You are trying to swat the railroad flea while ignoring the highway elephant.

 

Excellent! :clap: :clap:

Great editorial,

 

and addressing something 327 mentioned earlier, I don't mind the comparisons to Milwaukee-Chicago... Sure, railroad wonks like those on UO would know the difference, but to the general public, esp those Harris is trying to persuade?  I think not.  It's great to keep up the attack on the 39mph overall speed with the poignant observation that a large number of people, if not the majority, will not ride from end to end, but engage in regional travel (ie Cleveland-Columbus) where 79mpg trains ARE competitive with autos... Editorials like these, highlighting Ms. Molitoris' excellent 3-C defense (so nice to have ODOT on board w/ rail w/ an ex-Fed. Rail chief, at that!), paint Harris into the corner; to the extent there is no logical reason not to build this railroad, not even folks neutral to the 'choo-choo.' 

Hi all, my prior message here was based on word through the grapevine. But it doesn't mean you shouldn't be letting your voice be heard.

 

So.... when you make calls and send e-mails to your legislators about 3C trains, please be sure to also contact the governor's office at:

 

PHONE: (614) 466-3555

FAX: (614) 466-9354

E-MAIL: http://www.governor.ohio.gov/Default.aspx?tabid=150

 

A simple message: I support investing the $400 million in federal rail funds to develop better transportation choices in the 3C Corridor -- the nation's most densely popuated intercity travel market without passenger trains. I also support Ohio providing annual financial support to maintain the train service, just as we do to annually subsidize highway safety and services.

 

Thank you for speaking up for better transportation choices in Ohio!

Check out this great story! State Senator Shannon Jones, who supports legislation to ban texting while driving, sent a anti-3C trains Tweet while she was driving! If anyone needs 3C rail so they can text, tweet, talk, dine, drink, work, sleep while traveling at 79 mph, it's Shannon Jones!

 

Reality checks are sold separately....

 

 

Shannon Jones, Twitter Addict?

by Joseph on March 23, 2010 · View Comments

 

A few months back State Senator Shannon Jones caught some flack for sending a dozen Twitter updates from the House floor during Governor Strickland’s State of the State speech.

 

Not only was she breaking House rules which prohibit the use of electronic devices on the floor, but she generally came off looking like a rude, disrespectful, impolite and spoiled child whining and carrying on when she should have been at least pretending to listen the Governor.

 

READ MORE AT (including seeing Sen. Jones actual Tweet):

http://www.plunderbund.com/2010/03/23/shannon-jones-twitter-addict/

 

 

 

Jones drives and tweets. At the same time?

By Laura Bischoff | Tuesday, March 23, 2010, 05:03 PM

 

Democrats are accusing state Sen. Shannon Jones of tweeting while driving on the eve of a House vote on a bill that would ban such dangerous activity.

 

Jones, R-Springboro, sent out three text messages using Twitter between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. on Tuesday, March 23, and arrived in Columbus for legislative meetings around 10 a.m. but Jones said the 9 a.m. messages were sent while she stopped for gas.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/ohiopolitics/

From the same reporter who brought you the "Trainiacs" column, now Mr. Nash is having a hard time understanding that this extent of planning and engineering is required of ALL federal funded transportation projects under the National Environmental Policy Act. Consultants and subcontractors are ALWAYS hired to do it -- Engage Communications oversees public involvement, not public relations. Public involvement is required for federally funded projects, including for highway projects, bike paths, transit projects and more. And ALL public agencies farm out this activity to contractors. However, the only thing that's unusual with this rail project is the amount of scrutiny that it is receiving for following the same planning process required of a highway project. Why the double-standard?

 

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/03/22/copy/rail-spending-heads-down-track.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

 

This shoddy reporting demands YOUR RESPONSE. Here are the two people who need to hear it......

 

Editor Ben Marrison

[email protected]

 

Reporter James Nash

[email protected]

 

Looking at the comments section of that article. Never saw such venom.

^ Agreed. This is the same kind opf verbal bullying we've seen in the health care debate.  Now that the debate is over, these same folks seem to be turning their attention toward rail & transit projects.

 

But let's not sink to their level. Stick to the facts and keep it civil.  Let them expose themselves for what they are.

When I read that stuff I want to leave the country for my own safety and sanity. It's why I don't read it -- because I don't want to have to move. Moving within your own country is enough of a pain.

^ I'm pretty sure like most news reply boards that it's the same 2 or 3 people posting under different names. Would not surprise me if they had some connection to roads/cars/oil.

 

The rest are just ignorants posting your typical "WHAT ABOUT THE CHILDREN!?" reactions that they probably reply to any spending issue.

Any truth to the rumor that AT&T and Verizon have both aproached ODOT with a desire to provide the WiFi service on the trains? Any idea how much revenue that might bring in?

 

If true, now we can enjoy these two companies battling each other for the 3C WiFi rights. Wonder what those TV commercials might be like?!?!

 

Any truth to the rumor that AT&T and Verizon have both aproached ODOT with a desire to provide the WiFi service on the trains? Any idea how much revenue that might bring in?

 

If true, now we can enjoy these two companies battling each other for the 3C WiFi rights. Wonder what those TV commercials might be like?!?!

 

 

I am imagining Luke Wilson in engineers's overalls and hat going about AT&T's superior train coverage....

We already are at their level.  Invective, conspiracies, the whole works.  We should focus on the "persuadables" and not the vehement anti crowd.  Focusing on the opposition helps them as much as it helps us.  That's what they want.  But legislators want to know that their average constituents, who don't have a horse in this race, are at least minimally supportive of the project. 

 

To me that means selling the rail experience, which includes wi-fi and all the trimmings, but also the ability of average people to use 3C for their own typical trips along the route.  Without that, the trimmings don't amount to anything.  What sort of riders do we expect to have on 3C?  For what purposes are their trips?  How will it work for them?  Answering those questions would quiet the Harris line of attack.  And these expected riders are the people who need to be reached... especially if the controlling board punts until after the election.  If that happens, 3C pretty much needs to win this election district by district.  At the moment I think Harris expects otherwise and would prefer to shoot this down with a bigger "mandate" behind him. 

 

Speaking of trimmings, I assume there will be restrooms on these trains?  Nice ones?  There sure are a lot of urination commercials on TV these days.  What a big advantage for rail over car travel.  Means a lot more than the internet for some people, especially retired people who can be more flexible about their travel times than business travellers can.

^

What's a "urination" commercial? Just asking.

pissed off people, I guess!

"Going often?  Stopping and starting?  Going in the middle of the night?  Maybe it's not your bladder.  Maybe it's an enlarged prostate."

 

Or the pipe-people (with bladder meters) who are confident enough on this pill that they can be on a boat, or in a hedgerow maze, where there's no bathrooms.

 

There are so many of these that Saturday Night Live did a parody a few years ago.  "Thick golden braids!"  My point is that this might sell well among retirees, on bathrooms alone.  I know plenty of older people who can tell you where all the rest areas are on the interstates around here.  It's at least as big a deal as wi-fi to them.  My other point is that retirees lead the league in voter turnout.  Inverted pyramid and all.  I think retirees and semi-retirees are an important demographic for this on more than one level. 

^

I see. Will now work these thoughts into my letter to Governor Strickland.

Ohio Department of Transportation  •  News Release

Division of Communications

1980 West Broad Street Columbus, Ohio 43223

http://www.dot.state.oh.us

 

Ohio’s Passenger Rail update

Federal Railroad Administration affirms Ohio’s Use of Funds to make Business Decision on Passenger Rail

 

COLUMBUS (Wednesday, March 24, 2010) - As Ohio looks to move to the next phase of work to bring passenger rail service to the state, the Federal Railroad Administration is supporting plans by the Ohio Department of Transportation and the Ohio Rail Development Commission to use $25 million of a $400 million federal grant on needed engineering and design.

 

“We believe the engineering and design work provided by this initial $25 million investment will give us the information needed to fully understand and refine the scope of work, costs and benefits for passenger rail in Ohio,” said ODOT Director Jolene M. Molitoris. “I received word from the FRA reaffirming that these funds are intended for this purpose. Ohio would complete the final environmental study, engineering and detailed design work, as proposed under agreement with the FRA, and Ohio would not have to repay the $25 million if the state decided not to pursue passenger rail service.”

 

As part of a meeting last week with Ohio Senate President Bill Harris, Director Molitoris committed to talking to the FRA regarding his questions about the Controlling Board’s release of $25 million in stimulus funding.  Upon receipt of this answer from FRA, Director Molitoris shared these facts with President Harris in a conversation yesterday afternoon.

 

“While there is a lot of solid data and evidence now, we believe the results of this next phase of work will provide policy makers the information they need to support this important job-creating investment for Ohio,” Molitoris said.

 

Director Molitoris also clarified that contrary to recent news reporting, ODOT has not moved forward on any new contracts or activities (phase two - final environmental study, engineering and detailed design work) prior to securing release of the $25 million in federal funding by the Controlling Board.

