A Public Input Meeting in Dayton to discuss the 3C Quick Start passenger rail plan and whether it should become part of the Miami Valley's long-range, regional transportation plan

 

 

 

Public Meeting Regarding LRTP Amendment in Anticipation of Receiving Passenger Rail Funding

 

Dayton, OH – The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission (MVRPC) will hold a Public Participation Meeting regarding the proposed amendment to the Region’s Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP) in anticipation of receiving passenger rail funding (3C + D Corridor)

 

The meeting will be held as follows:

 

Wednesday, December 16, 2009

Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission

One S. Main Street

Suite 260

Downtown Dayton, OH

4:00 pm – 6:00 pm

 

The Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) and the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT), in consultation with statewide transportation stakeholders have, for a number of years, been working on a master plan to implement passenger rail service in Ohio. This Ohio Hub Plan identifies a series of prospective transportation corridors for providing passenger rail service throughout Ohio.

 

The project planning process towards reintroducing passenger rail service in the 3C + D corridor (Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati + Dayton) has progressed to where it is time to coordinate amending the project into Ohio’s MPO Long Range Transportation Plans located within the 3C + D corridor service area (including MVRPC). The Plan amendment effort includes a financial strategy and a new transportation conformity determination (air quality analysis).

 

Ohio’s “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan, known as the 3C + D Corridor, will connect Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati and Dayton with modern, conventional speed (up to 79 MPH) passenger trains, in the state’s most densely-populated travel corridor, which last had passenger rail service in 1971. It also is part of the corridor for future high speed rail (up to 110 MPH) under development by Ohio and its neighboring states. With funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Ohio’s 3C + D “Quick Start” plan would have initial conventional-speed service running by 2011, putting another travel choice in reach of more than 60% of Ohio’s population and is expected to carry 478,000 riders in the first year.

 

If you are unable to attend, information is also available for public review on MVRPC’s web site.

 

The public can also review the information at the MVRPC offices, One Dayton Center, One S. Main Street, Suite 260, Dayton, OH, 45402, during regular business hours (8:00 a.m. – 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday).

 

At all MVRPC public participation meetings, interpreters for hearing impaired individuals or bi-lingual interpreters are available upon request. Requests should be made at least one week prior to the meeting date. Contact MVRPC at (937) 223-6323 or 1-800-750-0750 TTY/TDD to request an interpreter.

 

The Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission strives to foster collaboration among communities, stakeholders and residents to advance regional transportation priorities. MVRPC is a forum and resource where these regional partners can identify priorities, develop public policy and implement collaborative strategies to improve the quality of life and economic vitality throughout the Miami Valley. MVRPC performs various regional planning activities, including air quality, water quality, transportation, land use, research and GIS. As the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), MVRPC is responsible for transportation planning in Greene, Miami and Montgomery Counties and parts of northern Warren County.

 

For information regarding the Region’s Long Range Transportation Plan, contact Ana Ramirez, MVRPC’s Director of Long Range Planning & Engineering at (937) 223-6323 or via e-mail.

 

###

 

 

$8 Billion in High-Speed Rail Funds to Be Allocated—Soon

By Jerry Beilinson

Published on: December 15, 2009

 

U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood delivers remarks on the administration's efforts to transform travel in America with a system of high-speed railways. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

 

Last winter, Congress set aside $8 billion for high-speed rail as part of the $787 billion stimulus bill, but the money hasn't been spent yet—or even allocated.

 

Speaking at a breakfast meeting for magazine editors today at the Hearst Tower in midtown Manhattan, U.S. transportation secretary Ray LaHood said that recipients of the funds will be announced in January. "People want this," LaHood said. "They come back from Europe or Asia, and people scratch their heads and say, why don't we have high-speed trains here?"

 

One reason could be the cost. The official estimate for a single high-speed line, California's proposed San Francisco–to–Los Angeles route, is $42.6 billion. So, PM asked, is it possible that money could be better spent on cheaper transportation projects? "That's a load of baloney," LaHood said, arguing for broad spending on everything from road repair to light rail and other "livable city" projects.

 

Full story at: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/transportation/4339857.html?nav=RSS20&src=syn&dom=yah_buzz&mag=pop

 

Japan enters US high-speed train sales race

By JAY ALABASTER (AP)

 

NAGOYA, Japan — On a desolate stretch of track just before midnight, when all passenger lines have been put to bed, a juiced-up Japanese bullet train goes online and accelerates to over 200 miles per hour. The 700-ton train, about a quarter of a mile long, whooshes by rice paddies in under five seconds.

