Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, February 8, 1995 TAG: 9502080052
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
The Senate's version of the budget bill includes funding for the Commonwealth Transportation Board to continue its study of running trains between Bristol and the state and nation's capitals; the House budget bill does not.
The prospect of restored service remains less than a sure thing, to say the least. But the study ought to continue - not because passenger trains have a sentimental pull on this region's heart strings, but because initial findings suggest the trains could be an economic success for the state.
A preliminary report last week by Leo Bevon, director of Virginia's Department of Rail and Public Transportation, was surprisingly upbeat: Yes, restoring the service is economically feasible. The trains could be operating on a break-even basis by 2007, and turning a profit by 2012.
Though Bevon estimated that $41 million would be required to buy the rolling stock, plus an additional investment in passenger stations and other facilities, he figures that the service could recoup $18 million in revenue in its first year of operation if it ran two northbound and two southbound trains per day.
The initial report, based on extensive surveying of the public's transportation wishes and needs, also suggests that using the train service would be cheaper for passengers than operating their own automobiles. And possibly faster, too. The study proposes using a new type of tilt rail cars that would allow for faster speeds without having to rebuild curves on the rails.
Ahem - the rails. For those, obviously, the state would have to look to the cooperation of Norfolk Southern Corp., which has been somewhat less than giddy about the prospects of passenger trains' return. NS officials (needlessly) remind that the railroad is in the business of hauling freight, not people - which it gave up hauling in and out of Roanoke in 1971. The railroad, Bevon candidly told legislators, views the state and its possible interest in using the rails as ``unwelcome guests at this point.''
But perhaps NS could be persuaded to become more accommodating. It wouldn't hurt if a more accurate costs-benefit analysis, expected in the second phase of the study, were to show that passenger trains could be operated on the tracks without significantly disrupting the freight-hauling business.
From the legislature's perspective, firm evidence also would be needed for the proposition that rail service can pay adequate dividends in economic development and increased tourism to justify the state's investment.
But those potential dividends could be significant. The General Assembly, which traditionally has funded studies on everything from cabooses to kudzu, ought to continue the passenger-rail study to find out.
by CNB