Study looks at high-speed rail link through Willamette Valley
EUGENE, Ore. (AP) - A council made up of mayors, legislators and state and local transit officials is considering four routes for high-speed travel in the Willamette Valley.
The routes would be hugely expensive to create, and the obstacles, including securing money, are so many that it's possible the new line might never be built.
But the study is under way with the Oregon Passenger Rail Leadership Council set to choose one of the four by fall of 2014, according to the Register-Guard.
The council is airing four "corridor concepts" under consideration for the future route of passenger rail in the valley.
The proposed routes for a new line are:
- The I-5 right of way.
- A westerly route made of pieced-together short haul lines that include a stop at Corvallis.
- The old, unused Oregon Electric Railway right of way that runs through the valley, merging with the existing Union Pacific line near Canby.
- The existing Union Pacific lines that carry Amtrak long-haul and commuter passenger trains, as well as freight trains.
Hundreds of people have turned out to see maps of the proposed routes at a half-dozen state Department of Transportation open houses this month throughout the valley. Additionally, 424 people have attended a virtual open house on the department's website.
In Eugene-Springfield, "there's a very high interest in rail," said Eugene Mayor Kitty Piercy, co-chairwoman of the statewide leadership council.
Ridership on the Amtrak Cascades line has increased 22 percent since 2009 and by 238 percent since 1995, according to the state.
The route provided 845,099 rides in 2012 to people who bought $30 million worth of tickets, according to Amtrak.
In the next 25 years, the Willamette Valley population is expected to grow by about 35 percent, reaching about 3.6 million by 2035, meaning increased congestion and increased demand for transportation in all forms.
Oregon would like to optimize its in-state tracks to approach 90 mph. The top speed today is 79, and the trains can only go that fast on a straightaway near Junction City. The trip between Eugene and Portland averages two hours and 35 minutes, according to the state. That's 40 minutes slower than driving.
Union Pacific, whose main job is moving freight, is upgrading its tracks to reach 79 mph, but it's not keen about higher speeds, Piercy said.
"Union Pacific has been pretty specific in saying to us that you can't go very fast along their line," Piercy said. "They're thinking no faster than 70-something."
For most passengers, speed isn't the top priority, Piercy added. "People care about frequency and reliability more than they care about speed. They'd like it to be a little faster; they'd like it to be competitive with cars. But reliability is so important."
___
Information from: The Register-Guard, http://www.registerguard.com
(Copyright 2013 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.)
"The routes would be hugely expensive to create, and the obstacles, including securing money, are so many that it's possible the new line might never be built."Â That's never stopped them from wasting money before, why start now?
Â
"Hundreds of people have turned out to see maps of the proposed routes at a half-dozen state Department of Transportation open houses" Hundreds.. at half a dozen places? That's what, five or six dozen really bored people at each one? Wow, absolutely mind-boggling. I've had almost a half-dozen people watch me reel in a pretty feisty carp - is that news-worthy, too, nowadays?
Â
Â
Instead of doing yet more costly  "studies" about things that we-the-taxpayers can't afford (and don't need), how 'bout putting whatever money there is towards some road repair...stuff like that, that already exists and that we need to use NOW..?  Â
It's nice to dream and plan for the future, but right now, we have an economy that's still in trouble, and many projects that DO need attention..!
I'm sure they will ram this down out throats, just like they did with light rail.Â
once again proving Oregon legislators have California envy.........
Â
Gov. Moonbeam is forcing high speed rail to nowhere down cali's throat and Oregon is doing the same thing just on a smaller scale.
Unfortunately, the requirements for freight and passenger trains are very different. Rail design on curves optimized for freight would be dangerous for high-speed passenger trains.
How about we first balance our budget so we don't have to borrow ever increasing amounts just to pay the bills we already owe?.
Let me guess another choo choo train the voters will vote down again and again. The same choo choo the libs of this state will still ram down our throats at great cost, while claiming there is no money for education, police, fire, or libraries.    Seen this song and dance before.  You keep re-electing them Mulnomah County, how about something different next time.  Â
I should say that election message is not just directed at multnomah but also Lane, Linn County ect.
"Oregon would like to optimize its in-state tracks to approach 90 mph. The top speed today is 79, and the trains can only go that fast on a straightaway near Junction City. The trip between Eugene and Portland averages two hours and 35 minutes, according to the state. That's 40 minutes slower than driving."
Â
So someone wants to spend billions of dollars to gain 11 mph? Typical of politicians. If you want to talk high speed rail how about looking at France, Germany, or China. High speed rail should be at least 200 mph. We elect idiots!
 @I812 No offense but the top speed is about 150-170mph. There are trains that have tested faster, but no trains run on a regular service level at that speed, period.
@Bio Sphere No offense but you are wrong. There are trains all over the world that are capable of speeds in excess of 200 mph. Do a little research and you will find ICE in Germany has a service speed of 205 mph and has reached a speed of 226 mph. China has trains running at 204 mph. France had the first high speed train, the TGV. And there are many, many more. The United States is far behind the rest of the world when it comes to moving people.
