Better Planners Podcast

Pocket Park Ep: Pacific Northwest High Speed Rail

• Mary Heberling-Creighton, Shelley Denison

Share episode

Welcome to another installment of a pocket park episode! In this one, Mary and Shelley discuss all things high speed rail, including the new federal funding to study a potential high speed rail line in the Pacific Northwest. What are the exciting opportunities, but also what are the pitfalls? Is it worth it to be able to go from Portland to Seattle in 1 hour, but it'll take years to fund? What about the existing Amtrak line? We talk all about it in this episode.

What is a pocket park episode? It's a shorter episode on highly relevant, planning related topics that are happening in the public realm in real time.

Episode Resources:

Want to be a part of the podcast? Send in an email!
The team behind the upcoming Better Planners podcast wants to hear from you about the real life issues you handle as a planner. What are the honest, gritty, wicked problems you find yourself managing?

To share your experiences, email betterplannerspodcast@gmail.com
Your message might end up in one of the upcoming podcast episodes. You can be as anonymous or as identifiable as you want.

Where to find us:
Website: https://oregon.planning.org/community/betterplannerspodcast/
Instagram: @betterplanners

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Okay, Shelly, if you could go anywhere via train. And, like, it could exist already, it could not exist. Where would you go?

Shelley Denison:

I would love to do a train trip around Slovenia and Croatia. Ooh. I think, okay, so first of all, I want to go to Slovenia and Croatia. Right. Like, the natural environment? And one of the things that I love about train travel is that you can actually appreciate the natural environment in a way that you can't on an airplane, and you can't if you're driving a car. I love that about trains. And so I would love to go to a beautiful part of the world, like, The Baltic States, Slovenia, and Croatia, and do train travel with, uh, specifically, you know, like the Amtrak cars that have like the, the windows.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Oh, the like, yeah, the, the big window walls.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah, the big like panoramic windows.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Right. With, with that vibe. That's what, that's what I want.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Oh, that sounds amazing.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah. What about you?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I, so this, uh, does not exist, but I think that it would be a fun idea if there were specific trains that just go all between the different, various national parks in the country.

Shelley Denison:

Oh!

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

And, that's your way to, like, get in the park, so one reduces, cars within the parks, which they already do for a lot of the national parks, but it just seems like a really fun idea. Plus, because it's in, like, such Beautiful natural areas as well. The ride sounds like it would be amazing.

Shelley Denison:

Oh, yeah.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

like say yeah, say you're like taking a trip from Portland down to Crater Lake and You just get to sit on a train and then you get to be at this beautiful blue lake.

Shelley Denison:

I love that.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

And truly it is very blue. If you've never been you need to go to Crater Lake

Shelley Denison:

Alright, Slovenia and Crater Lake.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yes.

Shelley Denison:

Bucket list.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Bucket list for sure. You're listening to the Better Planners Podcast brought to you by the Oregon Chapter of the American Planning Association. I'm Mary Heberling Creighton.

Shelley Denison:

And I'm Shelly Dennison.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

You can find us on Instagram at better planners, planners is plural, on the webpage for the Oregon APA chapter, and on all of your favorite podcast streaming platforms.

Shelley Denison:

You can also get in touch with us by sending an email to better planners podcast at gmail. com. If you'd like to support the podcast, you can go to Ko-fi. com slash better planners. That's K O dash F I. com slash better planners. Mary, what are we talking about today?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Oh, boy. So if you couldn't guess from our opening question, it's about trains. And in particular, you probably, especially if our audience is of, you know, like planners, allied professions, they're probably paying attention to this kind of stuff that's happening in the news. But, so in December of 2023, Biden announced 8. 2 billion dollars in new grants for high speed rail. And pipeline projects nationwide. Part of that 8. 2 billion is kind of providing funding for two different types of programs. So the 1st, one is the federal state partnership for inner city passenger rail program, which will advance two high speed rail corridors and fund improvements to existing rail corridors for expanded service and performance. Some of those, like, high level ones that people talk about a lot, because it's was a big deal was that it'll help deliver high speed rail service in California, Central Valley. It will create a brand new high speed rail corridor between Las Vegas, Nevada, and Southern California, serving an estimated 11 million passengers annually. Um, it's also going to expand and add frequencies to the Pennsylvania Keystone Corridor between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh. And among others, it'll invest in Chicago Union Station and has an initial step toward future improvements to critical Midwest corridor hubs. So a lot of great things. It's not just about high speed rail. It's also improving existing passenger rail infrastructure. But then the other set of program was to announce 69 corridor selections across 44 states. Through the quarter identification and development corridor ID program, which will drive future passenger rail expansion. So, the corridor ID program is a new planning program made possible by President Biden's bipartisan infrastructure law, which will help guide inner city passenger rail development throughout the country. And in this inaugural round of selections, it aims to 1 upgrade 15 existing rail routes. Two add or extend service on 47 new routes. And three, advance seven new high speed rail projects creating a pipeline for intercity passenger rail projects, ready for implementation and future investment.

