All you need to do is get travel times close to that of a car and your market expands drastically. 

 

Especially when you can actually work for 4-5 hrs while sitting on the train--In the worst case scenario, we have an affordable alternative to flying while increasing our professional productivity.

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR. Let's just get the thing rolling and then take the next steps to get it going 110 mph over the entire route. All you need to do is get travel times close to that of a car and your market expands drastically.

First, the Tampa-Orlando line is going to be HSR (~168mph) built from scratch. (The route between Tampa and Orlando would actually run in the median of I-4 most of the way.)

 

This is a good idea. Not only will it be a touristy thing to do if you're coming via Tampa, but drivers on the highway will watch the train zoom by at three times their speed.

 

Now if only I-75 between Dayton/Cincinnati had real HSR running down the median instead of getting a 40mph used train that ends in Sharonville and won't be used by anyone that has access to a car. The argument will be made that this is nothing more than a suped-up bus system for the state, a sort of land based Greyhound.

 

:'(

Now is not the time to be fighting with eachother on this.  We are all (for the most part) on the same team and want to see passenger rail flourish again in Ohio.  Connecting the 3C's is the first step and we've just been awarded money to make that happen.  Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.  Let's just get the thing rolling and then take the next steps to get it going 110 mph over the entire route.  All you need to do is get travel times close to that of a car and your market expands drastically. 

 

Agreed! We should be identifying obstacles and ways to overcome them.

 

From a marketing standpoint it seems that its not going to be faster than driving. So the ability to use wifi and not deal with the stress of driving should be played up. In general, people are willing to put up with added travel time if it means they don't have to drive. This could be a good thing for business travelers among others.

 

For the CUT, we need to identify possible funding sources, and see if there is anyway to expedite the 4th line study. The Obama Administration has proposed an increase in funding for HSR in subsequent yearly budgets. I don't recall the amount. If this is not cut out by Congress, is it possible to apply for these funds for connecting the 3C line to CUT?

 

Additionally, I heard there is talk of running a line from Cincy to Louisville but I don't know how serious KY is about this. If that is the case, CUT could also benefit from that separate application if it gets off the ground.

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.

 

Correction: Florida's high speed rail is from "scratch."

All you need to do is get travel times close to that of a car and your market expands drastically. 

 

Especially when you can actually work for 4-5 hrs while sitting on the train--In the worst case scenario, we have an affordable alternative to flying while increasing our professional productivity.

 

Exactly!  It's all about having transportation options. 

 

I don't always feel like driving to Cincinnati to see friends, but I'm not going to pay to fly... and that's not convenient anyway.  I would be willing to take the train (even with the added travel time) given that I could work/play/sleep the entire way instead of fighting to stay awake on the rural parts of 71 and white knuckling it through Columbus.

I guess I'm just astonished that some people are so unhappy over winning $400 million in the FRA lottery. There are plenty of states (cough, Michigan, cough cough) where they asked for much more than we did but would have loved to win as much as we did. I feel bad that some of you cannot enjoy this stunning fact:

 

This is the largest-ever federal grant awarded to a passenger rail project in Ohio's history.

 

This project has been sold as HSR and as 3C, yet it won't be either one of those things within any conceivable timeframe.  Perhaps expectations were too high all along.

 

OK, so it appears that instant-HSR is physically possible in Florida.

 

I would suggest laying down infrastructure as quickly as possible here, because we don't know how long we'll have democrats in office at any level.  I'm not saying panic.  I'm saying these things swing to and fro, and for all we know we're about to enter another Conservative Decade.

 

If that happens, any part of this project left for future monies may not get done for quite a while.  I'd prefer that Ohio enter that hypothetical situation with at least one state-of-the-art example of passenger rail for us to rally around.  I don't wanna be telling people "no, you just haven't yet seen what it can really do" when the thing's already been running for years.  And I don't wanna be telling them "it was never possible to build any HSR here, not until we first ran slow trains for X years" if that's demonstrably false.

^Exactly! It's all about have transportation options.

 

I don't always feel like driving to Cincinnati to see friends, but I'm not going to pay to fly... and that's not convenient anyway. I would be willing to take the train (even with the added travel time) given that I could work/play/sleep the entire way instead of fighting to stay awake on the rural parts of 71 and white knuckling it through Columbus.

 

Kentucky studied several high-speed rail proposals along the Interstate 71/75/64 corridor (the Triangle High Speed Rail Corridor) in the 1990s, and while those studies are still valid and relevant, no line was constructed due to excessive cost. There are now proposals and grants in the works to fund additional studies to continue on with the Triangle alignment, while in the same breath, there are seriously proposals to bring passenger rail back to the state via slow-speed lines.

 

RJ Corman is contemplating passenger service between Louisville and Lexington via his own line between the two cities. And several sitting senators in the state -- on both sides of the aisle, are working on other proposals.

I understand that most states have implemented rail slowly, with improvements coming over time.  However, most of these states (California, North East states, etc.) have had rail for quite some time.  Having slow rail transit in the 1970's was probably a lot more acceptable than it is now.  When people go to Florida and ride their high speed rail, or the East coast and ride the Accela (sp?), and then come back and ride a 45 mph train in Ohio, they are going to be sorely disappointed.  I love rail, but I just don't see how I could ever justify paying money to sit around in a train "station" (more likely a parking lot in Sharonville), make a stop in Dayton, and and chug into Columbus, only to have to wait around for a bus or cab to take me where I want to go in C-bus.  Currently the drive takes just over an hour and a half, is done on way less than a tank of gas, and I have my car once I'm in Columbus, so I can actually go where I need to go.  I *hate* to use the words of COAST, but this is looking like a giant boondoggle!

 

And to understand why Cincinnatians are especially unenthused about this proposed plan, just substitute your city with Cincinnati, and try not to feel slighted.  What if the train was to stop in a fancy new downtown Cincinnati station, downtown Dayton, and right on High St in Columbus, and then stopped at a parking lot 16 miles south of downtown Cleveland?  Well, you gotta save money somewhere, right? Obviously I'm not advocating this situation, but I think the concerns of Cincinnatians are completely valid.

OK I did try to search Google and this thread, but had no luck. Did Florida get any FRA grants for the $3.5 B needed for the "Orlanda to Tampa" HSR from scratch?

OK I did try to search Google and this thread, but had no luck. Did Florida get any FRA grants for the $3.5 B needed for the "Orlanda to Tampa" HSR from scratch?

$1.3B of FL's $3.5B was from FRA.

 

 

Time has a great article that we all should probably read if we aren't familiar.

 

Can High-Speed Rail Succeed in America?

By  Bryan Walsh  Friday, Jan. 29, 2010

 

When the White House announced last spring that it would allocate billions of stimulus dollars to high-speed-rail projects, states submitted 45 applications for more than $50 billion in aid. In the end, the Federal Railroad Administration decided to distribute $8 billion in funding to 31 states, with the biggest single grants going to California ($2.3 billion) and Florida ($1.3 billion).

 

But whatever the public's vision of a sparkling new 150-m.p.h. bullet train like those in Japan and Europe, the reality is that not all, or even most, of the stimulus money will go toward creating entirely new rail service. Instead, much of the initial funding will be spent improving and speeding up existing service.

 

In Florida, however, the money will in fact help build a new stretch of track between Tampa and Orlando, which will allow trains to travel at speeds up to 168 m.p.h. It is the first leg of an intercity corridor that is expected to continue southward to Miami.

 

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1957575,00.html?xid=rss-topstories#ixzz0eJtH9lkB

 

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1957575,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.

 

Correction: Florida's high speed rail is from "scratch."

 

Indeed.  And, gasp, it only connects Tampa-Orlando....  Where is the outcry from Miami or Jacksonville for being "left out" of the equation?

 

I don't recall anyone here ever stating or implying that we were unhappy with getting $400 million for passenger rail.  All some (many) of us are doing is asking questions.  Is what's been proposed the best use of the money, given that this $400 million is not enough to get all the way to Cincinnati in a meaningful way?  (I'm only going by what some posters from Cincy are saying.)  I can't stand how asking questions somehow equates to "I'm unhappy that we 'won the teat-sucking lottery'." 

 

We also now see that starting at high speeds from scratch IS possible, since they're doing it in Florida.  And I'm here on a rail-advocate populated message board where Cincinnatians are saying they won't use the freaking rail line!  327 asked honest questions about implementing high speed on sections of the corridor and was told "You can't do high speed at once" (which, unless you think the ORL-Tampa service is doomed to fail, is not true) and asked "why aren't you happy we won this money?"

 

If Cincinnati can't handle or doesn't want this rail line, isn't it prudent to ask, how fast can one make Columbus-Cleveland?

It looks like the Florida line is a demonstration line to promote HSR to tourists and Floridians.  I also think that this has something to do with it's swing-state status.  (Florida will probably have more Electoral votes after the 2010 Census while Ohio is supposed to lose some).  I can't help thinking this is part political play.

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.

 

Correction: Florida's high speed rail is from "scratch."

 

$1.8 billion for 84 miles

I can't find a poster on here that is complaining about the $400 million, nor about passenger rail. What most of it boils down to is what you nailed on Matches.

