Norco and Corona Split on HSR
Corona is one of the major crossroads and urban centers of the Inland Empire. Norco – a shortening of the original community name of “North Corona” – is a suburb with an equestrian background that doesn’t quite see itself as the kind of crossroads Corona does.
Unsurprisingly, they don’t seem to agree on high speed rail:
Over the past month, Norco Mayor Malcolm Miller has not been shy about his opposition to the California high-speed rail project at City Council meetings. He has said the project would destroy Norco’s business district if a route through Hamner Avenue is pursued. He fears ridership won’t pay for the estimated $45 billion project and the state will plunge further into debt.
“The more I learn about it, the more I hate the idea,” Miller said, adding that right-of-way issues already plague the project and construction would wreak havoc on the environment….
“I just think the entire concept is not going to be workable for California,” Miller said. “What I’m afraid of is if this doesn’t succeed, if it’s a waste of taxpayer money.”
Miller strikes me as a rather typical example of a Southern California conservative, despite his fascinating background as a black South African who fled Apartheid to become a doctor in Orange County – inherently hostile to big government projects (except freeways) and convinced that any passenger train will be riddled with debt. Miller apparently isn’t familiar with the numerous HSR systems around the world that meet their ridership goals, or with the rising oil prices that have caused such widespread economic damage across the Inland Empire. The chances of it “not succeeding” are minimal at best, and as most people familiar with HSR know, it is a net and significant benefit to the environment, reducing carbon emissions and pollution while fueling the growth of renewable energy.
Thankfully, Corona officials take a more sensible approach – supporting studies for the project:
But Corona Mayor Karen Spiegel says money is already on the table to study preliminary alignments and impacts and cities should take advantage of that. If the time isn’t right, the project can be revisited.
“If we have to shelve it and maybe it’s on the shelf forever,” Spiegel said. “Maybe we’re going to see that it’s going to be too much.”…
But with construction scheduled in segments, and the Los Angeles to San Diego segment not slated to be complete before 2026, Spiegel said cities should take a measured approach and wait to determine the state’s financial situation down the road. If money isn’t there, the project won’t be built.
“All we’re doing now is surveying it. No decisions are being made,” Spiegel said, adding that the rail authority plans to work with cities on right-of-way issues and Norco will have an opportunity to play a part in the decision-making process.
While I might prefer a more full-throated “HSR is awesome, let’s not block it” from Spiegel, what she says is pretty sensible stuff. Now isn’t the time for Norco or anyone else in the Inland Empire corridor to be suggesting the project just be shut down outright. Along with the Central Valley, the Inland Empire is one of the regions of California that has the most desperate need for HSR. Many residents in the Norco-Corona area, as in other parts of the Inland Empire, commute to jobs located in the San Gabriel Valley and downtown LA. HSR will help them get to and from work more easily.
This is especially ironic since Norco has some familiarity with what happens when you delay and block a transportation project. Interstate 15 had a gap for many years between the 60 freeway and the 91 freeway, right through Norco, which was only closed in the late 1980s. That gap’s closure helped fuel population and economic growth in both Norco and Corona. But here in the 21st century, passenger rail is going to serve as the backbone of transportation and growth for California. Norco/Corona would benefit from HSR serving their area with a station at Corona, and the cities ought to find a way to integrate HSR effectively in their community.
Of course, this all might be academic – the CHSRA Program Alignment follows Interstate 215 from Riverside/San Bernardino south to Murrieta and toward San Diego, bypassing Norco and Corona entirely. But the Alternative Alignment does follow Interstate 15 through those two towns, and so it makes sense for both Norco and Corona to consider HSR with an open mind, mindful of how it can benefit them by fueling economic growth and better connecting them to the rest of the state.
Is Norco Mayor Malcolm Miller among the ‘inbetween age’ group? Sounds like it.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 8:00 pm
Confirmed: check details on his own website:
http://www.millernorco.com/cv.html
http://www.millernorco.com/education.html
http://www.millernorco.com/archive.html
http://www.millernorco.com/biography.html
http://www.millernorco.com/vision.html
What stands out is that he is a horseman, and a strong one for them at that!
