Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
RAILforum
»
Passenger Trains
»
Amtrak
»
California HSR - "Unfavorable" New York Times
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by George Harris: [QB] To say this article is slanted would be one of the major understatements of the century. With apologies to Mr. Norman, it falls right in with my general opinion that the NYT has long since proved that it achieves its highest and best use as either birdcage liner or packing paper. It is hard to know where to begin in pointing out the outright errors and slants in this article. For starters, the whine about land takes is about as real as a $3 bill. The take will be less than that of a two lane road, in this part of the country, in other words, between 50 and 100 feet. For the most part it will be right-of-way to right-of-way with the BNSF line, so there will be few isolated slivers of land as a result of its construction. Then there is simply the sanctimonious hypocrisy of any Central Valley farmer complaining about land take. It may be in part the fact that I am a grandson of a West Tennessee farmer and have heard quite a bit about these Federal projects in and for the Central Valley, but these Central Valley farmers have been a huge beneficiary of federal irrigation programs that have turned useless semi-desert land into productive farmland an virtually no cost to the land owner. If the people involved had to comply with current environmental regulations, these projects would not have happened at all. Now these same people are prostituting the environmental regulations in an attempt to stop something that is of real benefit to the whole country at absolutely no cost to themselves. Do you not think they will be paid a premium for their land? They will be crying and moaning all the way to the bank. These complaints are simply a positioning technique to increase their payoffs. As to Cordoza: This first portion is outside his district. I suspect he would be singing a completely different song if it was in his district. Notice that Fresno is neither shown on the map nor mentioned in the article. Aside from the fact that for the most part the people there fall somewhere between enthusiastic and wildly enthusiastic about the HSR, it is a city of over a million people, and approximately the half-way point between San Francisco and Los Angeles. The current San Joaquin trains, six a day in each direction, always have a respectable ridership to and from Fresno, despite requiring bus connections on both ends to reach either SF or LA. On holiday periods there can be more than 100 people off and on one train at Fresno. Recall the proximity to BNSF mentioned above? As part of the deal grade crossings where the lines are parallel will be separated for both. This is one of the reasons BNSF is happy to see this coming, and why the adjacent farmers should be too. Every year there are ag trucks hit by trains. Quite often the drivers turn out to be illegals. Another hint why many of these Central Valley farmers really should not want any close scrutiny. As to Corcoran’s concerns: Again, think of a 50 feet wide strip adjacent to the existing railroad. Probably does not affect one single building in the whole town. "Mayberry” which it is definitely not, will still be as much Mayberry as it is right now. "85 decibels" is complete nonsense. This thing will be sound walled to the max. How about the 12 passenger trains plus likely 12 to 20 freight trains going through there every day blowing their horns from end to end due to the grade crossings? That is the real and current source of noise, which will actually be reduced due to the high speed railroad. Part of the reason for the selection of this particular location is that it must have "independent utility" if I remember the term correctly. In other words, it must be usable even if nothing else is ever built. That is the reason behind the north end being at Borden. It is not a destination at all, but a point where tie in to the existing BNSF line is practical. * * * * As to San Francisco to San Jose: Anything I could say about that segment, I probably should not, so I won't. I will say that if everything wanted there is done, it will likely cost more than the entire rest of the system, and not be fast, either. The huge cost of the system has more to do with attempting to make all the pressure groups happy than any real cost of building the railroad. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
Home Page
Powered by
Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2
Copyright © 2007-2016
TrainWeb, Inc.
Top of Page
|
TrainWeb
|
About Us
|
Advertise With Us
|
Contact Us