HIGH-SPEED LOCATION One thousand high-level officials, experts, and stakehold- ers in high-speed rail attended Highspeed 2012, which was presented by UIC and APTA in cooperation with the Associa- tion of American Railroads, Amtrak, the Federal Railroad Administration, and VIA Rail Canada — all UIC members — at the Pennsylvania Convention Center in Philadelphia on July 10–13. The theme, “High-Speed Rail: Connecting People, Building Sustainable Prosperity,” reflected the growing pres- ence of high-speed rail in U.S. transportation-policy discus- sions — and not just at the national level. Indeed, while Congress actually voted to defund Obama’s
$53-billion plan in 2011, the California Legislature approved its own $7.9-billion plan just days before Highspeed 2012 got under way. There was even talk on the exhibition floor that as many as 200 of the conference’s attendees were walk-up registrants, and were a direct result of California’s decision. Once it was determined that UIC would be bringing its
biennial program to the newly relevant United States, fig- uring out when and where specifically to convene in 2012 became the first priority. “When the event was awarded to us, we went around talking to all of our industry partners, anyone else who has an interest in rail all around the world, to figure out when their events were in the 2012 cycle,” Gal- lagher said. “We didn’t want to come up against even our own [APTA] Rail Conference, which happens every June. … And because high-speed rail has been such a signature component of the [Obama] administration, we wanted to make sure it happened before the [presidential] election in November.” APTA considered several destinations along the North-
east Corridor, stretching from Boston to Washington, D.C., because that’s where the United States has its only version of high-speed rail, in the form of Amtrak’s Acela Express service. “We moved to Philly, and they had the best package available for us,” Gallagher said. “They could handle our dates, the number of people we anticipated, and the amount of exhibit space.” Philadelphia was a good fit for other reasons as well. “The
[Pennsylvania] Convention Center is known for being part of Reading Terminal, which is one of the main [rail] hubs on the East Coast,” said Peter Horch, director of events at the Pennsylvania Convention Center. “The train station is part of the convention center and is actually where [UIC] had a lot of their events, in the old train shed, so to speak — which has, of course, been renovated.” Highspeed 2012 held its Gala Din- ner, for example, in the soaring train shed, which was built in 1893 and has been renovated to become the convention cen- ter’s signature 30,000-square-foot Grand Hall ballroom.
PLANNING ACROSS BORDERS Other planning aspects of hosting a European-headquartered organization’s biennial event for the first time in the United
The theme reflected the growing presence of high- speed rail in U.S. transportation- policy discussions.
Was Highspeed 2012 Derailed?
Funding for high-speed-rail projects in the United States is contentious. While states like California have recently approved money for their own programs, and the issue received a high- profile push from President Obama at the beginning of his administration, governors in Florida, Ohio, and Wisconsin just last year rejected federal funding for the development of individual high-speed-rail programs in their states based on their estimates of low ridership and cost overruns.
What did it mean for high-speed rail’s premier industry event to convene in the United States for the first time in such a divisive climate? Peter Horch, director of events for the Pennsylvania Convention Center, which hosted the 8th World Congress on High Speed Rail, thought it was a good thing. “[California’s decision] boosted attendance even more, boosted a lot of local attendance,” Horch said. “It brought a lot of the other European transportation secretaries over to take a look at things — and in fact [the United States’] transportation secretary was here to open the show.”
Horch also said that he didn’t notice a lot of polarization among organizers and attendees, nor did the controversy seem to affect the planning process. And while oficials from APTA and UIC were hesitant to draw specific comparisons between the California vote and their planning efforts, Railway Age magazine reported that APTA head Michael Melaniphy did note “perhaps it influenced events in some small way.” In the same article, UIC Director-General Jean-Pierre Loubinoux was quoted as saying: “We were certainly fortunate, weren’t we?”