U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2016, 03:56 PM
 
12,318 posts, read 15,231,831 times
Reputation: 8121

Advertisements

In the UK, electrification and speeding up train service is making relatively affordable Bath a popular place. And it's not in service yet. West County property: catch a train to Bath in an hour - Telegraph I also noticed the article referred to "season tickets," normally associated with sports in the US. Must be British vernacular.
Of course, rail commuters from Belen to Santa Fe NM, about the same distance, only pay $1200 for an annual pass. But they don't get there anywhere near as fast.

Last edited by pvande55; 01-23-2016 at 04:26 PM.. Reason: Add line
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-09-2016, 03:43 PM
 
10,930 posts, read 5,058,991 times
Reputation: 4890
Quote:
Originally Posted by darkeconomist View Post
Agreed. In the SF area, halving (no exaggeration) the cost of housing by using HSR from super-exurbs would be enough to justify such prices.
Yea, if it meant going from a 1 million dollar shack in Palo Alto to a significantly larger 500,000 dollar house in Gilroy, many people would consider the house(s) in Gilroy if HSR was there to bring them north.

I know people like to only talk about the LA <-> SF portion of the future CA HSR line, but I actually think its effect on exurbs/far-flung cities will be more interesting. You will likely see these lines start to be used as commuter lines for cities that would normally not be considered part of the region.

Last edited by HockeyMac18; 02-09-2016 at 04:18 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 11:52 AM
 
2,104 posts, read 1,845,934 times
Reputation: 1987
The lowest price in Palo Alto for a house is $1.6 million. It's fixed up a bit, but only 1000 sqft.

There are houses in Gilroy for 500K, but more likely it'll be $700K.

Difference in the two mortgages? About $4,000 a month! yikes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 07:06 PM
 
12,318 posts, read 15,231,831 times
Reputation: 8121
Quote:
Originally Posted by brown_dog_us View Post
The lowest price in Palo Alto for a house is $1.6 million. It's fixed up a bit, but only 1000 sqft.

There are houses in Gilroy for 500K, but more likely it'll be $700K.

Difference in the two mortgages? About $4,000 a month! yikes.
Even the existing trains cover that in 1.5 hours. Total travel time, 1.5 * 2 * 21 = 63 hours.

Subtracting the ticket cost $250, you are "earning" $59/hr by commuting.

Depending how much faster the HST is and how much more the tickets cost, it may be more.

Last edited by pvande55; 02-10-2016 at 07:09 PM.. Reason: Add calculation
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2016, 10:48 PM
 
Location: Vallejo
14,091 posts, read 16,126,368 times
Reputation: 12684
Quote:
Originally Posted by pvande55 View Post
Even the existing trains cover that in 1.5 hours. Total travel time, 1.5 * 2 * 21 = 63 hours.

Subtracting the ticket cost $250, you are "earning" $59/hr by commuting.

Depending how much faster the HST is and how much more the tickets cost, it may be more.
Would be more like $99/hr for me since I can work on the train anyway. Kind of moot as I can't afford Palo Alto though =D
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2016, 11:48 PM
 
27 posts, read 36,106 times
Reputation: 21
What are some solutions to the very real (negative) consequences HSR might have in promoting additional exurban sprawl, as posted earlier? This is a problem I have with the transit plans of the Phoenix, AZ metro area. Its initial LRT line was greatly successful because it connected the two densest regions of the state, after which there is a significant drop in density levels. A recent expansion took the line into downtown Mesa, which has been great for Mesa's downtown visions, but the train runs at-grade with multiple stops during its run through town, making it no more valuable than a streetcar but for a heck of a lot more money. And, now that it has been expanded that far, there's plans to connect to places like the Capitol (which is a minor 9-5 employment center), Cardinals football stadium (used for a handful of games per year), etc.

The only three things I can think of are 1) in exchange for a station, cities agree to zone the land within 1/4 mile for high-intensity use, 2) the transit authority is more aggressive in purchasing properties within 1/4 mile and then preparing them/selling them to developers for dense projects, or 3) the value of land surrounding an HSR station will rise so dramatically that more intensive development will become inevitable.

^ I am just throwing those out as starting points; I am sure claiming more land would be a political nightmare, for example, but transit should be part of a long-term sustainability strategy, and it being used to herd in exurbanites to work each day sounds so very wrong.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 12:21 PM
 
77 posts, read 55,978 times
Reputation: 135
Me, I would come.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-17-2016, 03:14 PM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,009,246 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by westmont_resident View Post
What are some solutions to the very real (negative) consequences HSR might have in promoting additional exurban sprawl, as posted earlier?
I'd be careful to differentiate between "bad" (ie, financially and environmentally unsustainable) outward growth and "good" outward growth. Exurban doesn't necessarily mean sprawling (and expensive to build and maintain) autocentricity.

As to your question, unless individual cities put in place and follow zoning and DoT rules that promote compact development and deny sprawling, disconnected tract development, there's little to be done. It gets lost on politicians that much of this development is low value/high cost per acre over the lifetime of it when quick development dollars are so tantalizing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-21-2016, 01:55 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
6,646 posts, read 3,700,783 times
Reputation: 12489
I would like to see a better passenger rail grid between the two coasts -- high speed would be nice but not if I have to go through Chicago to ride from Albuquerque to Denver. A "front range line" from El Paso northward through Las Cruces, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and Denver, would connect three east-west Amtrak passenger lines. A line from Omaha through Kansas City and south to Oklahoma City would be good, too, as long as we are adding new routes. On one trip I met a guy going from Albuquerque to Ft. Worth on Amtrak -- through St. Louis. The little connector line between Kansas City and St. Louis kept hem from having to go all the way to Chicago but a line from Kansas City to Oklahoma City would have been better. A line from ABQ to El Paso would have worked as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-22-2016, 11:01 AM
 
2,553 posts, read 2,009,246 times
Reputation: 1349
Quote:
Originally Posted by SunGrins View Post
I would like to see a better passenger rail grid between the two coasts -- high speed would be nice but not if I have to go through Chicago to ride from Albuquerque to Denver. A "front range line" from El Paso northward through Las Cruces, Albuquerque, Santa Fe, Pueblo, Colorado Springs, and Denver, would connect three east-west Amtrak passenger lines. A line from Omaha through Kansas City and south to Oklahoma City would be good, too, as long as we are adding new routes. On one trip I met a guy going from Albuquerque to Ft. Worth on Amtrak -- through St. Louis. The little connector line between Kansas City and St. Louis kept hem from having to go all the way to Chicago but a line from Kansas City to Oklahoma City would have been better. A line from ABQ to El Paso would have worked as well.
Connecting major, already intertwined metros makes sense. But it'd be hard to justify national HSR when airlines already work. Air travel is far from perfect, but what would rail offer that would justify the cost?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Urban Planning
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top