tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post8180145692544548904..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: Prop 1A Endorsements: The Good, The Bad, and The StupidRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-2850340896744114662008-09-17T00:40:00.000-07:002008-09-17T00:40:00.000-07:00Really..post this somewhere beside this board ..th...Really..post this somewhere beside this board ..that nobody reads except pro-hst and those old bags in Menlo ParkAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-35037089890275002322008-09-16T11:43:00.000-07:002008-09-16T11:43:00.000-07:00"I have been under the impression this was a proje..."I have been under the impression this was a project to provide HSR between LA and SF as its prime objective.Is its prime objective now changing to one of providing jobs?"<BR/><BR/>It can do both.<BR/><BR/>And the Los Banos station is gone. They removed it. <I>They listened to you</I>.Spokkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03244298044953214810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-46931636459133659252008-09-16T11:16:00.000-07:002008-09-16T11:16:00.000-07:00Yeah, Martin Engel used to post under his name her...Yeah, Martin Engel used to post under his name here at the start of this blog under his own name. <BR/><BR/>NOW, he's nowhere to be seen in this blog but since has turned into this anonymous fellow spewing garbage, b.s, and missinformation! Not to insult pro-HSR anonymous posters who "get it" and not the rabid train hater named Martin Engel, one of a few.<BR/><BR/>Morris Brown, at least you have the guts to post under your own name even though I am sure some of your posts are under anonymous to protect your reputation!luis d.https://www.blogger.com/profile/04825999683258862540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-77908092990827133172008-09-16T09:36:00.000-07:002008-09-16T09:36:00.000-07:00Morris uses his name anonymous is Martin EngelMorris uses his name anonymous is Martin EngelAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-61747662148008205052008-09-16T09:01:00.000-07:002008-09-16T09:01:00.000-07:00I think Morris brown should stop posting under ano...I think Morris brown should stop posting under anonymous!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-48524922776778523632008-09-16T08:13:00.000-07:002008-09-16T08:13:00.000-07:00Well Robert, are you now morphing this project int...Well Robert, are you now morphing this project into, what is a WPA project; if so then please write a column in that direction.<BR/><BR/>I have been under the impression this was a project to provide HSR between LA and SF as its prime objective.Is its prime objective now changing to one of providing jobs? <BR/><BR/>Please keep in mind, our State is supposed to have every year a balanced budget. The State doesn't have the power to decide to run deficits like the Feds do, which allow the Feds to create and fund infra structure projects, go to the moon, fund research in science and health, fund wars and what ever else they deem necessary, regardless of whether they have a balanced budget or not.<BR/><BR/>Now I don't think I would call these times, anything like the 1930's, but maybe you do. If you do, then you better go back and read some more about the 1930's.<BR/><BR/>This project was supposed to be about providing an alternative method of travel between LA and SF/San Jose in its initial stages. The current leadership has used political power to morph it into a developer's and land speculator's dream. <BR/><BR/>Just take a look at Prop 1A language. You see that funny, sticking out like a sore thumb statement, "there shall not be a statoin between Merced and Gilroy"?<BR/><BR/>What's gong on here? Why is this language here? Its here because sometime earlier a station really was planned in the Los Banos area. Why was a station planned there? Ask Diridon? The CHSRA had on its payroll a paid consultant, who owned a dairy farm at that location. Amazing !!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-60788697289129183372008-09-16T07:16:00.000-07:002008-09-16T07:16:00.000-07:00spokker, we not only built Hoover Dam, we built bo...spokker, we not only built Hoover Dam, we built both the Golden Gate and the SF-Oakland Bay bridges, the Grand Coulee Dam and Bonneville Dam, the Central Valley Water Project, the Tennessee Valley Authority dam project, and on and on and on.<BR/><BR/>Someone mentioned oil prices. They *always* fluctuate and usually drop in September and October. That happened last year as well. But the long-term trend is unmistakably upward, the fundamentals driving the oil market still point upward, and we're insane to forget about spring's huge spike just because fall is bringing temporary relief (and really, is $3.75 a gallon "relief"? hardly).Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-8130194632894510572008-09-16T06:40:00.000-07:002008-09-16T06:40:00.000-07:00"Even if prop 1a passes" Well it polling a yes vot..."Even if prop 1a passes" Well it polling a yes vote in the 60 percent range...Why do you think this is going to wildly reverse?<BR/> And if you read SFgate last week <BR/>there were hunders of pro-comments<BR/>if anthing its the old Mccain type railfans that are voting no...not the general publicAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-84486898977280455142008-09-15T23:52:00.000-07:002008-09-15T23:52:00.000-07:00We built the Hoover Dam in the midst of the Great ...We built the Hoover Dam in the midst of the Great Depression didn't we?Spokkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03244298044953214810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-45488516381938945852008-09-15T20:34:00.000-07:002008-09-15T20:34:00.000-07:00Depending on what happens in the next few days or ...Depending on what happens in the next few days or weeks on Wall Street, the whole idea of any possibility of the voters passing Prop 1A may be moot.<BR/><BR/>California is about to pass a budget with severe cuts in spending and some "hocus-pocus" financial book nonsense to make it appear the State has a balanced budget as required by the constitution.<BR/><BR/>If the market really "tanks", Prop 1A will go down in flames period.<BR/><BR/>At this stage, with oil prices having come down dramatically, Robert's "we must have this project of California is doomed" will have no traction with the voters. Only the "diehard" rail advocates will be voting for the project.<BR/><BR/>The lawsuit has considerable merit, especially on the San Jose to Gilroy segment. Unless UP relents, and that does not seem at all remotely possible now, they will have to re-do a major section of the EIR, because the Judge is going to rule that present portion invalid -- that seems certain. Then as Rafael says, if they are going to stick with Pacheco, they will have to also somehow buy up land for a new ROW and get an EIR approved for the new position of the route.<BR/><BR/>What you have here is a clear case of lousy management. You have management by politicians rather than rail / transportation experts. Remember, Diridon for all his bluster, was and is a politician. If I'm not wrong he was a County supervisor for 20 years. Kopp spent the bigger part of his professional career in the State legislature.<BR/><BR/>The project has been completely miss-handled. I feel almost certain, even if somehow Prop 1A passes, the legislature is going to take the agency into another part of government, where they can control it. I don't know if that is a good way to go or not, but it will rid the project of those two.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-15565766544327420252008-09-15T18:29:00.000-07:002008-09-15T18:29:00.000-07:00@ anon @ 3:34pm -there's a lot of confusion about ...@ anon @ 3:34pm -<BR/><BR/>there's a lot of confusion about the terms "route", "corridor", "ROW", "tracks" and "alignment". Let me try to clarify them.<BR/><BR/>In the context of HSR, "route" refers to roughly where the trains will run in-between the endpoints of the line. It reflects fundamental decisions, such as Grapevine vs. Tehachapi and Altamont vs. Pacheco.<BR/><BR/>Zoom in to "corridor" and you're talking about the fairly wide stretch of land several hundred feet wide on either side of an existing major tranportation artery. This is used to assess the impact on wildlife, cultural artifacts etc.<BR/><BR/>"ROW" (right of way) refers to a narrow strip of land inside the corridor that is owned by either the state of California or a private railroad. It is dedicated to the construction of future transportation capacity, which is why its owners may exercise eminent domain to acquire additional land required for the construction of turnoffs, stations etc. Yes, Congress has delegated limited powers of eminent domain to selected private companies deemd to serve the greater public good, e.g. freight railroads and utilities.<BR/><BR/>"Tracks" refers to actual gravel and steel inside a ROW.<BR/><BR/>Now, the EIR/EIS that CAHSR has sent off to FRA defines the corridors that will be used for the HSR route. Ideally, the Authority would like to buy part of existing ROWs to lay its own, brand-new tracks.<BR/><BR/>However, to do so it must first persuade the current owners (e.g. UPRR) that the additional traffic will not cause safety problems and then pay a king's ransom for the land. That's assuming the owner is prepared to sell at all or can be legally forced to do so.<BR/><BR/>Plan B is to buy land adjacent to the ROW but still within the corridor. This involves dealing with a much larger number of landowners, possibly tearing down additional buildings, moving roads and/or constructing rail flyovers etc. CAHSR has glossed over this, but in truth it would be significantly more involved, disruptive and possibly expensive than plan A.<BR/><BR/>Unsurprisingly, the freight railroads are not at all keen on selling any part of their ROW. They know just how hard it is to acquire and want to retain the option of expanding their own capacity at some point in the future. This is especially true in the portions of the HSR route that are relatively near to the LA, Long Beach and Oakland harbors.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-25560199071720669962008-09-15T17:51:00.000-07:002008-09-15T17:51:00.000-07:00Thanks, rafael. I am used to having a "read more" ...Thanks, rafael. I am used to having a "read more" tag, as we have at Calitics, so sometimes I can get a bit verbose. But folks can skim if they like and read closely if they like. I am working on implementing a "read more" feature, as you can see right now.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-21238328021889502432008-09-15T17:48:00.000-07:002008-09-15T17:48:00.000-07:00Folks, it's Robert's blog. He can post as verbosel...Folks, it's Robert's blog. He can post as verbosely as he likes. Just read today's post diagonally if its contents look familiar to you. Plenty of people (incl. a few journos) are only now developing a serious interest in the project and won't dig through the archives for their Cruickshank fix (thx for the quote, btw).<BR/><BR/>A few comments if I may:<BR/><BR/>a) even after the legislative soap opera that was AB3034 at the state level, there is unfortunately still plenty of scope for local politicians and interest groups to add a lot of cost to this project by forcing engineering change orders. Those are where construction companies make their money.<BR/><BR/>The only way to keep a lid on things is to do a solid job of the segment-level detailed EIR/EIS planning, secure the ROW before breaking ground and then not stop until the job is done. Easy to say, hard to do if you have to go back to Sacramento for actual appropriations every year.<BR/><BR/>b) SF to LA for $55 one-way was the estimate given in the ridership analysis and based on year 2005 dollars. The numerical amount will be higher in 2018 because of inflation.<BR/><BR/>I know Quentin Kopp said that would be the numerical amount in 2018 but it won't be. He's a big-picture wheeler-dealer kind of guy. Don't rely on him for your nitty gritty.<BR/><BR/>c) airlines are in a funk because oil is so much more expensive now than it used to be. It's now down by a third from its peak, but only because the US economy is in a recession that looks set to get nasty. This will depress core demand in the US and the supply risk premium on the price of oil - OPEC will mothball some production capacity to maximize its revenue.<BR/><BR/>Ergo, jet fuel prices will come back down in the months, perhaps years to come. Unfortunately for US airlines, so will ticket sales as consumers and businesses cut back on non-essential travel.<BR/><BR/>Gas prices should also come down eventually. Let's hope those who have switched to commuting by train stick with it and spend the savings on keeping up their mortgage payments. Every little bit helps.<BR/><BR/>Of course, once the US finally puts the mortgage mess behind it (could take a while yet), demand for oil will go back up and so will its price. Renewable electricity may be a relatively expensive way to run trains, but at least its price is not subject to such wild gyrations. For infrastructure, boring is good.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-38960319812718382862008-09-15T16:55:00.000-07:002008-09-15T16:55:00.000-07:00Robert, in all honestly, its really not necessary ...Robert, in all honestly, its really not necessary to search every trivial article you can find critical on the subject in the state of California and refute their claims point by point. Just post the basic idea.<BR/><BR/>Focus on presenting new points and reactions to events. Its not necessary to reiterate the same ideas.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-35793338846379899482008-09-15T15:34:00.000-07:002008-09-15T15:34:00.000-07:00What?? The Reason Foundation is against the proje...What?? The Reason Foundation is against the project? Maybe we really should think twice about high speed rail. God knows they would never be against any sensible transit project.<BR/><BR/>About the EIR and UP ROW, An earlier post suggested that certain portions of the alignment in the LA area depended on those UP tracks. Is that not the case?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-20999959909170759122008-09-15T12:14:00.000-07:002008-09-15T12:14:00.000-07:00@robert4 pages in a Word document and 1800 words. ...@robert<BR/><BR/>4 pages in a Word document and 1800 words. Please try to keep your comments shorter -- we only have some much time to devote to this issue.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com