Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
You're right, adding any similar increase in door to door travel time, no matter the mode, will tend to increase sprawl in a similar manner. As HSR is currently that much faster than other surface modes, it offers at least the possibility for significantly greater development/sprawl along a longer route (going back to the two hour travel time 'limit').

If the state or federal funding sources for an Express HSR corridor have the will and capacity to fight sprawl, all they need do is to not pick station locations that offer no infill development opportunities and do not integrate well with local transport networks.

You're kind of shooting yourself in the foot then, no? Trains need volume. You either have high density very close to the stations or you have an extensive feeder network, be it car, bus, tram, regional rail, etc. We don't have density and as it stands now, we don't have much ability to create density through land use restrictions. Instead we have to rely on feeder networks to bring in traffic. Outside of a few major urban areas, the only feeders we have are cars. That's the rub.

by Jace on Thu Jun 2nd, 2011 at 02:33:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display: