Lyon_Wonder wrote:In some communities the motive to build a railroad bypass is to get rid of grade crossings and cut down on crossing accidents. Here in central Illinois, Springfield constructed a bypass along it's south side in the early 1990s that is used by both NS and KCS. The perceived need for security just adds another incentive for communities to push this issue.
Do you happen to know the break down of who paid for what with this bypass? Was it mostly paid for by the city, or did the railroads have to chip in?
dsktc wrote: From Carl Prine and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:The shortest distance to avoid a terrorist attack isn't a straight line. That's what an increasing number of cities are thinking: They won't be targets if they reroute dangerous gases and explosives around metropolitan areas. In 2005, a federal judge upheld Washington, D.C.'s ban on particularly deadly rail shipments on CSX tracks through the capital. While the ban is being appealed, nearly a dozen other cities and the state of California are watching to see if legislation they've drafted can become law, too. "It's only going to take one attack, just one attack and none of this will be an issue," said Fred Millar, an architect of the district's rail rerouting plan who consults for labor unions, environmental organizations and city governments. "If you want to avoid a disaster in your city, tell the railroads to reroute the chemicals around it."http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_487291.htmlDave
From Carl Prine and the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review:
The shortest distance to avoid a terrorist attack isn't a straight line. That's what an increasing number of cities are thinking: They won't be targets if they reroute dangerous gases and explosives around metropolitan areas.
In 2005, a federal judge upheld Washington, D.C.'s ban on particularly deadly rail shipments on CSX tracks through the capital. While the ban is being appealed, nearly a dozen other cities and the state of California are watching to see if legislation they've drafted can become law, too.
"It's only going to take one attack, just one attack and none of this will be an issue," said Fred Millar, an architect of the district's rail rerouting plan who consults for labor unions, environmental organizations and city governments. "If you want to avoid a disaster in your city, tell the railroads to reroute the chemicals around it."
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/cityregion/s_487291.html
Dave
One thing to keep in mind here. If US mainlines are an equivalence of the US Interstate Highway System, then most cities would have a railroad bypass akin to a three digit Interstate bypass.
TheAntiGates wrote: spokyone wrote: If a city wants to relocate tracks, that city should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the voters decide.LOLIf a RAILROAD wants to REVITALIZE tracks, that RAILROAD should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the OWNERS decide. sorry couldn't help myself. Your post just made me think about DM&E.
spokyone wrote: If a city wants to relocate tracks, that city should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the voters decide.
If a city wants to relocate tracks, that city should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the voters decide.
LOL
If a RAILROAD wants to REVITALIZE tracks, that RAILROAD should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the OWNERS decide.
sorry couldn't help myself. Your post just made me think about DM&E.
Oooohhhh! At first I thought you were talking about NS.....
....and BNSF......
....and UP......
...et al.....
..but NOOOOOO, poor ol' AG is engendered with an unholy obsession of the DM&E....
If only AG's fantasy about the predecessors to those aforementioned railroads having also paid at least 90% of their construction costs, then at least he'd have a leg to stand on with his DM&E bashing.
AG, you're legless.
spokyone wrote:If a city wants to relocate tracks, that city should pay at least 90% of the cost. No federal or state grants allowed. Then let the voters decide.
Well, then they better shut down all the natural gas lines.
A little perspective, please.
How much do you want to bet that "they" didn't think about that.
Many cities have dedicated truck routes to keep trucks in defined corridors away from residential neighborhoods and downtown. Now someone thinks that they can apply the same to railroads. I'm with Tree68, it's WAY TOO EASY do drive a truckload right to the target. Remember, it was only a small to medium sized straight truck parked on the street that brought down the building in Oklahoma City.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.