 

“ODOT has been finalizing phase one work - including preliminary environmental assessment and federally-required public outreach and involvement - under existing environmental planning contracts,” Molitoris said. “We recognize and respect the fact that we cannot proceed further with this project until we have Controlling Board approval.”

 

###

 

For more information contact: Scott Varner, ODOT Central Office Communications, at 614-644-8640

or Mark Paustenbauch, FRA Communications, at 202-493-6006

Additional information on Ohio’s passenger rail efforts are online at http://3CisMe.ohio.gov

 

327, I'm glad you have identified some specific approaches which you think are effective. I was hoping we could all try to do this, toward the end of framing a best-line-of-attack. It seems you're discontent with the way things were going so far boiled over into some creativity. Very good ideas!

 

If we can put it on a human level, where people envision (if not themselves) someone in their family, or friends, using the line, then it should help to reach those who are receptive to the idea.

 

I wonder if some sort of viral campaign would be effective. The Dayton Google Wi-Fi video really strikes me as effective. Someone could make a Youtube video (and perhaps a website displaying it) which shows residents talking about how theline would be useful in their life, and what is especially appealing about it for them. I know the Dayton one is very high in production value, but something simple would also be effective. Perhaps All Aboard Ohio has the resources for this?

 

After a quick search, I see there is a 3C Facebook group. I didn't know it was there until now.

 

I think perhaps I'm unaware of what people are doing since I've never been able to access the 3CisMe site.

Let me posit another argument in favor of expanded rail:

1. If electric cars are a serious option for the future, their biggest challenge is intercity travel (hybrids also lose nearly all of their benefit in terms of gas mileage on long highway stretches). Then folks who buy those cars are going to have make different kinds of choices when they want to travel.

2. Rail provides an option for people who would like to travel between cities but have a vehicle that is not conducive toward that kind of travel. It can be sold as a part of lower carbon economy. This doesn't make an argument for bus over rail, though I would hope that over time Ohio might actually have the kinds of runs that would make electrification of the rail system within the bounds of reason (I'm talking 50-100 years).

^

I see. Will now work these thoughts into my letter to Governor Strickland.

 

LOL'd at my desk. Thanks.

Speaking of trimmings, I assume there will be restrooms on these trains?  ....

 

I have to ask, have you traveled on Amtrak?

 

If not, I think it would be a good idea. Although one day-trip wouldn't put you on the same footing with many of the posters in this thread who have many miles of rail travel behind them, both in the US and abroad, it would help answer some of your questions and give you a clearer understanding of the comparisons between train and other modes.

 

Something you could accomplish in a day, or a weekend if you wanted a good getwasy destination, would be Amtrak from Cleveland to Pittsburgh, and then return via Greyhound. Or you could switch the modes the other way around. Either way, you'd be able to compare the comfort, convenience, and amenities of both modes over the same trip.

Just back from the Columbus Metropolitan Club debate on 3-C, with an all-Republican panel: retired ORDC director Jim Seney and former GOP legislator Gene Krebs on the pro side; Republican strategist Terry Casey and GOP legislator Shannon Jones on  the con side.

 

Seney was a key panelist, frequently bringing out facts and figures and specific ideas to refute Casey's general opposition. For example, Casey complained that the manufacturers of rail equipment are foreign-owned and out of state. Seney responded by mentioning three that were based in Columbus, and a couple of them had officials in the audience. Casey mentioned a Wisconsin company that supplies equipment. Seney countered that the company gets all of its components from Ohio companies, which employ 26,000 Ohioans in rail-related manufacturing.

 

Casey and Jones complained about the speed and schedules. Seney shot back that the interstate highways in Ohio were built over decades, not overnight, and that at one point, highway segments in Toledo that cut through neighborhoods were unusable for years because there was no bridge over the Maumee to connect them. He said if we held highways 50 years ago to the same build-it-all-build-it-now standard we apply to railroads, we never would have had an Interstate system.

 

Likewise, Krebs refuted Casey's trite and erroneous assertion that highways pay for themselves through user fees by pointing out that ODOT is going broke and that the feds have subsidized the Highway Trust Fund with $20 billion in general revenue over the last couple of years.

 

Jones didn't have much of substance to say. She must've been preoccupied, as she is one of those twits who turn to Twitter to tweet their twaddle.

Seney shot back that the interstate highways in Ohio were built over decades, not overnight, and that at one point, highway segments in Toledo that cut through neighborhoods were unusable for years because there was no bridge over the Maumee to connect them. He said if we held highways 50 years ago to the same build-it-all-build-it-now standard we apply to railroads, we never would have had an Interstate system.

 

That's an excellent point.

