Quote:
I mean really a gateway that's it? I understand World Fairs usually involve constructing some sort of landmark but calling its main purpose a gateway well... And most people hated the Eiffel Tower when it was constructed I think it's ridiculous to compare the Wings to the Eiffel Tower/Gateway Arch/Sydney Opera house but I think with some revisions and added functions it could be a landmark for San Diego. |
Quote:
I'm not saying we need a Sydney Opera House, or an Eiffel tower. But the hate for this piece is so reminiscent of the little-thinking's, small-town lovers who have kept San Diego down for decades. Lets be a little more constructive. After reading this forum these past few days I can see why we have been in the halls of San Jose and Tampa Bay... |
Quote:
|
If San Diego gets HSR by the time I retire I'd be shocked.
|
Quote:
|
staplesla:
" Quote:
http://amtrakcalifornia.com/index.cf...deral-funding/ Although it would have made perfect sense to build LA-San Diego first, there are several reasons why it wasn't picked. Planning was farther along for the Central Valley segment and the Recovery Act requires that construction begin by 2012. Land is also much cheaper in the Central Valley than coastal Orange County and San Diego, so limited Prop 1A and Recovery Act funding could literally go farther in the Central Valley. Unemployment is also significantly higher in the Central Valley than Southern California, and of course one of the goals of the Recovery Act is to reduce unemployment (which most economists agree it has done: http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politic...Obama-stimulus). |
I can provide two solid reasons why the Valley segement for the Los Angeles to San Francisco section was selected first, and not Los Angeles to San Diego.
1) The Valley provides a nice long straight and flat stretch of land to provide a test track. Mile for mile, it should also be cheaper. And, provide more options for a less costly maintenance and storage facility. A test track is ncessary for testing vehicles and burning them in, which is required before vehicles go into service. Each vehicles needs to be tested up to the planned top speed before they are 'commissioned' and go into service. 2) The Valley is in the center of the State and center of the planned system. It provides both geographic and political equity. Neither SoCal or NorCal is first... and being in the Valley provides the opportunity for political support for each end of the system to support double-ended extensions if pursued at the same time. Yes, I agree LA to San Diego provides a logical answer if ridership alone were considered. But after taking other things into consideration, the Valley has a lot of merit too. Plus, San Diego really has not done itself any favors for earning consideration, has it? San Diego has not given the project more than luke-warm reception (routed miles inland versus the shorter coastal route), and, the answer for a terminal station is at Lindbergh Field - a location that does not get to downtown and has zero synergy with air travel into San Diego. |
Quote:
I think 90% of the problem with the project is poor perception developed from the miniscule public outreach and planning efforts in the early years of the project. The CHSRA has come off looking dumb or clumsy or stubborn. But, the CHSRA shouldn't be faulted too much. Why? Because the State legislature has not fully funded them for the planning phases. And, both progress and outreach have been hurt. For many years, as few as 5-7 State employees were actually employed by the State on this project... the rest being contracted out. Tell me.. how can 7 employees effectively manage so many contractors, or, the multiple and dollar laden contracts? Pffff... I say the State Legislator is the first party that has goofed on this project. From a more macro perspective, a few essential things need to be taken into consideration before coming to any conclusions on the need for this project. First, the State is expected to grow from 39 million to 60 million by 2050. Statewide travel demand is expected to grow proprtionally. Less room is available for building freeways and airport expansions. Secondly, if there were room, the cost would be x2 to x3 times the cost of a more effecient high speed rail system. Thirdly, continuing to build roadways does nothing to wean ourselves away from our dependence on oil; which hurts the environment and sends American dollars out of this country to places that are hostile to us. We are also spending American blood to defend those same oil supply lines. Does this make any sense at all? |
In San Diego they want to build wings, in St. Petersburg it's a Big Wave.
http://inhabitat.com/big-makes-a-spl...st-petersburg/ |
going to visit your city...
I don't know if this is the right place to ask but, I will be coming to your city this month. I was wondering if anyone had any recommendations for things to do or places/neighborhoods to photograph. Any help or advice would be much appreciated. Again sorry if this is the wrong place to ask.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
LOL! This Wings of Freedom debate has somehow drifted into the US Cities discussions. http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=195811
As for me I'd like it for one minute and hate it the next. Kinda torn. I like the fact that it has gotten some attention throwing many into debate. Maybe a totally revamped design will come into fruition and maybe at a different location. The general consensus seems to be that it's a decent start, it reminds some of Milwaukee's "wings", and please don't call it WOF. . . |
Quote:
Nobody rides it and it is heavily subsidized. The track was laid over a 100 years ago when land was cheap. I know that cost doesnt bother you dreamers but consider the cost of land, relocation and legal problems that would ensue today. In end you are left with a mode of transportation that people would not use. Planes are faster and cars are more convenient for the others. I took Amtrak last year to SLO (thats San Luis Obisbo to you) and the train was a quaint and solitary experience, since it was practically empty. you probably forgot that trains stops at each town to board passengers, which makes it slow, just like the high speed train will be. You probably think it is going to zoom along at high speed from SoCal to Nocal-it doesnt work that way in the real world, unless you think nobody gets on or off along the way. You probably think that if it does stop tht it will just be for a moment like the Red Trolley. You probably forgot that each stop will require on and off loading of bags/passengers and that takes time. |
laguna:
Quote:
Second, roads are also heavily subsidized. The federal highway trust fund has needed to be bailed out with $7B - $8B from the general fund each of the past four years (i.e. a subsidy for driving). User fees also barely pay for more than half of the cost of federally-funded roads (http://subsidyscope.org/transportati...ding/analysis/), meaning roads and driving are heavily subsidized. It is even worse with state and local roads, which are often paid for by property taxes, sales taxes, bonds, development impact fees, or other financing methods that have nothing to do with driving and are thus a subsidy for automobiles. Third, if nobody rides Amtrak, why has Amtrak set ridership records every month for nearly the past two years? Ridership was up on Amtrak almost six percent last year, while vehicle miles traveled decreased by 1.7%. Just recently, Amtrak set another ridership record over the Thanksgiving weekend, with more than 720,000 passengers (http://thehill.com/blogs/transportat...rship-numbers/). The Pacific Surfliner route, connecting LA and San Diego is also Amtrak's second busiest route, outside of the Northeast corridor. Let's also not forget that federal transportation policy and funding is tilted heavily against passenger rail. Last year, more federal money was spent on highways than has been spent on Amtrak during its entire 40 year history combined. Who needs facts, however, when you have your ideology. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
The HSR will make a longer trip from SF to LA in under three hours, and that's taking the stops into consideration. I would much rather make that trip than a 13 hour Amtrak ride, or a LAX nightmare which takes much longer considering the drive, parking and security. I have ridden on many HSR trains in Italy, France and Germany, and they all work great. The train only stops for a few minutes at each station for unloading, and in California we are only talking about a few stops in between the two metro areas. It is not making the laundry list of stops that the archaic Amtrak system does. Oh, and in case you just woke up from sleeping in your city college urban planning class, there is a train called Amtrak that travels from L.A. to San Diego. It's called Pacific Surfliner...you should look into it. |
Since we've been on the topic of signature buildings/projects, I thought I'd share this. It looks like a pretty cool set of 40-story bridges that are being built in Dallas.
Dallas Bridge-o-Rama http://www.alphatesting.com/assets/i...atrava%201.JPG |
That is ugly...our pedestrian bridge is better
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 2:12 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.