Orlando High Speed Rail IS DEFINITE

[SeaCastle]

It really all boils down to oil and energy for our future. A bullet train would ultimately save gas- a lot of it, so consumers will walk more once off the train (healthly America, yay), spend money they would have otherwise spent on gas (Economic circular flow, yay), and it would help the USA actually be able to compete with other countries :lol:

But the whole NJ Rail Tunnel issue isn't really about any of that. Without a doubt, there is a need for the rail tunnel to be built, which isn't bad in of itself. But NJ was due to foot the bill on any cost overruns, and rest assured there would have been massive cost-overruns (like there always is). Unless you're a taxpaying New Jerseyan, the gravity of the situation is lost because it will ultimately come down to folks like me paying higher taxes for years to come because of this project's supposed cost overruns. NJ is already in a dire fiscal situation as it is, thus all of the budget cuts being made across the state. I'm not an apologist for Gov. Christie in any way, shape, or form, but I agree that the state (and ultimately, people like me) shouldn't have to pay for cost overruns.

It's situations like this that make me wonder how the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels were built so relatively efficiently in the 20's and 40's and how they've lasted this long.

 

[flavious27]

If you ignore all the NJ citizens who work in NY, and all the NY citizens who would have moved to NJ because there was now a quicker and more efficient means to get to work, sure.

how would moving from ny be easier to commute to ny?

NYC gets the business taxes with indirect taxes and revenue while strengthening its position in industry. nyc and ny were not contributing any funds to this tunnel; nj, the fed and the commuters of the port authority.

 

[trr1]

:lookaroun :lookaroun
maybe they can give WDW the $2.4 billion for a monorail expansion

:animwink:

 

[ChrisFL]

I have many thoughts on this issue, while I like the IDEA of it, the practicality if it is uncertain at best.

First, while the Orlando side will have plenty of traffic between WDW and the Airport, I really don't see that being very feasible on the Orlando to Tampa route.

Unlike WDW, Tampa doesn't have a free bus system, and unless they have free parking somehow, it's not going to be cost efficient (not even mentioning the cost of the train itself).

The infrastructure around a high-speed rail is the most important factor.

I love going to Tokyo and Hong Kong because they have fully realized, advanced rail, bus and ferry systems...but they are VERY VERY densely populated cities.

 

[flavious27]

New Jersey got the short end of the stick there...getting stuck with the likely hundreds of millions in cost overruns that would have happend anyway, and we'd have to pay the bill. Thankfully there is significant private sector interest in the project, so we may end up getting those tunnels. But do you really believe Christie would have cut the largest public works project in the nation that would have created 6,000+ jobs just for the hell of it?

Back on topic, I'm a bit surprised that people on here have their panties in such a knot about the HSR for Florida being cancelled, when they vehemently argued against the usefulness of it when jt was pushing it forward.

It makes more sense for nj to have any jobs that would be created in ny to be on this side of the hudson

 

[WDW1974]

It's situations like this that make me wonder how the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels were built so relatively efficiently in the 20's and 40's and how they've lasted this long.

Because you had people with VISION working to make things better for all.
That isn't today's reality. Be it in NJ, FLA, CA etc.

And I looked at high speed rail as something akin to a Disney park that wasn't built as a full-day experience from the start ... you can pick the park, but the question I'd have for most fanbois is whether you'd rather the parks exist or not.

It's the same with rail ... this may not be perfect ... but it's a start. You either get this or you get nothing.

I am not thrilled with the Fantasyland project in scope or product, but would I rather have it or the status quo? I want the new and redone stuff, of course ... because there's always the possibility of more in the future.

With rail, you either start building or you don't.

Our Governor made a very bad choice today, albeit a predictable one, for Florida's future.

 

[fillerup]

I have many thoughts on this issue, while I like the IDEA of it, the practicality if it is uncertain at best.

First, while the Orlando side will have plenty of traffic between WDW and the Airport, I really don't see that being very feasible on the Orlando to Tampa route.

I like the idea of it as well.

But let me question your second thought about plenty of traffic on the Orlando side.

First - even though they donated land for the station, Disney has been adamant all along that they had no intention of discontinuing DME - that rail would only be an alternative. That will have a major impact on rail ridership.

The second thing that I think argues against heavy tourist ridership is the location of the OIA station. This may be a more informed group, but most people I talk to are unaware that the rail station was to be built at a new South Terminal (not yet constructed). Officials at OIA say that "one day" this terminal will handle 50% of airport traffic.

Passengers wanting to take the train from the North terminal would have to collect their luggage, return to the upper level, travel on another tram 1/2 mile to the South terminal to reach the rail station.

