All,

This is slightly off the topic of passenger rail in the Midwest, but it
provides valuable insight into how transportation decisions get made.

Rick


Monday, January 17, 2000


The gamble to land Southwest

William Tuthill Business Review Reporter

Capital District Business Review (Albany, N.Y.)



On Monday, April 5, John Egan, chief executive officer of the Albany County

Airport Authority, briefed two prominent local businessmen. The meeting was

informal--it even finished with the three of them talking in the parking lot

outside Egan's office.


Later that day, the two businessmen would carry the message to Sen. Joseph

Bruno (R-Brunswick), majority leader of the state Senate.


It was those two meetings, perhaps more than any others in 22 months of

campaigning, that helped clinch the deal to bring Southwest Airlines to

Albany International Airport. Twenty-four hours later, Bruno took Egan aside

at a public event at the airport and promised $6.2 million in state money to

build an addition to the terminal, which Southwest required.


Southwest, famous for dramatically boosting airports' overall traffic volume

with its low fares and snappy service, announced Jan. 6 that it would begin

service to and from Albany in May.


"These are two businesspeople who enjoy great credibility with Bruno," Egan

said of the two emissaries who went to the powerful state senator on that

day in April.


Egan declined to name them, saying he did not want to embarrass them.

Neither did Kevin O'Connor, president of the Center for Economic Growth, the

Albany-based not-profit economic development agency where the two men are

board members.


Bruno got the $6.2 million as a "member item"--money set aside for

individual state Senate and Assembly members to use at their discretion,

generally for projects in their legislative districts. Member-item requests

this large usually take some time to get approved, in consultation with the

majority leader. But in this case, there was no waiting.


The airport is not in Bruno's district, and the terminal expansion alone

would not guarantee that Southwest would choose Albany. It was something of

a risk, and Egan acknowledges that if Southwest had declined, he would be

"out on the street, looking for another low-fare carrier" today to fill the

space.


O'Connor, the Center for Economic Growth president, called the terminal

expansion an act of faith on the part of Bruno and the Airport Authority.

"This kind of speculative investment is not something the Capital District

is known for," O'Connor said.


For Dallas-based Southwest, the Albany terminal expansion was just one of

three factors that had to converge in order to start serving Albany by May

2000. The other two factors were gate availability at other airports and the

delivery schedule of new aircraft.


Egan said the $6.2 million member item was needed in April so construction

could start immediately and be substantially completed by Oct. 31. That was

the latest date on which Southwest could assign passenger gates for the

coming year at Baltimore-Washington International Airport, its main airport

on the East Coast and a likely destination from Albany. Oct. 31 also was the

date when Southwest needed to know where it would deploy the Boeing 737s

that are slated to be delivered in 2000.


"It was a narrow window of opportunity," Egan said.


Egan said the success at attracting Southwest also was due to strong public

support and pent-up demand for cheaper flights, and to the numerous business

leaders and public officials who kept the issue on the front burner in

speeches, public hearings and opinion pieces in the local media.


Also, the publicity generated by the opening of a new airport terminal and

parking garage in 1998 again highlighted the fact that Albany's airfares are

among the highest in the nation.


Christine Turneabe Connelly, a Southwest spokeswoman, said the timing of the

Albany announcement was made possible by the availability of the terminal

expansion.


But she also said that of the more than 150 airports that were courting the

airline, Albany was one that met its other criteria: The airport is

considered overpriced and underserved; it is not a congested hub or

slot-controlled airport, like New York City's LaGuardia or Chicago's O'Hare,

and it has good accessibility and parking facilities.


The Capital Region also has the underlying economic strength to support a

minimum of eight daily departures, Connelly said. Southwest will detail its

routes from Albany at a Jan. 18 press conference, though Baltimore is

expected to head the list of destinations from Albany.


Although Connelly said Southwest believes the region's economy can support

eight to 10 flights a day, Albany International Airport serves a smaller

population base than most of the airports in Southwest's system. Local

officials, businesses and economic developers now are talking up the airline

to make sure it gets the business to stay here.


"We've all made the case rather aggressively that there is the volume if

ticket prices are affordable," said Rep. John Sweeney (R-Halfmoon), vice

chairman of the U.S. House Aviation Subcommittee. "This will very

significantly test us in the Capital Region on our ability to sustain a

first-class airport."


Sweeney and others are banking on the "Southwest Effect," a term coined in

1993 by U.S. Department of Transportation officials. In most of the cities

Southwest has come into, other airlines match its fares, and traffic volume

for all carriers increases dramatically.


Eileen Seery, owner of Custom Travel in Clifton Park, said that since

Southwest started service out of Hartford, Conn., in October, fares to the

West Coast have dropped by half, from about $650 round trip to $320. Seery

said people who previously drove from Albany to Hartford to fly will now use

Albany International Airport, and people who never flew will be induced by

Southwest's fares, which average only $79 one way.


However, the bottom line remains Southwest's ultimate concern, Seery said.

"We've begged them to come in here; now we have to support them," she said.


"This area is famous for not supporting things. Look at the sports teams

that have come and gone. Southwest won't stay in a market that doesn't

support them," Seery said.

In a message dated 1/14/00 12:40:47, broaddus@... writes:

<< Dates have been set for meetings hosted by the DOT and HNTB

Associates to introduce a new preliminary engineering study for

Madison-Milwaukee passenger rail service.  Please pass this info

along to all interested parties.



Jan. 27, Madison, O’Keefe Middle School, 6 pm


Feb. 2 Watertown, at Riverside Middle School, 6 pm


Feb. 3, Waukesha, Zoofari Conference Center, 6 pm



Meetings will introduce the Madison-Milwaukee preliminary

engineering study to the public, and address local concerns.

Preliminary engineering is underway for passenger rail

servicebeween Madison and Milwaukee, with local stops in

Watertown, Oconomowoc, and Brookfield.  Open questions include

trainset technology, station location in Madison, and how to link

new passenger rail service to local transit.  They will also present

the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative plan, a nine-state plan for 110-

mph passenger rail service using Chicago as the center of a hub-

and-spoke system.   >>

Area may get new train routes
Toledo Blade
January 12, 2000
BY DAVID PATCH
BLADE STAFF WRITER Rail travelers in Toledo and other parts of northern Ohio
soon are expected to have more time-of-day choices to many destinations
between Chicago and New York.
A proposed schedule for a Chicago-New York train operating via Toledo,
Cleveland, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia shows a westbound stop in Toledo at
2:41 p.m. and an eastbound stop here at 5:09 p.m.
"Nothing is confirmed enough that we even have a date when it might start,''
said Toledo stationmaster Paul LeClair.
The soonest any new service is likely to start is April, when Amtrak
traditionally revises its schedules for summer traffic demand.
If added, the train - tentatively dubbed the Manhattan Limited - would
provide a fourth daily round trip for Toledoans traveling to Chicago or
Cleveland and a third daily round trip to Pittsburgh. The train would stop in
Sandusky and Waterloo, Ind., but a stop in Bryan is not shown.
A schedule for a possible Boston-Cleveland-Chicago train operating via
Fostoria, meanwhile, was published in several rail-enthusiast newsletters
last month, though it was later retracted as being premature.
And Robert Greenlese, director of surface transportation and logistics for
the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, said he has discussed restoring
passenger service between Toledo and Detroit with Amtrak officials.
Amtrak spokesmen in Chicago and Washington declined to comment on any
possible train changes in the region.
"It would be premature to comment until the railroad has weighed all the
options that require careful consideration before final decisions and
announcements are made," Amtrak said in a prepared statement.
Mr. LeClair confirmed, however, that the Manhattan Limited, the
Boston-Fostoria-Chicago train, and Toledo-Detroit service are under
consideration.
"It's marvelous - if it comes to pass,'' said Bill Hutchison, president of
the Ohio Association of Railroad Passengers, a train-advocacy group.
"Multiple daytime frequencies is something you haven't seen here for more
than a generation."
Amtrak officials would not say even when they expect an ongoing "Market Based
Network Analysis," upon which Amtrak leaders say they will base service
planning for the next 15 years, will be completed.
Wisconsin Gov. Tommy G. Thompson, chairman of the Amtrak Reform Board, told a
Senate subcommittee in October the analysis will "identify opportunities to
grow rail service and increase Amtrak's share of the travel market."
Past Amtrak efficiency studies have concentrated on cutting service to cut
costs.
For several years in the early 1970s, Toledo had no passenger trains at all,
and until 1990 it only had one daily train in each direction on a New
York-Chicago run. The 1990 rerouting of the Chicago-Washington Capitol Limited
  through Toledo gave the city another set of destinations, but both trains
continued to cross Ohio during the wee hours, limiting their usefulness for
short-distance trips.
Facing one of many financial crises during its 29-year history, Amtrak
eliminated Toledo-Detroit service in March, 1995, and canceled the Broadway
Limited through Fostoria the following September.
At the same time, however, Amtrak began marketing itself as a
truck-competitive means for transporting freight.
Amtrak's cargo push succeeded to the point that it restored service on the
former Broadway Limited route in 1997, albeit with a new train name, the Three
  Rivers. A year later, Amtrak's extension of the Philadelphia-Pittsburgh Penns
ylvanian to serve Cleveland and Chicago gave Toledo its first daytime run to
Cleveland and points further east since the 1960s.
If established, the Manhattan Limited would run about six hours later than
the eastbound Pennsylvanian and about six hours earlier on the westbound
side. The eastbound would leave Chicago around noon and get to New York the
next morning; the westbound would leave New York in the late evening and
reach Chicago at suppertime the next day. Mr. Greenlese said he was unaware
of the Manhattan Limited proposal.
The notion of restoring Toledo-Detroit service, he said, is driven by
Amtrak's need for more capacity to move cargo in and out of Toledo, now one
of its busiest express-freight terminals.
The train will still be slower than driving. Like existing Toledo-Pittsburgh
service, the Manhattan Limited would be allowed between 51/2 and 6 hours to
travel between those cities, a trip that takes about 4 hours by car.
And Chicago-bound trains are allowed 80 minutes to travel 16 miles from
Hammond, Ind., to Chicago, which provides time for a stop in the railyard
outside the station so cargo cars can be uncoupled before the trains go to
the platform. But additional trains may attract some car-weary or car-leery
travelers for whom current train schedules are inconvenient. The only
Chicago-bound trains from Toledo today offer Windy City arrivals in the late
morning or after midnight.
Similarly, the only Toledo-New York schedule now available leaves after
midnight and arrives in the Big Apple in the early afternoon.

Friday, January 7, 2000

In Europe, Airlines Put Connecting Fliers On Railroads as Jet-Travel Hassles
Grow
By DANIEL MICHAELS and PAULO PRADA
THE WALL STREET JOURNAL


PARIS -- On United Airlines' service from Chicago to Le Mans, France,
passengers make a connection in Paris. Not to an Air France flight to Le
Mans -- to a high-speed train that covers the 179 miles in 93 minutes.

It has come to this: Air travel in Europe is so crowded and difficult that
airlines are starting to book connecting passengers onto trains. Europe's
quickest trains, zooming 185 miles an hour or more, are often simply faster
and more economical than planes.

"There is certainly an irony in this," says Andrew Sharp, director general
of the London-based International Air Rail Organization, an independent
group working to join trains with planes. "But you take whatever suits best
the journey you have in mind."

Letting fliers take the plane to the train makes good business sense.
Short-hop flights are notoriously unprofitable around the world. Short-hop
flights that square off against ultrafast trains tend to land in even more
red ink.

At Charles de Gaulle Airport outside Paris, the terminal for the superfast
TGV train is now part of the airport complex, making it easy to hop from
plane to train. In recent months, Germany's Lufthansa, UAL Corp.'s United
Airlines, AMR Corp.'s American Airlines and Air France have all made
connection deals with the TGV's operator, the Societe Nationale des Chemins
de Fer Francais.


Laurence Paget, who arrived at Charles de Gaulle after a 24-hour flight from
New Caledonia, completed the final leg of her Air France trip by high-speed
train. "It's very convenient," she said as she headed to a special counter
for her train ticket to Lille in northern France. The train portion of the
trip even counted toward frequent-flier miles.

For Air France, the TGV offers a way to free up planes and reach smaller
French cities where the airline either doesn't fly or can't make money
flying. For foreign carriers, the TGV network is a way to provide service
beyond the big airports. Lufthansa and United cover most of the world
through their 13-airline Star Alliance group, but they lacked a French
partner, leaving a strategic vacuum in one of Europe's biggest domestic
air-travel markets.

Back home in Germany, Lufthansa is linking up with Deutsche Bahn AG's ICE
Inter-City Express. Only Frankfurt Airport has an ICE terminal now, but more
ICE stations are coming on line at airports in Berlin, Cologne, Dusseldorf
and Leipzig. Eventually, the airline hopes to replace most of its domestic
flights with high-speed rail connections.

Air France says that for rail trips of up to two hours, there's not much
time difference between train and plane. The country's high-tech trains are
also roomier than short-hop planes. And in contrast to plane travel, the TGV
boasts a 95% on-time record.

"The TGV is nicer than a plane," says Mike Hickey, a retired businessman
from Florida honeymooning in France. "It's a little slower but you get to
see the countryside and you can get up and walk around." He also says the
food is better when you can make your selection at a dining car.

Connecting between the plane and the train isn't yet as seamless as
switching planes. Rail tickets, for example, list both seat and car numbers,
but airline booking systems still aren't programmed to accept car numbers.

Baggage-handling is a particular challenge. On planes, passengers check in
their bags, but on trains, every bag is a carry-on.

KLM Royal Dutch Airlines bumped into this problem back in 1997 when it tried
to join up with the sleek, fast Thalys train between Brussels and Paris.
"People don't want to carry their own luggage," says KLM spokesman Peter
Wellhuner of the six-month experiment. "The reaction to the test was it
should be more interconnected." KLM and Thalys expect to have the problem
solved before Thalys initiates high-speed service on the entire route
between Paris and Amsterdam in 2005.

Swiss Federal Railways has been transferring baggage from 23 train stations
to airports in Geneva and Zurich since May. While the country is too small
to require a high-speed rail network, its punctual train system comes
closest to providing a seamless air connection. Passengers must arrange for
the service in advance, and it costs nearly $13 for each bag to be
transferred. Delegations from other European railroads have flocked to
Switzerland to study the set-up.

©1999 San Francisco Chronicle

------------------------------------------------------------------------
California Bullet Train Taking the Slow Track
Rail authority decides to ask for funds in increments

Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer      Monday, December 20, 1999

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Depending on your perspective, the California dream of a bullet train
speeding between the Bay Area and Southern California is either stuck at the
platform or inching its way out of the station.
The California High Speed Rail Authority has decided not to go to the voters
in November 2000 and ask for $25 billion to build a 700- mile high-speed rail
line with trains running up to 220 mph. The authority instead wants to
advance in small steps, starting with $25 million worth of preliminary
engineering and environmental studies that would take two years. An
additional four years of more detailed work would precede construction. The
first high-speed train would zip out of the station in 2016, the authority
projects.
That leaves the California bullet train in an awkward position. To lurch
forward, high-speed rail needs support -- and money -- from a governor who
once called it a ``Buck Rogers'' idea, a Legislature that has until now distan
ced itself from the costly project and a public disdainful of big government
projects and tax increases to pay for them.
The bullet train's battle will begin soon. San Joaquin Valley lawmakers Sen.
Jim Costa, D-Fresno, and Assemblyman Dean Florez, D-Shafter, have said they
plan to introduce bills early next year that would grant the rail authority
$25 million and make the authority, formed in 1996 and due to expire in June
2001, a permanent entity.
``I think next year we should be able to convince the governor,'' Costa said.
Gov. Gray Davis' office referred a call Thursday to the Business, Housing and
Transportation Agency, where a spokeswoman said the governor had no position
on the matter because the authority's report has not been submitted and the
legislation not yet introduced.
Davis might require some persuading. The governor earlier this year described
high-speed rail, a technology in use in Europe and Japan for decades, as a
``Buck Rogers'' idea, a statement he tempered about a week later.
But the big sell would come three to six years down the line when the
authority would either try to persuade the Legislature and governor to raise
the $25 billion by increasing the state's 7 1/4 percent sales tax by a
quarter cent or go to the voters to back a bond measure.
As the environmental and engineering studies progress, said John Barna, the
authority's deputy executive director, the agency could also interest private
investors and get a better idea of what the rail system would cost.
The speedy rail network would link Sacramento and the Bay Area with Los
Angeles and San Diego, slicing through the San Joaquin Valley en route. An
express trip from San Francisco to San Diego would take about 3 1/2 hours.
Los Angeles would be just a 2 1/2-hour ride away.
According to the authority's business report, the bullet train would be
competitive with in-state air travel, offering significantly cheaper tickets
and comparable travel times if getting to and from increasingly crowded
airports is taken into account.
The authority estimates that the bullet trains would carry more than 42
million riders a year and produce $900 million a year in revenue -- $300
million in profits.
Citing California's booming economy and worsening airport and highway
congestion, some high- speed rail supporters are criticizing the authority,
saying it could be killing a project the state needs badly.
`'The time to do this is now,'' said John Shields, a Chico resident and
passenger train supporter who is organizing Californians for High Speed
Passenger Rail to lobby for the system.
``The authority and its predecessor commission have spent about six years and
somewhere in the neighborhood of $12 million to create a veritable mountain
of paper about building a California bullet train,'' he said. ``That is
enough information to produce a proposal for the voters.''
Although he acknowledges that he does not have the backing yet, Shields would
like to build enough support for a bullet train among the public, business
and organized labor to bypass the authority and place an initiative before
voters, who he says can be sold on high-speed rail.
But other bullet-train advocates support the authority's methodical approach,
saying it will give backers time to build public support for the project,
which would be the costliest public works project in state history.
``To go slow may be appropriate,'' said Arthur Lloyd, a Caltrain board member
and retired Amtrak employee. ``It would be tough to ask voters to raise the
gas tax or float a bond issue. I don't see two-thirds (majority vote) out
there.''
Eugene Skoropowski, executive director of the Capitol Corridor train service,
said the extra time and research will make the project easier to sell,
whether to voters, legislators or private investors.
``The more you have your facts refined, the more you have credibility when
it's time to make decisions,'' he said.
Skoropowski is the former deputy director of the Florida Overland Express --
FOX -- consortium, which was preparing to build a high-speed rail system in
that state until Gov. Jeb Bush yanked away state funding early this year.
Skoropowski blames FOX's demise on politics. ``I still believe with every
bone in my body that the Florida project was viable and would have been
successful,'' he said.
Although he does not know the details of the High Speed Rail Authority's
research, Skoropowski said common sense says a bullet train would succeed in
California, too.
``You have double the number of people in California, you have a high level
of tourism, probably equal or higher than Florida, you have several major
transportation centers,'' he said. ``Yeah, it makes sense.''
Of course, not everyone agrees. Barna realizes that skepticism surrounds the
rail project, with everyone from politicians to the person on the street
regarding it as a pipe dream.
``Having people say we're nuts and it will never get off the ground is
probably a compliment to us,'' he said. ``It gives us incentive. And a lot of
projects that Californians rely on now people said could never be done. We're
not discouraged. We have history on our side.''

In a message dated 12/14/99 18:06:01, narp@... writes:

<< To all NARP Members -- December 14, 1999:

This is a followup to yesterday's message asking you to contact the
White House and the Office of Management and Budget on behalf of "full"
Amtrak funding ($989 million) for FY 2001. If you have time and energy,
consider also sending a copy of your message to:

The Honorable Rodney Slater
U. S. Secretary of Transportation
Washington, DC 20590

since he is the one who likely would have to go to President Clinton and

press hard for any additional Amtrak funding, if that added funding is
actually to materialize. It would be good for him to see the pro-Amtrak
communications that go to the White House and the Office of Management
and Budget.

--Ross B. Capon
Executive Director
  >>

In a message dated 12/13/99 13:16:54, narp@... writes:

<< To all NARP Members -- December 13, 1999:

The Clinton Administration's FY 2001 budget process is well underway,
and this week could be crucial. [Federal Fiscal Year 2001 begins on
October 1, 2000.]

The Administration long ago indicated its intention to request $521
million for Amtrak, consistent with what Amtrak has said could get it to

"operational self-sufficiency" by the end of FY 2002. HOWEVER, THIS
LEVEL WOULD NOT PERMIT ANY MEANINGFUL GROWTH IN SERVICE.

Because of that important caveat, 26 governors signed a November 17
letter to President Clinton urging him to include in his FY 2001 budget
the full amount authorized for Amtrak, $989 million. We understand that
the Department of Transportation submitted a request well above $521
million.

Unfortunately, however, we hear that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), in its first review of the DOT's request, pared Amtrak
back to the "minimum-for-survival" level of $521 million. Indeed, The
Wall Street Journal last week reported that DOT in general was a "big
loser" in the internal budget review process on grounds that Congress is

likely to restore funds the Administration cuts. When it comes to
intercity passenger rail, however, this Congress tends to treat
Administration funding requests as ceilings.

The internal Administration process is proceeding quickly. For Amtrak to

get more than $521 million, The White House needs to hear from
individuals and organizations who favor the $989 million.

You can e-mail the White House by going to this web address:
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/Mail/html/Mail_President.html>.  I urge
you also to send a copy of your letter by regular mail to:

The Honorable Jacob J. Lew, Director
Office of Management and Budget
Old Executive Office Building, Room 252
Washington, DC 20503

Thanks for your efforts, and best wishes for a happy holiday season.

--Ross B. Capon,
Executive Director >>

From Decmber 4 Chicago Tribune
3RD CHICAGO AIRPORT LABELED `NOT DOABLE'
HOUSE TRANSPORTATION CHIEF OFFERS BOOST FOR ROCKFORD FACILITY

Associated Press
December 4, 1999
ROCKFORD, Ill. -- Plans for a third Chicago-area airport "are probably not
doable" and the state should look at Rockford's airport as an alternative,
the chairman of the U.S. House Transportation Committee said Friday.
Rep. Bud Shuster (R-Pa.) offered a well-received boost for the Greater
Rockford Airport during a tour of the facility arranged by Rep. Donald
Manzullo (R-Ill.).
Shuster listened as officials from around northwest Illinois pitched their
favorite regional transportation projects, from the expansion of U.S. Highway
20 between Freeport and Galena to an intermodal cargo hub in Rochelle.
Shuster's strongest comments focused on his belief that the nation does not
need any new major airports and that such plans are unlikely to overcome
financial and political hurdles. He said he has expressed those views to Gov.
George Ryan's administration.
"I just don't see it in the cards for a third airport, and to the extent that
the state focuses on something that's probably not doable, then they're not
focusing on other things that might be doable," Shuster said, prompting
applause from more than two dozen area officials.
The Rockford airport's boosters have been trying for some time to take
advantage of the strong opposition to a third Chicago airport by positioning
their site as an alternative, even as they struggle to build passenger
service.
The Rockford airport is a major cargo hub for United Parcel Service but has
only one passenger carrier with limited service to Detroit and Minneapolis.
The state Transportation Department has said the Rockford airport is too far
away and too small to offer real relief for congestion at O'Hare
International and Midway airports in Chicago.
Ryan recently proposed a scaled-back one-runway airport instead of the
original two-runway facility proposed for Peotone, south of Chicago. But the
Federal Aviation Administration has determined that project is not eligible
for federal support.
A Ryan spokesman said the governor "respectfully disagrees" with Shuster.
Shuster cited Rockford as a classic example of an "underutilized" regional
airport.
"We're not talking about coming in here to spend a billion dollars to put in
a 10,000-foot runway and to provide the infrastructure that would be
necessary," Shuster said. "The enormous plus is you've got it here."
Shuster said the air transportation bill pending in Congress would
potentially triple Rockford's share of federal airport money to $1.5 million,
to help fund expansion and promote passenger growth.

From http://www.prnewswire.com via AOL

Kentucky Cardinal Brings Amtrak Passenger Service to Louisville Metro Area

CHICAGO, Dec. 2 /PRNewswire/ -- For the first time in 20 years, daily
passenger train service returns to the greater Louisville metropolitan area
on December 17 when Amtrak begins operating a new direct service between
Chicago and Jeffersonville, Ind.  The new train will be called the Kentucky
Cardinal and will feature evening departures and overnight travel southbound
from Chicago and northbound from Jeffersonville via Indianapolis.

"Amtrak is pleased to be once again serving passengers in the Louisville
market," said Ed Walker, President of Amtrak Intercity.  "This is an
excellent opportunity for Kentucky and southern Indiana passengers to take
advantage of a direct route to Indianapolis and Chicago and experience the
relaxing and convenient travel alternative that Amtrak offers nationwide."

Walker said Amtrak is committed to extending the Kentucky Cardinal into
downtown Louisville if an adequate station facility can be built.  He said
the train would continue to stop in Jeffersonville, Ind., if a downtown
Louisville stop is established.  No other stops between Jeffersonville and
Indianapolis are currently planned although Walker said Amtrak is receptive
to adding stops if ridership and revenue projections justify the addition.

The southbound Kentucky Cardinal will depart Chicago Union Station each
evening at 8:10 p.m. and arrive in Jeffersonville at 8:40 a.m. the following
morning.  The northbound Kentucky Cardinal will depart Jeffersonville each
evening at 10:25 p.m. and arrive in Chicago at 10:05 a.m. the next day.  The
station in Jeffersonville is located at 500 Willinger Lane.  A limited number
of parking spaces are available at the station.

Three days per week, the Kentucky Cardinal will operate between Chicago and
Indianapolis as a section of Amtrak's Cardinal, a train that operates
thrice-weekly between Chicago and Washington, D.C., via Indianapolis.  In
Indianapolis, the Kentucky Cardinal will be joined with, and separated from,
the Cardinal on the days of that train's operation.  On the remaining four
days per week, the Kentucky Cardinal will operate independently between
Chicago, Indianapolis and Jeffersonville/Louisville.

Food service will include vending machines on the lower level of the coach
car.  In addition, passengers will have access to the Cardinal's dining car
on the Chicago-Indianapolis segment on the days the Kentucky Cardinal
operates as a section of the Cardinal.

The Kentucky Cardinal will operate with bi-level Superliner equipment and
will offer passengers both coach and sleeping car service.  The Superliner
sleeper contains deluxe and economy sleeping accommodations, a handicapped
accessible bedroom as well as a family bedroom that sleeps two adults and two
children.

Passengers utilizing the Kentucky Cardinal will be able to connect in Chicago
to Amtrak's national network of short and long-distance trains.  Same day
connections can be made at Chicago to the Californian Zephyr serving
Oakland/San Francisco, the Empire Builder serving Portland and Seattle, the
Southwest Chief serving Los Angeles, the Lake Shore Limited serving New York
and Boston, and numerous other trains to destinations throughout the country.

While Amtrak's core business will always be serving the needs of the
traveling public, its growing Mail and Express business supplements revenue
generated by passengers and improves Amtrak's overall financial performance.
Amtrak is also announcing that Mail and Express service will also be
available on the Kentucky Cardinal to businesses in the Louisville market.
Working in partnership with the Louisville & Indiana Railroad, Amtrak will
open a Mail and Express handling facility in Jeffersonville, Ind., to provide
fast and efficient service to customers in the Louisville area.

"We welcome this partnership with Amtrak to provide premium mail and express
service to a significant new market," said Peter Gilbertson, Chairman of the
L&I.  "We also welcome the return of rail passenger service to this line
after a 20-year hiatus."

Amtrak Mail and Express offers truck competitive service to West Coast and
East Coast points from Louisville.  Interested businesses can call
1-800-368-8725 for more information about Amtrak's Mail and Express program,
or the Louisville and Indiana Railroad at 812-288-0940, extension 3024.

Amtrak operates a 22,000-mile intercity passenger rail system, serving more
than 500 communities in 45 states.  Under Amtrak's new leadership, the
corporation is turning the corner to become a successful business enterprise.
As part of its turnaround, Amtrak is focusing on growing public and private
business partnerships, expanding its Mail and Express business, improving and
guaranteeing consistency and quality of service, introducing high-speed rail
in the Northeast, and developing other high-speed rail corridors nationwide.

Passengers wishing to travel on the Kentucky Cardinal or any other Amtrak
train can make reservations and obtain information on fares and schedules by
calling Amtrak's toll-free reservation and information number,
1-800-USA-RAIL. In addition, customers may visit a staffed Amtrak station or
see an authorized Amtrak travel agent for details on any Amtrak service.
Ticketing, schedules and service information are also available at the Amtrak
site on the World Wide Web at www.amtrak.com .

Southbound Kentucky Cardinal           Northbound Kentucky Cardinal

  Depart Chicago        8:10 p.m.        Arrive Chicago       10:05 a.m.

Dyer, Ind.            9:19 p.m.        Dyer, Ind.            8:15 a.m.

Rensselaer, Ind. CT  10:11 p.m.        Renssalaer, Ind. CT   7:24 a.m.

Lafayette, Ind. EST  12:18 p.m.        Lafayette, Ind. EST   7:21 a.m.

Crawfordsville, Ind. 12:50 a.m.        Crawfordsville, Ind.  6:47 a.m.

Indianapolis, Ind.    3:00 a.m.        Indianapolis, Ind.    5:41 a.m.

Arrive                                 Depart

Jeffersonville, Ind. 8:40 a.m.         Jeffersonville, Ind. 10:25 p.m.

SOURCE  Amtrak

CO:  Amtrak

ST:  Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky

IN:  TRN

SU:  PDT

12/02/1999 14:57 EST http://www.prnewswire.com

This is a long but, very interesting series of articles about Gary Airport
from the Chicago Tribune. The first two are articles written this week, the
last two are letters to the editor that ran today.  I think you will find
them interesting. AOL frequently hacks up large emails. I can send you a MS
Word file if you like.

GARY AIRPORT GROUNDING PEOTONE

DALEY CONVOYS HELP TO INDIANA, THWARTING RYAN

By John Schmeltzer, Tribune Staff Writer.

Published: Sunday, November 21, 1999

Section: BUSINESS

Page: 1

Take that, governor.

Flying under the radar of almost everyone, the mayors of Chicago and Gary may
have succeeded in turning an overlooked airstrip in Gary into a viable
commercial airport for metro Chicago, undermining Gov. George Ryan's push for
a brand new airport in the far south suburbs.

Through a multimillion-dollar lend/lease operation, Mayor Richard M. Daley
quietly has transferred surplus firefighting and de-icing equipment to the
Gary airport. The Chicago Department of Aviation also has lent Gary some of
its most talented personnel.

Already, some late-night cargo flights that have kept weary suburbanites
awake around O'Hare International Airport have been diverted to Gary and more
could be flying there once construction of an air-cargo facility that the
Chicago Aviation Department helped design is completed.

"The staff and the administration from the Chicago Department of Aviation
have been here time and time and time again to be of assistance," said Gary
Mayor Scott King. "No request has gone unanswered."

And last week, the mayors got the big payoff their administrations hoped for
when the cities signed a pact four years ago creating the Chicago/Gary
Regional Airport Authority, the vehicle through which nearly $6 million in
passenger-ticket tax revenue has been funneled to Gary from potential
projects at O'Hare and Midway Airports.

The little lakefront airport--now known as the Gary/Chicago Airport--became
the Chicago region's third commercial airport when the reborn Pan Am Airways
began scheduled service between Gary and airports near Boston and Orlando.

Aviation industry analysts and some politicos say Ryan's chances of building
another regional airport, in the cornfields outside Peotone, suffered a
perhaps fatal blow with Pan Am's move.

"This puts the Gary airport far ahead of the farmland they are talking about
for an airport near Peotone," King said.

David Balfour, a longtime aviation executive and now president and chief
executive of CityLink Airlines Inc., a start-up carrier, said Gary/Chicago
Airport has driven a stake through the heart of plans for a Peotone airport.

Balfour, who helped United Airlines launch its Pacific service after it
acquired routes from the old Pan Am, compares Gary/Chicago to the airport in
Newark, N.J., before discounter People Express Airlines put the neglected
facility on the map in 1980 in the early days of airline deregulation.

"Newark was a backwater with very little traffic and now it is bursting at
the gills," he said.

One reason that Newark has taken off is that in ideal traffic conditions, it
is a half-hour drive from Midtown Manhattan--about the same travel time along
the Chicago Skyway between Gary and Chicago's Loop. Newark and Gary may have
miserable reputations, but they are handy, he said, and that's what counts,
he said.

Still, some doubt whether Gary can pull it off.

"Gary can't make it on the long pull," said Don Goff, chairman of the Third
Airport Alliance, which supports construction of an airport near Peotone. "It
is just not feasible."

Goff said he was particularly disturbed that the Chicago Aviation Department,
unbeknownst to the alliance, has been supplying engineers and equipment to
help get the Gary airport ready.

"I can't believe that the mayor is taking our Chicago money and using it to
help a sister state," he said, "rather than do the right thing for Chicago
and Illinois."

Also, two previous attempts at providing commercial air service in Gary over
the last decade failed after only months because of lack of demand.

Ryan said he is unconcerned about what Daley and King have accomplished in
Gary.

"It does show that there is a need to be filled for air transportation in
that southern metro region," Ryan said. He said the state is still seeking
clearance from the Federal Aviation Administration to begin the environmental
and planning process.

But, he added: "As governor of the State of Illinois, I would like to see
that air transportation expansion and the regional benefits that accrue from
that to be here in Illinois."

Much of the work at Gary/Chicago Airport was done in preparation for next
year's launch of service by Balfour's airline. But efforts were accelerated
when Pan Am executives unexpectedly appeared on Gary's doorstep three months
ago to say they wanted to use the airport as their gateway to Chicago.

Unlike previous commuter service at the Gary Airport, such as United Express
service to Bloomington, Ill., that ended abruptly in 1992, the new Pan Am
service leapfrogs Gary/Chicago into the big leagues by providing
point-to-point service to more-popular destinations.

"This is what we call a metro-convenient airport," said David Fink, Pan Am's
president.

"You've got O'Hare here. It is a wonderful airport. Midway--it is a wonderful
airport, and Logan (International) in Boston. They are all taxed to the
limit," he said. "We see this as a great opportunity or we wouldn't be
putting our capital and effort here."

In addition to the initial service to Orlando and New Hampshire, the airline
is considering service to Las Vegas, Atlanta, Pittsburgh and perhaps Branson,
Mo.

Unlike for Midway Airport, the drive between Gary/Chicago and the Loop is
almost entirely on interstate highway.

And unlike O'Hare Airport, which is hemmed in by angry suburbs, Gary/Chicago
is surrounded by heavy industry and vacant marshland. It also sits on the
edge of a community that has suffered for decades as the steel industry has
shrunk its payrolls and that desperately wants the economic boost that
passenger air service can provide.

"We know this is really going to be the first cornerstone in some tremendous
economic development in the city and region," said Thomas Crump Jr.,
president of the Gary Chicago Airport Authority, an Indiana taxing agency
that has operated the 50-year-old airport for more than half its life.

The airport is near the Trump Casino in Gary's Buffington Harbor and only a
few miles from the other gambling boats docked along Lake Michigan's shore.
That could explain the nearly full plane Pan Am said it was expecting for
Saturday's flight to Gary/Chicago from the former Pease Air Force Base, where
the airline is headquartered, 60 miles north of Boston.

William Staehle, who says he was hired last year to help guide the
Gary/Chicago Airport through its early development phase, says the bi-state
agency has helped identify his airport's spot on the map.

"Our niche is to provide service of the variety and sort that currently flies
out of Midway. We won't do jumbo jets, therefore. We won't do international
flights, therefore."

But he noted that the airport already has more acreage and a longer runway
than Midway and therefore could do business similar to that of the Southwest
Side airport.

Gary/Chicago may be more than that soon--perhaps much more.

The airport is negotiating with a short-line freight railroad about
abandoning its spur that forms the west boundary of the airport. Abandonment
of the line would permit the airport to extend its main northwest-southeast
runway to 8,500 feet from its current 7,000. Gary officials are also discussin
g plans to relocate U.S. Highway 12 so its secondary runway could be
lengthened, too.

Staehle said he would like to clean up the automobile approaches to the
airport by purchasing many of the abandoned factories that line the north
side of Industrial Highway, Gary's name for U.S Highway 12, and replacing
them with airport-related businesses.

And next February, a consultant is expected to hand in a master plan, which
O'Hare ticket tax money has paid for, that Staehle says likely will call for
relocation of the terminal to the southwest corner of the airport, where more
than a dozen former Nike missile silos were located. That would put the
airport's terminal at Interstate Highway 90, speeding up access.

The new terminal would have at least 12 gates, up from three today, as well
as jet bridges, which airline passengers have come to expect.

"If Pan Am begins to show any success at all, other air carriers will be
required to take note and in their own interest they will be here looking for
slots and gates to fly out of Gary," Staehle said.

That may take a while, however. Thursday's flight from Orlando only had two
paying passengers, while the flight to Portsmouth an hour later left empty.

But the folks behind the new Pan Am have deep pockets. Pan American Airways
Corp. is a subsidiary of the privately held Guilford Transportation Co.,
which now profitably operates the Boston & Maine Railroad. Its chairman is
Tim Mellon, a member of the Mellon family that for years owned the Mellon
Bank in Pittsburgh.

Gary/Chicago Airport also has Daley behind it, and the Chicago mayor doesn't
seem ready to bow to the governor over the issue of airports.

Copyright 1998, The Tribune Company. Unauthorized reproduction prohibited.
The Tribune Company archives are stored on a SAVE (tm) newspaper library
system from MediaStream, Inc., a Knight-Ridder Inc. company.

BACKERS STAND BY PEOTONE PLAN AS GARY JET SERVICE TAKES OFF

By Stanley Ziemba and Bob Merrifield, Tribune Staff Writers.

Published: Thursday, November 25, 1999

Section: METRO SOUTHWEST

Page: 18

The start of jet passenger service at the Gary/Chicago Airport last week
doesn't appear to have dimmed support among south and southwest suburban
officials for a third Chicago airport near Peotone.

U.S. Reps. Jerry Weller (R-Ill.), Jesse Jackson Jr. (D-Ill.) and other
Peotone site proponents say they aren't buying industry analysts' predictions
that the beginning of scheduled commercial flights by Pan American Airways
from Gary to Orlando, Fla., and Portsmouth, N.H., eliminates the need for a
new airport in the south suburbs.

If anything, it is evidence of the need for more airport capacity to relieve
overcrowding at O'Hare International and Midway Airports, Weller said in an
interview this week.

"With air travel expected to double over the next 10 to 15 years, there is a
real need for a third airport in the Chicago area," Weller said. "Gary might
be OK for the time being, but it's surrounded by wetlands and, therefore,
landlocked. As a result, it can't be significantly expanded to accommodate
future air traffic growth. Moreover, there are environmental concerns."

The Gary airport is part of the Chicago-Gary Regional Airport Authority,
created in 1995 by Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, an opponent of the Peotone
site, to prevent Republican state legislators from creating their own
authority that would control O'Hare and Midway and pave the way for
constructing a third airport near Peotone.

As a member of the authority, the Gary airport receives about $1.5 million a
year in passenger fees collected at Midway and O'Hare, a fact that perturbs
Weller and other supporters of a Peotone airport.

"We're sending our money to another state," Weller said. "I can't help but
wonder about that."

The Federal Aviation Administration under President Clinton has refused to
move forward on the Peotone airport, favored by Gov. George Ryan and other
state Republican leaders. In fact, the FAA has declined to provide funding to
undertake a study of the feasibility or environmental impact of an airport
near Peotone.

But that likely will change if Republicans take control of the White House,
Weller predicted, adding that he was confident that Texas Gov. George W.
Bush, the GOP front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination next
year, will be president in 2001.

GARY'S CHARMS

John Gaitskill

November 26, 1999

PARK FOREST -- I bought a ticket on PanAm's first flight out of Gary, Ind.,
to Sanford, Fla., on Nov. 17. Anyone in the south suburbs or Northwest
Indiana who needs to go to central Florida or New England now has a better
choice than Midway or O'Hare. Close-in free parking, easy roadway access,
uncrowded terminal. Increasing both airline service out of Gary and rail
service to closer cities should take care of Chicago's transportation needs,
obviating the need for plowing under Illinois fields for another airport.

CHICAGO'S NEWARK

Peter M. Altman

November 26, 1999

WHEATON -- "I can't believe that the Mayor (Daley) is taking our Chicago
money and using it to help a sister state," says Don Goff of the Third
Airport Alliance (Business, Nov. 21). "Nuts!" says I.

The $8 million from O'Hare and Midway taxes to help fire up the Gary airport
is chump change compared to the huge amount of tax money--from all Illinois
taxpayers--that will go into environmental and transportation studies, and
legal and consultants fees, before even one soybean plant is plucked for
Peotone.

Where is Peotone? Gary airport is right off of Interstate 80/94, the Chicago
Skyway, Interstate 65, the Chicago, South Shore and South Bend commuter
railway and major cross-country freight rail lines.

In terms of economic development, not only Gary but the vast southeast side
of Chicago and nearby Cook County and Illinois' south suburbs, all hard-hit
for years by steel mills rusting out, will get a much-needed economic shot in
the arm.

The suburban-area folks should get off their high horses about O'Hare expansio
n noise and go back to work for their schools, streets and roads. Air cargo
and its coincident truck traffic can go to Gary, taking the noise, traffic
and air pollution pressures off of their towns' residents. It all sounds and
smells good to me--and Peotone can stay quiet, bucolic and truck- and air
pollution-free.

To Gov. George Ryan, Goff, and all you others who have been plugging to pave
the soybean fields, it's time to wrap it up, use common sense and support a
"sister state" transportation alliance. It's worked well for years for New
York and New Jersey and it can work here even better. For one thing, you
won't get stuck in Lincoln Tunnel traffic.

In a message dated 11/26/99 9:48:05, narp@... writes:

<< To all NARP Members, November 26, 1999 --

On Monday, the price of crude oil topped $27 a barrel, the highest level

since the Persian Gulf War.  This compares with just under $11 in
December, 1998.

On Tuesday, many newspapers carried reports of what amounts to a
campaign for more highway construction by the American Highway Users
Alliance.  Fortunately, some coverage included alternate views, such as
from the Surface Transportation Policy Project.

The Washington Post put the oil story at the top of page A1 (left
column),
while the highway story was the lead in the Metro section, keying off
local intersections identified in the AHUA report.  USA Today's lead
story was "National Gridlock," and was accompanied by a fine-print
complete listing (page 16A) of the intersections.

Particularly if your local newspaper covered either the oil or gridlock
stories, you may want to write a letter to the editor which draws from
items on energy supply in our October-November and December
newsletters.  In a letter I sent today to USA Today, I noted that road
construction induces new traffic.  I-270 in suburban Montgomery County
(MD) became "a rolling parking lot" less than eight years after a $200
million widening project that included up to 12 lanes in some places.
The Washington Post on January 4, 1999, reported that Robert S. McGarry,

the former county transportation director who pushed the project, said
"I just didn't in my wildest dreams think it would fill up that fast."

I concluded by noting the importance of developing energy-efficient
passenger rail, and of land-use planning and road pricing that
encourages people to rely on public transportation.  Perhaps you can
think of local angles for your newspaper.

The same USA Today also carried two letters about airline passengers
'behaving badly.'  One woman noted that she used to fly if the drive was

over three hours.  She now drives "longer trips, just because passengers

are getting increasingly rude and aggressive, and I can't stand to see
myself act like that."  A second letter blames airlines for crowding
passengers closer and closer together.  These letters underline an
opening for passenger rail!  If you would like to make that point in a
letter to USA Today, the address is <editor@...>.

Hope your Thanksgiving was pleasant!

Ross B. Capon,
NARP Executive Director >>

Chicago meeting planned "before the end of February 2000."

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Wednesday, November 17, 1999
Contact: Bill Adams
Telephone: 202-366-5580
DOT 189-99

U.S. Transportation Secretary Slater Announces
Community Forums on Safety, Quality of Life

         U.S. Transportation Secretary Rodney E. Slater today announced a
series of regional community building forums focusing
on safety issues and livable communities.  They will take place in New
York; Denver; Seattle; Boston; Kansas City, Mo.;
Houston; Los Angeles; San Francisco; Philadelphia; and Chicago before
the end of February 2000.

         "These community forums will help advance President Clinton's
and Vice President Gore's comprehensive livability
agenda to help communities across America grow in ways that ensure a
high quality of life and strong, sustainable economic
growth," Secretary Slater said.  "Safety begins in our communities, and
these forums will be an especially effective
opportunity to improve safety, our highest transportation priority."

         An expected outcome from each forum is an action plan to address
transportation safety and livability issues in
communities in each region. Secretary Slater made a commitment to host
the forums during the U.S. Department of
Transportation's National Transportation Safety Conference in Washington
in March 1999.

         The first of the 11 forums in the series took place Oct. 19 in
Atlanta, where regional and community leaders, interested groups, and
transportation officials focused on pedestrian safety as a
result of a rash of pedestrian fatalities there.

         Participants, including Gloria Jeff (deputy administrator of the

Federal Highway Administration, representing Secretary Slater) and
Atlanta Mayor Bill Campbell as well as other  key federal,
state and local officials, signed a memorandum of understanding to
establish a framework for cooperation and action.  That
memorandum outlines four areas of concentration:  driver and pedestrian
education, improved engineering, city planning and
enforcement of pedestrian and driver laws.  The specific goal of the
Atlanta memorandum and pedestrian forum was to save
lives and reduce the number of pedestrian injuries.

         In conjunction with the forum, Georgia underscored the strength
of the local commitment to safety by announcing its Drive
Civilized Georgia campaign, a statewide public information and
enforcement effort.

         The U.S. Department of Transportation holds that walking instead
of driving has strong beneficial community effects such
as improved air quality, increased mobility, better physical health and
reduced vehicular traffic.

         A list of upcoming community forums and their topics can
be accessed through the Department's Internet Briefing Room at
http://www.dot.gov/briefing.htm

                                 ###

         Visit the DOT Public Affairs Web Site at:
                 http://www.dot.gov/briefing.htm

If your Governor is on the list below, please send a thank you letter.
If not, please send a letter asking him or her to join the effort.

Thanks
Rick
_______
National Railroad Passenger Corporation
60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Fourth Floor
Washington D.C. 20002-4285
www.amtrak.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: John Wolf
(202) 906-3860
ATK-99-182
November 17, 1999



MORE THAN HALF THE NATION'S GOVERNORS URGE PRESIDENT CLINTON TO SUPPORT
FULL FUNDING OF AMTRAK FOR FISCAL YEAR 2001
Governors Want Funds To Support High-Speed Rail Corridors
WASHINGTON--Amtrak today applauded the bipartisan efforts of 26
governors urging President Clinton to include full funding for Amtrak in
his FY2001 Budget Request. Full funding of the nation's intercity
passenger railroad at the authorized level -- $989 million -- is
essential if Amtrak is to continue the building of high-speed rail
corridors across the country, generating significant transportation and
economic benefits as well as relief from road and airport congestion.
Corridor development is one of the five major components in the
corporation's business plan that will enable Amtrak to achieve
operational self-sufficiency.

"States have always been the laboratories for solving the nation's
transportation challenges," said George Warrington, Amtrak's president
and chief executive officer. "A growing number of governors have
recognized that high-speed rail service is the solution to road and
airport congestion. Amtrak is working actively with the governors to
meet that demand."

The 26 governors, including 13 Democrats, 11 Republicans, one Reform and
one Independent, signed a letter to President Clinton writing that
federal funds are needed for high-speed rail development. "Currently,
throughout the country, there are high-speed rail programs of immense
potential, which will shortly be ready for preliminary engineering and
final engineering work and initiate the procurement of new equipment.
While states are prepared to share in the funding of the programs,
Federal high-speed rail funding is essential."

The governors of the following 26 states wrote President Clinton
requesting full funding for Amtrak: Alabama, California, Connecticut,
Delaware, Georgia, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New York, North
Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Vermont,
Virginia, Washington, West Virginia and Wisconsin.

State demand for improved passenger rail service has increased momentum
in past few weeks. Amtrak and Pennsylvania unveiled a $140 million
partnership to build high-speed rail between Philadelphia and
Harrisburg, Pa. The states of Illinois, Michigan and Wisconsin announced
plans to purchase high-speed trains. And, Virginia Governor James
Gilmore announced his state's intention to upgrade the line between
Richmond, Va., and Washington, D.C., to connect with Amtrak's new Acela
  high-speed service in the Northeast.

Amtrak operates a 22,000-mile intercity passenger rail system, serving
more than 500 communities in 45 states. Under Amtrak's new leadership,
the corporation is turning the corner to become a successful business
enterprise. As part of its turnaround, Amtrak is focusing on growing
public and private business partnerships, improving and guaranteeing
consistency and quality of service, introducing high-speed rail in the
Northeast, and developing other high-speed rail corridors nationwide.

Source:  Amtrak

In a message dated 11/17/99 5:10:29, AOL News writes:

<< Traffic Clogs U.S. Urban Centers

.c The Associated Press

  By TOM VERDIN

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Brake lights may be the sight Southern California
commuters dread most.

Like strings of unwelcome holiday lights spread across freeways, they're
something Steve Tillett sees all too often. In his 22 years as a United
Parcel Service driver, he has seen his commute of about 21 miles increase
from 20 minutes to more than an hour.

``You can't get anywhere these days,'' he said Tuesday after making a
delivery in Rosemead, east of Los Angeles. ``It's unbelievable. There's just
too many people here in Southern California.''

And they're spending a lot of time staring at another vehicle's trunk,
according to a study released Tuesday.

Los Angeles-area commuters spend 82 hours each per year stuck in traffic,
ranking the region No. 1 nationwide in freeway frustration. Los Angeles has
been tops in the dubious category every year since 1982, when the Texas
Transportation Institute at Texas A&M University began its study.

The study found that in Los Angeles, congestion forces drivers to spend about
50 percent more time in their vehicles during peak travel periods than they
otherwise would. For drivers in the San Francisco Bay area - ranked third
worse for congestion - the increase is about 40 percent.

Like so many other drivers, Raul Hernandez tries to combat Southern
California's clogged freeways by trying to avoid them.

Hernandez, who has delivered baked goods in the San Gabriel Valley for 13
years, has created his own survival guide - a route index showing how to
reach his nine stores while touching freeways only once.

``As soon as you see taillights ahead of you, get off as soon as you can,''
he said. ``Sometimes you have to take a residential street at 25 mph ... But
it's better to take 25 than zero.''

Learning to adapt will become even more important. Over the next 20 years,
Los Angeles, Orange and surrounding counties are expected to add 6 million
people to the approximately 16 million already there.

The bulk of growth will be in cities on the northern and eastern fringes of
the Los Angeles sprawl, said Jeff Lustgarten, spokesman for the Southern
California Association of Governments.

``You're going to have that many more people commuting long distance every
day,'' he said. ``It's a fairly frightening prospect.''

Potential solutions include building dedicated lanes for big-rig trucks,
developing high-speed rail and charging drivers for entering freeways during
peak travel times. The California Trucking Association advocates building
more highways, and keeping existing roads in better shape.

But freeway construction isn't the answer, said Gloria Ohland of the Los
Angeles office of the Surface Transportation Policy Project, a national
transportation policy group.

Within five years, 90 percent of new freeways built in California
metropolitan areas fill with new traffic, she said.

``We just get in this cycle where we build more roads, and more cars come out
to use the roads,'' Ohland said. ``Build it, and they will come.''

It's a pattern that Gene Reinhardt, 58, has seen repeated during more than 30
years of driving Southern California freeways. He takes only streets on his
rounds as an electronic technician.

``It's just an automatic nightmare,'' he said. ``People don't even talk about
it anymore. It's just something we have to go do.

AP-NY-11-17-99 0510EST

  Copyright 1999 The Associated Press.  The information  contained in the AP
news report may not be published,  broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
distributed without  prior written authority of The Associated Press.
  >>

Copyright 1999 News World Communications, Inc.
                                        The Washington Times
                               November 10, 1999, Wednesday, Final Edition

SECTION: PART B; BUSINESS; Pg. B8

HEADLINE: Gilmore's budget to earmark funds for high-speed rail;  Service to
Richmond eyed
BYLINE: Chip Jones; RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH

    RICHMOND - Prospects for 110-mph train service between Richmond and
Washington are accelerating after exchanges
between Gov. James S. Gilmore III and the head of Amtrak.
In a little-noticed announcement Oct. 28, George D. Warrington, Amtrak
president and chief executive officer, said the national passenger railroad
"expects to be a financial partner in new high-speed rail service between
Richmond and Washington."
Amtrak's support is crucial to creating 90-minute train service from
Richmond to Union Station in Washington, knocking an hour off the current
trip, as well as increase the number of trains business people and tourists
could catch between the cities. With state and federal backing, Virginia's
first high-speed rail service could roll by 2006.   Mr. Warrington told Mr.
Gilmore that Amtrak "strongly supports development of the Richmond corridor,
and we want to continue to assist you in this process in any way we can."
Amtrak's goal is "to invest directly in the new high-speed trains that would
operate between Richmond and New York-Boston," Mr. Warrington said.

The top speed of 110 mph in Virginia's part of Amtrak's system would be
slightly less than the 125-mph pace of Metroliner
trains that zip from Washington to New York, according to company spokesman
John Wolf.   The state's goal is to get service of 125 mph to 150 mph from
Richmond to Washington.

Richmonders who travel by rail to Washington, or stops along the way, plod
along at the speed of freight - no more than 70
mph and often far slower.
Mr. Gilmore is expected to propose a $2.5 billion transportation package to
the 2000 General Assembly. His plan is weighted toward road construction and
improvements but includes dollars for high-speed rail.  He said faster
Richmond-Washington rail service could help take motorists off the highways,
easing road congestion in Northern Virginia.

The new service would dovetail with the Virginia Railway Express, the
commuter rail service between Washington and
Northern Virginia's southern and western suburbs.

Amtrak's Mr. Warrington stopped short of putting a price tag on the
railroad's commitment to the project. By year's end, he said, "Amtrak will
have completed an internal analysis of the market potential for the Richmond
corridor."  After that, Amtrak's board of directors "will determine how much
the corporation will invest in new equipment," Mr. Warrington said.  The
investment would buy locomotives and passenger cars. The railroad won't pay
for new track or signals, leaving that to the state and federal governments.

Leo J. Bevon, director of the state department of rail and public
transportation, said only two Washington-bound trains
originate each day in Richmond.  (My addition: also served by 3 Florida
trains and 2 trains to Newport News).  The state is promoting hourly train
service between the cities during the day, especially at peak commuting
times in the morning and evening.

Under the state's plan, the high-speed rail service would pull into a
renovated Main Street Station downtown.
The state has estimated high-speed rail development would cost at least $370
million. If the state financed 40 percent, it would cost $25 million a year
between now and 2006, Mr. Bevon said.  "We think that if the state puts up
its share, we can go to the federal government and it will put up its share
of the money," Mr. Bevon said.

"This is the very first time in my memory that a sitting governor of
Virginia has publicly gone on record as favoring an aggressive plan to bring
better rail service at high speed to Richmond," said Richard L. Beadles,
executive director of the Virginia High-Speed Rail Development Committee.  >>

National Railroad Passenger Corporation
60 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Fourth Floor
Washington D.C. 20002-4285
www.amtrak.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: John Wolf (Amtrak)
(202) 906-3860
Retha Sherrod (Sen. Lautenberg)
(202) 224-5885
ATK-99-180
November 10, 1999

AMTRAK CAPITAL FUNDING BILL COULD HELP EXPAND HIGH-SPEED RAIL NATIONWIDE

Bipartisan Tax-credit Bonding Bill Worth $10 Billion Introduced by Senator
Lautenberg, Cosponsored by 21 Others
WASHINGTON--Amtrak President George Warrington today expressed enthusiastic
support for a bill that would give the national passenger railroad authority
to sell up to $10 billion in bonds whose revenue would finance high-speed
rail corridors around the country. Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) today
introduced S 1900, "The High-Speed Rail Investment Act." The bill would give
tax credits to purchasers of the bonds, which would be issued by Amtrak to
raise capital for development of high-speed rail corridors. Twenty-one
Senators co-sponsored the bill (see attached list).
"Amtrak appreciates Senator Lautenberg's tremendous support for passenger
rail over the years, and I think American travelers are going to thank him
too, when high-speed rail begins to loosen the grip of transportation
gridlock in various regions of the country," said Warrington. "This creative,
bipartisan legislation demonstrates that rail travel is finally being broadly
recognized around the country as an efficient, cost-effective alternative to
more highway and airport construction, which has failed to ease congestion,"
he added.
The "High-Speed Rail Investment Act" would enable Amtrak to sell $10 billion
in high-speed rail bonds over 10 years. The funds would be used to upgrade
existing routes, construct new dedicated high-speed rail tracks, purchase
locomotives and passenger coaches, as well as for capital improvement to the
existing high-speed rail corridor in the Northeast. Investors would receive
federal tax credits based on the amount of their bond purchases.
At the time the legislation was being drafted, Amtrak board chairman Gov.
Tommy Thompson said, "These senators have seized the day, crafting an
important measure that will support the grassroots movement growing
nationwide to improve and expand rail service."
"The next millennium will usher in America's rail renaissance with the
introduction of Acela Express in the Northeast," said Gov. Mike Dukakis,
Amtrak's vice-chairman. "This bill will help speed the delivery of high-speed
rail service to other corridors nationwide."
Introduction of the legislation in the Senate follows by two weeks Amtrak's
announcement that its bottom-line financial result for fiscal year 1999 (Oct.
1, 1998-Sept. 30, 1999) surpassed the target set in its business plan by $8
million, meaning Amtrak is on course to achieve operational self-sufficiency
by 2003. The corporation reported record total revenue of $1.84 billion. For
the first time, Amtrak's ridership has increased three consecutive years with
ridership this year up 2 percent.
Amtrak operates a 22,000-mile intercity passenger rail system, serving more
than 500 communities in 45 states. Under Amtrak's new leadership, the
corporation is turning the corner to become a successful business enterprise.
As part of its turnaround, Amtrak is focusing on growing public and private
business partnerships, improving and guaranteeing consistency and quality of
service, introducing high-speed rail in the Northeast, and developing other
high-speed rail corridors nationwide.
Cosponsors of "The High-Speed Rail Investment Act," S1900
Senators:

*   Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.)
*   Daniel Patrick Moynihan (D-N.Y.)
*   James Jeffords (R-Vt.)
*   John Kerry (D-Mass.)
*   Max Cleland (D-Ga.)
*   Joseph Biden (D-Del.)
*   Barbara Boxer (D-Cal.)
*   Herb Kohl (D-Wis.)
*   Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.)
*   Charles Robb (D-Va.)
*   Paul Sarbanes (D-Md.)
*   Robert Toricelli (D-N.J.)
*   Arlen Specter (R-Pa.)
*   Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.)
*   Bob Graham (D-Fla.)
*   Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.)
*   Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.)
*   Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.)
*   Mike DeWine (R-Ohio)
*   Carl Levin (D-Mich.)
*   Olympia Snowe (R-Me.)

Senator Launtenberg introduced a bill last week designed to raise capital
funds for rail projects around the country.  He is currently looking to get a
enough cosponsors to keep the bill moving during recess. (Recess starts
Wednesday.)

Please phone or fax your Senator today!  Tell him or her that you support
both this bill and S1144, the TEA-21 corrections bill.  Calls to Durbin and
Fitzgerald are particularly valuable.

Following are the name address phone and fax for Senators in the MWRRI
states.  Or go to www.vote-smart.org

Below the Senator info I have included a summery of the bill.

If you get any feedback when you call, please let me know.

Thanks,  Rick Harnish, Midwest High Speed Rail Coalition, 312-409-7723


IL  Richard Durbin  Senator US Senate   364 Russell Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-2152    202-228-0400
IL  Peter   Fitzgerald  Senator US Senate   B40-5 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-2854    202-228-1372
IN  Richard Lugar   Senator US Senate   306 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-4814
IN  Evan    Bayh    Senator US Senate   B40-2 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-5623
IA  Charles Grassley    Senator US Senate   135 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-3744    202-224-6020
IA  Tom Harkin  Senator US Senate   731 Hart Senate Building    Washington
DC  20510   202-224-3254    202-224-9369
MI  Spencer Abraham Senator US Senate   329 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-4822    202-224-8834
MI  Carl    Levin   Senator US Senate   459 Russell Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-6221    202-224-1388
MN  Rod Grams   Senator US Senate   257 Dirksen Senate Building Washington
DC  20510   202-224-3244    202-228-0956
MN  Paul    Wellstone   Senator US Senate   136 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-5641    202-224-8438
MO  John    Ashcroft    Senator US Senate   316 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-6154    202-228-0998
MO  Christopher Bond    Senator US Senate   274 Russell Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-5721    202-224-8149
NE  Chuck   Hagel   Senator US Senate   346 Russell Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-4224    202-224-5213
NE  Bob Kerrey  Senator US Senate   141 Hart Senate Building    Washington
DC  20510   202-224-6551    202-224-7645
OH  Mike    DeWine  Senator US Senate   140 Russell Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-2315    202-224-6519
OH  George  Voinovich   Senator US Senate   B-34 Dirksen Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-3353    202-228-1382
WI  Russ    Feingold    Senator US Senate   716 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-5323    202-224-2725
WI  Herb    Kohl    Senator US Senate   330 Hart Senate Building
Washington  DC  20510   202-224-5653    202-224-9787

High Speed Rail Investment Act

Authorizes Amtrak to sell $10 billion in high speed rail bonds over ten years
for the purpose of developing high speed rail corridors across the nation.
This leveraging of private sector investment would allow Amtrak to complete
outstanding capital improvements on the Northeast Corridor and bring faster,
better, more frequent service to eight federally designated high speed
corridors.
Benefits of the Legislation

*   Reduces congestion on our roads and runways.

*   Creates jobs and spurs economic growth through enhanced mobility and
productivity.

*   Promotes smart growth through the economic development of downtown urban
centers.

*   Preserves open space, protects the environment and improves air quality.

*   Puts passenger rail on the same playing field as other transportation
modes and strengthens our intermodal transportation system

Details of the Proposal

*   Authorizes Amtrak to sell $10 billion in high speed rail bonds between FY
2001 and FY 2010.

*   Federal Government provides tax credits to bondholders in lieu of
interest payments.

*   Amtrak is authorized to invest this money on 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.
In addition, these funds may be used for capital upgrades to existing high
speed rail corridors.

*   Up to five 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 the bond principal by the trust would be assured by a
separate guaranteed investment contract.

*   State funds contributed in excess of the 20 percent minimum could go
directly towards funding projects.  The State requirement ensures that Amtrak
will invest these funds in only the most economically viable projects.

Ohio's Greatest Home Newspaper

The Columbus Dispatch

Split vote means rail plan is dead

By Phil Porter
Dispatch Staff Reporter
Nov. 3, 1999
A split decision for COTA at the polls yesterday means buses will roll but
commuter trains will not.
Status-quo bus service will continue with minimal expansion.
Voters rejected doubling COTA's current tax base, approving Issue 20 but
rejecting Issue 21.
The Central Ohio Transit Authority succeeded in passing a permanent 0.25
percent sales tax, replacing its existing 10-year tax of the same size that
expires Jan. 31.
But the loss of Issue 21, a 10-year, 0.25 percent tax, means COTA will not be
able to double bus service hours or build eight commuter rail lines by 2020.
"I am disappointed," said COTA General Manager Ronald L. Barnes. "But the
community also did something very historic by for the first time providing a
permanent funding source for transit."
COTA now is smaller in bus-service hours and funding than it was in 1985,
Barnes said. But he promised the authority will work hard to stretch every
dollar.
COTA will return to the polls at some point with another expansion plan but
probably not next year, Barnes said. First, it must assess what voters were
saying before mounting another expensive campaign.
With just one of the two taxes passing, there is not enough money to build
any of the rail lines or provide any meaningful bus expansion, COTA spokesman
Kent Carson said.
"What voters were saying is they want mass transit, but they want an
effective mass transit," said opponent Richard Sheir, who had hammered away
at the issues of empty buses and inefficiency.
Sheir urged COTA to consolidate routes, impose a six-month moratorium on any
new routes and perhaps come back to the ballot after careful study with one
proposed demonstration rail line.
COTA plans to proceed with building a Downtown transportation terminal that
would be "bare bones," not for commuter trains but for the proposed
Columbus-to-Cleveland passenger train, Carson said.
The authority also plans to go ahead with construction of a transit center at
the Easton development on the Northeast Side, but 15 others will not be built.
The first of the eight commuter rail lines was proposed for introduction in
2005 between Downtown and Crosswoods Center on the Far North Side.
Bus service hours would have been doubled to make transit more convenient.
This is the second time in four years bus expansion was rejected.
The loss of Issue 21 was attributable, in part, to the ambiguity of the
ballot language that failed to spell out what each issue was for, said Curt
Steiner, the COTA campaign's lead consultant.
A decision last spring to seek two sales taxes, one permanent and one for 10
years, instead of one tax might have played a role in yesterday's partial
defeat, said Herb Asher, an emeritus professor of political science at Ohio
State University. But there was no guarantee that if COTA had sought an
all-or-nothing 0.5 percent permanent sales tax that COTA would have found
that easier to sell.
Some in the business community pushed for the two-tax compromise, including
one tax for a fixed number of years, as a way to maintain accountability.
COTA needed overwhelming support of central-city voters, those most likely to
be bus riders, to win both issues. It achieved strong support in the city,
but failed to win enough suburban support.

 Copyright © 1999 The Providence Journal Company
10.30.99 00:22:23
Acela repairs in motion, Amtrak says
By RUSSELL GARLAND
Journal Staff Writer

The companies building Amtrak's new Acela Express trains have told the
railroad that they have figured out how to fix the wheel problem that has
delayed the high-speed service.

But Amtrak wants further tests before setting a launch date for the trains,
according to Amtrak spokesman Rick Remington.

The railroad is trying to avoid any further embarrassment after announcing
almost two months ago that the start of the much-touted service would be
delayed from late this year until next spring.

``We want it done right,'' Remington said of the corrective measures.

Amtrak and the consortium of Bombardier Transportation, North America and
ALSTOM, which is building the trains, have said the problem is a maintenance
issue, not a safety one.

Tests in Colorado on the first of the 20 trains found that the passenger
coach wheels were wearing faster than expected. ALSTOM, the French company
that is building the coaches, has been working on modifications to the cars
to reduce wheel wear.

The consortium, which faces penalties for the delivery delay, had 60 days to
set a new delivery date for the trains. That time is about up.

Remington said that before agreeing on a date, Amtrak wants to ensure the
problem is fixed based on further tests on the two completed trains, one in
Colorado, the other in the Northeast. The latter train was recently in Rhode
Island testing the overhead electric lines south of Providence.

Remington said Amtrak still expects to begin Acela Express service between
Washington and Boston this spring. The trains, which will reach 150 mph, will
travel between Boston and New York in three hours, stopping in Providence.

``We're more than confident for spring 2000,'' said Gilles Pag , spokesman
from the Montreal-based Bombardier.

Pag declined to go into detail about what the consortium is doing to fix the
problem, saying various measures are involved and more tests are required.
``It's going well, we can affirm,'' he said.

Amtrak also has not set a precise schedule for replacing diesel locomotives
with electric ones on its regular trains between Boston and New Haven, Conn.
This will cut the trip time between Boston and New York to less than four
hours, about an hour faster than when trains must change engines in New
Haven. Remington said the all-electric service will begin in mid-January.

Meanwhile, Amtrak has announced the highest total annual revenue in its
28-year history. Revenue for the fiscal year ending Sept. 30 was $1.84
billion, up 7 percent from the previous year. This was $8 million more than
its business plan, marking the second consecutive year that the company has
exceeded revenue expectations.

The railroad still lost $476 million, but said it is on course to end its
need for federal operating subsidies by the end of 2002. Getting the
high-speed Acela service on track is essential to achieving this goal.

For the transcript of this show go to:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/transportation/july-dec99/amtrak_10-27.html

HSGTA Applauds Lautenberg High Speed Rail Investment Act
U.S. Newswire
28 Oct 17:19
HSGTA Applauds Senator Lautenberg's Bipartisan High Speed Rail Investment Act
To: National Desk, Transportation Reporter
Contact: Anne Chettle of the High Speed Ground Transportation Association,
202-789-8107
WASHINGTON, Oct. 28 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Sen. Frank Lautenberg
(D-NJ) unveiled a bipartisan "High Speed Rail Investment Act."
Joining him were the bill's co-sponsors, Sen. Daniel Patrick
Moynihan (D-NY), Sen. Max Cleland (D-GA) and Sen. John Kerry
(D-MA), as well as Amtrak Chairman Wisconsin Gov. Tommy Thompson,
Amtrak Vice Chairman former Governor Michael Dukakis and Amtrak
President George Warrington.
The bill would enable Amtrak to sell $10 billion in high speed
rail bonds over ten years to help develop and improve the high
speed rail corridors across the nation. Specifically, the private
sector funds would allow continuing improvements to the Northeast
high speed corridor and further development to high speed corridors
in the Midwest, Southeast, Gulf Coast, California and the Pacific
Northwest.
Proclaiming the "comfort, reliability and ease" of high speed
rails, Sen. Lautenberg emphasized that the U.S. is overwhelmed
by congestion, pollution and gridlock, and needs an alternative to
airplanes and cars. Lautenberg, Gov. Thompson and Sen. Moynihan
all emphasized the necessity of capital to make our railroads
in the same league as those overseas.
Sen. Cleland talked of Atlanta, which has the distinction of
having the worst traffic congestion in the South. Building on his
colleagues' comments, Sen. Kerry talked of the billions of
dollars lost each year in productivity because of pandemic traffic
congestion. He also urged the U.S. to "invest properly in the
infrastructure," and not continue to spend the least of any country
on rolling stock. Former Gov. Dukakis concluded the
presentation by urging the crowd that high speed rail is not "pie
in the sky," and is "absolutely critical to the future of this
country."
Other bill co-sponsors not present at the presentation include
Sens. Jim Jeffords (R-VT) and Joseph Biden, Jr (D-DE).
High Speed Ground Transportation Association President Mark
Dysart was encouraged by the bill and stated: "This demonstrates
how high speed rail has really come to the forefront in the
nation's consciousness." He continued by saying "for the U.S. to
avoid being paralyzed by gridlock on the roads and winglock in the
skies, capital investment in high speed rail is an absolute
necessity."
HSGTA is a trade association that promotes the development and
implementation of high speed ground transport systems in the United
States. Its members include industry suppliers, engineers,
consultants, unions, public officials and members of the public.
-0-
/U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
10/28 17:19
 
Copyright 1999, U.S. Newswire

This appeared in the Editorial section of the Chicago Tribune, Wednesday 20

THE MAINSTREAMING OF URBAN SPRAWL

Geneva Overholster, Washington Post Writers Group.


WASHINGTON
    You can tell a movement's gone mainstream by the way people talk about it:
"I'm not a feminist, but . . ." say countless converts to women's rights.
Now, opponents of sprawl have followed suit, and with similar catchwords:
"I'm not a tree-hugger, but . . ."
    Take Georgia Gov. Roy Barnes, who promised to fight sprawl and did: He
created an agency with strong powers over zoning, roads and transit in
Atlanta's 13-county area. And how did he explain himself to Newsweek last
summer? "I'm no tree-hugger . . . my pitch to the business community is, this
is about money for schools and cities, to grow the state."
    Or consider "Challenging Sprawl," a report by the National Trust for
Historic Preservation, beginning with these quotes: "An `unrelenting pathogen
. . . sucking the marrow from our cities and towns.' `A strange collection of
objects flung across the landscape.' `It creates the conditions for social
decay and behavioral pathology.' " These words, the report continues, "come
not from tree-hugging environmentalists, but from a businessman, a real
estate developer and a clinical psychologist."
    Sprawl presents big, practical problems, and its opponents are now seeking
practical, market-oriented solutions--though their effort to get the market
on their side is, so far, incomplete.
    First, though, the problems: Sprawl is expensive. Roads go unrepaired in
one part of the state even as they're built pell-mell elsewhere. Sound school
buildings fall into disuse while new ones are put up across town.
    Sprawl is also inconvenient. Atlantans drive an average of 36.5 miles
round trip to work daily, according to that Newsweek article. In Dallas, the
commute is 29.5 miles; in Los Angeles, 20.5.
    And sprawl is greedy with resources: From 1972 to 1992, Michigan lost
farmland equal to all the land in Maryland, said the National Trust report.
Minnesota is losing an average of 74 acres a day. Ninety-five percent of
California's original wetlands are gone. Every day in Florida, 450 acres of
forest and 410 acres of farmland are cleared. And water tables under
Dallas-Ft. Worth, says the Cato Institute, have dropped 492 feet since 1960.
    This lavish use of resources is part of a national penchant for gobbling
things up and throwing things away, says Susan Strasser in "Waste and Want: A
Social History of Trash." Americans have come to believe, she said in
Washington this week, that "there are whole realms of . . . what we `deserve'
in our relationship with the material world."
    One of our "deserts" being wide-open spaces, the cities left behind have
atrophied. The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development last summer
reported that between 1970 and 1996, America's suburban population grew more
than four times faster than its central-city population.
    Here is another battleground for anti-sprawl forces. As Jonathan Barnett,
planner and author of "The Fractured Metropolis," said recently at the
National Building Museum, "Cities have begun to put themselves back
together." He said Cleveland's revitalization, for example, "demonstrates
that there is still a future for these old urban centers." With utilities and
roads in place, development in cities is cheaper than on new land.
    But if the anti-sprawl forces are counting on the market to help them,
they're missing something crucial: cheap gasoline. A recent survey of urban
experts by the Fannie Mae Foundation named "interstate highways and the
dominance of the automobile" as the No. 1 influence shaping American cities
for 50 years. And the gasoline that fuels it all is flowing freely. The
Environmental Protection Agency reported last week that new vehicles' average
fuel economy has fallen to its lowest point since 1980--23.8 miles per gallon
for 1999 models. We've come a long way from the energy-conserving 1970s, when
our fear of reliance on foreign oil spurred fuel-efficiency innovations.
    Choosing fuel-efficient cars, said EPA Administrator Carol Browner, can
"save drivers at least $1,500 in fuel costs and avoid more than 15 tons of
greenhouse gas pollution over the life of the vehicle as well as help reduce
dependence on foreign oil." But when a gallon of gas costs less than a cup of
gourmet coffee, where's the incentive?
    The "I'm not a tree-hugger, but . . ." folks have gone mainstream, and
their numbers and strength are growing accordingly. But as long as the market
pulls so powerfully for gasoline usage, theirs will be an uphill struggle.
    ----------
    E-mail: overholserg@...


Copyright Chicago Tribune

Amtrak train hits 168 mph, but service still stuck at station
Web posted Oct. 12 at 10:41 PM
By Glen Johnson
Associated Press
WASHINGTON -- Amtrak says its new high-speed Acela train has already set a
national speed record of 168 mph, but a nagging question remains: When will
passengers be able to come aboard?
There's still no clear resolution to wheel problems that have plagued the
train in tests, and the precise start-up date is unclear.
Montreal-based Bombardier Inc., which is building the train with Alstom of
Paris, says it will announce a timetable by the end of the month, as promised
when it divulged on Sept. 1 that the train's wheels were wearing prematurely.
``We're aiming at spring of 2000,'' Bombardier spokesman Gilles Paget said
Tuesday.
On Monday, the second production silver-and-turqoise Acela train hit 168 mph
between the Rhode Island cities of Warwick and Kingston during a test of new
lines that will provide electricity to the train.
Amtrak said that was a U.S. record for a passenger train operating on a
regular track. The previous record was nearly 160 mph, set decades ago when
Penn Central was testing Amtrak's then-new Metroliner trains.
``It was a milestone,'' said Amtrak spokesman Russ Hall. ``There was a lot of
shaking of hands and pats on the back.''
While the first production Acela model has also hit 168 mph since March on
closed loop of test track in Pueblo, Colo., this week's record represented
another step toward high-speed rail in the United States.
The trains are slated to carry passengers at up to 160 mph, and when they do,
it will lead to three-hour service between Boston and New York and 2 hour, 45
minute service between New York and Washington -- a savings of up to 90
minutes and more competitive with airline shuttle service.
Amtrak is hoping that Acela will not only generate $180 million in new
profits annually, but that the cash infusion will allow the national railroad
to fulfill its promise to Congress of self-sufficiency by 2002. Since 1971,
it has required federal subsidies of $23 billion.
Amtrak is also hoping that success in the Northeast Corridor will spur
creation of similar service in the South, Midwest, Gulf Coast, California and
Pacific Northwest.
Amtrak had planned to run its first high-speed train in November or December,
but in September it said the date had been pushed back to next spring. It
promised a clearer timetable within 60 days, and Paget said the train makers
will meet that deadline.
Asked whether the problems had been resolved, he said: ``We're testing
components and we're quite optimistic that we'll be able to set the new
delivery schedule.''

-----------------
Forwarded Message:

Subj:   American Airlines and France's National Railway Sign...
Date:   Tuesday, October 5, 1999 4:24:55
From:   AOL News

American Airlines and France's National Railway Sign Marketing Agreement To
Create Convenient Air-To-Rail Connections Via Paris and Three Other French
Cities

FORT WORTH, Texas, Oct. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- American Airlines and SNCF,
France's national railway company, have signed a marketing agreement that
will make convenient air-to-rail connections possible at Paris' Charles de
Gaulle Airport.  Under the agreement, American plans to connect passengers
from its U.S.-Paris flights to SNCF's high-speed TGV rail service between the
airport and the French cities of Lille, Lyon and Nantes.  The partners may
extend the arrangement to other French cities in the future.

American will market the rail service as a continuation of its U.S.-Paris
flights by labeling it in computer reservations systems with the "AA"
designator code and flight numbers.  The marketing arrangement will begin
after American and SNCF receive any necessary governmental approvals.

"We are pleased to be able to offer our customers a unique way to access more
of France," said Gerard J. Arpey, American's senior vice president - finance
and planning.  "Through this intermodal service, which will link our Paris
flights to SNCF's high-speed TGV rail network, we can offer our customers
more travel options, greater convenience and superior value."

"After long-term technical cooperation, the partnership between American and
SNCF has been enhanced," said Guillaume Pepy, SNCF's senior vice president -
passenger services.  "Now American Airlines' customers will be able to
appreciate the comfort and convenience of SNCF's high-speed trains, and SNCF
will have the opportunity to distribute its products more widely in the
United States."

American operates daily flights between Paris and Boston, Chicago,
Dallas/Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami and New York.  The airline moved its
Paris base from Orly Airport to Charles de Gaulle Terminal 2A on Oct. 1.
SNCF operates at Charles de Gaulle from a station adjacent to terminal 2,
where it provides high-speed rail service to more than 50 cities.  SNCF's
extensive European rail network includes TGV service to more than 200 cities.
  Its TGV trains operate at approximately 185 miles per hour.

Sabre, a unit of American's parent company, AMR Corp., has provided technical
services to SNCF for several years and developed the railway company's
passenger reservations and yield management systems.

Current AMR Corp. (NYSE: AMR) news releases can be accessed via the Internet.
  The address is http://www.amrcorp.com/corpcomm.htm.

SOURCE  American Airlines

CO:  American Airlines; AMR Corp.; SNCF; Charles de Gaulle Airport

ST:  Texas, France

IN:  AIR LEI

SU:  JVN

10/05/1999 05:00 EDT http://www.prnewswire.com

The following article appeared in yesterday's Chicago Tribune.  Would you be
willing to write them suggesting a dream idea?  Two that I would like to get
folks to write are:  An express train from O'Hare through Union Station to
McCormick place,  and a network of frequent fast trains hubbing in Chicago
serving the major midwestern cities (The Midwest Regional Rail Initiative).
The address is at the bottom of the article.

Thanks
Rick Harnish
Midwest High Speed Rail Coalition
312-409-7723


IF WE RAN THINGS
OUR PLANS -- SOME REALISTIC, SOME FANTASTIC -- TO FIX TRANSPORTATION

By Mike Conklin, Tribune Staff Writer.

    Everyone talks about her or his commute. How many get the chance to do
something about it?
    If you were queen (or at least secretary of transportation) for a day and
could make one "improvement" to our commuting culture, what would it be? Ban
car phones? Serve refreshments on trains? Lower/raise speed limits? Add bike
trails?
    Here then are 15 ideas gleaned from the Tempo staff members, each one a
dedicated commuter.
    - Ban all delivery trucks from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. in downtown Chicago, where
they cause most of the traffic snarls.
    - Double-deck expressways. The express lanes would go on top, local lanes
on the bottom.
    - Eliminate the right turn on red in pedestrian-heavy areas. The law
seemed like a good idea once, but don't forget it originated in California,
where very few people walk. And make it a $500 fine for drivers (that
especially includes cabs and buses) who turn into a crosswalk while the
"walk" signal is showing.
    - Add a fourth color -- such as blue -- to stoplights. Everyone ignores
yellow. Anyone caught going through a blue light, either on foot or in a
vehicle, would be arrested and thrown into the hoosegow as if they had run a
red.
    - Create a satellite Metra train network ringing Chicago and connecting
such suburbs as Waukegan, Schaumburg, Naperville and Joliet.
    - Establish a mega, downtown center for car-rental companies -- Hertz,
Budget, National, Avis, etc. -- possibly near Union Station and similar to
what you find at airports. Ever tried to rent a car in the Loop? Most
locations are hard to find.
    Move Meigs Field to the top of McCormick Place. The roof is large enough
for landings by small aircraft without brake problems.
    Mayor Daley would thus be able to turn Meigs into the green space that
Maggie wants and all the business execs and state workers would still have an
airstrip close to the Loop.
    - Extend the northern end of Lake Shore Drive to Highland Park, where it
could merge with I-94. The North Shore beaches could be re-created with
landfill, like those at Montrose.
    - Ban those cute little horsy carriages from downtown and put them in the
parks -- Grant and Lincoln. The smell is overwhelming in summer heat.
Besides, it's demeaning to be driving a big, powerful automobile trailing a
horse-drawn vehicle.
    - Enlarge the underground pedway system in downtown Chicago to the size of
Toronto's and Montreal's. This would make it possible to reach more
locations, or shop, while avoiding inclement weather.
    - Run a subway on Belmont between the Red/Brown/Purple Line station at
Sheffield and the Blue Line station at the Kennedy. Now, North Siders taking
the "L" to or from O'Hare must go through downtown.
    - Expand water taxi service between the Metra stations and the Michigan
Avenue bridge to include stops on the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal on the
South Side and the North Branch all the way into Evanston.
    - Resurrect the Crosstown Expressway. The plan was first floated in the
early 1960s to provide a direct expressway link between the North and South
Sides of the city on a route following Cicero Avenue from the Kennedy near
the Edens junction past the Stevenson to 76th Street, where it would have
turned east and joined the Dan Ryan. Political bickering killed it.
    - Freeze the Chicago River in the winter for ice skaters, who can skate to
the Loop from any location on the south or north branches just as they do in
Amsterdam. If engineers can reverse the flow of the river, why can't they
freeze it?
    - Put hydrofoil commuter boats on Lake Michigan -- like those that cross
the English Channel -- to bring Loop-bound passengers to Navy Pier from
regular stops on the North and South Shores.
    ----------
    Your turn: Send brainstorms to Tempo, Chicago Tribune, 435 N. Michigan
Ave., Chicago, IL 60611. Or e-mail to ctc-tempo@.... Please include
your name, address and phone number.

Copyright Chicago Tribune

-----------------
Forwarded Message:

Subj:    S.1144 - another step forward
Date:   Thursday, September 30, 1999 16:29:29
From:   s.leonard@...
To:     s.leonard@...

From:   s.leonard@... (NARP)
Reply-to:   s.leonard@...
To: s.leonard@... (NARP)

To all NARP members, September 29, 1999--

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee this morning approved
S.1144, the bill that (among other things) would allow states the
flexibility to spend some of their federal TEA-21 funds on intercity
passenger rail capital projects.

However, there was an unsuccessful attempt to strip the bill of the
pro-rail language. This came in the form of an amendment from Senator
Bond (R-MO). Bond argued that--

--Motorists pay into the trust fund with the sole expectation it all
goes to roads [NARP members who are motorists -- is that true?];
--Highway trust fund money is "for highways" [what about transit, bike
trails, etc.?]; and
--That it's wrong to spend more money on a "subsidized" Amtrak [implying
other modes don't benefit from government involvement -- anyway, the
states would decide exactly which projects benefit, not Amtrak].

Committee Ranking Democrat Baucus (MT) also argued against the pro-rail
language, saying it was "ad hoc, not well thought out, willy nilly"
[never mind that the Senate has passed it three times since 1991!].
S.1144 author Senator Voinovich (R-OH) countered that any rail project
that would benefit from S.1144 would have to go through the same
rigorous evaluation process on the state and local levels that TEA-21
projects must go through.

The Bond amendment, fortunately, failed on a 6-12 vote. The vote follows
below. If your Senator appears below, thank him or her for their
pro-rail vote (and express your displeasure at the anti-rail votes).

--Scott Leonard

Pro-rail votes (anti-Bond amendment)--
--Boxer (D-CA)
--Crapo (R-ID)
--Graham (D-FL)
--Hutchison (R-TX)
--Lautenberg (D-NJ)
--Moynihan (D-NY)
--Reid (D-NV)
--Voinovich (R-OH)
--Warner (R-VA)
--Wyden (D-OR)
--Chafee (chair, R-RI)

Anti-rail votes (pro-Bond amendment)--
--Bennett (R-UT)
--Baucus (D-MT)
--Bond (R-MO)
--Inhofe (R-OK)
--Smith (R-NH)
--Thomas (R-WY)

-----------------
Forwarded Message:

Subj:   Germany To Derail Train Project
Date:   Tuesday, September 28, 1999 13:09:09
From:   AOL News

Germany To Derail Train Project

.c The Associated Press

  By TONY CZUCZKA

BERLIN (AP) - Whizzing along a monorail at more than 250 mph, the Transrapid
was supposed to be the future of rail travel in train-loving Germany.

But the prestige project seems about to grind to a halt after Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder's government gave new signs Tuesday that it intends to pull
the plug.

Long opposed by environmentalists who claim its electromagnetic radiation is
a health hazard, the Transrapid has been doomed since the center-left
coalition came to power last fall with the ecology-minded Greens as junior
partner.

Schroeder's recent drive to cut federal spending has made it even less likely
the government will step in to save the sleek magnetic levitation train.

``As far as I'm concerned, the Transrapid is headed for a coffin,'' Kerstin
Mueller, a leading Greens legislator, said Tuesday.

Scrapping the Transrapid would kill a prestige technology project and export
hope for German industry.

Already, industry took a hit Tuesday when shares in Thyssen Krupp, the
project's driving force, dropped 5 percent on the Frankfurt stock exchange
after the government's latest statements.

Several firms in the consortium to build and operate the train have indicated
they're ready to scrap the project, said Social Democrat lawmaker Wilhelm
Schmidt. He gave no details.

The gliding train, driven by electrically generated magnetic forces on a
cushion of air, would cut travel time between Berlin and Hamburg by
two-thirds, to just under an hour in the first intercity link of its kind.

