Does Cincy have or will Cincy get Light Rail service ? (Cincinnati: coupons, transfer)

[dramamama6685]

Originally Posted by The Don

One of the reasons why Western Hamilton County voted against it was there was nothing in it for us.

The original plans called for a line parallel to I-71 and maybe crossing over the river to the airport. Eventually there was a potential for some unknown line to serve the western suburbs.

Add to that the fact that we (Cincinnati) do no have the LEADERSHIP to get something like that done... can you imagine what a field day City Clowncile would have with a project like this? My God, they can't even get started on the Banks project - something that has been successfully accomplished in cities across the country - including our neigbors on the other side of the Ohio River.
Building a rail system would require insight, innovation, foresight; our elected officials (I can't call them leaders) lack these.

Let's not forget more tax dollars.. they can't even run Metro efficiently. What makes you think that this will be any different? More government=more inefficiency period.

[jlrosen]

metro is run more efficiently than any other transit service in ohio, they have the lowest per passenger cost, lowest per mile cost and lowest per hour cost. And while giving rides to those too young, too old, too poor, or too disabled to drive might be considered inefficient, it is still a good idea to do so.

if we want to get people out of poverty, get people working we need to connect them to jobs, transit does that

[esya]

There is nothing "efficient" about the single family home, the suburbs, or the passenger vehicle system to transport one person to and from work and the store every day. It's just personally convenient, that is different than efficient.

[woxyroxme]

Originally Posted by jlrosen

so you would be in favor of abandoning the interstate highway system and switching to toll roads?

Fuel taxes collect 4 times the amount of funds required to build and maintain roads. A feasability study was done on light rail and based on the projected number of users vs. the cost, they found it would be cheaper to just buy everyone that would use it their own Audi TT.

[jlrosen]

That is not an accurate statement, or perhaps it was accurate when the light rail was proposed, but is no longer an accurate statement.

The federal highway trust fund, based on gasoline taxes will be bankrupt in 2009. The ohio department of transportation's highway fund, funded by gasoline taxes, will also be bankrupt in 2009.

Ohio
The Cincinnati Post - Ohio's highway projects stall (broken link)
Feds
As repair needs mount, highway trust fund faces shortfall (8/16/07) -- www.GovernmentExecutive.com

[dramamama6685]

If it's now more cost efficient/ feasible, why wouldn't someone in the private sector invest in doing this? I'm just saying...

[woxyroxme]

I think allowing the metro busses to use the shoulder on the interstates is a better solution.

[The Don]

Originally Posted by dramamama6685

If it's now more cost efficient/ feasible, why wouldn't someone in the private sector invest in doing this? I'm just saying...

Acutally there was a time when what is now Cincinnati Metro was the Cincinnati Traction Company and it was a private corporation. Evidently, it just became economically infeasible for it to continue as such. So I guess that answers your question - private sector control was tried but did not succeed.

I think that transportation has fallen into the perview of public works - whether it is the federal highway system, federal involvement at airports, or light rail.

[jlrosen]

Originally Posted by dramamama6685

If it's now more cost efficient/ feasible, why wouldn't someone in the private sector invest in doing this? I'm just saying...

because the amount of government subsidies for road projects makes it impossible for a private company to compete.

[Boilermaker_Fan]

Originally Posted by dramamama6685

Yet,another way to waste tax dollars. Studies were done in other cities that got light rail and it was a bust. Couldn't even pay for itself due to little use and I believe, cost overruns.

Apparently Minneapolis wasn't included in that study.

Minneapolis opened a light rail system in 2004 and it has been a HUGE success (if you know Minneapolis the LR runs along hiawatha ave and connects bloomington, the MSP airport, minihaha, and the major neighborhoods of minneapolis). It has already surpassed its 2030 ridership goals and due to its greater than expected popularity funding was passed to expand the original hiawatha line and add a central corridor line that will connect to the university of minneapolis and downtown st. paul.

I recently moved to Minneapolis after living for many years in Cincinnati and I have been very impressed with the light rail system. It is a great way to get downtown to see a ball game and is really helping revitalize growth in the urban areas along the line. All along the line you can see where new condos are springing up and areas are being revitalized -- which is quite a feat given the current state of the economy. Given future trends in energy cost and commute times, I can only imagine that property values near stations will go up and the value of having a good mass transit system in development will only increase as time goes on.

I only made this post because I was among the many that voted against the Cincinnati transit proposal back in 2002. But after I have seen how great the light rail can be (particuarly when I want to go see a ball game) I can't help but think that a good light rail system wouldn't have been just what Cincinnati needs to help rebuild its downtown and urban areas. I hope that people change their mind and vote it in someday -- but if not at least I can enjoy it here in the twin cities!