Tag: Transportation

Categories
News Transportation

Signal Timing and Pedestrian/Bicyclist Safety

Signal timing can be a great thing. It can move automobiles and bicyclists more efficiently through the city while also providing for a safer, more predictable traffic patterns for pedestrians. In order to achieve this success and a safe right-of-way for automobiles, bicyclists and pedestrian then this timing needs to be done at the right speed. What is that speed though?

In New Haven, CT they are moving forward with a signal timing project that will keep downtown speeds there between 25 and 30mph. But many Complete Street advocates would argue that 25mph is too fast. Studies have shown that a pedestrian hit at 20mph has a 5 percent chance of death, while a pedestrian hit at 30mph has a 45 percent chance of death. These findings have led to many cities looking towards urban traffic speeds in the 15 to 20mph range (bicyclists travel around the 12mph mark).

Personal experience makes me say that posted speed limits do very little to manage speeds. Signal timing does seem to work out of the appeal avoided stop-and-go traffic. Urban environments, when well designed, also will naturally reduce traffic speeds in most cases. This is a reaction of mental comfort levels for drivers. When there are lots of people around, buildings and other structures close to the street, and plenty of things to observe drivers tend to naturally slow down – self-regulating in a way.

With that said there are streets in Cincinnati that are in need of reduced traffic speeds. Aside from the typical residential streets that people always seem to clamor for lower speeds, what streets would you like to see made safer for bicyclists and pedestrians by reducing traffic speeds? My top pick would be the Calhoun/McMillan network. The parallel streets are complimentary of one another and both have large pedestrian and bicyclist volumes. Due to their straight orientation, one-way traffic flow, limited traffic-calming designs, and lack of a completely built out urban streetscape the speeds are very high and very unsafe for anyone other than automobile drivers.

Categories
News

Transit video contest(s)

I have recently been made aware of not one, but two video contests going on for transit causes. The first is sponsored by Cincinnatians for Progress and is asking people to submit videos through YouTube that, “describe why Cincinnati should vote NO on the charter amendment.” CFP is asking that links to the YouTube videos be sent to cincinnatiansforprogress@gmail.com.

CFP will then share the best videos with Cincinnati’s online community, local news media and the winning video will be shown at a special screening event and might even be used in a TV commercial this fall to help defeat the Anti-Passenger Rail Amendment.

The next video contest is being sponsored by the American Public Transit Association and is asking for people to submit videos about why they “dumped the pump.” Winning entries in the Dump The Pump Video Contest are eligible to win a year of free transit, an iPod touch and $25 VISA cash cards. Entries must be submitted by September 18th.

Categories
News Transportation

Streetcar discussion tonight at Downtown library

Tonight, representatives from COAST and Cincinnatians for Progress will be part of a discussion on the Cincinnati Streetcar proposal. The event is part of the Downtown Residents Council’s monthly community meeting, which will take place at the main branch of the Public Library at 800 Vine Street. The meeting starts at 6:00 pm and will be held in the Tower Room on the library’s third floor.

Learn more about this and other upcoming events by looking at DRC’s Upcoming Events calendar.

Categories
News

Misguided amendment garnering state-wide opposition

Sunday’s Enquirer featured an opinion piece that called the recently proposed Charter amendment to ban all passenger rail expenditures without a prior vote a “poison pill.” The Enquirer’s piece marks yet another local institution that’s committed to voicing their opposition to the dangerous amendment. Followers of transportation debates in Cincinnati will readily admit that the Enquirer has been vocally opposed to the proposed streetcar line, so it is clear that they’ve seen the dangers of passing such an ill-conceived restriction on our city’s Charter.

The debate surrounding the proposed amendment has garnered attention beyond the I-275 loop as well. Although only residents of the City of Cincinnati have the ability to vote on this amendment, its potential negative implications have warranted statewide criticism.

