Trains.com

Major rail expansion on track with stimulus plan

5741 views
56 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Wednesday, February 25, 2009 8:12 AM

passengerfan

bobwilcox

 

The Fed put out a map showing projected high speed rail corridors in the US.  Has anyone put a number on what this would cost?

I have spent the last hour looking for the article I copied from the STB about costs of all of the proposed HSR services and I believe the price tag for the following services totaled $500 billion.

Vancouver BC-Seattle-Portland-Eugene

Minneapolis- Milwaukee-Chicago

Chicago-St. Louis- Kansas City

Chicago-Indianapolis-Louisville

Chicago- Indianapolis-Cincinnatti

Chicago-Cleveland

Chicago - Detroit

Cleveland -Columbus-Cincinnatti

Little Rock-Texarkana-Dallas

Tulsa-Oklahoma City-Dallas

Dallas-Austin-San Antonio

Houston-New Orleans-Mobile

New Orleans-Birmingham-Atlanta

Atlanta-Macon-Jacksonville

Miami-Atlanta-Tampa

New York-Buffalo

Washington-Jacksonville

Washington-Atlanta

Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh

Boston-Montreal

Not all of these services would be new HSR many would be upgrades of existing lines to 90-110 mph service shared with freight. The report did not designate which would be HSR and which would be upgrades of existing lines for higher speed and shared with freight services. In any event I won't live long enough to see it unless I find the Fountain of Youth and am somehow able to live an additional 45 years or so.

Al - in - Stockton

  

Was this what you were looking for: http://transportationfortomorrow.org/final_report/pdf/final_report.pdf

Check around page 137...

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 3:06 PM

blue streak 1 -

Oh, like wow  - Chapter 3 alone looks like it's 156 pages ! (3.04 MB)

Must be some really good stuff there.  You're right, that'll give me something to absorb. 

Thanks much !

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 2:28 PM

PDN:  Wait until you have plenty of time to digest it. Was listed under CALTRAINS projects list.

LINK     www.caltrain.com/electrification.html           Chapter 3 covers a lot but you really need to read the whole thing.  Enjoy!!!   BS-1  

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Tuesday, February 24, 2009 8:50 AM

Geez, youse guys (and gals) are slow off the mark this morning !  Didn't anyone else hear - or think to post - the link to the NPR (National Public Radio) segment from a little after 7:00 AM EST this morning regarding "Stimulus Puts High-Speed Rail On The Fast Track" by Brian Naylor (4 mins. 10 secs.), which can be found - with pretty much of a transcript and a map [EDIT:  The map is dated 10/19/2005, and appears to be from / has the logo of the U.S. Department of Transportation - Federal Railroad Administration] - at:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=101073906 

blue streak 1 - Thanks for your sensible and fact-based response and comments above.  Can you provide an Internet URL / "link" to the CalTrain electrification proposal that you mentioned ?  Yes, it's probably not as easy as it seems.  But locally, our PennDOT District 5-0 wants to spend the stimulus $ on sandblasting & painting highway bridges.  Since the spending is probably going to happen anyway whether we like it or not, I wish we could find a use for that money that puts more people to work, and engages more of the manufacturing and construction sectors of the economy, and results in more long-term benefits to society, than merely painting bridges.  Sigh

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Monday, February 23, 2009 6:21 PM

PN:  Certainly the substations that will be installed could be put in place. Also the power feeds from the power companys to the substations. Even the engineering for the placement of the substations will is needed. (max loads due to number of trains, grades, station stops etc)  Then the placement of the auro transformer stations also be decided - at least grading for such and the future requirements that are not currentlly needed. If you read in detail the electrification proposal of CALTRAIN it might be an eye opener.  

If even the poles were installed it would slow ROW and track construction. I can't imagine how much  the wires would slow construction.(some of those cranes are big)   The biggest problem I see is the curves. For every curve that is an 80 MPH curve that can be curve eased to 110+ a time savings of 2 -3 minutes is possible. In fact the NE corridor has some between Newark and PHL including a S curve that is a present impediment. After studying the NCDOT detailed engineering report there are about 10 -  2 degree curves from CLT to RALEIGH that will be 80MPH curves that need easing. NCDOT has not even addressed the higher speeds possible on that route in any public documents. One item is the host RRs are going to want CAT support poles as far away from the ROWs as possible and that probably be subject to much negotiation.

I remember that the first CAT to last installed on the NEW HAVEN - BOS segment took almost 2 years and when the first AEM arrived in BOS it had to switch tracks several times (6-8 ?). Wasn't it almost 6 months more before the last CAT was installed?  

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Monday, February 23, 2009 9:35 AM

A major obstacle for any rail-oriented stimulus project is the long lead times - like 3 to 5 years - before actual large-scale construction starts.  For design, testing, specifications, and bidding for passenger equipment such as HSR; for design, permits, R-O-W acquisition, and bidding for new R-O-W and tracks.  So, not a lot of blue-collar assembly and construction jobs to replace those lost in housing and manufacturing will be created before then, other than the white-collar professions involved in such pre-construction work -engineers, lawyers, appraisers, administrative, etc.

But we could start to install some parts of an electrification system real quick, even if it is left unenergized for a few years.  Copper wire and poles - steel and/ or concrete should be pretty much available or capable of being ordered and put into production, which would add that kind of in the near future real soon.  No extensive design should be needed for most portions of main lines - "Put a pair of poles in every at a spacing of every 150 ft. on tangents and 100 ft. on curves (or whatever distances), 1 on each side of the track at 20 ft. (or whatever distance), from centerline."  Of course, leave out for now the tunnels, bridges, interlockings, yards, stations, and other special areas that would require extensive and time-consuming study and design - that can be done in the meantime, and either added on at the end of the program or done later as each section is about to be activiated.  Sure, some will turn out to be in the wrong place or otherwise wasted, and yes, theft of the copper wires will be a challenge to prevent - maybe just buy it and the hardware now and defer the actual installation of that, too, untl it is just about to be used.  But it would go a long ways towards getting the wires up and activiated over the nation's rail system, and probably return more "bang for the buck" in terms of actual stimulus and job retention than a lot of the other projects that are being bandied about.

Agree, disagree, suggest changes, etc. ?

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    March 2004
  • From: Central Valley California
  • 2,841 posts
Posted by passengerfan on Sunday, February 22, 2009 5:42 AM

bobwilcox

 

The Fed put out a map showing projected high speed rail corridors in the US.  Has anyone put a number on what this would cost?

I have spent the last hour looking for the article I copied from the STB about costs of all of the proposed HSR services and I believe the price tag for the following services totaled $500 billion.

Vancouver BC-Seattle-Portland-Eugene

Minneapolis- Milwaukee-Chicago

Chicago-St. Louis- Kansas City

Chicago-Indianapolis-Louisville

Chicago- Indianapolis-Cincinnatti

Chicago-Cleveland

Chicago - Detroit

Cleveland -Columbus-Cincinnatti

Little Rock-Texarkana-Dallas

Tulsa-Oklahoma City-Dallas

Dallas-Austin-San Antonio

Houston-New Orleans-Mobile

New Orleans-Birmingham-Atlanta

Atlanta-Macon-Jacksonville

Miami-Atlanta-Tampa

New York-Buffalo

Washington-Jacksonville

Washington-Atlanta

Philadelphia-Harrisburg-Pittsburgh

Boston-Montreal

Not all of these services would be new HSR many would be upgrades of existing lines to 90-110 mph service shared with freight. The report did not designate which would be HSR and which would be upgrades of existing lines for higher speed and shared with freight services. In any event I won't live long enough to see it unless I find the Fountain of Youth and am somehow able to live an additional 45 years or so.

Al - in - Stockton

  

  • Member since
    September 2002
  • From: Rockton, IL
  • 4,821 posts
Posted by jeaton on Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:55 AM

DennisHeld
Here is the corridor map (if the link works): http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/618

"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Champaign, IL
  • 185 posts
Posted by DennisHeld on Sunday, February 22, 2009 3:00 AM
Here is the corridor map (if the link works): http://www.fra.dot.gov/us/content/618
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Crozet, VA
  • 1,049 posts
Posted by bobwilcox on Saturday, February 21, 2009 7:07 PM

 

The Fed put out a map showing projected high speed rail corridors in the US.  Has anyone put a number on what this would cost?
Bob
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, February 20, 2009 10:30 PM

Paul_D_North_Jr

Conclusion:  Maybe you were being a little facetious, but any of these figures will get you comfortably beyond range of my vision, esp. in the brown air pollution haze / smog that blankets most urban areas that don't have a rail-based mass transit system already in place. Mischief

- Paul North.