 

What can we do best with $400 million? In my opinion, if it means securing right-of-way for high-speed rail, then that would be great. If it means conducting additional studies regarding high-speed rail, then that would be great. Or if it means constructing part of a line between Columbus and Cleveland, where there is already some decent west-east connections, then that would be great.

 

But even on many of the rail forums that I belong to, many of the die-hard railfanners are understandably disappointed in this. And it isn't surprising that most, if not all, of the Cincinnati-based forumers are foaming at the mouth after being excluded.

 

No one is pissing on the 3C plan, since it is needed. But the questions we should be asking is: Is the slow-speed proposal feasible? Can we spend that money to advance up a high-speed proposal? And what do we do about the money spent on slow-speed rail once high-speed rail is (or if) in place? $400 million is not pocket change.

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.

 

Correction: Florida's high speed rail is from "scratch."

 

Indeed.  And, gasp, it only connects Tampa-Orlando....  Where is the outcry from Miami or Jacksonville for being "left out" of the equation?

 

I don't recall anyone here ever stating or implying that we were unhappy with getting $400 million for passenger rail.  All some (many) of us are doing is asking questions.  Is what's been proposed the best use of the money, given that this $400 million is not enough to get all the way to Cincinnati in a meaningful way?  (I'm only going by what some posters from Cincy are saying.)  I can't stand how asking questions somehow equates to "I'm unhappy that we 'won the teat-sucking lottery'." 

 

We also now see that starting at high speeds from scratch IS possible, since they're doing it in Florida.  And I'm here on a rail-advocate populated message board where Cincinnatians are saying they won't use the freaking rail line!   327 asked honest questions about implementing high speed on sections of the corridor and was told "You can't do high speed at once" (which, unless you think the ORL-Tampa service is doomed to fail, is not true) and asked "why aren't you happy we won this money?"

 

If Cincinnati can't handle or doesn't want this rail line, isn't it prudent to ask, how fast can one make Columbus-Cleveland?

 

I think a lot of us had our hopes up and are sick of being pushed around.  Why can't we ever get things done right?

 

Maybe we're not as important electorally as Florida or hold key positions in power like California. 

 

Like I said before, let's do this right, however humble it might be instead of doing it all (or just to Sharonville) and watching it die on the vine.

Yes, the train won't be HSR from the start, but as KJP has pointed out no rail line starts off as HSR.

 

Correction: Florida's high speed rail is from "scratch."

 

$1.8 billion for 84 miles

 

In that case, we couldn't even do HSR from Col-Day with the money we've been allotted.  I wonder if Ohio's funding application was based on the idea that the 3C aspect was more important than the HSR aspect.  Did we even ask for something like Florida did?  Did we make a conscious decision not to? 

 

If I'm in DC and I'm presented with Ohio's application for an entire state worth of slow trains, vs. Florida's "let's build HSR right now and show people what it can do" theory... I'm probably giving Florida billions and giving Ohio a small fraction of that.  That dreaded "vision thing" again. 

 

It's like Cleveland's RTA telling us the feds won't help us build new rail... when RTA has submitted no such plans to the feds and shows zero interest in developing any plans for new rail.  Regardless of all that... Blame those fools in Washington!!!  Yeah right.

 

Don't tell me what can and can't be done.  Tell me what happened when you actually tried to do it, and maybe we can find a solution. 

It was based on the application which was based on the study.  The study called for conventional service between the 3 C's with HSR coming years afterwards.  The "vision" was conservative but based on proven models as KJP has reiterated.  I am not familiar with Florida's but I think they have more political will than our state does in terms of transportation planning. 

 

The disconnect here is that the impression given by the local media was that we were applying for HSR when in fact that was never really the initial intention.

This is a quick start rail venture.  This to me means we are trying to get any kind of rail up and going by 2011 connecting the 3Cs.  Not all the costs have been fleshed out and not all the decisions as far as routing are set in stone. 

 

The advantage to this is that instead of spending more money on more studies and having more debate about the route and how many stops, we get some kind of rail system going in the most expeditious manner possible.  I believe that once the sunk costs are set by 2011 there will be immediate updates to improve the whole system by 2013.

 

We could also wait everything out until 2013 and not have any benefit of train travel until all the studies are complete and then the new set of politicians will have come in to have their say on the whole project perhaps deciding that should put it to a vote of the people or maybe just killing it outright.

 

I live in Summit county about 15-20 miles away from a 3C stop.  I think this is needed to help the inner cities of the 3C.  I don't think its a big deal that Cinci doesn't have a downtown stop for 2011.  I would expect there to be a pledge that there would be one by 2013 whereever they can decide is the best place.

...and an alcohol car.  Seriously.  A bar car will bring me on a trip from downtown Dayton to drinking in Tremont!

 

Just wait till you see Sherman's reaction when it's announced that the lounge car will be run by Mynt Martini. :)

 

Nobody wants to see true high-speed rail more than I do, and I sympathize with those who feel conventional 79MPH service is inadequate. I also agree that Cincinnati is potentially getting screwed here... Ironically, one of the running comments during the Issue 9 debate was that if Issue 9 passed, Cincinnati's 3C station would be located in Sharonville. Reminds me of the story about how New York's LaGuardia Airport was built:

 

The initiative to develop the [LaGuardia Airport] for commercial flights began with a verbal outburst by New York mayor Fiorello La Guardia (in office from 1934 to 1945) upon the arrival of his TWA flight at Newark — the only commercial airport serving the New York City region at the time — as his ticket said "New York". He demanded to be taken to New York, and ordered the plane to be flown to Brooklyn's Floyd Bennett Field, giving an impromptu press conference to reporters along the way. At that time, he urged New Yorkers to support a new airport within their city.

 

Maybe Mayor Mallory will do something similar when his 3C train tries to put him off in Sharonville.

 

That said, if given the choice between $400M for conventional rail, and zero dollars for high-speed rail, I'll gladly take the former as long as it's the first step toward faster train service in the future. In this case, we can't afford to let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

 

More about LaGuardia:

 

The airport was dedicated on October 15, 1939, as the New York Municipal Airport, and opened for business on that December 2.[3] It cost New York City $23 million to turn the tiny North Beach Airport into a 550-acre (2.2 km2) modern facility. Not everyone was as enthusiastic as LaGuardia about the project, some regarded it as a $40-million boondoggle. But the public was fascinated by the very idea of air travel, and thousands traveled to the airport, paid the dime fee, and watched the airliners take off and land.

 

If done right, I'm convinced that high-speed rail will capture the public's imagination in a similar way. But spending $400M on more studies isn't the way to make that happen, and the first priority right now needs to be providing passenger rail service so that people can get used to the idea of being able to take a train across Ohio. In time, and as people see other high-speed corridors coming online elsewhere in the US, people will demand the necessary upgrades to bring high-speed service to Ohio.

 

    Starting a high-speed system from scratch is technically possible, given enough money. This is the approach that Japan took in the 1960's. 

 

    Since Ohio doesn't have the money to start a high-speed system from scratch, I think that it's out of the question for Ohio.

 

    It may be technically possible to build just one segment of high-speed rail, from say, Dayton to Springfield, with the money that we have, but obviously it will attract a limited ridership, and also have limited political support.

 

 

 

   

But could that money be used for groundwork? Such as right-of-way purchases, further planning and study, and etc. for high-speed rail?

 

  No offense to the good people of Cincinnati proper, but Sharonville and the other northeast suburbs are part of "Cincinnati" to most people.

Well, if I am going to Dayton, why would I need to take the 49 MPH rail when I could travel 70-80 MPH on Interstate 75? Especially so if they are widening it to four-lanes from Sharonville north? The biggest obstacle to going to Dayton from Cincinnati is the chronic congestion, namely between Cincinnati and Sharonville, where it widens out. The first 20 miles in the state are some of the worst, and average speeds can be down to 20-30 MPH in rush-hour, so if it could be avoided, you'd have a great seller right there from Sharonville to CUT. Park and Ride!

 

 

    High-speed rail (over 79 mph) is going to require a lot of new right of way, complete with grade-separated crossings. It is expensive. There is no way around that fact.

 

    Ohio COULD start purchasing right-way and preparing for high-speed rail, but there is no completion date in sight without funding.

 

   

    "Well, if I am going to Dayton, why would I need to take the 49 MPH rail when I could travel 70-80 MPH on Interstate 75?"

 

    You wouldn't need to take the train. You could take I-75. Especially if you are travelling to a point in the suburbs at either end.

But could that money be used for groundwork? Such as right-of-way purchases, further planning and study, and etc. for high-speed rail?

 

My guess is that it could not per the NEPA planning process.  To purchase ROW for a service above the 3-C Quick Start the environmental studies required have yet to be completed.  The money for additional studies in the 3-C corridor and other state corridors has been allocated by ODOT in the TRAC process - hence, it did not make sense to apply for these types of funds.  KJP raises good points as far as the successful state corridors, but the simple truth is the Ohio has not done enough in the environmental and preliminary engineering phases to move to higher speed rail corridors.  The states that received funds for higher speed rail (CA, FL, IL) have all completed these studies to at least the point of being able to purchase ROW.

^ Well, my point was hypothetical, not based on what has already happened. Of course, it would be great to begin securing ROW for high speed rail, but that's not what was sought.