If you're arriving in off peak hours, the Rail Commission has said only that trains would run hourly. If you just miss boarding one, you would have been cooling your heels for an hour.

Once off the train at the OCCC or WDW, you would have had to catch a cab, or wait for a hotel shuttle to get you to your room.

You could easily spend more time transiting on the ground in Orlando than you did on your flight.

Human nature being what it is, most people will take the path of least resistance and lowest cost.

 

[ChrisFL]

I like the idea of it as well.

But let me question your second thought about plenty of traffic on the Orlando side.

First - even though they donated land for the station, Disney has been adamant all along that they had no intention of discontinuing DME - that rail would only be an alternative. That will have a major impact on rail ridership.

The second thing that I think argues against heavy tourist ridership is the location of the OIA station. This may be a more informed group, but most people I talk to are unaware that the rail station was to be built at a new South Terminal (not yet constructed). Officials at OIA say that "one day" this terminal will handle 50% of airport traffic.

Passengers wanting to take the train from the North terminal would have to collect their luggage, return to the upper level, travel on another tram 1/2 mile to the South terminal to reach the rail station.

If you're arriving in off peak hours, the Rail Commission has said only that trains would run hourly. If you just miss boarding one, you would have been cooling your heels for an hour.

Once off the train at the OCCC or WDW, you would have had to catch a cab, or wait for a hotel shuttle to get you to your room.

You could easily spend more time transiting on the ground in Orlando than you did on your flight.

Human nature being what it is, most people will take the path of least resistance and lowest cost.

I see your point. I hadn't actually researched the details of the OIA side of things, but as far as the WDW side, I thought that they would probably be sure to increase service for the bus service and the hotels.

I can see why they'd say they would still offer DME, since it's a perk they can offer for free. The high-speed rail won't be free for WDW hotel guests unless somehow Disney could do some MAJOR deal with the transit authority.

 

[toolsnspools]

Why we ever thought going backwards was a good idea I'll never know.

We started with rail. It was great. It allowed us to expand across the country. We could move long distances quicker than ever.

We improved on that idea with the car. Not only could we go long distances relatively quickly, we had the freedom to move around once we got where we were going.

We improved on the car with the Airplane. I doesn't have to take 25 hours to get from NH to FL anymore because we can fly there. I can still use the auto (rental) when I get there for local travel, so I don't have to walk 5 miles to get groceries.

Why are we moving backwards to the train again? We should be spending that money to innovate, not to attempt to improve a technology that doesn't meet the need. Would it be impossible to create a rail system that travelled high speed that you could pull your car onto? You could save on gas, stop worrying about traffic, hop in the back seat and watch a movie with the kids. Could you solve traffic congestion and accidents with a system like that? Could you build trains that would connect and split real time based on the travellers destination, so they don't have to stop at every station?

HSR as they were planning to build it it a step in the wrong direction. It doesn't solve the problem that has plagued trains since the beginning. You can only go as far as the rail will take you. You have to walk from there. There are far better ideas out there.

"I believe in being an innovator." - Walt Disney

 

[lazyboy97o]

And, again, I said I had some issues with the plan as presented. But you need to start somewhere and if this was gonna be it, then it should have been allowed. I don't know if you reside in FLA, but this state is hurting in a way I have never seen. It needs jobs, real high-paying jobs and it needs to start to get into the 21st century.

Construction jobs are temporary. Creating jobs that ultimately serve nobody but those employed only creates bigger problems not just for the state budget, but also for moving forward with other projects.

It's the same with rail ... this may not be perfect ... but it's a start. You either get this or you get nothing.

There is a starting point and there is just a really bad idea. Nothing about the Tampa-Orlando route works for high speed rail. All you get is a really expensive system that never outperforms conventional rail systems, making it a poster child for the anti-high speed rail crowd. Tampa-Orlando should be a dedicated conventional system that actually serves the proper areas of that town, as compared to the totally out of the Amtrak service, and is properly designed so that, in the future, high speed trains can make the express trip down to Tampa. Going back to your parks analogy, this is like building and opening just the hotels before you even begin seriously talking about starting design on the park.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Going back to your parks analogy, this is like building and opening just the hotels before you even begin seriously talking about starting design on the park.

Or how about opening DCA (the 2001 version) before Disneyland, or WDSP before DLP? How long would those resorts have survived? How much capital would they have earned to invest in improving the product? How much of a reputation for quality, or consumer loyalty, would they have established?

Not that I'm saying this project would have definitely been that type of disaster (we'll never really know), but I can think of situations where (at least in theory) just opening any park and calling it a starting point might have killed further expansion, rather than fueling it.

