Mixing High Schools and High Speed Trains
Back in 1989, after Orange County voters had approved Measure M the previous year (a sales tax increase to fund freeway expansion), my high school began to lose its front lawn to a freeway.
Interstate 5 was the target of the widening, and Tustin High School was in the way. Most of the front lawn was taken so that El Camino Real could be moved to accommodate the six new lanes on the freeway. The town’s batting cages were taken as well, and though I still remember the “Save the Cages” petitions at the site when my little league team went there, they obviously didn’t succeed.
20 years later, you’d be hard pressed to find anyone living in Tustin or attending THS who wishes the freeway hadn’t been widened, or who thinks it turned out for the worse. Overall it hasn’t led to any unsafe situations (a good friend of mine died on the freeway right across from the school in the late 1990s, but it was an accident that could have happened anywhere, and had nothing to do with the widening project). I used to walk with friends under the overpass at Red Hill Avenue or Newport Boulevard to the local pizza place, or to one of their houses to plug a phone line between computers and have long afternoons of multiplayer Doom. I never felt unsafe, and to my knowledge the thousands of students who have followed after me haven’t either.
While it’s not ideal to locate a high school next to a major freeway (and the school district has often talked about moving the school somewhere else), it has worked out pretty well over the years.
One can’t say the same about high schools located near the active railroad corridor on the Peninsula. As many are aware, Palo Alto has seen a spate of suicides near Gunn High School. An at-grade heavy railroad in the middle of a densely populated urban area such as Palo Alto or San Mateo is just not a safe situation.
An elevated, above-grade solution for the corridor, to carry both bullet trains and Caltrains, would make a lot of sense for the schools adjacent to or near the tracks. It’s definitely worth sacrificing a front lawn. So it is a bit bizarre to read these concerns about Burlingame High School and HSR:
The proposed high-speed rail project through the Peninsula could pose serious vibration, noise, safety and other concerns for Burlingame High School, local education leaders said.
“The way I see it is the rail corridor essentially goes through the front yard of Burlingame High School,” Dave Pine, board president for the San Mateo Union High School District, said earlier this week. “If the (high-speed rail project is) above ground, it’ll have a significant impact.”
Really? More significant than an at-grade railroad?
With the front of Burlingame High about 400 feet away from the tracks, Pine said that “any kind of above-ground approach would have a substantial impact on the campus” without adequate mitigation measures.
Noise from the high-speed trains, for example, could require “extra insulation” for the school, he said. Campus buildings may also need additional reinforcement for the trains’ vibration.
San Mateo Union leaders also want to know how the project and its construction could displace the way students go to and from school, “especially those who walk and bike,” district Superintendent Scott Laurence said.
“We’ll have to do a quick polling on how students get to school, identify who walks and bikes “… and figure out what would be the impacts to school routes,” Laurence said.
The trains will likely be much quieter than the existing Caltrain locomotives, and at a distance of 400 feet from the tracks it doesn’t seem too likely that vibration will be a major issue, especially if the tracks are elevated. Student transportation to and from campus can easily be accommodated, and school officials and parents would likely welcome a rail corridor that is much more difficult for teenagers to access.
District officials did identify one legitimate issue:
The possibility that the project could dig up arsenic along the tracks is another major concern for the district, Pine said.
Burlingame High has already gone through an expensive effort to remove arsenic and other contaminants found on the property.
District leaders believe the arsenic could have come from weed killer sprayed along the tracks years ago, Pine said. They are wary that the construction of the high-speed rail could stir up that contaminant.
“Substantial precautions have to be taken so there’s no hazard to our students,” he said.
That is a reasonable concern, one that can and should be addressed. But it’s no reason to be worried about or opposed to HSR along the corridor.
The article mentioned that the 35 other schools near the rail corridor will have to determine what impacts HSR will have on their operations. But these shouldn’t be seen as “problems” but instead are very real benefits. As San Carlos councilmember Omar Ahmad explained at the Palo Alto state Senate hearing in January, San Carlos has seen its rail corridor become extremely safe since the grade separation was constructed.
You’d think that parents and neighbors up and down the Peninsula rail corridor would leap at the chance to separate the tracks from their children. And in fact, many of them are doing just that, even though their voices have so far been drowned out by their NIMBY neighbors.
