tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post7055456326606570184..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: Should CHSRA Be Abolished - Or Improved?Robert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-34451135495299359692009-05-10T19:10:00.000-07:002009-05-10T19:10:00.000-07:00They want an overbuilt blight to make up the time ...<I>They want an overbuilt blight to make up the time lost by the Tehachapis detour and various podunk stops that have been added</I> one-They haven't added any "podunk" stops. and two- it wouldn't matter how many stops they add when not every train makes every stop anyway. An express to LA is an express to LA. and three -- the palmdale route serves a huge chunk of La county that will house most of La counties future growth. That growth won't be happening on the grapevine.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-42599609595664436632009-05-10T10:40:00.000-07:002009-05-10T10:40:00.000-07:00@mike
A surface option is not what the CHSRA want...@mike<br /><br />A surface option is not what the CHSRA wants - they are demanding a massive four track elevated. They want an overbuilt blight to make up the time lost by the Tehachapis detour and various podunk stops that have been added.<br /><br />The upside of the Peninsula resistance is that it will undoubtedly bring attention as well to the whole screwed-up route of the HSR.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-78340592352836333772009-05-08T14:47:00.000-07:002009-05-08T14:47:00.000-07:00Wish I'd seen this post earlier.
First of all, wi...Wish I'd seen this post earlier.<br /><br />First of all, without any specifics, your comments on CEQA are depressingly transparent: "Change the process (somehow) until we get the results CAHSR wants". <br /><br />This admission will color your future comments on planning process issues.<br /><br />Second, you are discounting the idea that this shoestring outsourced planning process may not have gotten it 100% correct. There will be issues which will come out of the process and be rectified. Even your own "mediterranean viaducts" proposal attests to this.<br /><br />Finally in many other posts, you have complained that politicians aren't lending their weight to HSR, but here you advocate the agency's independence. I think you should realize these are incompatible goals -- if you want direct political support for HSR, you have to accept the oversight and control that comes with it.flowmotionnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-26730241672584994222009-05-07T14:47:00.000-07:002009-05-07T14:47:00.000-07:00The safest strategy is to dot the i's and cross th...The safest strategy is to dot the i's and cross the t's when it comes to the EIR. It may take a little longer at the beginning, but in the long run I suspect it will save time by strengthening CHRSA's legal position in court.<br /><br />There was an interesting SF Chron article a couple days ago on HSR tunneling and what happened with Devil's Slide (Hwy 1). Caltrans originally proposed a surface bypass for Devil's Slide, but San Mateo County lobbied for a tunnel solution. They eventually got the tunnel, and the article implies that perhaps something similar will happen with HSR.<br /><br />The interesting part is that you can actually find the Devil's Slide EIR online. The tunnel solution was not substantially more expensive than the surface bypass (something like $130 million vs $110 million). No doubt the same decision making process will play out with HSR. If the tunnel is only 20% more expensive than the surface alignment, then I have no doubt that CHSRA would go for the tunnel (perhaps with small contributions from local towns). I also have no doubt that, in this case, the tunnel is going to be far, far more expensive than the surface alignment. The EIR will simply establish it as a non-viable alternative (which pretty much everyone already knows, save a few people on the Peninsula).mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-6470562580425019752009-05-07T14:38:00.000-07:002009-05-07T14:38:00.000-07:00@lyqwyd Actually, the SF Bike Plan situation is a...@lyqwyd Actually, the SF Bike Plan situation is a perfect example of why I think Robert's "bypass CEQA entirely" strategy is a dangerous one. To quote a nice summary of the SF Bike Plan fiasco from a commenter at SF Bay Guardian:<br /><BR>"Like NEPA, the federal version, California's Environmental Quality Act...is merely a law that requires that a project sponsor disclose potential significant environmental impact to decision makers who are free to ignore them. Of recent, it has served a proxy to oppose projects more so than to protect the environment.....<br /><br />This is what happened with the 2002 Bike Plan. Advocates and staff agreed to ignore CEQA even though they'd been told that the LOS matter is a potential impact under the current rules. This happened under pressure from advocates backed by supervisors. Thus, issuing a negative declaration fort the Bike Plan which under CEQA says no EIR is needed, landed them in court with the plaintiffs having to make the easy case to the judge that there was a "fair argument" that an EIR was needed. Staff took a risk at the behest of advocates and got bit. <br /><br />This dynamic is already having an impact on moving the Bike Plan forward, as staff have gone polar on us, from proposing no EIR to insisting that we have a full-blown EIR. Of course, a full-blown EIR will take years to produce and that is where we are now."mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-32962402809540814662009-05-07T13:49:00.000-07:002009-05-07T13:49:00.000-07:00Given the above, I still think that HSR should go ...Given the above, I still think that HSR should go through the CEQA process, mainly to eliminate the attacks that will come if it does not go through the process. It's just sad that our environmental review is so flawed.lyqwydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13246339570684365095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-13415934037849880382009-05-07T13:46:00.000-07:002009-05-07T13:46:00.000-07:00The California environmental review process is ext...The California environmental review process is extremely flawed. The recent 3 year holdup on SF Bike improvements is the most egregious example that I am aware of.<br /><br />It seems that most of the time it is only used to delay projects by people that don't like them, regardless of what the project's actual impacts are.<br /><br />I certainly believe that environmental impacts should be taken in to account, but the way we do it today is a travesty. The process is ridiculously time-consuming and expensive, and the regulations are seriously outdated.lyqwydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13246339570684365095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-20326360015787374882009-05-07T13:41:00.000-07:002009-05-07T13:41:00.000-07:00There is precedent for CEQA exemptions, in the mos...There is precedent for CEQA exemptions, in the most recent CA budget 8 projects were given exemption (all road projects):<br /><br /> 1. Santa Clara County U.S. Highway 101 interchange modification project to add a southbound auxiliary lane and a southbound mixed flow lane from Interstate 280 to Yerba Buena Road.<br /> 2. San Diego County Interstate 805 high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) project to construct north and southbound HOV lanes from Interstate 5 to Carroll Canyon Road, and to construct north-facing direct access ramps.<br /> 3. Tehama County State Route 99 Los Molinas rehabilitation and traffic calming project from Orange Street to Tehama Vine Road.<br /> 4. Fresno County State Route 99 Island Park widening project, which adds one mixed-flow lane in each direction, from Ashlan Avenue to Grantlund Avenue.<br /> 5. San Joaquin County State Route 99 median widening project, which adds one mixed-flow lane in each direction, from State Route 120 west to 0.4 miles north of Arch Road, in Manteca.<br /> 6. San Joaquin County State Route 12 pavement rehabilitation and shoulder widening project on Bouldin Island.<br /> 7. Orange County State Route 91 widening project, which adds one mixed flow lane in each direction, from State Route 55 to Weir Canyon Road.<br /> 8. San Luis Obispo County U.S. Highway 101 pavement rehabilitation and shoulder widening project.<br /><br />(see http://www.rtmmlaw.com/news.php for more info)lyqwydhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13246339570684365095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-29326926087982902902009-05-07T10:48:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:48:00.000-07:00Martin Engel called Robert a fascist further upthr...Martin Engel called Robert a fascist further upthread.<br /><br />And the point of The Prince isn't that the ends justify the means. It's a primer about how to achieve the ends of seizing and holding power. This is similar to modern political consultants' writings, and contrasts with previous political philosophy, which talks about the purpose of the good and the need for just leadership. Machiavelli doesn't even talk about infrastructure as a means of maintaining power, even though that was done frequently in the Roman Empire. He talks mainly about war and general governance issues.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-34072223649745467912009-05-07T10:09:00.000-07:002009-05-07T10:09:00.000-07:00@Alon Levy said...
if you really think Robert is ...@Alon Levy said...<br /><br /><I>if you really think Robert is a fascist, then you're ignorant about what fascism actually is.</I>I know exactly what fascism is. And I never called Robert a fascist so the rest of your lecture is silly.<br /><br /><I>Ditto invocations of The Prince.</I> <br /><br />Except that this is exactly what Robert is pushing... the ends justifies the means. I would challenge Robert to point out one place where he has taken a more balanced attitude.<br /><br />Anyhow got better things to do with the week.Pat Moorehttp://sworddance.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-1334008085652195812009-05-06T20:53:00.000-07:002009-05-06T20:53:00.000-07:00@Anon: you seem to be assuming that HSR would be f...@Anon: you seem to be assuming that HSR would be forced into tunnels. Our friend FONSI may well conclude otherwise!Clemhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01374282217135682245noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-51847326160417318912009-05-06T20:18:00.000-07:002009-05-06T20:18:00.000-07:00At what point does the cost of tunneling under Pal...At what point does the cost of tunneling under Palo Alto, Menlo Park and Atherton exceed the cost of re-locating to the 101 freeway corridor?<br /><br />Moreover by having its own ROW the HSR will be spared any collateral damage from Caltrain snafus. Any incident that would stop Caltrain would likely stop the HSR as well. And problems can be expected to occur: witness the three hour disruption 2 days ago of BART service in the Transbay Tube caused by simple debris arcing the thrid rail.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-87981179014838928042009-05-06T15:33:00.001-07:002009-05-06T15:33:00.001-07:00jet said... "The french would like to do it for us...jet said... "<I>The french would like to do it for us. I say hand it over to them then, lock stock and barrel and wake us up when its done.</I>"<br /><br />This is likely confusing an expression of interest in operating an HSR service on the corridor with an interest in taking over the construction of the corridor.<br /><br />"<I>On its current path of progress we aren't going to have revenue service before 2025 if that.</I>"<br /><br />If its current path of progress means that there will be a state financial crisis so that bonds will not be able to be sold for over 50% of the time between now and then, certainly ... the repeated inability of the California legislature to do its job (in large part due to anti-democratic requirements for super-majorities that allow a minority to block action without having the majority and therefore with no responsibility to proceed with engaging in any action), if it continues as in the past twelve months, will hobble the project.<br /><br />But since nobody will take it over for the state without being paid, that goes for whoever is doing it.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-11983985286592899572009-05-06T15:33:00.000-07:002009-05-06T15:33:00.000-07:00You could make a case that the existing highway sy...You could make a case that the existing highway system and airport system are significantly advantaged relative to HSR by having been built before CEQA.<br /><br />I don't see that as enough of a reason to abandon the environmental review process. It would take a while to set up an acceptable alternative, in any case, so it's not clear that that would get the system built any faster.<br /><br />If there should arise any insurmountable CEQA problems, the state representatives can override them. You only need 50% for those votes, so it'll get done.<br /><br />p.s. Robert, project confidence, not desperation. Don't let the Peninsula jerkoffs get to you.theonoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-72590643999558386792009-05-06T15:00:00.000-07:002009-05-06T15:00:00.000-07:00@mike -- mostly right.
What you are missing about...@mike -- mostly right.<br /><br />What you are missing about CEQA is that it also demands that the "need/purpose" statements not presume the proposed project.<br /><br />For example, a project's purpose cannot be "build HSR to LA". (presumes conclusion). But it can be "improve travel times between LA and SF"<br /><br />(Unless you are Robert)Pat Moorehttp://sworddance.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-29332340754648760942009-05-06T14:56:00.000-07:002009-05-06T14:56:00.000-07:00@Robert (Apostle)--
"NIMBYs abuse the process"
...@Robert (Apostle)-- <br /><br />"NIMBYs abuse the process"<br /><br />Ex-squeeze me???<br /><br />CEQA exists to make sure government follows a process and makes sure there is a real need and that the real need is being served by a proposed project. <br /><br />Because you have clearly forgotten, CEQA/NEPA exist because in the 50s/60s there was no way that communities could object to having a freeway rammed through their city. If you ever want to know why Detroit is such a mess -- start with the communities that were destroyed by the roadbuilders.<br /><br />When CEQA/NEPA came in, the highwaymen started bleating about the "process" being abused, same as Robert is now.<br /><br />CEQA/NEPA as it exists is relatively toothless. If CHSRA cannot survive that lawsuit then that says pretty significant things about the flawed "process" up in Sacramento.<br /><br />All kneel before the one TRUE god.Pat Moorehttp://sworddance.com/blognoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-52115098041984864092009-05-06T11:24:00.000-07:002009-05-06T11:24:00.000-07:00The french would like to do it for us. I say hand...The french would like to do it for us. I say hand it over to them then, lock stock and barrel and wake us up when its done. On its current path of progress we aren't going to have revenue service before 2025 if that. Think about it. We ned to build what, 10 hsr stations, some whoes locations haven't even been chosen. Row hasn't been chose, nor permission aquired. tbt issues still left unresloved. hundreds of miles of track, concrete, and catenary, and several major tunneling projects. There is no way on gods green earth that these trains ill run in 2020. Especially when the whole thing is being overseen by people with no railroad experience whatsoever. Five years from now, we will still be in court with PA etc.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13215968441208042594noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55982645359191410022009-05-06T10:16:00.000-07:002009-05-06T10:16:00.000-07:00Anony-mouse: "The issue the lawmakers is more fund...Anony-mouse: "<I>The issue the lawmakers is more fundamental.<br /><br />They have been asking for a proposed org chart for almost a year and CHSRA has been unable to provide that which even the smallest startup in Silicon Valley must provide.<br /><br />Not only have they failed to scale up, they have failed to even develop a basic plan to scale up.<br /><br />It is time for the grownups to take over this process.</I>"<br /><br />Yes, legislators have been asking the CHSRA to do things while failing to perform their basic legislative responsibility of getting a budget done on time and keeping the state finances from blowing up ... both on an ongoing basis, as well as with two acute budget crises, one interfering with the funding for the business plan they were demanding, and most recently delaying the sale of bonds by months at precisely the time Anony-mouse is criticizing the CHSRA for not staffing up while they had no funds to use to hire any large amount of new staff.<br /><br />Putting forward the people who so completely and regularly fail to perform their primary jobs in putting together a state budget are the "grown ups" in the room ... as a serious argument? No wonder the person putting it up was not even willing to come up with a pseudonym to go with the argument.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-76928014328848979312009-05-06T10:09:00.000-07:002009-05-06T10:09:00.000-07:00The sad thing is that it's actually not unthinkabl...<I>The sad thing is that it's actually not unthinkable at all to exempt HSR from CEQA. Whether one likes it or not, the precedent is actually there, whether it's the CEQA exemption for grade separations or the CEQA exemptions for Prop 1B projects that were rammed through as part of the recent budget deal. </I><BR>Fair enough. But virtually all of those projects are widening/enhancements of existing transportation corridors. The analog would be exempting CHSRA from CEQA on the Caltrain corridor for all sections that do not require more than X sq feet for eminent domain (which I believe would be more reasonable, the Palo Alto folks paranoia notwithstanding). As AB 289 makes clear, the grade separations are almost surely already exempt anyway. That's a far cry from exempting the entire project, including entirely new sections on entirely new ROW, from CEQA, however.<br /><BR>That being said, I suspect the "bypass CEQA" strategy, except where clearly allowed by established law, is not a smart one in the long term anyway. Once again, <B>the purpose of EIR is not to ensure that there are zero environmental impacts along any dimension</B>. If the NIMBYs think that this is how EIR works - that all they have to do is show the judge that there is some environmental harm along some dimension and that will stop the project - they are going to be sorely disappointed. Rather, the purpose is to document all of the possible environmental impacts, choose the <B>economically feasible</B> alternative that minimizes the total impacts, and make good-faith efforts to mitigate the resulting impacts from the chosen alternative (e.g., install sound walls, plant trees, whatever). That's it. Lawsuits can delay the process, but they are unlikely to ultimately stop it (or move it somewhere where it's infeasible anyway, like the 280 corridor).<br /><BR>Where you run into problems - i.e., where the NIMBYs can actually win in court - is if you <B>fail to do your due diligence in the EIR</B>. That is to say, you fail to catalog some environmental impacts, or perhaps you skip the EIR altogether (as Robert suggests). Then they can sue you for failing to fulfill your obligations under CEQA, and they might actually win because they'll be right. The real sin as far as the law is concerned is not failing to eliminate all impacts cataloged in the EIR, but rather failing to catalog the impacts to begin with.mikenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-65519517679207256832009-05-06T09:58:00.000-07:002009-05-06T09:58:00.000-07:00God. Let me say this as someone who's never cared ...God. Let me say this as someone who's never cared much for terminology like "Denier": if you really think Robert is a fascist, then you're ignorant about what fascism actually is. It's not about giving a single authority power to build things regardless of opposition - on the contrary, fascist regimes have generally been very responsive to business and high-income communities, leading many Western investors to idealize them. It's about shooting people who agitate for too much labor rights or democracy or peace or minority self-expression. The English-only crowd has a lot more to do with historical fascist practice than HSR boosters ever will.<br /><br />Ditto invocations of The Prince. What Robert's pushing for is a more streamlined role for authorities, on the model of SNCF or Narita Airport. Some of the people living on the grounds that were slated to become Narita promised to firebomb the new home of every resident who voluntarily agreed to relocate. The Peninsula people are nothing compared to that. The Japanese/French model is more centralized and less participatory than the US one, but let's not pretend it's in any way authoritarian.Alon Levyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12195377309045184452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-16215229526450778822009-05-06T09:36:00.000-07:002009-05-06T09:36:00.000-07:00What a surprise. Wealthy people on the Peninsula h...What a surprise. Wealthy people on the Peninsula hate anything with rails. They killed BART 40 years ago (only to demand it later and at great cost) and now they're doing it again. <br /><br />It is amazing that a pack of self-styled entitled "activists" from a rich community somehow have this vast knowledge of how to run an HSR system. Why, oh why are they limiting themselves to yelling at city council meetings? Why aren't they forming a private company to build the perfect HSR system and save us from the misery that is the status quo? Why aren't we seeing them roll out Big Plans instead of just whining like little kids and trying to overturn the will of the voters and the Administration? <br /><br />Oh, that's right. They don't have a plan. They don't really know. All they know is how to use this situation for short term political gain in the local elections. Well Played, nimble NIMBYs. Well played. I hear many a politician in Burlingame, Palo Alto, et al got their start like this 40 years go. Because what the state needs more of is selfish, entitled baby boomers demanding their needs met now, and who don't care about the future. It's worked so well in the pastAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-71371610206225701882009-05-06T09:34:00.000-07:002009-05-06T09:34:00.000-07:00The issue the lawmakers is more fundamental.
They...The issue the lawmakers is more fundamental.<br /><br />They have been asking for a proposed org chart for almost a year and CHSRA has been unable to provide that which even the smallest startup in Silicon Valley must provide.<br /><br />Not only have they failed to scale up, they have failed to even develop a basic plan to scale up.<br /><br />It is time for the grownups to take over this process.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-26957196364915769822009-05-06T08:37:00.000-07:002009-05-06T08:37:00.000-07:00I think this says all that needs to be said about ...I think <A HREF="http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:SFO_BART_plaque_1.JPG" REL="nofollow">this</A> says all that needs to be said about Quentin Kopp and his sponsors, the Bechtel Infrastructure Corporation, Parsons Brinckerhoff, Tutor-Saliba, HNTB, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-70863290072476507502009-05-06T08:19:00.001-07:002009-05-06T08:19:00.001-07:00The key benefit of the Department of Rail proposal...The key benefit of the Department of Rail proposal is that it avoids the risk that the CHSRA will be folded into Caltrans. Putting a HSR project inside the reach of bureaucratic empire builders with their power base in roadworks will be the kiss of death.<br /><br />As far as positive benefit, it may be a case of closing the barn door after the horse has fled ... that is, if it had been done in 2006, it seems likely that the CHSRA would not have been hammered so badly by the delay in bonded funding at the beginning of this year. But the defensive benefit is well worth it.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-6298907074578128322009-05-06T08:19:00.000-07:002009-05-06T08:19:00.000-07:00I quite agree thath in its current form, the CHSRA...I quite agree thath in its current form, the CHSRA does not the ability and staff to oversee construction of the line. That's because up until now, it's job was to plan and provide outline design - so it employed peopel who do those things. It would be very silly if they had employed engineers and mega-project managers, because there woudl have been nothing for them to do.<br /><br />So, the solution is to provide it with the means to employ the right people with right skills - which requires funding.<br /><br />Why do politicans make things seem so complicated?TomWhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13453251490705724225noreply@blogger.com