US Conference of Mayors: We've Studied it Enough, It's time to Move on HSR!

[FayeforCure]

Video: http://www.elitegroup.tv/high-speed-rail/

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/

Too much talk and lack of action.

The multiplier effect for our ailing economy is much higher with true HSR than with "higher speed" conventional rail that shares freight tracks.

Incremental High Speed Rail? One of the most cynical myths about slower speed rail is that it is a "stepping stone" to genuine high speed rail, which is now being built in some countries to operate from 200 to 220 miles per hour. Such claims are patently misleading. The slower speed 110 mile per hour trains will run on tracks shared with freight trains and there will be some grade crossings (intersections with roads where trains, trucks and cars could conceivably collide). Genuine high speed rail requires starting all over.

(snip)

There is nothing incremental about building one line and then abandoning it to build another.

http://www.newgeography.com/content/001895-stuck-station-the-high-speed-rail-low-ball-express

How Two Republican Governors Are Giving High-Speed Rail an Unintentional Boost:
spreading out federal funds to too many marginal projects is a mistake operationally and politically.

http://www.progressivefix.com/how-two-republican-governors-are-giving-high-speed-rail-an-unintentional-boost

[JeffreyS]

Well if we can do high speed rail that will be wonderful. A radical expansion and improvement of conventional "higher speed rail" would be wonderful also.
Of course I feel like in general commuter rail would be much more useful than corridor service at any speed because we have good air and highway service between cities.

[dougskiles]

I heard the prez say imagine going from city center to city center...  but isn't the Orlando HSR plan more like airport to airport?  So you drive your CAR to the AIRPORT to get on a TRAIN?

I understand that a fast, sleek and sexy HSR is an easier sell emotionally than a commuter rail system.  When I hear them talk about jobs - are they talking about the jobs created through the design and construction of the HSR system itself?  With an expanded commuter rail system, we'll get those jobs plus all of the new neighborhood retail/business centers that will pop up at the stations - and those are permanent and not as dependant on government money.

I wonder if we aren't going about this backwards.  If I have to get in my car to get to a train station (which would presumably include finding a place to park the car and walking), then I'm probably going to just stay in my car and drive the rest of the way.  But if I could walk down the street to a reliable trolley (or streetcar) and then get to the train station - wow!  No car needed at all.  If we can get people used to using public transportation (or bikes) for the shorter trips then we can start to build the larger system - and do it more organically (i.e. grow it where it wants to grow instead of forcing it).

[tufsu1]

I heard the prez say imagine going from city center to city center...  but isn't the Orlando HSR plan more like airport to airport?  So you drive your CAR to the AIRPORT to get on a TRAIN?

only the Olando to Miami leg.....the Orlando to Taqmpa leg is airport to city center....the key is having direct connections to local transit services that will carry people throughout the region.

btw...a major purpose of HSR is to cut down on air travel and free up clogged airports and air space.....no one who flies lands in the city center....and they use local travel connections (car, bus, taxi, etc.) to get to/from the airport.

[dougskiles]

How many people fly from Orlando to Tampa or from Orlando to Miami?

How would this benefit Jacksonville?  We have a spread-out city that would benefit tremendously from an efficient commuter rail system with connections to a more efficient neighborhood transit system.  I would rather see any money proposed to connect Jacksonville to an HSR be spent on a local system first.

[tufsu1]

very few fly from Tampa to Orlando....but there are many flights a day between Tampa and Miami/Ft. Lauderdale..also between Orlando and Miami/Ft. Lauderdale

We have a real problem if the decision to support a project at the state or national level is based solely on what it can do for any given city.

Also keep in mind that true commuter rail is different than intercity rail....there are some hybrids out there....but even the Amtrak Pacific Surfliner train in CA makes fewer stops than the commuter rail trains on the same line serving LA and San Diego.

[Ocklawaha]

Video: http://www.elitegroup.tv/high-speed-rail/

http://www.usmayors.org/highspeedrail/

Too much talk and lack of action.

The multiplier effect for our ailing economy is much higher with true HSR than with "higher speed" conventional rail that shares freight tracks.

What a stupid statement. Again Faye? Really? I hear Julia Roberts, Nicolas Cage and Robert De Niro are all about high speed rail too, so obviously it must be right!

This statement is based on what? Amtrak? Illinois Central? or maybe California?

FACT, we have NEVER DONE IT ANYWHERE and don't have a clue what a major reconstruction and upgrade of a conventional rail line would bring to the table. You do know that freight would prove a much larger job generator then passenger, don't you Faye? Toss in a couple dozen very fast modern passenger trains and our world would start to turn around without mortgaging our children's future.

Incremental High Speed Rail? One of the most cynical myths about slower speed rail is that it is a "stepping stone" to genuine high speed rail, which is now being built in some countries to operate from 200 to 220 miles per hour. Such claims are patently misleading. The slower speed 110 mile per hour trains will run on tracks shared with freight trains and there will be some grade crossings (intersections with roads where trains, trucks and cars could conceivably collide). Genuine high speed rail requires starting all over.

(snip)

There is nothing incremental about building one line and then abandoning it to build another.

The slower speed 110 mile per hour trains will run on tracks shared with freight trains

Yeah? Who says?

there will be some grade crossings

Obviously slower speed train people don't know how to build an overpass.

intersections with roads where trains, trucks and cars could conceivably collide

Wow this is rich, and high speed trains could conceivably fly off the tracks of suck out all of the oxygen and kill the passengers... Uh Huh...

Genuine high speed rail requires starting all over.

This might actually be worth a shot if we had built ANY demand for rail travel in this country... Oop's back to California because that is what THEY have been doing for 30 years. It's graduation time in California, Florida wants to skip the school of learning and jump right into an executive position...

RIGHT OFF A FREAKING CLIFF...


http://www.newgeography.com/content/001895-stuck-station-the-high-speed-rail-low-ball-express

How Two Republican Governors Are Giving High-Speed Rail an Unintentional Boost:
spreading out federal funds to too many marginal projects is a mistake operationally and politically.

Florida Should be Centerpiece

The administration now has the opportunity to fund true high-speed rail by reallocating the Midwest money. It can fully fund the high-speed Tampa-Orlando line in Florida as well as help get a segment of California’s proposed 200-mph railway between San Francisco and Los Angeles into revenue service. There may even be money left over to accelerate “shovel-ready” projects in busy rail corridors with proven ridership in Illinois and Connecticut.

Newly elected California governor Jerry Brown (D) is a strong supporter of his state’s rail program â€" as is outgoing Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. Both Illinois incumbent governor Pat Quinn (D) and  Connecticut governor-elect Dan Malloy (D) are also pro-train.

Florida’s Republican governor-elect, Rick Scott, initially opposed the Tampa-Orlando line (the current governor, Charlie Crist, supports the project). But Scott has recently relaxed his rhetoric and says he is in favor of high-speed rail so long as Florida taxpayers don’t pay for it

http://www.progressivefix.com/how-two-republican-governors-are-giving-high-speed-rail-an-unintentional-boost
[/quote]

Yep this is the new think of the crazies... Skip building a rail system... Skip testing the demand... Go with the consultants promises (like the Skyway's 60,000 - 40,000 - 20,000 - 10,000 - 2,000 passengers) Just spend that money like drunken sailors and guess what we are going to get? CATASTROPHE!

If Scott buys into this scheme (hard to call it a plan) he's dumber then some of our posters (such as Faye) think he is... Interesting that FEDERAL DOLLARS don't come from FLORIDA TAXPAYERS...

Stand-by everyone, next week Faye will post how the Daily Lama is proposing a high speed line from Qinghai to Athens...  Which I'm sure she and TUFSU support....

OCKLAWAHA

[dougskiles]

We already have a real problem when it comes to public support for HSR because most people are having trouble envisioning how it helps themselves specifically.  Add in the perception that our federal government has thrown ridiculous amounts of money at quick fixes in the last few years and it is not hard to understand why the recent election went the way it did.

I'm not against HSR but I am more in favor of money spent on local systems because those systems effect the lives of more people.  When you go on a long trip, how often do you sit in traffic once you are outside the suburban areas?  When I drive to Orlando, I don't think it is the people driving through Orlando causing the back up.  It is the people who live in the suburbs driving to/from work that are jamming up the roads.

Consider this: Southwest has 5 daily flights from Orlando to Ft Lauderdale.  Assuming 100 passengers per plane are only making that trip (i.e. not flying on to Nashville, etc.), that's 500 per day (or 1,000 if you include round trip).  I-4 has over 100,000 trips per day going through Orlando.  We're talking order of magnitude difference.  Not that all 100,000 are going to jump on the commuter train - but those that do will free up space on the freeway and thereby improve everyone's situation.

[tufsu1]

ok....well let's try this then....SunRail predictions are for less than 2,500 riders per day....which will barely put a dent in I-4 congestion....so should we scrap the project?

The reality is we can't continue to always widen/build new roads...imagine the cost of widening I-4 to 10+ lanes through urban Orlando.....public transportation (be it bus, light rail, commuter rail, Amtrak, high speed rail, air) provides people options in the short-term and is likely less expensive in the long-term!  

[dougskiles]

Do you know what is limiting them to 2,500 per day?  Public interest? Or lack of connectivity in the neighborhoods?  If someone has to get in their car to get to the station then they will most likely just drive.  I suppose the long-term plan is that residential development will increase within walking distance of the suburban stations eliminating the need for driving by some.  Ridership would also increase with a better neighborhood transit system (trolleys, street cars, bike friendly roads).  Is this a better public investment than a high speed rail?  I think so.  I have no data to back this up, but my guess is that we could cover much more ground and get more people off the highways with the same money that we'll spend on high speed rail.

We seem to have the same goal (giving people a reasonable alternative to driving everywhere - and not paving the entire planet), but perhaps a different idea of how it needs to be accomplished.

Great discussion - and I'm grateful that we have this forum to kick these things around!

[JeffreyS]

Part of the ridership numbers are due to the fact that commuter rail is intended to change the way people work and live that takes time. Ridership should grow over time.