If each road project of this cost came with a tax increase a lot fewer of them would get done, wouldn't they? But there are scores of highway projects in Ohio over the next few years that will cost more. But of course it's OK because "winner" projects are subject to little scrutiny and don't need to produce a return on investment.

 

I love the baseless assumption that any rail project comes with a tax increase. It lets me know who did their homework and who didn't.

If each road project of this cost came with a tax increase a lot fewer of them would get done, wouldn't they? But there are scores of highway projects in Ohio over the next few years that will cost more. But of course it's OK because "winner" projects are subject to little scrutiny and don't need to produce a return on investment.

 

I love the baseless assumption that any rail project comes with a tax increase. It lets me know who did their homework and who didn't.

 

Funny how we have to run the gauntlet for any sort of public transportation improvements. We have to go to the ballot box, campaign for the levy, fight off the NIMBY's, COAST, Politicians and other assorted foes to get it passed. Roads? They just happen with nary a peep from those same groups. The exception to that may be any general funds for roads or local streets. Since COAST doesn't get it, maybe it's time for others in Ohio to start raising the issue of mobility for people who can't or don't want to drive every time funding of roads from general funds is discussed.

That double standard was on full display during Cincinnati City Council's deliberations on the streetcar vs. the MLK interchange. The economic analysis findings for the streetcar were better than the road project. Yet, even though the University of Cincinnati had signed off on both analyses, the streetcar's projected benefits were disregarded as not believable.

 

Here's the real kicker. You know when ODOT did its first-ever economic impact study of a proposed road project? In 2006 for the Inner Belt project in Cleveland. It was a pure amateur job, as the billion-dollar-plus project did not account for regional and multi-modal impacts.

That double standard was on full display during Cincinnati City Council's deliberations on the streetcar vs. the MLK interchange. The economic analysis findings for the streetcar were better than the road project. Yet, even though the University of Cincinnati had signed off on both analyses, the streetcar's projected benefits were disregarded as not believable.

 

Chris Wetterich of the Cincinnati Business Courier wrote a great article about the double-standard related to those two specific projects, and the progressive members of Cincinnati's city council made sure to push for the type of information on the 71 interchange that streetcar opponents asked for about the streetcar. I really hope this continues, and more people continue to press the issue. It's very encouraging that this debate was recently brought into the light of mainstream public discourse in Cincinnati. Feels like maybe we're not just pounding on a brick wall anymore.

Amtrak's Chicago-Indianapolis "Hoosier State" train service gets more financial backers. The state/local funding model for this train service actually makes it easier for local governments in Southeast Indiana and Southwest Ohio to add in their own financial contributions to extend service to Cincinnati. However, some track/signal improvements in Indiana as well as a faster routing into Chicago should probably happen before or as part of any route extension to Cincinnati. Station track and platform improvements are also needed at Cincinnati Union Terminal.

 

___________

 

updated: 1/2/2014 8:22:27 AM

 

City, County OK Amtrak Funding Plans

InsideINdianaBusiness.com Report

 

More local governments have approved plans to fund Amtrak's Hoosier State line for one year. Our partners at WBAA in West Lafayette report the city of West Lafayette and Tippecanoe County Commissioners have approved funding proposals.

 

The city will pay nealry $17,000 per month, while the county is coming up with $25,000 each month.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.insideindianabusiness.com/newsitem.asp?ID=62998#middle

OHERN ‏@OHERN_OH  29m

T or F:  Ohio Governor Kasich refuses Federal government's $400m infrastructure grant for fear of ongoing $13m annual cost to Ohio taxpayers

 

OHERN ‏@OHERN_OH  21m

T or F:  Ohio Governor Kasich proposes adding $1.5 billion in state taxes for needed Ohio infrastructure, despite ongoing >$13m annual cost

Redirected from the Cleveland Hopkins thread.....

 

Except when the intercity rail that is proposed would take 6+ hours to go from Cleveland to Cincinnati, when the drive is only 4.

