Saturday Open Thread
I’m in LA for the California Democratic Party convention, but will shortly be heading over to Union Station for the NARP/RailPAC meeting on “Steel Wheels in California.” Blogging will be light this weekend, so have at it in the comments!
now sit down watch this and feel the joy!
Adam Clark Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
very beautiful! Favorited!
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 4:45 pm
Ah yes, a very beautiful neglect of any technical considerations…
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 12:30 pm
Besides the actively fraudulent way in which they pretend that this is a Caltrain extension to their Big Bus Stop in the Sky, where the reality is appallingly bad, infrequent, slow service — at best! –, and where the majority of Caltrain runs are not even allowed to run on the “Caltrain” downtown extension at all ….
… beyond that, this dissimulation of the train dungeon level systematically misleadingly and fraudulently shows a competently configured escalator and stair configuration (multiple parallel channels, flanking centrally placed structural columns, just like you’d find in in a professionally designed and engineering passenger facility), rather than the actual, catastrophically inept TJPA scheme in which massive circular section columns are placed to obstruct platform circulation and viewlines and in which there is only space for a single stair or escalator — meaning slowness and pedestrian conflicts getting on and off the platforms, meaning longer dwell times, meaning less capacity, meaning bye bye Caltrain, enjoy Fourth and Townsend.
Compare the fictional and deliberately misleading promotional video
with what any minimally-competent real engineer or real architect working on a passenger facility would come up with.
(Notice anything else? Where’s are all the vitally necessary full plate mezzanines hiding? Surely everybody wants to go shopping underground in San Francisco much more than they want to get on and off the trains and in and our of the station, right? Geez, what’s wrong with those Spaniards and Germans and British and Italians and French and Austrians and Norwegians anyway? They need to get some lessons from the TJPA!)
In short: <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5WJAu3G0wU"Mission Accomplished! You’ve done a heckuva job, World’s Best Transportation Engineers. Have $10 billion, on us! It’s the least we can do to recognize your heroic efforts.
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 12:47 pm
SO we can assume you’ll forgo hsr travel and continue to fly? You know, since it isn’t going to work anyway.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 12:59 pm
The glorious radiance of the Transbay terminal will be tempting but since he doesn’t live in San Francisco he’ll probably be using a station that’s closer. No point in going north to go south when he can just get on a train that’s going south at a station that’s closer.
Marc Brandt Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 2:50 pm
Richard, In your opinion… Do you think if we had a merger of transit entities that we might find better design choices being made, i.e. more in line with the EU countries you mentioned. Or is there another better answer?
Andrew Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
The only thing that would satisfy him is if everyone who had even the slightest measure of decision-making power in the American transportation world simultaneously shot him or herself in the face.
Alon Levy Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 5:28 pm
Surely there’s an ex-VP there who’s willing to help.
Joey Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
I wouldn’t call it fraudulent or malevolent so much as just plain incompetent. These people aren’t trying to make bad decisions, they are just incapable of making good ones…
Peter Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 7:53 pm
As I’ve said many times, it’s a lot more tempting to accuse people of being corrupt than to accept that they are simply human and make mistakes.
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 11:48 pm
true peter… they can’t be both incompetent and corrupt. corruption takes some skill and competence. The reality is the same as it is in every aspect of american life, there is no all or nothing, and no perfect answer. everything in america is relative, and subject to the whim of the people, the politicians, and the finances of the day. The whole american system is one of scrambling to do what can be done while pleasing some people at the perceived expense of others, and doing that with limited resources, every changing parameters, and the constant whining of an increasingly fussy and insatiable constituency.
to complain about the lighting in the not even yet built tbt, in the context of getting a project, 30 years in the making, finally off the ground, is like someone giving you a house in Sea Cliff and then complaining you like the one next door better.
AKA being spoiled.
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 11:53 pm
In the end the average californian isnt going to notice any of the details of the project that are hashed out here day in and day out. The average californians concern will be as follows… “where’s the train, when does it leave, how much does it cost, is there a discount, is there parking?”
give em a discount and parking place and they’ll be on their merry way. dim platform lighting be damned. I promise you that.
Spokker Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:03 am
You work for Amtrak.
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:29 am
yes and?
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:32 am
45 years in california and 30 of those in customer service, Im pretty sure I know californians. Unless there is some separate hidden population of californians on reserve, being kept in cold storage somewhere until hsr opens up.
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:34 am
omg that’s it!… and I know where they are being kept… in a tunnel deep in the OC under Laguna Hills.
Spokker Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:37 am
Yeah, and they don’t ride Amtrak!
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:53 am
so the nimbys were right, this is being built as an expensive toy for the elite?
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:58 am
and not expecting to serve any of these folks? you know better than that now. come on. Although some will be upset if they can’t check that 16 ounce hand bag to fresno in checked baggage….
AndyDuncan Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 5:27 pm
Is there another video for the majority of people who will be getting off Caltrain and HSR at 4th and King?
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 5:31 pm
The majority won’t … unless they are forced to.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:00 pm
I think we can dispense with the hand wringing. I doubt the doomsday scenario some imagine will actually materialize.
AndyDuncan Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:15 pm
What hand wringing? Unless you’re going to dig out some more tracks for caltrain, most caltrain passengers will be stuck at 4th and King. There’s no need for that to materialize, it’s in the TJPA’s own documents. They can keep posting videos about how the law mandates the trains go to TTC, but they won’t if they can’t fit, and even under a generous interpretation of the TTCs layout, two 200m platform tracks isn’t enough for caltrain.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
well, yes two tracks are enough since i think the plan is to use emus. which aren’t very long and will most likely be bi level. They can easily have up to four at any given time at the platform, and they can do just what muni does at embarcadero where trains arrive and depart every two or three minutes or less at peak hour, using one platform, two tracks, and tail/switchback track.
… assuming caltrain is still in business that is ;-(
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:31 pm
200m platforms can barely fit eight-car trains. They’re too short to hold two trains each (given that you have to have some amount of space between the trains). And who says EMUs aren’t very long (especially bi-level EMUs)?
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
id say that if they plan to use emus, they wont be more then 3-4 cars each if they are going to run that frequently. so you can fit 2 four car trains one behind the other. besides, they can pull up to the tail as soon as they off board pax. By the time another train arrives 5 minutes later, the first emu will be on the opposite platform.
I don’t see a problem. And I think there is waaaaaay over kill on the projections of numbers of trains, headways, people anyway. The need for that many arriving and departing catrains and hsrs is just not going to materialize…. at least not for decades.
Itll be fine. don’t worry.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
oh, i just noticed something in that video. it actually indicates that there will be a loop around back to 4th. Looks like they plan to use the station until it reaches capacity then continue the tracks back around. its here at 2:58 so there’s the solution. which was the obvious solution all along.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
The video is rather old, and the “future loop” is not compatible with the latest planning documents we’ve seen.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
And how good a chance is there going to be of digging nice holes next to the 100 story building they are going to put on what are now parking lots?
HSRComingSoon Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Amazing to think that the future loop tracks are remarkably similar to the design as what would’ve been used for the Beale St. alternative station (which in my opinion was a better HSR/Caltrain station). The main exception of course is that the tracks would travel under main street but still run into problems traveling between two piers for the Bay Bridge and a water pumping station for SFFD. Please tell me I’m not the only one who thinks this is just a little ironic…
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 10:46 pm
Meh, just dig straight out until you reach the Bay and then hang a right with a submersed tube to loop back around and hook up with the DTX.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 12:49 am
The problem with going to Oakland is on land, if they could get to the waterfront they might as well go all the way to Oakland and then be able to go to Sacramento or Santa Rosa or … nevermind not enough pedestrian space in Transbay to do that…
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 9:50 am
well its not my choice! I think my point is that there is no point in fretting over the design cuz they ain’t gonna change it. So accept it, be glad we are getting anything at all after 30 years of talk, and just look forward to the ride. Trains-o-plenty will serve the transbay terminal and you won’t be inconvenienced. I’v said all along that 4 departures per hour is more than enough. And it will be. The idea of departures every few minutes has always been ludicrous. There just isn’t going to be that much demand. And I sill maintain that for at least one forth to one third of passengers, 4th and king will be the more convenient choice. This way, we have that choice.
