It is currently Fri Nov 24, 2017 11:52 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:46 am 

Joined: Sun Aug 22, 2004 1:51 pm
Posts: 8358
Location: Baltimore, MD
I'm just gonna leave this here without comment. The line in question is the Winnepesaukee Scenic between Meredith and Weirs Beach in New Hampshire:

http://www.laconiadailysun.com/newsx/lo ... -wow-trail


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 9:51 am 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 11:07 am
Posts: 521
How much of a study would they get for 10,000?

Does the word "naive" apply?

Bob H


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 10:09 am 

Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 8:18 pm
Posts: 2080
Heavenrich wrote:
How much of a study would they get for 10,000?

Does the word "naive" apply?

Bob H


The south shore extension cost millions in a study. 10,000 may get 3 people 5 days taking pictures.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Thu Oct 26, 2017 7:39 pm 

Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 2:06 am
Posts: 145
Heavenrich wrote:
How much of a study would they get for 10,000?

Does the word "naive" apply?

Bob H


A closer read of the article reveals the $10k figure is only the city's portion. Other contributors are indicated. mld


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 2:47 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:46 am
Posts: 2447
Location: S.F. Bay Area
A lot of these projects are nothing more than grand schemes to leech G-money, partly in consultancy fees to write reports that are basically phoned-in. People pouring in private capital would defeat the purpose of taking off the dole. So it's likely the town or state match is all there is to this project.

If I were king, the government could only match $3 for every $1 raised by proper fundraising, donations capped at $100 for matching purposes, and donors would be ineligible to leech (get contracts). This consultant report would've required $2500 donations from at least 25 people. Those donors would expect so much more for their money. It would shut down this entire business.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 3:37 pm 

Joined: Sat Nov 28, 2015 7:28 pm
Posts: 171
Location: Northern WV
Ah yes, the government study.


Attachments:
five_year_government_study.jpg
five_year_government_study.jpg [ 72.81 KiB | Viewed 1596 times ]

_________________
Roger Cole
Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Sat Oct 28, 2017 4:09 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2015 11:54 am
Posts: 128
Location: Orrville, OH
Hmmm.... $10k city money plus money from bike trail proponents. Doesn't sound like the end result would be unbiased. If I lived there, I'd be looking at that closely since the city is spending tax dollars for a study with a possibly predetermined conclusion. Just sayin'...

_________________
Eric Schlentner
ORHS


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Sun Oct 29, 2017 3:43 pm 

Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:46 am
Posts: 2447
Location: S.F. Bay Area
Who did the railroad cheese off? Somebody hates them...

We can reverse engineer the numbers to see the railroad is taking in a million bucks a year. In my experience visitors spend 2-3x that at other local businesses. And then there's the multiplier when the railroad spends much of their income locally. I regularly get comments like "you're killing my business" when we don't run or "I want your schedule so I know when to add staff", and mind you, we're super small. I'm talking real spending, not this fantasy money they stick in these reports: if the railroad were credited for the same Sean Spicer numbers as the pro-trail reports use, it would be 10 times! So the bike path had better show more than $10M by a margin to pay its capital costs.

Realistically, bike paths cause a spike in business for the ice cream parlor and comic book shop because the #1 beneficiary is neighborhood kids.

End of the day, the railroad is a real functioning producing business, and real tourism. The trail is a fantasy of some starry eyed bicyclists with a hidden agenda to get the government to subsidize their fun.


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 1:36 pm 

Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 12:53 pm
Posts: 162
Location: Manchester, NH
The State of New Hampshire has spoken... They will not support a trail-without-rail:
http://www.laconiadailysun.com/newsx/lo ... d-corridor

_________________
-Ed Lecuyer
Volunteer, WW&F Railway Museum, Alna ME.
Please help the WW&F construct a Narrow Bridge Ahead!


Offline
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Another Trail Proposal Attacking an Extant Tourist Line
PostPosted: Fri Nov 10, 2017 3:52 pm 

Joined: Thu May 24, 2012 1:37 pm
Posts: 896
You have to love the quote by the person originally trying to get the railroad removed:

Quote:
“The current draft of the resolution needs to be recalibrated,” he said Thursday. “The communication that we received in the way of that letter and from others means we probably need to take a step back before we proceed with some sort of study.”


He also said he didn't want to 'prejudice' the idea of extending the existing trail by tying it to any particular approach (e.g., 'rail with trail' like some other parts of what's there already.

The article does make mention of the track running on 'causeways' and through 'tunnels' that complicate the routing of a trail that is not on or near the rail ROW, and also mentions the objection of NIMBYs in gated communities who think a trail past their properties will increase the likelihood of theft or vandalism.

_________________
R.M.Ellsworth


Offline
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 10 posts ] 

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


 Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 49 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: