Brightline Trains Florida discussion

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Brian_tampa said:
I guess the biggest shocker for me is that the Scott administration, which at one time wanted to defund Tri-rail completely, is now spending money for its expansion! Could this be part of their overall support of AAF more so than for helping Tri-rail? I am beginning to believe that the Scott administration really wants to see AAF succeed. Perhaps it is, in part, to blunt the widespread criticism of him for rejecting HSR funds back in 2011? Then he could say at the end of his term as governor that private business succeeded in running a higher speed passenger rail service without using billions of tax money. I would not be surprised to see Gov Scott aboard the first run of an AAF train and use it politically in early 2017!
Click to expand...
I think that a succesful and profitable privately financed and operated inter city train is a great argument for the GOP in their battle against Amtrak.

So I would suspect he's ideologically behind this scheme and wants it to succeed, even if this requires bending the definition of "no state support".
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I think they have pretty much said that 'no state support" means "no financial risk for the taxpayer". I can live with that definition. I am glad that Scott is supporting it in other important ways for whatever motivates him. I would like to see AAF succeed, and would like to see a station built in the Melbourne/Cocoa area, so that I can take it to Orlando Airport to catch my flights, instead of driving an hour to it.

Incidentally, I would also like to see Amtrak service down the FEC, which also is not something that Scott has vocally opposed. I could even live with FEC passenger service to JAX connecting with Amtrak there.
 
Miami-Orlando train track may host Tri-Rail commuter trains to downtown

Tri-Rail, the commuter service that has been running trains on the CSX track west of Interstate 95 between Palm Beach County and Miami since late last century, is now working on a major new plan: to run trains into downtown Miami beginning in late 2016 or early 2017.


Jack Stephens, executive director of the South Florida Regional Transportation Authority, said the plan calls for running the trains on a stretch of the same track that would be used by a planned Miami-Orlando passenger service.

The plan requires construction of a spur connecting the CSX track that Tri-Rail uses to the Florida East Coast Railway track. Though the spur is slated to be built by the Florida Department of Transportation, Tri-Rail is seeking an additional $69 million — money that would be needed within eight weeks to mesh with the construction schedule set for the Miami-Orlando service, known as All Aboard Florida. The money would be used to build Tri-Rail train platforms plus other enhancements such as ticket-vending machines.
Click to expand...
 
http://media.bizj.us/view/img/5093291/aaf-friedman-report.pdf

http://www.bizjournals.com/orlando/blog/2015/02/all-aboard-florida-to-lose-millions-annually.html

On the one hand, I want to cringe. Badly. On the other hand...

1) I'm going to assume that the report represents the worst-case scenario (a baseline for performance, if you will) given that it was commissioned by an anti-rail

2) Even hiring an economist to attack the project they couldn't knock the CR under about 118%. That is, IMHO, a very good sign.

3) ...which leads to the ticket price assumptions, which on a quick read-through are almost insanely low, particularly to/from Orlando on the "leisure" side (the cost indicated is far below the IRS costs associated with driving, and from what I can tell is actually below gas+tolls).

4) Also, on the ridership assumptions...without discussing the relative levels, there's no attempt to made to differentiate ridership on the basis of distance (I'll happily grant that ridership WPB-MIA is going to have a different character than that MCO-MIA).

5) The debt service assumptions seem to be more than a little high. I'll grant a fair catch here while disagreeing, in that he used the 12.5% coupon on the bonds issued earlier as the basis for his figures. I would argue for a substantially lower figure, mainly because those bonds came out before any approvals had gone through IIRC (so it wasn't even clear if there would be assets to grab if they flopped), not to mention that IIRC the bonds were issued with the option for AAF to pay them in more bonds rather than cash.

--Moreover, going with the author's estimate of a cost of 5% on the bonds, the debt service would be $87.5m (not $125m); even going with the 5.9% indicated later you're only at about $103.25m.

6) Finally, taken as a whole...this is a caveat emptor for bond buyers, not an argument that the project will fail. Particularly if there are indirect benefits for FEC and/or significant development profits from the station projects above and beyond the stations themselves (he largely ignored those, but that seems likely to make a significant dent in the bottom line), there's a lot of room to improve on those numbers without touching the ridership estimates.