As for spending money in the future. One, we will need those job in the future no doubt and two, we don’t know what other developments will come to pass between now and 2050. What will bart do? what will muni do? In what direction will san francisco and oakland growth take place? A lot can happen between now and then and locking in a long range decision ( concerning tail tracks, a loop, a new transbay crossing, or any other predicted growth based decision) could prove to be just as flawed as waiting to see what other parameters develop.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:22 pm
Well I hate to break it to your “at least not for decades” but what we’re doing now is planning for our future transportation needs … for several decades to come. We need to build the best transportation system possible now, and not have to iron out the kinks/gaping deficiencies later, because doing it then will doubtlessly be more expensive and more disruptive.
By the way, standard EMUs are 85 feet = ~26m. Four car trains, which are also pretty standard for this type of EMU, will therefore be 104m. Given that you have to have at least a little bit of space between the two trains, the 800m platforms are NOT long enough for two trains, not that it would really add any significant amount of capacity to begin with.
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 12:34 am
In case you hadn’t noticed. We don’t build anything “the best” for the future. We build what we can while considering the financial, and political realities of the moment.
Joey Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 7:55 am
Well fine, if you want to spend another $15 billion in 15 years just to fix the stuff we should have done in the first place…
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 10:16 am
4th will serve all these people and the majority of the predicted 200k pop growth in sf will occur in the blue area.
jimsf Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 10:23 am
and, you can see here that as far as 4th, one, its smack in the middle of an established and growing dense residential neighborhood, adjacent to the the ball park and the university, and the freeway ramps drop smack on top of it with ample parking ( none at tbt ). So look on the upside, this is a very useful location. its good that we get two stations.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 11:10 am
Joey, it shouldn’t cost 15 billion to build a big station… in Oakland… there won’t be any place to put in San Francisco so they’ll have to do it someplace else.
Samsonian Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
I think you’re right about that.
Oakland is basically the only place to put a real station, and have an intermodal with BART. West Oakland around 7th Street seems like a good area for it.
Of course, the problem is getting from the Transbay Terminal to there. Given the totally broken design, that’s unlikely to happen. What a sad tale, the Transbay Terminal won’t live up to its name.
jimsf Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 12:01 am
Oakland is basically the only place to put a real station, and have an intermodal with BART except the bart connection at tbt via montgomery st bart and the connection at san jose with bart. so yes, oakland could be a third connection. although unnecessary. and 7th street in west oakland, yes thats where everyone wants to go.
by the way bart is only 1 agency, the tbt will serve somewhere in the neighborhood of 8-10 other agencies as well…….
…..is thing thing on?
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:39 pm
By the way how many trains you can fit in the station in tandem has little to no effect on the turnback capacity. The real question is how quickly you can get the train into the station, unload passengers, load new passengers on, and get back out of the station. The ways to do this are to (a) have more platforms (b) improve the station throat design to allow for parallel paths or (c) create a track loop (which could potentially more than double capacity)
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:59 pm
But they going to have a tail track right? or was that cancelled? its simple really. you have an inbound side of the platform and an outbound side of the platform, trains enter on the first track, drop passengers, proceed empty into the tail/swtichback, the operator walks to the cab at the other end of the emu, then pulls the train back into the platform on the outbound side, opens doors and pax board. that is exactly what they do at embarcadero station, it takes less than 5 minutes for the whole procedure.
as for the approaching three track tunnel, you can use on inbound track for caltrain, and one for inbound hsr trains and use the center track for outbound both trains interlacing them, single file, one behind the other per dispatch. you can send trains south, with headways as close together as you want one after another.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
Appendix H from the SF-SJ draft AA (newest material we have) shows no tail tracks for CalTrain. Not that those help all that much, but they would add a little more capacity and possibly allow for the future creation of a loop. Truth be told, this configuration is in some ways even worse than the previous one we saw from the TJPA (and would probably require the demolition of a high-rise building, where the TJPA had shortened the northernmost track to avoid it).
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:29 pm
now lets say worst case scenario. two tracks, 6 car emus (depicted in video rendering). Fine then. one train arrives on track one. 5 minutes later another train arrives on track 2, opposite side of platform. once the train arrives, the train over on track one departs. 5 minutes later, the other train departs after a third train arrives. That still gives you 5 minute headways. The trick is managing the filing of trains one behind the other in and out and thats what dispatch is for.
This is giving me a headache. Im going to make a banana cream pie now. and eat the whole thing.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:33 pm
That assumes that the trains are spaced evenly, which, with more advanced express timetables, they aren’t.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:37 pm
That assumes that the trains are spaced evenly, which, with more advanced express timetables, they aren’t
well then. clearly we are all doomed. none of this can possibly work and all the trains are boing to wind up in a pile up under a huge cloud of dust. Mayhem will ensue as commuters run screaming from giant 1950s japanese monster movie creatures. People’s hairdos will burst into flames. This my friends, is the true and sinister plan being devised as we speak.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:38 pm
If frequent delays of 10 minutes or more create those things, then yes, we are doomed.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:44 pm
but what Ive always heard around here is that only the olde tyme amtrak steam trains are subject to delays. The new superior all electric ATC/PTC foreign made zippity do da trains are quite flawless. LEast that’s what I hear tell. which is it?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
Mayhem will ensue as commuters run screaming from giant 1950s japanese monster movie creatures. People’s hairdos will burst into flames. This my friends, is the true and sinister plan being devised as we speak.
But it won’t be a problem in the East Bay or Marin or Sonoma or Sacramento or Chicago or Seatlle because trains from those places won’t be able to go to San Francisco. They can all watch from Oakland.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Jim: Newer signaling and trains will result in fewer mainline delays, but no amount of that will allow you to put two trains in the same place at once (for instance, a train entering and a train exiting the station at the same time through a single track).
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:54 pm
Joey, we’ve explained to him before that the only way his plan works if Transbay is equipped with a 6 dimensional time-space warp drive allowing two trains to be on the same track at the same time…..
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
By the way, the three track tunnel isn’t the main capacity constraint of the throat. CalTrain can use any of those tracks for most of the length of the tunnel. The real constraint is the single track section right before the curve (as that track is the only one with access to the CalTrain platforms).
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:05 pm
Didn’t they add an extra “emergency” turnout for Caltrain? As in, in the last curve?
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
Sorry, I meant crossover, not turnout.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
Yeah, but the “emergency” part makes me think we’re still going to be looking at a lot of delays.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:06 pm
But they aren’t doing that. It seems that they got together and figured out how to build the slowest station they could and then made it worse. After they were done they threw in some extra geegaws to make sure it was truly expensive.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
how do you know what they are going to do? no doubt they have their own ideas which they aren’t going to share with any of us, as far as actual operations, anyway. and one man’s geegaw is another mans neighborhood improvement.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
Jim: Appendix H shows no tail tracks in any configuration.
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:30 pm
joey, but the video cleary depicts “future loop extension”
jimsf Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:33 pm
and the video was posted feb 2010, and also currently on the updated tjpa site.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
There’s preliminary engineering drawings which is how I know what they are going to do.
The third track isn’t going to improve any neighborhood. All it’s doing is increasing costs by 50% because ten years ago there was vote and the people of San Francisco screwed themselves especially well.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:34 pm
Without technical documents to back it up, what ends up in a video is immaterial.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
(this is from experience, having watched the CHSRA’s videos)
I attended the NARP/RailPAC meeting this morning…. and stayed through the lunch break. It was mostly attended by advocates, some vendors (including Talgo & Siemens), at least 2 elected officials, and some government employees.
Wish I could say more…. much of the talk was from advocates and about HSR. And, most of that was about the Union Station to Anaheim segment, but nothing detailed. Opinons were expressed concerning shared alignment or doing it right the first time.
Different opinions by speakers were expressed about where the first $1 billion for HSR should be spent. Two ideas were forwarded…. 1) design and constructing the Union Station run-through tracks and 2) implementing the Union Station to Bakersfield segment.
I felt that many speaker/advocates miss one crucial point… AB 3034 and Prop 1A – Shared track is not consistent with those. And, imo, advocating such should go hand-in-hand with proposal for a ballot initiative to change that. And there wasn’t.
