So when does this supermajority board vote?  Is and is there a drop dead date?

More about speeds.... Style is the top speed. But the substance is the average speed. I prefer the latter.

 

FYI, I prepared this visual as my own personal thoughts on how the second phase of 3C might play out as the Ohio Hub environmental impact study gets under way. So all of this can and probably will change as that process plays out. But I wouldn't be surprised to see something like this POSSIBLY happening:

 

 

The map assumes:

 

Cleveland - Berea (NS): 79 mph, 12 miles, a congested freight section with spatial limitations, including many adjacent neighborhoods and a busy rapid transit line along it.

Berea - Greenwich (CSX): 110 mph, 42 miles, a third main track may be needed for multiple daily passenger trains on this busy (50-60 freights daily) section. So build it to CSX's preferred 110 mph standards.

Greenwich - Galion (CSX): 90 mph, 24 miles, a second main track is to be completed here with 3C "Quick Start." Upgrading to 110 mph for such a short section does not produce a significant travel time savings over 90 mph.

Galion - Columbus (CSX): 110 mph, 58 miles, there are few (5-10 daily) freights on this section and thus could be rerouted on a parallel CSX line via Marion, a move which CSX supported a decade ago for the Columbus LRT North Corridor. Local freight and fast intermodal service could remain on the 3C line.

Downtown Columbus area (CSX/NS): 79 mph, 3 miles, freight density, spatial limitations and converging/diverging traffic may limit top speeds here.

Columbus - Fairborn (NS): 110 mph, 50 miles, a parallel and intact rail corridor east of London via Camp Chase might be used for 110 mph passenger trains with the corridor west of London using the existing NS right of way that is to be upgraded in the "Quick Start" phase.

Fairborn - Moraine (NS/CSX): 90 mph, 11 miles, density of freight traffic, proximate stations and limitations of the existing right of way may not permit top speeds above 90 mph here. But that speed increase will be aided by capacity enhancements in the "Quick Start" phase.

Moraine - Sharonville (NS): 110 mph, 35 miles, capacity enhancements to the parallel CSX line could permit detouring NS freight traffic via Hamilton leaving a largely freight-free rail corridor through Middletown. Existing industries would continue to be served at night or during daytime lulls in passenger traffic.

Sharonville - Cincinnati (NS/CSX): 79 mph, 15 miles, freight density, adjacent neighborhoods and converging/diverging traffic may limit top speeds here. Cincinnati Union Terminal access preliminary engineering to get underway later this year may provide answers as would the upcoming Ohio Hub PEIS.

 

Just in case anyone wants to know the technical stuff of what's possible. Remember this is just theoretical. The Ohio Hub PEIS will show what's realistic.

Cross-posted from the "Actual cost of driving" thread...

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,5109.0.html

 

April 7, 2010

Costs of driving shift up for 2010

By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY

 

It's official: Your driving costs are going up.

 

The average cost of owning and operating a sedan in the USA rose 4.8% this year to 56.6 cents per mile, or $8,487 per year, a study out today by auto club AAA finds.

 

Rising gas prices are primarily responsible for the increased costs and also are lowering the resale or trade-in value of cars that don't get good gas mileage, says John Nielsen, director of AAA's approved auto repair and auto buying network.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2010-04-07-cost-of-driving_N.htm

 

  Oh gee, KJP, sometimes I think you WANT gas prices to rise.  :-(

If it produces more market-based decision-making when it comes to where people live/work, how they travel (and how often), and where their energy comes from, then yes I certainly do.

 

I was going to post more, but let's keep this to 3C (unless you wish to discuss the impact of higher driving costs on 3C). There's several other threads here on UO to discuss driving costs in general, as well as gas price impacts on the urban form, transit/rail usage, and where we source our energy.

:?

Strickland pushes ahead with passenger rail plan

By MATT LEINGANG Associated Press Writer

Published on Thursday Apr 08, 2010

 

Gov. Ted Strickland signaled Thursday he is willing to push ahead with a plan to restore passenger rail service from Cleveland to Cincinnati with or without Republican help.

 

His administration said it will take the project to the state Controlling Board on April 19, asking it to release $25 million in federal stimulus money needed to complete final engineering and design work.

 

Democrats control the panel 4-3, which should mean a clear victory for the Democratic governor, his spokeswoman said. But bipartisan support from Republicans, who have been critical of the project, will be crucial for subsequent votes needed to buy trains and make track improvements.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.ohio.com/news/ap?articleID=4313447&c=y

:?

 

Been to Europe to see what high gas prices do to enhance urban density, vibrancy, transit usage, train usage, biking, pedestrian activity, etc? They view the lack of these activities as more expensive and worth a higher price of gas. After seeing it in person four times, so do I.

Yes, but their higher gasoline prices are _not_ market driven. It is socialistic governments that imposes far higher taxes for fuel, where not all of the revenue generated is used to fund highway projects. Much of the funding is used on rail projects, for example.

I think the Europeans do a better job of having the direct, social and environmental costs of the automobile paid for by the users than we do. On that score, I think we're more socialistic by under-pricing car use through the use of general taxes. But.... http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,5109.0.html

 

So how about that Strickland, finding "a technicality" (as Harris' spokesperson calls it) for moving 3C forward?

Strickland pushes ahead with passenger rail plan

By MATT LEINGANG Associated Press Writer

Published on Thursday Apr 08, 2010

 

Gov. Ted Strickland signaled Thursday he is willing to push ahead with a plan to restore passenger rail service from Cleveland to Cincinnati with or without Republican help.

 

His administration said it will take the project to the state Controlling Board on April 19, asking it to release $25 million in federal stimulus money needed to complete final engineering and design work.

 

Democrats control the panel 4-3, which should mean a clear victory for the Democratic governor, his spokeswoman said. But bipartisan support from Republicans, who have been critical of the project, will be crucial for subsequent votes needed to buy trains and make track improvements.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.ohio.com/news/ap?articleID=4313447&c=y

 

Good for Strickland!... Time to cut off Harris and his BS who, as I see it (correct me if I'm wrong), is trying in his own way to fillibuster the train to death.  Gov. Ted is taking the right approach: full steam ahead. 

 

.... as for a gorilla tactic I mentioned: per info from an someone's earlier post, why not start spreading the word, in the media/on the internet to publicize Harris' auto dealership as evidence of is conflict/self interest against 3-C.

State law says spending for "capital improvements" is subject to a supermajority vote of at least five members.

 

The Ohio Department of Transportation considers capital improvements to be physical assets _ equipment or construction, spokesman Scott Varner said.

 

Since the initial $25 million is for engineering and planning, a supermajority vote is not needed, but the administration will continue to seek Republican support, said Strickland spokeswoman Amanda Wurst.

 

Clever.  ODOT is supporting Strickland with that interpretation.

 

Good for Strickland. He is pushing back, which will put the GOP on the spot.  The only way they can stop the study is to go to court.  However the real showdown is kicked down the road, becuase the accepting the actual investment will, apparently, require that supermajority.

 

Is there a time limit on accepting the full $400B?

 

Is there a time limit on accepting the full $400B?

 

The full $400M (M not B) has to be obligated by Sept. 30, 2012.

Jeffrey has it right.  Strickland still has to get a republican vote, he's just delaying the fight.  Hopefully the results of the studies will make it near impossible for the republicans to vote nay without looking like total fools.  Although I'm sure they'll just say the studies are biased and unacceptable.

I'm not sure if I've posted this before. So here it is in case I haven't. 3C will be one of the fastest at the outset. I looked at new-start, state-supported Amtrak services begun since 1980. Among 12 such routes started over the past 30 years, 3C's projected average speed of 45 mph would be the fourth-fastest -- putting it in the top third.

 

Here's the list ranked by end-to-end average speed when the state-sponsored service started:

 

38 mph -- Capitol Corridor -- Bay Area-Sacramento -- 1991

41 mph -- Vermonter -- St. Albans-Springfield (WDC) -- 1995

41 mph -- Ethan Allen Express -- Rutland-Albany (NYC) -- 1996

42 mph -- The Downeaster -- Portland-Boston -- 2002

43 mph -- Piedmont Corridor -- Charlotte-Raleigh -- 1990

43 mph -- Cascades Corridor -- Seattle-Portland-Eugene -- 1993

45 mph -- Heartland Flyer -- Oklahoma City-Fort Worth -- 1999

45 mph -- Pere Marquette -- Grand Rapids-Chicago -- 1984

45 mph -- 3C Corridor -- Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati -- ? ? ?

50 mph -- Pennsylvanian -- Pittsburgh-Philadelphia -- 1980

51 mph -- Missouri River Runner -- Kansas City-St. Louis -- 1980

58 mph -- Hiawatha Corridor -- Chicago-Milwaukee -- 1989

 

Just in case this matters to anyone....

I know the planned eventual top speed is 110, but what's a realistic number for the highest average speed we can reach on this line?  It may be better used to refute the 39mph average the opponents are shouting.

There's a lot of padding in the schedule to account for dispatcher switchovers, waiting for freight trains, and other contingencies.  I'd be interested to know what the average speed will be when the train is actually moving, ignoring time waiting around for clearance to proceed. 

I know the planned eventual top speed is 110, but what's a realistic number for the highest average speed we can reach on this line? It may be better used to refute the 39mph average the opponents are shouting.

 

If the traffic choke points in the cities can be addressed to benefit passenger and freight, then probably something in the vicinity of 80 mph.

American “Made in China” high speed trains?    

Railway Age Magazine

 

China is well ahead of the United States in high speed rail, with plans to invest nearly half a trillion (that’s trillion with a “t”) dollars through 2012 on a national network of rail lines, most of which would be dedicated (“true” or “very”) high speed lines with passenger trains operating at speeds up to 220 mph. Some 1,200 miles of HSR will open this year alone, at a cost of $50 billion. The country’s longer-term plans call for high speed routes expanding beyond China’s borders, linking Shanghai to Singapore and New Delhi and connecting Beijing and Shanghai to Moscow, Tehran, Prague, and Berlin. The Beijing to Shanghai system will be finished by early 2012, cutting travel time to four hours from 10. By comparison, traveling by Amtrak from New York to Chicago on the Lake Shore Limited, a similar distance (about 1,000 miles), takes about 20 hours. 

 

Full story at: http://www.railwayage.com/breaking-news/american-made-in-china-high-speed-trains.html

It would nice if the 3C could go by the airports.  I'm sure that would have increased ridership from Col/Cin to Dayton International.  Too bad DIA is in Vandalia.

Yes, imagine it being possible to get from Chicago to New York City by train in 10 hours (as was possible in China BEFORE they invested in high-speed rail). That translates into traveling by train from Cleveland to Chicago (340 miles) in 3 hours 30 minutes, and Cleveland to New York City (620 miles) in 6 hours.

 

Imagine having those speeds with trains every hour in each direction, serving large downtown stations linked to buses, subways, trams, regional trains and other intercity trains, and the downtown areas built up heavily around those stations. Such conditions are the jumping off point for high-speed rail.

 

And that is the kind of rail evolution I keep talking about here, and to emphasize how far behind we are the rest of the world in rail development.

It would nice if the 3C could go by the airports. I'm sure that would have increased ridership from Col/Cin to Dayton International. Too bad DIA is in Vandalia.

 

The last thing anyone was thinking about when siting the international airports was rail proximity.

Not true. Many city airports were built near rail lines for the purpose of air-rail linkages. Pennsylvania Railroad ran a joint rail-airline transcontinental service -- trains at night, air during the day, owing to the lack of nighttime navigation for airplanes -- resulting in Port Columbus Airport being built next to the PRR's NYC-STL mainline. Ditto for Cleveland Hopkins (first airport served by an electric interurban and later by the Rapid system), or Lunken Field in Cincinnati, plus others.

 

However, many World War II airfields were built away from cities and rai lines, as in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, and after the war they were developed for commercial passenger travel.

Not true. Many city airports were built near rail lines for the purpose of air-rail linkages. Pennsylvania Railroad ran a joint rail-airline transcontinental service -- trains at night, air during the day, owing to the lack of nighttime navigation for airplanes -- resulting in Port Columbus Airport being built next to the PRR's NYC-STL mainline. Ditto for Cleveland Hopkins (first airport served by an electric interurban and later by the Rapid system), or Lunken Field in Cincinnati, plus others.

 

I'm old enough to remember when you needed to leave a little extra time when going to Hopkins to account for the presence of trains at the Snow Road and Five Points grade crossings.

 

Strickland wants OK of rail study

$25 million sought for passenger-service plan even as GOP questions it

Saturday,  April 10, 2010 2:51 AM

By James Nash

 

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

Gov. Ted Strickland's administration is asking legislators to approve spending $25 million in federal money on a detailed study of passenger rail service even though the overall project faces uncertain prospects when it comes to a final vote.

 

On April 19, the Ohio Department of Transportation is to ask a panel of legislators to approve its request to hire two consultants for a comprehensive study of the engineering, design and environmental aspects of connecting Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati with passenger rail service.

 

The Strickland administration needs at least a 4-3 vote on the Controlling Board, the panel of legislators that votes on spending requests. The board has a 4-3 Democratic majority, so passage seems likely.

 

Full story at: http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2010/04/10/copy/strickland-wants-ok-of-rail-study.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

Again, I think Strickland is dead right in his approach.  Get the study to help answer Harris' questions -- er, that is, if he really has any questions or, as many including me suspect, is merely an obstructionist.  Objecting to the $25M for a detailed study that could answer many questions is the way to go.  $25M is not so much for such an such an important project that anyone, in their right mind, could argue should not be spent while holdout Republicans on the Controlling Board piddle around and continue their disingenuous shell game risking the $400M (and more importantly, potentially losing any realistic quality train service for Ohio for a long, long time).

    "Many city airports were built near rail lines for the purpose of air-rail linkages....Lunken Field in Cincinnati..."

 

    It is true that Lunken Airport happens to be near a railroad - hence the proposed 3-C station near Lunken. However, I doubt that the site was chosen for that reason. The land was already owned by the City of Cincinnati, and was situated in a rare flat spot big enough to build a runway. It was superceded by CVG because Lunken was surrounded by hills and had no room for expansion.

Lunken is also plagued by fog and, until fairly recently, flooding.  I think Eighth and State is right that Lunken's proximity to the former Little Miami Railroad is little more than a fluke.  The nearest passenger station was on Carrell Street, and anyway, what little commuter railroad service in Cincinnati remained into the 1930s was killed off by the requirement that all passenger trains use Union Terminal, and that happened before Lunken opened.  The Cincinnati, Georgetown & Portsmouth interurban also ran by the airport (the flood wall that crosses Wilmer Avenue marks its location), but it was abandoned just before the airport opened as well, save for infrequent freight shipments to the California Waterworks.  There may be some isolated incidences of early rail/air connections, but that's not the case for most large airports of today. 

Milwaukee Airport..... has an Amtrak Station

 

BWI (Batlimore)....station on the Northeast Corridor served by Amtrak and MARC

 

TF Green Airport (Providence) .... served by Amtrak stop.

 

 

Not true. Many city airports were built near rail lines for the purpose of air-rail linkages. Pennsylvania Railroad ran a joint rail-airline transcontinental service -- trains at night, air during the day, owing to the lack of nighttime navigation for airplanes -- resulting in Port Columbus Airport being built next to the PRR's NYC-STL mainline. Ditto for Cleveland Hopkins (first airport served by an electric interurban and later by the Rapid system), or Lunken Field in Cincinnati, plus others.

 

However, many World War II airfields were built away from cities and rai lines, as in Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, and after the war they were developed for commercial passenger travel.

 

I meant when citing the Cincinnati and Dayton international airports.

Great line in this great editorial: "The chamber needs to send its Jon Husted to lobby Sen. Husted"

 

Editorial: Dayton needs Husted on board for trains

By the Dayton Daily News | Sunday, April 11, 2010, 03:07 AM

 

Sen. Jon Husted’s opposition to bringing passenger trains to Ohio is directly at odds with what’s good for Dayton.

