This is sadly comical...a 52 mile route...at least $2.8 billion....about 20,000 riders a day....and that's the best route!
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/aug/28/tbarta-wesley-chapel-st-pete-rail-route-would-draw/news-money/
This is why the voters down there will not likely cote for increased taxes....and/or why they may be building special-use lanes way before they even touch light rail.
I don't understand. Between $58 million and $109 million PER MILE for a light rail line???
Is the whole damn thing supposed to be elevated? How on earth are costs getting this high?
I consider myself a supporter of rail-based transit - but I'm getting sick of all these bloated proposals coming from all levels of government. I don't think any electorate should get behind projects that are this expensive.
It's a FLORIDA thing, take any simple transportation job or technology, turn the FDOT neanderthals loose on it, and come back with a wild bloated project. I bet it could be done for 1/2 of that price.
OCKLAWAHA
remember that they ahve to get across Tampa Bay....that's a 6+ mile long structure
I like this comment:
QuotePosted by ( Concerned_Taxpayer ) on 08/29/2009 at 06:51 am.
Wake up from your funk FDOT, TBARTA, and Tampa Bay politicians. You say "the Wesley Chapel-Tampa-St. Petersburg rail route could cost between $2.8 and $5.7 BILLION for construction and equipment with annual operating and maintenance costs of $39.1 million and take 25 years to build?"San Diego built a world class 13 mile start-up light rail system in two years for $80 million. They bought 153 miles of freight track and right of way from the Southern Pacific Railway for only $18 million, some of which was for additional light rail phases.Is public transit really that much more expensive to own and build in Florida than it is in California or do you think we're all a bunch of crack heads that won't see the difference when you want to waste public money on your overpriced planning or give another sweetheart deal to CSX Railroad?Obviously it's time for more political and bureaucratic change in Florida!
You have to crawl before you can walk or run.
Tampa has an easier path to an affordable starter line than we do. Freight traffic there is insignificant compared to what runs on Jacksonville's lines. Imo, they should get their feet wet by attempting to purchase or lease the seldom used CSX line that runs through downtown and throwing a DMU on it (before attempting to raise taxes). While it won't immediately get you to the airport or USF (make this a phase II), it would connect Tampa's major urban core destinations (Ybor, DT, Univ. of Tampa, Hyde Park, SoHo, etc.). The same could be done with the seldom used CSX line between DT St. Pete and Clearwater. Unfortunately, the way they are going, they will kill the idea before it ever takes root.
Quote from: thelakelander on August 31, 2009, 03:10:00 PM
I like this comment:
QuotePosted by ( Concerned_Taxpayer ) on 08/29/2009 at 06:51 am.
Wake up from your funk FDOT, TBARTA, and Tampa Bay politicians. You say "the Wesley Chapel-Tampa-St. Petersburg rail route could cost between $2.8 and $5.7 BILLION for construction and equipment with annual operating and maintenance costs of $39.1 million and take 25 years to build?"San Diego built a world class 13 mile start-up light rail system in two years for $80 million. They bought 153 miles of freight track and right of way from the Southern Pacific Railway for only $18 million, some of which was for additional light rail phases.Is public transit really that much more expensive to own and build in Florida than it is in California or do you think we're all a bunch of crack heads that won't see the difference when you want to waste public money on your overpriced planning or give another sweetheart deal to CSX Railroad?Obviously it's time for more political and bureaucratic change in Florida!
You have to crawl before you can walk or run.
Tampa has an easier path to an affordable starter line than we do. Freight traffic there is insignificant compared to what runs on Jacksonville's lines. Imo, they should get their feet wet by attempting to purchase or lease the seldom used CSX line that runs through downtown and throwing a DMU on it (before attempting to raise taxes). While it won't immediately get you to the airport or USF (make this a phase II), it would connect Tampa's major urban core destinations (Ybor, DT, Univ. of Tampa, Hyde Park, SoHo, etc.). The same could be done with the seldom used CSX line between DT St. Pete and Clearwater. Unfortunately, the way they are going, they will kill the idea before it ever takes root.
Hmmm. since Tampa "peed on CSX's parade," per John Mica, CSX hasn't been very inclined to agree to anything:
QuoteOne of our concerns with the Orlando rail plan is how it might affect Tampa and Lakeland. CSX told us they are moving more freight trains to this side of the state and wouldn't allow passenger trains on freight lines here. What are your thoughts on that?
