3ROLF\)RFXV5HSRUW/LQFROQ,QVWLWXWHRI/DQG3ROLF\ High-Speed Rail International Lessons for U.S. Policy Makers PETRA TODOROVICH, DANIEL SCHNED, AND ROBERT LANE High-Speed Rail International Lessons for U.S. Policy Makers Petra Todorovich, Daniel Schned, and Robert Lane Policy Focus Report Series The policy focus report series is published by the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy to address timely public policy issues relating to land use, land markets, and property taxation. Each report is designed to bridge the gap between theory and practice by combining research findings, case studies, and contributions from scholars in a variety of academic disciplines and from profes- sional practitioners, local officials, and citizens in diverse communities. About This Report This report was prepared with the Regional Plan Association as part of the Lincoln Institute/ Regional Plan Association joint venture partnership known as America 2050. This is the third report on high-speed rail generated by America 2050 since 2009, when the U.S. High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program was launched. The program has made investments of $10.1 billion in high-speed and conventional passenger rail corridors across the country. Previous reports by America 2050 proposed a federal decision-making framework for invest- ments in high-speed rail based on regional factors that contribute to ridership demand, such as population density, employment concentrations, the presence of rail–transit connections, and existing intercity traffic flows. This report assembles key lessons and research on the potential benefits of high-speed rail, drawn from nearly 50 years of experience with this mode of transportation in more than a dozen countries across the globe. Intended for policy makers, professionals, and interested citizens, it documents the approaches to high-speed rail that best leverage public investments for transportation benefits, economic development, and environmental and safety concerns. In the context of a new and controversial U.S. commitment to major high-speed rail projects, such as the statewide California system, this report offers recommendations for federal policy and explores various funding and financing strategies, as well as ideas about station location and design. It points to the Northeast Corridor and California as the two most promising regions in which to pursue high-speed rail initially, and suggests steps toward building support for those projects. Copyright © 2011 by Lincoln Institute of Land Policy All rights reserved. 113 Brattle Street Cambridge, MA 02138-3400, USA Phone: 617-661-3016 or 800-526-3873 Fax: 617-661-7235 or 800-526-3944 ON THE COVER: Email: [email protected] Germany’s Inter-City Express (ICE) high- Web: www.lincolninst.edu speed rail system began operation in 1991. ISBN 978-1-55844-222-1 © COMSTOCK Policy Focus Report/Code PF029 . Contents 2 Executive Summary 4 Chapter 1. International Experience with High-Speed Rail 6 What is High-Speed Rail? 7 High-Speed Rail’s Track Record 8 Prospects for a U.S. System 14 Summary 15 Chapter 2. Potential Benefits of High-Speed Rail 15 Transportation Benefits 16 Economic Benefits 19 Environmental Benefits 21 Summary 22 Chapter 3. U.S. Policy and Programs for High-Speed Rail Investment 23 The Current Legislative and Funding Framework 24 The High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Program 26 Federal Rail Policy Challenges 27 Summary 28 Chapter 4. Station Location and Design: A Typology and Case Studies 28 Four European Stations 35 Taking Advantage of Redevelopment Opportunities 36 Summary 37 Chapter 5. The Promise of High-Speed Rail in California and the Northeast Corridor 37 High-Speed Rail Plans in California 39 Current Conditions in the Northeast Corridor 45 Summary 46 Chapter 6. Funding and Financing Options for High-Speed Rail 48 Government Financing Tools 49 Public-Private Partnerships 53 Summary 54 Chapter 7. Recommendations for High-Speed Rail in the United States 57 References 60 About the Authors 60 Acknowledgments 61 About the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, America 2050, and Regional Plan Association TODOROVICH, SCHNED & LANE O HIGH-SPEED RAIL 1 . ([HFXWLYH6XPPDU\ © ISTOCKPHOTO The departures board igh-speed rail has been adopted In 2009–2010, the U.S. Congress appro- at Paris’s Gare du Nord throughout the world, and is priated $10.1 billion for a new high-speed TGV station. now being planned and devel- and intercity passenger rail program. Appli- oped in the United States. Over cations from 39 states requested nearly $75 Hthe past 50 years, U.S. transportation spend- billion, demonstrating broad interest in ing has favored the development of inter- and support for this program. The available state highway and aviation systems. In the