ragland
August 6th, 2005, 04:22 AM
Note: Yes, I've never been to New York. Architecturally, I can see why there would definitely be forums for it. My focus is more on transportation which I must say is aesthetically not nearly as pleasing. Below is a brief summation with included link on Virginia's Statewide Multimodal Long Range Plan for the next 20 years AKA Vtrans 2025. What effects does transportation planning and all the private monied interests and government interests have on the effect of architecture? Does architecture (good architecture) stand out as an artistic abstraction or does it blend it with its enviornment?
I haven't researched if Newyork state has recently done a statewide multimodal long range report. One can assume NYC has been built out for a long time despite new projects it may be doing such as demolition of old buildings and remembrance for the victims in the WTC. But New York State probably isn't all built out and it would be interesting to find the hotspot developers have targeted.
Personally, I'm not thrilled with Virginia's Statewide Intermodal Long Range Transportation Plan. The report is something of an oxymoron since it places general emphasis on primary road usage, discourages intermodal services (especially long haul carriers on rail freight.
I read an Eastern District Court New York Judge filed a RICO charge against the ILA for having close connections with known mob figures. There was scary talk of a strike but then all of a sudden something interceded and it was announced there will be no strike during the RICO charge.
Well, here it is about 5 hours away from you.
In partial relationship with VDOT's plans for the proposed widening of I-81 located at http://<font color="#800080">http:/...lan.html</font> (http://<font%20color=) I researched VTrans 2025 AKA Virginia's Statewide Multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan in which several state public and private stakeholders contributed. What is contradictory under one section of "freight" in Phase One Status Report to the General Assembly is it states, "Get trucks off I-81". If you read further the report states, "Divert truck freight along the I-81 corridor to rail or a dedicated truck route." As will be seen there is implicit approval of widening I-81 by this body.
It states, "Expand the Shenandoah travel system throughout the I-81 corridor and other sections of the state and build out urban areas before destroying open space. And under "environmental justice", "Provide an assistance program to economically deprived areas that are displaced by road projects.
Although Virginia's Statewide Multimodal Long Range Transportation Plan is complex and involves many interrelated modes of transportation it is clear where it bias and interests lay when it states, ""Recognize that roads will still be the primary transportation mode in 20 years." If you look at the Plan it is a self fulfilling prophecy. Any genuine Statewide Multimodal Long Range Plan should operate from the "goal" the ultimate purpose is to strive for roads not being the primary transportation mode in the future in certain areas and even if it is in twenty years than the goal should be to mitigate it.
Instead, this so-called Statewide Multimodal Long Range Plan seems only interested in the most superficial and negligible role of intermodal train freight by stating, "Studies are underway to identify freight needs in the I-81 and I-95 corridors. These processes include a safety evaluation of all grade crossings in the study areas. A major rail needs assessment for VDRPT was conducted in 1997-98. Since that time, rail service has undergone a transformation nationally due to major changes in transportation logistics. This transformation was in response to changes in the global marketplace, product origin and destination, and innovation in passenger rail technology that makes high speed rail travel competitive with air travel. Following the studies underway, identified freight and passenger needs will result in an update of the rail needs for Virginia. Data collection and an update of VDRPT’s efforts of 1998 will result in a prioritized needs list to reflect real time rail needs for Virginia’s passenger and freight rail network. Given the current set up, don't expect anything favorable from such an update.
Furthermore, from a competitive cost analysis the report states, "Provide grade-separated infrastructure for rail freight. Divert freight from trucks to rail or waterways. Reinvest in waterways as a means of moving freight. Recognize that intermodal transfer increase the cost of moving freight and encourage movement by truck." In a way you could call this Virginia's Statewide anti multimodal Long Range Transportation Plan for intermodal rail freight for long-haul trucks. Remember this is a projected 20-25 year Plan and is clearly crafted with state support and federal support as well as private stakeholders.
Under Smart Growth and Sprawl the report states, "Define Smart Growth". There is no such thing as smart growth. It has become one of those euphemisms used by planners and others for rampant development. The report does make some good recommendations but they are already largely in place and more is needed such as when it states, "Expand Virginia's inland ports to encourage freight movement by rail. Invest in a smart tag system for freight to facilitate across state lines. Make more use of the north/south rail system to remove trucks from roads." We need more than just the north/south rail system, to remove trucks from roads. On the congested East Coast there is just one line.
One of the "other" possibilities the report states to deal with sprawl is to "reinstate the car tax". At the same time the report mentions the need for more roads and trucks on them and higher density it has the bizarre possible proposal, "Study why biking/walking to school is declining and provide safer routes. Plan growth and land use to make bike transportation more practical." If you're projecting more roads and trucks and cars on them and roads being the primary mode of transportation in 20 years, in most cases planners don't account for that. Surely, being on a school bus is safer in today's world for a youngster to walk or bike to school.
I recently wrote Virginia Senator John Warner with my lengthy concerns and his reply summed up was, "I am committed to increasing the safety of the I-81 corridor while maintaining its vital role in our nation's transportation system." Let me tell you what the "proposed" widening of I-81 is. It will facilitate much more truck traffic and material goods and money and will fit nicely with NAFTA/CAFTA-DR. That is what it is all about. It has nothing to do with safety or the American people or preserving the rural character of the Shenandoah or the 40 communities of it opposed to it.
Contact you state and federal representative and tell them what you think of the proposed widening of I-81.
I haven't researched if Newyork state has recently done a statewide multimodal long range report. One can assume NYC has been built out for a long time despite new projects it may be doing such as demolition of old buildings and remembrance for the victims in the WTC. But New York State probably isn't all built out and it would be interesting to find the hotspot developers have targeted.
Personally, I'm not thrilled with Virginia's Statewide Intermodal Long Range Transportation Plan. The report is something of an oxymoron since it places general emphasis on primary road usage, discourages intermodal services (especially long haul carriers on rail freight.
I read an Eastern District Court New York Judge filed a RICO charge against the ILA for having close connections with known mob figures. There was scary talk of a strike but then all of a sudden something interceded and it was announced there will be no strike during the RICO charge.
Well, here it is about 5 hours away from you.
In partial relationship with VDOT's plans for the proposed widening of I-81 located at http://<font color="#800080">http:/...lan.html</font> (http://<font%20color=) I researched VTrans 2025 AKA Virginia's Statewide Multimodal Long-Range Transportation Plan in which several state public and private stakeholders contributed. What is contradictory under one section of "freight" in Phase One Status Report to the General Assembly is it states, "Get trucks off I-81". If you read further the report states, "Divert truck freight along the I-81 corridor to rail or a dedicated truck route." As will be seen there is implicit approval of widening I-81 by this body.
It states, "Expand the Shenandoah travel system throughout the I-81 corridor and other sections of the state and build out urban areas before destroying open space. And under "environmental justice", "Provide an assistance program to economically deprived areas that are displaced by road projects.
Although Virginia's Statewide Multimodal Long Range Transportation Plan is complex and involves many interrelated modes of transportation it is clear where it bias and interests lay when it states, ""Recognize that roads will still be the primary transportation mode in 20 years." If you look at the Plan it is a self fulfilling prophecy. Any genuine Statewide Multimodal Long Range Plan should operate from the "goal" the ultimate purpose is to strive for roads not being the primary transportation mode in the future in certain areas and even if it is in twenty years than the goal should be to mitigate it.
Instead, this so-called Statewide Multimodal Long Range Plan seems only interested in the most superficial and negligible role of intermodal train freight by stating, "Studies are underway to identify freight needs in the I-81 and I-95 corridors. These processes include a safety evaluation of all grade crossings in the study areas. A major rail needs assessment for VDRPT was conducted in 1997-98. Since that time, rail service has undergone a transformation nationally due to major changes in transportation logistics. This transformation was in response to changes in the global marketplace, product origin and destination, and innovation in passenger rail technology that makes high speed rail travel competitive with air travel. Following the studies underway, identified freight and passenger needs will result in an update of the rail needs for Virginia. Data collection and an update of VDRPT’s efforts of 1998 will result in a prioritized needs list to reflect real time rail needs for Virginia’s passenger and freight rail network. Given the current set up, don't expect anything favorable from such an update.
Furthermore, from a competitive cost analysis the report states, "Provide grade-separated infrastructure for rail freight. Divert freight from trucks to rail or waterways. Reinvest in waterways as a means of moving freight. Recognize that intermodal transfer increase the cost of moving freight and encourage movement by truck." In a way you could call this Virginia's Statewide anti multimodal Long Range Transportation Plan for intermodal rail freight for long-haul trucks. Remember this is a projected 20-25 year Plan and is clearly crafted with state support and federal support as well as private stakeholders.
Under Smart Growth and Sprawl the report states, "Define Smart Growth". There is no such thing as smart growth. It has become one of those euphemisms used by planners and others for rampant development. The report does make some good recommendations but they are already largely in place and more is needed such as when it states, "Expand Virginia's inland ports to encourage freight movement by rail. Invest in a smart tag system for freight to facilitate across state lines. Make more use of the north/south rail system to remove trucks from roads." We need more than just the north/south rail system, to remove trucks from roads. On the congested East Coast there is just one line.
One of the "other" possibilities the report states to deal with sprawl is to "reinstate the car tax". At the same time the report mentions the need for more roads and trucks on them and higher density it has the bizarre possible proposal, "Study why biking/walking to school is declining and provide safer routes. Plan growth and land use to make bike transportation more practical." If you're projecting more roads and trucks and cars on them and roads being the primary mode of transportation in 20 years, in most cases planners don't account for that. Surely, being on a school bus is safer in today's world for a youngster to walk or bike to school.
I recently wrote Virginia Senator John Warner with my lengthy concerns and his reply summed up was, "I am committed to increasing the safety of the I-81 corridor while maintaining its vital role in our nation's transportation system." Let me tell you what the "proposed" widening of I-81 is. It will facilitate much more truck traffic and material goods and money and will fit nicely with NAFTA/CAFTA-DR. That is what it is all about. It has nothing to do with safety or the American people or preserving the rural character of the Shenandoah or the 40 communities of it opposed to it.
Contact you state and federal representative and tell them what you think of the proposed widening of I-81.