 

  I was ignoring the funding stipulations. If Ohio had $400 million to spend without restriction, Ohio could purchase right-of-way, but there is no gurantee that Ohio will ever be able to come up with the money to complete the project.

As I understand it, the 3-C Quick Start is being built mainly in existing rail right-of-way, which allows for less environmental work.  Essentially, the project is built within disturbed earth.  Higher speed service requires ROW, bridge overpasses, stream mitigation, wetland mitigation, air studies, noise studies, and on and on...

 

To just purchase ROW for a future service, all the those studies need to have been completed and accepted at the federal level.  Ohio has not done that, but we are on our way to completing those studies.  Those planning constraints plus the timeline constraints of ARRA funding contributed to the service that is being proposed. 

On page 65 JYP mentioned alternative funding for the 4th main as it relates to getting trains into CUT.  One thing I'm curious about, is the 4th main something that is technically independent of the 3-C plans?  I want to say it is, that CSX/NS interests are pushing for it due to the congestion impacting their own freight operations.  If that's the case, then is it possible for it to get Federal and/or State funding through some other program, or (heaven forbid) from CSX and NS themselves?  It seems like the 4th main is going to have to happen at some point, whether there's passenger trains or not, and that seems like a good thing.

Yes, it is a TRAC project

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Submitted%20Applications/2009D08-02.pdf

RJ Corman is contemplating passenger service between Louisville and Lexington via his own line between the two cities. And several sitting senators in the state -- on both sides of the aisle, are working on other proposals.

 

It would be intresting to see if they actually get passenger service in KY again.  But nice to hear about bipartisan support for it.

 

 

The advantage to this is that instead of spending more money on more studies and having more debate about the route and how many stops, we get some kind of rail system going in the most expeditious manner possible.

 

Get 'r done!

 

 

 

 

Im curious about what Florida has going on. I understand the Orlando/Tampa thing as an excellent demo project to sell the concept to tourists, who would return home wanting one for their state, but FLA has an even higher speed line projected between Orlando and Miami...180 - 190 MPH.

 

 

 

 

Husted is setting up the rationale for the GOP to pull the plug on the operating subsidy after a "decent interval". 

 

It's too bad that ideologues like Husted really oppose this because it's a Strickland/Democrat/Obama led initiative.  Pure politics.  He's making a "prediction" with out any evidence on which to base it. 

 

The partisan division that's choking Congress and our state legislatures is one of the things that's destroying America.  Some of these guys don't care about anything except political power and trying to win elections.

It's looking like this train system (if it ever really happens), could be a black eye for Democrats.  Granted, the Democrats it hurts won't be Strickland or Obama because they'll most likely be out of office by then.

 

 

 

Strickland will be long gone before any of that comes to pass.

 

The way the polling is looking the voters seem prepared to give him the heave-ho in favor of Kaisich, who will pull the plug on 3-C. And we know that John Husted is opposed.   This has become a partisan political issue.

 

 

Hopefully a sensible, non-populist Republican with some sort of transit/economic sense can get ahold of Kasich's ear.

^There's a good case for populist support for rail if only someone would make it.  Look at it this way, the DOT spends money on roads and ever-expanding interstates and now we're going to build trains.  Why don't we cut highway funding and put it toward HSR.  If you bait the conversation with info about China having the fastest train in the world, you could build the issue into a national pride initiative.  Obama should consider this method.

 

Im thinking the North Carolina passenger service might be a good case study since it serves a state that has a lot of urban sprawl and is also fairly politically conservative (thinking about both the politics of support and the type of place)

 

  ^----We could build a new high-speed 3C line with the money that ODOT spends now. However, that money is already accounted for, and ODOT is not likely to give it up. That's like saying that we could build the 3C line with the money that we spend on Iraq war.

The Dayton Daily News editorializes that this is a good opportunity for Dayton:

 

Dayton Gets Break in Trains Decision; Follow-up is Key

 

Whatever one thinks of the federal pasenger train program, it presents an opportunity for Dayton and the state.

 

The route the new trains will take is described by one newspaper as linking “the state’s three largest cities (and Dayton) by passenger train for the first time since 1971.”

 

If Dayton doesn’t use this opportunity that other mid-size cities would love, it’s not only missing the train, but the proverbial boat... (more at link)

 

The comments are predictably anti:

 

"This is just another AMTRAK. The fares will not cover the expenses and Ohio taxpayers will have to make up the difference! People think!"

 

and...