 

There are no locals around to witness the train glide to a stop at a deserted Kyoto Station, but that's not the point. This is an accelerated sales pitch aimed squarely at the U.S., where Japan is competing with European train makers for a new high-speed train network that could deliver contracts worth hundreds of billions.

 

Diplomats, business leaders and journalists were crammed in to watch special speedometers record the feat last month, the first time operator Japan Central Railway Co. has allowed outsiders to join a test run. Rivals abroad said Japanese trains weren't up to spec, and JR Central wanted to set the record straight.

 

Full story at:http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gKtB7ARp6j6ptp8FB7Pg9qj65x3gD9CK6R300

On Thursday, December 17, 2009, the City of Dayton hosted a tour of its proposed 3C passenger rail line station on the corner of 6th Street and Ludlow St, former site of the Dayton Union Station. 

 

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

 

3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan Update:

ORDC / ODOT Evaluate the City of Dayton’s Proposed 3C Rail Line Station   

 

DAYTON (Thursday, December 17, 2009) - As Ohio awaits a decision on its federal stimulus application for the 3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) are actively evaluating the City of Dayton’s proposed train station.

 

As part of the $564 million application to the Federal Railroad Administration, ODOT has proposed investing at least $5.9 million into a proposed Dayton station.

 

The preferred station would be located on Ludlow Street at the site of the former Union Station. The $5.9 million investment would be for construction of one of the original passenger platforms, lighting, vertical access, as well as sidewalks and walkways to the station with amenities and signage, ticket vending machines, and a paved driveway and parking area under the elevated station structure.

 

Restoring passenger service to Dayton is critical to the 3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan, as Dayton is the 4th largest metro area in Ohio, with more than 837,000 residents. The Miami Valley is also home to more than 56,000 college students, a group identified by Amtrak as a major component to the success of the 3C rail line.

 

Quick Facts on the 3C “Quick Start”:

·  The 250-mile 3C Corridor - stretching from Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati - would reconnect nearly 6 million Ohioans with 79 mph passenger trains for the first time in 40 years.

 

·  According to Amtrak estimates, the 3C “Quick Start” would serve more than 487,000 riders in its first year of operation, making it the 12th largest passenger generator in the nation.

 

·  Ohio’s application requests $564 million in 100% federal stimulus funds, covering needed capital investments in infrastructure, station stops, and equipment (along with construction cost contingencies) to meet high ridership demand, maximize market response, and minimize initial operating costs.

 

·  ODOT expects the federal stimulus funds to be awarded by the U.S. Department of Transportation in the first quarter of 2010

 

· Compare the fare: train travel is cheaper than driving, taking the bus, or flying.

Driving – 55 cents/mile (IRS 2009)                               

 

Air – $1.30 cents/mile (Delta/Continental airlines, August 2009)

 

Bus – 13.5 cents/mile (Greyhound, August 2009)             

 

Rail – 0.12 cents/mile (Amtrak, August 2009)

 

Why this stop in Dayton?

·  Proposed Dayton station will be within walking distance from the RTA’s Wright Stop Plaza – The Greater Dayton RTA provides over 11 million annual trips

 

·  56,000 college students who attend Wright State, University of Dayton and Sinclair Community College will be less than 10 miles from proposed station

 

·  According to federal formulas from the U.S. Department of Commerce, every $1 invested in passenger rail development can generate $3 in economic benefit. According to LinkingOhio.com, this station investment could generate a roughly $18 million benefit to Dayton’s economy (for more information visit www.linkingohio.com)

 

###

 

For more information, contact Scott Varner, ODOT Communications, at (614) 644-8640

or Stu Nicholson, Ohio Rail Development Commission, at (614) 644-0513.

Dayton already has a very basic rendering of its rebuilt Union Station.  If this actually happens it might look nothing like this, but here goes:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/23753769/Recommendations-Transportation-Appendix3-1#keyo06ev0aqhkmhoemt4xd

 

Not as grand as the old station:

 

 

 

Interior:

It should also be noted that the 3C passenger rail service will be the only intercity public transportation service in the City of Dayton....

 

Greyhound relocated its bus station to suburban Trotwood, which is a 40- to 55-minute MVRTA transit ride away from downtown.

