NIMBYS - Your Thoughts?

[Qapla]

It takes time and money to build any means of travel expansion - that applies to air, road and rail.

However, the airports have been able to expand as have the roadways. Rail has not had the rate of expansion as these other methods.

While there are various things that impact the expansion of rail - one of them is surely the "Not In My Back Yard" mentality ... as we can see from the number of lawsuits to stop, relocate or restrict rail expansion.

What do you think? How much of an effect have the NIMBYS had on rail as compared to other factors?

 

[Exvalley]

Have airports really been able to expand their footprint? That seems to be an extreme rarity.

 

[Qapla]

If you look at the time frame of Amtrak - 1971 till now - yes, there have been several airports that have expanded

 

[John Bredin]

IMHO, NIMBYs haven't had nearly as significant impact as those who oppose increased public funding for passenger rail or rail transit generally.

Airport and highway projects are broadly accepted as generally proper expenditures of tax money, with quibbling over the usefulness or impact of particular projects. Some of that quibbling isn't just NIMBY, and some of it is valid (third airport for Chicago at rural Peotone, for instance). And plenty of modest but useful rail projects go through on a similar basis in regions where intercity and/or transit rail is a vital part of the economy.

But propose a new rail project for somewhere that doesn't have any or much passenger or transit rail, or propose a really large project (Second Ave. Subway or Gateway in NYC, California HSR) even for someplace that does, and opposition pours in. It seems to me to be rarely on a NIMBY basis -- from landowners near the project, objecting to the particular location of the project -- and more on an idea that the project will be a waste of tax dollars that nobody will use.

Opponents will use NIMBY arguments as one of their tools to kill a project, but will also generally propagandize against "socialist" rail projects as "social engineering" (cite) that will somehow "force" people out of their cars (cite). Those are not NIMBY but "not in anyone's back yard" arguments that completely ignore that (1) roads are also publicly planned and funded, (2) choosing to invest in roads over rail also shapes society and could equally be called "social engineering," and (3) nothing is more unforced than whether someone who owns a car chooses to drive or take a train for a particular trip. Few of the attacks on high-speed rail documented here are on NIMBY grounds.

 

[Exvalley]

If you look at the time frame of Amtrak - 1971 till now - yes, there have been several airports that have expanded

How many in 50 years? Hardly any.

 

[WWW]

How many in 50 years? Hardly any.

I can think of -3- right off hand - Salt Lake City (recently) - Denver from Stapleton to the new Denver International - and Kansas
City Missouri from downtown to the suburban location 15 some miles NW. Atlanta added an additional runway at its south border.
Dallas-Ft. Worth moved from Downtown Love Field (still active) to the mid-point between the two cities.
Expansion may not be outside of the physical perimeter of the existing facility.
Not so oddly railroads (tracks) have been pulled up and reverted to hiking/biking nature trails and even some given back to
adjacent land owners - the amount of abandoned rail tracks is outstanding compared to new tracks laid for light and high
speed traffic.
Differences between rail and air are like the differences between apples oranges mangos and pears.

 

[Bob Dylan]

I can think of -3- right off hand - Salt Lake City (recently) - Denver from Stapleton to the new Denver International - and Kansas
City Missouri from downtown to the suburban location 15 some miles NW. Atlanta added an additional runway at its south border.
Dallas-Ft. Worth moved from Downtown Love Field (still active) to the mid-point between the two cities.
Expansion may not be outside of the physical perimeter of the existing facility.
Not so oddly railroads (tracks) have been pulled up and reverted to hiking/biking nature trails and even some given back to
adjacent land owners - the amount of abandoned rail tracks is outstanding compared to new tracks laid for light and high
speed traffic.
Differences between rail and air are like the differences between apples oranges mangos and pears.

Austin moved from Mueller ( now an upscale Housing Village) to Bergstrom, the old Air Force Base SE of town.

 

[Exvalley]

Moving an airport to another existing field wasn’t what I asked about, I asked how many existing airports have increased their footprint. The number is incredibly small. Certainly nothing comparable to the rise in over travel by air.

 

[Qapla]

In the last 50 years many of the airports in Florida have expanded and upgraded - that applies to regional ones as well as international ones like Jacksonville, Orlando, Tampa and Miami

While the airport in Gainesville has expanded and/or upgraded more than once since 1971 ... the tracks from Gainesville to Waldo have been removed and the land used to widen the highway. The tracks to Ocala and those going to the east coast have been removes with many of them becoming "rails-to-trails"

Many of the people who have been born in the Gainesville since the 1980's (or have moved here) have no idea that trains ever came to Gainesville or that the tracks used to go to the Amtrak depot in Waldo (the Waldo depot is no longer active for trains - just a Thru-way bus stop)

 

[Exvalley]

Ask anyone in the aviation community and they will tell you that the infrastructure hasn’t come close to increasing with demand. I know it’s fashionable to hate on the airlines, but our system‘s capacity is antiquated and strained in many cities.

I’m all for money being allocated to both forms of transportation. It’s shouldn’t be a competition. If you foster a competitive attitude, trains are bound to be on the losing side.

 

[Qapla]

Ask anyone in the aviation community and they will tell you that the infrastructure hasn’t come close to increasing with demand

Not increasing with demand is not the same as not increasing. Airports and the roads feeding them have increased in size and numbers while train tracks have been removed and the number and/or size of trains have been downsized.

Money being available is not the only reason trains have not increased like roads and airports. While lack of funding has had impacts on rail expansion ... here in Florida there has been quite a lot of NIMBYS that have tried to prevent rail while they have not objected to the Interstate system or improvements to local roads so they can build new neighborhoods and shopping areas.

 

[Willbridge]

In the Denver area NIMBY's turned out to oppose us running trains on right-of-way that we had owned since before they moved into the neighborhood. The W-Line light rail runs past houses that were built to be near the interurban stations. During WWII trains with explosives and finished ordnance from the Remington Arms plant rolled past their homes. Their protests were subsidized by a political group opposed to public transit in general. One of the businesses opposing it had a temporary easement over our right-of-way for access to their landlocked property so they opposed the line on the grounds that they would have to buy the right to cross a neighbor's property. They had thought it was a big joke that there would be trains on the rail line again.

In my career I ran into varying degrees of NIMBYness and always had to listen carefully in case there was an actual issue. Sometimes it was just funny, though. For the original Denver LRT line we were holding a public meeting near the route in the Baker neighborhood (for those who know Denver) and a guy testified that the wires would have electro-magnetic waves that would cause cancer. I pointed out that the controversy about that involved high voltage AC power, not our 750V DC power. He didn't have much else to say, but afterwards -- in a walking neighborhood -- I saw him get into an old beater of a car which emitted a nasty blue-grey cloud when he fired it up to drive out of the neighborhood.

 

[west point]

The new DFW (Dallas FtWorth ) airport actually was an expansion of the old Greater Southwest airport (GSW). GSW was a large American Airlines maintenance and office hub at one time . The GSW property was largely in what is now the SW portion of DFW. How much land was taken for DFW has been lost to time in my mind. Now another rather large expansion of an airport has been in stages .

That is Atlanta airport. Originally it only had one east west runway ( 9-27) , and NE - SW runway (3-21 ) and a NW - SE runway ( 15 - 33 ) which was the main instrument landing runway ( Radio range then ILS ). First another EW runway was built 5000 ft to the south of the first EW runway. Took in part of SOU RR tracks to Warm Springs. Then the new terminal was built which caused I-85 to be relocated to the west taking in much property . New terminal closed 3-21 and 15-33 runways, Then a parallel EW runway north of the original E-W runway which took in property including a SOU RR spur, part of Ford plant property, and much of Hapeville city. that was part of alternate route to Warm Springs. Ford plant had to build new RR spur to Ford plant.

Next another parallel E-W runway south of the 2nd E_W runway was built that resulted in the small town of Mountain view being obliterated. Not to be outdone a final E_W runway was built another 5000 ft south of the fourth E_W runway that included a runway bridge ( a monster ) over I-285 that took over CSX active spur to the west and many business and homes.

SO ATL probably in all its expansion took as much or probably more property as the many new build cited above. A small claim to fame about ATL is that have flown off and on all 7 runways in both directions. Cannot say that about ORD as missed 3 or 4

 

[railiner]

I can understand the sentiment against new infrastructure being forced thru an established residential area , whether it be for roads, rails, or airports; but it really galls me when protests are made for restoring or improving rail service to a dormant line.
One that comes to mind is the former LIRR Rockaway line, that diverged from its mainline at Rego Park in Queens, and ran south towards Rockaway. The NYC subway took over its southern portion in 1956, and LIRR ran its last passenger train on the remainder around 1962.
When train service to JFK was first proposed, the best idea was to reuse that line, and have fast, comfortable, one seat LIRR service from Penn Station direct to JFK.
But the NIMBY’s put the kabash to that, and as a result, we have the Airtrain.

 

[jiml]

My favorite NIMBY's are the ones who move in next to infrastructure of any kind (rail line, airport, hydro ROW) then complain that it's there.

 

[railiner]

My favorite NIMBY's are the ones who move in next to infrastructure of any kind (rail line, airport, hydro ROW) then complain that it's there.

That's so true. When Denver built its new airport, it selected a vast site so far from town, that wag's said it was "out in Kansas". I wonder how long it will be before developers will built new housing tracts nearby, and how long before its residents complain about flights over them?

 

[tgstubbs1]

Isn't Eminent Domain the 'big gun' the constitution allows to counter NIMBY on the grounds it's for the public good?

 

[Exvalley]

Isn't Eminent Domain the 'big gun' the constitution allows to counter NIMBY on the grounds it's for the public good?

It’s a very slow and expensive gun.

 

[Qapla]

In Florida, the land along the Interstate where Brightline is building some of their new line, had been set aside for this use long before many of the people who live there purchased their land and houses. When Brightline started clearing the trees from the ROW they are allowed to use there were protests of "I didn't know they were going to cut down all the trees. I don't want to see the traffic on the Interstate" - even though it was clearly stated in their land deeds that the land had been granted for use by rail.

This is one case where the NIMBY mentality didn't work. They never read their own deeds and thought that complaining would stop the land clearing. Not the case.

 

[Bob Dylan]

In Florida, the land along the Interstate where Brightline is building some of their new line, had been set aside for this use long before many of the people who live there purchased their land and houses. When Brightline started clearing the trees from the ROW they are allowed to use there were protests of "I didn't know they were going to cut down all the trees. I don't want to see the traffic on the Interstate" - even though it was clearly stated in their land deeds that the land had been granted for use by rail.

This is one case where the NIMBY mentality didn't work. They never read their own deeds and thought that complaining would stop the land clearing. Not the case.

Where did that damn Railroad/ Airport/ Freeway come from?? Its ruining my Property's Value!!!

 

[Qapla]

Jacksonville International Airport used to be way north of the city ... the airport hasn't moved but the city has grown up to the area. When they started to get up there with some of the higher-priced homes they began to complain about the noise the jets make flying in and out. They tried to get some sort of something passed with the city that would require the airport to make less noise.

It didn't work since the airport was there first.

 

[Asher]

An airport 1 1/2 miles east of me has added a terminal for business class and private jets. The traffic over the last couple of years has greatly increased. The noise level of modern jets is far less annoying than in the past. But, the airport has added a new departure route that instead of turning 45 degrees shortly after clearing the runway, has now been giving straight out departures that crosses just to the south of my house. The jets are climbing out and pass so quickly they are gone in a flash so not too bothersome, its the small piston driven plane that is barely gaining altitude and makes about 5 departures right over my house that makes me want to call the tower and complain.

 

[Willbridge]

That's so true. When Denver built its new airport, it selected a vast site so far from town, that wag's said it was "out in Kansas". I wonder how long it will be before developers will built new housing tracts nearby, and how long before its residents complain about flights over them?

At RTD we used to joke about whether we would have to set up free transfers with the Wichita bus system. On the other side of NIMBYism was a faction that argued that because Stapleton airport was in the Local flat-rate fare zone, so should be the new airport. After all, it was only 19½ miles further from downtown.

 

[railiner]

Yes, I recall riding the #32 out to Stapleton for something like a quarter, or so....

 

[tomfuller]

There has been recent talk of making a high speed (over 100MPH) tube train system from Portland OR through Seattle and ending in Vancouver BC. Money in nearly equal terms to be supplied by Oregon, Washington, British Columbia and Microsoft. I fear that this is just a "pipe dream" but we'll see.