That's not true. What they have said is that their plans right now wouldn't be to do anything. I don't have a proposal from this area. That's why I'm saying this area has to get in the mix.
Most of existing rights of way are owned by CSX. If you pee on CSX's parade in Central Florida, do you think they're going to cooperate with other entities?
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/dec/14/co-getting-rail-out-of-the-station/
I'm a light rail supporter. Maybe they can get some lower bids.
Typically LRT is more expensive to implement than commuter rail. As for Tampa, a signficant portion of their LRT plan uses CSX ROW. Only a fool would not attempt to cooperate with the very same company it needs permission from to run LRT on that company's ROW.
QuoteTBARTA: Wesley Chapel to St. Pete rail route would draw most riders
By TED JACKOVICS | The Tampa Tribune
Published: August 28, 2009
TAMPA - A 52-mile passenger rail route between Wesley Chapel, Tampa and St. Petersburg would draw the highest ridership among five potential light rail lines under study by the Tampa Bay Regional Transportation Authority.
A 25.4 mile rail route between from Carrollwood to Westshore, downtown Tampa and Brandon ranked second in potential ridership, followed by Clearwater-Carillon-Tampa, Clearwater-North Pinellas-USF and Clearwater-St. Petersburg rail lines.
TBARTA released a draft report for discussion today that adds detail to the seven-county initiative for a combination of rail and bus transit routes, with the first service expected by 2035 provided local counties can generate funding to draw matching funds.
For example, the Wesley Chapel-Tampa-St. Petersburg rail route could cost between $2.8 billion and $5.7 billion for construction and equipment with annual operating and maintenance costs of $39.1 million, the TBARTA report created for the Florida Department of Transportation showed. It would draw between 14,950 and 25,199 daily boardings.
Officials emphasized the routes and costs were projections with a wide degree of variance developed so TBARTA members could begin to assign priorities for planning purposes.
Details of where stations would be located on each route and what technology for rail routes could be determined within two years, said Cassandra Ecker, transportation planning group manager for Jacobs Engineering's Tampa office, which provides technical assistance for TBARTA.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/aug/28/tbarta-wesley-chapel-st-pete-rail-route-would-draw/news-money/
LRT it may be, but cheaper than commuter rail? No way.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 06, 2009, 08:46:49 PM
Typically LRT is more expensive to implement than commuter rail. As for Tampa, a signficant portion of their LRT plan uses CSX ROW. Only a fool would not attempt to cooperate with the very same company it needs permission from to run LRT on that company's ROW.
QuoteTBARTA: Wesley Chapel to St. Pete rail route would draw most riders
By TED JACKOVICS | The Tampa Tribune
Published: August 28, 2009
TAMPA - A 52-mile passenger rail route between Wesley Chapel, Tampa and St. Petersburg would draw the highest ridership among five potential light rail lines under study by the Tampa Bay Regional Transportation Authority.
A 25.4 mile rail route between from Carrollwood to Westshore, downtown Tampa and Brandon ranked second in potential ridership, followed by Clearwater-Carillon-Tampa, Clearwater-North Pinellas-USF and Clearwater-St. Petersburg rail lines.
TBARTA released a draft report for discussion today that adds detail to the seven-county initiative for a combination of rail and bus transit routes, with the first service expected by 2035 provided local counties can generate funding to draw matching funds.
For example, the Wesley Chapel-Tampa-St. Petersburg rail route could cost between $2.8 billion and $5.7 billion for construction and equipment with annual operating and maintenance costs of $39.1 million, the TBARTA report created for the Florida Department of Transportation showed. It would draw between 14,950 and 25,199 daily boardings.
Officials emphasized the routes and costs were projections with a wide degree of variance developed so TBARTA members could begin to assign priorities for planning purposes.
Details of where stations would be located on each route and what technology for rail routes could be determined within two years, said Cassandra Ecker, transportation planning group manager for Jacobs Engineering's Tampa office, which provides technical assistance for TBARTA.
http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/aug/28/tbarta-wesley-chapel-st-pete-rail-route-would-draw/news-money/
LRT it may be, but cheaper than commuter rail? No way.
The LRT routes may make more sense in terms of ridership, so cheaper is not always better. But I'm beginning to think you own CSX shares.
I'm beginning to think you own stock in a company CSX put out of business.
Seriously though, $5.2 billion is ridiculous for LRT. That number makes HSR seem like pocket change. Its even more insane to refuse to work with the company (CSX in this case) who's ROW you'll need to pull your plan off (luckily for Tampa's sake, I don't think their leaders are giving CSX the middle finger). Nevertheless, given the cost and economic climate, it may be better to evaluate other options/routes that may be more realistic if they seriously want taxpayers to vote to tax themselves for this system.
Commuter rail can be had for as little as $2 - 5 million a mile, including crossing protection and some capacity improvements, very simple 300' platforms, a basic "economy style" CR.
While I have seen LRT for well under $20 million a mile, I would assign that sort of cost to streetcar or rapid streetcar today. (keeping in mind streetcar is a type of LRT, which is also a type of CR) LRT might be closer to $50 Million a mile for a basic system.
Operations wise, electric is cheaper to operate and maintain then diesel, or hybrids, just due to mechanics.
LRT offers much more frequent service with headways anywhere from 5 to 30 minutes, while CR generally has headways much farther apart except for rush hours.
You are correct, the only way to do rail in the Tampa/St. Pete area is to deal with a railroad, and the only railroad there is CSX. They might also use medians, side of the road, elevated, subway, or electric transmission line rights of way for LRT, while CR is pretty much stuck with the railroad.
The lines from Tampa, go West towards Clearwater, North to Brooksville, East to Lakeland - Jax, SE to Bartow - (possible Miami), South to Sarasota. All CSX except for the end of a couple of the branchlines.
OCKLAWAHA
(http://www.freewebs.com/lightrailjacksonville/railmaplarge1%20Tampa%20LRT%20regional%20Plan.jpg)
Looking at the Tampa LRT plan, most of it runs on active CSX ROW. Regardless of how someone may feel about the company, some sort of agreement will have to be reached for this thing to become reality.
(http://assets.bizjournals.com/story_image/201422-0-0-1.jpg)
Quote from: thelakelander on September 06, 2009, 10:51:22 PM
I'm beginning to think you own stock in a company CSX put out of business.
I'll be up front and tell you that I do not own any RR stocks, and NEVER did..
But thanks for letting me know that you own CSX stock,..........that explains a lot.
Faye...where did Lake admit to owning CSX stock?
Quote from: stephendare on September 06, 2009, 11:29:26 PM
that is of course, unless you use amtrak's corridor improvements yourself Faye, and then there isnt any real ROW cost
Stephen, Tampa is a different animal. The Amtrak corridor does not go anywhere near USF, Clearwater, St. Pete, TIA, etc. The only thing the Amtrak corridor would provide is better access to Lakeland, Brandon and Orlando. However, this runs parallel with the HSR corridor.
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 07, 2009, 01:17:54 PM
Faye...where did Lake admit to owning CSX stock?
I'm sorry to be a disappointment to you all but I do not own stock in CSX. I just believe its better to negotiate with them (than giving them the middle finger), if the plans are to possibly use their property for mass transit.
QuoteTampa has an easier path to an affordable starter line than we do. Freight traffic there is insignificant compared to what runs on Jacksonville's lines. Imo, they should get their feet wet by attempting to purchase or lease the seldom used CSX line that runs through downtown and throwing a DMU on it (before attempting to raise taxes). While it won't immediately get you to the airport or USF (make this a phase II), it would connect Tampa's major urban core destinations (Ybor, DT, Univ. of Tampa, Hyde Park, SoHo, etc.). The same could be done with the seldom used CSX line between DT St. Pete and Clearwater.
This is the major reason why we need to be knocking on the door of CSX to buy the "S" line from downtown to Yulee. We also need to secure and quit building bike trails on the parts of the abandoned "S" line that we already own.
Lake, Stephen, Tampa may be a different animal, but Amtrak DID go from Tampa - Clearwater - St. Petersburg for several years. So it was an Amtrak corridor that Amtrak gave up for being too circuitous. It took the train a couple of hours to round the bay and make all of the stops they had. When they cut if off, they replaced it with Amtrak Charter Buses beyond Tampa. From a pure passenger standpoint, probably a big mistake, but like the Ocala route, I didn't see Florida protesting. If I'm on a train for 18 hours from New York to St. Pete, those last two hours don't mean a thing to me. Just pull into the station on the advertised. Transferring to a bus is a trip bumming hassle. Like it or not, all of that right-of-way is in CSX hands. OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2009, 01:43:05 PM
Yet. Theres nothing to keep tampa from advocating these things though.