funds were awarded to dozens of conven- meantime, countries such as China, Japan, tional intercity passenger rail projects and Spain, France, and Germany have been in- a few dedicated high-speed rail projects in vesting in modern high-speed rail systems 32 states and the District of Columbia, and to satisfy the travel demands of current and those projects are now moving forward. future generations. As the United States em- The U.S. Department of Transportation, barks on the High-Speed Intercity Passenger which manages the passenger rail program, Rail Program launched in 2009, it can learn has adopted a tiered approach, which em- from the experiences of other countries in phasizes investments appropriate to the planning, constructing, and operating different markets and geographies in the high-speed rail. United States. It defines three categories 2 POLICY FOCUS REPORT O LINCOLN INSTITUTE OF LAND POLICY . of passenger rail service that are intended to This report describes several funding strate- work together as a network: Core Express refers gies that have proven to be successful in other to high-speed trains operating on dedicated countries, and makes specific policy recommen- tracks with frequent service; Regional service dations to better position the federal high-speed operates at moderately high speeds and high rail program for success. frequency on shared corridors; and Emerging/ Feeder service is less frequent and connects Strengthen the federal policy and man- smaller and emerging markets to major markets agement framework by expanding the feder- located along Regional and Core Express routes. al role in planning and prioritizing high-speed Decades of international experience with rail corridors and working with the states to high-speed rail suggests that it could create secure rights-of-way. similar transportation, economic, environmen- tal, and safety benefits in American cities and Prioritize corridors that meet investment regions. While it requires high upfront invest- criteria by clarifying the objectives and desired ment, high-speed rail promotes economic growth outcomes of the federal program and promot- by improving market access, boosting produc- ing investments in those corridors that exhibit tivity of knowledge workers, expanding labor the characteristics that are indicative of success. markets, and attracting visitor spending. When planned thoughtfully with complementary in- Establish new mechanisms for corridor vestments in the public realm, high-speed rail management by developing legislation that can promote urban regeneration and attract enables the creation of public infrastructure commercial development, as shown in several corporations that can operate across state and European examples. High-speed rail has greater national borders and attract private investment. operating energy efficiency than competing modes and takes up less land than highways. Plan for maximum land development The initial investment of $10.1 billion in the benefits by coupling high-speed rail station U.S. High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail Pro- investments with policies that encourage land gram, after years of minimal federal investment, development around station areas. In general, required that the federal government and par- well-connected stations in center-city locations ticipating states quickly scale up to the challenge offer the greatest potential for urban revitalization. of laying the groundwork for a foundational pro- gram and implementing it at the same time. Focus initially on the Northeast Corridor Those states that had the staff capacity, exper- and California, which offer the best opportu- tise, and experience in rail planning, such as nities for Core Express high-speed rail service in Illinois, North Carolina, and Washington, were the United States, by addressing the management successful in securing high-speed rail grants. and financing challenges each region faces. However, carrying the momentum of this initial investment forward has proven to be a struggle Secure adequate and reliable funding in a difficult fiscal environment, and California by drawing on a full complement of potential is currently the only federally funded Core Express federal, state, and private sources. Such sources high-speed rail project moving forward. In 2011, could include increasing existing transportation- Congress voted to strip funding from the program. related fees (such as a portion of the gas tax or The expiration of the legislation authorizing the ticket surcharges), creating an infrastructure high-speed rail program in 2013 may provide bank, forging public-private partnerships, and an opportunity to consider policy changes. expanding existing credit assistance programs. TODOROVICH, SCHNED & LANE O HIGH-SPEED RAIL 3 . CHAPTER 1 International