3-2-3

Trench-2
The following is from Kristin Reihl, our representative on the Citizen Committee.

****************************

On Wednesday, December 6 the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB) unanimously adopted a resolution supporting option 5A (the 3-2-3 option) through the Ashland/Hanover portion of the DC2RVA corridor. The resolution includes language intended to limit property acquisition along the tracks in Ashland and protect property and operations at Randolph-Macon College. The resolution by the CTB is a recommendation to the Federal Railroad Administration who will make the ultimate decision on the track improvements throughout the 123 mile DC2RVA corridor.

Town staff have compiled a substantial resource page at http://www.ashlandva.gov/505/DC2RVA-Information where you can review video and minutes from DC2RVA related meetings as well as various resolutions, letters and studies published by interested parties. Please contact Town Manager, Joshua Farrar at (804) 798-9219 or Jfarrar@ashlandva.gov if you have questions.

Advertisements

CTB Meeting: 2017-11-09

Commonwealth Transportation Board 2017-11-07

The Commonwealth Transportation Board held a meeting on November 11th at Randolph-Macon college to discuss the Tier II Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). The discussion was for the whole corridor — not just the Ashland/Hanover section.

Here are a few notes:

  • 3,350 comments were submitted during the Tier II EIS comment period— over half were from the Ashland/Hanover area.
  • They are recommending the 3-2-3 option: 3 tracks to north of Vaughan Rd. and three tracks south of Ashcake Rd., with two tracks running through town.
  • Overpass bridges would be installed at Vaughan and at Ashcake.
  • There was some discussion about installing fences along the track.
  • There have been many management changes at CSX but it is not known how they might affect the project.
  • There is no funding for the project.
  • Various people stressed the role that new technology might play in the project — specifically hyperloop and deep bore tunnels.

Highly Hazardous Chemicals — Trench

Burning tank car

One of the concerns to do with the trench option is that a release from a tank car carrying highly hazardous chemicals could be particularly serious because there is nowhere for explosive or toxic vapors to disperse and so become diluted. This concern is a particular concern for light flammable materials such as LPG (of which we have many cars). If the gas leaks to an open space (as it would now) then we could have an unconfined vapor cloud explosion. In the trench, however, we could have a confined vapor cloud explosion, which is much worse.

At the meeting where the trench option was first mooted it was reported that studies to do with highly hazardous chemicals in trenches have been carried out but that the team had not had a chance to look at them. Since my specialty is process risk management I asked for copies of those reports.

I received the following reply today.

*****************

Dear Mr. Sutton,

Federal regulations direct railroads to assess the risks for hazardous materials shipment routes. The DC2RVA Team found that risk analysis reports for other trench projects were not publicly available due to potentially sensitive security information.

Sincerely,
Emily Stock

*****************
The way that the EPA manages the security of this type of information under their Risk Management Program is to provide secure rooms and to check who is looking at the reports. But the fundamental policy is that such information needs to be available to the public in general and emergency services in particular.

I wrote to Ms. Stock as follows.

*****************

Dear Ms. Stock:

Thank you for your reply. I recognize that the information in these reports is sensitive and may represent a security concern. Nevertheless, the information should be made available to interested parties, particularly professional risk analysts and emergency responders.

The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) faces the same problem with their Risk Management Program (RMP). They do provide company reports to members of the public, but under controlled circumstances (for example, with secure rooms).

As you know I have worked in process risk management for many years. I would like to see these reports. I would, of course, agree to any reasonable security controls.

Regards,

Ian Sutton

*****************

The Destruction of Ashland

mcmurdo-annotated-2

The following is a letter written by Roseanne Shalf to various regulatory and government agencies. Given that technology is moving so fast it seems highly doubtful that the mid-1950s proposal from the DRPT will actually happen. But, as the letter points out, the destruction of our town is happening now.

*********************

Dear DC2RVA,

I am a resident of Ashland, Virginia. I have researched and written much about the history of Ashland including its historical relationship with the railroad companies that travel through the center of town. I have also attended most of the meetings regarding the third rail options for years now, including the most recent ones in 2017. I am very familiar with the Section 106 study done on Ashland’s historic properties. I think that the DC2RVA group must have been surprised about the strong community reaction to the third rail through town, and you should take the wisdom of the community very seriously.

I oppose the option to put a third rail through town for a number of reasons. A few are below.

#1. THE FRA DECISION WILL HAVE IMPACTS IMMEDIATELY: The biggest and most immediate impact will be simply the decision by FRA to choose the option to add a third rail through town, even though it is scheduled for 15 years down the road. The town’s economy will begin to crash now, not just in 15 years or during the construction that will close Center Street for several years. I cannot say that strongly enough. It has happened in large cities, and even years after construction, the economy struggled to repair itself. But Ashland is a small town. We are constantly struggling to build up our public image. A 15-year lead-up, a 3 year shutdown of our historic downtown, and the impact on our primary employer Randolph-Macon College, will destroy the town for decades and it may never recover. It doesn’t matter how pretty we can make it look after construction. The economic scare has already started. Homeowners who want to sell are having difficulty getting contracts. This is especially true for homes facing the tracks. Shop owners are wary of longterm commitments and are beginning to look for a way out of the commitments they already have. That will intensify over the next 15 years should FRA choose the 3rd rail through town. Such a massive project as the one proposed for a small town like Ashland, with so few commercial, residential, and tourist corridors, cannot be compared to a project on a city that has many such corridors. Ashland WILL LIKELY NEVER RECOVER. We have too few resources.

So, if there is a better alternative, such as the Hyperloop or streamlined ways for deep-bore tunnel construction, that are developed in the intervening 15 years, it will be too late for Ashland. If the decision is made now for a third rail through town, Ashland will have collapsed. How can you contemplate such a project for this town?

#2. THE 1836 RIGHT OF WAY IS TOO SMALL: The current right of way for the rails through Ashland was established in 1836 and the town developed around it. The oldest and most historic part of town is along that current right of way. The oldest shade trees line the track. A third rail would require demolition of some of the houses and businesses, demolition of all the 100-year old street trees along both sides of the track, and it would place the rails so close to many homes and businesses that they would be rendered uninhabitable—useless. Moreover, the development over the last 181 years has been so dense that there is no way to move the buildings back 10-20 feet. Is it really worth it to choose this option? The lawsuits would be unending, would cost the government many millions, and would create longterm delays.

#3. THERE WILL BE NO WAY TO ACCESS MID-BLOCK HOMES AND BUSINESSES DURING THE 3-YEAR CONSTRUCTION PERIOD: The town was laid out formally in 1854, (please see attached map) although we believe that some buildings were constructed before then. The lots along the tracks were between 8 and 30 acres each, and over the intervening years they have been subdivided into smaller, different size lots. That created lots of different depths so that today there is not straight line along the backs of the lots. (See the Hanover gis site, attached, or access it at http://www.hanovercountygis.org) Thus, there are no alleyways behind the buildings along the tracks. To try to create alleyways today to access the mid-block buildings from the rear would require demolition of even more buildings in the historic district. To create a temporary rail or temporary travel lanes along the fronts of buildings along the right of way in order to create access to mid-block buildings would bring the car lanes or tracks within feet of some of front porches and doors—For three years or more with no break! The project cannot be phased.

#4. THE SECTON 106 STUDY REVEALED BUILDINGS THAT ARE POTENTIALLY ELIGIBLE FOR INDIVIDUAL LISTINGS. The DHR and the consultants who completed the study marked a number of buildings along the tracks in the business district of the Ashland Historic District, the residential part of the Historic District, and on the Randolph-Macon Historic Campus that are potentially eligible for individual status. They were designated as potentially eligible for individual listing because they are an unusually intact example of Greek Revival, High Victorian, or Colonial Revival architecture, or an important event took place, or an important person lived there during formative years, or an important architect designed a building. As an example, our 1923 Train Station, designed by W. Duncan Lee of Richmond, would be demolished to make way for the enlarged right of way.

We are justifiabley proud of our Ashland Historic District and the Randolph-Macon Historic Campus, and we have been planning for some time to create a separate historic district in the Berkleytown area to the north of the campus that is traditionally an African-American neighborhood to tell that part of the state and national story. These historic districts and the buildings that are potentially eligible for individual listings are not only fun nostalgically, but they tell a state and national story as well. They are serious history. Aren’t historic districts and buildings elevated to individual historic listings supposed to protect our state and national history?

#5. THE 100-YEAR OLD STREETSCAPE WILL BE DESTROYED: We have also pointed out that the 100-year old streetscape along the tracks would have to be demolished if a third rail on the surface or in a trench or in a soft-earth tunnel were to be constructed through town so that utilities could be reinstalled. It would take another 100 years to regrow those oak and maple shade trees, to say nothing of certain trees that hold a special history. As an example, the oak in the front yard of 604 S Center Street was one of a pair. In the 1870s, the family balanced a plank between the two trees to create a bench for Col. Pumphry, wounded during the Civil War, to watch the trains go by and to talk to his neighbors as they strolled by. The plank is long gone, but the tree remains. The old oaks in front of the former Ashland Baptist Church were likely planted when the church was built in 1859. Early pictures show them. Such old trees are not only pleasant to view, but the also tell a history, they soften the landscape, and they lower the ambient temperature. Not many towns in Virginia have so many large old trees that have survived so long. ( See photos of the streetscape below)

#6. THE TECHNOLOGY THAT FRA IS USING NOW IS FROM THE 1950s: We all know how fast technology changes. In transportation, countries like Canada, France, South Korea, and other nations are embracing new technology called Hyperloop for for both freight and passenger systems. Elon Musk is experimenting with a deep bore machine that would reduce costs and disruptions in our transportation system and in the social impacts. (Please see this link: https://iansutton.com/downloads/Hyperloop-Standards.pdf or Wikipedia explanation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop or Wired.com’s article on the new deep bore machine from Elon Musk’s The Boring Company at http://www.wired.co.uk/article/elon-musk-tunnel-boring) The cost is decreasing on both of those technologies. Imagine a deep bore tunnel under I-95, which is fairly straight, has plenty of right of way, and takes a train through Akka yard. It would not even require using potential future traveling lanes. Or a tunnel through the land west of Ashland, that would protect the historic farms, allow farmers to get to their fields, and would eliminate the need for and costly lawsuits related to eminent domain. Why are we still planning on using mid-20th century technology for a project that will be built mid-21st century? Shouldn’t FRA be looking at these new technologies before planning this gigantic, expensive, 3rd rail from DC to RVA, let alone through Ashland, Virginia? Innovative projects can attract donations from major private foundations like the Gates Foundation. Perhaps FRA could use this corridor as a model for the rest of the country.

Using new technology would eliminate costly lawsuits related to eminent domain.The social upheval would be nil. The project would raise support for rail projects where there was none. And the cost might be defrayed by foundation grants.

Thank you for paying attention to our comments. Please don’t put a third rail through Ashland, Virginia.

*********************

Draft EIS. Comment #11: Appendices I and J

Map of CSX operations
The following letter was mailed to the DRPT.

This is my last comment. I am commented out.

*************************************

712 S. Center St.
Ashland, VA 23005

281-782-7459

October 30th 2017

Dear Ms. Stock:

As you know I have submitted many comments on the Draft EIS to do with new technology. In summary, they say that the proposed expansion to the rail system, as discussed in the Draft EIS, is unrealistic due to the rapid and profound changes that are taking place in the transportation industry.

I recognize that considering the impact of new technology is outside the remit of the DRPT’s current scope. Nevertheless, it would, in my opinion, be inappropriate for the DRPT to continue spending funds on developing a project that is so unrealistic.

I have prepared a report entitled “Hyperloop — Setting the Standards”. A copy is enclosed with this letter; it can also be downloaded from https://iansutton.com/downloads/Hyperloop-Standards.pdf.

With regard to the details of the EIS I have two specific comments.

  1. I challenge ‘Section 2.2 Assumptions’ of Appendix I. No consideration is given to the fact that technology is changing. This assumption should be added to the report, and then defended.
  2. I also challenge the Contents of Appendix J, ‘Section 2.3 Supply’. It lists five types of transportation but fails to identify new technologies such as hyperloop.

As always, I would be grateful if you could acknowledge receipt of this letter. I am not confident that mailed comments are always processed properly.

Yours truly,

Ian Sutton

****************************

Hyperloop — Setting the Standards

Hyperloop train approaching New York
Regular readers of this blog know that, during the two years in which I have been writing about the proposed “High Speed Rail” project, I have been learning more and more about new technologies — particularly hyperloop. An increasing number of posts at this site have been to do with that topic.

I have decided to combine much of my research and analysis into a single report: Hyperloop — Setting the Standards. It can be downloaded here. (This is Rev.1; I will be making updates on a regular basis.) In the report I speak to four fundamental questions about hyperloop:

  1. Will it work?
  2. Is it safe?
  3. Can it be profitable?
  4. Is it socially acceptable?

The fourth question is probably the most relevant to our community. Virtually all the discussion to do with the proposed project has been about real estate. The insight that Elon Musk expressed in the year 2012 to do with hyperloop is that it is not about speed — it is about avoiding the use of new real estate.

As I said in a previous post,

  • I have registered the domain HyperloopVA.com. (There is no web site yet.) I will use it for further information and discussions to do with hyperloop. The site ashlandrail.com will continue to challenge the ill-thought out “High Speed Rail” project.
  • I will be preparing a matching video that you can download at no cost.
  • If you would like to speak in a meeting let me know.

I will submit this report (by mail, not email) to DRPT and the CTB (Commonwealth Transportation Board), and then I am done with commenting. (I have also offered to make a presentation to DRPT and the CTB.)

Draft EIS. Comment #10: The Boring Company

The Boring Company hyperloop

The following will be submitted as a comment to the DRPT.

****************************************

In previous posts I have pointed out that Elon Musk’s insight regarding transportation is that we are constrained by available real estate. The key advantage of hyperloop is that the low pressure tubes can be installed along existing rights of way with minimal disruption to the local communities. The fact that the capsules move at 600 mph is attractive, but it is not the prime reason for installing hyperloop.

In the context of our own “high speed” rail project my vision has been that we install the hyperloop tubes along the I-95 median. The capsules would be used for long-distance passengers and for high value freight. Our existing tracks — which would not need to be expanded — would be used for low value freight, such as coal, and for stopping passenger trains, such as we have now.

Needless to say, Musk is ahead of us. If we are to move into the third dimension we should also look at going down as well as up.

During the early discussions to do with the DRPT project the idea of a tunnel under Ashland was summarily dismissed as being too expensive. Yet, once more, Musk is turning things around. This year he formed a new company — the Boring Company — to come up with ways of creating tunnels more quickly and at lower cost than traditional methods. And now he has a contract: a tunnel between New York and Washington for hyperloop pods, with the first ten miles to be dug being in the Baltimore, MD area.

It would appear to be a simple matter to use the same technology for building a tunnel under Hanover County. Why is this option not being considered given that costs are being reduced so dramatically?

Draft EIS. Comment #9: Time Out

Elon Musk
Elon Musk

The following comment has been submitted to the DRPT.
***********************************
I recognize that the scope of the draft EIS does not include consideration of new technologies. Yet, if there is one industry in the United Sates that is undergoing radical change it is the transportation industry. In my view it would be irresponsible for the DRPT to make a recommendation to do with the future of passenger and freight transportation along the east coast corridor without considering these profound changes.

There are many aspects to the new technologies — these include drones, autonomous vehicles and electric vehicles. But the one that will have the greatest impact on the rail industry is what is known as ‘hyperloop’. The seminal paper on this topic was written by Elon Musk in the year 2012. He recognized that the key advantage to this technology is not speed — although traveling at 650 mph is certainly enticing — but the fact that such systems can be implemented without needing much real estate.

I am currently preparing an article with the working title, The Practicality of Hyperloop, for publication in a professional journal. In the article I address three questions:

  1. Does it (hyperloop) work?
  2. Is it safe?
  3. Can it be profitable?

Question #1
Hyperloop is made up of well-established and commercially proven pieces (low pressure tubes, linear induction motors, mag lev suspension), so my conditional answer to the first question is “Yes”.

Question #2
Process-Risk-Reliability-Management-2ndI have spent many years analyzing the risk to do with industrial systems (the picture is of one of my books on the topic: Process Risk and Reliability Management). Based on this experience I would say that there are legitimate safety concerns, but that traveling by hyperloop is likely to be safer than flying on a commercial airplane. So the answer to the second question is also a conditional “Yes”.

Question #3
Richard Branson Virgin Hyperloop OneFinally, we look at economics. Obviously there are many unknowns but the fact that Sir Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines has now made a substantial investment in the company known as ‘Virgin Hyperloop One’ suggests that professional investors see a real opportunity. So, once more, I respond with a conditional “Yes”.

