Our City Online

Messageboard - Transportation

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Light Rail in Central Ohio

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Transportation Light Rail in Central Ohio

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 634 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1096764
    MichaelC
    MichaelC
    Participant

    Any mass transit line–streetcar or otherwise–has to connect Downtown with a suburb, IMO, and with at least one other destination in between.

    A line that connects Downtown to the airport, Easton, and Gahanna/New Albany makes a lot of sense; a line that connects Downtown to the Hilltop, the casino, and Hilliard makes sense; a line that connects Downtown to Grandview/UA/Dublin and the Zoo makes sense; a line that connects Downtown to German Village, the south side, Grove City and Rickenbacker makes sense; a line that connects Downtown to Bexley/Whitehall, the east side, and Reynoldsburg/Pickerington makes sense; and perhaps most pressingly, a line connecting Downtown with the SN, campus, Clintonville, Worthington/Westerville, Polaris, and Olentangy/Powell makes sense.

    And connecting the ‘burbs directly makes sense; the point made above that all bus routes must not go through Downtown is absolutely right, and our mass transit should, if not initially, account for that eventually.

    Pie in the sky, though:

    I’d love to see us do something unique with our mass transit here; our plans must be cognizant of the sea changes coming to transit, namely self-driving cars, Hyperloop, etc. Whatever we do here, let us do it thinking long-term, to facilitate Columbus’ growth rather than having to be so reactive and outdated upon its completion.

    Let’s build something here that’s uniquely functional, unlike lines built in similarly situated cities around the country or world.

    Let’s build a system that can deliver people more efficiently than they could travel on their own.

    #1096765
    derm
    derm
    Participant

    If traffic congestion is used to determine placement the lines would first run along 70 from Pick/Reynoldsberg and the second line would be 33 from Lancaster. They are the worst ones.

    #1096770

    jbcmh81
    Participant

    If traffic congestion is used to determine placement the lines would first run along 70 from Pick/Reynoldsberg and the second line would be 33 from Lancaster. They are the worst ones.

    A line along 33 to Lancaster was actually once a proposal back in the first half of the 1990s. It popped up around the time that Columbus had a proposal for 8 routes in a sort of spoke system from Downtown to various suburbs.

    #1096778
    derm
    derm
    Participant

    Driving out to Belle Valley today at 7am the traffic at that time was backed up bumper to bumper all the way to 256. It stays packed inbound to the city for hours. I normally drive 33 south at the same time and the line goes to the north side of Lancaster. I go against traffic both ways, thank goodness. At 7:15am it is fully packed. The median of both roads has enough space to hold an east/west line similar to how the Rapid works in Cleveland.

    They need some big park and rides like they have in Chicago and that would move a bunch of people. Neither line would serve the airport or High st(which does not need a line at all in my opinion), but would serve the people and would stand the most chance of success in my mind due to usage. The third line would come in 70 from the west and pick up Hilliard people. The fourth line would mimic 315 all the way up to Powell or Lewis Center. Or heck all the way to Delaware.

    I am picking lines based only on how long the traffic lines are at rush hour. When I was in NYC over Labor Day it was interesting to note how and which subway lines were closed over the holiday. They based usage and closures strictly on rush hour usage and not tourism usage or convenience usage. The subways exist to get people to and from work in NYC. They shut down half of them in Brooklyn/Central Park/Battery Park over the holiday as although there were some who wanted to use them(still thousands of people), the bread and butter of the lines are the every day work riders. I think we need to do this as well.

    #1096819

    substance
    Participant

    <So if I had to choose just one line to build I would choose something like Broad st. since it goes straight through downtown west to east and intersects High st. I’d start from say maybe 70 to the west and go all the way to Franklin Park to the east. It could then easily be extended to run from 270 to 270 and an extension from Broad to the airport along Stezler.

    I agree a bunch. My amendment would to have the line start at Convention Center Arena District go south on High to Broad then to CMH

    #1096924

    lbl
    Participant

    An East-West line along Broad would seem like the natural choice though at least on the East side of town locating it on Main St might make for a better business development route since it was originally designed for that use. and sorely need in of development.
    E. Broad was designed as a residential “boulevard”.

    #1097529
    Ned23
    Ned23
    Participant

    I was up in Cleveland over the weekend and rode the health line express bus up and down Euclid several times. I found it to be surprisingly effective, given the level of investment. I like that they put a bell on it, so it actually rings as it’s pulling into a stop, like a trolley.

    #1097600
    lazyfish
    lazyfish
    Participant

    once the bike lanes fail, there will be an open lane on N.4th and Summit for light rail, ingenious.

    #1097610
    Eridony
    Eridony
    Participant

    How exactly will the bike lanes fail?

    #1097619
    lazyfish
    lazyfish
    Participant

    several possible scenarios…revolt of the Clintonville commuters, increased accidents, disuse as cyclist choose their own route ( Indianola is used way more south of Hudson than either Summit or N. 4th), impractabilty for snow plowing, parking, and trash/recycling collection on Summit, lack of any comprehensive planning, bike fad fades, light rail replaces it.

    #1097637

    substance
    Participant

    Bike lanes will succeed when Clintonville commuters realize that there are multiple methods to get to IV and SN in a safe and healthy manner.

    #1098328
    Posole
    Posole
    Participant

    once the bike lanes fail, there will be an open lane on N.4th and Summit for light rail, ingenious.

    I see more of a streetcar/trolley on N 4th. Light Rail would likely follow the railroad tracks with various stops along the way. Behind Soussy market would be a good stop, so would that vacant lot between 11th & Chittenden and the RR.

    #1098351
    Josh Lapp
    Josh Lapp
    Participant

    http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2015/10/20/big-project-could-attract-federal-funds-metro.html

    From a Cincinnati Biz Journal article:
    Metro has a BRT-lite line known as Metro*Plus that runs from Kenwood to downtown through Uptown. Amongst U.S. cities, only Cleveland has a true BRT line with a dedicated lane and signal prioritization. Columbus also is considering a project, Holland & Knight’s representatives said.

    #1112396

    JAL
    Participant
    #1112397
    Walker Evans
    Walker Evans
    Keymaster

    Hopefully this can get momentum soon.

    From the article:

    “At this stage, the discussion would be entirely theoretical…”

    Breaking News: No news to report.

    In related news, Zach Klein may depart council by the end of the year.

Viewing 15 posts - 571 through 585 (of 634 total)

The forum ‘Transportation’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: