- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: New Infrastructure Spending Plan likely means a NOLA -Baton Rouge passenger rail link
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:49 pm to doubleb
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:49 pm to doubleb
quote:
Way more revenues than would this commuter line.
The study shows percentage-wise revenue generated by the rail would go much further in covering costs than the gas tax does.
quote:
Yes, they predict an average of 430 riders per day, 210,00 a year.
You realize you divide 210,000 by 260 and not 365?
2
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:50 pm to member12
quote:
this was also to replace a bridge over the spillway that is in disrepair. So freight movements would get some benefits out of it as well.
Pretty much is. Some other upgrades like double track as well.
The feds are covering that railroad bridge at some point, so the money is going to be spent.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:52 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
Why do any project then?
Why spend money in BR to widen I10? It will only minimally help traffic? We should leave it as is. Send that money to another state.
10 has been neglected for decades. It’s substandard, it’s unsafe and it needs major improvements.
That along with a new bridge, critical by-passes and a comprehensive plan will improve traffic and improve safety.
We pay federal and state taxes to upkeep and maintain roads and highways, and to build new ones. As long as we pay taxes we should see some benefits.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:53 pm to doubleb
I don't see direct benefit from I10 in BR. Should I be against it?
Rail is far safer than highway travel.
Rail is far safer than highway travel.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:53 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
You realize you divide 210,000 by 260 and not 365?
Go read the study, the train moves 365 days a year, The numbers are not mine, they are ftom the study.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:55 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
I don't see direct benefit from I10 in BR. Should I be against it?
Rail is far safer than highway travel.
Honestly, are you out of junior high on vacation?
You live in BR snd don’t benefit from 10????
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:55 pm to doubleb
Daily riders doesn't account for those who ride 2-3 times a week.
Also doesn't take into account festival and tourism traffic.
Even you said that the study doesn't show where the rider numbers come from, so looking there is futile.
Also doesn't take into account festival and tourism traffic.
Even you said that the study doesn't show where the rider numbers come from, so looking there is futile.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:57 pm to doubleb
I don't live in BR. Haven't been to BR in months if not over a year.
If there was rail going there I would have been. I don't mean that facetiously either, I would take the trip to BR, for recreation, if there was rail, I'm not driving though.
Fwiw, I lived in BR when the last I10 widening project happened. It took 8 years or so (granted reasons for delay) and didn't really improve traffic time wise.
If there was rail going there I would have been. I don't mean that facetiously either, I would take the trip to BR, for recreation, if there was rail, I'm not driving though.
Fwiw, I lived in BR when the last I10 widening project happened. It took 8 years or so (granted reasons for delay) and didn't really improve traffic time wise.
This post was edited on 4/6/21 at 1:59 pm
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:57 pm to 92Tiger
quote:
I think you may be missing the point. Sure, the Amtrak commuter running through Northern VA into DC is wonderful. You don't really expect the same experience and clientele riding b/t the NOLA Amtrak station and the BR station?
I take the Metra train into Chicago daily; it runs through some of the worst neighborhoods in Chicago and even stops at Kedzie. The clientele is 90% commuters. The rest are people that appear to kids our tourists going to or coming from some concert or sporting event in the city. I've seen some sketchy activity on the city's CTA light rail lines, but never on the Metra commuter trains.
It's pretty awesome. After work, I can crack open a cold one while I step onto the train, answer a few emails, and set my alarm to wake me when I get close to my stop. Beats the hell out of driving and parking.
Never had a problem with Amtrak's NEC lines either. Even in Philadelphia or New Jersey. Commuter trains attract a very different clientele than local city light rail lines and street cars.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:58 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
The study shows percentage-wise revenue generated by the rail would go much further in covering costs than the gas tax does.
Rail line: initial visits by Feds and the state. Self generated revenues 0.
Rail line self generated revenues per year 2,100,000 dollars. Operating cost over 8 million.
That’s a lot of money for an average of 430 riders per day. Ten will provide a vital service, the train won’t.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:59 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
Why do any project then? Why spend money in BR to widen I10? It will only minimally help traffic? We should leave it as is. Send that money to another state.
Because some projects will provide more benefit to more people than others. That’s why. You maximize the effectiveness of your tax dollars spent.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 1:59 pm to doubleb
quote:FYI: Louisiana gets $1.14 from the Federal Government for every $1.00 that it sends to them.
We pay federal and state taxes to upkeep and maintain roads and highways, and to build new ones. As long as we pay taxes we should see some benefits.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:00 pm to doubleb
quote:
Ten will provide a vital service, the train won’t.
10 already provides vital service.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:00 pm to dewster
quote:
Just because your work schedule isn’t conducive to a hypothetical train schedule doesn’t mean other people will have the same issue. This isn’t a solution for everyone in South Louisiana. But they believe enough people will use it to justify the existence of a new rail line.
What if there aren’t enough people commuting to work between the two cities?
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:02 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Because some projects will provide more benefit to more people than others. That’s why. You maximize the effectiveness of your tax dollars spent.
It may actually make traffic worse.
Actual research, not OT level anecdotal evidence, shows that often times is the case.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:02 pm to fightin tigers
quote:
I don't live in BR. Haven't been to BR in months if not over a year.
If there was rail going there I would have been. I don't mean that facetiously either, I would take the trip to BR, for recreation, if there was rail, I'm not driving though.
Fwiw, I lived in BR when the last I10 widening project happened. It took 8 years or so (granted reasons for delay) and didn't really improve traffic time wise.
I get you benefit from the highways in your neck of the woods.
If you live in a major urban area you probably benefit from commuter trains too.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:03 pm to soccerfüt
quote:
FYI: Louisiana gets $1.14 from the Federal Government for every $1.00 that it sends to them.
Wd should get more than that. Half the country sends us their sewer.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:04 pm to Macfly
quote:
This idea surfaces every few years and fizzles because it's basically a slow milk run. High speed is out of the question because of weak infrastructure and low passenger volume.
The plan is to improve the quality of the rail lines for high speed. There are stretched on Amtrak between Detroit and Chicago where speeds go 110 mph. The Acela in the NEC reaches 150 mph. If we build and maintain steel rail and traditional wooden ties you can go that fast.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:04 pm to doubleb
quote:
10 has been neglected for decades. It’s substandard, it’s unsafe and it needs major improvements.
That along with a new bridge, critical by-passes and a comprehensive plan will improve traffic and improve safety.
We pay federal and state taxes to upkeep and maintain roads and highways, and to build new ones. As long as we pay taxes we should see some benefits.
I agree. Louisiana should see a new Mississippi River bridge and a vastly improved highway network.
But here's a pile of federal cash for transportation infrastructure that might take some cars off that highway. Even if you don't believe all of the surveys and studies on it; the worst case scenario is that it totally flops and you are left right where you are now....no passenger train service, but with brand new cross arms, safer rail crossings, and a new rail bridge that your state tax dollars won't have to pay to replace.
Posted on 4/6/21 at 2:04 pm to doubleb
This train would probably not benefit me much, if at all. Recreational travel would probably be my only use.
I have traveled between BR and NOLA enough for work to know that there is a demand that people would pay for and utilize. I don't expect everyone to realize that because most have never experienced the situation.
I have traveled between BR and NOLA enough for work to know that there is a demand that people would pay for and utilize. I don't expect everyone to realize that because most have never experienced the situation.
This post was edited on 4/6/21 at 2:07 pm
Page 20 of 22
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News