[Senate Hearing 106-1134]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 106-1134
RAIL PASSENGER SERVICE IN THE STATE OF GEORGIA
=======================================================================
FIELD HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 6, 2000
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation
87-176 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpr.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ONE HUNDRED SIXTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
CONRAD BURNS, Montana DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
SLADE GORTON, Washington JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi Virginia
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana
JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada
BILL FRIST, Tennessee BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan RON WYDEN, Oregon
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas MAX CLELAND, Georgia
Mark Buse, Republican Staff Director
Ann Choiniere, Republican General Counsel
Kevin D. Kayes, Democratic Staff Director
Moses Boyd, Democratic Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on December 6, 2000................................. 1
Statement of Senator Cleland..................................... 1
Witnesses
Barnes, Hon. Roy, Governor, State of Georgia..................... 35
Prepared statement........................................... 37
Campbell, Hon. Bill, Mayor, City of Atlanta, Georgia............. 41
Prepared statement........................................... 43
Crosby, Stephen A., President, CSX Real Property, Inc............ 55
Prepared statement........................................... 57
Elder, Hon. Eddie, Chairman, Barrow County Board of Commissioners 44
Ellis, Hon. Jack C., Mayor, City of Macon, Georgia............... 27
Prepared statement........................................... 29
Lewis, H. Craig, Vice President of Corporate Affairs, Norfolk
Southern Corporation........................................... 60
Prepared statement........................................... 62
Molitoris, Hon. Jolene, Administrator, Federal Railroad
Administration................................................. 7
Prepared statement........................................... 9
Pruett, Hon. Cecil, Mayor, City of Canton, Georgia............... 40
Rhodenizer, Hon. Carl, Vice Chair, Georgia Rail Passenger Program
Management Team................................................ 48
Prepared statement........................................... 50
Roberts, Steve, Program Manager, Georgia Rail Consultants........ 52
Prepared statement........................................... 53
Slater, Hon. Rodney E. , Secretary, U.S. Department of
Transportation................................................. 3
Prepared statement........................................... 5
Warrington, George, President, National Railroad Passenger
Corporation.................................................... 17
Prepared statement........................................... 21
Appendix
Response to written questions submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to:
Rodney E. Slater............................................. 67
Jolene Molitoris............................................. 71
George Warrington............................................ 72
Bill Campbell................................................ 75
Eddie Elder.................................................. 76
Jack C. Ellis................................................ 77
Steve Roberts................................................ 78
Stephen A. Crosby............................................ 80
H. Craig Lewis............................................... 82
Atlanta Regional Commission, Atlanta, GA, prepared statement..... 83
RAIL PASSENGER SERVICE IN THE STATE OF GEORGIA
----------
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 6, 2000
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
Atlanta, GA.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:10 p.m., at the
Georgia Capitol Education Center, 180 Central Avenue, Atlanta,
Georgia, Hon. Max Cleland, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAX CLELAND,
U.S. SENATOR FROM GEORGIA
Senator Cleland. Ladies and gentlemen, I will call the
hearing to order. Thank you very much for coming.
We have a very exciting agenda ahead of us today and only a
couple of hours to get it all in, so we will proceed.
I would like to start with an opening statement. We would
like to thank all of you for coming to today's field hearing of
the U.S. Commerce Committee. The full Committee's name is U.S.
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. So
transportation is a key focus of the Senate Commerce Committee.
I happen to be on the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation
and Merchant Marine, as well as the Aviation Subcommittee, so I
get involved in transportation issues all the time. And we are
delighted to have all of you here.
Gathered in this one room today, we have some of the best
and brightest minds in transportation in America. We will focus
today on Georgia's commuter congestion--a dilemma mirrored in
countless highways across the country--and on creative
solutions to one of the 21st century's most challenging and
frustrating problems--gridlock.
Now we are fortunate to have with us the head of the U.S.
Department of Transportation. Secretary Slater, your department
has given us very sobering statistics about the status of our
transportation, particularly here in Georgia. We appreciate you
being here and the work of your staff. According to the U.S.
DOT, traffic congestion in America will increase 400 percent on
our urban freeways and more than 200 percent on other roads in
just the next two decades. Ask anyone from Atlanta and they
will swear to you that the lion's share of that congestion is
bound to be right here in our own neighborhood. Just consider:
Metro Atlanta is the most traffic-congested city in the south.
Atlanta motorists drive more miles per day than drivers from
any other metro area in America. Total the number of miles
Atlantans drive in a single day and they will stretch from the
earth to the sun.
Our traffic-clogged roads have taken a toll on our
environment. Due in large part to the exhaust from nearly three
million vehicles, Atlanta's skies are in violation of national
clean air standards. The boom fell in 1998, when the region
lost federal funds for new road projects and became the
nation's poster child, unfortunately, for urban sprawl. Now
other Georgia cities are in danger of following in Atlanta's
footsteps.
But, as the song says, ``the times, they are a--changing.''
This past summer, the federal government approved a
transportation plan submitted by the Atlanta region which, for
the first time ever, devotes half its funds to transit. The
state stands ready to flex hundreds of millions of dollars from
highway projects to transit projects. Georgians are looking at
the future possibility of constructing a magnetic levitation
high-speed train system from Atlanta to Chattanooga. The
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority is expected to launch
a system of express bus service operating along HOV lanes.
Georgia transportation planners are considering the potential
of intercity bullet trains, of light rail and commuter rail
lines serving downtown Atlanta from corridors extending to
Athens, Bremen, Griffin and Senoia. Given the fact that two
railroad tracks will carry the equivalent of 20 lanes of
highway traffic in rush hour, it is little wonder that there is
a great potential for the rebirth of rail in Georgia.
These are some of the transportation options we will be
examining today. We all know these transportation challenges
will not be easy, and they will not be quick. And we all know
these options come with questions. Will drivers leave their
cars for trains? Will trains reduce commuter traffic time? Will
rail ridership justify costs? How are communities reacting to
the possibility of rail expansion? What federal assistance is
out there to help us? Is there sufficient local commitment to
meet federal match requirements?
We truly have a blue-ribbon panel today--the head of the
U.S. Department of Transportation, the head of the Federal
Railroad Administration, the President of Amtrak, Governor
Barnes, Mayor Campbell, Mayor Ellis, the Chairman of the Barrow
County Board of Commissioners, the Vice Chair of the Georgia
Rail Passenger Program Management Team, representatives from
both CSX and Norfolk Southern, and the point person who
engineered the successful state of Virginia--Virginia Rail
Express partnership. I am looking forward to hearing from the
panelists on how we can address Georgia's problems in terms of
transportation in the 21st century.
And now ladies and gentlemen, let me just introduce our
panelists here. The Honorable Rodney Slater, Secretary, U.S.
Department of Transportation; The Honorable Jolene Molitoris,
Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration; and Mr. George
Warrington, President, National Railroad Passenger Corporation,
better known as Amtrak.
The rules of the game are you can talk as long as you want
to, but we will cut you off after 5 minutes.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cleland. Now, we would appreciate you introducing
your statement into the record and summarizing and we would
like to ask Secretary Slater to go first. Mr. Secretary,
welcome to Georgia--welcome back to Georgia.
STATEMENT OF HON. RODNEY E. SLATER,
SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Secretary Slater. Thank you, Senator Cleland, and thanks to
all who have gathered. I am delighted to join you for this
important hearing on the future of transportation in the
southeast, and especially the role that Georgia and Atlanta
will play in that regard.
Aided by Senator Cleland's effective advocacy in Washington
and the work of Governor Barnes here in Georgia and Mayor
Campbell and other officials here in the region, Georgia has
already become an emerging hub for the global economy in the
21st century. Atlanta and this important region are staking out
an early claim as a premier global city and global metropolitan
region in this, a new century and a new millennium.
Senator, I am also pleased, as you have noted, to be here
with Administrator Jolene Molitoris and also Amtrak President
George Warrington, because this could not be a better time to
talk about rail transportation. The two of them have truly led
a renaissance in this arena and we are excited about not only
what is going on now as relates to Amtrak service and rail
service across the country, but also the bright future for this
service especially as we recall the celebration of the
unveiling of the high-speed rail service in the Northeast
Corridor just a few weeks ago.
This region's economic and technological assets for the
competitive global environment ahead are all impressive. The
key to realizing the full potential of this region in this new
century and new millennium, however, will require more than
assets.
Senator if I may, I would like to talk about what I think
is the first and foremost requirement for meeting the
challenges of our time and ensuring that we have the kind of
transportation system necessary to meet those challenges. I
believe that first and foremost, the requirement will be
visionary and vigilant leadership committed to seizing the
opportunity of our times. This will give birth to the kinds of
public and private partnerships with all stakeholders, ranging
from governments to neighborhoods, to the business community,
all who have an important role in ensuring that economic
security and social progress for the people of the region is
truly realized. It will also take this unified, intermodal
transportation focus to come into play to make these lines that
are on the map, that Jolene and George will talk about in
greater detail, a reality when it comes to providing quality
passenger rail service. For only through forging a shared
vision and a vigilant daily near-term focus on the kinds of
initiatives and strategies and change efforts necessary to
bring that into being can we master the challenges ahead and
create the transportation system of our dream.
The next 25 years will be challenging and exciting for all
aspects of the transportation enterprise, especially rail. I
mentioned Acela service, but also the vision for high-speed
rail that I am sure President Warrington will get into, where
we will touch some 10 regions of the country and give 150
million Americans access to high-speed rail, and where we will
touch 75 percent of the top 100 metropolitan regions in the
country. And you should know that Atlanta will be one of those
rail hubs, as it has always been a rail and transportation
leader in years past.
Our understanding of transportation, though, to bring this
into being--our understanding must change. We must move beyond
the traditional and sort of narrow public works definition of
transportation, Senator, as you have noted that we must, to
view transportation in a much broader and more comprehensive
light. We must see how it impacts our safety, how it impacts
mobility and access, how it undergirds our economy and aids us
in the international trade environment, how you can invest in
transportation and actually enhance the environment, and its
importance as it relates to national security.
In order to bring this into being, there is the need for a
new policy architecture for transportation decisionmaking in
the 21st century, a transportation policy architecture that
will bring all parties to the table, that will allow us to take
advantage of the extraordinarily wide range of economic,
social, political, and environmental factors that have to be
taken into account if we are to make our vision real. That is
really the reason, Senator, that you have caused us to come to
this place to talk about that unified approach.
And I want to say to all who are here gathered that we are
willing as a department to establish an intermodal
transportation team that will work with you, Senator, and the
people that you have gathered to deal with all aspects of the
transportation challenges that you are facing in this region.
The reason we commit ourselves to do that is because of the
importance of this region to the overall health and well-being
of the nation's economy, not just yours.
When you look at all that you have done, clearly you are
paving the way here to be remembered not just as the poster
child of the gridlock of years past, but to be viewed as the
poster child of those who have answers through visionary and
vigilant leadership to provide the quality response to the
challenges of the present and the future.
Here, if I may, Senator, let me cite the work that you and
Governor Barnes and others engaged in, as you worked to bring
into creation the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority.
This Authority is working in partnership with all other
interested parties in the region, to bring a new focus and a
new vision to the importance of transportation in the region.
As we do so, we are moving beyond the belief that added road
miles are the only answer to every transportation challenge and
we are beginning to see the important role that rail and
transit can play in that regard.
Senator, as I close, let me say that as the home of such
international heavyweights as CNN and Coca-Cola and IBM and MCI
WorldCom along with premier transportation leaders recognized
worldwide, Delta and UPS, Atlanta is already rightly claiming
its place as a world city. In order to truly develop, though,
and to realize your full potential, you will have to have the
kind of transportation system of the future that gives you the
ability to exercise all options and realize your full
potential. You deserve particular credit for your integrated
approach to planning that is now underway, that includes a
focus on high-speed rail corridors, transit, and commuter and
intercity passenger rail, and intercity and express bus
service, as you have noted, as well as highways and air
transport.
We stand ready to work with you in this regard. All of the
great work that we did as we prepared for the Olympics stands
as a prime example of the wonderful work that we can do as we
plan to win the gold medal when it comes to the transportation
system of the 21st century.
This can be done. Some of the resources are there, but if
we produce the vision, we can get the additional resources we
need, Senator, to make this dream a reality.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to be a part of this
panel, to be here with you, and I am looking forward to joining
my colleagues as we respond to questions from you and members
of the audience about how we proceed to make this dream a
reality.
[The prepared statement of Secretary Slater follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Rodney E. Slater, Secretary,
U.S. Department of Transportation
Senator Cleland, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before you
today on the potential for rail to improve transportation in the
Southeast, specifically in Georgia. High-speed rail corridors, transit,
commuter and intercity passenger rail, as well as intercity and express
bus service, and intelligent transportation systems offer great promise
for addressing the transportation challenges in metropolitan Atlanta.
The Atlanta region is well positioned to showcase the positive effects
of transportation on mobility and the environment and to show what is
possible with an integrated approach to transportation planning and
strong financial commitments at the local, state and federal level.
Atlanta is facing some particularly daunting challenges. The
metropolitan Atlanta region, which is growing very rapidly, already has
a high dependence on the automobile and the highest vehicle mileage per
capita in the Nation. It has undertaken major air quality planning to
meet the requirements of the Clean Air Act. And, it has developed a
transportation plan that helps the region meet its mobility and clean
air goals.
Another challenge facing Atlanta is the transportation concerns of
civil rights, environmental justice, and low-income groups. Many
minority and low-income residents do not own cars. In response to their
concerns, the U.S. Department of Transportation, with the Georgia
Department of Transportation (GADOT), the Atlanta Regional Commission
(ARC) and a coalition of environmental justice and community groups are
conducting an assessment of environmental justice issues relating to
Atlanta's transportation planning process. We anticipate that this
process will help regional transportation planners adjust their
strategies to meet transportation needs more equitably, and also serve
as model for other metropolitan areas around the country.
State and local leaders are to be commended for their efforts to
get critical elements in place. The Georgia Regional Transportation
Authority (GRTA), created in 1999, has broad powers to manage
transportation and air quality projects and land use in nonattainment
areas. And, most important, it has the support of the public and
private sectors, including the business community. ARC and GRTA are
committed to ``smart growth'' and are looking at ways to encourage
local governments to work toward development that supports that
objective. Steps are being taken to assure that all communities in the
Atlanta region are involved in the transportation planning process.
Providing a broad range of transportation options and choices is an
essential component of livability and ``smart growth.'' I understand
that Georgia has taken good advantage of the flexible provisions of the
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) by directing
close to 55 percent of the transportation funds for Atlanta for transit
purposes. The recently adopted transportation plan for the Atlanta
metropolitan area emphasizes both transit and commuter rail as a part
of the metropolitan transportation system. Encouraging land use that
supports and sustains transit is a key feature of the metropolitan
plan. Such linkages are essential to the long-term effectiveness of
transit and to achieving a balanced surface transportation system.
Across the Nation, communities have demonstrated a strong interest
in pursuing ``smart growth''--an approach that ensures a high quality
of life and strong, sustainable economic growth. The Department has
strengthened its role as a partner with states and local communities by
providing the tools and resources, in concert with our partners, to
preserve green space, ease traffic congestion, and pursue regional
``smart growth'' strategies. We are showing that collaboration works.
Partnerships are emerging across sectors, as businesses, state and
local governments, environmentalists, community groups and others
recognize the common ground they share. These regional approaches
produce benefits for all.
Atlanta is one of the four cities nationwide in the Clinton-Gore
Administration's new program, The Partnership for Regional Livability
(PRL). One of the primary goals of this program is to identify a role
for the federal government in support of regional initiatives. Mayor
Campbell and Governor Barnes, both of whom are here today, have been
strong supporters and catalysts for the Chattahoochee Riverway Project.
That project is part of a broader state and regional initiative to
support livable communities and combat sprawl throughout northwest
Georgia. This is just one example of what can be accomplished when
partners work together.
Georgia has been a leader in forging partnerships at the state and
local levels. The partnership of the Georgia Department of
Transportation, GRTA, and the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority (GRPA)
is a case in point. These three bodies want to revive rail passenger
service in Georgia with links serving the Macon-Atlanta corridor and
the Athens-Atlanta corridor. They are looking at other options as well,
including bus service in these corridors. You'll be hearing more about
these from other witnesses today. This is part of a vision for better
passenger service throughout the Southeast.
Under the Clinton-Gore Administration, a record amount of money has
been available for transportation--including $58.8 billion for fiscal
year 2001, of which $43 billion is for transportation infrastructure,
more than double the average amount provided in fiscal years 1990-1993.
TEA-21 not only provided more funding than we have ever had before, it
provided unprecedented flexibility to use the funds for a wide range of
transportation solutions. The Department's surface transportation
programs include formula and discretionary grants as well as programs
that provide direct loans, loan guarantees and lines of credit. These
varied and unique approaches to funding give communities a broad range
of incentives to expand transportation choices. As I noted at the
outset, Georgia has capitalized on this flexibility.
TEA-21 programs supporting high-speed rail include the Next
Generation High-Speed Rail Technology program, that develops technology
to improve the effectiveness of high-speed rail in partnership with
states and industry, and the Grade Crossing Hazard Elimination Program
that includes support for states with designated high-speed rail
corridors. In addition, TEA-21's Maglev Deployment Program is assisting
state planning for seven maglev projects including the one proposed
here in Atlanta that would provide for the first 31 miles of a 110-mile
maglev project linking Atlanta Hartsfield Airport to Atlanta and
Chattanooga's Lovell Airfield along Interstate Highway Route I-75. The
legislation specifies that one project will be selected for federal
funding and construction, subject to the appropriation of funds. The
Department has cooperated with Amtrak and the states to implement
Amtrak's Acela Express high-speed rail in the Northeast Corridor and to
plan for high-speed rail service in ten other corridors, including a
new route between Birmingham, Alabama and Atlanta, Georgia and a new
route from Atlanta and Macon to Savannah, Georgia and Jacksonville,
Florida.
TEA-21 authorized two innovative financing programs for major
transportation projects. The Transportation Infrastructure Finance and
Innovation Act (TIFIA) program provides loans, loan guarantees, and
lines of credit to fund major transportation investments of critical
national importance. The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement
Financing (RRIF) Program provides direct loans and loan guarantees for
terms up to 25 years to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or
rail equipment and facilities. There is a statutory maximum of $3.5
billion in principal. A unique feature of the RRIF Program is the use
of a Credit Risk Premium instead of appropriated funds. The premium is
a cash payment provided by a non-federal entity to cover the estimated
long-term cost to the federal government of a loan or loan guarantee.
High-speed rail offers an attractive transportation alternative to
congested highways and airports in certain intercity corridors, such as
the corridors under study in Georgia and between Atlanta and other
southeast cities. The Clinton-Gore Administration has supported
increased funding for Amtrak, both through capital budgets and our
proposed Expanded Passenger Rail Fund. The Administration also strongly
supports enactment of the proposed High-Speed Rail Investment Act
currently under consideration by Congress. It would provide up to $10
billion in funding over a ten-year period for capital investment in
high-speed rail, which could include the Atlanta high-speed rail
corridor. States would be required to put up a match of at least 20
percent. The additional funding provided could reduce traffic
congestion and air pollution, enhance smart growth, protect open space
and contribute to the economic development of communities served by
passenger rail. We hope that Congress will pass this important
legislation before the end of the current session.
Primary federal funding sources for transit projects include the
Federal Transit Administration's Formula Grants program and Capital
Investment Grants program. The Formula program may be used for either
operating or capital costs, including bus and rail vehicle
replacements. The Capital Investment program provides funding for new
and extended fixed guideway systems, fixed guideway modernization, and
bus and bus related facilities.
Many transit projects also are eligible for the surface
transportation flexible funding programs including the Surface
Transportation Program (STP) and the Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), and also, in some circumstances,
the National Highway System (NHS) program. CMAQ, for example, can help
communities create high occupancy vehicle lanes, provide incentives for
ridesharing, improve transit facilities, and select from a number of
other options for more livable transportation systems. Georgia has made
great strides, but as with any state, it must continue to look closely
at its own sources of funding, both at the state level and locally, as
all of these federal programs require a significant local commitment of
funds.
We recognize that the Atlanta area is making real progress in
addressing its transportation and environmental challenges while
continuing to support a growing economy. Transit and rail clearly are a
major part of the picture, along with highways. No one approach can
meet the varied and complex transportation needs and environmental
demands. We look forward to continuing to work with Georgia's state and
local officials and other interested parties as they work toward a
viable solution for the Atlanta region, a solution that includes a
strong financial commitment by them. With a strong local commitment and
continued creative leadership, Atlanta is becoming a showcase for the
Nation.
This concludes my prepared statement, Senator Cleland, and I would
be happy to answer any questions you might have.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I
would just note that a winning team needs a winning coach. You
are our coach, and we thank you very much for coaching us in
the right regard, in the right direction.
Secretary Slater. Thank you.
Senator Cleland. I could not help but think when you
mentioned UPS, UPS has just won six new routes to China. We are
still trying to get to Jesup.
[Laughter.]
Secretary Slater. Well, let us get you to Jesup.
Senator Cleland. At that point, we will turn it over to Ms.
Jolene Molitoris, Administrator of the Federal Railroad
Administration. Thank you very much for coming, ma'am.
STATEMENT OF HON. JOLENE MOLITORIS,
ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION
Ms. Molitoris. Thank you very much, Senator, Mr. Chairman.
It is a delight to be here. I am always glad to be in Georgia
and in Atlanta because I know that is where the transportation
action is.
Following up on the Secretary's leadership and statements,
I wanted to point out the four areas that seem to be keys to
success in other parts of the country and then maybe we can go
into more detail with questions. But those four key elements
are leadership, partnership, planning, and adequate funding.
As I observe--and I go all over the country and literally
all over the world--there is no place more poised to take
advantage of leadership in transportation than Georgia and the
Atlanta region. Because of your championing balanced
transportation and recognizing the role of rail, your
championship of the High-Speed Rail Investment Act, which we
still hope will pass this year, with Governor Barnes, Mayor
Campbell, the mayors from the other towns, Macon and Athens and
so on. In addition to the elected officials, the leadership of
the organizations like the Georgia Regional Transporation
Authority (GRTA) and the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority
(GRPA) and all of them, you have a team that is really
unbeatable.
We have seen it in New York, and the states of Washington,
California, Illinois. It could not have happened there without
that kind of top leadership. We know that you have it here and
we are so glad for your state and we want to work with that.
Second is the partnership aspect. These kinds of projects
cannot happen without everybody pulling together and what we
have found is that in some sense more partners are better. I
always say develop them better and nurture them often because
you need everyone. It seems to us that when people, even though
they have different interests, different agendas on what is
important to them, when you get everybody around that table
with people of good will and with success in transportation at
the top, win-wins happen and common ground is reached. I
believe that the Secretary's proposal of an action team is
really important. I am here representing not only the Federal
Railroad Administration, but also the Federal Transit
Administration, the Federal Highway Administration, and we all
work together under the challenge of one DOT that the Secretary
has set out. We are a team. We want to come and help make your
team successful.
A couple of other across-the-country examples that may
pique some of your interest. For example, in Charlotte, North
Carolina, perhaps an unlikely partner, the Bank of America,
from its headquarters there, has assumed a leading role in
assembling the private sector business advocates for the
development of the southeast high-speed rail corridor which, as
you can tell, we see going all the way to Atlanta. Those
private sector partners are key for this effort.
And then let me just mention planning. A lot of people see
planning as some kind of necessary evil, somehow they see it as
taking too long and being too complex. That is where we come
in, because we want to show you that planning is (a) a very
good investment and (b) something that we can help straighten
out the curves and the twists and help you do it in a timely
fashion. Good planning will save you money and will help you
reach success. I can tell you there are other parts of the
country that have come to us at the end of the process after
they have spent a lot of money, and they had to spend a lot
more to get into compliance. We think that we can help you
avoid any pitfalls there.
You know we have been very involved in the Washington, D.C.
to Richmond planning for the beginning of this southeast
corridor. We have a lot of experience at FRA and we are willing
to share that. Other people have made mistakes; you do not have
to make those any more because we have already figured them
out. So the more experience we have, the more we know that this
can happen.
In Virginia, for example, after we did the work--we
completed the planning work in May of 1999--in the State's 2000
budget request was a request for $67 million to begin
implementing the plan. So there is a line, we set the stage,
the leadership in the state takes over and sets the stage on
the investment that they are going to make.
Let us just remember there are many sources of funding
because funding is always an issue. As you heard today in the
press conference, everyone wants to know about that. But in
addition to the kinds of funds you can determine to use at the
state level, there are transit and CMAQ funds where the
eligibility permits. There are investments related to freight
that will help with the freight railroads' participation. We
have a new loan program, the Railroad Rehabilitation and
Improvement Financing (RRIF) program, with $3.5 billion
available for loans for these kinds of things (of which $1
billion is reserved for shortline and regional railroads.) I
think that what the Clinton-Gore Administration has really done
is helped set out a menu of opportunities. As we said in the
news conference, we believe you know best how to invest. We
hope that additional flexibility provisions come along in the
next reauthorization and at the earliest possible time.
So on behalf of Administrator Wykle, Administrator
Fernandez and myself, we stand with our team here and with our
partner George Warrington, I might say who has been a terrific
partner. We believe in your success and we want to support and
facilitate it.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Molitoris follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Jolene Molitoris, Administrator,
Federal Railroad Administration
Introduction
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I appreciate the
opportunity to be here today to testify about the potential of rail
passenger transportation in the Southeast, with particular attention to
the State of Georgia. I am particularly gratified and honored to appear
before you in company with Transportation Secretary Rodney Slater, who
has done so much to advance the cause of intermodal transportation, and
Amtrak President George Warrington, who has overseen his company's
transformation into the dynamic, expanding embodiment of the intermodal
ideal. Our joint appearance today symbolizes our long-term partnership
in progress.
Role of FRA
The Federal Railroad Administration, which I head, plays a crucial
role in rail transportation of all kinds, and fulfills unique and
longstanding functions in rail passenger transportation. Of course, our
first priority is safety for all railroad operations, freight,
intercity passenger, and commuter. Consequently, most of our people are
involved in safety assurance. Regarding the freight railroads, we
provide advice to the Secretary on regulatory issues and other matters
of national significance, conduct focused research and development, and
manage financial assistance programs.
With respect to passenger railroads, we initiated and worked
closely with Amtrak to implement the Northeast Corridor Improvement
Project, making possible the Metroliners and the Acela Express, and
introducing true high-speed rail service to America. We also represent
the Secretary on Amtrak's board of directors and we provide financial
assistance to Amtrak.
Today, the Federal Railroad Administration not only serves as the
Secretary's principal advisor on Amtrak matters, but also catalyzes
partnerships among the states, Amtrak, and the freight railroads for
improved passenger service. One of our many roles in this process is
that of designating corridors for high-speed rail development.
Technically, these designations merely make rail lines eligible for
some very limited special funding for highway-rail grade crossing
elimination; but practically, the designation process has energized the
states and Amtrak to pursue far-reaching programs for corridor
upgrading. In support of such programs, we are also developing safe,
low-cost technologies (like non-electric locomotives and positive train
control) that will make high-speed rail investments more affordable and
marketable than ever. Recently, the designation of high-speed rail
corridors has increased in importance because of pending legislation
which would make such corridors eligible for up to $10 billion in bond
funding for capital investments.
Importance of Rail Options for Large Metro Areas
Passenger trains are essential elements of intermodal
transportation within and between our large metropolitan areas. Let me
give you just a few reasons for this:
In the last two decades of the 20th Century, the Nation's
population grew by one-fifth, but intercity travel more than doubled.
Over that same period, lane miles increased by only three percent.
Capacity has not kept up with the growing demand. The result? Americans
are driving more than ever, but bottlenecks in heavily trafficked urban
areas--where delays have increased by as much as 50 percent--often
detract from the travel experience.
Air travel, too, has grown rapidly, at times posing challenges to
individual passengers. First, worsening highway congestion has hampered
airport access by motor vehicles. Second, since the 1980's, airlines
have raised the number of flights by one third and concentrated those
flights in the Nation's top airports. This dramatic leap forward in
flight availability and convenience has led to lengthier gate-to-gate
travel times on most of the routes serving America's busiest air hubs.
Finally, as the deregulated airlines have become more adept at setting
fares and scheduling services, full flights have become the rule rather
than the exception. Consumer complaints about airlines have increased
in recent years--even as more consumers than ever before have availed
themselves of the world's finest air transport system.
In brief, the Nation's mobility challenge reflects the
extraordinary success of its highways, its airlines, and their
supporting industries in bringing transportation options to an ever-
broader market.
These mobility issues will directly affect the Nation's future
livability. President Clinton was correct when he recently said:
``To make our communities more livable . . . This is a big issue.
What does that mean? You ask anybody that lives in an unlivable
community, and they'll tell you. They want their kids to grow up next
to parks, not parking lots; the parents don't have to spend all their
time stalled in traffic when they could be home with their children.''
To safeguard mobility and livability in the new millennium,
Americans need a lasting solution in the form of a balanced
transportation network. Offering an exciting, innovative transport
option for the future, rail passenger service brings to bear several
inherent advantages as part of such a seamless intermodal network.
Railroads are largely independent of the traffic gridlock of
highways and airports. Of all travel options, only Amtrak's
high-speed Northeast Corridor has unencumbered access to the
heart of Manhattan. Trains can whisk passengers into the hearts
of other large cities, like Los Angeles, Chicago, and of course
Atlanta (once the intermodal terminal is built), without
succumbing to highway traffic jams or most types of bad
weather. In brief, passenger trains eliminate the traffic jams
that are one of the major sources of unreliability in the
overall transportation system.
With stations in downtowns, suburbs, and outlying population
centers, rail has its own pick-up and delivery system, giving
passengers the freedom to choose where to get on and off the
train. Passenger convenience can further benefit from rail
stations at airports and transit stops. For example, in Boston,
Amtrak stops at Route 128, Back Bay, and South Station. At the
last two stops, passengers have direct access to three rapid
transit lines, as well as to commuter rail routes to Boston's
southern and western suburbs. Such convenience could be
replicated in other regions of the country.
Railroad stations can anchor the revitalization of city
centers. Washington's Union Station redevelopment, for
instance, has turned a former white elephant into a vibrant,
high-traffic shopping and recreation center that is sparking
the rebirth of Washington's North Capitol Street corridor.
With rail, it's not just the speed that is important; it is
the total passenger experience. Passenger comfort on Amtrak is,
indeed, outstanding and constantly improving. With spacious,
reclining seats, plenty of room to walk around, snack bars and
even dining cars on board, rail travelers have mobility within
their mobility. The public reacts well to this: new train
equipment in the Pacific Northwest with European-style decor
and taste-tempting local meals on the menu has sparked a 50
percent increase in ridership since 1993. Amtrak's Acela
Express on the Northeast Corridor which was just inaugurated
for revenue service to rave press reviews will offer world-
class comfort and amenities.
Improved rail passenger service operates so cleanly that it
actually reduces total transportation emissions as it attracts
riders from planes and cars. A recent Federal Railroad
Administration study estimated that the introduction of high-
speed rail in seven corridors would create pollutant emissions
reductions valued at almost half a billion dollars, just by
diverting travelers from airlines and automobiles. Rail
passenger service is also compact and sparing in its use of
resources, usually making use of existing rail rights-of-way--
in contrast with other modes, which often require new highway
lanes or runways.
With inherent advantages like these, passenger trains clearly
deserve a prominent role in America's 21st Century intermodal
transportation system.
Intercity and Commuter Rail--Integrated and Intermodal
Today, we speak of ``intercity'' and ``commuter'' rail as separate
modes. This is an artificial distinction, reflecting the funding
mechanisms and the institutions that have arisen since the mid-20th
Century. It is true that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA)
partially funds commuter rail projects, using the transit share of
federal fuel taxes and that whatever federal funds are made available
to intercity rail come from general funds through the Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA). It is also true that different entities, the
commuter agencies and Amtrak, are responsible for the two types of
service.
But in reality, just as the FTA and the FRA are really part of One
DOT, so are commuter and intercity services two facets of a larger
transportation offering. Commuter and intercity trains use the same
tracks, the same signals, and the same stations. Improvements that
benefit intercity trains usually benefit commuters, and vice versa. The
potential for interconnections between the two services, and with
transit, are legion. Anyone who has ever left an Amtrak train at
Newark, crossed the platform, and taken the PATH train direct to the
World Trade Center; or ever changed at Penn Station, New York to the
Long Island Rail Road for direct service to the east would know what I
mean. It is no accident that all the services I have just mentioned
were owned and operated for many years by a single company, the
Pennsylvania Railroad. With engineering foresight and a dedication to
public service, that company built integrated facilities and
coordinated its train schedules, providing interconnections both in
space and time for maximum passenger convenience.
The days when commuter and intercity trains were operated as one
service by large private firms like the Pennsylvania Railroad have
gone. Today, the participants in rail transport are as numerous and
varied as the sources and uses of the funds that support them. Yet, the
actual physical interdependence, and the potential for connectivity, of
these two types of services remain strong. That more agencies are
involved simply means we have to work harder to fulfill the growing
potential of rail passenger transportation.
For example, the FRA recently prepared a study of the Washington-
Richmond corridor. We worked with the freight railroads, the commuter
agencies, and Amtrak, as well as state and local governments. What
resulted was a plan that would improve all services by addressing their
common needs and intelligently allocating improvements to their common
facilities. We have a similar study underway in the Philadelphia-
Harrisburg corridor, and--closer to Atlanta--on the Richmond-Charlotte
route. The principle is always the same--careful attention to the needs
of all users--and the outcome is not surprising: where there's a will,
there's a way to design cost-effective improvements that will result in
better-integrated transportation.
All rail services form part of an even larger transportation
network. I have already mentioned examples where commuter and intercity
trains intersect with local transit services. Although intermodal
terminals are scattered throughout the country, the most prominent
examples of seamless passenger service remain in the Northeast, the
Great Lakes region, and California. Georgia generally, and the Atlanta
region in particular, is a prime location given its status as the hub
of transportation in the South, for this kind of intermodalism. Indeed,
I salute Georgia for its efforts to join other prominent metropolitan
areas in moving to a higher plateau of passenger transport.
Role of Amtrak
I am particularly excited to have Mr. Warrington on this panel
because Amtrak fulfills multiple roles in today's world of intermodal
passenger transportation. Increasingly, the states and Amtrak are
creating successful partnerships to make the service and facility
improvements that move the Nation toward high-speed rail. This has
already taken place in the Pacific Northwest, in California, in the
Chicago hub region, in New York State, in Pennsylvania, and in
Virginia. Further service expansions are occurring elsewhere under
Amtrak's Network Growth Strategy, which moves our national rail
passenger system out of the ``retreat and retrench'' mode into the
realm of dynamic growth. Amtrak's experience in intermodal transport
goes far beyond the state high-speed rail partnerships and includes
Amtrak's ownership and operation of the Northeast Corridor, which is
host to thousands of daily commuter trains operated by local agencies.
Moreover, nothing speaks to the synergies of commuter and intercity
services better than Amtrak's success in directly operating both
intercity trains on its own account and commuter services under
contract to many local agencies. So, Amtrak is both a ``landlord'' and
a ``tenant''; both a commuter operator and a facility provider for
other agencies. In addition, Amtrak has been a key player in the
development of mixed-use intermodal terminals, for example in
Washington, D.C. and in Philadelphia. For all these reasons, the
sponsors of commuter and high-speed rail are increasingly Amtrak's
partners and customers.
High-Speed Corridor Designations
One of FRA's principal roles in rail passenger service is in the
designation of routes for development as high-speed rail corridors. Our
current map of designated corridors positions Atlanta as a possible hub
for the high-speed corridors in the South. The map shows lines
radiating from Atlanta to Charlotte and Richmond, to Macon, Savannah,
and Jacksonville, and to Birmingham, Meridian, and New Orleans. While
it may be some years before ``high-speed'' service can be implemented,
there is no reason why ``high-quality'' and ``higher-frequency''
service could not be quickly realized on some or all of these routes.
Uncertainties remain regarding the precise long-term route between
Atlanta and Birmingham and congestion on the Norfolk Southern route may
make restoration of the old Seaboard Air Line (SAL) route, if
available, more economic. A similar situation may exist on the
Savannah-Jacksonville run, where the former SAL line may provide a
realistic option. These alternatives would affect the routes from
Atlanta/Macon to Savannah and Jacksonville. Also of interest are the
potential impacts of these designations, and their future options and
service patterns, on the design of Atlanta's proposed intermodal
terminal.
Beyond the current map, many possibilities are in play: direct
service between Atlanta, Birmingham, Meridian, Shreveport, and Dallas/
Fort Worth, in keeping with Amtrak's Network Growth Strategy and
connecting the existing Gulf Coast and South Central Corridors; and
service between Atlanta and Chattanooga, or between Atlanta and
Birmingham, thence north to Nashville, Louisville, and the Midwestern
states, possibly as part of a restored connection between the Midwest
and Florida. The possibilities are endless, all would redound to the
ultimate benefit of Georgia and the Atlanta region, and all would
exhibit synergy with plans for commuter rail service, in keeping with
the essential unity of the two types of passenger trains.
Rail Success Stories
All these prospects for rail service are realistic if there is a
consensus among all the agencies and entities involved in rail
passenger service in Georgia and the Southeast, and if an effective
partnership is forged with Amtrak and the freight railroads that own
the tracks.
FRA's experience with similar projects in other parts of the
country underlines the realism of these possibilities. The shared theme
of all these success stories is local involvement.
Northeast Corridor
Alone among the high-speed rail projects in the Nation, the
Northeast Corridor (NEC) was primarily a federal project from its
modest origins in the 1960s until its substantial completion this past
year. Still, there was substantial state and local involvement: in
securing the original federal funding in the mid 1970s; in providing
matching funds and local planning participation for the station
program, which transformed the passenger experience at every important
station on the entire 456-mile corridor; and in progressing the
electrification of the last non-electrified segment from New Haven to
Boston. At every step of the way, in the planning, the environmental
process, the construction, and now the operation, states and localities
partnered with the FRA and Amtrak. All these efforts have paid off as
the NEC hosts continually improving commuter and intercity services,
ranging from new, direct service from northern New Jersey to Manhattan,
to an intercity passenger service so good that it now carries as many
passengers as the airlines do between New York and Washington. Over the
long term, from Amtrak's first full year of operations in 1972 through
1999, intercity passenger traffic on the NEC more than doubled--the
surest indicator of the program's success.
The partnership continues as Amtrak, the states, the metropolitan
planning organizations, FRA, and the commuter authorities continue to
plan additional improvements to fulfill expanding demand for passenger
service in the new century. Projects in other parts of the country will
require even more intensive state and local involvement.
California
Of all the states, California has invested most heavily in
intercity rail passenger services--over a billion dollars in direct
state funding of capital improvements alone, for track, signals,
equipment, and support facilities. The localities, Amtrak, and the
freight railroads have contributed another $600 million in a remarkable
partnership. As a result, California has an outstanding frequency and
quality of intercity rail service in many of its corridors, although
much remains to be done in that vast and topographically difficult
state. The result is obvious: passenger-miles more than tripled on
Amtrak's main line in California's Central Valley, and have scored
impressive gains elsewhere, since the early 1980s.
Pacific Northwest
The states of Washington and Oregon have conclusively demonstrated
that new equipment, higher frequencies, and a winning attitude can
score impressive gains for rail passenger service even in the absence
of heavy fixed plant investments. The new Cascades services, making use
of modern Talgo equipment, have created traffic volumes almost ten
times those of the early 1980s. These phenomenal gains have occurred
with state and local contributions totaling $130 million, which
leveraged additional funds from Amtrak and the freight railroads. The
success of the Cascades services testifies both to the value of
partnerships and to the public's hunger for attractive rail passenger
services--even if major speed increases are slow in coming.
Midwest (Chicago Hub)
In the Midwest, nine states have joined together to develop a
comprehensive plan for service centered on the Chicago hub. They call
it the ``Midwest Regional Rail Initiative.'' Although major service
improvements have yet to be realized, progress is underway in a number
of partnerships: positive train control demonstrations in Michigan and
Illinois; creative grade crossing barrier systems in Illinois, where
some track reconfigurations and reroutings are in process; and most
recently, a joint equipment request for proposals by Amtrak, and the
States of Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. This request involves 13
trainsets that will provide upgraded service over the Chicago Hub
network.
Lessons Learned
What do these success stories teach us that we can apply to a
potential Atlanta hub system for intercity and commuter rail service?
Let me sum up the basic principles.
Local commitment. Where there is intense state and local
commitment, there will be progress in rail passenger service.
We see this most clearly in California, which has made the
heaviest investment, but even in states that have committed
more modest resources a strong dedication and focused attention
to specific, perceptible service improvements can overcome a
lack of funds.
Partnership. Time and again we see that it is possible to
bring Amtrak and the freight railroads into mutually beneficial
agreements. Our state-by-state estimates show that Amtrak and
the freight railroads pumped almost a billion dollars into
intercity passenger improvements in the 1990s, with the freight
carriers contributing almost 40 percent of that amount. While
no one can foresee the future ability of either Amtrak or its
freight colleagues to replicate that investment in the coming
decade, the precedent exists; and we have ongoing programs in
Pennsylvania, New York, Virginia, and elsewhere to back up our
hopes.
Incremental progress. We would all like to see high-speed
rail right away, in its full glory. The fact is, it takes time;
the Northeast Corridor, well-funded though it has been, has
taken over 35 years from concept to realization. Part of that
delay reflects the complexity of the Northeastern rail
operations, with their thousands of commuter and hundreds of
intercity trains each day, as well as the sheer number of
different state and local governments involved. Simpler
corridors, with more straightforward operations and fewer
actors, can take much less time. The phenomenal success of the
Pacific Northwest corridor, still at top speeds of 79 mph,
further confirms the lesson that modest improvements can
produce major increases in service quality and ridership.
Equipment pays. Often, it is easier to finance and acquire
attractive equipment than to make the fixed plant improvements
for high-speed service. Equipment can often be privately
financed; it is not a sunk cost, but rather has a market value
that can be used to secure a loan. It can also be used at a
variety of speeds--conventional speeds where necessary, higher
speeds when investments and safety considerations permit. Just
as Amtrak and the Midwest states are proceeding with equipment
in advance of major fixed facility investments, so can other
states do so. As long as the equipment meets FRA safety
standards, provides the marketability that rail passenger
service needs, and (in the case of the Southeast Corridor) is
well-suited for through operation over the Northeast Corridor
and its high-level platforms, it can be used to good effect.
Detailed planning; freight and commuter needs. Our
enthusiasm must always be tempered with the realities of rail
transportation today. Specifically, just because the tracks are
there, and even empty, does not necessarily make them suitable
for passenger service. The proper connections must be in place
at the right places; the needs of freight service--so vital to
the Nation's economy--must always be protected; and future
commuter services must be allowed for. Even our remaining,
disused passenger stations are of no benefit if the tracks that
lead to them are gone, or if huge skyscrapers are blocking
their former approaches. The bottom line is: detailed
engineering investigations must be the prerequisite to
significant rail passenger investment. I know that you have
done, and are doing this in Georgia, but there is always the
danger that enthusiasm can outpace realism. So, I advise all
advocates of rail passenger improvements, wherever they may be,
to get the facts before leaping into visionary projects. This
does not mean that we cannot make big plans--just that the big
plans must take into account the engineering realities.
Sources of Funds
Time and again, this testimony has emphasized state, local, Amtrak,
and freight railroad funds. This emphasis reflects the limited
availability of direct federal funding for intercity rail passenger
improvements.
Some limited programs are available. The FY 2001 Transportation
appropriation includes $200,000 for planning, earmarked for the
Charlotte-to-Macon segment of the Southeast Corridor. In recent years
such planning funds have been scarce, and only available for earmarked
routes. We also have a total of $5.25 million in grade crossing
improvement funds, also for high-speed lines, and also completely
earmarked.
For larger federal investments, the most promising options right
now are the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program
(RRIF), managed by the FRA, and the Transportation Infrastructure
Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), which is a DOT-wide program. Let me
summarize for you these two creative financing approaches, both of
which originated in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century,
or TEA-21. In addition, there are some other opportunities for
intercity rail funding under TEA-21 as well as a pending proposal in
Congress that should be of considerable interest.
RRIF
The RRIF program provides for direct loans and loan guarantees for
terms up to 25 years. There is a statutory maximum amount of
outstanding principal of $3.5 billion. Of this, $1 billion is reserved
for projects primarily benefitting short line and regional railroads.
Statutory priority projects are those that:
Enhance safety;
Enhance the environment;
Promote economic development;
Are included in state transportation plans;
Promote U.S. competitiveness; and
Preserve and enhance rail or intermodal service to small
communities and rural areas.
Eligible applicants for RRIF funding include state and local
governments, government-sponsored authorities and corporations,
railroads, and joint ventures that include at least one railroad.
Financing can be used--
To acquire, improve, or rehabilitate intermodal or rail
equipment or facilities, including track, track components,
bridges, yards, buildings, and shops;
To refinance existing debt incurred for the previous
purposes; and
To develop and establish new intermodal or railroad
facilities.
RRIF funding is not restricted to freight, and could be applied to
passenger railroads.
The unique feature of the RRIF Program is the payment of a Credit
Risk Premium in lieu of an appropriation of funds. The Credit Risk
Premium is a cash payment provided by a non-federal entity. The Credit
Risk Premium must cover the estimated long-term cost to the federal
government of a loan or loan guarantee. The amount of Credit Risk
Premium required is determined by the specifics of the transaction. It
is based on an applicant's creditworthiness as well as the impact of
the project on an applicant's financial strength. The pledging of
collateral will reduce the amount of the Credit Risk Premium since the
greater the value of the collateral, the higher the recovery in the
event of default. The credit risk premium must be paid to the FRA
before funds are disbursed.
FRA issued final procedures for applying for RRIF financing (49
C.F.R. Part 260) this past summer.
TIFIA
The Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act
(TIFIA) is a new program created in Section 1501 of TEA-21 that
provides federal assistance in the form of credit (e.g., direct loans,
loan guarantees, and standby lines of credit) to help fund major
transportation investments of critical national importance. The TIFIA
credit program is designed to fill market gaps and to leverage
substantial private co-investment by providing supplemental and
subordinate capital.
The TIFIA credit program consists of three different types of
financial assistance designed to address projects' varying requirements
throughout their life cycles:
Secured loans are direct federal loans to project sponsors.
These loans provide combined construction and permanent
financing of capital costs. The interest rate is ``not less
than'' the yield on marketable Treasury securities of similar
maturity on the date of execution of the loan agreement.
Loan guarantees ensure a federal government full-faith-and-
credit guarantee to institutional investors making a loan to a
project.
Standby lines of credit represent secondary sources of
funding in the form of contingent federal loans that may be
drawn upon to supplement project resources if needed during the
first ten years of project operations.
Funds to implement the project may be provided by a corporation, a
joint venture, a partnership, or a governmental entity. The amount of
federal credit assistance may not exceed 33 percent of total project
costs.
Projects eligible for federal financial assistance through regular
surface transportation programs (Title 23 or chapter 53 of Title 49)
are eligible for the TIFIA program. In addition, regionally or
nationally significant projects such as intercity passenger rail
facilities and vehicles (including Amtrak and magnetic levitation
systems), publicly owned intermodal freight facilities on the National
Highway System, border crossing infrastructure, and other large
infrastructure projects such as the Penn Station Redevelopment project
in New York are examples which could fit under the TIFIA umbrella.
To qualify, projects must cost at least $100 million or at least 50
percent of a state's annual apportionment of federal-aid funds,
whichever is less. Also, the project must be supported in whole or in
part from user fees or other non-federal dedicated funding sources
(e.g., tolls) and must be included in the state's transportation plan.
For Intelligent Transportation System projects, the minimum cost must
be $30 million; these might include a regional train control project or
a significant advanced train propulsion control system covering a major
metropolitan area.
Qualified projects meeting the above threshold eligibility would
then be evaluated by the Secretary based on the extent to which they
generate economic benefits, leverage private capital, and promote
innovative technologies. The senior debt for each project must possess
an investment grade rating (BBB minus or higher) in order to receive
federal credit assistance under TIFIA.
Under TEA-21, a total of $530 million of contract authority was
provided to pay the subsidy cost of supporting federal credit under
TIFIA (to cover anticipated losses). The maximum amount of credit that
may be provided is capped at $10.6 billion over the 6-year
authorization period.
Other TEA-21 Sources
Although TEA-21 did not provide the expanded flexibility for states
to apply highway trust fund moneys to intercity rail passenger
investments that the Clinton/Gore Administration sought, there are some
limited opportunities for states to do so. For example, feasibility
studies of a broad range of alternative transportation investments
(including rail investments) in a corridor might be included in FHWA-
funded planning activities. Also, the FHWA's grade crossing safety
funds may be applied to high-speed rail corridors as long as FHWA
mandates are followed. Similarly, the Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ) Improvement Program can be (and has been) used for rail
passenger and freight purposes in nonattainment and maintenance areas
under TEA-21. All these applications of funds to rail passenger
purposes of course require the concurrence of the FHWA division
offices. Finally, as Secretary Slater has discussed in his testimony,
federal funding is available from the Federal Transit Administration
for commuter rail improvements. Improvements benefitting commuter rail
also frequently provide a benefit for intercity rail passenger services
operating over the same rail lines.
Pending Proposal in Congress
Congress is currently considering legislation, the ``High-Speed
Rail Investment Act,'' that would finance Amtrak/State partnerships to
build high-speed rail systems. This legislation has the endorsement of
the Clinton/Gore Administration. The proposal's basics, furnished by
the bill's sponsors, are as follows (note that the legislation is
changing as Congress continues to refine it).
Amtrak is authorized to sell $10 billion in high-speed rail
bonds between FY 2001 and FY 2010.
This money may be invested in designated high-speed rail
corridors to upgrade existing routes to high-speed rail,
construct new dedicated high-speed rail tracks, and to purchase
high-speed rail equipment.
No more than $3 billion of the bonds will support any one
corridor.
Up to ten percent of the funds would be available to improve
non-high-speed rail service nationwide.
States are required to match at least 20 percent of Amtrak's
share. These funds would be managed by an independent trustee
and used to redeem the bonds. The repayment of bond principal
by the trust would be assured by a separate non-federal
guaranteed investment contract.
State funds contributed in excess of the 20 percent minimum
may go directly towards funding projects. The state matching
requirement ensures that Amtrak will work in partnership with
the states and invest these funds in only the most economically
viable projects.
A preference will be given to projects with a state share
greater than 20 percent.
Provisions are included which would prevent the use of both
bond money and Highway Trust Funds.
Bondholders receive tax credits in lieu of interest
payments, which decreases federal revenues by $762 million over
five years and $3.3 billion over ten years.
The states have already spent a significant amount to get started--
about $1.5 billion in the last decade-mostly on incremental
improvements, and they plan to spend another $1.3 billion in the next 5
years, even without recognizing the full effects of the proposed High-
Speed Rail Investment Act. Thus, improved intercity rail passenger
service will expand somewhat in any case, but the High-Speed Rail
Investment Act would make a dramatic difference.
Future Vision
Incremental high-speed rail systems are likely to emerge in a
number of corridors in this decade. Construction will probably begin on
a new high-speed rail or maglev system between major cities somewhere
in this country, probably on the West or East Coast. All these systems
will demonstrate growing synergy with commuter rail, transit, and motor
vehicle transportation, thus fulfilling Secretary Slater's vision of a
seamless transportation network.
Beyond that, I envision a constant improvement in the quality and
consistency of Amtrak's service on all its routes, as well as an
expansion of intercity rail passenger service to new markets (like
Atlanta--Birmingham--Dallas/Fort Worth). To achieve these improvements,
we need to apply the lessons learned from our recent work on developing
improved passenger rail service. We need to combine a local commitment
in partnership with cooperation from freight railroads and federal
support. We need to take advantage of opportunities to improve track
and equipment gradually, as our resources permit, so that improved
service and ridership generates support for further improvements in the
future. And we need to make sure that our enhancements improve service
quality for all rail users-intercity passenger, commuter and freight.
The demographics of the United States are changing with unprecedented
growth occurring in regions like Atlanta and the State of Georgia. The
rail system of the future needs to reflect the residential, commercial,
and travel patterns of the future, not those of the past. That's why I
expect great things to happen in Georgia and the Southeast as
population increases, congestion poses challenges, and opportunities
for improved rail service converge to make this region a world-class
hub for intermodal transportation. Thank you.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. When you partner with a state, is the
federal match percentage predetermined or is that flexible or
does it depend on what type of program the state wants and
therefore they can buy a Ford or a Cadillac or what--tell us
about that partnership and the matching funds.
Ms. Molitoris. Well, I can just mention a success story and
that would be the Alameda corridor. I recall at the beginning
of the Clinton-Gore administration, the people from that area
came in and they had a concept of how much money they wanted,
and it was a lot, and we knew we could not afford it. So what
we did was help them create a model that worked for everybody.
In other words, they started off, I think, with a goal of
something like $800 million that they thought they needed from
the federal government. I think at the end of the day, it was
around $400 million, but we had helped them bring partners
together. The private freight railroads did a wonderful job,
the people of the community did a wonderful job. We were able
to find different places to find funding and so we really
created a financial plan. That has been one of the hallmarks of
the Secretary's leadership is this innovative financing where
you try to match it. Because really the truth is, Senator,
every corridor and every region is a little bit different,
different kinds of freight needs, different kinds of right-of-
way issues--curvy, hills, flat. And so the challenges are
different. But we feel, with the experience we have had, we can
help you create a successful plan. We get some of your
financial institutions and private sector people who have done
it there, they can help too.
Senator Cleland. Thank you. That's Alameda, California?
Ms. Molitoris. Yes, Alameda corridor.
Senator Cleland. Thank you.
Mr. George Warrington, thank you very much for being here
today.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE WARRINGTON, PRESIDENT,
NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION
Mr. Warrington. It really is an honor for me to be here
today, Senator. It is also great to get out of Washington every
once in awhile.
Senator Cleland. Yes, sir.
Mr. Warrington. I would like to begin by thanking you,
Senator Cleland, and Governor Barnes, Mayor Campbell, Secretary
Slater and Jolene, Administrator Molitoris, and others here
today for all of your consistent and very strong support for
Amtrak.
Your advocacy really has been instrumental, in particular
over the past year or two, in building support for the critical
High-Speed Rail Investment Act and I just want everyone to know
that we at Amtrak deeply appreciate all your efforts and
consistent leadership and support on this vital question,
because in the end, this is really all about money and do we
have the will and the ability to deliver the kind of investment
that can really make a difference and build a system across
this country that we can all be proud of, including right here
in Georgia and in Atlanta.
I also want to share a little bit of our vision about
Georgia and Atlanta. Atlanta clearly lies at the heart of our
own vision for high-speed service along the entire Atlantic
coast. As the region's leading business and transportation
center, Atlanta really is poised to become as important a rail
passenger hub as Washington, D.C. and New York today are on the
Northeast Corridor. Atlanta is the key to the ability of the
southeast high-speed rail corridor to successfully connect with
our very successful Northeast Corridor to the Gulf coast and
Texas, providing fast, reliable service to Birmingham,
Greenville, Charlotte as well as Macon, Jacksonville, and
Florida's future high-speed rail network, which is a clear
vision as well.
Our vision is a string of pearls, the major business
centers of the southeast tied together with an integrated fleet
of 110-mile-an-hour tilting trains that provide business as
well as discretionary and leisure travelers with productive,
comfortable, attractive, and competitive service, a service we
can all really be proud of in this country and in this economy.
The challenge that Georgia, Amtrak, and all of our freight
railroad partners face is two-fold, and we need to be frank and
we need to be honest about this. We need to upgrade the
region's rail lines to accommodate both the significant
increase in high-speed rail service planned by Georgia and the
projected growth, which is equally important, in regional rail
freight service as well--very important to local economies and
to important shippers which Secretary Slater mentioned earlier
today. We need to do it together and as Jolene said, this
really is about honest partnership.
High-speed rail has already proven to be an economic engine
for development throughout the entire Northeast Corridor.
Indeed, for many of the cities Amtrak serves in the northeast,
the focus for commercial development at this point is new
hotels, convention centers, offices, retail centers entirely,
almost exclusively, around developing train stations. And in
fact, a launch of our Acela Service in the northeast has
promoted and stimulated significant additional both public and
private investment as engines in communities between Boston and
Washington. That is because the road system is already at
capacity, cannot deliver more people to urban centers and only
trains, when invested in incrementally and wisely, can bring
the additional workers and customers to our cities across
America.
But of course high-speed is not just--and what this hearing
is about--is not just the northeast, it is about urban centers
all across America, including the southeast. And Amtrak can and
will help--I commit to you, Amtrak can and will help this
entire region make the most of those precious rail resources
which exist here today.
We are ready to initiate an association with the State
Department of Transportation and the Georgia Passenger Rail
Authority to plan a study for a new Atlanta-Macon-Jesup-
Jacksonville service, and we are also working with Georgia on
the Atlanta capacity study and planning for the new very
important multi-modal passenger station in downtown Atlanta, a
very important facility, both substantively and symbolically to
our vision about building Atlanta as a very important hub in
America.
Thanks to you, Senator Cleland, and other members of the
Georgia delegation, the new fiscal year 2001 transportation
appropriations bill provided $200,000 to Jolene and Secretary
Slater in order to extend the Boston-Washington-Richmond-
Charlotte transportation plan, very important planning work, to
Atlanta and to Macon. Frankly what has happened is that has
jump-started and led to a remarkable planning process, bringing
together, probably for the first time, all of the interests--
freight railroads, the federal and state governments, and
Amtrak--to really jointly develop, as Jolene said, in
partnership, real partnership, a high-speed rail plan that
could effectively accommodate both passenger as well as freight
growth.
We look forward to working with South Carolina, Georgia,
CSX, Norfolk Southern, and the Federal Railroad Administration
on the important study, and I want to personally thank you,
Senator Cleland, for your efforts to secure the funding to
jump-start this initiative.
I should also mention we are right now literally at this
moment in the process of procuring new 110-mile-an-hour tilting
non-electric high-speed trains for use on corridors throughout
the midwest, in particular Chicago, Milwaukee, Minneapolis,
Chicago-Detroit, and Chicago-St.Louis. These trains, the costs
of which are being shared with our midwest state partners,
would be ideal for use in Georgia and the southeast high-speed
rail corridor and we will very much look forward to working
with the state on both an equipment strategy over the next
several years as well as an equipment plan.
Mr. Chairman, this country has reached a crossroads with
respect to transportation policy--and this really is about
national transportation policy. As the saying goes, it is time
to put up or shut up. We can either go on pretending that the
chaos that is engulfing our highways and airports will somehow
magically disappear--it is a phenomenon that used to occur only
in the northeast, it is now occurring in metropolitan centers
all across this country--or we can resolve to actually do
something about it. And as I often say, this is all about
money. And doing something means investing in passenger rail,
not at the expense of highways or aviation, but to simply
provide the development of the third leg of the stool to
provide better choices and better alternatives for Americans.
There are two reasons why solving this crisis requires a
substantial investment in rail. First, there is the cost issue.
As we are increasingly finding out--you referenced earlier
today in our press conference--the incremental cost of building
new highways and airports are climbing and the costs of adding
to our rail capacity are comparatively attractive, in a
relative sense. And the throughput, the bang you get for that
buck, the capacity that you build and the ability to move
people with that incremental dollar at this point in the
evolution of the transportation, points in the direction of a
wise rail investment.
Second, there is the balance issue. Our national
transportation system might be compared to a three-legged
stool. For the stool to be balanced, all three legs--highways,
airports and rail--have to be strong and they have to be
sturdy. If you remove the rail leg and try to balance the
transportation stool on highways and airports alone, the entire
structure, as we are beginning to see, begins to wobble and
totter and eventually collapse altogether. That is what we are
facing today, a transportation system that is wobbling and
tottering and in danger of collapse on many metropolitan
regions all across this country.
We are investing more--as Secretary Slater said earlier
today, more than $40 billion a year--in our highway network and
I support that investment. It is important and it has done a
terrific job for this nation and its economy. We are investing
$14 billion a year, almost $15 billion a year, in federal money
in our aviation system annually and we support that investment
as well. Yet we invested about $500 million in America's 22,000
mile national passenger railroad system last year and to get
it, we had to fight like dogs for table scraps. This shockingly
low level of investment not only places the future of passenger
rail in doubt, it jeopardizes the viability of the entire
transportation system, given its evolution over the last
several decades.
To restore the balance to this system--and this really is
about money and it is about balance--the country has to stand
up and make a commitment to invest in rail and the Europeans
did it decades ago. We are frankly tired of folks coming back
from Europe and say why can we not do it here? We have
demonstrated in the past several weeks that we are able to do
it on the Northeast Corridor with an outstanding Acela service
and we want to be able to transport that opportunity all across
this land. It can be extraordinarily powerful not only for
Amtrak's bottom line, but for the American economy and
communities all across this nation.
As you well know, Congress still has before it this year,
thanks to your support as a co-sponsor, as you mentioned
earlier, the High-Speed Rail Investment Act, which would
provide $10 billion in bonding authority for Amtrak to partner,
genuinely partner with states and freight railroads in
developing high-speed corridors like the Northeast Corridor
across this country, including right here in Georgia. I
appreciate your leadership, Senator Cleland, in pushing this
vital legislation so hard, and I want to reiterate to you in
the strongest terms possible the need to see this legislation,
for all of us, enacted this year.
In conclusion, I really want to thank you, Senator Cleland,
as well as Governor Barnes, Secretary Slater, Administrator
Molitoris, for your strong, consistent, and unambiguous support
for Amtrak and in particular for the High-Speed Rail Investment
Act. You have all been leaders of this effort and I am
convinced that the future of high-speed rail in the southeast
depends upon successful implementation here in Georgia. It is
why we are so proud to be a partner with you and with the State
of Georgia in a common effort to improve the quality of life
and the economy for the people of Georgia and this region. And
in the end, it is all about money. And I want to thank you for
your leadership and for pushing this vital agenda, which is
really long overdue in this country.
Thanks so much, Senator.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Warrington follows:]
Prepared Statement of George Warrington, President,
National Railroad Passenger Corporation
Mr. Chairman.
It's an honor for me to testify here today. I'd like to begin by
thanking Senator Cleland, Governor Barnes, Secretary Slater and others
here today for their strong and effective support of Amtrak and
passenger rail. Their advocacy has been instrumental in building
support for the High-Speed Rail Investment Act, and I deeply appreciate
their efforts.
I also want to congratulate the Members of this Subcommittee for
stepping outside the beltway and holding this hearing in what I think
of as the ``real'' America. Georgia epitomizes the potential role that
high-speed rail and commuter rail can play in addressing regional
transportation gridlock. Few cities in America face the huge
transportation challenges that confront Atlanta every day: the busiest
airport in the world; serious air quality concerns; gridlock on the
highways; and the need to enhance access to the city in order to
maintain economic growth.
Atlanta lies at the heart of Amtrak's vision for high-speed rail
along the Atlantic Coast. As the region's leading business and
transportation center, Atlanta is bound to become as important a rail
passenger hub as Washington and New York are today. Atlanta is the key
to the ability of the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor to
successfully connect the vibrant Northeast Corridor to the Gulf Coast
and Texas--providing fast, reliable service to Birmingham, Greenville,
and Charlotte, as well as to Macon, Jacksonville, and Florida's future
high-speed rail network. Our vision is a string of pearls--the major
business centers of the southeast--tied together with an integrated
fleet of 110 mph tilting trains that provide business and discretionary
travelers with productive, comfortable, stress-free rides.
The challenge that Georgia, Amtrak, and our freight railroad
partners all face is twofold. We need to upgrade the region's rail
lines to accommodate both the significant increase in high-speed and
commuter rail planned by Georgia, and the projected growth in regional
freight rail service. We must work together toward our common goal of
making the most of a remarkable resource--the old rail line--to relieve
regional congestion and enhance the regional economy.
High-speed rail has already proven to be an economic engine for
development throughout the Northeast Corridor. Indeed, for many of the
cities Amtrak serves in the Northeast, the focus for commercial
development--new hotels, convention centers, offices, retail centers--
is around the train station. That's because the road system is already
at capacity and simply can't deliver more people to the city center.
Only trains can bring in the additional workers and customers.
Examples of commercial development in the Northeast Corridor
include:
Boston--where nearly $2 billion in commercial development is
planned around South Station due to high-speed rail and MBTA
commuter service;
Providence--where a major shopping mall was built adjacent
to the station and a convention center was also built near the
station;
New London--where Pfizer world headquarters and major city
redevelopment projects are adjacent to the station;
And Philadelphia, Wilmington and Baltimore, all of which
have major hotels, conference centers and office buildings
built adjacent to their train stations, in order to benefit
from the commercial opportunities.
But, of course, high-speed rail isn't just for the Northeast.
Nowhere are the potential benefits of high-speed rail greater than here
in the Southeast. Amtrak can and will help this entire region make the
most of its rail resources. We are ready to initiate, in association
with the State Department of Transportation and the Georgia Passenger
Rail Authority, the planned study for a new Atlanta-Macon-Jesup-
Jacksonville service. We are also working with Georgia on the Atlanta
capacity study and planning for the new multi-modal passenger station
in Atlanta.
As you know, thanks to Senator Cleland and other members of the
Georgia delegation, in the new FY 2001 transportation appropriations
bill, $200,000 was provided to the Federal Railroad Administration to
extend the Boston-Washington-Richmond-Charlotte transportation plan
south to Atlanta and Macon. This has led to a remarkable planning
process, bringing together the freight railroads, the federal and state
governments, and Amtrak to jointly develop a high-speed rail plan that
can accommodate passenger and freight rail growth. We look forward to
working with South Carolina, Georgia, CSX, Norfolk Southern and the FRA
on this important study, and we thank Senator Cleland for his efforts
to secure this funding.
Amtrak has considerable experience in partnering with states to
develop high-speed rail. We are working closely with Virginia and North
Carolina on the upgrade of the Charlotte-Richmond-Washington segment of
the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor and expect to jointly fund the
acquisition of new trains that will be used on the Southeast Corridor.
In Pennsylvania and New York, we have partnered with the states on
funding the upgrades necessary to implement new high-speed service. And
in Washington State, Amtrak, the freight railroad and the state have
partnered to upgrade the rail line and procure new trains to
significantly reduce travel time and increase ridership.
Amtrak is also experienced in partnering with communities to help
address local needs and concerns. For example, we established TEMPO--
the Texas Eagle Marketing Performance Organization--as a partnership
between Amtrak and local communities served by our Texas Eagle train.
It involves local businesses, chambers of commerce, sports and
entertainment franchises and venues, travel agencies, mayors and every
other segment of the business community. TEMPO is responsible for many
successful marketing efforts to support the Texas Eagle, and also plays
a role in promoting station improvements along the route. The Crescent
Coalition is another example of a successful partnership between Amtrak
and local communities--this one focused around Amtrak's Crescent
service. These efforts are being duplicated around the country and we
would promote such a partnership down here.
I should also mention to the distinguished Members of this
Committee that Amtrak is in the process of procuring new 110 mph
tilting non-electric high-speed trains for use on corridors in the
Midwest. These trains, the costs of which are being shared with our
Midwest state partners, would be ideal for use in Georgia and the
Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor. We very much look forward to
working with the state on an equipment strategy and plan.
Mr. Chairman with all due respect, this country has reached a
crossroads with respect to transportation policy. As the saying goes,
it's time to ``put up or shut up.'' We can either go on pretending that
the chaos that's engulfing our highways and airports will somehow
magically disappear, or we can resolve to do something about it. And
doing something means investing in passenger rail.
There are two reasons why solving America's transportation crisis
requires a substantial investment in passenger rail. First, there's the
cost issue. As I'm sure everyone on your Committee knows, the costs of
building new highways and airports are climbing way up; the costs of
adding to our rail capacity are falling way down. As the marginal cost
of highway and airport construction rises, while the marginal cost of
increasing our passenger rail capacity falls, rail becomes cost-
effective relative to other transportation modes. In plain English, you
get more ``bang for your buck'' by investing your transportation dollar
in passenger rail than by investing that same dollar in new highway or
airport construction.
Second, there's the balance issue. Our national transportation
system might be compared to a three-legged stool. For the stool to be
balanced, all three legs--highways, airports and rail--must be strong
and sturdy. But if you remove the rail leg and try to balance the
transportation stool on highways and airports alone, the whole
structure will wobble and totter and--eventually--collapse altogether.
That's what we're facing today--a transportation system that's
wobbling and tottering and in danger of total collapse. We're investing
more than $40 billion a year in our highways annually--and I support
that investment. We're investing more than $14 billion in our aviation
system annually--and I support that investment as well. Yet, we only
invested about $500 million last year in our passenger rail system.
This shockingly low level of investment not only places the future of
passenger rail in doubt; it jeopardizes the viability of our entire
transportation system. Because, to repeat, ours needs to be a balanced
system. If you remove passenger rail from the balance, the other parts
of the system just don't work right. But if you've got a strong
railroad system that takes some of the pressure off of our highways and
airports, then you enable them to fulfill their potential, as well.
To restore balance to our national transportation system, and to
turn the corner into the new century with a modern passenger rail
system made up of high-speed corridors linked together by longer
distance train service, this country must stand up and make a
commitment to invest in rail. None of the terrific projects here in the
Southeast Corridor that I have mentioned today will be realized unless
the federal government puts rail on the list with highways and airports
for capital investment funding. As you well know, Congress still has
before it this year an opportunity to enact the High-Speed Rail
Investment Act, which would provide $10 billion in bond authority for
Amtrak to partner with states in developing high-speed corridors. I
appreciate your leadership, Senator Cleland, in pushing this critical
legislation so hard, and I want to reiterate to you, in the strongest
possible terms, the need to see this legislation enacted this year.
In conclusion, I would just like to once again thank you, Senator
Cleland, as well as Governor Barnes, Secretary Slater, and the many
others here for their strong, unambiguous support for Amtrak and high-
speed rail. You have all been leaders in this effort and I am convinced
that the future of high-speed rail in the Southeast depends on its
successful implementation here in Georgia. That is why Amtrak is so
very proud to be a partner with Georgia in a common effort to improve
the quality of life for the people of Georgia and the entire Southeast.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much for those kind words.
May I just ask you to share with all of us how important it
is that you have a source or sources for extra bonding
capacity, in this case, or it might be other resources, to
begin to invest in the kind of expansion that you would want. I
am a co-sponsor of the High-Speed Rail Investment Act, but it
focuses on bonding capacity. Are you limited in your ability to
invest in new trains, new equipment, new road beds and
maintenance and so forth? Are you limited in that right now?
Mr. Warrington. Yes. We do not have a dedicated capital
source of funds, unlike all of the other competing modes--
commuter rail, maritime, aviation, and highway. Amtrak needs to
beg, scrape and scrap on an annual basis for what ends up being
a significantly lesser amount of money than is necessary to
build a system across this country that we can be proud of. And
the High-Speed Rail Investment Act enables us to jump-start and
begin to initiate the kind of service that we have recently
launched on the Northeast Corridor all across this country, in
partnership. As a practical matter, what is occurring is states
like Georgia, states like California, states all across this
land, North Carolina, Virginia are taking a leadership role
around figuring out methods to raise resources in order to
partner with Amtrak and what Amtrak desperately needs is the
kind of flexibility and dedicated commitment of capital to be
able to really partner with states and partner with freight
railroads to make this vision a reality. We have never had it
in 30 years and the time is right right now to enable us to use
the tools of today's existing railroad system across this
country to build an attractive and competitive and powerful
railroad. It is about capital and it is about money. The Act
gives us the opportunity to make that happen and make it happen
relatively quickly across this land.
Senator Cleland. Count on me for continued support. Whether
we get it this year or not, I am there for the duration.
I might say, is it your understanding that given some
access to capital and the ability to invest in the
infrastructure that you want, that you could begin to find,
shall we say, willing partners, both in the public sector and
the private sector that would facilitate you coming south in
the next few years and fleshing out this system that you have
before us?
Mr. Warrington. Absolutely. The most successful operation
that Amtrak runs today is the Northeast Corridor and the single
most important vision that we have and we have had for a number
of years is moving that Northeast Corridor as far south as
rapidly as possible to top into the development that has been
occurring in this region, the southeast, over the past 10 to 20
years. As a practical matter, from a business point of view, it
is very important to Amtrak to connect to reliably and
frequently and with faster trains to the entire southeast
market, to Atlanta and ultimately to Jacksonville.
We very much want to be there, it is a tremendous
opportunity and it is simply a matter of money and commitment
and will to make it happen.
Senator Cleland. Well, again, count on me for doing my part
for the money and the will to make that happen.
Mr. Secretary, I noticed that you recently designated
extensions of the Gulf Coast and Southeast High-Speed Rail
Corridors which do impact Georgians directly. Specially, you
announced a new route between Birmingham and Atlanta that links
the Gulf Coast and Southeast Corridors and another route from
Atlanta and Macon to Savannah and Jacksonville.
In terms of federal funding, what do you think these
designations mean to our state here?
Secretary Slater. Well, first of all, Senator, let me say
that I think that clearly it takes the money, but I think to
start there and not acknowledge the leadership that George and
his team have provided over the last few years would be missing
a point here, because it is going to take that same kind of
leadership to carry us forward.
And if I may, in 1997, Amtrak could not even get along with
its workers. Service was declining and there were not the
resources, and we did not have the commitment from the
Congress. At that point, the leadership stepped forward, we put
our heads together, we resolved the issues with the labor
unions. George and his team have moved forward and they have
not only met the challenge of the moment of providing quality
service with the system we currently have, but with the
credibility that they have built up through the partnerships
with others, they have been able to come forward with this kind
of vision that is out there now to be seized upon, to be
enjoyed. That brings us to the point that you just mentioned.
There are some funding opportunities that are out there.
Clearly, where you have situations where commuter service is
there and it is sharing the same track with the high-speed rail
corridors, then that investment could actually bring about
improvements to that physical stock. We have a number of new
start projects that we are looking at for this region, commuter
projects, and we want to be supportive of your efforts and the
efforts of this region in bringing those into being.
Let me just say that the FTA new start initiative involves
the Macon-Griffin up to Atlanta stretch, and then from Atlanta
over to Athens. So it includes all of that. Right now, our new
start resources are stretched, but we believe that, because of
the tremendous benefits that we have seen through investments
in transit, that any administration that comes after this one
will continue to be a wonderful partner with you and with the
citizens of the region to invest in this initiative.
Also, as has been said, we have some flexibility within
current law where you can actually flex some highway dollars to
transit projects that especially help you to deal with air
quality issues and the like through the CMAQ program, and
through the surface transportation program. And so we would
work with you to put together those kinds of financing packages
as well.
Administrator Molitoris also mentioned the RRIF program and
we also have a TIFIA program that deal with using federal
dollars to actually leverage private sector dollars. Those
kinds of funds could be made available as well.
Senator Cleland. Leverage private sector dollars?
Secretary Slater. Exactly. And with the fact that you have
brought together not only the governmental representatives but
also representatives from CSX and Norfolk Southern, you have
the kind of leadership team that is developing here to tap all
of those sources. I also know that the business community is
represented through representatives of the Chamber as well,
from the region, and that kind of presence is also quite
important and significant.
Ms. Molitoris. Senator.
Senator Cleland. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Molitoris. May I just add one point? I always agree
with everything the Secretary says----
[Laughter.]
Ms. Molitoris.--but I do want to just raise one cautionary
note. In any transition, there are a lot of new people and we
have spent the last almost 8 years now developing these
relationships and doing an education process, and as George
says, and I think appropriately, scrapping and scraping to make
sure that the right kinds of funds, to the best of our ability,
are there. I would say to you that the kind of relationships we
have had, for example, with Catherine Ross and Stan and Mather
and the Governor. I would hope that you would become that
facilitator during the transition so that there is no time
lost, so that there is a consistency and a connection through
this period of transition.
Senator Cleland. We would hope this hearing would serve
that purpose.
We thank the panel. Unlike Congressional hearings in
Washington, I would like to take the opportunity of the chair
and just open it up for a question or two from the audience
here. We have great participation from the audience.
Yes, sir. Would you like to stand up and give us your name
and maybe an agency that you represent?
Voice. I am here as a member of AARP. I would like to ask
Mr. Warrington if the Postal Service is indicating that it is a
willing partner in any of your routes like going from Atlanta
to Fort Worth through Meridian as you are proposing to do.
Mr. Warrington. Yes, we have a very successful business
commercial relationship with the United States Postal Service
and that relationship has grown substantially over the last
several years and we focus internally around premium quality
service for our express customers like the Postal Service, as
much as for our passenger services. That business has grown to
be about $120 million or $130 million. We have a vision around
increasing both the volume of business and our gross and net
revenue yield from that business over the next several years.
And in fact, it is one of the contributors to the performance
and the rationale for extending or presence from Meridian to
Fort Worth-Dallas, and much of that traffic rests between
Atlanta and Dallas-Fort Worth.
Secretary Slater. Mr. Chairman, before we leave, I might
want to say a little about maglev as well.
Senator Cleland. Please.
Secretary Slater. We are currently reviewing seven projects
in that regard and you have got a very promising project that
is in the mix that would provide maglev, at least the beginning
of that process, I think about 32 miles or so of the 100 or so
mile stretch from Atlanta to Chattanooga. The staff has readied
for me their assessment analysis of the seven projects and we
hope to soon make a decision about how we proceed. But I
mention that because again, as we talk about Atlanta, we are
talking about the future of transportation. You have really
positioned yourself well, not only when it comes to highway and
transit transportation investments but also now with the
potential for high-speed rail, and then with the potential to
move from that to maglev service in this region as well.
So we want to be supportive of you and again, I reiterate
my commitment to put together a DOT team that can begin right
now working with you, Senator, and your colleagues. You have
got representatives from--Senator Hollings and also from
Chairman McCain. And this Committee through your collective
leadership has done such a tremendous job. We would look
forward to working with you and the others to continue this
process, not only for Atlanta and Georgia, but for the benefit
of the nation as a whole.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, for
taking that positive initiative.
Let me just say for those who are not familiar with the
technology, my understanding--and when you talk about the
future, my understanding is that commuter rail runs at an
average speed of about 79 miles an hour, something like that,
the passenger service that Mr. Warrington runs in the Northeast
Corridor with the new technology is somewhere around 110, 120
miles an hour; is that correct? Magnetic levitation trains run
at some 220 miles an hour. It is something that we learned from
the Japanese, the bullet train. But I was just in Japan and
they are testing out a new magnetic levitation technology that
goes up to 330 miles an hour. So we just want everyone to know
that we are not talking about just the old Nancy Hanks, bless
her heart. But we are talking about the future of Georgia.
I have one more question. Ms. Molitoris, I worked to get
funding in the transportation bill this year to extend the
Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor study from Charlotte to
Atlanta and Macon. We did include some $200,000 to the Federal
Railroad Administration for this purpose. What kinds of
information can we expect from this study and, in addition, I
would like to know if there is a 50/50 match requirement for
this earmark. The study will benefit, of course, Georgia, South
Carolina and North Carolina. Am I correct that Georgia will be
required to contribute only a part of the match?
Ms. Molitoris. Senator, and thank you very much for your
initiative on getting that money because I think as George has
pointed out, it has really been the jump-start point for
getting people together.
The kinds of information that will come out of the study
will be an analysis of the existing rail operations, a
projection of future rail operations, the kind of
infrastructure necessary to meet all of these future needs and
then the priorities for investment and what the costs and the
benefits will be. Considering that all the people have to be at
the table and there is a lot to look at, that will probably be
about a year to get that done.
In terms of the match, what we have seen work successfully
is that the parties in question get together and have this
discussion because there are different kinds of benefits.
Sometimes the discussion is a little lively but in the end, it
has worked out in every other coalition like the midwest and so
on. So I am sure that you can certainly facilitate that and we
would be supportive in whatever way we could.
Senator Cleland. Glad to help.
Well, ladies and gentlemen, let us thank our panelists
today for this enlightening discussion. Thank you all.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. We will take about a 5-minute break while
the second panel convenes. The second panel will include
Governor Barnes and Mayor Campbell and Eddie Elder, Chairman of
the Barrow County Commissioners, and Jack Ellis, Mayor of
Macon. I would like to also ask Cecil Pruett, the Mayor of the
City of Canton, to join our panelists here.
Five minute break. Thank you.
[Recess.]
Senator Cleland. If it is okay with everyone, we will now
begin with our second series of panelists here. We have three
mayors and a wonderful chairman of a county commission. We will
just start off with Mayor Jack Ellis. Mr. Ellis, we are glad to
have you and thank you for joining us today.
STATEMENT OF HON. JACK C. ELLIS,
MAYOR, CITY OF MACON, GEORGIA
Mayor Ellis. Thank you very much Senator and good
afternoon. Let me again, as the other panelists, thank you for
your leadership and what you have meant to high-speed rail and
transportation throughout the state of Georgia. And of course,
to the assembled people here, I am Jack Ellis, Mayor of the
City of Macon and of course a proud member of Amtrak's Mayors
Advisory Council.
Macon, if you do not know, is located in central Georgia
approximately 80 miles south of Atlanta on Interstate Highway
75, and indeed is the last stop on the Southeast High-Speed
Rail Corridor. So as you can see, I have more than a passing
interest in commuter rail and rail passenger services.
I appreciate the opportunity to present testimony this
afternoon in support of high-speed rail in Georgia and
generally between the City of Atlanta and the City of Macon in
particular. There are many reasons I believe a high-speed rail
system would be good for our state. First, every day, hundreds
of Maconites and residents of middle Georgia and the Macon
region, make the approximately 180 mile drive round trip to
Atlanta to take advantage of the many employment opportunities
in the metro Atlanta area. Many other residents in the middle
Georgia region make the same trip at least during the week to
conduct business in the Atlanta area or to enjoy Atlanta's
culture, entertainment venues, see doctors, attend classes, or
engage in other activities.
While not in the same volume yet, residents of the metro
Atlanta area are increasingly traveling to Macon and the middle
Georgia region for some of the same reasons. For example, until
recently I had an employee of our city government who commuted
from the Atlanta metro area to Macon on a daily basis. And my
own wife commuted from Macon to Atlanta to work for the last 7
years.
So high-speed rail would provide a more efficient, reliable
and safer mode of transportation than is currently available to
those who must travel between these two centers of our state.
And it would do so in a manner that would be more
environmentally friendly.
Second, I support high-speed rail because it would help
make us, as a nation, less dependent on foreign oil supplies.
We all know the story of the high price of gasoline in the last
few months and what it has meant to the family budget.
Therefore, I encourage Congress to pass Senate Bill 1900,
which of course I am singing to the choir when I talk to you
about that, Senator, and that is the $10 billion in bonds over
the next 10 years, to enable development of the high-speed rail
corridor.
Third, high-speed rail will improve Georgia's ability to
compete in the global marketplace. Through connecting the
state's metropolitan regions, high-speed rail would allow
Georgia to be viewed as one seamless market by companies
desiring to do business in our state.
High-speed rail connecting Atlanta and Macon also has the
potential to serve another important strategic national
objective and that is relieving the congestion at the nation's
busiest airport.
In the City of Macon, we are in the process of updating our
airport master plan at this time, thanks to you and the grant
that we were able to get from the FAA to make this possible,
Senator. We have undertaken an approximately $3.2 million
renovation of the airport terminal at this time. And of course,
the passage and funding of AIR 21, which you worked so hard on,
made this possible. As we expand this airport, of course, we
will look for some other opportunities.
High-speed rail between Atlanta and Macon would enable the
state to optimize the use of an underutilized existing resource
to help solve the air traffic congestion at Hartsfield, which
is of a local, regional, and national interest.
Fourth, and extremely important to us in Macon and middle
Georgia, high-speed rail supports Governor Barnes' one Georgia
initiative. High-speed rail has the potential to make Governor
Barnes' vision of making economic opportunity accessible to all
of Georgia a reality.
Macon is a shopping, medical, banking, educational, and
cultural center of the middle Georgia region. In addition,
Macon is the second largest rail hub in the southeast and we
are the last stop on the proposed Amtrak Southeast High-Speed
Rail Corridor, as mentioned earlier.
Senator Macon is blessed to have the only Union Station in
the state of Georgia. This station has been recommended as the
location for passenger rail service and to be designated as a
multi-modal facility for Macon and middle Georgia. This
recommendation, of course, was made by local leaders in Macon,
including myself.
The City of Macon is currently negotiating with the Georgia
Power Company to acquire this historic and most significant
asset to help facilitate the return of passenger rail service
to Macon and middle Georgia. We have applied for state and
federal funding to assist in the acquisition and restoration of
our Union Station.
Macon was once a major passenger rail hub. With your
assistance and leadership, it will once again take its rightful
place in the future of passenger rail service.
Mr. Chairman, I lived in Europe for 3 years, both in France
and Germany, and I have seen first-hand the efficiency and
value of passenger rail service. On a recent trip to England, I
was amazed to discover how many workers in London live over an
hour away via commuter passenger rail.
So Mr. Chairman, the same thing is possible in Georgia and
throughout our country with a tremendous positive impact on our
economy, environment and quality of life, if only we would make
the necessary investment to make it happen now. In the City of
Macon, we have a strong public/private partnership and rail is
at the centerpiece of our entire downtown revitalization, which
you have heard so much about, NewTown Macon and of course, the
City of Macon and the County of Bibb working together to make
this happen, and with rail being the centerpiece, it will
happen; and with your support, we know it will happen.
Thank you very much for this opportunity.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Hon. Ellis follows:]
Prepared Statement Hon. Jack C. Ellis, Mayor, City of Macon, Georgia
Senator Cleland, Governor Barnes, Secretary Slater and my fellow
mayors, I am C. Jack Ellis, Mayor of the City of Macon, Ga. I
appreciate the opportunity to present testimony this afternoon in
support of high-speed rail in Georgia in general and between the City
of Atlanta and the City of Macon, in particular.
Needs and Opportunities
There are many reasons that I believe that a high-speed rail system
would be good for our state. First, everyday hundreds of Maconites and
residents of the Middle Georgia region make the approximate 180-mile
drive round trip to Atlanta to take advantage of the many employment
opportunities in the metro Atlanta area. Many other residents in the
middle Georgia region make the same trip at least once during the week
to conduct business in the Atlanta area; enjoy Atlanta's cultural,
entertainment venues; see doctors; attend classes or engage in other
activities. While not in the same volume, yet, residents of the metro
Atlanta area are increasingly travelling to Macon and the middle
Georgia region for some of the same reasons.
High-speed rail would provide a more efficient, reliable and safer
mode of transportation than is currently available to those who must
travel between these two centers of our state; and it would do so in a
manner that would be more environmental friendly. In addition, high-
speed rail would provide increased mobility for students, senior
citizens, disabled persons and other non-driving populations in these
areas of our state. The result would be improved mobility and access to
the Atlanta for thousands of the state's citizens who currently spend
countless hours in their automobiles to get to their destination, which
causes traffic congestion and degrades our air quality.
Second, I support high-speed rail because it will help make us as a
nation less dependent on foreign oil supplies. The increased gasoline
prices several months ago because of supply cut backs by OPEC was a
rude awakening to us of our vulnerability in this regard and made us
aware once again (as we were made aware in the 1970's) of the adverse
impact that such dependency can have on us economically. For example,
the average price of a gallon of regular gas before the price hikes was
approximately $0.90.
Currently, it is approximately $1.40. For the Macon or middle
Georgia resident that must drive between Macon and Atlanta, as well as
other Americans who lack alternative forms of effective and efficient
transportation, this represents a reduction in their standard of living
that many can least afford. An Editorial in the Monday's edition of the
Atlanta Constitution makes the point that as the cost of transportation
increases, less is left to spend on ``health care, food, entertainment
and personal care products and services--quality of life
expenditures.''
Third, high-speed rail would improve Georgia's ability to compete
in the global market place. Through connecting the state's metropolitan
regions, high-speed rail would allow Georgia to be viewed as one
seamless market by companies desiring to do business in the state.
After flying into Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport, businesses
would have efficient and effective transportation via high-speed rail
(a mode of Transportation that is quite common throughout Europe) to
the other commercial centers of the state.
High-speed rail connecting Atlanta and Macon also has the potential
to serve another important strategic national objective--relieving the
congestion at the nation's busiest airports. In the state of Georgia,
we are blessed with the busiest airport in the World--the Hartsfield
Atlanta International Airport. However, like many airports around the
country, in order for Hartsfield to continue to accommodate growth in
passenger air transportation, it must expand. Such expansion is
expensive and it can be disruptive to surrounding neighborhoods and
communities. In addition, the expansion will take several years to
complete. For example, Atlanta is about to undertake the construction
of the Fifth Runway project to relieve some of the congestion
Hartsfield is experiencing. However, it will be five to six years
before this project is completed and the relief can be provided. The
congestion cries out for a solution today. I believe that the City of
Macon can be a major part of the solution to Hartsfield's growing pains
in the short-term. In the City of Macon, we are in the process updating
our airport master plan and undertaking an approximately two million
renovation of our airport terminal building. Currently, we have
sufficient runway capacity to accommodate smaller jet traffic and we
will be seeking funding to expand the capacity of our runways to handle
larger jets. High-speed rail between Atlanta and Macon would enable the
state to optimize the use of an underutilized existing resource to help
solve the air traffic congestion at Hartsfield, which is of local,
regional and national interest.
Fourth, and extremely important to us in the Macon and middle
Georgia region, high-speed rail supports Governor Barnes' One Georgia
Initiative. High-speed rail has the potential to make Governor Barnes
vision of making economic opportunity accessible to all of Georgia a
reality. Because of its central location in our state, I believe that
the City of Macon is uniquely and strategically positioned to be the
conduit through which economic growth and development can be generated
and made accessible to the far reaches of the middle and southern part
of our state. Macon is the shopping, medical, banking, educational and
cultural center of the Middle Georgia region. In addition, Macon is the
second largest rail hub in the Southeast; and we are the last stop on
the proposed Southeast Corridor.
As part of the One Georgia Initiative, the state has already begun
to build a foundation for this growth and development in this region
the state. These include the Secretary of State Office building, the
Georgia Sports and Music halls of fame, the State's Agricultural Center
in Perry, Georgia. We in Macon and Middle Georgia appreciate these
developments and we applaud our State officials for their commitment to
the One Georgia Initiative. High-speed rail will ensure that the
returns on these investments by the State are maximized; and it will
make more palpable the transfer of additional state offices and
institutions to the Macon and the Middle Georgia region. As future
decisions are made regarding the location of government offices and
institutions, we encourage the State, as well as the Federal
government, to give favorable consideration to Macon and the Middle
Georgia region.
Challenges
As with all opportunities, there are challenges that must be
overcome for the opportunities to be realized. Some of the challenges
that I believe must be overcome to make high-speed rail in Georgia a
reality are as follows:
The system must be designed and built in a manner that makes
it an attractive alternative to the automobile commute. In this
regard, the system of high-speed rail must have the following
elements:
--Competitive fares
--Travel time that is comparable to the commute via automobile
--Connection to a seamless inter-modal system on each end of
the Atlanta-Macon high-speed corridor. To the extent feasible,
the objective should be to have a one-fare system so that a
passenger may go from one mode of transportation to another
without the inconvenience of multiple ticketing.
Consummating an agreement with Norfolk Southern to share use
of their existing rail.
Upgrading rail crossings in a timely manner.
Funding Concerns
As regards funding, I would ask that the following concerns be
considered:
In the City of Macon/Bibb County and the State of Georgia
are working together to create a waterfront in the Downtown
Macon that will include the Ocmulgee Heritage Greenway (a seven
mile riverwalk) and a multi-million mixed used development. The
Norfolk Southern H line that runs between downtown and the
water's edge blocks effective access to the Ocmulgee River's
southern riverfront and poses as a barrier to this development.
The waterfront development is seen as an opportunity to create
significant economic catalysts in the revitalization of the
historical, cultural and economic Center City of the region.
Fortunately, an unprecedented window of opportunity has opened. FTA
and G-DOT propose to redevelop and expand the I-16/I-75 interchange and
widen I-16. At the same time, the Program Management Team is
considering this part of the Norfolk Southern `H' Line as an
entranceway for inter-city passenger rail from Atlanta to Macon. The
late Frank Pinkston requested that G-DOT prepare an alternative concept
of the I-75/I-16 expansion that would include the relocation of these
two miles of railroad. Senator Cleland has been appraised of the
initiative and even the late Senator Coverdale expressed support for
the relocation in one of his last letters written to us. Chairman
Justice and I have requested of Harry Dixon his support of a relocation
feasibility study. Roy Fickling has requested that GRPA consult with G-
DOT about the mutual benefits of relocation, and recently Tommy
Olmstead, our new Chairman of the County Commission, has pledged his
support and will use his influence for support from the State.
Moreover, very importantly, Norfolk Southern has described itself as
open to the possibility.
G-DOT through Moreland-Altobelli did suggest a futuristic concept
that would reroute the rail 26 miles around Macon but would be many
years in development with significant expense. The two-mile relocation
across the river was never in G-DOT's scope of work or budget;
therefore, feasibility and expense were not quantified. Hence, our
request of the State for the study. The feasibility and cost estimates
will include both rail relocation and road modifications to accommodate
the rail. At Senator Cleland's recent ``Smart Growth Task Force,''
Governor Barnes ably described the importance of ``synthesis'' in
transportation and land use planning. The Macon community, through
NewTown Macon, has asked the Governor to consider a detailed study by
Moreland-Altobelli to estimate the feasibility and cost to relocate two
miles of Norfolk Southern `H' line railroad that blocks effective
access to the Ocmulgee River's southern riverfront in the heart of our
city. This proposal requests a detailed study of the relocation of the
rail line to the opposite or north side of the river, integrating the
new rail line with G-DOT and FTA's planned expansion of the I-16
interstate. By quantifying the cost, the study will provide guidance to
evaluate the cost/benefits of the relocation and effectively weigh the
financing alternatives. This smart growth strategy will allow those
given the responsibilities of improving both transportation and land
use in our city, county, region, state and nation the opportunity to
pool resources and expertise to insure wise development along Macon and
Middle Georgia's birth canal, the Ocmulgee River.
If this two miles of rail were relocated, the result would do
nothing less than transform our city forever. The expense and
complications should be seen from the perspective of Middle Georgians
today and the many future generations whose quality of life and
economic opportunities will be improved. The relocation of the active
rail allows a ``rails to trails'' for the Ocmulgee Heritage Greenway,
our 7 mile river-walk, spurs economic development for our public-
private partnerships' $25 Million mixed-use Riverside Development, and
improves access to one of Georgia's greatest natural resources, the
Ocmulgee River. In addition, there are other benefits of relocation,
such as improved freight and possible passenger rail efficiency.
Extend the high-speed line from Macon the Macon Regional
Airport. The extension will support initiatives underway to
attract a major air carrier to the airport and enhance its
viability as a reliever airport for Hartsfield Atlanta
International Airport. Initially, the extension was included,
but then deleted. The extension should be re-instated.
Rethink the use of the gas tax exclusively for road
improvement. It is time we reconsidered earmarking the gas tax
for a particular mode of transportation and used it to support
a comprehensive transportation system that would include mass
transportation, high-speed rail, as well as, road improvements.
I believe that this is justified on the basis that high-speed
rail will generate positive externalities that will accrue to
all of our citizens. I further believe that this new
perspective would be consistent with G-DOT commitment to ``take
a fresh look at how to best to meet the transportation needs of
the State of Georgia for the new millennium by updating the
Statewide Transportation Plan.''
Provide additional funding for mass transportation at the
federal level. In the City of Macon, we provide an annual
subsidy to our public bus system of approximately $1.2 million.
However, this is insufficient to enable our bus system to
expand into the areas of our county where many of the jobs are.
Public transportation to these areas is of vital importance if
we are to implement successfully the Work Force Investment
Initiative and Welfare-to Work.
Again, thank you for allowing me to speak today, and share with you
the growing excitement Middle Georgians are developing as the
opportunities of passenger rail and the related transportation oriented
development are described. The Macon and Middle Georgia community plan
to work together with federal, state, and regional partners, both
public and private, to promote and enhance economic opportunities
through passenger and freight rail, mitigate environmental emissions by
implementing a viable and more efficient means of transportation, and
relieve automobile congestion and actually enhance our road systems'
viability by supporting alternative forms of transportation.
I look forward to your consideration and guidance in these matters
to which the continued growth and development of our state and region
are intricately bound.
______
Supplemental Material
Macon Rail Station Location Study
Views of Downtown Macon Development Opportunities (To be provided at
hearing)
Macon Rail Station Location Study
Criteria Discussion and Site Recommendation Draft
The Site Selection Committee was selected by the Commission on
Macon to Atlanta Rail (COMAR) to study a recommended site to the
Program Management Team. The committee met over a period of months as
an ad-hoc group appointed by COMAR without standing except that it
represented a cross section of the Macon community. The Program
Management Team and their Rail Consultants have stated that community
input will be a strong determinant in the site selection process.
The deliberations followed the criteria below which included
questions of both feasibility and usefulness of the different sites. 1-
7 were suggested by Parsons Brinkerhoff (see work sheet) and others
were added by the committee from research from other communities with
passenger rail. There were certain assumptions made to expedite the
process e.g. the use of the `Old Central of Georgia' Line, Macon's
Station would be a hub vs. an end line, and the understanding that even
though the committee included many development professionals and
engineers, the discussions lacked certain technical expertise due to
the Rail Consultants having just begun their work. The mission of the
Site Selection Committee was to compare different sites, develop
consensus on a particular site and make a recommendation to COMAR.
1. High Quality Rail Connections: The fact that the Macon
station would serve as a hub limited discussion to the existing
Terminal Station site and a site ten blocks south due to the
various tines converging from several directions (see attached
existing rail map). The Terminal Station having served 100
arrivals a day at its peak was easily the most feasible even
though some track that had been either abandoned or taken up
would need redevelopment.
2. Room for Multiple Train Storage: Similar to the discussion
above the Terminal Station provides historic multiple train
storage with opportunity in the Industrial Rail Park room for a
Passenger Rail Maintenance Yard in addition to the state's
largest freight yard in Brosnan Yards. An argument could be
made for the site ten blocks south due to its proximity to
Terminal Station.
3. Parking: For discussion an assumption was made that
adequate parking could be provided at all sites including
Terminal Station in the many acres of available `brown-field'
redevelopment area behind the Station and parking opportunities
associated with a proposed multi-modal station near the
Terminal.
4. Access to both Automobile and Other Transportation Modes:
If automobiles were the only consideration obviously 1-75 and
1-475 is most desirable with site at the end of the Proposed
Fall Line also well positioned. Terminal Station and the
Airport are adequate with the extension of Fall Line Freeway
enhancing the Terminal's position. Considering access to other
forms of transportation Terminal Station is the only qualifier
with existing bus, Greyhound, and Taxi's; and proposed downtown
shuttle and Multi-modal station as part of Terminal Station
(see Macon-Bibb County Bus Routes attached).
5. Ownership of Entire Site and Environmental Issues: For
discussion sake, assumptions were made that all sites were
feasible.
6. Support Services far Layovers: The Terminal Station and
Downtown Macon has significant advantages with this criteria.
7. Existing Train Station: Available Again in discussions of
advantages and disadvantages of the different sites sometimes
the most obvious is overlooked. The Terminal Station is a
historical and cultural icon in downtown Macon; the Station is
one of the most architecturally significant buildings in the
region. It is also the last of the great `Union stations' in
the State of Georgia. Other sites would require the building a
station:
8. Existing Statewide Rail Linkages: Similar to the first
criteria of connections, this criteria speaks to the need of
existing rail that converges in a particular location which
again eliminates all sites except the Terminal Station with the
possible exception often blocks south which would need some
redevelopment (see Existing Rail Lines).
9. Transportation Oriented Development and Supports Economy:
This is a question of synergism. Which location for a
transportation hub would have the greatest impact on existing
and future commercial and residential development?
Transportation Oriented Development (TOD) is a buzzword in
economic development with many examples and viable models
demonstrated around the country. Even though all locations
would benefit from TOO, the most significant development and
redevelopment would be in and around the Terminal Station and
its support of existing and future development in downtown
Macon. It has been said that Terminal Station's revival as a
rail hub will have the single greatest impact on the
revitalization of downtown Macon, the center of the Middle
Georgia Region.
10. Attraction of Federal Support: This question considers
opportunity for the Macon community to leverage Federal dollars
for redevelopment. A case could be made for all locations but
the Rail Station Foundation describes significant Federal
support when involving historic train stations, multi-modal
transportation facilities, and urban revitalization. The
Terminal Station is the only location that would meet this
criteria with the possible exception of an airport location.
11. Historical and Cultural Significance: This criteria deals
with part of the `place making' opportunities or as sometimes
described `creating places worthy of our affection'. Terminal
Station obviously is superior with this criteria. Return of
passenger rail to this site will help resurrect Georgians love
affair with passenger rail while restoring a significant part
of Georgia's history and culture. Middle Georgian memories
alone is a powerful marketing tool in the decision to return
passenger rail to the Terminal Station.
12. Supports `Livable Community' and/or `Smart Growth'
Concepts: Literature on the subject provides support for all
locations in degrees of priority. The important components of
`reuse of existing facilities and infrastructure', support of
mixed-use development, `density by design' by supporting urban
centers, and the use of multi-modal and alternative
transportation (other than car) gave the Terminal Station the
strongest position among the locations.
13. Benefits the Greatest Number of People: This criteria was
used to discuss locations that would have the greatest appeal
to the broadest market of rider-ship. Each location had
advantages to certain areas of Middle Georgians and to certain
demographic and economic strata but the central location of the
Terminal Station with the multi-modal opportunities provides
the strongest support using this criteria.
14. High Commercial Density and/or Job Clusters: This criteria
was used to distinguish locations that provided existing
employment base in close proximity to the station location.
Passenger rail's strongest support has come from travel
associated with work and employment related travel. The
downtown Terminal Station location was the obvious choice using
this criteria if concentration of employment is used.
15. Marketable Location: All the locations enjoyed marketing
ploys that could be used in the promotion of particular
attributes. But the historic Terminal Station as has been seen
in other redeveloped stations that included a mix of retail,
urban entertainment, access to other urban venues of hotels,
shopping, museums, office, residential, medical complexes,
university etc. eclipsed all other possible location
alternatives.
16. Land Use and Zoning Prerequisites: For these discussions
it was assumed all locations would meet all land use and zoning
criteria.
17. Maintain Green-space: This speaks to the redevelopment of
obsolete buildings and infrastructure that would avoid new
construction in green-fields. Depending on the particulars all
sites might qualify with the downtown sites definitely meeting
this criteria.
18. Hotel and Motel Rooms in Vicinity: The Terminal Station
would have the best position on this criteria with more rooms
planned in the future.
19. Physical Constraints: This criteria might be summarized by
several of the preceding criteria. All sites depending on the
particulars would meet this criteria. Concerns of fast trains
would in an urban setting could be mitigated at all sites with
proper development
20. Established Communications: This would refer to access to
as simple a communication link as telephone to wide band and
fiber optic connections. It was agreed that these were
available at the Terminal Station and possibly the airport
while other locations would need development.
The Site Selection Committee having met several times over a period
of months in fall of 1999 and Winter of 2000 came to a unanimous
decision to recommend to COMAR the Terminal Station based on their
deliberations. On March 9, 2000 after hearing the report from the
Committee moved unanimously to recommend to the Program Management Team
at an upcoming `Rail Summit' the use of the historic Terminal Station
as Middle Georgia `s `Union Station'. C/eve Cunningham, Chair of COMAR
Site Selection Committee
Senator Cleland: Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor.
As a career military man yourself, I was going to ask you
had you not seen and visited in other countries in western
Europe, particularly Germany. I was just in Japan and in these
countries. Is it not your understanding that rail--high-speed
rail, high-speed rail corridors link major cities and help grow
the entire economy of these nations? For instance, in Japan, I
was just there and high-speed rail links not only Tokyo, but
other major cities in that country. Is it not your experience
in visiting these other countries that is true?
Mayor Ellis. No question, Mr. Chairman. I was stationed at
NATO headquarters in the early 1960's and at that time NATO
headquarters was located in Paris and I had the occasion, of
course, to travel to Germany quite often. In order to get from
Paris to Frankfurt, I mean it was more efficient to take the
train than to drive a car or even to take a plane at that time.
So if we are going to compete with these countries, and indeed
we are in competition with them this being a global economy, I
think it behooves us to compete in every aspect, and of course
rail transportation is a big part of their economy.
Senator Cleland. Yes, it is. Well, thank you very much for
that testimony.
We are delighted to have Governor Roy Barnes with us today,
a leader in transportation issues, an acknowledged leader in
our nation in smart growth and the ability of our state to
respond to the challenges of the 21st century, particularly in
terms of transportation.
And without further ado, it is my pleasure to recognize the
Governor of Georgia, Governor Roy Barnes.
[Applause.]
STATEMENT OF HON. ROY BARNES,
GOVERNOR, STATE OF GEORGIA
Governor Barnes. First, I would like to thank Senator
Cleland for bringing this hearing to Georgia. It is always
difficult for us sometimes to appear in other places and your
effort in doing this and bringing this hearing today here to
Georgia is something that I want to personally thank you for.
It is important that you are here, because our state faces
several major environmental challenges as we attempt to improve
transportation.
And so I commend Senator Cleland on his hard work on behalf
of Georgia's citizens to earmark the funds that we will need to
bring our transportation program to fruition. Without your help
and the help of many of our Congressional delegation, including
our late, great friend, Paul Coverdell, we would not be as far
along as we are. And I want to thank Secretary Slater and all
of the others for their help and assistance in extending high-
speed routes in our state.
It is our hope that the southeast will be able to link
together through transportation initiatives and that Georgia,
as it always has historically, will play a significant part in
that system.
Right now, however, we need your help in freeing up the
financial resources that have been appropriated so that we can
begin our system of transportation needs, particularly in
commuter and intercity passenger rail program moving forward.
When I became Governor in early 1999, the EPA directed that
federal dollars could not be spent on our roads or highways. We
all remember this, it was a crisis that we confronted. We
arrived--I arrived and our administration arrived at this state
of affairs because the local governments in the region had not
been successful in working together and coming up with a common
transportation plan. In the 18-county metropolitan region that
really is Atlanta, there are over 80 separate governmental
jurisdictions. Each one has its own needs and its own views and
it is completely confident, each of them is completely
confident in its own course of action and somewhat suspicious
sometimes of anyone else and their agenda.
The Atlanta Regional Commission, one of the first
metropolitan planning organizations in the country, is in
charge of helping these metro counties come up with a regional
transportation plan. Unfortunately, it had no power to carry
out its mission. That is what brought about, with the Atlanta
Chamber of Commerce and their MATI initiative, the creation of
the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority. Primarily, we
designed GRTA to implement the ARC's plan to give it the power
it must have to actually make a difference.
Now the lack of cooperation that we saw among the local
government was also apparent among the departments of state
government, especially in dealing with our passenger rail
program. As a result, we formed what is called the Program
Management Team, PMT--you know, everything in government has to
have an acronym--to coordinate and direct our passenger rail
effort. Sonny Deriso of Albany, who is also vice chairman of
GRTA, heads up this team.
From all of that, what have we learned? Well, we have
learned that commuter rail is a part of solving our
transportation needs. It is not the sole answer, we have to
make sure that it is part of a recognized effort, a coordinated
recognized effort, and as the Mayor, as Jack has pointed out,
the connection also of the mid part of our state and the rest
of our state in one transportation system is imperative.
I think that we have made tremendous progress in our state
agencies of trying to work together and our federal partners,
particularly under Secretary Slater, has been very supportive
of us, as you have, in assisting us in this regard.
I guess I will leave you with this thought. This is a new
effort on a statewide basis, it is a new effort in trying to
blend together an integrated transportation plan, one that not
only has high-speed rail as part of it, as the Northeast
Corridor has, and provides a commuting basis for those who live
and work apart, but also we know that we have to get--we have
to change some attitudes, we have to have folks that, for
example, have access to expanded bus service and HOV high-speed
bus lanes so that the routes are connected and we are not too
far away from home.
So as we encourage our state agencies and require our state
agencies to work together, I want to tell you that this is
broader than just the federal government, it is broader than
the state government, it is broader than just local
governments. It is a collaboration among us all because what we
are dealing with is not only improving transportation,
improving mobility, but also--and probably most importantly--
improving air quality, which helps us to establish a quality of
life that allows us to continue to grow.
There is much more that we need to accomplish if we want to
see passenger rail operating in Georgia. But the efforts and
the hearing such as you have sponsored today I believe will put
us far down the road.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Governor Barnes follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Roy Barnes, Governor, State of Georgia
I would like to thank Senator Cleland for bringing this hearing to
Georgia. It is important that you are here, because our state faces
several major environmental challenges as we attempt to improve
transportation.
I commend Senator Cleland on his hard work on behalf of Georgia
citizens to earmark the funds we will need to bring our transportation
program to fruition. Without his help, and the help of many of our
Congressional delegation--including our late, great friend, Senator
Paul Coverdell--we would not be as far along as we are. I also want to
thank Secretary Slater and Administrator Molitoris for their help and
assistance in extending the high-speed routes in our state.
It is our hope that the Southeast will be able to link together
through transportation initiatives and that Georgia will play a
significant part in that system.
But right now we need your help in freeing up the financial
resources that have been appropriated so that we can get our commuter
and intercity passenger rail program moving forward.
In 1998, at the beginning of my administration, the EPA directed
that federal dollars could not be spent on our roads or highways. We
arrived at this state of affairs because the local governments in the
region would not work with each other. In the 18-county metropolitan
region that is ``Atlanta,'' there are over 80 separate governmental
jurisdictions. Each one is completely confident in its own course of
action, and somewhat suspicious of anyone else.
The Atlanta Regional Commission, one of the first Metropolitan
Planning Organizations in the country, is in charge of helping these
metro counties come up with a regional transportation plan.
Unfortunately, it had no power to carry out its mission. We needed an
agency that had the power to create and enforce a regional air quality
plan.
At the time, The Atlanta Chamber of Commerce had just completed a
months-long study of the region's transportation challenges, and from
their report came the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority.
Primarily, we designed GRTA to implement the ARC's plan, to give it the
power it must have to actually make a difference.
The lack of cooperation that we saw among the local governments was
also apparent among the departments of state government especially in
dealing with our passenger rail program. As a result, we formed the
Program Management Team (PMT) to coordinate and direct our passenger
rail effort. Sonny Deriso of Albany, who is vice-chairman of the GRTA
board, heads up this team.
I encourage our state agencies, federal partners and elected
officials to continue to support our efforts in Georgia to improve
transportation and most importantly air quality. There is much more
that we need to accomplish if we intend to see passenger rail operating
in Georgia.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Governor.
One of the lessons we learned from the first panel is that
we are all in this boat together, we all have to grab an oar
and pull. There is no one particular agency, no one particular
horse we ride, no one particular silver bullet that is going to
solve all of this, that we are in a situation where we have to
work together. Is that your understanding, that this level of
partnership, public, private, federal, state, all of us pulling
together is the key?
Governor Barnes. It is, it is a partnership and a
collaboration, but it is also an education effort. One of the
things that amazes me is the misconception by even editorial
writers, and I cannot believe that they ever make mistakes----
[Laughter.]
Governor Barnes.--but the misconception that there is
really one form of shared transportation instead of mass
transportation, as I like to call it, that is going to be
dominant. This is a mixture of all. And it makes it very
difficult for us new in this effort--and that is what we are,
we are new. The only mass transit we had in the Atlanta region
or anywhere in the state was MARTA, of course, and some
isolated bus systems. But the idea is there are going to be
choices for people and you have to make those choices.
If they make the choices to continue to say I do not want
any shared transportation, they pay a price for that--time,
congestion, and otherwise. And that the choices that are made,
when you allow people to make free choices, they will choose
the time.
One of the things that--and I do not mean to dominate this,
but one of the things that was most interesting to me in the
last few months is that CNN did a program--I do not know how
many of you saw this, but CNN did a program in which it talked
about sprawl and travel time and congestion and all these other
things, and it took a family out of Woodstock, Georgia, and
interviewed this family. The mother and father, both who
commuted and worked, said well, you know, we used to leave at 7
in the morning to get to work. Now we are leaving at 6:30 and
if traffic gets any worse, we will be leaving at 6. And of
course, the same story in the afternoon returning. And then the
reporter said well why do you do this? And they said well, we
do it because of the quality of life for our children. We want
our children to have a better quality of life.
Then they interviewed the kids separately from the parents.
[Laughter.]
Governor Barnes. You know what the kids said? We hate it.
They get home, they are grumpy, they go right to bed, they
never spend any time with us and we hate it.
And so I thought to myself, that was a very interesting
observation from kids, that every hour we spend tied up in
traffic, sitting on the Interstate, is less time that we have
to spend with a child or spend in community efforts or the
building of neighborhoods that are necessary to make children
grow as a whole person. And that is kind of the message that
you have to get across.
Now what if that same couple could leave promptly and knew
that they could make the same commute, because of shared
transportation of whatever source it is, in an hour instead of
2 hours. Would they do it? Yes, eventually. And so this idea
that people will not move toward it, I think is short-sighted.
We, as policy makers, all of us as policy makers, we have
to make sure that it is competitive. What they will not do is
sit in a train or mass transit or a bus if it takes longer to
get there, it is not more efficient and more competitive than
to make them have an advantage of spending more time with the
family.
So when we design these plans, that is the reason it has to
be a menu of choices so that we allow a good competition that
gets them there faster and saves time that they can spend with
family.
I think there is a growing realization--just a month or so
ago, they interviewed some folks that were riding the Cobb
County Transit, the bus system. And of course the ridership in
mass transit is remarkably--I mean shared transit, whether it
be bus or whatever--and one of things they found, the complaint
was there are not enough routes, there is not enough time, we
need more. That is what I think we cannot be short-sighted
about. We have to make sure that we give top service, which is
competitive time, if we are to be able to make these choices.
Because I will tell you, we cannot as policy makers, we cannot
force these choices on folks.
Just today, as Mayor Ellis was talking, just to follow up
on what he said, today we had the annual economic predictions
that we have every year from the Terry School of Business,
where we bring in a national leader to give the macro look and
then Dean Benson always gives the state. One of the things he
talked about was a slowing economy, but he says there are
certain cities in Georgia that are going to boom because of
this continuing growth. One of them was Macon and he said just
like Atlanta, it is at the cross section of transportation and
transportation is what started Atlanta and is still its
lifeblood. Macon is the same way, particularly if the Fall Line
Freeway ever gets finished and the rail system connects Atlanta
and Macon.
So this is an economic issue, it is a quality of life
issue, it is a health issue. But you have to provide those
multitude of choices. And to be quite frank with you, we cannot
do it alone--that is the state. I mean, our financial
resources--listen, last year, we gained 30,000 children in this
school system statewide. I have got to build classrooms, hire
teachers, and everything else. Yes, we are dedicating more and
more resources to transportation. I am going to go to the
General Assembly next year with a plan to try to advance fund
some of that so that we can start some of these, but I hate to
say this, this is one place that the federal government can
help us.
[Laughter.]
Governor Barnes. There are certain things that the federal
government cannot do to help us. This is not one of them. This
is one that the federal government can help us. And I
appreciate your effort in assisting us because you understand
that very well.
Thank you.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. Governor, significant investment is going
to be needed to meet the capacity needs of the freight
railroads, improving signaling, increasing grade crossing
protection to allow speeds of up to 110 miles an hour that are
recommended to attract passengers and create benefits for the
state. Are there currently any dedicated state sources for
funding commuter and intercity rail service?
Governor Barnes. We do not have a dedicated source, but we
are committed to providing an overall sharing of the sources.
Now let me add one other thing, since you are on that subject.
One of the things that we have great difficulty with and all
the professionals in this room can tell you, is negotiating
with the freights in order to make competitive any rail that
goes.
And you do have to do all of those things, you have to
improve the grade crossings, you have to do all of those things
that are necessary.
So yes, we do not have a dedicated source, but we do have
some funding schemes and some funding plans that we think would
be sufficient, with some federal help, to be able to meet our
match and to meet our goals in doing so.
Senator Cleland. Well, thank you. I will say that one of
the missions that I see for myself on the Commerce Committee
and the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation is to be that
point person to go after federal funding to fulfill the
transportation plan that you have here in Georgia--rail, roads,
commuter rail, everything that you have on the table. That is
one of the reasons I am holding the hearing here, is for us to
garner--me and my staff to garner some insight here as to how
we might do that job better, how we might be a better advocate
for what our state wants and our cities want.
I might say that up there in Woodstock and near Woodstock,
the great city of Canton, Georgia in Cherokee County, Mayor
Pruett has some interesting insights on this life in the outer
suburbs and how connecting with certain transportation means
might make a better life for us all.
Mr. Mayor.
STATEMENT OF HON. CECIL PRUETT,
MAYOR, CITY OF CANTON, GEORGIA
Mayor Pruett. Thank you for letting me be a walk-on at
today's meeting. I appreciate that, and I truly appreciate the
opportunity of following the Governor and him referring to
Woodstock, because I have got a solution to that problem.
[Laughter.]
Mayor Pruett. Those people do not need to have to go
through that, they need to be able to get on commuter rail and
get to Atlanta without having to go through those difficult
times.
The earlier panel had mentioned vision and planning,
implementation and all that. For quite sometime now, for 3
years, the City of Canton has evolved from a vision and it has
put into place a plan that would incorporate commuter rail. Of
course, we may not get that in the next year or two, but what I
am simply suggesting that we consider is that Canton should be
used as a demonstration project, because the rail line itself
is privately owned and those people are very willing and
capable and able to communicate and to agree in some kind of
understanding whereby that track could be utilized for commuter
rail.
And of course, we are already working with our friends at
Cobb County, and even though that track only goes to Marietta,
then we could connect with CCT and make that a seamless system.
But we could learn a lot about what it would cost, what kind of
ridership we would get.
Even in the City of Canton now, we already have a shuttle
system in place that is free of charge. And I think other
cities ought to be doing that same thing in order to--you know,
that pay box does not create a whole lot of money, but we try
to get people out of a bad habit into a good habit and that is
to leave the car in the garage, because we have all got the air
quality, the congestion problem, and we are trying to make sure
that is solved. So that when commuter rail does come to our
city, we will have people trained to get on that shuttle bus
and get to the station and go to work. Sixty-five to seventy
percent of our citizens leave our county every day. We are
working on that too, to try to make sure that jobs are created
in our city to cope with that issue. But without that vision,
you do not have a plan, and without that plan, you do not have
implementation.
And our vision is to hopefully get Georgia Rail Passenger
Authority and others to consider our city as a demonstration
project. They were in our city 3 months ago for their monthly
meeting and I think they saw what we have got planned. And we
have planned and will continue to plan a livable cities
initiative based strictly around commuter rail.
Thank you for the opportunity, my friend.
Senator Cleland. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Let me see if I can get it right. There is a private rail
line that goes from Canton to Marietta?
Mayor Pruett. Yes, sir. it goes all the way up through
north Georgia, but I am not particularly advocating at this
point in time we go to Gilmer County yet with commuter rail----
[Laughter.]
Mayor Pruett.--but I am certainly anxious for it to come to
Cherokee County.
Senator Cleland. Gotcha.
[Laughter]
Governor Barnes. I do not mean to dominate, but Mayor
Pruett, I want to commend--I have done this several times, I
want to commend him publicly. They have been on the cutting
edge of providing alternatives for this bus shuttle system that
they have in the city and it works. It works and it is an
example of how--just as I was speaking, if you give choices and
it is dependable and it is faster, they will use it.
Mayor Pruett. And Senator, we are also very actively
involved in smart growth element, which you know, when we
participated in your seminar over in Athens, and our city is on
the cutting edge, and this can just simply be another project
that we can help. You know, we need a win-win situation and I
think this is a great opportunity. We could have one running in
6 months if everybody decided that would be something that they
could entertain.
Thank you.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much. Fascinating
initiative. Thank you for being willing to join our panel.
Mayor Campbell, all roads seem to lead to Atlanta.
STATEMENT OF HON. BILL CAMPBELL,
MAYOR, CITY OF ATLANTA, GEORGIA
Mayor Campbell. Thank you very much, Senator. And I want to
echo the comments of Governor Barnes in expressing our
appreciation to you, not only for being a forceful advocate for
Georgia, but for the issue of rail, and not just that, but the
TEA-21 infrastructure funds which you also fought for and which
have actually played a part in our continued planning for our
multi-modal center. And I want to thank you very much for being
so supportive. To my other colleagues here and those that are
here, you have assembled a great group just to listen to the
panels. Representatives from the Georgia Department of
Transportation, I came in with Wayne Hill, Chairman of the
Gwinnett County Commission, who also chairs ARC, and of course,
the new head of MARTA and friends from the legislature.
It makes a real difference for us to be able to advocate
because we think in many ways Atlanta has seen the future and
we have invested in it, particularly with the efforts on both
the multi-modal center where we have invested for years in
keeping this possibility, this very exciting possibility alive,
but also with the help of many of our corporate friends.
A perfect example of that--there are three examples. The
first one comes with the Atlantic Station, formerly known as
Atlantic Steel. This is a perfect effort that shows how we can
blend together all these different issues where people can work
and live, shop and play in a community that really reduces both
air pollution and traffic congestion. As you know, because we
have worked with you, Senator Cleland, the Environmental
Protection Agency has adopted this project under its Project
Excel designation as a national model for smart growth
features. And not only that, but of course we get the added
benefit, they repatriated the land, the polluted land that was
there. So these features are aimed at reducing single occupant
vehicles and we are delighted that that is the kind of
alternative community building and smart growth that will make
a difference.
Another example is the $6 million Lindbergh Project which
is currently under construction sponsored by MARTA. It is being
developed in conjunction with BellSouth and its effort at
consolidating the work locations of its employee base, and that
helps us as well. Fifty acres of MARTA land are going to be
transformed into, again, this sort of smart growth initiative
where people live and work and shop all in the same community.
It consists of three locations served directly by MARTA rail.
Two of those are in the city and the third is immediately
adjacent. A third community is historic Westside Village on the
Martin Luther King corridor right across the street from
Paschal's where I know you spent many of your formative years
there enjoying the vintage fried chicken and just being a part
of the whole community. This development project will become
the mixed use anchor for the Atlanta University Center. It will
have housing, office space, retail, and it is also of course
right there on top of a MARTA station. And we are delighted to
have that kind of initiative.
But the most exciting of all these ``transportation-smart''
and ``land use-smart'' development projects is our Multi-modal
Passenger Terminal project. It has taken awhile to come
together. When I say that Atlanta invested in the future, we
made certain that we assembled the land, we made certain that
the infrastructure was in place. We look for this project to
create for our city, our region, and our state, the surface
transportation counterpart to Hartsfield Airport. In a
remarkable multi-layer transportation nexus, we are looking to
have Amtrak, MARTA, commuter rail, various means of busing, and
of course, the Atlanta-Chattanooga Maglev--and I want to again
thank Secretary Slater for his continued support--all together
in one central location. The major advantage will be the
seamless university and urban continuity that will connect
neighborhoods to downtown to the Atlanta University Center, to
Philips Arena, the Georgia World Congress Center, Centennial
Olympic Park and it combines all of this working with the state
and with the federal government under this Project Management
Team.
So we believe we have invested in the future, we have seen
what is important and we hope this will go a long way towards
overcoming some of the regional difficulties and provide all of
us with an effort at working together. You know, Mayor
LaGuardia said it best and that is that there is no Democratic
or Republican way to pick up the trash, it is only whether or
not it gets picked up. And it is the same issue with people
sitting in traffic. People want a solution, they do not care
about the regional difficulties, they do not care about
transportation projects. They simply want it to work. And one
of the best ways of doing so is through rail.
I lived in Copenhagen, I lived in a suburb of Copenhagen,
and they had a wonderfully seamless regional transportation
system that was in essence commuter rail. That was 30 years
ago. They have improved upon that now. They now have, as you
know, having ridden the high-speed rail in Japan and of course
the same in France, it is a wonderful opportunity for us to cut
down on traffic, cut down on air pollution and be able to help
these wonderful people in Woodstock and their children to spend
more time together. I think it just goes to show you that the
things that we think are important are not as important to the
people that we are trying to help the most--that is our
children. We all want to serve our children. We think we do
that by working two jobs, getting up earlier for them. It turns
out it is just the opposite. They would rather have us spend
more time with them. And the best way to do that is through
commuter rail, high-speed rail, more HOV lanes, a better mass
transit system. I happen to believe MARTA is the best in the
country. The best way to enhance that is by having it serve
more of the surrounding areas. And we hope to be able to do
that in a seamless way.
So I want to thank you, Senator, because we think that what
we are doing is really providing for the future. We are
investing in these corridors, these nodes, that will help
people to stay out of cars, cut down on the air pollution, and
be able to get people from point A to point B.
As you know, we are one of the few cities in the world
where you can fly in to our airport and because of the vision
of my predecessors and those at MARTA, you can walk only 20
yards from where you pick up your baggage and get on the mass
transit system in the terminal. I mean think about the vision
that that took. They created the whole seamless corridor there
10 years before the MARTA line ever went into the airport. It
is now one of the great advantages of our airport and of our
mass transit system.
It is that same sort of vision that I think can help us.
And I appreciate you bringing us all together and making us
work together and providing the money which, of course, is a
needed ingredient, so that we can all move forward together.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mayor Campbell follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Bill Campbell, Mayor, City of Atlanta,
Georgia
Atlanta is beginning this exciting new century with major rail
transportation initiatives. Under Governor Barnes' leadership,
establishment of the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA)
has created a new set of partnerships that we expect will rebalance
transportation programs and priorities for our city and region. This
rebalancing is already evident in new development initiatives and
partnerships with private sector developers. Together, we are
responding to the growing market for urban choices. We are responding
to the need for mixed use, mixed income communities where effective,
convenient and affordable transit is a central component.
One of these communities is Atlantic Station, where over the next
several years a ten million square foot complex will be built to help
reduce both air pollution and traffic congestion. In fact, the
Environmental Protection Agency has adopted this project under its
Project XL designation as a national model of ``smart growth''
features. Such features are aimed at reducing Single Occupant Vehicle
trips, providing effective transit alternatives, and creating an
environment that helps reduces both the number and length of trips.
Another example is the six-million-square-foot Lindbergh project
presently under construction, sponsored by MARTA. Approximately 50
acres of MARTA land, much of which were parking lots, are being
transformed into a mixed use development, this time anchored by office
space for BellSouth. The purpose is to consolidate space needed to
accommodate nearly 13,000 employees. It will consist of three locations
served directly by MARTA rail. Two of these are in the City, and the
third is immediately adjacent.
A third community is Historic Westside Village. This development
project will become the mixed-use anchor for the Atlanta University
Center and nearby west side neighborhoods, again providing housing,
office and retail space. The project will total more than one-million-
square-feet right on top of a MARTA rail station. Other such
initiatives for the Village are in the planning stages as well.
Yet the most exciting of all our ``transportation-smart'' and
``land use-smart'' development initiatives is the Multi-modal Passenger
Terminal project. This project has taken awhile to come together and is
designed to provide a comprehensive land development and multimodal
transportation program centered in the core of downtown. We look for
this project to create for our city, region, and state, the surface
transportation counterpart to Hartsfield Atlanta International Airport.
In a remarkable multi-layered transportation nexus, we are looking to
have Amtrak, MARTA and commuter rail, various means of busing, and the
Atlanta-Chattanooga Maglev together in one central location. One major
advantage will be seamless urban continuity from downtown to nearby
neighborhoods, to the Atlanta University Center and Philips Arena, the
Georgia World Congress Center and Centennial Olympic Park.
This project combines several entities into a state level project
called the Project Management Team. The team is partnering with the
City and the downtown business community, through Central Atlanta
Progress, to sort through the project's daunting technical, financial
and political challenges and opportunities. All parties are
participating enthusiastically to achieve the best outcome.
We look for this project to go a long way on both a regional and
intercity scale. We expect it to provide the full range of travel and
development choices that distinguish a mature and well-managed
metropolis. It will ease rush-hour commutes. It will reduce air
pollution and congestion. It will provide seamless connections between
local, regional and intercity travel modes. It will concentrate
employment and residential areas. And it will provide conventioneers,
sports fans and entertainment seekers with a wide range of options for
reaching their destinations pleasantly and conveniently.
What is impressive about this project is the convergence of
multiple parties--all vested in helping Atlanta discover even greater
cutting-edge solutions. Atlanta is a city that has grown and succeeded
by being on the forefront of transportation innovation. We have gone
from rail to road, to air to rail transit, to superhighway, and now to
multi-modal surface transportation. To take full advantage of this
opportunity, strong and effective partnerships are needed to create and
study policy, develop programs, devise funding strategies and implement
projects.
What we need is the assistance of federal, state, local and private
entities--including their financial assistance. We need to support our
key rail partners in managing rail operational needs in conjunction
with commuter rail needs. This is vital to our continued growth. We
need to strengthen partnerships that are essential to any diverse 21st
century city. Overall, we must help Atlanta once again distinguish
itself as a cutting edge transportation-driven city. This time, with a
range of rail innovations. As a core city that values the diversity of
its population and attractions, and is always looking toward the
future, Atlanta is destined to be not just a transportation model, but
a model city in every way.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, well said.
Mr. Elder, we have been talking a lot about corridors.
There is Barrow County right smack dab in the middle of a
fascinating corridor. Share with us your view.
STATEMENT OF HON. EDDIE ELDER,
CHAIRMAN, BARROW COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
Mr. Elder. Thank you, sir. I too appreciate the opportunity
to be here today to speak to the Subcommittee on behalf of
Barrow County and also for, I guess, more rural Georgia. Unlike
most of my counterparts here, even though we are one of the
fastest growing counties, we still feel like there is a lot of
rural opportunity there.
But transportation is one of the most important ingredients
in a county to its quality of life. And the direction that we
will grow and plan for the future must be based on
transportation.
As one of the fastest growing counties in Georgia, our
economic development, our residential growth, must be planned
with smart growth and green space, but we must develop a
network of transportation also.
Growing up in Barrow County in the 1940's and 1950's, we
had three sources of transportation at that time. I was born
and have lived all my life just off the CSX rail line, and in
those days, there were more passenger trains running on that
track than freight trains. In fact, just in front of my house,
there was a passing track built so that those freight trains
could pull aside and wait to let those faster moving passenger
trains pass by. There was a stop in every small town--Bogart,
Statham, Winder, Auburn--and people used those trains. In those
days, not everybody had an automobile and if you were going to
Athens or Atlanta or a further distance, the train or the bus
was your main way of traveling.
With the congestion that we have today on the University
Parkway and on Interstate 85, you could drive to Atlanta faster
50 years ago on a two-lane road than you can travel it today.
[Laughter and applause.]
Mr. Elder. With Gwinnett County moving towards us on one
end of University Parkway and Athens-Clarke County moving
toward us on the other end, and with the great University
systems that we have on both ends, we need all sorts of
transportation. There are people in Barrow County who travel
every day to Atlanta or Athens to work. With the number of
students and employees that goes with all those universities
traveling, it is indeed important that we have alternative
transportation.
We feel that a big part of that though is still an upgrade
to 316 or the University Parkway, to full limited access. With
the number of automobiles on that road, the number of accidents
and the number of deaths that we have had, this is very
important. But also, the proposed corridor for the rail
paralleling with University Parkway must make it a high
priority in this region.
There is no doubt that the current trend of low density
decentralized automotive-dependent development so common in our
country for the past 50 years is a major threat to the quality
of life in Barrow County. Not only is it expensive for local
governments to serve, but the impact that this form of
development has on the environment is staggering. Automobile
emissions create toxic air pollution. Stormwater surging across
miles of asphalt poisons our rivers and streams. Thousands of
acres of farmland, woodland, and open space are lost to strip
malls and parking lots.
We in what was rural Georgia are among a growing number of
people who are beginning to understand the link between the
health of our environment, our economic stability and the way
that we use our land. No county or city by itself can solve all
the problems of air quality, water pollution, or land use. We
must work as a region, a state and a nation to solve these
problems.
The presence of these transportation projects creates an
urgent need to determine if there is a better way to manage
growth in our area in such a way as to reduce traffic, improve
air quality, protect our environmentally sensitive areas, have
cost-efficient infrastructure, and in general, a more livable
community. At the same time, this urgent need becomes a unique
opportunity to point the way to a more sustainable future for
Barrow County and the Atlanta region.
At the present time, most of our new development is on
University Parkway. Years ago, when Barrow County was built,
all these towns were built on CSX rail lines. With this
corridor becoming usable again, then we have the opportunity of
revitalizing these areas that were built and so important 50-70
years ago.
I urge us all to go forward with the planning and the
implementation of the Athens to Atlanta rail service and
enhancing and upgrading University Parkway system to give us a
model alternative transportation system for all of Georgia and
the nation to appreciate.
Thank you very much for the privilege of being here today
to address this Committee, Senator.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Your comments about passenger rail being on these rail
lines bring back my own personal experience in growing up in a
little town called Lithonia, Georgia when we were part of rural
Georgia, where there was a passenger train that went every day,
daily service, from Atlanta to Augusta and came through my
little hometown of Lithonia, stopped at the depot, picked up
passengers, all the way to Augusta and then turned right around
and in the afternoon came right back all the way to Atlanta.
You could ride from downtown Lithonia to Atlanta for 50 cents.
You know, one wonders, and I have often thought, all those
little towns over the last 100, 125, 150 years, through DeKalb,
through Rockdale, through Newton County on out, through
Thomson, Georgia and on to Augusta, on that one railroad, all
those little towns that have seen a deterioration of the
downtown area. What if somehow, some way, passenger service--
maybe not even super high-speed, but just some kind of access
on a train--what that would do to revitalize what used to be a
thriving part of our state, small downtown rural Georgia. And
so I share your experience.
I would just like to ask, we were able to get $16 million
in the Transportation Bill, TEA-21 actually, to authorize
construction of an Atlanta to Athens transportation corridor.
What do the citizens out there in Barrow County think of this
corridor, think of this possibility of rail, passenger rail
coming their way?
Mr. Elder. I think there are mixed emotions, as has already
been brought out by Governor Barnes. Most people are a little
bit skeptical. We, after World War II and because of cheap
fuel, the mass production of the automobile, all feel like if
there are two of us, we need three automobiles. We did not get
in this shape overnight and we will not change that feeling
overnight.
I do agree though that if I had had the choice today of
driving to Atlanta, and we were very fortunate and did not get
tied up in traffic, but if I had had the choice of getting on a
train at the depot where our Chamber of Commerce is located
now, and riding it to the Capitol, I would have ridden that and
I think most people will, but they will have to see it. I think
just to talk about it and just to ask their opinion, they are
going to say no, I am not giving up my car. But if they are
spending an hour and a half or 2 hours commuting to Atlanta and
they can do it not only cheaper but faster and dependably--I
had the opportunity to come to the DOT office about a month
ago. I left Winder at 11, knowing that I had to be here at 1,
so I allowed myself an extra hour. I was fortunate that day, I
drove it here in an hour and 5 minutes. But it could have
easily taken me two and a half to 3 hours with just one wreck
on Interstate 85.
So I do feel like that it is something that will be used
once we prove that it will happen.
Senator Cleland. Mayor Ellis, may I say TEA-21 contains
more than $29 million to construct an Atlanta to Griffin and
Macon rail corridor. I would just be curious, what is the
status of the multi-modal terminal in Macon at this point?
Mayor Ellis. Well, with regard to the multi-modal terminal,
we have decided through a consensus process that our historic
Union Station would probably be the better place for the multi-
modal facility. We have made application to the state DOT and I
am very hopeful that will be funded through some funds to make
that happen as we acquire this facility and hope that we can
convince Georgia Power to make the other donation of the
facility. As you know, the City owned this facility, we bought
it from Central of Georgia Railroad in 1976 for $200,000. The
facility was built in 1916 at a cost of $2 million at that
time. We were able to buy it for $200,000, but the Mayor at
that time, felt that he would double the investment and he sold
it for $400,000; and of course, Georgia Power bought it and put
some money into it and now they have agreed to sell it back to
us at a price of $2 million----
[Laughter.]
Mayor Ellis.--They did make some investments and Georgia
Power is a good corporate citizen in Macon and I want to make
sure that is very clear. So, we are working with them and the
federal and state government to get some funds so that this can
become a reality for our multi-modal facility.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much.
I noticed that you gave me a little history of Macon and
there was a poster promoting Macon dated 1911 and it advertised
Macon as the center of railroads, population, schools and
wealth.
Mayor Ellis. Exactly. They were doing in 1911 what we are
doing today. We are trying to convince the Governor and other
state agencies to move some state agencies to Georgia and they
were advertising bringing the state capitol to Macon at the
time, and bringing other state agencies. So we are still
working on this.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cleland. We are not going to get into that.
Thank you all very, very much for coming. Let us give our
panelists a round of applause.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. We will take a 5-minute break and our
panelists for our last panel will be Carl Rhodenizer, Steve
Roberts, Stephen Crosby and Craig Lewis.
Five minute break.
(A short recess was taken.)
Senator Cleland. It is good to have Carl Rhodenizer, Vice
Chair of the Georgia Rail Passenger Program Management Team,
the inter-disciplinary team that is pulling things together
across bureaucratic lines. Carl, we know that the Chairman
could not be here today, but give him my best regards. We
appreciate you taking your time and we would like to hear from
you.
STATEMENT HON. CARL RHODENIZER, VICE CHAIR,
GEORGIA RAIL PASSENGER PROGRAM MANAGEMENT TEAM
Mr. Rhodenizer. Thank you, Senator. We appreciate you being
here and we appreciate the opportunity to come before you to
discuss the Georgia rail program, even though I am substituting
for someone else.
I am representing the Program Management Team that the
Governor referred to earlier and I am standing in for Mr. Sonny
Deriso, who is the Chair and is in Boston today for the Mayors
Conference. I am also Chairman of the Georgia Rail Passenger
Authority and a Commissioner in Clayton County. And I want to
take advantage of this opportunity to say that in our meeting
last evening, the Clayton County Commission approved our
transportation contract for mass transit using the services of
GRTA. And I am extremely proud of that.
Senator Cleland. We were glad to get you some money for
that.
Mr. Rhodenizer. Thank you, we appreciate that too.
I want to thank you for your support for the rail studies,
the funding and the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st
Century. Frankly, I do not believe we would be here on this
platform today if you had not done that, by earmarking almost
$50 million for the multi-model transportation corridors for
which we are extremely grateful.
I believe Secretary Slater and Administrator Molitoris have
left, but I also want to thank them for their support and the
designation of the high-speed corridor.
I would like to spend most of my time just explaining how
this organization of the Program Management Team came together.
It has been about 1 year ago today I believe that this was put
in place. Governor Barnes realized that the need to get the
state transportation agencies focused on both commuter and
intercity service for the citizens of Georgia, that we needed a
joint effort, so he suggested a joint entity to guide this rail
development in Georgia.
The Program Management Team consists of two members from
the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority, two members from
the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority and two members from the
Georgia Department of Transportation. I believe the Governor
mentioned this also, that he appointed the Chairman, Mr. Sonny
Deriso, who is representing him. Representing the Rail
Passenger Authority are Mather Stapleton and myself.
Representing GRTA are Sonny Deriso and Sharon Gay. And the
Georgia Department of Transportation is represented by Brad
Hubbert and Jimmy Lester. And I think everybody in the room
probably knows all of those people and recognizes that they
represent equally the metropolitan area of Atlanta as well as
the entire State of Georgia.
One year ago, these three agencies put into effect an
agreement to serve as a mechanism for implementing effective
and also efficient rail passenger service in Georgia. The first
line of that agreement states, and I would like to quote,
Senator, ``the parties recognize and agree that effective and
efficient rail passenger service in Georgia can be implemented
only through the cooperative and coordinated efforts of the
parties.'' That means pulling together the great talent of the
Georgia Department of Transportation, the Georgia Rail
Passenger Authority and the Georgia Regional Transportation
Authority. And I believe in the year since we entered into that
agreement, I believe that we are doing just that.
Under our agreement, the Georgia Department of
Transportation will be primarily responsible for planning,
designing and constructing the rail infrastructure. GRTA will
be responsible for integrating local and state transportation
and land use decisions, with the rail passenger program. This
will certainly involve working with local governments to
establish transit, bicycle, pedestrian facilities, and transit-
oriented development to enhance the rail program. The Georgia
Rail Passenger Authority will be primarily responsible for the
operation of passenger train service, location and design of
rail stations, and also for local government coordination.
All three agencies are jointly responsible for capital
improvements such as trackage and train sets, identifying new
service needs, making signal and control system improvements,
developing access and operating agreements, and generally
cooperating with other transit and planning agencies to
contribute to a comprehensive public transportation program for
the entire metropolitan region as well as the entire state.
To provide the necessary technical expertise we needed, the
Program Management Team established the Rail Program Managers
Committee and this Committee supervises the work of the Georgia
Rail Consultants, and my colleague, Mr. Steve Roberts, to my
left, whom you will hear from today, is program manager for
those consultants.
Our consultants are using the most recent rail studies
prepared by the Georgia Department of Transportation; also
using the previous studies of the Atlanta multi-modal terminal.
All of this is part of our ongoing environmental assessment of
the Athens to Atlanta and the Macon to Atlanta rail corridors
which we have identified as the two corridors with the highest
promise for rail passenger service. This program also includes
the studies of potential service to Albany, Jesup, Savannah,
Canton, Columbus, Bremen, Madison, Augusta, Senoia, and
Gainesville.
A 5000-mile network of railroads crisscrossing the State of
Georgia provides an excellent opportunity to establish a rail
network in the state. The previous studies of passenger travel
by mode and trip preference found that Georgians would make
about seven to ten million trips a year if the service was
provided at a reasonable cost and was reliable.
But Senator, we have some very tough questions to answer
before we are ready to recommend a passenger rail investment
program. Whatever the Program Management Team recommends to the
Governor, the legislature, the next administration, and the
Georgia delegation, we believe it must be based on a very sound
and very thorough analysis.
Here are some principles that we think are very important:
One, we must have a thorough, meaningful alternatives
analysis that examines every practical alternative in these
corridors. The selected preferred alternative will have the
highest value returned to the state.
Two, the preferred alternative must be competitive with
other forms of transportation in terms of time, cost, and
perhaps comfort as well, and convenience.
And three, we need to keep the big picture in focus. We are
not just talking about running commuter and intercity trains to
Atlanta. We are part of a larger regional effort that will lead
to the development of the high-speed passenger rail network in
the southeast that we have talked about already today. The
business community, led by the Metro Atlanta Chamber of
Commerce, is very excited about the potential of the high-speed
transportation alternative to other major cities and has been
doing a good bit of work on that in the last few months. We are
part of the network and we will not lose sight of this concept.
The task before us is a heavy responsibility and we have
all recognized that and we pledge to ourselves every day that
we realize that is true. And I also pledge to you and to the
entire Congressional delegation that we will do everything
possible to implement this rail passenger program efficiently.
Thank you.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rhodenizer follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Carl Rhodenizer, Vice Chair, Georgia Rail
Passenger Program Management Team
Thank you, Senator Cleland, for the opportunity to come before you
today and talk about the Georgia Rail Passenger Program in Georgia.
I am here today representing the Program Management Team of the
Georgia Rail Passenger Program. Sonny Deriso, the chairman of the PMT,
could not be here today, so I am substituting in his behalf. I also
serve as chairman of the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority and as a
member of the Clayton County Board of Commissioners, and I am a banker
and former President of the Clayton County Chamber of Commerce.
But before I go any further, let me first thank you for your
support for rail program funding in the Transportation Equity Act for
the 21st Century. Frankly, we would not be here today but for the help
from you and other members of Georgia's congressional delegation in
providing specific funding for rail in our state. You alone earmarked
almost $50 million for multimodal transportation corridors, and we are
grateful.
I also want to thank Secretary Slater and Administrator Molitoris
for responding to the PMT's request to extend the Southeast High-Speed
Rail Corridor designation from Macon to Savannah, via Jesup, and to
extend the Gulf Coast High-Speed Rail Corridor designation from
Birmingham to Atlanta. Now, we have a firm foundation to build a high-
speed rail network throughout the Southeast, centered in Georgia.
Now, let me explain the PMT. About a year ago, Governor Barnes
realized the need to get the state's transportation agencies on the
same track. The Governor established a joint entity to guide passenger
rail development in Georgia. The PMT comprises two board members each
from the State Transportation Board, the Georgia Rail Passenger
Authority and the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority. The
Governor appoints the Chairman, and Mr. Deriso, as the governor's
appointee, has served with distinction and fairness during his tenure.
Representing the State Transportation Board are Jimmy Lester and
Brad Hubbert. Representing the Rail Passenger Authority are myself and
Mather Stapleton. Mr. Deriso and Sharon Gay represent GRTA.
On one year ago today--December 6th--the three agencies put into
effect an agreement to serve as the mechanism for implementing
effective and efficient rail passenger service in Georgia. The first
substantive line of that agreement states, ``the Parties recognize and
agree that effective and efficient rail passenger service in Georgia
can be implemented only through the cooperative and coordinated effort
of the Parties,''--meaning GDOT, the rail authority and GRTA.
Senator Cleland, I believe in the year since we entered into this
agreement we are doing just that.
Under our agreement, GDOT will be primarily responsible for
planning, designing and constructing the rail infrastructure. GRTA will
be primarily responsible for integrating local and state transportation
and land use decisions with the rail passenger program. This will
involve working with local governments to establish transit, bicycle
and pedestrian facilities and transit oriented development to enhance
the rail program. The GRPA will be primarily responsible for the actual
on-going operation of passenger train service and the rail station
siting, design and local government coordination.
All three agencies are jointly responsible for capital
improvements, such as trackage and train sets; identifying new service
needs; making signal and control system improvements; developing access
and operating agreements; and generally cooperating with other transit
and planning agencies to contribute to a comprehensive public
transportation program for the metropolitan Atlanta Region and the
State of Georgia.
To provide the necessary technical expertise, the PMT established
the Rail Program Managers Committee. This committee supervises the work
of the Georgia Rail Consultants. Steve Roberts, who you also will be
hearing from today, is the program manager for the Georgia Rail
Consultants. He will be speaking in more detail about their work.
Our consultants' work is founded upon the most recent available
rail studies commissioned by GDOT, and the Multi-Modal Passenger
Terminal proposed design as part of our on-going environmental
assessment of the Athens-to-Atlanta and the Macon-to-Atlanta rail
corridors, which we have identified as the two corridors with the
highest promise for rail passenger service. The program also includes
the study of potential service to Albany, Jesup, Savannah, Canton,
Columbus, Bremen, Madison, Augusta, Senoia and Gainesville.
A 5,000-mile network of freight railroads crisscrosses the State of
Georgia, providing an excellent opportunity to establish a passenger
rail network in the state. Previous exhaustive studies of passenger
travel by mode and trip preference found that Georgians would make
about seven to 10 million trips a year by passenger rail if it were
provided at a reasonable cost, was reliable and provided a frequency of
service to meet travel needs.
Senator, we have some tough questions to answer as we prepare to
recommend a passenger rail investment program. Whatever the PMT
recommends to the Governor and Legislature, the next Administration and
the Georgia Congressional delegation, it must be based on a sound and
thorough analysis.
Here are some principles that I think are important:
One, corridor analysis of transportation alternatives must examine
every practical alternative on these corridors to arrive at the highest
value return of the preferred alternative.
Two, the preferred alternative must be competitive with other forms
of transportation in terms of time, cost, comfort and convenience.
Three, we need to keep the big picture in focus. We are not just
talking about running commuter and intercity trains to Atlanta. We are
part of a larger regional effort that will lead to the development of a
high-speed passenger rail network in the Southeast. We now have that
foundation of a high-speed network that I spoke of earlier. The
business community, led by the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, is
excited about the potential of a high-speed transportation alternative
to other major cities in the Southeast and the whole Eastern seaboard.
The task before all of us is a heavy responsibility. I pledge to
you, and the entire Georgia Congressional Delegation, that we will do
everything possible to implement this Rail Passenger Program.
Thank you.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Rhodenizer, we
appreciate your service and your attention to detail. It is a
key responsibility you and your colleagues have and we thank
you for exercising it with such diligence.
Let me just go to Mr. Roberts now. Mr. Roberts worked to
establish a unique program between the State of Virginia and
some federal authorities. Mr. Roberts, share with us a little
bit your experience and maybe what it might mean for Georgia.
STATEMENT OF STEVE ROBERTS,
PROGRAM MANAGER, GEORGIA RAIL CONSULTANTS
Mr. Roberts. I have prepared some remarks and provided them
to the staff, but I thought perhaps, as you have just asked
that question how we might focus what we are doing here in
Georgia on the corollary that was the Virginia Railway Express,
I unearthed my little pin that I brought along today. This is
our 10,000 rider pin* from Virginia, it means we are 25 percent
ahead of our passenger projections and still growing, and that
is about 5 years ahead of the time frame that those forecast
patronage numbers were made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* On October 3, 2000, VRE celebrated its first 10,000 daily trip
day on a non-event day.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think that you will see from the testimony of the two
freight railroads that this growth and this success is
essentially dependent on the hard work of their management and
their employees as well as Virginia Railway Express, and
Amtrak, which was our contract operator there.
There is just no question that all of the things that
people have gone before us have said are the key to why people
get on trains. They are reliable, they are dependable, they are
safe, and with that sort of activity and with that sort of
commitment, it is likely that we will have the same success
here in Georgia. Absent that or absent doing the thorough job
and making sure that everyone's train runs on time, it is
likely that we will have the kind of problem that VRE had at
one point in its history. I had the good fortune to survive it,
but we had an incident in 1997 in which our ridership dropped
about 30 percent, our on-time performance went to 39 percent
and people basically quit riding trains. Since that time,
having got to 10,000, there is a pretty significant pattern of
change and it really represents recognition by all the parties
that we had to invest in on-time performance, whatever that
took.
Two corridors have significant work underway to evaluate
alternatives. Just as Mr. Rhodenizer spoke, we are not only
looking at the market in these corridors for how rail would
serve it, but utilizing the capacity on the highway,
conceivably building HOV facilities, and this would apply to
both Macon and Athens. I cannot imagine, frankly, a system in
which only rail--as several people have spoken, this will be a
mix, it will be a network and part of our challenge is to make
it seamless for the consumer.
It is good that technology has evolved in the intervening
period. When I first started work on our train in Virginia, we
were not just putting coins in fare boxes, but the magnet strip
on the back of the Metro Rail fare card was a relatively new
technology. We have now evolved the smart cards, which we have
a lot more flexibility and a lot more interest in. I think not
only in the technical community but also in the banking
community, to work with us to create that kind of seamlessness.
I think overall the kind of guidance we are going to have
to design into the system is that this is a system where people
with choices will make those choices. If we are not responsive,
people will not be on trains. But if we do make it responsive
to what they need, they will be on trains.
I am looking forward to being a part of this, I am looking
forward to working with Norfolk Southern and with CSX to
examine what is needed to make sure that their freight needs
and what is needed for reliable passenger service are all
encompassed in the set of investments that we make, and I am
equally confident that as these three public agencies that are
involved in designing and implementing the service put it
together, there are going to be trains and there are going to
be all kinds of other things--using the highways and
conceivably some new dedicated right-of-way initiatives as
well.
It is amazing to me, there are a lot of folks in this room
that I have been in meetings with over the last two decades
examining how best to serve metropolitan transportation needs.
It is amazing to me that we managed in Washington and we did
not manage it here. I am sure that I am not going to be the
difference but I am sure that I am going to be part of what
happens and I am looking forward to it.
I think it is clear from all the testimony here that you
are going to be a part of it too and I very much look forward
to working with you.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Roberts follows:]
Prepared Statement of Steve Roberts, Program Manager,
Georgia Rail Consultants
Senator Cleland,
I am Steve Roberts, project manager for the implementation of the
Georgia Rail Passenger Program. I am formerly the Chief Operating
Officer for the Virginia Railway Express. I have 24 years of experience
in the development of transit and commuter rail operations. VRE's
current success is based on the day after day hard work of the
management and employees of CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern and
Amtrak.
Georgia's Rail Passenger Program was adopted in November 1999, one
year ago. I am an employee of SYSTRA Consulting in a joint venture with
Moreland-Altobelli and Parsons Brinckerhoff. The joint venture known as
Georgia Rail Consultants was created in response to an invitation from
the Georgia Department of Transportation and now their partners in the
Georgia Rail Passenger Program, both the Georgia Rail Passenger
Authority and the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority. Just as
the engineering community has formed a joint venture, so the state
agencies have signed a memorandum of agreement distributing the
responsibilities in the program implementation under the guidance of
the Program Management Team. PMT Vice Chairman Carl Rodenizer has
outlined those in some detail.
During this first year significant activities were initiated and
advanced:
Much work has gone into assembling a phased implementation
concept for the Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal [MMPT] adjacent
to the Five Points MARTA station and many of the federal
agencies with Atlanta offices. In early October the City of
Atlanta, Central Atlanta Progress and the Program Management
Team hosted a planning charette of community leaders to discuss
the MMPT and to ensure that the needs of the Intermodal
partners: MARTA, Amtrak, commuter rail, Amtrak, regional bus
service and Greyhound are fulfilled. Following the charette
serious discussions have begun with adjoining property owners--
in particular Turner and Cousins interests--to knit this
important facility into the redevelopment of the downtown core
area.
We have just concluded a major milestone in the evaluation
of transportation alternatives to serve--Macon and Athens
corridors., what may become the first two commuter lines of
seven recommended in earlier work completed by GDOT. We met
with the public in May and again in October to examine a number
of routes to serve those corridors. These public meetings have
been well attended and reflect a keen interest in the problems
to be addressed and solved. Meetings were held in Athens,
Winder, Lawrenceville, Decatur, Atlanta, Forsyth, Jonesboro,
Griffin, and Macon. By this time next year we expect to have
advanced each of these corridors to a single preferred
alignment, to have completed an environmental analysis, made
application for and received grants of the federal funds either
appropriated by the Congress for High Priority Projects or
flexed from highway funds and to have ordered locomotives,
coaches and buses and begun the critical problem solving
process of preliminary engineering.
In addition to the substantial appropriations [HPP
$68,350,000] for the rail passenger program that accompanied
the enactment of TEA-21, the State Transportation Board has
within its 2001-2003 Transportation Improvement Program [TIP]
$169,175,000 for a total of $237,525,000 toward the initial
capital investment for track capacity, facilities and rolling
stock. This is an unprecedented investment of flexed funds, and
a precedent we hope to engage throughout the twelve-year
implementation of the rail passenger program. As a result the
federal transportation agencies play a critical role in our
program. Secretary Slater's ``One DOT'' initiatives must be
fully realized if we are to knit together the administrative
processes of Federal Highway, Railroad and Transit
Administrations.
We have begun the important process of creating partnerships
with both CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern. As VRE
demonstrated, a most important attribute of commuter rail
service is public use of existing railroad rights of way. In
Georgia these freight railroads are vital to the growth and
health of a vibrant state economy that is the envy of many. We
expect negotiations to lead to a ``win-win-win'' outcome.
Overall the concept of customer service represents a core value
in our ``win-win-win'' strategy. We have to be safe, dependable
and reliable. The railroads have each outlined a number of core
principles for our relationship that will be important to the
rail passenger program as well:
1. Capacity: Another term for this is ``transparency,'' the
railroads need sufficient capacity to ensure that both freight and
passenger trains run on time, in this case we are working with the
freight railroads to develop both an overall program requirement as
well as a phased program of improvements and service. Senior officials
of both companies are pointing toward a much greater investment in rail
capacity to handle expanding freight markets as well.
2. Compensation: The Georgia Rail Passenger Program is intended
to be a valuable customer for the railroad companies. Payments made by
other commuter rail systems for passenger train access to tracks
represents extremely high leverage for the railroads. Measured against
return on investment the railroads' returns on passenger operations are
well above their cost of capital.
3. Indemnification: The freight railroads supported the creation
of Amtrak and several major commuter railroads in order to be relieved
on the risk of liability in the operation of passenger service. This
will be a difficult and costly process to resolve. In the main the
freight railroads have indicated that they are totally unwilling to
assume the risk for passengers.
4. Safety: knowing your many years of service to the state you
are aware of the significant number of grade crossings in the Macon
Atlanta and Athens Atlanta corridors. We would anticipate the
installation of significant protection and warning devices along with
an extensive program of grade separations in these two corridors.
Commuter and intercity rail passenger service in Georgia
contributes to the smart growth strategies that you continue to
champion, rail is an important tool to enhance mobility in the Atlanta
region and intercity rail is an important link for the commercial and
international travel hub that is Atlanta. Passenger rail in the
southeast is an untapped resource in this high growth region of our
nation. It will provide a new trip choice to travelers dealing with
already congested roadway and airport facilities.
On behalf of the Georgia Rail Consultants team, we are pleased to
be a part of this effort and look forward to extensive opportunities
for passenger train travel in Georgia.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Roberts. We
appreciate your service and we need your expertise here in
Georgia.
Mr. Stephen Crosby, tell us how life looks from your side
of the tracks.
STATEMENT OF STEPHEN A. CROSBY,
PRESIDENT, CSX REAL PROPERTY, INC.
Mr. Crosby. I will be glad to do that. Thank you, Senator.
I will give you a little perspective from the view of the owner
of the existing rail infrastructure as well as the corridor, or
at least one of the corridors being considered. So I will get
started with that.
Just by means of contrast, our company operates rail lines
on roughly 30,000 miles of right-of-way across the United
States and Canada. It is nice to have an opportunity to talk to
you at an early stage, a relatively early stage, in the
evolution of your passenger operation here in Atlanta.
With increasing congestion on America's highways and
concerns over air quality, we see more and more communities
across the country looking to rail as an environmentally
friendly and fuel efficient means to move people and freight.
CSX does its best across the country to work with
communities and agencies to provide both technical expertise
and operations analysis in order to help local planners and
policy makers, just as we have heard today, make the well-
reasoned transportation decisions that are necessary. Where
feasible, we also attempt to make our right-of-way available at
fair market value for the construction of commuter rail
systems. We currently have six commuter operations on our
network and at least 28 others are being studied. Our recent
experience with proposed new starts in Orlando and New Jersey
has shown that, as Administrator Molitoris said earlier today,
there is no one size that fits all solutions to these problems.
In Atlanta, my colleagues and I have worked for several
years with the various agencies that have an interest in
furthering the concept of commuter rail. We have worked with
many people in this room. As you have heard today, we are now
working jointly with both Norfolk Southern and GRTA to study
the combined freight network in order to evaluate the
feasibility of introducing commuter rail service into this
corridor.
Atlanta is an extremely complex situation from a rail
perspective, given the convergence of many lines and the high
volume of freight that moves through the metropolitan area. The
issues presented by adding commuter rail service to a mainline
freight network are extremely challenging. A poorly planned
implementation will degrade existing freight service while
providing a level of passenger service that will not meet
public expectations. Steve Roberts alluded to that in his
comments, that on-time service is critical for everybody,
whether it be freight or passenger.
We are committed to working cooperatively to determine
whether there are answers in fact that will work for everybody.
You have already heard about issues that communities around
the metropolitan area and public officials look at. So I will
spend a little more time and share with you four key principles
that guide our thinking as we go through these analyses in
various communities that we work in.
First and foremost is the safety of our employees and the
public. It is a preeminent consideration. CSX is committed to
operating with the highest degree of safety. Put simply, the
risks to our employees and the public must be no greater after
passenger rail systems are implemented than they are today.
Among the critical issues we examine are train operations,
integration between freight and passenger rail, grade crossing
safety, passenger and pedestrian safety at station stops, and
train-to-train safety.
Second, any relationship with passenger rail services must
give CSX the opportunity to effectively serve current customers
and just as importantly, meet our future demands as our
customers grow. This capacity issue is particularly critical in
the Atlanta region, which is our busiest hub in the southeast.
CSX serves more than 200 Atlanta-area companies and moves over
one million carloads of freight into and out of the region each
year. Our lines in the region are at our near capacity today
and our Atlanta terminal handles over 120 trains daily.
Commuter rail could further limit our capacity and force
some of the freight we move back onto the highways, increasing
the number of trucks on metropolitan roadways. This has the
potential to be more harmful to the environment because
railroads have a clear environmental advantage over trucks.
When passenger trains squeeze freight trains off the tracks,
more trucks are added to the highways, more pollutants are
added to the atmosphere in addition to the traffic congestion
that is created. Certainly that is not a situation that any of
us want to have occur as a result of introducing commuter rail.
Capacity studies are an important first step and they are
critical to our ability to analyze a particular proposal. We
need to understand current and future use. We need to know
whether specific lines are able to accommodate regular
passenger service. If they are not, we need to determine if
those lines can be expanded or improved to meet the potential
commuter needs. In some cases, such improvements and additions
can be achieved and passenger rail can be accommodated. In
other situations, it cannot.
The third point I would like to make is that CSX does not
have a role in funding commuter rail operations. We are an
investor-owned company, we operate on private property that we
maintain. We are not a public utility, and as a result, we
simply cannot ask our shareholders and our freight customers to
subsidize the cost of commuter rail operations.
The commuter agencies need to pay the costs associated with
determining project feasibility, obtaining operating and
property rights, as well as building and maintaining the
infrastructure associated with a passenger service.
Communities must realize and be realistic about funding
needs when they set forth to develop a passenger rail system. A
proposed 16-mile system that we were associated with in
Orlando, Florida, for example, would have cost in excess of
$600 million. A 30-mile system in Bordentown, New Jersey that
we were recently involved in with with Norfolk Southern will
cost approximately $700 million.
These are very different systems than envisioned for
Atlanta but I use them as examples simply to illustrate two
things. First of all, that these systems are expensive; and
second, that we have demonstrated an ability to successfully
work with agencies and communities in introducing commuter
rail.
In both these cases, it took a great deal of work and
ultimately safety, capacity, and funding were all worked out.
Actually, in the Orlando case, funding is still being worked
out. One of the cautions I would like to add is that time frame
considerations are crucial. In both those situations, the time
frame for actual implementation of the service took longer than
originally projected.
We are working closely currently with GRTA to ensure that
they have access to all the information that we have generated
through our experience in these various communities, that they
can benefit from the lessons learned by ourselves and the other
commuter agencies that we have worked with, and that we are
able to provide the resources and flexibility necessary for
them to arrive at a workable solution.
The final matter that I would like to address on our four
point scale is the matter of liability. Although the likelihood
of a catastrophic derailment is low, the potential does exist
for a freight accident to occur simultaneously with a passing
commuter train. The imposition of thousands of people, rail
passengers and those who would work around the stations, into a
freight corridor creates a certain level of risk that does not
exist today.
Consistent with sound business practices in states that do
not have liability limits, we currently require a minimum of
$500 million of insurance coverage as a condition to any new
use of our properties for passenger purposes.
In conclusion, I would like to simply restate that we
remain actively engaged with communities across our system and
of course in Atlanta in a fact-based approach to explore
passenger and transportation options. Here, we are committed to
continuing our involvement in the studies and the dialogue that
have been initiated and that we have been involved with over
the years.
We, like Mr. Warrington and others commenting earlier
today, are committed to an honest partnership.
I thank you for the opportunity to share our opinions.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Crosby follows:]
Prepared Statement of Stephen A. Crosby, President,
CSX Real Property, Inc.
Thank you Senator Cleland. I am Steve Crosby, President of CSX Real
Property, Inc., a subsidiary of CSX Corporation. I represent CSX in
discussions concerning the introduction of commuter rail onto CSX's
rights-of-way in metropolitan Atlanta. These lines are part of the
30,000 mile rail freight network CSX operates in 23 states, two
Canadian Provinces and the District of Columbia. I appreciate the
opportunity afforded us today to explain our approach to potential
passenger operations on our freight lines in Atlanta and elsewhere.
With increasing congestion on American highways and concerns over
air quality, more communities than ever before are looking to rail as
an environmentally friendly, fuel-efficient means to move people. CSX
works with communities, including Atlanta, to provide technical
expertise and operations analysis to local planners and policy makers.
Where feasible, we also attempt to make our right-of-way available at
fair market value for the construction of commuter rail systems. We
currently have six commuter operations on our network and 28 others
being studied. Our experience has shown that there is no ``one size
fits all'' solution.
In Atlanta, my colleagues and I have worked for several years with
various agencies that have an interest in furthering the concept of
commuter rail. We are now working jointly with Norfolk Southern and the
Georgia Regional Transportation Authority (GRTA) to study the combined
freight network in order to evaluate the impact of the potential
imposition of commuter service. The results of this study will yield
important feasibility and cost analysis of alternative proposals and
will provide a greatly needed decision tool. While Atlanta is an
extremely complex situation given the convergence of rail lines and the
volume of freight trains moving through, it also can be an exciting
model if creativity is used in addressing these challenges.
The issues presented by adding commuter rail services to a main
line freight network are extremely challenging. Poorly planned
implementation will degrade existing freight service while providing a
level of passenger service that does not meet public expectations
either. We are committed to working cooperatively to determine whether
there are answers that work for everyone. To that end, we have guiding
principles we use when working through this process with communities on
our system, including Atlanta. You already have heard about issues
communities and public officials look at, so I would like to share with
you these principles which guide our thinking and analysis.
First, safety must be the pre-eminent consideration. CSXT is
committed to operating with the highest degree of safety for both our
employees and the public. Put simply, the risks to our employees and
the public must be no greater after a passenger rail system is put in
place than the risks are today.
Since 1989, CSX has reduced train accidents by 40 percent and
employee injuries by 63 percent. Despite this record, the possibility
of an accident cannot be dismissed. The Federal Railroad Administration
has authority over the introduction of rail passenger operations onto
the freight network. CSX also undertakes its own review and in some
cases our policy may be more stringent and restrictive than federal
guidelines. Among the critical issues we examine are train operations;
integration between freight and passenger rail; grade crossing safety;
passenger/pedestrian safety at station stops; and, derailment risk and
intrusion detection.
Second, any relationship with passenger rail services must give CSX
the ability to effectively serve current customers and to meet the
future demands of new and growing customers. This capacity issue is
particularly critical in the Atlanta region, which is our busiest hub
in the Southeast. CSX serves more than 200 Atlanta-area companies and
moves over one million carloads of freight into and out of the region
each year. Our primarily single-track lines in the region are at or
near capacity today with our Atlanta terminal handling up to 120 trains
daily. Commuter rail could further limit our capacity and force some of
the freight we move back to the highways increasing the number of
trucks on metropolitan roadways. This has the potential to be more
harmful to the environment because railroads have a clear environmental
advantage over trucks. Locomotives emit one-tenth the hydrocarbons and
diesel particulates as trucks do, and each rail car carries the
equivalent of approximately three trucks. When passenger trains squeeze
out freight trains, more trucks are added to the highways and more
pollutants are added to the atmosphere--an extremely important matter
for regions such as this that are not in compliance with federal clean
air standards.
Capacity studies are critical to our ability to analyze a
particular proposal. We need to understand current and future use, and
we need to know whether specific lines are able to accommodate regular
passenger service. If not, can those lines be expanded and improved to
meet commuter needs. In some cases, such improvements and additions can
be achieved and passenger rail can be accommodated. Studies, property
acquisition (if needed) and construction have a high cost.
CSX does not play a role in funding commuter operations. We are an
investor-owned company, operating on private property that is
maintained by private investment. We are not a public utility. As a
result, we simply cannot ask our shareholders and freight customers to
subsidize the cost of commuter rail operations. The commuter agency
needs to pay the costs associated with obtaining operating and property
rights as well as building and maintaining infrastructure associated
with the passenger service. So putting a realistic estimate and funding
package together is a critical early step. With advanced engineering
almost anything is possible. The question becomes quite simply: How
much does it cost and how much is it worth to those who will use it?
Building and maintaining additional rail infrastructure--even assuming
an existing right-of-way has room--can cost hundreds of millions of
dollars. Communities must be realistic about funding needs when they
set out to develop a passenger rail system. A proposed 16 mile-system
in Orlando that we worked on recently, for example, would have cost in
excess of $600 million. A 30-mile system in Bordentown, New Jersey that
we were involved in is budgeted at approximately $700 million. In both
of these cases we worked closely with the local, state and federal
agencies to ensure safe, and compatible operations.
These were very different systems than envisioned for Atlanta, but
I use them as examples simply to illustrate that we can work
successfully together to design solutions that meet the needs of all
parties. However, as we found in both cases, unless safety, capacity,
funding and timeframe expectations are realistic, a positive outcome
cannot be achieved. We are working closely with GRTA to ensure they
have access to information generated by our experience in these and
other communities. The lessons learned are that commuter operations
require considerable resources, cooperation and flexibility to achieve
productive and workable solutions.
The final matter that must be considered in a new passenger
proposal from the railroad's perspective is liability. Although the
likelihood of a catastrophic derailment is low, the potential does
exist for a freight accident to occur simultaneously with the passing
of a commuter train. The imposition of thousands of passengers into a
freight rail corridor creates risks that do not exist today. Consistent
with sound business practices, CSXT currently requires a minimum of $
500 million insurance coverage as a condition to any new use of its
properties for passenger purposes.
On another front, I understand that high-speed rail and possibly
mag-lev are being considered in Georgia in addition to commuter rail
options. My colleague Paul Reistrup, Vice President, Passenger
Services, has been actively involved in discussions with Amtrak and
other entities concerning these types of operations. As with commuter
initiatives, we take a fact-based, analytical approach to high-speed
rail, which presents some unique challenges of its own.
Importantly, the greater the difference in the speed of trains, the
more capacity is used up on a railroad. To illustrate the point, we all
know what the term Sunday driving is all about and the havoc that a
slow driver can cause on a busy road. Traffic always moves more
smoothly if everyone is generally going the same speed. Freight lines
are generally analogous to two lane state roads while high-speed lines
need to be like super highways. We know that you can't turn a state
road into an interstate by simply raising the speed limit.
The super-elevation needed for high-speed passenger trains requires
different engineering and significantly more maintenance than the track
structures freight trains use. In addition, in the interest of public
safety, all grade crossings need to be eliminated over tracks where
trains operate above a designated speed threshold, as has been done on
the Northeast Corridor. As a result, while every situation is unique,
our basic proposition is that high-speed trains travelling above 90 MPH
should be on separate tracks that are grade separated.
In conclusion, we remain actively engaged with communities across
our system in a fact-based approach to explore transportation options.
Locally, we are committed to continuing our involvement in the studies
and dialogue that have been initiated in Atlanta. I will be pleased to
answer any questions you may have.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much, Mr. Crosby.
Just a comment or two. Could you tell us a little bit about
your experience with existing commuter operations on your
network and whether they actually satisfy your core concerns of
safety, capacity, indemnification and compensation?
What is your experience with some existing systems that in
your opinion work well?
Mr. Crosby. As I said, we have recently worked with two
startups and I assume your question really relates to the six
other or the four other systems that we have up and running.
Most of the systems that we have on our railroad other than the
two I mentioned in Orlando and New Jersey were inherited
systems. And by that, I mean they were systems that came to us
from predecessor railroads or as a result of the time when our
predecessor companies were involved in the passenger rail
business.
We are currently, quite honestly, playing catch up with
many of those agencies in an effort to bring our relationships
with those organizations to our current standard.
I might use as an example Tri-Rail in south Florida, which
is not--which was not a pre-existing situation. That is a
situation where we actually sold our right-of-way and our track
structure to the State of Florida. It was at the end of our
line, it was a declining business base for us and it offered an
opportunity for the state to match its needs for commuter
operations with our declining business base and it seemed to be
a good fit. And it has been a good fit. However, what has
happened over time is that our freight business has grown
unexpectedly, and the passenger business has flourished. And
so, the State of Florida is today in the process of adding a
third mainline to that track structure that they bought from us
to accommodate both the freight needs of the state as well as
the passenger needs.
So to answer your question, we can get there, but it does
take a great deal of work.
Senator Cleland. Well, thank you very, very much.
May I just introduce Craig Lewis. Craig, nice of you to
come--Vice President of Corporate Affairs for Norfolk Southern.
Thank you very much for coming.
STATEMENT OF H. CRAIG LEWIS, VICE PRESIDENT OF
CORPORATE AFFAIRS, NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION
Mr. Lewis. Senator, thank you, it is a pleasure to be here.
Let me commend you for pulling us all together today. I
think that the information that has been exchanged, the
opportunity to interact with the people who are going to be the
key players as things move forward in the Atlanta area has been
extremely important and will be the keystone from which the
relationships will be developed that will be crucial as we move
forward in the next couple of months and years. So thank you
for giving us this jump start to make this work.
Senator Cleland. Thank you for being part of it.
Mr. Lewis. We are also pleased to be here, of course,
because Norfolk Southern and Georgia mean a great deal to each
other, as I am sure you know. Our collection of lines touches
virtually all of the corners of this state and the riches of
Georgia's forests and your fields and mines and the factories
literally fill dozens of our trains every day.
Atlanta is one of the most important junctions in the
21,000 miles of the Norfolk Southern system. As the hub of five
of the important mainlines, it anchors the southern quadrant of
our railroad. And the freight that comes from Atlanta and the
state of Georgia is a meaningful part of the business of our
company. And a comparable statement might also be made about
what we think Norfolk Southern means to Georgia and to Atlanta,
because every year, well over a million freight cars pass
through the state on our rails. In Atlanta alone, half a
million cars of freight begin or end their journey in the metro
area. And in terms of our highways, this is the equivalent of
two million or more trucks that are not on I-20 or I-85 or I-75
every year.
The 5,000 Norfolk Southern men and women who keep the
trains rolling in Georgia add hundreds of millions of dollars
to the state's economy. And, of course, the purchases that we
make and the industrial development activities in which we are
engaged, again, have a very substantial impact upon the tax
base and the economy of the municipalities and of the state
itself.
Our fastest growing business, interestingly, is intermodal
freight. This is the transportation of truck trailers and
containers on trains over long distances. This business segment
generates more revenue for our income statement now than any
other commodity in Atlanta. Interestingly, our biggest customer
for this our biggest business segment is Atlanta's own United
Parcel Service. And I do not know what the new lanes to China
are likely to mean to our railroad business, Senator, but I can
tell you that we are certainly prepared to help you get to
Jesup.
[Applause.]
Mr. Lewis. The public benefits of a vibrant rail system are
enormous and all too often, we have been the quiet, unseen,
unknown part of the consumer delivery service and that is why I
want to take just a moment to focus on this point. Our freight
trains, both the Norfolk Southern and the CSX, perform behind-
the-scenes deliveries of virtually all types of consumer
products from new cars and trucks to food to California wines,
building materials, packages, parcels, and the coal that is
used to make the electricity in our power plants. Without us,
the good life would not only be a lot more expensive, but the
Interstates would be a lot more crowded.
Despite the volume of freight moving in and around Atlanta
and the critical importance of the heavy duty mainlines to our
collective well-being though, there are possibilities that
routes can be developed for passenger service and some very
quickly. We are willing to pursue win-win partnerships with
public agencies, with Steve and with the discussion with you
and the other public officials in trying to identify where we
can move forward in these regards.
We subscribe to the same ground rules that you heard Steve
articulate on behalf of CSX and these really are the principal
components that we will look to measure as we move forward in
our discussions with the public agencies.
Passenger service on the heavily used mainlines, as Steve
has said, can be problematic at times. But, passenger trains
can be accommodated in certain instances after a great deal of
study, work and hard analysis. It is important to appreciate,
however, that new passenger rail proposals are not a low-cost,
snap-of-the-fingers, overnight solution to commuter traffic
congestion.
As a practical matter, however, we know that freight and
passenger service can co-exist because it has recently been
done elsewhere in the United States. In the Pacific Northwest,
in California, in Virginia, and as Steve mentioned, recently in
New Jersey. And we believe that it may be quite possible to do
it here in Atlanta as well.
The key, as we see it, and the goal, is to commit ourselves
a new partnership. Where public interests promote not only the
movement of people, but the goods they use as well. A
partnership in which each of us can see a better day, and we at
Norfolk Southern are committed to working in that spirit with
all of you here in Atlanta and in Georgia.
[Applause.]
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lewis follows:]
Prepared Statement of H. Craig Lewis, Vice President of Corporate
Affairs, Norfolk Southern Corporation
I am Craig Lewis, Vice President, Corporate Affairs for Norfolk
Southern Corporation. Our group takes principal responsibility for new
passenger service proposals within our geographical territory.
We appreciate the opportunity to participate in this hearing
because Norfolk Southern and Georgia mean a lot to each other. Our
spider web of lines touches virtually every corner of the state. The
riches of Georgia's forests, fields, mines and factories fill dozens of
our trains headed in all directions everyday.
Atlanta is one of the most important junctions in the 21,000 mile
Norfolk Southern system. As the hub of five important mainlines, it
anchors the southern quadrant of our railroad. The freight that comes
from Atlanta's manufacturing, distribution and consuming markets
constitute a meaningful part of Norfolk Southern's business.
A comparable statement may be made about what Norfolk Southern
means to Georgia and to Atlanta. Every year well over a million freight
cars pass through the state on our rails. In Atlanta alone, a half-
million cars of freight begin or end their journey in the metro area.
That's the equivalent of two million or more trucks that aren't on I-20
or I-85 or I-75.
The 5000 Norfolk Southern men and women who keep the trains rolling
in Georgia add hundreds of millions of dollars to the state's economy
each year. And NS spends hundreds of millions more on goods and
services in the Peach State, including construction of new facilities
to handle our growing freight business and maintenance of our track to
keep it safe and in good repair.
Further, our industrial development group helps industries--freight
generating, tax paying, job-providing industries--to expand their
factories or build new ones. This is an activity that pumps hundreds
more millions into the Georgia economy.
Our fastest growing business is intermodal freight--the transport
of truck trailers and containers on trains over long distances. This
freight generates more revenue for our income statement than any other
commodity in Atlanta. Our biggest customer of this, our biggest
business segment, is Atlanta's own United Parcel Service.
The public benefits of a vibrant rail freight system are enormous.
Freight trains perform behind-the-scenes delivery of new cars and
trucks, food and drink, building materials, packages, and parcels and
coal to make electricity. Without us, the good life would be a lot more
expensive and the Interstates would be a lot more crowded.
Despite the volume of freight moving in and around Atlanta, and the
critical importance of the heavy-duty main lines to our collective well
being, there are possibilities that routes can be developed for
passenger service fairly quickly. We are willing to pursue win-win
partnerships with public agencies on these lines.
There are certain ground rules we need to follow where new
passenger service is concerned:
Safety--must be enhanced
Liability and Indemnity--NS cannot be exposed to any new or
additional liability by the presence of passenger trains.
Capacity--the presence of passenger trains cannot diminish the
capacity of a line to handle its existing freight service and must
provide for anticipated freight growth.
Compensation--NS expects to be fairly compensated for the use of
its track and right-of-way.
Passenger service on the heavily-used mainlines is problematic and
figuring out how, if at all, passenger trains can be accommodated
requires a great deal of work and analysis. It is important to
appreciate that new passenger rail proposals are not a low cost, snap
your fingers, overnight solution to commuter traffic congestion. As a
practical matter, however, we know that freight and new passenger
service can co-exist because it's recently been done elsewhere in the
U.S.--in the Pacific Northwest, California, Virginia, New Jersey. It
may be possible to do it here in the Atlanta area as well.
Regardless of the route used, starting new passenger service is a
difficult and expensive proposition (although not nearly as expensive
as new highway construction). If the resources are available, and if
the right routes can be identified, Norfolk Southern is prepared to
move forward.
The key, and the goal, is to commit ourselves to a new partnership.
Where public interests promote the movement of people, and the goods
they use, each of us can see a better day ahead.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much for a very positive
and encouraging statement. Both of you, thank you so much.
I might say, Mr. Lewis, I was fascinated by your statements
for some successes. Do you have an example of something you
would like to articulate as the essence of success in this
regard? Is it out in the Pacific Northwest or somewhere else?
Mr. Lewis. Well, there is a great example out in the
Pacific Northwest that I think we all need to look to, in which
there was a partnership among the two freight railroads and
Amtrak and the commuter agencies.
But let me talk about one in which we have some personal
experience within just the last year and a half. And that is
the Bordentown transaction to which Steve Crosby alluded. This
is in New Jersey. This is a recent endeavor in which the New
Jersey transit agency sought to institute new rail service
where none had existed before, and it appeared as if after
years of work and planning and the investment of a great deal
of time and money, that they had come to an absolute dead end
and that the project was not possible of fulfillment.
We went back--and we as CSX and Norfolk Southern--went back
to the drawing board with the transportation commissioner and
with a little bit of creativity and with a recognition that the
impacts on freight rail in terms of moving goods would be
affected beyond just the corridors of this 31-mile passenger
project, we put together a program that not only enabled the
New Jersey Transportation Commission to move forward with its
new passenger start, but to provide a public/private
partnership for the improvement of rail freight infrastructure
in other areas of the state.
So I think that there is a model there that we can all
learn from and build upon that really reflects a new attitude
toward the need and the opportunities that can arise from a
public/private interaction.
Senator Cleland. Thank you very much.
I would just like to say if we proceed with expanding rail
service in Georgia, I want you both to know that I am committed
to ensuring that such a partnership is mutually beneficial for
passengers and for freight railroads. Norfolk Southern and CSX
have indicated--both of you have indicated--a willingness to
negotiate with our state officials and for that, I am very,
very grateful.
In the future as you look at this, what areas do you think
might be major challenge areas for reaching agreement? What are
the big challenges you see in this?
Mr. Lewis. So much of this is new for all of us, Senator,
not only for those of us in the freight railroad business, but
for everyone concerned with the development of the movement of
passengers and commuters in urban areas. We need, first, to
commit ourselves to open, candid communication. I think one of
the biggest concerns that I have encountered is the fear that
one side or another is not being honest, is trying to gain an
advantage somehow or another, and our first challenge is really
in a professional commitment to improving circumstances for all
who are affected in moving ahead with that kind of openness and
commitment for the future.
The rest of these things can fall in place. We heard George
Warrington say that it is a matter of money. This is expensive,
we need to appreciate that. There will be instances in which
the capacity requirements of the freight railroads simply
cannot accommodate a desired passenger opportunity, but if we
have trust and confidence in each other, we will accept those
circumstances for the reality that they are, and then find ways
to solve them.
And I do not think--I have not seen any situation that
cannot lend itself to a solution somewhere, somehow, if we are
prepared to understand that each of us has obligations that
have to be met in terms of the objectives from our commitment.
Senator Cleland. Well, I want to thank you both for being
here and for your forthcoming, positive attitude and
willingness to cooperate. It means an awful lot to all of us
because this potential that we have here could never be done
without you.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Roberts, just a question. The cost of the Athens to
Atlanta line along I-85 and Georgia 316, some have estimated
the cost as over $1.5 billion and that express buses running
along a similar route would cost about $164 million, or about
one-tenth the cost of trains. Considering the cost, what is
your take on rail? Do you still like rail in that regard? You
saw this probably in Virginia.
Mr. Roberts. That is a rather dramatic difference. First of
all, let me say, you cannot have too many Steves in a program.
The difference that you have mentioned is something that we are
going to work hard to minimize. That $1.5 billion expense
actually is an alternative that shares the median of 316 and I-
85. We have several other options that depend on some new
alignment and some that are entirely expected to encompass
investments in the existing rail right-of-way that are
substantially less.
I think that part of what we have been examining in our
alternatives analysis does speak to markets that trains do not
serve. And so, as has been mentioned earlier, I think there is
a very high likelihood that there will be buses running and
there will be trains running where we can accomplish it, as I
think Craig Lewis just spoke to.
Going to Chattanooga on a train is going to be the toughest
possible investment to accomplish. But perhaps most of these
other corridors, there will be opportunities and going to
Athens, I am confident that--the Chairman of the Barrow County
Board made a point that is going to make rail much more
attractive, which is that the revitalization of all these
communities along the railroad to serve the smart-growth
initiatives, I know you have been a part of, is going to make
this the most likely success.
I favor rail as an option, I am here because I am a rail
guy, but I do have a history of riding buses and I do know that
they can succeed and succeed quite well where they are provided
express service opportunities.
Senator Cleland. Well, thank you very much.
I want to thank all of our panelists for a marvelous
discussion today. Let us give them all a round of applause.
[Applause.]
Senator Cleland. The hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:49 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
Appendix
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland
to Rodney E. Slater
Question 1. I was very pleased when you recently designated
extensions to the Gulf Coast and Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridors
which directly impact my state of Georgia. Specifically you announced a
new route between Birmingham and Atlanta that links the Gulf Coast and
Southeast Corridors and another new route from Atlanta and Macon to
Savannah and Jacksonville. In terms of federal funding, what do these
designations mean for Georgia?
Answer. Corridors designated as high-speed under Section 1103(c) of
TEA-21 are eligible for funding authorized under that section--
specifically $5.25 million annually in contract authority from the
Highway Trust Fund and $15 million authorized to be appropriated
annually from the General Fund of the Treasury for the elimination of
hazards of railroad-highway crossings. These corridors would also be
eligible for funding under the proposed High-Speed Rail Investment Act,
which would make $1 billion per year available for capital investments
in high-speed corridors.
Question 2. Could you please tell us the status of the rail
projects authorized in TEA-21, specifically the Athens to Atlanta
transportation corridor, the Atlanta-Griffin-Macon corridor, and the
multi-modal passenger terminal in Atlanta?
Answer.
Three projects were authorized in TEA-21: Atlanta-Athens
commuter rail, Atlanta-Griffin-Macon commuter rail, and the
South Dekalb-Lindbergh corridor. Since each of these proposed
projects have not yet completed local planning studies, they
have not yet been evaluated and rated based on the New Starts
criteria. The status of the Atlanta-Athens commuter rail, the
Atlanta-Griffin-Macon Line, and the multimodal passenger
terminal is described below:
Atlanta-Athens Commuter Rail: The Georgia Rail Passenger
Authority (GRPA) is conducting a Major Investment Study (MIS)
to examine the feasibility of various transportation
improvements in the 70-mile transportation corridor between
downtown Atlanta and downtown Athens, Georgia. The alternatives
under evaluation include the no-build option, Transportation
Systems Management (TSM) options, including commuter bus
service on existing roads, commuter rail service on the
existing CSX line between Athens and Atlanta, as well as
potential rail alignments outside the CSX corridor. The GRPA
has submitted a preliminary draft of the MIS for review by the
federal agencies, the Georgia Department of Transportation
(GDOT), the Atlanta Regional Commission (ARC), the Athens-
Clarke Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the transit
operators in the Atlanta and Athens areas. Both the MIS and the
Draft Environmental Impact Study (EIS) are scheduled for
completion in June. An additional analysis of ridership,
capital and operating costs and financing will be conducted as
part of the MIS. In addition, study sponsors are working with
CSX to address unresolved issues on the use of CSX right-of-way
in the proposed corridor.
Atlanta-Griffin-Macon line: GRPA, in coordination with the
Georgia Department of Transportation (GDOT), is advancing the
Statewide Transportation Plan with its program of combined
intercity/commuter rail service in Georgia. The plan calls for
commuter rail service to Griffin and intercity services beyond
to Macon, Georgia. The proposed line will serve numerous
communities in seven counties (Bibb, Monroe, Lamar, Spalding,
Henry, Clayton, and Fulton). The GRPA has undertaken a study to
update the Statewide Transportation Plan in preparation for
completing a Major Investment Study (MIS) in the corridor. Both
the MIS and the Draft EIS are scheduled for completion in June.
Plans for the initial service outline the utilization of over
102 miles of an existing Norfolk Southern commercial freight
line. Total capital cost for the initial service from Atlanta-
Griffin-Macon is estimated at $163.12 million. The Georgia
General Assembly has appropriated approximately $4 million to
continue with the MIS and follow-up activities.
Multi-Modal Passenger Terminal: The original Environmental
Assessment has been updated to reflect changing conditions in
conjunction with the study of the Atlanta-Griffin-Macon line
and the update has been cleared through FTA. The Multi-Modal
Passenger Terminal will be the downtown terminus station of the
proposed Atlanta-Griffin-Macon line.
Question 3. In your testimony you mentioned TEA-21's Maglev
Deployment Program. This is a good program and one that the region is
interested in. Can you tell us where DOT is in the process and what
your projections are for the future of the program?
Answer. In January 2001, I selected the projects proposed for the
Pittsburgh metropolitan area and between Baltimore and Washington to
proceed to the next level of this program. This was a difficult
decision because each of the corridors had proposed projects that met
important transportation needs. FRA will make available to each of the
corridors not selected, approximately $900,000 in 2001 to further
refine their plans and to help advance the project definitions to the
point they might be funded under other transportation programs.
Question 4. It is my understanding that the state may use federal
funds provided through Federal Transit Administration and Federal
Highway Administration formula grants to Georgia to continue to study
the possibility of new rail service. Can you discuss the money provided
through these programs and what it may be used for?
Answer.
Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds include
Metropolitan and Statewide Planning grants, as well as
Urbanized Area Formula program funds.
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) funds include
Metropolitan Planning (PL) and State Planning and Research
(SPR) funds.
These funds can be used for planning, environmental studies,
and other preparatory analyses.
Funds are programmed through the local Metropolitan Planning
Organization (Atlanta Regional Commission) and the State DOT
(Georgia DOT).
Funds are apportioned by formula in each of these programs,
and are allocated at local option to whatever planning studies
are desired, although the metropolitan planning funds from FHWA
and FTA generally go to support the basic process of developing
the region's Long Range Transportation Plan and Transportation
Improvement Program, and the SPR funds are limited to planning
activities that are performed within the context of the
statewide transportation planning process. Individual model
plans are not eligible unless they are developed as part of the
statewide transportation planning process.
Question 5. While the formula funds are flexible and can be used
for study and planning purposes, at what point will the state need to
go back to the federal DOT and receive approval for a large commuter
rail project? Can you describe the process and what types of funds
would be available at that stage of the project?
Answer.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) program that could
provide funding for a large commuter rail system is the Capital
Investment Program (commonly known as New Starts Program)
authorized under 49 U.S.C. 5309. Other federal funding sources,
such as FHWA flexible funds, may also be used for construction
of a large commuter rail project. All projects must have NEPA
approval and all appropriate environmental studies completed
and adopted by the regional MPO into the region's Long Range
Plan prior to approval for funding. If New Starts funds are
requested, the process outlined below applies to project
approvals for funding:
TEA-21 requires that FTA rate each candidate New Starts
project as either Highly Recommended, Recommended, or Not
Recommended in the Annual New Starts Report submitted to
Congress and at several key milestones in the project's
development. These overall project ratings are based on the
following criteria prescribed by TEA-21:
Project Justification:
--Mobility Improvements
--Environmental Benefits
--Operating Efficiencies
--Cost Effectiveness
--Other Factors
--Transit Supportive Existing Land Use and Future Patterns
Local Financial Commitment:
--Local Financial Commitment (measuring the strength of the
project's capital and operating financial plans)
FTA analyzes the information submitted by project sponsors
and assigns a rating of high, medium, or low to individual
measures, then produces summary justification and finance
ratings for each project.
Project justification and finance ratings are considered to
determine overall project ratings according to the following
decision rule:
Highly Recommended--Projects must be rated at least medium-high for
both project justification and finance;
Recommended--Projects must be rated at least medium for both
project justification and finance;
Not Recommended--Projects not rated at least medium in both
justification and finance will be rated as not recommended.
Projects are not approved to initiate key milestones in
project development (preliminary engineering, final design) nor
approved to execute a full funding grant agreement unless the
project has been rated Highly Recommended or Recommended by
FTA.
Question 6. Already there are more transit expansions and additions
authorized for funding in the so-called New Starts program than there
are guaranteed federal funds to pay for them. Do you think new commuter
rail programs will all have to be financed by ``flexing'' highway
program funds, or is there any room at all to pay for commuter rail
from the New Starts program? Do you think the next Administration will
have to address the problem in New Starts funding when TEA-21 is re-
authorized?
Answer.
High Demand for New Starts Funds: FTA's New Starts program
currently includes 28 projects with executed or pending Full
Funding Grant Agreements and 42 projects in either Final Design
or Preliminary Engineering (PE). Note that 14 of the 42
projects (33 percent) in Final Design and PE are commuter rail
projects. In addition, FTA is tracking nearly 100 local
planning studies that are seriously considering potential new
starts transit investments.
Commuter Rail Can Pursue Federal Flexible Funds as well as
New Starts Funds: Local project sponsors can consider a variety
of local, state and federal funding sources for design and
construction of proposed commuter rail projects. In fact, the
most successful New Starts projects typically are funded
through a mix of federal flexible, New Starts, and non-federal
funds. New Starts projects now average approximately 50 percent
of total cost funded from the New Starts program, even though
the statute allows a federal share as high as 80 percent.
New Starts Funding Will Likely be Addressed in the Next
Reauthorization: Given the continued high demand and limited
supply of New Starts funding available, it is likely that the
need for additional funding will be considered in the next
reauthorization.
Question 7. Please discuss some of your experiences with the
development of large commuter rail projects. Specifically, what are the
most important issues that metropolitan Atlanta should focus on as the
community considers options for future transportation alternatives?
Answer.
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) has provided
technical support and funded the construction of commuter rail
projects in cities throughout the United States. Based upon our
experience with major capital investments, FTA encourages
detailed project planning to identify and resolve environmental
and institutional issues early in the project development
process, and insure that there is local financial support for
both construction of the proposed system as well as long-term
operations. Additionally, the project planning and public
outreach efforts should be used to build support for the
project from local elected officials, citizens, and the
business community. Below is a summary of outreach activities
and guidance provided by FTA to assist project sponsors
undertaking major capital investments:
Use the best information available to determine a preferred
investment strategy: FTA provides guidance for local project
sponsors on the New Starts rating process in the Technical
Guidance on the Section 5309 New Starts Criteria, last updated
by the FTA Office of Planning in July 2000. In addition, FTA
offers numerous training Workshops throughout the year, and
shares information with local project sponsors through the New
Starts Roundtable.
Develop a Good Financial Plan: In June 2000, FTA published
and distributed Guidance for Transit Financial Plans in order
to provide local project sponsors with a consistent framework
for developing and reporting financial plans. FTA also provides
constructive feedback to local project sponsors on what can be
done to improve project justification and finance ratings.
Gain Local Financial Commitment: One of the key lessons
learned is the significance of demonstrating local financial
commitment. FTA requires firm commitment of local funding
sources, particularly in the later stages of project
development. FTA expects to see local actions, such as
referenda or state legislative action completed before a
project enters final design.
Demonstrate Project Readiness and Technical Capability:
Another lesson learned is that project readiness and technical
capability must be ensured before FTA can propose projects for
full funding grant agreements. In addition to achieving a
rating of Highly Recommended or Recommended, local project
sponsors must demonstrate to FTA that there are no outstanding
issues related to completion of environmental requirements,
project design and firm cost estimates, right of way or real
estate, project management and technical capability, local
political or institutional issues, and compliance with other
federal requirements.
Develop Good Cost Estimates with Adequate Contingency: Full
funding grant agreements represent a commitment by the federal
government. But they also commit the recipient to complete a
specified project on schedule and within budget, and the
agreement places a cap on federal funds committed to the New
Starts project. Increases in project cost or delays in the
schedule are the responsibility of the local project sponsor.
Therefore, it is in the recipients best interest to develop
firm cost estimates and schedules, solid local financial
commitments, and comprehensive project management plans before
pursuing a full funding grant agreement.
Question 8. It appears that commuter rail programs are seen as
transit operations and fall under the guidance of the Federal Transit
Administration, while regional intercity service is the responsibility
of the Federal Railroad Administration. However, there appears to be
many operational and efficiency benefits of operating both of these
entities as a single program. What do you think can or should be done
to improve coordination between the FTA and FRA? Do you think there
would be a benefit to establishing a single office of commuter and
intercity passenger rail within either the FRA or FTA?
Answer.
FTA and FRA already work quite closely together. For
example, they recently issued a joint policy statement on
shared use of track for the situation where local light rail
service is provided in or on railroad rights of way. In
addition, our Departmental efforts continue to look for further
opportunities for FTA and FRA to work together on common
issues. Further, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is
also an important partner within the Department for light rail
and commuter rail operations.
FRA's primary role is safety involving rail operations,
while FTA's role is financial assistance. Thus, FRA is
responsible for rail safety issues, even for commuter rail
systems operated with FTA capital assistance. In addition, FRA
has limited financial resources to assist these agencies. FHWA
is responsible for funding and approval of highway/rail grade
crossing safety improvements, such as signs, flashing light
signals, and other grade crossing infrastructure improvements.
To date, there are no state or local agencies operating both
commuter and intercity regional rail. Further, Congress has not
provided any funding for state or local agencies to establish
intercity operations. The present arrangement, however, would
not prohibit a single state or local agency from operating both
types of service. For example, a state or states could
establish an authority to do both commuter and intercity
service. It would be governed by FRA for safety purposes, and
could receive FTA financial assistance for its commuter
operations, while financing any non-commuter operations
locally. In fact, this is the arrangement for all of the very
successful commuter agencies in operation today.
Question 9. In your view, how can the Congress assist the U.S.
Department of Transportation in expediting the development of regional
passenger rail service?
Answer. Through TEA-21, Congress has enhanced the states'
flexibility to invest federal transportation funds in ways that best
meet their individual transportation needs. The Clinton Administration
believes that providing Amtrak with the capital it needs, enacting the
High-Speed Rail Investment Act, and continuing to support FRA and FHWA
initiatives to address next generation high-speed technology, train
control, and grade crossing safety in designated high-speed rail
corridors will further expedite the development of regional passenger
rail service.
Question 10. What do you think the Congress should do to assist the
states in developing viable commuter and intercity passenger rail
service?
Answer.
Continued support of the existing funding sources will
assist the states in developing commuter and intercity
passenger rail services. The FTA New Starts program is likely
to be the largest source of potential discretionary funding for
new commuter rail systems. Support for the New Starts program
includes continuing to support the New Starts project
development process, which includes a requirement for
evaluation of potential projects for their justification, and
especially for the local financial commitment to the projects.
In my view, Congress could consider expanding the eligibility of
flexible Federal Aid Highway program funds to include intercity rail
passenger service.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland
to Jolene Molitoris
Question 1. What do you see as the Federal Railroad
Administration's role in assisting the development of regional commuter
and intercity passenger rail service?
Answer. FRA sees its role as partner with the state and regional
authorities and Amtrak in the development of safe, efficient and cost-
effective passenger rail service. FRA has been the lead agency for
planning and conducting environmental studies for high-speed rail and
commuter rail systems on the existing rail system from Boston to
Charlotte. FRA will assure that the efforts south of Charlotte will
benefit from the expertise that FRA has developed and assure the
coordination and consistency of these efforts. FRA will also serve as a
resource for planners in Georgia in areas of safety, operations, and
program implementation.
Question 2. I worked to get funding in the Transportation
Appropriations bill to extend the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor
study from its terminus in Charlotte, North Carolina to Atlanta and
Macon. I'm pleased to say that the conference report provides $200,000
to the Federal Railroad Administration for this purpose. Please tell us
what kinds of information we can expect from this study. When can we
expect to have this information? In addition, I have heard that there
is a 50-50 match requirement for this earmark. This study extension
will benefit three states--Georgia, South Carolina and North Carolina.
Am I correct that Georgia will be required to contribute only a part of
the match? Can Georgia use non-federal funds allocated to a similar
project for its part of the match?
Answer. Developing improved passenger rail service on existing
railroad infrastructure is about building partnerships. FRA has found
that the development of detailed transportation plans for the corridor
in question is an important aid to the development of these
partnerships. The studies will analyze existing rail operations,
project future rail operations, identify the infrastructure necessary
to meet all future rail users needs, identify priorities for
investments, and estimate costs and benefits.
Given the detail and the many partners that are involved, these
studies often take about one year to complete. With regard to the match
requirement, FRA believes that Georgia and its state partners in the
development of the Southeast High-Speed Rail Corridor must consult on
the ways to allocate the non-federal share of this and other planning
efforts. Non-federal funds that the states plan to spend in this area
for planning and engineering this rail corridor may be used for
matching purposes, and I understand that when considered in combination
with non-federal funds for a commuter rail study, there are sufficient
funds for the match.
Question 3. In your testimony you talked about the new railroad
loan guarantee program at the FRA, the Railroad Rehabilitation and
Improvement Financing Program. Would you be able to tell us what
Georgia rail projects might be eligible?
Answer. The Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing
Program (RRIF) could be an important tool in developing an innovative
financing package to improve rail passenger service in Georgia. FRA's
Office of Railroad Development is prepared to meet with appropriate
officials from Georgia to discuss the opportunities created by this
program.
Under RRIF, the Secretary may provide direct loans and loan
guarantees for terms of up to 25 years. Eligible applicants include
state and local governments, government sponsored authorities and
corporations, railroads, and joint ventures that include at least one
railroad. RRIF funding may be used to acquire, improve, or rehabilitate
intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, including track, components
of track, bridges, yards, buildings, and shops; to refinance existing
debt incurred for the previous purposes; and to develop and establish
new intermodal or railroad facilities. There is a statutory maximum
amount of outstanding unpaid principal at any point in time of $3.5
billion. Of this, $2.5 billion is available for projects such as we are
discussing today.
Question 4. There is a fundamental demand of the general public
when it comes to transportation, whether it be by road, air or rail and
that is that it has to be safe, efficient and reliable. Where in the
U.S. do you believe there is a good model for Georgia to go to in order
to fashion a rail corridor that delivers on the all-important
requirement of safety? Also, by virtue of the fact that rail stops
within and travels through several municipal areas on its way to its
final destination, it has an impact on communities' land use and
redevelopment. I don't have to tell you that individual states and
cities have their own definition of what success is within their own
boundaries. Given that intercity rail service must be a seamless
operation that integrates many states, counties and cities, how have
you dealt with this multi-jurisdictional dynamic in the past? Utilizing
the knowledge gained from lessons learned, what strategies or efforts
in this regard are you going to pursue in the future? Do you have any
specific advice for Georgia in this regard?
Answer. The important thing is to develop a good plan for each rail
corridor to determine what improvements are required to meet all
intercity, commuter and freight needs. FRA has found that states such
as Virginia, have successfully used such plans to develop
implementation strategies and funding partnerships that make improved
passenger rail service a reality. FRA, working with the other modes of
the Department, is prepared to help the transportation planning
agencies in Georgia undertake this effort.
Question 5. Does the FRA have the resources needed to properly
support the development of regional commuter and intercity passenger
rail service? If not, what additional resources or tools do you need?
Answer. FRA, working with the other agencies of the Department of
Transportation, is prepared to actively support the development of
passenger rail service, both commuter and intercity, in Georgia today.
Future events, such as the hoped-for enactment of the High-Speed Rail
Investment Act, may require additional resources.
Question 6. What do you believe the Congress should do to assist
the states in developing viable commuter and intercity passenger rail
service?
Answer. Continued support of the existing funding sources will
assist the states in developing commuter and intercity passenger rail
services. The FTA New Starts program is likely to be the largest source
of potential discretionary funding for new commuter rail systems.
Support for the New Starts program includes continuing to support the
New Starts project development process, which includes a requirement
for evaluation of potential projects for their justification, and
especially for the local financial commitment to the projects.
In my view, Congress could consider expanding the eligibility of
flexible Federal Aid Highway program funds to include intercity rail
passenger service.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland
to George Warrington
Question 1. What do you believe the State of Georgia needs to be
doing at this time to improve or increase intercity rail passenger
service?
Answer. Three critical steps are required to progress the state's
ambitious passenger rail program. First, of course, is funding. The
state's $1.9 billion intercity and commuter rail plan depends on a
significant funding commitment by the federal government. To date, that
commitment does not exist. It is for this reason that Amtrak, Georgia,
and so many public officials around this country are supporting
enactment of the High-Speed Rail Investment Act, which would create an
80:20 Amtrak/state matching program to develop new high-speed rail
corridors.
Second, there must be a commitment from the freight railroad
owners--in this case the Norfolk Southern Railroad and CSX
Transportation--to work with the state and with Amtrak to upgrade the
speeds and capacity of the rail lines to facilitate growth in passenger
rail service. This can be a win/win for the freights, with significant
public investment in their lines to improve both freight and passenger
rail service.
Third, on a practical level, the state needs to commit to
construction of the new Multimodal Passenger Terminal in Atlanta. This
facility is the lynchpin for new intercity passenger and commuter rail
service. A commitment to build the facility will be a clear signal that
Georgia plans a long-term commitment to passenger rail.
Question 2. What is the timetable for the completion of the
ridership studies now underway? What is the timetable for new service
if merited by the ridership studies?
Answer. Amtrak, as a subcontractor to Georgia Rail Consultants and
the Department of Transportation, expects to complete its
infrastructure and ridership analyses of the Atlanta-Macon-Jesup-
Jacksonville during the summer of 2001. Georgia DOT is undertaking
additional state-wide analyses.
Question 3. What do you see as the biggest obstacle to a viable
passenger rail system in this country?
Answer. The long and simple answer is funding. There is very strong
nation-wide support for upgrading existing rail lines to permit fast,
competitive, safe and reliable passenger rail service. Indeed, the
HSRIA, which would fund these upgrades, has been endorsed by the
National Governors Association, major environmental organizations, the
American Road & Transportation Builders Association, and dozens of
other planning and urban development organizations. Without a federal
(or Amtrak) funding partner, passenger rail service will not grow
significantly or achieve its vast potential in helping to address the
nation's transportation and congestion challenges.
Question 4. What do you see as the Federal Railroad
Administration's role in assisting the development of regional commuter
and intercity passenger rail service?
Answer. The FRA can play a leadership role in several areas. First,
it has been the nation's advocate on improving rail safety,
particularly regarding at-grade crossings. Some 500 people lose their
lives each year at grade crossings. There must be a concerted federal
effort to improving the safety of these crossings. Second, FRA should
continue to fund high-speed rail planning efforts. Lastly, FRA should
continue to take the lead in technology developments, which include new
signal systems and new-technology locomotives.
Question 5. Across the country, automobile use has been growing at
a rate four times faster than the driving-age population. Trips are
getting more frequent and longer, while vehicle occupancy is going
down. Today's hearing is looking at rail as one alternative to the
auto. What do you believe motivates a person to give up driving and
take the train?
Answer. Travelers will change modes only if they are not overly
inconvenienced. To replace a car with public transportation, there must
be frequent, trip-time competitive, and reliable alternatives. For a
high-speed rail corridor, this means multiple daily round-trip trains,
high on-time-performance, and a comfortable ride. In addition, there
must be seamless connectivity at train stations. It does no good to
arrive at the station and then have no way to get to the final
destination. This is one reason that the proposed Multimodal Passenger
Terminal in Atlanta is so important. It will bring together intercity
and commuter rail, bus, taxis and MARTA all at a single location. With
this in place to make access to a traveler's final destination easy,
travelers will embrace Georgia's planned commuter and intercity rail
systems.
Question 6. Rail seems to be in the midst of a renaissance. More
and more Americans seem to be leaving their cars and opting not to fly
in order to once again ride the rails. Do you have an explanation for
this recent return to the rails?
Answer. Passenger rail can provide a reliable and safe alternative
to the congestion that is clogging the highways and airports. With
travelers spending more and more hours each week stuck in traffic,
transportation has become a major quality-of-life issue. Passenger rail
can significantly enhance quality-of-life and this is a major reason it
is being embraced around the nation. Amtrak ridership is at record
levels, as is ridership on the nation's commuter rail systems.
Question 7. Amtrak's Acela Express is the nation's first high-speed
``bullet train'' and operates in the Northeast. Is Amtrak's high-speed
service going to be limited to cities along the Northeast or will other
parts of the country, including the Southeast, be able to look forward
to similar alternative forms of transportation?
Answer. Amtrak is working with some 36 states to develop new
passenger rail service at both conventional and high-speeds. Major
efforts are underway to develop high-speed rail along the Atlantic and
Gulf Coast states, in Florida, along corridors in the nine-state
Midwest Regional Rail Initiative, California and in the Pacific
Northwest.
For example, Amtrak, the states of Washington and Oregon, and their
freight partners have committed more than $590 million in track and
signal upgrades, train equipment, and station improvements on the
Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor. In addition, Amtrak rebranded the
service as Amtrak Cascades, featuring new custom-built Talgo trains
with tilt technology and improved customer service and amenities. The
new Talgo trainsets replaced the older and slower trains that Amtrak
had been running. In California, Amtrak has embarked upon a major
community-based planning initiative in cooperation with local elected
officials, Caltrans, the owners of the infrastructure (freight
railroads) and the federal railroad administration. This effort will
establish corridor goals for each existing and potential corridor in
California. It will also identify and prioritize specific projects to
increase train service, reliability and speed on existing and potential
intercity corridors in California.
Construction work is underway in several other areas of the country
on new high-speed regional systems. Amtrak is in the process of
procuring non-electric high-speed trains that would operate in the
Midwest, and is refurbishing additional turbine powered trains to
operate in upstate New York.
Amtrak submits a quarterly update to Congress that summarizes the
exciting work underway around the nation in high-speed rail and I would
ask that the most recent update be included in the record.
[See attachments titled America's High-Speed Rail Program, dated
July 15, 2000 and January 15, 2001]*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* The attachments referred to were not available at time this
hearing went to press.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Question 8. Mr. Warrington, it is my understanding that you have
been Amtrak's President and CEO for just over two years. While the
nation just witnessed the launch of Amtrak's new high-speed train,
Acela Express, what other progress has been made since you have taken
over control of the company?
Answer. Amtrak is using high-speed rail to move more than people.
In the last two years since I have become CEO Amtrak has engaged in new
and exciting businesses like Mail and Express and Smartsend, the
fastest most reliable way to send packages between major northeast
cities. Last summer, Amtrak introduced its new brand identity and the
unconditional Satisfaction Guarantee. No other national transportation
provider offers this kind of no-questions-asked guarantee. Amtrak
promises all guests a safe, comfortable and enjoyable experience. Those
who feel their experience fell short of expectations are compensated
with future free travel.
--Acela Express, America's first high-speed train, began revenue
service in December. The new service is competitive with the airline
shuttles in travel time and fares, but far exceeds the competition in
amenities. Serving guests between Boston, New York and Washington,
Acela Express is the answer for business travelers in search of comfort
and productivity.
--For fiscal year 2000, Amtrak's ridership (22.5 million) and
ticket revenue ($1.1 billion) were both all-time highs, and it was the
fourth consecutive year of growth for Amtrak.
--The company introduced Amtrak Guest Rewards, the travel
industry's most flexible rewards program. It is a huge success, with
nearly 40,000 guests now registered. Rewarding the most loyal guests,
and luring new ones, the program gives members two points for every
dollar spent on Amtrak travel. Points may be redeemed nationwide for
future travel and other fantastic rewards.
--Acela Regional made a historical debut in January by being the
first fully electrified train to run between Washington and Boston.
Amtrak's Northeast Corridor employees made all-electric service
possible by completing the final link of the corridor's overhead
electrification system--a 156-mile section between New Haven and
Boston.
--Amtrak announced a major plan early this year to expand its
national network. The Network Growth Strategy will eventually expand or
improve service in 21 states, add service to 975 new station pairs, add
11 route segments, and grow ridership by 7 percent. It will also double
the number of shipping lanes available to Mail and Express.
--Amtrak continued to maximize new business opportunities. The
company is increasingly becoming a key provider of Mail and Express
services. In fiscal year 2000, the company earned $122 million moving
goods across America-a 24-percent boost from the previous year-and has
plans to increase this to more than $350 million in the next few years.
--The new Pacific Surfliner service debuted along the San Diego-
Los Angeles-San Luis Obispo rail corridor. The Pacific Surfliner, which
has replaced the San Diegans, will feature nine modern trains by next
spring, with enhanced amenities and upgraded stations along the route.
By introducing all new trains throughout the entire corridor, guests
can expect the same world-class service on board every train, every
time.
Question 9. Let me ask you the same question I asked Ms. Molitoris.
Given that Amtrak runs intercity rail service through many states,
counties and cities, and given the fact that this rail service impacts
land use in the communities it serves, how have you dealt with this
multi-jurisdictional dynamic in the past? What specific advice do you
have for Georgia in this regard?
Answer. One of the great benefits of upgrading existing rail lines
for new high-speed rail service is that this minimizes impacts to the
communities through which the trains operate. In many cases, the
railroads operated on a larger physical plant in the past, with second
or third tracks that have since been removed. Implementation of new
high-speed rail will only require, in any cases, that these tracks be
re-installed to provide the additional capacity for new passenger and
future freight rail service. For example, in the case of the recent
high-speed rail improvements between New York and Boston, all work to
upgrade the railroad was undertaken on existing railroad property. This
minimized adverse land-use issues. Moreover, adding additional rail
service along existing rail corridors minimizes noise issues.
State leadership, as the advocate for the public interest in the
state, also is critical. Where one community may object to certain
work, the state can best work with the community to address those
issues without undermining the enormous state-wide benefits from the
rail upgrade program.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland
to Bill Campbell
Question 1. Atlanta's population explosion has been coupled with an
increase in the percentage of people who live a fair distance from
their job. In fact, more than half of the area's employees now live in
one county and work in another. What effect do you believe passenger
trains will have on your city? Do you believe a significant number of
people will abandon their cars for rail?
Answer. The overall objective is to shorten the length of time
people must spend travelling to and from work. I believe the key to
reducing traffic congestion, increasing the use of rail, and improving
transit options is to expand housing opportunities within the City.
The City of Atlanta's strategy is to take the necessary steps to
provide access to housing within the City for a cross-section of people
with incomes ranging from very low to very high. By creating housing
affordability closer to the City, where the jobs are located, we are
providing incentive for people to get out of their cars and on to rail.
In Atlanta, we have enacted a number of zoning and funding
initiatives that will increase the housing affordability in the City to
allow for more development of mixed-use and mixed income communities.
We expect that our neighboring jurisdictions will promote similar
community-focused options.