 

He complains about the costs of a passenger rail system from Cleveland to Columbus to Dayton to Cincinnati. He points to both the federal debt and Ohio’s troubled budget.

 

Those are certainly real problems. But the Kettering Republican is being penny-wise and dollar-foolish.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/opinion/entries/2010/04/11/editorial_dayton_needs_husted.html?cxtype=feedbot

IMHO, the best response following the editorial was this one:

 

By KeepinItReal

April 11, 2010 11:28 AM | Link to this

Americans are too fat, stupid and lazy to deserve what advanced countries with educated populaces have. They would much rather bankrupt themselves than to give in to any kind of progress that might puncture the fantasy world they live in. Americans don’t have to worry about a post-fuel future, because as everyone knows, the Earth is filled with a creamy nougat center of crude that will last into infinity and beyond.

Great line in this great editorial: "The chamber needs to send its Jon Husted to lobby Sen. Husted"

 

Editorial: Dayton needs Husted on board for trains

By the Dayton Daily News | Sunday, April 11, 2010, 03:07 AM

 

Sen. Jon Husteds opposition to bringing passenger trains to Ohio is directly at odds with whats good for Dayton.

 

He complains about the costs of a passenger rail system from Cleveland to Columbus to Dayton to Cincinnati. He points to both the federal debt and Ohios troubled budget.

 

Those are certainly real problems. But the Kettering Republican is being penny-wise and dollar-foolish.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.daytondailynews.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/dayton/opinion/entries/2010/04/11/editorial_dayton_needs_husted.html?cxtype=feedbot

 

Right on !!

IMHO, the best response following the editorial was this one:

 

By KeepinItReal

April 11, 2010 11:28 AM | Link to this

Americans are too fat, stupid and lazy to deserve what advanced countries with educated populaces have. They would much rather bankrupt themselves than to give in to any kind of progress that might puncture the fantasy world they live in. Americans don’t have to worry about a post-fuel future, because as everyone knows, the Earth is filled with a creamy nougat center of crude that will last into infinity and beyond.

 

Yeah, not surprising given the high number of Americans who believe the govt is run by aliens; or that Obama has links to al-Qaeda or is the anti-Christ... 

If 3C happens, you can bet the same politicians who opposed the project will be all to happy to have their photos taken at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

If 3C happens, you can bet the same politicians who opposed the project will be all to happy to have their photos taken at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

 

Six Phases of a Project

 

1. Enthusiasm

2. Disillusionment

3. Panic

4. Search for the Guilty

5. Punishment of the Innocent

6. Praise and Honors for the Non-Participants

If 3C happens, you can bet the same politicians who opposed the project will be all to happy to have their photos taken at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

 

To combat that we will have some burly guards stationed around the perimeter of the ribbon cutting with orders to only allow "real americans" who believe in rail inside. :police:

If 3C happens, you can bet the same politicians who opposed the project will be all to happy to have their photos taken at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

 

To combat that we will have some burly guards stationed around the perimeter of the ribbon cutting with orders to only allow "real americans" who believe in rail inside. :police:

 

Not burly guards, burly conductors, and they'll have to present their train tickets. :D

NOTE: for whatever reason, the Sun Press decided to take a nasty shot at 3-C while opining on the RTA Blue Line extension.  So much for that liberal, open-minded view of the Heights/Clevelnad...

 

Plenty of ink and air time has been devoted to debating the merits of a high-speed rail line connecting Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. In our view, it seems like a lot of money to provide limited access between the three major Ohio cities with no real benefit in terms of time saved as opposed to driving Interstate 71.

Railing for Blue Line extension: Sun Press Editorial

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunpress/2010/03/railing_for_blue_line_extensio.html

 

IMHO, the best response following the editorial was this one:

 

By KeepinItReal

April 11, 2010 11:28 AM | Link to this

Americans are too fat, stupid and lazy to deserve what advanced countries with educated populaces have. They would much rather bankrupt themselves than to give in to any kind of progress that might puncture the fantasy world they live in. Americans don’t have to worry about a post-fuel future, because as everyone knows, the Earth is filled with a creamy nougat center of crude that will last into infinity and beyond.

 

Lifted right out of the James Howard Kunstler playbook! Nasty!