As I stated, my math could be off by a factor of 154......Wink  Are you remembering to factor in the legal costs of those who don't wish to sell their land for any amount of money?  Right now, landowners in western S.D. are raiding holey heck over the DM&E/CP plan to (maybe) someday purchase a 100' wide strip of their property, for a railroad that will probably never get built.

Conclusion:  I understand where you're coming from on the numbers, but $8 Billion seems like a drop in the bucket, compared to what it would cost to do it up right.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Champaign, IL
  • 185 posts
Posted by DennisHeld on Friday, February 20, 2009 7:29 PM
I've been watching this thread with a certain amount of interest. For the better part of the last 30 years, if a major transportation project was funded by the federal government, it would have been for aviation or highway projects. The Feds, particularly the Bush administration, has been trying to kill Amtrak. Federal money for CREATE? Nope, it's just a rail project. Rail projects get nothing but scraps and crumbs from the Feds. Now someone in the federal government is throwing a big, juicy bone to railway transportation and people are whining that it isn't spiced correctly. Under what other conditions would the federal government throw that much money into railroads? And people are worried that it may benefit some Liberal Congressperson? It's a rail project. It's being decided by a Republican. Mr. LaHood. From Illinois. It's rail infrastructure! It's not a new airport somewhere. Federal rail money just doesn't happen.
  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Rock Springs Wy.
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by miniwyo on Friday, February 20, 2009 4:49 PM

Railway Man

miniwyo
Another question I have is, True or not, Why would the government just shell out the money to build a Vegas to LA/Disneyland Maglev ...

 

It's not true.

RWM

 

 

I know it's not, What I was driving at is if it did happen, would the entities involved be asked to pay for some the expenses? What was required in the case of Euro Disney?

Just a what if situation. I guess I should have chosen my words a little better.

RJ

"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling

http://sweetwater-photography.com/

  • Member since
    November 2007
  • 2,989 posts
Posted by Railway Man on Friday, February 20, 2009 3:42 PM

miniwyo
Another question I have is, True or not, Why would the government just shell out the money to build a Vegas to LA/Disneyland Maglev ...

 

It's not true.

RWM

 

  • Member since
    January 2003
  • From: Rock Springs Wy.
  • 1,967 posts
Posted by miniwyo on Friday, February 20, 2009 3:20 PM
Why is it going to just develop HSR? IMO, what we need to focus on is gaining and maintaining a NATIONWIDE passenger rail system, THEN making it High Speed. Another question I have is, True or not, Why would the government just shell out the money to build a Vegas to LA/Disneyland Maglev, Without any kind of financial backing from Nevada, California and Disney? When I was in Europe, I took the Eurostar from London to Paris, but could have taken it to Euro Disneyland too, making me wonder, did Disney pay for any if that, or did the government just build it and Disney reaps the profits?

RJ

"Something hidden, Go and find it. Go and look behind the ranges, Something lost behind the ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go." The Explorers - Rudyard Kipling

http://sweetwater-photography.com/

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, February 20, 2009 3:19 PM

NMRXfan

Bucyrus
I don’t think any conservatives are trying to have it both ways, but some republicans have decided to have it the liberal way. 

Bush and his Republicans allies in congress, who had control of the White House for 8 years and the Congress for 6 years presided over and voted for the largest expansion of national debt and size of Federal gov't this nation has ever seen.

I agree.  You are making my point.  The Republican Party used to be the home of conservatism, but it has moved to the left to compete for democrat voters.  In doing so, the Republican Party has abandoned its conservative base.  Bush is an example of that move to the left.    

  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Wake Forest, NC
  • 2,869 posts
Posted by SilverSpike on Friday, February 20, 2009 3:10 PM

 Is $8 billion dollars enough to create a new high speed rail (HSR) system for the US? According to the Huffington Post this was added to the total package as a last minute deal. Interestingly however, the map that the Huffington Post has in reference to their article has actually been on the U.S. Department of Transportation (US-DOT) Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) plans for some time now, in fact, the map is dated 2005 as found on their Corridor Descriptions web page. And the High Speed Ground Transportation for America commercial feasibility study (CFS) Report To Congress - September 1997, was written more than 11 years ago.

Now I am sure that a lot has changed since the 1997 CFS, cooridor descriptions and map were created, but this makes for a perfect starting point to develop a new plan with some start-up capital in building a new infrastructure for our future transportation needs. As of January 2002, the FRA has designated ten high-speed corridors under section 1010 of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Act of 1991 (ISTEA) and Section 1103(c) of the Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). Designation allows a corridor to receive specially targeted funding for highway-rail grade crossing safety improvements, and recognizes the corridor as a potential center of HSR activity. These designated corridors are shown on the map at the beginning of the document and are listed, generally from Southwest to Northeast.

Ryan Boudreaux
The Piedmont Division
Modeling The Southern Railway, Norfolk & Western & Norfolk Southern in HO during the merger era
Cajun Chef Ryan

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, February 20, 2009 3:05 PM

Continuing briefly, since RWM's post above (which showed up while I was busy working on my other one) reminded me of something I meant to put in my 1st one way above:

1 mile of 50-ft. wide R-O-W = 5,280 ft. x 50 ft. = 264,000 sq. ft.

Divided by 43,560 sq. ft. per acre = 6.06 acres per mile.

At the $1 million per acre = $23 per sq. ft. value, each mile of 50-ft. wide R-O-W would cost about $6.06 million.

For a 100-ft. wide R-O-W, just double the appropriate figures above.

From RWM's figures (above):

$8 billion will buy 16 miles of "inside downtown core, almost all in tunnel" line - that's everything - "complete & ready to go" - not just the R-O-W. 

Since the 16 miles will get you outside of the urban core, the lower figures will start to be applicable instead.  Using the $100mm*/ mile for the "built-up areas outside of downtown cores, almost all elevated", the $8 billion will buy 80 miles of that type of construction.  For my hypothetical 50-ft. wide R-O-W, the $6 million per mile for that would be about 6% ($12 million and 12% for 100-ft. wide) of RWM's $100mm/ mile typical cost for installing everything - which proportions are within customary ranges for such things at this general level of "non-detail".

* - RWM's "mm" = "million", as in "1,000 thousands" = "m x m", if that's not belaboring the obvious here.

Conclusion:  Maybe you were being a little facetious, but any of these figures will get you comfortably beyond range of my vision, esp. in the brown air pollution haze / smog that blankets most urban areas that don't have a rail-based mass transit system already in place. Mischief

Back to billable hours work.

- Paul North.

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 44 posts
Posted by NMRXfan on Friday, February 20, 2009 2:49 PM

Bucyrus
I don’t think any conservatives are trying to have it both ways, but some republicans have decided to have it the liberal way. 

Bush and his Republicans allies in congress, who had control of the White House for 8 years and the Congress for 6 years presided over and voted for the largest expansion of national debt and size of Federal gov't this nation has ever seen. I repeat, while they had control of the gov't. Without so much as a peep out of the dittoheads in protest when their boy George W. or Tom DeLay we're passing runaway budgets and running things into the ground. Yet, they continue to claim to be the party of responsible fiscal conservatives.

The last surplus was under a Democrat, who handed it off to a Republican, who now has handed the largest financial mess in our history off to a Democrat to clean up.

 

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, February 20, 2009 2:41 PM

Hi, Murphy -

Well, I can support the $1 million per acre value easily enough, at least for this purpose, if I correctly understand that's one of your points.  Here's the public data for 2 different size and commercial "use" parcels along the "Golden Mile" commercial shopping and retail strip in the northern suburbs of Allentown, PA:

Lowe's home-improvement store at 2650 MacArthur Rd., Whitehall Twp., Lehigh Co., $13,216,750 for 14.245 Ac. incl. new building (Nov. 2007) in March 2008 = $927,800 per acre;

Taco Bell fast-food restaurant at 2113 MacArthur Rd., Whitehall Twp., Lehigh Co., $702,000 for 32,316 Sq. Ft. = 0.742 Ac. incl. 15-year old building in March 2006 = $946,000 per acre.

Or, perhaps your broader - and more interesting point - is the overall methodology here.  In brief, it doesn't work the way you've laid it out, much as you might want it to.  Breaking it down:

Your 4,000 SF lot = 0.092 acre; for $170,000 incl. dwelling is $1.851 million per acre, which almost double my nominal figure, so hopefully we won't have to do too much of that.

But if what the rail line really needs is the 12' x 2' strip of your access, unfortunately you don't get to unilaterally set your price, as in your scenario.  Instead, if and when it and you can't agree on a mutually acceptable $ figure, then the rail line will resort to the condemnation or "eminent domain process".  Important point: You're legally and constitutionally entitled to "just compensation" for having your property taken for public use, under another (less-famous) clause of the U.S. Constitution's 5th Amendment, as well as most state constitutions or statutes.  So the railroad will start that process by getting a duly licensed appraiser (who's paid for by the railroad, don't forget) to usually provide a professional opinion as to the "Fair Market Value" ("FMV") of the entire property in 2 conditions or configurations, as follows:

1)  "As-is" now, with that strip, "before" the acqusition; and then,

2)  Without that strip, after the acquisition.

