tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post6319740159840087044..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: Friday Open ThreadRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger59125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-68479749906885129392009-07-14T05:57:04.973-07:002009-07-14T05:57:04.973-07:00Question: Could the language of the federal govern...Question: Could the language of the federal government's Essential Air Service be modified to allow HSR to compete for subsidy funds? Or could HSR to a city eliminate EAS to a city assuming the is a connection to a major airport within X minutes?<br /><br />I'm thinking of Merced and Visalia specifically, which receive a very generous subsidy for air travel according to Wikipedia, and would each be an hour's ride away to SFO or ONT...Andy Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06687550362199067746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-41296743643484857132009-07-13T09:17:03.863-07:002009-07-13T09:17:03.863-07:00If BART had longer distances between stations it c...If BART had longer distances between stations it could easily do 110mph sustained speeds. For the feds to say you can only have express service to qualify seems arbitrary. Just how far between stations is defined as express. I would counter that stopping in Palmdale is not express.<br /><br />BART is expert at sniffing out money. If a big chunk of the federal rail transport budget is now set aside as strictly for high speed rail BART would have to go for it. It's all about the money. BART could argue it is quite fast oveall and its passenger counts are very high. It would be somewhat comparable to hsr between Chicago and Milwaukie. BART could also argue that the public demands local stops - just look at Merced, Palmdale, etc. with the CHSRA.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-23831283772967474502009-07-13T08:15:16.991-07:002009-07-13T08:15:16.991-07:00Hitting 110mph briefly and sustained operating spe...Hitting 110mph briefly and sustained operating speeds around 110mph are two quite different things. The latter would require a mix of Express and Local services, and either separate Express tracks or some form of tilt technology to run at high speed on track elevated for the local traffic.<br /><br />It need a hard look to make the case that its worth the trouble for an urban/metropolitan mass transit service ... its more obviously a benefit for genuine interurban services.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-36349525623779046592009-07-12T21:52:53.683-07:002009-07-12T21:52:53.683-07:00If 110mph is the bar for high speed rail BART can ...If 110mph is the bar for high speed rail BART can make it. For a short time in 1972 when it started on the Fremont line it was hitting 100.<br /><br />With the broad gauge 110mph should be easy if the expansion funds are enough to justify the high motor maintenance costs. The question is if BART hit 110 between stations on new extensions in the East Bay would it qualify as high speed by the feds standards? It certainly would be challenged but it might be worth calling a bluff to throw out the possibility. BART's distances are in the interurban range especially going east toward Sac.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-57280551313293736662009-07-12T19:33:40.488-07:002009-07-12T19:33:40.488-07:00BART to San Jose remains an open question in terms...BART to San Jose remains an open question in terms of project viability. Even with the passage of Measure B last fall it's far from clear that there'll be enough funds to go from Fremont to Diridon.<br /><br />But that (to me) seems the only place where HSR and BART might potentially compete for riders. BART seems to have little intention of pursuing extensions in San Mateo County (and would the locals let them, given the problems with the SFO extension?). BART's other extension plans include full-scale BART to Antioch and Livermore, and "eBART" to Brentwood, perhaps even Tracy.<br /><br />So there *might* be a contest for funds, but BART doesn't qualify as HSR, and so they wouldn't be fighting over the same well in DC. Everyone's going to fighting over the dry well here in CA, although unity would achieve FAR more results than division there.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-43945534601937007522009-07-12T15:50:25.927-07:002009-07-12T15:50:25.927-07:00Thus BART and the hsr are likely to be antagonists...<i>Thus BART and the hsr are likely to be antagonists because they are vying for the same monies.</i><br /><br />Except that Quentin Kopp is a big HSR enthusiast... if anything HSR reinforces BART, by making BART to San Jose look less stupid.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-41357023684849430482009-07-12T15:25:06.756-07:002009-07-12T15:25:06.756-07:00That's funny....
"First, the Authority h...That's funny....<br /><br />"<i>First, the Authority has made the claim that forcing them to do a thorough review of the Bay Area segment will cost the state Stimulus funding. This is not true. Work on the San Francisco to San Jose segment, </i><b>beyond electrification of the existing tracks and work on the Transbay Terminal</b><i>, will not qualify for stimulus funding since the environmental review is not currently scheduled to be done in time, even without a complete review of alternate alignments.</i>.<br />.<br />Emphasis <b>Added</b><br /><br />How much are those two activities valued at? Didn't someone cite $4 billion plus. How much in ARRA stimulus funding is being sought for those; over $1 billion as I recall. <br /><br />Regardless of the accuracy of those figures... that's a butt-load of funding to dismiss on the part of the PCL! How can anyone take the PCL seriously when they take a position like that? And for what... to study additional alternative alignment options? Silly people! <br /><br />Hey... the recent phase of the environmental review was a draft phase. In it, the Authority identifies what they plan to study, and seek comment on what they should consider. The public comment period has ended.<br /><br />Then the next phase begins.... and not all is lost for folks like the PCL and Peninsula NIMBY's. <br /><br />The Authority is compelled to respond to each comment.. in sufficient detail to satisfy legal requirements and their Board. <br /><br />Forecasting the events to take place later this Summer or Fall... given the preponderance of comments speaking to tunnels, US 101 alignment, and other, the next phase will day-light results of the Authority on those ideas. <br /><br />And, the public will get another opportunity to comment. <br /><br />I suspect the Final environmental documents will identify that <b>US 101</b> was eliminated from consideration as part of the Program Level EIR (or whenever phase it was), and is not considered as viable at this time (unless something physically and substantive has changed since the prior decision was made). However, final environmental review documents will probabaly go through additional documentation efforts to say why it was eliminated. <br /><br />Similar may be true for <b>tunneling</b>; citing construction challenges, other infrastructure (like vent shafts) associated and what environmental impacts those would have. <br /><br />After vetting tunneling issues, the CHSRA may select that path; however, acknowledge the greater risks..., such as cost increase, implications throughout the state, and not having all funding sources yet identified and greater risk.<br /><br />But, imo, tunneling at a much greater cost seems silly when considering that there is already a corridor, separated alignment will save lives and reduce noise. <br /><br />In fact, local NIMBY concerns will likely be seen as beeing meritless and a matter of baseless impression.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-26044302619149686362009-07-12T15:06:34.373-07:002009-07-12T15:06:34.373-07:00The language clearly says, “As part of the project...<i>The language clearly says, “As part of the project-level design and environmental review activities, the Authority shall analyze alternative alignments to that identified as the preferred alignment in the certified program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Francisco-San Jose corridor.”</i><br /><br />The program-level (tiered) EIR/EIS considered and settled the alignment questions at the program level. Those are now concluded and certified (pending the minor matter of the Atherton lawsuit).<br /><br />Re-opening alignment alternatives at the project level is, <i>de facto</i>, a re-opening of the certified program EIS/EIR. You don't reopen a certified EIS/EIR unless it was legally flawed and someone sued under CEQA or NEPA within 90 days of certification. (which Atherton et al. did)<br /><br />This language is a back door way to circumvent the environmental review process, and I doubt that even if the language was signed into law (which it won't be) that it would stand up to judicial review. Environmental protection laws exist not only to protect the public, but also to protect the agencies undertaking new projects from endless and senseless cycles of review, and eventual death by red tape.Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-76202460135122702542009-07-12T14:43:19.725-07:002009-07-12T14:43:19.725-07:00Regarding the SJ Mercury news article and Editoria...Regarding the SJ Mercury news article and Editorial exclaiming that language in the budget bill would cause California to lose stimulus dollars, The Planning and Conservation League (PCL) has sent a <br /><a href="http://rapidshare.com/files/255109888/PCLLET.doc.html" rel="nofollow">letter</a><br /> <br />refuting these bogus claims the paper has publised.<br /><br />In particular note from this letter:<br /><br /><b><br />Lastly, we would like to rebut several false claims made recently by the Authority. First, the Authority has made the claim that forcing them to do a thorough review of the Bay Area segment will cost the state Stimulus funding. This is not true. Work on the San Francisco to San Jose segment, beyond electrification of the existing tracks and work on the Transbay Terminal, will not qualify for stimulus funding since the environmental review is not currently scheduled to be done in time, even without a complete review of alternate alignments. The consultants conducting the review as well as High Speed Rail staff have made this clear and that is why staff did not recommend seeking Stimulus funding for this segment. Second, Director Ron Diridon has claimed that the language in the budget requires the Authority to reopen the Program Level EIR. This also is not true. The language clearly says, “As part of the project-level design and environmental review activities, the Authority shall analyze alternative alignments to that identified as the preferred alignment in the certified program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the San Francisco-San Jose corridor.”