The Hard Reality of Richmond Passenger Trains

Richmonders are no different than many people in the new urbanist world. They like the idea of moving back downtown where it is easy and efficient to travel to their offices without cars walk to restaurants and entertainment and have quick access to inner city depots for transportation out of town.
For Richmond, that ideal centers around the downtown Shockoe Slip and Bottom areas that feature the Main Street Station, an ornate 1901 train stop in a Renaissance Revival style. Urban planners and developers are scheming to have the station, which reopened for limited passenger service on Amtrak six years ago, become the focus of new world of condos, shops, offices and eateries along the area’s cobble stone streets.
Even more important, Main Street Station, being a downtown depot, figures in grand schemes to have higher speed rail trains rocket passengers north to Washington and to points south. President Barack Obama is a big fan of higher speed rail and has already distributed $8 billion to get it moving. One requirement is that the new trains must stop in downtown areas. Virginia got only $75 million in the first round of financing.
Therein lies the problem. The capital city’s movers and shakers had their balloon pricked when Thelma Drake, a former Virginia Beach congresswoman who is now Secretary of the Department of Rail and Public Transportation, told them that a new Amtrak train from Norfolk to Washington won’t be stopping at Main Street Station when it starts service in three years.
Lo and behold, the train will stop at Staples Mill Road station, an ugly building in Henrico County that handles most of Richmond’s rail traffic.
Some day Main Street Station may be used, but not now, she says. Why? CSX lines from Petersburg are the only ones with appropriate signals and other gear to handle northbound passenger trains. They go to Staples Mill Road station. For Main Street to accept such trains, it will cost about $600 million to refurbish a 15-mile-long line that runs from Centralia Road in Chesterfield County along an industrial maze along Interstate 95 and on to Main Street, as I note in an article in Style Weekly.
Richmond’s business elite, who dream of the days they can get to DC in 90 minutes from downtown, were horrified by this shocking tidbit of financial reality. One of Richmond’s many self-appointed “Leadership” groups that supposedly does the hard thinking and planning for area residents says it will cost only $122 million.
Whatever. Be it $600 million or $122 million, no one has that kind of transportation money in a state that is already $20 billion in the red for needed transport projects.
What’s more, some hard questions will need to be asked. Why spend hundreds of millions on northbound access to Main Street when Amtrak figures show that only 2,000 passengers a month use it on a few weekly trains that run from Newport News northward? Staples Mill Road sees 20,000 passengers a month. Even Charlottesville’s Amtrak stop has four times as many monthly passengers as current Main Street.
When I wrote about this little bit of fiscal reality in Style Weekly, commentators accused me of being everything from a twerp to a hack for suburban interests. What I am is merely a bearer of bad news.
Peter Galuszka

Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

92 responses to “The Hard Reality of Richmond Passenger Trains”

  1. Alfonsozo Avatar
    Alfonsozo

    Peter,

    I had a thought about this recently. I doesn't the amtrak train travel along the river and bypass the acca yard that way. The train coming in to Seattle for instance much of the trail is scenic along the water. The James would like nice if the Amtrak train used those tracks somehow. I don't know if this is even possible or if they would have to build new track. Perhaps you do?

  2. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "What I am is merely a bearer of bad news."

    What you are is merely the one who is documenting why the Richmond NUR should have been planning for the future 30 years ago instead of finding ways to build more roadways for more Autonomobiles.

    Observer

  3. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    Alfonszo,
    DOn't hold me to this but the rail lines along the James River are CSX ones that go from the coalfields and points west to Newport News. They won't work for a Norfolk to DC train.
    Peter

  4. Union station has a similar maze of indusrial park thrains have to go through to get to the station.

    With all the switches and such, it is a slow trip.

    If they started thirty years ago they would still have needed to set aside $16 million a year to fix fifteen miles of track.

    As good as trains are, accessibility is not their strong suit. it's a good thing that people in the new Urbanist World like the IDEA of trains: it is all they are likely to get.

    Course, we could build new tracks with TOLLS, right Larry?

    RH

  5. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    To me it would make more sense to have a transportation terminal locted at the airport, where buses, trains, airplanes, and autos can converge.

    I can take the train or fly to Providence or Boston, but either way it is an awkward transfer to the bus station to get down to Wood's Hole to go to the Vineyard.

    During summer you can sometimes take the train to Hyannis but if you fly to Providence you somehow have to get from Greene to the train station.

    And if you want to take the hydrofoil from New Bedford, well, good luck.

    As it stands, by the time you make the transfers, you are within an hour af the driving time direct to Woods hole and within the driving time to New Bedford. Might as well drive and save $400 each way each passenger.

    RH

  6. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    You could have a commuter airline from Richmond to Manassas, connecting with VRE to Washington and the ticket would be roughly $60 – $80 one way. Trip takes around 40 minutes from Richmond to Manassas and an hour on VRE from Manassas to Crystal City.

    Or you could fly direct to Reagan National for maybe $120 in under an hour. Landing fees are higher there.

    RH

  7. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "To me it would make more sense …"

    Such ideas are exactly why there is no light at the end of the tunnel.

    We look forward to Peter explaining why this is foolishness.

    Richmond Railfan

  8. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    For starters, the only thing less likely to provide transport in the future than the car is the airplane.

  9. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Interesting article.

    I am not sure that I quite "get" President Obama's fascination with high speed rail.

    Let's say you could get to Washington, DC in 90 minutes. Logically, it would take you 90 minutes to get back home. That's 3 hours on the train. Unless you live in a train station on both ends you still have to get to/from wherever you're going. Let's add another hour. That's a 4 hour commute from Richmond to Washington, DC. Leave at 7 AM, arrive at work at 9. Work until 6. Get home at 8. 13 hours a day of commuting and working.

    I don't see it.

    I guess there are people who need a day or two in the other city every couple of weeks for meetings. And some people will come to sightsee. Richmond has a population of 1.2M people. How many train trips for two day meetings and sightseeing will that generate?

    What would high speed rail from Richmond to Washington accomplish?

  10. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Off the topic … LarryG – do you still think McKrystal's gaffe was some kind of critique of the war effort?

    It was a blunder.

    Here's what I've been told…

    The Pentagon authorized a short interview between the Rolling Stone reporter and McKrystal, et al. Then the volcano erupted. What was meant to be a two hour interview turning into something like a two week visit.

    The reporter got chummy with the general, et al. The general and his aides started quacking like ducks around the reporter.

    And the rest is history…

    Sounds like a blunder to me.

  11. James A. Bacon Avatar
    James A. Bacon

    It's nice to find myself agreeing with Peter for once. He is absolutely right. Given the economic realities, it makes no sense at present to run the train line through downtown. Everybody needs to get real. State/local governments are suffering through hard times right now, and the hardships are expected to endure for at least another year or two. We can no longer afford the pork barrel/boondoggle spending we once could. To believe otherwise is utter fantasy.

    Looking toward a future of higher energy costs, the U.S. needs high-speed rail as an alternative to air travel, which, as EMR has frequently pointed out, will become hideously expensive as the price of aviation fuel soars higher. What Virginians cannot afford to do is invest hundreds of millions of dollars in a system that serves only a few thousand people. To make Main Street Station work will require appropriate scale and density of development all around the station as well as transportation connectivity that will feed people to the station. I would be interested to know what the city's new downtown plan calls for.

  12. Eventually airplanes may become prohibitive because of fuel costs but that is not yet the case and fuel cost is only part of the issue. Also high speed trains are heavy compared to airplane so the energy savings are not as great as might be expected.

    If and when air travel becomes unecenomic it can be discontinued with no loss of sunk costs for infrastructure. What first raised the possibility of commuter air to Richmond was an 80% reduction in fuel use for commuter aircraft.

    The aircraft in question can fly profitably with as few as five passengers. At a ticket price comparable to the train. Our market analysis suggested that the Richmond market would eventually reach 20,000 passengers per year. That is a number that can easily be accommodated by a small commuter aircraft operating with reasonable frequency, but not enough to fill a train.

    Dismissing aircraft out of hand is a mistake if your goal is to provde high speed flexible travel options at low cost. Trains make sense if your goal is to support a populist movement based on misguided environmental concerns.

  13. Groveton is correct. There really is no reasonable economic justification for high speed rail between DC and Richmond. Especially since a good part of the trip will not be high speed.

    Unless you apply the developers mindset and figurethat if you build it they will come. If that is the case then you need to rationalize how you will treat fairly those developers who don't need expensive "subsidy by train".

    I suspect that McCrystal has just become a verb.

  14. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The other interesting thing about real high speed rail (which we mostlikely will not get) is that it needs a truely secure dedicated guideway. such a facility will divide communities and make access between them difficult, just as surely as a freeway does.

    And then there is the issue of keeping tha guidewqay secure. Since we can"t seem to secure our boarders maybe we can hire immigrants to keep watch on the high speed rail guideways.

  15. "Such ideas are exactly why there is no light at the end of the tunnel."

    Well, its not my idea. And isn't that exactly what they have at Reagan and Mansassas and soon at Dulles? And doesn't Baltimore Airport have rail links?

    After you dismiss realility with contempt, what have you left? Like I said, insane people can invent any world they like and live in it.

    Air travelers will still get off the plane and walk to the Metro, or train, or bus, or car. Why not facilitate transportation choices and avoid the situation in Providence and DC where the trais station is 50 miles from the airport as a relic of history?

    It makes sense to eliminate the slow and expensive part of a high speed rail trip – the urban part.

  16. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Good topic Peter.

    In the comments there are several goods and bads.

    As frequently is the case Jim Bacon is on target,

    As is sometimes the case Groveton is intentionally not getting it and seems to be proud of the fact.

    As Dr. Risse recently noted on this Blog, HighSpeed Rail makes NO sense unless:

    There is intelligent settlement patterns at every station (METRO station-area Ziggurats on steroids. See his “All Aboard” column of 16 April 2007),

    A small footprint shared-vehicle system for across-the-platform transfers to serve supporting nodes at the Community Cores throughout the New Urban Region (a 15 minute max ride to 2 million citizes), and

    LONG distances between stations (one per New Urban Region Core).

    Anon 10:15 makes two very good points:

    HighSpeed corridors dismember human settlement fabric so very careful siting through the Countryside, tunnels in the Urbanside is critical (France seems to have done a good job), and

    Security and safety will be imperative. Derailing a 180 mph train in a tunnel within the Clear Edge could rival flying an airplane into the World Trade Center. Prof. Risse says the only solution to terrorism is to remove the causes of terrorism.

    Observer.

  17. "The county must identify a way to pay for an estimated $1.5 billion in road and transit improvements to accommodate all the cars the growth will bring, even if many new residents and workers ride Metrorail."

    WAPO today, in a story about Tysons.

    The hard reality of trains is that they breed cars.

    RH

  18. High speed rail in the US is moe likely to be 125 MPH than 180 MPH because of our predilection to overbuild and oversecure things along with our fear of risk.

    I don't think a 180 mph train will pass the train crash requirements without being too heavy to go 180.

    Not that it will make much difference to the occupants.

    RH

  19. I love the way obsever dismisses anyone who he disagrees with without offering a counter argument. This time it was Groveton,, who I thought made good sense: high speed rail to Richmond does not pass the reasonableness test.

    The Emperor has no clothes, and Groveton was the little boy who said so. "Shut up little boy, you don't understand."

    RH

  20. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    (a 15 minute max ride to 2 million citizes),

    Lets see, I calculate that to be between 17 and 40 people per GROSS acre, not taking out anything for roads, parks, reservoirs, etc.

    RH

  21. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “I don't think a 180 mph train will pass the train crash requirements without being too heavy to go 180.”

    Now RH is an expert on HighSpeed Rail safety?

    Why would US have higher standards than Japan, China, France, Great Britain or Spain?

    DO NOT ANSWER THAT UNLESS YOU HAVE FACTS, NO ONE CARES WHAT POPS TO THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD.

    The factor that will limit the HighSpeed trains is the cost of energy to overcome friction and air resistance as speed increases – and the security of the guideway.

    RH is always looking to pick a fight:

    “I love the way obsever (sic) dismisses anyone who he disagrees with without offering a counter argument. This time it was Groveton,, who I thought made good sense: high speed rail to Richmond does not pass the reasonableness test.”

    My reading of Observer’s comment is that it speaks directly to Groveton’s question.

    And, of course running HighSpeed from the National Capital SubRegional Core to Richmond would be foolish. That service would have to be part of a Portland Maine to at least Charlotte if not Atlanta system to get enough passengers to make it worthwhile.

    RMJ

  22. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Well, well, well:

    RH passed the math test.

    And who said he was dumb as stick?

    17 persons per acre gross is about right for the Core of a NUR with station-area densities at 150 to 250.

  23. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Well, well, well:

    RH passed the math test.

    And who said he was dumb as stick?

    17 persons per acre gross is about right for the Core of a NUR with station-area densities at 150 to 250.

  24. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    “I don't think a 180 mph train will pass the train crash requirements without being too heavy to go 180.”

    Now RH is an expert on HighSpeed Rail safety?

    Nope, just a simple scientist. F=MA still applies to trains.

    Anyway, don't attack me, it's not my idea and it was first put forth by others who are experts, but whom I cannot cite.

    European high speed trains are much lighter than American passenger trains (which are mostly old anyway). But they were built that way to pass the crash tests conducted by the government.

    Unless the specifications for those tests change, expect to see heavier and slower trains in the US.

    Also, bet that the new Metro cars will be heavier than the old ones which failed a very real world test last year.

    No expertise needed. Just a little bit of basic knowledge and the ability to reason it through to the logical conclusion – whether it is the desired one or not.

    RH

  25. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The factor that will limit the HighSpeed trains is the cost of energy to overcome friction and air resistance as speed increases – and the security of the guideway.

    F still equals MA.

    Trains still have more mass and they will require more Force in order to accelerate to speed. The higher mass means more difficulty keeping it on the rails and more friction and wear and tear on the wheels and rails.

    You are correct about air resistance. And it goes up FASTER than the velocity. With a high speed trian it begins to approach the resistannce felt by airplanes.

    ===============================

    Now, trains have rigid axles. ther eis no differential to allow the outside wheel on a turn travel farther than the one on the inside, like a car.

    Care to know how it works, without ripping the axle in half?

    RH

  26. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Station area densities?

    This is an Amtrak station, right?

    Not a subway / metro station.

    You won't commute on Amtrak.

    So, what makes people want to live near the station?

    People live near subway stations because they can commute with the subway. They don't give a rip about living near an Amtrak station unless there is also a subway station there – like Union Station in DC for example.

    So, one more time, tell me why this Amtrak station will generate high density development?

  27. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    RMJ:

    I don't think you read very well. The only thing observer said about Grovetons observations was:

    "As is sometimes the case Groveton is intentionally not getting it and seems to be proud of the fact."

    Then he digresses to irrelevenat repetition of EMRs writings.

    Where did you find that Observer responded directly to Grovetons points?

    Not to pickl a fight, but do you always so blatantly reinvent reality, as in what is currently on this page?

    RH

  28. Groveton, I was going to ask that but they would accuse me of being the enemy.

    Video of a train crash test. Not to show the indestructibility of a train, but of the nuclear container it hits.

    There are alwyas trade-offs, so in this case it is the train that has to give.

    If this ever happens to you, then you will be pleased to know that your life was given to pevent the spread of deadly radiation.

    http://www.metacafe.com/watch/2114885/spectacular_100mph_train_crash_test/

  29. "Our crash standards are FAR higher than those in Europe and Asia due to our larger & heavier freight trains…"

    http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/01/25/central-japan-railway-enters-competition-for-u-s-high-speed-market/

    Flat earther here. Simple facts – take 'em or leave them. Your world will be incomplete without them, however.

    RH

  30. Here is something i did not know.

    Japanese High speed trains are wider than US trains, giving hem a wider wheelbase and more ability to avoid upset in high speed curves.

    Now, who would like to consider a whole new set of dedicated rail and right of way for high speed service, which is what it is going to take anyway.

    RH

  31. Peter –

    Longtime reader, first time commenter. I went back & re-read your article (online so I could see the comments). You make a compelling argument, but so do the online comments from readers. I love this blog, so please consider this as constructive feedback, not criticism, but…you seem to accept the $600mil price tag quite easily, which opens you up to the (probably) unfounded attacks of bias against downtown.

    Where does that figure come from? Yes, from the experts at DRPT. But it wouldn’t be unimaginable for an agency now led by a former Congresswoman from Norfolk to push her pet project benefitting Norfolk at the expense of us. And wouldn’t a hefty pricetag be useful in scaring away Richmonders from making a fuss?

    In my quick websearch, I saw that DRPT came up with $600mil as the cost of everything they asked from the Obama admin when it was giving out free money for high speed rail. If I went on a free shopping spree at Best Buy, would I only take the 17” tube TVs (sufficient to get by with), or would I pile up HD 60” TVs along with any other excesses I could fit in my cart? High speed rail is the HD TVs.

    But trains in this area won’t be high speed for a really long time from now. The Norfolk train beginning in 2013 will be a traditional-speed train, just like the ones that already go from NewpNews, through MainSt and on to Staples Mill.

    You didn’t point out that just last year, DRPT told the feds it would cost $600mil to get a whole bunch of daily high speed trains through the downtown route, but now, DRPT is saying it will cost $600mil to get 1 traditional speed train through there.

    Plus, the main part of the route (MSS to SM) already has two round trip trains running on it every single day, so it shouldn’t need anything. Is there a chance DRPT is using that $600mil to scare people and they figure people won’t realize they are talking about apples (traditional speed) and oranges (high speed)?

    It seems this ‘self-appointed “leadership group”’ (are they the “Capital Region Collaborative” in your article?) may have poked around to find the cost for traditional speed is actually much less. But you never explored whether DRPT’s figure could be lower. Instead, your tone indicates a willingness to accept DRPT’s price tag, throw your hands in the air, and say “If the lady from Norfolk says it will cost too much, Richmond is hosed again.”

    How did that Collaborative come up with $122mil? Did you do any research into the projects totaling $600mil? Do we really need them all? For what type of train: high speed or just traditional speed? Are the really needed right now or can they occur over many budget years, with gradual speed increases?

    An investigative piece following up on the disparity between $600 & $122 could be a more thorough analysis. If you explained how the $600 number is really the true cost, or if you exposed it as a DRPT exaggeration, the reader would have less rationale for accusing you of bias.

    I would support going around Main Street Station if it really is free vs. a $600mil lump sum to include MSS. But, I believe there are some things that government should spend money on. Revitalizing our downtown is one that will return the investment. The immense value of a downtown transportation hub forces me to question the motives of anybody tossing out figures without details. I want to know more before I quickly abandon our downtown.

    I am glad there are groups like this Collaborative trying to dig deeper. Seems like they are trying to do a true cost/benefit analysis before quickly jumping ship.

    The journalists should dig deeper, too. It is easy to drink the Kool-Aid and act penniless, hopeless and helpless. It is harder to do the investigative journalism that might move us forward.

  32. That service would have to be part of a Portland Maine to at least Charlotte if not Atlanta system to get enough passengers to make it worthwhile.

    For the forseeable future, if you are going over 600 miles you ae better off to fly.

    It does not matter how many people ride the whole system, for Richmond to Washington to work, enough people have to ride that segment.

    Through riders will help, but now what you ae saying is that local trave will be subsidized by long distance travel.

    Whatever happened to full locationa costs?

    RH

  33. I think RVA has the right picture. We will start with what we have and improve it. We will have real high speed rail eventually ins some places but it will be built from scratch to all new specifications.

    RH

  34. Gooze Views Avatar
    Gooze Views

    RVA,
    Yes, I'd like to explore what the cost for the spur loine improvement might really be.
    But what bugs me about Richmond and its elite is that you have this usual crowd of self-important and self-appointed "leaders" running around (Leadership Metro Richmond, Leadership for Beagles, whatever)and they are only NOW discovering that bringing passenger trains from the south (the most important route) to downtown will cost a hell of a lot of money.
    One year ago, I sat in Willow Oaks Country CLub and listened to the gradiose plans for getting billions from Obama's "high" speed rail project. I sat at the same table as uber-leader Jim Ukrop who asked me in a most annoying and patronizing way if I had any experience covering rail issues (I've only been a journalist for 37 years but I keep trying).

    These are the same "Leaders" who ended up with a measely $75 millon from Obama's higher speed rail project while North Carolina got more than $400 million. Why? Because, just like the Research Triangle Park, Tar Heels got on the ball decades ago compared to Virginians.
    You would think that if our "Leaders" were in any way comptetent there would have been no surprise from Thelma Drake. They would have known what renovating the line would cost. In some ways it doesn't matter whether it is $100 million or $600 million THE MONEY ISN'T AVAILABLE.
    It is if it comes from the hated federal government and the Obama Administration that our "Leaders" love to criticize for being socialistic budget busters. Except, of course, when it helps the Richmond business elite.
    That's hypocrisy if not a Marxist contradiction.

    Peter Galuszka

  35. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    "WASHINGTON, D.C. – "The Association of American Railroads (AAR) today reported that intermodal volume on U.S. freight railroads for the week ended June 19, 2010, reached its highest level since the 45th week of 2008. Intermodal traffic totaled 227,985 trailers and containers, up 21.2 percent from last year but down .2 percent from 2008."

  36. sculYeah, I hate it when the federal government gives me money.

    RH

  37. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    Peter –

    I get irked by self-appointed leaders too. But let’s be careful not to lump them all together. They can’t all be arrogant and incompetent. Some must have gotten to their position of influence for good work. Plus, I think we often attack them in a negative manner just because they don’t agree with us.

    Take John Sarvay… He prides himself on being an outsider, but he isn’t… He is part of the establishment. He often invited to events hosted by these “leaders,” asked to speak as the expert on Richmond issues, and was invited to be on the advisory council of Trani’s new think tank (Style 6/9/10 article). Now that he has become a somewhat respected part of the establishment, does that suddenly make him somebody his followers should no longer support because he is a “self-appointed leader.”

    John’s quote near the end of the article is hilarious. He doesn’t realize, he is now part of the list of usual suspects he rails against. But that is exactly my point… The list of usual suspects changes over time, so we can’t just presume the usual list of suspects is all bad. Let’s judge them each on the merit of their work and abilities. For instance, Chesterfield County’s leadership is unbelievably different today than it was before the past election when 4 of the 5 incumbents were replaced. They went from uberconservative to electing two progressive independents and a more liberal democrat. Should we label them the same ‘ol “leaders” just because they are the same Chesterfield Board of Supervisors?

    So, you might want to be careful defining the “usual crowd.” If you define it as Leadership Metro Richmond folks, well, you just knocked out a few thousand people of varying levels of influence in this area. LMR alums include the good, bad, liberal, conservative, business, non-profits, and even the media. [As for Leadership for Beagles, they need to stop crapping on my lawn.]

    That Collaborative group seems like it might be the usual crowd, but then again, it doesn’t seem like the usual crowd. Looks like they are made up of the Chamber and the Regional PDC and I know both of those organization have changed immensely in the past two years.

    I would also say we need to hope that govt/groups/leaders might actually embrace the change that us critics preach. Whether you call it “coming to Jesus,” an “epiphany,” being “converted,” or just “succumbing to the 2×4 to the head,” sometimes people do change and become more effective. And organizations sometimes change too, even when their membership doesn’t. If people or organizations eventually come around, let’s congratulate them, not chase them back to the hole they were in before (one commenter on the Style article discussed this, although kind of rudely).

    I propose that as bloggers and readers we evaluate each leader (whether an individual or a group) on their merits. Which brings me back to Sarvay and judging him on the merits of his work. (I use John because not only does he epitomize my point, but I think he has a thick skin and many of us know him well.) I like what he does most of the time, but I hope he didn’t break his arm patting his own back and proclaiming himself the savior bringing “candor and independence” to the masses. Zing!

  38. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Groveton:

    Sorry to have overestimated what you would have gleaned from your worldly travels:

    You asked:

    “This is an Amtrak station, right?

    Yes

    “Not a subway / metro station.

    Think back, how many main railway stations, including those served by the TGV in the Paris New Urban Region for example have you been in that are not BOTH long haul rail (both HighSpeed and conventional) and SubRegion and Region serving stations.

    “You won't commute on Amtrak.”

    You may not – no Amtrak in Great Falls or Reston – but many do – in fact Amtrak ran VRE until what, yesterday?

    “So, what makes people want to live near the station?”

    Because stations are interchange points. The fact that people do not live near Union Station is a problem, not a solution.

    “People live near subway stations because they can commute with the subway. They don't give a rip about living near an Amtrak station unless there is also a subway station there – like Union Station in DC for example.”

    Ah, now you are getting it!

    Now back to the first question: How many main railway stations have you visited… Paris, Rome, London, Stockholm, Vienna, Frankfurt, Toronto, …

    “So, one more time, tell me why this Amtrak station will generate high density development?”

    Forgive me, I though the criteria cite from Prof. Risse would have given you all the information you needed.

    We will repeat them here:

    1. There is intelligent settlement patterns at every station (METRO station-area Ziggurats on steroids. See his “All Aboard” column of 16 April 2007),

    2. A small footprint shared-vehicle system for across-the-platform transfers to serve supporting nodes at the Community Cores throughout the New Urban Region (a 15 minute max ride to 2 million citizens), and

    3. LONG distances between stations (one per New Urban Region Core).”

    If you try to feed HighSpeed rail with cars OR with only across the platform transfers from other share-vehicle system it will not work. There must be actual trip ends near the HighSpeed platform – in the Ziggurat and within walking distance.

    The intensity of use near ALL shared vehicle station platforms is critical but that does not mean “Manhattan.”

    Lets take the plan approved for Tysons Corner yesterday. Existing Tysons Corner is 1,700 acres. Let us say that a whole New Tysons is 3,000 acres. Let us also assume that a New Tysons would provide a Balance of J / H / S / R / A for 400,000 citizens. (As you will see this could be cut in half and not make that much difference.)

    That means it would take five New Tysons to get 2 million citizens within 15 minutes of the HighSpeed rail station.

    Within 15 minutes of the one HighSpeed rail station serving the Core of the NUR there are about 110,000 acres.

    That would mean 15,000 acres of New Tysons and 95,000 acres of Green and Blue as Dr. Risse calls it in Stark Contrast.

    110,000 acres is about the amount of land inside the Capital Beltway (if the average radius is 7.5 miles).

    There could be a lot of other things going on in the 95,000 acres other than Green and Blue – like more Tacoma Parks and McLeans and Bethesdas, etc.

    But you get the idea.

    Observer

  39. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    Judging these Collaborative leaders on their merits…

    I talked to an acquaintance who is familiar with these people, who doesn’t think they were “only NOW discovering that bringing passenger trains from the south (the most important route) to downtown will cost a hell of a lot of money.” He says he knows they knew it when they did their events last year at Main Street Station and talked about it. Says the PDC folks were working to get VDOT to keep ARRA funding on Acky Yard (sp?).

    Apparently, they were surprised by is how DRPT didn’t tell anybody they were “solving” the problem by just going around the city. I checked DRPT’s website ( Richmond/Hampton Roads Passenger Rail Project website) and saw that the maps they showed during their public hearings and the text clearly say it is going to Main Street Station.

    Also, the Collaborative folks are not “the same "Leaders" who ended up with a measely $75 millon from Obama's higher speed rail project while North Carolina got more than $400 million.” It was DRPT’s application. They were just trying to support it. It looks like they all knew the costs involved, but DRPT was saying it would all be taken care of.

    So, the public hearings with DRPT promoting the route through Main St ended in Jan or Feb, then sometime between March and Apr the decision to go around Richmond was made and not publicized. Ouch! I would be shocked too.

    You said that “You would think that if our "Leaders" were in any way comptetent there would have been no surprise from Thelma Drake.” But what if the surprise wasn’t the cost, but the fact that DRPT had suddenly changed course from saying they will address the costs to simply taking Richmond out of the picture? If DRPT is holding public hearings saying they are going to do what it takes to go through Main Street Station, then privately decides to go around, it isn’t the “leaders” fault.

    I agree that “whether it is $100 million or $600 million THE MONEY ISN'T AVAILABLE.” But what if we could get some improvement with $25 million this cycle, then a bit more later, than more after that? Norfolk just go $100mil in one lump sum buffet. Can’t they give us a small bite to nibble on slowly?

  40. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    Something else to ponder… (Can you tell you got me interested in this and I can't stop Googling the subject or IMing friends of friends?)

    Why didn't we get the stimulus funds?

    I haven’t ever heard that it was because “Tar Heels got on the ball decades ago compared to Virginians,” but that may be a big portion of it. If so, that is only very slightly the fault of our region’s business and local government leaders. But I don’t think that was it.

    I heard the reason was much more political. Rumor has it the feds told DRPT the decision was made from high in the executive branch. The stimulus for high speed rail was announced on January 28… can you guess what major political fight took place between the Commonwealth and the Obama Administration in the week beforehand and culminated at the Capitol the night before the stimulus announcement? (Seriously, post your guess.)

    Plus, Cantor endorsed the high speed rail application for Virginia and the DNC was very active in trying to slaughter him on the issue. They didn’t want him to get a photo op to show he brought home any bacon.

    But that is water under the bridge (or tracks) now. (Apparently, the Collaborative group doesn’t want to point fingers because it doesn’t help the situation in any way.) I kind of agree — but it is still fun to discuss.
    Just because Va didn’t get the stimulus, and just because DRPT is spending $100mil in Norfolk, doesn’t mean Richmond can’t get a few million dollars to move forward on one or two of the projects that might reduce the time from Main Street to Staples Mill by two minutes. The first engineering phases are probably only a few million. Throw us some table scraps here!

  41. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Observer:

    I have been to almost all of those main rail stations in Europe. Not sure the railway created Paris. But I know a railway that was supposed to create some great economic development and rational development in Nord Pas de Calais and Kent – the EuroStar.

    Wikipedia has a good summary with good cites …

    "Five years after the opening of the tunnel, there were few and small impacts on the wider economy, and it was difficult to identify major developments associated with the tunnel.[75] It has been postulated that the British economy would have actually been better off without the costs from the construction project,[76] both Eurotunnel and Eurostar, companies heavily involved in the Channel Tunnel's construction and operation, have had to resort to large amounts of government aid to deal with debts amounted.[77][78][79] Eurotunnel has been described as being in a serious situation.[80]".

    I've been on the EuroStar as well. I've seen how little development was created in Kent and Nord Pas de Calais.

    I've also actually ridden the Amtrack all the way from DC to Boston. Many times. Union station? No real transit oriented development. BWI? No transit oriented development. Baltimore. Some development, but it is transit oriented? Wilmington? No transit oriented development. Philadelphia? No notable transit oriented development. Metropark? No noticable transit oriented development. Newark – Maybe. New York City. City was these before Penn Station. No obvious additional residential build up. Stamford – maybe. Rt 128. No observable transit oriented development. Back Bay – been these a lot longer than the train station. South Station. Maybe, although those neighborhoods have been there a long time too.

    Not sure I see Amtrak stops creating a Clarendon or Ballston type situation.

    Might an Amtrak station in a city provide a slight inducement for people to move back to the city. Maybe a very slight inducement.

    Will an Amtrak stop in a suburban area create dense transit oriented development around the Amtrak stop? Nope. Not in the NorthEast US, not in France, not in England.

    Dr. Risse has a lot of theses. Some can been seen to work in real life. Some can't. Metro or subway stops creating transit oriented development. Yes, in about 1/2 of NoVa's Metro stations. Regional rail stops (without metro or subway connections) creating transit oriented density? I don't see it.

    Does downtown Richmond or Henrico County have plans to intersect a local metro or subway system with the regional rail? I assume not. Therefore, from empirical evidence, I doubt the regional rail station will generat much transit oriented development.

  42. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Dr. Risse's cites are interesting. I am not sure that any of them pertain to the actual plans for high speed rail being considered by Richmond.

    I contend that Richmond's current plan (whether in downtown Richmond or Henrico County) will result in:

    1. No substantial new transit oriented development and …

    2. Substantial financial losses for the routes based on inadequate ridership.

    I'll grant Jim Bacon his due. If there are substantial carbon taxes which penalize airlines through vastly more expensive AV fuel the equation could turn in favor of high speed rail and make concern #2 less valid. However, the airlines a big businesses chock full of union employees. I have a feeling that a lot of other people will be paying carbon taxes long before they are applied (by the Republicans or Democrats) to avaiation fuel.

  43. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    I agree that full-size trains will never have the same impact as light rail or subway. They are not used by the same type of rider. Comparing the two is really apples and oranges. Very few people argue that heavy rail has an impact on residential use like those commuter options. That bus rapid transit plans are seeking for that type of commuter service.

    However, that doesn't mean that passenger rail (aka heavy rail) doesn't have value. It can be a huge economic development driver for corporate growth. Here in Richmond, many corporations have said they would be more likely to relocate into the city if it had reliable train service to Washington, DC.

    As for plans to connect development with Amtrak, I can't cite anything nearly as reliable as Wikipedia… but the Henrico County website on the Innsbrook Area Study and the Innsbrook Next site indicate a circular bus connection with the Staples Mill station. But again, no land use expert in their right mind would plan mixed-use or residential development as part of transit-oriented development that ONLY includes an Amtrak station. The key is options.

  44. The plans for carbon taxes most likely to pass involve offsets against other taxes.

    Rh

  45. If carbon taxes cause a shift to renewables for those who are able then the price of oil itself may go down for other users.

  46. But you get the idea.

    After reading and re-reading this, the idea I get is that the six paragraphs previous are a masterpiece of often repeated ideas that sound perfectly reasonable as written, but which are, in fact, perfect nonsense.

    It is a dreamscape that isn't going to happen, or might happen in a couple of hundred years.

    And the reason that it is nonsense is that the three criteria listed as prerequisites do not exist and are not likely to.

    One reason for that is described in yesterdays WAPO article about Tysons. Those with land near the Metro station have won a lottery ticket, while those only a little farther away are out of luck. Yet who is going to pay for the Metro?

    Everyone.

    Even if 15,000 acres of New Tysons and 95,000 acres of green and blue were to happen from a planning standpoint, from a political standpoint it could only happen if those who get stuck with the 95,000 acres get some help supporting it out of the profit from New Tysons instead of the other way around.

    If the 95,000 acres are valuable enough to be preserved in this way, then they are valuable enough to have the costs of conservation paid for somehow.

    RH

  47. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    "But again, no land use expert in their right mind would plan mixed-use or residential development as part of transit-oriented development that ONLY includes an Amtrak station."

    Hopefully, Observer is reading this.

    RVA Source –

    Maybe you can help me with some of the "use cases" for corporations which would move to Richmond if Richmond had reliable rail service to DC.Who would take the train, why and for what reason?

    Baltimore has reliable train service to Philadelphia. Does this materially improve Baltimore's position with employers?

    I could definitely be missing something but I just don't see the connection in a material way.

  48. When we were researching possible passenger loads for our airline project we spoke to community development directors in several cities (which had no current commercial air service).

    Each of those cities were ones in which the feds had provided money to build a brand new air terminal. Most of those terminals are still in place and still unused.

    In each case the development director told us of companies that had looked at the local offerings for business development and declined on account of no air service. It was my understanding that part of the reason the chip manufactuing facility in Goochland never went through was because of transportation issues.

    I'm not certain that train service buys you the same credibility that air service does, but I assume the effects would be similar.

    Groveton points out that he has taken the train to Boston many times, and I assume that business was the impetus. I'm willing to believe that better transportation of any sort makes for more and better business.

    For myself, I fly to Boston about as often as I take the train, but both methods have become so painful that is is just about as easy to drive. especially since these are pleasure trips and I'm travelling on my own dime. (I know, Groveton, I'm Cheap)

    It is 528 miles to Woods Hole which is at the upper limit for a train ride and the lower limit for a plane trip. And either way you slice it you are going to have a 60 mile transfer at each end of the trip that has to be made by bus or car. The last couple of times I tried it, the train ticket cost more than the plane ticket, even after the Amtrak subsidy.

    Another way to look at this might be to go look at some cities where air service has been withdrawn, and see what effect that had on local business.

    RH

  49. "Passenger train service won’t take off yet"
    Written by NCHIDZI SMARTS
    Wednesday, 23 June 2010 00:00

    The public will have to wait a little longer for the reintroduction of the Botswana Railways (BR) passenger service which was discontinued last year.

    BR was reported to be running at losses of P30 million which were mainly attributed to overhaul and maintenance costs of locomotives and wagons as well as other costs associated with train operations like fuel and wagon hire. The losses led to the discontinuation of the passenger train. As a result BR put passenger train carriages and locomotives up for sale in order to unlock tied revenue.

    Industry sources have indicated that passenger train services worldwide except in China and India do not have the capacity to make profits without government subsidies.

    Apparently Passenger trains are a hard reality in Botswana, too. Is anyone really going to sign up for densities like China and India ion order to make trains ay their own way?

    RH

  50. Rail review follows bill for higher subsidies
    By Gill Plimmer

    Published: June 17 2010 21:42 | Last updated: June 17 2010 21:42

    The government has signalled a radical shake-up of the rail industry at the same time as an arbitrator ruled that it must pay Stagecoach between £70m and £100m ($104m and $148m) in subsidies.

    With train revenues under pressure from falling passenger numbers during the recession, the government has been forced to pay higher subsidies than expected to rail operators, blowing a hole in the Department for Transport’s budget and raising concerns over the system’s credibility.

    Determined to get middle classes on the buses, Theresa Villiers, minister of state, said on Thursday the government had cancelled the bidding competition to run the Greater Anglia and Essex Thameside train services until a review of the franchising system has been completed at the end of the year.

    Changes likely to be considered include a restructuring of the revenue-sharing agreement between train operators and the government, the adoption of longer 15 to 20-year franchises to buy greater stability and a transformation of the role played by train companies so that they could, for example, invest in stations and rolling stock.

    The review, which was welcomed by the industry, is an attempt to shore up the rail franchise system, under fire since National Express said last July it would hand its loss-making East Coast main line back to the government.

    Private sector giving up its franchise back to the government. That is the picture in Britain.

    RH

  51. "There's something romantic about trains, but try getting the tracks to come to your house. When it comes time to unload the groceries, the romance of the train ends immediately."

    P. J. O'Rourke

  52. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Groveton:

    INCREDIBLE!!

    How can it be made any more simple?

    You cite evidence to support what I said and what Dr. Risse has articulated for years.

    For some reason you fail to not understand that you are undermining your own position.

    How can that be?

    Please reread what was said above and then consider these notes on your ‘evidence.”

    “I've also actually ridden the Amtrack all the way from DC to Boston. Many times.”

    You are the one who raised the specter of Amtrack being related to a discussion of HighSpeed Rail.

    First: Amtrack is NOT HighSpeed Rail.

    In addition, the political support for Amtrack is such that even if there were twice as many passengers riding every day as there are on Amtrack, no sane developer would speculate on the future of Amtrack as it exists or as it has existed since it was formed.

    That is why bus systems do not generate ‘transit oriented development.’ With rubber tires and no track, the bus can be here today and gone tomorrow.

    That is also why there must be a convergence of forces for a Critical Mass of Urban fabric that will support shared-vehicle systems of any sort to evolve.

    As to your survey of Amtrack stations, PLEASE NOTE criteria 2:

    For any high capacity system, ESPECIALLY both HighSpeed Rail (InterRegional) and Heavy Rail (IntraRegional) to function there must be a small footprint, shared-vehicle system with cross platform transfers in the SAME location.