 

Good thing that wasn't the plan, though Kasich's lie stuck. Besides most new services started at slower speeds and some got even slower. But adding more departures is what drove mostly huge ridership increases since the first year... http://freepdfhosting.com/4808eafeb0.pdf

 

I'm sure CLE will not do as well without a hub, but it's not airline armageddon. Losing hubs don't destroy economies anymore. See Pittsburgh.

 

Well the PD originally reported that the trip would take around 6 hours.  In 2010, the travel time was revised to around 5 hours, 11 minutes.  That's hardly a powerful incentive to take the "high speed" train over driving.

 

The Ohio Rail Development Commission begged Amtrak's Assistant VP Michael Franke not to release a preliminary report that showed what 3C Corridor performance would be without any capital improvements to the rail corridor. But Amtrak released it anyway. The report showed a 6-hour running time was possible without the capital improvements. That wasn't deemed satisfactory, so began the planning to see what capital improvements under $400 million were possible and what the end-to-end running time would be. That's when the final estimated running time of just over 5 hours was projected. Based on a proven ridership model used by multiple global engineering firms including Parsons Brinckerhoff, a projected ridership of just under 500,000 was estimated for the first year and rising to 600,000 in a couple of years which would have made 3C one of the fastest, highest ridership new-start passenger rail services in the USA in 30 years:

http://freepdfhosting.com/4808eafeb0.pdf

 

But the opposition did a good job of continually repeating the original "39 mph" estimate (which still would have generated some decent ridership) even though it wasn't based on any of the capital improvements for which the state had 100 percent federal funding and will never get again. It was the first step on a glide path to upgrading the corridor to 110 mph, as no 100+ mph passenger rail service ever started out at 100+ mph. Never. It always started much slower and built the constituency. And until Ohio is willing to build a slow train, it will never have a fast train.

 

EDIT: By the way, if you want to read many of the state's 3C Corridor planning documents, we were tipped off to rescue them from the ODOT website the day before Kasich was sworn in. The day after, they were gone. But we have them and some of our own documents here....

 

http://allaboardohio.org/transportation-planning-library/3c-corridor-planning-documents/

"The Ohio Rail Development Commission begged Amtrak's Assistant VP Michael Franke not to release a preliminary report that showed what 3C Corridor performance would be without any capital improvements to the rail corridor. But Amtrak released it anyway."

 

Good old Amtrak. Runs all of their "service" thru Ohio in the middle of the night, cut more trains here than anywhere else, stiffed the 3C by prematurely releasing the "no-build" report as KJP points out and came back with an outlandish scenario for an earlier Cleveland-Columbus study that had fares lower than Greyhound and not coincidentally low revenue. 

^call us Ohindiana

^call us Ohindiana

 

Indiana spends more on transit than Ohio, has a dedicated fund at the state level for transit, is overseeing the $74 million expansion of capacity on the NS line between Porter, IN and the IL state line (used by Amtrak trains into Michigan AND Ohio to the East Coast), and is now a co-sponsor with online communities of Amtrak's Hoosier State train service between Chicago and Indianapolis.

 

I wish Ohio was as progressive as Indiana when it comes to trains and transit. <<sigh>>

A High-Speed Rail Hub For Cleveland

February 05, 2014

Julius Parod

 

This past week United Airlines announced plans to cut 60% of its flights out of Cleveland in the next year. This is especially bad news in today’s economy where cities need to connect to opportunities around the country and across the globe to be economically competitive. Cleveland now is suffering from a lack from a lack of transportation choices, that it can’t afford.

 

At the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, we envision a brighter reality – with Cleveland as an economically vibrant, global city. MHSRA has studied what would happen if high-speed trains connected Cleveland to regional cities like Chicago, Cincinnati, and Toronto. The results are astounding.

 

A single high-speed line to Chicago and Detroit will attract two million passengers to Cleveland each year, which will help supplement the declining number of nine million annual airline passengers. If additional lines to Cincinnati, Toronto, and New York are built, Cleveland will become a major transit hub, with travelers connecting to destinations across the region, by train.