 

Now the laughing turns to reality. The trivial amount paid for the startup will leave HUGE amounts to be funded by the states. That along with paying to operate after the thing is built will be a huge drain on state budgets. We are not Europe. We are not the east coast with highly populated, close-by areas. ————————-I found that Cincinnati Cleveland will be 6.5 hours. I can drive it in 3.5. I can only guess what Dayton to Columbus is—2.5??? So for that morning appointment, unless it’s within 3 blocks of the train station will require 4 hours of get up, drive to Dayton train station, wait for train, ride for 2.5 hours, then take taxi to location. Same for return trip, if it’s even possible in the same day. —————This is a joke

 

...so they are making some subsidy and praticality arguments against this.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No offense to the good people of Cincinnati proper, but Sharonville and the other northeast suburbs are part of "Cincinnati" to most people.

 

Yes that's understood, but high quality rail systems have train stations right in the heart of the metropolitan region.  This is part of the benefit of rail over air travel.  You can take the train from Cincinnati's center city to Columbus' center city, or Cleveland's for example...and should there be local rail options in place, then you could avoid the use of a car altogether.

 

For example, look at what is being planned in Denver:

^

I imagined I am somewhere in Europe, than I saw the Union Station sign...

You, this Sharonville thing...and I know this is just speculation....this Sharonville end-of-the-line reminds me a lot of how the old South Shore line didnt go into downtown but ended in the western suburbs of South Bend, and you had to take a cab downtown since they didnt have bus service either.  Evnetually they terminated the line at the South Bend airport, which was better, but still pretty weak compared to a downtown terminal.

 

Both situations were unsatisfying, so I agree with Rando on his points....that they need to really find a way of getting the line into downtown Cincy (downtown, not CUT).  Then you'd get the benefit of recreational travel to the stadium and downtown things, which could be a real market for this line.

 

That is what Riverside is banking on...recreational travel to and from the Air Force Musuem (though they...probably Riverside...will need to run a shuttle bus from the station & hotels to the museum).

 

Anyway, I agree with Rando on dtwn Cincy is a must-have, if not now, very soon. 

 

 

Denver's plan is beautiful.  The city is aggressive for both transit and passenger trains... And, remember, Denver is high up in the Rockies, far removed from other major metro areas... unlike Ohio, which should be the hub of rail btw the East and Midwest... oh that's right, we are planning the Ohio Hub.

Ditto Jeffery and Rando.  Let's remember why inter-city rail died in Ohio in the 70s.  Automobiles and their proponents (in the public and private sectors) provided good reason to dump trains in favor of cars.  No one put up a strong enough defense of real rail options.

 

A downtown to downtown link is essential for the 3C's but so are local streetcar systems and regional light-rail.  Since the odds of these sorts of changes coming all at once are nil (even though they're as high right now as they ever will be), the implementation will be piecemeal.  Therefore, every implementation of the system must be constructed to a gold standard that makes automobile-transport pale in comparison.  And this is where the "$400 million "Quick Start" system is a good start" idea really falls flat.  If "Quick Start" and HSR ran on the same type of track, then that argument would hold some water.  Otherwise, I see this 3C plan dying on the vine if not drastically improved which is a tragedy.

You, this Sharonville thing...and I know this is just speculation....this Sharonville end-of-the-line reminds me a lot of how the old South Shore line didnt go into downtown but ended in the western suburbs of South Bend, and you had to take a cab downtown since they didnt have bus service either.  Evnetually they terminated the line at the South Bend airport, which was better, but still pretty weak compared to a downtown terminal.

 

Both situations were unsatisfying, so I agree with Rando on his points....that they need to really find a way of getting the line into downtown Cincy (downtown, not CUT).  Then you'd get the benefit of recreational travel to the stadium and downtown things, which could be a real market for this line.

 

That is what Riverside is banking on...recreational travel to and from the Air Force Musuem (though they...probably Riverside...will need to run a shuttle bus from the station & hotels to the museum).

 

Anyway, I agree with Rando on dtwn Cincy is a must-have, if not now, very soon.

 

Comparing the South Shore with the 3C probably isn't representative. The South Shore is commuter rail, with a maximum distance end-to-end of about 90 miles. But anyway, a little more info for comparison:

 

Prior to urban removal in the 1970s, the South Shore did go all the way downtown. The station was at the LaSalle Hotel, and a small layover yard was just across the river. At the later Bendix location shared with Amtrak there was still a milepost with the number 2 on it, indicating 2 miles from the origin of the line. The Bendix neighborhood was terrible; it wasn't safe to leave your car there even during the day, let alone at night.

 

Moving the terminal to the airport consolidated South Shore service with an intercity bus terminal, airlines, and South Bend Transpo city transit buses. Despite the distance from the city's core, ridership continues to climb; whereas trains east of Michigan City used to be two cars, in the past year I've seen four-car sets frequently at South Bend.