A Columbus-based group that promotes the free markets by advocating for greater transportation choices, All Aboard Ohio, voted unanimously to adopt a resolution condemning the amendment as “punitive and discriminatory.” The resolution goes on to argue that if passes, the amendment would only bolster a predominately car-based public policy that “siphoned jobs, residents and wealth from the city [and] will continue to be funded by taxpayers in the City of Cincinnati.” The group’s president, Bill Hutchison, decries:

“This is very sad to see this happening… They’re really not thinking this through. Passenger rail has a strong record of bringing economic vitality and environmental quality to urban centers throughout the world. For groups who claim to want these characteristics for Cincinnati yet seek an anti-rail charter amendment is very disappointing.”

The groups Mr. Hutchinson references are the Green Party and the local chapter of the NAACP, which helped circulate petitions to place the proposed amendment on the November ballot. The Green party’s involvement befuddles most, as an increase of options for non-vehicular transportation aligns closely with green initiatives. Furthermore, in increase in transportation options not only creates jobs, but allows those without the means to purchase a car greater mobility and access to existing jobs.

WHIO, a news talk radio station in Dayton, cautioned this weekend of the dangers of the amendment. “The issue also could put the brakes on Cincinnati’s involvement in future rail projects across Ohio,” the statement warned, “meaning the proposed high-speed rail proposed by the federal government could be in jeopardy.”

Categories
News

Ohio’s 3C Rail Corridor Project Seeking Input

The Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) last week announced that they have jointly developed a website called 3CisMe, which will serve as the main hub for information surrounding Ohio’s proposed 3C (Cincinnati, Columbus, Cleveland) rail corridor. Although the name of the site is admittedly lame, the site itself is quite useful.

3CisMe is meant to both inform the public as to the progress of Ohio’s 3C rail line and serve as a sounding board for critics and boosters alike. In addition to being one way that the ODOT and ORDC will disseminate information on the progress of the project, a “public comment” section will allow citizens an opportunity for their voices to be heard. Some of those comments will even be featured in the application for funding through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (better know as the Stimulus Package). Ohio must turn in its application by October 1.

The current 3C proposal would allow travelers to travel between Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus, Cleveland, and Toledo, collectively home to 60% of the state’s population. With stimulus funding, Ohio’s “quick-start” plan would be operational by 2011.

This system will link in with a larger mid-west network, servicing Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Louis, Indianapolis, Louisville, Omaha, and Kansas City. The Chicago Network Hub would serve as the gateway to the west. The 3C corridor is well suited to link with the Keystone corridor, a network of rail lines servicing New York, DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and the rest of the east coast.

A March 2009 Quinnipiac University Poll showed that nearly two thirds of Ohioans favored re-establishing passenger rail in the 3C Corridor. Some want to see it happen because they know the economic development potential it creates, while others think the 3C corridor would be useful because they don’t want to put the mileage on their car, or they don’t have a car at all. While some want to travel by train because it is more relaxing than traveling by car or plane, others like the idea because it will allow them to be more productive, like this commenter from the site:

“Several times per year, I have to travel to Columbus for meetings and training. Whenever I go now, I lose at least 5 hours of productivity per trip. On the train, I could use a laptop to keep up with my e-mail, tend to paperwork, have telephone conferences, and sometimes even meetings with coworkers. These things can’t be done in a car.”

Just one parting thought: There is a proposed amendment to the Cincinnati City Charter that would require a vote each and every time the city wanted to invest in a new phase of planning or constructing passenger rail. If it passes in November, neither the State nor the Federal government would be able to count on Cincinnati as a stop on the system. The timeline on this project is one that will require cities and states to efficiently compile an application for funding. If Cincinnati cannot commit in a timely manner (and it would not be able to commit without going to another vote if this passes), the Federal dollars will go to one of the other 278 projects in 40 states that have already submitted pre-applications as of July 17.

Cincinnati would be offered another transportation choice with rail, but the city could easily be left out if the amendment passes. Passing the amendment would reduce travelers’ choices, and leave Cincinnati at a competitive economic disadvantage. For more information on the potential negative implication of the proposed amendment, please see the Cincinnatians for Progress web site. Though I disagree with them, for the other perspective on the amendment, please click here.

Note: to visit the 3CisMe site directly, go to http://3cisme.ohio.gov/ and please note that it does not include the www in front like many sites. Source for this post.