HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #241  
Old Posted Jan 12, 2011, 5:45 AM
hammersklavier's Avatar
hammersklavier hammersklavier is offline
Philly -> Osaka -> Tokyo
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The biggest city on earth. Literally
Posts: 5,863
Anti-transit Republicans = massive idiots.

If Iowa doesn't want to spend money on having a train from Iowa City to Davenport, have the fast-ish train end at Rock Island for now. No biggie.
__________________
Urban Rambles | Hidden City

Who knows but that, on the lower levels, I speak for you?’ (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #242  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2011, 7:21 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammyg View Post
So now that Wisconsin, Ohio, and possibly Iowa and Florida have cancelled their projects, what's left? Illinois, California, Washington/Oregon and North Carolina?
Colorado's High Speed Rail (HSR) project, continues to move forward. Colorado was just awarded a total of $1.5 million from the Feds and has provided an equal $1.5 million local match to progress to the next step. The Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) has concluded it's recent study for the I-70 Mountain Corridor from Denver to Vail/Eagle County Airport and the preferred recommendation is that over the next 20 years the corridor will need a series of advanced highway management upgrades, passing lanes, some highway widening, and an Advanced Guideway high-speed transportation system.

The $3 million in funding is for creating a High Speed Rail department in the CDOT, which will be the final requirement needed for inclusion on the Federal High Speed Rail corridor list -- which will qualify Colorado for future federal funds to further advance the program and construction phases.

Another part of the $3 million will be used to conduct the PEIS, the next study required by the feds. These next two steps are expected to take 2-3 years to complete.

Denver's Mayor John Hickenlooper (D), supported and helped to win voter approval (which passed), the massive Denver area FasTracks mass transit expansion project. Hickenlooper has now been elected in as Colorado State Governor. Transportation is one of his main agenda's behind economic development and job creation, and in fact he directly ties transportation improvements to economic development, job creation and quality of life (all which help attract and retain businesses and jobs).

From Hickenlooper's website:
Quote:
Advance Recommendations for the I-70 Corridor: The Interstate-70 (I-70) West Mountain Corridor is a critical corridor that impacts commerce, tourism, recreation, and overall economic development in Colorado. After years of contentious debate, there is now a consensus recommendation from stakeholders along the corridor for multi-modal I-70 improvements. This recommendation includes a combination of highway improvements and an "advanced guideway" system. The big question facing Colorado is how to fund these needed improvements. We are committed to convening stakeholders and exploring all funding opportunities to address the long-term needs while strategically seeking short-term solutions to provide immediate relief to the corridor's year-round congestion problems.
Immediate and Strategic ideas for the I-70 corridor include:

-Work with CDOT and the Federal Highway Administration to complete the I-70 Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS), with the consensus recommendation as the preferred alternative, in a timely fashion.
-Pursue projects that do not require completion of the PEIS such as safety projects, community mitigation projects, environmental projects and some highway widening.
-Start an alignment study for high speed rail.
-Implement more Travel Demand Management (TDM) projects. Examples include:
-Incentivizing truckers and local communities to find ways to consolidate deliveries and avoid peak travel periods.
-Running direct transit service from Denver to mountain towns during peak seasons.
-Implement Transportation System Management projects and carefully review the viability of proposals such as "zipper lanes".
-Work with Colorado's congressional delegation to designate I-70 as a Project of National and Regional Significance in the federal transportation re-authorization process.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #243  
Old Posted Jan 13, 2011, 10:50 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
Quote:
Transportation is one of his main agenda's behind economic development and job creation, and in fact he directly ties transportation improvements to economic development, job creation and quality of life (all which help attract and retain businesses and jobs).
Something that HAS to be done more often if the willfully resistant Right is to get on board with transportation investment of all modes. It is an INVESTMENT that pays off with economic growth if done correctly. This is an argument that appears to be thoroughly understood by other industrialized nations, but has yet to be universally understood and accepted in this country outside of the auto-based, commerce-focused Interstate Highway program.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #244  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 5:25 AM
WilliamTheArtist's Avatar
WilliamTheArtist WilliamTheArtist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Tulsa Oklahoma
Posts: 800
Tulsa recently got 50 mill TIGER Federal funding for part of its HSR/Commuter Rail initiative. That with the state funding portion will get construction starting soon.

http://blog.garverusa.com/2010/12/ti...construct.html

__________________
Tulsa
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #245  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 8:17 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
Ha! I love the use of an Spanish AVE HSR train in the renderings!
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #246  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 9:01 PM
drifting sun drifting sun is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 233
Tulsa is going to build out rail systems?! Surely though, there is the same kind of opposition to those kind of capital investments as we see in the Midwest.

Meaning no disrespect to Oklahomans, but if this is true, Wisconsin sure has gone down the tubes if Tulsa is demonstrating that it is more willing to take the lead on progressive projects.......
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #247  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 10:12 PM
Onn Onn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The United States
Posts: 1,937
Quote:
Originally Posted by hammersklavier View Post
Anti-transit Republicans = massive idiots.

If Iowa doesn't want to spend money on having a train from Iowa City to Davenport, have the fast-ish train end at Rock Island for now. No biggie.
Well considering state budget's are way out of control, that wouldn't be smart would it?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #248  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 10:20 PM
SouthByMidwest's Avatar
SouthByMidwest SouthByMidwest is offline
reticulating splines
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Houston -> Chicago
Posts: 629
I like how even the supposed fiscal conservatives rarely bat an eye at the billions we've blown in failed nation-building exercises abroad but won't hear about building infrastructure that will serve this country for generations if it's maintained properly.

Guess we can pony up for another airline bailout when oil gets too expensive.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #249  
Old Posted Jan 14, 2011, 11:34 PM
SnyderBock's Avatar
SnyderBock SnyderBock is offline
Robotic Construction
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 3,833
From what I can find, it seems the Oklahoma HSR program was defeated. Now they are pushing a $26 million plan to upgrade freight rail tracks from Oklahoma City to Tulsa and from Oklahoma City to Wichita, KS to allow for conventional passenger rail service.
Source: http://www.kjrh.com/dpp/news/local_n...r-rail-service

Being a state which votes 60% conservative, it is no surprise that they are taking the path conservatives always try to direct these HSR programs into. Conservatives know that if they can "compromise" down from HSR to conventional rail, that the cost will be reduced to a smaller amount (less to loose) and the riderships will be so low (because it's so slow and infrequent), that the annual subsidized will be high enough that they can in later years use that as ammunition to cancel the service altogether.

At that point, it would likely take 20 years before people forget about this big failed boondoggle, before they would ever consider another rail project in their state again.

This is the conservative blueprint to defeat rail projects nationwide, not just in the near future, but for the next 20+ years. They want a scaled back rail project to get built, so they can make it fail, so they can prove to voters they were right all along and progressives were incorrect about rail being a good investment.
__________________
Automation Is Still the Future
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #250  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 1:02 AM
Xing's Avatar
Xing Xing is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 15,857
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamTheArtist View Post
Tulsa recently got 50 mill TIGER Federal funding for part of its HSR/Commuter Rail initiative. That with the state funding portion will get construction starting soon.

http://blog.garverusa.com/2010/12/ti...construct.html

OMG!!! They're all going to fall in the water and get killed!!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #251  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 1:33 AM
hammersklavier's Avatar
hammersklavier hammersklavier is offline
Philly -> Osaka -> Tokyo
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The biggest city on earth. Literally
Posts: 5,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Onn View Post
Well considering state budget's are way out of control, that wouldn't be smart would it?
Instituting user fees on expressways (if not total privatization) would trim states' transportation budgets far more than some showy, ostentatious, but ultimately ineffective, wielding of the veto pen.
__________________
Urban Rambles | Hidden City

Who knows but that, on the lower levels, I speak for you?’ (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #252  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 1:36 AM
hammersklavier's Avatar
hammersklavier hammersklavier is offline
Philly -> Osaka -> Tokyo
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The biggest city on earth. Literally
Posts: 5,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by SnyderBock View Post
Being a state which votes 60% conservative, it is no surprise that they are taking the path conservatives always try to direct these HSR programs into. Conservatives know that if they can "compromise" down from HSR to conventional rail, that the cost will be reduced to a smaller amount (less to loose) and the riderships will be so low (because it's so slow and infrequent), that the annual subsidized will be high enough that they can in later years use that as ammunition to cancel the service altogether.
Modern conservatives are very very good at having wrong genre savvy. Higher oil prices = higher gas prices = more people taking the train.

And oil prices are gonna go up.
__________________
Urban Rambles | Hidden City

Who knows but that, on the lower levels, I speak for you?’ (Ralph Ellison, Invisible Man)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #253  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 5:04 AM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
High-Speed Rail in America


January 11, 2011



Read More: http://www.america2050.org/2011/01/h...n-america.html

PDF Report: http://www.america2050.org/pdf/HSR-i...a-Complete.pdf

Maps: http://www.america2050.org/maps/

Quote:
A new study released today by America 2050 identifies the high-speed rail corridors with the greatest potential to attract ridership in each of the nation's megaregions. Corridors connecting populous regions with large job centers, rail transit networks, and existing air markets scored best. The study also recommends that the federal government adopt a quantitative approach to evaluating future investment in high-speed rail.



Quote:
The United States has embarked on a program of building
high-speed rail corridors in the nation’s most urbanized
corridors and regions. This is a bold step toward meeting the
infrastructure needs of the coming century, including providing
capacity for economic growth in regions where air and road
congestion threaten economic competitiveness and quality of
life.

However, given the newness of the program, there is a steep
learning curve for states and regions in developing high-speed
and even “classic” intercity passenger corridors. This report
aims to educate the public and decision makers about the elements
of success for high-speed rail as measured by factors that
contribute to ridership demand for these services, particularly
as they apply to the unique spatial attributes and travel patterns
of America.

This report provides the first and only comparative study of
close to 8,000 existing and proposed rail rights of way (of fewer
than 600 miles in length) and their relative ability to attract
passengers. In doing, the analysis reveals which regional corridors
are best suited for high-speed rail in the United States,
based on factors that have contributed to rail ridership in other
systems around the world. Our approach evaluates and scores
each corridor based on parameters related to regional population,
employment concentrations, transit accessibility, air travel
markets, and composition of employment sectors, among others.
Those corridors receiving the highest scores in our analysis
are most suited to attract ridership and should be the focal
point of federal investments.

The federal government has defined three categories of
high-speed rail in the United States: Core Express Corridors,
Regional Corridors, and Emerging/ Feeder Routes, to reflect
the great variety of regional characteristics and suitability
for passenger rail nationwide. This is not a “one size fits all”
program. While not every corridor in the country may be able
to generate sufficient demand to justify Core Express Corridors
at this time, incremental investments in corridors suited for
Regional and Emerging/ Feeder service can meet important
transportation needs while building markets for passenger rail
that may someday justify investments in Core Express Corridors.
__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #254  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 8:46 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
^ I think the Phoenix-Tucson area will be much more connected to LA-SF-LV by 2050 than it is now.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bobdreamz View Post
He and others at the Reason Foundation have published detailed attacks on the Los Angeles MTA’s rail projects and on transit investments in general.


Why? Why would someone be asinine enough to attack our transit plans? Anyway, for decades and decades, LA spent billions and billions in wasteful spending on highway projects, and all the while encouraged unsustainable sprawl that wiped out our old PE system.

It'll take much more than this pathetic conservative movement to stop one, if not the greatest urban movement in the US in 100 years.
__________________
Revelation 21:4

Last edited by JDRCRASH; Jan 15, 2011 at 8:57 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #255  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 2:47 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
They're pawns of the highway lobby - It's as simple as that. Once that's understood, their positions and statements make total sense.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #256  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 2:58 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,913
The article in Governing a couple of years ago, "King of the Road," about the hypocrisy of these oil-industry hacks at 'Reason' Foundation and Cato should be required reading. Public money spent on transit and high speed rail is a Stalinist-Marxist plot but billions of dollars of public money for highways and other roads is the perfect result of the free-market.

King of the Road
What's up with groups that argue for less government but see publicly built highways as an expression of the free market?

BY: ALEX MARSHALL | APRIL 1, 2008

http://www.governing.com/columns/eco...-the-Road.html

Robert Poole has no problem arguing for generous subsidies for private aircraft owners. In a posting on the Reason Foundation’s website in October 2008 (http://reason.org/news/show/1003189.html ), Robert Poole argues for a $5,000 subsidy per pilot to equip general aviation aircraft with NextGen avionics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #257  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 3:26 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
I'm always interested in finding out what these Think Tanks are advocating.

About Us
America 2050 is guided by the National Committee for America 2050, a coalition of regional planners, scholars, and policy-makers to develop a framework for the nation's future growth that considers trends such as:
Rapid population growth and demographic change
Global climate change
The rise in foreign trade
Sprawling and inefficient land use patterns
Uneven and inequitable growth within and between regions
Infrastructure systems that are reaching capacity
The emergence of megaregions

Huh? Inequitable growth between regions?
Are they suggesting it's wrong for Texas and the South to grow?
I ask because it looks like they are.....just look at the list of supporting organizations.... full of Think Tanks from the Northeast.

America 2050 is supported by:
The Rockefeller Foundation = New York
The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation = New York
The Surdna Foundation = New York
The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy = Massachusetts
The J.M. Kaplan Fund = New York
AECOM = California
Park Foundation = New York
The William Penn Foundation = Pennsylvania
STV Group, Inc. = New York & Pennsylvania
The Ford Foundation = New York

Isn't it amazing how following the money.... you can find their agenda.... and it isn't Rail for America.... it's Rail for mostly New York ---- at the rapidly growing South's and West's expense......

JMHO!

Last edited by electricron; Jan 15, 2011 at 8:13 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #258  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 4:40 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
^

The Northeast already has enough infrastructure. Once again, wasteful spending. All they really need is to upgrade Acela somehow.

What really gets me electricron is if only our states had lobbyists like this...but we don't...WHY?! Really, how hard is it for people to see that California has been starved of funds for transit projects and that the Northeast is almost always favored? LA County alone wastes $9 Billion a year in lost productivity because of sitting in traffic, and we're tired of it.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #259  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 5:19 PM
philvia's Avatar
philvia philvia is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 452
because the south and west ^^^ don't support transportation like the NE. nothing about the two are similar in terms of density or development, so drop the whiney comments. you guys are the super minority in your areas, so what do you really expect?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #260  
Old Posted Jan 15, 2011, 6:32 PM
s.p.hansen's Avatar
s.p.hansen s.p.hansen is offline
Urban Planning Proselyte
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 2,242
This America 2050 study totally put a downer on my day. This is our vision of the best this country can do by 2050?

Why are there small gaps keeping the west from being united into bigger systems? After you've sunk so much money into HSR why wouldn't they just connect Wichita to Kansas City so that Texas could be tied into the east coast? Why not put a little more into connecting Phoenix to Albuquerque so that Denver could be tied into LA and San Francisco?

Did Southwest Airlines help negotiate this or something?

What's the deal with this map and the city sizes being downgraded if they are below 3,000,000; are they talking about metros or cities? Chicago (the city as of now is not yet over 3,000,000 neither is San Francisco or any city in the Bay area. If they actually mean metros then why isn't Phoenix upgraded because its metro as of now is over 3,000,000. Also, if we are talking about metros and projecting into the future until 2050 then Las Vegas, Salt Lake City and Denver would have over 3,000,000 in their metros (Denver's metro is barely under 3,000,000 right now).

I really don't know what to make of these "Mega-regions." What am I supposed to make of these shaded areas? Are they hinting at a posibility of a certain number of human beings living per square mile in these areas without interruption? Because that would just be a flat out lie for the LA to Las Vegas or Denver to Albuquerque "mega-regions."
By that same logic couldn't I justify projecting into the future (2050) a "Mega-region" that would exist from Provo (UT) to Salt Lake City (UT) to Ogden (UT) to Logan (UT) to Pocatello (ID) to Idaho Falls (ID)?

Last edited by s.p.hansen; Jan 15, 2011 at 8:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:16 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.