HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #401  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 7:21 AM
sammyg sammyg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
So yeah, I think that would be just a tad more useful than an empty choo-choo from Orlando burbs to Tampa burbs.
Why do you keep saying suburbs when neither end of the train is in the suburbs?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #402  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 3:00 PM
bnk bnk is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: chicagoland
Posts: 12,741
Any one that uses the phrase cho-cho is just re vomiting right wing talking points and anyone that puts the word choo-choo or their likeness should be excluded from rational dialog in this page. Let them learn their talking points and talk with FR, Sumdge, ect. The rest of us are more mature and more inteligent to be talked down upon by calling transit Choo Choos. Talking points that are years old and years behind the times. Centuries behind the times really...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #403  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 3:17 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
scott's decision is not too popular even in his own state:

Quote:
Scott rebuked by 26 senators over high-speed rail funding

A veto-proof majority of the Florida Senate tells federal officials to give Florida $2.4 billion in bullet train money, even though Gov. Rick Scott wants to reject it. Meanwhile, state officials and lawmakers seek other ways to get the money.

BY ALEX LEARY, MARC CAPUTO AND BILL VARIAN
Herald/Times Staff Writers
Posted on Thursday, 02.17.11

From Washington to Tallahassee, Florida lawmakers scrambled Thursday to save $2.4 billion in federal money for high-speed rail that Gov. Rick Scott rejected.

In Washington, members of Florida’s Congressional delegation met with U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who gave them one week to cobble together a complicated deal that would give the money to a private entity such as Amtrak or a regional planning organization.

“The cart’s in a ditch right now and we’ve got to figure out a way if we can all pull it out together,” said U.S. Rep. John Mica, an Orlando area Republican who is chairman of the powerful House transportation committee.

In Tallahassee, a veto-proof majority of the Florida Senate rebuked Scott in a letter that urged the federal government to give the state the money Scott has refused.

“Politics should have no place in the future of Florida’s transportation, as evidenced by this letter of bipartisan support,” said the letter, signed by 26 members of the Republican-controlled Florida Senate.

“This project would create real jobs, cleaner and smarter transportation and true economic development for Floridians,” said the letter written to LaHood.

The letter was authored in part by one of Scott’s first Senate backers, Republican Paula Dockery of Lakeland, who argued that the newly created Florida Rail Enterprise could act independently of Scott because the state’s share of the rail money — $300 million — was already approved last year by a previous governor, Charlie Crist.

Late Thursday, a Florida tea party group and the conservative activist organization Americans for Prosperity reached out to supporters to drum up support for Scott’s decision.

“We have watched over the past 24 hours as our governor has been attacked because he has stood up to the Obama administration and the high speed rail boondoggle," read an e-mail alert by the South Florida Tea Party, which included a link for people to send a fax to Sen. Bill Nelson. "As a tea party member, I will remember who fought for the people in November 2012!" it reads.

Americans for Prosperity urged supporters to call representatives in Tallhassee and Washington and blasted the bi-partisan coalition that wrote the letter to LaHood. "They noted that politics should have no place in the future of Florida’s transportation, but they are doing exactly that with this political power play to quiet your voice and that of your elected Governor."

...

A gaggle of lawmakers, mostly Democrats, vowed to make the deal work and said they have already talked to Amtrak and regional planning groups in Florida.

The deal would work like this: the money would flow through the state to a group that would serve as a subgrantee. The proposed deal calls for the entity to assume any additional cost not covered by the federal grant and assume future risk and responsibility.

But the deal would likely need Scott’s approval and he was not budging.

“I don’t believe we should be trying to push our counties into taking an irresponsible act of taking the risk of a high speed rail project,” he said at a news conference Thursday.

Scott said he would rather the federal money go into Florida’s ports.

“We’ve got the opportunity with the expansion of the Panama Canal, the opportunity with the economies of Central and South America.”

...

LaHood, a former Republican congressman appointed by President Barack Obama, is a staunch proponent of Florida’s project but could only grant a one week reprieve. A spokeswoman for LaHood said the federal stimulus money was intended to be put to work as quickly as possible.

Already New York, California and Washington have lobbied for Florida’s share.

...

Haridopolos, who is running for U.S. Senate against Nelson, did give the green light for some of his top lawmakers to sign Dockery’s letter, including Senate Republican leader Andy Gardiner, R-Orlando, who pushed the rail legislation more than a year ago.

“We’re just saying slow this down, don’t give away this money just yet,” Gardiner said.

Gardiner referred questions about the legality of Scott’s rejection of federal money to Sen. David Simmons, whom he described as the “brains” of the Senate. Simmons helped write the letter with Dockery and Sen. Thad Altman, R-Melbourne.

“The bottom line is that he can’t reject this money: It was already approved by another Legislature and another governor,” said Simmons, R-Altamonte Springs. “It’s like trying to veto a bill after it becomes law. It’s too late.”

The number of senators who signed the letter, 26, is significant because it is a veto proof majority. The lawmakers have the power to override any attempt Scott might make to block the appropriation of rail money.


Other senators said they also didn’t like the fact that Scott decided to reverse a decision of the Legislature without giving lawmakers a heads up.

Said Sen. Greg Evers, R-Baker, “This is a sign: Talk to us first.”
Read more: http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/02/1...#ixzz1EK87sA2C
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #404  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 4:09 PM
Lakelander's Avatar
Lakelander Lakelander is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Jacksonville, FL
Posts: 3,867
Rick Scott is a clown. Of course people are pissed down here. We've been pushing for some sort of system for nearly 30 years now, only to have plans repeated sabatoged by short-sighted people when they get placed in leadership positions. While, the Florida HSR plan does leave a lot to be desired, what's the harm in putting this thing out to bid to see if the private sector is truly committed to covering the remaining costs and risk, for a chance to get ahead of the competition in the US HSR race? Unfortunately, politics continue to get in the way of common sense. This issue is much larger than a train between Tampa and Orlando. Its a chance at completely turning around how we plan for and integrate land use with transportation, which will determine this state's future development patterns. In the middle of that, there's also thousands of jobs that could be created at stake.
__________________
Metro Jacksonville
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #405  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 8:30 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grego43 View Post
The Tampa to Orlando line was to be the first in a Florida network. Orlando to Miami would have been the next line built.
If you were going to built a massively expensive, tens-of-billions Florida network, why would you start by building between two incredibly autocentric exurbs which show zero demand for transit?

It would seem to be if this were really the "grand plan" (and I have never heard of such a thing), why start with the least logical segment? Why not up the Atlantic coast?

It would be as if I would build a Northeast Corridor bullet train, but started by connecting suburban NJ to suburban Albany or something. Even worse, probably, because at least those areas have considerable transit infrastructure and ridership.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #406  
Old Posted Feb 18, 2011, 8:36 PM
Crawford Crawford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NYC/Polanco, DF
Posts: 30,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by bnk View Post
Talking points that are years old and years behind the times. Centuries behind the times really...
Right, I must be centuries behind the times if I want to build rail lines that will actually get customer use.

I think I'll take your advice and "get with the times".

We should shut down all the rail in our urban centers, and rebuild the lines along freeways in 100% autocentric suburbs. Just like this line. Much more "up-to-date", I'd say.

If anyone seriously wants HSR in the U.S., then they would support blocking funding for ridiculous corridors like suburban Orlando to suburban Tampa. They would be a disaster and the likely death of U.S. HSR.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #407  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2011, 3:16 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
I hate to say it, but I think Crawford might be right. Like everyone on this forum, I want to see HSR all over the country,
But because of the current political climate with stupidity of biblical proportions, we have to focus on the very most important corridors first.
We might need to set things in several tiers. And not just three.

Tier One: CAHSR, Chicago Hub, NEC upgrades.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #408  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2011, 9:10 AM
Jasonhouse Jasonhouse is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23,744
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post

If anyone seriously wants HSR in the U.S., then they would support blocking funding for ridiculous corridors like suburban Orlando to suburban Tampa. They would be a disaster and the likely death of U.S. HSR.
How can Tampa-Orlando possibly be worth building HSR for? 6 million residents, 82 million visitors (many of whom are used to HSR back home and do not want to have to use automobiles), one 6 lane highway that clogs twice daily and no air service. Add in the fact that the real plan includes Miami and this is just the first segment,a nd once you get into the details, it makes a lot more sense... Cuban travel will open up soon, travel to Latin America is doing nothing but growing. The state itself is of course growing, in spite of the economy and all of that... Connecting these cities with HSR thereby allows the feds to save billions not having to expand airports and widen interstates. (Just like how Acela has soaked up half of the air travel demand in the NEC, freeing up valuable gates for more lucrative longhaul flights)... Add in the fact that our proposed network was the only one at the time the decision was made that had undergone an investment grade ridership study, had the groundwork for a public-private partnership already done,plus all of the environmental permitting and preliminary engineering. Plus, we own the land, and the right of way was already designed for HSR... We had already spent many millions of our own money piecing these things together over many years and still as of yet have nothing to show for it. That's how we can get 200mph trains up and running from scratch for $35 million a mile now. Can anyone else do it for even close to that?

Remember, the money sent to Fl was this stimulus/Recovery Act money. The priority was to allocate the money where it could be used the quickest, where the economy was the worst off, and where the infrastructure would provide the biggest bang for the buck. C'mon, Florida is basically at the top of the list given the reality of the decision making process and you know it.

Last edited by Jasonhouse; Feb 20, 2011 at 12:15 AM. Reason: cleaned up a typo I just noticed
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #409  
Old Posted Feb 19, 2011, 10:14 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
What I find most interesting is the best way to kill something like this, in my state, would simply to form a few task groups and have them study it to death. In Oregon and Washington, we could spend 10+ years re-studying a line to make sure the EIS statement and the "options" have been all documented. Its like the Florida government is too efficient here, folks!

I'm amazed how politically incompetent this Scott guy is at even killing this project, as evidenced by the Florida Senate essentially trying to wrest control of the project from him. I don't know Florida politics, but this (all within the first month!) screw-up would probably be a death-knell and at least kick off a recall election, in most states at least.


I'd also like to comment that the pricetag of this project is approximately twice that of our new 7.3-mile long light rail line (with trains traveling ~50 mph). This thing is really cheap, all things considered - I say build it.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #410  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2011, 12:08 AM
Jasonhouse Jasonhouse is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23,744
Florida has no recall process... Which has now been kicked off in the FL state Legislature to get a law passed providing for such a process.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #411  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2011, 2:06 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
Tier One: CAHSR, Chicago Hub, NEC upgrades.
In theory, I agree with you.

But the political reality is that high-speed rail cannot work like this. Our government gives far too much power to sparsely-populated and small states. Some level of investment will need to flow to these areas from Day 1 if you want the overall program to last more than one or two years.

The interstate highway system is full of "wasted spending". If they had built the interstates the way you're proposing, we'd have 4 highways between Philly and New York and none between Little Rock and Memphis. But if they HAD done it that way, Congressmen from Arkansas, Tennessee, and every other state that got shafted would have killed the program immediately. It wouldn't have lasted out the 1950s.

John Mica's viewpoint is nothing new. Congress and Amtrak have agreed, since Amtrak's creation in 1971, that the Northeast Corridor was a good candidate for high-quality rail service, and to a lesser extent the cities of the Midwest (California had no interest in rail at the time). Under that viewpoint, Amtrak was basically starved of funding, forced to rely on occasional grants that allowed them to just barely hold everything together with spit and duct tape.

A real rail system, anywhere in the country, cannot exist unless everyone, including the small states, believes that rail investment is a good idea. Those small-state people won't support rail unless they get a piece of the pie too.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #412  
Old Posted Feb 20, 2011, 2:42 AM
Beta_Magellan's Avatar
Beta_Magellan Beta_Magellan is offline
Technocrat in Your Tank!
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Chicago
Posts: 648
^^^Which is why cutting Amtrak funding was rejected by the House, 250-176. No matter how pointless the cross-country line through your state is, you don’t want to be the one responsible for making it disappear.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #413  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 4:38 AM
Jasonhouse Jasonhouse is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Tampa, FL
Posts: 23,744
So who all exactly is trying to get FL's money, now that Rick Scott has proven to be a knee-jerk ideologue? And what exactly are they going to do with it? (upgrade to 110mph? do some real HSR?)