    As RVA Source notes:

    “But again, no land use expert in their right mind would plan mixed-use or residential development as part of transit-oriented development that ONLY includes an Amtrak station.”

    That is what we said above. How anyone could think, based on what we have posted in comments here or what Prof. Risse has written for the last 20 years that I (or I suspect he) would differ is just trying to make trouble and trying to confuse readers.

    Let us examine the reality of Amtrack stations you noted:

    Almost without exception, Amtrack uses late 19th century stations and station sites except for the ones at airports and parking lots near limited access roadways.

    Many of these stations were originally located in splendid isolation so they could be admired from afar as statements of monumental industrial might and civic pride by the Organizations that paid for them and the architects that designed them.

    Most of these stations were later surrounded by uses that reflected the mistaken belief that Autonomobiles (both Private and shared, e.g. taxis) could provide Mobility and Access within Urban fabric.

    As Dr. Risse has demonstrated it is a physical impossibility to feed a high capacity rail system with low capacity Autonomobiles. See his classic Backgrounder “Time to Fundamentally Rethink METRO in the National Capital Subregion” and other work.

    Many of the rail stations had supporting street car and InterUrban lines removed in the 30s, 40s, 50s and 60s. Since then, roads and parking garages have further isolated most of these platforms from easy access to origins and destinations of travel. Union Station in the Federal District, Penn Stations in Baltimore and the 30th Street station in Philadelphia are classic examples.

    The existing stations used by Amtrack – including the one in Richmond – provide a lexicon of error in the evolution of functional settlement patterns. That is why the leaders in the Richmond NUR should have started planning for the real future 35 years ago when it became obvious that the transport plans created up to that point were unsustainable.

    Observer

  53. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Part II

    Here is Groveton’s list:

    “Union station? No real transit oriented development.”

    There is very little due to factors noted above plus the federal district and federal monument regulations of land use. At least there is a METRO station that bring a million citizens within a 15 minute METRO ride, but that is not enough.

    The uses surrounding Union Station and the configuration of Union Station as a monumental ‘terminal’ without convenient provision for through trains makes it a poor candidate for a real HighSpeed terminal in the future.

    “ BWI? No transit oriented development.”

    BWI is the Baltimore Washington International Thurgood Marshall Airport. That is, as the name implies, an AIRPORT. Hear the noise? There is a light-rail service and bus service in the area but no real Urban fabric and no reason to create Urban fabric in this location.

    “Baltimore. Some development, but it is transit oriented?”

    No much because of the LOCATION of the terminal. See factors noted above.

    “Wilmington? No transit oriented development.”

    No Critical Mass AND factors noted above.

    “Philadelphia? No notable transit oriented development.”

    Station LOCATION and factors noted above.

    “Metropark? No noticeable transit oriented development.”

    That is a PARKING LOT, what do you expect?

    “Newark – Maybe.”

    Station location limits potential for Critical Mass, no high capacity or small footprint shared-vehicle system serves the terminal.

    “ New York City. City was these before Penn Station.”

    Exactly! The station is underground and in a location that generates foot traffic.

    They tore down the above ground monument to build space for human activity near the platforms. But the big factor is the high-capacity Subway that provides access to millions of Job locations and Housing locations.

    “No obvious additional residential build up.”

    Unless you look. Ever hear of West Village, Greenwich Village, Soho, East Village, Murray Hill…? How many live there or near other Subway stations because they have a need or desire to travel up and down the East Coast? How many more would if there was HighSpeed service?

    Recall that with Balanced station-areas, resident citizens only need to take a few high-value trips to make the location decision a smart one.

    “Stamford – maybe.”

    Check out the reasons that Royal Bank of Scotland located 1million sq ft of office space .2 miles from the station.

    “Rt 128. No observable transit oriented development.”

    Route 128 is the Boston NUR Beltway, what would you expect?

    “Back Bay – been these a lot longer than the train station.”

    Exactly! There was a base upon which to create Critical Mass.

    Actually Back Bay used to be a bay and fens. Of all the East Coast Amtrack stations this area reflects rational evolution of land uses, including the Mass Pike that is underground here too.

    “South Station. Maybe, although those neighborhoods have been there a long time too.”

    See Back Bay.

    Observer

  54. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Part III

    Now look at the stations in the places we listed above:

    Paris, Rome, London, Stockholm, Vienna, Frankfurt, Toronto, …

    Many have more than one station and a few exhibit some of the same problems as New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore and the Federal District but ALL have important lessons.

    Note especially the way the French have integrated the TGV (NOT EuroStar) into both the Countryside and the Urbansides. A good example is that through TGVs from the South of France to the North do not have to go into Paris, they interchange with the RER (Paris’s other Metro) at the Disney’s Paris site of all places.

    You have been to all of these places. They have all been built and rebuilt to support functional human settlement patterns, and are not isolated by space to drive and park Large, Private Vehicles.

    You do not have to revisit them, just look at a map or Google Earth and try to understand what you are seeing.

    Then another red herring that you thought supported your argument but does not:

    “I've been on the EuroStar as well. I've seen how little development was created in Kent and Nord Pas de Calais.”

    Again you are making the case for the opposite point of view.

    Human settlement patterns and the infrastructure to support them must be planned, designed and evolve together. Just building a train station does not automatically create the impetus to evolve functional settlement patterns in the station-area.

    How can it be so hard for you to understand?

    Or do you understand but do not want to come to grips with the reality of how badly the US settlement patterns are vis other parts of the world?

    In my view your confusion has four causes:

    Neural Linguistic Frameworks: You hear a word or phrase and create an image that does not relate to what the writer intended.

    Naive Realism: Simple perceptions of complex reality.

    Conventional wisdom that fits comfortably with preconceived notions of what is best for individuals (‘me’) vs what is sustainable for society.

    Geographic Illiteracy and Spacial Obliviousness: What you should have been taught at Groveton but were not.

    Observer

  55. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Observer missed one big issue.

    As I recall that location for the East Paris interconnection of high speed rail and the RER was part of the 1965 (YES 1965) plan for the expansion of Paris that included Marne LaVallee and was a planned location for a region-serving recreation venue and a multi-region serving conference center where Disney decided to locate Euro Disney two decades later.

    The sad thing is the Regions in the US – including the National Capital SubRegion were creating similar Regional plans at the same time that were later abandoned due to a complex set of forces that Dr. Risse explores in The Shape of the Future.

    AZA

  56. "For any high capacity system, ESPECIALLY both HighSpeed Rail (InterRegional) and Heavy Rail (IntraRegional) to function there must be a small footprint, shared-vehicle system with cross platform transfers in the SAME location."

    Which does not exist. If it is a prerequisite for high speed rail thenit is an additional cost (OR SUBSIDY TO) rail, which puts the cost even further out of the park.

    Amtrak, even the Acela, is NOT high spped rail and neither is whar Richmond will have. There will first be some intermediate higher speed rail before a whole new dedicated set of guideways are built.

    The first of these will be a short section from Tampa to Orlando, for which 1.25 billion has alrady been allocated. The 84 mile trip will have five stops, obviating much of the 168 mph top speeed. And there is the question of where the state will find the other 2.6 billion.

    The drive takes 82 minutes and the train takes 58 minutes. The environmental impact statement says it will make no difference in auto usage on Interstate 4.

    More than a third of the riders will travel only 19 miles, to the Magic Kingdom.

    Magic Kindom indeed.

    RH

  57. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    Maybe you can help me with some of the "use cases" for corporations which would move to Richmond if Richmond had reliable rail service to DC. Who would take the train, why and for what reason?

    Richmond is becoming a key city for industries tangentially related to DC’s government services (private entities that feed off government contracts). Ones that have government affairs needs, but not daily lobbying needs. Ones that send teams of people up to DC once or twice a week, or different individuals every day. We are in the middle of 2 major federal/military cities (DC & Norfolk), so we are getting contractors that want to be near those cities, but don’t have to be IN those cities. In addition, R&D companies in Raleigh want to put satellite offices in Richmond to be fairly close to the home office in Raleigh, but also close to DC.