Oops, you're right, I forgot about that. OK, add some more money for each over/underpass for the tracks or the roads that have to cross. Â
 @jpk That's why the world's high speed trains do not have grade crossings.
 @jpk ~  ...the stuff of which major nightmares are made.... shudder...
The US probably has more distracted drivers who would not heed crossing signals. Can you imagine what could happen to a train moving at 200 mph if it hit a loaded semi trying to cross the tracks?Â
By the time someone gets to the station, parks their car, buys a ticket, waits for the train, and then gets to their destination, they would have spent more money if their time could be worth $$$, and would have spent a longer time waiting and stopping than if they had just driven to their destination.A cool idea, but not worth the taxpayer money, and the commuter's time.Â
 @dblshot If you want to drive anywhere, that's great.  Based on the ridership from Portland to Seattle there are a lot of people that can't/won't drive that route.  Lots of college students don't have cars, is it so bad if they have access to the rest of the valley?
 @knottriel  @dblshot They do have access. There is Amtrack, Greyhound, and if you need to go to Seattle from Portland there is Bolt Bus. All very inexpensive options.Â
 @Beergod Or hitchhiking
Write a check Knot. Wouldnt it be nice have an escalator instead of stairs in our homes? Its a nice toy but hardly needed at the hit it would take on your household budget.Â
 @knottriel  @dblshotÂ
Â
Yes, in a perfect world where money grew on trees and we weren't about to go bankrupt, this would be nice thing to have, but until then, just say no.
No matter how much money they blow on this unprofitable venture, I bet that a Bolt Bus with sub twenty dollar fares would be vastly more popular. Â How many people commute from Eugene to Portland anyways (besides college kids coming back to visit family)?
 @UtterReality How profitable is I-5?  I-84?  PDX?
 @knottriel I was referring more to ongoing operational costs.  In that case, a better analogy would be Greyhound - which is profitable - versus Amtrak - which hasn't been profitable for years.
 @knottriel To re-frame your answer, it's really a matter of re utilizing existing multi-use infrastructure for public transportation or creating new infrastructure for it.  I could see where a new rail line would make sense over utilizing the existing roads if it was superior technology (like maglev bullet trains) and there was a genuine need for moving large amounts of people quickly - but I don't see that here.  Express bus service can cover the value market very economically, and high speed air travel already covers the high end of the market.
 @UtterReality Amtrak has to pay to use and/or upgrade track for most parts of the network.  Greyhound gets the local roads and Interstates for pretty much free.  It's not really a great comparison.
I hope the state doesn't use the same engineering firm it hired to do the Highway 20 rehab up around Nashville on the way to Toledo.....
I hope this study doesn't take valuable paperwork generating resources away from the new Columbia River bridge project.
Pie in the freakin' sky! How about this for an exotic idea, Salem?
Let's concentrate on one fantasy at a time, okay? Get the Columbia Crossing finished, or at least fully funded! (now, there *is* an exotic idea!) before we begin a new fantasy planning commission who gets paid millions of $$$ long before anyone even entertains the idea of, "Hmmm. Why is this considered a good idea by ***anybody***?!"
Spending our way out of debt.
Â
Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.
-Albert Einstein
 @Mipsfer So we should aim for austerity so we can end up like Greece?  Austerity has never worked, so unless we're insane we probably shouldn't try that.
 @knottriel  @MipsferÂ
Â
A family living within its means has never worked. The only truly successful ones have gone deeply into debt to stimulate their motivation to work.Â
Â
When government becomes the motor behind capitalism, job creation and growth then we have completely lost our way and we really will become Greece.
 @Mipsfer Ri-i-i-ight!Â
Whiner: "Oh, but it creates jobs! Are you anti job-creation?"
Me: "Not at all! I'm for a reduction of (get this!) wasteful government spending."
Whiner: "Right! You're against jobs!"
I love my tax money wasted on unnecessary projects. To hell with Oregons broken educational system, hungry children and the homeless. Obviously they must be living in a fantasy land to even consider this in the first place.Sounds like a fun place, sign me up
 @B00gs Federal transportation dollars can't be diverted legally to pay for schools, feeding kids, or taking care of the homeless.  If we don't have a plan in place and those federal dollars go up.  As long as the federal government is spending money on infrastructure it seems stupid to pass up taking our share back to make our state better.
 @knottriel  @B00gs True, but those federal tax dollars rarely completely cover the costs of the project - not to mention ongoing operational and maintenance costs.  No matter what, the local taxpayer still ends up being on the hook to support these projects.
 @UtterReality  @B00gs With train type projects it's usually a fairly small amount because of the investment match thrown in by the owner of the rail line.  The only time that's usually not the case is if the state bought the rail line in question.
 @B00gs The politician's developer buddies wouldn't get rich from such frivolous things as education, helping neglected children and providing mental health care.  You should all know by now what drives the wheels of "progress" in this state.
I'd be willing to bet my lunch money that this is how it plays out
Â
Of course the study  WILL say there is sufficient demand,  it will be built  at a  tremendous cost  plus significant cost over runs.... and  it will just end up being  an ongoing money pit  with mostly empty trains going up and down the valley.Â
How nice. Spend millions of taxpayer dollars to study something that "The routes would be hugely expensive to create, and the obstacles, including securing money, are so many that it's possible the new line might never be built."
 @wondering Sounds like normal government spending to me.  When I was looking at the maps, I wondered how much money somebody earned just putting the "X's" over the rejected rail lines.
How about taking the money and spending it to fix our roads!
 @Jim330rifle Money given by the federal government for transportation projects, especially rail projects due to their significant influence over the past few centuries of the US, are not something that can be turned over to fixing local roads.  That's appropriated by Congress, and if the money is for railways we better have a railway plan in place or our federal taxes are going to a state willing to take them like CA, NY, NJ, CT, PA, MA, VA, MD, WA, etc.
Â
It's not the state's fault that the feds give out money that way, they're just trying to get into a position to collect what they can. Â If it helps make it easier for kids from Portland to get to school in Eugene at least it's helping kids here instead of across the country.
We got plenty of money for studies, lets spend some!
There is no infrastructure at the train stops. Once you get there by "high speed", you are then forced to travel at a snail's pace either waiting for public transport to eventually take you close to where you want to go, or rent a car with problems parking when you get there. Or you could walk several miles to where you need to be. At least when I'm in my car I can come and go when I want, and I really don't care if there is a Silver Streak passing me on rails as I head up and down I-5, because I know I will get exactly where I want to go in more comfort. Also I won't have to put up with crappy food on the train, or smelly people, or those that spread out all over the area with their belongings. And yes, I speak from experience. Took Amtrak from Salem to Tacoma once and watched cars and trucks move along I-5 at a much faster rate than this train went. Even motor homes going uphill were going faster. LOL. Also the train was late upon arrival in Tacoma, with the station already shut down. Yup! I'll stick to my car.
 @jpk Stick with your car and enjoy paying the parking fees.  Oh, and enjoy paying for the expansions at PDX and SEA to expand the airports to accommodate more flights between the two cities.  As populations grow that will happen at all the regional airports.  But since the FAA isn't viewed as a bad guy like Amtrak nobody cares about the billions we sink into air travel every year.
They would rather do this - than a by-pass on the west side.Â
Â
GREAT. Going nowhere FAST.Â
Is Tri Met Max expanding again?
Wasting money again.
I'd take high speed rail if it were available AND there was a car that I could use at the other end. The problem is that it costs way too much money to take the train and rent a car. Plus with the travel time to get to the train station and waiting for the train to show up I can drive down south for less money and get their quicker.
Â
Cost to go to Eugene via Amtrak is $52 round trip plus car rental of $20 per day. Time is 2.5 hours plus time to rent a car and drive to the destination. If a cab is used then the price actually is higher.
Cost to to to Eugene in a car is about the same money and I can make it there in 45 minutes less time and get right to the destination. Plus I can go home when I want to and don't have to wait for a train.
Â
The savings is significant.
@RalphCramden Yes but if they run those trains on dirt roads their won't be any speeding and people will have plenty of time to contemplate their lives, the state of the country, or what kind of car they might like to rent.
 @RalphCramdenÂ
Â
I think long haul is better, or if you don't need a car.
Â
I often took rail to Seattle and had people pick me up. It was cheaper but it actually took longer than driving.
Â
The train to DC was really nice, but it took a long time. And the commuter trains were really crowded but very fast.
Â
I think expresses and long distances should be where speed should be considered. Short trips just aren't worth the time.
Â
Although is lines get any longer going through airports that might change.
Â
Â
A new opportunity for speedy TSA checkpoints before getting on the train?
 @jpk Maybe they can install them at the malls and schools too!
 @RepomanÂ
I agree. Short hops are not profitable for me. It is was a long trip then I just fly. Trains are only for those who have the time and money.
 @I812 Â
Airports used to be private until the government decided to take over. Airports need to go back to being private. I don't want to pay any taxes to subsidize them.
Â
Bridges and roads used to be private until the government took over and they did just fine. In fact the Oregon trail was a toll road and was built by private enterprise. There is still a park called Toll Bridge where people paid to get across the Sandy river.
Â
Government takes over everything when they need to leave it to private enterprise.
Â
We don't need government except for a common defense and a few other regulatory issues.
@RalphCramden You fly? But what about those federally subsidized airports you don't need or want to pay for? Or the Federal air traffic controllers you don't want to pay for that keep the traffic safely flowing? Or the National Transportation Safety Board and Federal Aviation Administration you don't want to pay for or need that keep the airlines safe and investigate accidents?Â