Cincinnati Light Rail News

[John Schneider]

Still with the I-75 reconstruction looming, there's great opportunity to lay commuter tracks in the median or alongside it as part of one project but due to the silliness of US transportation policy it's ridiculously complicated and nobody seems to have even brought it up as part of preliminary planning and I suppose it's already far too late.  Such tracks could serve dually as a dedicated approach for intercity trains and for local commuter service. 

They are preserving ROW for LRT as part of the I-75 rebuilding.

[jmecklenborg]

^I vaguely remember someone saying they were reserving some ROW on the east side near Norwood but I haven't heard any details beyond that.  If you have any please share them. 

[John Schneider]

^I vaguely remember someone saying they were reserving some ROW on the east side near Norwood but I haven't heard any details beyond that.  If you have any please share them. 

I don't have any details, but several people have told me they're doing this. And remember, the straightest line to Tri-County goes through Xavier.

[jmecklenborg]

I think a big advantage to LRT from distant suburbs converging at Xavier and then running downtown via UC is that right now suburban express buses simply run straight downtown.  Rail will actually be slower on average than some of the express bus routes but it will offer a lot more options for suburban commuters. 

I haven't heard much specifically about what is envisioned for the "I-75" light rail alignment...would it favor Tri-county or the GE side of I-75?

Also in Dallas 3 miles of a DART line tunnel beneath an expressway...not something that there's a need for here but an example of what can be done when highway and rail projects are designed in conjunction.

[John Schneider]

Here's the map: http://www.pro-transit.com/

[BallHatGuy]

They are preserving ROW for LRT as part of the I-75 rebuilding.

I have heard with my own ears various city transportation folks discuss this.  It was not why I was in a meeting with them but it tangentally was part of what we were talking about.  I have no more specifics than that and that the subway portals north of Brighton are to be saved and not altered as part of I-75 rebuilding IN CASE the tunnels could be used for light rail. Not saying they will, not saying they could be, not saying if that is the best path for light rail.  I'm just saying.

[jmecklenborg]

Well the tunnels absolutely can be used for light rail, this has been confirmed several times.  They were designed for high platform full-size subway cars so the curves adn clearances are a non-issue.  The "too small" rumor stems from efforts to lease the tunnels to railroads for downtown freight delivery.  The main technical issues are removing the water main installed around 1955 and most likely rebuilding the stations to accomodate a different platform height.  This would also allow for ADA compliance, modern fire protection, etc.  Also the stations don't necessarily have to be rebuilt if they simply aren't used (trains run express) or new stations are built in different locations in the tunnel such as Findlay St. or Ezzard Charles.

The three routes that would most likely feed into the existing tunnel would be the C&O westside line (studied around 1980 but unfortunately almost all of that line's infrastructure has been demolished and ROW sold), a line from I-74 via Northside, or a line from I-75.  I'm guessing the I-75 line makes the least sense if the other I-75 approach is built first since the main advantage of a stop in Northside is a transfer to UC-area buses and that would be accomplished already by the line connecting downtown-UC-Xavier.         

I also have a hunch that with the I-75 reconstruction Camp Washington might attract some office buildings and so a light rail stop in Camp Washington could be a great compliment to that.  In South Boston a large industrial area was turned into a secondary office area with the Big Dig I-90 extension, tunnel connection to the airport, and construction of the underground Silver Line bus tunnel.   


 

[Jimmy_James]

I think a big advantage to LRT from distant suburbs converging at Xavier and then running downtown via UC is that right now suburban express buses simply run straight downtown.  Rail will actually be slower on average than some of the express bus routes but it will offer a lot more options for suburban commuters. 

A light rail line would be a godsend for people working in Ohio, yet living in the KY suburbs.  I-75 is a parking lot every morning, sometimes all the way back to 275.  I assume that TANK has express bus routes, but they'd be stuck in that mess as well.  I think ridership from NKY would be strong, as light rail would be able to bypass all of that.

On the topic of streetcars though, I'm still hoping that eventually it will link up the CBD with Covington and Newport. I've heard that this will be considered in "future phases".  I know that this is putting the proverbial cart before the horse, but assuming that this thing gets built, does anyone know what kind of a timeline we're looking at before expanding the system?  Or what parts of those cities would be included (i.e. most of downtown Newport as opposed to one stop at the Levee and then back across the river)?  Obviously, nothing is set in stone, but I'd be interested to know if any rough plans for the future have been hashed out along with what we've seen for phase one.