I give props to Daniel Krause, who I believe is on this blog site from time to time. He forwarded the idea that HSR should be constructed right the first time. I believe he was also the one to raise the question concerning Metrolink using Union Station run-through tracks – ones that HSR would use.
Another fellow, Bob Huddy (spelling), and who I believe may now be a retired project manager for the Caltrans Department of Rail, spoke to the capacity enhancing ability of the originally design run-through tracks for Metrolink/Amtrak from circa 2001-2003. He said that they would triple to quadruple capacity at Union Station, and as it is now, the station is at capacity. Also said that if LA wants to see more use of Union station, that that cannot happen without expansion.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
Sorry I missed meeting you, Brandon! I was there from about 9:30 to 12:30. Dan Krause is indeed a commenter on this blog and is Vice-Chair of Californians For High Speed Rail. His presentation came out of a series of conversations our organizations has had about how to approach the LA-Anaheim corridor, where we’ve emphasized the need to do HSR right the first time, while being flexible about what that means, within clearly defined guidelines.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
I thought I saw you while walking out for the break for lunch. Sorry I missed meeting you… I felt had to leave… that meeting was not doing it for me and I was starving for something more than a box lunch. We’ll need to meet some time. I am glad I can toss $40 away like that.
Almost forgot….
DesertExpress was there too. I enjoyed the summary because I heard info that was either new to me, or had not stuck to the inside of my skull. Points expressed that I want to repeat:
– Maglev proposal is 40 miles and stops in Primm and has no EIS or funding and the new Desert train is an exursion train – Neither is advanced or compares to DesertExpress.
– DesertExpress is almost complete environmentally, and is entertaining 2-3 different funding arrangements.
– California recently changed the project description of their HSR program to bridge the distance between Victorville and Palmdale (that should be verified).
– The El Cajon Pass is passable via train, spoke to frieght right now (whether it’s HSR-able is a different discussion).
– DesertExpress would have 20 minute headways.
– Las Vegas terminal would be at Flamingo & I-15 and be a multimodal transportation hub, including monorail connection (should be verified).
– 39 million person trips from Southern California are made each year, 90% drive, and DesertExpress expects a 25% mode share switch. A ridership peer review was conducted by Cambridge and found to be within a 10% of margin. (My general math thus indicates about 9 million riders a year, or 25k to 30k per day, or 16k to 20k per day per peak direction. Assuming 20 minute service 24 hours a day, peak demand would have approximately up to 300-400 persons per train – likely westbound trips on Sunday afternoon/evenings???).
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 4:39 pm
Monorail does go right past the Flamingo Hotel in LV.
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Which is on the other side of the Strip…
Joey Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
That’s right behind the Bellagio. Doesn’t the DX have some connection with the owner of the Bellagio…?
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
I was very, very, very impressed with their presentation. DesertXpress is a serious project that deserves our support.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 11:33 pm
I enjoyed the presentation, but it was a bit salesman type. I am glad he is positive concerning funding opportunities.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 1:03 am
I didn’t get that at all…I saw it as a fairly detailed look at the concept, with a lot of time spent justifying the choice of a Victorville terminus (which is something I’ve always believed is a legitimate and logical choice).
The big question everyone I talked to had about the DesertXpress presentation was indeed about where they’re getting their funding. But this is clearly a solid project, they’ve done their homework.
Brandon from San Diego Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 1:23 am
Agreed. Funding was the only questionable part for me… and the only part where I wondered if the audience was getting snowballed/sold on something. I wish them success.
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 11:17 pm
There’s been talk of jurisdictions getting federal loans to help jump-start transit projects as a sort of “second stimulus” plan. Apparently the idea was pitched by Villaraigosa to no avail for a while and then suddenly it’s gained some currency in D.C.
It’s clear that even if the feds underwrote construction, the funding for operations would come from venture capitalists or investment banks etc… interested in a ….revenue guarantee. The way this would work…nominally is that Goldman or similiar entity would write bonds for Desert Express and someone would buy them. Then as service waxed or waned… the bonds would grow or decline in value. To which you say, nonsense this is junk….but alas this is how “derviatives” work…they are just option or future contracts on things which you can’t use.