--On the ridership side, I'd be curious as to what the ridership figures for the closest station pairs to the AAF stations are on Tri-Rail.

--Also on the ridership side, I'd be curious as to how many riders would be choosing the train themselves versus a cruise line deciding it is cheaper to fly folks into MCO and move them on a train than to fly them into FLL.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
These reports seem to be suggesting that AAF hasn't done due diligence and run the figures.

I'm pretty sure they have.

They're backed by a succesful corporation and corporations don't get succesful by living in la la fantasy land.
 
The report was funded by CARE FL.

Who is that and why do they care about the train?
 
This data is absolute tosh.

Amtrak is supposedly losing about 60 dollars per passenger (this is from memory, so correct me if I'm wrong).

This report is saying AAF will lose more than 200 dollars per passenger.

And this on a corridor with more favorable conditions than Amtrak's average, a densely populated corridor with lots of tourism, and using state-of-the-art equipment and high speeds?

Makes you wonder what they were smoking when they magicked those figures.
 
The study predicts a loss from financial expenses with break even or small surplus operationally. That's about what I've always expected. What the study fails to do is look at revenue from the real estate associated with AAF. Bad form to ignore that in what is obviously a vertically integrated system, especially if those station construction costs are included in the capital budget.
 
Some very interesting and I think significant news. AAF has announced their intention to consider additional stops in Martin, St Lucie, and Indian River counties.

http://host.coxmediagroup.com/wpb/circulation/html/?s=all-aboard-florida-encouraging-exploration-of-more-stops.html

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/all-aboard-florida-encouraging-exploration-of-more/nkJZm/#__federated=1

Quote:

All Aboard Florida is signaling its willingness to build additional stations between West Palm Beach and Orlando, offering to initiate ridership and environmental studies for communities that identify possible locations.

The move is markedly opposite statements made as recently as October when the company's president and chief development officer told the Northern Palm Beach County Chamber of Commerce that no new stops would be considered until the first phase of the express passenger rail project is completed in 2017.

But Russell Roberts, vice president of government affairs for All Aboard Florida, spoke Saturday during a special meeting of the Stuart City Commission, telling board members the Treasure Coast should consider a site analysis for a stop.

"This was contradictory to everything they've said in the past," said Stuart City Commissioner Troy McDonald, who spoke often with All Aboard Florida in his former position as mayor. "It is my belief at this time that we are not interested in negotiating a station, and I don't think the residents want us to do that."

In a statement released by the company Wednesday, Roberts said All Aboard Florida remains "open to future expansion opportunities." He pointed to the Space Coast Transportation Planning Organization, which voted this month to work with the Canaveral Port Authority to find locations best suited for an All Aboard Florida stop in Brevard County.

"We support that vision and encourage the Treasure Coast to focus their resources on a similar process," Roberts said. "All Aboard Florida will work with communities that identify station locations by initiating a pre-development process, which will include analyzing ridership data and any necessary environmental studies."

An All Aboard Florida opposition group says the offer was made in reaction to last week's votes in Martin and Indian River Counties to pledge a combined $4.1 million to fight All Aboard Florida's plan to run 32 trains per day on the Florida East Coast Railway tracks.

While the project has received a mostly favorable response from areas in Miami-Dade and Broward counties, there is opposition in northern Palm Beach County and the Treasure Coast, where trains will run at speeds up to 110 mph.

"The counties have now made a very big stand that they are opposed to All Aboard Florida and I think it wants to divide and conquer," said KC Traylor, a Palm City resident and founder of Florida Not All Aboard. "They want to cause a fracture, but at this point it would be committing political suicide to advocate for a station."

Mark Brechbill, a board member with the group Stuart Main Street, said All Aboard Florida could be devastating to downtown if the city doesn't get a stop, so he's open to hearing options for a station. Brechbill owns land east of the railroad tracks in downtown Stuart and plans to build a mixed-use development there.

"It's a shame in Martin County that it has become politically impossible to express any kind of positive feelings about All Aboard Florida," Brechbill said. "Most people see this as an economic disaster, but as a business person, I'm not ready to jump to that conclusion."

End quote.

It is my opinion that Tallahassee has pressured AAF into this. Remember that the state of Florida has so far refused to submit their comments on the draft EIS. The comments from various state agencies were due by the first week of December 2014. 3 months later, nothing. I now believe that this inaction was intentional. AAF needs those comments in order for the final EIS to be submitted and approved by the FRA. The PAB authorization (and RRIF loan application) that AAF is wanting is dependent on the final EIS being released. Also, the Treasure Coast has been raising a political ruckus. Gov Scott (and the Republican Party of Florida) do not need this opposition at this time.

My thoughts: Gov Scott and his administration have recently made a deal with AAF. If AAF reaches out to the counties that oppose AAF, then the state of FL will release the necessary comments on the EIS and continue to provide support and the approvals necessary for the project to move forward. I do not believe the U.S. DOT (FRA) is involved in this as they are more of a regulatory body that approves projects rather than get involved in local political dealing. The state of Florida can, however, make life very difficult for AAF at the local level.

This is such a big change in direction for AAF that I cannot think of anything else but government interference that would "persuade" them to reconsider their long standing position against additional stops. This definitely does not pass the smell test!

This is unfortunate, but perhaps a necessary reality.

The recently announced study for a stop in Brevard I believe is unrelated. That was probably a reward for Brevard approving the PAB authorization late last year. And maybe AAF sees more potential in Brevard anyways. The ever more popular cruise and cargo port at Canaveral could provide significant business for both AAF and FECR.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian_tampa said:
Some very interesting and I think significant news. AAF has announced their intention to consider additional stops in Martin, St Lucie, and Indian River counties.

http://host.coxmediagroup.com/wpb/circulation/html/?s=all-aboard-florida-encouraging-exploration-of-more-stops.html

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/business/all-aboard-florida-encouraging-exploration-of-more/nkJZm/#__federated=1

Quote:

All Aboard Florida is signaling its willingness to build additional stations between West Palm Beach and Orlando, offering to initiate ridership and environmental studies for communities that identify possible locations.

The move is markedly opposite statements made as recently as October when the company's president and chief development officer told the Northern Palm Beach County Chamber of Commerce that no new stops would be considered until the first phase of the express passenger rail project is completed in 2017.

But Russell Roberts, vice president of government affairs for All Aboard Florida, spoke Saturday during a special meeting of the Stuart City Commission, telling board members the Treasure Coast should consider a site analysis for a stop.

"This was contradictory to everything they've said in the past," said Stuart City Commissioner Troy McDonald, who spoke often with All Aboard Florida in his former position as mayor. "It is my belief at this time that we are not interested in negotiating a station, and I don't think the residents want us to do that."

In a statement released by the company Wednesday, Roberts said All Aboard Florida remains "open to future expansion opportunities." He pointed to the Space Coast Transportation Planning Organization, which voted this month to work with the Canaveral Port Authority to find locations best suited for an All Aboard Florida stop in Brevard County.

"We support that vision and encourage the Treasure Coast to focus their resources on a similar process," Roberts said. "All Aboard Florida will work with communities that identify station locations by initiating a pre-development process, which will include analyzing ridership data and any necessary environmental studies."

An All Aboard Florida opposition group says the offer was made in reaction to last week's votes in Martin and Indian River Counties to pledge a combined $4.1 million to fight All Aboard Florida's plan to run 32 trains per day on the Florida East Coast Railway tracks.

While the project has received a mostly favorable response from areas in Miami-Dade and Broward counties, there is opposition in northern Palm Beach County and the Treasure Coast, where trains will run at speeds up to 110 mph.

"The counties have now made a very big stand that they are opposed to All Aboard Florida and I think it wants to divide and conquer," said KC Traylor, a Palm City resident and founder of Florida Not All Aboard. "They want to cause a fracture, but at this point it would be committing political suicide to advocate for a station."

Mark Brechbill, a board member with the group Stuart Main Street, said All Aboard Florida could be devastating to downtown if the city doesn't get a stop, so he's open to hearing options for a station. Brechbill owns land east of the railroad tracks in downtown Stuart and plans to build a mixed-use development there.

"It's a shame in Martin County that it has become politically impossible to express any kind of positive feelings about All Aboard Florida," Brechbill said. "Most people see this as an economic disaster, but as a business person, I'm not ready to jump to that conclusion."

End quote.

It is my opinion that Tallahassee has pressured AAF into this. Remember that the state of Florida has so far refused to submit their comments on the draft EIS. The comments from various state agencies were due by the first week of December 2014. 3 months later, nothing. I now believe that this inaction was intentional. AAF needs those comments in order for the final EIS to be submitted and approved by the FRA. The PAB authorization (and RRIF loan application) that AAF is wanting is dependent on the final EIS being released. Also, the Treasure Coast has been raising a political ruckus. Gov Scott (and the Republican Party of Florida) do not need this opposition at this time.

My thoughts: Gov Scott and his administration have recently made a deal with AAF. If AAF reaches out to the counties that oppose AAF, then the state of FL will release the necessary comments on the EIS and continue to provide support and the approvals necessary for the project to move forward. I do not believe the U.S. DOT (FRA) is involved in this as they are more of a regulatory body that approves projects rather than get involved in local political dealing. The state of Florida can, however, make life very difficult for AAF at the local level.

This is such a big change in direction for AAF that I cannot think of anything else but government interference that would "persuade" them to reconsider their long standing position against additional stops. This definitely does not pass the smell test!

This is unfortunate, but perhaps a necessary reality.

The recently announced study for a stop in Brevard I believe is unrelated. That was probably a reward for Brevard approving the PAB authorization late last year. And maybe AAF sees more potential in Brevard anyways. The ever more popular cruise and cargo port at Canaveral could provide significant business for both AAF and FECR.
Click to expand...
 
I don't think its necessarily unfortunate. There's no reason for every train to make the added stops, if they even get built. If that is indeed what it gets to win the state's cooperation, then I think it's worth it. If the towns don't want stations, no change in plans. If they do, then just have some small subset of the total schedule make stops. The rest can keep going as planned. With 32 trains a day they have some scheduling flexibility.
 
Keelhauled,

I mean it is unfortunate that local politics have become involved in what is strictly a private endeavor. And if you know anything about the opposition in the counties mentioned, you would understand why I am not pleased that they are being given a chance to get a stop. They really do not deserve a stop now because of all the lies and BS they have spread over the past year. Why should they benefit from something they are trying to kill?

In a normal world, yes I do agree with you that only certain trains out of 32 each should stop and that would be a benefit. Please research the opposition and see the stuff they have been saying about AAF. I look at Martin and Indian River counties as being a threat to the rest of the state getting an alternative transportation mode. The treasure coast is 3% of the population of Florida. AAF will potentially expand to serve almost 50% of the state's population if they expand to Tampa and Jacksonville. Why should 3 small counties decide such a big issue such as this for the rest of the state?

Edit: the treasure coast counties have a combined population of about 600,000 people. The state of Florida total population is 19.9 million people.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian_tampa said:
Keelhauled,

I mean it is unfortunate that local politics have become involved in what is strictly a private endeavor. And if you know anything about the opposition in the counties mentioned, you would understand why I am not pleased that they are being given a chance to get a stop. They really do not deserve a stop now because of all the lies and BS they have spread over the past year. Why should they benefit from something they are trying to kill?

In a normal world, yes I do agree with you that only certain trains out of 32 each should stop and that would be a benefit. Please research the opposition and see the stuff they have been saying about AAF. I look at Martin and Indian River counties as being a threat to the rest of the state getting an alternative transportation mode. The treasure coast is 3% of the population of Florida. AAF will potentially expand to serve almost 50% of the state's population if they expand to Tampa and Jacksonville. Why should 3 small counties decide such a big issue such as this for the rest of the state?

Edit: the treasure coast counties have a combined population of about 600,000 people. The state of Florida total population is 19.9 million people.
Click to expand...
Do these counties have much leverage anyway? If AAF says they're going to run the service and the State of Florida says they can, isn't that good enough. They're not even having to do much eminent domain as they already own the tracks. Surely is a railroad owns operational tracks it is allowed to run trains on them. I don't see what the opposition can seriously do here apart from beat drums and make a lot oif noise.
 
Whether they deserve a stop or not, the fact is that if they have a large customer base, it would be good for the train to serve the market. Trains don't do well with long barren stretches of expense but no income.
A greater number of city pairs increases revenue exponentially at little extra expense. If they can get a favorable deal on a station location it would be good business to stop at the larger cities.
 
I think AAF will find that they will have an opportunity to run both an Express skip stations service between Miami and Orlando, as well as a stopping service.

In Brevard County we would eventually be campaigning for two stops, one in north Brevard around Cocoa, and another in south Brevard around Melbourne by Rt 192 or thereabouts. For now figuring out and getting one stop, which will likely be the north one would be a good start.

I guess we will know where FCRP stands on such matters during their March 13 Annual Meeting in Winter Park. On the surface they appear to be too focused on Amtrak, to the exclusion of everything else (but I am hoping it is not so), but we'll see.

At the rate things are going in Amtrak LD land, it seems it will be a long time before any Amtrak comes down the east coast of Florida.
 
A new document out today that rebuts the assumptions made by the economist Friedman that CARE hired last month:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/documents/2015/mar/09/response-care-report-all-aboard-florida/#__federated=1

In this new memo, Louis Berger details their concerns about the false and erroneous assumptions that Friedman used in his economic study. Too bad AAF did not release this to the public back when they received it on February 20th. It would have helped them against the groups opposed to AAF.

I just don't understand why AAF has not challenged the extremely over-estimated capital expenditure costs ($3 billion for the total project including real estate vs actual $1.5 billion for only the rail infrastructure) that Friedman uses as the basis for his conclusion that AAF will not be able to meet its debt repayment obligations.
 
Brian_tampa said:
A new document out today that rebuts the assumptions made by the economist Friedman that CARE hired last month:

http://www.palmbeachpost.com/documents/2015/mar/09/response-care-report-all-aboard-florida/#__federated=1

In this new memo, Louis Berger details their concerns about the false and erroneous assumptions that Friedman used in his economic study. Too bad AAF did not release this to the public back when they received it on February 20th. It would have helped them against the groups opposed to AAF.

I just don't understand why AAF has not challenged the extremely over-estimated capital expenditure costs ($3 billion for the total project including real estate vs actual $1.5 billion for only the rail infrastructure) that Friedman uses as the basis for his conclusion that AAF will not be able to meet its debt repayment obligations.
Click to expand...
Probably because [A] trying to disentangle some of the train station projects would be tricky (at least some of the station stuff is obviously attributable to the rail operation) and the counter would be that AAF is assuming the debt for both the stations and the trackwork together, so they both impact AAF's viability (i.e. an overblown set of stations could, in theory, bankrupt AAF just as a number of bad real estate investments did a number on the Pennsy).
 
jis said:
Or maybe they are just avoiding feeding the troll. :)
Click to expand...
I think that's exactly it, jis. AAF seems to exude a feeling of "We're set up to succeed, people, so please just deal with it."

(Amtrak could take some psychology lessons from them, but that's probably a whole other thread.)
 
I think the sop to the counties is just trolling. These counties will not get their act together to get sites and approval for stations, and there isn't much of a business case. AAF is smart to say this (now that bypassing them for the short term is baked in the cake) and let them duke it out amongst themselves. It's clear from the news article that opponents perceive it's a trick, but there's not much they can do about it.

I have mixed feelings about Brevard. Their record on public transit isn't great. However, it would be mutually beneficial to put an AAF stop there. Brevard has some tourist attractions, especially Kennedy Space Center on Merritt Island which isn't very far from downtown Cocoa. Plus, I think I've heard something about access to cruise ships. Anyway, it makes sense for AAF and I think Brevard sees dollar signs so maybe they will get their stuff together on this one.

Tampa? Please. AAF is not going to pay for that. I think they jawbone it so there will be political pressure for the state to spend money and seek fed grants again. Remember, the original price tag was one billion for EIS and engineering. If it EVER happens it will be PPP (public-private partnership).

I think Jax will happen if Orlando-Miami is more successful than planned. That would bump up the economics of going to Jax for them. If AAF phase one is only mildly profitable it doesn't make much sense for them to do Jax, IMO.

I think AAF phase I will be very successful although it might take a couple of years to see its true potential as business travelers switch away from in-state flights and bus companies start funneling customers in (if you can't beat 'em, join 'em--bus companies helped kill FOX years ago, very short sighted of them as bus co's in NEC territory make more money than the ones in Florida, I guarantee it).
 
On the withheld comments: I was under the impression that if the comments aren't delivered, it doesn't delay the process...the state just technically doesn't get to say anything in the process (hence why it was such a passive occasion when it happened; moreover, IIRC nobody at the state level indicated that the delay was intentional). The ability of a state or other entity to delay (or even completely stop) a project by simply not issuing a comment seems like an awfully passive-aggressive ability even by the dysfunctional standards of the EIS process.

Also, goofy stalls like this seem all too common and I'm not putting much stock in the delay as being related to the missed comment periods. VA has a similar stall insofar as there's a long delay in producing a scoping report on the Richmond-Washington project. FEC may be taking a slightly more "casual" approach here since they're chugging away down in South Florida.

As to Jax and additional stops, I think the business case is there for both. On the additional stops:
-If FEC can grab, say, 20 acres (or allocate the land from existing services) for a station somewhere, there's a case behind the station as TOD. That should pay for the stations themselves. As to the case for making the stops, at a bare minimum there's a case for traffic to/from OIA (and per the studies we've seen, there's space on the trains heading into Orlando to take advantage of for that traffic. I ran a quick check on car rental prices, and you save about $100 for a one-week not-paid-in-advance rental with Hertz by renting in Cocoa as opposed to renting at OIA (the airport taxes and fees on a one-week rental come to $80-100 at OIA vs. $35-40 at Cocoa), so if you're flying into OIA and then going to somewhere on the coast, taking the train out and picking up a car makes certain sense.

-More to the point, all of the signals that I saw before were that AAF didn't want to add stops to the plan lest the EIS get delayed by those changes. The fact that in their fights with Tri-Rail they specifically wanted to have the right to add more stops in South Florida (I think they wanted the ability to add at least three more) speaks to them reserving the ability to run a stopping service as well, as does their similarly-indicated reservation of the ability to add a lot more trains from Miami to West Palm Beach.

-And then there's the commuter service wrinkle itself...if FEC /does/ get some sort of commuter line going in South Florida (be it a Tri-Rail contract or something they run on their own), I think you could plausibly see them extend a limited version of the service further north if the local governments are interested. Not to put too fine a point on it, but if the infrastructure is effectively all there you probably have nothing stopping you from extending a handful of trains that would terminate around West Palm up to Cocoa (I don't think that would even need an EIS).

On Jax:
-The main reason this isn't already happening is the debt load involved with getting into Orlando. I'm not sure how much they'd need to shell out for JAX-Cocoa, but it can't be anywhere near what's needed for the Cocoa-Orlando segment (which is, I believe, the bulk of the cost with AAF). AAF has already set up a company to start pursuing this ("AAF Jacksonville Segment LLC") and there's been a rights agreement put in place.

-The question is what they deem necessry to make the connection happen. Basic class 5 track shouldn't be too horridly expensive in the scheme of things...presumably they'll already have to put in PTC (albeit with some of the costs shifted to the AAF entity involved), but aside from double-tracking parts of the line (maybe not the entire line, even) the costs here should be at least controllable.

On Tampa:
-I tend to agree that AAF isn't likely to go out-of-pocket here anytime soon. At a bare minimum they'll want to discharge most of the debt load from Orlando and/or Jacksonville first (shelling out $1bn in real dollars is plausible once those debts are gone). As such, Tampa is likely to be some sort of PPP...I could see the HSR project being mostly resurrected, but with AAF as the operator (and also with a large existing network to plug into and potentially, the ability to possibly re-route Amtrak's trains in some manner, and the ability to possibly expand some segments somewhere).

Also...what was FOX?

Hertz OIA:
Compact: $305.00/$400.88 or $213.50/$291.26
Standard: $326.00/$426.03 or $228.20/$308.86

Hertz Cocoa:
Compact: $263.00/$303.12 or $223.55/$260.16
Full Size: $293.00/$335.79 or $249.05/$287.92

Format is [base rate/with taxes and fees]
 
Today was the first time I saw work being done at the West Palm Beach site, since the demolition of the Sewells Hardware building. Workers removed the Evernia Street crossing today, and it looks like they're set up to remove the Datura Street crossing tomorrow. As far as some NIMBY claims that traffic would get worse on Clematis and Quadrille after the closing of the crossings earlier this year, that appears to be false. I've noticed absolutely no change in traffic conditions. These streets were very seldom used to begin with.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top