 

South Shore commuters have the option of driving Interstate/expressway instead, and although trains attain 70-75mph, station dwell time brings the average down to about 39mph end-to-end, and on the western 50 miles of the line many trains are standing-room only. Much of the time, the South Shore operates at capacity.

 

On Notre Dame game days, shuttle buses meet the South Shore trains. A similar service could be provided on a daily basis for 3C trains at Riverside or Sharonville, or wherever the stations turn out to be. Shuttle buses could run to/from multiple locations, like major hotels and a free or discounted secure parking facility for 3C patrons. Use nice buses with luggage bins, and drivers trained to provide a service that's a cut above local transit service.

Did you see the presidents budget today?  Another $1 Billion (at least) for high speed rail in 2011 and several other financial mechanisms for funding transit systems.  There will be more funding in the coming years to potentially increase speeds along the 3-C and to add additional legs of the Ohio Hub.  Be patient folks!

Some of you above are ignoring the fact that 14 other states began their state-supported passenger rail services in much the same way as Ohio is doing now..... basic service at conventional speeds with a gradual ramping up of those speeds and frequency of service.  Those states saw ridership grow along with demand for more and better service.  Their reward: if you look at the majority of states that got Stimulus $$$ last Thursday, nearly all of them were states that started out with incremental service.  Three of them...Illinois, Florida and California....will now be developing higher-speed trains.

 

No one at the ORDC or ODOT ever claimed that the 3C would propel Ohio into the same level of service as Amtrak's Northeast Corridor all at once.  This has always been characterized as a "start-up": one that will lead to more trains on more corridors and at faster speeds. But it has to start someplace.

 

From some of the postings I've seen in recent days, it is clear that some posters have barely read the 3C Quick Start Plan, if at all. 

 

I mean, how does one poster claim that the 3C won't work because their are no streetcars or light rail in the cities that will be served?  Last time I looked, that wasn't a requirement of the NEPA process.  The state has been working closely with local transit authorities to make sure that stations are served and that other "last mile" solutions like rental cars, cabs and biclycles are available

.

Another starts comparing the 3C project to failed and poorly planned commuter projects that don't even compare in either scope or detail.  Is the implication that we should plan for failure?

 

The fact the 3C got funded is the result of a solid team effort by staff at both the ORDC and ODOT to get a project application through a first-phase environmental assessment when even FRA officials doubted it could be done.  Well, it not only got done, I am told at least one FRA official said Ohio's was just about the best application for a new start-up they saw out of the 28 states that applied....and consider that ohio was competing against states that had already proven themselves with successful corridors.

 

This is Ohio's time to get passenger rail underway and it can and will get done.  Will there be hurdles to overcome and kinks to work out?...absolutely.  But issues like finding a way to get trains into CUT will get done.  Four Ohio corridors will have their environmental work underway even as the 3C project progresses.  If there was any evidence that the 3C is the beginning of something bigger and better, it is that.

 

For years on these pages... I've read posters whine and moan about how there's no money for passenger rail , so Ohio should just give up and stop planning.  It was that determination to keep the planning going that got us $400-million last week!  Now, I hear and see people whining and nitpicking over how that $400-million should be spent.... or that this route is better than that route.... or the ever-present "I can drive faster between Columbus and (wherever)...."  It's like listening to a bunch of starving people who, when invted to dinner, all they do is gripe about the food.  Would you rather the money get sent back so another state can get started or expand service?

Did you see the presidents budget today? Another $1 Billion (at least) for high speed rail in 2011 and several other financial mechanisms for funding transit systems. There will be more funding in the coming years to potentially increase speeds along the 3-C and to add additional legs of the Ohio Hub. Be patient folks!

 

Exactly !  Thats' why setting the stage with the 3C Quick Start is critical.  Ohio has to psoition itself for these future dollars, just as other states did over the last deacde and were awarded with stimulus funds last week.

Did you see the presidents budget today? Another $1 Billion (at least) for high speed rail in 2011 and several other financial mechanisms for funding transit systems. There will be more funding in the coming years to potentially increase speeds along the 3-C and to add additional legs of the Ohio Hub. Be patient folks!

 

Wow. That's the second thing I've seen that makes sense!

 

I sure understand the misgivings some of you may have over the 3-C proposals, but there are a few things to ponder:

 

a) Without Obama---who personally intervened and demanded money for rail---there would not be one red cent for any sort of rail passenger program, be it high speed, mid speed or slow speed. Ohio, left to its own devices, would still be where it has been since 1971, when Amtrak was created: dithering and twiddling its thumbs.