Those sounded like great assertions. It makes me happy that someone in a position of authority had such a competent argument.

Any idea if there will be audio, video, or a transcript of the debate made available?

Any idea if there will be audio, video, or a transcript of the debate made available?

The even better question is if the anti-rail rags we call local papers will bother to cover the event.

 

I would like to see or hear the debate, however.

Thanks for the info UrbanSurfin.  I like Seney's emphasis on manufacturing.  Although, having worked for one of these suppliers, I can tell you that the counterpoint does have some merit.  The primary equipment manufacturers (of the trains themselves) are indeed located outside the US.  I just see that as an opportunity for Ohio to produce a company to compete with them, and the location of so many suppliers here makes that a reasonable thing to pursue (like right now). 

 

Seney also made an excellent point about building the highways.  Unfortunately the issues of speed and schedule are not similarly applicable to highways.  When driving, the speed is your speed and the schedule is your schedule.  If competitive speed and schedules for rail require more upfront infrastructure than the interstates did, that's a legitimate issue we need to deal with.  The fact that more infrastructure is required to make 3C competitive does not negate the actual need for it to be competitive.  In other words that's not a solution... it's an excuse for not having one.  We can't answer questions about utility with talking points about infrastructure, and then berate people for asking the utility questions again.  That's obfuscation.  It's also pretty transparent, and leaves the listener perhaps more concerned about speed and schedules than they were before they asked.

 

Speaking of trimmings, I assume there will be restrooms on these trains?  ....

 

I have to ask, have you traveled on Amtrak?

 

If not, I think it would be a good idea. Although one day-trip wouldn't put you on the same footing with many of the posters in this thread who have many miles of rail travel behind them, both in the US and abroad, it would help answer some of your questions and give you a clearer understanding of the comparisons between train and other modes.

 

Nope.  I looked into it before, but based on the prices and times I went with Greyhound.  The biggest problem was that my Amtrak trip from Detroit to Youngstown had to go through Chicago.  No direct Toledo connection available.  This is why I'm so glad to see our rail system expanding... but sad that Ohio isn't first connecting its cities to the bigger ones nearby.  I realize my "it has transit" argument doesn't work for Detroit, but it's a pretty logical move as far as Toledo's concerned and that metro is considerably larger than anything along 3C. 

 

And I hope we're not comparing D&D wizard levels as far as rail ridership.  I also hope we're not expecting Ohioans to take random Amtrak rides in order to familiarize themselves.  Dana Carvey as George Bush says:  Not gonna do it!  I myself would like to find a way to take an Amtrak ride in the near future.  But I don't travel all that much, and I given that I'm already posting here, you can safely assume I'm a rail proponent.  So again... it doesn't matter what I personally think, know or believe.  I'm already sold.  I'm trying to discuss the marketing of this idea from the perspective of groups that I'm not in, like republicans and undecideds and retirees.  Perhaps even undecided republican retirees.  Call it a thought experiment. 

 

Most of the Ohio market is unfamiliar with Amtrak, doesn't plan on checking it out right now, and doesn't want to be judged on that basis.  Yet they may already support this plan, or they may be easily convinced.  I do think it matters whether likely voters and likely riders are aware of these restroom facilities... and I'm willing to bet it hasn't really crossed their minds either way.  These people will only hear what's put out there for them.  Framing the issue means a lot.  Right now they're hearing ideological debates and a bunch of stats, all of which sounds pretty wonky to them.  Kinda like we do. 

 

Most of the market doesn't give a hoot about statistics or abstractions either.  That stuff is for the people on the pro and anti sides of all this, and neither side accepts the others' stats anyway.  Joe Blow doesn't care.  He wants to know about the details of the service itself.  Chances are that this is how he will be sold or not sold.  That's why I keep wanting to look deeper into the market for this and tailor the message to the market's specific concerns, whatever those might be.  And I offer that restrooom facilities are probably one of them.  Food service too.  If it's better than eating on an airliner, that seems like a decent selling point. 

 

Instead they're hearing about the near certainty of ridership gains over the years... as if they themselves are livestock, predictable and lacking free will.  Their desires and priorities mean nothing.  Nobody needs for them to be sold on anything because the whole matter is over their heads.  Either they like this plan for whatever reasons we deign to give them or they're irretreivably backwards.  I think we could make a more favorable impression with "heeere, kitty kitty kitty kitty" than with this treating people like numbers approach.

The biggest problem was that my Amtrak trip from Detroit to Youngstown had to go through Chicago. No direct Toledo connection available.

 

???