Now, I have great respect for horse owners. I live in an area with racing breeders, and my own family, on my mother’s side, raised horses for the Polish military as far back as when Poland was a kingdom, with armoured calvary (i.e., mounted knights). My mother was also a great animal lover, and in addition to the usual dogs and cats she brought home as a girl (and for which she was scolded by my grandmother for bringing home another mouth to feed in the Depression), she would also visit a Budweiser Clydesdale exhibition team that was stabled down the street from her house in Wheeling, W.Va., when she was a teenager in the late 1940s. She enjoyed riding in her younger years, and considered horses much more intelligent than dogs, and much more loyal if you treated them right. She could recount stories from Poland, reminiscent of a recent film about a man who whispered to horses, of my great-grandfather and great-great grandfather, who would just talk to the work horses on the farm they had, and as a result get tremendous bursts of strength from them, say to pull a stuck wagon out of the mud of a creek crossing. She said such animals would break their hearts for you.
Having said that, it seems strange to me that when I suggested the option of a light rail line in West Virginia in an area of great growth outside Washington, I was told I was trying to take people’s cars away and bring back the horse and buggy! This was in addition to being called a Communist.
Go figure.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 9:53 pm
According to his bio he’s now either 63 or 64. Seems more like a classic case of “the status quo is just fine, any attempt to change it will produce doom” attitudes that are sadly widespread in California these days.
Roger Christensen Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 12:09 pm
I am a little gunshy about using terms like “typical Southern California conservative”. The anti-raid jihad of the 1990s was led by the Bus Riders Union and Tom Hayden leaving supporters alone in a very narrow middle. I myself am solidly liberal in my conviction. Would you call the people of Palo Alto typical nothern cal conservatives?
wu ming Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 9:13 pm
palo alto – and even moreso, atherton – are typical bay area conservatives. ex-bay area norcal conservatives are quite different, and regionally inflected between sac’s socal transplant exurban antitax reactionaries, central valley farmland conservatives, and the “i’ll piss in my water supply if i damn well want to” libertarian types on the north coast and sierra foothills.
Bianca Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 12:19 pm
The generation discussion reminds me of this:
2) anything that gets invented between then and before you turn thirty is incredibly exciting and creative and with any luck you can make a career out of it;
3) anything that gets invented after you’re thirty is against the natural order of things and the beginning of the end of civilisation as we know it until it’s been around for about ten years when it gradually turns out to be alright really.
My mom has lived in the western part of the City of Riverside for 23 years and I’ve been driving through NORCO from the I-15 since it was built. NORCO is kind of the Inland Empire in distilled conservative anti-urban form.
Corona and Riverside are probably more representative of the way the region feels.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:07 pm
I remember well when the I-15 gap was still there, and thru traffic had to use Hammer Avenue. Some in Norco liked it that way, and others clamored for the gap to be closed, which it eventually was.
Norco is an interesting place, given its equestrian background. Many residents, including the current mayor, see it as a rural island amidst the SoCal sprawl. Which is fine – they don’t seem to realize they can leave Norco pretty much as-is even with HSR traversing the city.
Dennis Lytton Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 11:40 am
You’re comments re: Norco’s demographics/outlook are probably fairer than mine.
Your point is well taken. Look at HSR through Spain and France. If anything, by controling sprawl, implementing smart growth principals (and HSR), you keep places like Norco and genuine rural areas more vital.
Off topic, but the audit alleged that contractors were paid for work without verifying that the work was actually done. Did they ever find out if the contractors actually did the work or not, or is that impossible now?
Also off topic, but what are the specific concerns with community engagement?
It seems that Buena Park got mad that they were told that it was either the Metrolink Station or the condos, but what’s wrong with that? They were being honest about what had to be done to get the line through. I would keep the rail station and bulldoze the clone housing. Critics make a point that the CHSRA should have to know what’s going on with every housing development near the tracks, yet there is no responsibility placed on cities to make sure they don’t build up right next to right of way that may, gosh, someday be expanded.
If the solution to community engagement is to bend over backwards for everybody who wants a tunnel, then the project will not happen at all.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 9:57 pm
You make some excellent points here. CHSRA is facing a “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation. Decades of poor urban planning decisions, including encroachment on the rail ROW, have left the CHSRA in a tough spot. If they’re honest with communities and say “look, to make this work, we need to expand the built corridor” then people get mad, even though that can generally be done with very minimal eminent domain takings (something else I should have called out regarding the PCC list of demands). But if they say “OK, we’ll build a tunnel to make you happy” then the cost soars beyond all reasonable amount.
Nadia Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:54 pm
Are you referring to Senator Simitian talking about Community Engagement at the Auditor’s meeting?
In general, the reason CARRD suggested CSS as a way to allow for community engagement is that it follows an established process which is already used for highway projects. The goal is to balance the transportation needs and the community needs and to help save money in the process. The 8 CSS steps are well outlined here: http://www.peninsularail.com/main/8_Steps_of_CSS/page56.htm
CSS is ideally done early in the process – the idea being that you don’t spend money and time studying non-starters.
The PCC is frustrated because they asked for the process, the PRP agreed and later PRP changed the terms (at the last minute) by saying that each city would be responsible for essentially leading their own CSS efforts. The cities were left to deal with CSS and they are unfunded in this effort- hence Jackie Speier’s letter to Curt Pringle requesting federal money be used to help the communities work with HSR.
And note, under CSS, communities don’t just get what they want – nor does the agency for that matter. The solution lies somewhere in the middle – that’s when you know it has worked. What is now being billed as CSS is NOT CSS at all – the phrase is being misused….
BTW – CSS is not new – it is what is used by the Federal Highway Administration. Jackie Speier wrote in part “…it is also important for the authority to look to the example of the federal highway administration and to use the community input processes that have proven successful in those major projects built in modern times.”
HSRA could learn a lot from the mistakes made by the “decades of poor urban planning decisions” that Robert mentions. CARRD believes that if the FRA were to adopt CSS as a policy nationwide, it could help build HSR throughout out the US by getting citizens involved early in the process to help build support. California is the canary in the coal mine for the problems that come if agencies don’t work directly with the stakeholders in a collaborative process.
Here’s an article by Project for Public Spaces that explains why CSS and HSR are a good idea together:
http://sustainablecitiescollective.com/Home/16522
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 8:17 am
CSS is great and I support its use as widely as possible on this HSR project.
But neither is it necessary to enable the kind of public involvement with this HSR project. Note that Speier’s letter mentions “CSS or other input mechanisms.” If for whatever reason CSS isn’t fully employed, that doesn’t mean public input is shut out. It just means that public input happens in other useful and valuable ways.
It is also clear that many on the Peninsula want CSS because they are convinced it will give them the design they prefer – in many cases, a tunnel. That’s not what CSS is to be used for, and I could empathize with the Authority *if* they felt that CSS merely enables those who are not interested in a genuine collaboration or would not accept a true compromise. To be very clear, I don’t know if the Authority feels that way at all.
More importantly, there is no small hypocrisy in those who lobby the legislature to deny funds to the Authority until they get their way on some issue, and then demand that the Authority pay for local CSS. Of course, Jackie Speier has been entirely consistent here, supporting federal funding for HSR and Authority funding for CSS or some other input mechanism. If people want a regional CSS program, it would be best to instead argue for a robust level of funding of the Authority.
In short, people on the Peninsula need to decide what they’re really after: killing the HSR project or doing it right? If the latter, then it seems wise to abandon all efforts and public statements that undermine the project, because that just makes it more difficult to do it right. And it would help if there were indeed a genuine spirit of collaboration and an openness to all types of implementation of HSR on the Caltrain corridor among Peninsula residents involved in the CSS process, otherwise that process will not succeed.
