Quote:
|
Quote:
Looks nice. Personally, I have visions of an Arc de Triumph type building in Balboa Park at Laural Drive and Balboa... immediately east of 6th Street. Call it, "The Arc of Tolerance" |
Just watch, the double deck parking will turn into single level meters, the amphitheater into a circle of benches, and the monument into a 30ft pencil, designed to maintain the "view." This city's citizens are way to simpleton to let this go through.
|
Quote:
Right now i believe it was around $170billion for all those expansions and only around $98billion for bullet train. PLUS the high speed train is more environmentally friendly. using less energy to transport people. and its proven to be one of the safest transportation methods in the world... yes trains can derail... but far far less than how many car accidents happen everyday and waiting time is shorter than airports. |
HSR isn't going to do away with the need for airports or freeways.
|
Conversely, airports and highways can't do away the need for High Speed Rail and the cost of expanding their capacity exceeds the cost of building HSR.
|
Quote:
I voted for HSR but that was based on proponents saying it would only cost $33 billion for the entire system. We've blown way past that. |
Quote:
Personally, I don't think ribbons of concrete for freeway is the way to go. I also don't want to see downtown San Diego become a car park. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Wow a sudden flurry of activity on the San Diego page. Where do I begin, towers on 6th Ave, Seaport Village Hotel, Navy Pier proposals, HSR debate....
Great to see some density going in the Southern Portion of Bankers Hill jet noise be damned I still think there is good potential there. Of course a street car up Fifth would really help. Seaport Village is in dire need of a redo so I applaud that proposal and lets get that Police Headquarters project moving please... Seems to really be lagging. I'm down with the wings as long as they use really good materials, would like to see some more detailed renderings though. And I really don't know enough about HSR to weigh in on the debate I just don't see it getting built with the global economy set to go in to the shitter again very soon and costs ballooning combined with California NIMBYism and regulations/lawsuits... |
For those who don't think HSR will help with air traffic...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madrid%...peed_rail_line Quote:
|
HurricaneHugo:
Quote:
1) A report, "Expect Delays: An Analysis of Air Travel Trends in the United States," by Brookings notes that almost half of all flights in 2009 were distances less by 500 miles. The second biggest origin/destination pair in the US is SF - LA. http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Fil...vel_report.pdf 2) SH&E, a very well respected transportation consulting firm, estimates that 12% of passengers at San jose, 9% at Oakland, and 4% of passengers at SFO will switch to high speed rail, a total of 6M annual passengers. http://www.thetransitcoalition.us/ne...n20100224b.pdf 3) SFO is the second-most delayed airport in the US from Jan - Aug. 2011. http://www.bts.gov/programs/airline_.../table_04.html 4) SAN has a single runway and may be capacity constrained in coming decades. http://www.aci-na.org/static/confere...Van%20Beek.pdf 5) High speed rail can actually improve aviation by expanding the catchment area for airports, especially SFO. This airport would be an hour (or less) from Fresno and other Central Valley cities. http://www.aerlines.nl/wp-content/up..._AMS_BRU-1.pdf For those who are interested, there is an excellent Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) report about the ability high speed rail to alleviate aviation capacity and delay issues in the coastal megaregions: http://www.njtransit.com/pdf/acrp_rpt_031.pdf |
It is also worth noting that high speed rail will be valuable for intra-city travel if there is high or volatile oil prices. When oil was $145 per barrel in 2008, airlines were quickly cutting capacity and charging fuel surcharges of $20-$30. Just this week, the IAEA announced that Iran is much closer to developing nuclear weapons than previously estimated. If there is a Middle Eastern war involving Iran and Israel or Iran and its Arab neighbors, oil could quickly rise to $150 - $175 per barrel. It would be nice to have options for intra-city travel in CA (and other corridors in the US) that don't put us at the mercy of petro-dictators hostile to the US>
|
The point is sometimes you have to spend money for the future. If its 100 billion now it will be 1 trillion in the future. In the future people will see it as a good investment if you keep the lines up and running. Things that need to be done shoudln't have to worry about the price ($) it will take to get them done but what is at stake if its not done. If its not done traffic will be higher on roads and there really is only so much roads you can build till enough is enough. Same with airports. California's real problem is overpopulation which no one has the balls to adress anywhere in the world except china. Yah I said it. :tup:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
$65 billion = 2010 dollars Assumed is a 3% annual increase in cost of construction. That might be overly aggressive. |
Quote:
|
AKA Winged Ugly
Really? This giant piece of art (junk) sitting smack in the middle of the downtown waterfront, completely discordant with the landscape and serving no purpose other that (further) junking up the view, is going to draw people like the Eiffel Tower or the St. Louis arch? LOL.
Kinda like people will want to fly to SD to see this "iconic" piece of junk: http://art.san.org/pub_art/legacy/ga...he_gate/large/ ? Quote:
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 8:03 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.