On 9/6/2020 at 5:53 PM, KJP said:

Even Amtrak is getting more aggressive in the face of private sector competition to enter markets they aren't serving. They want to get into markets like Charlotte-Atlanta, Atlanta-Orlando, Nashville to somewhere, Cleveland-Chicago, Cincinnati-Chicago, 3C and others. But they need to operate under federal policies that allow them to get into expansion mode. I wrote about that here: http://allaboardohio.org/2020/03/02/amtrak-considers-new-resources-for-new-trains-services-including-ohio/

 

But Amtrak is doing that by trying to extract money from the states to make it happen.  Given the very serious problems with Amtrak's non-GAAP compliant route cost accounting and complaints from states that work with Amtrak already about how they are opaque about costs and can't even communicate how much it would cost to do a simple thing like add a coach to a train, I wouldn't trust them at all. 

On 9/10/2020 at 12:06 PM, gildone said:

But Amtrak is doing that by trying to extract money from the states to make it happen.  Given the very serious problems with Amtrak's non-GAAP compliant route cost accounting and complaints from states that work with Amtrak already about how they are opaque about costs and can't even communicate how much it would cost to do a simple thing like add a coach to a train, I wouldn't trust them at all. 

 

Maybe not, but it's the best deal Amtrak has offered to states so far. Not only are the proposing up to 100 percent federal funding of start-up capital costs but also 100 percent federal funding of operating costs for the first couple of years, then descending to lesser shares in subsequent years. To me, that sounds like a pretty good deal -- assuming Congress passes it. If they do, it should come with harder enforcement of Amtrak's GAAP compliance.

On 9/11/2020 at 12:28 PM, KJP said:

 

Maybe not, but it's the best deal Amtrak has offered to states so far. Not only are the proposing up to 100 percent federal funding of start-up capital costs but also 100 percent federal funding of operating costs for the first couple of years, then descending to lesser shares in subsequent years. To me, that sounds like a pretty good deal -- assuming Congress passes it. If they do, it should come with harder enforcement of Amtrak's GAAP compliance.

 

Good point.

Proposed "Biden Plan" for Amtrak system.

Look closely at the map and you'll see a Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinnati passenger rail route.

 

Here's the presentation this came from, given by Amtrak's Ray Lang to the Rail Passengers Association

https://railpassengers.org/happening-now/webinars/developing-new-amtrak-corridors-expanding-the-u.s-passenger-market/

 

 

AND

 

 

Edited October 21, 20204 yr by KJP

On 10/21/2020 at 4:24 PM, KJP said:

Proposed "Biden Plan" for Amtrak system.

Look closely at the map and you'll see a Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinnati passenger rail route.

 

"Look closely" indeed -- the pillar and regional/core express corridors appear to bypass Ohio.  Looks like a lack of support for rail in our state government is diverting interest toward a Chicago-Detroit-Toronto as a main route rather than Chicago-Cleveland-Buffalo-Toronto.  C'mon Ohio!

Let's be real. There's more online population via Detroit, better passenger rail infrastructure on both sides of the border, new trains being delivered and more funding mechanics/political support via Detroit. No brainer.

1 minute ago, KJP said:

Let's be real. There's more online population via Detroit, better passenger rail infrastructure on both sides of the border, new trains being delivered and more funding mechanics/political support via Detroit. No brainer.

 

That doesn't make it any less disappointing!  🙂

1 minute ago, Foraker said:

 

That doesn't make it any less disappointing!  🙂

 

Considering passenger rail advocacy in Ohio is inherently disappointing, seeing anyone attempt to make any overtures to improve passenger rail service is about as good as it gets.

On 5/6/2020 at 11:58 AM, Foraker said:

 

Not necessarily.  There is the potential for a Buffalo-Detroit line through Ontario instead. 

 

And if Ohio refuses to contribute funding to interstate routes, there is a possibility that Ohio would get no say in where the stations are, if any.  The train could simply travel through Ohio without stopping.  Although I would be surprised if it passed through any of the 3C's without stopping.

Two considerations:  1)  Going through Ohio without stopping is  not as workable of a solution as you might think.  All those train miles through Ohio have a cost and not stopping in Ohio just puts those costs on surrounding states.  That makes the train a less viable idea overall.  The Downeaster corridor from Portland, ME to Boston, MA has this problem with New Hampshire.  New Hampshire refuses to contribute to the corridor's cost.  However, the New England Passenger Rail Authority knows that if they don't make stops in New Hampshire, the financial performance of the train plummets.  This leads me to consideration #2:   interstate routes should be a federal responsibility.  It is a form of interstate commerce after all, but that's a separate subject for another time.

Edited December 5, 20204 yr by gildone

On 5/5/2020 at 5:06 PM, ryanlammi said:

 

It's not quite the same thing. If we're talking about going Cincinnati to Dayton, Cincinnati to Cleveland, Columbus to Detroit, etc, most of these trips aren't done with flights. Some business folks will fly between those cities, but it's largely faster and easier to just drive. So these regional trips shouldn't be comparing train travel to flights. They should be comparing train travel to driving.

 

But if I'm going to take a train to Indianapolis, or Detroit, or even Chicago (which is where flying starts to look more attractive), I want to make sure I am able to get all of my tasks done (whether for business or pleasure) without renting a car or waiting around for 30 minute headways on bus routes that end at 11pm. Otherwise, I'm just going to drive somewhere.

Yet when the Ohio Hub plan was being put together, the ridership analysis showed the system to be very much viable.  Ridership analyses are very carefully done and designed to be conservative.  It's why virtually every state-funded Amtrak corridor in the country exceeded their ridership projections when the trains went into service.  No public official wants to be caught supporting a lemon, so the analyses are deliberately designed to be conservative.

An incremental approach to implementing the Lakeshore Corridor Initiative (see link below) could be one way to bring daytime passenger trains to northern Ohio:

 

https://www.hsrail.org/sites/default/files/images/Lakeshore_4_Pager.pdf

 

This would have to occur post-pandemic, of course, but It could begin with a connecting bus from Toledo and Cleveland to Buffalo that would connect with Amtrak's Maple Leaf to New York City.  And one from Cleveland and Toledo to connect with a Wolverine Corridor train. This would give Cleveland and Toledo a daytime connection to Amtrak trains to Chicago and New York.   From there, piggy back on the Toledo-Detroit Corridor (https://tmacog.org/transportation/passenger-rail) and upgrade to Cleveland-Buffalo and Cleveland-Detroit trains.  From there, move on to additional frequencies between Chicago and New York. 

 

And what about Ohio's schizophrenic state government when it comes to passenger rail support?  Well, one possibility could be to form a joint powers authority made up of local government entities from Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria, Cleveland, and possibly Lake County modeled after the joint powers authorities in California that oversee the Amtrak corridors within the state.  As I recall, All Aboard Ohio started looking into this option after former Governor Kasich killed the 3C project, and they found that there doesn't appear to be any legal impediment in the state for local governments to form such an arrangement.  This needs looking into again and in more depth, but it's an option.  A joint powers authority could apply for federal transportation funds and not involve the state at all if the state is not interested. Money can also be raised for the trains by using tax increment financing (TIFs) from re-development around stations.  All of the aforementioned cities have development opportunities around potential station sites.

 

 

1 hour ago, gildone said:

An incremental approach to implementing the Lakeshore Corridor Initiative (see link below) could be one way to bring daytime passenger trains to northern Ohio:

 

https://www.hsrail.org/sites/default/files/images/Lakeshore_4_Pager.pdf

 

This would have to occur post-pandemic, of course, but It could begin with a connecting bus from Toledo and Cleveland to Buffalo that would connect with Amtrak's Maple Leaf to New York City.  And one from Cleveland and Toledo to connect with a Wolverine Corridor train. This would give Cleveland and Toledo a daytime connection to Amtrak trains to Chicago and New York.   From there, piggy back on the Toledo-Detroit Corridor (https://tmacog.org/transportation/passenger-rail) and upgrade to Cleveland-Buffalo and Cleveland-Detroit trains.  From there, move on to additional frequencies between Chicago and New York. 

 

And what about Ohio's schizophrenic state government when it comes to passenger rail support?  Well, one possibility could be to form a joint powers authority made up of local government entities from Toledo, Sandusky, Elyria, Cleveland, and possibly Lake County modeled after the joint powers authorities in California that oversee the Amtrak corridors within the state.  As I recall, All Aboard Ohio started looking into this option after former Governor Kasich killed the 3C project, and they found that there doesn't appear to be any legal impediment in the state for local governments to form such an arrangement.  This needs looking into again and in more depth, but it's an option.  A joint powers authority could apply for federal transportation funds and not involve the state at all if the state is not interested. Money can also be raised for the trains by using tax increment financing (TIFs) from re-development around stations.  All of the aforementioned cities have development opportunities around potential station sites.

 

 

I like this as a good short term way of building ridership up in order to justify additional train trips in the future. 
 

