gin pointed out, they completely missed the boat on mortgage debt leading up to the financial crisis.  They subsequently demonstrated their worthlessness last year during the debt ceiling debacle.  S&P downgraded the United States and what happened?  Treasury yields fell and the world collectively yawned.  I can't stress enough how little meaning the S&P negative outlook for Cincinnati has, though it unfortunately provides more negative press and fodder for those who don't know any better.

Cranley is really making a big deal about the reaffirmed second highest ratings in which one company gave a negative outlook due to the general fund deficit.

If you remember OKI's late 90's I-71 light rail study, the feds rated it as "Not Recommended".  Was this because it was a bad plan?  No.  It was "Not Recommended FOR FEDERAL FUNDING" because there was no local match.  Yet the press went wild with it.  Same with the "Functionally Obsolete" Brent Spence Bridge.  Every bridge and tunnel in New York City is functionally obsolete. 

No, public transit is not about racing, but it IS about travel times and a lot of other factors.

 

"The problem with public transit is that it is too slow."  - Wendel Cox.

 

(I agree with Wendell Cox on this point.)

 

 

 

Cox is a political hack.

 

Someone like you, unfamiliar with using true and large public transit systems in larger cities would think that public transit is too slow. In Cincinnati, it often is. Mainly because our buses use the same right-of-way as motor vehicles on already congested highways and roads.

 

Go to a city like Chicago and try driving from Comiskey to Northside when the Cubs or Sox are playing. Then do the trip again via the Red Line and see how much quicker it is.

 

Just because the speed limit on a highway is 65 mph and a light rail vehicle may only consistently travel at 45 mph doesn't mean the car is necessarily always faster. However, to the unaware onlooker it seems that way. By the time you sit in traffic, navigate side roads and find a place to park - you could've ridden a train or bus and simply gotten off at your stop.

 

The Cincinnati Transit Center is underutilised

 

Underutilized in terms of being a Transit Center, yes, but not for lack of trying *cough* Metro Moves *cough.* However, it would've cost nearly as much to fill the area in with dirt and at present the approach areas are rented out to System Parking who pays rent to the city, generating revenue.

 

The Greater Cincinnati airport is underutilized

 

As already stated by someone else, this isn't due to a lack of locals not wishing to use it, they simply go elsewhere. It's underutilized because of political mis management and the assumption that Delta would always be awesome (spoiler alert: they're not). See this: http://queencitydiscovery.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-downsizing-and-dying-of-cvg.html

 

Folks on this board have poo-pood the idea of trolley buses instead of streetcars.

 

Yes and they've poo-pood your flawed, watered down COAST logic again and again (how many times did we have that diesel generator streetcar at Sawyer Point argument?). A trolleybus is not comparable, not similar or anything like a modern streetcar.

 

a streetcar idea that never gets built

 

Why do you continually live in denial of the fact that the streetcar is CURRENTLY under construction?

 

You say "a living dog is better than a dead lion."

 

I say: "You're wrong, again."

 

Edit: Didn't mean for this to come off as so rude, but 8th&St you bring up the same flawed logic all the time as if you have little regard for any other arguments for/against the project. I'm all for hearing other voices and opinions, in fact I welcome it. Especially when this board is mainly pro-streetcar. However, repeating the same things ad-nausem isn't bringing anyone to your side especially when your support examples aren't even comparable to the topic at hand. I.E. CVG's low numbers have nothing to do with public transit.

 

What Gordon Bombay said. Charlie Winburn's "let's just buy a trolley bus and see what happens" argument has already been debunked here and elsewhere a thousand times.

 

As for my argument about BRT: It's not simply a matter of building BRT and then "upgrading" to light rail. The busways would have to be entirely ripped up so that tracks can be installed, and the platforms would likely have to be rebuilt as well. And what do you do with all the BRT passengers while construction is in progress? The money spent on the BRT infrastructure would be wasted when you have to tear 80% of it down to build light rail. Cincinnati is fortunate in that the city already has a number of rights-of-way that could easily converted to light rail, as most of them are already existing railroad ROWs. To convert them from rail to BRT and then back to rail would be a colossal waste of resources.

^ No busway or BRT anywhere in the U.S. has ever been converted to rail. It's a one-way street. So to speak.

No, public transit is not about racing, but it IS about travel times and a lot of other factors.

 

"The problem with public transit is that it is too slow."  - Wendel Cox.

 

(I agree with Wendell Cox on this point.)

 

 

 

Cox is a political hack.

 

Someone like you, unfamiliar with using true and large public transit systems in larger cities would think that public transit is too slow. In Cincinnati, it often is. Mainly because our buses use the same right-of-way as motor vehicles on already congested highways and roads.

 

Go to a city like Chicago and try driving from Comiskey to Northside when the Cubs or Sox are playing. Then do the trip again via the Red Line and see how much quicker it is.

 

Just because the speed limit on a highway is 65 mph and a light rail vehicle may only consistently travel at 45 mph doesn't mean the car is necessarily always faster. However, to the unaware onlooker it seems that way. By the time you sit in traffic, navigate side roads and find a place to park - you could've ridden a train or bus and simply gotten off at your stop.

 

The Cincinnati Transit Center is underutilised

 

Underutilized in terms of being a Transit Center, yes, but not for lack of trying *cough* Metro Moves *cough.* However, it would've cost nearly as much to fill the area in with dirt and at present the approach areas are rented out to System Parking who pays rent to the city, generating revenue.

 

The Greater Cincinnati airport is underutilized

 

As already stated by someone else, this isn't due to a lack of locals not wishing to use it, they simply go elsewhere. It's underutilized because of political mis management and the assumption that Delta would always be awesome (spoiler alert: they're not). See this: http://queencitydiscovery.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-downsizing-and-dying-of-cvg.html

 

Folks on this board have poo-pood the idea of trolley buses instead of streetcars.

 

Yes and they've poo-pood your flawed, watered down COAST logic again and again (how many times did we have that diesel generator streetcar at Sawyer Point argument?). A trolleybus is not comparable, not similar or anything like a modern streetcar.

 

a streetcar idea that never gets built

 

Why do you continually live in denial of the fact that the streetcar is CURRENTLY under construction?

 

You say "a living dog is better than a dead lion."

 

I say: "You're wrong, again."

 

Edit: Didn't mean for this to come off as so rude, but 8th&St you bring up the same flawed logic all the time as if you have little regard for any other arguments for/against the project. I'm all for hearing other voices and opinions, in fact I welcome it. Especially when this board is mainly pro-streetcar. However, repeating the same things ad-nausem isn't bringing anyone to your side especially when your support examples aren't even comparable to the topic at hand. I.E. CVG's low numbers have nothing to do with public transit.

 

Hear hear! Amen to what Gordon wrote.

Let me go ahead and beat my dead horse by stating that there are several arterial roads in the City that are ideal for bus ROW such as Reading, Paddock, Montgomery, etc, etc.  Some planning goes into altering parking rules, frequency, fleet, any route changes and whatnot but it ain't that complicated.  Why it hasn't happened yet is more of a mystery than how to execute such a plan.

>No busway or BRT anywhere in the U.S. has ever been converted to rail. It's a one-way street. So to speak.

 

The Seattle bus tunnel was converted from bus-only to buses mixed with rail.  However, the tunnel had to be closed completely for about six months in 2008-09 to undo provisions that had been made for rail when the tunnel was built since light rail technology had changed so quickly.  Infamously they had to scrap the mile of double-track rail that had been installed in the 80's and lower the floor of the entire tunnel by two inches.  However lowering the floor caused the bus side mirrors to be low enough to where they could hit people's heads on the platforms so they had to install strobe lights on them. 

 

Excuse my ignorance, but what is the construction timeline for this project and what is the scope (length) of the line?

So are the Battery powered streetcars off the table?

Why do you continually live in denial of the fact that the streetcar is CURRENTLY under construction?

 

You say "a living dog is better than a dead lion."

 

The streetcar was supposed to have been opened by now. For a startup cost of a few $million, we could have had a new bus route on the proposed streetcar line. Whether the bus is decorated to look like a trolley, whether it was a regular bus with some streetcar advertising on it, or whether it was just an ordinary Metro bus, it could have brought some attention to the proposed streetcar route and gotten people used to the idea. Then, it could be cancelled and replaced by a streetcar.

 

So, the bus could have been used WHILE the streetcar was under design. That's all I'm sayin'. Instead, the city put up those streetcar station signs, and the media had a field day with it.

 

I'm still not convinced that the streetcar will actually get built, though. I'm no fan of Smitherman, etc., but he is vowing to stop the streetcar construction if he gets the chance. 

 

 

^ You do realize the media would have a field day with anything whatever. If your suggestion had been executed, they would have had a field day with that. So would COAST and etc. I don't know what the particulars are of the crazy they would inevitably conjure, but it might go something like "We are spending X million on an unnecessary stage of a project that is low on resources as it is!" or maybe "See? We can just run a bus and forget the streetcar! Look at the bus doing the exact same thing as the streetcar will do!" You mention the streetcar stops, and that first criticism was waged toward them, except the funding for them was in the thousands.

 

Sometimes I get the sense you would be a critic of your own ideas, were the city to have come up with them before you.