Kings County Appeals to Governor Brown – For Unclear Reasons
Earlier this week Kings County wrote a letter to Governor Jerry Brown asking for him to intercede on their behalf with the California High Speed Rail Authority and the Federal Railroad Administration. Only thing is, it’s not exactly clear what they want Brown to do or what their overall goals are.
Kings County officials are appealing directly to Gov. Jerry Brown to intervene and force a reconsideration of the proposed high-speed rail route that would swing through local farmland.
The letter, dated Thursday, asks Brown to “bring the California High-Speed Rail Authority and Federal Railroad Administration to the table to coordinate the proposed project’s enormous impacts on Kings County as required by the National Environmental Policy Act.”
“Kings County understands your support for the project and also your awareness of the growing criticism of management and increasing costs of the project,” the letter states, going on to refer to recent news reports that quoted Brown as saying he wanted to become personally involved in “working with the Authority to get its act together.”
By “coordinate the proposed project’s enormous impacts on Kings County” the letter may be referring to the minimal impact on farmland that will result from the tracks bypassing Hanford. Kings County may also be hoping to get Gov. Brown to help them convince the Authority to adopt a Highway 99 alignment, despite the enormous costs of doing so (and despite Union Pacific’s longstanding opposition).
Such an alignment isn’t necessarily a bad idea. The problem is that Kings County is not going to get it by following the path they’re currently on. Protesting to the governor is fine, but if they really wanted to put Highway 99 back on the table, they ought to be going out and finding some money to make that happen. I’m speculating here, but if Kings County were to come up with its own cash, that could help change things.
Instead, Kings County is more interested in prepping a lawsuit:
Since then, the county’s coordination strategy has been laying the groundwork for legal challenges to the Authority down the road.
“We’re putting all these issues in the record … By doing that, it will allow us to continue the EIR/EIS process,” [assistant county administrator Deb] West said.
It was always safe to assume that someone in Kings County would sue to block the EIR for the Central Valley segment. Residents there should ask why their tax dollars will foot the bill for a lawsuit that would be filed on behalf of a small group of farmers, at the literal and figurative expense of everyone else in a county whose economic future depends on the HSR link to jobs and economic activity elsewhere in the state.
Totally off topic, but a neat little video none the less and it includes my favorite equipment, Siemens ICE.
How Do They Do It? – High Speed Rail
Neville Snark Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 4:21 pm
What struck me is that all of workers/engineers they interviewed were so positive, so optimistic and excited. It’s as though America is fixated on the negative.
elportonative77 Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 5:41 pm
It is one of the things we excel at. Almost complete list: Negativity, obesity, war, twitter pics of our penises, god fearing, illegal drug consumption, whining (which kinda ties in with negativity), idol worship, gossip, gang violence, chest thumping, second amendment preaching, free hate speech, pornography, crappy film making (think Michael Bay), voting against our own self interest, arrogance (which ties in with negativity, whining, and chest thumping when you think about it)……and ummmm…….that’s about it I think. That’s all I can really think of right now. I know I’m forgetting something but I can’t think what. Oh right and frying food. We can fry anything. ANYTHING. Yeah now that’s it.
Richard Mlynarik Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 5:58 pm
mrcawfee Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 8:13 pm
<3 snow crash
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 8:33 pm
I’m not always so sure about movies and music.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 9:04 pm
30 minutes, or else Uncle Enzo will come to your house and apologize personally and indulge you so much you feel like you owe the mafia. What happens to the delivery person who by being late forced him to visit your shitty house in the burbclaves is never specified, but is not pleasant.
Andre Peretti Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 6:13 pm
Would you really expect workers on a Siemens-sponsored clip to be negative?
neville snark Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 6:49 am
Ha ha, you got me. I’m an example of why propaganda is so powerful. ‘Those nice responsible men say that Obama is from Kenya!’, etc.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 6:36 am
Got to take a look at that video, and one of the things that surprised me was that part of the footage was shot on a single track line. Was this one of the legacy lines the ICEs run on?
swing hanger Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:05 am
Likely. Also at 0:46 you can see what appears to be a flying junction, which involves a single track going over a two track main to prevent a crossing at grade.
Max Wyss Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 12:53 pm
Actually, quite a few scenes look as if they were shot at the Siemens test track, which is, of course, single track.
Also, there are a few shots of the ICE-T, tilting train, which looks kind of like an ICE3 high speed set, but has a maximum speed of “only” 220 km/h. These trains were used between Stuttgart and Zürich, which has extensive stretches of single track.
Emma Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 12:53 am
Absolutely. The folks at DB are some of the nicest people I have ever met. You know why they are so nice? Because even at that level, they are still not “nice enough” for German customers. People over there complain about the tiniest shit. But, then again, maybe that’s the reason why they have higher standards on everything. From tap water to education.
Kinda pointless to suggest that Kings County deal with it by finding the money to change the alignment. There are only 150,000 people in the entire county, a number which I don’t believe is generally considered a sufficiently large tax base to support billions in spending.
If they were permitted to charge a per train toll over their preferred alignment, the funding situation would be rather different, but that isn’t a necessarily good idea.
joe Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 7:10 pm
Between dairy price supports and the the significance of state and federal jobs in Kings County I’d say they should deal with it.
I fully expect the Governor to remind them that their decision to block HSR would have long reaching consequences on where he will further cut State spending.
wikipedia
In response to GOP obstruction on the state budget, Brown eliminated the 48M annual check CA gave Orange Co. for paying interest related to their bankruptcy.
If hanford would have opted for a downtown station they could have had a good downtown business climate and kept the train on the bnsf existing corridor and no property would have to have been taken.
Joey Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 8:25 pm
The downtown Handord alignment is unsuitable for any reasonable speed. Hanford is actually the one place where I’d say a downtown station doesn’t make much sense, considering Hanford’s relatively small population and the fact that the station would be serving more of a regional market.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:35 am
The “downtown” station in Hanford wouldn’t have been downtown. It would have been in the big box shopping area, and a 220 mph alignment would have wiped out most of that shopping area. Joey is correct is stating that Hanford is the one location where a downtown station makes little sense.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:44 am
But Peter; Gilroy envisions HSR changing the downtown. Why not Hanford?
Our City fully expects to see even new storefront construction torn down for more profitable, taller, station appropriate commercial use when HSR comes.
Putting a station in a field to protect big box store fronts with parking,parking,parking wouldn’t make the downtown property owners happy – they’re all about location, location, location. Being near the HSR is location.
If you look around Gilroy’s Caltrain station, the expectation is those low rent store fronts and shopping along Tenth will be torn down and built up. I fully expect the Dollar Store to vacate and some other business or building to take it’s place.
Since there is a Hilton in town, and it fills up. The thought is a 6-10 story marriott/hilton or equivalent would reside downtown. The rental car store fronts on Tenth would move and expand.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:48 am
Gilroy’s station would be in downtown. Hanford’s station would not be in downtown. I guess calling it a “downtown” station is misleading.
jimsf Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:05 pm
My point was – to clarify – that is you look at the route – north of hnf suddenly the train veers off the bnsf and slices thru all that precious farmland. whereas if they had stuck to the “existing row” no one would have had to lose their land and the station could be downtown where the existing station is. But the hnf folks were afraid of the big scary train bringing outsiders to fill their downtown coffers ( I have this info first hand) they wanted it far away, so instead, the farmers are pissed.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:26 pm
Jim, that’s not why the alignment avoids going through Hanford. It doesn’t go through because a 220 mph alignment would have physically decimated the existing big-box shopping center just west of the BNSF tracks. The town has worked really hard to develop that shopping center.
A 220 mph alignment would not have been able to follow the BNSF ROW through town, and the station would not have been in the same location.
jimsf Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 4:38 pm
neverthelss the word onthe street in hanfrod is that they want to keep that small town small. period. They don’t want growth, nor do they want to be quckly connected to other places.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 6:00 pm
Well, that’s lovely, but that doesn’t change what the city government’s reason was for rejecting that alignment.
Newest HSRA appointee Dan Richard: Give high-speed rail a chance
While in Europe communities lobby hard to have HSR come their way, in the U.S they sue to keep it away. Of the articles and blogs I read, very few support HSR and when they do the comments are more than hostile. Vox populi, vox dei. You can’t go against it.
Maybe people feel HSR is a costly solution to a non-problem, as was the Concorde in its time.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 8:27 pm
Viewing these comments, I couldn’t help but recall how so much of the opposition seems to be generational, and how that generation’s vision of the future comes from the past.
I had been having fun with YouTube, and some of these vintage car ads are just too cool not to share; they also give us some idea of where the public opinion against rail originally came from:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0cz5yHbHVfA&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hbSnWejmgNY&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQoLXBF4uSA
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 8:29 pm
Maybe we need to use sex to sell trains:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPbhy5ZCUYs
I’m sure there are good reasons, but i’m still disappointed that HSR will be going through Hanford rather than Visalia. I still remember the long bus ride from the Hanford depot to Visalia, in the 1950′s. And when the bus stopped running, there was a long car ride. It’s really a long way to go to catch a train. And Hanford doesn’t even want HSR.
Visalia has become quite a big city! It’s sprawling all over the place. It would be nice to have something, like a HSR station, pulling inwards. With HSR in Hanford, Visalia is going to sprawl the rest of the way to Hanford, and more vitality will be sucked out of the downtown.
If HSR does go to Hanford, they should set up a good bus rapid transit corridor to serve Visalia, Tulare, and Exeter. HSR ticket holders should get a free ride.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 2nd, 2011 at 10:21 pm
The way it looks right now, it’s going to serve a greenfield station in the middle, in order to reduce the amount of urban construction required. See map here.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 4:42 am
I was thinking along the same lines as Peter B. The HSR feeder line suggested here is the kind of subsidiary transit development HSR is meant to bring about (placemarks indicate station sites). Not only would it connect these towns and cities with the rest of the state, it would also connect them with each other. Downtown Visalia would be at the center of the line, receiving new vitality from its easy access to/from HSR and all the towns in the area. The greenfield station site will create a certain amount of sprawl, but a feeder line like this one will more than make up for it by promoting TOD all along the line.
