Trail Moves Foward

New walking and biking trail linking Coopersburg to Hellertown planned

July 10, 2009

Plans for an eight-mile walking and biking trail linking Coopersburg to Hellertown have taken a significant step forward.

Attorneys for SEPTA and the four municipalities that would host the trail met June 23 and have reached an agreement in principle on a $1-a-year 30-year lease of an abandoned rail bed that will become the trail.

The agreement could be ratified by the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transit Authority's board in September, and approved by the four municipalities' governing bodies soon thereafter, said Hellertown Borough Manager Charles Luthar.

''[Municipal officials] will have a chance to look at the language. The engineers and attorneys have been looking at it,'' Luthar said. Topics of discussion have included maintenance of the trail and removal of railroad signal infrastructure, said Lower Saucon Township manager Jack Cahalan.

The municipalities have agreed to maintain the walking and biking surface, but do not want to be responsible for structures such as bridges.

SEPTA will leave its equipment intact, but remove any environmental hazards, Cahalan said.

''SEPTA retains the right of reversion, which means that if they want to bring back train service, they can notify us and take back control of the trail,'' Cahalan said.

The four municipalities hope to be able to open the trail to the public in the spring after resurfacing it, probably with gravel. Cahalan said he has been getting calls about using the trail, but he said people should stay off the rail bed for now, until it can be improved, and opened to the public in spring 2010.

Once the lease is approved by all four municipalities, the next step would be to create a steering committee and come up with funding to make improvements, he said.

Cahalan said the four municipalities plan to apply to the Department of Conservation and Natural Resources for a grant.

Well this article published in the Morning Call makes the chances of rail service being restored to the Lehigh Valley to Philadelphia look quite unlikely.

LANTA unveils 12-year plan for future

The Morning Call ran this article on June 23, 2009. It says that LANTA views providing bus service to rail stations in the next 12 years. Despite not actively endorsing rail service or helping actively bring it back, LANTA does appear to believe it will have a future role as a feeder service. This is good to see considering the ability to have connecting transit service to the train is important as the service itself. Without the ability to interconnect with the LANTA system, many people will be discouraged from using rail due to the inability to get to their final destination. So while LANTA might still not be behind rail, they seem to plan on taking some kind of positive role in the future.

LANTA unveils 12-year plan for future

Recommendations include more 'through routes,' better service to business, education and employment centers Public attendance was limited, but the comments were positive Monday regarding the long-range plan being developed by the Lehigh Valley's public bus agency.

The Lehigh and Northampton Transportation Authority's ''Moving LANTA Forward'' plan features consultant's recommendations including more effective use of ''core routes'' such as Tilghman Street/Union Boulevard, Hamilton Street/Hanover Avenue, and Susquehanna Street/Broadway; increasing the number of ''through routes'' between major destinations with fewer stops and transfers, and more frequent service to existing and emerging employment and business centers such as Fogelsville, the Sands casino, Airport Center shopping plaza and Lehigh Carbon Community College.

Further down the road, Abrams-Cherwony Group of Philadelphia also proposes development of ''bus rapid-transit'' concepts such as dedicated bus lanes and limited traffic-signal pre-emption, and the development of ''satellite hubs'' with links to the existing service hubs in Allentown, Bethlehem and Easton.

Satellites could be developed at high-traffic locations such as Lehigh Valley Hospital-Cedar Crest; Emmaus; Lehigh Valley International Airport; the area of Routes 22 and 512, and Route 33's Freemansburg Avenue interchange, site of the planned St. Luke's Hospital's expansion.

Eventually, Abrams envisions LANTA being involved with long-range plans for the restoration of passenger rail service between the region and Philadelphia and New York, not as a direct operator, but by running bus routes to area train stations. Development of ''light rail'' or trolley operations within the Lehigh Valley could be another part of the LANTA's future.

The proposed 12-year plan, for which Abrams was paid $250,000, was presented to the public at 3 and 7 p.m. Monday at the Lehigh County Government Center, Allentown, and similar public meetings are scheduled at the same times today at Bethlehem City Hall and Wednesday at the United Church of Christ, 27 N. Third St., Easton.

At Monday's afternoon in Allentown, only five people attended in addition to officials from LANTA or Abrams. But the few who spoke were generally positive, and sometimes enthusiastic.

''I'm quite pleased with the bus system here,'' said Robert Clarke, an Allentown retiree who no longer drives a car, relying on LANTA for basic transportation. The future plans would only improve services, he said, liking in particular Abrams' proposal to improve service to inter-city bus terminals such as Bieber and Trans-Bridge.

Frequent customer David Lahr of Allentown also looked forward to many of the proposed improvements.

Future service demands, the state and federal funding picture and other variables will help determine how much of the plan gets implemented.

The LANTA board wants to consider the public comments being gathered before formally adopting the recommendations, but the administration basically views them favorably, said Executive Director Armando Greco.

Gauging support for the return of rail

The Morning Call ran another front page article on rail this Saturday morning. This article is the first one on public opinion and the findings are interesting.

Gauging support for the return of rail

There hasn't been rail service to NYC for 50 years. If service returns, locals would ride and back it

By Josh Drobnyk | OF THE MORNING CALL | May 30, 2009

Lehigh Valley residents remain less than thrilled about the quality of transportation in the region, while a significant number say they'd be willing to pay higher taxes to bring rail service to the area, a Morning Call/

Muhlenberg College poll shows.

Returning rail to the Valley has been a hot topic for years among transportation planners, who have debated whether a critical mass of residents would take advantage of the service.

Nearly a third of poll respondents said they would use passenger rail about once a month or more if service were established between the Valley and New York City. Just 3 percent said they would use it multiple times each week. Still, even that small number translates into nearly 15,000 adults from Lehigh and Northampton counties.

Overall, only 5 percent of residents rate transportation in the Lehigh Valley as excellent, a number that has remained consistent in the seven-year history of the poll. Forty-five percent rate it as good, while four in 10 say it is not so good or poor.

Asked whether they would be willing to pay higher sales taxes to bring a rail line to the region to connect to New York City, 43 percent said yes, while 47 percent said no. A similar percentage said they would be willing to pay a higher gasoline tax if the money were used to establish more rail transportation across the United States.

''To even have public opinion mixed on the matter of raising taxes is a pretty good indicator that there is some strong support in the Valley to have rail service come back here,'' said Muhlenberg College pollster Christopher Borick, who directed the survey. ''Usually when you ask any tax question, it is not very close.''

Muhlenberg College surveyed 403 residents of Lehigh and Northampton counties between April 13 and May 18. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 5 percentage points. The Allentown college and The Morning Call are partners on a number of surveys each year.

Despite the mixed feelings about transportation in the Valley, nearly four in 10 residents say they are very satisfied with the amount of time it takes them to commute to work, while just 8 percent say they are somewhat or very dissatisfied. More than a quarter said they weren't sure.

Rail service between the Lehigh Valley and New York City ended nearly 50 years ago. One poll respondent, 92-year-old Ralph Weiner, said he recalled occasionally making the trip with his wife for a night out at the theater.

The Allentown native spent much of his career driving 90 minutes to and from Philadelphia, where he worked as a test administrator for the federal government. He said he'd pay more in sales taxes to see train service restored. He said he doesn't drive much anymore, but would hop on a train to the big city perhaps once a month.

''When you have rail traffic to a major city, you are not going to use your car by any means,'' he said, ''which in turn will decrease the flow of traffic.''

Planners and rail enthusiasts have been discussing the idea of trying to restore the service for years. Valley leaders have commissioned a $250,000 study that should be completed around the end of this year. Among the questions to be answered is what the rail ridership could be.

The Morning Call survey provided a glimpse.

The bulk -- 32 percent -- of respondents said they would use passenger rail service a few times a year if it were established between the Valley and New York City. Fourteen percent said they'd use it once a month; 9 percent a few times a month; 4 percent about once a week; and 3 percent multiple times a week. One in five said they would use it less than once a year.

Rates of potential ridership were greater among younger residents and minorities, according to survey responses. One in eight nonwhites and 18- to 34-year-olds said they'd use the service multiple times per week.

Paul Marin, chairman of the passenger rail panel of the Lehigh Valley Economic Development Corp., cautioned against reading much into the survey findings. He said it's difficult to get an accurate read on who and how often people would use the train when they don't know where exactly it would stop or how much it would cost to ride. He likened it to asking people how much they would use the freeway before interstate highways were built beginning in the mid-1950s.

''My contention is that we are simply at a point -- at the front end -- of a massive program of rail for the country,'' he said, noting President Barack Obama's plan to spend $13 billion-plus on high-speed rail in the next five years.

NJ Transit Could come to Lehigh Valley

Apparently rail could be brought back earlier though a deal with tolling the Delaware River bridges. This is a good an interesting development.

Plan could bring commuter rail to Lehigh Valley in five years


Link to NJ Transit: Bridge panel would use millions in toll money to pay for it.
By Matt Assad Of The Morning Call
October 14, 2008


A plan to bring passenger railroads into the Lehigh Valley would tap the millions of dollars that motorists pay in Delaware River bridge tolls to fund a $100 million line that would link Easton to NJ Transit trains.

Talks to have the Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission pay to extend a line 20 miles west from High Bridge, N.J., began two years ago and have been re-energized by high gasoline prices and highway congestion.

Such a deal would mean trains could be running into Easton in as little as five years, helping regional planners avoid what could otherwise be a 10- to 20-year wait to get enough federal funding.

But for now, the plan remains a concept awaiting the blessing of the governors of Pennsylvania and New Jersey, said bridge commission Chairman David R. DeGerolamo.

''The frustrating thing is if we had done this two years ago, when I first suggested it, we'd be close to having trains running,'' said DeGerolamo, who is also a Phillipsburg councilman. ''Now it's sort of in a holding pattern until we get some kind of direction from the governors. It's too bad, because I think we missed an opportunity.''

Chuck Ardo, spokesman for Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, said Rendell supports establishing the line into the Valley and the bridge commission is free to fund the construction if it chooses, but said the costs of running the railroad must also be considered.

''It's unquestionably a worthwhile project,'' Ardo said. ''No one has specifically approached the governor about it, but even if they do, funding is going to be an issue, not only for construction, but for ongoing operations.''

New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine's office did not comment.

If the commission had approved floating $100 million in bonds as DeGerolamo requested, it would have had to determine whether it could repay them through existing tolls, increased tolls or by adding tolls to one of its 13 free bridges. That's still the case.

The issue of extending NJ Transit into the Lehigh Valley resurfaced in recent months, as Valley highways became more crowded with people commuting to New York City and New Jersey and gas prices rose to more than $4 a gallon.

Lehigh and Northampton counties along with the Lehigh Valley Economic Development Corp. have together committed $250,000 to pay for a study of what it would cost to extend the NJ Transit line through the Valley and what it would cost to operate.

But Paul Marin, a former Wall Street money manager now living in Allentown, says the line would be a small piece of a statewide rail network that he's been advocating throughout the region.

He's spent the past two months meeting with officials, including Pennsylvania Community and Economic Development Secretary Dennis Yablonsky and Transportation Secretary Allen D. Bieler. Last week, he made his plea during the annual Pennsylvania Planning Partners Conference in Canonsburg, Washington County.

''If we can build a statewide rail plan, then we are eligible for billions of dollars in federal money,'' Marin said. ''Locally, the toll bridge commission is an option that could have trains running within four years after floating the bonds. That would be ideal.

Morning Call Calls for Light Rail

This is an opinion piece found in the Morning Call in December

In 2009, start to make Valley's rail connections real

Imagine speeding over the land at 200 miles per hour, reading this newspaper while having a drink and chatting with your family or business associates in absolute comfort and safety.

That is quickly becoming the reality for the rest of the world.

Over the next decade, the Chinese government is planning to spend roughly $500 billion to construct an extensive high-speed rail network. They are hardly alone. Vietnam, Korea, Taiwan, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Spain and others -- the list of countries investing in high speed rail is too long to print here.

Meanwhile, the United States spent just $1.3 billion on Amtrak in 2008, or about 2 percent of the federal transportation budget.

Amtrak has been on life support for decades, receiving just enough money each year to keep it from shutting down completely. Yet, despite aging equipment and slow service, more than 28 million people rode Amtrak last year, a record.

In the 1950s, America had the fastest and most luxurious trains in the world. That was then. Today European and Asian rail networks are extensive and growing with trains that can exceed speeds of 200 mph. In a competitive world economy, we are falling far behind.

In fact, we are the only large developed country in the world that does not use the tripod of transportation: air, roads, and rail. As author James Howard Kustler says, "The United States has a passenger rail system that Bulgaria would be ashamed of." This must change -- and it is.

This past November, despite a massive recession and state budge woes, California voters approved $10 billion in state bonds to construct a high speed rail system. The bonds will help to provide the local match for partnerships with other investors, such as Uncle Sam.

Other states are watching with interest. In the Midwest, 10 states have joined forces to plan an expansive rail network with a hub in Chicago. Texas has looked at high speed rail to link Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio. Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, and numerous other states are developing state rail plans to expand passenger rail service.

If Pennsylvania does not act quickly, we will be left behind when the federal government gets serious about funding passenger rail. Other states will have solid plans and environmental clearances ready, so they will get the infrastructure dollars.

And, the United States is falling behind the rest of the world in terms of transportation. China, for example, is investing hundreds of billions of dollars in high speed rail to link its cities.

When people visit the United States from other countries, they are often shocked by our lack of viable public transportation. They act as if a basic element of modern infrastructure is missing, as if we had opted not to build something as essential to them as hospitals or fire departments.

Pennsylvania is ideal for passenger railroads. We have areas of high population density, and many of our cities and towns are already linked by rail infrastructure. We have great downtowns that are perfect for rail stations. We also have experience with high-quality passenger rail. The Keystone trains between Harrisburg and Philadelphia zip along at 110 miles per hour.

Yet, there is a common belief in other parts of the country that the "northeast" rail network is complete just because we already have the Northeast Corridor connecting Boston to Washington D.C. We already have trains in New York and Philadelphia, so what else do we need?

The Lehigh Valley has more than 800,000 residents, yet we have no rail service. Meanwhile, cities like Norfolk, Va., and Phoenix, Ariz. are building light rail. This week, a new commuter train opened in Santa Fe, N.M., a city with only 72,000 residents ( Allentown has over 100,000). Clearly, our rail network is nowhere near as extensive as it needs to be.

A state rail plan is needed to bring rail service to all of Pennsylvania's population centers. Trains must be frequent, reliable, and fast. Such a network will help our local economies remain competitive, create jobs, reduce our dependence on foreign oil and will provide an option for residents to travel quickly and safely.

Paul J. Marin of Allentown is the chair of the Transportation Committee of the Lehigh Valley

Published in the Morning Call on December 29, 2008

Wonderling Talks About Light Rail

This article was on the front page of the Morning Call today and talks about light rail and transportation in general.

Wonderling in the Driver's Seat

Senate committee chairman talks tolls, light rail, taxes.

As federal stimulus money for transportation projects begins to flow into Pennsylvania, state Sen. Robert C. Wonderling, R-Montgomery, will be close to the action.

First elected in 2002, Wonderling, a former official in the state Department of Transportation during the Ridge administration, was named chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee earlier this year.

He took a few minutes to chat last week in Harrisburg with The Morning Call about some of the transit challenges facing the state in the coming months.

Q: You've served at PennDOT under Gov. Ridge and now chair the Senate Transportation Committee. Where does this interest come from?

A: It wasn't by design but more by coincidence. My first job out of college, I worked for a policy think tank … and it was transportation-related. It was literally planes, trains and automobiles … I've grown to understand that transportation is a core function of state government. A well-maintained and modern transportation system is the key to any development. It's a building block that cannot be ignored.

Q: What did your time in the executive branch teach you about how the state funds its transportation needs? How are you applying those lessons now?

A: One of our bipartisan objectives is to try to move PennDOT more quickly as it relates to delivering projects and completing transportation work. The old adage that time is money really does ring true … The fact [that] I understand some of the arcane aspects of the PennDOT bureaucracy was invaluable in terms of this assignment now. We can develop meaningful legislative initiatives and not just be window-dressing.

Q: Light rail, specifically a line linking Pennsylvania to New York City, has been suggested as one way to ease traffic congestion. Is such a plan realistic?

A: The Lehigh Valley, which has grown rapidly in population, should take the prospects for passenger rail very seriously because it is a strategic part of any economic development in the Valley. New residents are expecting that.

Q: Does the state have a responsibility to fund mass transit? If so, to what extent? If not, why not?

A: State government does have a responsibility. I voted for Act 44, which created a dedicated source for transit for the commonwealth. Under Act 44, depending on how you do the numbers, right now local government is only responsible for 15 percent of transit, which means state and federal government pick up the balance.

Q: Act 44, which authorized tolls for Interstate 80, will expire next year, leaving the state about $450 million a year short for its transportation needs. Your House equivalent, Rep. Joe Markosek, D-Allegheny, has suggested that it might be appropriate to try to toll all the state's interstate highways. Would you support this?

A: I agree. And I hope, through the reauthorization of the federal transportation law, that states will have greater flexibility to toll interstates if they see fit. We have about a year to figure out if there will be tolls on Interstate 80] and, if not, what the alternative will be. Over the long term, I believe gas taxes will be a declining source of revenue to fund [transportation]. As we move more to hybrid vehicles, and see federal government raise the fuel efficiency standards, you'll have people in vehicles that use less gas … that creates a declining source of revenue.

Q: Can you talk about your working relationship with Chairman Markosek? What kind of cooperation are you trying to foster?

A: The good news, for Pennsylvania, is that transportation has always been a bipartisan endeavor. There shouldn't be an ideological conflict on how to fix a bridge. I make a point to talk to [Markosek] every week or 10 days just to check in. On transportation issues, Democrats and Republicans have always gotten along, because you have to work together to keep the system going.

Q: You have a reputation for being someone who's willing to listen to good ideas no matter which side they come from. Is there too much emphasis on the partisan ground game in Harrisburg?

A: I think it's becoming increasingly hard to get a 360-degree view of all the facts surrounding a legislative initiative. So, often times what motivates members to vote a certain way is opinion, or group-think. Special interests have really become a cottage industry in Harrisburg. Everyone has their own perspective. A special interest, at the end of the day, will only agree to issues on the margins, so you get a lot of rigid positions. So you've only got limited information being presented to you. I find it increasingly difficult to sift through all the special interest info that comes to my doorstep and reach a conclusion that comes from a broader perspective. Since I was elected in 2002, there's been a turnover. I'm finding members willing to listen to a range of perspectives. Not as many seniors any more. There's a lot of sophomores and juniors willing to listen and take a new approach. I think members on both sides have tired of gotcha politics, the nasty mailers.

Q: It appears as if there won't be a tax increase this year thanks to an infusion of stimulus money. But, given the state's precarious financial health, is a general tax increase inevitable?

A: I think there are still plenty of opportunities to cut state government and reposition it for a more modern Pennsylvania.

Q: You've been mentioned as a possible candidate for lieutenant governor, how actively are you pursuing that right now?

A: If there is some opportunity to me to rise to statewide office and I can serve the citizens in that capacity, I would definitely do that. But since the first day of January I've been so immersed in transportation, I've really just focused on doing this job well. This assignment is time consuming and that has really been the case.

From the Morning Call April 20, 2009

It seems that Wonderling definitely understands the importance of rail in a comprehensive transportation plan.