In most cases, the value of that 2' x 12' = 24 sq. ft. strip is pretty nominal - 24 sq. ft. x $23/ SF in my example = $552.  Most appraisers will say either $500 or $1,000, and call it "Done".  I have personal experience in similar R-O-W acqusitions along a state highway for widening it for a local municipal project in the past couple of years .  The standard recommended offer there was $2 per SF for a full purchase, $1 per SF for a drainage or temporary construction easement or the like.  We had lots of values in the $200 - $1,000 range, a few in the $1,000 to $10,000 range, one in the $25,000 range, and 1 total taking for about $150,000 - and this is fairly typical for projects like that. 

But if that 2' x 12' strip effectively isolates or landlocks your lot, then you've got a good case that it amounts to a "total taking".  In that case the railroad will indeed have to pay you full value for your entire property, unless it somehow lessens the taking or mitigates those damages, such as by constructing a functionally equivalent replacement access/ driveway, modifying your house or lot, etc.

If there's no agreement after all this, it usually goes to a "Board of View" for a determination of the damages.  If the railroad and you still don't agree, you can usually appeal to the county court, and continue your battle through that system.  Did I mention that you also have to hire and pay for your own appraiser and lawyer through all this ?  If it gets this far, in the end it's a "roll of the dice" as to what compensation you'll finally receive.  Obviously, for your example eveyone would be far better off to agree early in the process to a figure, and then move on with life, absent some compelling circumstances.

Now, as to your 5-story office building and the Mayo Clinic examples:  Those are the same thing, just writ larger.*  If that kind of situation arises, before any acqusition starts someone like Railway Man or mudchicken will first ask the locating engineer - remember that thread ? - to explain why this absolutely has to be, and why he can't move his R-O-W the 2 ft. or 3 ft. to avoid that situation, or live with a narrower R-O-W right there, etc., etc.  Less drastic alternatives - such as retaining walls, moving a switch or a signal to avoid the problem, etc. - will be explored in detail, in proportion to the perceived acqusition cost.  This is all part of the design and location process - tweaking and refining the design to avoid disproportionate impacts and effects while retaining the essence of the design.  More likely, some poor sap's house on the other side of the proposed R-O-W alignment - like yours - will be taken instead for the $170,000, instead of $X million to the Mayo Clinic or office building owners.  (See separate discussion along the lines of the "environmental justice" debate, which tends to revolve around why it's usually the poor people's homes and land that are affected, not the rich folks' or the expensive businesses.) In the end, if it absolutely has to be, then it has to be.  Or, another alignment will be selected instead, which avoids that cost, if it will function reasonably as well. 

* - Not 100 yards from where I sit typing this is a 1-story office building and 1.6 acres that PennDOT condemned in 1985 to widen I-78 /PA Rt. 309.  At first they were going to demolish it because they needed to slice about 12 ft. off it to accomodate the widening.  But some creative thinking intervened, only 1 row of offices was removed, and a new wall was constructed and installed along the then-open side of the building - I remember driving past it then and wondering what the heck was going on with the partial demolition.  The office building was then returned to service - PennDOT kept it for that use - until they sold it this past summer.  So these kinds of things do happen, but not as drastically as you might think.

My point here is not (now) to debate the fairness or inequities or dynamics of that process.  Instead, I'm using this to point out that while R-O-W acqusitions certainly can be expensive - we've all got horror stories (future landfill expansion capacity, anyone ?) - and use up a lot of money, $1 billion or $8 billion will go a lot farther than you might think for any one system.  It's definitely not going to be gone within my sight distance, unless we're talking downtown Denver or Dallas kind of thing.

Well, this has turned into an RWM post. Smile,Wink, & Grin   I've got to get back to detailing a grade crossing design. Smile

- Paul North.

 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, February 20, 2009 1:33 PM

NMRXfan

 Republicans Hail Parts of Bill That Few of Them Supported

Just hours after voting against the bill on the House floor last week, Representative John L. Mica of Florida issued news releases lauding the inclusion of $8 billion for high-speed rail projects around the nation. Mr. Mica said the bill would also help pay for a commuter train project in his Central Florida district.

“If we could put a man on the moon, we should be able to move people from city to city quickly instead of wasting time on a congested highway,” said Mr. Mica, the ranking Republican on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. “I applaud President Obama’s recognition that high-speed rail should be part of America’s future.”

It's really funny seeing these clowns now trying to have it both ways, claiming fiscal conservatism when they're out of power, but when they're in power they just precided over the largest expansion of the national debt and big gov't this country has ever seen. Now they care. Yeah, right.

Hypocrites.

 

I don’t think any conservatives are trying to have it both ways, but some republicans have decided to have it the liberal way. 

  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 44 posts
Posted by NMRXfan on Friday, February 20, 2009 12:42 PM

 Republicans Hail Parts of Bill That Few of Them Supported

Just hours after voting against the bill on the House floor last week, Representative John L. Mica of Florida issued news releases lauding the inclusion of $8 billion for high-speed rail projects around the nation. Mr. Mica said the bill would also help pay for a commuter train project in his Central Florida district.

“If we could put a man on the moon, we should be able to move people from city to city quickly instead of wasting time on a congested highway,” said Mr. Mica, the ranking Republican on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. “I applaud President Obama’s recognition that high-speed rail should be part of America’s future.”

It's really funny seeing these clowns now trying to have it both ways, claiming fiscal conservatism when they're out of power, but when they're in power they just precided over the largest expansion of the national debt and big gov't this country has ever seen. Now they care. Yeah, right.

Hypocrites.

  • Member since
    November 2007
  • 2,989 posts
Posted by Railway Man on Friday, February 20, 2009 12:21 PM

The estimates to build and equip a two-track, 150-185 mph rail alignment, including design, permitting, r-o-w acquisition, stations, and maintenance facilities, are on the order of $100 million/mile.

There is no way to effectively purchase the necessary right-of-way in any built-up residential area in the U.S. under any conceivable future political balance, and it will be extremely difficult to purchase right-of-way even in farmland or ranchette-land surrounding suburbs.  That leaves either elevating the right-of-way on an existing linear infrastructure, or tunnelling.  Tunnelling is expensive enough out in the countryside, but in an urban area with a maze of buried utility lines and foundation integrity to worry about, it's horrendously expensive.  Back in the "good old days," when NYC built its subway system, it simply demolished whatever was built on top of its subway routes, chopping diagonals right through block after block of brick buildings, excavated a trench, built a subway, buried it, and sold the land back to the real-estate magnates it bought it from.  In those days real-estate was concentrated into the hands of a few and they simply turfed out their tenants, and made a profit with every transaction.

In rough terms, the cost of the alignment and stations, including design, permitting, and r-o-w acquisition, is:

  1. $25mm/mile in open country of no value (desert), no elevated track
  2. $50mm/mile in mountainous country of no value, some elevated track, some tunnelling
  3. $50mm/mile in moderately developed farmland, 50% elevated track
  4. $100mm/mile in built-up areas outside of downtown cores, almost all elevated
  5. $500mm/mile inside downtown cores, almost all in tunnel
RWM
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, February 20, 2009 11:56 AM

Don’t forget the millions for public art displayed in the stations.  The money will get sucked up in a hurry because it is being spent by people who have not earned it, and they are shooting it out of a fire hose to stop a crisis.  It will probably cost the government 8-billion dollars just to spend 8-billion dollars. 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Friday, February 20, 2009 11:39 AM

Paul_D_North_Jr

Assume the R-O-W cost is $1 million per acre (a nice round figure to facilitate comparisons - also, not that far off reality for a  lot of land, except in the core downtown areas of large prosperous cities).

1 acre = 43,560 sq. ft.

So R-O-W costs $1 million/ 43,560 sq. Ft. = $22.96 per sq. ft. - say, $23.00 per SF.

A 50 ft. wide R-O-W will cost 50 ft. x $23.00 per sq. ft. = $1,150 per linear foot ($2,300 per LF for 100 ft. wide).

At $1 million per acre, the $1 million will buy 43,560 SF / 50 ft. wide R-O-W = 871.2 LF of 50-ft. wide R-O-W (or 435.6 LF of 100 ft. wide R-O-W).

So at $1 million per acre, $1 billion will buy 1,000 times as much, or 871,200 LF of 50 ft. wide R-O-W, which - dividing by 5,280 ft. per mile - is 165 miles of 50-ft. wide R-O-W (82.5 miles of 100-ft. wide R-O-W).

