 |
Re: When considering the alternatives
Author: LEL
Date: 12-12-2020 - 07:18
I put a BG reference above. This rail thing really wouldn't be happening if not for Microsoft. Also, his Medina neighbor, Bezos, just created a 10 billion earth fund for environmental causes. I wouldn't be surprised if he pitches in as well. The rail has cost being 40-50 billion. Between the two of them they have worth approaching a 1/4 trillion dollars.
Also, it was interesting to see how Seattle responded to its recent growth spurt.
"..single occupancy vehicle (SOV) commutes are down nine percent in the last year alone."
[seattlebusinessmag.com]
Freeway is not going away anytime soon but commuters are certainly showing they are sick of it.
And yes, will we ever recover from our covid induced coma. We'll know by this summer.
FUD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Initial caveat: for rail, I'm thinking of the way
> things were before Covid. Things will almost
> certainly be different for a long time.
>
> Rail vs I-5: It's not either-or. It's both. I-5
> has probably nearly reached its limit in terms of
> expandability, at least in the urban areas. Rail,
> especially electrified at a decent speed, can
> provide nearly another freeway's worth of capacity
> in a smaller footprint. The studies address that:
> rail is an addition to the freeway, not a
> replacement. Naysayers like to point out that
> adding rail won't have much if any effect on
> traffic congestion - that's true, and the old saw
> about making room for more drivers also has some
> truth to it. Overall, it provides an alternative
> mode of travel in the corridor that will attract
> riders from various groups, not all of which would
> have made the trip if they had to drive or ride a
> bus. That's not really a bad thing. The main
> questions revolve around environmental and social
> impacts, and of course who pays for it (because
> passenger rail never pays for itself; there's
> always some real or implied subsidy to account for
> the public good of compressing travel into a small
> physical and environmental footprint). The "who
> pays" thing is always a balancing act, and is
> usually what determines whether the project will
> work, not the technical issues.
>
> Is BG really willing to cut a multi-billion dollar
> check?
Also, it was interesting to see how Seattle responded to its recent growth spurt.
"..single occupancy vehicle (SOV) commutes are down nine percent in the last year alone."
[seattlebusinessmag.com]
Freeway is not going away anytime soon but commuters are certainly showing they are sick of it.
And yes, will we ever recover from our covid induced coma. We'll know by this summer.
FUD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Initial caveat: for rail, I'm thinking of the way
> things were before Covid. Things will almost
> certainly be different for a long time.
>
> Rail vs I-5: It's not either-or. It's both. I-5
> has probably nearly reached its limit in terms of
> expandability, at least in the urban areas. Rail,
> especially electrified at a decent speed, can
> provide nearly another freeway's worth of capacity
> in a smaller footprint. The studies address that:
> rail is an addition to the freeway, not a
> replacement. Naysayers like to point out that
> adding rail won't have much if any effect on
> traffic congestion - that's true, and the old saw
> about making room for more drivers also has some
> truth to it. Overall, it provides an alternative
> mode of travel in the corridor that will attract
> riders from various groups, not all of which would
> have made the trip if they had to drive or ride a
> bus. That's not really a bad thing. The main
> questions revolve around environmental and social
> impacts, and of course who pays for it (because
> passenger rail never pays for itself; there's
> always some real or implied subsidy to account for
> the public good of compressing travel into a small
> physical and environmental footprint). The "who
> pays" thing is always a balancing act, and is
> usually what determines whether the project will
> work, not the technical issues.
>
> Is BG really willing to cut a multi-billion dollar
> check?