I think that our primary goal right now for intercity train routes should be a second or even third Lakeshore limited (NYC/Boston, upstate New York, CLE, Chicago) per day, and extending the Pennsylvanian (NYC Philly Pittsburgh) to Cleveland AND on to Chicago, plus making it twice a day. This would result in 5 or 6 Cleveland to Chicago round trip trains per day, without requiring any infrastructure upgrades. (Well, I suppose there would need to be a few sidings added and the CLE station track infrastructure upgrades to minimize interference from freight traffic.) Keep in mind, increasing frequency on the Lakeshore is only changing the Buffalo to Chicago part - the rest of that route is already served multiple times per day by other Amtrak services. Maybe a “Maple Leaf” could be split at Buffalo, like how the Lakeshore splits at Albany. 

 

Another good option for extending the Pennsylvanian would be to Cleveland and on to Detroit. And of course increasing frequency on the Capital Limited (Chicago CLE Pitt DC) would also be great. 
 

It feels like increasing frequency on existing routes would be much less expensive and therefore easier to accomplish compared to new service. When those efforts are successful, it becomes easier to justify new service. 

 

19 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

I like this as a good short term way of building ridership up in order to justify additional train trips in the future. 
 

I think that our primary goal right now for intercity train routes should be a second or even third Lakeshore limited (NYC/Boston, upstate New York, CLE, Chicago) per day, and extending the Pennsylvanian (NYC Philly Pittsburgh) to Cleveland AND on to Chicago, plus making it twice a day. This would result in 5 or 6 Cleveland to Chicago round trip trains per day, without requiring any infrastructure upgrades. (Well, I suppose there would need to be a few sidings added and the CLE station track infrastructure upgrades to minimize interference from freight traffic.) Keep in mind, increasing frequency on the Lakeshore is only changing the Buffalo to Chicago part - the rest of that route is already served multiple times per day by other Amtrak services. Maybe a “Maple Leaf” could be split at Buffalo, like how the Lakeshore splits at Albany. 

 

Another good option for extending the Pennsylvanian would be to Cleveland and on to Detroit. And of course increasing frequency on the Capital Limited (Chicago CLE Pitt DC) would also be great. 
 

It feels like increasing frequency on existing routes would be much less expensive and therefore easier to accomplish compared to new service. When those efforts are successful, it becomes easier to justify new service. 

 

 

Read the Lakeshore Corridor Initiative.  Three additional frequencies along the current Lakeshore Limited route IS the ultimate goal. 

 

As for infrastructure upgrades, it won't be that easy.  Congestion between Hammond/Whiting and Chicago has been problematic for years.  The South-of-the-Lake Bypass is needed to alleviate the problem.  That's an expensive project.  Also, NS has required that for any new passenger rail services on their lines,  all stations have access to both main tracks or be able to be serviced off the mains altogether.  That means there can be no new trains serving Bryan, Sandusky, and Elyria unless that occurs.  Now, that doesn't mean that new services have to stop in those towns right away, but those changes will ultimately need to be done.   Additional frequencies in New York will require, at a minimum, infrastructure investment to eliminate congestion issues between Rochester and Buffalo. 

 

Anyway, here's a guesstimate of what a thruway bus to the Maple Leaf could look like.  I'm not sure how much layover time Amtrak requires for one of their connecting buses, so I guessed one hour.  It could be more.  I suggest the new Buffalo Exchange St. Station as the connection point because the Depew Station has a godawful waiting environment:

 

Edited December 6, 20204 yr by gildone

On 3/5/2020 at 3:02 PM, KJP said:

NOACA has ignored them. Port Authority has ignored them. Amtrak has ignored them. But we have Hyperloop!!

 

Now you know why I'm stepping away from passenger rail advocacy after 35 years. I'm still somewhat involved, but nowhere near what I was.

I don't blame you!  I don't know why I'm allowing myself to be sucked back in...

On 5/6/2020 at 3:21 PM, westerninterloper said:

Ive had a copy of that map up in my office since it was released...I had just moved to BG from Japan, where never had a car and only used trains, so I was giddy thinking about being to take a train out of Bowling Green. All these years later, I think I took Amtrak from Chicago once (because I missed the Megabus) and it was three or four hours late back to Toledo. Havent ridden since, though I have looked into it from A2 to Chicago. 

 

As much as i would prefer the comfort of the train, megabus has it beat from Toledo - the bus is faster, makes fewer stops, is cheaper, and much more reliable than Amtrak. In Japan, the bus was cheaper, but had more stops, and was far slower. 