[Jimmy_James]

Well the tunnels absolutely can be used for light rail, this has been confirmed several times.

Reusing those sounds like a great idea.  I can't believe that never occurred to me.  My main concern about light rail has always been how to make it connect with downtown seemlessly both during and after construction, and I never even considered that possibility.

[John Schneider]

On the water main in the subway tunnels ... when we rebuilt Fort Washington Way, the water main we installed under Third Street was sized to be large enough to feed downtown is the one in the subway tunnel had to be abandoned. So it's not such a big problem.

Without getting into all the details, people working on the downtown Cincinnati Streetcar have met with Northern Kentucky interests with good results. The feeling south of the river is that they're looking for Cincinnati to get its work going first and then leverage their plans off that.

[jmecklenborg]

Here is a jpeg version of one of the pdf's from that report:


And here's a close-up:


These are interesting because they show every single possibility and together comprise a sort of fantasy transit map.  Interesting to see the Merriemont(sp?) spur on there...that couldn't possibly attract much more than a bus line without a park & ride on the east side of that neighborhood and even then I'd guess the prospects are low. 

Also look how this freight revival might interfere with the potential I-75 light rail connection into Norwood and Xavier.  I've walked that line (currently a single overgrown track) and there's definitely room for three or four parallel tracks if need be but there would be a few replacement bridges and retaining walls necessary if both freight and light rail were to use that alignment.     

I also found it amusing how the report spent a lot of time talking about the Nashville project when it's been a borderline disaster with only a few hundred riders per day.  Cincinnati has much larger bus ridership and will have much larger rail ridership and TOD's...unlike Nashville the BASF and Zumbiel Packaging property near Xavier has potential to be a huge TOD.  Downtown Nashville hardly has as many workers and activity as that site together with Xavier has the potential for, although commuter rail terminating at Xavier would be bizarre.  As much as possible people need to be thinking about a a region-wide standard for equipment as to avoid a Boston-type situation with incompatible equipment on every line.     

[LincolnKennedy]

^These maps are so much fun.  A couple questions for jmeck:

1)How heavy is the freight rail traffic going into the city?  You've mentioned the growth of warehousing in northern suburbs and we can all see that.  I can't say I've seen much traffic on the Oasis Line, the Wasson Line, nor on that line that goes through Madeira and down Camargo road into Madisonville, all of which seem to disappear right before getting downtown.  Are these rights-of-ways really being used to transport goods into the City?

2)Do you think the efficiency of the rail line to Portsmouth, as shown on the above map, would be compromised if it instead followed a more northernly alignment from its western end point along the Lateral up 71, then over to 275 somewhere near Cross-County (I realize the two don't connect and that Indian Hill sort of in the way)?

[John Schneider]

Jake, can you draw the Wasson Line going up Gilbert to Xavier to show how direct this would be? I'm thinking streetcars on MLK to Clifton Heights, say.

[jmecklenborg]

>Jake, can you draw the Wasson Line going up Gilbert to Xavier to show how direct this would be? I'm thinking streetcars on MLK to Clifton Heights, say.

Sorry, I have been very busy this week so this was the first chance I had to get to it.  Really, it does make a lot of sense.  Obviously it misses UC and the big hospitals, but at the same time it requires no major tunneling or elevated structures.  The cost-benefit could be quite high compared to the Mt. Auburn Tunnel alignment.  And its big strengths are as a tool for development of the Broadway Commons area and BASF redevelopment site next to Xavier.  Really, I think just the line from downtown to Madison/Edwards alone could be quite successful, however the Wasson Rd. line is currently active just to serve those small businesses on Dana.  So just getting to Edwards would be as tough as getting all the way down to Red Bank Rd. 



This is a congested area and the line should probably be rebuilt to pass under this goofy intersection.  And a station here would be only a 7 or 8 minute walk from Hyde Park Square. 


The Broadway Commons station would reduce parking demands for development of this area.  The yellow arrow at top right points to the one major problem which is the at-grade crossing of Elsinore.  A new bridge would be necessary here to pass over Elsinore and I-71.  Also, the existing bridge is only single track so it would need be doubled anyway. 


With easy access to I-71 and mass transit, the BASF and Zumbiel properties could be the site of some major new offices:

[Maximillian]

Nice Ideas, build this puppy close to my house!! 

[thomasbw]

Xavier would be the big winner here, as well as the rest of the city

[dmerkow]

It all seems so right.

[John Schneider]

Jake, I'm thinking that instead of following the existing ROW through Broadway Commons, you'd extend it right through the middle of the vacant site from west to east and out to Gilbert Avenue to where the I-71 entrance is. The trains would run on Gilbert north of there.

Extending Central Parkway to Gilbert at the ramp entrance would get rid of a lot of the traffic that backs up on Reading Road south of Elsinore wanting to enter I-71 there. Plus, you'd get six or eight or new block faces along Central Parkway for development of new housing and office space. QUESTION: could you draw-in 400-foot blocks along an extended Central Parkway to determine exactly how many there would be?

Eventually laterals could come off the extended Central Parkway to the north and south, restoring the street grid there, if it ever existed al all. Broadway Commons could contine to provide parking for downtown office workers who could take the train for the last mile until the land were too valuable to hold in parking.

[jmecklenborg]

>Plus, you'd get six or eight or new block faces along Central Parkway for development of new housing and office space. QUESTION: could you draw-in 400-foot blocks along an extended Central Parkway to determine exactly how many there would be?

This doesn't illustrate exactly what you were suggesting so far as extending Central Parkway but I think it does illustrate just how much land is there.  I copied and pasted some familiar blocks from the CBD which are 400ft. blocks with 66ft. streets. 



I think too the top right section of Broadway Commons is doomed to remain surface parking.  But I had the thought that people commuting downtown via bus from various directions could ride the light rail line from Government Square up to new offices at Broadway Commons which reduce its dependence on parking.  This would go even for the offices at Eden Park Drive.  Also, the Eden Park Dr. stop illustrates one of the advantages of light rail versus heavy rail, that building a station at this location is much less of an investment than would be an elevated or subsurface 400+ foot heavy rail station.           

Also, some observations...Gilbert Ave. through Walnut Hills has very few storefronts meaning running on the surface in the place of street parking won't upset too many merchants.  It's less obvious as to how the tracks could best run up the hill from downtown, there are quite a few driveways on the east side so perhaps curb running there is a bad idea.  Both tracks could run down the center or along the west side of the street perhaps separated from traffic by a curb or low barrier.  In Boston in-street tracks are protected from traffic by low fences which prevent left turns from side streets.  As-is Gilbert is both one of the few wide streets in the city, has the easiest grade, and appears to get fairly light traffic...too bad UC wasn't built in Walnut Hills.  Also, I'm not sure if there's room for the line to travel at high speed under the I-71 Victory Parkway bridge.  Specifically, this would be a place where grade separation (such as a bridge over I-71) would enable to the line to hit 45-50mph between Xavier and the Gilbert Ave. hill north of MLK.     

Although not the alignment with the highest ridership, it doesn't prevent future construction of the Mt. Auburn Tunnel route and in fact both can converge at Xavier. 

As an alternative to streetcars to connect with UC on MLK they could run on Lincoln Ave. and University Ave. straight into the campus then turn north and head toward Ludlow Ave. on Clifton Ave.  This keeps them off MLK and from interfering with emergency vehicles.  But I'm not sure how much such a line would be used by people heading downtown because Clifton Ave. and Vine St. buses run straight down from UC without a transfer. 

 

[John Schneider]

MINNEAPOLIS

By Anna Ewart , Minnesota Daily

The University wouldn't be the first U.S. university to have a light-rail train on campus.

The Central Corridor Management Committee will be taking lessons from universities that have already put light-rail lines through campuses.

On Nov. 5 and 6, members of the committee will visit the light-rail trains that go through the University of Utah in Salt Lake City and San Diego State University.

Click on link for article.
http://www.tcdailyplanet.net/node/7639

[jmecklenborg]

MINNEAPOLIS
By Anna Ewart , Minnesota Daily

The University wouldn't be the first U.S. university to have a light-rail train on campus.

The Central Corridor Management Committee will be taking lessons from universities that have already put light-rail lines through campuses.

On Nov. 5 and 6, members of the committee will visit the light-rail trains that go through the University of Utah in Salt Lake City and San Diego State University.


