Jerry Brown Gives Vote of Confidence to HSR Project
30 years ago, Governor Jerry Brown brought the concept of high speed rail to California. He fought hard to get Caltrans to embrace it and when a group of Japanese investors proposed a Shinkansen-style train from Los Angeles to San Diego in the early 1980s, Brown helped their project along, including giving it a CEQA exemption. The project died after Brown left office in 1983, but the concept remained.
As California is on the verge of building its first set of high speed tracks in the Central Valley, there’s been a lot of criticism of the project from longtime opponents. They’ve been getting traction given the general political movement towards reckless and insane austerity. But Jerry Brown, once again occupying the governor’s office, refuses to give in and abandon support for this transformative and important project.
In a meeting with the Fresno Bee editorial board, Brown reiterated his commitment to the project:
Gov. Jerry Brown said this afternoon that California’s embattled high-speed rail project should move forward, despite growing criticism about the project’s management and cost.
While the nation is in a “period of massive retrenchment,” Brown told The Fresno Bee’s editorial board, “I would like to be part of the group that gets America to think big again.”
Brown gets it, completely and entirely. The HSR project isn’t perfect, but we need to get it done and get it right for the future of our state. We are in no position to sit around and do nothing while our economic crisis continues. We learned during the Great Depression that the only way out is for government to take the lead and spend, especially on infrastructure projects that help create long-term value.
Brown also spoke about criticisms of the project:
Brown said he is “really getting into” the project and that “we’re working directly with the authority to get their act together.”
He said he will appoint a commissioner to fill a vacant seat on the agency’s governing board this week, though he declined to say who.
“I’m doing the best I can to keep this train running,” Brown said.
These are positive statements that suggest Brown is interested in ensuring HSR is built – and built right. He is not likely to give in to the small but loud chorus of voices who believes we should do nothing about our transportation needs, our jobs crisis, or our energy problems. That’s now how Brown operates.
Brown is going to engage more deeply on the issue over the next few months, as he spent the first half of 2011 focused on the state budget. This is a good opportunity for HSR advocates to help get a better project – and serves as a reminder to HSR opponents that the Governor is not going to help them kill the project he spent 30 years championing.
UPDATE: More from the Fresno Bee:
Brown said the statewide system of 220-mph passenger trains would put California into a league of “important countries [that] are investing in high-speed rail,” joining Germany, England, France, Japan and others.
High-speed rail, he said, “could reshape the Valley. … But it is expensive, and people are coming out of the woodwork to oppose this, whether they’re from Atherton or farmers.”
Translation: Brown is paying attention, and knows about the anti-HSR criticism…and is unfazed by it.
“The numbers look big,” Brown said, but he added that the investment is small when compared to the state’s economic productivity over the life of the system. That, he suggested, is why the state needs to “look to the future instead of the past.”
This is the best quote of all. Brown understands the value of investment, the dividends that HSR will create, and the need to build for the future.
Today was not a good day to be an opponent of California high speed rail.
Open comment to any politicians or staff researchers who might find this blog: please do what you can to help get HSR done right. There are many good suggestions and relevant discussoins on this blog and on the Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog. Please look past the off-topic comments and you will find insightful discussoins. Or better yet, write to the blog authors and ask. They can steer you toward a summary of the many suggestions discussed here trying to figure out how to make the California HSR system more like the established HSR systems on other parts of the World. Please do not conclude that the more lively discussions mean that these blogs have nothing to contribute. It is clear that there is a better way to build HSR in California. Better service at a lower cost. Before we pour concrete, lets get it right.
Anthony Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:47 am
James, I don’t know… Most of the Democrats support this, I’d say around 98% of them. This includes your reps in DC.
What is needed now is vision from the top and we have that to deflect any nonsense from a very loud but very small, sometimes rich anti-HSR crowd. Brown like Obama has the biggest mike in the room and should use it more often to push his vision. Often when they say something, they not only hear it in the US, they hear it in Canada (Bombardier), Siemens (Germany) and other companies/Governments around the world that want to invest in California’s project so they can then use it as a showcase to sell more rail systems and train sets in the US and elsewhere.
The question of MONEY should really be a non-issue. We need to break ground and when people see it will happen despite the naysayers, investment will flow.
Hopefully Brown can be more effective in getting things done for the state than Obama has been in getting things done for the country. All we need as californians is for california to do well and move forward.
elportonative77 Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 7:20 pm
Right on man.
trentbridge Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 8:09 pm
Excuse me? President Obama was the one that sent us a few billion dollars to start this project. He has been advocating High Speed Rail for America since he took office. It wasn’t Democrats that slashed the funding. It wasn’t Obama that lost enthusiasm in this project. Bitch about the economy but the President went to bat for California on this.
elportonative77 Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 9:00 pm
Looks like someone’s an Obama supporter.
VBobier Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
And Trentbridge is correct. I’ve watched as Repugs in DC tried to slash this and that, But then some are nothing but Racist Pigs who’d rather live in the Confederate States of America and not in the United States of America, the Copperheads are back.
YesonHSR Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 11:46 pm
As shoud be…if you want HSR in America
joe Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 9:56 pm
A Democratic Congress appropriated the HSR funding.
It could have been more but team Obama wanted a smaller stimulus package. One team member, Summers, is now advocating for more stimulus, alas the White House declines and gave back some transportation funding. Obama’s cutting the deficit, remember?
Anthony Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:01 am
Wanted? No they floated around twice the amount the got. At first it was 5 Trillion dollars if I wasn’t mistaken but to curry favor from the FEW remaining moderate Republicans in the house and a few Blue Dog Democrats from much smaller states in the Senate required it be a 2/3rds TAX CUTS.
They also refused larger infrastructure investment during the sausage making so it we’re lucky to have gotten what we have gotten. Plus Lahood is behind the project and he’s Republican, so I don’t quite understand this Anti-Obama rhetoric.
Is the economy bad because the Stimulus was too small = YES
But who’s fault is that? Obama trying to get a bigger plan, but having to pare it down for passage or getting what he could when he had an advantage? Look at the current Republican controlled House, they don’t bother most of the time because its fruitless. I see understand where the Left wants Obama to stand up and fight but that’s just not his nature. You have to go back to what Shelby Steele has said about Obama and some other Black Pundits. You often don’t listen to them because the Main Stream Media doesn’t ask them to come on their programs, or haven’t you noticed.
Don’t forget the main reason Obama is even in office despite Rev Wright’s statements and meltdown at the Press Club is because White People as a whole believe Obama wasn’t going to makes an example out of White People for 300 years of Slavery, Jim Crow and continued economic depression.
He should have at least threaten it IMHO and Racism 2.0 would be easier to see. Many on the Left in Blogs and elsewhere didn’t disagree with Rev Wright… After all the US Government did give infected blankets to Black People, it also gave Small Pox to Indians. Are you saying its not capable of such treachery??? Just because it doesn’t openly support certain things, just look at WHAT THEY DO.
jimsf Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 3:59 pm
Obama is just a union busting enabler who willing to put the working class people who supported him on the chopping block. Obama in a second term will allow cuts to social security, cuts to medicare and will further enable the robbing of pensions on behalf of wall street. Watch and see.
Peter Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 4:17 pm
I love how everyone seems to have forgotten what Obama’s administration accomplished with the help of a Democratic Congress. Stimulus funding and healthcare reform come to mind.
Things really began going to shit when the teabaggers gained an excessive amount of power in 2010. Luckily, most of them will be kicked back out on the streets in 2012.
joe Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:33 pm
Amen jimsf.
The LA Times had an article this morning about how CA’s budget issues are leading Jerry Brown to limit his ambitions (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-jerry-brown-20110817,0,570235.story). It’s good to see the Governor is still committed to this project that will reduce our dependence on foreign oil from petro-dictators, improve air quality, create jobs, improve safety, and give people an alternative to California’s congested highways.
Robert missed the punchline:
Why build one big dumb money hole when you can build two? Republicans are happy. Democrats are happy. Everyone wins (except the taxpayer).
synonymouse Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 9:41 pm
Yeah, anything for LA. First you give them a free BART to Palmdale and then all our water. And Villaraigossa is not even grateful. He has been dumping on Jerry recently. Recall them both.
But it sures does add another level of enjoyment and schadenfreude to watching those sci-fi flicks wherein our homie space aliens just level smogburg street by street. Wish they would let me design the special effects – I’d have gasoline tankers colliding in midair as elevateds come crashing down. I don’t think it is by accident that it is always Lalaland that gets flattened in these movies. You could put together a pretty decent college literature course on good writers who poison-penned LA.
Donk Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 10:49 pm
You’re just jealous because you know that LA is the city of the future. We have billions in local tax revenue coming in, we have the most transit friendly mayor in the world who is going to get us federal matching loans, and (with the exception of the Crenshaw Line and the Green Line/Metrolink gap) have ambitious plans for a rail system that actually makes sense. Once we get a rail line under the Sepulveda Pass connecting from the Valley to Westwood to LAX, we will have one of the best rail systems in the world.
Enjoy your dysfunctional $10/ride BART system to the freeway median of your choice.
Spokker Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 11:11 pm
All it takes is for synonymouse to turn off the faucet and Los Angeles dries out.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:49 am
I think we can all agree on a popular solution: invade Canada and build a pipeline for their water.
Or an IFR doing desalination. As an added bonus, we could feed it nuclear waste and so cut down on it.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 9:32 am
It wouldn’t take much.
Joey Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
LA’s lack of local water is at the very least a problem to take note of. Any growth in population is a problem when it means you have to import more water from somewhere else.
Donk Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 12:04 am
Oh yeah, well at least we didn’t ruin Hetch Hetchy.
Kidding aside, Phoenix and Las Vegas have a lot more to worry about than LA, and are going to be the bellwethers (sp?) for water crises in this country. I’ll wait until they have a crisis before I stop watering my lawn. There is so much inefficiency in our water systems that we can probably double in population if we just make a few obvious fixes.
BTW, the problem with our water shortage is that it is one of the few problems in our lives that we can’t blame on China. It’s more fun when you can blame China.
Pete Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 12:33 am
You mean from northern California? Last time I check we’re still one California and that doesn’t constitute a import.
Steve S. Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:45 am
As in: it has to be imported from outside of the metropolitan area. If Philadelphia had to get its water from Pittsburgh, that would be considered a net export for Pittsburgh and a net import for Philadelphia…despite both being in the same state.
Water has always had to be imported to serve thirsty towns. Think of Rome’s aqueducts. Or the pipelines between Manhattan and the source of the Delaware River.
Anthony Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:14 am
Actually we have desalination projects underway and we can always desalinate the Salton Sea for drinking water. But we have a very informed population about water conservation as well, I don’t fear not having drinking water at all. There are solutions for it.
Who is this synonymouse anyway? I think he’s a libertarian or something. Some palms have to get greased, that’s how Capitalism works. If you don’t like the system, change it. Even in much of Europe things don’t get done without appeasing some group that may be disadvantaged by whatever project your promoting.
