^

Do we have a URL on this yet?

The map and list of Ohio rail industry suppliers and contractors is at:

 

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/3CisME/Documents/Proposed3CRoute-Stations-With-Contractors-Suppliers.pdf

^ What is the Riverside station? I thought there was talk of a Middletown station?

Per the state's FRA application, the initial 3C stations are proposed to be:

 

Downtown Cleveland at the existing lakefront Amtrak station;

Southwest Cleveland at GCRTA‟s West 150thStreet/Puritas heavy rail station;

Downtown Columbus at the Greater Columbus Convention Center on High Street;

Downtown Springfield (east of Spring Street overpass);

Riverside (across the street from the National Museum of the United States Air Force);

Downtown Dayton at Main Street at the former Union Station;

North Cincinnati at Sharonville at U.S. Route 42 and Kemper Road, Park 42;

Downtown Cincinnati at Lunken Airport.

 

Future Station Locations

Additional areas along the line where future stations may be sited have also been identified. The locations include:

 

North Central Ohio

Delaware Area and North Columbus

Middletown

 

Read more at:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/3CisME/3C%20Federal%20Stimulus%20Application%20Documents/OH_3C_Service_Development_Plan.pdf

"Downtown Cincinnati at Lunken Airport" is like saying "Downtown Manhattan at Bedford-Stuyvesant".  Just thought it was funny.

"Downtown Cincinnati at Lunken Airport" is like saying "Downtown Manhattan at Bedford-Stuyvesant". Just thought it was funny.

 

I agree!

The 2C+D+S Plan

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

 

 

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?

 

Not really.  Don't be offended either of you, but I always prefer to believe Google over guys I don't know like Neville and DanB.  Google says it is 247 miles and 4.0 hours, so that's what it is.  And Google calculates driving time by assuming no breaks.

 

So, is a one hour total non-productive break time reasonable within a total 5 hour drive?  Absolutely it is.

 

Some people can reduce the break time.  You can efficiently drive off the fascinating Interstate and into the nearby drive up window, order something in a wrapper, fish your wallet out of your pants, and then drool grease and ketchup all over yourself while dining and driving.  Too bad there isn't a hands-free burger for the auto, yet.  Or, you could do like my traveling salesman Dad did when he needed to get somewhere quick (and what he made his sons do too) - get out the can from under the seat and try to avoid potholes.

 

For me, I'll take a more leisurely 5 hour rail trip, a club car, and a real bathroom, all the while continuing to move to my destination.

ODOT Questioned On Company Selected To Lead Passenger Rail Study

By Patrick Preston | Investigative, Political Reporter

Published: March 25, 2010

Updated: March 25, 2010

http://www2.nbc4i.com/cmh/News/local/article/ODOT_Questioned_on_Company_Selected_Lead_Passenger_Rail_Study/34038/#comments

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio—Plans to bring passenger rail service to Ohio are on hold as Republicans question the reliability of ridership and cost estimates. 

 

Ohio received $400 million in federal funding to develop passenger rail service between Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland.

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation needs Republican approval to spend $25 million for final design, engineering and environmental studies of the 3C rail project.

 

ODOT leaders are relying on a design firm’s estimate that passenger rail would attract 478,000 riders in the first year. But critics argue those numbers can be skewed to rally public support. And some Republicans say the consulting company selected by ODOT to carry out the next round of studies and analysis has a vested interest in moving the rail project forward.

 

some Republicans say the consulting company selected by ODOT to carry out the next round of studies and analysis has a vested interest in moving the rail project forward.

Have they ever raised such concerns for road project studies? What about rural and exurban roads? How do we know they will be used by over 9000 people?

It's an invalid concern in the first place.  The consultants were chosen through a bidding process the same as for highway projects.  They are chosen for their level of competence and their record of being accurate in their assessments. 

 

Casey and State Senator Shannon "Tweedle-dee" Jones both cried Croc tears over what they claim was no Ohio firm being chose.  They somehow forgot that Parsons-Brinkerhoff, while not based in Ohio, has several offices here and it's employees all live and pay taxes here in Ohio.  That's somehow not good enough??

The level of silliness -- and hypocrisy -- in all of this is staggering. Should we question the motives of senators like Harris or Jones because they receive thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the highway lobby (Ohio Contractors Association + Ohio Trucking Association) and the oil lobby (Ohio Oil & Gas Association)?

