Railroad Forums 

  • Albuquerque New Mexico Rail Runner Railrunner

  • General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.
General discussion of passenger rail systems not otherwise covered in the specific forums in this category, including high speed rail.

Moderators: mtuandrew, gprimr1

 #768408  by M&Eman
 
neroden wrote:
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:You really do have to wonder just how many people would ride Railrunner if the fare structure reflected reality? Multiply the current fares by a factor of five or ten for a realistic rate of farebox recovery.
Well, I think it would still be pretty popular, given the Santa Fe - ABQ bottleneck. Especially now that people have gotten used to it (teaser pricing does work).

They should bite the bullet and increase fares before people get too used to the current prices. If the goal is 'congestion mitigation' I can see an argument for pricing it somewhat cheaper than gas for the trip in a decent car, but that should get the maximum number of people off the roads so I can't see the argument for making it much cheaper than that.
If Railrunner fares are raised, New Mexico should also toll the highway between Santa Fe and Albuquerque. It's only fare. Out west there are way too many freeways and not enough toll roads. Motorists are not paying their fare share of transportation costs. Look at the success of the Eastern Turnpike Complex (All of the Illinois Toll Roads, Indiana Toll Road, Ohio Turnpike, Pennsylvania Turnpike, NJ Turnpike, Garden State Parkway, Deleware Turnpike, Del's Route 1 Turnpike, Maryland's toll roads, NY Thruway, Masspike, and New Hampshire Turnpike). It is an interconnected network of toll roads, often augmented with toll bridges too, that covers its own maintainment cost. The tolls don't deter people from traveling. There are proposals to toll all of New Jersey's interstates as well as I-80 in Pennsylvania too.
 #768495  by goodnightjohnwayne
 
M&Eman wrote:
neroden wrote:
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:You really do have to wonder just how many people would ride Railrunner if the fare structure reflected reality? Multiply the current fares by a factor of five or ten for a realistic rate of farebox recovery.
Well, I think it would still be pretty popular, given the Santa Fe - ABQ bottleneck. Especially now that people have gotten used to it (teaser pricing does work).

They should bite the bullet and increase fares before people get too used to the current prices. If the goal is 'congestion mitigation' I can see an argument for pricing it somewhat cheaper than gas for the trip in a decent car, but that should get the maximum number of people off the roads so I can't see the argument for making it much cheaper than that.
If Railrunner fares are raised, New Mexico should also toll the highway between Santa Fe and Albuquerque. It's only fare. Out west there are way too many freeways and not enough toll roads. Motorists are not paying their fare share of transportation costs. Look at the success of the Eastern Turnpike Complex (All of the Illinois Toll Roads, Indiana Toll Road, Ohio Turnpike, Pennsylvania Turnpike, NJ Turnpike, Garden State Parkway, Deleware Turnpike, Del's Route 1 Turnpike, Maryland's toll roads, NY Thruway, Masspike, and New Hampshire Turnpike). It is an interconnected network of toll roads, often augmented with toll bridges too, that covers its own maintainment cost. The tolls don't deter people from traveling. There are proposals to toll all of New Jersey's interstates as well as I-80 in Pennsylvania too.
Placing tolls on previously free highways for the sake of subsidizing passenger rail would be a surefire way of making passenger rail universally unpopular.

The toll road systems back east are neither popular nor efficiently managed. To give a single example, the NYS Thruway is run by a large overstaffed authority, an example of political patronage at its worst. The proceeds of the tolls do not go to passenger rail, but the little used Barge Canal, and the toll hikes accomplish little other than an ever increasing bureaucracy. Of course, the NYS Thruway should have become a free interstate a generation ago when the original bonds were paid off, but as you might have guessed, the bureaucrats in the thruway authority weren't about to get rid of their own jobs - hence the funding of the useless canal. Oh well, the pleasure boaters do enjoy the canal and and a high percentage of drivers evade the tolls by driving through the EasyPass lanes without slowing down.

In reality, toll roads and bridges are no better maintained than their free counterparts since toll revenues are largely squandered on do-nothing jobs associated with toll collection and the management of the toll collecting authority. It seems that even when toll collection is largely automated, the authorities increase their payrolls further. Even when the debts are completely paid off, these authorities invariable take on new projects, unrelated to the original mission, to justify their own existance.
 #772335  by Amtrak7
 
Effective Presidents Day, these changes went into effect:

-Weekday fares are increased to be double the old reduced fare prices
-The 3-zone day pass increases by a dollar
-Weekend fares are increased to match the new weekday fares
-5 Saturday trains have been cancelled

Press Release
New Fares
New Saturday Schedule
 #772433  by electricron
 
Fares had to increase, there's no way they could keep it running long with the old very low fares in place.

Other news found in your links:
Kewa station (Santo Domingo Pueblo) opens March 2010
 #774382  by FFolz
 
goodnightjohnwayne wrote:The proceeds of the tolls do not go to passenger rail, but the little used Barge Canal, and the toll hikes accomplish little other than an ever increasing bureaucracy. Of course, the NYS Thruway should have become a free interstate a generation ago when the original bonds were paid off, but as you might have guessed, the bureaucrats in the thruway authority weren't about to get rid of their own jobs - hence the funding of the useless canal.
Agreed that any public entity that makes a "profit" has a tendency to turn into a patronage farm without strong public pressure, but that said:

besides the need to pay operating and maintenance costs (the reason that MassHighway's I-90 tolls were cut, not eliminated, when the bonds were paid off a decade ago), tolls factor into System Optimization of the road network. A well-designed toll scheme can work to rationalize traffic flows and reduce travel times. (No, seriously.)

London figured this out (using a high-tech system); NYC is working on a version using bridges, and Massachusetts has realized for a while that they need to at least achieve toll parity into Boston, although there are political and legal barriers.

My understanding is that Fed-built interstates cannot be tolled. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 #774385  by FFolz
 
Amtrak7 wrote:Effective Presidents Day, these changes went into effect:

-Weekday fares are increased to be double the old reduced fare prices
-The 3-zone day pass increases by a dollar
-Weekend fares are increased to match the new weekday fares
-5 Saturday trains have been cancelled
From website, looks like $8 roundtrip Alberquerque to Santa Fe, 1.5 hr each way. It's $6 one-way on Marc WAS-BAL, 1hr ride, so basically to this prospective tourist that fare is still CHEEP. I have no idea how the commuters perceive it, but one would expect many of them have determined the value to themselves personally by now.

For commuters, on a 220 workday schedule, you can buy the 5-zone pass online for $990 for an effective fare of $2.25--CHEAPER THAN MOST EXPRESS BUSES. Don't think you'll see much dent in ridership at those rates, but then again, I don't know NM (though I understand the poverty level is high).

Shame about the service cuts.
 #774469  by electricron
 
While it is disappointing to read about service cuts, I'm not surprised. The trains that were cut were running mostly empty. NMRX's future fares and funding are limited to what local taxes can subsidize. With an ill economy, local funding is also ill, therefore requiring the need for both fare increases and service cuts. Once the economy becomes strong again, local funds can subsidize either lower fares or greater services, or both.

The last things NMRX Board members want to do are cut services and raise fares inappropriately. It isn't a us vs them scenario or rich vs poor scenario, it's a survive or go bankrupt scenario.......

As it is, NMDOT found some additional "environmental" funding to help ease NMRX's pain, but some other NM "environmental" program is going to suffer because NM stole from Peter to pay Paul (NMRX)......
 #774785  by ne plus ultra
 
It's interesting to me that the service started out six days a week with a lot of trains on Saturday and none on Sunday. It expanded to Sunday, and then when it needed to contract the schedule, two Sunday trains were kept but some Saturday trains were dropped.

I think the new schedule is probably better for ridership. I know that there were originally concerns that trackwork and maintenance could be handled more effectively on a train-free Sunday. Whatever may have made that true at the time, they seem to have figured out how to work around it.
 #774843  by Patrick Boylan
 
FFolz wrote: My understanding is that Fed-built interstates cannot be tolled. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I can't actually correct you or say you're wrong, since I'm not sure if there's a distinction between Fed-built interstates and interstates in general, but these roads have tolls:
interstate 95 in Delaware and Maryland, and once upon a time in Connecticut
interstate 76 and 276, and part of interstate 80 in Pennsylvania
interstate 80 in Ohio, and I think Indiana

I cant' tell for sure if those roads were Fed built or not, for example interstate 76 and 276 I believe were Pennsylvania built. Which doesn't mean there wasn't Fed money involved.
Also there are lots of toll bridges and tunnels on otherwise toll free interstates.
 #775086  by M&Eman
 
gardendance wrote:
FFolz wrote: My understanding is that Fed-built interstates cannot be tolled. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I can't actually correct you or say you're wrong, since I'm not sure if there's a distinction between Fed-built interstates and interstates in general, but these roads have tolls:
interstate 95 in Delaware and Maryland, and once upon a time in Connecticut
interstate 76 and 276, and part of interstate 80 in Pennsylvania
interstate 80 in Ohio, and I think Indiana

I cant' tell for sure if those roads were Fed built or not, for example interstate 76 and 276 I believe were Pennsylvania built. Which doesn't mean there wasn't Fed money involved.
Also there are lots of toll bridges and tunnels on otherwise toll free interstates.
All of the examples you cite are roads built completely by the states that predated the interstate highway program. The Northeast needed highways before the rest of the country, and took it into their own hands to build them. These roads are signed as interstates for the sake of continuity and navigation convenience. There are some toll roads that are not interstates though. The Garden State Parkway, the Turnpike south of the Pennsylvania interchange, and Deleware's state turnpike 1 come to mind.
 #785673  by CHIP72
 
M&Eman wrote:
gardendance wrote:
FFolz wrote: My understanding is that Fed-built interstates cannot be tolled. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I can't actually correct you or say you're wrong, since I'm not sure if there's a distinction between Fed-built interstates and interstates in general, but these roads have tolls:
interstate 95 in Delaware and Maryland, and once upon a time in Connecticut
interstate 76 and 276, and part of interstate 80 in Pennsylvania
interstate 80 in Ohio, and I think Indiana

I cant' tell for sure if those roads were Fed built or not, for example interstate 76 and 276 I believe were Pennsylvania built. Which doesn't mean there wasn't Fed money involved.
Also there are lots of toll bridges and tunnels on otherwise toll free interstates.
All of the examples you cite are roads built completely by the states that predated the interstate highway program. The Northeast needed highways before the rest of the country, and took it into their own hands to build them. These roads are signed as interstates for the sake of continuity and navigation convenience. There are some toll roads that are not interstates though. The Garden State Parkway, the Turnpike south of the Pennsylvania interchange, and Deleware's state turnpike 1 come to mind.
Interstate highways built using Highway Trust Fund dollars cannot currently be tolled. Various states, most notably Pennsylvania, are applying to the Federal Highway Administration for a waiver of that rule (specifically in PA's case to toll Interstate 80). If the waiver is granted, look for MAJOR changes throughout the U.S. regarding how interstate highway maintenance funding is obtained (i.e. many states will look to toll their interstates). Incidentally, the Pennsylvania application does have an impact on transit; the state's Act 44 allowed PennDOT to borrow money from the PA Turnpike Commission until I-80 is tolled, and a decent chunk of that Act 44 money is allocated to SEPTA, PAT, and other transit agencies in the Keystone State. If FHWA does not grant a waiver to PA to toll I-80, Pennsylvania transit agencies probably will have funding shortfalls, as the Act 44 funding transfer ends after either (I think) state fiscal year 2010 or 2011.
 #810873  by neroden
 
FFolz wrote:My understanding is that Fed-built interstates cannot be tolled. Correct me if I'm wrong.
They can be tolled, but the proceeds can only be used for maintenance of the tolled road, not for anything else.

Interestingly no state has been willing to explicitly start a toll for maintenance purposes. Given the expense of maintaining certain expressways, it actually would make sense.

Edit: I believe it still requires a waiver from the federal government to add the toll. The regulations for the waiver are what I just described. (I believe the reason Pennsylvania's request was rejected is that they wanted to toll one highway in order to upgrade something *else*.)
 #824833  by jtbell
 
Returning to the subject of this thread :wink: , here are some pictures I took of the Rail Runner on a recent visit:

http://web.presby.edu/~jtbell/transit/Albuquerque/

Bernalillo is a convenient place to stay, because the Motel 6 and Super 8 at the US 550 exit on Interstate 25 are both a short walk from the Sandoval County / US 550 station. In fact, the Super 8 is right on the other side of the station's parking lot.

Because of the way the timetable is set up, it took me most of a day to do a complete round trip Bernalillo - Santa Fe - Belen - Bernalillo. When I finally got back to my car, thunderstorms had started to pop up, which interfered with my attempts to chase the rest of the day's trains. I'm looking forward to making another trip there someday!
  • 1
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 11