RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
We’ve recently been getting daily news updates that the 3C Corridor passenger rail project is slowly moving closer to reality. Not everyone is on board though, and its expected that there’s going to be a few naysayers popping up to make complaints. Some citizens don’t think it’s a smart move to use less than a fraction of a percent of ODOT’s budget on passenger rail because only a fraction of a percent of Ohio’s population will ride it. A very similar complaint made an appearance in the Sunday Dispatch’s Letters to the Editor section (thanks to Juana for emailing me the link). The name attached to it was a Mr. Bob Weiler.
Is this the same Bob Weiler who is a fairly well known local developer? Is this the same Bob Weiler who serves on the Board of Trustees at COTA? Is this the same Bob Weiler who last summer publically derided inner-city rail transit in Columbus, which COTA would actually be in charge of operating?
Who knows. There’s no title or credentials listed with the Dispatch LTE. So it could be someone other than the guy in the photo above. Who knows.
Since when do wooden puppets get to weigh in with a transit opinion?Who is pulling his strings??
Hrm.
http://www.whitepages.com/search/FindPerson?extra_listing=mixed&form_mode=opt_b&post_back=1&firstname_begins_with=1&firstname=robert&name=weiler&street=&city_zip=columbus&state_id=OH&localtime=survey
You’ll have to take my car keys from my cold, dead hands.
Bob Weiler’s letter is the product of someone who is still living in the 1950′s…. as if $4 a gallon gasoline never happened and we are all free to hit the open road and drive as we please with no consequences. That’s okay Mr. Weiler. You just go and party like it’s 1959….. you and the rest of the transportation troglodytes.
Dunno if that’s him or not.
If cost is the opponent, though, I renew my never-ending calls for higher gas taxes in order to pay for the remarkably high real costs of driving!
Mr. Weiler should object to subsidizing those costs at a much higher rate.
Does everything on this topic have to be “trains vs. cars?” Isn’t there room for a “trains plus cars” position here?
It is possible to be pro-rail rather than anti-car. Yes, I know, Weiler has a big mouth, a somewhat less than visionary mind, and a high-visibility name at this point, which gets people animated. Nevertheless, I get queasy reading things like proposals to jack the gas tax into the stratosphere and all kinds of other clearly anti-car proposals from some of the rail enthusiasts I see here and elsewhere.
@gram – yes, I think there is room for “trains plus cars”. For a second here, based on the tactics to expose Weiler’s residence, profession and identity I thought Weiler was a Klansman, warlock or child perp and we were summoning the goon squad to rip his door down and lynch him. Reality check. He’s a critic of the rail plan. I almost forgot.
Though, I’m sure it wasn’t his intention, I do think Weiler alluded to something worthwhile in his remarks. We should be thinking bigger than the slow trains that are proposed. Is there any talk of making this a high speed rail corridor?
Wasn’t 3-C intended to be high speed?
For some reason, I had the setup in my mind like this:
OhioHub: Many cities, slow(er) trains
3-C: Four cities (Cincy, Dayton, Columbus, Mistake By The Lake), high speed.
I believe the ultimate goal for the 3C is to be high speed, but its a long way off. Its going to take more time and be more expensive. In the interim we can either wait and have nothing, or we can have standard-speed rail.
I’ve never been anti-car. I’m just discouraged that someone who appears to be one of our selected local transit leaders would write such an oversimplified argument against something that I’m positive he has a better understanding of.
The difference between speed of the current 3C and speed of what it would be as “high speed” is about 15MPH.
The biggest problem I have with Weiler is if you look at his real estate portfolio, this is a guy HEAVILY invested in sprawl, so his opinions are subject, IMO.
cars really have zero to do with this conversation, quite frankly…and every time a rail discussion turns to punitive measures towards drivers and the other nonsense, the pro rail conversation loses credibility.
Fact is, if I was heavily invested in 10 or 12 lots along the proposed streetcar route, I’d be a streetcar advocate with questionable motives.
If I had my money tied into Arbors of Dublin and Scarborough Mall and Hibernia, I’d not want transportation dollars dumped on that stretch High St. and would want a lot more spent on far reaching bus routes…and I’d have questionable motives.
Well, again…Robert Weiler’s portfolio:
Hibernia Apartments Asherton of Dublin Highland Park Apartments Independence Village Country View Estates Scarborough Shopping Center Port Columbus Executive Park Alum Creek Drive Development Harrison Road Industrial Park
I think people conflate “anti-car” with “anti-car culture”. Cars wouldn’t be a big deal if we didn’t become so over-dependent on them and require 3/4 of the oil produced in the world. Locally of course, we still have a dead Downtown filled with tons of parking lots and miniature one-way highways, several commercial corridors stripped of any functioning walkability or bikeability, and newer parts of the city all but require a car to get around, not to mention how ugly car-oriented development is.
Maybe Mr. Weiler likes the boring drive to Cleveland or Cincinnati, but I don’t and would rather not have to do the driving. I know plenty of other people aren’t crazy about driving on I-71 either and would like to have a choice. Also think about what this will do for our downtowns.
If this is the same Bob Weiler, wouldn’t he be more inclined to write a bit more of an argument than this? It’s not even an argument, really. And if it is the same Bob Weiler, I’d like him to meet that Ibiza guy.
Saw a colleague at lunch who works for the Ohio Rail Development Commission. He is gung-ho about the new direction in the 3-C development, though concerned that the admin types are not pushing for high speed rail. They would need to apply for a Fed grant to pursue high speed, but he/I think it would be worth it. Why build passenger rail unless you are going to provide a superior experience … think Acela vs. basic Amtrak. If you have been on the Acela train you would not want to get basic Amtrak service.
On a side note … wish we had the 3C when I was in grad school. I was in Cincy my girlfriend (now wife) was here in Cbus. I got soo many speeding tickets that my license was suspended for 6mo. on points. Live and learn.
The Acela travels at an average of 86 MPH. Amtrak between St. Louis and Chicago averages 79 MPH.
p.s. I can’t remember where the 3C or Ohio Hub video is, but at current plan I believe it runs around 75MPH. I’d prefer not to go back to the drawing board and asking for hundreds of million more dollars for 10MPH.
Core, you’re right. It’s not much faster, but I have ridden the Acela many times and the overall ride and experience is better.
I’ve always been under the impression the opposition to high-speed in the states is due to population density. My question is why can places that are much more densely populated (Shanghai and Tokyo to name a few) support true, high-speed rail? Yes, I would love to see rails and rails everywhere, but I’d like to see something future forward.
My opposition to high speed in this project is that it becomes a whole different project, and one that is light years from funding or approval.
I’d love high speed if it could go on the existing tracks and get done for even the same ballpark as what funds are being discussed, but since it can’t, I think rail advocates criticizing the 3C for lack of high speed becomes self defeating.
How much higher a price tag are we talking about? (And how much higher a price in terms of time, not just money, for that matter?)
Well, from my understanding…using any existing tracks=gone. So without knowing much more, I’d say that makes it cost and time prohibitive. Again though, I THINK there’s information on the high speed proposal out there, I just don’t know where to put my hands on it.
wikipedia’s article gives a good summary of Acela and speeds
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela
The trains run faster overall on the original tracks, but it requires upgrades to the rail lines to get *top* speeds in many areas.
With Ohio having a lot lower population density than the northeast corridor, I think it would be a lot cheaper to upgrade lines, especially in rural areas between cities.
Regular trains are a good start though. Just get things running, then worry about adding faster trains, then worry about upgrading sections of track to get top speeds in rural areas.