 

I know there's Thruway Motorcoach service available to connect Detroit and Toledo (which is run by Amtrak, so the schedules match up).  It's not as ideal as a rail line directly connecting them, but it's far better than going through Chicago.  Is this service new, maybe?

The biggest problem was that my Amtrak trip from Detroit to Youngstown had to go through Chicago. No direct Toledo connection available.

 

???

 

I know there's Thruway Motorcoach service available to connect Detroit and Toledo (which is run by Amtrak, so the schedules match up). It's not as ideal as a rail line directly connecting them, but it's far better than going through Chicago. Is this service new, maybe?

 

This was in 1999 or 2000.  The info came from Amtrak themselves when I called to buy a ticket.  If I had had the money they wanted for that ticket, I wouldn't have been car-free at the time.

Unfortunately the issues of speed and schedules are not similarly applicable to interstates.  When driving, the speed is your speed and the schedule is your schedule.  If competitive speed and schedules for rail require more upfront infrastructure than the interstates did, that's a legitimate issue we need to deal with.  The fact that more infrastructure is required to make 3C competitive does not negate the actual need for it to be competitive.  In other words that's not a solution... it's an excuse for not having one.

 

We're doing what we can with the funds we were given.  High speed rail is the interstate highway of railroad travel, but we were only given the funds to upgrade the equivalent of existing 2-lane rural highways by repaving, adding traffic signals, and expanding a few sections to 4-lane divided highways.  The speed on roads is not "your speed" anyway, it's the speed that's determined by engineers based on what the geometry can handle.  You can't go 80 mph on a 2-lane highway running through Podunkville's business district just because you want to. 

 

You're bringing up the same tired argument that's come up on nearly every page of this thread, that it's too slow so it's not worth it.  That's been proven false any number of times, because we simply can't build something faster with the money, nor would we be able to get the funding for something faster without an already established corridor.  The same is true for roads.  They wouldn't have built I-75 or I-71 if there weren't already surface streets and rural highways connecting those areas, if there wasn't already traffic.  We've already established that the money spent now on the 3-C corridor is building the foundation of future higher speed rail.  It's not building a different system that will be thrown away and wasted. 

 

  ^---"It's the speed that's determined by engineers based on what the geometry can handle."

 

    The legal speed is set by state law. It is somewhat related to geometry; the speed limit for a street in a business district is less than that on an interstate. Still, there are a lot of inconsistencies. Residential streets that are designed for 40mph are still 25 mph; school zones are 20 mph regardless of conditions, and some school zones are inappropriately slow. The interstates were designed for 75 mph based on geometry. Some county roads are designed to a higher standard then some state routes.

 

    Of course, a speed limit that isn't enforced isn't really a limit. On a typical highway, 90% of the drivers go faster than the speed limit and are technically breaking the law.

 

    90 mph seems to be about the most practical speed limit for safe driving provided that the geometry allows it. Anything higher than that wastes excessive energy due to air resistance. High speed rail can go significantly faster than that due to a low coefficient of drag.

 

 

You're bringing up the same tired argument that's come up on nearly every page of this thread, that it's too slow so it's not worth it.  That's been proven false any number of times, because we simply can't build something faster with the money, nor would we be able to get the funding for something faster without an already established corridor. 

 

It's a question, not necessarily an argument, which was just raised today in a public debate.  And generally the audience, not the proponent, decides what's been proven false and what hasn't.  Things have been asserted plenty of times, yet people other than me continue bringing up "the same tired argument."  Maybe they don't view their own questions in such a derisive way... maybe they see it as a core issue being repeatedly brushed aside.  I've heard this raised by many people, beyond myself, who generally support rail and specifically support this project.  Again... I support this project, I'm not the enemy.  There shouldn't even be an enemy.

 

The only reason highway speeds come into it is that-- regardless of maximum speeds-- the average speed for a car on the highway is more than the average for 3C starting out.  That's it.  But that's a big deal to some people.  And today I mentioned retirees, because maybe it's less of a big deal to them.  Instead of claiming the speed issue is a reason not to do the project, I've tried to suggest a way to market 3C in spite of the lingering speed concerns.

Going from Cincinnati to Cleveland, it takes me about 5 hours. That's driving faster than the speed limit (75 mph) and 2 stops for restroom/water) Its 247 miles. The average speed: 49.4 mph.

 

That isn't significantly faster than via rail.

