AaronMichaelGordon.com           Voice of Degeneration
AaronMichaelGordon.com: Voice of Degeneration

On "The Pros & Cons Of Amtrak, And Falling In Love With Vermont."

Print the article

This entry was posted on 12/28/2007 12:19 PM and is filed under Environment, URBAN PLANNING, mass transit, General.

This past holiday season, I went up to White River Junction in Vermont to visit one of my oldest friends and his gal Friday. Like many in the Mid-Atlantic and the Northeast, I took the train, mostly to save money (as a flight to Lebanon in New Hampshire was $600,) but also because it was the most convenient way to get there.

Unlike the rest of the country, trains are a useful, dynamic and vibrant transportation option in BosWash. There is a veritable superhighway of trains running from DC to Washington along the Northeast Corridor, from commuter rail to Acela's 'high-speed' service (marginally faster than the regular trains, and an embarassment when compared to Europe, Japan, China and indeed, much of the world.) Nonetheless, the Northeast Corridor is a great example of how trains can and do work to get people from A to B. Nearly half of the travelers going from DC to NYC take the train instead of the plane (and this with three major airports in each metropolitan area, no less.)

I highly advise the trip from DC to NYC on Amtrak. For about $100-$140 round-trip, you'll go from the center of Washington to the literal center of Manhattan in about 3.5 hours. There's even a promotion for $100 round trips! For around $100 more, you can drop an hour off this on Acela. If you drive it, it will take 4-5 hours, and you have to find a place to park (good luck with that in the Big Apple.) Flying there only takes an hour and a half, but it costs $200-ish...and you're leaving out the security time and wait in the airport...which kind of negates the time savings. And if you get on the train early in the morning (or in the middle of the night,) you can snooze your way to New York.

The Northeast Corridor was really something to travel on. Many lines of electrified trains whisked down the tracks, and all of the stops were at stations that were clearly used and maintained. Clearly, people in the Northeast care about their trains, and it shows. That having been said, Amtrak's 'AmCans' were kind of a sad commentary on the state of passenger rail. My particular car dated back to the early 1980's, and while the seats were certainly roomier than those on planes, it's kind of pathetic that the very same trains I took to sleepaway camp are in use more than twenty years later.
 
My one complaint is that the Northeast Corridor is pretty ugly, in general. Between graffiti and the urban blahs (the outer ring of NYC looks like a set for a dystopic vision of the future,) this ain't scenic train travel. Still, it gets you there, comfortably and on time. And you're deposited right in the center of the center of it all. Pretty damn awesome.

The train left the Northeast Corridor in Vermont...and here's where I begin to have a mixed-bag experience. On the one hand, Vermont is insanely stunning to travel in. Instead of 'Blade Runner' you have 'Cold Mountain.' On the other, that fast train becomes a slow train, making frequent stops at decrepid stations. It's almost the inverse of the Northeast Corridor, where the environment was crap but the stations were used, well-maintained and lit. Decouple from that, and you're sharing track with freight, slowing down due to aging iron, and visiting the ruins of American rail.

A grand example of that would be this 'main transfer' station. This is...for lack of a better word...pathetic. The slats in the roof leak, the whole place is dirty, and it just reeks of neglect. Very few of the stations off of the Northeast Corridor matched the scenery of the region. Almost all were ugly and rotting.

Which is a shame, because Vermont is beautiful. Once you get off the train and leave the 'shack from the 50s station' behind, the state is just a wonder of nature. I saw three deer and a moose while training through Vermont (most likely my first moose and fourth deer, ever.) My architectural eye was tickled by colonial and turn-of-the-century buildings, some sadly crumbling but others vibrant and used. Since agriculture left New England, the former farms are now wooded forests, yet they still retain their centuries-old rock fences, a bizarre mixture of the man-made and the pastoral idyll. Massive icicles framed rock-faced cliffs while frozen lakes present a mirror of the sky.

I fell in love.

Now, mind you...I'm pretty certain that I can't live in Vermont, at least not the areas of Vermont that I traveled through. Both my profession and my need to interact with culture, nightlife and Lucky Brand Jeans demand setting up shop in a metropolitan area (which, in Vermont, would be Burlington, so keep your boots crossed.) And, I really love DC for all of the aforementioned reasons. But I totally 'get' why people live and love Vermont. I certainly heart it. The state has done a tremendous job of keeping the city and suburban sprawl out, and in effect, has separated the urban world from the rural and rustic.

Why is this important? In Vermont, it creates specific urban areas, like Burlington, where the city mice can live, breed and shop. It keeps the malls and their disposable facades, their acres of parking and their utter blight out (in New Hampshire: a distinct border crossing from Lebanon into White River Junction.)

Imagine what the region along the Northeast Corridor would look like...had we, the people done this. At present, the city becomes the suburb becomes the suburb to the next city...from south of Washington to well past Boston. In effect, you won't see the natural landscape until you leave Virginia or New Hampshire! Look, I'm a city mouse, but there has to be a limit to the 'urban area.' We can't keep churning over 'empty land' and dropping houses, malls and other sundry developments on the nature.

My home state of Florida is a great example of what not to do, as they basically heard the song and paved paradise to put up a parking lot (to be fair, flat and swampy Florida could never be a beautiful as Vermont.) My home region of South Florida is made up of 110 miles (north/south) of unending, uninterrupted suburban carpet. My home city of Miami basically stretches from the Everglades to the sea, an unbroken sea of cement adjoining 7-11 to suburb. Worse, this process is repeating itself from Orlando to Tampa...in effect creating New Jersey in the tropics.

I don't know about you, but if I'm going to live in a crowded metropolis, I want to actually live there, and not is some quasi-city, dressed up in new home development drag. If I'm to live in the country (don't hold your breath,) I'd want to live in the woods, the forest, the small town and not just another suburb, fitted up in 'country' drag.

I'd want to live in Vermont.              



     

 

What did you think of this article?




Trackbacks
Trackback specific URL for this entry
  • No trackbacks exist for this post.
Comments
    Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

    Leave a comment

     Enter the above security code (required)

     Name

     Email (will not be published)

     Website

    Your comment is 0 characters limited to 3000 characters.



      
    Copyright . http://aaronmichaelgordon.com. All rights reserved.