Passenger rail for Florida

Posted on 21 April 2008
Filed under Conservation, Florida
Comment on this post

The United Rail Passenger Alliance recently posted an extensive and thought-provoking analysis and recommendations for regional passenger rail in Florida.

Florida is currently served by two long-distance Amtrak routes, with daily service in each direction: the Silver Meteor and the Silver Star. Both routes have New York City as their northernmost terminus, to Miami in the south. In Florida, the routes vary slightly: the Silver Meteor heads south from Orlando, while the Silver Star first goes through Tampa, then doubles back. (The Silver Star also calls at tiny Okeechobee Station, while the Meteor doesn’t.)

Although Florida’s largest cities are served by the Amtrak routes, one daily train in each direction makes the routes unsuitable for most travel within Florida. If, say, you’re trying to get from Orlando to Tampa for a 9:30 am meeting, Amtrak can’t help you.

In addition, Amtrak’s Auto Train runs from Sanford non-stop to Virginia, only for passengers transporting a vehicle. The Sunset Limited, which formerly ran from Orlando to Los Angeles, has only come as far east as New Orleans since Hurricane Katrina struck the Gulf. And of course, Florida’s had a number of schemes for various transit systems which never reached fruition, the most prominent of which was the high-speed rail system voters approved in 2000 (then repealed in 2004).

On the other hand, there’s commuter rail: the Tri-Rail system in South Florida, and the Central Florida Commuter Rail system expected to begin operations in 2010. But commuter rail doesn’t connect metro areas, so it can’t help a family in St. Petersburg get to Grandma’s house in Ft. Lauderdale for Passover.

To fill the gap, enter regional passenger rail. Many states already contract with Amtrak to provide regional passenger rail; I recently took one such train from Flint, Mich. to Chicago. Florida isn’t yet one of them. But Amtrak was in town last month, trying to drum up support for an intrastate system in Florida.

So what’s the verdict? The United Rail Passenger Alliance’s analysis makes a strong case for regional passenger rail in Florida — and lays out how it can work.

Reading the post, a number of comments came to mind. I won’t summarize the URPA report (read it first) or point out where we agree (which we mostly do), but only where my opinion differs.

I do want to highlight, though, that it’s a really interesting report, and I hope a lot of people read it. As the report emphasizes, regional passenger rail makes a lot of sense for Florida. The tracks are there, many of the stations are there; we just need to run the trains. The coming Central Florida Commuter Rail system demonstrates that we can do it — that, when it really matters, we can get the state, federal, and local governments on the same page, as well as the railroads who own the tracks.

The first point where the report seriously raised my eyebrows is the discussion of with the railroads — without a critical word for the model established by the Central Florida Commuter Rail deal with CSX. The deal has been widely panned for limiting CSX’s liability only to accidents involving their own trains; if another train has an accident on the tracks CSX maintains and formerly owned, CSX can in no way be held liable. This strikes me as an unfortunate handout; for the most part, I expect courts to assign reasonable blame, and carving out an exception like this smells like corporate welfare. There have also been accusations that the deal was improperly negotiated and less than transparent. I’ve argued in the past that we shouldn’t let these issues hold up the long-overdue Central Florida Commuter Rail system — a message echoed by Florida PIRG’s Brad Ashwell — but that doesn’t mean we should take it as a model for the future, either. Given the prominence of the issue, it seems odd that the URPA report doesn’t even mention it.

The next eyebrow-raiser were the proposed routes:

There are 11 proposed routes, which seems like a large number to start with for a state without much established ridership.
Route Six, “Palmetto Extension,” simply adds a link to Jacksonville from Amtrak’s Palmetto route, which runs from Savannah, Ga. to New York City — in effect, duplicating service available from the Silver Meteor and the Silver Star. Why?
No routes stop in Gainesville, although two stop nearby in Waldo and Hawthorne. I suspect this is due to the layout of existing track, but it’d be worthwhile to make the investment necessary to route through Gainesville. Literally thousands of students travel to Gainesville from another Florida city at least twice a year: more than 80% of UF freshmen are Florida residents, and few are originally from Gainesville. At a minimum, that’s one trip to and from campus each semester. Add the trips home for holidays, weekends with family, etc. — plus the visits by Mom and Dad, friends from home, etc. — it quickly adds up. Then consider the tourists to Gainesville, gameday visitors, alumni visits for Homecoming… there’s plenty of reason to have a station in Gainesville. Certainly, some visitors would take the train to Waldo or Hawthorne and connect to a shuttle or taxi, but many wouldn’t.
Many stops at small stations. Although I agree that regional rail should stop more frequently than long-distance trains, I’d shave off at least a tenth, and maybe as many as a quarter, of the stations proposed by URPA. For instance, I’d replace the stations in Waldo and Hawthorne with one in Gainesville. Maintaining smaller stations costs more than expanding larger stations. More stops might add convenience getting on/off, but it also increases travel time for passengers. Particularly at the beginning, when ridership is low, operating less-used stations will be a cost center. As with the overall number of routes, I take a less ambitious view of the initial scope of the system; I certainly would take issue with delaying operations until all the proposed stations and routes were online. It makes much more sense to roll out the backbone of the system first, and expand service as demand build and necessity dictates. The main advantage I could see of starting with many small stations would be the potential to garner greater support from legislators representing those cities.
This is probably another case of the existing track working against us, but we need a more direct route from Central Florida and the Gulf Coast to Tallahassee and the Panhandle. Few students from Tampa or Orlando would take the train to Florida State if it went first to Jacksonville before connecting to Tallahassee. Driving would have a significant time advantage. Even travelers from South Florida might find it considerably to take the Turnpike north. I don’t want to focus too much on colleges, but Florida’s large universities represent the potential for tens of thousands of in-state trips each year. Yet both Gainesville and Tallahassee are under-served in the URPA proposal. Linking Gainesville to Lake City could cut 90 minutes from a Panhandle-bound trip. (For comparison, this was part of the vision plan for high speed rail.) I appreciate the difficulty in making this feasible, though, even aside from the issue of track: Would a regular route bypass Jacksonville? Would you run a special connection solely between Gainesville and Lake City? How would that work with the timing of the other trains? So this isn’t so much a criticism of the URPA proposal as a comment on one difficulty of regional passenger rail in Florida.
I guess this is another issue with the track, but: no route from Orlando to the beaches? Seems like this could be a real money-maker, from tourists as well as residents. As it stands now, someone traveling from Melbourne to Tampa would have to first connect through either Jacksonville or West Palm Beach — which means, in practice, that very few people would take the train. (For comparison, this was part of the vision plan for high speed rail.)
Similarly, the lack of a connection from Naples to South Florida means that someone traveling from Fort Myers to Miami would have to first connect through Lakeland. That’d take much longer than driving, and few people would do it. (For comparison, this was part of the vision plan for high speed rail.)

(On a related note: It’s a 6.5 hour drive from Orlando to Atlanta. On Amtrak, it’s 26.5 hours, not counting time between the two connections in North Carolina. What the hell?)

Adding new track lengths — from Ocala to Lake City through Gainesville, from Orlando to the beaches, and from Naples to South Florida — is certainly a long-term goal. But I’d consider serving the smaller stations proposed by URPA (many of which don’t exist and would have to be built) a similarly long-term goal. Serving the smaller stations is easier to do than building new track, but it’s also less important. It wouldn’t be feasible (or very smart) to build an entirely new rail infrastructure in Florida, since the existing passenger-grade track — with stations in many places — is already there; but we should leave the door open to building short lengths of new track, or upgrading existing track, where doing so would have a significant benefit in terms of ridership, travel time, and efficiency.

Despite my criticisms, URPA’s proposal seems to serve most of Florida’s population remarkably well (and even better with my suggestions). A few places of significance — such as St. Augustine, Panama City, and Key West — are still more than 30 minutes away from a train station, but these could be served reasonably well by bus service (particularly buses coordinated with the train schedule, as with Amtrak’s Thruway service). Notably, these areas tend to be more significant as tourist destinations than for their resident population, so the lower fixed cost of buses can exploit the need to adjust schedules seasonally (more so than for other parts of the state). With that said, I look forward to the day when schoolchildren take trains to their field trips in St. Augustine (or at least most of the way, connecting to a bus or shuttle).

Which brings me to my next comment on the report. Amidst all the discussion of what the system should/shouldn’t do, there’s nothing about being intermodal. Intermodality is crucial for transit systems. Unless one form of transit runs to your house, your job, and everywhere you ever want to go, the system has to be intermodal. Currently, roads are the most intermodal transit infrastructure: they connect to other roads, to bus stations, train stations, airports, pedestrian infrastructure, and on and on. The more intermodal that passenger rail is, the more successful it will be — in a strictly business sense, nevermind the benefits for the environment and urban design. One good thing about the URPA proposal is it already interconnects with existing Amtrak stations, as well as Tri-Rail and Central Florida Commuter Rail. It also talks about having ample and safe parking. But there should be more emphasis on interconnecting with local and long-distance buses, airports and seaports (e.g. for cruise ships). I was saddened when I saw Ocala’s intermodal bus/train station, which is no longer actually served by trains; we need to bring that back.

In addition to ample and safe parking for cars and motorcycles, there should be ample and safe parking for bikes. Passengers should be able to bring their bike with them while traveling. Secure and clean lockers should be available in stations. Nearby sidewalks and crosswalks should be designed to handle increased foot traffic and ensure pedestrian safety (with appropriate signage or calming for motorists). Trail planners should be encouraged to consider ways to interconnect with train stations. (Many of Florida’s paved “recreational” trails were formerly railroad lines — you may think of them as a place to jog or rollerblade, but they may also be useful for pedestrians connecting to transit.)

The URPA proposal discusses amenities on board. I think they may overestimate the number of passengers interested in “premium” accommodations, but they are right to look at amenities and upgraded services as potential revenue centers. But the same approach should be taken with transit facilities. In addition to lockers and bike racks/lockers, there should be a cafe on-site or in the immediate vicinity. Clean, attractive facilities are important for building a positive image with passengers. Advertising is acceptable and can help generate revenue, but there should also be space for educational displays with information about the local heritage, culture, and environment. This helps build the sense that transit stations are “common spaces,” a feeling that will be helpful to help build Florida into a state more welcoming of transit.

Finally, I want to emphasize the part of the URPA report which states marketing will be essential. It will be. This cannot be overstated. Floridians are not used to this; it will take a lot to make us aware of the option, and to convince the skeptics. But consider how much we spend advertising the lottery, a frivolous service. We will need to take that kind of approach to publicize regional passenger rail (although the politics of creating the system, and the construction/renovation, will get a lot of attention for free). But if we build it — and if we tell people about it — they will come.

See also the National Association of Railroad Passengers’ vision for passenger rail in the Southeast. It incorporates one of my suggestions: connecting Atlanta to Lake City, as well as to Savannah, which would make it practical to take a train to Atlanta.

Comment on this post

Gavin Baker

A Journal of Insignificant Inquiry

Passenger rail for Florida

Recent Posts

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

Monthly Archives

Pages

Find It

Admin

Web Standards

Design