Columbus to be a Rail Hub




Columbus to be a rail hub Amtrak train

In the Spring of 2021, I wrote about Amtrak’s proposal to bring passenger rail back to Columbus as part of its ConnectUS plan. That original plan included Columbus in just one route- the long-sought-after Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati route, otherwise known as the 3-C Corridor. In my article, my view was that this plan was far too limiting for Columbus. That its growth and location suited the city for much better local and regional connections. Now, Amtrak is calling for Columbus to be a rail hub, complete with multiple routes and connections that rival those found in Chicago.

Here is the original map from last year:
Columbus to be a rail hub

And here is the updated version, recently released:
Columbus to be a rail hub 2022

In the new plan, the Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati route is maintained, but the following routes would be brand new:
Columbus-Chillicothe
Columbus-Athens
Columbus-Toledo-Detroit
Columbus-Pittsburgh
Columbus-Fort Wayne-Chicago
Louisville-Nashville would be an extension of the Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati route.
So overall, Columbus residents would have direct connections to 12 different cities. Of course, many of those cities would have their own routes, so Columbus residents would have rail access to large parts of the country under the plan.

The timeline for completion is tentatively for 2035. Most of the proposed routes already have existing rail lines, so it would come down to funding any necessary upgrades along with buying the trains, etc. Whether any of these routes are ever actually built and opened remains to be seen, though. Passenger rail, unlike in most of the world, is politically controversial in the US, and public transit remains deeply underfunded and underbuilt in every part of the nation arguably outside of the New York and Northeast Corridor.



1900 Debate on Columbus Transit



1900 debate on Columbus transit

Streetcars in 1909.

In a January, 1900 debate on Columbus transit, a group of concerned Downtown Columbus residents and business owners voiced their opposition to the Columbus & Newark Traction Company being greenlit to build and operate a streetcar line on Mound Street. Today’s car-dominated environment means most arguments against transit projects would likely revolve around rail being too expensive or that few would ride them. In contrast, 1900 arguments involving transit options showed a very different attitude towards public transit in general.

The opposition group put out a list of 10 reasons why they objected to the project. They were:
1. We believe it to be the interest of prospective passengers of a street railroad from the east over the National Road, that the cars come into the city over the Main Street tracks.
2. Because it would be most direct to the center of the city.
3. Coming over the Main Street line would confine cars of the new line to the established rate of speed while in the city.
4. The proposed line on Mound Street would get but few city passengers.
5. It is not likely that reduced fares would be secured.
6. Transfers over old lines could not likely be had.
7. Cars would be far between.
8. A car line on Mound Street would be useless to residents of the city because too near Main Street where cars are much more frequent than could be expected on a suburban line.
9. Not getting city traffic, cars on the proposed line over Mound Street would run at a high rate of speed, making it dangerous for people in that part of the city and especially so for the residents of Mound Street.
10. We believe that it would be to the general interest of the city and the special interest of the southeastern part, also the interest of a new company that the proposed new line over the National Road from the east should come into the city two or three blocks from, if not on the Main Street line, but never over Mound Street.


Besides being somewhat repetitive in places, the given reasons are more practical than the emotional anti-rail tirades often witnessed today. The group wasn’t so much opposed to rail- just the opposite. Instead, they didn’t like that there were too many lines in the same area, thereby making a new one redundant and financially infeasible. They didn’t bring up construction costs, but objections to the potential lack of transfer stops. They weren’t overly worried about the line interfering with other traffic, but whether the service would run enough cars.

Too often in the current transit debate, proposals tend to get bogged down in politics rather than the basic transit needs of the population. A century ago, even opposition groups seemed to fully understand that the issue was not rail itself, but in ensuring that what got built made the best sense possible. Columbus hasn’t had rail in more than 40 years. In its long absence, we’ve perhaps lost the plot on what really matters.

The opposition group lost the fight and Mound Street got its streetcar line. The East Mound section ended service in 1929 as the car became increasingly dominant.
The last streetcar trip in the city occurred on September 5, 1948.