Light Rail - Where and how do we get started! (Cincinnati: taxes, living in)

[unusualfire]

NYC has narrow highways wow. When you have an awesome transit system like that have I guess you can do that.

[Marv101]

Light rail hasn't been the bonanza that many of its boosters have been chortling about for decades; cities such as Phoenix, DFW & Raleigh among many others have spent billions on their systems, yet less than 2% of the residents of those cities utilize those systems, as opposed to a super-dense city such as NYC, where 30% of the locals use it daily.

Can a city bleeding money from their NFL stadium as detailed in a front-page story in the WSJ last year afford another public relations and fiscal disaster?

[WILWRadio]

My point by posting this article is that the city of Cincinnati, should it implement any kind of rail system, better be prepared for the day when tens of thousands of commuters cannot use the system for one reason or another. Even if it goes down for a day, it will have a very big impact on the lives of the people that rely upon rail for their sole means of getting around and especially the businesses that are served by these lines.

[hensleya1]

Originally Posted by Marv101

Light rail hasn't been the bonanza that many of its boosters have been chortling about for decades; cities such as Phoenix, DFW & Raleigh among many others have spent billions on their systems, yet less than 2% of the residents of those cities utilize those systems, as opposed to a super-dense city such as NYC, where 30% of the locals use it daily.

Can a city bleeding money from their NFL stadium as detailed in a front-page story in the WSJ last year afford another public relations and fiscal disaster?

Marv101--

You're absolutely correct, but you won't find many here agreeing with your otherwise common sense post. C-D's Cincinnati forum is not representative of Cincinnati. Almost everyone here thinks John Cranley is the Antichrist, but Cranley won the mayoral primary by a pretty convincing margin.

Personally, I believe the streetcar will go the way of Detroit's people mover - completely empty and an endless liability on the city. It'll go right up there with the overpriced stadium and the unused riverfront transit center.

Unless Cranley (1) gets elected and (2) stops the streetcar before any more damage is done.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by hensleya1

C-D's Cincinnati forum is not representative of Cincinnati.

So true. Too many suburbanites here to represent the city of Cincinnati.

Originally Posted by hensleya1

Almost everyone here thinks John Cranley is the Antichrist, but Cranley won the mayoral primary by a pretty convincing margin.

Whoop-tee-doo. Courtis Fuller won the 2001 primary against Charlie Luken, but Luken won the general election. And in 2005, David Pepper won the primary, but Mark Mallory won the general election.

Originally Posted by hensleya1

Unless Cranley (1) gets elected and (2) stops the streetcar before any more damage is done.

That makes no sense what soever. Stop the project after millions have been spent? Cranley is a slimey idiot.

[kjbrill]

Originally Posted by hensleya1

Marv101--

You're absolutely correct, but you won't find many here agreeing with your otherwise common sense post. C-D's Cincinnati forum is not representative of Cincinnati. Almost everyone here thinks John Cranley is the Antichrist, but Cranley won the mayoral primary by a pretty convincing margin.

Personally, I believe the streetcar will go the way of Detroit's people mover - completely empty and an endless liability on the city. It'll go right up there with the overpriced stadium and the unused riverfront transit center.

Unless Cranley (1) gets elected and (2) stops the streetcar before any more damage is done.

You are right on one point, you will not find very many here on ths C-D forum agreeing with your views. But that is easy to understand, as the preponderance of responders here want Big Government to solve all of our problems, including this public drain of rail transit. Those of us who disagree are simply dismissed as out of touch dimentia derarnged old fu8ks or worse.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by unusualfire

Transit does not cost more than a car. lol Where in the world did you get that from?????? Also haven't you heard of a schedule to get you to places you need to get by transit?????

Maybe it depends on how much the local government decides to charge for a fare. I can make it to work and back in my car for less than the one-way fare.

The schedule does you no good if you are two miles from the nearest transit stop. Here, unless you live on (or close to) one of 8 arterial routes, and unless your destination is near one of those routes, the transit is useless to you.

All of those routes converge on a transit center in the middle of the city. This is the only place you can changes buses without paying again.

Each arterial bus route takes an hour to go from the transit center, out one arterial, and back to the transit center. Each bus does the two out and back arterials that are in opposite directions before repeating. (E.G. Route 3 goes on the straight west route, then back to the transit center, and goes on the straight east route and back). So any one bus takes 2 hours to repeat its route. Each pair of arterials has 4 buses on it, spaced half an hour apart.

All of the routes get to the transit center at about the same time. There they wait until the set departure time, so people can change buses with transfers. If your bus comes in late, and you are not going straight across the city, you have to wait half an hour at the transit center for the next bus going in your direction.

It can take over an hour to use the transit to get from point A on one arterial to point B on one of the others. I can drive from any point in the city to any other point in at most 20 minutes, including all of the places the transit does not run. At no time does this require speeding. The city is about 8 miles across.

Around rush hour in the evening, three of the of the arterials get backed up. The buses habitually return late during that hour, so your trip can take over an hour and a half, rather than over an hour. They keep three extra buses at the transit center that hour, so the bus leaving is not delayed by the late entering bus. But those on the late entering bus have to wait on the bus or in the transit center half an hour.

The schedule does you no good if you have to be at work by 8:00 AM, but the first transit of the day coming from your direction doesn't get there until 8:20 AM.

In the case of our city, buses from the transit center get to an employer at 7:20 and 7:50, but the first bus from the transit center to pick you up gets you at 7:45, but doesn't get back to the transit center until 8:00. There, you change buses, and ride another 20 min to your work.

The schedule does you no good if you get off work at 8:00 PM, and the last transit of the day going in your direction passes at 7:40 PM.

The same kind of timing problems apply in my city. A bus at 8:10 could take you to the transit center, but there is then no bus to take you home from the transit center.

Due to insurance requirements, city buses in my city are not allowed to leave the city limits for any reason. So the shopping centers not inside the city have no bus service.

[Troubleshooter]

Originally Posted by TomJones123

Brill, you have absolutely no concept of the role rail plays in people's lives in the NYC metro. According the article, 40,000 people take the New Haven line every day. That's 10,000 more people than the entire population of Mason, and that's only one line. Metro North has five lines total that connect to Grand Central Terminal, where most transfer to the subway to get to their destination. Get a clue.

There is a difference in the 15 largest cities in the US. There, the transit systems are elaborate enough that almost everyone has transit service. The governments of smaller cities can't hope to provide such service.

I went to Chicago several times, and was able to do everything I needed to on the transit system, including getting to and from the airport. But I certainly can't do that here. The only way to our airport, if you don't have a car, is a taxi.

[TomJones123]

Originally Posted by Troubleshooter

There is a difference in the 15 largest cities in the US. There, the transit systems are elaborate enough that almost everyone has transit service. The governments of smaller cities can't hope to provide such service.

I went to Chicago several times, and was able to do everything I needed to on the transit system, including getting to and from the airport. But I certainly can't do that here. The only way to our airport, if you don't have a car, is a taxi.

Totally agree. I own a car and use it regularly and I live downtown. If I could, I would ditch it in a heartbeat. Was carless for years in NYC.

[natininja]

Originally Posted by Marv101

Light rail hasn't been the bonanza that many of its boosters have been chortling about for decades; cities such as Phoenix, DFW & Raleigh among many others have spent billions on their systems, yet less than 2% of the residents of those cities utilize those systems, as opposed to a super-dense city such as NYC, where 30% of the locals use it daily.

How about some more thorough analysis? How much has NYC spent vs. Dallas? How is the ridership versus how much of the city is served? Are we talking city numbers or metro numbers?

2% mode share could mean positively overflowing in riders, depending on the size of the system.

Are any of these cities looking to expand these systems, based on perceived success? What sorts of investments have appeared along the light rail lines?

What about cities more similar in size to Cincinnati which have built LRT? Charlotte, Minneapolis, Portland? Have they seen enough success to continue system expansion? Have they seen investment/development near LRT stations?

You're cherry-picking fractions of relevant facts which don't even say anything on their own. And they aren't even accurate. Raleigh has no rail transit whatsoever. So how do you get that they have spent billions, and that they have 2% modeshare on some phantom trains? You're literally making things up to justify your predetermined conclusion.