Thursday Is HSR Stimulus Day
It’s looking pretty certain now that Thursday will be the day the federal government announces the recipients of the $8 billion in HSR stimulus funds. According to the Wall Street Journal:
The Obama administration is set to award $8 billion in stimulus funds for high-speed rail, and Florida is seen as a front-runner to get some of the money first….
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has spoken highly of Florida’s high-speed rail plans. He has declined to say which projects are likely to get stimulus funds, and said last week only that an announcement would come soon from President Barack Obama and Vice President Joseph Biden.
The White House declined to comment. The president and vice president are scheduled to appear at an undisclosed event in the Tampa-St. Petersburg area Thursday, raising expectations among local elected officials, business groups and the state’s congressional delegation that high-speed rail will be a focus.
So that seems like it’s all but confirmed: HSR stimulus money will be announced and Florida will get some of it. That shouldn’t surprise anyone who has been paying attention, especially after Ray LaHood leveraged the HSR stimulus money to get the Florida legislature to approve a rail funding package.
But what of California? If you read the tea leaves, it looks likely that we’ll be getting something from the feds on Thursday as well:
Other states seen as big contenders for federal funding include Illinois, whose plans include laying a second track between Chicago and St. Louis, and California, which is planning a high-speed rail corridor between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
I’m going to so far as to say this is the WSJ’s way of suggesting those will be the other two big recipients of HSR funding. Of course, it’s not yet clear just what in the California application will be funded. There are four main elements we’ll be watching for:
1. Will the $400 million request for the Transbay Terminal train box get funded?
2. Will the San Francisco-San José segment get funded? If so, will Peninsula HSR critics actually tell the public and their own constituents that no, we don’t really need free money or jobs?
3. Will both Central Valley segments get funded? Splitting it into Merced-Fresno and Fresno-Bakersfield raised concerns in the Valley that only one piece could get funded, when both are needed.
4. Will LA-Anaheim get funded? If so, this could be the first and most high-profile segment of the system to open. Functioning HSR in Southern California would be a massive boost to the system. Of course, it’d be an incomplete segment, so the ridership projections will have to keep that in mind.
Whatever the answers, this will be a big week for California high speed rail – perhaps the most important since the November 2008 election.
From the Transit Coalition newsletter:
The Long Beach Press-Telegram is calling for another high-speed rail vote (http://www.presstelegram.com/opinions/ci_14255135). Prop 1A, they say, was deceptive and they believe that with new information such as higher fare estimates and cost escalations voters would send a new high-speed rail ballot measure down in flames.
When Prop 1A was voted on there were many unknowns, and there will still be unknowns in November 2010. Perhaps it would be wise to vote again in 2012-2013 when all the specifics are known, including what the exact alignment will be, what it will cost to ride and what color the restrooms will be painted.
And flash forward, as Dan Walters reviews the new television series Human Target. It is a fictional look at the high-speed rail project with a lot of crossovers to reality.
Peter Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
What? A MediaNews Group paper is against HSR? Wow, that IS news.
Joey Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 4:52 pm
While we’re at it why don’t we have everyone in the world plan their traveling schedules (don’t forget tourists) for the next 25 years so that we can get accurate ridership projections.
And haven’t we already been over the fact that Human Target was practically a joke on the technical side of things?
By the way, what does this have to do with stimulus?
Peter Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
Add to that a prediction of airline prices 25 years from now.
BruceMcF Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 5:42 pm
I predict that an airline trip from San Francisco to San Diego will cost a BEEELLYUN DOLLARS in 2035.
Truth be Told Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 6:10 pm
Right, let’s compare that to the 83% increase that CAHSR has already fessed to without even putting a wheel on a track. You boys need to get real — your HSR boondoggle hasn’t got anything to compete with (other than the Amtrak joke which has always operated in the red…as you will too).
Airlines not only compete with each other (they’re still capitalistic, not socialistic cattle cars for the masses as you seek), so faced with competition like you (that’s a stretch as you’re at least three times slower), don’t you think there’ll be some fare adjustment just to keep customers off your silly, already bankrupt train?