<br /></b><br /> <br />I want to add that personally, I am not a supporter of this HSR project as planned. I would not support this project if it went down 101 or 280 or thru the east bay. It is a boondoggle for so many reasons. So I can be labeled a denier or NIMBY (I do live about 600 feet from the CalTrain corridor), but I consider this project a disaster for California and its future generations.Morris Brownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-89327089526564828302009-07-12T14:34:30.601-07:002009-07-12T14:34:30.601-07:00Rafael ( & Tom Q.),
Per 12:20pm 7/11 post
I ...Rafael ( & Tom Q.), <br />Per 12:20pm 7/11 post<br /><br />I don’t think the response squarely hit the nail’s head.<br /><br />Every environmental review considers a ‘no build’ or ‘do nothing’ action. The purpose is to daylight conditions IF a proposed alternative is not selected. <br /><br />No agency is compelled to take action; however, taking no action does have implications. The intent is to examine and day-light those implications for decision makers. Differences between ‘no build’ and alternatives can be compared. <br /><br />For the San Jose to San Francisco project level environmental review, I have not read it in detail, but I suspect the ‘no build’ action considers stopping the line at San Jose.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-20914867270568281882009-07-12T14:04:32.635-07:002009-07-12T14:04:32.635-07:00Did I mention that if you didn't drive to work...Did I mention that if you didn't drive to work everyday through the GG or anywhere else, the resale value of your car would stay higher (Mileage) then it would be if you drove. Money is lost everywhere!davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-31700265394987070862009-07-12T14:00:01.700-07:002009-07-12T14:00:01.700-07:00@ jim,
I'm for good paying jobs and don't...@ jim, <br />I'm for good paying jobs and don't see Unions as all bad. But in this economy, Bart's employees should be happy they have a job and take a pay freeze. Nobody (that I know) is suggesting they lower pay, just freeze it. <br /><br />They are selfish in that they have a job while others are losing theirs and complaining about freezing their already very good pay in an agency that has to make cuts.<br /><br />@ BAR<br />Maybe they can add the toll for whomever crosses the Golden Gate on BART like they are to SFO. People use their cars (Wear and tear), cost of maintenance, miles driven, GAS and then the HIGH TOLL. Might as well pay for the train ride + Toll. That would be slightly cheaper then driving.davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-9756161702031945492009-07-12T13:35:08.102-07:002009-07-12T13:35:08.102-07:00As for competing for money, rail transit benefits ...As for competing for money, rail transit benefits from from layers of service.HSR is not competition for bart and wouldn't be even if it were on the peninsula. for all the bitching and moaning people do about bart the fact it is has served the bay area extremely well for nearly 4 decades with ever increasing ridership and better coordination with local services. Bart's only downfall isn't its empoyees, but its success in building ridership, and the subsequent decline in the rider experience due to first and foremost, bad behavior, trash and filth created by riders and a coplete lack of respect for public property as seen every day all over the bay area. The other downfal is simply overcrowding, and a lack of capacity in the tube. That will be remedied some day and hopefully with coordination with other agencies.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-43792144410239068322009-07-12T13:27:37.034-07:002009-07-12T13:27:37.034-07:00@dave - I should remind you that americans have ev...@dave - I should remind you that americans have every right to unionize and bargain for wages and benefits and the bart employees are not being "selfish" they are looking our for their interests just like every other american in the country looks out for their own interests from wall street to main street. When you buy goods made in china on the cheap who's interest are you looking out for? Yours.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-91383343330199527802009-07-12T13:21:05.517-07:002009-07-12T13:21:05.517-07:00The reason the Golden Gate Bridge district did not...The reason the Golden Gate Bridge district did not grant access to bart is because the GG bridge would lose essentially ALL of their toll based funding if they did that. We have to pay for the GG bridge somehow, its sort of a landmark don't you think?Bay Area Residenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15807091317788242756noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-19890508487105829492009-07-12T13:04:33.107-07:002009-07-12T13:04:33.107-07:00"Dedicated" can be changed at the stroke..."Dedicated" can be changed at the stroke of a pen. Just consider how BART was able to appropriate monies that had been dedicated to the Dunbarton Bridge project. All public funding is political.<br /><br />I doubt that the CHSRA's existing funding mechanism will prove adequate, especially if economic conditions remain deteriorated. In due course they will have to go hat in hand to the politicians, where they will come into direct competition with BART, whose capital needs are equally enormous.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-65120149441709179392009-07-12T12:46:30.541-07:002009-07-12T12:46:30.541-07:00In what sense are they competing for the same mone...In what sense are they competing for the same money?<br /><br />(1) The state level capital funding is through the '08-Prop1A bonding;<br /><br />(2) Federal funding will be through various HSR allotments that BART is not eligible for;<br /><br />(3) The HSR will not require operating funding ... the only (small) operating cost impact for BART is that if HSR is successful it will represent some small increase in off-peak patronage for BART and therefore a small boost to BART's farebox to operating cost ratio.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-29637654328155329412009-07-12T12:23:34.056-07:002009-07-12T12:23:34.056-07:00I think you have to live in the Bay Area to unders...I think you have to live in the Bay Area to understand how it works. BART and its employees work for each other, not for the public. And they are both part and parcel of the political machine, which directs funds to them in return for electoral support.<br /><br />Thus BART and the hsr are likely to be antagonists because they are vying for the same monies. And no one can outdo BART when it comes to hoovering up whatever funds there are.<br /><br />Were the BART empire even bigger it might have enough juice to close the hsr out of the inner Bay Area completely, arguing that all you have to do is transfer to BART at an outlying location.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-7122576609392995952009-07-12T10:58:05.523-07:002009-07-12T10:58:05.523-07:00You can't blame BART for it's selfish empl...You can't blame BART for it's selfish employees and Unions. They should just fire everyone and hire new employees with a new LOW Union contract that will not screw things up later.<br /><br />Bart having a line all the way down could have had a different effect on the rail line then what it is today.<br /><br />That's not an excuse to cover your arses for what's been done already!davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-68357049074759144952009-07-12T10:39:05.165-07:002009-07-12T10:39:05.165-07:00If BART had succeeded in expropriating the Souther...If BART had succeeded in expropriating the Southern Pacific ROW, elevated and broad- gauged it there would be no room for the hsr. The CHSRA would have had to use the 101 corridor, which of course they would have magically declared feasible, just as it still could be done.<br /><br />How dumb to pine for a BART regional monopoly. You want to hand their unions more leverage? A quite possible scenario in the next few days is that they will go on strike just long enough to save enough money to give both management and platform employees a nice raise. A win for them and a lose for the riders and taxpayers. But this time the public will be really ticked off.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-8073365641362369362009-07-12T08:41:47.623-07:002009-07-12T08:41:47.623-07:00IF nimbys want to see what a real case of "it...IF nimbys want to see what a real case of "its going to ruin are town" is they need to look up on the web the photos of the freeway construction that was done to American cites in the late 1950-1960s..1000 footwide gashes..and these babies are crying about 10 feet along a 140 year old railroad<br />and in just a few spots at that!NONIMBYSnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-4890492585242059342009-07-12T01:53:08.670-07:002009-07-12T01:53:08.670-07:00They wrecked the BART line to their area in 1961 b...They wrecked the BART line to their area in 1961 by blocking it in a NIMBY way! It says so on the bottom of the map. <br /><br />Otherwise we probably would have had BART covering the whole Bay Area maybe in a circle down to San Jose and back up the East Bay and maybe beyond!luis d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04825999683258862540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-57827690809150539922009-07-12T01:48:19.072-07:002009-07-12T01:48:19.072-07:00And since it's an open thread, here's that...And since it's an open thread, here's that original <a href="http://sonic.net/~mly/www.geolith.com/bart/figure1.html" rel="nofollow">map of Bart</a> from 1961. It shows how NIMBY's from 1961, somehow are still alive to wreck HSR in 2009 for all of us!luis d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04825999683258862540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-19960072412213118212009-07-12T01:40:37.237-07:002009-07-12T01:40:37.237-07:00Here's an interesting link of how U.S passenge...Here's an interesting <a href="http://www.trainweb.org/moksrail/advocacy/resources/subsidies/transport.htm" rel="nofollow">link</a> of how U.S passenger rail (AMTRAK) is grossly underfunded while Roads and Airlines are Tremendiously Subsidized to death by our Govm't. Your tax dollars being burn't.luis d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04825999683258862540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-25036309168090920832009-07-12T01:30:58.539-07:002009-07-12T01:30:58.539-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.luis d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04825999683258862540noreply@blogger.com