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.
For this to happen it will be largely funded on Federal dollars. This leads me to believe it will not happen for a long time. Not only because of the bureaucracy, but also because a line between San Fran and LA would be a much higher priority.
Who cares? Some of the old Roman roads are still in use today. What we build today will likely be relevant for 2000 years.
But not your leftist choo-choo. Nobody wants to be crammed like sardines into a government train with a bunch of smelly, stinky poor people. Period, end of discussion.
not true. People love public transportation, when its good and cost effective. If it can get you from A-B faster than a car and cheaper, people will use it---but it must be both or at least more convenient.
I take the train from Chicago to Columbus. Now I am in Columbus, and I have no car. How do I get from the train station to anywhere else in Columbus? I don't have a car. So I have to rely on the buses.
Anybody who's tried to use the bus system in Columbus knows the problem here. The bus system is slow, unreliable, and impossible to navigate unless I already know where each route goes and what other routes it connects to. A stranger getting off a train will find the bus system about as useful as a horse and buggy.
Inter-city public transport in useless without effective intra-city public transport. I would never take a train to Columbus or Cincinnati, because once I'm there I can't get anywhere within the city. And I LOVE inter-city rail. I used it all the time when I lived in Asia. I used it all the time when I visited Europe. But it was only useful because once in my destination city, I could rely on the local bus system to get me around. I would be terrified of taking a train to Columbus.
I think they are putting the cart before the horse.
Edit: typo
Last edited by GenericUsername73; 12-14-2015 at 12:51 PM..
I take the train from Chicago to Columbus. Now I am in Columbus, and I have no car. How do I get from the train station to anywhere else in Columbus? I don't have a car. So I have to rely on the buses.
Anybody who's tried to use the bus system in Columbus knows the problem here. The bus system is slow, unreliable, and impossible to navigate unless I already know where each route goes and what other routes it connects to. A stranger getting off a train will find the bus system about as useful as a horse and buggy.
Inter-city public transport in useless without effective intra-city public transport. I would never take a train to Columbus or Cincinnati, because once I'm there I can't get anywhere within the city. And I LOVE inter-city rail. I used it all the time when I lived in Asia. I used it all the time when I visited Europe. But it was only useful because once in my destination city, I could rely on the local bus system to get me around. I would be terrified of taking a train to Columbus.
I think they are putting the cart before the horse.
Edit: typo
There are taxi services in Columbus, as well as Uber if you don't want to use a bus (the bus system is getting a major overhaul, btw). The proposed line would connect to a multi-modal station to be located at the airport, where you could at least catch taxis or the bus, and possibly bike share. This really isn't rocket science.
I still think it is mighty strange how someone with your username and 5 whole posts only seems to specifically post about transit in Columbus. Seems kind of set-upish to me.
[/quote/]I still think it is mighty strange how someone with your username and 5 whole posts only seems to specifically post about transit in Columbus. Seems kind of set-upish to me.[/quote]
Oh, come off it. I post about the things I care about. Let's have a conversation. This doesn't even make sense. Who would be organizing the set-up? To what end? To benefit what interests? To advance whose agenda? It doesn't even make sense in terms of allocations of resources. What secret cabal would spend money to post on a forum for urban planning nerds?
Come on, be serious.
Yes, you are correct, you could take taxis or Ubers from the train station. But think about how expensive that would become in such a short period of time. And catching the bus isn't the problem. The problem is the fact that a person unfamiliar with the system cannot use it, because the bus stops themselves do not contain any useful information (schedules, timetables, route maps, etc.). And the buses don't keep to the schedules anyway.
The way I see it, don't expand a broken system. If your city can't handle its public transit system as it is, making it larger and more complex does not benefit your citizens. I would love to see high speed rail in the Midwest.
Last edited by GenericUsername73; 12-14-2015 at 02:08 PM..
Reason: Add a paragraph
Oh, come off it. I post about the things I care about. Let's have a conversation. This doesn't even make sense. Who would be organizing the set-up? To what end? To benefit what interests? To advance whose agenda? It doesn't even make sense in terms of allocations of resources. What secret cabal would spend money to post on a forum for urban planning nerds?
Come on, be serious.
Yes, you are correct, you could take taxis or Ubers from the train station. But think about how expensive that would become in such a short period of time. And catching the bus isn't the problem. The problem is the fact that a person unfamiliar with the system cannot use it, because the bus stops themselves do not contain any useful information (schedules, timetables, route maps, etc.). And the buses don't keep to the schedules anyway.
The way I see it, don't expand a broken system. If your city can't handle its public transit system as it is, making it larger and more complex does not benefit your citizens. I would love to see high speed rail in the Midwest.
Just seems like the modus operandi of a few specific people who never have anything positive to say, as you, and who focus on things like transit, as you have done. They are not financed and seem to have no other agenda than to be negative about a city they don't like, so it's not exactly unprecedented. People are strange.
People use taxis in all major cities, and I don't think they'd be more expensive in Columbus than elsewhere.
The bus system isn't so much being expanded than going with a different system altogether in terms of routes and stations. I'm not going to argue that COTA is fantastic, but some of the issues are being resolved and I believe it is better now than it used to be and will continue to get better with time as more changes are implemented.
As for this particular HSR line, the city of Columbus will not be running it. It will put money towards its construction, but so will all the cities along the proposed route, and the line itself will likely be privately run. The multi-modal stop in Columbus will be part of the new airport terminal, with initial construction projects for that getting started next year, but it will take several years to complete it all. In any case, I haven't heard much about this rail project for a few months. I know it was in, or trying to complete, an environmental impact study necessary to apply for federal funds, but I'm not sure where that is right now.
Frankly, it's ridiculous to use federal or state transportation funds on high-speed rail between Columbus and Chicago.
1) It would make more sense for a high-speed rail line from Buffalo/Cleveland through Toledo, with a spur to Detroit, and then terminating in Chicago, given the massive populations along Lake Erie and existing rights-of-way.
2) With tolls escalating annually on the Indiana Toll Road and Ohio Turnpike due to Republican financing fiascoes (long-term lease of the Indiana Toll Road and leveraging the Ohio Turnpike), with funds used to finance transportation projects directly or indirectly through the entire state, the northern Ohio and Indiana economies are being impaired and their once hefty manufacturing presence being destroyed. This isn't good for either Ohio or Indiana because the Great Lakes region offers plentiful water and other advantages that are being marginalized by the most costly for users long stretch of interstate highway in the U.S.
Making the case worse, the funds raised by the Republicans were expended immediately. Escalating tolls will take place on the I-76/I-80/I-90 corridor through Ohio and Indiana for decades (or almost a century in the case of the Indiana Toll Road), all to finance constructions projects that will be archaic by the time the financing mechanisms have run their course.
My point is that a transportation priority for federal and state funds in both Indiana and Ohio should be to unwind the disaster posed by the "Republican Toll Road."
Diminishing the economies of the northern parts of both states is a disaster for both Indiana and Ohio. At some point, the issue will be addressed out of necessity. The longer this ridiculousness is allowed to stand, the more expensive it will be to resolve.
E.g., interest rates are very low right now. Five years from now, they will be much higher. So it would be much less costly for Indiana to repurchase the Indiana Toll Road now, and for Ohio to assume the bonds issued by the Ohio Turnpike Authority, than will be the case in future decades.
I doubt that a high-speed rail system between Chicago and Columbus is possible without massive public financing.
The Republicans, as evidenced by Kasich, oppose any new taxes to pay for public transportation, even when a gasoline tax hike is an obvious and needed solution. They instead chose to impose hefty, hidden taxes on vulnerable regions of both Ohio and Indiana. With massive and deferred highway infrastructure needs, the Republicans will not support any public financing for a high-speed rail system anywhere.
So, unless the Democrats are in complete control again federally and state-wide, this discussion only is wishful thinking.
Frankly, it's ridiculous to use federal or state transportation funds on high-speed rail between Columbus and Chicago.
