Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Port Of Seattle To Acquire BFI?  
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3503 posts, RR: 10
Posted (7 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 3624 times:

Quote:
The Port of Seattle would acquire Boeing Field from King County and would give the county a 47-mile Eastside rail corridor in exchange under a deal proposed today.

The transportation "swap" would mean the freight heavy-rail line would be converted to a recreational trail. It would bring management of busy Boeing Field, a commercial and general aviation hub, under the auspices of the Port, which owns and operates Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...s/2003322715_webboeingfield25.html

Not a very long article, but interesting nonetheless. Thoughts?


Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
28 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineAirTranTUS From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 17 hours ago) and read 3613 times:

Where will the rail freight go?

User currently offline707lvr From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 583 posts, RR: 2
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 16 hours ago) and read 3613 times:

I'm trying to consider this (and wondering why there aren't 500 replies yet), but it's hard to get past a picture of the hordes of lawyers and activists who will get involved.

Thinking outside of that, it's potentially a lovely and sensible plan. Which is why it will never, ever, ever happen.


User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3091 posts, RR: 2
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 16 hours ago) and read 3604 times:

Quoting 707lvr (Reply 2):
I'm trying to consider this (and wondering why there aren't 500 replies yet), but it's hard to get past a picture of the hordes of lawyers and activists who will get involved.

Thinking outside of that, it's potentially a lovely and sensible plan. Which is why it will never, ever, ever happen.

I disagree. King County has been trying to get its hand on the trail, so they're essentially trading BFI for the trail. Note that this article says nothing about commercial aviation at BFI - totally separate concept that WON'T happen.


User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3503 posts, RR: 10
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 16 hours ago) and read 3578 times:

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 3):
Note that this article says nothing about commercial aviation at BFI - totally separate concept that WON'T happen.

Very true, but it will be interesting to see what the POS (as apt an acronym as any) does if they get their hands on BFI...Sims has been trying to unload it on them for years because of its relative lack of profitability. Perhaps they'll try to lure in some new cargo carriers, or maybe even some carriers currently flying into SEA.



Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently onlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5495 posts, RR: 29
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 15 hours ago) and read 3560 times:

Quoting AirTranTUS (Reply 1):
Where will the rail freight go?

They're doing everything they can to kill the Dinner Train, BNSF has already filed to abandon a short segment of the line right in the middle, the number one customer on the line is Boeing and they will continue to be served from the far south end, and the county is rumored to be negotiating with the remaining freight customers to relocate.

All for the want of a trail.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 3):
I disagree. King County has been trying to get its hand on the trail, so they're essentially trading BFI for the trail.

Ron Sims wants his trail, and he will move heaven and earth to get it. I'm not sure how well BFI will do with the POS in control - they aren't considered the most productive bunch in the world - but perhaps controlling SEA and BFI will create some synergies that would improve both airiports.

Oh, and we'll have a 47 mile trail, too. Woopee.  Yeah sure

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineGunsontheroof From United States of America, joined Jan 2006, 3503 posts, RR: 10
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 3545 times:

Updated story posted at 12:24 AM PST

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...news/2003323559_boeingfield26.html

Quote:
The complex deal offers something for both the Port and county. Boeing Field is barely in the black after several money-losing years, so Sims may welcome the opportunity to swap it for a popular amenity. For the Port, the deal provides control of a potentially competing airport, and also results in long-sought rail improvements.

Sims and Dinsmore said they broached the swap idea last year, a month after another proposal to reshape Boeing Field was rejected. Southwest Airlines had proposed moving to Boeing Field to avoid high fees at Sea-Tac; the Port fought that idea vigorously.

...

Boeing is the biggest tenant at Boeing Field, leasing property at the airfield and delivering its 737 narrowbodies there. "Boeing will wait and see how the discussions between the Port of Seattle and King County develop," said spokesman Peter Conte, who learned about the Boeing Field piece of the swap from a reporter.

...

Dinsmore said there are no plans to move commercial air service. "It would not be our intent to do anything different than what we so adamantly argued against last year," when Southwest Airlines proposed moving to Boeing Field, he said. The Port could consider expanding service to Boeing Field when Sea-Tac hits capacity, but he doesn't expect that to happen until 2020.



Quotes and photos from The Seattle Times

[Edited 2006-10-26 09:39:11]


Next Flight: 9/17 BFI-BFI
User currently offlineBoeing7E7 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 3535 times:

Makes sense. Move cargo there. Decreases demand of SEA. Regionalizing airports is no big deal. The state could actually step in and make it so withou the swap.

User currently offlineArticulatexpat From Hong Kong, joined Sep 2006, 156 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 14 hours ago) and read 3521 times:

It's unfortunate this rail line probably wouldn't be converted to transit purposes, if this deal goes through. The Seattle area's a congested nightmare. It needs urban rail transport more than it needs another trail.

User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9585 posts, RR: 52
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 3486 times:

I guess I'll say that I hope things will stay the way that they are since I think if big changes happen to BFI, then General Aviation will be pushed out. BFI is such a great convenient location. Yes its airspace is ridiculously complicated with it being 4 miles from SEA, but it is where I did my pilot training, and I liked using the airport.


If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineRevelation From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 12422 posts, RR: 25
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 9 hours ago) and read 3461 times:

Since the article says Boeing is the largest freight customer (unless I read it wrong), what Boeing facilities does the rail serve?

Indeed it seems to me removing a potentially underutilized 47 mile rail link in the Seattle area is moving in the wrong direction.

And putting BFI in the hands of POS will mean the landing fees at Seatac will stay high for a long long time, stunting LCC growth.

On the other hand, WN seems to have bitten the bullet at Denver, and is doing okay there. Seems WN has picked all the low hanging fruit and just going to have to deal with costlier airport fees.

If POS does get BFI, I imagine it will just stay the way it is for another 20 years or so, which seems to suit most people just fine.



Inspiration, move me brightly!
User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1724 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 7 hours ago) and read 3421 times:

A railway that is to be convert to trail has zero trading value.

If I understand things correctly, most, if not all of the railway in the State that has been converted to trail was given away by the railroads. Unused railway cost the railroad money because of the liabilty exposure when the public accesses it. There may also be property tax being paid on it. If that is the case, the county looses even more when that tax base is converted to public ownership.

If Ron Simms is for it, I am against it. I have dealt with him personally and his is a liar, a hypocrite and a racist.

Tod


User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 966 posts, RR: 38
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 3396 times:

I think the real reason is to block WN from leaving SEA for BFI. The politicos are working behinds the scenes to make sure WN doesnt get out of paying the high fees at SEA by moving. If POS controls both BFI and SEA.. WN moving to BFI just won't happen. Just another way to make sure that pax pay the higher fees for the fancy new atrium at SEA.

User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3091 posts, RR: 2
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 6 hours ago) and read 3385 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 5):
They're doing everything they can to kill the Dinner Train, BNSF has already filed to abandon a short segment of the line right in the middle, the number one customer on the line is Boeing and they will continue to be served from the far south end, and the county is rumored to be negotiating with the remaining freight customers to relocate.

All for the want of a trail.



Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 5):
Oh, and we'll have a 47 mile trail, too. Woopee.

Wrong! First, by closing the rail line, the state can save $30M of taxpayer money when I-405 is widened through Bellevue in a couple years. Second, the trail corridor will potentially be used for light rail in the future, so it isn't just about a "trail", but about preserving a right of way for public use.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 12):
I think the real reason is to block WN from leaving SEA for BFI.

Disagree. The county has been trying to get this trail for the past few years, well before WN caused their ruckus.


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4049 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 3324 times:

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 13):
Disagree. The county has been trying to get this trail for the past few years, well before WN caused their ruckus.

Yes the county has wanted the trail for a long time, but I think the move by WN last year has made this acquisition more of a priority.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently onlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5495 posts, RR: 29
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 3296 times:

Quoting Boeing7E7 (Reply 7):
Makes sense. Move cargo there. Decreases demand of SEA. Regionalizing airports is no big deal. The state could actually step in and make it so withou the swap.

True, but the whole idea is based on the county getting the rail line, and not so much the Port getting BFI. IMHO.

Quoting Articulatexpat (Reply 8):
It's unfortunate this rail line probably wouldn't be converted to transit purposes, if this deal goes through. The Seattle area's a congested nightmare. It needs urban rail transport more than it needs another trail.

It will be very difficult, if not impossible, to get past the NIMBY's once the current rail is removed. It's [almost] a red herring to suggest future transit use once a trail is put in.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 9):
I guess I'll say that I hope things will stay the way that they are since I think if big changes happen to BFI, then General Aviation will be pushed out. BFI is such a great convenient location. Yes its airspace is ridiculously complicated with it being 4 miles from SEA, but it is where I did my pilot training, and I liked using the airport.

BFI is very convenient for many GA folks. I hope it stays this way as well.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
Since the article says Boeing is the largest freight customer (unless I read it wrong), what Boeing facilities does the rail serve?

Boeing Renton 737 plant. Currently all fuselages are delivered in one piece from Wichita by rail. The -600, -700, and -800 come via the south end of the line in Renton, but a bridge over the Cedar River will just barely fit a -900, so those are always brought the full length of the line from the north. This is true for a number of high/wide items that will not fit through the tunnel under downtown Seattle. (Ironically, while typing this, four fuselages just rolled through downtown Renton past my window.)

Once this bridge is replaced next year, all the fuselages will be brought from the south, so from basically Renton north, the line will see only local shipments.

Quoting Pygmalion (Reply 12):
I think the real reason is to block WN from leaving SEA for BFI.

I doubt it. The real reason is that the county (Ron Sims) wants his trail. This is a means to an end, though it does make the Port happy as well I guess.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 13):
Wrong! First, by closing the rail line, the state can save $30M of taxpayer money when I-405 is widened through Bellevue in a couple years. Second, the trail corridor will potentially be used for light rail in the future, so it isn't just about a "trail", but about preserving a right of way for public use.

$30 million is $30 million. Having said that, it is $30 million that any agency would need to spend if they wanted to infringe on the right-of-way of a railroad. That BNSF is willing to forgo the replacement of the line segment doesn't make it a taxpayer argument. Taxpayers wanted the freeway expansion, and that included rebuilding/replacing the rail line.

In regards to preserving the rail right-of-way for future transit use, as I said before, it is a noble and indeed responsible idea - but a probable red herring. I don't know if you've visited the line, but it runs literally right outside many people's homes along Lake Washington. Those folks may not be too pleased to have 20 trains a day rolling outside - in fact, they might not be too thrilled with all the people that might be walking outside their home either.

One point I'd like to make, RwSEA, is this: The line doesn't need to go anywhere. The ONLY reason that this is happening is that BNSF knows it can get tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from the County if they "make it redundant". If the county walked away, they would still need to file for abandonment, and any piece they chose to abandon could be purchased by an existing operator (Dinner Train, shortline railroad) or by, say, the city of Renton, and left in place for use.

Why do the tracks need to come out? There are customers. There is the Dinner Train. The Dinner Train owners have freight railroads in the state and are more than capable of growing the business. They recently took over a line in Clark County that was doing 65 carloads a year, and next year they'll be doing 1000+.

Sorry to get off "planes", but the whole deal comes off sounding great, until you realize it is being made possible by killing the Dinner Train, paying (or offering incentives to) businesses to relocate, etc. Why? For a trail. They could just as easily buy the right-of-way, build a trail next to the tracks, and have the best of both worlds. Nope - gotta kill the businesses. Hmm...

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 13):
Disagree. The county has been trying to get this trail for the past few years, well before WN caused their ruckus.

True.

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3091 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 2 hours ago) and read 3296 times:

Quoting SLCUT2777 (Reply 14):
Yes the county has wanted the trail for a long time, but I think the move by WN last year has made this acquisition more of a priority.

Disagree. I take this at face value: the county has wanted the corridor for a long time, but didn't have the money to buy it. At the same time, they've wanted to unload BFI because it was losing them money. The POS on the other hand has money, and airport management experience. I don't think WN has much to do with this one way or the other.


User currently offlineSLCUT2777 From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 4049 posts, RR: 11
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 3279 times:

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 16):
Disagree. I take this at face value: the county has wanted the corridor for a long time, but didn't have the money to buy it. At the same time, they've wanted to unload BFI because it was losing them money. The POS on the other hand has money, and airport management experience. I don't think WN has much to do with this one way or the other.

More of a priority for the Port Authority of Seattle, NOT King County. The whole thing with WN last spring/summer made getting control of BFI a priority for the Port Authority of Seattle. Otherwise the whole deal with WN would have been to good to not go with given that BFI was a money loser for the County. However many other opponents showed the other environmental issues this would cause (traffic, noise etc...), and the likely costs that the county would have to pick up.



DELTA Air Lines; The Only Way To Fly from Salt Lake City; Let the Western Heritage always be with Delta!
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9585 posts, RR: 52
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 3267 times:

Quoting Tod (Reply 11):
A railway that is to be convert to trail has zero trading value.

I disagree. The population of the Seattle area is a very outdoory crowd. A fully flat 47 mile length stretch that has very few stops and intersections would be heaven for the thousands of bikers ervery day. There are lots of trails, but the rail line that they are talking about would be an expressway in the morning and evening for communters if it was paved and opened for cyclists. It might not have monetary value, but it has social value.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 10):
Since the article says Boeing is the largest freight customer (unless I read it wrong), what Boeing facilities does the rail serve?

This I believe is the line that runs to Renton. Renton has the manufacturing plant for the 737. Lots of shipments run through there. In fact all of the 737 fuselages come to the plant on a train. But there are multiple rail lines.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently onlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5495 posts, RR: 29
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 1 hour ago) and read 3238 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 18):
In fact all of the 737 fuselages come to the plant on a train. But there are multiple rail lines.

Well, there is only one rail line to Renton, and that is this line. Unless, of course, we start floating them across Lake Washington  Smile. It's a moot point, though, because BNSF will retain the line from Tukwila (interchange with the main line) to the Renton Boeing Plant.

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 18):
There are lots of trails, but the rail line that they are talking about would be an expressway in the morning and evening for communters if it was paved and opened for cyclists.

It would likely serve a great purpose for bicycling commuters. However, with a 100 foot right-of-way, give 50 ft to the railroad to keep operating and 50 ft to the trail use - why kill one for the other?

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlinePygmalion From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 966 posts, RR: 38
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months ago) and read 3230 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 18):
The population of the Seattle area is a very outdoory crowd. A fully flat 47 mile length stretch that has very few stops and intersections would be heaven for the thousands of bikers ervery day

It will allow a south loop/link with the existing Sammamish, Burke Gilman trail and the trail running to Issaquah around East lake Sammamish from Redmond. You would finally be able to do most of the ride around Lake Washington on a bike trail instead of mostly urban streets.

It would be nice to complete the south end loop.


User currently offlineRwSEA From Netherlands, joined Jan 2005, 3091 posts, RR: 2
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months ago) and read 3223 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 15):
$30 million is $30 million. Having said that, it is $30 million that any agency would need to spend if they wanted to infringe on the right-of-way of a railroad. That BNSF is willing to forgo the replacement of the line segment doesn't make it a taxpayer argument. Taxpayers wanted the freeway expansion, and that included rebuilding/replacing the rail line.

Thing is, even if the rail line were salvaged and kept as-is, the segment between Factoria and Bellevue would still be out of commission for a couple of years during this freeway expansion. That would have happened no matter what eventually happened.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 15):
In regards to preserving the rail right-of-way for future transit use, as I said before, it is a noble and indeed responsible idea - but a probable red herring. I don't know if you've visited the line, but it runs literally right outside many people's homes along Lake Washington. Those folks may not be too pleased to have 20 trains a day rolling outside - in fact, they might not be too thrilled with all the people that might be walking outside their home either.

That's an argument that has already been heavily litigated on Lake Sammamish in an identical scenario. The county came out on top every time, and the trail is now open. Additionally, as I mentioned, part of this corridor could likely be used for light rail or some other sort of transit in the future. However, this is in the Bellevue to Kirkland segment, and unlikely on the Bellevue to Renton segment, which runs right by the lake and all the homes.

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 15):
One point I'd like to make, RwSEA, is this: The line doesn't need to go anywhere. The ONLY reason that this is happening is that BNSF knows it can get tens if not hundreds of millions of dollars from the County if they "make it redundant". If the county walked away, they would still need to file for abandonment, and any piece they chose to abandon could be purchased by an existing operator (Dinner Train, shortline railroad) or by, say, the city of Renton, and left in place for use.

I disagree with you here, we'll have to agree to disagree. The dinner train has its merits, but at the end of the day it's really just a tourist attraction that is a private business. The public is much better served by a multi-purpose use trail that can be used for commuting and recreation, and that potentially provide ROW for mass transit in the future. With the trail, the whole eastside benefits; with the dinner train, only the owners of the dinner train benefit. And the dinner train management have known about this potential issue for a few years, and are exploring other opportunities such as moving the traing to Woodinville, running to Snohomish or elsewhere instead of Renton, so it's not totally out of business.


User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1724 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months ago) and read 3212 times:

Quoting RoseFlyer (Reply 18):
It might not have monetary value, but it has social value.

I agree completely, the social value would be great. As a past member of the Washington State Trails Coalition, I have seen what the "rails to trails" organizations have accomplished. It's been good to see idle assets put to good use.

I was purely looked at dollar value of aquisition and then the conversion/development costs. In our fine state, the money that gets spent on studies, assessments, etc before you actual touch the ground is often larger than the money it takes to get the work done. Unless the county planned to pony up the dough on their own, the customary path is to go before the Washington State Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation and apply for a grant from either the National Recreational Trails Fund or from the state Non-highway and Offroad Vehicle Account (why non-motorized use trails get monies from this fund is a rant that goes way OT). Being awarded these grant funds would not be a sure thing.

Sorry about going O/T a bit.

Tod


User currently onlinePlanesNTrains From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 5495 posts, RR: 29
Reply 23, posted (7 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3149 times:

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
Thing is, even if the rail line were salvaged and kept as-is, the segment between Factoria and Bellevue would still be out of commission for a couple of years during this freeway expansion. That would have happened no matter what eventually happened.

No. A "shoo-fly" would have been built. For example, Reno has had a mainline running right through the middle of town for many years. They recently built a trench there to put it in, but during the construction, the railroad used a shoo-fly that bypassed it - rail traffic continued during the construction uninterrupted.

Part of the $30 million in savings was from not having to construct the shoo-fly.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
That's an argument that has already been heavily litigated on Lake Sammamish in an identical scenario. The county came out on top every time, and the trail is now open. Additionally, as I mentioned, part of this corridor could likely be used for light rail or some other sort of transit in the future. However, this is in the Bellevue to Kirkland segment, and unlikely on the Bellevue to Renton segment, which runs right by the lake and all the homes.

The point I was making was in converting "Trails to Rails" - this is the difficult part. They haven't tried to do that anywhere around here, and it's been very difficult to impossible in other similar circumstances nationally.

Bottom line - the people that are fighting vehemently for a trail to preserve the corridor for future transit use will likely fight vehemently against any future transit service.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
I disagree with you here, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Hey, no problem, though I don't think we totally disagree.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
The dinner train has its merits, but at the end of the day it's really just a tourist attraction that is a private business. The public is much better served by a multi-purpose use trail that can be used for commuting and recreation, and that potentially provide ROW for mass transit in the future.

You are absolutely right. Except that the Dinner Train has had a profound impact on the local (Renton/Woodinville) economy. $140 million impact over 14 years, upwards of 100,000 people a year going to Renton, 80+ employees, tens of thousands of dollars a year given to local charities, etc.

Freight moves along the line as well. However, what we're being told is "Put those thousands of truckloads worth of goods back on the freeways across Lake Washington".

Also, in regards to the $30 million point, does it bother you that the estimates thrown around for this were "$100-$180 million"? That's an $80 million variance, and that also puts the Dinner Train out of business and displaces businesses, again, for a trail.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
With the trail, the whole eastside benefits; with the dinner train, only the owners of the dinner train benefit.

Actually, if only the owners of the Dinner Train benefit, then only those who actually use the trail benefit. You can't have it both ways.

Quoting RwSEA (Reply 21):
And the dinner train management have known about this potential issue for a few years, and are exploring other opportunities such as moving the traing to Woodinville, running to Snohomish or elsewhere instead of Renton, so it's not totally out of business.

Well, it remains to be seen where they end up. Having said that, I find it interesting how displacing a business that brings a lot of benefits - while providing tax revenue to the county rather being funded by taxes - is so disposable, but I think it speaks to the current mentality of Western Washington.

In regards to Boeing Field, if they really value the deal at $180 million, am I the only one that thinks that seems very low for such a huge asset?

-Dave



Next Trip: SEA-ABQ-SEA on Alaska
User currently offlineTod From Denmark, joined Aug 2004, 1724 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (7 years 9 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 3063 times:

Quoting PlanesNTrains (Reply 23):
converting "Trails to Rails" - this is the difficult part. They haven't tried to do that anywhere around here,

Actually, they have done a bit of that in Washington.

The Foothills, Iron Horse and john Wayne trails come to mind, but there are more that I can't pull off the top of my head.

Tod


25 Kohflot : The way I see it, a POS-owned BFI actually cracks open the door again for Southwest. If both airports are owned and operated by the POS, why does it m
26 Clickhappy : there is also the trail along east lake sammamish. what a nightmare that was!
27 Post contains images PlanesNTrains : Your correct if your referring to "Rails to Trails" but I was referring to reconverting "Trails to Rails". You may be right, but I doubt it. I think
28 Cpw : Yes, and he wants to keep the bicycle groups happy. They want a trail along the corridor, and don't want to share it with anyone (i.e. high capacity
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
WestJet To Acquire 738s & Q29 Of Profitability posted Wed Apr 28 2004 15:30:46 by YOW
Mexicana To Acquire 4 More 767-300 By End Of 2004! posted Sun Feb 1 2004 04:10:55 by DFWMEX
Zoom Airlines To Port Of Spain Trinidad (New) posted Wed Sep 24 2003 21:03:59 by BWIA330
PAN American To Port Of Spain posted Wed Jun 4 2003 02:03:37 by BWIA330
Air Transat A330-300 Down To Port Of Spain posted Thu Apr 10 2003 19:23:53 by BWIA330
Charter Flights To Port Of Spain Trinidad posted Wed Feb 5 2003 04:54:41 by BWIA330
Widebodies To Port Of Spain posted Wed Jun 27 2001 04:34:14 by BWIA330
New Rumours Of Easyjet To BRU! True? posted Wed Nov 22 2006 18:05:17 by VinnieWinnie
FI: Alenia Wants To Acquire ATR, Link With RRJ posted Wed Nov 15 2006 07:15:46 by N328KF
WSJ: Iraqi Airways To Acquire 5×737-400 posted Sun Nov 12 2006 23:59:29 by N328KF