Cities in any of the planned HSR lines more than knew what was going on ..its not like HSR just popped up in 2007-08. its been 10 years of some kind of meetings all over the state..O course some figured it might never happen and if the get some kind of funding for say that metrolink station and have just a set amout of money they will go for it..even if its not the best over the long term..thats our country!!
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
Many of these cities assumed HSR was vaporware, and didn’t bother to pay close attention to the details or to HSR’s global success. WAY too many California cities appear to have believed that cheap oil would last forever, even though the trend from 2003 to 2008 would seem to have been pretty clear that wasn’t going to happen.
Others, like Palo Alto, were strongly supportive until a small but vocal group of NIMBYs began to make trouble, and suddenly the electeds lost their nerve.
Something else of interest in the generation gap:
http://people-press.org/report/610/socialism-capitalism
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:03 pm
No surprise. Many will claim that younger folks will be less enamored with socialism as they age, but I don’t see any reason that would be the case. We’re in a very different place than we were in the 1970s or 1980s, when previous generations shifted against the left in order to bolster capitalism.
What the numbers indicate is that younger voters don’t really care about “-isms,” they instead care about whether an idea is practical and workable or not. That’s why HSR appeals – it has a long, proven, global track record. It works. California HSR opponents are making a purely ideological argument that flies in the face of the evidence.
There is some slight possibility those opponents might be able to block HSR in the near future. But they can’t block it forever. It’s going to happen. We might as well do it now, when it’s more affordable and more useful to us all.
Spokker Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 11:09 pm
Haha wow, I guess I’m different. When I hear “family values” I head for zee hills!
“I just think the entire concept is not going to be workable for California,” Miller said. “What I’m afraid of is if this doesn’t succeed, if it’s a waste of taxpayer money.”
This is what California sounds like when its lost its confidence. Economic downturns often make people feel conservative and less willing to take perceived risks.
Of course, the Golden Gate Bridge, Hoover Dam and the Bay Bridge were all built in worse economic times than these. People need to be reminded that HSR isn’t risky, its a sensible long term investment in modern infra-structure.
Robert Cruickshank Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 9:50 pm
That’s just an excellent point all around.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tly6NRxgoXY
Joey Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:37 pm
That assumes they run it via I-15 and not 215. I like their enthusiasm though, and the station looks cool…
D. P. Lubic Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
Visually very impressive, and also likely expensive! (And I wish I could do it, too.)
Who paid for it?
Dave Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 11:13 pm
CHSRA has a contract with NC3D until 2012 for visualizations of HSR.
http://www.nc3d.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/NC3D
Joey Reply:
May 17th, 2010 at 11:21 pm
I’m not sure this was NC3D. It looks like it may have been commissioned by the city and not by the Authority. I could be wrong though.
rafael Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 2:03 am
Very nice animation. However, there is one problem: siting the HSR station well south of the I-15/CA-91 interchange precludes the creation of connecting transportation via Metrolink. The existing Metrolink Corona station is located west of the interchange and would need to be closed to create an intermodal, but that might be a price worth paying IFF there is a need or desire to avoid traffic impacts on the freeways.
There are, however, a number of issues that would need to be resolved:
a) the HSR tracks need to clear both levels of the freeway interchange, which already have to clear the BNSF Transcon line at grade. This implies the HSR tracks would have to run either quite high above grade or else underground. Neither is ideal for a station, though it would be doable.
b) the BNSF Transcon line features a curve and small yard in just that location. The Metrolink platforms would have to be just west of Radio Rd, which is about 800ft east of I-15.
c) BNSF and Metrolink would both have to agree to closing the existing Corona station at North Main in favor of a new one at Radio Rd, slightly further from downtown. Someone would have to fund the move. Note that the cost would be peanuts compared to HSR construction.
d) the City of Corona would have to substantially reconsider its development plans, including traffic impacts on E 6th Street and Radio Rd plus connecting bus service into downtown.