I don’t like it, but its like trying to turn around the Titanic and my best defense from an increasingly oppressive Federal Government is a rich country or in our case a rich State like California.
We can tax the rich, they aren’t going anywhere. The weather is too good, their wives won’t tolerate it.
thatbruce Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 2:23 pm
Lower salt content in the Ocean than the Salton Sea, plus that’s only a limited supply of water.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 9:30 am
You want to take that one back? No project shall ever be built because the fulcrum of all the Mayor’s transit dreams revolve around downtown Los Angeles becoming something it’s never been (the economic heart of Southern California). The studios, the defense plants, the factories, the theme parks… nearly all of that was enabled by surburban growth. Now instead of having a rational system of land use, cities and counties compete against each other to the point of stupidity.
Secondly, every MTA project like BART is chained to previous ROWs acquired by defunct rail lines with the exception of the subway. And Metrolink is required to use active rail lines, which also complicates matters. BART, meawhile is competitive against other commuter rail services AND is faster.
So don’t fool yourself. LA does a great job with the resources it has…but without a major infusion of money (all the less likely because political representation is shifting east) LA isn’t going to be the next Manhattan.
Matt Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:01 am
I think Donk was way over enthusiastic about LA having one of the best rail systems in the world, but it could be a pretty impressive one by American standards with Measure R. Even now before any Measure R projects have been completed, LA MetroRail had 349k weekday riders in July. Typically BART is in the 350-370k range (not sure of their Jul. numbers). With opening of half of the Expo Line in 3-5 months, that could add another 20-30k riders and gasp, and it is not completely inconceivable that LA MetroRail would serve as many people as BART very shortly.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:20 am
Indeed, but the apples to apples comparison would be to take BART, ACE, Muni and VTA ridership and compare it to LA Metro and Metrolink. That’s not to say that I want LA public transit to fail…just the opposite. But no matter what is built there will have to a real change in culture and urban planning to make it work too….
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:20 am
Oh excuse me…BART, ACE, Muni, VTA, and Caltrain…
Matt Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 2:41 pm
I agree you have to include Muni to make a fair comparison (which has another 150k rail riders). Metrolink vs. Caltrain + ACE pretty much cancel each other out right now. VTA isn’t a heavily used system, but I suppose you can throw that in the mix. Also, the Bay Area has less people too so you have to consider that. On the other hand, the Pacific Surfliner is used somewhat for trips within LA/OC as Metrolink reimburses for a night run to OC instead of running its own train.
Nevertheless, I think the days where people say LA has no rail ridership are getting outdated even if most everyone outside the region still feel that is the case erroneously.
Downtown LA, despite being a disappointment to some, is still the largest single employment center in the West and the Civic Center within Downtown is 2nd largest concentration of government workers in US after DC.
You are right that there are many other employment and city centers that need to be connected, but places like Westwood, Century City, Culver City and Santa Monica will be in upcoming future extensions.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 3:01 pm
It’s not just that… there’s also the fact that Century City and Warner Center and Del Amo came at the expense of downtown L.A. In order to get ridership up, there will have to be casualties among the other job centers. Moreover, most of the employees downtown work for the County, which is the one entity that should be broken up and scattered around. Sure, the City, the Feds, MTA, and DWP employ lots of people…but it’s not a financial, manufacturing, etc. center these days and comparing it against other big metropolises, it shows.
Matt Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 3:37 pm
Actually, the County is making some strides in returning some workers back to Downtown. Work has started on retrofitting the old Hall of Justice which will return the LA County Sherrif’s Dept. back Downtown from Monterrey Park. The Sherrif thought it was much more efficient to be near the courts, LAPD, and other government officials and entities, which of course it is. Los Angeles is still the county seat of LA County and more or less the geographic center so it makes sense.
I don’t buy the argument that everyone has to work downtown to make a transit system work. You can have a city of work centers as long as they are connected by transit and it can work fine.
Also, most cities in the US have not been growing in just their downtowns. Take San Francisco, for example, growth in employment has largely been in Silicon Valley suburbs and the East Bay, even if they have managed to keep a strong city center and are even able to attract a few tech companies to the actual city now too.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:59 pm
It’s not everyone has to work downtown; it’s that wherever transit can most effectively drop people is going to be the downtown… that’s why SF and LA are fighting so hard for their respective terminals. They know that proximity = power.
I think the concept of what the County is doing is fine, but after some thought, I realized that they should probably cut up the southern counties so that people can be closer to their county seat and county workers don’t have to travel as far. Also if you cap the number of people in a county even at 4 million, you solve a lot of problems as far as implementation of state law.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:29 am
353,381 average weekday for BART in July. LA Metrorail was 349,432. Weekend boardings were significantly higher for LA however. 204,340 for Saturday vs 173739.2 average BART. 169,499 Sunday vs 128914.2.
bixnix Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 1:00 pm
There’s already a culture change going on. Who would’ve thought that L.A. County, the car capital, would approve, with a supermajority, a transit sales tax. This vote, plus the tax, is the impetus towards a more urban L.A. It has encouraged development in the more urban areas such as South Park, Hollywood, the Arroyo Blvd corridor in Pasadena, and more to come in places like Universal City.
And let’s not forget that it started with a single line, only 21 years ago, the Blue Line.
Donk Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 4:14 pm
Actually I don’t want to take it back. I’ll admit that my cheerleading was a bit over the top in response to Synonymouse’s nonsense. But many of your points are dead wrong:
1. Mayor’s transit dreams centered around Downtown: This is the guy who has been pushing for the subway to the sea, west of Downtown. He is pushing for rail expansion county-wide. Sure he is supporting the downtown connector, but that will improve travel times THRU downtown. Sure the system is currently centered downtown, but that is because it was the easiest place to build, with no NIMBYism. You can’t build additional hubs until you build additional track from the existing downtown hub.