Does anyone know whose ROW this is?
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:58 am
I think that’s the San Joaquin Cross-Valley Railroad. I think it’s owned by Hanford and Visalia. I think.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:20 pm
I already asked my first-impression question about freight traffic further downthread. But here are additional questions, assuming the answer to the first question is such that reasonable regional rail is feasible:
2. Is the HSR station going to be at the intersection with the rail line? The map is too low-resolution to see this, but probably the station will be at the intersection with 198, for optimal car and bus access. A location on the rail line is only justified if it’s done in concert and full compatibility with the regional line you propose.
3. Why go all the way to Lemoore and Porterville, instead of concentrating service between Hanford and Visalia?
4. How are the highways in the area? In particular, can rail be time-competitive with driving on 198?
5. Why just one stop per city (other than Visalia)? Most traffic is not going to be HSR-bound; the top city pair would be Hanford-Visalia, which suggests you should add more stops in Hanford and Visalia, for good local service.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:40 pm
In particular, can rail be time-competitive with driving on 198?
It’s not going to be time competitive with driving….ever. Whether or not people use it for getting to the HSR station will depend a lot on what the parking rates are at the HSR station. Even then it’s going to compete with kiss-n-ride and taking a cab or a shuttle that picks you up at your door.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:51 pm
“Even then it’s going to compete with kiss-n-ride and taking a cab or a shuttle that picks you up at your door.”
All very true. The point is to redevelop things so that a generation from now most people are living within easy walking or biking distance of a train station, and the train outcompetes those other options. This takes a while, but it’s worth it.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Or if you need ride; Cab and Shuttle and Bus get prime location up front for drop off and pick up. Make that easiest. Then the kiss and ride in 2nd best location and rental cars are near site in the short term parking. Put the short term parking near but charge $60 per overnight becuase business travelers use it that way and charge the company. Economical, long term parking is off site and do full cost recovery on the parking – $20 at least.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 5:16 pm
hear hear
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:32 pm
Alon is right about the station location; it stands to reason that they’d put it at 198 barring any concrete plans for a feeder rail line. Actually, depending on exactly where the line goes, it might just fit nicely between 198 and the railroad, with an exit at each end. If it passes where 198 and the railroad are farther apart, the station should be placed adjacent to the railroad, since people who are driving can simply turn north and drive a few hundred yards more.
Regarding time competitiveness, beating cars in a race to the HSR station is not the point of lines like this one — convenience is more important to people than speed. There are lots of reasons why people would choose to ride rather than drive: their household doesn’t have enough cars for them to leave one parked at the HSR station while they’re out of town; they don’t have a car at all; they don’t want to pay for gas and parking; they’d rather read or do work on their laptop than drive. The point of the line is to create the conditions for these towns to concentrate their development at key points (adding extra local stops begins to defeat this purpose at some point), creating vibrant, walkable city/town centers that everyone can enjoy. The fact that such places do not presently exist is not reason to eschew rail projects; on the contrary, it is reason to embrace them. Unless feeder lines are built to accompany hsr, hsr will do little to promote TOD in this state.
People shouldn’t just think in terms of speed when they think about hsr. The point of hsr is not speed but convenience and connectedness. Speed is just one part of convenience.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:59 pm
On Page 35 of the “Station Plans” document in Volume III of the Fresno-Bakersfield Draft EIR, it shows the Hanford station building located just north of the Cross Valley Railroad, with the station building, bus transit center, and 700 space parking lot to the west of the HSR tracks.
I can only imagine they’re putting it there because it’s easier to improve 8th Avenue to handle increased station traffic than to build freeway on- and off- ramps for direct access to and from 198.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 5:37 pm
So they’re leaving open the option of developing local rail service, that’s terrific.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:07 pm
I seriously doubt any real TOD will come from this. HSR by itself won’t bring any – people wishing to build TOD around an HSR station are going to have a much easier time doing so in Bakersfield and Fresno than near a beet field station between Hanford and Visalia. If development comes to the area near the station, it’s almost certainly going to be of the sprawling, car-oriented kind. Look on Google Earth and see how little development there is next to Le Creusot-TGV and Mâcon-Loché-TGV, two stations which have had HSR service for thirty years.
Conversely, if Hanford and Visalia want to look less sprawly, they need only revamp their zoning code, which they of course won’t do. (Read JJJJJ’s blog to see how bad it is in Fresno.) A regional rail line wouldn’t do too much by itself; it could work for providing transportation between the existing developments in Hanford and Visalia, but that depends on how fast and convenient it is relative to driving.
Andre Peretti Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 6:05 am
“see how little development there is next to Le Creusot-TGV and Mâcon-Loché-TGV”
This illustrates the fact that lobbying for a station and then just waiting for the “TGV miracle” to operate just doesn’t work. A city must get its various communities (business people, developpers, public services, etc…) to work out a development plan integrating the station.
Even the station’s name is important. The unimaginative “Name-Of-City+TGV” suggests an unintegrated add-on. Lille rejected “Lille-TGV” and called its TGV station “Lille-Europe”, making it sound like the city’s opening onto the rest of the continent.
By the way, the legend that the TGV saved Lille from decrepitude is too simplistic. The truth is that Lille saved itself by making the most of what the TGV could bring. HSR is just a new tool. Cities either learn how to use it (like Lille), or they don’t (like Le Creusot).
datacruncher Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:41 am
Downtown Visalia was never in the running for the regional station. The city of Visalia was willing to donate city owned land near the interchange of 99/198 for a station if the 99 corridor had been used.
Joe A. Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 1:23 pm
I agree – Visalia would have been a far better choice than Hanford, and I too am disappointed. More population, more growth, better attitude about HSR. I suppose there are reasons (Union Pacific not willing to share right of way, BNSF willing to share ROW. I am not sure about expense.) Sure – there still would have been challenges, but HSR through Visalia via Hwy 99 corridor would have been a better tolerated and understandable choice. Too bad it is still not being considered. But what is done, is done.
As a Modesto resident, the HSR coming onto 99 would be the greatest thing that could happen.
Four different transportation agencies meeting in one place, and a bus bridge to Amtrak. What more can something that claims itself as a “big city” ask for, really?
(If you’re wondering, there are two local bus services that go out as far as Merced at the downtown hub, plus Modesto is a Greyhound stop — serviced by the same 300-yard stretch of land. Combine that with possible HSR lines…)
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:29 am
Jess – Peter
Peter Jess
– I need coffee.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:44 am
There won’t be any Amtrak once there is HSR service.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 1:19 pm
Just keep on telling yourself that.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:29 pm
Assuming the greater Hanford Visalia area gets an HSR stop why would Amtrak or the state of California want to run trains?
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 4:02 pm
Because people going to stations other than those that get HSR stations might want to go there? Or people might not want to pay the HSR premium?
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 4:56 pm
http://www.amtrak.com/pdf/factsheets/CALIFORNIA10.pdf
Go ahead, total up the ridership at the stations along the line that won’t have HSR.
Multiply by ten. Divide by 365 to get an average daily ridership. How many trains do you have to run to meet that demand.. Keep in mind that on average half of those people will be arriving and half will be departing. And while it won’t be perfectly balanced in each direction around half of them will be headed north and half will be headed south.
How many 25 passenger bus trips do you have to run to the nearest HSR station to serve the demand in lets say for instance Wasco?
Alon Levy Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 6:58 pm
If HSR costs a premium over regular intercity rail, you may be doing it wrong. (May – Germany has a premium, France doesn’t, Japan in principle doesn’t but in practice does.)
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 6:59 pm
Spain does too, I don’t know about others.
VBobier Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:20 pm
Why would anyone pay to ride on Amtrak California, when HSR will get one there quicker? Oh sure part of It would last for a for a bit longer, the part going to Sacramento, of course after that leg is completed then there would be no more reason for Amtrak California to be continued and that is where a good majority of HSR users will come from.
Peter Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:47 pm
They’re looking at extending the San Joaquins up to Chico and maybe even Red Bluff and Redding.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:37 pm
Do the math on Amtrak’s current ridership. Multiple by ten and divide by 365 to approximate average daily ridership. You might be able to fill a bus a few times a day. The bus might be faster than taking the train.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:28 pm
There is absolutely a market for slow and cheap even when hsr is available. But IMHO it has to be sacrificed in order to support hsr, upon which the entire statewide urban redevelopment scheme depends. I don’t think we can have it both ways.
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:43 pm
And there is a perfectly reasonable way to provide slow and cheap, it’s called a bus.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:53 pm
just finished a comment on sarcasm, and here’s some more. C’mon guys, you can do better.
12800, nothing personal, your comments are great, a true highlight of this site.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 9:29 pm
The requirement to run HSR at cost could put political pressure on subsidized rail alternatives to cease competition between stops.
Jesse D. Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:28 pm
Then why doesn’t Amtrak offer its services and railyards to merge with HSR and get this project off the ground faster?
Oh, right, competing agency that runs all over the USA. My mistake!
(Replace “Amtrak” with “CalTrain” and replace “USA” with “Bay Area” and you have the CalTrain argument as well. It’s really sad. Same with BART.)
VBobier Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:27 pm
Amtrak doesn’t own any trackage in California, CalTrans owns the rolling stock that Amtrak California uses and Amtrak California has nothing to do with CalTrain at present. Maybe You ought to get back in Yer Tardis, as Yer in the wrong time period I think.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:39 pm
You were going great before that last sentence; why’d you have to kill the buzz with the sarcasm?
VBobier Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:15 am
Sorry. :o
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 11:12 am
Hey, V., can you get me a Tardis or a WABAC ( pronounced “way back,” it was Mr. Peabody’s device)? Being a steam fan, I live in the wrong time.
You want to know what’s really awful? I have had friends tell me I live in the wrong time, too!
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 11:54 am
You have to ask Dr. Brown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ktMe0xclxA
BruceMcF Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:52 pm
You mean, in Kings County? No, obviously not ~ the San Joaquin gets truncated to a connection to Stage 1, once HSR starts running.