Every school district along the route will have to make accommodations for HSR. That’s a necessary and valuable process. It’s also one that should be embraced as an opportunity to create a safer environment for children, instead of something to be feared out of concern for one’s own property values.
Robert– I went to high school at Corona del Mar HS, which is directly under the flight path of Santa Ana/John Wayne. Although some people complain very vocally about the noise from this airport, it is a necessary part of Southern California’s infrastructure that helps to spread the supply of flights across the region rather than just at LAX. Arguably, noise from jet engines is louder (perhaps much louder) than that from high speed rail, yet Corona del Mar high school consistently ranks near the top in Orange County in academic performance.
wu ming Reply:
March 21st, 2010 at 7:43 pm
jets are way louder than HSR. we had to stop class all the time in tacoma while military planes flew overhead on their way to land at ft. mcchord. by comparison, i was able to carry on a conversation with my mom on the platform as a taiwan HSR train whizzed by.
Victor Reply:
March 21st, 2010 at 8:57 pm
I agree Jets are Loud, Electric Locomotives are a heck of a lot quieter, As electric motors are not all that noisy, Some have said electric cars as an example are too quiet, So I doubt HSR being electric will be noisy, As most equate trains with noise cause of freight trains use of diesel locomotives and switching of freight cars, Caltrain I’ve never seen or ridden on, So I can’t comment on that, But I have seen the rail lines such as the Gold line and the Red line and they use Electric power and I could not hear them.
wu ming Reply:
March 21st, 2010 at 9:40 pm
as a dumbass n00b out of town driver, i came very close to getting pasted by caltrain a couple of years ago, so i’m definitely in favor of grade separations for that reason alone. it will be way quieter, the objection on noise has always baffled me.
ks Reply:
March 21st, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Electronic motors may be quiet, but I believe the main concern is aerodynamic noise, right?
Matthew Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 9:49 pm
I lived in Germany for a few years, and the Siemens ICE trains are pretty damn aerodynamic. On the whole it’s very quiet. Also, the trains are much more lightweight than freight trains, so vibration is almost nonexistent. No rumbling, no ringing bells, no honking horns, no wheel squeal, no whistling. A short wooden wall is sufficient to block pressure waves from disturbing nearby houses (see pictures below for examples). In the second picture, a much higher wall was built to insulate sound and pollution from both the train line and the freeway. Unfortunately, I couldn’t find one where the trains pass through a very nice upscale neighborhood of Frankfurt.
http://www.nationalcorridors.org/df2/df11122007c.jpg
http://www.railpictures.net/images/d1/1/9/8/4198.1208612910.jpg
Robert, I think you are missing the point of Dave Pine’s message. He is not saying grade separation isn’t a good thing. He gets that it is. We all do. He is, however, realistic about the impacts of doubling the system in front of his schools, something I do not believe you are. He is saying putting HSR below grade is a better solution for providing a proper learning and teaching environment for students than an elevated structure, especially as far as noise is concerned. I’m surprised you wouldn’t want what is best for students. You are wrong about the electric trains being quieter. The whole point is that trains will be allowed to run faster than they do now and there will be more than twice as many. Any savings in sound level do to the switch in power type will be more than offset by the higher sound frequency (at same dB levels, higher frequency sound of electric is perceived by the human ear as louder), train frequency (cummulative noise) and sound due to increased speed (pressure wave). Admittedly, the vibration due to operation is less of a concern, but the main building at BHS is old and the vibration due to driving piles during construction for upright supports for an elevated structure can do serious damage (that’s what heppened to surrounding buildings when BART was built, although in many cases they denied it), plus that sound is very distracting to people trying to study. There are other older buildings in Burlingame, such as the Candy Store or the car dealerships, that will be even more susceptable. If shoofly tracks are placed along Carolan (the enrance to BHS), traffic and parking are going to be a big problem for students. I’m glad to see you at least acknowledge the arsenic dust could be a problem. At least you care a little.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:26 pm
You miss the point of my post.
I attended high school for four years next to an elevated freeway – Interstate 5, 12 lanes wide. It caused NO problems for ANY of us in terms of our learning environment.
Vibration issues can and are being studied. Those ought to be addressed.
But there is nothing in your comment to justify the claims that an elevated structure will hurt students or their learning. You are using the students as a hook to force the rest of the state to fund your desired tunnel so your aesthetic values are satisfied. Let’s at least be honest that’s what this is all about.
Robert, why don’t you mention tunneling as the preferred design? This would no doubt be the best protection against noise and disruption for the residents, the schools and the cities? CEQA does not require the cheapest construction method if it significantly reduces impacts.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:28 pm
How will you pay for a tunnel?
High speed rail is necessary. It’s worth spending the money to build it. But we do not have an inexhaustible source of funds.
An elevated solution will work just fine for the Peninsula. It will lower the noise experienced on the corridor – I am stunned that you guys think it will somehow be louder. It will be much less disruptive, since the existing rail corridor will be made more permeable.
If that’s not good enough for you, OK. It is then your responsibility to find the funds to match the cost difference between an elevated solution and a tunnel. If you can do it, I’ll turn the first shovelful of dirt myself.
I don’t want to call this issue a red herring, but in the case of Burlingame High School (BHS), I think many of the concerns are over done. Specifically, when it comes to safety, if the tracks are grade separated and made even more difficult to walk on, then the issue of student safety is a moot point. The biggest problem are kids ignoring the warning signs about stepping onto the tracks when the trains are coming. Sadly, this has been demonstrated by many kids, most recently at Gunn. But does this make HSR unsafe? No. Similarly, BHS is already “disrupted” by the sound of horns a couple times an hour which, when the tracks in Burlingame are separated, then good bye horn and not to mention, electric trains are quieter. The vibration issue is a red herring. Also, many students take the train to high school up and down the peninsula, I know because I did when I went to school in Atherton and it was very convenient, which shows that high schoolers can handle being around trains.
Swing hanger Reply:
March 21st, 2010 at 9:50 pm
Totally agree about HS students being able to use trains- it’s also inherently safer than driving. In Japan, trains rather than school buses (h.s. students are prohibited from driving here) are the main means of long distance school commuting. In the bigger cities, even elementary school children use them to get to school (no “soccer mom” chauffeuring in SUVs) All the brouhaha over HSR passing near schools and “endangering” the children really serves to illustrate how backward some things are in the U.S.
Matthew Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 10:01 pm
Take the MBTA green line through Brookline, Massachusetts, and see how many children of wealthy middle class families take the train to and from school. The students carry backpacks with built in wheels and handle so that their backs aren’t injured from the weight of their books; their parents clearly care about their health and safety very much. This is a line that runs at grade through the middle of the street. Not quite high speed rail, but you don’t have to leave the US to find common sense. If you create an aesthetically pleasing environment that allows safe and convenient transportation without a car, you’re really showing children that you respect them and their personal mobility. That is one of the most important lessons you can teach.
One of the best high schools is right here..next to 140 year old main line tracks CHI-NY-NJ..PRR /Conrail
NS…www.massillonproud.com/fans/stadium.htm these people wpould beat the shit out of palo alto or any SF Cali team
Evan Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:45 am
Hey there, we won state in basketball like 3-4 years ago at Palo Alto, so watch it!
Again, None of you seem to get it that no one is disagreeing with you on the grade separation. It is safer. It is safer. It is safer. So stop bringing that up. Where we do seem to disagree is how grade separation should be achieved. Burlingame originally wanted a tunnel. They’ve since softened their approach and would now consider a cut-and-cover arrangement, whereby the entire trench is not covered. This is a realistic compromise. But do you care? It seems not. I wonder how many of you actually have a sense of the shear scale of a four track elevated structure? I encourage you to go stand under a 100′ wide highway overpass (measure it first) and translate that to a quiet small town setting. It’s not a good feeling. Nor is a 100′ wide trench, but at least it disappears as you back away from it. And, it has built in sound walls, something the aerial sructures will need due to the increased sound and sound propagation. There is a 19dB increase from a trench to elevated (FRA study).
YesonHSR, Your school is more than twice as far away from the tracks as BHS. You would have plenty of room for shoofly tracks during construction. Your rail is very similar to ours now, not the 4 track system with trains running every two minutes as proposed. Look it up on Google Earth! I notice your school points out all the wonderful historic elements of your town on its website. I wonder how it would feel if it were in the same shoes as some of the towns and schools along the SF Peninsula which are more densely packed around the tracks than your town? I think I know. Easy for you to comment from where you are sitting. BTW BHS earned a GreatSchools Rating of 8 out of 10. The latest statewide rankings put your school at 628th out of 798, while BHS was 96th out of 834. Sports isn’t everything.
HSRComing Soon, The existing horns, though loud, aren’t anywhere near as continuous or often as the almost constant pulsing whine the “upgraded” high speed system is going to eventually create (if CHSRA ridership projections are correct). If HSR is so quiet, why are the folks in places like Japan and France demanding sound walls after the fact? Because they believed what you believe now, but found out differently after HSR was built.
I don’t understand why the supporters of this blog have such a hard time wanting to build something just a little better than the cheap and dirty? Why can’t you support doing a nice job for all to enjoy, not just the riders? Buy-in is critical if you don’t want delays. Why not work together and let the Obama administration know they need to get serious. An $8B downpayment on a $500B to $1Trillion nationwide system is BS compared to what China is pouring into their system ($44B last year, over $80B this year, $300B total by 2020 plus advantage of cheaper construcion costs). If the White House can’t do any better, then they can’t afford it yet and we’ll all just have to be patient.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:31 pm
I answered your point about the schools above (sorry that I didn’t get to approve your comments sooner – the system automatically holds for moderation all comments from new posters as an anti-spam measure). I am very familiar with the kind of elevated structure you describe, because I went to high school next to one. It worked out just fine.
As to the cost, I’ll give you the same answer I gave Cathy: we do not have a limitless source of funds for HSR. We must be economical. If an elevated structure will meet the operational needs of the system and benefit the community, which in this case it will, and if it does so at a lower cost, then it should be chosen. If localities prefer an underground solution, they should be tasked with finding the funding to make up the difference, exactly as Berkeley did with BART in the 1960s.
HSRComingSoon Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 9:48 pm
Ted, thanks for the comment. When it comes to noise, electric trains are quieter than diesel. This includes when traveling less than 150 mph. The Caltrain corridor speed would be capped at 125. Also, sound barriers are being planned as part of the construction, so again, a relatively moot point. Also, as BHS is about 400 feet or more away from the tracks, vibration can be mitigated to the point that I doubt BHS will damaged, let alone feel the vibrations. Likewise, the school was renovated extensively, so again, I doubt vibrations would damage it. As for the historic Candy Store, I am sure work will be done to protect the collectors cars inside. I know, every gull-wing Mercedes along with the vintage Bugatis, Porsches, etc. must and will be protected. As for the car dealerships along California Drive, the economy will dictate their fate, look at the Putnam dealerships as great examples. Assuming they’re still around, I’m confident they’ll be compensated for the costs of remodeling for insulation, new windows, and vibration mitigation construction techniques.
YesonHSR Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Well thou a famous high school/town I never lived there ..cousins do ,I live here in the BayArea why I mentioned it was to point out that if a high school that nice can live with a loud noisy busy mainline (30) freight train railroad..these high schools can surly be ok with a passenger railroad. Yes its not next door but I have been there to watch football games and you sure can hear the trains. also if you go to that google map you will see the railroad runs right thru town and also right by another high school outside of town,,all seem just fine and would laugh at the fuss made about this project….And funny your went into such depth to even look up school rankings (work for the schools)? Scores might be explained by the fact that this is a Real midwest blue collar town were everyone goes to the same high school..rich or poor..not a well off Bay Area “town” that has mostly white collar parents..BTW how come schools like Burlingame or Paly have schools made out of house trailers and not something like that poor scoring midwest school that puts most JCs here to shame
And hey, if schools want extra insulation for sound and temperature, I’m in favor of that. You don’t need HSR as an excuse.
I went to Palo Alto High School, where the train is sometimes a very large issue for students. Partially, it’s because it does come very close to campus — namely to a group of buildings at the northeast part of the school. However, Paly, for reasons that remains blurry, has had far too many students who have ended their lives on the Caltrain tracks.
