Comments on: Rail Becomes an Election Issue in Kentucky; Could it Become Important in Other Statewide Campaigns?

By: Matt Fisher

Matt Fisher — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:54:36 +0000

One more thing: The rail idea is a lot better than the I-66 and I-69 crap that’s being proposed. They should both be dropped.

By: Matt Fisher

Matt Fisher — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 18:53:35 +0000

Dr. Dan should replace his monorail plan in Louisville with true electrified light rail. That’s what was proposed in the first place. And it is not “diesel light rail”; it’s more like commuter rail.

The idea of a “Kentucky State Railroad” serving rural areas is even more ambitious than what I myself would see.

By: john

john — Mon, 11 Jan 2010 09:34:36 +0000

The issue is clear here Kentucky lacks good intercity transportation. Today only Ashland, South Shore, Maysville and Fulton have Amtrak service. Greyhound serves only Elizabethtown, Bowling Green, Madisonville, Paducah, Lexington, London, Berea, Louisville and Ashland. Only Ashland has both Greyhound and Amtrak. Our state capitol has NO Inter City Service no Greyhound, No Amtrak, No Airline. No scheduled transportation exists between Louisville and Frankfort or Lexington and Frankfort. The facts are clear KY transportation is broke and needs fixing. The state gets nearly 2 million to fund inter city bus services yet when both Miller Trailways and Anchor Trailways applied for this funding they were turned down by the office of transportation delivery. The routes included from Miller Trailways – Route One Evansville to Henderson, Owensboro, Cloverport, Hardinsburg, Brandenburg, Fort Knox to Louisville Route Two Louisville- Simpsonville- Shelbyville- Frankfort – Versailles- Lexington – Winchester- Mt Sterling- Morehead- Olive Hill – Grayson- Ashland- Huntington, WV Route Three: Lexington- Winchester- Mt Sterling- Frenchburg- West Liberty- Salyersville- Paintsville- Prestonsburg- Pikeville and Jenkins KY KYTC Turned down this idea in favor of on demand response service at a cost of 80 cents per mile from the rural transits. Imagine the cost at 80 cents per mile for a one way trip on demand from Pikeville to Lexington geez Anchor Trailways proposed service from Fulton to Paducah and from Paducah to Louisville over the WK Pky. It was also turned down. The Miller Trailways plan had the backing of Greyhound!!!! Ironically at the same time Miller Trailways applied for the same money in Indiana and guess what five new routes start this month from Kalamazoo MI to Elkhart to South Bend to Kokomo and Indianapolis, From Indianapolis to Bloomington to Bedford, Mitchell, Orleans, Paoli. Vincennes, to Evansville, from Seymour to Columbus to Edinburg to Indianapolis, From Indianapolis to Fortville, Pendleton, Anderson and Muncie and a final service from Louisville to Corydon, Ferdinand and Evansville. Anchor Trailways is running with the same type of funding service from Nashville Tennessee to Columbia TN and Florence Alabama, It is also going to operate service from Memphis to Union City to Paris to Nashville later this year. Tennessee has an aggressive state wide passenger rail plan and it is on the internet. So Dr Dan’s ideas have merit especially between Louisville and Nashville, Cincinnati and Louisville, Cincinnati and Lexington .Busses would be better for the rest of it for now. Sadly I remember when a good part of it was in place prior to 1971 and 1979. By rail and 1989 by bus.

By: Allen

Allen — Fri, 18 Dec 2009 03:18:32 +0000

There’s a national transit fund? Really?

By: The Lexington Streetsweeper

The Lexington Streetsweeper — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 00:35:26 +0000

What most of us transit savvy folks need to realize is that Dr Mongiardo has been sheltered from some of these realities mentioned before. This plan is far from complete and NEEDS a lot of work. I, for one, am glad that the subject has even come up in a race for any political office in Kentucky.

To a lot of people in this state, the map looks good and the press release is full of buzzwords and generalized facts and it might strike a chord in some minds. If we want it to become a reality, then we need to quit trashing it and begin supplying corrections and finer details to the campaign. They have shown interest in gathering more information(as I have posted on my blog).

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:13:05 +0000

TARC is a bus system with 45,000 daily riders, hardly the pinnacle of connecting transit. But even it is better than what’s proposed in the plan. The article Yonah links to says,

He’s proposed hybrid light rail lines to connect metropolitan regions and their suburbs, with electric cars that can travel up to 80 mph on existing freight train lines. He has also proposed local monorail systems with automated cars that would travel about 55 mph on elevated tracks above existing roads.

In other words, the plan’s only urban lines are driverless monorail, i.e. gadgetbahn. And either the plan or the article made the mistake of calling commuter rail “hybrid light rail.” I don’t need to completely discredit; this proposal discredits itself.

By: Jake

Jake — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 04:01:56 +0000

Ok if you’re going to downtown Louisville where the businesses are you can walk or take TARC. TARC has a goof reputation in the state as decent. Plus, doesn’t this plan also include intra-city transportation monies? If what you said should be the case everywhere, not connecting to cities w bad public transit, then half the HSR plan for the nation should be trashed. I definitely see your points. Believe me, I live here, way too little transit, I agree. But don’t completely discredit.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 03:03:08 +0000

Jake, say you want to get from Louisville to Lexington. There’s an intercity train, but there’s no transit worth mentioning in either Louisville or Lexington. Or, there’s a highway, with good connecting urban roads in both cities. Which mode of transportation do you choose to take?

By: Jake

Jake — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:55:36 +0000

Ok Louisville, Lexington, Ashland, Bowling Green and Northern Kentucky are not “little back-country communities.” Some of the extensions are dillusional, yes. Like to Pikeville and what not. But a connection between NKY, Louisville, and Lexington would be very feasible. Highway traffic can be ridiculous through these areas and same with traffic. THere’s lots of traffic all the time between these areas. THey’re the lifeline of KY’s economy. There’s no reason to think it wouldn’t work here. Maybe not this extensive but the larger lines, most definitely

By: Nikko P

Nikko P — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:13:19 +0000

This guy is delusional. He means well but this plan isn’t realistic on any level. Frankly, the federal government is more likely to invest in places like Florida, California, and Texas — major urbanized areas that are in desperate need of public transportation and mass transit systems. And of course Alon makes the point that this primarily serves rural areas. In rural Kentucky, transportation is a real issue but its probably not feasible to make a state-wide transportation service to serve these little back-country communities.

If anything, they should be funneling their transportation funds into localized transit projects.

An Amtrak service passing through some of Kentucky’s cities and smaller towns might not be such a bad idea though.