Passenger Trains > TX HSR - Study will account for 1/3 of timeline

Interesting update on the Texas HSR project

68 trains per day and competitive with airlines,
without the wait.

One thing I thought was odd... or the new norm,
was that the study is expected to take more then
half the time it will take to actually construct
the line.

Jul 25, 2014, 6:00am CDT Houston Business Journal
Bullet train goal: 68 trips a day from Dallas to Houston by 2021

http://www.bizjournals.com/houston/morning_call/2014/07/bullet-train-goal-68-trips-a-day-from-dallas-to.html

/Mitch

Unfortunately, not uncommon anymore. One hundred years ago, the challenge to any construction project was actually getting the work done, but today the challenge lays in getting the approvals to start the work. The construction itself, while costly and possibly time consuming, usually isn't even a challenge anymore.

Here are two examples of projects rushed through construction without adequate planning, both were later demolished:
San Francisco's Embarcadero Freeway and Boston's Arterial, both elevated highways in historic neighborhoods.
Maybe we do need careful planning, but the time spans for responses from all stakeholders is too long.

On the other hand, both the Empire State Building and the Pentagon were built in slightly over a year, and they are still standing...

railstiesballast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>> San Francisco's Embarcadero Freeway and Boston's
> Arterial, both elevated highways in historic
> neighborhoods.

I never had a chance to drive on the Embarcadero Freeway (only saw if from a difference as it was being torn down) but the Boston Arterial was designed by a fool or at least someone with grossly underestimated traffic volume predictions while who ever built it was obviously the lowest bidder. It was so bad at the end, the State highway department wouldn't even allow highway number signs on that section. They were very embarrassed by it. Today it looks so much better and it should, the Big Dig cost enough.

The Embarcadero was built to access The Financial district and Chintown without having to drive surface streets through town. The general era believed that the waterfront was wasted space and something new era had to be built, so they built the modern themed elevated double deck freeway to pass over the undesired areas. Typical planning for that era, any study of the day would have said the same thing. The topic of the day was all the profit to be made by filling in the Bay.

The options would have been to plow straight through existing Businesses and build a freeway though town, not around it. The stated planning policy was that all freeways were to lead into San Francisco.

For me, balanced planning is important, green space is important. I don't like the high density urban effect but other people prefer it.

Texas isn't like California. The study taking 1/3 of the timeline is better than taking 90% of the money.

Bob

I'll see it to beleive it, the CA. HSR is an example on how hard it is on even breaking ground for crying out loud!