And don’t give me crap about security delays — you’re entirely at-grade and a enormously expensive 500+ mile target that will make for GREAT news photos when Al Queda decides it’s your time. HSA will screen your few riders just as severely as they screen air passengers now.
Time to wake up, kiddies. You’re toast one way or the other.
Joey Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
You can’t blow up a building with a train. At least not any easily than you could with, say, a truck (compare to airplanes which are explosive even without a bomb).
And what makes you think HSR will not be competitive? Or have you not traveled abroad at all?
Joey Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
*more easily
jimsf Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 11:48 pm
Wait, socialistic cattle cars? Just he other day it was a fancy luxury train for the wealthy. Which is it?
you know , when say things like “socialistic cattle cars” you don’t make a valid point. All you do is show you are some one who can’t or won’t think for himself because you have haven’t any critical thinking skills. Its unfortunate you get to vote at all.
Alon Levy Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 2:20 am
Liberals are welfare cheats and latte sippers at the same time. They’re also Godless sodomites and Islamist sympathizers.
Get on with the program, Jim.
TomW Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:13 am
It took me a moment to realise that was sarcastic… a poor reflection on right-wing exteremists commenting skills.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 7:05 am
TbT… are you for real?
mike Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Fact check:
The Long Beach Press-Telegram is not “calling for another high-speed rail vote.” If they were, it would be an editorial.
Rather, a single columnist is asking whether it would make sense to have another vote, noting some arguments in favor (of a second vote). However, he also notes that such a thing has “never before been done with any bond issue” and concludes that you shouldn’t “hold your breath waiting for one.”
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 5:05 pm
This is the same op-ed that I debunked last week.
Bianca Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
Nobody knows what the price of gas will be in 10 years. Guess we shouldn’t build any more roads.
Spokker Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 7:28 pm
“Right, let’s compare that to the 83% increase that CAHSR has already fessed to without even putting a wheel on a track.”
It’s not an 83% increase. Different fare scenarios have been studied that set the cost of a high speed train ride between 50%, 83% and 100% of air fares for the comparable route. Each scenario has pros and cons, namely, how much revenue and ridership each scenario brings in. Lower fares = higher ridership but lower revenues and vice versa.
The updated business plan even mentions the 50% fare scenario.
“High-speed train fares are a key factor in the level of ridership and the revenue forecast. Forecasts for the programmatic EIR/EIS work used fares based on an LA–SF fare at half (50 percent) of the 2005 air fare, and varied proportionally with distance for other trips. This “50 percent” fare level generates relatively large passenger flows without requiring operating subsidy, and creates large public benefits from the public investment”
But they go on to explain why they chose the 83% fare level for the updated business plan.
“Tests of the sensitivity of riders and revenue to fare levels 33 percent higher and 66 percent higher than the “50 percent” base level showed progressively higher revenue, although lower ridership. The 66 percent higher case (which becomes the “83 percent” of air fare case) appears to be near the level that will generate the highest revenue, and reduces the operating costs and the number of trainsets needed. Because of the importance of increasing the amount of private sector funding in the construction and procurement of the project, the 83 percent fare scenario was adopted for this business plan. The fare is calculated in the same manner as the 50 percent, but is anchored by an LA-SF HST fare at 83 percent of the air fare, or in 2009 dollars a high-speed train fare of $105 vs. a $125 air fare, and a $118 cost to drive.”
Why is all of this lost on people?
Peter Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
It’s lost on them because they choose to either ignore it or they don’t do their research.
Dan S. Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 8:24 pm
It’s also lost on them because the CHSRA is just lame in positioning its reports. I know and you know that the biz plan is just a snapshot of a scenario at this point in time, but but Joe Homeowner doesn’t know that, so the CHSRA needs to be super-defensive about releasing anything that says anything like “fares will now be $100 from LA to SF.” They have got to start applying some PR spin and tact to all their utterances. They are in a PR war right now and they’re losing because they’re not even fighting!
Clem Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 10:11 pm
Agree. The other aspect they did a terrible job explaining was the switch from 2009 dollars to year-of-expenditure dollars. They said most of the budget increase came from the change of accounting method, but they failed to explain that the change of accounting method didn’t actually increase cost to the taxpayer. A dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow.