1) It would make more sense for a high-speed rail line from Buffalo/Cleveland through Toledo, with a spur to Detroit, and then terminating in Chicago, given the massive populations along Lake Erie and existing rights-of-way.
2) With tolls escalating annually on the Indiana Toll Road and Ohio Turnpike due to Republican financing fiascoes (long-term lease of the Indiana Toll Road and leveraging the Ohio Turnpike), with funds used to finance transportation projects directly or indirectly through the entire state, the northern Ohio and Indiana economies are being impaired and their once hefty manufacturing presence being destroyed. This isn't good for either Ohio or Indiana because the Great Lakes region offers plentiful water and other advantages that are being marginalized by the most costly for users long stretch of interstate highway in the U.S.
Making the case worse, the funds raised by the Republicans were expended immediately. Escalating tolls will take place on the I-76/I-80/I-90 corridor through Ohio and Indiana for decades (or almost a century in the case of the Indiana Toll Road), all to finance constructions projects that will be archaic by the time the financing mechanisms have run their course.
My point is that a transportation priority for federal and state funds in both Indiana and Ohio should be to unwind the disaster posed by the "Republican Toll Road."
Diminishing the economies of the northern parts of both states is a disaster for both Indiana and Ohio. At some point, the issue will be addressed out of necessity. The longer this ridiculousness is allowed to stand, the more expensive it will be to resolve.
E.g., interest rates are very low right now. Five years from now, they will be much higher. So it would be much less costly for Indiana to repurchase the Indiana Toll Road now, and for Ohio to assume the bonds issued by the Ohio Turnpike Authority, than will be the case in future decades.
I doubt that a high-speed rail system between Chicago and Columbus is possible without massive public financing.
The Republicans, as evidenced by Kasich, oppose any new taxes to pay for public transportation, even when a gasoline tax hike is an obvious and needed solution. They instead chose to impose hefty, hidden taxes on vulnerable regions of both Ohio and Indiana. With massive and deferred highway infrastructure needs, the Republicans will not support any public financing for a high-speed rail system anywhere.
So, unless the Democrats are in complete control again federally and state-wide, this discussion only is wishful thinking.
Cleveland already has rail service, but in any case, a Chicago-Columbus line wouldn't mean one through Cleveland couldn't happen. There is probably a group out there already studying this. The existing rights of way couldn't take HSR, as they are used for freight. A brand new line would probably have to be built. And Columbus is one of the nation's fastest growing major cities. Let's not act like no one is there.
The toll issues, whatever they may be, have nothing to do with this rail line given that it is unlikely that Ohio Republicans would support giving the project any state funds.
The proposal funding plan was through a combination of federal and local funds from cities the route would travel through, not state money.
Cleveland already has rail service, but in any case, a Chicago-Columbus line wouldn't mean one through Cleveland couldn't happen. There is probably a group out there already studying this. The existing rights of way couldn't take HSR, as they are used for freight. A brand new line would probably have to be built. And Columbus is one of the nation's fastest growing major cities. Let's not act like no one is there.
The toll issues, whatever they may be, have nothing to do with this rail line given that it is unlikely that Ohio Republicans would support giving the project any state funds.
The proposal funding plan was through a combination of federal and local funds from cities the route would travel through, not state money.
I personally don't care if localities and private persons spend money on high-speed rail.
For the reasons stated, I don't want my federal Senators and Representative spending federal money on such a project when a vital transportation artery such as the "Republican Toll Road" through northern Ohio and Indiana is zapping the northern Ohio economy by creating the most expensive interstate highway in the nation.
I personally don't care if localities and private persons spend money on high-speed rail.
For the reasons stated, I don't want my federal Senators and Representative spending federal money on such a project when a vital transportation artery such as the "Republican Toll Road" through northern Ohio and Indiana is zapping the northern Ohio economy by creating the most expensive interstate highway in the nation.
If we were being completely honest, pretty much all highways should be tolled like that, as they are very expensive to maintain. I don't want public dollars spent on the construction of more roads that don't get paid for, but they are by far the dominant expenditure in transportation funding. At least this line has the opportunity to be somewhat profitable.
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.
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.