Shelley Denison:

Hmm, cool.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Wasn't there something in this grant program, um, that might apply to our region, the Pacific Northwest?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yes. And that's why we're going to talk about this. In particular, in that Corridor ID program, the Cascadia High Speed Rail Study project was awarded a 500, 000 grant. Now that doesn't sound like a lot, but the grant will then unlock 50 million in allocated state matching funds for this high speed rail study, and the CID program will provide access to federal funding without having to reapply. And provide access to an additional 100 million in identified state match funds for future biennium.

Shelley Denison:

Hmm.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So it kind of is, is a small step. That can be taken to gain a lot more funding for this particular project.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah. So with high speed rail projects, there's always a lot of technicalities, especially when it's like a federal level project.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Just like a ton of details. So what are like the high level things that we should know about the Cascadia high speed rail project?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah. So good question. The proposed project would go from Portland to Vancouver, B. C. So the like Pacific Northwest area. Um, the key vision of the project is a fast, frequent, reliable and environmentally responsible transportation system that unites the Cascadia maker region. That's kind of the term that they use for that. And they want it to position themselves for global competitiveness and future prosperity. And with the proposed plan, they are suggesting that the high speed rail could potentially get someone from Portland to Seattle in one hour.

Shelley Denison:

That's wild.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Right?

Shelley Denison:

That's wild.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

You could like, you could like wake up on a Saturday morning and just decide you're going to go to Pike Place Market.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, absolutely.

Shelley Denison:

That's wild.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Wow.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, because currently, for those that do not live in the Pacific Northwest, Uh, it takes roughly about three hours to drive from Portland to Seattle, if you have good traffic.

Shelley Denison:

And then Amtrak, you know, it's, I love, I love taking the Amtrak.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Up to Seattle. It's my preferred way to get up there. But it is quite a bit slower. And then also, just sometimes like, not super reliable.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Right. Yeah. So the current Amtrak train. It's called the Cascade Line. It is about, it runs about 79 miles per hour, and it's also routinely delayed by congestion on the mainland shared with freight trains, and that's the thing that I learned while doing research for this podcast, is that all of the rail lines are owned by freight rail companies. And so the passenger rail lines basically have to like, hey, can I borrow your your rail line.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So, and freight rail is extremely profitable in comparison to passenger rail, so they want to obviously provide more resources or more availability for freight lines than they do for passenger rail.

Shelley Denison:

Right. I had a friend who lives in Seattle Come down to visit a few months ago and I told him, you know, you should take Amtrak and he had never taken Amtrak before and I was like, you should, you should take Amtrak. It is such a good experience. So comfortable. It really is. I like it is so much.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

It's actually a beautiful ride from Portland to Seattle.

Shelley Denison:

But his train ended up being delayed three hours. He was sitting on the train for three hours.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I did one time take the train from Portland to Seattle, and then I, because I was taking a flight out of the Seattle airport. And they had, it's so great because the main station in Seattle is like right in the heart of the city. And then they planned it, like they, good job, those transportation planners in the city of Seattle. Uh, they're like, their version of the, the Max Line, or their version of the, um, the Light rail. You can take directly from the train station to SeaTac.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah. Yeah. Way to go, Seattle. I mean, it's almost as if people who design, like, passenger train infrastructure, are also the kind of people who think holistically about the kinds of places people want to go.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Imagine that.

Shelley Denison:

Imagine that.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Planners planning.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

What? What is that?