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:33 pm
Did anyone say who might fund this project? Goldman Sachs? Although I fully anticipate DX to have an intermodal station with the monorail, I’d be shocked if it was at I-15 and Glamingo.
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:40 pm
Well, according to the draft EIS on the FRA’s website, the DX terminal will be right at S Main St & Bonneville Ave, Las Vegas, NV 89101. That’s nowhere near the monorail.
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/rrdev/Appendix_A-1_Plan_and_Profile_Drawings_Segment_7.pdf
Peter Reply:
April 17th, 2010 at 10:04 pm
I stand corrected. They have two station designs for near the strip at Flamingo Rd.
May I have your attention please. At this time it has been determined that we are all doomed to perish in a fiery mish mash of assorted electric rail vehicles somewhere under 2nd street. Please discontinue blogging and exit the web single file. Thank you for your cooperation.
All should check out the great site Fresno has put up for HSR……fresnoworks.org.
datacruncher Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 7:26 pm
I saw that the other day. Fresno’s EOI for the HMF is linked at the bottom right corner of the that website.
HSRComingSoon Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 7:51 pm
The website is well done. Their proposal seems pretty legit too. I wonder how Merced will respond to what Fresno has produced.
YesonHSR Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 8:21 pm
Yes quite a different mindset than some towns 2O miles south of SanFrancisco
HSRComingSoon Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 9:06 pm
It’s nice to see some communities actively seeking to start building, unlike my home town, Burlingame, and the rest of the PCC members who will only support HSR if it is “done right”, a.k.a not built here.
datacruncher Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 8:56 pm
At Curt Pringle’s Fresno visit on Thursday it was stated that Fresno’s proposal for the heavy maintenance facility site now has letters of support from the mayors of Los Angeles, Sacramento, Long Beach and Santa Ana. Fresno seems to be playing more statewide politics than Merced right now.
http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/04/15/v-print/1898174/fresno-woos-high-speed-rail-official.html
Spokker Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
Haha, they want to create a high speed rail university. That’s where I want to graduate from.
Risenmessiah Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
Don’t laugh, human capital is big of an asset as anything else in the modern, post-industrial economy.
Spokker Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 11:14 pm
I have a bachelor’s degree from In N Out University.
For those that are interested – on Thursday in Sacramento they held a budget and fiscal review meeting on HSR. The outcome – they’ve withheld money until they provide more information. R. Diridon and Carrie Pourvahidi (interim Exec Director) were there representing the Authority.
Part 1 isn’t HSR
Part 2: https://www.calchannel.com/channel/viewvideo/1263
They discussed all sorts of things, including Ridership, the Peninsula corridor, outreach, etc.
Joey Reply:
April 18th, 2010 at 8:12 pm
What type of money exactly have they withheld? Money to build? Money for further studies? Or CHSRA’s budget request?
Nadia Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Here’s the agenda that shows what the money was for:
http://www.senate.ca.gov/ftp/SEN/COMMITTEE/STANDING/BFR/_home/Sub2/41510Sub2Transweb.pdf
starts on pg 20
Peter Reply:
April 20th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
So, essentially, they placed the entire budget on hold.
Anyone know when the Central Valley Test Track is supposed to start construction?
As recent news has shown, another benefit of HSR: You have an alternative when airplanes are grounded due to volcanoes. Imagine how much worse off the traveling public would have been without Europe’s extensive HSR. Though I don’t think it’s a realistic selling point for CHSR. :-)
Peter Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 3:17 pm
Until Mount Saint Helens blows its top again.
Andrew Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
There are more than a few volcanoes on the west coast.
The glorious radiance of the Transbay terminal will be tempting but since he doesn’t live in San Francisco he’ll probably be using a station that’s closer. No point in going north to go south when he can just get on a train that’s going south at a station that’s closer.
Peter and Andrew – True. But HSR deniers would probably roll their eyes if pro-HSR folks used it as an argument today. Now if we could just get a volcano to disrupt air traffic here….
Peter Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
Well, it already has disrupted air traffic here. I heard yesterday that 1/4 of the passengers domestically are based on passengers traveling to and from Europe.
Peter Reply:
April 19th, 2010 at 5:11 pm
The way we roll our eyes at the noise and vibration arguments?