 

 

If 3C happens, you can bet the same politicians who opposed the project will be all to happy to have their photos taken at the ribbon-cutting ceremony.

 

Six Phases of a Project

 

1. Enthusiasm

2. Disillusionment

3. Panic

4. Search for the Guilty

5. Punishment of the Innocent

6. Praise and Honors for the Non-Participants

 

This is going on the wall behind my desk. As soon as I find a job.

Here again is the list of state-sponsored routes started in the past 30 years, this time with first-year ridership/2009 ridership:

 

38 mph -- Capitol Corridor -- Bay Area-Sacramento -- 1991 -- 400,000/1.7 million;

41 mph -- Vermonter -- St. Albans-Springfield (WDC) -- 1995 -- 31,000/74,000;

41 mph -- Ethan Allen Express -- Rutland-Albany (NYC) -- 1996 -- 34,000/47,000;

42 mph -- The Downeaster -- Portland-Boston -- 2002 -- 292,000/458,000;

43 mph -- Piedmont Corridor -- Charlotte-Raleigh -- 1990 -- 122,000/361,000;

43 mph -- Cascades Corridor -- Seattle-Portland-Eugene -- 1993 -- 185,000/740,000;

45 mph -- Heartland Flyer -- Oklahoma City-Fort Worth -- 1999 -- 54,000/82,000;

45 mph -- Pere Marquette -- Grand Rapids-Chicago -- 1984 -- 73,000/103,000;

45 mph -- 3C Corridor -- Cleveland-Columbus-Dayton-Cincinnati -- ? ? ?

50 mph -- Pennsylvanian -- Pittsburgh-Philadelphia -- 1980 -- 83,000/200,000;

51 mph -- Missouri River Runner -- Kansas City-St. Louis -- 1980 -- NA/150,000;

58 mph -- Hiawatha Corridor -- Chicago-Milwaukee -- 1989 -- 295,000/738,000;

 

BTW, the ridership numbers were rounded to the nearest thousand to make quick visual comparisons easier.

 

As for sourcing.....

 

First-year speed: Amtrak National Timetable for that year

First-year/2009 ridership: Amtrak, individual state DOTs

 

 

A couple of economic impacts for some short, infrequent state-supported services

 

After five years of operation, the Heartland Flyer between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth was the subject of an Oklahoma Department of Transportation study showing the single-daily round-trip returned $23 million in economic benefits to the region's economy in 2005 dollars. The economic activity generated by the Heartland Flyer included $11 million in direct consumer spending in Oklahoma, the creation of 349 full-time jobs in the economy paying more than $6.9 million in salaries and wages and $5.2 million in federal grants spent by the state for improvements to train depots. There are now plans to expand the route north to Kansas City.

SOURCE: http://normantranscript.com/local/x519048301/NEW-Amtraks-Heartland-Flyer-celebrates-10th-anniversary?keyword=topstory

 

According to the Vermont Rail Action Network, the 20,000 people visiting Rutland per year on the Ethan Allen Express train spent an average of $177 per day and producing millions per year in downtown business. The train replaced intercity bus services that were discontinued for lack of ridership.

SOURCE: http://www.railvermont.org/passenger/67-ethan-allen-express/122-statement-on-the-bustitution-of-the-ethan-allen-express.html

 

I'll try to pull together more economic impact information, but others here have posted compelling economic cases including from Maine and North Carolina.

NOTE: for whatever reason, the Sun Press decided to take a nasty shot at 3-C while opining on the RTA Blue Line extension.  So much for that liberal, open-minded view of the Heights/Clevelnad...

 

Plenty of ink and air time has been devoted to debating the merits of a high-speed rail line connecting Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. In our view, it seems like a lot of money to provide limited access between the three major Ohio cities with no real benefit in terms of time saved as opposed to driving Interstate 71.

Railing for Blue Line extension: Sun Press Editorial

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunpress/2010/03/railing_for_blue_line_extensio.html

 

 

Send a letter to the editor. Mary Jane Skala likely wrote it. Address it directly to her at:

 

5510 Cloverleaf Parkway, Valley View, OH 44125

[email protected]

^ I did; thanks.