Shelley Denison:

What is this? So, we're big Train fans.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

But not everybody is. Um, so what are some of the issues or concerns about this proposal and, uh, why are some people uh, Hesitant or skeptical about high speed rail.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah. And, and I would say in my research, it's, it wasn't, uh, people against, uh, trains. It was folks that thought the money could have been used a little bit more effectively to actually even promote more passenger rail, um, which I thought was a super interesting, um, point on all of this. Um, but also, so if you noticed, I mentioned that the high speed rail line would go from Portland to Vancouver, BC. And it misses some of the, uh, cities south of Portland, which is Salem, which is the capital of Oregon. And then Eugene, which is, uh, a college town, so the University of Oregon is in Eugene. And the Amtrak line does go south. So you can take Amtrak all the way from Eugene up to Vancouver, BC. And you could even keep going south all the way down into California as well. But, uh, the high speed rail line project does not propose that currently. So some lawmakers in Oregon did introduce a bill that would require high speed rail project to extend all the way down to Eugene. But there is hesitation around that because people are thinking that there wouldn't be enough ridership to kind of make up the cost to build the infrastructure south of Portland. But I would argue that like Eugene is kind of a pretty nice central hub for the state. It's kind of in a really nice central location. It's almost like two hours to get to most major cities is from Eugene.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

And so I can see that being actually a really interesting kind of hub.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

To create for folks to, to take this high speed rail, so.

Shelley Denison:

And I also imagine, you know, the demographic of Eugene, a lot of Eugene is college students.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

And I imagine train travel would be, you know, if it were more of an option, it would be a really, really popular option because it is so affordable.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Mm hmm.

Shelley Denison:

Um, and yeah, if students could go more places, they'd be more likely to use passenger rail.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah. Well, and if they like fly into the Portland. International Airport.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Or even SeaTac.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Like up in Seattle. They could just then take the train down to their school.

Shelley Denison:

Exactly.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah. And then, um, Eugene is also very close to Corvallis, which is the other, the other college town for the other state university, which is Oregon State.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So that's one pitfall that some folks have brought up about the high speed rail project in the Pacific Northwest. Another one, which I found super interesting because I don't remember hearing, you know, like, High Speed Rail is kind of this, like, hip thing to talk about right now. Which, there are definitely reasons why it's,, cool and, we should be looking into it, you know. Obviously, fast train travel is amazing. But there are some rail advocates that actually didn't like that the federal money was given for the Cascadia High Speed Rail line because they wanted to actually see more money being used toward the existing Amtrak line. So the Amtrak line that goes from Eugene all the way up to Vancouver, B. C. So passenger rail advocates and transit user and climate action groups actually have voiced misgivings about throwing money and energy at the Cascadia bullet train while the existing Amtrak Cascades line struggles with reliability and capacity. Some of the things that they suggested that money actually should be used for is a prior prioritizing ramping up services on the state supported Amtrak cascade line up to 110 miles per hour with hourly departures throughout the daytime and evenings. That would cause, or that would require some infrastructure improvements around some of the like curves that we have so that you could increase the speed for the train line. Um, but ultimately the, those infrastructure improvements would be significantly cheaper than it would be to build a brand new high speed rail line. Um, and we already have the Amtrak line so it's in my opinion, I think it's a very valid point. Earlier in 2023, a consultant on contract to the Washington legislators joint transportation committee said that it could cost anywhere between 36 billion dollars and 150 billion dollars to build this high speed rail, similar to the systems that you see in Europe and Asia. So like the elite high speed rail lines.

Shelley Denison:

I want to interject. So 36 billion is a lot of money. That's just objectively a lot. 150 billion is like an obscene amount of money. That's a giant range.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, it really is.

Shelley Denison:

Like, I, I, listen, I love consultants. Some of my best friends are consultants. Um, but to come back and say, this could cost Anywhere from 36 billion to 150 billion. It's like, okay.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Okay. Uh, sure.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

That is, yeah, that is completely fair. One thing though, uh, if you are a planner in Oregon or Washington, one thing to kind of think about in regards to the 30, at least let's start with the low number, the 36 billion dollar number to build high speed rail. We've been trying to, for the last decade, to build a new bridge over the Columbia River, a new interstate 5 bridge, which would cost 6 billion dollars. And we're only halfway through it with that goal. It's been really hard to get the funding for that particular project. So it's just something to think about when you've got these large infrastructure projects and the funding is pretty significant. It's going to take a while to get the funding and, and not only would we need the funding, but like all of that would include a new dedicated track just for at the high speed rail, which would probably include extensive tunneling and new bridges and all of that to get to the desired speed that they would want for a high speed rail. So a lot goes into that.

Shelley Denison:

Right. You know, I also know part of the passenger rail discussion, more broadly, is a question about the role of government.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Mm hmm.

Shelley Denison:

You know, you have a lot of folks, maybe more on the conservative end politically, who would argue that it's not the government's responsibility. It's not in their purview to subsidize, to develop passenger rail infrastructure. You know, I lived in Ohio, went to grad school in Ohio. I was there for about six years. So back in the 2000s, there was a high speed rail project proposed by the Ohio Department of Transportation, another ODOT, but Ohio, called the Ohio Hub.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yep.

Shelley Denison:

And it was going to be funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. And what it was proposed to be was a passenger rail, high speed passenger rail, in what was called the 3C Corridor. You have Cincinnati in southwest Ohio, Columbus right in the middle, and then Cleveland in northeast Ohio. And it's flat. There's nothing. So, I mean, just ideal, ideal corridor for high speed rail.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

And those three major hubs, I mean, literally just like almost in a straight line, right, would have been absolutely perfect for high speed rail. A lot of people were super excited about it. And so the state got funding in 2009, and the governor, John Kasich, refused the federal funds.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, call that name out.

Shelley Denison:

John.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Just call him out.

Shelley Denison:

John Marie Kasich. Sorry.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

That was so good.

Shelley Denison:

Hold on. Richard. John Richard Kasich, Jr., born May 13th, 1952.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

What's his social security number? Just get it all out there.

Shelley Denison:

He wasn't even born in Ohio.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Shelley Denison:

Okay, anyway. So, he refused. John Kasich refused the federal funds, and they were reclaimed by the federal government, and his big justification for that was this is not what government money should be used for. No, but it's, it's one of those things of, um, where, of what I think points at A thing, a, a phenomenon that, that shows up that is symptomized in so many different areas, including this, which is that idea of the American dream is absolute freedom and autonomy of the individual.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

And there is, unfortunately, the sentiment that mass transit. Um, high speed rail, buses, commuter rail, light rail, is an attack on the idea of the absolute freedom, absolute sovereignty of the individual.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Mm hmm.

Shelley Denison:

That it's not, it's a, it's the war on cars, right?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

And so I think that sentiment is very real. In a lot of places.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Mm hmm. It absolutely is. Uh, uh, in my research, I also found, like I mentioned earlier, freight rail is significantly more profitable than passenger rail line. And so what happened in the 1970s was there was It's some bill that I don't remember, some federal ruling that allowed freight lines to not provide passenger rail, and then that's what created Amtrak. So Amtrak is exclusively passenger rail. So if you want to know why, how Amtrak got started, there you go. Um, also we're going to provide a bunch of resources in the show notes.

Shelley Denison:

As always links in the show notes.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So you'll get some really interesting, um, input about Amtrak and high speed rail and all of this sort of thing. But in itself, uh, passenger rail is not a profit led industry, right?

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

But. You could argue a lot of just passenger transportation isn't, like, the ultimate profitable thing.

Shelley Denison:

Highways are not profit generating. The post office is not profit generating. The military, well, we won't go there.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

We don't want to go there.

Shelley Denison:

Um, yeah, and that's like another big question is should the government be revenue generating? Should the government be profit, not revenue, but profit generating? Is that, is that the job of the government?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah. And what's also interesting, like I said earlier, so freight lines, it's one of the only transportation entities that is owned solely by the private market.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So, interstates, that's government. That's the government funded thing, right?

Shelley Denison:

Mm hmm.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Uh, airlines have to pay to use airspace that is owned however you want to define that.

Shelley Denison:

Right. Yeah.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So they, they basically have to ask for permission to use various airspace, right? So it, it's this interesting phenomenon that is not usual for transportation that is you're dealing with an entity that is solely private market.

Shelley Denison:

Yeah, so has there been much research or much looking into, you know, sort of the general interest in train travel?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, I don't know if it's a recent phenomenon. I'm not going to say it is, but I think it is. With all of the conversations around climate change and wanting to provide space for, for people to travel in a more climate conscious way, I think train travel has become A lot more talked about in that sense. So a study at UPenn says that a long distance train trip produces 37 percent less emissions than a plane flight. Also on top of that, you are 17 times more likely to die while driving than taking a train.

Shelley Denison:

Interesting.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

And I don't have any good stats for any of this, but I think we can all say flying sometimes is not great. You have to deal with TSA, the, uh, seats have gotten smaller over the years, I think that's, maybe that is data, like, facts? Not just me saying that? Um, and you can't get up and stand and, like, really just walk and kind of provide that ability to stretch and kind of, You know, have a more enjoyable transportation experience. Those are the reasons why I, I mean, if I never had to get on a plane again...

Shelley Denison:

I know.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I would do it.

Shelley Denison:

I, listen, if getting on a plane has one hater, it's me. If getting on a plane has zero haters, I'm dead. I hate everything. I hate everything about airports, about airplanes. I hate everything about it. I, a thing that drives me absolutely crazy is how every single airport, TSA in every single airport, every single security checkpoint does things just a little bit differently. Like, this one wants you to take your laptop out of your bag. This one's like, no, leave your laptop in your bag. What are you doing? You're about to go to jail if you take your laptop out of your bag. But then they all yell at you. I hate that. It makes me want to cry. And as somebody who just wants to get a good grade in the airport security line, it just makes me so anxious. Getting on Amtrak is a dream.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Oh, it's so easy.

Shelley Denison:

And they have those footrests.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

And the giant seats, and you can lean back, and you can walk around, and the bathroom's more comfortable, and they have the little view cars.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah, the view cars.

Shelley Denison:

And the food cars, you can just go like buy a snack.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Mm hmm.

Shelley Denison:

Beautiful. Beautiful. Also, I was going to make a joke when you said that, um, you're 17 times more likely to die while driving than taking a train. I was going to make an off color joke about like, oh, as long as Boeing doesn't make trains.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Um, one of my favorite things that I found. So, of the, like, folks that were, kind of unhappy about this, this funding and, for High Speed Rail, there's, a mayor up in Washington that's, a big, like, train person, but, not a fan of the High Speed Rail project, and he calls it the bullet train bon bondoggle? Boondoggle?

Shelley Denison:

Oh my gosh, the bullet train boondoggle?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

Oh my gosh. That's good.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I love it.

Shelley Denison:

I hate that that's so good.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I know.

Shelley Denison:

I hate that that's so good.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Eugene is also very close to Corvallis, which is the other, the other college town for the other state university, which is Oregon State.

Shelley Denison:

Right.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

So.

Shelley Denison:

I get them confused.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

That's okay.

Shelley Denison:

Which one's the duck and which one's the beaver?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Well, okay.

Shelley Denison:

I'm sorry. I'm not from here.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

As, as a duck alumni, not too happy about that statement, no.

Shelley Denison:

I'm so sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I know the ducks are, they're the green and yellow ones.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

That, that, yes.

Shelley Denison:

Okay.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

That's true.

Shelley Denison:

Great.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

And they're the ones in Eugene.

Shelley Denison:

And they're, they're Oregon State.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

No! You said that on purpose, didn't you?

Shelley Denison:

God, no! No, you, okay, University of Oregon.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yeah.

Shelley Denison:

The green and yellow, they're the ducks. They're in Eugene.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Yes, yes.

Shelley Denison:

And then Oregon State is like, orange?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Orange and black.

Shelley Denison:

Orange and black. And they're the beavers, which is hilarious to me, that the two mascots for the major universities in Oregon are ducks and beavers.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

I love it.

Shelley Denison:

What a weird, what a weird state we live in. Um, I mean that's okay, my alma mater, my graduate alma mater is a buckeye? What is that?

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

It's like a nut?

Shelley Denison:

It's a nut! It's literally a nut that grows on a tree. Anyway. I wish we had one of those little train whistles.

Mary & Shelley:

Woot woot!

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Please use that as like a blooper at the end.

Shelley Denison:

Okay, okay.

Mary Heberling-Creighton:

Woot woot!

Shelley Denison:

Woot woot!