2. Only existing transit corridors: Sure the Blue Line, Pasadena Gold Line, Expo Line, and a small portion of the Crenshaw Line follow existing corridors. And the PE line to OC that probably will never get built. But the existing corridors are almost built out. The following don’t follow existing corridors: Wilshire Purple Line, Downtown Connector, East LA Gold Line, most of the Crenshaw Line, and 405 Line. Most new lines are not chained to existing corridors.
3. LA the next Manhattan: I never said it would be the next Manhattan. What they are doing is connecting hubs around LA, which is completely different than the Manhattan model. The reason I said the 405 Line is the key in the whole thing is because this will finally create additional hubs in the city, including one at LAX, one at Westwood/UCLA, and one in Sherman Oaks that are the intersection of major transit corridors and are located at major employment centers. The 405 Line is partially funded out of Measure R.
Some think the Crenshaw Line is going to serve as a key N-S corridor in the same way, but in reality is just side-show that was a political gift to the county supervisors/city councilmen representing that region of LA, and really is poorly planned out. If somebody was really planning a county-wide network, that one would have been configured much differently. And now they want to bleed more money out of other more important projects in the county and underground nearly the entire thing.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
Donk, as someone who lived almost his entire life in Southern California until a couple years ago, I wish I could agree with. I don’t have Bay envy, and I’ve been there many a times but never lived there. Although I was not involved in the transportation sector long while there, I would answer you with the following:
1) The issue with Villaraigosa is that he does want transit, and he wants to build in urban areas that would enrich the Latino labor unions. The problem is that Phillip Anschutz and the other developers that want to turn downtown L.A. into Seattle or Manhattan don’t listen until it works as a way to drive people to their new properties like Staples Center, the Orsini, the Standard Hotel, Farmer’s Field…. Now the Koreans are quite happy with downtown also getting bigger because they already have access to LA Union Station and the like via the Purple Line.
2) The ballot measure in 1990 basically allowed LACTC (the precursor to Metro) to purchase abandoned rail lines for transit purposes. They have owned the ROW used for EXPO, the Blue Line, the Gold Line north of Union Station, and the Orange Line for a long time. Now it is true that the Eastside expansion didn’t use existing ROW, but it also cost something like $1 billion for a very short distance mostly through tunnels. The Crenshaw Line does utilize old rail lines outside of the part along Crenshaw itself.
3) I wasn’t referring to Manhattan in any other vein than transit ridership. I was originally going to write “Tokyo”. I know you don’t think it will get that dense…
The Crenshaw is really about creating a redoubt for the shrinking black population in Southern California. Compared to the Orange Line, the Blue Line, it’s actually a good strategy.
Donk Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 11:32 pm
Ok, so then I don’t really see a major problem with points 1, 2, and 3. What would you prefer was done with the LA transit map? Who else would have been a bigger cheerleader for LA transit? The guy got the subway tunneling ban overturned in congress, he got Measure R passed, and he already got Boxer to give us a federal loan for the Foothill Gold Line extension. He is now lobbying for federal money for the Purple Line and Downtown Connector, and is pushing for additional loans thru Americal FF. What else could you possibly ask for?
My only beef really comes down to the Crenshaw give-away and the fact that the Green Line is not going to connect to Metrolink. I would also prefer that the 405 line was a higher priority, but I can understand that the Expo and Purple lines need to reach the 405 first.
Risenmessiah Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 6:30 am
It’s not about that; it’s that so long as you have County supervisors and other elected officials with set districts there will always be a contortion of what could actually be done.
The biggest issue with the L.A. transit map is it’s over reliance on light rail. I know it is cheaper, but it’s also slower and not able to absorb high capacity or that good for long distances. The next biggest issue is that Metrolink is very limited as to where it can serve because it has to use operating rail lines still in service. Another issue is the politics, and a fourth is the issue of port traffic.
But has Antonio done a good job…yes…and did I vote for the guy (even in 2001), yes. Do I want LA to have a decent mass transit system…also yes. I just know more now that I did before….
Donk Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 9:57 pm
I agree about your point about too much light rail. I guess at least we have a subway as the backbone, and at least we have platform boarding rather than stairs like many of the other more worthless systems in the country (eg San Diego, VTA).
If there is a 405 line, I would make that one a subway. But then you will have Maxine Waters, Yvonee Burke/Ridley-Thomas, and Gloria Molina complain that their districts didn’t get heavy rail, not realizing that a heavy rail 405 line benefits the whole region. So yeah, you are on target on that point. But I don’t see any way around these politics.
Matt Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 9:30 am
Your point #1 is quite a stretch. You imply that Villaraigosa just wants to build transit for latino labor unions, which is pretty silly. He is somewhat of transit visionary and has been the big proponent of the Subway to the Sea since before he was mayor. If you think this is all to benefit latino labor unions, you are entitled to your opinion, but I suppose if he supported any type of infrastructure, you would have the same opinion.
Your point about the developers not listening – I am not sure what this means. Downtown LA is underutilized in that there are a lot of buildable parcels of empty land or dilipadated buildings and yet Downtown is the center of the transportation network from both the road network as well as the commuter rail and MetroRail network so it makes sense to develop here. Staples Center has been a boon and unleashed the potential of Downtown LA. You mentioned the Standard Hotel. It was an underutilized office building previously. Would you prefer it stay that way? Do you think Staples should have been built somewhere else? Not sure what you are getting at.