Question 2. In your testimony you focused on transit-oriented
developments featuring mixed-use villages of office, retail space,
apartments, and condominiums around MARTA stations. You cited, for
example, the redevelopment of the old Atlantic Steel site and efforts
by Bell south to consolidate dozens of suburban offices into three
locations served by MARTA. What more do you think can be done to
encourage people to change from an automobile-centered commute to a
commute centered on rail?
Answer. We believe we should stay on course with our current
strategy, because the culture is changing. Each day more people are
embracing the concept of commuting by rail rather than automobile.
Citizens of Atlanta are making lifestyle adjustments to improve the
environment and their quality of life. In fact, just last month,
citizens voted overwhelmingly to support a City bond initiative geared
at enhancing city livability by investing in more streetscaping,
sidewalks and bicycle trails. This speaks to people's strong desire to
get out of their cars and into alternative modes of transportation that
reduce traffic congestion.
The public's desire can be reinforced by public and private efforts
to build residential developments near commercial centers. This will
provide residents easy access to all that they need without having to
rely on their automobile to get there.
Question 3. Plans have been in the works for several years to build
a multi-modal passenger station in downtown Atlanta, which, as you say,
would link Amtrak, commuter trains and regional buses to MARTA. In
fact, TEA-21 contains over $20 million in authorization money for the
station.
Where do plans for the terminal stand now?
Answer. I am pleased to say that significant progress has been made
on the terminal.
First let me say that we appreciate Congress' support in TEA-21 for
the multi-modal terminal. We look forward to working closely with you
as this project proceeds.
We appreciate also the renewed partnership we have with the
Governor, who recently created and directed a management team to
coordinate the efforts of GRTA, GDOT and various transportation bodies
on the project development.
Along with the state, we have a working partnership with Amtrak,
Greyhound, MARTA, and Norfolk Southern. It is vital that we continue to
strengthen and maintain this coalition, which has brought the project
to where it is today.
Our vision is to have the multi-modal terminal serve as a hub of
transportation, residential and commercial activity in downtown
Atlanta. It will be the central location for commuter rail and bus
transportation, as well as commercial and residential development that
will link with important regional commuter, as well as commercial
transportation centers.
Cousins' Properties and Turner Properties are key partners in the
vision of co-planning the multi-modal site. They are developing the
mixed use, commercial and residential activity on and around the site.
This will further strengthen the downtown, and provide a concentration
of activity around the terminal.
The site permits are moving forward. A detailed schedule has been
worked out for the development and implementation of the project. We
want to have trains running from the terminal by 2004.
In the City, we are considering a dedicated source of funds from
the car rental tax surplus to support the mixed-use joint development
transportation connections of the terminal. Likewise, we hope that the
state will commit more funds, along with our private, local and federal
partners. We hope we can count on the Congress continued support as a
federal partner.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to
Eddie Elder
Question 1. How do you believe rail service would affect traffic
congestion in your city? What effect do you believe it would have on
the creation of a high tech business corridor between Lawrenceville and
Athens?
Answer. The Athens-Atlanta corridor is anchored by four of the
states research universities. In Atlanta, Georgia Tech, Emory
University, and Georgia State University; in Athens the University of
Georgia, which is quickly gaining national recognition with
Biotechnology research. The seeds of a high tech business corridor
already exists. The linkage between them however is now only with a
congested highway. Commuter rail would facilitate easier travel between
Athens and Atlanta, especially during peak travel times.
Question 2. TEA-21 contains over $16 million in authorization money
to construct an Athens to Atlanta transportation corridor. What do the
citizens of Athens think of such a project? What is the status of the
Athens-Atlanta line?
Answer. The citizens from Athens have been very supportive. Quite
literally putting their money where their mouth is, by allocating $11
million of local sales tax monies for the development and building of
the Athens Multi-Modal Terminal. This terminal will bring together
commuter rail, intercity bus service, local bus service, and connect
with the University of Georgia's Campus Bus System.
Question 3. What is the expected ridership for the Athens-Atlanta
line? Do you believe the cost to begin rail service justifies the
number of riders the trains are projected to carry?
Answer. Expected ridership in 2010 is projected to be over 12,000
weekday riders. The cost to begin service is justifiable on many
levels. Commuter rail will help the regions air quality, help the
localities where it stops focus development, and help ease the burden
on our highways.
Question 4. What do you believe Congress should do to assist the
states in developing viable commuter and intercity passenger rail
service?
Answer. I would like to see the federal government place the same
emphasis in dollars in commuter rail as it has on other modes of
transportation in the recent history of our country. i.e. aviation
during the 1960s and interstate highways during the 1950s.
Question 5. Do you foresee a day when people will be doing a
reverse commute, traveling from Atlanta to Athens for job
opportunities?
Answer. With the University of Georgia in Athens, reverse commute
of students from the Atlanta area is almost assured. Also, a number of
faculty and staff of the University live in the Atlanta area, commuting
to Athens daily. With the emerging Biotech research base that is
already developing in Athens due to the University, a market for
reverse commuting by rail is already developing.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to
Jack C. Ellis
Question 1. There has been much discussion, as well as
disagreement, over whether people will leave their cars behind to ride
the trains. What do you expect from your constituents in Macon on this
issue? What incentives do they have to prefer rail over roads?
Answer. Senator, I welcome this public interest, because an
undertaking of the magnitude of passenger rail travel must bear intense
scrutiny and solicit the input of all its stakeholders. Will people
leave their cars to ride the trains? Yes, indeed, if the trip cost,
travel time, and convenience of the train trip compare favorably with
the automobile trip.
People tend to like what is convenient. We are now used to our
cars, and habit is convenient. So, it is no surprise that the bold plan
to re-introduce passenger rail service to Macon has stimulated a lot of
discussion and, yes, initial disagreement.
Yet the people of Macon also recognize that traffic congestion and
poor air quality, the products of sprawl, are very inconvenient. Our
leaders of business and industry recognize that non-attainment and
highways clogged with unhappy employees stuck in traffic will be
extremely inconvenient. Faulty infrastructure can cause layoffs or
business closures, inconveniences everyone understands and no one
likes. We do not want this to become our future, and there is no
disagreement there.
My constituents recognize that we must devote top priority to
maintaining the attractiveness of our location to domestic and
international companies. If Middle Georgia is to continue to grow as a
highly desirable place to live and do business, we must offer
convenient, clean, and cost-effective transportation choices.
The Selig Center for Economic Growth predicts a healthy 2.1 percent
job growth in the Macon MSA for 2001 that in part reflects our
extensive surface transportation system. Macon is located strategically
at the intersection of I-75 and I-16. When the Fall Line Freeway is
completed, we will have multi-lane highway connections to the other
major metropolitan statistical areas of Augusta and Columbus. Macon has
two major freight railroad lines, and excellent general aviation
facilities that are used by local residents as well as businesses and
travelers from throughout much of South Georgia.
However, the University of Georgia economic experts warn that an
overburdened transportation infrastructure will hamper growth and
diminish the high quality of life which the greater Macon area is
blessed with. Moreover, the midstate economy has a ripple effect in
rural south and west Georgia. My office and our numerous community
partners are solidly engaged in educating the public on the benefits of
transportation alternatives to the single-occupancy, gasoline-powered
automobile.
We will benefit from the lively discussion about future passenger
rail travel, because I fully believe that my constituents will support
the concept widely once they have had the chance to examine the
arguments on both sides. We must remember that an entire generation of
adults here has never even experienced train travel since the last
train departed Macon in 1971. Those who have had the opportunity to
ride modern trains in the United States or abroad understand the
tremendous potential of this mode of transportation.
I expect my constituents to use passenger rail enthusiastically. As
Georgia Governor Roy Barnes points out, this is about providing more
transportation choices. Riding the train provides a safe, clean, and
relaxing alternative to driving an automobile.
Question 2.
(a) TEA-21 contains more than $29 million to construct an Atlanta-
Griffin-Macon rail corridor. What is the status of this project?
(b) What is the status of the multi-modal terminal in Macon?
Answer.
(a) The Georgia Rail Consultants (GRC) have prepared a Screening
Report of Alternatives--Athens and Macon Corridors that will be
presented to the Project Management Team (PMT) Thursday, Dec. 7, 2000.
The purpose of this report is to present a preliminary analysis of the
rail passenger alternates and to eliminate the ones with fatal flaws.
If the PMT concurs with the GRC report, a more detailed
analysis of the GRC-preferred three S-line alternatives as well
as the bus rapid transit TSM alternative will follow. (Federal
law mandates that a Transportation Solution Management, i.e.
low-cost alternative must also be considered). The ``H-
family,'' the alternatives east of I-75, would be more
expensive to upgrade, would conflict with Norfolk Southern
freight traffic, and would serve fewer passengers. New
construction along I-75 would be vastly more expensive as well
as producing lower ridership.
LThe remaining alternatives will be recommended for detailed
study in order to determine the best alternative. The detailed
study will take another 5 or 6 months.
(b) The City of Macon plans to acquire the historic Terminal Union
Station from its current owner, Georgia Power, and so lay the
groundwork for this tremendously important icon to become the focal
point of the future multi-modal terminal. The City has already received
a $15,000 pre-construction grant from the Great American Station
Foundation, as well as a 2002-2003 TEA-21 Transportation Enhancement
for $1 million to assist with the acquisition.
At this time, an Intermodal Passenger Terminal Facilities Plan is
under preparation. The Plan will study other locations for the multi-
modal terminal besides the Terminal Station and identify a preferred
location. The Plan will also recommend operating functions and space
requirements for the future operating years of 2005, 2010, and 2020.
The final report will be delivered in June, 2001.
Question 3. (a) What is the expected ridership for the Atlanta to
Macon line? (b) Do you believe the cost to begin rail service justifies
the number of riders the trains are projected to carry?
Answer.
(a) S-lines: 8,800 passengers per day, H-lines and I-75: 5,200
passengers daily, Bus rapid transit: 6,000 passengers daily.
Yes, I believe the initial cost is well worth the benefits, and in
this I concur wholeheartedly with my fellow mayors across the nation
who are represented by the U.S. Conference of Mayors. The President and
Congress must make passenger rail service a top priority in order to
address the congestion problems that are strangling economic growth and
diminishing our quality of life.
There is no getting around it that constructing the passenger rail
infrastructure will be expensive. We have invested many billions of
dollars in air travel and highways, and it is clear from the present
air and traffic congestion that we need more solutions. We must take
the appropriate steps to make passenger rail just as strong a
transportation option in this country as road and air travel.
Question 4. What do you believe Congress should do to assist the
states in developing viable commuter and intercity passenger rail
service?
Answer. I urge Congress to enact the following measures:
Commit $12 billion in bonds to support investment by Amtrak and the
states in intercity high-speed passenger rail systems, earmark portions
of the federal gas tax for rail projects, enable the states to provide
tax incentives for the upgrading of all existing rail lines, and
require rail freight carriers to work with the state Departments of
Transportation to utilize and upgrade existing tracks.
Senator Cleland, I thank you very much indeed for your devotion to
identifying viable solutions to our state's and our nation's
transportation problems. I am honored by this opportunity to assist you
through my testimony.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to
Steve Roberts
Question 1. Before becoming the project director of Georgia Rail
Consultants here in Atlanta and agreeing to assist Georgia with its
congestion concerns, you successfully promoted a passenger rail program
in Virginia and headed the Virginia Railway Express (VRE). How did
commuters in Northern Virginia adapt to commuter rail?
Answer. Northern Virginia commuters have responded to VRE in
several ways:
During 1997 and 1998 there was a substantial decline in ridership
as VRE struggled to overcome a CSX Transportation failure to provide
on-time performance for VRE trains.
Since that time, CSXT and NS commitment to on-time performance has
provided a base for VRE to not only recover, but surpass projections
for the mature system. VRE was initially forecast to carry 8,000 daily
trips, moving to 10,000 in 2005 after the construction of lengthened
HOVlanes and Metrorail extension to Springfield. VRE is already
carrying in excess of 10,000 daily trips, four years ahead of the
original schedule.
Commuters/customers have been encouraged to consider VRE as
``their'' railroad and to ask for those qualities that are important to
them. VRE now provides service guarantees, a safety net for customers
with day care, mid-day options, transfers to other systems, cross-
honoring with Amtrak in the VRE service corridors, GPS-based train
information for real time checks, varied communications with customers
e-mail, an on-board newspaper, and an active web site, a performance
based incentive compensation for both Amtrak corporate and employees
based on customer satisfaction.
Question 2. How does your experience in running Virginia's commuter
trains compare to the situation in Georgia? How is it different?
Answer. Northern Virginia's commuter rail experience has been
largely a local initiative, with the cooperation of the Commonwealth;
in Georgia the initiative is principally by the state through the
several agencies that have agreed to form the Program Management Team.
The opportunities in Georgia are more immediate in that the rail
infrastructure is both more robust and more ubiquitous. The rail
opportunities are also more immediate in that there is little existing
service from the region's transit supplier--MARTA; and currently only
one operating suburban bus system.
There are similarities, in that the cities are of similar size,
traffic congestion is significant; the suburban residential markets are
similar to those in Virginia. The Atlanta region is in a similar
position to Northern Virginia in the 1980s, beginning to make a choice
to strengthen the core employment areas and improve access to them
using other means than the single passenger car.
Question 3. What do you think can be done to encourage people to
change from an automobile-centered commute to a commute centered on
rail?
Answer. The most effective marketing is the quality and character
of the service. The satisfactions that others gain on the 18 operating
commuter rail systems in North America will reinforce the continued
patronage of Georgians. The commitment to redevelopment the region
along the routes of existing infrastructure are a foundation to work
with developers and employers in supporting a business climate that
supports the quality of life and productivity elements of a move away
from the single occupant automobile for commuting.
Question 4. Some have estimated that the cost of the Athens to
Atlanta line along I-85 and GA 316 would cost over $1.5 billion and
that express buses running along a similar route would cost $164
million, or about one-tenth the cost of the trains. Considering the
costs, do you support rail over buses and if so, why?
Answer. We have looked at seven alternatives for providing service
in the Athens-Atlanta corridor. The most expensive option requires the
reconstruction of the 316 and I-85 rights of way to accommodate rail in
the median, that option was estimated to be in the range of $1.5
billion. We have several others that rely on the expansion of capacity
on the existing CSXT right of way between Athens and Emory, with
options for reaching downtown and the proposed multi-modal passenger
terminal. Those alternatives that use existing rights of way vary in
cost between $315 and $460 million. The bus option is less expensive
but it is also less productive, carrying only 53 percent of the
passenger forecast for the best rail option.
The Program Management Team has directed our work to examine those
remaining alternatives to recommend a preferred alternative that may
well include buses and trains as each mode responds more effectively to
certain elements of the market. We expect to make recommendations in
Spring 2001. Athens trains are forecast to carry between 10 and 12
thousand daily trips in 2010 and we will examine a 2025 forecast in
assessing a recommendation or a selected alternative.
Question 5. What is the expected ridership for the Atlanta to
Athens line? The Atlanta to Macon line? Do you believe the cost to
begin rail service justifies the numbers of riders the trains are
projected to carry?
Answer. As in the Athens corridor we have been directed by the PMT
to narrow the studied options to those using existing rights of way and
to evaluate the manner in which a selected alternative may incorporate
the most effective response to the market. The elimination of the more
heavily used Norfolk Southern ``H'' Line will strengthen the
consideration of bus service, especially in areas east of I-75. Macon
trains on NS's former Central of Georgia ``S'' Line are forecast to
carry approximately 8,700 daily passengers in 2010. We will examine a
2025 forecast in assessing a recommendation for a selected alternative.
Question 6. What do you say to transportation planners who say it's
best to demonstrate demand with a bus service first before investing
hundreds of millions of dollars in rail?
Answer. The demonstration of demand with bus service would only be
as successful as the manner in which the proposed bus service can
provide the qualities of rail service: timeliness, reliability, and
safety. The full express bus service costs over a hundred million
dollars itself and generated half the ridership, and thus only half of
the benefits of rail. If only a fraction of the service is provided,
smaller benefits will be generated, and there will be less incentive to
create the patterns of land uses that encourage peak hour transit use.
There is no doubt in my mind that if you make a significant
commitment to public transportation and support it with complimentary
land uses, the ridership will be there. We know from the dozen or so
start-ups in the last decade that new commuter rail lines attract
plenty of trips in cities formed by the auto, and we know the kinds of
things that are necessary u reliability, parking at the home end, mid-
day guaranteed trips back, good connectivity with the transit systems,
and so forth. There is no reason to believe that Atlanta is radically
different from Los Angeles or Dallas or Chicago in that respect.
The absence of truly exclusive bus-ways, as for instance in Houston
and portions of Northern Virginia, will adversely influence the
reliability of express bus service for the roadway network now in place
inside the Perimeter.
Question 7. How would you describe the public meetings that your
organization has held since October 14th to present the seven
alternatives for each of the proposed lines linking Atlanta and Athens
and Atlanta and Macon?
Answer. There are two overriding qualities to the public response
in our meetings:
Why is this taking so long?
``We had no idea this was under consideration.''
Clearly there are those who are aware of the significant work that
has preceded this current effort and wonder why it is still in the
talking stage; and, there is a second group, many of whom are new to
the region, which are uninformed of any real efforts to address the
issues of mobility and patterns of development.
There was general support of using the existing rail lines rather
than spending much more on new alignments, there were a few suggestions
that bus service be tried first, and there was only one meeting in
which there was significant community concern. Much of that concern was
based on the mistaken belief that the proposed service was like earlier
MARTA heavy rail proposals that would have had major takings of
property along the line as well as closings of key streets crossing the
lines.
As part of the public involvement process that accompanies our work
on the Georgia Rail Passenger Program we have continued to meet with
the localities, neighborhood groups, and other interested parties to
clarify the understanding about the proposed services and answer
questions. The public involvement process will be enhanced as we move
toward our Spring 2001 recommendations.
Question 8. How are important community issues like air quality,
wetlands, parking, historic properties, parkiands, community disruption
and safety being addressed?
Answer. We are following the processes established in the National
Environmental Policy Act [NEPA] and federal transportation planning
legislation and the associated agency regulations implementing that
legislation. We have been engaged in are now engaged in the detailed
study of air quality, wetlands, parking, historic properties,
parklands, community disruption, safety and environmental justice. In
our recommendation of selected alternatives we will be recommending any
necessary mitigation should we find adverse effects on these valuable
community resources.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to
Stephen A. Crosby
Question 1. In order for passenger rail service to become a
reality, viable partnerships must be reached between the state and
federal governments and the freight railroads. This partnership will
have to include sacrifices and concessions to ensure that freight
railroads continue to be able to perform at or above current operating
levels, including improvements to tracks and rail alignments. If we
proceed with expanding rail service in Georgia, I want you to know that
I am committed to ensuring that such a partnership is mutually
beneficial for both passengers and freight.
In your negotiations with the state, what specific kinds of
financial and operational issues do freight railroads believe must be
addressed? What kinds of concessions are freight railroad operators
willing to make to advance passenger rail service, both in the short
term and long term?
CSX and Norfolk Southern have indicated a willingness to negotiate
with state officials. However, an agreement has not yet been reached.
What do you believe are the major challenges to reaching such an
agreement?
Answer. We are currently working with GRTA to negotiate the details
of the first major freight and passenger rail study ever initiated in
Georgia by all relevant parties. Given the complexity of Georgia's rail
network and the number of organizations that need to be involved, this
is a challenging, but necessary, task. We are continuing to meet and
work on this study agreement. While the negotiations are not complete,
we are very close to a final agreement. And CSX is making every effort
to resolve the issues as quickly as possible.
Question 2. In your testimony, you refer to experiences with two
``new start'' commuter systems that have been proposed. Could you tell
us about your experience with existing commuter operations on your
network and whether they satisfy your core concerns of safety,
capacity, indemnification, and compensation?
Answer. Every commuter system on CSX's network is different no
system in one city can be replicated in another. Given the complex
demands of our freight rail customers and the needs of individual
commuter systems, we must develop unique systems that meet localized
requirements. Therefore, I cannot point to a model in another city that
would work in Atlanta.Our experience, however, with the six commuter
systems running on CSX. leads to the following observations.
First, it is in the public's interest to ensure that freight
capacity is maintained and protected for future growth in order
to keep trucks off the highway. CSX moves one million freight
cars through Atlanta each year, with each car roughly the
equivalent of three trucks. So, put simply, failure to protect
freight capacity in this area could mean as many as three
million new trucks on the highways of Atlanta and surrounding
areas. As a result, the goal of reduced highway congestion is
defeated and road wear and tear increases significantly.
Second, it is important to build the new infrastructure
required by or additional passenger operations on the freight
network before such service begins. While that may lengthen the
time in which new or expanded passenger service can start, it
will pay far better dividends over the long-term. For example,
in the case of VRE, CSX is in discussion with state and
commuter authorities about the need for additional
infrastructure capacity prior to any expansion of existing VRE
service. Be it Virginia, Massachusetts, Georgia or any other
state in which officials are looking to railroads as an
alternative to chronically congested roadways, rail service
will not be reliable for freight or commuter customers without
the proper infrastructure in place. And by frustrating our
respective customers with unreliable service, freight shippers
will switch to trucks and commuters will stay in their cars.
Third, the best solution is building and operating commuter
systems on separate track structures. By operating commuter
trains on dedicated commuter tracks and freight trains on
dedicated freight tracks, we can provide optimum service to all
users. The United States has, in terms of performance and
productivity, the best freight rail system in the world. But we
will never approach world-class status for passenger rail
systems if each is forced to work within the confines of the
other. This is the model used on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor
between New York and Washington.
Fourth, safety and liability concerns are addressed best
when rail systems are completely separated from vehicular
systems. Grade crossing closure and over/underpass programs are
important infrastructure considerations in any increased use of
the rail right-of-way.
Fifth, liability concerns are best addressed through state
legislation, similar in form to the Amtrak Reform and
Accountability Act and a Massachusetts statute. Such
legislation would provide a cap on tort liability and establish
insurance requirements for the protection of the freight
railroad providing access to passenger trains.
Question 3. Does CSX see the development of commuter and intercity
passenger rail service as a help or hindrance in meeting the
infrastructure needs of your company?
Answer. Our goal in working with commuter operations is to ensure
that there is no negative impact on our rail operations. That is why in
working with both new starts and currently operating commuter systems,
we require the necessary infrastructure to be in place prior to the
commencement of service. Our experience has demonstrated that when
commuter service begins before such infrastructure is in place, three
things happen--the needs of freight rail customers are not met, more
trucks appear on the highway as customers shift away from rail
transportation and commuters get frustrated by unreliable service.
By forcing passenger service on freight lines or in adjoining
rights-of-way without proper planning and funding, the needs of neither
freight nor public transportation will be met. Schedules will become
unreliable, quality service will diminish and capacity will not be
available to fully meet the needs of either constituency. The result
will be the antithesis of the state's goal--highway congestion will
increase as millions of new trucks are forced onto the highways and
people remain in their automobiles. Therefore, it is in the best
interest of all parties to develop and implement the right
infrastructure plan, consistent with the judgement of operating
professionals, before beginning commuter operations.
Question 4. Assuming liability and safety issues could be addressed
adequately and assuming that there was no impact--or a net positive
impact--on freight rail capacity, what other issues are there that must
be addressed in order to gain the freight operators' support for
passenger rail operation?
Answer. Assuming liability, safety, and capacity are addressed, the
remaining outstanding issue is fair compensation. The freight railroads
are not public utilities. We are publicly held companies, operating on
private property that has been purchased and maintained by private
investment. For that reason, we simply cannot ask our shareholders and
customers to subsidize the cost of commuter rail and rail transit
operations. As freight rail capacity, or our property is consumed by
passenger rail systems, CSXT must seek the fair market value of the
assets being used.
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Max Cleland to
H. Craig Lewis
Question 1. Let me reiterate what I said to Mr. Crosby: If we
proceed with expanding rail service in Georgia, I want you to know that
I am committed to ensuring that such a partnership is mutually
beneficial for both passengers and freight. Do you believe there can be
mutually beneficial outcomes that could be derived from passenger rail
development? If so, what are some examples?
Answer. We believe, based upon experience in other parts of the
country, that mutually beneficial outcomes for freight and passenger
rail interests can be achieved as part of new passenger rail
development.
The most common scenario is one in which a passenger rail project
is accommodated on existing freight tracks or right-of-way in return
for infrastructure improvements that assure the freight railroad that
capacity required for present or future freight service will not be
reduced or constricted. Further, the freight railroad would expect to
be able to use much of the passenger infrastructure in non-peak
periods, if desired. These mutually beneficial partnerships can occur
only with public support and public funding so your support, Senator,
will be crucial in achieving these goals.
Question 2. In the state of Georgia the CSX and Norfolk Southern
railroads own and operate eighty percent of the total state systems of
railroads, consisting of approximately 5,000 route miles. This is very
impressive. Are there peak times that these tracks experience heavier
traffic than at other times? How difficult do you believe it is to
schedule additional trains on these existing tracks?
Answer. Many of the issues that need to be addressed in
negotiations are common to CSX and Norfolk Southern. However, the
principal railroad segments under discussion are separately owned. We
believe the major challenges to reaching an agreement are:
a. Separating the discussion about Atlanta/Athens from the
discussions about Atlanta/Macon.
b. Helping to inform elected officials and the public that there
are no simple or inexpensive solutions.
c. Identifying sources of funding so discussions have a context of
reality.
Question 3. Where do you currently have commuter service that
satisfies the core concerns of safety, capacity, indemnification, and
compensation?
Answer. All areas in which commuter and freight service are
conducted fulfill the core concerns you identified. However, most of
these areas have had joint operations for long periods of time. The
challenge arises with regard to core concerns when new or expanded
passenger service is proposed for existing freight lines. Our most
recent experience with these circumstances has been in New Jersey. We
are actively engaged in discussions in New York, Philadelphia, Chicago,
Charlotte and Cleveland.
Question 4. Norfolk Southern and CSX have indicated a willingness
to negotiate with state officials. However, an agreement has not yet
been reached. What areas do you believe are the major challenges to
reaching such an agreement?
Answer. There are peak traffic periods that vary more by day of the
week, line segment and commodity type than time-of-day. The real
challenge with introducing passenger service to a freight line is
frequency and speed of the passenger trains. Passenger trains typically
run at much faster speeds than freight trains so there is a constant
problem of passenger overtaking freight--think of it like a pac-man
dynamic. And so, without track and infrastructure improvements,
passenger service tends to shut out, or severely curtail freight
service during much of the typical passenger operating period (6 a.m.-
10p.m.), creating the unacceptable situation of relegating freights to
a very limited night-time window. The challenge is to find the right
balance in which each rail operation can meet its requirements with
transparency to the other. Technology does not solve the problems; more
tracks and intelligently designed stations usually will.
Question 5. Would you support appointing a senior member of your
operations staff to be the point of contact in rail negotiations with
the state in order to help explore all realistic options for developing
passenger rail service in Georgia?
Answer. Yes
Question 6. Could you please tell us about your experience in
Virginia in regard to commuter rail and the lessons Norfolk Southern
learned in that state?
Answer. We learned that, when working together with a commitment to
promoting the interests of both parties, government and the private
sector can construct relationships that can get things done. Most
importantly from our perspective, the State of New Jersey understands
and accepts the value of keeping NS commercially viable whenever new
passenger service is imposed. Where most passenger authorities are seen
as having an entitlement mentality, New Jersey Transit has shown
genuine sensitivity to the effects of passenger trains operating over
freight railroads.
Question 7. Does Norfolk Southern see the development of commuter
and intercity passenger rail service as a help or hindrance in meeting
the infrastructure needs of your company?
Answer. Either. Historical attitudes have typically cast new
passenger rail proposals as a hindrance to freight operations. The
potential for a new paradigm, the development of public/private
partnerships centered around preservation of freight competitiveness,
can be constructive and helpful for all parties.
______
Prepared Statement of Atlanta Regional Commission, Atlanta, GA
As the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Atlanta
Metropolitan Region, we want to take this opportunity to emphasize the
importance that passenger rail implementation plays in the future of
transportation in our region. The Atlanta Region is classified as a
non-attainment area under the Clean Air Act of 1990 and thus has been
required to implement an intensive regional transportation and land use
planning effort in order to demonstrate conformity with the emission
targets established by the state and federal environmental agencies.
The recent adoption and approval of a new long range Regional
Transportation Plan (RTP) demonstrates our commitment to this process
and clearly sets a new direction for transportation infrastructure
investment for the Region.
Passenger rail implementation plays a significant role in this
plan. Commuter rail projects are programmed for early implementation.
The commuter rail projects are:
Atlanta--Athens 2003-2005
Atlanta--Griffin--Maco 2003-2005
n
Atlanta--Senoia 2010
Atlanta--Bremen 2010
We expect the population of the Atlanta Region to grow by
approximately 1.1 million people over the next 25 years. It is
essential that we invest now in transportation infrastructure that will
meet the mobility needs of the future without compounding our air
quality problems. These commuter rail projects will enhance regional
mobility for our citizens and will provide the much needed alternative
to the automobile.
We have recognized that future development and land use go hand in
hand with transportation infrastructure investment. We have adopted a
Regional Development Plan (RDP) that recognizes the importance of land
use decisions to the regional transportation system. The RDP provides a
guide for the future that encourages land use decisions which will
create higher density development around available rail and transit
systems. This change in development patterns will decrease our
dependency on the automobile and promote utilization of alternative
transportation modes.
The Atlanta Regional Commission also supports statewide efforts to
implement intercity high-speed rail. Atlanta has always been the major
transportation hub of the Southeast and this will certainly continue.
The Atlanta-Hartsfield International Airport is now the busiest airport
in the world and will quickly reach its maximum capacity. Our
interstate highway system becomes more congested every day. It is clear
that intercity passenger rail service is needed as a viable alternative
to these other modes. The original designation of national high-speed
rail corridors included the route from Charlotte through Atlanta to
Macon and from Savannah to Jacksonville. With the additional
designation this year of the continuation from Macon to Jesup, a
complete tie in through the state will be available. We believe that
the designation of additional corridors such as Atlanta-Chattanooga and
Macon-Albany-Tallahassee should be considered as future enhancements to
the high-speed corridor system.
The Atlanta Regional Commission has been an active participant in
developing rail programs that have the potential to significantly
change our mobility options. In partnership with the Georgia Department
of Transportation, the Georgia Rail Passenger Authority, the Georgia
Regional Transportation Authority and other local government agencies
in both Georgia and Tennessee, we are participating in the National
Maglev Deployment Program. We have done a tremendous amount of work on
this project and believe that Maglev is not only feasible, but will
provide a modern, safe and comfortable mode of transportation that will
be financially supportable over the long term.
In summary, we are committed to the implementation of commuter rail
in the Atlanta Region and fully support the early development of
intercity high-speed rail programs. We hope that this Committee will
work to provide the investment necessary to bring these rail options to
reality.