Cincinnati-Indianapolis-Chicago high speed rail (Dayton, Toronto: discount, estimate, station)

[WILWRadio]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

No … HSR has been left out of the discussion because, like the majority of threads in the Cincinnati forum, this has turned into an urban-suburban "debate".

The fact that AMTRAK is discontinuing its line to Chicago from Indianapolis is a pretty good indication that high speed rail will not work either at this time. At least not in the Cincy to Chicago corridor. Again, what people fail to grasp is the lack of population density required for this service to work. Light rail in Cincy might work since it has some areas with a high population density. Indy? Nope. Too spread out. High Speed Rail will work in the Northeast and California simply because the population densities are there to sustain the service.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by animatedmartian

This is pretty much backwards thinking. Any small town in America that doesn't have a large college, a large single employer (small businesses are incredibly vulnerable to the economy), strong local tourism, or is even within proximity to a larger metro area is pretty much struggling.

Bigger cities have a wider labor force that employers can choose from which is beneficial to smaller companies looking to grow and allows bigger companies to maintain stable labor costs. Big cities are also better at adapting to changes in the economy, though not always perfectly. A smaller town can't do any of these things.

The quality of life in many small towns is worse now than it has been in probably 70 years. If a town doesn't have any of the mentioned qualities in my first paragraph (which by the way, usually adds growth to that town), then literally the only way to live in a small town is if you're a farmer.

Everyone wants to live in a small town, but they also aren't willing to give up the amenities and opportunities that they enjoy in a bigger city and probably don't even know what it's like until they're gone.

Just about everything you said is wrong.

Let's look at some of the best, highest rated cities (Top 10 Best Cities for Families 2014 | Parenting) in America, OK?

Madison Wi has not gown in 10 years.

Virginia Breach has grown 10% since 1990.

Raleigh has not grown since 2005.

Worcester MA his the same population as 50 years ago.

Richmond Va shrunk 10% over the past 50 years.

Allentown PA is the same size it was in 1970.

Dallas Tx - Shrunk 10% in past 9 years.

Except for Dallas which has exactly zero public transportation, all of these small cities are top rated, not growing, and are about the same size as Cincinnati.

[Kevin1813]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

The fact that AMTRAK is discontinuing its line to Chicago from Indianapolis is a pretty good indication that high speed rail will not work either at this time. At least not in the Cincy to Chicago corridor. Again, what people fail to grasp is the lack of population density required for this service to work. Light rail in Cincy might work since it has some areas with a high population density. Indy? Nope. Too spread out. High Speed Rail will work in the Northeast and California simply because the population densities are there to sustain the service.

Amtrack was mandated by Congress to take all routes that were below a certain milage and turn them over to the states. Amtrack will still run the Cardinal (the line that stops in Cincinnati) through Indianapolis 2 or 3 days a week to Chicago. The line you are mentioning was put into place to ensure daily trips were availiable from Indy to Chicago. It's now up to the State of Indiana to fund that line (as it should be honestly since it really only serves the state of Indiana), which they are debating whether or not to do.

I agree wholeheartedly that a high speed rail system wouldn't be warranted for Cinci/Indy to Chicago but the idea of having a line which runs at 90-110 mph should be one that is discussed.

[Kevin1813]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

http://ballotpedia.org/Cincinnati_Ci...(November_2011)

http://ballotpedia.org/Cincinnati_St..._Issue_9_(2009)

I just hope they can get that average ridership needed to break even. Something like 3,000 riders daily (annual average) will be needed if it is going to break even. Since it won't be able to run during certain weather events it will be necessary to have higher numbers of riders during the better weather days.

What weather event would render it unusable? Earthquake? Tornado?

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by WILWRadio

The fact that AMTRAK is discontinuing its line to Chicago from Indianapolis is a pretty good indication that high speed rail will not work either at this time. At least not in the Cincy to Chicago corridor. Again, what people fail to grasp is the lack of population density required for this service to work. Light rail in Cincy might work since it has some areas with a high population density. Indy? Nope. Too spread out. High Speed Rail will work in the Northeast and California simply because the population densities are there to sustain the service.

That Amtrak service is not HSR, so it's not really fair or honest to use that as a reason why HSR wouldn't work. It also doesn't address any other potential issues, like fares, promotion, track-sharing, etc. What about air travel between Cincinnati and Chicago? Is density required for that?

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by rrtechno

No … HSR has been left out of the discussion because, like the majority of threads in the Cincinnati forum, this has turned into an urban-suburban "debate".

It's not an urban-suburban problem, but a generational one, as said before. Rail would economically benefit any suburbs it went through.

[jbcmh81]

[quote]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Just about everything you said is wrong.

Let's look at some of the best, highest rated cities (Top 10 Best Cities for Families 2014 | Parenting) in
America, OK?

Madison Wi has not gown in 10 years.

Wrong.
2000 Population: 208,903
2010 Population: 233,209
2013 Population: 243,344
Change: +34,441
% Change: +16.49%

Virginia Breach has grown 10% since 1990.

Wrong.
1990 Population: 393,069
2013 Population: 448,479
% Change: +14.1%

Raleigh has not grown since 2005.

So wrong.
2000 Population: 276,093
2010 Population: 403,892
2013 Population: 431,746
Change: +155,653
% Change: +56.4%

Worcester MA his the same population as 50 years ago.

Technically true, although it has been growing since the 1980s, at about 3.8% per decade, which is still much faster than Cincinnati. It should pass its 1960 population in the next few years.

Richmond Va shrunk 10% over the past 50 years.

Wrong.
It shrank by about 2.7% between 1960 and 2013, but has been growing since the late 1990s, at about 4% a decade. It should pass its 1960 population in a few years.

Allentown PA is the same size it was in 1970.

Wrong.
1970 Population: 109,871
2013 Population: 118,577
% Change: +7.9%

Dallas Tx - Shrunk 10% in past 9 years.

Wrong.
2000 Population: 1,188,580
2010 Population: 1,197,816
2013 Population: 1,257,676
Change: +69,096
% Change: +5.8%

Except for Dallas which has exactly zero public transportation, all of these
small cities are top rated, not growing, and are about the same size as
Cincinnati.

Wrong. Using those real census numbers, every single city on the list is currently growing faster to significantly faster than Cincinnati. The 3 cities you didn't mention are also all growing pretty quickly.

[Wilson513]

Your population numbers are estimates. And are wrong, as usual for you. I used actual numbers. Nice try.

[jbcmh81]

Originally Posted by Wilson513

Your population numbers are estimates. And are wrong, as usual for you. I used actual numbers. Nice try.

They're official from the census. The 2010 numbers are not estimates and would equally prove you wrong. You should really do your research before making claims.

[Wilson513]

Originally Posted by jbcmh81

They're official from the census. The 2010 numbers are not estimates and would equally prove you wrong. You should really do your research before making claims.

Wrong again. your 2013 are estimates.