 

And why should an Ohio engineering firm be chosen? What passenger rail projects have they developed here? I welcome an outside company coming in and showing us cave dwellers the light at the end of our tunnel. Problem is some of our neighboring CAVE (Citizens Against Virtually Everything) people are scared of the light pouring down from above and don't understand it. Instead they throw rocks at that strange light in the sky, fearing it will somehow hurt them. It's OK. Everything will be OK....

Citizens Against Virtually Everything = spitting out my coffee with laughter

 

Referring to Ohioans as cave dwellers = spitting on the clientele

 

OK the "Ohio engineering firm" complaint is loopy.  That's grasping at straws.  And there is a certain irony in pro-business republicans pointing out someone else's conflicts of interest.  But that doesn't mean there are no conflicts, and consultants are used all the time to legitmize what people want to do.  I've had consulting gigs like this.  It's really not uncommon and it's not rail-specific at all.  Doesn't matter if the consultant is mandatory.  The only consultant I trust 100% is the one paid by an uninterested third party. 

 

This attitude toward consultants is not uncommon either.    It's a tough thing for consultants to overcome, but it's part of the business.  Questioning the consultant and scrutinizing their methods is a rudimentary political dance move.  This is normal.  These republicans are just doing their jobs.  Their disagreement with the plan here does not make them bad people.  It doesn't make them troglodytes either.

 

I myself would like to know more about how our ridership estimates were calculated.  I would also like to know what decision metrics were used to select this plan over others.  I would pay close attention to whether they used Boston and Chicago as comparables, and if alternative plans look like they may have been shrugged off.  I've seen plenty of reports like that in my day, so it's not surprising to hear these lines of attack come up.  All we can do now is already have been prepared for them.  I hope we're prepared and I hope the consultants' model withstands scrutiny.

Citizens Against Virtually Everything = spitting out my coffee with laughter

 

http://slevingroup.com/index.php/newsletter/take-the-nimby-challenge/

 

My favorite has always been BANANA.  There's plenty of those.

From the perspective of a Florida consultant who worked primarily out of state, I can say that every RFQ we sent to Ohio we knew would be rejected, and as far as I recall, the winner was always a firm in Ohio or with an office in Ohio or the great lakes region.

 

You might say that this is common in consulting nationally, which would usually be true. But Ohio/Michigan were exceptionally harsh. When we did do work in Michigan, we had citizens come right up to us and say we shouldn't be there because we were taking jobs from them. The client of course knew that there was no knowledge base in Michigan to do what we were doing, but they had to take enormous political flack for it.

 

Also, it always caught me off guard how many people had the attitude of "This might work for you in XYZ, but it's not going to work here." Really? Seriously? We're such a homogeneous society that people complain about it, but then backpedal and think they're different.

Also, it always caught me off guard how many people had the attitude of "This might work for you in XYZ, but it's not going to work here." Really? Seriously? We're such a homogeneous society that people complain about it, but then backpedal and think they're different.

 

I firmly believe that the quote "Those who tell you to abandon your dreams have probably already abandoned theirs" at the bottom of my messages applies to many of these people.

This attitude toward consultants is not uncommon either. It's a tough thing for consultants to overcome, but it's part of the business. Questioning the consultant and scrutinizing their methods is a rudimentary political dance move. This is normal. These republicans are just doing their jobs. Their disagreement with the plan here does not make them bad people. It doesn't make them troglodytes either.

Their issue here is with the system, though, and not this specific project. Therein lies the absurdity: the selective application of their outrage.

one guys 3c vs greyhound comparison.

 

http://thephonyconey.blogspot.com/2010/03/3cs-rail-versus-greyhound.html

Nice piece. I hope this give story ideas to media to ride Greyhound in the 3C Corridor to see what it's really like. Then go ride the state-supported passenger rail services in other states (North Carolina, Michigan, Maine, etc.) and report back on the comparisons.

The one thing that I wasn't aware of that scares me the most is that even if you buy a greyhound ticket you may not get to ride on the bus.  Does amtrak oversell trains?

Forumer BuckeyeB rode up to Cleveland from Columbus a couple years ago. His northbound bus was oversold twice over, and fortunately they chartered an extra bus (after the first bus broke down at the terminal). Southbound, his bus was oversold three times over and Greyhound chartered two extra buses. Nope, no travel demand on this corridor -- even for an inferior product like intercity bus!

 

Yes, Amtrak can and does oversell non-reserved trains (most of those are peak-hour trains in the Northeast Corridor), but you can still get on. You may have to stand or sit in the lounge car.

 

I think all trains outside of the Northeast Corridor are reserved, meaning you are guaranteed a seat (unless the train is sold out in which case you can't buy a ticket anyway!). You will know for certain if they have a boxed "R" in the "On Board Service" row of information atop each train timetable, such as this one for the Michigan trains...

 

http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobkey=id&blobwhere=1249207066711&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobheadername1=Content-disposition&blobheadervalue1=attachment;filename=Amtrak_W22.pdf

The level of silliness -- and hypocrisy -- in all of this is staggering. Should we question the motives of senators like Harris or Jones because they receive thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the highway lobby (Ohio Contractors Association + Ohio Trucking Association) and the oil lobby (Ohio Oil & Gas Association)?

 

I think the GOP opponents of this project are getting desperate.  They're throwing everything against the wall on this hoping something will stick

Report: Many Ohio businesses could ride rail boom

RICK ADAMCZAK

Daily Reporter Staff Writer

March 26, 2010

 

A new report shows that the planned expansion of the nation's railroad system could greatly benefit Ohio's economy because the state has many companies that serve the railroad industry.

 

For example, Canton-based Timken Roller Bearing, which makes roller bearings for train cars, should see business increase as more trains are used in the United States.

 

The report, released yesterday by the Ohio Rail Development Commission, comes about two months after Ohio learned it would receive $400 million in federal money to help pay for passenger rail service in the state along what is known as the 3C corridor connecting Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland.

 

 

Full story at: http://www.sourcenews.com/news/today/cdr_a.lasso

So whats the Average & Top Speed for this line?  The Diesel line near me is an Average of 60mph and tops out at 95mph , South of a Certain area.

Better than most new-start passenger rail services: 79 mph top speed (the max absent an interactive signal system that costs $2 million per mile to add); with the average at about 45 mph end-to-end and most intermediate sections at 50 mph or better. That would make 3C the fourth-fastest (out of 12) intercity rail services started by a state in 30 years.

 

What's the diesel line that's near you? I'm not aware of any diesel corridors in New Jersey that offer 95 mph service. The Atlantic City line tracks were designed for 90 mph but the signal system keeps the limit at 79 mph.

After a certain area south of Wood-ridge on the Pascack Valley line , the limit increases to 80mph , but some experienced engineers push that to 95mph.  Since theres no at grade crossings anymore. :-)

Your math is off.... The fastest trains on that line are the two inbound weekend expresses from Spring Valley, each arriving Hoboken 51 minutes later. The Pascack Valley Line is 31 miles. That's an average speed of 36.5 mph.

 

The number of grade crossings is irrelevent. Under federal law, you can have grade crossings on rail corridors with speeds up to 125 mph as long as there are four-quadrant gates to seal the crossing. If the signal system lacks interactivity with the locomotive's controls (such as automatic train stop that is activated when a red signal is ignored), then you cannot go over 79 mph (also federal law). For decades, locomotives have had overspeed governors (either a mechanical governor in older locomotives or electronic governor in newer ones) installed to prevent "speeding" except on routes with ATS or similar systems. To my knowledge the Pascack Valley Line lacks ATS. The only NJT line I'm aware of that has ATS is Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and perhaps the northern section of the North Jersey Coast Line. There, NJT electric trains using the new Bombardier bilevels are permitted 95 mph. Perhaps that is what you are thinking of.

 

OK, back to 3C Corridor.

 

    Ideally, passenger trains and freight trains should operate on separate tracks. Notice the wear on the track in the foreground.

 

    Derailment in Cincinnati near Hopple Street Viaduct Photo by Erik Landrum

 

Car trapped in front of truck ~~ A1 Wetherby

 

Ideally, so should trucks and buses/cars! In reality, passenger trains and freight trains have been operating together on the same tracks for 140 years. You think it's bad. OK...

 

As for your second false assumption, I also won't take the bait regarding the track in the foreground. Would you like to know why that track is probably safe for the limited purpose being asked of it?

How about these European freight trains? Think they belong in the mix with passenger trains?

