RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTube
It was announced last Friday that the Amtrak study for restoring passenger rail service between Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati was going to be delayed for two weeks in order to give additional attention to studying other national routes. Officials at the Ohio Rail Development Commission expressed little concern that the delay would have a negative impact on the state’s position in applying for federal funds to get the project started.
The ORDC and ODOT are holding a workshop today at 10AM at the Fawcett Center to discuss the “3C Quick Start Passenger Rail Plan”, which is the initial 79-mph service scheduled to be up and running by 2011. Public input at these workshops will help decide the best routes and stops for the new rail corridor.
Additionally, the announcement mentions that the planned routes should be competitive with highway driving times between the four cities. Projections have the Cleveland-Columbus route estimated with a 3 hour travel time from downtown to downtown, comparable to the 2.5 hours on a non-congested highway route.
The Columbus-Cincinnati route is slightly less direct as it also includes service to downtown Dayton. The estimated passenger rail trip would take 3 hours, which would compare with an uncongested highway drive time of 2 hours and 20 minutes through Dayton.
“What makes the time on the train competitive is how you can use it,” said ORDC Executive Director Matthew Dietrich. “The business traveler can be on the phone or connected to a laptop the minute he or she gets on the train. Travel time no longer has to be down time.”
The Ohio Association of Regional Councils also announced their support of the passenger rail plan yesterday. This organization includes 21 regional planning, development, and government agencies that represent more than 10 million people throughout Ohio.
“Ohio may find it difficult to connect to a future high speed rail network if it fails to develop substantial passenger rail service in the state within the next few years,” said John Getchey, president of the OARC.
All Aboard Ohio also simultaneously released an announcement yesterday that included three major speaking points.
First, a Highway Cost Savings Report (PDF) was released that totals up the amount of money that can be saved on highway maintenance through railroad improvements. In addition to accommodating new passenger rail service, the planned railway upgrades will also allow for an increase in freight transportation capacity. The report concludes that the diversion of semi truck operation to freight rail operation will save ODOT between $1.6 and $3.2 million per year in highway repair work.
Secondly, All Aboard Ohio commented on the projected travel times released by the ORDC, reiterating that the times are based on unimproved rail infrastructure. “Projected capital investments of between $250 million and $400 million in federal American Reinvestment & Recovery Act funds should dramatically reduce those travel times,” said Bill Hutchison, president of All Aboard Ohio.
Lastly, one small but significant detail mentioned in the All Aboard Ohio release was the estimate that 3C fares may be approximately 14 cents per mile, based on existing Amtrak fares in the Midwest. This could mean that a one-way ticket from Columbus to Cleveland could cost $20.30, a ticket from Columbus to Cincinnati could cost $18.20, and a ticket from Columbus to Dayton could cost $10.50. When compared to the IRS driving cost of 55 cents per mile, these fares are roughly 4 times cheaper than the actual cost of driving these routes.
More news and information is expected to follow today’s workshop, as well as third workshop taking place on September 15th. Stay tuned for more details.
^False. Metra ends in Kenosha, approximately 40 miles south of Milwaukee. That line – The Union Pacific North – ends in downtown Chicago at Ogilvie Transportation Center and does not continue through to Indiana. The Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) has tracks that come into Millennium Park Station (Randolph Street) from South Bend.
there’s a survey on the 3C rail website asking for public opinion.
please take the 5 min. to let them know what you think!
http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Rail/Programs/passenger/3CisME/Pages/default.aspx
Walker et al,
Here is a great piece from statistics guru Nate Silver at fivethirtyeight.com on car/air/high speed rail travel. He’s the prevailing go-to guy with anything numbers-related these days.
The fact that it’s 50/50 whether someone drives from St. Louis to NYC is why I’m worried for rail ridership numbers.
I like Nate Silver’s work, but that really wasn’t helpful at all. It was a comparison between driving & flying with no real conclusions reached on rail travel: “What does this mean for something high-speed trains? It could be either good news or bad news.” Hrmph.
Anyway, I don’t know if the 50/50 split between the distance of St. Louis & NYC is really that worrisome for rail travel. I doubt the average train travel trips are that long, so I don’t know if the personal decisions that people make on those types of travel scenarios will have the same implications for rail travel. What we’re talking about here are much shorter distances (Cols-Cleve, Cols-Cincy) where air travel is practically non-existent and out of our potential scenarios for Ohio travel.
And while this argument works against rail (although to a lesser degree) you’ll notice that those cost comparisons of the drive/flight between NYC & STL are assuming you’re only one person driving or flying. Once you add an extra passenger or two, the cost effectiveness is reversed and driving becomes the cheaper alternative when you factor in the extra plane tickets.
Which actually ties into something else I was thinking about the other day and needed a good transition for (thanks!)… I was thinking about our previous discussion on successful ridership rates for the 3C and how that comparison could be made to the existing highway infrastructure. There are already expectations set by ODOT for total number of cars to be moved along each section of road, but I don’t believe the number of people per vehicle is taken into account for those figures. So my question would be… is a train from Columbus to Cleveland running at only 20% ridership any less effective than a highway running at expected auto capacity with 5-seater vehicles only each moving one person per car? The scenario reminds me a bit of those popular car/bus/bike images. Or it’s like saying that your refridgerator is “full” even though every condiment bottle is nearly empty.
Anyway, I think you and Nate and I can speculate all day on how rail will be utilized in Ohio, but I don’t know if we can really truely accurately measure the results until we put something in place. Which is why I’m a fan of trying something small and cheap first and seeing how it works before further investment.
Since I don’t commute to Cleveland or Cincinnati for anything other than catching a Reds or Indians or Browns game with friends, I was hoping the fares would be substantially less.
Roundtrip:
4 people by car = 4 hours commute time and about $40 in gas
4 people by train = 6 hours and $160 in fares
Maybe they’ll have deals on the weekends for recreational travelers.
Sure, the train isn’t going to be optimal in every situation. Still… if you and your four friends want to watch a movie, you can shell out $4 to rent at blockbuster and all of you can watch at home, or pay $32 (4 tickets at $8 each) to watch a film in the theater. The costs are drastically different, but so are the values and experiences.
I wish the 3-C were ready right now. I’m planning to take Greyhound up to Cleveland to meet my wife during her conference up there. I can’t miss work, and we’ve downsized to one car. 3-C will really help some people save money on personal transportation!
I should have outlined what I thought was relevant: the stats on people’s heuristics. Folks would use a relatively similar (though not the same, to be sure) decision-making process when deciding to drive vs. fly as when deciding to drive vs. the train. One is them getting you there; one is you getting you there. And those heuristics have people driving even when it’s not “rational” (I’m not going to engage in what qualifies as rational).
Case in point: Grubersauce’s post. That’s exactly how most of us make decisions, not through a thorough calculation of the depreciation of our cars and opportunity cost of time and such. That’s what Silver’s point was, and that’s why I’m concerned.
As for trying something small and cheap first—I’m 100% with you on that. I also hope I’m totally wrong in my worries. I’m just very cautious in my optimism as long as gas is cheap.
Right Jefe – and I haven’t been to the movies in a while because its
1.) expensive
2.) people in the theater are loud and rude
3.) what I have (home theater) is much more convenient
I see the same trends with the rail vs the car.
Maybe if they have a bar and big screens in one of the trains… then it might be a different story ;)
Grubersauce Says: Maybe if they have a bar and big screens in one of the trains… then it might be a different story ;)
Many Amtrak trains do have dining/drinking cars, and you could always take a laptop or portable DVD player for entertainment. ;) Not exactly what you’re asking for, but still two things you can’t do while driving. But I digress…
Jefe Says: I should have outlined what I thought was relevant: the stats on people’s heuristics. Folks would use a relatively similar (though not the same, to be sure) decision-making process when deciding to drive vs. fly as when deciding to drive vs. the train. Case in point: Grubersauce’s post. That’s exactly how most of us make decisions, not through a thorough calculation of the depreciation of our cars and opportunity cost of time and such. That’s what Silver’s point was, and that’s why I’m concerned.
Sure, I understand your concerns, and I agree with Grubersauce that train travel would be cost prohibitive in scenarios such as the one he mentioned. I think the key word in all of this though (bolded above) is most. If most people make a decision to just keep driving cars along the 3C corridor, yet enough still do use other factors or have other scenarios in which train travel makes more sense, then shouldn’t the ridership still be likely to meet expectations? I mean… Silver’s point seemed to be that you have to go a long long long way out to get people to hit that 50%-50% sweet spot in the decision to drive vs fly. I’m saying that if we can get 5% of the people to ride the 3C on some occassions instead of drive, then we’re most likely going to see what most people would consider acceptable ridership levels and a significant enough impact on reducing highway congestion. It’s not like we’ve got to find that unrealistic 50/50 sweet spot for ridership to be adequate.
Anyway, all things said, I do appreciate your cautious optimism. The last thing I want to do is make anyone too overoptimistic with my opinions, only to have their expectations not met if I’m not 100% accurate with my armchair predictions and back-of-the-napkin calculations. I’m trying my best to look at this project in the most realistic manner possible.
From the Dispatch…
Ohio in race for rail funding
http://www.dispatch.com/live/content/business/stories/2009/09/11/CHOOCHOO.ART_ART_09-11-09_A12_C6F1JIU.html
Ohio High-Speed Rail Advocates Look to Maine as a Model
By MARSHALL MCPEEK
Ohio high-speed rail advocates say Maine’s passenger rail system is a huge success and could be a good model for a system connecting Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati.
READ MORE
More info on the “Downeaster” here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downeaster