tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post4554845823295462988..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: Rampant HSR NIMBYism In Palo Alto Council RaceRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger106125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-19008934848582212502009-10-16T07:57:16.515-07:002009-10-16T07:57:16.515-07:00@ anon @ 5:12pm -
I deleted your comment because ...@ anon @ 5:12pm -<br /><br />I deleted your comment because it contained an F-bomb. Seriously, folks, mind your p's and q's here please.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-67153133528351020582009-10-15T23:44:09.674-07:002009-10-15T23:44:09.674-07:00I'm sorry. It's just ... frustrating. Th...I'm sorry. It's just ... frustrating. The comments by many of the candidates show zero willingness to cooperate with CHSRA to come up with a design that can work for everyone (CHSRA has shown repeatedly that this is not the case on the other end), even if <a href="http://cahsr.blogspot.com/2009/10/has-palo-alto-turned-corner.html" rel="nofollow">this</a> tells a different story. What gets me is that many people in Palo Alto and a few other peninsula communities act like high speed rail is some sort of monster whose only purpose is to destroy their community, to cut through without bringing any benefits to the locals, while ignoring the benefits of better service (both CalTrain and HSR) and grade separations, not to mention the economic development and convenience it will provide to the entire state (and economic development, like recession, tends to propagate everywhere).Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-79010092968041651032009-10-15T22:45:46.221-07:002009-10-15T22:45:46.221-07:00" but the paranoia and ignorance associated w..." but the paranoia and ignorance associated with this whole matter is out of control."<br /><br />And your smug arrogance continues to be annoying.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-8277294056413607182009-10-15T20:50:11.860-07:002009-10-15T20:50:11.860-07:00Of course, because high-speed rail lines and nucle...Of course, because high-speed rail lines and nuclear power plants are exactly the same thing.<br /><br />Seriously! HSR is a minor visual impact, probably about the same noise levels (maybe even less if sound walls are used), better traffic flow and lots of economic development. If they were planning on bulldozing a large strip of houses to build a rail line with big, smelly, loud freight trains running day and night then maybe I could understand, but the paranoia and ignorance associated with this whole matter is out of control.Joeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16406340564037825796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-30857105425369997702009-10-15T17:12:39.395-07:002009-10-15T17:12:39.395-07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-83782541416847354842009-10-14T22:26:25.070-07:002009-10-14T22:26:25.070-07:00Explain why ridership is higher on the Raritan Val...<i>Explain why ridership is higher on the Raritan Valley line, all diesel line that terminates in Newark compared to the Gladstone branch which usually uses electric trains and has service to Penn Station and Hoboken.</i><br /><br />The parts of the Raritan Valley Line that get high ridership are located south of the common Morris and Essex trunk line rather than the Gladstone Branch, and get less ridership. The part of the line that competes with the Gladstone Branch has low ridership.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-43649690153730215352009-10-14T21:53:26.533-07:002009-10-14T21:53:26.533-07:00Camden and Trenton are both large secondary downto...<em>Camden and Trenton are both large secondary downtowns</em>.<br /><br />If you want to go to a dollar store or a government office building. One of the major complaints about the Trenton Transit Center is that it isn't "downtown" you have to get on a bus to go "downtown". Otherwise there isn't much in either though Camden is beginning to attract riders to the last stop - the Entertainment Center. The $20 parking fee probably has a bit to do with that. <br /><br /><em>You'd expect a light rail line there to have ridership in the same ballpark as one connecting Jersey City, Hoboken, and Union City.</em><br /><br />If the places it connected had the same population, same demographics and <em>parking</em>. Camden is the poorest city in the US. Median house price in Camden is $48,983. No I didn't drop a digit, houses are selling for under fifty thousand dollars in Camden, some of them with views of the Philadelphia skyline. Median in Trenton is $130,000. What's the median house price in Jersey City? How about Hoboken? Ever tried to park in Jersey City, Hoboken? The big park-n-ride lots at the HBLR station just off the NJ Turnpike have a bit to do with it's ridership - suburbanites drive to the cheap parking lot at the Turnpike exit and use the trolley to the dense parts of Jersey City or to Hoboken. That people in Hudson county can't find parking and therefore live without cars has a bit to do with it too. <br /><br /><em>What is it higher than - a tourist trolley in Flagstaff, Arizona?</em><br /><br />In very round numbers the River line carrys: roughly a quarter of the ridership of the Hudson Bergen Light Rail; roughly the same as the trolley car ridership in Cleveland; roughly half of what Newark carries but traffic and parking in Camden and Trenton are much easier than in Newark; roughly half of what Charlotte carries but Charlotte doesn't have NJTransit trains and buses to compete with either; roughly two thirds of what they carry in New Orleans; more than the Sprinter line in San Diego county. It's not the Green Line in Boston but it has a respectable level of ridership. <br /><br /><em> The drop in ridership at the end of electrification is sudden, even on lines with through-trains to Manhattan.