 

British mail train built from former self-propelled electric passenger cars:

 

Note that the freight train at 1:30 is on a new 300km (186 mph) German InterCity Express line (plus an awesome bridge at 7:04!). I believe freight trains operating on German high speed lines are allowed to travel at up to 140 km/h (87 mph):

 

And, the ultimate freight train -- France's TGV Postal trains (the yellow train) at 170 mph:

 

Still think freight and passenger don't belong on the same tracks together? Or might it be that such compatibility issues are a figment of the imagination of isolated Americans? Since we are so far behind the rest of the developed world (and now the developing world) when it comes to passenger rail, perhaps we might learn through greater awareness....

I won't post until I see them. Otherwise it is futile and would rather send letters of support down to appropriate avenues. The energy exhausted on here can be channeled in more productive ways to help the subject matter.

To be quite honest many of us in the Rail Community don't see the 3C line happening anytime soon , but we do see the Keystone Extension form Harrisburg to Pittsburgh - Cleveland happening sometime this decade.

What "rail community" is that? The one that you're in or the one that sees PennDOT has no money in hand, let alone any intentions to start NEPA planning to extend the Keystone Corridor west to Pittsburgh? All they want is a feasibility study. That and $1 will get me a cup coffee.

 

If you want to discuss the Keystone Corridor, please go to the "What other states are doing..." thread.

To be quite honest many of us in the Rail Community don't see the 3C line happening anytime soon , but we do see the Keystone Extension form Harrisburg to Pittsburgh - Cleveland happening sometime this decade.

 

The western half of the Keystone Corridor is nowhere near as far along in the planning stage as the 3C. The 3C is ready to go into the EIS (environmental impact) stage: the final stage prior to engineering and construction.  It could begin operation with 2 years.

 

 

It is curious that there are people outside the state betting that 3C won't happen. Like they think they know Ohio politics better than Ohioans or something.

 

There's obviously the possibility it could be stalled out in committee, but it's a fool's wager to bet that that will happen for sure. And if it doesn't happen, well, I don't understand why it wouldn't be built.

 

We on UO know very well that there are a lot of backward-thinking people and politicians in the state, but we also know those people often don't get their way. I would actually expect that an outsider would see Strickland being all about the plan and think that all systems are go.

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

I'm still looking for an answer to this question.

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

I'm still looking for an answer to this question.

I agree that it makes no sense. It's almost like Dayton has 3 stations, since Springfield has one.

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

 

Back when the private railroads ran passenger trains, there were more stops between Columbus and Cincinnati, too. The reason is there are more population centers there. Nowawdays, the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base is the largest single-site employer in the state. Since it and the Air Force Museum (one of the state's largest tourist attractions) are right across the street from the 3C tracks in Riverside, it's a shame not to stop there. And you wouldn't go through downtown Dayton (170,000 population) without having a station there, or right through downtown Springfield (70,000 population) either. These would represent three stops in 25 miles.

 

This isn't the only place in the Midwest where Amtrak makes multiple station stops in a relatively short section. Consider that, from Dearborn, MI to Pontiac, MI (31 miles) Amtrak makes five station stops: Dearborn, Detroit, Royal Oak, Birmingham and Pontiac. Or there's the stations in Lee's Summit, MO - Independence, MO - Kansas City, MO (23 miles). Or, there's Sturtevant, WI - Milwaukee Airport, WI - Milwaukee, WI (23 miles).

 

By comparison, the only population center between Cleveland and Columbus is Mansfield, yet the 3C rail corridor never went through there because the topography didn't easily allow it.

 

ORDC's technical team came up with few alternative station sites within each town of Springfield and Riverside, so it was easier to identify the preferred site through the environmental assessment. They were added earlier than several other potential station sites. The other station sites are within/near Middletown/Hamilton, North Columbus/Delaware and in the North Central area (Galion/Crestline/Shelby). The optional sites are much more numerous and the site identification is much more involved.

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

I'm still looking for an answer to this question.

 

Dayton is an obvious stop.  But think about why Riverside was also chosen.  It is literally on the doorstep of:

 

1. Wright-Patterson AFB: the largest single-site employer in the the state.

2. Museum of the United States Air Force: over 1.5-million visitors a year.

 

Riverside also has a detailed , mixed-use development plan for the area around its station site.  It is a major plan that includes hotels, restaurants, office, residential and retail.

I think Springfield should be postponed. It will happen eventually, but there's already a shortage of funds for making a proper 3C+D.

 

I guess I would make that call, though, based on how much money and time it would save.

 

(Springfield residents could use Riverside, in the meantime.)

Not seeing the justification for two fairly close stations in Dayton? Explain please? Was it political? This is quite a few stops between Cincy and Cbus.