Tom McNamara Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 11:35 am
Just a couple clarifications on what I meant:
Los Angeles and Las Vegas are fairly unique in that they have well-organized labor organizations that are predominately Latino. I am sure other cities will end up this way, but I just don’t know if Chicago, New York, etc, have crossed the threshold. Transit projects are by definition prevailing wage jobs, so unions need them to continue to justify membership. Otherwise why would you pay $500 a year just to be paid like a scab? Also, because the transit agencies are special districts, they have extra-jurisdictional powers that other entities don’t. Metro is building a comprehensive transportation plan for L.A. County all the while 88 other cities and the County continue to plot their intrigue without communicating their whole intent. So Villaraigosa is realist, but also a good statesman. He knows that you synthesize good policy from what has to be done, what can be done, and what should be done.
As to my comment on developers: Los Angeles’ psyche includes the feeling that somehow, if we can just build one more thing, one more [insert public works project here] we can solve ALL our problems. The problem with downtown LA is that corporation headquarters moved out, and low wage jobs (hello Staples Center) moved in. Meanwhile, the politicians want more residents to move in…but most of these people are lawyers or judges who want a shorter commute…it’s not families chasing the American dream. So, the only chance that something like Metro or HSR has politically is to be tied to other redevelopment like Staples, the Orsini, the Grove, [insert tacky shopping center here] because those projects need foot traffic.
Meanwhile, Rome still burns.
VBobier Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:05 pm
My Grandpa would be proud of LA were He alive today, He proposed a Monorail system I was told, He was a City Councilman of Culver City CA before I was born, Around 1923 He was the Police Chief of Culver City(cause the family owned the Garage where the City Police cars were maintained at, We have His Gold Shield still), After WWII He owned a Bicycle shop in Palms CA(He sold It sometime around when I was born as He was 82 in 1969, I was 9yrs old when He passed away) and the shop is still there to this day on National Blvd near Motor Ave, It’s too bad that the family Auto Repair Garage(Washington Blvd and Irving Pl) didn’t survive the Great Depression, As near the end It was a Durant Car Dealership too, of course the building is long gone, But not My Grandpas house though, It’s intact minus a Giant Avocado Tree that was in the front yard(nearly 15′ from the front of the house).
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:22 pm
This might interest you, courtesy of the Monorail Society:
http://monorails.org/tMspages/LA1963.html
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:46 pm
I got curious just to find Ray Bradbury’s original letter to Westways; I didn’t find that, but a surprising number of other things turned up, including this one:
http://www.greencar.com/articles/ray-bradbury-speaks-out.php
These paragraphs are most interesting:
GCJ: While you’re envisioning that you can take the monorail to commute around the city, there are still going to be people who want to drive off to the Grand Canyon or up to Montana.
RB: “Any kind of vehicle can do that. It’s the car and the city environment that doesn’t work. It doesn’t matter whether you have hydrogen cars or not. There has got to be other means of transportation. The Japanese can teach us because they have the high-speed bullet train between cities in Japan, and we should have developed a similar high-speed train system to San Francisco (from Los Angeles) years ago.”
GCJ: So when it comes to cars, would you say that we’ve been too content with the status quo?
RB: “Yes we have. I had lunch with the head of the Automobile Association 30 years ago and he looked me right in the face and he said, ‘I want things just the way they are right now, I don’t want anything to change. I love the millions of cars, I love the millions of members of the Automobile Association, so I’m not going to do anything to change it.’ I looked at him and I said, ‘You don’t want to change things because things go your way and continue to go your way for the next 40 or 50 years. I can’t look at you as an agent of change because you don’t want any change.’ And the average man doesn’t want any change.”
Looks like he was pretty active in promoting monorails some years back:
http://articles.latimes.com/2006/feb/05/opinion/op-bradbury5
thatbruce Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
I’ve been to a few transit meetings with ‘ol Ray present. Excessive Utopia-vision.
Matt Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:32 am
On the water issue, I do find it a little odd that when things like the Peripheral Canal come up, a lot of people seem to think this has something to do with a LA water grab. The City of Los Angeles gets about half of its water from its city owned land in the Owens Valley as well as local groundwater and recycling. Much of the rest comes from the Colorado River with a portion from the State Water Project, which would be No. Cal, but it is a fairly small percentage. Even though the city has grown a lot, conservation has meant that the city does not use any more water than it did in the 70s.
LA suburbs who do not have the Owens Valley as a resource for much of their water do get more from the State Water Project, but it varies. For example, Santa Monica gets almost all of its water from local ground water and Orange County has done a good job recycling its water.
San Francisco, of course, also imports a lot of its water – from the destructive Hetch Hetchy Reservoir.
Donk Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
Good point. Really the suburbs are the ones to blame for most our state’s water problems. If people want to call Santa Clarita, Palmdale, or Indio “LA”, then they can also call Los Banos “San Francisco”.
joe Reply:
August 17th, 2011 at 9:58 pm
Yeah! What moron would build a water project, irrigate the Central Valley and grow crops? Like almonds or some other silly food thingy? What a wasteful money hole.
jimsf Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 4:01 pm
Well if they are going to build the canal then build that section of hsr row alongside it.
Oh good. Well unfortunately, Brown doesn’t have a time machine to take us back to pre November 2008 before Prop 1A was approved by voters, and AB3034 was signed into law. – back before politicians might have had some leeway to convince voters to do something ‘big league, big thinking, reshaping’ like this regardless of cost, regardless of funding levels, regardless of ‘usable segments’, regardless of ‘existing transportation corridors’, and oh so many details which we know are no longer up for Brown’s ‘good judgement’ calls, but are defined for him and the rest of the state by that law. So, I’m glad to hear Brown is wising up and stepping up to the plate – that he wants HSR to happen so we’re obviously going to see him force some plans that meet the requirements of Prop 1A. Can’t wait. Good luck with that.
joe Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:56 am
Unfortunately NIMBYs and Rail opponents do not interpret and enforce Prop1A.
Alan Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:45 am
More like, “Fortunately NIMBYs and Rail opponents do not interpret and enforce Prop1A.”
Peter Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:52 am
They sure think they’re right with their quite skewed interpretations of Prop 1A, though. Focusing one one provision while ignoring others…
Arthur Dent Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:46 pm
How is that different from ignoring one provision while focusing on the others…
Peter Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:50 pm
That’s actually what I meant to say.
Specifically, the fail-safe provision of AB 3034, that allows the issuance of the bonds even if not all of the requirements of AB 3034 have been complied with. That one is continuously ignored by project opponents.
Arthur Dent Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:55 pm
I’m not sure I follow you. Where do you read that?
VBobier Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Meh. It’s a wash one vs the other.
Walter Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 10:54 am
I’m getting more and more convinced that this “outpouring” of opposition on the Peninsula is about 15 people with too much time on their hands.
synonymouse Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 11:32 am
More like there are 15 PB foamers on the Peninsula.
Most of the residents favor BART Ring-the-Bay even tho Caltrain could be a lot better. Prop 1A would lose now.
Eric M Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 2:33 pm
Sources?
Peter Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 4:26 pm
He was told by the little green men in the shiny silver saucers who visit him at night.
I just show a video from youtube that highlight highway vs rail in terms of footprint used and noise pollution.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjpGg1jjJo0&feature=feedrec_grec_index
In this video, you can see how a aerial duct can be elegantly constructed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F-7Chrx-sX8&feature=related
Another quote from the Fresno Bee’s article published this morning:
“Brown added that U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood “called me to say [the federal government] is still behind this” project.”
http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/08/16/2501872/gov-brown-to-visit-fresno-wednesday.html
synonymouse Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 11:19 am
And LaHood’s tenure will be up next year in all likelihood. So forget about future federal funding.
Stock market did another 400 dump this morning and Hugo Chavez is frantically rounding up whatever gold Venezuela has overseas. Clearly there is a crisis of confidence in government and Jerry’s ratings will soon be down there with Barack’s. You don’t have to look very far to see the leadership vacuum. A great country like Italy still hasn’t found the energy to dump that bozo Berlusconi. You’ll look in vain for any leaders of anywhere near the caliber of FDR or Churchill. Or even Eisenhower, as prez. Putin at least has some charisma.
If Jerry wants to look anything like in charge he needs to rationalize this hsr mess pronto. Forget about Borden to Corcoran. Ask yourself the question would the UP or the Santa Fe even want this trackage if it were given them for free? They’d have to maintain it. Where is the utility for freight?
The entire thrust of the CHSRA should be immediately shifted to closing the gap. If Prop 1A does end up back on the ballot, revising and refocusing it may the only way to salvation.
For sure the only way I would vote for it again would be if the CHSRA repudiated the Palmdale fiasco, in no uncertain terms.
James Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
Mr. Obama was derided as being young, inexperienced and incapable of handling the job of president. The so-called ‘news’ talk radio and TV pundits have put up a rentless attack that has slowly escalated since the election. To do what they do they must convene a war-room every morning to generate the considerable spin on their talk shows. They spin to the point where the words have almost no relation to facts. They have absolutely nothing positive to say about the president. The best they can do is say nothing when the president does something right. The Republicans put up road blocks at every opportunity. Then the pundits complain the the President cannot get anything done or has comprimised to make some progress. So what happens. The President stands toe to toe against the opposition up to nearly bankrupting the government. If the President is incompetent and incapable and the opposition has been attacking on all fronts, they should be able to beat him easily. But President Obama handles the budget crisis and simply turns to the next item on the agenda. As for stimulus spending, what part of ‘avoiding another depression’ do people not understand? Remember a few years ago when Wall St. short term lending was stalled for a few weeks? The country was in financial cardiac arrest. Stimulus spending was looking pretty good then.
Now in California we have Democrat Jerry Brown showing the leadership you might think a Republican would demonstrate, to tackle the mess left by the previous so-called Republican governer. If Jerry can get California budget back on track more power to him. It will be painful for a while.
Just like Sarah, Arnold quit part-way through his term. Unlike Sarah, Arnold didn’t bother to tell anyone.
Leadership vacuum?
synonymouse Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 12:45 pm
The country still is in financial cardiac arrest. Barack, reasonably enough thought that the New Deal model would work today. But times have changed way too much and unfortunately we are in uncharted territory. In any event, shoveling taxpayer billions to PB-Balfour-Beatty-Bechtel dba’s to blow on detours only benefits their bottom line and a relatively small number of high-paid unionized equipment operators. Infrastructure blowouts don’t employ that many people and the jobs are mostly temporary. For your borrowed billions you get ill-conceived infrastructure that is under-utilized and requires sujbsidized maintenance. This at a time when essential water mains are blowing out all over the country at an accelerated rate due to the high temperatures. And these localities have no money to rebuild their water system. Palmdale stilts are sheer bloviated nonsense by comparison.