 

Because we in America want highway vehicles to be faster and better than trains, even though when rail technology is applied to its utmost, it is faster, cheaper and more comfortable than buses. BTW, while Amtrak has service has been halved across Ohio, Megabus is gone as are many Greyhound departures. But we must pay an average of $9,000 per year to have a car to have "freedom."

 

1 hour ago, gildone said:

I don't blame you!  I don't know why I'm allowing myself to be sucked back in...

 

I hope you can read to be informed without getting sucked back in.

On 12/5/2020 at 8:51 PM, KJP said:

 

Because we in America want highway vehicles to be faster and better than trains, even though when rail technology is applied to its utmost, it is faster, cheaper and more comfortable than buses. BTW, while Amtrak has service has been halved across Ohio, Megabus is gone as are many Greyhound departures. But we must pay an average of $9,000 per year to have a car to have "freedom."

 

 

I mentioned to my own son that he would need to buy a car when he graduated from college and he laughed at me.  He and many of his friends have recognized that cost of a car and say "I can just Uber everywhere for less."  And "I'll rent a car when I need one."  That might still represent a small slice of society, but that sentiment is practically nonexistent outside NYC or Chicago for my generation.  Hopefully that signals a changing attitude about trains as well.

On 12/5/2020 at 11:09 AM, gildone said:

interstate routes should be a federal responsibility.  It is a form of interstate commerce after all, but that's a separate subject for another time.

 

I agree.  Railroads don't like paying taxes on their right-of-way, and the states won't like giving up those taxes, but it's past time to have a national interstate rail plan for both passenger and freight routes.  The lack of coordination of our transit systems is a limitation on our efficiency.

20 hours ago, Foraker said:

 

I agree.  Railroads don't like paying taxes on their right-of-way, and the states won't like giving up those taxes, but it's past time to have a national interstate rail plan for both passenger and freight routes.  The lack of coordination of our transit systems is a limitation on our efficiency.

 

I don't think railroads property taxes on their rights of way anymore. I do a lot of property searches and every listing that I see shows that railroads are exempt. And when they did pay property taxes, they paid them to local governments not the states.

On 12/7/2020 at 12:12 PM, Foraker said:

 

but it's past time to have a national interstate rail plan for both passenger and freight routes.  The lack of coordination of our transit systems is a limitation on our efficiency.

The younger generations do want trains.  That's pretty clearly known.  It's our government that's the problem.  I agree about a national plan.  A federal passenger rail program is needed (Amtrak is not a rail program).  For that we need a federal passenger rail development agency/administration and a dedicated source of funding to purchase rights-of-way, whether it's unused ROW along existing freight mains, abandoned ROW where it makes sense, or new ROW where it's needed.  The state of Virginia has a model for this, so there is no need to re-invent the wheel. 

 

Also, Amtrak needs to be kept out of the picture as much as possible when it comes to planning.  They are too opaque about costs, exaggerate the costs of routes outside the NEC, lie about NEC profitability, and as an increasing number of states are realizing, they are just a bad business partner. 

 

Edited December 8, 20204 yr by gildone

3 minutes ago, gildone said:

The younger generations do want trains.  That's pretty clearly known.  It's our government that's the problem.  I agree about a national plan.  A federal passenger rail program is needed (Amtrak is not a rail program).  For that we need a federal passenger rail development agency/administration and a dedicated source of funding to purchase rights-of-way, whether it's unused ROW along existing freight mains, abandoned ROW where it makes sense, or new ROW where it's needed.  The state of Virginia has a model for this, so there is no need to re-invent the wheel. 

 

Also, Amtrak needs to be kept out of the picture as much as possible when it comes to planning.  They are too opaque about costs, exaggerate the costs of routes outside the NEC, lie about NEC profitability, and as an increasing number of states are realizing, they are just a bad business partner. 

 

I agree with the first paragraph. I agree with the concerns you lay out in the second paragraph, but I believe those issues can and should be fixed by the Federal government and Amtrak management. You can’t have a federal passenger rail program without fixing those issues, even if the program remains separate from Amtrak as an operator. 

1 minute ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

I agree with the first paragraph. I agree with the concerns you lay out in the second paragraph, but I believe those issues can and should be fixed by the Federal government and Amtrak management. You can’t have a federal passenger rail program without fixing those issues, even if the program remains separate from Amtrak as an operator. 

As far as Amtrak goes, it is my view that their management is un-fixable.  They are too NEC-centric and too much believe the garbage their route cost accounting system turns out.  I think a necessary fix is to split up Amtrak into two separate companies.  Amtrak becomes a NEC-only company.  A separate company is chartered and headquartered in Chicago to operate the interstate/long distance network and the state-supported corridors.  It's not a far-fetched idea:

A Two-Amtrak Concept

Railway Age

October 10, 2019
https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/intercity/a-two-amtrak-concept/

On 12/7/2020 at 12:12 PM, Foraker said:

 "I can just Uber everywhere for less."  And "I'll rent a car when I need one."  That might still represent a small slice of society, but that sentiment is practically nonexistent outside NYC or Chicago for my generation. 

You can add Washington to NYC and Chi. A car can be quite a burden here.

5 minutes ago, Dougal said:

You can add Washington to NYC and Chi. A car can be quite a burden here.

I don't think that's necessarily true. I know quite a few millennials (of which I am one) and younger here in SLC who are car-free and this isn't a walkable city. In my previous job I did a lot of recruiting for a local large university and when I went to the Bay Area, Seattle and LA one of the main questions potential students asked was if they needed a car and all were very happy to know that students at the U of Utah got free transit passes and light rail and buses could get them wherever they needed to go including stadiums, airport, downtown and ski resorts.

1 hour ago, JaceTheAce41 said:

I don't think that's necessarily true. I know quite a few millennials (of which I am one) and younger here in SLC who are car-free and this isn't a walkable city. In my previous job I did a lot of recruiting for a local large university and when I went to the Bay Area, Seattle and LA one of the main questions potential students asked was if they needed a car and all were very happy to know that students at the U of Utah got free transit passes and light rail and buses could get them wherever they needed to go including stadiums, airport, downtown and ski resorts.

🙂  I'm not sure where we disagree.  My point was LOTS of Wash DC folks go carless, which included me when I lived in Georgetown and could walk to work.

We need to revive the Lakeshore Corridor Rail Initiative:

 

http://www.lakeshoretrain.org/

 

 

What do y'all think about the lines on this guy's map?

1 hour ago, Henryefry said:

 

 

What do y'all think about the lines on this guy's map?

 

I think they or any lines need a sh!tload of money and the winning of some tough political battles. The design/engineering/construction is the relatively easy part.

This really belongs here, not in the Amtrak thread.......

 

 

^The route shown on that drawing would skip Hamilton, which cuts about 8 miles off the Cincinnati>Dayton route. 

 

Seems like there might be genuine hope for this, though I would have to pinch myself if I ever boarded such a line here in Ohio.

 

Biden is a well-known train rider and advocate.

 

DeWine has expressed in the past that he would be open to considering rail service.

 

Kasich is long gone.

 

I see a 40-60% legit chance of this happening for real.

 

The biggest obstacle will be the batsh*t right wing kook faction of the Republicans in the General Assembly who believe a passenger rail line is some kind of antifa conspiracy to turn fetuses into peanut butter sandwiches for Bill Gates.

So...where would the actual trains come from?  I don't see how we actually have trains running within 3-4 years even if Amtrak orders 100 new trainsets on February 1. 

10 minutes ago, jmecklenborg said:

So...where would the actual trains come from?  I don't see how we actually have trains running within 3-4 years even if Amtrak orders 100 new trainsets on February 1. 

 

Where did the "3-4 years" come from?

If even some of this got implemented, I'd be elated. A Cincy-Columbus route via Dayton would be a boon and could feasibly make Dayton and Springfield more attractive bedroom communities for folks getting priced out of the city centers in the C's. 

11 hours ago, jmecklenborg said:

^The route shown on that drawing would skip Hamilton, which cuts about 8 miles off the Cincinnati>Dayton route. 

 

My understanding was that the Ohio Hub 3C+D route from 12 years ago went straight from Middletown to Sharonville, missing Hamilton.  Is there documentation showing otherwise?

 

Based on documentation of the Ohio Hub, I had put this google map together.  Please let me know if there is documentation showing different routes.

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=15lcIcdt6ccSaZsZlUVtirtBH_kxw-yGG&usp=sharing

 

@KJP - Do the new proposals include Youngstown? Maybe you'll actually get your Ravenna Connection finally.

 

 

Here's the map of the Ohio Hub proposal that I used to build from.  Hamilton is shown as a "feeder bus route" and also possible commuter rail.

 

56 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

 

@KJP - Do the new proposals include Youngstown? Maybe you'll actually get your Ravenna Connection finally.

 

 

Too early to know. I would hope that Youngstowners would be interested enough in this to advocate for it but I have my doubts. The fine folks at Eastgate COG were decidedly anti-rail the last time I met with them.

 

If they're still not interested, Greater Youngstown can be served on the existing Amtrak route with a station in Columbiana next to SR11. Might be fine for just one new train a day anyway.

The problem with all these studies is to bypass the Akron/Canton/Youngstown Corridor with major rail is a  non-started for any of these plans. An area of close to 2 million and little to no service, why would their political representatives support that. The tax dollars of A.C.Y being used to subsidize rail service to other Ohio metros in the state, some of them with declining populations, will never be approved state-wide. There is no way until a true plan that includes that area on a broader scale will any of these plans come into fruition.

Akron has better train service right now with CVSR than most major cities in Ohio.

 

Seriously though, I'm glad Columbus didn't feel that way when they were bypassed by the Ohio Canal. Eventually they got served with a canal and so might Akron with passenger rail, especially commuter rail, even though it's a city with declining population too.

 

Keep in mind that this is just an introductory level of service. And it's hard to serve Akron and Cleveland on the same rail line to Columbus or Pittsburgh. First, any rail corridor that serves both Akron and Cleveland would require significant construction to provide passenger service operating at at least 79 mph. The reason is that Akron didn't grow up until after the railroad building boom was over in the 1910s. And even if capital was found to  construct a passenger-quality right of way  from Columbus or Pittsburgh to Cleveland via Akron, past studies have shown that the added ridership from Akron would be more than offset by lost ridership at Cleveland due to the less direct and more time-consuming routing via Akron.

 

15 minutes ago, vulcana said:

The problem with all these studies is to bypass the Akron/Canton/Youngstown Corridor with major rail is a  non-started for any of these plans. An area of close to 2 million and little to no service, why would their political representatives support that. The tax dollars of A.C.Y being used to subsidize rail service to other Ohio metros in the state, some of them with declining populations, will never be approved state-wide. There is no way until a true plan that includes that area on a broader scale will any of these plans come into fruition.

If we wait for a plan that covers every population center, we will NEVER get passenger rail in Ohio. The only “new” routes in this proposal are the 3C+D, which serves the four largest population centers (including the only area of the state that is actually growing) and Toledo to Detroit. (The other proposals are basically added frequency on existing passenger routes.) Furthermore, both of these new passenger routes are on well maintained freight lines, which reduces startup costs. A Cleveland to Akron line would require new track (in existing right-of-way) - a much more expensive and longer startup. Furthermore, when routes were formally studied (mid-2000s), routing Cleveland to Columbus via Akron and Canton added over an hour to the run time. The increased time decreases ridership by MORE than A+C added.

 

Sorry, but adding Akron and Canton in the first phase is a poison pill that would undermine the project and make it far less likely to happen. 
 

The best hope for Akron / Canton rail is a downtown rail loop in Cleveland improving the likelihood of a CLE-CAK commuter rail. The next best hope for it is to be preceded by other successful rail projects in Ohio. And I want to emphasize that I would LOVE for it to happen. Let’s just be realistic about it. 

I recall that METRO RTA, Akron City Council, the Mayor of Tallmadge, and other local government leaders in Summit County were starting to look at commuter rail proposals back when Obama's high speed rail plan and the 3Cs' rail line here in Ohio was itself proposed. The collective vision then was shaping up as commuter network of Akron-area spokes that would ultimately connect into the 3C hub in Cleveland via Downtown Akron and perhaps a northern suburban station in Cuyahoga Falls, since there wasn't a practical way to directly include Akron on the 3Cs line.

 

Of course, train-killer Kasich beating Strickland in 2010 snuffed out those efforts and any hope for state funding, but there were concepts and studies completed. Perhaps it's time to dust these off and update them?

 

An extension to CAK and further into Canton didn't seem like a high priority back then, and Canton/Stark County itself didn't seem too interested in much that Akron/Summit was doing 10 years ago. However, a new generation of leaders today in both cities & counties seems to see the benefit of regional collaboration. I could see Akron and Canton working together to build a commuter rail system that would also include Akron-Canton Airport, the HoF/Village, and Downtown Canton. Think tourism and travel.

1 hour ago, NEOBuckeye said:

I recall that METRO RTA, Akron City Council, the Mayor of Tallmadge, and other local government leaders in Summit County were starting to look at commuter rail proposals back when Obama's high speed rail plan and the 3Cs' rail line here in Ohio was itself proposed. The collective vision then was shaping up as commuter network of Akron-area spokes that would ultimately connect into the 3C hub in Cleveland via Downtown Akron and perhaps a northern suburban station in Cuyahoga Falls, since there wasn't a practical way to directly include Akron on the 3Cs line.

 

Of course, train-killer Kasich beating Strickland in 2010 snuffed out those efforts and any hope for state funding, but there were concepts and studies completed. Perhaps it's time to dust these off and update them?

 

An extension to CAK and further into Canton didn't seem like a high priority back then, and Canton/Stark County itself didn't seem too interested in much that Akron/Summit was doing 10 years ago. However, a new generation of leaders today in both cities & counties seems to see the benefit of regional collaboration. I could see Akron and Canton working together to build a commuter rail system that would also include Akron-Canton Airport, the HoF/Village, and Downtown Canton. Think tourism and travel.

 

It would be AWESOME to have commuter rail like: CLE Hopkins, Downtown CLE, E55th (old Penn Station), Garfield Heights, Bedford, Northfield, Macedonia, Hudson, Cuyahoga Falls, downtown Akron, Akron (Triplett), Green, CAK, North Canton, NFL HoF, downtown Canton.  That would be a FANTASTIC project.  We can dream.

 

My google maps of NEO rail proposals:

 

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1jwJYTqDuRjTaOhrx5g9gMR63xEMr783u&usp=sharing

 

Right, but this thread is about the Ohio Hub/Midwest Regional Rail, not NEO commuter rail.

6 minutes ago, X said:

Right, but this thread is about the Ohio Hub/Midwest Regional Rail, not NEO commuter rail.

I did look for a Commuter Rail thread before posting. Perhaps I missed it? And seeing as how the original Ohio Hub plan included a CAC commuter rail proposal, and the number one question about the 3C+D is “why doesn’t it include Akron - Canton”, I think it’s a reasonable part of this discussion. 

Yes, as long as we're discussing the CAC as a part of the Ohio Hub plan, then it is on topic.  If you want to start discussing regional commuter rail options in and of themselves, then feel free to start a new thread for it.

38 minutes ago, X said:

Yes, as long as we're discussing the CAC as a part of the Ohio Hub plan, then it is on topic.  If you want to start discussing regional commuter rail options in and of themselves, then feel free to start a new thread for it.

 

If he does it now, it would be topic #15,000.  😀

This is the only thread I can think of. See below. The last serious effort on starting Cleveland-Akron-Canton commuter rail was in the mid-1990s. That was 10 years before Urban Ohio beginning.

 

Interesting that Gov. DeWine is proposing a $1 billion "invest in Ohio" budget, namely for infrastructure, communities and getting young people who moved away from Ohio to come back.

 

Ohio needs modern trains as part of its draw to young people. Remember this from a decade ago?

https://www.bizjournals.com/columbus/blog/2011/10/young-professionals-digging-columbus.html

 

Or this more recently?

https://www.dispatch.com/news/20170824/lack-of-passenger-trains-poor-intercity-bus-service-ding-columbus-in-transportation-study

 

Or what I wrote a decade ago?

https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2011/05/dear-gov-kasich-building-more-highways.html

 

A decade later, Ohio politicians are still struggling to figure out what young people want.

Coverage on the Ohio parts of the Amtrak proposal from CLE dot com, including quotes from Stu Nicholson (All Aboard Ohio) and Grace Gallucci (NOACA)

Amtrak looking at major expansion in Cleveland, with possible service to Columbus, Cincinnati

 

https://www.cleveland.com/business/2021/02/amtrak-looking-at-major-expansion-in-cleveland-with-possible-service-to-columbus-cincinnati.html

...

Grace Gullucci, executive director of the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency, has a meeting scheduled with Amtrak on Thursday. “They have told us they are seriously looking at making investments in Ohio,” she said. “We’re very excited about it.”

 

She described any discussion about increasing multimodal transportation in the region as a step in the right direction. “Amtrak is a service that is available to all people,” she said. “It can connect lots of communities with lots of opportunities.”

....

The article also says Amtrak has contacted Ashtabula city officials about restarting service there.

 

5 hours ago, KJP said:

A decade later, Ohio politicians are still struggling to figure out what young people want.

I felt like Strickland was on the verge of it with the 3Cs rail proposal and policies that spotlighted economic development in the state’s cities, a relative rarity in this state. 

Then he lost to Kasich, and we know how that story played out. It’s a broken record at this point.

 

I don’t ever care about the partisan view of it. Just get the practical sh*t done here, and stop pandering to hot button issue fringe extremists with axes to grind.

 

If DeWine can move through the General Assembly the proposals he announced today to make Ohio a truly more progressive state and attract more people here, more power to him. And if he wants more younger people to take a look at Ohio as a place to live, make it easier for them to get around cities and the state itself without being car owners. Building out passenger rail ought to be a cornerstone in any such plans.

I shared this with SW Ohio interests who are seeking some guidance. I figured many of you would be interested in this. You are all welcome to share it and act on it......

 

here is some background info you can share, including a federal ask for SW Ohioans. I'll follow-up with a state ask tomorrow after I get some info from ODOT.

 

In June 2020, the House of Representatives passed a surface transportation bill (H.R. 2) that included the TRAIN Act and authorized more than $60 billion for passenger rail development from FY2021 through FY2025, a sharp increase over prior years. Unfortunately, a companion bill was never introduced by the relevant committees in the Senate. A copy of the bill passed by the House is available here: https://transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/BILLS-116HR2-RCP116-54.pdf 

 

Although the new state-development program language starts on Page 1002 under "SECTION 9209. STATE-SUPPORTED ROUTES OPERATED BY AMTRAK" the relevant text starts on page 1006 under the subtitle "(g) NEW STATE-SUPPORTED ROUTES." The funding amounts for each passenger rail development program are on pages 962-967. The total amounts across all passenger rail development programs work out to an average of about $12 billion per year. The corridor expansion program itself would be a $25 billion program, or an average about $5 billion per year.

 

Under the TRAIN Act:

+ Amtrak shall pay up to 100 percent of the capital costs necessary to initiate a new State-supported route, including planning and development, design, and environmental analysis, prior to beginning operations on the new route.
+ For the first 2 years of operation, Amtrak shall pay for 100 percent of operating costs and capital costs.
+ For the third year of operation, Amtrak shall pay 90 percent of operating costs and capital costs and the State shall pay the remainder.
+ For the fourth year of operation, Amtrak shall pay 80 percent of operating costs and capital costs and the State shall pay the remainder.

+ For the fifth year of operation, Amtrak shall pay 50 percent of operating costs and capital costs and the State shall pay the remainder.
+ For the sixth year of operation and thereafter, operating costs and capital costs shall be allocated in accordance with the cost allocation methodology described under subsection (a), as applicable.

 

While it would seem that with the Democrats taking control of both houses of Congress and the White House that this bill would be a cinch for moving forward. Amtrak officials ask that we not make that assumption. As we have seen, anything can and does happen on Capitol Hill. Amtrak officials are asking us to garner support from the Ohio Congressional Delegation to move this bill ASAP.

 

As for which Ohio routes Amtrak would like to pursue, Amtrak has done a market analysis of dozens of potential routes of 750 miles or less across the country and selected 45 routes including five serving Ohio over which Amtrak would like to start new or expand existing services.

 

This is part of a presentation here:  https://railpassengers.org/site/assets/files/16610/september_23_-_new_corridors.pdf 

And in a video presentation by Amtrak's Ray Lang here: https://www.railpassengers.org/happening-now/webinars/developing-new-amtrak-corridors-expanding-the-u.s-passenger-market/ 

 

The illustration that Amtrak is sharing with community leaders in Ohio cities shows that Amtrak would like to start four daily round trips between Cincinnati-Indianapolis-Chicago and three daily round trips between Cincinnati-Dayton-Columbus-Cleveland, on top of the existing, middle-of-the-night Cardinal service that operates three days per week in each direction. That would work out to about 15 trains per day at Cincinnati, or one train less per day than Milwaukee has now. Milwaukee boards more than 600,000 Amtrak passengers per year. A suburban station at the Milwaukee Airport boards about 180,000 passengers per year. In SW Ohio there would also be potentially hundreds of thousands additional boardings at suburban/outlying stations like Sharonville/I-275, Oxford, Middletown and possibly others. This represents a significant increase in mobility and, given the nature of train service that allows its riders to work, meet, eat/drink or relax while traveling, offers a meaningful increase in business productivity and our quality of life.

 

As noted earlier, the State of Ohio would eventually take over the sponsorship/purchase of service of the Amtrak route(s). So, once route planning and design is complete with Ohio's input and oversight, Ohio would seek a contract with Amtrak for the operation of the service going forward. The State of Ohio doesn't need to do anything at this time, but there are some things it can do to improve the planning process. I will get into that later this week. The focus right now is on Congress.

 

Please let me know if you have any questions.