<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Buena Park&#8217;s HSR Concerns</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=buena-parks-hsr-concerns</link>
	<description>California High Speed Rail support blog, spreading news and info about the high speed trains project approved by California voters in November 2008.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 06:34:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Joey</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71993</link>
		<dc:creator>Joey</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:31:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71993</guid>
		<description>Rumor has it the shared track configuration with CalTrain is more or less dead.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Rumor has it the shared track configuration with CalTrain is more or less dead.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alon Levy</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71990</link>
		<dc:creator>Alon Levy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71990</guid>
		<description>The easiest way to kill the tunnel is kill the dedicated HSR tracks. Build two tracks with passing sidings at Norwalk. That way you could even do something radical like send HSR directly to Santa Ana and Irvine in Phase I. I don&#039;t get why it&#039;s an axiom that Anaheim needs direct service but everyone else in the metro area needs to transfer.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The easiest way to kill the tunnel is kill the dedicated HSR tracks. Build two tracks with passing sidings at Norwalk. That way you could even do something radical like send HSR directly to Santa Ana and Irvine in Phase I. I don&#8217;t get why it&#8217;s an axiom that Anaheim needs direct service but everyone else in the metro area needs to transfer.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Spokker</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71988</link>
		<dc:creator>Spokker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 09:13:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71988</guid>
		<description>&quot;there’s an argument for designing tracks shared with Metrolink, like the tracks planned to be shared by Caltrain and HSR in the Peninsula.&quot;

Well that&#039;s off the table in the South. Work on denying Anaheim homeowners their tunnel.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;there’s an argument for designing tracks shared with Metrolink, like the tracks planned to be shared by Caltrain and HSR in the Peninsula.&#8221;</p>
<p>Well that&#8217;s off the table in the South. Work on denying Anaheim homeowners their tunnel.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71974</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 03:16:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71974</guid>
		<description>;)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Risenmessiah</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71972</link>
		<dc:creator>Risenmessiah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 02:30:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71972</guid>
		<description>....it&#039;s some crazy stuff man...got it at the same place I bought my tin foil hat...

In case others are wondering:

Warren Buffet owned part of BNSF, but recently he purchased the rest of their stock. So now BNSF is one of the companies owned by Berkshire Hathaway. There&#039;s lots of speculation why Buffett did this, but I think it&#039;s pretty clear he is moving towards (depending on how long he lives) to something not unlike vertical consolidation. He&#039;s not alone in trying to control flow of goods, as opposed to simply producing them.

Now, it is public knowledge that Buffet back in 2008 dumped $5 billion into Goldman Sachs using preferred stock. But by the same token, the purchase of BNSF has cost Berkshire Hathaway its AAA credit rating. So, it&#039;s likely that there will be &quot;right-sizing&quot; of the railroad to help cut costs.

Now if you were the Administration and you wanted a way to thank Buffett for saving Goldman Sachs from utter ruin, one way might be to buy something at a loss. Enter the A1 alignment, which isn&#039;t part of Buffet&#039;s grand plan to ship food to Asia (or God knows what else). By making enough sales, it&#039;s likely that Buffett can get his credit rating back and all is right with the world. 

But again, hear what I am saying: so far we haven&#039;t seen any dollars for the new right of ways that will need to built...only acquiring or upgrading what someone already owns.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8230;.it&#8217;s some crazy stuff man&#8230;got it at the same place I bought my tin foil hat&#8230;</p>
<p>In case others are wondering:</p>
<p>Warren Buffet owned part of BNSF, but recently he purchased the rest of their stock. So now BNSF is one of the companies owned by Berkshire Hathaway. There&#8217;s lots of speculation why Buffett did this, but I think it&#8217;s pretty clear he is moving towards (depending on how long he lives) to something not unlike vertical consolidation. He&#8217;s not alone in trying to control flow of goods, as opposed to simply producing them.</p>
<p>Now, it is public knowledge that Buffet back in 2008 dumped $5 billion into Goldman Sachs using preferred stock. But by the same token, the purchase of BNSF has cost Berkshire Hathaway its AAA credit rating. So, it&#8217;s likely that there will be &#8220;right-sizing&#8221; of the railroad to help cut costs.</p>
<p>Now if you were the Administration and you wanted a way to thank Buffett for saving Goldman Sachs from utter ruin, one way might be to buy something at a loss. Enter the A1 alignment, which isn&#8217;t part of Buffet&#8217;s grand plan to ship food to Asia (or God knows what else). By making enough sales, it&#8217;s likely that Buffett can get his credit rating back and all is right with the world. </p>
<p>But again, hear what I am saying: so far we haven&#8217;t seen any dollars for the new right of ways that will need to built&#8230;only acquiring or upgrading what someone already owns.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71963</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:51:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71963</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I see what you mean with the reverse curves. I was only looking south from SR152. Forgot that there was a spur northwards to Merced/Sacramento. Whoops.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I see what you mean with the reverse curves. I was only looking south from SR152. Forgot that there was a spur northwards to Merced/Sacramento. Whoops.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71962</link>
		<dc:creator>Peter</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:37:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71962</guid>
		<description>Well, since aerials are planned through Fresno, I don&#039;t think that would be much of a problem. Madera would be a problem, but could that possibly be solved with aerials through there as well? Transition from at-grade to an aerial prior to crossing the river, then cut across to the UP ROW and stay on an aerial all the way until you reach the end of town, at which point you rejoin SR-99 and descend back to grade?

For a large portion of the run through Madera the alignment would be going through industrial areas. For the part where homes are within 200 feet (barely) of the ROW, you could build soundwalls.

How does that sound?

Of course, that would not solve the issue of building through Fresno, but it could minimize the impact to agricultural land. Compromises must be made.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, since aerials are planned through Fresno, I don&#8217;t think that would be much of a problem. Madera would be a problem, but could that possibly be solved with aerials through there as well? Transition from at-grade to an aerial prior to crossing the river, then cut across to the UP ROW and stay on an aerial all the way until you reach the end of town, at which point you rejoin SR-99 and descend back to grade?</p>
<p>For a large portion of the run through Madera the alignment would be going through industrial areas. For the part where homes are within 200 feet (barely) of the ROW, you could build soundwalls.</p>
<p>How does that sound?</p>
<p>Of course, that would not solve the issue of building through Fresno, but it could minimize the impact to agricultural land. Compromises must be made.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathanael</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71961</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathanael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:28:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71961</guid>
		<description>As noted above there are some nasty multiple-reverse-curve deviations in SR-99.  At Madera, the HSR could fly up on an aerial to keep going straight, I suppose.  At the Chowchilla Airport, it would have to tunnel, presumably.  And at Fresno I see absolutely no way to avoid UP ROW, however you do it (probably aerial).

It&#039;s going to be A-3.  If they can make it faster than the ramrod-straight A-2 (which seems bizarre to me, but that&#039;s what they&#039;re saying) they&#039;ll have to choose it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As noted above there are some nasty multiple-reverse-curve deviations in SR-99.  At Madera, the HSR could fly up on an aerial to keep going straight, I suppose.  At the Chowchilla Airport, it would have to tunnel, presumably.  And at Fresno I see absolutely no way to avoid UP ROW, however you do it (probably aerial).</p>
<p>It&#8217;s going to be A-3.  If they can make it faster than the ramrod-straight A-2 (which seems bizarre to me, but that&#8217;s what they&#8217;re saying) they&#8217;ll have to choose it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathanael</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71960</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathanael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:18:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71960</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s pretty good and parallels the ROW *most* of the way but SR-99 has deviations in Madera and at the Chinchilla Airport where the UP ROW would have to be followed.  (The deviation in the north of Fresno is near existing curves and multiple routes could be considered.)  Then of course downtown Fresno is incredibly problematic and I can see absolutely no way of doing it without, at the very least, aerials over UP.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s pretty good and parallels the ROW *most* of the way but SR-99 has deviations in Madera and at the Chinchilla Airport where the UP ROW would have to be followed.  (The deviation in the north of Fresno is near existing curves and multiple routes could be considered.)  Then of course downtown Fresno is incredibly problematic and I can see absolutely no way of doing it without, at the very least, aerials over UP.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathanael</title>
		<link>http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/03/buena-parks-hsr-concerns/comment-page-1/#comment-71959</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathanael</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 18:13:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cahsrblog.com/?p=2933#comment-71959</guid>
		<description>There will be farm (local access) underpasses.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There will be farm (local access) underpasses.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