I will mail a draft of my article to the DRPT before the November 7th comments deadline.

If DRPT management is interested in having a presentation on this topic, please let me know. I would be very willing to visit with management and discuss these issues in greater depth.

Open Letter

Open letter from Ragan Phillips; CSX subsidies
Shown below is an open letter written by Mr. Ragan Phillips to the Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT), dated October 7th 2017. I fully support what he says.

**********************

OPEN LETTER

October 7, 2017

TO: Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT)

Commonwealth of Virginia

Gentlemen:

The proposed rail system between Washington and Richmond (DC2RVA), promoted by the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (DRPT) and financially supported by the Commonwealth Transportation Board (CTB), represents devastation for farms and homes in western Hanover County or for homes and businesses in Ashland.

The CTB and the DRPT are poised to announce an unjustified “death sentence” on Hanover County and the community of Ashland.  Whenever and wherever this rail system is built, families, farms, friendships and communities will be destroyed.

Even though the execution may be years in the future, this “sentence” defines our area as a “dead man walking.”

ETHICAL DUTY OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

Federal and state government officials have a strong ethical duty to protect American tax –payers from improper or improvident use of our tax dollars.

This means that our tax dollars should be expended fairly and prudently. It does not mean that one element of industry or, particularly, one entity, should be the beneficiary of Federal and Commonwealth expenditures. It does not mean these expenditures should be made at the expense of the vast majority of the citizenry who receive no direct or indirect benefit.

The beneficiary of this huge multi-billion tax-payer funded project is neither the Commonwealth nor the public.  THE REAL BENEFICIARY IS CSX.

ASSERTION vs. FACT

ASSERTION:  The DRPT official web site states: “The purpose of this project is to provide a competitive transportation choice in the corridor by increasing intercity passenger rail capacity and improving travel times.”

FACT: Upwards of ninety percent (90%) of the railcars that will pass though the Commonwealth on this DC2RVA system will be CSX freight cars. Amtrak passengers would benefit by reducing the time for the Washington-Richmond trip by twenty minutes.

ASSERTION: The DRPT claims that this “public transportation” project, will be paid for by “federal, state and local sources.”

FACT: Sources? The DPRT has failed to advise the public that this “source” is us. Our tax dollars will underwrite CSX freight operations. In effect, the citizens of western Hanover and Ashland are being asked to write the checks for our own destruction.

ASSERTION: the DRPT publicizes this DC2RVA rail system as a “…segment of the Southeast High Speed Rail (SEHSR).”

FACT: It is, in fact, definitely not “high speed.” In actuality, DC2RVA is a huge upgrade on freight-laden rail lines primarily for the financial benefit of CSX.

A HAND IN THE TILL

To subsidize CSX, along with issuing misleading information, is certainly not an act that meets the aforementioned ethical duties of public officials.

The DC2RVA Project would allow CSX, an $11 billion revenue corporation with a $3 billion cash flow, to haul more freight at a faster pace and add to their bottom line.

CONCLUSION

The citizens of western Hanover County and the Town of Ashland must not be forced to pay for our own destruction.

The Commonwealth of Virginia has numerous essential, but under-funded, projects and institutions: affordable housing, mass public transportation, pre-school for all children, upgraded public education, and health care. Funding these needs would have a real, positive and long-term impact on the citizens of the Commonwealth.

If CSX wants this high cost upgrade of their rails, let them make the investment with their corporate resources of equity and from willing providers of debt.

In this case, public officials’ fiduciary duty is quite simple:

Invest our tax dollars to ensure a stronger Commonwealth…

not a better CSX freight line.

 

Sincerely,

Ragan Phillips                    Phyllis Theroux

504 Duncan Street/Ashland, Virginia 23005

 

cc: Senator Timothy Kaine

      Senator Mark Warner

      Governor Terry McAuliffe

 

 

 

 

Draft EIS. Comment #8: Operations

Map of CSX operations
This comment is based on the earlier post Greenfield / Brownfield. It notes that the trench option will be extremely disruptive to operations for four years or more. This will not only cause many delays to passenger service along the corridor, it will also negatively impact the operations and profitability of CSX and other freight companies.

A bypass, on the other hand, can be installed without causing any disruption to on-going operations.