 

[Wilt Dasney]

Some updated reactions to this story:

California pols want the money that Florida rejected.

Washington state, too! (And they already got some of the cash Wisconsin and Ohio turned down.)

Tampa mayoral candidates still want the rail, may lean on the gov. to reconsider.

 

[GrumpyFan]

I'm kind of in the middle on this. I think I agree with the governor's decision and his reasons for making that decision. I do believe the system could be more of a burden than a blessing for now. However, I really have to wonder if 10-15 years from now whether that decision might be questioned. I'm not necessarily saying that I think HSR is the be-all solution, but I do think it's one that should be considered, not just for Orlando to Tampa, but for our whole country. There are only so many roadways that can be built to handle traffic. Fuel costs are going to increase, and I don't believe electric cars are ready for mainstream just yet. Maybe that will change in another 10-15 years. But, in fifteen years when there are another 20-25 million visitors (80-100 million est. total) coming to the area, and another 100,000 citizens, will they be prepared to handle it? Or, will it be major grid-lock when trying to get from the airport to Disney or Universal or Seaworld?

 

[Wilt Dasney]

For the record, the California project is not without its own political wrangling. The first leg has been heavily criticized for connecting two spots on the map that nobody would want to travel between (Borden to Corcoran, a route that makes Tampa to Orlando look world class by comparison). (More here)

However, local voters have already approved the project in California, and the governor is staunchly behind it.

 

[dandaman]

HSR as they were planning to build it it a step in the wrong direction. It doesn't solve the problem that has plagued trains since the beginning. You can only go as far as the rail will take you. You have to walk from there. There are far better ideas out there.

"I believe in being an innovator." - Walt Disney

While valid points, I do find it a bit ironic that you quoted a man well-known for his love for trains.

 

[TP2000]

While valid points, I do find it a bit ironic that you quoted a man well-known for his love for trains.

Walt Disney was a fan of trains, no doubt about that. He famously included the Santa Fe Railroad in the earliest plans for Disneyland, and named the locomotives of the Disneyland & Santa Fe Railroad after the capitalist executives of that private railroad, names that exist to this day on the sides of the locos at Disneyland. The C.K. Holliday was Walt's personal favorite loco, named after the famous founder of the great Santa Fe Railroad, and the loco Walt commandeered a lot during his weekly visits to the park in the 1950's and 60's, and the handsome loco the publicity department also likes to use for celebrity visits.

Walt pulls the C.K. Holliday onto the Disneyland main line with young guests circa 1955

Sophia Loren rides shotgun on the C.K. Holliday circa 1965

The C.K. Holliday, lovingly cared for 56 years later, at Disneyland circa 2011. (with lucky young guests riding shotgun with the engineers)

The point? The Santa Fe Railroad, the icon of Walt's young life and key attraction at Disneyland USA, was and is a private railroad owned and operated by succesful industrialists working to earn profits. It's not a government owned railroad operated by bureacrats working to earn votes.



It's hard to imagine Walt (or anyone for that matter) idolizing the middling mediocrity of the heavily government-subsidized Amtrak of the late 20th and early 21st centuries.

.

 

[toolsnspools]

When Walt designed the original EPCOT, he built the entire city around the transportation. That was his idea of the best way to get all the layers of transportation to work together. It's not feasible to take an existing city and rebuild it to match the current transportation styles.

Anyone that is using California as a good example has not paid much attention to their budget woes. They have no idea what a sustainable spending level is.

 

[powlessfamily4]

Florida Gov. is on Fox News right now stating they are rejecting all funds and they will not move forward because of the expense it will eventually cost the tax payers of Florida.

 

[flavious27]

Why we ever thought going backwards was a good idea I'll never know.

Why are we moving backwards to the train again? We should be spending that money to innovate, not to attempt to improve a technology that doesn't meet the need. Would it be impossible to create a rail system that travelled high speed that you could pull your car onto? You could save on gas, stop worrying about traffic, hop in the back seat and watch a movie with the kids. Could you solve traffic congestion and accidents with a system like that? Could you build trains that would connect and split real time based on the travellers destination, so they don't have to stop at every station?

HSR as they were planning to build it it a step in the wrong direction. It doesn't solve the problem that has plagued trains since the beginning. You can only go as far as the rail will take you. You have to walk from there. There are far better ideas out there.

"I believe in being an innovator." - Walt Disney

Trains are better for the environment in many ways; modern trains do not pollute nearly as much as jets and cars do along with being more efficient, designing town and cities around rail prevents sprawl and is healthier for citizens.

 

[JEANYLASER]

I Love trains! I hope in 2015 the bullet train Miami to Orlando! I hope to see it in 2015!