 

Dayton Cox International Airport is in suburban Vandalia. The airport has no public transportation linkages.

 

How tragic is that for the 23 percent of households in Dayton with no car, the 15 percent of Daytonians who are 65 years and older, the tens of thousands of students without cars at Wright State University, central State University, University of Dayton and Sinclair Community College, and the overall accessibility of the mother city of a metro area having nearly 1 million people. Would a civilized state and nation really tolerate this forced isolation of so many people?

^Good points KJP.  There is the RTA bus service but that's only slightly more than county-wide.

 

The airport is in Vandalia but the land is owned by the city of Dayton.  The same goes for the smaller Wright Bros. Airport in southern Montgomery County bordering Springboro and the Austin Road Interchange.

Seth:

 

Thanks for the renderings! And thanks also for the pictures of the old DUT. The renderings show the station where it should be: At the site of the old DUT, where there is room to develop a true intermodal station and also room to grow.

Hey, someone got a photo of the first 3C train out of Columbus! Told ya there was a pent-up demand here in Ohio!

 

^ Let's hope there aren't any tunnels along the 3C route...

^ Let's hope there aren't any tunnels along the 3C route...

 

Or catenary!

Shocking!!

Stimulus spending in Ohio ramps up in 2010

By Matt Leingang, Associated Press Writer

 

COLUMBUS, Ohio — Ohio has plenty of President Barack Obama's economic stimulus package left to spend in 2010, but it's the big prize that hangs in the balance: the prospects of landing funds for a marquee train project.

 

For now, the state, will give rebates to people who buy new, energy-efficient appliances; it will begin work on a massive new bridge for downtown Cleveland; and it plans to finish high-profile projects to improve drinking water in rural areas.

 

Still up for grabs is $8 billion in stimulus money that Obama has set aside for high-speed passenger rail projects. By late January, the Federal Rail Administration will decide if Ohio gets $564 million for a 79-mph, startup train service connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati.

 

Full story at link below:

http://content.usatoday.net/dist/custom/gci/InsidePage.aspx?cId=cincinnati&sParam=32397081.story

Regarding the 3-C application to the feds... could Ohio have used all of the grade crossing money it has invested and plans to invest in the corridor as a state match?  If so, did the application include it?  I'm concerned that Ohio isn't putting much of its own money on the table and the feds are going to consider that in the apps.

 

 

It could. If the state's stimulus application doesn't get awarded with a substantial amount (ie: $400 million +), the state could reapply for the $2.5 billion available in 2010 using its recent grade-separation contributions as a non-federal match. But I don't know if these state funding amounts for grade separations would comprise 20 percent ($113 million+) of the total cost of the project.

Ohio's grade crossing $$$ are all federal (FHWA)....and only a portion of the grade separation dollars are state funds.  I don't know how far back those state grade separation funds could be grandfathered to make them eligble for a federal match.

I have a hard time believing the Feds won't approve at least some money for this project.

 

Why? This is Ohio.

Then let the politicians know about it.

 

http://linkingohio.com/signup.cfm?action=homepageSubmit

I have a hard time believing the Feds won't approve at least some money for this project.

 

Why? This is Ohio.

 

Exactly my point. One of the top 10 largest states population wise with 3 major metropolitan areas directly in the middle between NY and Chicago.

 

Plus, Ohio is a swing state. Politicians should be falling over themselves to do us favors!

 

No they shouldn't.  Residents need to call their politicians to let them know there wants and needs.

 

Politicians are reactionary, not innovators.

I have a hard time believing the Feds won't approve at least some money for this project.

 

 

Why? This is Ohio.

 

Exactly my point. One of the top 10 largest states population wise with 3 major metropolitan areas directly in the middle between NY and Chicago.

 

Plus, Ohio is a swing state. Politicians should be falling over themselves to do us favors!

 

No they shouldn't.  Residents need to call their politicians to let them know there wants and needs.

 

Politicians are reactionary, not innovators.

 

Right now the pressure on the so-called "anti-rail hitmen" and their buddies in Congress is overwhelming for Amtrak projects like 3-C's.  The naysayers are isolated to the extent where, only an absolute fool/moron, would vigorously argue against it.. Thank God we're in a period where -- although I hate to see the economic hardship our state and neighbors are suffering -- we have an Obama, a Strickland, a Sherrod Brown and others who understand, and are pushing the envelope; power people who understand that a 3-Cs project is exactly what an urbanized, struggling state like ours needs.

 

They think we're morons for pushing rail. After all, highways are free market and rails are subsidized....  :-P

They think we're morons for pushing rail. After all, highways are free market and rails are subsidized....  :-P

 

Absolutely. Legislators invest taxpayers' money in highway infrastructure. They draw the line at using tax dollars to subsidize expansion and upgrades to rail. :roll:

They think we're morons for pushing rail. After all, highways are free market and rails are subsidized....  :-P

 

Absolutely. Legislators invest taxpayers' money in highway infrastructure. They draw the line at using tax dollars to subsidize expansion and upgrades to rail. :roll:

 

But of course. Anything else would be positively un-Amerikan!!! :weird:

Below is an excerpt from an article today in the Newark Advocate - good to see local interest in the Columbus-Pittsburgh route:

 

County facing key challenges

Need for jobs tops list heading into the new decade

BY AMY HOLLON • Advocate Reporter • January 3, 2010

 

http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20100103/NEWS01/1030308/County-facing-key-challenges

 

In fact, many local officials see planning for commuter rail just as important. Newark is listed as the first stop on a proposed commuter train from Columbus to Pittsburgh.

 

Brems said local officials need to start lobbying to be included in the final design of that corridor, and Fowler said county officials need to start planning where to put the stations.

 

"We'll know if those rail efforts have any traction in the next couple of years," Fowler said.

How many more miles would be added to the trip, if instead of going the proposed way north of Columbus, they instead went through Newark, Coshocton, Massillon, Canton, Akron then Cleveland?  Simply eyeballing it, it seems to only add about 30 miles but adds 2 more of the larger Ohio cities as well as 3 more universities (Akron U, Walsh, Malone), and another major Airport (Akron-Canton).

It would add not just miles, but stops.  So the question is how much time it adds, and how that compares to the competing modes of transportation.

How many more miles would be added to the trip, if instead of going the proposed way north of Columbus, they instead went through Newark, Coshocton, Massillon, Canton, Akron then Cleveland? Simply eyeballing it, it seems to only add about 30 miles but adds 2 more of the larger Ohio cities as well as 3 more universities (Akron U, Walsh, Malone), and another major Airport (Akron-Canton).

 

i think the big issue is existing track and right of way that could be used relatively quickly.  i think both of these are missing in some places or would require substantial upgrades, which is why the other route was initially chosen b/c there is existing freight ROW and track that could be used with relatively modest safety and capacity enhancements. 

 

kjp posted on this a while back, it may be in this thread.  i will see if i can find his response.

It adds over an hour to the 3C Corridor travel time.  That's why it was dropped as a route option.

How many more miles would be added to the trip, if instead of going the proposed way north of Columbus, they instead went through Newark, Coshocton, Massillon, Canton, Akron then Cleveland?  Simply eyeballing it, it seems to only add about 30 miles but adds 2 more of the larger Ohio cities as well as 3 more universities (Akron U, Walsh, Malone), and another major Airport (Akron-Canton).

 

i think the big issue is existing track and right of way that could be used relatively quickly.  i think both of these are missing in some places or would require substantial upgrades, which is why the other route was initially chosen b/c there is existing freight ROW and track that could be used with relatively modest safety and capacity enhancements. 

 

kjp posted on this a while back, it may be in this thread.  i will see if i can find his response.

 

 

I think most of the lapses in track availability are between Cleveland and Akron if I read KJP's earlier post correctly.  A stretch that IMHO needs to be fixed anyway eventually for commuter rail purposes (I believe I read somewhere that around 30 to 40 thousand people commute between these 2 communities on a daily basis), so why not kill two birds with one stone and knock it out now with the help of Federal Stimulus money, paving the way for future commuter rail possibilities and at the same time improving the significance of the 3 C route by adding 2 major Ohio Cities and several national and local tourist attractions (Pro Football Hall of Fame/Football State Championships, Soap Box Derby)

It adds over an hour to the 3C Corridor travel time. That's why it was dropped as a route option.

 

I believe the estimate provided by Amtrak that added an hour a half to the trip time from Cincy going through Akron, took a different route than the 1 I proposed. They went North through Galion and Shelby then East at New London through Medina county.

Below is an excerpt from an article today in the Newark Advocate - good to see local interest in the Columbus-Pittsburgh route:

 

County facing key challenges

Need for jobs tops list heading into the new decade

BY AMY HOLLON • Advocate Reporter • January 3, 2010

 

http://www.newarkadvocate.com/article/20100103/NEWS01/1030308/County-facing-key-challenges

 

In fact, many local officials see planning for commuter rail just as important. Newark is listed as the first stop on a proposed commuter train from Columbus to Pittsburgh.

 

Brems said local officials need to start lobbying to be included in the final design of that corridor, and Fowler said county officials need to start planning where to put the stations.

 

"We'll know if those rail efforts have any traction in the next couple of years," Fowler said.

 

"Traction" was the popular name for the electrified interurban railway lines that laced Indiana and Ohio and tied much of the Midwest together. :-)

Fowler is very much interested in Newark being a stop for future service on the Panhandle Line.  And Brems is right that the planning process needs to begin at the local level now to not only locate a potential local stop....but to plan for what develops around it.

 

I think most of the lapses in track availability are between Cleveland and Akron if I read KJP's earlier post correctly. A stretch that IMHO needs to be fixed anyway eventually for commuter rail purposes (I believe I read somewhere that around 30 to 40 thousand people commute between these 2 communities on a daily basis), so why not kill two birds with one stone and knock it out now with the help of Federal Stimulus money, paving the way for future commuter rail possibilities and at the same time improving the significance of the 3 C route by adding 2 major Ohio Cities and several national and local tourist attractions (Pro Football Hall of Fame/Football State Championships, Soap Box Derby)

 

If Ohio had built just one Interstate highway in the 1960s and that single route included Cleveland, Akron, Canton, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati, it would have been a failure for cross-state traffic. Instead, we have three north-south highways and two east-west highways. That's what we need with rail, too: an interconnected NETWORK of lines. We have to pick one to start with, and that's the 3-C. Then we need other rail lines to roughly parallel the Interstates. First there were the canals. Then the railroads came alongside the canals. Then the highways followed the rail lines. Now the rail lines will again follow the highways.

If things keep going the way they are, we may see rail lines built where some old abandoned highways once ran!

 

I believe the estimate provided by Amtrak that added an hour a half to the trip time from Cincy going through Akron, took a different route than the 1 I proposed. They went North through Galion and Shelby then East at New London through Medina county.

 

Start-up and operating costs are also a big factor. Routing via Coshocton, Canton and Akron increases capital costs because the tracks and signals need more improvements, or need to be put back. The right of way south of Canton to Coshocton has been removed in many sections, with some abandonments (including a collapsed tunnel) dating back to the 1960s. The added miles also increases operating costs, while decreasing revenues. Past rail plans (including your Coshocton route) showed that the added ridership from Akron and Canton didn't offset ridership losses from Cleveland.

The bottom line is that, to be successful, the 3-C train must be able to compete with the drive time from Cleveland to Columbus to Cincy.  It doesn't have to be shorter, but it must be competitive.  It's that simple IMHO.

And that will come to pass as well as service and speeds are ramped up.  But it's not all about time & speed.... being able to free oneself from having to grasp a steering wheel for several hours per trip is also a factor. 

Not having to deal with traffic, bad weather, and parking would be worth a couple extra minutes to me.

 

And I believe the planned route will indeed add "a couple of minutes" to the drive time.  I doubt a 79 mph train with 5 or more stops could get to Cincy faster than I could in my car if I planned it to miss rush hour through C-bus.  Those couple of minutes would be well worth it.  But going through Akron and Canton would add AT LEAST an hour, maybe two, IMO and that would be if everything went smoothly with no delays.  Might still be worth it for you and me, but the 3-C has to attract Mr. I-am-indifferent-towards-rail-travel Guy and the added time, IMO, would discourage him from using the 3-C.

The bottom line is that, to be successful, the 3-C train must be able to compete with the drive time from Cleveland to Columbus to Cincy. It doesn't have to be shorter, but it must be competitive. It's that simple IMHO.

 

Very much so.  For this reason, I can't figure out why it would bother with Dayton (sorry Dayton), let alone all these small town stops.  This thing needs to bend over backwards to impress people with its speed.  Speed seems to be the biggest source of apprehension.  I'd prefer we focus on building the most effective 3-C train possible.  Dayton and Grafton stops would tend to frustrate that purpose, no?

^I'm Ok with Dayton, it is at least a notable city, but I agree on all the small towns. I don't see a point in having the train stop in towns with less than 100,000 people. I understand that otherwise these towns will not have any inter-city public transportation, and that many of these towns will only add 5 or so minutes, but if it slows the train down it will diminish the value of the whole line.

 

I feel simlilarly about all of Amtrak. Besides not coming to Cleveland at a decent hour, I won't ride Amtrak because it is just too darn slow because they stop in every little town.

^There should be a stop between Cleveland and Columbus IMO, but otherwise just hit the 3 C's and 1 D.

Although this has already been covered in this thread (hint: look for my post with the freight train pictures in it! EDIT: It's on Page 41 at http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,18328.msg422522.html#msg422522) The Dayton route is only 7 miles longer than the only other intact rail corridor which is via Washington CH and Wilmington. Those are the two largest cities on that route.

 

So it's worth the extra 7 miles to pick up 1 million people in the Dayton-Springfield area on a rail corridor that's already in excellent condition.

 

The rail corridor for the Washington CH alternative is in mediocre condition. The tracks need to be completely rebuilt to handle passenger trains. It doesn't even have a signal system which would add more than $100 million to the 3C price tag to remedy that shortcoming.

You also don't lose much speed through Dayton because much of the railroad right-of-way is grade- separated from local roadways.

We all have to take a deep breath and realize that this is just a startup service and that Amtrak's has projected a VERY conservative (slow) running time. This will change as operations settle and will be reduced further as more improvements are made. The main thing to focus on is getting the trains running. That should be our first order of business and even under the best of circumtances will be difficult.

 

The service must run via Dayton, for the reasons KJP gives. Via Coshocton is so problematic it can't be a serious consideration, except maybe as a commuter (Columbus-Newark) or as a tourist line that morphs into a regional rail service.

I've actually ridden the rail line from Coshcoton to the north in an Ohio Central locomotive...it is hilly, full of curves and would take way more work than it would be worth.

I was surprised at how fast trains can run when the track is maintained in good condition, especially when curves or hills are involved. The Cardinal (at least between Cincinnati and Ashland) can run as high as 100 MPH on the track according to the three engineers I spoke with. But it was the deteriorated rail condition and the grade crossings that keeps it at 45 MPH.

I was surprised at how fast trains can run when the track is maintained in good condition, especially when curves or hills are involved. The Cardinal (at least between Cincinnati and Ashland) can run as high as 100 MPH on the track according to the three engineers I spoke with. But it was the deteriorated rail condition and the grade crossings that keeps it at 45 MPH.

 

In the 1940s, the Pennsylvania Railroad's giant, sleek T-1 steam locomotives hauling the Broadway Limited could attain 120 mph on the long, flat, straight stretches across Northwest Ohio and Northern Indiana. Speeds of 100mph were routine then on the PRR. The Milwaukee Road's post-WWII diesel passenger locomotives were geared for 117mph, and regularly exceeded 100mph with the Hiawathas. Likewise, the Burlington's Zephyrs fairly streaked across the plains. If you saw a headlight in the distance, you didn't drive around the gate thinking you could make it across before the train got there.

 

Around 1960, in my '56 Ford I tried to pace an Erie passenger train westbound out of Decatur, Indiana, where the tracks ran parallel to US 224. At 90 mph I was steadily losing ground until I was forced by other traffic to forfeit the race.

3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan Update:

ODOT, ORDC and Cleveland transit officials evaluate

proposed 3C rail station in southwest Cleveland

 

CLEVELAND (Friday, January 8, 2010) - As Ohio awaits decision on its federal stimulus application for the 3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan, the Ohio Department of Transportation (ODOT) and the Ohio Rail Development Commission (ORDC) are actively evaluating the proposed southwest Cleveland train station at the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) Puritas Rapid site.

 

As part of the $564 million application to the Federal Railroad Administration, ODOT has proposed investing at least $2.2 million into the preferred southwest Cleveland station at the GCRTA Puritas Rapid site.

 

The preferred southwest Cleveland station would be located at the current GCRTA Puritas Rapid Red Line station.  The $2.2 million investment would be for construction of the 500-foot station platform, modification of pedestrian bridge, and installation of platform lighting, seating, signage and Ticket Vending Machines (TVMs).

 

Extending passenger service to Cleveland is critical to the 3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan, as Cleveland is the largest metro area in Ohio, with more than 2 million residents. The Cleveland metro area is also home to a dozen colleges and universities, a group identified by Amtrak as a major component to the success of the 3C rail line.

 

Quick Facts on the 3C “Quick Start”:

·  The 250-mile 3C Corridor - stretching from Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton, and Cincinnati - would reconnect nearly 6 million Ohioans with 79 mph passenger trains for the first time in 40 years.

 

·  According to Amtrak estimates, the 3C “Quick Start” would serve more than 487,000 riders in its first year of operation, making it the 12th largest passenger generator in the nation.

 

·  Ohio’s application requests $564 million in 100% federal stimulus funds, covering needed capital investments in infrastructure, station stops, and equipment (along with construction cost contingencies) to meet high ridership demand, maximize market response, and minimize initial operating costs.

 

·  ODOT expects the federal stimulus funds to be awarded by the U.S. Department of Transportation in the first quarter of 2010

 

·  Compare the fare: train travel is cheaper than driving, taking the bus, or flying.

Driving – 55 cents/mile (IRS 2009)                                Air – $1.30 cents/mile (Delta/Continental airlines, August 2009)

Bus – 13.5 cents/mile (Greyhound, August 2009)              Rail – 0.12 cents/mile (Amtrak, August 2009)

 

Why this stop in southwest Cleveland?

·  Proposed passenger station will operate from the GCRTA Puritas Rapid station – which is currently under construction and projected to open in 2011

 

·  Will provide direct access to and from Cleveland Hopkins International Airport – serving almost 12 million passengers annually (according to www.clevelandairport.com)

 

·  According to federal formulas from the U.S. Department of Commerce, every $1 invested in passenger rail development can generate $3 in economic benefit. According to LinkingOhio.com, this station investment could generate more than a $6 million benefit to Cleveland’s economy (for more information visit www.linkingohio.com)

 

###

 

For more information, contact Scott Varner, ODOT Communications, at (614) 644-8640

or Stu Nicholson, Ohio Rail Development Commission, at (614) 644-0513.

 

ATTENTION MEDIA:  Video from yesterday's station tour and info regarding the 3C “Quick Start” Passenger Rail Plan are available online at 3CisMe.ohio.gov

Here's some additional images of the Puritas Rapid station (current and proposed) that may be of interest to UOers....

 

Existing (as of July 2009 -- think 90 degrees on this frigid January weekend!)....

 

Looking toward the West 150th Street side of the station. The I-71 overpass is in the distance. The nearest track is RTA's eastbound Red Line track. The three tracks to the left of it are, from nearest to farthest, Norfolk Southern's two main Chicago Line tracks and the third, lower track is NS's West Park Sub on which NS uses to service Rockport Yard next to I-480 and the lesser used West Park yard between Lorain Avenue and West 150th. You may notice there is a vacant track space or two between the West Park Sub and the edge of the right of way. That might allow the West Park Sub and NS's #2 Main to be moved over a bit to allow an "island" station platform, plus elevator and stairwell, to be inserted between the two NS main tracks. The stairwell/elevator is needed because freight trains often sit on the West Park Sub and block access to the main tracks...

 

 

This is RTA's westbound Red Line track on the West 157th/Valley View Ave side of the Puritas station (where the residential kiss-n-ride is). The new station will replace the existing station at the same location, including the same exact RTA station platform site....

 

 

This an artist's view of the proposed new RTA Puritas station. Including using Shaker Rapid cars for some reason. This is the track level view, showing the new overhead walkway that will replace the dungeon-like pedestrian tunnel below the tracks.....

 

 

The station headhouse for the West 150th entrance.....

 

 

The station headhouse for the West 157th/Valley View residential/kiss-n-ride entrance.....

 

^That Puritas rendering with the LRV always made me so mad.  The designers should lose some of their fees for being so aloof from the station's operations.

 

Thanks for the run-down, KJP of the station site.

More recent pictures of the Puritas (W. 150th Street) station project....the passenger trains would stop along the parking lot (south) side of the station.

Roadblocks to Union Terminal use

By Barry M. Horstman, Cincinnati Enquirer, January 9, 2010

 

When it comes to the future of passenger rail transportation in Cincinnati, Union Terminal has history and sentiment strongly in its corner - but, at least in the short term, timing, financing and logistics are in its path.

 

With Ohio perhaps only weeks away from learning whether it will receive federal money to develop the so-called 3-C rail line linking Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland, about two dozen rail advocates gathered Saturday at Union Terminal's old control tower to discuss possible station sites for that and possible future high-speed trains.