Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 01-14-2011, 08:56 PM
 
8,317 posts, read 29,357,988 times
Reputation: 9305

Advertisements

There is a great article in the February 2011 issue of "Trains" magazine, written by Don Phillips, probably one of the top three most knowledgeable transportation journalists in the United States. The article talks about the winners and losers in the rail industry after the 2010 elections and what it means for transportation policy. Prospects for any new passenger rail service--outside of the states of California, Illinois, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia, states with strong state support for passenger rail--look very bleak for the foreseeable future. High-speed rail development is in even greater trouble.

Quoting Phillips here:

Quote:
Florida and California are the only states that might actually build a high-speed rail line--some day. For now, the debt ridden states must determine how to pay for it.
Phillips adds this, including this quote:

Quote:
"Most of the states with great potential for passenger rail are also the ones with the most serious budget problems," says Jim McClellan, longtime railroad official and consultant. "Enthusiasm for passenger rail is irrelevant if your credit card is maxed out."
As I've said umpteen times before, high-speed rail is an unaffordable white-elephant pork barrel project that will not solve our transportation problems. Rebuilding our conventional passenger rail system can solve many of our transportation issues, but it won't be rebuilt until public transportation policy in this country moves away from highways--which I believe will take a transportation crisis severe enough to gridlock the country into a "build passenger rail or die" mentality. I figure we'll probably get that crisis within a decade or so--after we've drizzled away more trillions of dollars in public and private capital that would be needed to rebuild our passenger rail system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-14-2011, 09:55 PM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,259 posts, read 24,350,175 times
Reputation: 4395
Colorado is the exception to what he has said. As stated by the study I posted there is a need for a HSR on the front range between Denver and Pueblo and unlike the other states we are not having the kind of deficit issue they are. Now will construction start in the next 5 years, unfortunately no. Will it happen in the next 10, maybe. Will it happen this century, defiantly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 12:07 AM
 
8,317 posts, read 29,357,988 times
Reputation: 9305
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
Colorado is the exception to what he has said. As stated by the study I posted there is a need for a HSR on the front range between Denver and Pueblo and unlike the other states we are not having the kind of deficit issue they are. Now will construction start in the next 5 years, unfortunately no. Will it happen in the next 10, maybe. Will it happen this century, defiantly.
What planet are you living on? Colorado has huge fiscal problems, ranking not far behind states like California on a per capita basis. Get real.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 12:55 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,259 posts, read 24,350,175 times
Reputation: 4395
Here's the link to the section of the actual report about the front range:

http://www.america2050.org/pdf/HSR-i...ront-Range.pdf

This report shows why they selected the front range. In fact Denver-Pueblo (17.13) beats out Dallas-Houston (16.2) and every line in Florida.

I think one reason it works so well here is that Denver is the only large metro area in the corridor. Take Dallas and Houston as a example. What does one city have that the other does not really have? If I lived in Dallas why would I want to go to Houston as more then likely I could find everything in downtown Dallas. Denver, Colorado Springs and Pueblo are completely different cities with their own unique culture that would make people from Denver want to visit Pueblo or Colorado Springs for a night and have people from Pueblo and Colorado Springs want to visit Denver for a night giving us a better rating in the study.

Last edited by Josseppie; 01-15-2011 at 01:03 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 01:43 AM
 
Location: Colorado Springs, CO
2,221 posts, read 5,245,953 times
Reputation: 1703
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josseppie View Post
Here's the link to the section of the actual report about the front range:

http://www.america2050.org/pdf/HSR-i...ront-Range.pdf

This report shows why they selected the front range. In fact Denver-Pueblo (17.13) beats out Dallas-Houston (16.2) and every line in Florida.

I think one reason it works so well here is that Denver is the only large metro area in the corridor. Take Dallas and Houston as a example. What does one city have that the other does not really have? If I lived in Dallas why would I want to go to Houston as more then likely I could find everything in downtown Dallas. Denver, Colorado Springs and Pueblo are completely different cities with their own unique culture that would make people from Denver want to visit Pueblo or Colorado Springs for a night and have people from Pueblo and Colorado Springs want to visit Denver for a night giving us a better rating in the study.
All a moot point when it is not economically feasible. It would be convenient for some, but it would not pay for itself. Last thing we need is another resource-sucking transportation system serving the few and paid for by the many.

This is especially true when the time and cost considerations are taken into account...the cost differential between HSR and a regular pax rail system is not justified by the time savings per passenger.

Denver people jumping on a train to go do the Pueblo night life? Now that's some funny s***! Delusional...but funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 03:17 AM
 
Location: Littleton, CO
3,158 posts, read 6,085,821 times
Reputation: 5619
Colorado is included on the list, but I don't think that we rank very high.

Every other route on the list mentioned links two or more major metro areas. The Colorado route links Denver with two medium-sized cities. Right now Colorado does not have the density to support HSR between the cities. Such a line would require huge subsidies to run, and, at the present time, would not offer a significant cost savings or time savings for travel between the cities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 03:29 AM
 
Location: On the Rails in Northern NJ
12,380 posts, read 26,746,347 times
Reputation: 4580
Make your Cities Core Dense and Walkable then you can talk about HSR. But even before that build a system to connect up with the station in medium cities like Colorado Springs and Aurora could build Streetcar or Light Rail systems....Cities like Lakewood , Fort Collins , Boulder , And Cheyenne could build a Streetcar or Bus Rapid Transit line / system..... The Trend across the nation is making the core of the city more dense...while keeping the rest of the city suburban like at least outside the Dense Northeast. I can't say if HSR would work now , because ive never been to Colorado... I think your region is more suited for a Intercity Electrified Railway.....which has a top speed of 140mph with Averages of 120mph.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 06:36 AM
 
Location: Sun City West, Arizona
50,122 posts, read 23,785,288 times
Reputation: 32519
Jazzlover said, "As I've said umpteen times before, high-speed rail is an unaffordable white-elephant pork barrel project that will not solve our transportation problems. Rebuilding our conventional passenger rail system can solve many of our transportation issues, but it won't be rebuilt until public transportation policy in this country moves away from highways--which I believe will take a transportation crisis severe enough to gridlock the country into a "build passenger rail or die" mentality. I figure we'll probably get that crisis within a decade or so--after we've drizzled away more trillions of dollars in public and private capital that would be needed to rebuild our passenger rail system."

My problem with your comments is not that you think HSR is a good or bad idea. It's that you think your view of the solution -- an opinion -- is pure fact. Your preference is "Rebuilding our conventional passenger rail system can solve many of our transportation issues", while many others have an opposite opinion that it does not make much sense to rebuild a system that began failing in the 50s with technology that dates back to the late 1800s. I can see some wisdom on both sides of the argument. It might be a better discussion if people on the various sides of the issues could tone down the hyperbolic rhetoric (e.g., " high-speed rail is an unaffordable white-elephant pork barrel project"). And by the way, do you have some evidence that Colorado's fiscal problems are somewhat comparable to California's? Virtually all states have fiscal challenges right now, but I doubt that Colorado's are as dire as California's...but, convince me.

Joseppie, I think you're off-base to think that a valid reason to build a new rail system between Denver and Pueblo is that the "different cultures" of Denver and Pueblo will be attractive to the citizens of each city and will facilitate a great deal of travel between the two places. Admittedly, I'm new to Colorado Springs, but a majority of the people I know here go to Denver fairly often (at least monthly)...some related to their jobs (although why anyone would want that kind of commute, I don't know), others to shop or go to events. I know only one person here in Colorado Springs who goes to Pueblo more than on very rare occasions, and that is because she has family there. If you want me to accept that there is sufficient regular traffic between Denver and Pueblo to make valid a proposal to spend billions of dollars to build HSR between the two cities...well, you haven't done so yet...your argument is basically that you would personally like it.