 

READ MORE AND SEE MAP AT:

http://midwesthsr.org/high-speed-rail-hub-cleveland

Note that the NS tracks Amtrak uses four times a day pass within 1,600 feet of Hopkins' ticketing counters....

 

Blog

 

With United leaving, experts peg Cleveland for high-speed rail

Marc Lefkowitz  |  02/07/14 @ 3:00pm   |  Posted in Transportation choices

 

When United Airlines in dramatic fashion walked away from Cleveland and the city’s large investment—from infrastructure to the premium on tickets for “hub” bragging rights—many wondered, are we just the latest to pay the freight for a failing business model?

 

The larger issue may be, what other option do cities have? What does Cleveland do to shore up its economic position—the city still ranks 111th in GDP among cities worldwide— particularly for business travelers who no longer have United’s extensive regional flights?

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.gcbl.org/blog/2014/02/with-united-leaving-experts-peg-cleveland-for-high-speed-rail?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Note that the NS tracks Amtrak uses four times a day pass within 1,600 feet of Hopkins' ticketing counters....

 

So perhaps we ought to be building a passenger rail station by the airport as well?

Note that the NS tracks Amtrak uses four times a day pass within 1,600 feet of Hopkins' ticketing counters....

 

So perhaps we ought to be building a passenger rail station by the airport as well?

 

Once we get more trains, absolutely.

Note that the NS tracks Amtrak uses four times a day pass within 1,600 feet of Hopkins' ticketing counters....

 

So perhaps we ought to be building a passenger rail station by the airport as well?

Well under the 3C plan we were going to build a station in Brookpark that would have connected to the airport via the Red Line, but I agree that it would make more sense to build one closer to the Airport and connect it directly.

Letter to the editor in today's on-line PD:

 

 

As upsetting as it is, I can't blame United Airlines for its recent decision to close its hub in Cleveland, nor should anyone else. The company simply acted as for-profit corporations are obliged to under the capitalist system which we claim to admire in this country.

 

There is blame to be had, but it's on the state of Ohio and its current crop of elected officials who have an obligation to foresee changing transportation trends, take notice of troubling signs that lead to events like United's de-hubbing of Cleveland, and plan accordingly for the state's mobility. It's not news that airlines have been cutting flights for years.

 

Ohio had some foresight when the Taft administration, with the support of the legislature at the time, created the Ohio Hub Plan to bring fast, frequent intercity rail service to Ohio and when the Strickland administration tried to begin implementing it with the 3C Corridor....

 

Read more at: 

 

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/letters/2014/02/letter_to_the_editor_899.html

 

Why blame? Let's instead work together on getting some transportation.

Why blame? Let's instead work together on getting some transportation.

 

You must know something.

You must know something.

 

Some good stuff MAY be happening. But I don't count my chickens until they're hatched.

You must know something.

 

Some good stuff MAY be happening. But I don't count my chickens until they're hatched.

 

I won't ask. I don't want to jinx things.

 

I won't ask. I don't want to jinx things.

 

What's my longtime saying? ;)

I won't ask. I don't want to jinx things.

 

What's my longtime saying? ;)

 

Believe it on the second day the trains run!

 

In the meantime...shhhh...  :angel:

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio ·5 secs

Elyria C-T editor: mayor in “fantasyland” for wanting “19th century” station as jobs-draw

 

Respond: [email protected] (info: http://www.greatamericanstations.com/why-invest/benefits-of-restoration)

Also see the video on the "new Normal" -- Normal, IL station development:

 

Elyria mayor says rail depot key to city’s growth

Filed on February 12, 2014 by Lisa Roberson

 

ELYRIA — In touting Elyria’s best future, Mayor Holly Brinda said Tuesday afternoon that she would like an Amtrak train to run right through it.

 

Returning passenger rail service to the city, most notably to the county-owned renovated old train depot known as the Lorain County Transportation Center, could jump-start redevelopment in downtown Elyria, Brinda said.