 

I'm still looking for an answer to this question.

 

Dayton is an obvious stop. But think about why Riverside was also chosen. It is literally on the doorstep of:

 

1. Wright-Patterson AFB: the largest single-site employer in the the state.

2. Museum of the United States Air Force: over 1.5-million visitors a year.

 

Riverside also has a detailed , mixed-use development plan for the area around its station site. It is a major plan that includes hotels, restaurants, office, residential and retail.

 

That all sounds exciting. To be sure, we did some cool work in Trenton around the station there. But this is intercity service, no? Proximity to local destinations is a finer grained consideration more in the realm of commuter or light rail. That is not just my opinion, that is the guideline that I worked under in a professional capacity. That's why Wright Patt doesn't sway me. In an intercity context, they ARE getting a station. It's called downtown Dayton.

 

This puts two stops within 3 miles of one another.

 

OK, not the end of the world. But what happens as speeds increase? Will there be express service with fewer stops? I'm not intimately familiar with Acela but I believe the closest stops outside of Boston proper are BWI and Baltimore, who's importance as intercity stops are without question, and they are still more than twice as far as these Dayton stations.

 

So, maybe my question is, are the stations proposed as part of QuickStart grandfathered in as true HSR stops? Even in the best scenario they seem like local service stops.

    KJP: "How about these European freight trains? Think they belong in the mix with passenger trains?"

 

    European freight trains are fast and light, more like passenger trains. Almost all of them are electric, too. There is no comparison.

 

    No one does freight trains like the Americans. They are the longest and heaviest trains anywhere.

 

    I didn't say that freight trains and passenger trains couldn't share tracks. They can. And I know that yard tracks carry slow traffic and take a lot of abuse. What I said is that ideally passenger trains and freight trains should travel on separate tracks. There are two reasons for this:

 

1. Accidents on passenger trains are unacceptable, and the track must be maintained in excellent condition. High Speed tracks cannot take the abuse of heavy freight trains.

 

2. Fast passenger traffic and slow freight traffic do not mix well.

 

    Japan purchased a lot of expensive urban property to build from scratch tracks for their bullet trains. Of course, conditions are different there. The fastest trains in Europe travel on separate tracks.

 

    The situation we have is less than ideal. That doesn't mean we shouldn't build it or that it is a bad plan.

 

    "Since we are so far behind the rest of the developed world (and now the developing world) when it comes to passenger rail..."

 

    Chill, dude. We have ALWAYS been behind Europe in transportation technology. (Ohio has been settled by Europeans for barely 200 years!) Americans are culturally less social than Europeans too. It's OK to look at the technology available in Europe and use it as an example of what could happen here, but the differences between America and Europe are vast. It is fair to say that we CANNOT successfully superimpose the European passenger rail system on top of America without changing everything else.

 

    If we are going to successfully build the 3-C, it has to be on it's own merit. It will not work just because passenger rail works in Europe.

I didn't say it should work in Ohio just because it works in Europe. I said passenger trains can mix with freights. In Europe they do because freight trains are lighter. In America they do because passenger trains are heavier.

 

 

Chill, dude. We have ALWAYS been behind Europe in transportation technology.

 

The U.S. has been behind a lot. But please don't use "never, ever, always" and other blanket statements. You were doing so well in trying to make a good point until then, just when I was starting to be so proud of you....

 

So, maybe my question is, are the stations proposed as part of QuickStart grandfathered in as true HSR stops? Even in the best scenario they seem like local service stops.

 

Possibly, but true HSR isn't being considered for 3C. A top speed of 90-110 mph will be the target of the planning to get underway as early as this summer. And, yes, the 3C "Quick Start" stations will likely be grandfathered into that plan -- but that's for the next phase of planning to determine. But I would be very surprised if the stations weren't, as prior investments are typically seen as dots to be connected and advanced.

 

Consider this timetable. Keep in mind this is my own musings of what a 3C service evolutionary development could look like (not the state's, not Amtrak's and not even All Aboard Ohio's). Some of the connecting services to the East Coast or to St. Louis/KC don't yet exist, but are possible outcomes of route/service overhauls to be considered by Amtrak over the next year or so. Those could bring even more ridership/revenue to 3C and further reduce the state's operating support...