    This is exactly why the Chamber cares so much about this issue. GRP has said that their recruitment of companies would benefit greatly. Richmond’s current big corporate entities are screaming for a reliable way to get to DC that isn't impacted by the horrible traffic between Fredericksburg and DC. They keep referring to 90-90-90 as the goal – 90 mph max speed, a 90 min one-way trip, and 90% on time reliability.

  58. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    Baltimore has reliable train service to Philadelphia. Does this materially improve Baltimore's position with employers?

    Baltimore’s train service to Philadelphia does not really improve their position with employers. But Baltimore’s reliable train service to DC drastically improves their position with employers. The MD counties north of the area served by the DC Metro feast off of the conventional-speed rail with employment centers and development built up around the stations. MD’s rail is like NoVa’s VRE, but on steroids.

    MD’s MARC system has 3 lines that all end at Union Station in DC, but extend more than 100 miles into WV, western MD, & northern MD (near border with DE & PA). Those trains serve 2 audiences… lots of everyday commuters and… lots of these government contractor companies that want DC money, but don’t want to be anywhere near the DC beltway. Tons of people who live way out use the train to commute to their daily work in DC, or semi-weekly trips to DC for contract work.

    Maryland has also shown a strong ability to use the MARC (heavy, conventional-speed rail) to stimulate economic development around the stations. The stops between DC and Baltimore are very heavily developed simply because they are near regular train stations. But of course, it is not Clarendon-type development; it is less residential and more corporate. A great example is New Carrollton, which has tall mega-office complexes built around the station. In addition to being a stop on the MARC, it is the end of the Orange Line on the Metro subway, but many more commuters take the MARC than the Metro there.

    AND… The trip from Richmond to DC’s Union Station is only 10 miles further than the longest of those MARC routes.

    Something weird is that MD has done well at utilizing their far away heavy-rail stations, while VA has done much better at building transit-oriented development around the Metro stops (i.e., Clarendon, Pentagon City, etc). But now MD is starting to do much better with their Metro stops.

    You know how Virginia is known as being uber-business friendly? MD is known as being the opposite when it comes to corporate taxes and incentives. The flout that they don’t care about “business-friendly” policies because their economy is built on the never-ending cash flow from the feds to the contractors, so those contractors will go to MD anyway. (That mindset only goes so far and they are now seeing some weakness in their argument.)

    So, in answer to your questions, economic recruiter groups believe that frequent and reliable train access to downtown Richmond will drastically increase our ability to draw business downtown. Urban planners believe that will further stimulate economic revitalization in the downtown area.

    [Again though, it would not be Clarendon, mixed-use development where you have a loft apartment on the 10th floor of a building that has a Crate & Barrel on the first floor and a Metro station underneath. It is more about getting major employers to the area, who want options for their employees, but more importantly they want options to get teams of people to other places for day-trip business meetings. If the employers are there, the other development (condo residential, retail, entertainment, bars, clubs, etc.) will follow. That is the theory.]

  59. The Acela trains are capable of over 150 mph, but they are limited by the tracks they run on. If the argument against Amtrak is that it is shoddy government service,additionally hobbled by union antipathy, then read the comments above conerning foreign attempts at privatisation.

    We could have spent the florida mony on rails for Acela, but did not. Maybe it was an attempt to buy votes in Florida.

    In any case the Flrida example will not meet any of EMRs criteria.

    RH

  60. "They keep referring to 90-90-90 as the goal – 90 mph max speed, a 90 min one-way trip, and 90% on time reliability."

    Easily done with modern commuter aircraft, and I could have it up and running in 8 months. Just guarantee me a set minimum number of ticket sales.

    I can carry you at 180 miles per hour and be wheels up to wheels down in under 40 minutes.

    Four trips in the morning, four trips in the evening and one late trip so no one is stranded.

    I'm sure it is higher now, but the last tgime I looked it was $0.50 per mile.

    RH

  61. I'm glad to know the real future was obvous 35 years ago. Somebody ought to be fabulously rich, if that is true.

    RH

  62. How much you want to bet the high speed termoinal winds up at Dulles, if it ever happens?

    Notice that the Florida line strts at the Tampa International airport.

    RH

  63. lots of these government contractor companies that want DC money, but don’t want to be anywhere near the DC beltway.

    Nah, there is no such thing according to EMR. There is no evidence that jobs move away from the zentrum.

    😉

    RH

  64. In my view observers description of Groveton's confusion has four causes and each one of them is argument ad hominem.

    That is preceded by appeal to false authority or arguing from false authority.

    Appeal to complexity

    Argument by half truth

    Argument by prestigious jargon

    Innumeracy

    And moving the goalpost.

    RH

  65. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    @ RVA Source
    I'm not at all convinced gov't contractors are going to move down I-95 because there is reliable rail service. Gov't contracting is kind of afterthought in the Richmond area whereas it is more highly regarded in DC.

    The arguement I've heard has more to do with alternative access to airports in the DC area.

    Usually when a corporate relocation gets down to say Raleigh, Richmond, Charlotte, and Atlanta, Richmond and Raleigh get eliminated because of the airport situation.

    With higher speed rail, Richmond boosters can point to the fact there is an alternative to a 2+ hour drive to catch a plain in DC.

  66. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    lots of these government contractor companies that want DC money, but don’t want to be anywhere near the DC beltway.
    ———–
    This might has some truth to it, but all the big dogs want be to in the DC area. Consider that less than 50 years ago, virtually all the major defense contractors were founded and based out California. Now they've all basically relocated to the DC area.

  67. Richmond has an airport, it is just hideously expensive to fly out of. You can fly DC to Boston for half of what it costs to fly DC to Richmond.

    It does not have to be that way.

    And a train station at the airport wouldn't hurt.

    There are thirty four airports, decent airports, within 250 miles of the three major Washington airports that have no commercial air service.

    Manassas, National, and BWI all have rail service, and Dulles will have eventually.

    RH

  68. If Richmond boosters wanted it, they could have a commuter air shuttle with hourly service to National or Manassas.

    And it wouldn't take them ten years to get it.

    RH

  69. Gee, for $600 million to fix the rails, you could buy the airline outright, operate it and give the tickets away FREE for ten years.

    If it makes you feel better, paint a train on the side of the plane and name it High SpeedRail or High Speed Aerial.

    RH

  70. The big dogs have plants and subcontractors all over the nation so they can get the votes their projects need.

    Air travel is a way of life for them, and even highspeed trains would only replace a fraction of their air travel needs.

    RH

  71. Groveton Avatar
    Groveton

    Observer:

    From Peter's article:

    "What's more, some hard questions will need to be asked. Why spend hundreds of millions on northbound access to Main Street when Amtrak figures show that only 2,000 passengers a month use it on a few weekly trains that run from Newport News northward? Staples Mill Road sees 20,000 passengers a month. Even Charlottesville's Amtrak stop has four times as many monthly passengers as current Main Street.".

    Then, from your commentary:

    "You are the one who raised the specter of Amtrack being related to a discussion of HighSpeed Rail.".

    Help me with your brilliant genius …

    What was the original article about?

    a)Japanese bullet trains
    b)Local subway service
    c)Regional rail – like Amtrak

    You and your frineds spend a lot of time touting your geographic literacy. Perhaps you should take a step back and focus on conventional literacy for a while.

  72. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The big dogs have plants and subcontractors all over the nation so they can get the votes their projects need.

    Air travel is a way of life for them, and even highspeed trains would only replace a fraction of their air travel needs.

    RH
    ——————————-
    True, but they moved the "nerve center" from California to the DC area. Imagine all the great consultancies moved their corporate head offices from Boston to say Atlanta. Or all the prestigious investment makes moved their corporate hqs to Charlotte. That is what has happened in the defense contracting industry.

    Sure, they have offices/facilities all over the world. But having a majority of the a majority of the key strategic decision makers in an area is the same as having a manufacturing facility.

