Geography is an interesting study.
Dictionary.com describes it as such.
1. the science dealing with the areal differentiation of the earth's surface, as shown in the character, arrangement, and interrelations over the world of such elements as climate, elevation, soil, vegetation, population, land use, industries, or states, and of the unit areas formed by the complex of these individual elements.
It is a science applied to the urban/human environment just as much, if not more, as it is to what is described as the natural environment. An understanding of the science essential to the urban planner. A study of relationships that can be experienced, come natural to some (everyone is gifted with their own form of genius) or can be learned. Urban geography being the focus of one of my honor classes when I was in school.
SARUP has had an outstanding and diverse array of lecturers for their Friday Afternoon Live, FAL, lecture series. Included in the past was an urban geographer/planner. After the lecture I asked a question concerning high speed rail. I questioned whether the traditional downtown or the airport, Chicago being the city in question, was more appropriate for a high speed rail hub. I suggested a slower system was appropriate to bring people into the Loop. The response to my query was, 'but it's not high speed rail' as if all rail must now be high speed.
Being the last question of the night, received with a bit of uncertainty and trepidation as all my questions are, I didn't push the issue. But in my view the issue is two fold; one is economics, the other scale.
I find this knee jerk reaction that all rail must be high speed rail even when it isn't, like what was planned for here in Wisconsin, not unsettling but uninspiring. Birds of a feather the common phrase that comes to mind describes it best. Those of a certain belief flock together and then need to invest far less to justify or sell their ideas. My ideas expressed here in this blog concerning high speed rail are not unique either. There are groups that promote using high speed rail to connect airports and those that believe in a much more personal scale of fixed public transportation; personal rapid transit systems.
First of all the cost of high speed rail is very ...high. Yes, minimal government producing a vibrant economy would create plenty of funds for such amenities that most often don't turn a profit, but may be considered beneficial overall in high density or traffic conditions. I do not believe most parts of the world will achieve such population densities to justify the wide spread use of traditional high speed rail. I advocated a much smaller scale system for the Milwaukee-Madison corridor. We will always have New York and Tokyo, among others, as part of the human experience, but man is far better off living closer to nature, in greener environments. I am better for my experiences living in such high density areas, and some could easily show their benefits to the world economy, global interaction and development. But how many mega metropolitan areas do we need?
So I do not believe we need to plan such density for new or growing cities. We do not need such a large scale high speed rail system. The cost would not be justified and no one will ride it where the car is available, making the cost all that more reprehensible. Also, bringing such rail through a dense urban environment to connect downtowns is fiscally irresponsible when the airport is clearly the new transportation hub for any large city.
And the scale. ...When I travel I truly enjoy observing the natural environment. When I drive out to the north woods the landscapes are beautiful. I can look upon it, ...and some minutes later look upon it again as I drive and it hasn't changed as far as I can perceive. I have taken the bullet trains in Japan and can take in the essence of all the changing natural environment, agricultural or otherwise, at very high speed.
Coming into an urban environment is very different. The density of flavor, color, the heart and soul of a city needs to be experienced at a much slower pace. Rushing through an urban environment at high speed is to deny oneself the kind of rich experiences that open our eyes to the essences of our fellow man. Yes, the high speed rail can slow, may have to slow, as it enters the city (the 'high speed' aspect becoming irrelevant), but one can transfer to a more appropriately scaled, in size and speed, system at the airport. All at lower cost to the public as rail systems generally don't turn a profit.
