Comments on: How 'bout some trails with those high-speed rails? http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945 Portland Oregon bicycle news, events, culture, travel and opinion. Mon, 28 May 2012 20:52:37 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Daniel Ronan http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1559378 Daniel Ronan Thu, 20 May 2010 08:41:05 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1559378 Also, I think a good idea would be to have a clean up effort of railway right of way of all of the former telegraph poles and wires. In its place we could create bike paths and interpretive spaces that will be able to tell stories of significant cultural places along the rail route. Given that rail lines go through older town centers, I feel that a project along these lines would kick start a large amount of interest and economic development. Also, I think a good idea would be to have a clean up effort of railway right of way of all of the former telegraph poles and wires. In its place we could create bike paths and interpretive spaces that will be able to tell stories of significant cultural places along the rail route. Given that rail lines go through older town centers, I feel that a project along these lines would kick start a large amount of interest and economic development.

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Champe Burnley http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1522587 Champe Burnley Sat, 27 Mar 2010 03:56:18 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1522587 As one poster mentions, many miles of freight rail are also scheduled for upgrade. They, too, would be great candidates for rails-with-trails. Regarding high-speed concerns next to rails-with-trails, Alta Planning did a study and found this really isn't an issue. See: http://bit.ly/6sMNdC Sign the online petition calling for RWTs at www.railswithtrails.com As one poster mentions, many miles of freight rail are also scheduled for upgrade. They, too, would be great candidates for rails-with-trails.

Regarding high-speed concerns next to rails-with-trails, Alta Planning did a study and found this really isn't an issue. See: http://bit.ly/6sMNdC

Sign the online petition calling for RWTs at http://www.railswithtrails.com

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: john in nh http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1501398 john in nh Sat, 06 Feb 2010 18:58:53 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1501398 chris, no high speed on the current lines wont happen, at least not true 220 or 300mph like europe, china, and japan have (or are getting) high speed requires totally new tracks, new grades, no road crossings, and new signaling so in that regard its new right of ways, and freight cant use them due to the nature of the rails and the need to keep them in top form. so freight has its lines and the true passenger service has its lines, with maybe slower rural routs using older freight lines, eg going from the main line to a small town. however there is opportunity for all levels of train service to have rail trails next to them, and noise is not an issue, I have been next to high speed lines in france, germany, and spain, and the sound is really not that bad. wind however is a bit of an issue and so traditional chain fences cant be used, some sort of deflector must be used if we are talking true high speed. this is very logical and the two transportation mediums fit well together, we need to do it!! chris, no high speed on the current lines wont happen, at least not true 220 or 300mph like europe, china, and japan have (or are getting) high speed requires totally new tracks, new grades, no road crossings, and new signaling so in that regard its new right of ways, and freight cant use them due to the nature of the rails and the need to keep them in top form. so freight has its lines and the true passenger service has its lines, with maybe slower rural routs using older freight lines, eg going from the main line to a small town.

however there is opportunity for all levels of train service to have rail trails next to them, and noise is not an issue, I have been next to high speed lines in france, germany, and spain, and the sound is really not that bad. wind however is a bit of an issue and so traditional chain fences cant be used, some sort of deflector must be used if we are talking true high speed.

this is very logical and the two transportation mediums fit well together, we need to do it!!

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Chris http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500488 Chris Thu, 04 Feb 2010 19:10:43 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500488 You will never see "high-speed rail" in the United States. The #1 reason is because the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) won't allow trains that travel on freight lines to be light enough to effectively accomplish anything over about 160 mph. The FRA needs to realize that technology has improved and 60 year-old rules regarding crash protection are outdated. You will never see "high-speed rail" in the United States. The #1 reason is because the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) won't allow trains that travel on freight lines to be light enough to effectively accomplish anything over about 160 mph.

The FRA needs to realize that technology has improved and 60 year-old rules regarding crash protection are outdated.

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: mattotoole http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500288 mattotoole Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:59:23 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500288 With so much talk about high speed rail lately, it's easy to forget the <strong>additional</strong> billions being given to railroads to upgrade their freight corridors. The return on that investment should be maximized through additional uses for those rail corridors -- non-motorized transportation, recreation, etc. <a href="http://www.vabike.org/rtc-releases-california-rails-with-trails-report/" rel="nofollow">21 examples of rails with trails in California</a> were featured in a recent report, and there are many more all over the US. Your community could have them too! With so much talk about high speed rail lately, it's easy to forget the additional billions being given to railroads to upgrade their freight corridors. The return on that investment should be maximized through additional uses for those rail corridors -- non-motorized transportation, recreation, etc.

21 examples of rails with trails in California were featured in a recent report, and there are many more all over the US.

Your community could have them too!

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: K'Tesh http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500258 K'Tesh Thu, 04 Feb 2010 01:44:05 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500258 I'd love to have railside trails! I'd have easy graded ways to move around, and I'd know that the guy honking the horn is doing it only at crossings. I'd love to have railside trails! I'd have easy graded ways to move around, and I'd know that the guy honking the horn is doing it only at crossings.

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Todd Boulanger http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500177 Todd Boulanger Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:33:01 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500177 The low amount of high speed rail funding going to Oregon is likely a reflection of how low passenger rail enhancements/ investments have been in Salem. Remember last year...when passenger rail service in Oregon was almost zeroed out...one of the two rented Washington State owned Cascade trainsets were about to be sent home, etc. The other aspect may also have to do with a set of different freight ROW / service ownership in Oregon - Washington State's Cascade service is on BNSF facilities (vs. OR's Union Pacific?). BNSF has been quite willing to take anyone's money to guarantee on time passenger rail service (vs. delay due to freight priority) and make upgrades from single track to double/ multi track. I think this is an opportunity...especially if the bikepath trail facility can be used by rail companies for access and maintenance purposes. I assume the noise from the planned high speed rail service will not be a problem for trail users yet...but once speeds pass 150 mph then it might be a problem. All in all...I am not surprised at the state of the affair under discussion...the rail companies all got another sweet heart deal to get out of public passenger rail service in the early 1970s ...when A.M.T.R.A.K. was born. Our passenger rail speed and headways in this county would make most rail users from 1920 complain - given the state of our other publicly financed transportation facilities (highways, ports, and airports). The low amount of high speed rail funding going to Oregon is likely a reflection of how low passenger rail enhancements/ investments have been in Salem. Remember last year...when passenger rail service in Oregon was almost zeroed out...one of the two rented Washington State owned Cascade trainsets were about to be sent home, etc.

The other aspect may also have to do with a set of different freight ROW / service ownership in Oregon - Washington State's Cascade service is on BNSF facilities (vs. OR's Union Pacific?). BNSF has been quite willing to take anyone's money to guarantee on time passenger rail service (vs. delay due to freight priority) and make upgrades from single track to double/ multi track.

I think this is an opportunity...especially if the bikepath trail facility can be used by rail companies for access and maintenance purposes. I assume the noise from the planned high speed rail service will not be a problem for trail users yet...but once speeds pass 150 mph then it might be a problem.

All in all...I am not surprised at the state of the affair under discussion...the rail companies all got another sweet heart deal to get out of public passenger rail service in the early 1970s ...when A.M.T.R.A.K. was born. Our passenger rail speed and headways in this county would make most rail users from 1920 complain - given the state of our other publicly financed transportation facilities (highways, ports, and airports).

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Todd Boulanger http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500175 Todd Boulanger Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:32:46 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500175 The low amount of high speed rail funding going to Oregon is likely a reflection of how low passenger rail enhancements/ investments have been in Salem. Remember last year...when passenger rail service in Oregon was almost zeroed out...one of the two rented Washington State owned Cascade trainsets were about to be sent home, etc. The other aspect may also have to do with a set of different freight ROW / service ownership in Oregon - Washington State's Cascade service is on BNSF facilities (vs. OR's Union Pacific?). BNSF has been quite willing to take anyone's money to guarantee on time passenger rail service (vs. delay due to freight priority) and make upgrades from single track to double/ multi track. I think this is an opportunity...especially if the bikepath trail facility can be used by rail companies for access and maintenance purposes. I assume the noise from the planned high speed rail service will not be a problem for trail users yet...but once speeds pass 150 mph then it might. All in all...I am not surprised at the state of the affair under discussion...the rail companies all got another sweet heart deal to get out of public passenger rail service in the early 1970s ...when A.M.T.R.A.K. was born. Our passenger rail speed and headways in this county would make most rail users from 1920 complain - given the state of our other publicly financed transportation facilities (highways, ports, and airports). The low amount of high speed rail funding going to Oregon is likely a reflection of how low passenger rail enhancements/ investments have been in Salem. Remember last year...when passenger rail service in Oregon was almost zeroed out...one of the two rented Washington State owned Cascade trainsets were about to be sent home, etc.

The other aspect may also have to do with a set of different freight ROW / service ownership in Oregon - Washington State's Cascade service is on BNSF facilities (vs. OR's Union Pacific?). BNSF has been quite willing to take anyone's money to guarantee on time passenger rail service (vs. delay due to freight priority) and make upgrades from single track to double/ multi track.

I think this is an opportunity...especially if the bikepath trail facility can be used by rail companies for access and maintenance purposes. I assume the noise from the planned high speed rail service will not be a problem for trail users yet...but once speeds pass 150 mph then it might.

All in all...I am not surprised at the state of the affair under discussion...the rail companies all got another sweet heart deal to get out of public passenger rail service in the early 1970s ...when A.M.T.R.A.K. was born. Our passenger rail speed and headways in this county would make most rail users from 1920 complain - given the state of our other publicly financed transportation facilities (highways, ports, and airports).

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Also Anonymous http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500114 Also Anonymous Wed, 03 Feb 2010 23:19:32 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500114 <i>Might want to know that in the US the definition of high speed is 80-90 MPH. We aren't getting a version of the TGV here or pretty much anywhere with this plan.</i> The corridor in California is planned to top 220 mph. In Florida and Texas, the plan is for somewhere in the neighborhood of 180 mph. The Pacific Northwest might see 150 mph someday, but definitely will see 110 mph in the next decade (in WA). <i>As for the money coming to Portland, $8M every cent is going to renovating Union Station, not a penny to rail infrastucture.</i> Not true. Most of it will go to Union Station, but some money will be spent on engineering for a few bottlenecks in NoPo. Might want to know that in the US the definition of high speed is 80-90 MPH. We aren't getting a version of the TGV here or pretty much anywhere with this plan.

The corridor in California is planned to top 220 mph. In Florida and Texas, the plan is for somewhere in the neighborhood of 180 mph. The Pacific Northwest might see 150 mph someday, but definitely will see 110 mph in the next decade (in WA).

As for the money coming to Portland, $8M every cent is going to renovating Union Station, not a penny to rail infrastucture.

Not true. Most of it will go to Union Station, but some money will be spent on engineering for a few bottlenecks in NoPo.

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]> By: Anonymous http://bikeportland.org/2010/02/03/how-bout-some-trails-with-those-high-speed-rails-28945#comment-1500092 Anonymous Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:51:55 +0000 http://bikeportland.org/?p=28945#comment-1500092 Might want to know that in the US the definition of high speed is 80-90 MPH. We aren't getting a version of the TGV here or pretty much anywhere with this plan. As for the money coming to Portland, $8M every cent is going to renovating Union Station, not a penny to rail infrastucture. Might want to know that in the US the definition of high speed is 80-90 MPH. We aren't getting a version of the TGV here or pretty much anywhere with this plan.

As for the money coming to Portland, $8M every cent is going to renovating Union Station, not a penny to rail infrastucture.

Recommended Thumb up 0

]]>