  73. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Being a wise ass or a RH look-alike does not become you Groveton.

    After noting 'limited' service by Amtrak, Peter's third Para reads:

    "Even more important, Main Street Station, being a downtown depot, figures in grand schemes to have higher speed rail trains rocket passengers north to Washington and to points south. President Barack Obama is a big fan of higher speed rail and has already distributed $8 billion to get it moving. One requirement is that the new trains must stop in downtown areas. Virginia got only $75 million in the first round of financing."

    Now why not try to answer Observers questions.

    MGM

  74. Follow the money. Frequently the headquarters are not that large an organization.

    If it is really a requirement that new high speed rail has stations downtown tat requirement will delay start up, raise cost and make the average speed lower.

  75. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    I don't see any questions in Observers last post.

  76. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    It seems quite clear that there would be no discussion if it were not for the prospect of HighSpeed Rail and the need for it to be near the Centroid of the Richmond NUR.

    It is also clear who raised the red herring about ‘Amtrak only’ stations.

    Sorry that trying to clarify what needs to happen to support high-capacity shared vehicle ground transportation up set Groveton.

    There are a lot of things to get upset about:

    Hottest Spring on record

    Double dip recession driven by Too Large House in Wrong Location

    Peak Oil in the rear view mirror

    The Long Depression II driven by Enterprise greed

    The end of American Hegemony

    If there is not a consensus soon on the need to achieve Fundamental Transformation in

    Human settlement patterns

    Governance structure

    Economic system

    Things will get much worse, much faster.

    Groveton had good ideas about governance structure but seems to have gotten sidetracked.

    Let us know if there is something we can do to get your focus back.

    Observer

  77. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    The silliest thing in these comments is the suggestion that airplanes can be a part of the solution for moving citizens within MegaRegions. That suggests that airports are good places for major Urban agglomerations? They may be good places for terminal rail car yards but not for major Regional Core serving stations.

    In the larger scheme of things, airplanes are ahead of cars on the downward slope.

    By the way EMR when are we going to see that item on “what comes after the car” that we seen drafts of?

    By the way, hint for Anon 3:05:

    Look for the question marks. They look like this: “?”

    In fact all of Observers three part comment is a question for Groveton. Note the second sentence, it has one of those “?” ‘s ;>)

    CJC

  78. Anonymous Avatar
    Anonymous

    Not just to "the DC Area" where ever that may be — but inside R=10 in a METRO station area.

  79. There are two question marks in observers last post

    They are both rhetorical question not intended to be answered. Rude rhetorical questions at that: a form of argument ad hominem.

    $300 million to fix 15 miles of track, which still wont be suitable for he rail. That is enough money to fly 400 million passenger miles instead.

    What is silly about that?

    Some day the price of oil may preclude all but the most valuable air travel,but not yet. AAA predicts air travel will be up 15% next weekend.

  80. hydrate Avatar

    To put it another way $300 million for track repair in the hope that it will revitalize an already failed downtown amounts to a giant subsidy to hoped for urban dwellers.

    What happened to true locational cost?

    If downtown landowners want more people,they can lower the rent.squetter

  81. Observer 3:10

    You worry too much about too many things.

    I try to keep my worry about a problem proportional to what I can reasonably do about it.

    In a stom atsea you take off the sails,tie things down, eat, bolt on the shutters. Then you relax and enjoy the majestic turmoil around you.

  82. Larry G Avatar

    sorry..been away a couple of days.

    re: tolls for passenger rail

    is that the same as fares?

    Of course the most interesting thing that most folks don't know is that about 3 cents of Federal Gasoline Tax goes for non-highway transportation, public transit, etc.

    re: Groveton's McCrystal question.

    My theory is that McCrystal did this on purpose to exit the war because he sees the handwriting on the wall and realizes that he cannot "win" the way he said he could and this was a good way to "get removed" rather than "quitting".

  83. Larry G Avatar

    so if Washington and Richmond were in Japan – what would be the primary means of transport between them and how long would it take – door-to-door?

  84. When the [Greenville, SC] Southern Connector opened in 2001, the toll road was expected to spark development in the southern part of the city. Boosters said it would carry thousands of cars daily, allowing them to bypass Interstate 85 congestion.

    But eight years later, development hasn't boomed. The four-lane highway carries only half as many cars as forecast. And because toll revenue is far short of projections, the $200 million project has been using its reserves to pay off its debt for six years.

    It's scheduled to go into default in January.

    As North Carolina moves forward to build several new toll roads, including two in the Charlotte area, the Greenville highway is a cautionary tale of how the public may not warm up to paying tolls. …

    Fares as tolls for railroads: yeah, right.

    If that happens you will definitely be able to fly cheaper than take high speed rail.

    RH

  85. If Washington and Richmond were in Japan the primary means of transport would be the automobile.

    Moving Washington and Richmond to Japan, would not make them japanese like cities in any form or fashion.

    RH

  86. June 28 (Bloomberg) — Incomes grew faster than spending in May, making it possible for American households to simultaneously increase savings and support the economic recovery.

    What double dip recession?

  87. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    @ RVA Source
    Anonymous said: I'm not at all convinced gov't contractors are going to move down I-95 because there is reliable rail service. Gov't contracting is kind of afterthought in the Richmond area whereas it is more highly regarded in DC.

    Well, I can guarantee you one thing… no business considering moving here cares what Anonymous is convinced about.

    The fact is that northern Maryland (north of Baltimore) has recruited tons of government contractors and easy rail access to DC (MARC trains) is a significant reason. This occurred even though Maryland is much less business friendly than Virginia. Plus, these areas are as far, or further, from DC than Richmond. Maryland has less of a military presence for these contractors to suck business from.

    Of course, rail is not the ONLY reason they came there, but it is a significant reason. The DC to NY corridor is the one place in the country where business folks view rail as a preferred option to air. They like the opportunity to work while they travel.

    But, I am betting that doesn't matter to you because no matter what, nothing will convince you differently.

  88. I notice that MARC is a significantly larger system than VRE which basically runs between Fredericksburg and Union Station.

    VRE is a highly-subsidized limited service that is pretty much limited from expanding because of a lack of funds.

    Makes me wonder what the finances of MARC are and it's funding sources.

    VRE pretty much operates on a 2% gas tax for the jurisdictions it serves.

    How about MARC?

  89. RVA Source Avatar
    RVA Source

    MARC is subsidized, but I am not sure to what extent. I do know that ridership is very high.

    I get frustrated when we get caught up talking about whether public transit is subsidized. Don't get me wrong, I think it is important to consider costs to taxpayers as part of decision-making, but public transit is not intended to be a profitable business. If it was, then the government wouldn't be doing it, a for-profit company would.

    But most of all, the question of subsidized vs. profitable seems to only come up for every transportation option, except car travel. Car travel is the most subsidized transportation option that the government pays for because of the cost of building and maintaining roads. But that is not necessarily a bad thing. Rather, government services should be judged on a cost-value analysis.

    Let's look at the value obtained and under a certain price, then make a judgment. But let's be sure to compare all costs, instead of giving roads a free pass.

  90. The only way that roads would be subsidized would be if they were funded from general tax revenues instead of gas taxes.

    If you drive car, you pay gas taxes, and those taxes, in turn are used to build highways.

    That's not a subsidy but a user fee.

    Where does the money come from to operate MARC?

    The funny thing about operations like MARC and VRE is that finding out the financial details of their operations is not as easy as going to their website and finding it proudly listed for all too see.

    You have to dig, dig, dig and even then you wont' get the true picture of how much of a subsidy they have and where it comes from.

    How about MARC? How about it's funding?

  91. keep in mind also – that Commuter Rail is doing exactly the same thing that commuter highways do with regard to sprawl.

    Sprawl is defined as auto-dependent development where you must drive to your job and to shop and play, etc …. i.e. residential without nearby jobs, shopping, recreation and whatever is nearby has to be driven to instead of walking, biking or using transit.

    People are free, of course, to move to wherever they please even if it is far from where they work – but shouldn't they own the commuting costs and not expect others to pay for their commutes?

Leave a Reply