 

b) That the $9 billion was labeled as "high speed" when only parts of really match that ideal. It's really incremental improvements to the existing rail passenger network. Politics being what they are, "high speed" sounds a lot sexier than "Let's fix this line and that," even if that's what is to be done.

 

c) $9 billion, as groundbreaking and significant as it is, is a drop in the bucket when compared to the national need for more and better rail passenger service. When the $9 billion was announced the feds ended up with over $100 billion in proposed projects! That illustrates how far we, as a country let things atrophy. Over the last ten years, Amtrak went thru one shutdown scenarion after another as the Bush Administration tried to zero out its funding. Carbuilders closed up because there were no car orders. If we build a truly national rail passenger system, the bill would be at least $250 billion, according to AASHTO.

 

d) Politics might have played a role in the way the $9 was disbursed and if true that only helped Ohio, a state which has not helped itself in the past. You can also thank the hard work of the Strickland Administration. The 3-C Corridor is one of the few new lines which was awarded funding. Some major states like Texas got very little. We are very fortunate to have a Governor who "gets it."

 

e) So, with a limited amount of funds the decision was made to spread the money around to those projects which got the most for the money, instead of focusing on one or maybe two high speed lines. I for one am glad they spread the money around. There is no way we would have been awarded the entire amount. The winner probably would have been California, which is far ahead of us.

 

f) Related to the last point, I wonder how many of you realize how expensive a true high speed (220 mph) line is and how long it would take to build.

 

Chicago-St. Louis is just a little longer (287 mi) vs. 3-C (265 mi) and gives us some idea:

 

110 mph: 4 hour running time on freight rail trackage - $1.2 billion

 

220 mph: 2 hour running time on all new right of way - $12 billion

 

That's right: $12 billion. Ten times as much. Even if we wanted to do this, where would the money--- state or federal---come from? Then there is the time spent doing environmental reviews, preliminary engineering, final engineering, acquiring right of way, addressing NIMBY concerns and all the rest that could add five years to the project.

 

Folks, we have to learn to crawl before we can walk. We are a long way from running yet. I agree that in a more perfect world, we'd do the whole thing the right way from the start. That isn't in the cards. Ohio is still taking a few tentative steps and that could be erased with the next election.

 

By the way, people WILL ride. This has happened all over the country on service which are not much faster than what is proposed here. It WILL happen.

 

Finally, that Amtrak report, where the infamous 39 mph average speed comes from is highly suspect. My personal belief is that running times will be faster than that. How fast remains to be seen, but this report should be viewed as starting point and not the final destination.

Time is never wasted if you're wasted all the time...all aboard!

^That is actually a fantastic idea. A booze cruise on rails. I'm serious. Who cares how long it takes you to get form point A to point B if you are partying the entire time.

 

I went bar hopping along Charlotte's light rail line.  We rode down to the south end, then started stopping at each stop that had a bar within walking distance until we arrived at the northern terminus in Uptown (aka downtown) Charlotte.  Good times.

For years on these pages... I've read posters whine and moan about how there's no money for passenger rail , so Ohio should just give up and stop planning. It was that determination to keep the planning going that got us $400-million last week! Now, I hear and see people whining and nitpicking over how that $400-million should be spent.... or that this route is better than that route.... or the ever-present "I can drive faster between Columbus and (wherever)...." It's like listening to a bunch of starving people who, when invted to dinner, all they do is gripe about the food. Would you rather the money get sent back so another state can get started or expand service?

 

I'd rather not just spend money for the sole purpose of spending.  If 400 million isn't enough to do the 3C project in a way that will be done right, then modify the plan.  Use the 400 million on a Cleveland-Columbus line, or a Cincinnati-Columbus line, and do it right.  Show the people of Ohio that rail works here, and that it can be a great alternative form of transportation to a bus, car, or plane.

 

Let's say you're trying a new type of food, say pizza.  Would you rather have:

A) a whole pizza with ketchup for sauce and canned cheese spread for the cheese.

or

B) a half of a pizza with a good sauce, and real mozzarella cheeze.

 

Sure you don't get as much, but the quality is so much better, you learn that you really like pizza, and you want to have more of it.

 

Personally, I'd rather have a more limited plan done right, than a shoddy and non car competitive comprehensive plan.  Rather dismiss people asking the question of why would they take a train that takes twice as long than a car, and leaves you carless is the middle of Ohio's car oriented cities, could you try answering it? I would really like to see this answered from someone supporting this plan.  I mean, really, what the hell is someone from Cleveland going to do when he gets to the "station" in Sharonville? There is either extremely limited bus service or none at all (and good luck getting a business traveler on a Metro bus), and a cab to downtown would be really expensive, and you'd be subject to traffic.  What is that person to do?