4 ms·
I've heard of these things before, but they always leave me confused. Common sense either you need to 1. shrink the train (and what more than "light rail" spe
by Ericson2314 6y ago
I've heard of these things before, but they always leave me confused.
Common sense either you need to
1. shrink the train (and what more than "light rail" speaks to the pain and embarrassment that accompanies crawling back from automobile culture)
2. expand the right-of-way
3. commit to turning over the trail once the rail is reconstructed
Which is it?
- pacaro 6y agoMy understanding is that the right of way for the rail is significantly wider than needed for the tracks alone. I live near a rail line that was converted to a multi use trail and as part of the conversion process there had to be a decision made about past encroachment onto the right of way — mostly homeowners who had pushed their property boundaries closer to the actual rail. Looking at the planning maps it was surprising how wide the path is, but I suspect that it is to allow for the embankments and cuttings needed to keep a railroad level (or at least to keep grades within tolerance)
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]