MAP
Missiondweller Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 9:37 am
Is that a parking structure combined with the station?
Brilliant and visually less obtrusive than a stand alone structure.
Should probably note that the CA4HSR scoping comments from last fall opposed a Corona alignment, given the fact that there was greater urban density along the I-215 corridor. As Chairman of CA4HSR I continue to stand by those comments. That being said, I do still believe Norco and Corona would stand to benefit from HSR no matter the alignment.
[blockquote]Many residents in the Norco-Corona area, as in other parts of the Inland Empire, commute to jobs located in the San Gabriel Valley and downtown LA. HSR will help them get to and from work more easily.[/blockquote]
That’s wishful thinking. The majority of Corona’s population works over the 91 somewhere in Orange County if traffic patterns are any guide.
The interesting question is what if the alignment was modified so that HSR went south through OC and Anaheim, continued east through Corona and Riverside and then went south to San Diego. That would leave Norco and other communities alone and reduce the number of trains needed.
Off topic, but there is an article on the Anaheim ARTIC station vs the SF TBT. A lot of these facts do not seem correct to me. They state that $400M of the $2.25B is definitely going to the TBT and that they want to siphon more money out of the Prop A bond money for ARTIC. If so this would be a disaster – these buildings should be built using non-HSR money. They should save the HSR money on tracks.
http://voiceofoc.org/oc_north/article_3f19aaf2-614a-11df-be9f-001cc4c002e0.html#user-comment-area
Spokker Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 2:50 am
I can’t imagine why they would build first world stations for a second world nation.
Elizabeth Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 6:52 am
You can read the MOU between Anaheim and the HSRA here – http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20100503141016_Agenda%20Item%204%20-%20HST-OCTA-ANA%20Draft%20MOU%20Attachment.pdf
Southern California not before 2026? I think we can finish the line once the first line opens. I noticed that Californians have a different attitude about High speed rail than most of the country (except the Northeast). I lived in Germany until 2008. We had the same debates, but despite the high population density they made it happen. Guess what, the cities that opposed the ICE now regret it. High speed trains are quieter than regional trains or a highway. Not to mention that they would pass by every 10-30 minutes and unlike highways where vehicles create permanently noise.
In addition to that, you simply cannot afford to miss the atmosphere, business and prestige that comes along with high speed trains and their incredible stations.
“the cities that opposed the ICE now regret it.”
This is also true for France’s TGV, Spains AVE. It will be true also for CA. all because of FEAR of something they don’t understand. Get your HSR main line’s and spur’s now or you will regret it later.
rafael Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 10:55 am
On the other hand, high speed trains can’t stop at every small town. IIRC, construction of the final section of the Madrid-Barcelona line suffered some minor delays because some village(s) tried to hold the planning process hostage in the hope of getting a station.
Dave Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 1:19 pm
Yes, not every city will get a HSR stop even with a HSR line running through it. But consider that once HSR lines are built other shorter service’s can be established within the existing line serving smaller stations at smaller cities using appropriate HSR equipment without interfereing with the main HSR system timetable. Like the Altamont Corridor Project, it’s not meant to be a HSR line with HSR stations but it is proposed to use the same kind of equipment, infrastructure that will allow the usage of HSR to cut across while giving it feeder service (ACE) and serving smaller stations that HSR would otherwise not serve due to the small city size, like Tracy, Livermore, Pleasanton.
If a main line is within reach, perhaps later it will be easier to just create a spur, or extension in future years once people realize how usefull it could be if it reached their towns. By spur I mean a EMU style train service that will connect at a HSR station with transfer points. HSR could keep the 24 station requirments and receive passengers from other corners of the state by smaller systems with more frequent stops, but still using HSR compatible equipment and infrastructure. That’s what I meant.
Peter Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 1:21 pm
Just as long as Los Banos doesn’t get a station…
Dave Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 1:55 pm
Yeah. I think we can draw the line with cities who want a line but don’t have enough residents to merit consideration. That and we don’t want to grow cow towns unecessarily. Only established city’s and above else, common sense.