 

http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/3-C%20Corridor%20scheduleKJP1.pdf

As I am sitting here drinking my coffee and reading the Sunday Plain Dealer and saw the latest anti-3C piece by Brent Larkin, I started to wonder what happened to Brent Larkin? Did his dog get hit by a train? Is repressed childhood anger for not getting that Lionel set as a kid? Mr. Larkin definately does not like choo-choo's and seems to throw everything but the kitchen sink into the argument against the 3-C....

 

Back to my coffee....

 

So, maybe my question is, are the stations proposed as part of QuickStart grandfathered in as true HSR stops? Even in the best scenario they seem like local service stops.

 

Possibly, but true HSR isn't being considered for 3C. A top speed of 90-110 mph will be the target of the planning to get underway as early as this summer. And, yes, the 3C "Quick Start" stations will likely be grandfathered into that plan -- but that's for the next phase of planning to determine. But I would be very surprised if the stations weren't, as prior investments are typically seen as dots to be connected and advanced.

 

Consider this timetable. Keep in mind this is my own musings of what a 3C service evolutionary development could look like (not the state's, not Amtrak's and not even All Aboard Ohio's). Some of the connecting services to the East Coast or to St. Louis/KC don't yet exist, but are possible outcomes of route/service overhauls to be considered by Amtrak over the next year or so. Those could bring even more ridership/revenue to 3C and further reduce the state's operating support...

 

http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/3-C%20Corridor%20scheduleKJP1.pdf

 

Well, I do see the value of the stations in some kind of service paradigm. But I do hope they don't grandfather in 3 HSR stops for the Dayton area. The region isn't that populated.

Larkin made one point and one point only.  ORDC signed a contract with CSX that limits shared track to 90 mph.  Any higher speed will require a "sealed corridor" which seems to be at odds with the federal program requirement of working directly toward 110 mph capability.  This is either true or it isn't.  I hope it isn't.  If it is, it sounds like a serious problem and a departure from what's been represented. 

 

The piece also includes an email suggesting ORDC is not sufficiently motivated to prioritize high speed.  I'm inclined to agree.  I maintain that we should be focusing on sealed track due to its ultimate necessity.  Is 3C worth doing, or better than nothing?  Yes, but that's not the issue.  Is 3C a good move?  That's the issue. 

 

Not a dime of the appropriation has been spent yet, right?  I still have a hard time believing the feds would force us to build this, or cut us out in the alternative, if we came forward (soon) with a more plausible approach to their 110 mph goal.  Ohio is still too politically important to screw us or screw Strickland.  Regulations schmegulations, Congress makes deals all the time.  Adminstrative process is a default.  It's there for small issues as designated by Congress.  It's not designed or intended to force policies on people.   

 

If ORDC were willing to open up this conversation a bit... I think it might discover an Ohio that's more than ready to embrace a future of high speed rail here.  An immediate future.  The only thing that hasn't advanced over the years is the philosophy behind the 3C plan.  The tree has been shaken from Washington.  We needed it.  This should be the beginning, not the end, of the conversation about passenger rail in Ohio.  The two sides in this debate need to start listening to each other.  I don't see any losers in that equation, everybody wins.

Larkin made one point and one point only.  ORDC signed a contract with CSX that limits shared track to 90 mph.  Any higher speed will require a "sealed corridor" which seems to be at odds with the federal program requirement of working directly toward 110 mph capability.  This is either true or it isn't.  I hope it isn't.  If it is, it sounds like a serious problem and a departure from what's been represented.

 

First, the document that he refers to is a Memorandum of Understanding which, in many cases, is not an enforceable contract. In fact, parties typically enter an MOU instead of a contract if what they are attempting to codify is that to which they have agreed in pursuit of a common objective.

 

And, in this case, the section that he quotes ends with "unless otherwise mutually agreed between the parties."

 

Taken as a whole and in context, I don't see what is the big deal. CSX is expressing safety concerns related to the use of shared track for trains traveling over 90 MPH and ODOT concurs that this should not be assumed as part of the agreement. It leaves open the possibility that shared track could be used for passenger service greater than 90 MPH but stops short of saying that it will be.

 

 

 

Here's the link to the PD story:

http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2010/03/brent_larkin_ohio_administrati.html

 

Taken as a whole and in context, I don't see what is the big deal. CSX is expressing safety concerns related to the use of shared track for trains traveling over 90 MPH and ODOT concurs that this should not be assumed as part of the agreement. It leaves open the possibility that shared track could be used for passenger service greater than 90 MPH but stops short of saying that it will be.

 

Larkin is trying to make a mountain out of a molehill.