Uhhh...there are several examples in the U.S. of heavy rail subways that have stations at universities, there's not really anything different about a light rail versus heavy rail subway station aside from a light rail system typically sporting shorter trains and platforms.  And if gradeschool children can successfully cross light rail tracks in Boston to board the green line trains as they've been doing daily for 100 years, I'd imagine University of Minnesota students can do so. 

The best university transit station I'm aware of is definitely Harvard's, which opened in 1912 as the terminal station of the Cambridge-Dorchester subway.  This station was completely rebuilt in the 1980's to accommodate the Alewife extension which added three more stations and terminates at a large park-and-ride.  Also, the Porter Square station just one stop away was built with a direct connection to a commuter rail line so those riding the commuter line can transfer to the red line subway without having to ride all the way downtown and then heading back out.  Overall a fantastic project.  It's one of those things rail-haters should be forced to visit.  

The Harvard Square subway station has direct connections to an underground bus transfer point.  These buses run via an overhead electric wire that allows them to operate exhaust-free in a tunnel under the congestion of the square.  The whole station lobby is built on a curve and is overall one of the most attractive and interesting subway stations in the country.  It stands in direct contrast to the decrepit condition of some of Boston's other transit stations including MIT's just two stops closer to town.   

Also, it's important to note that Harvard is of course a very famous university, but it is actually quite small, with under 15,000 students.  Compare that to UC's 35,000~ students and tens of thousands who staff at the main campus and surrounding hospitals.  There's a serious perception problem in Cincinnati that we're a "small" city which as I previously speculated stems from being a "small market" pro sports city.       

[John Schneider]

Jake, I probably should have posted follow-up comments from the blog from where I flinched this article. There were several other examples -- Philadelphia, with stations serving St. Joesph's, Penn and Villanova plus San Francisco State. And some others. Considering the number of colleges in the U.S., there weren't many.

[dmerkow]

The subway in Philly skirts the northern edge of campus (actually Drexel is closer to the line), but the trolley is underground through most of Penn's campus. There is actually a pretty cool entryway to the trolley that uses half an old trolley car for the cap.

[jmecklenborg]

>And some others. Considering the number of colleges in the U.S., there weren't many.

Having the benefit of subway service since 1912, it's worth noting that unlike virtually every other university in the country Harvard has no large surface parking lots and has no major parking garages that I can remember.  The university has bought up blocks of the surrounding neighborhoods and built new developments with underground parking.  Then again, Harvard is the richest institution in the world with the exception of the Roman Catholic Church.

I took some photos from the Carew Tower today, this one showing the Race and Elm St. areas where the streetcar route is planned:

   
I think this photo of Broadway Commons illustrates how a light rail line could run through this area and run directly to Gilbert Ave.  But there is an off-ramp from I-71 that joins Gilbert Ave. underneath the I-471 ramps so I'm not too sure ODOT would approve trains pulling in front of that traffic. 

[Sherman Cahal]

Hey Jake, have they considered using the former rail line that parallels Interstate 71 through the area?

[jmecklenborg]

Not really because that climb is 3% and the short tunnel and underpass at the top off the hill are both only single-track.  Also some of those new offices next to Gilbert Ave. block the former path.  The line can be used north of Walnut Hills though, it's the abandoned line that runs on a relatively new double-tracked bridge over Victory Parkway just short of Xavier University.   

[GCrites80s]

>And some others. Considering the number of colleges in the U.S., there weren't many.

Having the benefit of subway service since 1912, it's worth noting that unlike virtually every other university in the country Harvard has no large surface parking lots

UC has very little in the way of surface lottage.

[CiNYC]

>And some others. Considering the number of colleges in the U.S., there weren't many.

Having the benefit of subway service since 1912, it's worth noting that unlike virtually every other university in the country Harvard has no large surface parking lots

UC has very little in the way of surface lottage.

I can't think of one significant surface lot for and/or around UC which is commendable.

[jmecklenborg]

There is still a very large lot between the Veteran's Hospital and the UC Hospital.  On the main campus, the university had to go to great lengths to replace the large parking lot where the lawn is now with the enormous garage beneath the new building facing Calhoun.  With better mass transit in place, thousands fewer parking spaces would be necessary.   

[atlas]

^theres a tiny one on campus next to that faculty building and the one at the corner of vine and daniels is fairly large, although kids use that to play on, etc that go to that school/church/whatever that is.  But yea, cant really think of any other than that at the moment.