But Schroeder's Social Democrats and the Greens insist the government will
pay only the $5.8 billion pledged by the previous government - though the
total cost is expected to be 50 percent higher.

Recent studies predicting that the proposed link between Germany's two
biggest cities would attract fewer passengers than originally expected have
bolstered skeptics.

A last-minute idea by Schroeder's side - building a single 185-mile track
instead of two - also seems a nonstarter.

The governing parties agreed late Monday to approve that version only if it
makes economic sense - which the Greens and the German railways have already
said it doesn't.

Schroeder said Tuesday the government is reviewing the entire project, but
added: ``The train will run if it is economically viable.''

Opponents, in addition to citing high costs, argue the electromagnetic fields
driving the train could be unhealthy for people and animals.
Environmentalists say the tracks will endanger wildlife habitats in northern
Germany.

Some conservative opposition politicians urged the government to take the
plunge, saying the project would create jobs.

``A single-track version would be an acceptable solution,'' said Dieter Posch
of the small, pro-business Free Democrats.

AP-NY-09-28-99 1408EDT

  Copyright 1999 The Associated Press.  The information  contained in the AP
news report may not be published,  broadcast, rewritten or otherwise
distributed without  prior written authority of The Associated Press.

This is a long article that provides a good overview of airport funding
issues. 


Precedent for Peotone?
Peotone backers say Richard J. Daley pushed for O'Hare despite airline
opposition, proving that "if you build it, they will come." But history shows
it wasn't that simple.

Déjà vu: Airline veteran Jack Frawley says the Peotone airport debate makes
him think, "Been there, done that." Photo: Steve Leonard

September 13, 1999
By Kevin Knapp

A powerful politician wants to build a giant airfield in Chicago's distant
suburbs. Many of the surrounding municipalities are against it; airlines say
they don't want to fly there. Thousands of acres must be acquired, homes
relocated and highways and transit lines built to connect the airport to the
city. Construction costs are projected to be in the hundreds of millions of
dollars.
Sounds a lot like the current debate over the construction of a third airport
near south suburban Peotone. But actually, the year is 1950 and the airport
is O'Hare International.
As is the case with the proposed construction of a third airport near
Peotone, Chicago's second airport — which is now its pre-eminent airport —
was not without its detractors. From before the end of World War II until
1960, the story of O'Hare's development was one setback after another:
constant money shortages, political skirmishes and a failure to attract
interest from the airlines.
Supporters of a Peotone airport point to these historical parallels as
justification for a third airport. Contends Christine A. Cochrane, the
Illinois Department of Transportation's (IDOT) project manager on the third
airport, "The lesson (from the development of O'Hare) is: Don't let an
opportunity go by."
Then, as now, powerful forces were arrayed on both sides of the issue. Over
the years, Chicago's mayors, including Richard J. Daley, pushed for O'Hare,
while some debated the future of aviation and others complained about
capacity constraints at the city's bustling Midway Airport on the Southwest
Side.
If not for the development of commercial jets, which needed longer runways
than were available at Midway, O'Hare might never have gotten off the ground.
Midway's heyday
In the 1950s, Midway was flying high. By decade's end, it was the world's
busiest airport, handling some 700 flights a day. And the area around the
airport was attracting large investments from the airlines.
United Airlines, one of the key carriers at Midway along with Eastern Air
Lines and TWA, built a corporate headquarters on Cicero Avenue in 1939,
expanded it in 1941 and was building maintenance hangars and a fuel depot in
the area. By 1954, United had outgrown its Midway headquarters and was
completing construction of an additional administration building.
But the tremendous growth at Midway had been a mixed blessing. The airport
had no room to expand. The airlines had grossly underestimated the growth in
air travel, which was soaring 15% a year. They needed more hangar space and
better facilities than landlocked Midway could provide.
Even before the end of World War II, Chicago's business and civic leaders had
predicted that a second airport would be needed. In a process much like the
current planning for a third airport, a site selection committee in 1944
reviewed several locations — including one in the southwest suburbs and one
on Lake Michigan — before deciding on Orchard Field in the northwest suburbs.
The federal government had title to more than 1,000 acres where a huge
aircraft-building facility and two runways had been constructed during
wartime. City officials were able to get the land, which the military listed
as surplus shortly after the war ended, at no cost. The City Council quickly
passed ordinances to acquire thousands of acres of adjacent land and a slim
strip of property to connect the airport site to the city.
As Chicago began annexing thousands of acres for O'Hare, leaders in nearby
suburbs such as Des Plaines and Elk Grove Village became concerned that the
city was secretly planning to encircle and absorb them. Even then, some began
to anticipate the problems of increased aircraft noise.
The major airlines, meanwhile, fretted about the higher landing fees the city
would charge to pay for the new airport's construction, and complained about
the lack of a highway connecting the distant airport with the city — the same
arguments that would be used years later against a Peotone airport.
But the similarities between the development of O'Hare and the proposed
construction of Peotone end when it comes to technology. The advent of the
jet age made O'Hare a necessity, but no similar technological imperative is
pushing the airline industry to embrace Peotone.
With the arrival in the early 1960s of the new commercial jets — which needed
more space to take off, land and maneuver than previous generations of
aircraft — the scales began tipping in favor of O'Hare and away from Midway.
In 1959, Midway handled more than 10 million passengers and O'Hare, just over
2 million. Three years later, O'Hare handled 13 million passengers and
Midway, fewer than 700,000.
Once the airlines saw the benefits of jet technology, they became ardent
O'Hare supporters, giving up their established bases at Midway and going so
far as to underwrite the multimillion-dollar construction costs of the new
field.
O'Hare was the first airport built by a city with bond money guaranteed by
the airlines.
Before O'Hare, cities would build airports and operate them at a loss in an
effort to attract carriers. After O'Hare, airport finance was radically
changed. The airport authorities began to realize that they ran the inn — and
the airlines were the guests who had to pay their own way.
There is no corollary with the Peotone proposal to the jet-age changes that
propelled the construction of O'Hare. Airport facilities had to be updated
and expanded, and airlines recognized it was in their interest to pay for the
improvements.
The construction of O'Hare was not an "if you build it, they will come" kind
of story, says Ramone Ricondo, president of Chicago-based Ricondo &
Associates, a consultant on projects at O'Hare. "Availability of an airport
does not mean that new service will materialize," he says. "It also has to be
profitable to fly there."
In the end, O'Hare became a desirable airport not because of the political
will of Chicago mayors or because it had nearby roadways and other needed
infrastructure. It succeeded because technological innovation made Midway
Airport obsolete.
Airlines balked at cost
O'Hare's unique financing arrangement, which later would prove to be its
great strength, was at first perceived as a weakness, says Jack Frawley, a
former American Airlines executive who closed the carrier's operations at
Midway in 1962. "The airlines were not too happy about moving because the
city was forcing them to pay for O'Hare," he says.
The sheer size of the new airport — and the millions of dollars required to
make it operational — were daunting to the young airlines, which were
spending millions on new planes.
"O'Hare was so far beyond the scale of any airport in the world at the time,"
says Jeffrey N. Thomas, president of Cincinnati-based Landrum & Brown, an
airport consultancy that has done extensive work at O'Hare. "No one had ever
developed an airport of that magnitude."
When third-airport planners proposed the Peotone site more than a decade ago,
they had similarly grandiose plans — a $5-billion, six-runway facility with
120 gates and a high-speed train link to downtown Chicago. That proposal was
greeted about as warmly by the airlines as the O'Hare plan had been.
Getting there
In 1951, the airlines said they were ready to move service to O'Hare, but
they delayed shifting flights from Midway for the rest of the decade. They
had made substantial investments at the Southwest Side airport and were
hesitant to leave their established operations there.
This is a pattern that would be repeated. "Airlines have never been
particularly keen on spending money," says Mr. Ricondo.
The airlines demanded that the city make $33 million in improvements at
O'Hare before they would shift service. When that was done in 1954, they
stalled again. The expensive improvements had made O'Hare's landing fees more
than seven times those at Midway.
The airlines then maintained that O'Hare was inconveniently located. Work on
the Northwest Expressway — which would become the Kennedy — had begun, but
the $300-million project was not scheduled to be finished until 1960. The
drive to O'Hare from downtown took at least an hour, sometimes twice that,
recalls American Airlines' Mr. Frawley. "The roads were s_____," he says.
Another frequent criticism of Peotone is its distance — 35 miles — from the
city's center. Detractors note that if built, Peotone would be the most
distant airport from a downtown — even farther than Denver's new airport is
from that city's center. While IDOT's Ms. Cochrane says the proposed airport
is near "two major expressways and just a few miles from I-80," the
airport-to-downtown travel times would be significant.
Between 1955 and 1959, the airlines flirted with offering O'Hare service but
always retrenched to Midway. It was a classic catch-22: Without flights, the
airport couldn't afford to make improvements. Without more improvements, the
airlines didn't want to schedule more flights.
The impasse sounds eerily like today's chicken-and-egg debate over Peotone.
While third-airport boosters swear that airlines will be interested in flying
to Peotone once it's built, to build it, they need commitment from the
airlines. And no major carriers have signaled that commitment.
"Airlines will never be unambiguously supportive of new infrastructure," says
Jay Franke, Chicago's former commissioner of aviation, who presided over
construction of O'Hare's international terminal — a $600-million project the
airlines went along with only reluctantly.
In 1959, as the first jets were being ordered and the expressway was nearing
completion, Mayor Daley hammered out an agreement with the airlines to ensure
a funding mechanism for O'Hare.
With a new bond agreement in place, flights shifted to O'Hare and the airport
began a massive construction program, adding runways, terminals, parking lots
and other facilities needed to service the new jets.
By 1969, air traffic had grown so much that Mr. Daley proposed a $300-million
expansion. Subsequent expansions and additions in the following decades
totaled at least $10 billion, according to industry sources. Currently
planned expansions will cost another $3 billion.
Success begat success at O'Hare, especially as deregulation of the airlines
in 1978 allowed carriers to choose their routes. By routing passengers
through a hub like O'Hare, the airlines were better able to serve a variety
of destinations without having to build extensive infra-structure in every
city.
Increased flight frequency means increased marketshare, and more marketshare
means more profits. Bulking up at hub locations where passengers and freight
can be easily transferred creates efficient and profitable operations.
Splitting operations between several airports creates money-losing
inefficiencies.
'What's the incentive?'
Duplicating O'Hare's infrastructure at Peotone, including the
freight-forwarding and warehousing businesses that have sprung up around the
airport, would be difficult and not in the airlines' best interests, Mr.
Ricondo contends. "Every time you make an improvement at the airport, it
costs the airlines money," he says.
With a new airport, the airlines would have to wait years during construction
to see their investments begin to pay off. "What's the incentive for them to
spend money?" Mr. Ricondo asks.
Third-airport planners have conceded that a smaller, expandable airport may
be a more realistic goal, and planning for a one-runway "Inaugural Airport"
near Peotone has begun.
But the smaller facility would be burdened with many of the same problems
that O'Hare encountered in the early days — without the miracle of jets to
fuel interest.
Says Mr. Frawley, "Every time I hear someone talking about Peotone, I think:
Been there, done that."
©1999 by Crain Communications Inc.

In a message dated 9/17/99 12:28:25, wcox@... writes:

<< Wendell Cox on
Sprawlwatch List

17 September 1999:

The Sprawlwatch website has published a list of "pro-sprawl players," which
includes Demographia and The Public Purpose principal Wendell Cox.

Cox noted that he considered it to be a "badge of honor to be on such a
distinguished list," though indicated that Sprawlwatch had "rather
exaggerated" the facts by characterizing him and others on the list as
"pro-sprawl." He indicated that a more accurate characterization would have
been "pro-American Dream."


--
WENDELL COX CONSULTANCY
International Public Policy, Economics, Labour, Transport & Strategic Planning

The Public Purpose: Internet Public Policy Resource
http://www.publicpurpose.com

Demographia
http://www.demographia.com

Voice +1 618 632 8507; Fax  +1 618 632 8538
P.O. Box 841- Belleville, Illinois 62222 USA

"To facilitate the ideal of government as the servant  of the people by
identifying and implementing strategies to achieve public purposes at a
cost that is no higher than necessary." >>

This list will provide news updates and action alerts related to passenger rail
issues in the Midwest. It is broadcast only. Only the Midwest High Speed Rail
Assoc. can post messages. Messages will be sporatic except during periods
requiring quick public action.  If you have any questions, please call Rick
Harnish, Midwest High Speed Rail Association, 312-409-2029

Group Manager: midwesthsr-owner@egroups.com

To subscribe, send a message to midwesthsr-subscribe@egroups.com or go to the
e-group's home page at http://www.egroups.com/list/midwesthsr