Will High Speed Rail Work in Texas?

Efforts to bring high speed rail to Texas are chugging along. The Texas Department of Transportation this week formally applied for $1.8 billion in stimulus funding to improve existing passenger rail service in Fort Worth and other areas, and begin planning a world class system – in which cities may someday be linked by 185 mph trains. Historically, Texans have cast a skeptic eye toward passenger rail – at least during the automobile and aviation eras. In the 1990s, state officials rejected a proposal to build a bullet train-style system between big cities such as Dallas and Houston. This time, the key to success will be including smaller cities such as Temple in the early planning process, members of the advocacy group Texas High Speed Rail and Transportation Corporation testified Thursday during a Texas Transportation Commission meeting in Austin.  Grass roots support is crucial if state leaders want to avoid a repeat of the Trans Texas Corridor, a sweeping plan to build toll roads and utility lines across the state that became widely opposed by Texans who feared that too much private land would be seized, and projects would be built with too much foreign involvement. The seven-year-old Trans Texas Corridor plan was shelved earlier this year.

“One of the lessens we’ve learned is, we really need to start there at the community level,” transportation commissioner Bill Meadows of Fort Worth said of the rail plan.  “When we start talking about alignment, it has the potential to do great, but it also has the potential for impact. We really do want to start communicating, and more than anything else listening.”

If rural interests can be brought aboard, the proposed Texas T-Bone high speed rail line connecting Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston and San Antonio has the potential to revolutionize how people live and work, supporters said. Cities such as Waco and Bryan-College Station would suddenly be just a short hop from the state’s major metro areas. For now, the plan is to hire a rail director within the transportation department by next month, and take the necessary bureaucratic steps to begin governing the process, transportation department executive director Amadeo Saenz said. One option is to create a corporation within the transportation department that would be equipped to juggle public and private interests. The state hopes to get either its $1.8 billion stimulus request, or a comparable Federal Railroad Administration grant, he said. The transportation commission also renewed its agreement with Oklahoma to subsidize the Amtrak Heartland Flyer, which offers daily trains from Fort Worth to Oklahoma City. The states split the cost of covering Amtrak’s operating losses, and for Texas it will amount to $1.95 million for the next year. Kansas officials are pushing for the Heartland Flyer to be extended to Kansas City. Fort Worth also is served daily by the Texas Eagle, which connects San Antonio to Chicago.

Comments

[Garl B. Latham]

The simple answer to your question is YES; "high-speed rail" [sic] will work in Texas!

Unfortunately, completely lost in the politically-inspired hubbub is the fact that ANY passenger train services will work in Texas! All we need to demonstrate is the willingness to embrace proven railroad technology and operational logistics, and the fortitude to see the matter through to fruition.

As it stands, the Texas T-Bone proposal primarily indicates David Dean's powerful political connections, both in Austin and throughout our great state.

Otherwise, as a serious railway passenger plan, it leaves much to be desired.

I completely agree with the idea that smaller cities and rural areas should be made partners from the outset - and never ignored when it comes to sharing the benefits of our final product.

I also agree that a properly developed, maintained and operated passenger train system has the "potential to revolutionize how people live and work" in Texas.

Regrettably, it's at that point where my opinions quickly begin to diverge from the approach taken by the T.H.S.R.T.C.

I need to take a deep breath or two! I'll return later with a few salient questions.

Garl B. Latham
Dallas

[Garl B. Latham]

List of Questions, part I:

1. If the Texas T-Bone is being predominately designed as a "high-speed rail" project, why do we keep reading about a plan for some sort of "multi-modal corridor" on the T.H.S.R.T.C. web site? Hmmm...

2. What right-of-way would be used for service between Temple and Houston via College Station? There is not now, nor has there ever been, a direct, through railroad alignment seamlessly connecting the three locations. And what of GALVESTON?!

3. Where is the WORLD is "Fort Worth/Dallas"?! I presume the T-Bone's planning map is indicating a northern terminus at the D/FW International Airport. It's either that or a generic placeholder location, since no decisions have been made concerning the route's north end.

If it's to be the big airport, WHY?! True intermodalism is possible without requiring railroad passengers to go through all the hardships and heartaches involved with a typical visit to a 21st century airfield.

If we're actually discussing the needs of Fort Worth and Dallas as individual cities (which they are), then why the hang-up about indicating divergent and/or through routes? While we're at it, why do so many [ahem] "transportation planners" seem to think the world ends at the 'Metromess' [tm]?! What happened to Denton or Denison or any of the burgeoning suburban locations north of Big D?

4. Why hasn't the Texas D.O.T. ever taken the _federal_ D.O.T.'s "South Central High Speed Rail Corridor" plan seriously? I'm not sold on that idea, either; however, it makes a lot more sense (at least politically) to adopt the fed's map and add a Dallas/Houston leg to it, then request money to help build what Washington has already said it wants to do, than to come up with an entirely _new_ plan, starting from scratch, and request a sizeable handout for _that_! I'd love to have somebody explain it all to me.

5. This next question isn't solely related to the Texas T-Bone proposal, but it is based upon something mentioned in the article. How can Tex-DOT possibly expect to have a director of their newly formed railroad division in place "by next month," when the job's application period only closed one week ago last Wednesday?!

One final comment, then I'll take a break before returning with my List of Questions, part II:

It's pretty difficult to take a "high-speed rail" proposal seriously that _begins_ with a map which adds 20% more mileage to a Houston-Dallas trip than is necessary. North central Texas to the Gulf coast via Temple, indeed!

Later,
Garl

[Garl B. Latham]

List of Questions, part II:

6. Why is the Texas T-Bone to be dependent AT ALL upon the creation of ANY new infrastructure? Why can't potential alignments be planned in conjunction with existing railroad rights-of-way...at LEAST until the market proves itself and the political will necessary to support the construction of a _true_ high-speed alignment becomes evident?

7. WHY IS IT SO DIFFICULT TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A SINGLE EXAMPLE of a society establishing a dedicated high-speed passenger train system before fully developing its basic railway network?! NOT ONE!

8. Is our ultimate goal just to build something that's "world class," or is it actually to serve the greatest number of passengers safely, conveniently and comfortably? Are we going for fluff, or are we attempting to spend our money wisely?!

9. How can we sit here and try to justify the fact that Texas now has only one passenger train heading each way, daily, between Fort Worth, Austin and San Antonio, or that there is but one train, operating THREE TIMES WEEKLY, during the MIDDLE OF THE NIGHT, between San Antonio and Houston, or that there is currently NO PASSENGER TRAIN SERVICE WHATSOEVER between Fort Worth and Houston?!

Is our greatest immediate need to plan for some futuristic 185 m/h train, or is it to concentrate upon the not-so-sexy but very functional basic railway transportation alternatives we should be enjoying RIGHT NOW?!

Fact: Investing in conventional passenger train services would place rail-based options back into the public's consciousness.

Fact: These investments would greatly improve existing freight operations - a _vital_ part of our economy.

Fact: They would help prove to a skeptical public that passenger trains have a definite role to play in tomorrow's world. [After all, in EVERY INSTANCE where serious investment has been made to improve CONVENTIONAL intercity service in the U.S., IT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL!]

Fact: They would go a long way toward establishing the market in advance of any additional improvements, such as the construction of TRUE "high-speed" routes.

Fact: They would help create a market for domestically produced designs and materials, and allow us to begin "real world" testing with a new generation of equipment.

All these things (and more) would present us with a chance neither individuals or societies are oft' given: the opportunity to go back and correct some grave mistakes of the past!

Let's re-learn to walk before we try to run! We don't need a T-Bone. We need a good, tasty, filling meatloaf!

Or whatever...

Garl

[propecia online]

many people like to travel at very high speeds without awareness of the harm they may cause.

[coach outlet]

Great blog, I'll add you to my sidebar at Caveat and mention the blog in a post.I really enjoy reading you blog which spirit me up and pursue for futureYou really an outstanding person just the same as your articlesI really have a nice time with youThank you very much!