The proprietor of this website, Michael D. Setty, recently co-authored a Policy Brief with Timothy Collins of the Illinios Institute of Rural Affairs entitled: Connecting the Spots: Twenty-First Century Electric Interurban Railways to Meet Strategic Transportation Goals.

This document is located at http://www.iira.org under the "News" column on the homepage.

An excerpt:

Our definition of twenty-first century interurbans is more a service concept than a technological one. We propose an interurban service concept to replace the typical commuter rail niche on routes of less than about 100 miles, with the following provisions:

• Service on “clock headways” would occur at the same times every hour, with train frequencies of at least every 60 minutes operating at least 16 hours per day, for example, from 6:00 a.m. to at least 10:00 p.m., seven days per week.

• Rail routes serving markets with greater patronage potential would also operate on clock headways, every 30 minutes, 20 minutes, 15 minutes, etc. The service concept can also be stretched to less frequent, primarily non-electrified services of every two hours, every three hours, etc., where hourly services are not justified because of lower patronage potential.
• Corridors should be electrified, and generally operated by self-propelled electric multiple units (EMUs). Such equipment is usually much more energy-efficient than diesel-powered trains, and considerably less costly
• to maintain. EMUs also have faster acceleration than diesels, reducing travel times by 15-20 percent in most cases. Electric traction is also highly flexible, since it can use any source of generated power.
• Twenty-first century interurban schedules should be fully integrated with other types of rail and bus service at key stations using a pulsed hub network where arrivals and departures are carefully synchronized to minimize waiting.
• Generally, twenty-first century interurbans would stop at most smaller communities bypassed by conventional HSR and IPR. In Illinois and most states east of the Interstate 35 corridor [running north-south between San Antonio, Texas and Duluth, Minnesota], local stations typically would be 5-15 miles apart. They could be spaced even farther apart in the lowest density regions. These interurban routes would connect to HSR, intercity passenger rail, and other rail and bus services at key hubs in regional pulsed hub networks, typically located in larger cities, metropolitan areas, and also at important regional airports. Rural bus services would also be integrated into the overall network, connecting at secondary hubs located in smaller cities and towns.

A recent study of urban light rail systems concludes that the more extensive transit systems have greater influences on other transportation modes such as walking, biking and transit (Reconnecting America 2009). We suggest that a well-planned interurban web would enhance rural local and regional transportation options, while meeting national transportation goals. With the recent growth of rail transit systems in major cities such as St. Louis, there are opportunities to develop larger regional systems to strategically connect outlying areas.

Conclusion

In our view, twenty-first century interurbans could readily be coordinated with and supplement federal plans for HSR, as well as policy prescriptions by T4America.org , and the long-standing recommendations of the Midwest Regional Rail System (Transportation Economic and Management Systems, Inc 2004), among others. Including rural areas served by interurbans as feeders to HSRs and other transportation nodes would enhance rural communities, improve economic opportunities, and strengthen the national economy to meet global competition.

Pulsed hub networks, as perfected by the Swiss—and sometimes partially implemented by small city and suburban bus networks in the U.S.—is a network planning concept that is applicable to the entire passenger transportation spectrum, including infrequent rural bus lines, small city transit lines, the proposed interurbans, and 110-mph and 220-mph HSR. Where HSR service is not directly available, twenty-first century interurbans can connect rural, small town, micropolitan and metropolitan areas using existing rail lines, previously abandoned rights-of-way, and other alignments. Two case studies illustrate how the concept has been used on a small scale in the San Francisco Bay area and nationwide in Switzerland.

Electrifying these rail lines would provide fast and sustainable transportation to a broad spectrum of rural and urban residents who would otherwise be bypassed by a relatively sparse HSR network. Electrification is preferable because of its energy efficiency, ability to use any source of generated power, and its much better acceleration and service compared with diesel traction. Direct benefits to the community also include increased and sustainable energy efficiency, significant travel time savings (particularly in non-interstate highway corridors), reduced traffic congestion, increased access to jobs and educational opportunities, and rural and urban community revitalization through lower travel times to large cities that would encourage more businesses to expand and locate in smaller communities.