Peter Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 1:59 pm
No stations for towns where giving them a station would mean the opposite of TOD.
Dave Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 2:19 pm
Yeah, common sense right their.
rafael Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
Politics is the art of the possible. Palmdale will be getting a station, even though TOD in the High Desert is an unlikely prospect – unless the city’s access to water from the California viaduct is strictly constrained. Then and only then would the additional cost of constructing multi-story buildings with self and mutual shading possibly make sense.
Peter Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 4:28 pm
But Palmdale is also going to be the link to DesertXpress. It also has an estimated population of 152,000 (2010), versus 35,000 for Los Banos (2006). I’d say the case is a lot stronger for a station in Palmdale than Los Banos by a long shot. No matter what synonorat may say.
HSRforCali Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 6:06 pm
Palmdale holds a substanial amount of potential to become a suburb of Los Angeles with the coming of high-speed rail. With a 30 minute commute to Downtown LA, I wouldn’t be suprised to see thousands of people move into developments around the future station for the reason of cheaper housing than living in the LA Basin. Also, look at how popular other desert cities have become.
Risenmessiah Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
“TOD” isn’t just nice condos above frou-frou stores…Palmdale is well positioned to become the air hub of Southern California if things go according to plan. You would have the potential for the major airport to be connected to the Port with a high speed, grade separated route….
Spokker Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
““TOD” isn’t just nice condos above frou-frou stores”
That’s what most TOD is and it pisses me off. I want to live above a grocery store. That’s all I need. I want to go down and get my apples, not an apple smoothie from Trendy Smoothie Place #32131.
“With a 30 minute commute to Downtown LA, I wouldn’t be suprised to see thousands of people move into developments around the future station”
Depends on whether the train is set up for commuters. Will the monthly pass be reasonable, or will it even be offered?
rafael Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 1:48 am
@ Peter -
“But Palmdale is also going to be the link to DesertXpress.”
This is only true if CHSRA and DesertXPress fail to agree on technical parameters other than track gauge. The preferred solution by far would be compatible systems and mutual trackage agreements to enable DIRECT trains between LV and LA/Anaheim, LV and SF and ultimately, LV-Sac plus (perhaps) LV-SD as well. Nobody traveling between California’s primary population centers an Lost Wages is remotely interested in having to transfer – baggage in tow – in Palmdale.
The HSR station in Palmdale should be justified on its own merits, not on the very tenuous basis that there might one day be a connector between CAHSR and DX.
@ Risenmessiah -
see our earlier post onThe Palmdale (Airport) HSR Station. In a nutshell, LAWA has given up on PMD in favor of developing ONT.
AndyDuncan Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 9:39 am
It also has an estimated population of 152,000 (2010), versus 35,000 for Los Banos (2006).”
With lancaster and the other towns included it’s over half a million in the high desert with no other rapid transportation options. Some of our trolls on here call that a detour, I call it a “captive market”.
In a nutshell, LAWA has given up on PMD in favor of developing ONT.
Which makes more sense anyway. ONT has enough room for four parallel runways and it’s closer to LA. With code-shared HSR it could even function as San Diego’s international airport.
Peter Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 9:44 am
@ AndyDuncan
Right, I forgot about the towns in the area. And they’re even used to trains, having a Metrolink connection…
dejv Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 10:33 am
@AndyDuncan
There’s a question how many airports will offer international flights after HSR is built and prices of oil continue to rise. Airlines will like big planes with low costs per seat and HSR will allow them to gather enough passengers to fill such aircrafts.
Risenmessiah Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 8:15 pm
Things change.
1. Palmdale will have station years before Ontario does.
2. Palmdale will be accessible from a combination of HSR and Metro Rail, Ontario won’t be.
3. The Alameda Corridor and HSR would create a logistic axis to connect the port to Palmdale
4. Palmdale has space to build a truly world-class facility, Ontario is really more a feeder airport.
Joey Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 8:28 pm
Actually I don’t think the station will be anywhere near PMD. I know older maps say Palmdale Airport, but most of the more detailed material I’ve seen puts the station at the existing Metrolink stop, in downtown Palmdale. I guess they could build a people-mover or something…
anonomouse Reply:
May 20th, 2010 at 5:53 pm
3. The Alameda Corridor and HSR would create a logistic axis to connect the port to Palmdale
If you are shipping something a slow boat to China you don’t air freight it to California. Or if you are shipping something on a slow boat from China it doesn’t arrive and get air freight to Peoria.
Peter Reply:
May 20th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Rising oil prices will price out short-haul flights between HSR-served city pairs, leading to a decreased traffic count. This will enable more long-haul flights to use the current airports. There will be no need for LAWA to use Palmdale as a relief airport.
Travis D Reply:
May 18th, 2010 at 11:34 pm
I’m getting sick of the Los Banos bashing in here. Why on earth is that the only city that’s disallowed to grow? It might be one thing if the residents there didn’t want growth but it’s another when pretentious ***omitted*** from someplace else tell them they are not worthy of ever having new people move there.
I say if Los Banos wants to fund a station they should be allowed to do so.
rafael Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 2:04 am
Officially, the Sierra Club complained about the risk of Los Banos sprawling east into the sensitive grasslands area.
I suspect that inofficially, certain Santa Clara county residents simply didn’t want HSR to create a low-cost bedroom community because that would depress residential real estate values in Silicon Valley. They have some control over growth in the Gilroy area, though Hollister and San Juan Bautista in San Benito county could become boom towns. Merced and Fresno may also attract a modest number of Silicon Valley worker bees to residential transit-oriented development near their respective HSR stations.
Note that CHSRA’s ridership forecast assumes long-distance commuters will make up just a few percent of total ridership. They have not indicated any intent to offer discount fares to frequent riders, though whoever ends up operating HSR may well do just that. In France, SNCF offers special monthly passes for e.g. Reims-Paris and Tours-Paris to serve the “navetteurs a grande vitesse”, i.e. worker bees who cannot afford decent housing in Paris and don’t want to live in the banlieue suburbs where disgruntled immigrants have set cars on fire etc.
Peter Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 8:43 am
Why would the Sierra Club unofficially care about keeping housing prices in Santa Clara county artificially high.
Seriously, some people see conspiracy theories everywhere…
rafael Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 10:53 am
Protecting wildlife habitat is a valid goal in its own right, but curtailing development also keeps housing in desireable locations in short supply, i.e. it props up real estate values. Some of the Sierra Club’s wealthiest members happen to own homes in Silicon Valley, but I didn’t mean to suggest that particular organization’s actions were motivated purely by greed. Note that there were also other organizations that raised a red flag regarding a Los Banos stop.
Btw, note that environmentalism has never been just about wildlife. Indeed, it has always been about urban and suburban planning as well, including stuff like railroads. Whatever is on the other side of the fence in your back yard is, by definition, your personal environment. HSR merely extends the size of the area that has an impact on you, at least along the direction of the route.
Peter Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 11:12 am
Yes, of course “environmental” has to do with more than wildlife and habitat. NEPA, after all, is meant to improve the “human environment”, not to necessarily protect the natural environment from humans, although that is part of the equation.
Joey Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 8:57 am
Even if Los Baños were allowed a station, I doubt it would get one because it’s too small. IIRC its population is around 20000, whereas pretty much all of the other Central Valley cities with planned stations have at least 100000.
This talk of development in dry areas brings up an important concern–what will these places do for water? You need rail, we will have to deal with severe oil problems down the road, but water–well, the human race was around a long time before cars and railroads, but it has always, always needed water. . .and deserts are rather notorious for the lack of it.
Spokker Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 9:46 pm
Should we even be living in Southern California? Most of our water is used for landscaping this godforsaken place.
Maxi Reply:
May 19th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
Move everyone to Los Banos.
What Inland Empire towns think right now is irrelevant. If CAHSR is even mildly successful, then after trains start running every town will become supportive.