Multiple studies have highlighted the benefits of rail-based mass transit in the Greater Cincinnati region, and the city is proceeding with planning and engineering for a downtown streetcar circulator. The question then becomes: What form will a regional rail system will ultimately take?
Light Rail vs. Heavy Rail: A Hybrid Approach
TransPerth B-Series Trainset (Photo: perthtrains.nachohat.org)
The objective of the Metro Cincinnati project is to provide a vision of an ideal rail transit system that could be constructed as if funding were not a limitation, and the design of the system’s physical infrastructure in this project is based on that assumption. Without drastic changes in current priorities in transportation funding at the federal level, however, it is unlikely that such a system will be built in its proposed form.
Most of the discussion about a regional rail system for Greater Cincinnati has focused on the development of a light rail system, which incorporates a number of cost-saving measures compared to the heavy rail system proposed on these pages, but at the expense of speed and passenger capacity.
However, there are measures that can be taken to combine the cost-saving measures of light rail with the capacity and speed benefits of heavy rail. Such a hybrid approach may resemble the TransPerth system in Australia, which utilizes Bombardier B-Series trainsets that are similar to Washington Metro trains in many respects, including high-level boarding and increased passenger capacity. Unlike the Washington Metro, the TransPerth trains are run via overhead catenary wires and incorporate surface-running segments with grade crossings, which eliminate the need for costly grade-separation for the entire right-of-way. Given that the existing Central Parkway subway is already designed with high-level platforms, such an approach would also negate the need for the costly reconfiguration of the subway for low-floor light rail trains. Fare collection could initially be via a proof-of-payment system, thus eliminating the need for costly fare gates and staffed stations. Provisions can be included to facilitate the future installation of a fare gate system if warranted by increasing ridership.
This amateur video shows the ride on a TransPerth B-Series train from the Mandurah to Esplanade stations:
Some Closing Remarks
In his inauguration speech, President Barack Obama said, “You will be remembered by what you build, not by what you destroy.” For the latter half of the 20th Century, Greater Cincinnati has allowed its historic neighborhoods and stunning hillsides to be destroyed in favor of freeways and automobile-oriented sprawl. Its ambitions for rail transit have been allowed to languish, and efforts to resurrect it have been repeatedly met with cries of “boondoggle!” by naysayers who seemingly know the cost of everything but the value of nothing.
As gasoline prices continue to rise and the effects of global climate change become increasingly apparent, and as a younger generation rediscovers the benefits of rail transit and livable neighborhoods, the momentum is finally swinging back in favor of rail transit in Cincinnati. Plans are underway to build a streetcar circulator, and there has been increasing discussion about making another effort at a regional rail plan after the 2002 defeat of the Metro Moves levy. Since the 2008 presidential election, the federal government has showed a renewed interest in investment in rail transit, both within urban areas and between urban areas.
Cincinnati cannot afford to miss this opportunity to begin planning and construction of a regional rail system. Previous generations of Cincinnatians left behind a beautiful city with stunning architecture, and had already begun the groundwork for a robust rapid transit system. What will the current generation of Cincinnatians leave behind for their grandchildren?
