Just out of curiosity, how hard would it be to conduct deep-bore tunneling in the Cincinnati area compared to say, Seattle, in geological terms? Seattle, of course, is an active seismic zone with bedrock consisting of (IIRC) very hard granite and/or volcanic basalt.
Cincinnati has relatively porous and crumbly limestone and shale, which seems like it would be easier for a tunnel boring machine to eat through, but may also be less stable without proper reinforcing of the underground structures.
Inquiring minds want to know...
Regarding a new light rail measure, I hope Cincinnati learns from what went wrong with Metro Moves and adapts accordingly. It would be a disaster to trot out the same plan, use the same tactics, and get the same election results. It helps that the overall political climate is much different now than it was in 2002 and that gas is much more expensive (what the climate is like in 2012 remains to be seen), and hopefully the streetcar will be a proven success by then. Having the full backing of the mayor, council, state, and congressional delegation will also be crucial. But we can't afford to be caught off-guard when COAST fights the light rail plan with everything they've got. You know the same cast of characters will be as dishonest then as they were in 2002 and in 2009.
In your opinions, what should be done differently in 2012, compared to what was done in 2002 and in 2009? What, if anything, should be different about the light rail plan itself, and what should be different about the process of selling that plan to the public?
I would show how were the 2nd largest metro without any form of passenger rail...Then list all the cities around our size or smaller that have rail. Maybe list the economic impacts.
In another commercial I would show an average cost of maintaining an automobile combined with past to projected gas prices.
At the end of both commercials, show modern light rail in various cities. Show families and all sorts of people from all backgrounds boarding. Show the interior, how quiet it is, smooth, etc.
People just need to start being introduced to what it really is, not what they perceive it to be. The majority of arguments I hear against rail can all be dismissed easily:
1) It's not profitable
1a) If it is profitable a private company will invest in it
2) It's ancient technology and outdated
3) Its subsidized and a never ending money pit
4) It will never work here. We are too small and besides we have highways
Just gotta keep spreading the word.
On a side note, I really like the high speed rail they are going to construct in California...I wish that's what they were proposing for Ohio. Sacramento to LA in 3.5 hours! Unbelievable.