And, Bobfromdownsouth...as usual, you have some valid points. But I think where you're wrong is that everything has to pay for itself. There are many things in our society that do not pay themselves, but that we have other justifications for. For example, the American military system as a whole, or almost every component of the American military system does not pay for itself, but we can justify its existence in other ways. The Smithsonian institution does not pay for itself, but we justify it because it is key in preserving our nation's history and culture.

And Nexis, your preference seems to be along the lines of limited streetcars and light rail systems. Okay, that's a fine preference.

So, what's my point? You each have your own preferences, while I don't have a position yet. And, if I'm a voter that will help decide what the best solution is, none of you has won me over. I see a certain degree of intransegence in your various positions. I'd hate to sit in a room with you all and discuss this, because I don't see any openmindedness...what I see are entrenched opinions. And where does that leave us? Stuck. So my question is, if each of you was -- well, let's say governor -- how would you lead the citizenry to a common decision point...because that's what some governor is going to have to do before anything is going to happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 11:14 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,259 posts, read 24,350,175 times
Reputation: 4395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob from down south View Post
All a moot point when it is not economically feasible. It would be convenient for some, but it would not pay for itself. Last thing we need is another resource-sucking transportation system serving the few and paid for by the many.

This is especially true when the time and cost considerations are taken into account...the cost differential between HSR and a regular pax rail system is not justified by the time savings per passenger.

Denver people jumping on a train to go do the Pueblo night life? Now that's some funny s***! Delusional...but funny.
This study says that it is economically feasible.

As far as people coming to Colorado Springs and Pueblo from Denver. That happens all the time. Pueblo has some events like the state fair, Wild Wild West Fest, Chili festival, sporting events etc., that draw thousands of people from Denver. Colorado Springs does as well. Then I am always told that Pueblo has the best Mexican food in the state and people love to drive to Pueblo to eat at some of our restaurants. Colorado Springs has some of the best fine dining in the state including the Penrose Room at the Broadmore. If we were connected by a HSR it would make it that much easier for people up north to come down for a day or night to "get out of the big city". Sure you will have more people from down here wanting to go to Denver but keep in the numbers we are talking about. If on a Saturday a few thousand people from Denver want to come to Pueblo or Colorado Springs for a day that would more then likely be enough to have the trains at or near capacity. The Denver CSA is 3 million people so a few thousand is a small number and defiantly attainable. Since more people want to go to Denver from Colorado Springs and Pueblo the percentage of the total population would be more, however, the actual numbers might be about the same. The end result would be a profitable line. I admit this is purely guess work on my part but the study that was done is not guess work and that proved that it makes sense to have a HSR in Colorado.

I think it will be built this century, it has to. The only question is when and personally I would like it sooner rather then later.

Last edited by Josseppie; 01-15-2011 at 11:29 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-15-2011, 11:19 AM
 
Location: Pueblo - Colorado's Second City
12,259 posts, read 24,350,175 times
Reputation: 4395
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi View Post

Joseppie, I think you're off-base to think that a valid reason to build a new rail system between Denver and Pueblo is that the "different cultures" of Denver and Pueblo will be attractive to the citizens of each city and will facilitate a great deal of travel between the two places. Admittedly, I'm new to Colorado Springs, but a majority of the people I know here go to Denver fairly often (at least monthly)...some related to their jobs (although why anyone would want that kind of commute, I don't know), others to shop or go to events. I know only one person here in Colorado Springs who goes to Pueblo more than on very rare occasions, and that is because she has family there. If you want me to accept that there is sufficient regular traffic between Denver and Pueblo to make valid a proposal to spend billions of dollars to build HSR between the two cities...well, you haven't done so yet...your argument is basically that you would personally like it.
That was just an example. Commuting is yet another example. The HSR would be used for many reasons by thousands of people and I am sure that is why the study said it was a good idea in Colorado.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Colorado
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top