Hacker News Reader

One of the largest peacetime evacuations (>200,000 people) in North America occurred in 1979 when a train carrying toxic materials derailed in Mississauga, Ontario (about 30km from Toronto) [0]. Yet, even with the benefit of the knowledge of that barely averted disaster, trains were and are still barreling through and in proximity of cities.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1979_Mississauga_train_derailm...

View on HN

In nearly every case the city is there only because the railroad was there first. Obviously reasonable and pertinent safety measures should be taken ("Safety First", etc) but I think it's pretty unreasonable to ask the railroads to move their 100+-year-old routes because people built a city around it.

And even for the cases of older cities that predate rail, what exactly would be the point of a railway that doesn't go anywhere?

Seems like a world seen through north american suburbs... "Why did you have to build the rail so close to where people live?!" Question answers itself.

I don't see why it matters that the railroad came first. It's just a piece of infrastructure, not a native people. This happens all the time where a main road now goes through a town that has developed. A bypass is built so it doesn't have to go through the town anymore.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com