One of the two popular ways to get to campus is through the Churchill crossing, where hundreds of students walk and bike to school through. As trains zoom by at 79mph, access to the tracks is at grade level and far too close for comfort for a young student body.
Noise is obviously a concern, but let me make things clear: Nothing can be louder, more unsafe and more inviting to confused teenagers than the current Caltrain tracks. HSR has the potential to fix, or seriously mitigate, these problems, and I hope that the Paly community embraces the project.
Anonymoose Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 4:31 pm
Churchill is also the biggest mess the city could possibly see every morning
I think this sorta shows the problem with any large scale engineering project-NIMBYs/anti-transportation activists/Republicans/libertarians, etc. can latch onto a single technical aspect of implementing the project and create so much FUD and delay that no one wins.
I really fear for the future of massive, large scale public works projects, especially ones involving public transportation.
I’ve always chalked the Paly suicides up to kids having problems with their affluent, highly educated parents’ high standards. Then again, I tend to hate Palo Alto, so go figure.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:36 pm
Precisely.
I think that these difficulties will ease in the coming years. Right now we are stuck in the grip of a social attitude that sees the status quo as inviolable, people who believe that everything is just fine the way it is and that any change is a threat.
We saw that on health care and, despite the flaws of this bill, it did finally pass. Americans saw a choice between change and the status quo and chose change.
NIMBYism is a symptom of class privilege. Such privilege is fading fast.
All of the Paly suicides are traceable to specific mental health problems (e.g., chronic depression) of the individuals involved.
I don’s see how HSR would be noisier or vibrate more than the noisy, lumbering diesel engines of CalTrain. BTW, isn’t less vibration an inherent quality of HSR? Because if it vibrates too much, it’s uncomfortable for the passengers.
I hate to put it so bluntly, but the use of “the schools” as an excuse to not build HSR is just pure bullshit. (Full disclosure: I’m a high school student in Palo Alto who lives ~1000 ft from the E Charleston crossing)
If their arguments are valid about noise (which they aren’t), how can the many dozens of schools above SJC’s flypath over downtown San José possibly continue to function? What about the Superior Court and the many office buildings? And boy, just as a commenter above mentioned about CDM high school, jet engines ain’t quiet.
“Vibration?” Cute. Explain why Paly’s campus is still standing next to many daily 79mph diesel trains.
And access across the tracks? Isn’t that the point of the grade separation in the first place? If anything, it will be safer. Churchill crossing at 7.45 in the morning isn’t for the faint of heart, let’s just say.
And then there’s the topic of suicide….I’m still of the opinion that this isn’t germane to the high speed rail issue. It’s far too complex than could be possibly expressed in an online forum, but still, it’s pretty hard to be concerned about suicide and be opposed to maintaining the status quo.
Politics…….the crap people say to get their way. “The schools” is the new line against the project?
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:31 pm
Exactly. NIMBYs are using you students as cover for their own desires.
Spokker Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:53 pm
How about schools near freeways, air pollution killing students a little bit each day? You live near a freeway, your risk of developing asthma goes up. That results in higher medical bills and days missed from school.
http://www.usc.edu/uscnews/stories/11614.html
This doesn’t seem to register a lot of concern. Noise and visual “blight?” Watch out folks.
You know, many of those that you call NIMBYs are in fact in support of building high speed rail. People like me who live in Burlingame. I would love to see HSR to LA, but through a tunnel going thru my town, just like San Francisco is getting and probably Fullerton.
Why is this attempt to get this built with the least impact on our communities considered NIMBYism? For many of this this is about not taking the cheap way out. For some reason I dont see people on this board complaining about over $2-4B to take the train from 4th and Townsend into the transbay terminal just 5 blocks away. As if that is the center of SF anymore – if you are a tech person it certainly isnt. And they are spending over a billion building a subway that will connect the current train station with the other transit on Market street so that cant be the reason.
So all we are talking about is spending a couple of extra billion to build tunnels down the Peninsula where it goes through residential neighborhoods (a fact that was left out when describing the situation in San Carlos).
Trust me, a couple of extra billion on this project will be a drop in the bucket. Because if you think it will only cost $42B to build the first phase then I have a $1.5 billion dollar Bay Bridge you can drive over – the original estimate of the cost to replace the eastern side of the Bay Bridge. It wasn’t all redesign costs that ballooned the bridge project – it was wishful estimation of costs to get the desired outcome. And I promise, the same thing is going on here. I have many other large infrastructure projects that have suffered the same outcome over the last couple of decades. My guess for HSR Phase I? $100B. So an extra couple of billion for some tunnels through residential hoods doesnt seem too much to ask.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:33 pm
As I said to Ted and Cathy, if you want a tunnel, you find the funding for it.
Your “guess” as to HSR funding is not supported by any actual evidence. Guesses do not count. The money has to come from somewhere; giving you guys a tunnel when an elevated solution will do just fine does not strike me as the fairest or most effective use of taxpayer dollars.
You go tell people in Riverside and Salinas and Fresno and Berkeley and San Diego why their tax dollars should go to build you a tunnel when one is not necessary.
Ted Crocker Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 10:41 pm
An elevated solution will not do just fine for a lot of poeple. That’s the point. There is economic and mental benefit to aesthetics and relative environmental peacefulness. Maybe you all would like to picnic next to a freeway or HSR. I’d rather picnic next to a stream in a mountain meadow. We have different needs, I guess. Sound walls are likely on an elevated structure and there will go the rider view. Sure students can continue to study under less than enviable conditions, but why not give them the best advantages? Not all the cities want a tunnel or trench on the Peninsula either. Clem disproved the rollercoaster argument. You’re thinking short term here as this is a structure that will last for the next 100 years, so the extra money now becomes minor in the long run. There is a better solution. How about we ALL try to get the extra money together so that we all are satisfied? You get your HSR without delay. It’s a win-win. Buy-in is critical. Don’t forget delays cost money, too, and without added benefit.
Here’s a little ditty on noise and its effects. http://bmb.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/68/1/243
PS. Robert, No worries on the delayed moderation thing. Thanks for mentioning it, though.
dejv Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 2:51 pm
Not exactly high speed, but…
Sensible sound walls for speeds up to 200 km/h are either shinkansen style ending below windows or glass walls.
Your article mentions rail on only one page, citing another article of 1975. Window construction have made tremendous progress in last 40 years in terms of noise insulation.
Peter Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Also, the funding for the project has to be found within the next few years. Yes, we may be looking at 100 year life for the structure, but we’re not looking at funding it over that period.
Peter Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 4:26 pm
Any way we could postpone the noise debate until we have some more data? The Authority is supposed to release their noise study of trains in Spain and Taiwan within the next couple of months. Then we’ll have some hard data to argue with, instead of guessing.
Matthew Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 10:16 pm
Those of us who have lived in countries with high speed rail already know that noise is not going to be an issue.
I would like to point out that many on the Peninsula are very supportive of HSR – we just want the impact on our communities to be minimized. That hardly makes us NIBMYs. For many of us we just want to see HSR through tunnels where it goes through residential areas (which makes the comparison with San Carlos invalid since the trains only go through commercial/industrial areas).
And no one is asking San Francisco or Fullerton to pay for their tunnels. No one seems to mind spending $2-4B on a 5 block tunnel to take the trains from 4th and Townsend to the Trans Bay terminal as if that is the center of San Francisco (it is if you are a lawyer or banker). And they have already started spending $1B on a subway to take people from the existing train station to market street to hook up with other mass transit. So it cant be for that reason.
So for many of us, this is all about money only. Whats a couple of billion between friends? Because $42B is truly a low ball figure (remember what the estimates where for the eastern side of the Bay Bridge), a couple of billion will end up a drop in the bucket.
I’ve said this before: I voted for the bond just like many of you. And I’m willing to pay for it, just like you. I just didnt vote for a cheapo solution that will cause huge impacts in our relatively small towns. I’m guessing most of you throwing NIBMYism around dont live that close to the tracks or live in towns centered around Caltrain. I just want to contribute the same as you do.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:34 pm
Even if it is “a drop in the bucket” the source of that “drop” must be accounted for. Money for these projects does not just grow on a tree. It must be found and raised.