I know that NY, IL, CA and WA have specifically expressed interest in a cut of the money FL gave up. Who else?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #414  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 5:39 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,358
I'm guessing they'll do the same thing they did with Wisconsin and Ohio's allocations - give the money to previous recipients who didn't get their entire request fulfilled. If there's any money left over, it'll probably be added to the competition for 2011 funding.

That's assuming that Florida's legislature doesn't force the state to accept the money, of course (my preferred outcome).

If that doesn't happen, then I hope the money is divided between Hiawatha improvements, the California program, and the New York tunnel - the three most promising projects in the country in rail-friendly states. Scott Walker in Wisconsin claims to be open to the idea of Hiawatha improvements, which wouldn't saddle Wisconsin's government with additional operating subsidies.

Some investment in the Chicago-Indy corridor would be great.... The Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Detroit corridors have already seen plenty of money. Upgrading the Indy service to 3 daily trips and, um, bringing the travel time down from five hours would be great. Extending the Hoosier to Cincy would be great too.. curently Cincy only has Amtrak service three days/week.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #415  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 5:55 AM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jasonhouse View Post
So who all exactly is trying to get FL's money, now that Rick Scott has proven to be a knee-jerk ideologue? And what exactly are they going to do with it? (upgrade to 110mph? do some real HSR?)

I know that NY, IL, CA and WA have specifically expressed interest in a cut of the money FL gave up. Who else?
The Florida HSR situation is still in play because a number of Republicans are mad at Gov. Scot and want the federal money to spent in FL. LaHood is giving a week to work out a deal. But it can be difficult to work around a obstinate Governor who could refuse to cooperate on signing documents, and work to delay and stall the project.

if the FL HSR is killed, then it is up to the FRA and LaHood to figure out what to do with it. There are 2 pots of money that was awarded for the FL HSR project: around $1.6 billion of HSIPR stimulus and $800 million of FY2010 HSIPR which requires a 20% state match. To reallocate the funds quickly they will have to go to applications that were submitted. But there were a lot more applications for the HSIPR funds than were available.

I would expect CA HSR will get a good sized chunk of the funds as it has become the only true HSR project that has the EIS work in place. But there a lot of other projects out there that would make significant improvements in passenger rail in the next few years, not the 10+ years it will take for CA HSR to start LA to San Fran operations.

Good candidates for more funding are:
Chicago to St. Louis corridor
Chicago to Detroit corridor, specifically Kalamazoo to Detroit
Keystone East corridor in PA - PA applied for $490 million to upgrade it to 125 mph speeds and got only $26 million.
NY State Empire corridor
CT for the New Haven to Springfield MA corridor
NEC - maybe for the Portal bridge project or several smaller projects
NC and VA - could make a bold move and fund much of the Petersburg VA to Raleigh NC part of the Southeast HSR corridor which is close to finishing up the Tier II EIS.
Cascades corridor - might get more but WA state has already done well.

However, the H.R. 1 bill that was passed by the House late Friday night had in it language to rescind ALL of the FY10 HSIPR and Tiger grant funding and all of the unobligated HSIPR stimulus funds. There were a bunch of amendments passed which may have changed the rescissions. Of course, this all goes to the Senate, but rescinding the funds is not out of the question.

Last edited by afiggatt; Feb 21, 2011 at 7:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #416  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 6:32 AM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
If that doesn't happen, then I hope the money is divided between Hiawatha improvements, the California program, and the New York tunnel - the three most promising projects in the country in rail-friendly states. Scott Walker in Wisconsin claims to be open to the idea of Hiawatha improvements, which wouldn't saddle Wisconsin's government with additional operating subsidies.

Some investment in the Chicago-Indy corridor would be great.... The Milwaukee, St. Louis, and Detroit corridors have already seen plenty of money. Upgrading the Indy service to 3 daily trips and, um, bringing the travel time down from five hours would be great. Extending the Hoosier to Cincy would be great too.. curently Cincy only has Amtrak service three days/week.
Michigan only got $158 million in the FY10 grants for the Kalamazoo to Detroit part of the corridor while they applied for $308M to purchase 135 miles of NS tracks and upgrade the tracks. Another several hundred million would provide for upgrading the tracks for 110 mph speeds.

IL did get $1.2 billion for Chicago to St. Louis, but that only covers 110 mph upgrades to part of the route. Additional funding would allow for double tracking, and upgrading other parts of the route for faster speeds and greater capacity.

Indiana did not submit an application for Chicago to Indy corridor service. There was a $2.8 billion application for major track and trip time improvements for a corridor service Chicago to Cleveland, but it did not qualify for technical review because it lacked even a first stage EIS. In the Mid-West, getting the Chicago to St. Louis, Milwaukee, Detroit, and Indy corridors up to good daily frequency and 110 mph speeds would lay the foundations for the Mid-West regional rail system but Indiana would have to show real interest in starting a Chicago to Indy corridor service.

If Amtrak is able to take the Cardinal daily, then Cincinnati will have once a day service, albeit in the middle of the night.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #417  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 6:44 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by afiggatt View Post
I would expect CA HSR will get a good sized chunk of the funds as it has become the only true HSR project that has the EIS work in place. But there a lot of other projects out there that would make significant improvements in passenger rail in the next few years, not the 10+ years it will take for CA HSR to start LA to San Fran operations.

Good candidates for more funding are:
Chicago to St. Louis corridor
Chicago to Detroit corridor, specifically Kalamazoo to Detroit
Keystone East corridor in PA - PA applied for $490 million to upgrade it to 125 mph speeds and got only $26 million.
NY State Empire corridor
CT for the New Haven to Springfield MA corridor
NEC - maybe for the Portal bridge project or several smaller projects
NC and VA - could make a bold move and fund much of the Petersburg VA to Raleigh NC part of the Southeast HSR corridor which is close to finishing up the Tier II EIS.
Cascades corridor - might get more but WA state has already done well.
California should still get more funding, as Bakersfield to Fresno is going to be up and running LONG before the entire LA-SF section of the project is built.
The sooner the the Central Valley portion of the system gets built, the sooner we can prove that HSR can work in the state of California.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #418  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 9:21 AM
Kngkyle Kngkyle is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,096
Any state that doesn't agree to fund at least some of the project shouldn't get any federal dollars. It shows they don't really want it and are only taking it because its free. Give it to states that are actually willing to put some skin in the game.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #419  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 5:22 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kngkyle View Post
Any state that doesn't agree to fund at least some of the project shouldn't get any federal dollars. It shows they don't really want it and are only taking it because its free. Give it to states that are actually willing to put some skin in the game.
I completely agree. But not just for new HSR projects, why not the existing Amtrak Acela and Regional programs as well? I'm sorry, but 470 miles between Boston and D.C. doesn't quite meet the 700 mile length to qualify as long distance trains.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #420  
Old Posted Feb 21, 2011, 8:27 PM
mhays mhays is offline
Never Dell
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Posts: 19,759
The Portland-Seattle-Vancouver corridor had billions of requested upgrades, and got about $700m, mostly for incremental upgrades in the Seattle-Portland segment.

One particular need: The Seattle-Vancouver segment has a several-times-yearly landslide problem every rainy season (Nov-Apr mainly). Much of it is along a shoreline with hill on one side and no ability to add landfill on the other side. This affects the Everett-Seattle commuter line, Amtrak, and freight...because, absurdly, we only have ONE twin northbound set of tracks through town. We need retaining walls at key locations. The key is certainty.

And Seattle-Vancouver service is only two per day, not counting the West Coast through line which is once per day. The earlier stimulus is moving Seattle-Portland regionals from four per day to six per day. Bumping S-V to three or four per day would make that service far more viable, including times of day that work for more people, and economies of scale for the Customs offices at the border.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:22 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.