 

The city needs financial backing to pull that off, however, she said.

 

“We need a catalytic change to jump-start downtown revitalization, and I think this has the power to do it,” she said.

 

It is no secret Brinda, who delivered her third State of the City address to a packed room at Wesleyan Village during a joint meeting of the Elyria Rotary and Lorain County Chamber of Commerce, wants to see passenger rail service return to downtown Elyria. She has written letters to railroad bigwigs — Amtrak and Norfolk Southern — and attended numerous meetings along the Lake Erie coast gleaning every bit of information she can about how to get it done.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://chronicle.northcoastnow.com/2014/02/12/brinda%e2%80%88rail-depot-key-growth/

Here's some graphics regarding what may be needed for a possible route extension of Amtrak's Hoosier State from Indianapolis to Cincinnati....

 

 

Details of providing more capacity enhancements for accessing Cincinnati Union Terminal for one additional round trip....

 

^ Cost estimate for the above?

Probably $10 million for the CUT station and access track improvements. Lengthening the grade crossing circuits is about $5 million. Those are the most important improvements, in my opinion.

 

Each new station could be in the $250,000 to $500,000 range, depending on what each site is like now. Some, like the site near the Indianapolis Airport, already have existing access driveways and potentially undertutilized parking trackside for example.

 

Adding curve superelevations is probably in a similar ballpark, about $5 million. This is a probably a low-priority item, and the most curvaceous segments could be tackled first, like the section east of Connellsville.

^ Another question: will Indiana save operating costs by going to Cincinnati because of greater patronage?

More operating miles mean more operating costs. The actual amount and the projected revenue would have to be determined by service plan conducted by Amtrak and paid for a sponsor such as the affected local or regional governments.

It's too bad Cincinnati's airport is on the wrong side of the Ohio River to be a station for that alternate route.  It runs soooo close to CVG!

It's too bad Cincinnati's airport is on the wrong side of the Ohio River to be a station for that alternate route.  It runs soooo close to CVG!

 

I've seen airport people movers travel farther than that. Imagine what a joint APM, Amtrak and commuter rail station on the Ohio side of the river could do to spur some development in that area.

That would require a bridge, which would be a welcome addition on that side of town.  That would also make light rail from CVG to downtown fairly simple.  So you could have a dual purpose bridge for local auto traffic and trains, with light rail stations at CVG and Amtrak, then direct to downtown.

 

What determines whether that extension to Cincinnati happens?  Either alternative would be a great addition for Cincy.

^

You could run a shuttle to the airport, a far cheaper alternative, especially since we are only talking about one train a day.

It's too bad Cincinnati's airport is on the wrong side of the Ohio River to be a station for that alternate route.  It runs soooo close to CVG!

 

I've seen airport people movers travel farther than that. Imagine what a joint APM, Amtrak and commuter rail station on the Ohio side of the river could do to spur some development in that area.

 

Assuming they don't use PFCs to pay for the station. Then they'd have to close it off to the area around, like the EWR station.

^

You could run a shuttle to the airport, a far cheaper alternative, especially since we are only talking about one train a day.

 

I'm thinking the expensive part of this is the bridge that would be required over the Ohio River.  People continually gripe about not having light rail from downtown to the airport, a line that I don't think is actually a necessity.  But if you're building a bridge there anyway, you could take the opportunity to run light rail across it instead of just a people mover, and then make Amtrak a stop between CVG and the CBD that only gets service once or twice a day.

^ Should include LRT right-of-way in the Brent Spence plan....

 

Really, they should include tracks from the riverfront transit center to somewhere near Mainstrasse. Might even be worth running service between just those two stops.

^

You could run a shuttle to the airport, a far cheaper alternative, especially since we are only talking about one train a day.

 

But a much more circuitous and time-consuming alternative unless you put the shuttle buses on the Anderson Ferry as there is no direct road. The nearest road bridge is 6.4 miles east of the ferry in downtown Cincinnati. The nearest road bridge west of the Anderson Ferry is I-275, 14 miles west along the Ohio River.