If you want a tunnel, you ought to be willing to do the work to find that funding. If you succeed, I’ll be the first one to cheer on your tunnel plans.
Ted Crocker Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 10:43 pm
So if there is not enough money to build what you want, that would be okay, too, right?
Peter Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Well, if there’s not enough money to build a “usable segment”, then the bond money cannot be used toward that segment.
Joey Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:45 pm
Be careful with your desire for tunnels. It might be nice if you’re in the middle, but the portal areas get kinda shafted. Firstly, large staging sites will have to be cleared at both ends, and in the long run, 125MPH might be fast enough to incur tunnel boom (an event which occurs at the portals). Also, I would ask what you really mean by “huge impact.” There will be a definite visual impact (not as bad as many people portray it though), but claims about noise and vibration are questionable (more trains, but they will be quieter), and those who claim it will create a physical barrier are just flat out wrong (grade separation, if anything, will actually increase access from one side of the tracks to the other).
Most of us agree, the Fullerton-Anaheim tunnel is stupid (not that that has been decided yet), but the fact is that there isn’t really a physical way to serve downtown SF without a tunnel. You question the need to do that in the first place, which I will answer with two words: transit connections. You’ve got countless MUNI lines (both buses and the underground light rail), buses to the East Bay, Marin, and a bunch of other places, oh, and the elephant in the room, BART, which will likely be the single most important feeder service in the Bay Area. The central subway, in addition to being poorly designed, lacks the capacity to serve all of the transit connections necessary for HSR. Plus, adding another transfer in there is a sure way to kill ridership.
Oh, and by the way, it might only be a couple of billion for a tunnel through your town, but the peninsula is quite a long corridor, and when you consider all of the people who would take that as a cue to demand tunnels through their towns, that’s major cost escalation. In other words, you can’t give a tunnel to one town without giving it to all other towns.
Jim Wunderlich Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Now I know this has some moderation that is delayed – sorry for the nearly double post. And if you guys use your whole names so can I.
Millbrae is a great BART connection – that is already on the planned route.
And to avoid some of the problems with tunnels I would be ok with trenches.
I spent most of my life in San Francisco and I understand the focus on the City as the center of the universe. But every idea that is thrown out there to save or divert money (like stopping at 4th and Townsend or, gasp, San Jose) is immediately thrown out because it doesn’t fit in the SF mind set.
When I was sold on high speed rail I was (and still am) shown video’s with just two tracks running past freeways without any houses around. Now its becoming clear that it will really be 4 tracks up the Caltrain corridor, and up to 100ft wide. Makes San Carlos berms look wimpy. I have to admit, even the consideration of pylons instead of berms is movement in the right direction.
That’s all I want – to make sure the time is taken to do this as right as possible – including finding funding for what some would consider not completely necessary to reduce some of the impact in some communities.
For a specific recommendation, I would love to see the SJ->SF section done last – that way we will know that HSR is actually going to happen – instead of having a SF->SF segment blighting the Peninsula with nowhere to go. Lets use the first $11B we have on the other lines. Whats the rush on the Peninsula? Its all jobs for Californians either way. Its all progress.
But what I really want is the SJ->SF to be the last link
Matthew Reply:
March 23rd, 2010 at 10:26 pm
San Francisco isn’t the center of the universe, but it’s where the riders of this system want to go, including commuters from the peninsula into San Francisco. If the system doesn’t connect to one of the state’s top destinations and biggest business districts, ridership will fall drastically. Also, I’m a bit tired of peninsula residents saying they live in a small town. It’s in the middle of one of the state’s biggest metro areas.
Spokker Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 8:48 pm
For the record I am asking Anaheim and Fullerton to pay for their tunnels, if they do get tunnels that aren’t otherwise required by the route. I know there’s a trench near Fullerton Airport that’s planned.
I went to an elementary school about 1 mile east of Tustin HS; Heideman Elementary
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
March 22nd, 2010 at 9:35 pm
Yep, I know it well. I used to live on Alliance, which runs perpendicular to Heideman. We moved to Old Town Tustin before I started school, so never did attend Heideman Elementary.
There are also positive things from being able to see the trains go by from the school. It’s no secret kids like trains, and watching them go by every day may just be the inspiration for many a career in engineering.