Rail service draws interest

Possible BR, N.O. route discussed

Passenger rail service between Baton Rouge and New Orleans was one of the major topics of interest at public meetings this week to get input on revising the State Rail Plan.

The state Department of Transportation and Development held the meetings.

Talk of setting up a rail line connecting the two cities was the dominant issue at a meeting Wednesday in Baton Rouge at BREC’s Independence Park.

Justin Fox, senior project manager for CDM Smith, the firm retained by DOTD to develop the rail plan, said there was much discussion of the issue the day before at a hearing in New Orleans.

Rachel DiResto, executive vice president of the Center for Planning Excellence, said about 52,000 people travel between Baton Rouge and New Orleans on a daily basis. CPEX has formed the Connect coalition, a group of about 40 private and public groups in Baton Rouge and New Orleans that are pushing for rail service between the two cities.

“A Baton Rouge-New Orleans connection has tremendous economic potential,” said Doug Daigle, a Baton Rouge resident who attended the meeting. “The interstate highway system is probably becoming a hindrance between the two cities.”

Dean Goodell, an intermodal transportation manager with DOTD, said the state does not have the funding to support the operational costs for a primarily passenger rail system. But the state does allow for parishes and cities to form compacts for rail service and set up ways to cover the operational costs.

“The person who takes one trip a month to New Orleans to go to a football game will not support the train,” Goodell said. “We need enough passengers on the train to support a train.”

The Rev. Pat Mascarella, an advocate for local transportation issues for the disabled, noted that DOTD has spent a fortune on road projects that have not reduced traffic congestion.

“Money has been found for transportation on concrete, but not transportation on rail,” he said.

Fox said there would need to be major upgrades to the existing rail line between Baton Rouge and New Orleans before passenger rail service could start. Because of the condition of the rail line, cars would not be able to go more than 35 miles an hour.

“You would need to upgrade tracks, culverts and bridges,” he said.

One potential way to cover the cost of the rail service would be to establish a private-public partnership. Those partnerships were a major topic at the earlier public hearing during discussion of the New Orleans Rail Gateway project. The Rail Gateway project is now under study and improvements are being considered to the corridor that stretches from the West Bank of the Mississippi River near the Jefferson Parish/St. Charles Parish line to the Industrial Parkway in New Orleans East.

“Since money is hard to come by, the thinking is to leverage private-sector interest to potentially handle more passengers or more freight,” Fox said.

About 40 people attended the public meeting in Baton Rouge, including representatives from the offices of Sen. David Vitter and Rep. Bill Cassidy, the AARP, the Louisiana Environmental Action Network, the Louisiana Public Service Commission and the Port of Greater Baton Rouge.

Fox said comments at the Wednesday meeting and from the events in New Orleans on Tuesday and Shreveport on Thursday will be used for the State Rail Plan.

Under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act, signed by former President George W. Bush in 2008, rail improvements seeking federal assistance must be part of the state plan.

Fox said the goal is to develop a draft of the Louisiana rail plan by February and have the entire report completed by May or June.

Comments

1) Comment by ladyanderson - 06/10/2012

Just make it happen, I am so ready for this.

2) Comment by Winkchance - 05/10/2012

@MCBR, Yeah, they have randomly chosen these potentially broad areas as possible locations and most of them have been determined as unsuitable for what is being requested and the parishes have not signed on to develop these areas. You will need each parish to agree to develop these areas and build park and ride locations which will require buying a great deal of land and maintaining it. Until that happens, this is a pipedream.

3) Comment by Straight Shooter - 05/10/2012

Father Mascarella is correct: why are we continuing to fund only road projects when these projects have not alleviated traffic issues? As a taxpayer, I want more efficient use out of my taxes. Alternative means of transportation can be funded with current revenues.

4) Comment by phil - 05/10/2012

Another issue on many levels of government. I think we have too many people who sit around all day and plan new ways to spend taxpayer money just to justify their existence. Maybe one solution would be to just end many of these planning groups that seem to come up with the same ideas over and over again and also start new planning/design studies again and again to push something that has already been studied to death.

5) Comment by phil - 05/10/2012

Right, fair is fair - Everyone who actually drives pays gasoline taxes to pay for roads, and also in BR we have local taxes that were passed by the majority of voters for road repairs and for new roads (greenlight plan). When a few rich people want to get richer by using tax funds to build and forever subsidize a passenger train for $millions of tax dollars per year that relatively few people will use, then that is NOT fair. Besides there is already a subsidized bus that goes to New Orleans and there is no real need for a passenger train. So if you want a cheap ride to New Orleans then just ride the bus. If a private rail company wants to start a passenger rail using private funds then that is their business. Also what is fair? How about if you want this, then YOU volunteer to pay the taxes for it. I personally do not want it or need it so I will not volunteer my hard-earned money for this fiasco. Perhaps we need a new tax system called the "volunteer tax system" for those "progressives" who have so much money they can afford to build new stuff that makes no economical sense at all.

6) Comment by nimby? - 05/10/2012

since this venture is not expected to turn a profit after the initial federal funds run out where will the financing come from ? hafta agree with Chucky .

7) Comment by Chucky - 05/10/2012

1. @mcBR- Glad you said “like this”, as i do think some Fed. $ are welcomed for some projects. I do not like the Feds helping to build something that we as a state may not be able to maintain, I also do not like all the strings that come with Fed. Money some of this hidden and referenced in other laws. I do have an open mind on this issue and would like to see the need and cost, if even broke even I would be happy (talking about the train nothing else). I enjoyed in my youth taking the train to N.O. To visit my Uncle, Aunt, and Cousins

8) Comment by mcBR - 05/10/2012

@Chucky I realize there is an ideological opposition to using federal taxpayer money for something like this. But as a state governor, you do not have control over money that is earmarked in Washington. It is foolish not to accept it, given the realities. You have to work within the realities of the position you are in. It is the duty of the Congress to not earmark this money.

9) Comment by DMJ - 05/10/2012

Jindal can't let the federal government assist in building something the state needs. That would poke a hole in his party's "government is the problem" philosophy. If he actually allowed government to be part of the solution, this philosophy wouldn't hold up. Self-fulfilling, self-service prophecy if I ever saw one. Man, I can't wait for Jindal not to be governor anymore.

10) Comment by NewsReader - 05/10/2012

and btw that should include all bikes on roads and specially built bicycle paths along levees etc... but I expect when presented with a bill nobody would want to pay for things THEY use. People just don't like paying for stuff others may need and they can't see a use for.

11) Comment by Chucky - 05/10/2012

Just because it is federal money does not mean it is not tax money, and having the federal gov. with all its mandates and fingers in the pot is just more tickle down government. Spend my money on border security and education.

12) Comment by NewsReader - 05/10/2012

@phil, I agree. Let's cancel all public funds contributions to all road repairs and just charge tolls everywhere to all the motorists who use them. Fair is fair, right?

13) Comment by mcBR - 05/10/2012

@Winkchance The initial proposals that were published listed the locations for stations. I believe they were Florida Blvd bus terminal, Mall of LA area, Gonzales, Kenner/Airport, and NOLA bus terminal. I'll have to see if I can find them again. When planning a project this large it is impossible to have all of the details ironed out 100%. To some extent, there is a "if you build it, they will come" aspect, especially regarding things like CATS. There is also a required element of leadership, which is utterly lacking from the governor. The annual deficit that was somewhere around $1 million. I think that is a reasonable price to pay when considering the reductions in traffic (i.e., saved time), pollution, road deterioration, accidents/deaths, economic development, etc. The governor disagreed, and turned down a large check to advance his own anti-public works agenda.

14) Comment by phil - 05/10/2012

"ta" should have been "tax" in my previous comment. Also, if private rail companies or other private individuals/companies want to pay for this entire project then I wish them the best of luck. Taxpayers are already taxed to much and cannot afford to subsidize everything that everyone can think of that just sounds good on the surface but is not feasible.

15) Comment by phil - 05/10/2012

This is getting ridiculous. This keeps coming up by a few people who seem to not notice that there have already been studies performed for this and it was determined that it would cost $millions per year in ta subsidies to run a passenger rail line from BR to NO. Guess what. We ALREADY have private-public partnerships. That is when private citizens are taxed to pay for public projects and infrastructure that is run by the government and usually approved by a vote of taxpayers . That system has worked well for years. The new definition of public-private partnership seems to be when a private company gets in the middle and makes a large profit for the private company and possibly for some other individuals involved. Don't you know when you are being told a big story? Also just because the federal government might be involved don't forget that is still your tax money and also the federal government is already deep in debt. Federal money is NOT free money from heaven.

16) Comment by DMJ - 05/10/2012

Chucky, you can thank Bobby J for the lack of passenger rail service. The federal government was going to pay for the initial costs through the Stimulus, but Jindal refused the funds.

17) Comment by Winkchance - 05/10/2012

Everyone wants the rail service, but no one can identify enough pick up and drop of locations along the routes. Nor can anyone indentify the parishes, or parish leaders who have stepped forward and dedicated the land and location for park and ride locations in their parish along the rail line. Nor are any of these parishes along the route set up to provide additional transportation to and from the pick up and drop off location. New Orleans is the only location that has a transportation system that can remotely get you from the train depot to your destination. But their issue is land. All along this track there are relatively few locations where a parking lot can be built, or built cheaply, plus the local transit needs to be prepared to re-route their buses for pick up and delivery to other points of interest. CATS is no where near providing this in Baton Rouge, plus again, where are you going to have you stops? When the train drops you in the middle of no where in Ascension, St. James, Assumption etc, how are you goin to get to the place you are wanting to go? See, it is about more than just federal funding for the rail line, you have to have a plan and buy-in from the parishes. This currently does not exist because the passenger numbers do not exist for such a line.The 52,000 people who travel between cities do not want to be dropped off at Memorial Stadium, they want to be dropped off on the levee downtown and be able to take a bus to their office but these are two different tracks that do not connect. And again, where are you goign to build the station?

18) Comment by Chucky - 05/10/2012

The poor, the disabled, and the children need a rail system from Baton Rouge to New Orleans. The rail system will reduce traffic, it will save lives and (less auto accidents) and will help overall economic growth in its rail corridor. We can help this happen by spending more tax money both on the federal and state level. Did I miss any arguments for this ? Oh yea, Greenhouse gases will be reduced and help our coastal area from being flooded from raising water.