Bus Rapid Transit might be a better choice for a feeder, than upgrading the San Joaquin Valley Railroad to a commuter operation. Upgrading the railroad, a single-track industrial short line, would cost a fortune, and running buses would open up more route options.
Rail is an excellent option in dense urban areas, and on inter-city trunk lines. For rural California, particularly the hilly and mountainous areas, buses are California’s public transit future. California needs to learn how to do bus rapid transit right, and Hanford-Visalia is a good place to start.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:28 am
Peter; Please write a letter to your local newspaper editor – they want CA to sidetrack HSR, give back 3.5 Billion in construction money.
Apparently Modesto Bee wants gov’t deficit spending but for more, low cost water. Where and how we’re going to manufacture more water is beyond me.
Read more: http://www.modbee.com/2011/09/01/1841048/high-speed-rail-should-go-slower.html#ixzz1Wu3riFUN
Apparently Modesto Bee wants giv’t spending but for more low cost water. Where and how we’re going to manufacture more water is beyond me
Some one please tell the Agra-Business sycophants at the Bee that the money for HSR can’t be spent on supplying more subsided water to agra-business.
HSR ARRA funding, use it or lose it. 15%-20% unemployment in the CV,
It’s an IQ test.
synonymouse Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:40 am
Earth to Modesto Bee: Jerry Brown is not going to intervene to alter the CHSRA scheme in any way. No bond issue or megaproject could pass today so the LA water grab is on the indefinite back burner.
So it’s stay the course, which has always been and always will be to direct copious amounts of taspayer monies to the friends of the machine, in this instance PB-Bechtel dba’s, heavy equipment operators unions and a few connected big contractors.
Translation: pour as many stilts in Palmdale, Corcoran etc. as you can get away with and as fast and as soon as you can.
datacruncher Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:46 am
I was surprised the ModBee didn’t also mention diverting the federal money to improve 99. Jeff Denham is a cosponsor of HR761, Nunes’ bill to try to allow such a reallocation.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:07 pm
The Bee seems to be 100% for water, water and more water. Subsidized water, for Agra business.
Jesse D. Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:37 pm
With all due respect, **** the Modesto Bee.
Before the big Bay Area flight to Modesto back in 2001/2002, Modesto was pretty much a large “small town”, with ag business everywhere. Even today I could literally walk two and a half blocks north and be in farmland.
And every year I see the same thing. Irrigation, flooding of the fields. And they want more water? Bull. I just saw a documentary on how farmers in India are using drip irrigation and using 60% less water with the same gain. The output did not change, the water usage did.
But these stubborn people clamor “more water! more water!” when they should really be thinking about better water usage with the water they’ve got.
tl;dr Modesto is run by the “good ol’ boys” club, even today.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:39 am
Peter B, you might be right, but let me respond to a few points:
* It could still be a single-track line, with one or more short dual-track sections for trains to get past each other, depending on frequency of service
* Buses would open up more route options, but this would also partly defeat the purpose of concentrating population into vibrant walkable neighborhoods. The rail line hits the center of almost every sizable community in the area except Tulare.
* This area is not hilly.
Whatever feeding system we decide is best, this is a good opportunity to think about how to make HSR create connectivity and TOD — and halt sprawl– in local regions.
Does anyone else have an idea of how expensive it would be to enable basic passenger service on this rail line?
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:48 am
The thread is getting scrambled here. The line Peter Baldo and I are referring to is here.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:03 pm
How much freight traffic is there on the line in question?
BruceMcF Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:00 pm
Whether its rail or bus, a substantial portion of the feeder should not run parallel to the HSR, but cross it, which leaves out most of the Amtrak San Joaquin route. The core of a local rail service or BRT service would be Visalia / HSR Stn.
Though the area does not seem dense enough to invest in proper BRT, so a bus service would be a “Quality Bus”.
As far as which, some of that goes to FRA regulations ~ under the current regulatory regime, one’d assume Quality Bus.
Andrew Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:21 pm
Let me just reiterate my contention that buses are not going to sufficiently concentrate population to overturn the reigning sprawl paradigm. California cities are by world standards far too horizontal; we need rail, not buses, to restore balance to our urban development – not least in Kings-Tulare.
Tom McNamara Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 10:30 am
There are very few cities in the Western U.S. that did not grow up around the railroad. It was and is the fear of this sort of “octopus” strategy that allowed pro-auto advocates to shift the paradigm to sprawl as far as the eye can see.
But make no mistake…the SP shall rise again.
Alon Levy Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 11:10 am
Yes, exactly. Just one minor point: cities in the Western US grew up around the first railroads that reached them, rather than around the railroads that later became main lines. For example, the old SP Shasta Line has a few medium-sized cities, such as Medford, but the Natron Cutoff only has Klamath Falls.
Tom McNamara Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
That’s true, but also don’t forget that many of these lines adhere to established geographical crossing that were used by Native Americans and fur trappers for years before the train. Biologists love to say that “phylogeny is destiny”…and I think a geographer saying “physical geography is destiny” isn’t that far off….
Alon Levy Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 10:13 pm
Well, trail routes change over time; those original railroad lines merely followed the Native trails as of the 1800s. People’s choices of mountain passes and other route questions change over time. For example, the St. Gotthard Pass, today the most important pass through the Alps, was not an important pass until the Middle Ages; the Romans used Great St. Bernard and other passes.
In the case of the American West, the trails were optimized to the needs of humans, horses, and stagecoaches, for which 8% grades are no problem. The railroads following those trails were excruciatingly slow, because they were limited to about 3-4% at worst, with 1% preferred. That’s why alternative routes like the Natron Cutoff were useful – they avoided the worst grades.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 6:26 pm
Let us also recall that trains really don’t climb hills that well (especially with the tiny locomotives used in the 19th century), and also that most railroads were really cash-strapped in that time, even with the aid of land grants.
The solution to both problems in mountainous territory was for the surveyors and civil engineers to follow a river into the hills as far as you could go. This gave you the advantage of a grade that could be close to as level as water; you had a lot of curves to deal with, but this was considered less of a problem than the back-breaking grades that would result from trying to build a more direct route, or to go bankrupt building a level route. If the civil engineer was lucky, when he approached the summit he might find a gap in a ridge that could be used directly, or the ridge would be narrow enough to only require a relatively short tunnel. Long base tunnels were not practical in this time, so if the civil engineer was unlucky in that regard, he and the railroad were faced with the task of using power to overcome grades. This could be spectacular to railfans, but was expensive and undesirable for the railroad.
The New York Central called itself the Water Level Route, and advertised that you could sleep due to the smooth, swift ride on a railroad that followed the Hudson to Albany and the shores of the Great Lakes to Chicago. It had only one major hill at West Albany, and that grade was only about 8 miles long or so on a route of 960 miles.
This was in contrast to the Pennsylvania Railroad or the even worse up-and-down antics of the Baltimore and Ohio, with stops to couple and uncouple helper engines (particularly in steam days, and into the diesel era on the rugged B&O), and the noise and surging pull in the steam era as two or more hard-working steam locomotives would get into and out of step, occasionally with one slipping and causing a momentary loss of power and speed, followed by the jerk through the train as the engineer and his machine regained their footing and began to pull again. One veteran Pullman traveler would complain about the PRR’s Allegheny climb as having to listen to “one engine going gee, the other going gaw, and you could not sleep.”
Auto roads did not face such severe grade problems, and even today an interstate has a maximum grade of 6%, vs. the traditional railroad maximum in the 2% range, which in turn is much steeper than a preferred maximum for long climbs in the 1% range. These figures are for locomotive-hauled freight trains; a combination of much improved earth-moving equipment today plus the better climbing ability of relatively light MU trains or the power combined with light weight of HSR locomotive-hauled trains means grades in the 4% range can be practical today.
These are not absolute limits. Southern Railway (and successor Norfolk Southern) had a famous climb up Saluda grade that was in excess of 5%, while the Cumbres & Toltec (Colorado and New Mexico) and the White Pass & Yukon (Alaska and Yukon Territory) operate narrow gauge trains with steam engines on 4% grades that run for miles. What may be among the wildest of all is the Cass Scenic Railroad in West Virginia; this former logging line operates on a railroad that averages 5%, with several stretches that exceed 7% (and the road regularly stops and starts trains on a stretch of 8%), and has two stretches of an amazing 11%! This road used to be even wilder; one of those 11% grades used to be 13%! However, to operate an adhesion railroad this steep, and to go around curves as sharp as 40 degrees, requires special geared-drive steam locomotives. Cass has several Shays in operation, and a Heisler; a Climax type is also under restoration by volunteers. Top speed–12 mph for the Shays, 14 mph for the Heisler, and for one of these engines, that is flying! As it is, even with locomotives that can run on track that would scare a handcar and almost climb a tree, there are two places where they can go no further, but must reverse direction at switchbacks, running part of the way in reverse in deference to up-and-down terrain.
And once you get up such a hill, the really hard part begins–maintaining control on the way back down!
Alon Levy Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 10:19 pm
The 4% grade limit for modern EMUs and HSR (MU or not) comes from two separate things.
First, EMUs have high tractive effort, and can climb even higher grades – the 4% limit is just what guarantees the train will be able to maintain an acceptable acceleration rate starting from a standstill, in wet conditions, with 25% of its motors malfunctioning.
Second, HSR can climb very steep grades in high-speed territory simply because it has so much kinetic energy at the bottom that it can reach the stop without losing too much speed. The grade limit comes partly from the above worst-case scenario and partly from the need to brake on the way down.
So, the people with the money get their needs met, their interests protected, their environment protected, and their quality of life preserved, and the poor people who can’t ‘come up with the money’, get trashed as CAHSR forces ‘value engineers’ the cheapest solution possible down their throats. Thats an argument Robert repeats frequently and his minions on this blog swallow to hook line and sinker. Repeatedly.
And.. for unclear reasons? Really? Did you bother to read the 21 page letter? The reasons are pretty clear.
Eric M Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 8:53 am
You got one thing right which says it all,
“THEIR INTERESTS PROTECTED”!!
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:40 am
Eric;
Peninsula’s selfishness can be summarized by these stats
Black unemployment is at 16.7%.
Black male unemployment is at 18%.
White unemployment is at 8%.
Unemployment for those 25+ with bachelor’s degree or more education is at 4.3%.
PAMPA is doing just fine.
Kings Co. farmers that complain about HSR get dairy price supports, subsidized water and Kings County has more tax dollars flowing into their Co. than they contribute in taxes.
There’s nothing trashy about HSR or a disastrous about a 100ft ROW through a field.
PAMPA based CARRD and HSR opponents complain about above basic construction (costs) elsewhere and concurrently complain about value engineering.
synonymouse Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 10:46 am
Joe – you are making a very convincing case for Planned Parenthood.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 1:18 pm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
VBobier Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:33 pm
Good one Joe. :)
Eric M Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 11:37 am
I was referring to the peninsula’s selfishness
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 1:21 pm
Both Kings Co which is a net tax sink and benefits from state gov’t and price supports and the Peninsula.
A PAMPA NIMBY wants to complain about increasing costs for accommodating local concerns AND complain that HSR is going build the cheapest design.
http://menlopark.patch.com/blog_posts/high-speed-rail-double-talk-and-magic-tricks
peninsula Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 1:51 pm
“if Kings County were to come up with its own cash, that could help change things.”
And yet, Roberts point remains unchallenged by the mental giants on this blog. Those with money will get what they need, and those without money will get trashed.
Why? because the special interests (those that are looking out for THEIR self-interests) don’t give a rats hairy ass about the needs of the communities they’re trashing – unless they’re forced to care (with lawsuits or political counter force.)
BTW, yes, I AM against doing it cheaply, AND against spending more. Its precisely the disgusting tactic that was undertaken by the liars like Galgiani and the CHSRA who boosted Prop1A: grossly understate the total cost of the project to the voters by making completely unrealistic and incomplete assumptions coupled with all kinds of false promises, get voter approval based on a pack of lies, then later figure out (admit) that the cost of the thing is astronomically more than originally promised AND in order to keep costs down we’re going to have to ‘value engineer’ (ie” trash everything we need to), and put the cost of mitigation on someone else’s credit card.
joe Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 2:05 pm
A 100ft ROW is trashing a county – it’s hysteria.
I suggest Gov Brown remind Kings Co. crybabies that if a 100 ft ROW and clean electric motor propulsion is trashing the Co., CA will be sure to not trash Kings Co. with any additional State builds, infrastructure or jobs.
Since > 50% of income s from Gov’t jobs, it might get their attention.
Marginalization – it’s the only solution when critics make impossible demands.
Lot of luck with bonds/taxes/bake sales to trench HSR when it hits PAMPA. You’ve poisoned the well for adding costs to the HSR project.
First we’ll blend, then we’ll congest the ROW with trains and finally build out the HSR line.
VBobier Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 7:37 pm
If Kings Co doesn’t want to cooperate with the CHSRA, I say threaten to move as many state jobs as possible to Bakersfield Co, It’s called consolidation, watch them change their tune.
You gotta take care of #1 – that’s the American Way.
Believe PB is taking care of #1 and Palmdale is definitely taking care of #1, big time.
Jesse D. Reply:
September 3rd, 2011 at 3:39 pm
They should be taking of the #2 they’re currently spewing.
Actually, this letter is pretty significant…well…represents something significant.
You might remember that in the lawsuit over Proposition 8, the California Supreme Court denied standing to many of the plaintiffs in that case who were private citizens. The only party that was able to keep its standing (and thus allow the lawsuit to proceed) was Imperial County. It could be that Kings County (or at least the elected Supervisors of Kings County) is/are potentially going to be a legal straw man for an anti-Prop 1A lawsuit funded by Union Pacific and others.
The letter however, is a sort of olive branch to Brown. If you accede to our demands for X,Y,Z, then we will not join as a party to the lawsuit. Now, obviously, the CA-99 is too expensive and too subject to litigation to work…so there must be some other perquisite sought…what it is…though….I don’t know….
as goes kings county, so goes…what, tulare country maybe?
Peter Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:27 am
ROFL.
Don’t worry. If America votes with their guts again and elect Ron Paul, we don’t have to worry about a Transportation bill altogether because there won’t be one. After all the “private market” can offer all this as long as there is supply. RIGHT?
VBobier Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:13 am
He’s has no hope of being elected, but then He would like the USA to return to the Year 1900 when there was no FEMA or NOAA and without NOAA there is no more jobs for weather casters as thats where the weather info comes from. Oh and in Galveston Texas in 1900 the Hurricane killed roughly 8,000 to 12,000 people, only a cheapskate and a lunatic would like that type of event to happen again, NOAA has Air Force planes(C-130s) fly into hurricanes to get accurate weather reports and people want that stopped? Are they insane?
