The 3-C Corridor passenger rail project tying together Cincinnati, Dayton, Columbus and Cleveland will have zero risk to Ohio taxpayers, says All Aboard Ohio interim executive director Ken Prendergast.
Prendergast projects that, based upon an analysis of the experiences of 14 other states that fund Amtrak, a federal investment of $250 million would have several benefits along the 260-mile corridor:
- Immediate improvement in freight rail services due to track improvements and additional passing sidings
- The installation of Positive Train Control, which overrides human error along the entire route and is mandated to be installed by 2015 by the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008
- Safer grade crossings
- Train stations serving as multi-modal transportation centers in the heart of business districts
- The attraction of private investment around the service, including new construction and renovation of buildings containing a mix of uses
- Savings to travelers in excess of operating subsidies
An analysis of ridership projections and operating costs by the and Amtrak has yet to be completed, but Prendergast says that, because of these wide-ranging benefits, Ohio needs to act now to tap federal economic stimulus funds.
"We are aware of the concern expressed by some state legislators about making a decision without this latest passenger rail study being done," he says. "But I am confident that the benefits beyond the passenger rail service will make this investment worthwhile."
Cincinnati City Council passed a resolution of support for the 3-C Corridor project earlier this month.
Previous reading on BC:
Cincinnati supports 3-C passenger rail (3/10/09)
Cincinnati EDC to consider resolution of support for Ohio passenger rail service (2/23/09)
All Aboard Ohio: Stimulus bill may ignore Ohio's train and transit needs (1/21/09)
2 comments:
Among the positives that you mention are the multi-use train stations; for instance a Sharonville station could become a satellite station for SORTA and possible light rail integration when we get there.
It will be interesting to see how the ridership study gets its numbers. Being raised in Cincy it literally took Portland Oregon's "Go by Train" sign to clue me in that, "hey, I should check out how much the train cost". To my surprise it was the same as the greyhound price, $17 Portland to Eugene (111 miles), and you can take your bike on without disassembly. When I found a table for myself, walking room, the ability to go get a drink and meet people in the club car, and all on a smooth ride, I was sold. But before that moment I had taken the Greyhound on several trips because I mistakenly perceived Amtrak as being to expensive and really did not incorporate train service into my psyche. Due to an uneducated train community where will we get the ridership numbers? Can you ask a person who has never been on a train or lived where they had the opportunity to use a train as viable transportation if they would take a train or not? Sure you can ask, but do you get feasible results?
Great job by everyone involved so far.
Thanks!
I am anything but an expert on transportation issues and policy, but the "has only upsides" quote strikes me as terribly misleading. It may have only upside for the travelers -- saving $1.30 for every dollar of state subsidy does sound like a good deal -- but this ignores the facts that most citizens aren't travelers, and that huge federal subsidies are unaccounted for. Most people will subsidize this with their tax dollars and receive no measurable benefit at all. I don't see how that is "only upside."
Post a Comment