 

Besides, if Amtrak service to Chicago is to operate on the old Big Four route through Cleves and Lawrenceburg, it will make more than just one or two trains a day to make it cost-effective. A big reason why is that the Southwest Connection -- a curving ramp structure from CUT down to the old Big Four and B&O tracks -- was removed in the mid-1970s. Cost of restoring this was estimated at $38 million by Cincinnati's RISP (see: http://tinyurl.com/pc8qyoc). So if this corridor is to see passenger trains again from CUT, it will take a lot of them (probably Amtrak and commuter both) to justify it.

 

EDIT: There's also many more costs of upgrading the Big Four to Indy to passenger train standards -- not the least of which is figuring out how to get a quickly get a passenger train routed by the Honda plant in Greensburg. They relocated the mainline track on a tight curve around a new railyard for the plant. More than 100 miles of tracks need upgrading. Crossings need upgrading. Signals need to be restored and PTC added. It's a superior passenger corridor for 100+ mph trains that avoids the Mill Creek valley and CSX. And thankfully it's still intact. It just needs lots of capital improvements.

^

You could run a shuttle to the airport, a far cheaper alternative, especially since we are only talking about one train a day.

 

But a much more circuitous and time-consuming alternative unless you put the shuttle buses on the Anderson Ferry as there is no direct road. The nearest road bridge is 6.4 miles east of the ferry in downtown Cincinnati. The nearest road bridge west of the Anderson Ferry is I-275, 14 miles west along the Ohio River.

 

Besides, if Amtrak service to Chicago is to operate on the old Big Four route through Cleves and Lawrenceburg, it will make more than just one or two trains a day to make it cost-effective. A big reason why is that the Southwest Connection -- a curving ramp structure from CUT down to the old Big Four and B&O tracks -- was removed in the mid-1970s. Cost of restoring this was estimated at $38 million by Cincinnati's RISP (see: http://tinyurl.com/pc8qyoc). So if this corridor is to see passenger trains again from CUT, it will take a lot of them (probably Amtrak and commuter both) to justify it.

 

EDIT: There's also many more costs of upgrading the Big Four to Indy to passenger train standards -- not the least of which is figuring out how to get a quickly get a passenger train routed by the Honda plant in Greensburg. They relocated the mainline track on a tight curve around a new railyard for the plant. More than 100 miles of tracks need upgrading. Crossings need upgrading. Signals need to be restored and PTC added. It's a superior passenger corridor for 100+ mph trains that avoids the Mill Creek valley and CSX. And thankfully it's still intact. It just needs lots of capital improvements.

 

After looking at a map I can see what you mean. I really wonder if a shuttle to the airport is worth doing for just one train? Or, would it be better to put on a shuttle to another area of Cincinnati?

One other thing: I heard somewhere that Ed Ellis of Iowa Pacific/Pullman fame could be interested in bidding to operate the Hoosier State between Chicago and Indianapolis. Whether this is true or not I do not know but it might be worth it to check and if so, try to establish a dialog with him.

More operating miles mean more operating costs. The actual amount and the projected revenue would have to be determined by service plan conducted by Amtrak and paid for a sponsor such as the affected local or regional governments.

 

I think the question is better phrased as whether or not extending the Hoosier State would improve the operating ratio such that a larger operating subsidy would not be necessary, or better yet, a smaller one. 

 

On a related note... since the Lake Shore Limited loses only $1.5 million per year, I have to wonder if having even one additional frequency there to spread out station and other costs more and improve crew utilization would result in both trains nearly breaking even.  But, I don't know the math behind this stuff...

One other thing: I heard somewhere that Ed Ellis of Iowa Pacific/Pullman fame could be interested in bidding to operate the Hoosier State between Chicago and Indianapolis. Whether this is true or not I do not know but it might be worth it to check and if so, try to establish a dialog with him.

 

Hey, why not?  I don't care who runs the trains as long as the service quality is good and the fares affordable.

One other thing: I heard somewhere that Ed Ellis of Iowa Pacific/Pullman fame could be interested in bidding to operate the Hoosier State between Chicago and Indianapolis. Whether this is true or not I do not know but it might be worth it to check and if so, try to establish a dialog with him.

 

Interesting!

 

 

I think the question is better phrased as whether or not extending the Hoosier State would improve the operating ratio such that a larger operating subsidy would not be necessary, or better yet, a smaller one. 

 

On a related note... since the Lake Shore Limited loses only $1.5 million per year, I have to wonder if having even one additional frequency there to spread out station and other costs more and improve crew utilization would result in both trains nearly breaking even.  But, I don't know the math behind this stuff...

 

I'd just be speculating. Let's encourage the locals to pay for an operating and capital improvement plan to find out for sure.

One other thing: I heard somewhere that Ed Ellis of Iowa Pacific/Pullman fame could be interested in bidding to operate the Hoosier State between Chicago and Indianapolis. Whether this is true or not I do not know but it might be worth it to check and if so, try to establish a dialog with him.

 

Interesting!

 

You can bet that anything Ellis fielded would be far superior to Amtrak in terms of amenities.

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  2m

#Dispatch's @RickRouan notes Ft Wayne $ for Tier 1 EIS of CHI-FTW-COL #rail corridor http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2014/02/17/for-commuters-meters-are-a-dime-a-dozen.html … More $ due from other sources.

And if some wondered why a Chicago-Columbus route through Lima makes sense, here's a nearby corporate presence that can support it with ridership to Chicago and to O'Hare Airport. Not only isn't Marathon leaving Findlay anytime soon, they're expanding:

 

Marathon plans to expand Findlay headquarters

http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=1008491

 

Oh, and the expansion of this refinery to process oil-sands oil from Alberta will mean the DAILY delivery of 56 tank cars of oil through Chicago. The most direct route is via the same rail corridor leased by the Chicago, Fort Wayne & Eastern RR (CFE) that future passenger rail would use. The tracks could use some upgrading even for the safe, efficient movement of freight which can use this rail line at night and passenger trains during the day.....

 

Husky advances Lima refinery expansion

http://www.ogj.com/articles/2014/02/husky-advances-lima-refinery-expansion.html

 

And if some wondered why a Chicago-Columbus route through Lima makes sense, here's a nearby corporate presence that can support it with ridership to Chicago and to O'Hare Airport. Not only isn't Marathon leaving Findlay anytime soon, they're expanding:

 

Marathon plans to expand Findlay headquarters

http://www.northwestohio.com/news/story.aspx?id=1008491

 

Oh, and the expansion of this refinery to process oil-sands oil from Alberta will mean the DAILY delivery of 56 tank cars of oil through Chicago. The most direct route is via the same rail corridor leased by the Chicago, Fort Wayne & Eastern RR (CFE) that future passenger rail would use. The tracks could use some upgrading even for the safe, efficient movement of freight which can use this rail line at night and passenger trains during the day.....

 

Husky advances Lima refinery expansion

http://www.ogj.com/articles/2014/02/husky-advances-lima-refinery-expansion.html

 

 

Honda is right on the route in Marysville. They could become a major customer since they have to drive an hour the wrong way to get to the airport at Columbus, go thru security and all the rest. By the time one of their people actually boarded a plane, they could be halfway between Ft. Wayne and Chicago if they took the train instead. The train riders would also be in downtown before airline passengers landed, got off the plane and took the CTA Orange Line downtown. The train would be VERY competitive for this market.

 

If Honda hasn't been approached for support yet they should be.

Interesting to me that we have interest in three spoke routes into Ohio from Chicago now, serving Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.

New York–Buffalo–Cleveland–Chicago Corridor Improvement Proposal

 

+ Four Daily Round-Trips

+ Faster and More Reliable Service

+ Modern High-Performance Trains

+ Enhanced Stations

 

http://midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/images/Lakeshore_Corridor_Poposal.pdf

New York–Buffalo–Cleveland–Chicago Corridor Improvement Proposal

 

+ Four Daily Round-Trips

+ Faster and More Reliable Service

+ Modern High-Performance Trains

+ Enhanced Stations

 

http://midwesthsr.org/sites/default/files/images/Lakeshore_Corridor_Poposal.pdf

 

Now to build a station at Cleveland similar to the $215 million extravaganza for Orlando! Seriously, the schedules in this proposal are reasonable and I'd hope that leaders in northern Ohio would band together to make this happen, in cooperation with New York State. maybe it might be possible to get federal high speed designation for Cleveland-Buffalo somehow.

 

BTW, here's what an intercity rail station at Cleveland Hopkins Airport could look like. If we stopped the existing Amtrak trains that zip by the airport at 79 mph on the tracks past this potential station site, Hopkins Airport would gain direct daily passenger rail service to:

 

1. Albany, NY

2. Alliance, OH

3. Boston, MA (South Station)

4. Boston, MA (Back Bay Station)

5. Buffalo, NY

6. Bryan, OH

7. Chicago, IL

8. Connellsville, PA

9. Croton-Harmon, NY

10. Cumberland, MD

11. Elkhart, IN

12. Elyria, OH

13. Erie, PA

14. Framingham, MA

15. Harpers Ferry, WV

16. Martinsburg, WV

17. New York, NY (Penn Station)

18. Pittsburgh, PA

19. Pittsfield, MA

20. Poughkeepsie, NY

21. Rochester, NY

22. Rockville, MD

23. Sandusky, OH

24. Schenectady, NY

25. South Bend, IN

26. Syracuse, NY

27. Utica, NY

28. Washington, DC

29. Waterloo, IN (Ft. Wayne)

30. Worcester, MA

 

If through cars were operated from Amtrak's Pennsylvanian through Pittsburgh to Chicago on the Capitol Limited, Cleveland Hopkins would also gain these destinations:

 

1. Altoona, PA

2. Elizabethtown, PA

3. Exton, PA

4. Greensburg, PA

5. Harrisburg, PA

6. Huntingdon, PA

7. Johnstown, PA

8. Lancaster, PA

9. Latrobe, PA

10. Lewistown, PA

11. Newark, NJ

12. Paoli, PA

13. Philadelphia, PA

14. Trenton, NJ

15. Tyrone, PA

 

And if a Wolverine Corridor train was extended from Detroit to Cleveland, Cleveland Hopkins would also gain these destinations:

 

1. Albion, MI

2. Ann Arbor, MI

3. Battle Creek, MI

4. Dearborn, MI

5. Detroit, MI

6. Dowagiac, MI

7. Jackson, MI

8. Hammond-Whiting, IN

9. Kalamazoo, MI

10. Michigan City, IN

11. New Buffalo, MI

12. Niles, MI

 

So that's 57 new destinations, including many (or near many) that will lose direct service to Cleveland from United.

Since this work also benefits existing and future Amtrak service between Chicago - Toledo - Cleveland - New York City / Boston (via other Ohio station stops at Bryan, Sandusky & Elyria), I'm placing this article here.....

 

Passenger rail projects slated for spring

By Eric Anderson

Published 3:04 pm, Saturday, March 1, 2014

 

Construction work on several major passenger rail projects should get under way this spring, two Department of Transportation officials told members of the Empire State Passengers Association at its annual meeting Saturday.

 

Work on the second track connecting Albany and Schenectady, a fourth track at the Rensselaer train station, and preliminary track and platform work is expected to get under way this construction season, said Susan Andrews, rail projects group director for the state Department of Transportation. The projects will be let as one contract.

 

Also planned this season is an extension of the existing high-level platforms at Rensselaer that are level with the interior of the passenger cars, making the trains easier to board. And three crossings in Colonie will receive four-quadrant gates and other improvements.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Passenger-rail-projects-slated-for-spring-5280675.php