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 02-29-2016, 05:29 PM
 
9,381 posts, read 9,536,885 times
Reputation: 5786

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
I find it interesting that Old Lyme Village apparently had no issues when they constructed I-95 through the area. Apparently a 500 ft wide ROW for a six lane wide freeway plowing right through the middle of a 300 year old village is good, but a 100 ft wide ROW for a rail line is bad.
New Lyme is between 95 and the current tracks the plan was to cut threw the town and end up crossing 95 on the east of town. This would cut a NE-SW gash through the village, which nobody there wants.
Similar problems are at pretty much any other curve along the CT coastline. whether it be Old Lyme, Mystic, or New London, each curve being straightened the town residents will oppose.
After all why should a New London, or Mystic mayor support displacing their residents so some dude from Boston can get a quicker ride to NYC?
It depends if the Political will of CT, which will see more bad then good out of this project, is more powerful than the will of NYers to cut 20 minutes off their trip to Boston.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-13-2016, 03:54 PM
 
1 posts, read 539 times
Reputation: 10
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
I find it interesting that Old Lyme Village apparently had no issues when they constructed I-95 through the area. Apparently a 500 ft wide ROW for a six lane wide freeway plowing right through the middle of a 300 year old village is good, but a 100 ft wide ROW for a rail line is bad.
The idea that Old Lyme had "no issues," is simply not true. My in-laws fought it for over a decade, and I was just chatting with a man of few weeks ago who was lamenting that his farm fields were split right in half (which basically forced him to sell). Similarly the fight over the new Baldwin Bridge, also planned by Parsons Brinckerhoff, went on from the late 1960s until the end of the 1990s. And the right of way in planning documents is listed as a minimum of 150 feet, for what it is worth.

What you could say, however, was that (for better and worse) I95 included exit and on ramps. In this case the nearest station would be in New Haven.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2016, 05:54 PM
 
4,023 posts, read 3,265,560 times
Reputation: 2924
With an estimated completion date of 2030 for the CA HSR you'd be lucky to live long enough to see it. And that's just for phase 1 of the project. It would be a new world's record for the longest construction period of a high speed rail line, plus add another 5 to 10 years for the imminent delays.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-13-2016, 07:55 PM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,877,400 times
Reputation: 7732
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
With an estimated completion date of 2030 for the CA HSR you'd be lucky to live long enough to see it. And that's just for phase 1 of the project. It would be a new world's record for the longest construction period of a high speed rail line, plus add another 5 to 10 years for the imminent delays.
Plus when it does finally open, it will operate at speeds considerably below the promised 350 km/h. So the promised 2 hours and 40 minutes SF to LA trip will be more like 4 hours. 1 hour by air or 4 hours by train, Which will people choose? Of course the rail fans will still choose the train, but they would ride the current slow Amtrak trains.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 08:24 AM
 
Location: I-35
1,804 posts, read 3,695,975 times
Reputation: 715
Dallas-Houston high-speed rail loses key Brazos Valley support | WFAA.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 08:31 AM
 
Location: MMU->ABE->ATL->ASH
9,126 posts, read 17,133,831 times
Reputation: 9980
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Plus when it does finally open, it will operate at speeds considerably below the promised 350 km/h. So the promised 2 hours and 40 minutes SF to LA trip will be more like 4 hours. 1 hour by air or 4 hours by train, Which will people choose? Of course the rail fans will still choose the train, but they would ride the current slow Amtrak trains.
You need to look at the Door to Door time. 1hr by air is the flying time, but when you count in all the idle time, (Wait / Get thru Security, Wait @ gate, Planeload/Wait times) Air would be more in the 3hr time frame.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 10:45 AM
 
Location: Coos Bay, Oregon
7,142 posts, read 8,877,400 times
Reputation: 7732
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyonpa View Post
You need to look at the Door to Door time. 1hr by air is the flying time, but when you count in all the idle time, (Wait / Get thru Security, Wait @ gate, Planeload/Wait times) Air would be more in the 3hr time frame.
So thats the only advantage of HSR, the lack of TSA screening? Wouldn’t it make more sense to just eliminate or streamline the TSA procedures in the airports?

There was a time when you could drive right up to the steps of the plane, and walk on. How long before the government decides to expand the police state to the railroads too? It’s just a matter of time before there will be hour long waits for trains too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-14-2016, 11:00 AM
 
Location: Nescopeck, Penna. (birthplace)
12,351 posts, read 7,505,330 times
Reputation: 15950
Quote:
Originally Posted by cisco kid View Post
With an estimated completion date of 2030 for the CA HSR you'd be lucky to live long enough to see it. And that's just for phase 1 of the project. It would be a new world's record for the longest construction period of a high speed rail line, plus add another 5 to 10 years for the imminent delays.

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
Plus when it does finally open, it will operate at speeds considerably below the promised 350 km/h. So the promised 2 hours and 40 minutes SF to LA trip will be more like 4 hours. 1 hour by air or 4 hours by train, Which will people choose? Of course the rail fans will still choose the train, but they would ride the current slow Amtrak trains.

Just another case of fantasy running up against both technical and economic reality. As a parallel, it ought to be recognized that the Boston-Washington "Northeast Corridor" has now been "in development for 52 years (1964), and the event usually linked to the plan (an ICC study which predicted the demise of all "traditional" rail passenger service) had appeared five years previously. But in fairness, both the Northeast Corridor and the service now under construction will have an important role to play -- mostly as feeders from intermediate cities such as Fresno, Bakersfield and Stockton rather than the glamorized "2 & 1/2 hour end-to-end" pitch fed to a gullible public.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 12:24 PM
 
3,567 posts, read 2,369,965 times
Reputation: 2729
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaaBoom View Post
So thats the only advantage of HSR, the lack of TSA screening? Wouldn’t it make more sense to just eliminate or streamline the TSA procedures in the airports?

There was a time when you could drive right up to the steps of the plane, and walk on. How long before the government decides to expand the police state to the railroads too? It’s just a matter of time before there will be hour long waits for trains too.
Planes also take longer to board/empty than trains, and are naturally more susceptible to delays due to weather and mechanical complexity. Regarding TSA in particular, trains are less likely to be hijacked and weaponized due to their being path-constrained.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-17-2016, 07:26 PM
 
9,381 posts, read 9,536,885 times
Reputation: 5786
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller View Post
Planes also take longer to board/empty than trains, and are naturally more susceptible to delays due to weather and mechanical complexity. Regarding TSA in particular, trains are less likely to be hijacked and weaponized due to their being path-constrained.
Also sometimes airports are quite far away from the city centers, while train stations are generally right downtown.
For example LAX is about 45 minutes from Downtown LA, ditto JFK to Manhattan.
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