</em> <br /><br />It's more a function of where the people are or where the forest starts whichever way you want to look at it. Explain why ridership is higher on the Raritan Valley line, all diesel line that terminates in Newark compared to the Gladstone branch which usually uses electric trains and has service to Penn Station and Hoboken. Keep in mind that the Gladstone branch is more or less up the hill from the Raritan Valley Line and that if you are in Mountainside it's toss up whether New Providence or Westfield is closer.<br /><br /><em>It doesn't pay for itself, else many systems would have electrified over the years.</em><br /><br />It does, it takes a while though. So when management goes to the board and says "Lets spend great big gobs of money for three to five years on something that will make the line faster and cheaper to run once we replace all the expensive locomotives" the board says "No" or "NO" <br /><br /><em>electric trains was needed to exploit the possibility of raising it further, thus making better use of the sunk cost of the track infrastructure</em><br /><br />Intially it was put in because New York City said "No more steam trains in Manhattan" Since diesel trains hadn't been invented yet they had to use electric trains. All the stuff that was added afterward was because electric trains are so much cheaper to run than steam trains. There's stuff on Long Island that was added after diesels became an option, in the context of grade separation projects. That was done because the line was getting so busy they needed to grade separate. As long as they were doing that they put in level boarding, electrification was a small part of the whole project. Sorta like the cost of electrification on the Peninsula will be a small part of the project's cost.Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-45702889995883766602009-10-14T19:53:23.565-07:002009-10-14T19:53:23.565-07:00Palo Alto in Santa Clara? mea culpa But culturally...<i>Palo Alto in Santa Clara? mea culpa But culturally it belongs in San Mateo. </i>. <br /><br />Too funny. At least you have a sense of humor. Try making that argument to the election board though.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-81853018834776736952009-10-14T17:44:02.997-07:002009-10-14T17:44:02.997-07:00Rafael, those electrification projects are mainly ...Rafael, those electrification projects are mainly pre-Depression; they predate the current settlement patterns. If anything the electrified stations should have seen declines in traffic. For example, Croton-Harmon's economy collapsed when the New York Central folded; it's still the busiest station on the Hudson Line.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-77683822330428422172009-10-14T15:59:23.670-07:002009-10-14T15:59:23.670-07:00@ Alon Levy -
correlation is not the same thing a...@ Alon Levy -<br /><br />correlation is not the same thing as cause and effect.<br /><br />Perhaps those electrification projects were scoped to include only the sections where ridership was already high and the higher acceleration possible with electric trains was needed to exploit the possibility of raising it further, thus making better use of the sunk cost of the track infrastructure.<br /><br />Just sayin'Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-46807331055075640262009-10-14T15:18:46.812-07:002009-10-14T15:18:46.812-07:00Nice, but not necessarily a cost justified investm...<i>Nice, but not necessarily a cost justified investment, especially when the majority of their commuter rail lines have only rush hour service.</i><br /><br />Plenty do. Caltrain is not one of them. Caltrain's line (only counting the portion that would be electrified SJ-SF, not south of SJ) has very steady demand coming from both ends and the middle at most times of the day. Sure, it peaks at commute times, but in BOTH directions, and even then doesn't peak nearly as bad as BART or most other actual commuter rail systems (ACE, for example).<br /><br />Really, Caltrain is less of a commuter rail line than BART's Pittsburg line east of Oakland, the Fremont line south of Oakland, or the Pleasanton line east of Oakland.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-33838745908113156932009-10-14T15:10:54.741-07:002009-10-14T15:10:54.741-07:00More mumbo jumbo. Ridership drops on every line th...<i>More mumbo jumbo. Ridership drops on every line the further out you get, diesel commuter rail service goes to far more than just those 2 counties</i><br /><br />Okay. Look at station by station ridership on the <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/commutelirr.html" rel="nofollow">LIRR</a>, <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/commutemetro-north.html" rel="nofollow">Metro-North</a>, and <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyregion/commutenjtransit.html" rel="nofollow">NJ Transit</a>. The drop in ridership at the end of electrification is sudden, even on lines with through-trains to Manhattan.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-38808439823942915512009-10-14T14:35:54.213-07:002009-10-14T14:35:54.213-07:00What, are you planning to rescind the taxes suppor...<i>What, are you planning to rescind the taxes supporting Caltrain?</i><br /><br />There are no taxes supporting Caltrain. One of the biggest problems with Caltrain is the lack of dedicated funding (a la the BART sales tax), so Caltrain must beg for funding each year from the general fund of the three counties.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-22152006016331422862009-10-14T14:27:21.364-07:002009-10-14T14:27:21.364-07:00BTW, Alon Levy, my quips are meant in fun. I appr...BTW, Alon Levy, my quips are meant in fun. I appreciate your passion for transit and HSR, having read your comments on numerous boards. However sometimes assertions, conclusions, and things presented as fact are off the mark, hence my responses. Nothing personal, I'm just snarky by nature.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-18950803965069455572009-10-14T14:17:35.095-07:002009-10-14T14:17:35.095-07:00Anon: the diesel commuter services in Japan are he...<i>Anon: the diesel commuter services in Japan are heavily subsidized by the electric services. JR East has been wanting to abandon the diesel short lines for a while. In Europe, those lines are heavily subsidized by HSR and by local taxes. </i> <br /><br />More careless exaggeration. And so all of a sudden we are expecting commuter rail to make a profit? What, are you planning to rescind the taxes supporting Caltrain?<br /><br />Electrification is great, but it isn't a panacea or absolutely required. It doesn't pay for itself, else many systems would have electrified over the years. <br /><br /><br /><i>In Toronto, the diesel services come close to breaking even, but they raise so many environmental problems that local neighborhood groups are begging for electrification.</i> <br /><br />Nonexistent environmental problems. The local neighborhood groups beg for them primarily out of snobbery, not necessity. No children are dying from diesel trains, but electrification would be a bit quieter, slightly faster, have less fumes, and lower operation and maintenance costs. Nice, but not necessarily a cost justified investment, especially when the majority of their commuter rail lines have only rush hour service. Most of those neighborhood groups want electrification because of perception and quality of life dreams.<br /><br /><br /><i>In Boston, the busiest lines are electric - again, you have electric subsidizing diesel.</i><br /><br />An odd assertion, since MBTA's commuter rail service is 100% diesel. Pull facts out of your rear much? <br /><br /><br /><i>The same is true for Montreal, whose electric commuter line, Deux-Montanges, is the nation's busiest.</i> <br /><br />Out of what, about a dozen total commuter rail lines in Canada? Quite the impressive sample size. Are you sure about cause and effect?<br /><br /><br /><i>In New Jersey, the diesel regional rail line, the River Line, has laughably low ridership.</i> <br /><br />Again an odd assertion, considering that weekday ridership is close to the initial design capacity. 9,000/day is pretty good for a start up commuter rail style service (Though it is technically a diesel light rail line.)<br /> <br /><br /><i>So do the diesel commuter lines. In fact, the territory covered by diesel-only lines - Bergen and Passaic Counties - has only about a 20% mode share for commutes to Manhattan, whereas everywhere else in the region it's 80%. The lines that have both diesel and electric services are busier, but only in electric territory; ridership numbers drop like a stone beyond the end of electrification.</i> <br /><br />More mumbo jumbo. Ridership drops on every line the further out you get, diesel commuter rail service goes to far more than just those 2 counties, diesel service can only run Hoboken not to Manhattan so of course the mode share will be lower. That has little to do with the superiority of electrification's characteristics, but rather route structure and geography. Not really relevant to SF-SJ. I saw a butterfly this at dawn, does that mean it made the sun come up?<br /><br />Note the ignoring of Chicago, where the largest growth for years has come on non-electrified commuter rail lines. Again, that is because of geography, development patterns, service patterns, and demographics, not electrification. The point being that electrification is in no way a necessity for the survival of commuter rail service. No, survival depends on a willingness to continue the taxes that subsidize such service, with or without electrification. Other than perhaps a poorly planned startup service, I've seen no indication of public sentiment for ending established commuter rail systems anywhere in the country. (Thuggish scare tactics by gov't officials to cut such essential services first as a blackmail attempt at raising taxes are just that, tactics, they have no intention of actually caring out longer than as a stunt, because permanent cessation will get them booted out of office next election.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-28206995667111399162009-10-14T13:47:34.112-07:002009-10-14T13:47:34.112-07:009,000 passengers a day is low compared to the Lexi...<i>9,000 passengers a day is low compared to the Lexington Ave IRT. Not bad for a line that connects the huge metropolis of Camden to the even bigger Trenton through low density green leafy suburbs with trolleyless trolley cars on a single track.</i><br /><br />Camden and Trenton are both large secondary downtowns. You'd expect a light rail line there to have ridership in the same ballpark as one connecting Jersey City, Hoboken, and Union City.<br /><br />And no, 9,000 per day is low, period. What is it higher than - a tourist trolley in Flagstaff, Arizona?Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-62925379241525115662009-10-14T13:22:35.678-07:002009-10-14T13:22:35.678-07:00@rafael Rafael said...