No one claimed there was. An Amtrak corridor between Tampa and Orlando would be better than HSR down I-4, imo. However, the Amtrak discussion is really apples and oranges when we're talking about connecting rail to Gateway, Westshore, Pinellas County and USF. You can advocate, but in this case, the Bay Area's existing assets make little sense to present such an argument and it still does not get you around dealing with CSX.
I doubt they are making decisions based on what opinionated local bloggers are debating about in this thread. I'm also sure they know what their options are for building LRT and what their desired routes should be (see attached route images posted on page one of the thread). That's why they have maps and cost estimates. Its also why they will not be taking Faye's position and cursing the ground that CSX walks on.
I don't understand where you're coming from. We never said screw CSX, Sunrail, build LRT to Orange Park or commuter rail to Miami. You seem to be just as confused as she is on some of these points.
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2009, 02:55:54 PM
No. no one has ever said screw csx. Not even in these threads.
And if a line makes sense it makes sense. Whether its a line to the beaches or a line to Orange Park.
What doesnt make sense is devalidating support for lines that you know should be built out of a fear of losing a priority list.
Remember LRT can't travel on tracks with regular rail and we already have great infrastructure in place connecting these two points. So, LRT between OP and DT does not make sense. Its financially irresponsible. This is why we have been strong advocates of commuter rail between OP and DT on the CSX "A" line.
QuoteThere is a start point, naturally, but that start point doesnt devalidate the end points.
In fact its the other way around: The end points validate the start points.
No one in Jacksonville has any reason to be for a downtown only transit system that doesnt live in those neighborhoods.
No doubt. So how do we keep the Mayor from stealing local transit money? This should be priority #1.
QuoteBut we do have in our common interests a system that serves the whole city.
And that is our challenge. How to go about creating transit in a scalable, prioritized way.
Yes, this is what we have been pitching to the community and JTA in the form of streetcars, Amtrak, support for Sunrail and better skyway integration.
QuoteFaye, if she were by some miracle elected, would be the person who could lead support for the lines that run through her district. Apparently an orange Park line would be in that district. She would not be the person who would advocate for the S line, as it wouldnt run through her district at all, obviously.
I'm not even going here...lol. I'm not about to get into an election stump speech debate.
QuotePresumably this line of reasoning will eventually be read by other candidates as well.
Instead of a political discussion about why Mica is awesome, maybe it would be good to talk about how that district could benefit from cooperating with Jacksonville, instead of letting Ock's admiration of Mica and dislike of Faye's campaign lead the discussion?
Faye is the one obsessed with Mica. We can talk about how the districts can benefit from one another without worrying about the color of Mica's boxers.
QuoteI agree with your unspoken point. We should stay focused on our own first steps: getting transit built.
But if you don't keep the larger picture always in mind, you end up with STJR's $kyhighway.
Thanks, I have the larger picture in mind. I'm trying to keep a couple of us from getting caught up on little things that don't mean a hill a beans on our end. We need to keep our focus.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2009, 01:46:15 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 07, 2009, 01:17:54 PM
Faye...where did Lake admit to owning CSX stock?
I'm sorry to be a disappointment to you all but I do not own stock in CSX. I just believe its better to negotiate with them (than giving them the middle finger), if the plans are to possibly use their property for mass transit.
Nobody is giving CSX the middle finger, but we need to be cognisant of the fact that they have a virtual monopoly and that "negotiating" with them is more of a one-sided tax-payer on the hook situation, that likely leads to undesirable results if we negotiate from the concept of Sunrail at all cost.
It might be that Tampa would like to invest in LRT, because of routing and because of a more visionary approach. Yes, probably more expensive, but definitely an investment in the latest in environmentally sound transportation.
It would seem to me that you want to avoid LRT altogether or to add it at a later stage.
There are many public transportation advocates who advocate starting with LRT, because it is state of the art.
Quotelight rail is starting to roll, and commuter-rail creativity is percolating. That is what it takes to keep the region moving ahead.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2009329157_lance12.html
I may know less about local technicalities than you do, but I support the choice of starting with LRT, the way Orlando initially wanted to start with LRT. I'm sure Tampa is aware of their CSX option. They may just not want to go there.
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2009, 02:40:38 PM
I was actually the one that was at the rail conference with the high speed rail from tampa to orlando contingency there.
It was actually just me and Ock.
The whole set up seemed corrupt to me, as the primary people who spoke in the groups were all contractors, so maybe thats coloring discussion a bit.
Adam Hollingsworth gave the same advice about CSX to our board that you are giving, and he used to be an executive with the company. They really don't have any incentive to play ball with the municipal transit systems, as indeed why should they?
Amtrak doesnt have to negotiate in the way that a thousand other little municpalities would have to.
That is, if its backed by the feds and kept strong.
Yeah, that's the strength of doing things through Amtrak.
Quote from: FayeforCure on September 07, 2009, 05:51:24 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2009, 01:46:15 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 07, 2009, 01:17:54 PM
Faye...where did Lake admit to owning CSX stock?
I'm sorry to be a disappointment to you all but I do not own stock in CSX. I just believe its better to negotiate with them (than giving them the middle finger), if the plans are to possibly use their property for mass transit.
Nobody is giving CSX the middle finger, but we need to be cognisant of the fact that they have a virtual monopoly and that "negotiating" with them is more of a one-sided tax-payer on the hook situation, that likely leads to undesirable results if we negotiate from the concept of Sunrail at all cost.
It might be that Tampa would like to invest in LRT, because of routing and because of a more visionary approach. Yes, probably more expensive, but definitely an investment in the latest in environmentally sound transportation.
It would seem to me that you want to avoid LRT altogether or to add it at a later stage.
There are many public transportation advocates who advocate starting with LRT, because it is state of the art.
You should spend a little time in our transit archive section or join us at Hola again. Our opinions on rail transit may be closer than you think right now.
i'll say that all forms of rail are state of the art, imo. I don't believe LRT is anymore sleek than streetcars, Amtrak, heavy rail or commuter rail. They all have their place and environments where they work best. The best mass transit systems typically have a well integrated mix so it should not come down to an either or situation.
While not LRT, the Oceanside Sprinter and Austin Metrorail are impressive forms of rail for communities trying to get in the rail game without immediately raising taxes to pay for something that could cost billions. They have been designed to provide service with headways commonly associated with LRT. Also, have you followed up on how the San Diego Trolley or St. Louis LRT systems began? Both are good examples of not breaking the bank to get LRT started.
In any event, you have to design what best fits your community. Like HSR, I'm not against LRT. However, knowing the area I come from, asking the fiscally conservative taxpayers to approve a bloated cost estimate for any type of rail project could kill the plan before it starts. No true rail advocate wants to see that happen. So if there is a way to get it off the ground without the "bells and whistles", it should be looked into.
As for CSX, i'm glad you recognize that this private company has to be brought to the table, for rail plans that have been designed to use their ROW. With that said, we have to keep in mind that they are a private company in the business of moving freight. If we bring something that negatively impacts their core business (passenger rail), they will have to be compensated for it. Also, keep in mind that without CSX a significant portion of our statewide industrial network would dry up. This is one of the reasons I did not have a problem with the state paying CSX to upgrade the S-Line. Better rail access to the central part of the state would create more opportunities for additional industrial related businesses and the shift in freight from the "A" line would open up commuter and intercity rail opportunities in and between Jacksonville and Orlando.
Quote
I may know less about local technicalities than you do, but I support the choice of starting with LRT, the way Orlando initially wanted to start with LRT. I'm sure Tampa is aware of their CSX option. They may just not want to go there.
This is what I've been trying to say for a while in this thread. A significant portion of Tampa's LRT plans use CSX ROW. For example the line from USF to Downtown to Hyde Park is totally on CSX track/ROW. They have no choice but to work with CSX, regardless of whether they want to do LRT, commuter rail or both. However, this should not be seen as a negative for them. The line through DT recieves little freight traffic. They could probably get their hands on it without a huge fuss. The same goes for the line between St. Petersburg and Clearwater. If it were not for the St. Pete Times plant, there would be no use for that thing at all.
