The Virginian-Pilot
©
RICHMOND
Virginians might not see high-speed rail for at least a couple decades, but that has not discouraged many from climbing aboard what's shaping up to be a slow-moving train.
It won't be until 2030 before the first of the higher speed trains roll into Virginia, Department of Rail and Public Transportation chief Thelma Drake told more than 200 hopefuls this week at a regional conference.
The state recently won a $44 million federal grant to complete design of the $1.8 billion Richmond to Washington, D.C., segment of the high-speed rail corridor on the East Coast.
Drake said she estimates the work would take eight years. The first trains wouldn't run until after 2030 once time is factored in for federal applications and funding negotiations, and for construction.
A spur to Hampton Roads along the U.S. 460 corridor is planned for beyond 2030.
Drake credited the Southeast High Speed Rail Association, which hosted the conference titled "Making it Happen," for advocating for fast trains despite the slow process.
"It's been your synergy, your energy that's kept this debate alive," she said.
The day long Richmond conference attracted people from Atlanta to Boston, said Daniel Plaugher, executive director of Virginians for High Speed Rail.
"Being the optimist that I am, I think we can probably speed this timetable up," Plaugher said. "Our goal is to keep the momentum going in this region."
Drake said that while President Barack Obama's administration has made unprecedented sums of money available for high-speed rail, continued funding at those levels is unlikely.
"It's more important now than ever that we strategically plan transportation investments, so we get the best bang for the buck," Drake said.
A looming question for Virginia, she said, is speed: Will Virginia be satisfied with 110 mph and below, which is currently what's planned, or will significantly more money be spent to reach true high speed levels of more than 110 mph? For more than 110 mph, a sealed corridor separated from freight trains and other transportation modes is required.
Karen H edlund, Federal Railroad Administration's chief counsel, said her agency was swamped with applications for rail stimulus money.
"High-speed rail is something this country really wants," she said. "Massive revitalization of rail will not happen overnight."
Amtrak's Jeff Mann, senior director for policy and development, said high-speed rail's niche market will be for trips of less than 500 miles between urban areas. He said urban areas are expected to double in population by 2050, which will drive demand.
Jim Westmoreland, North Carolina's deputy transportation secretary, said, "These things won't happen easily. There's a new reality of how we work our funding options."
John Conlow, Amtrak's senior director of corridor planning, said he predicts there will be private participation in the development of high-speed rail and closer relationships with other transportation operators.
Debbie Messina, (757) 446-2588, debbie.messina@pilotonline.com

Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Twitter
Google
Yahoo
Wellfare for Well Connected
I though we already had a high speed transportation system to get to D.C. and beyond in less than an hour. It's called an airplane. Fully funded by private enterprise and paying customers. So explain why we should dump billions of public funds into "highspeed" passenger trains, convenience, efficient, funded by the customer base.
Thelma is and was a total failure.
Thelma is and was a total failure.
Not high speed till it clears 100.
Calling anything with an average speed below 100 mph "high speed rail" is being deliberately misleading.
same old ideas
Let's build high speed trains that are not affected by the snow or ice or water on the ground. Let's build high speed trains that don't have to slow down when entering the suburbs and urban areas. Let's build high speed passenger trains that are not so expensive that driving makes senses (can my family of four go to DisneyWorld or DC for less than it takes to drive)?
Build a monorail system. It is dedicated for passengers; it is off the ground (snow, ice and flooding); crossover traffic doesn't exist; if we can go to DC in the morning (an hour or so travel), tour, and come back home that night (an hour or so) then that's good.
How about getting some new ideas. It would be great for a MAGLEV or such, but until then ....
Only need to look at Japan and China who have done it all
Japan's bullet train is decades old. China has had its Maglev train (German technology) in place in Shanghai going 430 kph (60% faster than the bullet). So what's our problem? We just want to pay a SL of dollars to developers/contractors/gov engineers (that probably couldn't otherwise get a real job) for rail that is a whole lot less. Number 1, if you don't elevate it to keep it separate from highways, traffic, pedestrians and critters the thing will never be fast. Overall the destinations will never support its users with true city-wide light rail connections. Then, we boomers will never use the thing (no rascals, walkers and wheelchairs allowed!)
Bait & Switch - High Spped rail = 250 mph
Adding passenger trains on frieght lines that will take passengers just as long to get from Norfolk to Richmond and from Norfolk to Washington D.C. as driving will take - and adding yet another massive muliti-million dollars annual taxpayer subsidy to an already over budened state budget is NOT a good idea. Trying to pretend that "High Speed Rail" is only a few miles an hour abouve 79 MPH is sooo misleading. There are examples of true high speed rail that reached speeds of 250 MPH, or faster. IF we were to invest in a passenger rail service that dramatically REDUCED THE TRAVEL TIME between our region and Washington D.C., imagine what a HUGE benefit that could be for our region??? If we could get the travel time down to a little over an hour between here at D.C., folks in both areas could COMMUTE - the jobs and housing opportunities would be fantastic. Instead? Slow, slow, slow, rail. No thanks. Bring on High Speed Rail or not rail at all - not unless fares cover 100% of operations & Maintenance costs.
cost center
I don't care how slow or fast it goes. It should be a stand alone business venture and funded the same way. Taxpayers should have NOTHING to do with this idea.
Federal studies of HSR in 14 areas cite one common thread
HSR ultimately will only reduce traffic 2.5-4 percent at best, even in the next 20 years. A very low payback in terms of the initial cost. Find a better way for America! We like our cars, trucks and SUVs and high speed limits!
Please explain this to me ---
WHY are we spending $44,000,000.00 dollars on something that MIGHT happen twenty years from now? The odds of getting hit by lightening are better than that. Way to go Thelma --- waste a little more money!
Look across Pacific not Atlantic
The reader that said 'look across the Atlantic...' might also look across the Pacific to China who is now building real high speed rail to all major cities to spur growth. I won't go into where they got the money to do that.