@ jim -
the Coast Dayligh...@rafael <i>Rafael said...<br />@ jim -<br /><br />the Coast Daylight needs to run from Emeryville or even San Jose down to LA.<br /><br />During the remodeling period, PCJPB will need to host a new service on the Caltrain tracks like it needs another hole in the head.</i><br /><br />rafael, I'm not the one making the decisions ( ha, if only) caltrans and amtrak along with the communities involved, have their plans. talk to them about it. Many people around here are wondering when the trains will come to sf again.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-5296313448788158282009-10-14T12:28:11.033-07:002009-10-14T12:28:11.033-07:00In New Jersey, the diesel regional rail line, the ...<em>In New Jersey, the diesel regional rail line, the River Line, has laughably low ridership.</em><br /><br />9,000 passengers a day is low compared to the Lexington Ave IRT. Not bad for a line that connects the huge metropolis of Camden to the even bigger Trenton through low density green leafy suburbs with trolleyless trolley cars on a single track. <br /><br /><em>What you fail to understand is that placing stations in the middle of barely accessible...</em><br /><br />Are you defining "barely accessible" as "I can't park directly in front of everything"? Or is it a a case of "No one goes there anymore, it's too crowded" ? <br /><br /><em>will be to terminate in SJ, and use Caltrain as a feeder connection.</em><br /><br />Okay. Use Caltrain. How many more trains do they run to serve the thousands of people who will be getting on and off HSR in San Jose? If they leave the tracks just as they are that means many more trains going through the grade crossings. So there will be demands for grade separations. Grade separations mean faster trips for local passengers. Which means more trains. Which means more grade separations. Which means more passengers. It finally gets to the point where the passing sidings all connect up to one another and there's a four track fully grade separated railroad. So you have a diesel powered four track Caltrain. Which because of the noise and fumes generates demands for electrification. Once Caltrain is electrified the HSR trains can go all the way to San Francisco. So "terminate in San Jose" results in a four track electrified Caltrain that also has HSR trains. How much different is that from the current proposal which is four track electrified Caltrain that also has HSR trains? <br /><br />Or alternately electrify Caltrain on the existing tracks. HSR can then go all the way to San Francisco. Electric trains run faster than diesel trains. Which attracts more local passengers. Which means there are demands for more grade separations. Which speeds up the trip, Which increases demand..... So you end up with a four track electrified Caltrain that also has HSR trains. How much different is that from the current proposal which is four track electrified Caltrain that also has HSR trains?Adirondacker12800noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-68844848534472514502009-10-14T12:12:29.270-07:002009-10-14T12:12:29.270-07:00@ jim -
the Coast Daylight needs to run from Emer...@ jim -<br /><br />the Coast Daylight needs to run from Emeryville or even San Jose down to LA.<br /><br />During the remodeling period, PCJPB will need to host a new service on the Caltrain tracks like it needs another hole in the head.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-88334604313529717992009-10-14T12:08:14.092-07:002009-10-14T12:08:14.092-07:00@ anon @ 8:53am -
I have no problem with your dem...@ anon @ 8:53am -<br /><br />I have no problem with your demand that CHSRA and Caltrain prove the changes they end up proposing will not result in e.g. sound exposure levels above those the law says must be tolerated in residential neighborhoods.<br /><br />I do have a problem with commenters like Daddio ignorantly asserting that the results are already in.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-45668832385034755732009-10-14T11:05:26.640-07:002009-10-14T11:05:26.640-07:00I think the business plan bill is in fact an non-e...I think the business plan bill is in fact an non-event, given that they are about to release a new business plan in December, and released the last one a year earlier. So, now they're required to prepare one half as frequently as they are already doing?Peterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00326948451529910432noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-72259235680655344742009-10-14T11:03:12.425-07:002009-10-14T11:03:12.425-07:00Just one day prior to this strange post by Robert ...Just one day prior to this strange post by Robert (why's he so worried about a small handful of Nimby's in Palo Alto??) on October 12th, Governor S. signs Ashburn bill requiring CHSR o supply a new business plan every two years (with public input). Is this a non-event? Weird that we find no discussion on that event, which seems much more significant than the opinions of a few city council members in Palo Alto. Strange - what Robert and Rafael find important.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-19524982637691079032009-10-14T10:47:32.047-07:002009-10-14T10:47:32.047-07:00I don't know where the deniers get the idea th...I don't know where the deniers get the idea that people won't ride the train for this that and the other. I see who rides everyday - exactly the people they say won't ride. It's like some people live in this other reality. have they been outside?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55249896189189681972009-10-14T10:28:25.410-07:002009-10-14T10:28:25.410-07:00@ Jim
That was a good video! Shows you how HSR in...@ Jim<br /><br />That was a good video! Shows you how HSR in California is. If Amtrak can get very high ridership on all three lines with it's slower service. Then High Speed will do even better!davenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-63242482448173290082009-10-14T10:04:52.878-07:002009-10-14T10:04:52.878-07:00wow that was a pretty good video.wow that was a pretty good video.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com