Quote from: FayeforCure on September 07, 2009, 06:16:37 PM
Quote from: stephendare on September 07, 2009, 02:40:38 PM
I was actually the one that was at the rail conference with the high speed rail from tampa to orlando contingency there.
It was actually just me and Ock.
The whole set up seemed corrupt to me, as the primary people who spoke in the groups were all contractors, so maybe thats coloring discussion a bit.
Adam Hollingsworth gave the same advice about CSX to our board that you are giving, and he used to be an executive with the company. They really don't have any incentive to play ball with the municipal transit systems, as indeed why should they?
Amtrak doesnt have to negotiate in the way that a thousand other little municpalities would have to.
That is, if its backed by the feds and kept strong.
Yeah, that's the strength of doing things through Amtrak.
Question: I'm going to try and give you and Stephen the benefit of doubt by asking to shed further light on this. In this thread we're primarily talking about Tampa's LRT plan. I would like to know, in your opinion, how can working through Amtrak help Tampa establish LRT?
I think you know my answer. After all, I am the one who wrote the MJ resolution supporting Amtrak that was posted on the front page of this site and sent to all council members. ;D
Now its your turn. You may know something I'm currently overlooking. How can working with Amtrak help Tampa establish LRT?
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2009, 06:23:45 PM
Our opinions on rail transit may be closer than you think right now.
In any event, you have to design what best fits your community. Like HSR, I'm not against LRT. However, knowing the area I come from, asking the fiscally conservative taxpayers to approve a bloated cost estimate for any type of rail project could kill the plan before it starts. No true rail advocate wants to see that happen. So if there is a way to get it off the ground without the "bells and whistles", it should be looked into.
As for CSX, i'm glad you recognize that this private company has to be brought to the table, for rail plans that have been designed to use their ROW.
Fair enough,......basically LRT and HSR are cost prohibitive in Florida according to that view. That leaves only CSX and Amtrak to work with.
Yet a well-placed LRT almost made it in 1999 in Orlando, just one vote short. A major problem that the central florida rail project ran into was that many Democrats couldn't even support it in today's recession. It also seemed to be a sweetheart deal for CSX.
With the availability of federal HSR funding, there is no reason to take a "conservative" approach. HRT is definitely considered state of the art. It might actually open up some minds for other passenger rail in FL.
If you start with something visionary like Eisenhower did, you help move people's perception of what's possible and needed.
We need a jobs program in FL, we might as well get a BIG jobs program courtesy of the federal gov. Why let most of the jobs go elsewhere AGAIN.
QuoteFair enough,......basically LRT and HSR are cost prohibitive in Florida according to that view. That leaves only CSX and Amtrak to work with.
Its deeper than this. You have to evaluate each project on an individual basis.
1. HSR currently does not set up well to serve every day Central Florida commuters. There needs to be more stops that are closer to existing and future centers of population growth. I-4 may have the ROW necessary, but there will be no growth in the Green Swamp. We need to find a way to tap into those who commute to and from places like Brandon, Lakeland, Plant City, Auburndale, Winter Haven, Haines City, Poinciana, Kissimmee, etc. However, if you do this, then it won't be "HSR". But if skips over the places most commuters are going and coming from, they'll still be driving on I-4.
2. There are several LRT/streetcar plans across the state. You have to look at each one on an individual basis. Some seem solid, some seem like a stretch. In Tampa's case, they need their conservative taxpayer base to approve to raise their taxes to pay for the plan. Tossing around quotes like $5.2 billion could sink it before it happens. That's something neither of us don't want to see.
QuoteYet a well-placed LRT almost made it in 1999 in Orlando, just one vote short.
yes, that one sucked. Instead of LRT today in Orlando, Charlotte is reaping the benefits.
QuoteA major problem that the central florida rail project ran into was that many Democrats couldn't even support it in today's recession. It also seemed to be a sweetheart deal for CSX.
My problem with this is, the opposition did not bring a viable alternative solution to the table. So in the end we end up with nothing and Charlotte stands in line to get some more federal rail dollars that should have been spent right here in Florida.
QuoteWith the availability of federal HSR funding, there is no reason to take a "conservative" approach. HRT is definitely considered state of the art. It might actually open up some minds for other passenger rail in FL.
Its a risk because of the poor layout and expense. If it fails it could kill all other forms of rail transit in this anti rail state for decades. That's a risk I rather not take. Nevertheless, the HSR funding can also fund other projects in this state (ex. Sunrail and Amtrak/FEC). I'm not saying we should not go after the money. We should just make sure our plan actually benefits the communities its supposed to serve.
QuoteIf you start with something visionary like Eisenhower did, you help move people's perception of what's possible and needed.
We need a jobs program in FL, we might as well get a BIG jobs program courtesy of the federal gov. Why let most of the jobs go elsewhere AGAIN.
The skyway was also considered to be "visionary" and look where that has gotten us. Its effectively soured any talk of rail based improvements in Jacksonville for decades. The true definition of vision is making sure every project planned is developed in a way that provides as much benefit to the communities it is supposed to serve as possible. Its more about designing to your environment than what type of technology is seen as sleek and visionary by transit novices.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 07, 2009, 07:10:32 PM
The skyway was also considered to be "visionary" and look where that has gotten us. Its effectively soured any talk of rail based improvements in Jacksonville for decades. The true definition of vision is making sure every project planned is developed in a way that provides as much benefit to the communities it is supposed to serve as possible. Its more about designing to your environment than what type of technology is seen as sleek and visionary by transit novices.
The skyway was over the top visionary for Jax. HRT is much more run of the mill visionary.
The whole problem of HSR as planned in Florida right now is the I-4 line, and the plan to start at a very out of downtown Airport.
A look at the map shows how the old Atlantic Coast Line, "A" line, of CSX, runs right through the middle of the core cities of Central Florida. Starting with Deland, Orange City, Sanford, Lake Mary, etc... All the way to Tampa. (The St.Pete extension was former Seaboard Air Line track). West of Orlando, the line, and the string of cities drop quite south of I-4. Kissimmee, Haines City, etc. are all well south of I-4. So even if the HSR was successful, it would tend to PULL development toward I-4, creating another area of endless and mindless sprawl.
Also consider that the visionary form of HSR might not happen at all. As the industry sinks it's teeth into the Billions promised, they are realizing that this amount is not going to do much. What it will do, and what is being promoted on the inside, is "Higher Speed Rail," with many projects such as rebuilding cut-off's that have been abandoned since the railroads dumped passenger trains in 1971.
The Virginia-Carolina, former Richmond - Raleigh, Seaboard mainline is one of those projects, and I'll go out on a limb here and tell everyone IT WILL HAPPEN, AND SOON! I don't have the facts in front of me but it's a good 70 miles or so. They will rebuild with HSR in mind, top grade track and signals and target something in the area of 90-110 mph.
Now, move that to Florida and what could we do? How about Auburndale - Wildwood, the Central Florida Miami cut-off? This would completely relieve the fuss about Lakeland getting bombed with freight trains heading south from Ocala to Winter Haven. Plus it gives FDOT and Amtrak back one of the historic core fast tracks in the state. CSX knew what it was doing when it pulled that plug. I believe I spent some time with Stephen explaining how THAT process worked. Twisted logic.
Gainesville could be reconnected to a through railroad route. Florida could reopen the west coast mainline from Tampa up to Dunnellon. Track restoration to Naples and Venice? Maybe. If we had any vision, look at our own "S" line north of town. Future HSR? Maybe.
OCKLAWAHA
In the HSR Orlando to Tampa (maybe Miami) vs Amtrak 5 corridor state wide higher speed rail for less money debate. I choose greed. I want to use the system from Jax and go all over the state on it. I do not want to drive to Orlando then take the train.
I have to question the survey that shows Orlando to St Pete is the best place to start a pilot program of any type! Who did they ask and how were the questions slanted or worded? Most of this Forum members recognize how a question is worded means much in how the answer is given in reply! I am not convinced that particular area is anymore exploitable than say Tallahassee to Gainsville or Jacksonville to Miami!
How can we look at this image and think Jacksonville is not the place for Florida's rail plans to start?
(http://www.takepart.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/hsr-map.jpg)
I smell a rat! I do love Disney and do not blame them for trying to influence things to be best for there company but any rail plan would eventually get to them.
Jeffrey...this map is a compilation of corridors that have been outlined by Amtrak or states previouly.
There is no rat....Disney didn't push the Florida HSR constituional amendment that passed in 2000....the referendum language required HSR to connect the 5 largest urban areas in the state....those were determined to be Tampa Bay, Orlando, West Palm Beach, Ft. lauderdale, and Miami.
Remember that at the time of the referendum, there was very little movement on HSR nationally....of course, now that times have changed, it is important to make sure that an Orlando-Jax leg is added....but it doesn't need to be first since the other routes in the southeast are nowhere near "shovel ready".
Quote from: CS Foltz on September 09, 2009, 07:25:34 AM
I have to question the survey that shows Orlando to St Pete is the best place to start a pilot program of any type! Who did they ask and how were the questions slanted or worded? Most of this Forum members recognize how a question is worded means much in how the answer is given in reply! I am not convinced that particular area is anymore exploitable than say Tallahassee to Gainsville or Jacksonville to Miami!
Again CS Foltz...you often comment on a "lack of planning or vision"....the worst thing we could do here would be to build our first HSR line to connect Tallahassee and Gainesville....for several reasons:
1. 350,000 live in the Tally metro area and 250,000 in Gainesville metro area
Compare with 3 million in Tampa Bay and 2 million in Orlando
2. Little road congestion from Tally to Gainesville
3. HSR nationally is partiallly designed to minimize short-leg airplane trips (free up airspace)
There are no flights between Tally and Gainesville
Agreed theree are also none from Tampa to Orlando
But there are between Tampa-Miami and Orlando-Miami
Anyone that spends any time on the HSR corridor websites will find that the Gulf Coast Corridor, "Atlanta - Mobile - NOL - Houston" also has an eye on a Mobile - Jacksonville segment.
Southeast HSR Corridor, has not really fixed the Atlanta - Jax route, some maps show Atlanta-Savannah-Jax, others, Atlanta-Jessup-Jax, and still others (and the ONE that I would push) Atlanta-Macon-Valdosta-Jax.
Florida corridor maps, do have Jacksonville on them, but more like an afterthought. The worse thing about NOT starting in Jax, is we would be the only city in the USA with THREE distinct HSR corridors serving our Terminal. So it would make sense to start off where your major interchange, would locate your shops, and servicing facilities. Central to all three operations, and Jax would be America's Logistics Center and High Speed Rail Hub.
It "could" happen, but for the fantasy bullet trains, and BILLION dollar interurbans, don't hold your breath. When a $ reality check smacks these dreamers in the head, we'll go back to the railroad. AMTRAK or other corporations will be funded so they can raise track speeds and kill crossings. Meanwhile a hell of a lot of folks like at least 3 major posters on MJ, will get to play with the blocks and crayons, CHA CHING!
OCKLAWAHA
tufsu1..........I am much more cognizant of aircraft operations and maintenance than I am of train ops and the support there of. I concur regarding the population numbers for both area's compared to other area's in Florida! HSR and Light rail are two different options for two different problems. HSR is comparable to aircraft only if trip durations are 8 hours or more.......this is assuming point A to point B. Something time critical would utilize aircraft and HSR for a more leisurely trip but light rail is a 2 to 3 hour window and something else. I look at HSR for moving large numbers which aircraft can not do and light rail for intercity (trolley/monorails) and intracity (commuter)so I guess this would be a 3 pronged approach to mass transit. All three systems use track and track that is in place now........not something that has to be installed in order to use. Expansion would require additional track to selected routes but I think we have enough track already in place to start something that would be cost effective and usable!
Quote from: buckethead on September 23, 2009, 09:14:55 AM
(http://i122.photobucket.com/albums/o263/Daneelo/Occasional%20Train%20Blogging/LocalRail/Tram_Bordeaux.jpg)
Would Jacksonvillains be inclined to patronize this type of system?
Would it harm the asthetics of Riverside/Avondale or San Marco?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/15/125349/941
QuoteWould Jacksonvillains be inclined to patronize this type of system?
Sure, as long as it efficiently serves and takes people to where they want to go. This is exactly what JTA has proposed for Riverside to DT service.
QuoteWould it harm the asthetics of Riverside/Avondale or San Marco?
Both Riverside/Avondale and San Marco are streetcar suburbs. Without streetcars, these neighborhoods would not be laid out or as walkable as the way they are today. Streetcars would be more appropriate for them than the paved roads people drive on in those communities today. If the paved roads have not harmed their character, neither will historically accurate streetcars.