Related to that every time we circle around to this discussion of driving versus train, people drop these insanely fast numbers for their trips. I've had reason to drive regularly Cincinnati-Toledo (3.5 hours most times, rarely less than 3:15), Cincinnati-Dayton (1 hour, but w/ many longer trips due to traffic clustercusses), Cincinnati-Cleveland(Macedonia) - nearly always 5 hours+, Cincinnati-Westerville, 1:45. Those are door to door with Cincinnati equaling Pleasant Ridge. I drive usually between 70 and 75, though tickets have driven that down over the years. I stop usually once sometimes twice on the longer versions. The human body probably shouldn't drive more than about 35-45 minutes before there are sorts of negative physiological developments.

 

My point is: LET'S GET THIS TRAIN STARTED!

Any idea if there will be audio, video, or a transcript of the debate made available?

 

CMC forums are filmed for broadcast on the Ohio Channel (I don't know when this is scheduled to run, but go to http://www.columbusmetroclub.org/ to find out).

 

The forums also are archived at: http://www.columbusmetroclub.org/Default.aspx?pageId=150409

 

As for media coverage, I saw Aaron Marshall of the PD there, but I don't know if Nash from the Dispatch was. Nor did I see Jon Craig of the Enquirer or Hershey or Bischoff from Dayton.

327, today is the first day I'm really agreeing with you, for a long time (re:3C). We need to focus not primarily on arguments we deem sufficient, we need to focus on ones that appeal to other people. I know you've been saying that, more or less, for a long time. But you have had a bad way of expressing it, and nothing really to add to the table. Today, you've had a breakthrough where you're identifying specific ways to sell the idea and specific places where you think we need either a different or more streamlined angle of attack.

 

If the biggest question is speed, then we need to present a convincing reason why people will use it, regardless of the slower speed. It's not like this hasn't been done before: food/alcohol, wi-fi, relaxation, and productivity have all been discussed, ad infinitum. Some people are probably convinced by the idea, based on what has been said. Johio mentioned some other things today: construction, speeding tickets, traffic jams, finding parking, other stupid drivers/road rage, the ability to work/play without worry, weather. You focused on the restrooms for seniors, as part of your plan to focus on these questions:

 

What sort of riders do we expect to have on 3C?  For what purposes are their trips?  How will it work for them?

I think another appropriate question to ask is: What sort of people will not have much reason to ride 3C? Should we write off the idea of heavy travel among businessmen, and just hope to add them on in the future with higher speeds? Or is wi-fi, coffee, a table, and an electric outlet enough to make up for the inconvenience? I think we should wear on our sleeve the fact that we know not everyone is going to use the train. But we should convince them that their (grand)parents, children, friends -- some critical mass of people they know -- are likely to use it.

 

We should also think about what types of trips will be made. A business trip to Columbus will be more feasible than one across the state. Could Cinci/Dayton people use the train to commute?

 

I think the most obvious riders are college students. We should figure out a way to convince the general public that there are a huge number of students at Ohio State (and elsewhere) that would use this train all the time. Are there any numbers on this in the ridership studies? We should also target Ohio's college students in the same way you want to target seniors. I don't think it's hard: food/alcohol and wi-fi are easy sellers. No DUI is another possible seller for this demographic. That could also work for sports fans.

 

To summarize:

Targets: Commuters?, Seniors, college students, sports fans -- who else?

Write-offs: Business people?, suburbanites?, who???

Feds say Ohio can spend $25 million for 3C rail preparation without being on hook for project

By Aaron Marshall, The Plain Dealer

March 24, 2010, 5:23PM

 

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Ohio has the green light to spend $25 million on prep work for the 3C passenger rail line even though approval of the $400 million project still hangs in the balance, federal officials said Wednesday.

The news that Ohio can inch down the track to a passenger rail line without making a full commitment to the project comes as Republican state senators cast a skeptical eye on Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland's plan to link Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati with a passenger train averaging 39 miles per hour.....

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/03/feds_say_ohio_can_spend_25_mil.html

"I think the most obvious riders are college students."

 

Even more so if there are stops or at least connections to the universities.

 

One other point about today's 3-C debate in Columbus. At the beginning, Terry Casey condescendingly said, "I like trains," and held up a piece from an HO-gauge set. He went on about the trains being fun and how he and his son would play with them. Then he said they won't work for Ohio.

 

So here's an idea for anyone on a panel or any public discussion about rail. Start by holding up a Hot Wheels car. The say something like this:

 

I like cars. My sons  had a lot of these. Sometimes I would play cars with them. There's a lot of nostalgia in those toys. The last century was the century of cars: Their rise at the start of the century, the advent of the good-roads movement and federal highway spending, Henry Ford's assembly line, making cars affordable -- especially in an era of cheap oil. Cars were ascendant, then dominant. They reshaped the landscape, reshaped our cities.

 

But that was a time when oil was cheap, and governments seemed flush with money to spend on new roads, when we weren't worried about air pollution and carbon emissions, when we didn't tally up the tens of thousands of highway deaths across the nation, when we were readily able to use government's eminent domain powers to force landowners to sell rights of way for new highways, when those highways weren't jammed with increasing numbers of ever-larger tractor-trailers, when people had jobs and could afford to buy cars to go everywhere.

 

But now it's the 21st century. We spend billions to upgrade the expensive highways we just upgraded a decade ago. The big trucks do more damage than their fees and taxes can pay for. Higher gas prices force people to drive less in a sluggish economy. That and more fuel-efficient cars mean declining gas-tax revenue and serious budget problems for ODOT. The federal government has to subsidize the Highway Trust Fund from general revenues. Citizens have no real options to the cars and highways.

 

My sons visit family in Chicago and use Metra to go downtown or visit their cousins in the suburbs. They see Amtrak's Chicago-Milwaukee Hiawatha line come and go from the station several times a day. They say, "Why doesn't Ohio have trains?" They look at the future as they grow up and they see the options elsewhere. They wonder why they would stay in Ohio when it remains grounded in the last century while other places are building for the future.

 

 

Urbansurfin:  Thanks for the report on the debate.  Just the little bit you were able to convey here gives me confidence that Seney did a good job putting the opponents in their places. 

 

327 wrote: 

The biggest problem was that my Amtrak trip from Detroit to Youngstown had to go through Chicago.  No direct Toledo connection available.

 

Prior to approximately Labor Day 1995 Amtrak operated the Toledo-Detroit-Pontiac.  It was killed after Mercer Consulting suggested Amtrak cut that train, the Broadway Limited, the Pioneer, the Desert Wind, reduce service on some others that I forget and get rid of their Heritage fleet. 

^^awesome :)

Going from Cincinnati to Cleveland, it takes me about 5 hours. That's driving faster than the speed limit (75 mph) and 2 stops for restroom/water) Its 247 miles. The average speed: 49.4 mph.

 

That isn't significantly faster than via rail.

 

That sure is some funny math!  If you are driving 75mph, that's 3 hours 29 minutes of actual driving time.  That means you are taking 2 -45 minute potty breaks!  Which is it?

^

 

Here we go with that ruination thing again.

Going from Cincinnati to Cleveland, it takes me about 5 hours. That's driving faster than the speed limit (75 mph) and 2 stops for restroom/water) Its 247 miles. The average speed: 49.4 mph.

 

That isn't significantly faster than via rail.

 

That sure is some funny math! If you are driving 75mph, that's 3 hours 29 minutes of actual driving time. That means you are taking 2 -45 minute potty breaks! Which is it?

 

You know, a few months ago I wasn't sold on the merits of this plan and certainly didn't have all the information. One problem I saw, and actually continue to see, is that there is very little connection between Cleveland and Cincinnati.

 

But really, the vast majority of people will be using this thing to go back and forth to Columbus, or from Cincinnati to Dayton. Which makes a lot more sense than wondering why anyone would take a train from Cleveland to Cincinnati.

^

I do think this is key. In the Nineties, Cincinnati developed a plan to build light rail between our airport in Northen Kentucky and Mason, Ohio -- a distance of about 44 miles, I think.

 

Then some genius in our MPO started describing it as "light rail between the airport and the Kings Island Amusement Park," which is near Mason, because he thought more people knew where Kings Island was than Mason.

 

So, even though the average trip on light rail in the U.S. is something like four miles, the opponents started saying, "Who's going to want to fly into CVG and take this train up to Kings Island just to ride the rides there.

 

Right away, they were able to conjure up an image of a frivolous trip that no one would ever make and diminish the purpose and need for the investment.

 

We never could overcome it once this image was embedded with the public.

I personally would take the train to Cleveland (or Youngstown, since that's where family is).

 

And DanB, Going from Cincy to Cleveland, you aren't on the highway the whole time. That includes time getting to the on ramp, traffic on the highway, going to the rest area/gas station for bathroom/refreshment, getting back to the on ramp (twice in most cases), getting off the highway, and taking local roads to your final destination. For me, the last one adds 40 minutes to my trip, because the highway does not go to my front door.

Going from Cincinnati to Cleveland, it takes me about 5 hours. That's driving faster than the speed limit (75 mph) and 2 stops for restroom/water) Its 247 miles. The average speed: 49.4 mph.

 

That isn't significantly faster than via rail.

 

That sure is some funny math! If you are driving 75mph, that's 3 hours 29 minutes of actual driving time. That means you are taking 2 -45 minute potty breaks! Which is it?

 

You know, a few months ago I wasn't sold on the merits of this plan and certainly didn't have all the information. One problem I saw, and actually continue to see, is that there is very little connection between Cleveland and Cincinnati.

 

But really, the vast majority of people will be using this thing to go back and forth to Columbus, or from Cincinnati to Dayton. Which makes a lot more sense than wondering why anyone would take a train from Cleveland to Cincinnati.

 

Yup.  And on the Clevleand end, there's little discussion (that I've heard) about trips beyond Columbus.  This is what led me to my earlier point that statewide coverage was of little practical value and we're trying to do too much at once.  Make one of these markets truly happy with their rail service, then move on to the other one.  Something like a 2C+2C with Columbus counted twice.  Actually I still think so... but I realize it's a dead issue here so OK.  I fully agree that the focus should not be on trips spanning the entire state, because the numbers for those trips are less favorable, and people are less likely to take those trips anyway.  We don't want people judging this on its Cin-Cle aspects.  We want them to consider it for trips they're more likely to take.

Going from Cincinnati to Cleveland, it takes me about 5 hours. That's driving faster than the speed limit (75 mph) and 2 stops for restroom/water) Its 247 miles. The average speed: 49.4 mph.

 

That isn't significantly faster than via rail.

 

I wouldn't call 4 mph significant either. That's downtown Cincinnati to downtown Cleveland. If you get on at Sharonville (or conversely at SW Cleveland), the average speed will be even faster. But savings comes from what you are able to do while traveling.

KJP, Thats the point I was trying to make. Speed-wise, they are equivalent. The real difference comes from the fact that driving time = lost time. Time on a train = productive time, even if all you're doing is watching a movie or TV show.

Also it will soon be illegal to text while driving in Ohio

 

Ohio Rail Development Commission •  News Release

1980 West Broad Street • Columbus, Ohio 43223

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/ohiorail

 

 

Rail Investment means Jobs for Ohioans

More than 26,000 Ohio employees already tied to railroad industry

 

COLUMBUS (Thursday, March 25, 2010) - At least 225 Ohio businesses located across the state already benefit from investments made by the railroad industry, according to new research by the Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT).

 

With more than 26,000 employees currently, many of those companies are gearing up for more work as part of the growing national reinvestment in passenger and freight rail, according to industry experts.

 

“This demonstrates that moving people and freight by rail means more to Ohio than just the trains rolling through town”, said ORDC Chairman James Bradley, who is also a retired CEO from Wheeling-Pitt Steel.

 

“I know a lot about the supply chain from my years as an executive in the steel industry in Ohio”, said Bradley, who believes Ohio may soon see even more rail-related business and jobs as demand grows for passenger and freight rail equipment.

 

While much of the public attention in Ohio focuses on the 3C “Quick Start” - a proposed 79 mile-per-hour passenger rail service connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Springfield, Dayton and Cincinnati - the ODOT/ORDC research shows that companies throughout the state, not just along the 3C corridor, stand to benefit from increased investment in rail.

 

The list of companies include industrial leaders such as Canton-based Timken Roller Bearing, major construction contractors, medium-sized companies that install track or crossing signals, and smaller businesses that provide goods and services to Amtrak.

 

Of the companies that offered employment numbers, the research identified at least 26,000 workers in Ohio - roughly the same as the population of the city of Chillicothe.

 

“Across the country there is a growing demand for new equipment and that’s good news for Ohio’s rail-connected supply chain and the many Ohioans who work for these companies, including Wheeling-Pitt Steel,” said Bradley.

 

Other industry experts see the potential as well. Dennis Harwig, Business Development Director for Columbus-based EWI (Edison Welding Institute), believes there’s significant growth potential in the passenger rail manufacturing market.

 

“The current urban rail market for passenger trains has averaged near $1.5 billion nationally for the last several years,” said Harwig. “Current projections indicate a $2-$3 billion market within the next 2 to 5 years, which grows to $4 to $5 billion as the national High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail and Amtrak Fleet Replacement programs mature, and more urban rail systems come on line.”

 

The list of Ohio’s rail-related contractors and suppliers, as well as a map showing where the companies are located across the state, is available at http://3CisMe.ohio.gov, the state’s online source for information about passenger rail.

 

###

 

For more information contact: Stu Nicholson, ORDC Communications, at 614-644-0513,

Scott Varner, ODOT Central Office Communications, at 614-644-8640,

or visit http://3CisMe.ohio.gov (please note there is no ‘www’ in front of the website address)