We’re talking cuts to Metro-North, while planning on spending hundreds of millions connecting New Haven to Hartford, or asshole to armpit, by rail. Does this make sense? No.
Filed under Uncategorized
New Haven and Hartford already have the rails in place … can anyone justify $260 million for new cars, tracks, and signals? Is the commuter volume high enough?
It is a good idea, but not at the expense of the New York – New Haven corridor.
Where does the article mention cuts to mnrr?
It hard to fathom a more wasteful project than this rail line between three small cities of 100k to 140k in population.
If we are going to pour money into infrastructure, then lets look at making that existing acela train faster. Business people actual use that train and its helpful in reducing our crowded airports.
almost no one needs a train ride from springfield to hartford
Trains that were built after the revolution would be nice too.
The revolution has yet to occur.
There has never been a revolution in any country that has big screen tv’s. “What time does the game begin? Do we have enough beer?”
If trains go to Waterbury and Danbury. Then trains can go from new haven to hartford to Springfield. They already do and it is called Amtrak. This will be similar to shore line east expansion.
What exactly is the downside to commuter rail expansion ??
Lls2, the downside to commuter rail expansion in under populated areas is simple; operating deficits. The state of CT already has to subsidize the operations of the nearly full metro-north system. The operating subsidies to keep the empty trains running from Springfield to New Haven will be enormous.
Rather than paying to keep the lights going on empty trains, I’d rather see us pour that money into new school construction and/or other community assets for transportation.
Make commuters PAY for the real COST of their commutes. Dont lay it off on me, make them pay!!
Of course the costs are subsidized.
Highways are subsidized.
Corn is subsidized. Do you really believe that beef is really that cheap ? But I digress.
What if the trains are not empty as you presume ?
Think of the rail infastructure as an investment in our future.
Is it possible to but a price tag on mnrr that was built over 100 years ago ? On the nyc subway ?
anonster, I’m with you! If the commuters in cars paid the real cost of their commutes, the State treasury would be in much better shape very quickly!
LLS, roads are subsidized because 99.99% of us use the roads. Even the frail elderly in a nursing home rely on roads as roads bring to them their care givers, food and other resourses.
Society has limited resources and accordinlyg I dont see this as a wise investment. There are better public works projects we could be pushing forward and if we cant find any in transportation (which I doubt), I’d rather see us increase our investment in our public school infrastructure.
Jersey City has about as high a ratio of households w/o cars as you will find in the northeast outside of NYC proper and yet take a look at what this light rail line is costing the state. http://www.nj.com/hudson/index.ssf/2010/05/nearly_nj_transits_biggest_los.html
Everybody drives in dirty jersey because the gas tax is so cheap. So don’t go comparing nj to ct. Besides they just wasted 500~ million or so on a tunell that won’t be built.
And your point is ?
Washington State has a fleet of ferrys. The newest one cost 78 million making it the most expensive ferry in the World, You think you have problems!
Lls2, Building commuter rail systems that will be lightly used creates structural deficits that will burden society, not aid society. There are better projects will could be moving forward with than building light rail in central CT. For instance, we’d be better off working to make the Acela train even faster, particularly for Boston to NYC.
Btw, your point about the NYC subway system would be valid if CT had grand plans to build at the density of NY…which is never going to happen for a host of reasons.
Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.
Join 362 other followers