- Paul North.

  I think you're falling into a trap of putting in the numbers that support your idea, and because of that, I'm not sure you have a conclusion that works.

     You may buy my humble abode today for $170,000.  Please bring a cashier's check.  It sits on a 4,000 sq. ft. lot.  You have just purchased my property for $42.50 per sq. ft.  What's that, you say?  You don't want to buy the whole thing?  You only wish to buy a 2'  strip of my 12' wide back entry?  Well,  I suppose I could do that.  The price is still $170,000.  You've now paid $7,083.33 per sq. ft. for ground to expand your right of way. If I average your figure of $23.00 and my figure of $7083.33, it works out to $3553.17 per sq. ft.  $3553.17 X 50 X5280= $938,036,688 per mile.  Remember- this is based on a humble abode, in a suburb type situation, by a willing seller.

      Want to do some figures on a 5-story office building, that you only need a 3' slice of?  Suppose you have to buy a 2' strip of something like the Mayo Clinic?  Do you think those folks would go for $23?Laugh

Note:  I did the math quickly, so I could easily be off by a factor of 154, but you see my point.  I think I agree with the other poster about it sucking up $8 billion in a hurry.  Let's say you spent $8B on a high-speed rail option starting in a crowded, urban environment (where else would they be needed?),  I'd be willing to bet you could probably see the other end of the $8B investment from where you are standing.Dead

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    October 2006
  • From: Allentown, PA
  • 9,810 posts
Posted by Paul_D_North_Jr on Friday, February 20, 2009 9:39 AM

cacole
  If you use the recently opened, as yet incomplete Phoenix, Arizona light rail system as an example, 8 Billion dollars won't be enough to build any new rail lines anywhere.  Except in areas where rail already exists and can be upgraded, right of way acquisition costs in an urban area will gobble up 8 Billion overnight.  The worst part of these project seems to always be that the "studies" and "planning" and "environmental assessments" and "anti-rail lawsuits" use up the funds before a single rail is spiked into place. [emphasis added - PDN]

No, it often isn't the R-O-W per se - particularly if its a light-rail system that can fit into an already existing public street or road right-of-way - but all of the ancillary costs associated with it and the system.  To simplify greatly, for the former, it all takes surveys, plans, legal title searches, reports, and insurance, releases from easement and mortgage holders (among others) for clear title, plus an appraisal - before $1 is paid to the property owner.  The property owner is entitled to compensation not only for the undelying land, but for any buildings andn other improvements (such as the billboard or cell phone tower lease there), and the "going concern" value of any business, perhaps lost profits, and relocation expenses, etc.  For the latter, then there's utility relocations and protection, supporting and protecting adjacent structures such as with retaining walls, maintenance & protection of vehicle and pedestrian traffic, tunnels, bridges, repaving and restoration, etc., before the 1st rail is spiked down (or however).  Of course, there's also stations or stops and their parking, shops and their support facilities (sewer and electric), as well as the HQ office and its needs.  Don't forget signalling, communications, power systems, and gosh knows what all I haven't listed here.

Some numbers to put it into perspective:  Assume a 50 ft. wide fenced R-O-W in an urban area for 2 tracks, plus some support facilities such as an access road.  (I know we'd like to have it wider, such as 100 ft., but as you'll see that would be extravagant for a downtown area where you could live with 50 ft. - go wider out in the suburbs where land isn't so expensive, or jst adjust my figures to suit what you'd rather use instead):

Assume the R-O-W cost is $1 million per acre (a nice round figure to facilitate comparisons - also, not that far off reality for a  lot of land, except in the core downtown areas of large prosperous cities).

1 acre = 43,560 sq. ft.

So R-O-W costs $1 million/ 43,560 sq. Ft. = $22.96 per sq. ft. - say, $23.00 per SF.

A 50 ft. wide R-O-W will cost 50 ft. x $23.00 per sq. ft. = $1,150 per linear foot ($2,300 per LF for 100 ft. wide).

At $1 million per acre, the $1 million will buy 43,560 SF / 50 ft. wide R-O-W = 871.2 LF of 50-ft. wide R-O-W (or 435.6 LF of 100 ft. wide R-O-W).

So at $1 million per acre, $1 billion will buy 1,000 times as much, or 871,200 LF of 50 ft. wide R-O-W, which - dividing by 5,280 ft. per mile - is 165 miles of 50-ft. wide R-O-W (82.5 miles of 100-ft. wide R-O-W).