The press, and project opponents, ran away with the budget increase story treating it as a material increase. (And some portion of it was–but the CHSRA did a terrible job separating real cost increases from “increases” due to accounting method)
I sure hope we get the $400 million for the trainbox. That would surely remove any doubt about the Transbay Terminal. And hey, if we can’t get money from Obama here in SF we’re really in trouble!
Strategically, if segments are designated for funding I hope they’ll be the urban centers. Not because I’m just wanting money for my “own back yard” but because I’m sure these are the most expensive and complicated parts of the entire system.
Joey Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
One way or another, whether or not the trainbox gets funded could change the future of SF in many ways, though I’m sure which would be better.
HSRComingSoon Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 6:30 pm
If the feds don’t give the $400 million for the train box, then the money for the Oakland Airport Connector should do as it seems BART has run into some difficulties on that project. Oddly enough, that project is supposed to cost about $400 million as well.
Dan S. Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 8:25 pm
hah, I love this idea.
Peter Reply:
January 25th, 2010 at 8:37 pm
I’d be curious to find out who filed the complaint with the FTA. I’m guessing it was a “concerned party” who would not actually affected by the OAC’s construction.
lyqwyd Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 2:14 pm
Great Idea, I’d actually support TBT over Beale Alternative if it meant killing the Oakland Airport Connector!
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
Agreed.
Robert-
This is very exciting news and hopefully CA will get the $4.7B that it requested. Another source of federal money could come from the proposed National Infrastructure Bank (http://www.bondbuyer.com/issues/119_262/national-infrastructure-bank-1006259-1.html). The Senate Banking Committee will hold a hearing on this proposal in Feb. Sen. Dodd proposes an initial capitalizaiton of $10B, which is twice as much as the proposal in Obama’s budget last year.
I wonder if it would make sense politically for Califorina if the Central Valley segments were funded first. That would create a demonstration line (presumably at lower cost) with some impetus for connecting it with the large populations in the Bay Area and Southern California.
lyqwyd Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
I’d be for that. The central valley needs it most from a jobs perspective, plus it’s needed for the train-set testing. It’s probably the cheapest segment overall as well.
10 years ago, gas was 99 cents a gallon. It has more then tripled in price in the last 10 years. If the trend continues, then in ten years it would triple again or at minimum increase to the 5-6 range with peaks at 7 or 8.
HSR is faster than driving and faster and more convenient the flying.
HSR will serve areas that airlines do not serve and will serve them better and for less.
HSR offers travel flexibility ( intermediate points) that airlines can not offer.
HSR connects big cities with big cities , big cities with small cities and small cities with small cities. Airline offer only one choice.
Driving offers plenty of flexibility but does nothing to reduce congestion or help the environment, or add capacity, and driving is much slower. Speed limit 65mph versus, 220mph.
Airport expansion and freeway expansion cost as much or more than hsr.
Airport expansion and freeway expansion face much greater resistance, from both environmentalists and nimbys, than the handful of resisters you have opposing hsr.
Adding HSR does not decrease airline jobs because all modes still continue to increase. Arilines will simple shift their focus and intra state travel will shift to hsr. Both mode will continue to absorb new growth from an increasing population.
HSR brings stimulus to urban cores where it is needed for both, jobs, and increased density and all cities along the proposed route already have plans to implement such development adding to the stimulus effect.
Rail is much easier and much cheaper to expand and has far less impact than airport or freeway expansion.
HSR is well established, well engineered, common, accepted form of transport around the world and has been a success around the world, both in terms of profit, ridership, and convenience for the traveling public.
Those are the facts. You can say no till youre blue in the face but you cant change it.
The deniers consist of the following people.
The usual suspects, the wealthy Ive got mine anti tax anti common folk wealthy from places like the OC and other bastions of the gene pool mentality crowd. You know the olkd white guys and their pulled back shoulder padded wives who slurp martinis at the country club and look down their noses at the commoners who don’t have the correctly inbred blood lines.
Then you have the ignorant followers of those people ( the ones that get off being used by them) who vote against their own best interests, usually because their churches have checked made them check their brains and pickup their crayons at the door.