 

Dear Ms. Skala,

 

This letter is in response to the "Railing for Blue Line extension" Sun Press Editorial.  The editorial states, in part, "... it seems like a lot of money to provide limited access between the three major Ohio cities with no real benefit in terms of time saved as opposed to driving Interstate 71."

 

The Sun Press might want to recalculate the "time saved" for business people traveling between the three biggest metro areas of the 7th most populous state in our Union.  Traveling on a train means that I can work (or nap) safely and productively while I travel, without endangering myself or others through inappropriate use of my smartphone (or running off the road).

 

Last week I got up at 3AM in order to get to Cleveland from Cincinnati for a 1PM meeting.  Why?  Because I needed to put a meeting presentation together before I got on the road, and had no time to do it before.  After the meeting ended at 6PM we went to dinner, and then I left for Cincinnati (early morning commitments back home).  How fun; the pleasure of traveling alone in my automobile on I71 once again, now bloated after my meal and with only gas station coffee to keep me between the white lines.

 

Sometimes driving is overrated, and not all time is created equal.  How I longed to sleep a little bit longer and do my work on a train.  And how I really longed for a gin and tonic in a club car on the ride home, falling asleep only to be woken up by "Next stop, Cincinnati!"

 

Jim Uber, President

CitiLogics, LLC

 

Thank you! Great letter!

 

Anyone else have similar stories to tell? If so, kindly share them.

I was planning to get rid of my car (which costs me $9k a year with loan/ins/gas/maint/parking) when 3C came online since my only necessary driving was to Columbus.  Non-3C factors (RTA) have changed that, but it was a nice thought while it lasted.

Rail Supporters - have you heard of Linking Ohio, the digital grassroots effort in support of the 3C Quick Start Project?  We need your help in letting our state leadership know that the people of Ohio want intercity rail.  Visit http://www.linkingohio.com to send an email to state leaders.  Each email is delivered to:

- Gov. Strickland

- Senate President Harris

- House Speaker Budish

- ODOT Director Molitoris

- Your relevant House and Senate delegate based on your zip code

 

Help us grow our coalition.  Visit the site, and tell friends.  Also, please join our Facebook fan page (http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linking-Ohio/181838151266?ref=ts) and follow us on Twitter (www.twitter.com/linkingohio).

Great line in this great editorial: "The chamber needs to send its Jon Husted to lobby Sen. Husted"

 

The DDN came out swinging its own quirky way for 3-C in that op-ed.  Comments were good, too, especially that guy using Whigs & "internal improvements". 

 

NOTE: for whatever reason, the Sun Press decided to take a nasty shot at 3-C while opining on the RTA Blue Line extension.  So much for that liberal, open-minded view of the Heights/Clevelnad...

 

Plenty of ink and air time has been devoted to debating the merits of a high-speed rail line connecting Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. In our view, it seems like a lot of money to provide limited access between the three major Ohio cities with no real benefit in terms of time saved as opposed to driving Interstate 71.

Railing for Blue Line extension: Sun Press Editorial

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/sunpress/2010/03/railing_for_blue_line_extensio.html

 

 

As others have pointed out, drive time is non-productive (at least if you're a safe, attentive driver), while train time is multi-tasking time; you can work at your job while you travel to an out-of-town meeting or appointment.

 

Further, time isn't the most important factor for every traveler. Many who will ride the trains are people who don't have access to cars, can't drive because of physical impairment, or simply prefer not to enter the arenas that our interstates have become.

Husted pushes back at critics of his position, speaking at a Dayton Rotary lunch:

 

Husted: Rail Supporters should Ask Tough Questions

 

DAYTON — State Sen. Jon Husted, R-Kettering, said Monday, April 12, that supporters of a passenger rail system in Ohio should be asking state transportation officials the same tough questions he’s been asking about the proposed $400 million rail project.

 

“You have to force the people who want to do this to prove that future generations of Ohioans won’t be saddled with something we can’t afford and don’t use,” Husted told a luncheon meeting of the Dayton Rotary Club at Sinclair Community College.

 

(more at the link)

 

...and the article is open for comment.