Berlusconi in power in Italy is like having the decrepit Hugh Hefner the sitting US President. But Jerry B. is not far behind. And apparently Gavin and Antonio are vying to embarrass and unseat him already.
VBobier Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:26 pm
Lets See Democratic majority in House, Senate Repugs at the Time filibustered bills(You need 60 or more votes to end that), Democrats didn’t always have the Votes in the Senate to end a filibuster and still don’t to this day, Now Repugs are the Majority in the House and have not done anything about Jobs saying that’s only for Private Industry to do, Yet Private Industry sees no demand for Its products, So Private Industry has added only a few jobs(Can’t blame the President for a lack of Jobs, thats up to Congress and so far thats still a no go on the part of the Tea/Carpet Baggers), plus Repugs in the House have sent Lame bill after lame bill to the Senate knowing Senate Democrats would kill them as is the purpose of the US Senate which is to act as a brake on House weirdness, The Senate appointed members to a Conference Committee, While the House twiddled It’s thumbs and did very little outside of Hate having a Black Man in the White House. Sure President Obama isn’t perfect, but except for Jon Huntsman the Repug field is composed of weirdo loonys who can’t get their facts straight or keep their bigoted feet out of their mouths. It’s better to stay with the one We have than the escapees from Arkham Asylum…
It’s a good time for the state to issue bonds.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/08/18/BU331KOI50.DTL
Too much debt here and abroad is what is causing the ever increasing volatility in our financial markets. The bill is now due as they say and to add significantly more debt as the world is just beginning the very slow process of deleveraging will only make things worse. No amount of money spent by the government will do anything but offer a brief respite from the inevitable economic contraction we will be dealing with for years as excess debt is worked off of the balance sheets of the public and private sector. There is a relatively new book out there by John Mauldin called “Endgame–The End of the Debt Supercycle and How it Changes Everything” that does a pretty decent job explaining what is going on–it isn’t pretty. The 10yr U.S. Treasury which closed at 2.08% today is screaming that something is very, very wrong with our economy at home and with the global economy as well. Unfortunately, this is not going to end anytime soon.
David Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 9:30 am
Huh? First you say that we are in too much debt, and then you raise the alarm because investors want to lend money at record low rates? Shouldn’t we take essentially free money and invest it in the economy, growing GNP?
Caltrain appears about to dump Amtrak for TransitAmerica Services, a subdivision of Herzog Services:
Caltrain Recommends New Operator to Run Train System
synonymouse Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:09 pm
That’s one player out of the way and one step closer for Ring-the-Bay.
Hilarious headline: Congestion becoming worse on [Peninsula's] Highway 101, but causes hard to determine
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:51 pm
Ho, ho, ho, ho!! And it’s that Examiner rag, too!! How appropriate!!
(At least that’s how some others here would speak of it.)
I’ve been complaining for years that our driver instruction and licensing procedures are woefully inadequate. Looks like someone else (in the comments to this story) sees what I do:
“Several reasons for traffic other than too many cars on the road:
“On ramps and off ramps cause traffic. Why? Too many people are making last minute decisions to get off the freeway. For the on ramps, folks are still confused on how to merge with the rest of traffic. Short on-ramps do not help as well; they do not allow for proper speeding up. Sometimes there are too many on-ramps dotting the highway causing traffic to brace for oncoming traffic. Also, some of those off-ramps and on-ramps that are two in one; too confusing for the human mind to conquer. Another bad offender is the on ramp coming in from a merging interstate or airport and the collision of the next approaching street exit – San Jose has this problem.
“Another factor: technology gadgets; what’s the study of the amount of people spending more brain energy on their stupid cell phones/iphones/game pads than on concentrating on their vehicles?
“Nervous drivers: Those are the ones that step on the brake all too often causing the driver behind them to do the same, and the driver behind them…and so on and so on…thus a chain reaction.
Speeders: People traveling too fast also cause traffic jams; why? At the fast rate they are driving they too press on the brake pedal at odd intervals, causing the nervous driver to step on their brake and causing the chain reaction. Also, the speedster who is zooming in and out of lanes is creating a distraction to those who can barely concentrate on the road. And the speedster is also making last minute decisions.
“Lane Ends: Warnings about a lane ending/merge left should be posted a mile before it happens with flashing yellow lights. The one south of Burlingame does not warrant much warning time…also that piece of highway is quite narrow – causing people to brake too suddenly when a curve approaches.
Braking: If people would ease off the gas pedal and allow the car to coast to a lower speed when approaching either an upcoming slow traffic or an off ramp, this could reduce the chain reaction effect. Too many people are slamming on the brake when approaching the off ramp or can’t seem to measure the distance between their vehicle and either the vehicle in front of them (tailgaters) or the approaching slow down (in other words, pay attention).
“Semis/18 wheelers: They are big vehicles. yes they are slow and most of them stay to the right as much as possible. If a lane is ending or there is cause to move over; allow them to move over or merge. cutting them off or hurrying up so they don’t have a chance to merge only adds to the problem.
“Carpool lanes: dumb idea; what’s the purpose? So a car that has 2 or more passengers gets to use a lane that cannot be occupied by a single driver; this doesn’t ease pollution or traffic. It causes more. That vehicle at some point has to slam on the brakes and start merging with the rest of traffic so that it can get off the freeway. These ‘special lanes’ should be for those who absolutely have no business in the community they are driving in. If I am driving 101 and my destination of business is 75 miles away, I should be able to access the special lane in the community that is not my destination; granted that is what the left lane is really meant for but that’s not what it is used for by the general public. 18 wheelers should have their own special lane since most of them are long distance drivers. Shoving them on the right is not smart – unless they have business to do in the area.
“Local drivers: When I say local I mean those that board the highway just to exit within 2 exits. Useless. These drivers will even merge badly, be too impatient for the right lane, use all the other lanes to go faster then fly accross all the lanes so they can hit their precious exit. Chain Reaction.
“Lastly, Business Routes: they should have thought of laying down very long blvds or business routes along the Highway – like Central and Southern California. too late now.
“So really, whatever study needs to be make to find the ‘real cause’ should look at the big picture: it’s both creation and construction of the highway and driver habits that cause the traffic jam….and it’s probably a bigger factor than just too many vehicles on the road. These officials can add a lane all they want, it will not solve the problem.”
Just about everything this fellow sees, I have also seen. For once, it’s good to see somebody else speak the truth–too many of us are lousy drivers.
Oh, and did you notice the photo, taken from inside a car, with the speedometer at 0 mph?
So appropriate!! Ho, ho, ho, ho!!
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 6:56 pm
“18 wheelers should have their own special lane since most of them are long distance drivers. Shoving them on the right is not smart – unless they have business to do in the area.”
Hey, isn’t that the idea of a railroad?
JBaloun Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:01 pm
I commute from San Antonio to Marsh and yes the traffic has gotten worse over the past months. Recently the construction between Marsh and Willow has kicked it up a notch. It had gotten better when they turned on the metering lights but there is an overall trend getting worse. The analysts are trying to correlate with some factor. For example the difference when school is out is noticeable but this trend is longer term. Based on the past year events I too cannot think of what factor may be the cause. It is not like there was a sudden housing development or a new major employer that I can recall.
Not sure why this is so funny to you. It is adding minutes to my commute :(
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:16 pm
I’m sorry that traffic business is making you miserable; you have my sympathy, seriously. The traffic in the area of Washington, DC, near where I live in the east, is a big reason I’ll never drive there again unless I’m forced to. Heck, a commuter train that takes 2 hours to cover 75 miles is time competitive!
But it is still funny to me to see someone come out and say what I’ve been saying for years here in the east–that a big, big part of the problem is dumb, dumb drivers who were never taught properly, never screened, and never retested to see if they picked up bad habits or for other problems.
And driver testing is a joke! At least around here, you can get by with a little driver around the block or even a parking lot, and a parallel park exercise, and if you can pass that bit of nothing, you are ready to be turned loose on the road system. If I really had anything to say about it, your written test would not only include traffic laws, but also some basic mechanical and navigational knowledge. You would be tested on such basic things as oil change intervals, tire pressure checks, and so on, and you would have to know how to read a map. The driving test itself would be in a simulator, and would stress you.
And you would get retested whenever your license came up for renewal.
I figure you would knock out about half the dozy, doozy, droopy, drunky, dummy drivers on the road. That would (I hope) leave only the better half, which would improve everybody’s chances of survival, and would also cut traffic in half, too.
And those other drivers who could no longer drive? They become the customers for your new transit system! That bunch would be big enough you would have to have a good system, and if that were the case, I could join them on more than an occasional train ride to Washington.
synonymouse Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 7:41 pm
More teenagers driving all the time. And the general business level on the Peninsula has increased according to the rumors.
Summer’s over – back to school. Traffic will drop just before Xmas, except for shoppers in the evenings. That’s been my observation over the years. October-November always the busiest month. One guy suggested all the companies are working on annual reports at that time. And that is why they stock market tends to go down then – they discover the bottom line is not as good as advertised.
joe Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:28 pm
Wait until Facebook moves to and expands by several thousand new employees at 101 near the dunbarton bridge.
Max Wyss Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 11:31 pm
Interesting… most of the points boil down to “bad driver”…
D. P. Lubic Reply:
August 19th, 2011 at 4:01 am
There are reasons for that:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision
While looking for additional material, I came across this; man, some people are morbid:
http://www.car-accidents.com/
Public Gets Glimpse of High-Speed Future, Suggesting Tweaks
Members of the Gilroy High-Speed Train Visioning Project shared simulations of what future development might look like around a station in Gilroy.
The San Mateo Daily Journal reports that Caltrain’s Modernization Program director, told a group of local elected officials that the “blended” system to keep high-speed trains within Caltrain’s right-of-way could work with electrification of the corridor and a new signaling system.
LTK Engineering Services put the capacity report together using a computer model to simulate activities on the corridor with Caltrain going 78 mph and high-speed trains going 110 mph. To get four high-speed trains into San Francisco an hour, LTK indicated about nine miles of passing tracks will need to be added to the corridor.
The San Mateo County Rail Corridor Partnership is comprised of elected officials and staff from Redwood City, San Mateo, Burlingame, Millbrae, South San Francisco, Brisbane and Belmont.
U.S. Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto said in a prepared statement, “I’m very pleased that Caltrain’s feasibility analysis supports the blended system proposal.”
Full article can be found at:
http://www.smdailyjournal.com/article_preview.php?id=165459&title=Caltrain:%20‘Blended’%20rail%20feasible%20option
joe Reply:
August 18th, 2011 at 8:22 pm
It is perfectly understandable that The Caltrain Program Director is willing to limit HSR to 110 and spend whatever time slack HSR has for all segments of CA on it’s minor segment of the track.
The question has never been “can blended work”? The question is what limitations does this NIMBY requirement put on HSR going into 2035 with 45 M people in CA?
Off topic, but something to check out between now and tomorrow:
http://www.infrastructurist.com/2011/08/18/bring-your-questions-for-u-s-transportation-secretary-ray-lahood/#comments