That seems to me to be about enough for a single decent-sized system - the equivalent of 4 radial routes each around 20 miles long of 100-ft. wide R-O-W.  So it'll take about $1 billion for that.  The whole $8 billion will of course do that 8 times over - or, completely build about 1 new system with all the stuff I've listed above (I'm less well informed about those costs though).  More likely - to "spread the wealth" - is that with matching state & local funds, public R-O-Ws, facilities that can be adapted or modified for reuse, phased construction, etc., this might cover moderate construction or expansions for portions of 10 to 15 or 20 systems.

As just one local example, the proposed extension of passenger rail service from the existing end at Norristown to Wyomissing (western suburb of Reading) - about 30 miles - here in eastern Pennsylvania is estimated to cost from $234 to $297 million if done over the existing Norfolk Southern (ex-ConRail, exx-Reading RR) tracks [how, and what NS thinks about that, is not stated], or up to $2 billion if done as a stand-alone "new build" all the way from Wyomissing to Center City Philadelphia - about 20 miles more, or 50 miles overall.  See the news article on a press conference at 10:00 AM today (just a little while ago, or still underway) about possibly imposing tolls on the parallel Route 422 expressway, at:

http://www.readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=126290 

Conclusion:  cacole's post above is exaggerated, at least for the R-O-W component, but not that far off overall.  We're not going to get 50 - say, 1 for each state - complete new urban rail systems out of it, that's for sure.

By now you should know that I want to see responses and additional or contrary thoughts to this post, as always.

- Paul North.

 

"This Fascinating Railroad Business" (title of 1943 book by Robert Selph Henry of the AAR)
  • Member since
    January 2009
  • 44 posts
Posted by NMRXfan on Friday, February 20, 2009 8:05 AM

 Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Predicts Even More High-Speed Rail Funds Coming

 Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today emphasized the administration's long-term commitment to expanding high-speed rail service in "five or six regions" of the country, not just with the $8 billion provided in the economic stimulus package President Obama signed into law last week, but also "in subsequent years a very substantial effort." Meeting with reporters earlier today, LaHood said that for Obama building high-speed rail networks is, "if not his No. 1 priority, certainly at the top of his list. What the president is saying with the $8 billion is this is the start to help begin high-speed rail projects." He added that the administration "is committed to finding the dollars to not only get them started but to finishing them in at least five parts of the country," although he declined to elaborate on where these projects might ultimately be built.

The $8 billion is just the start.

  • Member since
    July 2003
  • From: Sierra Vista, Arizona
  • 13,757 posts
Posted by cacole on Friday, February 20, 2009 7:16 AM

 If you use the recently opened, as yet incomplete Phoenix, Arizona light rail system as an example, 8 Billion dollars won't be enough to build any new rail lines anywhere.  Except in areas where rail already exists and can be upgraded, right of way acquisition costs in an urban area will gobble up 8 Billion overnight.  The worst part of these project seems to always be that the "studies" and "planning" and "environmental assessments" and "anti-rail lawsuits" use up the funds before a single rail is spiked into place.

 

  • Member since
    August 2003
  • From: Antioch, IL
  • 4,371 posts
Posted by greyhounds on Thursday, February 19, 2009 10:33 PM

"Never have so few spent so much so quickly to do so little."

Nobody knew what was actually in this stupid law until after they voted on it.  That's one Hell of a way to run a government and spend $800 billion. 

And yes, some of it is "Trains for the sake of Trains."  No thought. No debate.  Just borrow and spend.  I can't see anything meaningful or productive comming out of it railroadwise.  I can readily see it being a negative for the railroad system as it will divert funds from productive projects in to "commanded" projects.  It will drive up the cost of capital and make it more difficult to finance needed railroad expansion.

The government can't print wealth.  Wealth has to be created. As in "Making Money".  As wealth is diverted by this stupid law into frivilous things it will also be diverted away from needed things; such as meaningful railway expansion.  We will all be poorer.  But Hey, they'll be some great pics of some snazzy lookin' trains.  IF you can afford the camera and gas to get to the photo site.

"By many measures, the U.S. freight rail system is the safest, most efficient and cost effective in the world." - Federal Railroad Administration, October, 2009. I'm just your average, everyday, uncivilized howling "anti-government" critic of mass government expenditures for "High Speed Rail" in the US. And I'm gosh darn proud of that.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy