Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Rail system expected to connect Ohio

marino.64@osu.edu

Published: Sunday, October 4, 2009

Updated: Tuesday, October 6, 2009 08:10

Highway traffic and airport security can be frustrating, and judging from online polls, Ohioans want another option.

In 2011, The Ohio Department of Transportation expects to open Ohio's 3C "Quick Start" Passenger Rail, referring to Ohio's three central cities: Cleveland, Columbus and Cincinnati. And because of the layout of the rail layout, Dayton will also be included on the list of city connections.
The revival will bring Amtrak back to Ohio, three decades after the company stopped service in Columbus and Dayton.

"It is not our goal to choose one [form of transportation] or the other, just to offer ‘true transportation' choices, which haven't been offered for 30 years," said Scott Varner, deputy director for ODOT.

According to an Amtrak report, "the goal of the proposed service is to provide an affordable, convenient, energy-efficient and environmentally-friendly transportation alternative to highway and airline modes. The proposed 3-C corridor route can be easily accessed by more than 60 percent of the state's population."
As the second largest city in the country without a passenger rail system, it's time Columbus was connected, Varner said.
The passenger rail is expected to serve an estimated 478,000 riders, who will primarily consist of college students and businesspeople, according to a Sept. 22 news release.

Students from Ohio State will be able to board the train at the Greater Columbus Convention Center and travel to cities such as Chicago and New York City.

OSU President E. Gordon Gee said in a letter of support that "Linking Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton and Cincinnati by passenger rail will provide tremendous benefits for our citizens, will directly enhance the proposed national hub in Chicago and will contribute to the realization of the Vision for High Speed Rail in America."

 

Ellen Manovich, a fourth-year in history and English, supports the rail system.

"It will be quicker, and I will be able to enjoy the experience of riding a train," Manovich said, who typically takes the Greyhound Bus home to Dayton.

The impact the rail will have on alternate transportation modes is difficult to determine, Varner said, but it is expected to give a boost to the freight industry.

"What makes the rail unique and quick to build is that ODOT plans to use existing freight rails," he said. "We're making all lines safer and more efficient, and the productivity of freight companies is expected to improve $6 billion."

A financial plan was submitted Oct. 2 and requested that $564 million of President Barack Obama's stimulus fund go toward building the rail.
"This [fund] will be the dollars we need to build new tracks, new stations, and trains," Varner said.

ODOT is waiting to hear if the requested funds will be approved.

Further information and train schedules can be found at dot.state.oh.us.

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

19 comments

Louise
Wed Oct 7 2009 01:00
Wake Up America - most of the world is ready for the demise of the automobile - but not Americans with the Largest Carbon Foot print on the PLANET! We are so 'special' we don't need to plan for the future... maybe we don't really have a future to plan for...
We need trains to move people and products and this is a step to get us there - who knows maybe they will add the option to transport your Hummer on the train too.
Nathan
Tue Oct 6 2009 23:20
This graphic is about the worst I've seen. First, it completely misrepresents the layout of the proposed rail system (e.g. as awesome as Dayton is, it doesn't get it's own freakin' express train). An accurate map of the 3C corridor is like three clicks in to the site you reference in the graphic!!! SO LAZY.

Also... WTF is up with the times? It either takes 3 hours to get to Cleveland both by rail AND by air - or it takes 3 minutes for both! This is madness. LABEL YOUR TIME UNITS.

In summary: THIS GRAPHIC IS BAD AND YOU SHOULD FEEL BAD.

Mark
Tue Oct 6 2009 18:08
I'm a railfan (meaning I go out of my way to watch trains), so there aren't many people who love trains more than me.

Being a railfan, I want to see train related things succeed - and this scheme won't.

Studies have shown that trains are more efficient when operated at capacity than other passenger alternatives - as long as you ignore the cost of laying and maintaining the tracks.

High speed trains require even more expensive track with more frequent maintenance and sometimes less environmentally friendly materials (such as concrete as opposed to wood ties that actually absorb CO2 when grown).

Of course, considering the train will be more expensive than flying or driving and take longer than both - it's also not likely that the trains will run at capacity.

Adults realize that efficiency can be measured in economic terms - and the economic facts cannot be hidden with subsidies. The September report referenced in the article cited a $2 million yearly operational deficit - and that's after the millions in capital improvements required to make the lines suitable.

The article mentions that Dayton will be included on the list of city conections because of the "rail layout". Dayton simply isn't on the way between any of these cities and political clout will be the only reason they see service as part of a Cleveland to Columbus route. According to the map, the rail lines apparently travel bouncy arcs from city to city - and Dayton still isn't anywhere close to the line connecting the 3C's.

I especially got a kick out of the dreamy idea of boarding a train at the Convention Center - which was literally built on the ruins of the old train station that used to be downtown.

If you want to waste money on trains, please join me in the hobby of model railroading - where you can do whatever you want at your own expense and not waste other people's money on your fantasy world.

James
Tue Oct 6 2009 14:16
It takes 8 hours to fly from Columbus to Dayton?
Scott
Tue Oct 6 2009 13:33
Everyone suggesting that rail has to be profitable should wonder why private industry isn't funding the roads, and in case you were going to mention the gas tax, they do not cover but a smidgen of the amount of road building that is funded through federal income taxes.

As more people leave their cars behind due to the increase in gas prices, the train as well as local transit is going to be much more appealing.

Jen
Tue Oct 6 2009 12:58
They don't sound too bad to me--though the Cols to Cinci time is pretty high. But I don't mind spending a little more if it means I can actually enjoy my time while traveling (reading, etc.) rather than driving, which takes up all of my attention and really isn't all that interesting. Also, train travel is much more comfortable than either driving or taking the Greyhound. The seats are much larger and you can easily get up and move around as you wish during travel. It's also nice not to worry about parking.
Doug
Tue Oct 6 2009 11:53
If this project were a winner private companies would already be providing rail service locally and between Ohio's major cities.

Apart from the fact that no one in there right mind would pay $56 and 6 hours to go round trip to Cincy and then be beholden to another mode of local transport when s/he could drive a car there for $35 and 3 hours, there is the opportunity cost of the $500million dollar construction cost. Moreover, if the gov't says it will cost $500million, it will probably be more like $750million.
For $750million I bet we could build a toll road parallel to the existing freeway all the way from Cincy to Cleve-burg and it would pay for itself as it would be something that people would actually want to use.

Bob I
Tue Oct 6 2009 11:33
This also ends up linking cities like Chicago, where I live, to Ohio. This is a huge boon to any city, as it allows for more visitors, both business and tourists. Flying is often too expensive for many people and families. Some, either do not want to or cannot drive between cities. I have a grteat car, and drive most places. It took 8 hours 2 weeks ago to make it from Chicago to Columbus, due to traffic, accidents, and construction. I would take a train in a heartbeat, be able to relax, be safer, yes .. help the environment, and likely have it cost us no more than tolls and gas. We can't wait. We are far behind the rest of the world in mass transit.
Tim
Tue Oct 6 2009 10:30
3 hours????!? $20+ per person??!?!

Forget that. I'll drive

Bill Grant
Tue Oct 6 2009 09:48
As one who has traveled a great deal on the NE Corridor either via the ACELA train-sets, or the regular AMTRAK service I'm pleased to see that Ohio is finally about to prvide relief for those who dislike batteling all the truck-traffic on I-71. This will also provide an option for those wanting to attend a cultural, sporting, et al event in the three major cities. There might even be a case made for an over-night departure from Cle. and Cinn scheduled to arrive in the other city in time for a business day. Only hope that the Ohio officials will serioulsy consider the TALGO sets used in Oregon & Washington [which I've used several times] as their state contract provides for the TALGO firm to service and mantain those consists, hence a good savings over the AMTRAK proposal stating a need for several high-cost maintenance centers. Or maybe Rickard Branson in the UK could bid to operate the trains as his VIRGIN TRAINS area a pleasure to ride.
carbme
Tue Oct 6 2009 09:01
Would it make more sense to test the feasability of local rail service available around Columbus and Cincinnati before jumping feet into a statewide system?

Once you ride into each city, how do you get to your destination from the station?

carbme
Tue Oct 6 2009 09:00
Would it make more sense to test the feasability of local rail service available around Columbus and Cincinnati before jumping feet into a statewide system?

Once you ride into each city, how do you get to your destination from the station?

William
Tue Oct 6 2009 08:14
I agree with the above posteres about getting the times down. I also think they should try and time trains for things like games. You could use the trains to get people into Columbus for the Ohio State games, or from other cities to Cinncinnatti and Cleveland for Bengals/Browns and Reds/Indians games. THey shoudl arrange transport from the rail stations to the stadiums, have themed rides, and reasonable party foods and beverages available. Other times tie into other things, like have a special for the State Fair, Irish Festivals, Oktoberfest etc or have a all inclusive ticket with access to the air force musuem in Dayton or Kings Island etc. If done right, this could be a great way to keep tourist money in the state, provide people with a better experience, promote being green, and help our lower income population by providing effect mass transit.
Neal Hicks
Tue Oct 6 2009 08:04
REALLY? Awesome!

They've been paying lip service to the concept of a 3C corridor for yearrrrrrs. Cannot express sufficiently how glad I am to see this finally happening. Anyone who delves into Columbus history will see that Columbus used to be HUGE into rail transit, from a huge yard where the current convention center is, to trolleys up and down high street. Union Station: not just a restaurant or a decorative arch downtown.

As for the speed of the train, note in the article that they are using existing freight routes...ergo, the rails are beat up to a severe degree. This isn't going to be a 110 mph NE Corridor high speed route. Maybe, just maybe, if this sees some use, they might expand it and create a new high quality line that would be faster.

But that it's finally going to happen, awesome!

Jason
Tue Oct 6 2009 07:52
I agree with all of the above comments. Why would I bother taking this train when it:

1) is more expensive
2) takes longer to get there

Sure, it's better for the environment, but that extra cost should be put on the state, not hard working families.

I suppose if I didn't have a car I might consider the train instead of Greyhound, if time isn't an issue. Or, if they offer FREE WIFI on the train and I wanted to use that time to get some work done. But most of the time, and I guess this is good for the auto industry that supports Ohio's economy, my first thought is still going to be -- I'm driving.

JJ
Tue Oct 6 2009 00:06
3 hours to get from Cincinnati to Columbus? Ridiculous - and then paying to either rent a car in the city or use mass transit?

I love the idea but they're going to need to make some serious improvements time wise for it to be worth it. Or else it's just another half a billion down the drain.

Your name
Mon Oct 5 2009 23:22
It's high time Columbus gets a train service. Good start.
Derek
Mon Oct 5 2009 23:08
How about some innovation and implement a high speed line? 3:13 minutes? Last time I drove it took a little over 2 hours. A rail needs to compete with driving not flying, round trip driving would take one tank of gas at about 35 dollars and it is still more economical for one person to drive round trip, factor in multiple passengers and a rail does not make sense, especially since the cost per passenger decreases? Get the fares down and the speed up and it would be a great idea.
Chad
Mon Oct 5 2009 22:42
They're going to have to work on those prices if they want my business. If my wife and I both board to go to Cinci it'll cost $112 round trip and I'll have to take cabs and mass transit once I get there... what is my motivation to use this?

Oh.. and what's up with those times? Why does it take 50% longer to get there on a 'fast' train?







log out