All of the above oppose anything and everything that would signal any kind of progress beyond the status quo ( and an erosion of their power structure)
Then there’s the nimbys, who simply care only about, as the name implies, their own back yard. Their slogan is “hey screw the other guy but just don’t screw me” ” built it but put in the someone else’s back yard.”
Then you have the armchair rail supporters and choo choo wannabes who, because they didn’t get the map they wanted, would just as soon kill the system before lending support after not getting their way.
Only the first group mentioned are adults. They have a good reason. But they are a minority in california and if they can find a way to make money of the project, they’ll get on board.
The other two groups need to be spanked and sent to bed without dinner.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:49 am
@jimsf
Just downloaded historic gas price trend for California. Here’s what the data shows (January):
1992: $1.19/gallon
1995: $1.20 – $1.46
2000: $1.37 – $1.60
2005: $1.91 – $2.23
2010: $2.86 – $3.20
June 2008: $4.45 – $4.76 Peak
Found Here: http://www.eia.doe.gov/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/wrgp/mogas_history.html
Essentially, the 2000 to 2010 change was a 100% increase. Or, prices doubled. But, as I note, the peak was in 2008… which was 3 times the price in 2000. Essentially.
That said, common opinion is that due to the economy struggles that demand is lower than what it would be if things were humming along… and that prices will return to previous highs once the economy improves. The $4.50/gallon gas we were paying a couple years ago… will be even higher.
jimsf Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 10:32 am
Those prices also depended where you were in california. SF some of, if not the highest price in the nation. Whereas Marysville probably has the lowest.
Bianca Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Yeah, there were gas stations in Palo Alto that popped over $5/gallon during the summer of 2008. And it’s only a matter of time before we see those prices again: finite supply + growing demand = higher prices.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 10:58 am
San Diego was in the high range too… the highest I thought!
Dan S. Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 8:21 pm
In a country that can’t raise a new tax to save itself from certain death, I (quietly) pray every day for gas prices to hit $4 again, even during a protracted economic recovery. I believe it to be the only practical way to get the country to adopt the policy changes I support. Don’t tell!
Alon Levy Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
On the contrary – $4 will happen if and only if there is a protracted economic recovery. The recession is putting a lid on oil demand, whereas growth would restore it to its full 2008 glory.
Dan S. Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
Jim, for argument’s sake, you may be correct, but if you have any interest in changing the sad situation you describe, then you should stop referring to “those people” as inconsolable children. If CHSRA did as much, they would likely fail miserably.
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
Luckily, Jim can be a grumpy old man who doesn’t speak for CHSRA. Same way the Peninsula NIMBYs don’t speak for the Peninsula.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:01 am
Im grumpy cuz Im so sick to death of the losers, the “party of no” crowd and their hangers-on as described above who, because they got their clocks cleaned in the last couple of elections, are wiling to drag the country down and any cost on every front and every issue, just because they didn’t get their way. They aren’t willing to compromise, consider, wheel and deal, or anything else. They were losing so they they refuse to stay in the game and I am sick to death of it. SICK of it. They need to have their asses beat. If you ask me. They ought to be ashamed to call themselves americans. Its not just high speed rail, its anything and everything else. They had 8 effing years to do what they wanted to do and what they chose to do was bankrupt the country and drag us into the toilet, and now they can’t even own up to it and instead, want to sabotage any attempted remedy because they are so GD afraid that they’ll be shown up and proven wrong. Thats whats really at the bottom of this. and I am SICK to DEATH of it. I want to kick them right i their smarmy loser faces. (But thats not my style. so Ill just voice my opinion instead and be done with it.) smarmy ass sore losers.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:08 am
Oh and if can stomach it, you can check out their endess pissy moan-y snarky comments about the TBT loan here where they can’t do anything bitch about every attempt to get something done and get people back to work and further, the comments are based on such garbage and ignorance its just unbearable. They just make stuff up out of the blue, or they are just that stupid. I don’t know which it is.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:15 am
ok. well, anyway, on a lighter note, take a look at this totally unrelated but very cool pic some one took by accident from their penthouse of lightning hitting the bay
(other three groups)
Hahaha damn, Biden got slammed hard on the Colbert Report and I don’t even think he was being sarcastic. He opened the show with a serious message about how great Obama’s piece on why Haiti matters was. Then he compared Biden and Obama.
He said, “This is the difference between a president,” holding up Obama’s cover article and then said, “and a vice president,” holding up Biden’s cover article on Amtrak. Haha it was hilarious.
I just saw this on the local news, Feinstein says we just got 171 million loan for tbt approved for bridge ramps and trainbox design. No other details mentioned.
heres the link for that
Reality Check Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 2:43 pm
Here’s the official TJPA press release on the $171m loan taken from the press release area of their web site.
Wired has a somewhat content-light piece on high speed rail in the US. It has some pretty pictures. Good to see a somewhat mainstream publication calling for HSR development, even if they are a little loose with the facts.
Uh-oh, Palo Alto’s mayor Pat Burt and the Daily Post are doing their best to whip up eminent domain fears again:
Palo Alto mayor: HSR eminent domain may spur voter revolt
synonymouse Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
You have to just recognize that BART quietly regards the Peninsula as its territory and its manifest destiny. BART killed the TBT tunnel before and you can be sure it is monitoring the Caltrain-hsr bogged-down berm blitzkrieg very closely. BART has a strong ally in Quentin Kopp and it is in a position to assure PA it could provide it with a subway ala Berkeley if payola is forthcoming. And the more industrial Redwood City-San Carlos factions can have the standard Brutalist treatment if they prefer elevateds.
Joey Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:14 pm
But why should we just sit here while a critical corridor gets subject to inferior transport?
synonymouse Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
BART frequency of service would compensate for the lack of express. BART has enjoyed a reservoir of loyal support on the Peninsula for decades.A professional opinion poll would be very useful on this issue and I suspect would contain some disturbing surprizes for the CHSRA cadres on this site.
Joey Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:54 pm
That doesn’t mean you can get to your destination any faster. Or that whatever BART does won’t cost four times as much as it would to quad-track, electrify, and grade-separate the peninsula, tunnel or no tunnel.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
Synonmouse.. you’re wrong… frequency does not make up for express along the peninsula… it is simply too far at the speeds BART travels. Further, a public opinion poll is mute at this point. Please see MTC’s adopted plans… and the regional rail plan.
Brandon of San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
BART sees Peninsula as its territory is ’stupid’ talk.
If anything… at most… SF Bay area operators view CHSRA as both a comliment to their own services, and/or as a potential competitor to limited/finite financial resources available in the Bay Area.
As you may or may not know… federal funds are apportioned to the SF Bay area. MTC is the designated recipient. And, as teh designated recipient, their Board decides where to focus resources. Some of those federal funds… will be directly, or indirectly, go to support HSR efforts. The development of stations is one possible area.
Right now… BART, MUNI and AC Transit get the lions share of federal funds apportioned to the area… largely for fleet replacement or other critical projects.
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:32 pm
And the rodent is shot down again with facts.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:55 pm
I should have pointed to the MTC long-range tranportation plan; however, their Regional Rail Plan would suffice too.
That document sites zero nada zilch BART projects on the peninsula. BART projects consist of extensions to San Jose (from Warm Springs in the East Bay), Oakland Airport Connector, and an East Contra Costa County extension (to Antioch/Brentwood). There is also a preservation program to retain the Rail ROW from Dublin/Pleasanton to Livermore.
Nothing on the peninsula!
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 5:02 pm
Sorry, I was referring to trollrodent.
But, since there’s a conspiracy, an official government document would not reflect their real plans, correct? *sarcasm*
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
NP. I assumed you were giving me props… and the benchmark was low set low.
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:41 pm
I was giving you props in my above post. I thought YOU were referring to my post below.
Clem Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 9:09 am
It’s not stupid talk.
There are two ways to look at this:
(1) BART has always planned to ring the bay and the notion itself is enormously popular. The configuration of the “terminals” in Millbrae and Santa Clara is specifically designed to enable a future connector down the Caltrain ROW. Caltrain/HSR will pave the way by fighting the difficult battles around grade separations. If Caltrain can be duped into a 100% segregated corridor configuration (with HSR and Caltrain running parallel from Santa Clara to Millbrae, but not at all integrated) then all the new Caltrain infrastructure becomes “dual use”… i.e. it could be signed over to BART in a heartbeat with nary a technical issue. Especially if someone notices that new tunnels into San Francisco are going to be mighty expensive–and these tunnels wouldn’t be needed for BART. End result: goodbye Caltrain, hello BART.
(2) follow the money. The transportation-industrial complex that backs BART is the same transportation-industrial complex that backs HSR. They get money with BART or with HSR, so they might not have a preference one way or the other as long as lots of concrete gets poured.
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 9:10 am
Then we should do our best to stop BART at Berryessa, I guess.
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 9:12 am
On the other hand, how else would you have configured the terminals in Millbrae and Santa Clara. It only makes sense to have them be parallel to the Caltrain ROW.
synonymouse Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 1:07 pm
I have always preferred an electrified Caltrain on the Peninsula to BART. Unfortunately at the shotgun marriage of Caltrain to CHSRA somebody in the audience should have stood up and objected.
What is so unfortunate about this whole fiasco is that most of the so-called nimbys in Palo Alto, etc. actually are sympathetic to rail transport and public transit. These folks simply don’t want to see their place trashed. I fail to see what is so hard to understand about this.
Find a politically and environmentally acceptable 4 track solution, not berms or elevateds, or face the prospect of BART filling the vacuum. I believe that Kopp has already said that it would be much easier to provide a subway with BART. Doesn’t that tell you something?
One approach, and not that disastrous, would be to pull the hsr from Caltrain and in time relocate to the 101 corridor. I understand that is anathema to the faithful on this site, but is it really such a problem? A dedicated, separate ROW has advantages, even with the curves. Meantime, patrons would transfer from Caltrain to the hsr at San Jose. If the hsr proves to be as successful as we hope, the money will in good time be found for the 101 alignment.
And of course to increase the chance of success move the tunneling to the Grapevine. One less than ideal compromise would be to leave the 99 routing intact and pop over to the Grapevine south of Bakersfield. A west valley bypass line could always be mooted later on.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Even if bart did plan to connect millbrae with santa clara, it would be 2075 before it would happen because they have other priorities before that. Its not even on the foreseeable horizon and a second transbay tube would be a priority ( in 2050) would come first. So if you want to hang around for 60 years, you may see bart down there.
synonymouse Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
The speed with which BART has moved on the San Jose extension demonstrates that this is an empire which knows how to expand and quickly when it needs to cement a “fix”.
If the train box is not included with the new TBT construction you can kiss the downtown station goodbye. The BART alternative would suddenly become a lot more attractive, maybe compelling.
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 3:23 pm
It took BART 20 years to even start building the Warm Springs Extension. Nothing about BART is “fast.”
Once again, you have NO idea what you’re talking about.
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
Please show us an official document where BART is planning to extend down the Peninsula since BART was extended to Millbrae. Otherwise you’re just flinging more conspiracy theories.
Joey Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:20 pm
Interesting … they even linked Clem’s posts…
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
Burt’s concerns might approach the realm of credibility were he able to actually provide backup for his “thousands” claim regarding the number of property takings. Further, what takings will occur may be limited to pieces of backyards, and not whole homes.
Peter Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:34 pm
And if the number is not known, then anything he says to that effect is conjecture.
Bianca Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
Wow that Palo Alto Post article is misleading. It says the new railroad would run alongside
the Caltrain tracks and would span about 100 feet. Describing it that way could easily lead to a misunderstanding that HSR would run adjacent to the Caltrain ROW instead of on it. Especially when the next paragraph is about eminent domain. Way to fan the flames with misleading language there.
synonymouse Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
My understanding is that BART did indeed consider building to SFO using the Caltrain ROW. AFAIK Kopp opposed that route.
I assure you that if the CHSRA plan is overturned BART will be waiting in the wings to pick up the pieces. The Peninsula represents a lucrative market for BART and Ring-the-Bay has considerable political appeal.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
You’re certainly a dreamer. There may have been considerable political appeal; however, that has all but evaporated. Caltrain has been on peoples main radar for quite some time. And now HSR is coming… to compliment Caltrain service.
BART is great, but it is too slow for the distances involved.
john Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 8:25 pm
No dice synonorat. BART planned to through Colma since at least 1956. There is so much to be learned on the internet.
This is also about the most recent technical drawing of anything BART south of Millbrae, so can we please lay this tired conspiracy theory to rest. I wager we’ll see a second transbay tube well before anyone whispers BART in Atherton with a straight face.
synonymouse Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 11:00 am
AFAIK, from comments made on other sites by BART insiders, the Caltrain ROW was studied in house as an alternative route at the time(long after 1956)the SFO extension was being planned. I am trying to remember but I believe the scheme envisioned branching out of the existing BART system rather than going to the vicinity of the TBT.
In any event the extension that was built added service and stations in San Mateo County, Quentin Kopp’s stomping grounds.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 11:57 am
There was no BART in 1956.
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:26 pm
But there were plans for a system that evolved into BART.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 2:15 pm
The same plans that have the trains going over the Golden Gate Bridge into Marin? And connecting San Raphael to Richmond. The ones with the Geary Blvd. subway? ….
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
I guess. I’m not saying the plans were ever all executed.
john Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
This one is my personal fave. BART Takes over the world! It was drawn on a cocktail napkin in 1957 so it must be true. Actually if you look at the phasing, BART to San Jose might be right on schedule…
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
That is hilarious, john.
As important as the train box is, it is essentially nothing more than a large hole in the ground. Maybe with a tunnel from 4th and King for it and the Caltrain. That could stand as a monument to the incompetence of the authority, at least in the eyes of the detractors, if it should be built and sit empty for some number of years, as it would till the HSR rolls in.
But since it needs funding ASAP so that they can start the TBT construction without having to leave the HSR box out, I hope that the TBT gets the $400 million box and then at least one operable segment: either SJ-SF or LA-Anaheim. Anything left after that should be for the Valley test segment. But I wouldn’t build both urban segments without the valley test segment. One of the urban segments will have to sit tight and wait while the other is being built. And in true non-NIMBY fashion, I don’t care which one gets built first, even though I live in SoCal. Whichever one makes the most economic sense is the one that should be built first.
Can’t wait to see what happens Thursday. It will be a momentous day indeed, especially for Florida!
RT
The hsr is still in the disputed stage while the BART extension to San Jose is underway. I guess somebody powerful in San Jose did not think BART was too slow.
Here’s a scenario for next fall. The water bond issue goes down in flames and the teabaggers win big. Emboldened, Jarvisites move to place an hsr overturn issue on the ballot. Not so farfetched, as the Republicans have a simple scheme easy to peddle: cut government pork(read hsr) and cut taxes. After all they can always point to John Kennedy’s tax cuts, which worked. Exactly the opposite of the stimulus, which has proved unpopular because it gives temporary jobs to a relatively small and specilized group of workers and because budget deficits are perceived as out of control and inflationary. New train jobs are offset by lost airline and bus jobs. A wash
Add to that the recognition that the hsr will require operating subsidies, when there is not enough money for existing public transit operations. Not to mention eminent domain. Using the recent expansion of 101 in Marin County as an example, when it comes to houses the whole property is taken. They wiped out one whole side of the street adjacent to Lincoln Avenue. Besides who would want to look out the back window at a 20 foot retaining wall plastered with grafitti and encased with razor wire?
The natives are restless; Yáll got a problem. Luckily for you the Supremes made it legal for the corps and contractors to pull out all the stops on brainwashing. We’ll see if those who stand to make the big bucks on the hsr overplay the propaganda. It can happen.
Alon Levy Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
Yes, San Jose’s urban boosters are insane. This is reflected in both the need for a BART subway and the insistence on a 14-track Diridon Station.
The Kennedy tax cuts were followed by spending increases, consisting of Medicare and the Great Society on the one hand and Vietnam on the other. This led to stagflation beginning in 1969. In fact US tax cuts rarely come with spending cuts – both the Reagan and Bush tax cuts were followed by spending increases, mostly but not only on defense. In all three cases, the ruling party’s takehome message was that deficits don’t matter, and the opposition stopped caring about fixing the problem once it won the election (even Clinton only raised taxes and cut spending after Greenspan threatened rate hikes).
I’m not sure why you’re repeating the line that HSR will require operating subsidies. Do you have proof for this? Attacking the business plan is not enough; HSR systems that have missed ridership projections by a factor of 4, such as in Taiwan, still make operating profits.
Finally, it’s nice you recognize how bad the Supreme Court ruling on corporate campaigning is. Welcome to the club – almost the entire left agrees with you here. It’s the conservatives and the libertarians who insist that money equals speech. It’ll be poetic justice if the Jarvis crowd starts losing elections because politically connected contractors flood the airwaves with attack ads.
Joey Reply:
January 26th, 2010 at 10:22 pm
“Add to that the recognition that the hsr will require operating subsidies”
We’ve been through this 1000 times. There is no recognition of that sort; I have no idea where you get that notion from, but either provide some evidence for it or GTFO.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:17 am
(You have too say it 1236 times though before it will sink in. Its right here in the the “Dealing with Dummies” handbook)
The hsr will run in the red due to being a government-run operation dominated, like BART, by a militant, politically connected union and handicapped by an inferior route scheme. Basically a big BART.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:25 am
“dominated, like BART, by a militant, politically connected union..” Gee, I hope I can still fit into my fatigues… now where did I put that bayonet …
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 8:35 am
Don’t forget the suicide vest.
Joey Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 7:49 am
Can you stop spouting conspiracy theories and actually say something useful for once?
Ok, guys, maybe an analogy might help. Try a government run airline that loses money even with a monopoly and plenty of passengers. Capiche? Labor costs too high because government-run. Moreover, in the case of the CHSRA the route is too screwed to be competitive with air times. d’óh
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 12:33 am
uh huh. do go on…
Peter Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 8:39 am
Labor costs too high at airlines …
Ever check and see what the current salaries are for airline pilots? For highly trained specialists who are supposedly getting paid to safely fly you from one city to the next?
Many pilots have to take second jobs to pay their bills. Sullenberger had to start a air safety consulting company to make ends meet.
by the way syn, you do know that airline employees are union right?
speaking of failed airlines we all know what a failure southwest is as a business right? (not)
and to think:
“Organized labor:
Although Southwest is considered a “low fare” airline, it is heavily unionized when compared to other airlines.[80] The Southwest Airline Pilots’ Association, a union not affiliated with the Air Line Pilots Association, International, represents the airline’s pilots.[81] The Aircraft Maintenance Technicians’ are represented by the Aircraft Mechanics Fraternal Association (AMFA).[82] Customer Service Agents and Reservation Agents are represented by the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Union (IAM). Flight Dispatchers, Flight Attendants, Ramp agents and Operations agents are represented by the Transport Workers Union (TWU).”
my goodness, how on earth to their planes even make it into the sky at all?!!!
Southwest is private; that’s the difference. Its management runs the airline. It is in competition with other airlines. It cracks the whip. The idea of Muni or BART cracking the whip is laughable.
BART and SF Muni management are intimidated by their unions. Because the union is directly connected to the political machine which funnels funding to said BART and Muni. The employees
call in sick and then work overtime on their days off. Pee in the sanders. Good work habits for the hsr.
The CHSRA will be government run because a private operator can’t make it profitable due to the crappy route. That’s when the unions take over. And the demand for subsidies. Just like BART.
jimsf Reply:
January 27th, 2010 at 1:06 am
Well, when that happens you are really gonna be mad huh.
YOu know I actually heard that Muni is proposing they just extend the T line to LAX, only they’ll tell the operators to drive really really fast. The whole system will be run from an operations center in the basement of san francisco city hall staffed by secret underground Marxist leaders. They plan to pipe mood music containing subliminal messages which will turn everyone gay throughout the trains and upon arrival in LA, they will hand out prescriptions for medical marijuana to passengers.
( hmm that last part would probably actually be a very popular ad campaign….)
Aint gonna happen ‘çause the public is slowly getting wise. Besides there won’t be anywhere nearly enough money for Palmdale boondoggles, interminable foreign wars, keeping Grandma on life support for 20 years – you name it. So Oregon taxes the rich and corporations – you know they have lawyers and pols who will devise a way to wesel out of paying. The hoi polloi have no money for pyramid building.
Ill leave that one for someone else. you make me wanna reach for a percacet.