I swear people these days, they assume that food just magically appears on the shelf and that the weather is always going to be perfect, their blatant ignorance is showing…
Peter Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:25 am
Actually, NOAA flies P-3s and a G-IV.
The Air Force Weather Reconnaissance Squadron flies C-130s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hurricane_hunter
Statewide Election Governor November 2010 :
Kings County: Jerry Brown 10607 votes Meg Whitman 13,868 votes
Jerry ain’t where he is because of Kings County. Case closed.
GoGregorio Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 6:38 pm
They’re still constituents. Good government means making the right decisions on behalf of all of your constituents, regardless of their political position.
A couple of off-topic items that might be of interest:
Debt cost currently zero, at least that’s what this fellow says:
http://thinkprogress.org/yglesias/2011/09/04/311696/ten-year-real-yield-curve-hits-zero/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+matthewyglesias+%28Matthew+Yglesias%29
Solar company calls it quits, big deal:
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/09/04/311706/conservative-media-solar-power/
Paulus Magnus Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:18 am
To be fair, solar power really doesn’t work, not without massive subsidies. It’s more of a gimmick than a useful source of power.
Tom McNamara Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 10:25 am
Solar power does work…it’s called photosynthesis….
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 11:23 am
“Solar power does work…it’s called photosynthesis….”–Tom McNamara
Well, now, that gives me an idea, although it may not be quite usable for HSR–but look at what this little jewel of a machine runs on:
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=335765&nseq=7
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=370844&nseq=3
Now wouldn’t a version of this with modern equipment make a great California HSR publicity photo?
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=372810&nseq=4
joe Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 11:50 am
Old but this gives an idea of how gimmicky solar power.
http://dieoff.org/page83.htm
…. [conservatively] we estimate that humans co-opt 42.6 Pg [petagrams or 10^9 metric tons] of net primary productivity (NPP )each year. This amounts to 19.0% (42.6/224.5) of total net primary production–30.7% on land and 2.2% in the seas.
Wikipedia sez:
overall photosynthetic efficiency of 3 to 6 percent of total solar radiation.
Solar cells are better:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:PVeff%28rev110826%29.jpg
This gimmick is our last best hope.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 1:51 pm
Molten salt breeder thorium reactors are a better hope.
HSTSheldon Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:16 pm
Continue holding out hope for your favourite tech. It will be interesting to watch nuclear proponents squirm as the price of solar continues its inexorable decline, now about $3 per Wp installed. Even crystalline silicon cell costs are now below $1.50 per W. They better get those nukes up and running within the next decade or its game over for them.
Paulus Magnus Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:55 pm
Hitachi is building nukes for $1500 per kilowatt overnight cost if memory serves, which is the same price point as those crystalline silicon cells of yours with the important difference, however, of a far higher capacity factor (and thus much lower cost per watt actually generated).
adirondacker12800 Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 9:11 pm
And nuclear plants work at night.
D. P. Lubic Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 8:46 pm
If we do get to renewable electricity, I think it will be with a combination of technologies. I imagine a lot of it being wind, some solar, some hydro (part of that will be older high-head plants, part of it new mini-plants and low-head plants), and a fair amount of home-generated electricity (all those backyard solar cells and small wind turbines people talk about). A grid system that is at least partially upgraded to handle moving all this power around will be important, along with a variety of storage facilities and appropriate rate schedules. I also think we will still have at least some fossil power stations and some nuclear stations around, likely for quite some time, until they become uneconomical to run.
I see two big obstacles, both of which are people-related. One is going to be getting cooperation from the utilities themselves; I’m afraid this is one industry that, as a whole, is even more conservative than the railroad industry! This industry will have at least some people who will be skeptical of such a widely distributed system for power generation, and they and perhaps others will also feel threatened by seeing their business having to deal with a bunch of partners who will share the revenue! I honestly think this will not be a problem for most of the real technical people–it will only be, conceptually, a two-way version of what is out there now, and has ample precedent in electric railroads with regenerative braking, and likely other things as well. The real fight will come from the lawyers, bankers, and other people who have been described as “rent seekers,” and more strongly as “parasites,” “leaches,” “bloodsuckers,” and “Wall Street.” Those guys don’t like to share anything, especially control.
The other people who will give problems will be “conservative” types who will look at this as something from liberal hippie land. I’m not talking about the Rush Limbaughs and Glenn Becks (they are in the “parasites” category) as much as the fools who buy their garbage. This would mostly be the same grey-haired and scared bunch who think rail service is an attempt to take away their automobiles. It will not help matters that they will not like the common-sense conservation measures that will likely also be needed to make such a distributed, relatively low-concentration power system work, just like they think they will not like HSR. They will be just stuck thinking it should be their right to use as much electricity as they want when they want to use it–never mind that such an approach only makes the power company richer and you poorer!
How did my country turn so dumb?
Paulus Magnus Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 1:47 pm
Could you at least give context the courtesy of a reach-around?
Tom McNamara Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 3:52 pm
Paul… I wasn’t being out of context. The problem with solar is that we are trying to devise ways to capture it that fit our existing energy paradigm. All energy comes from the sun, even oil and gas. The challenge is to find the most efficient way to harness it.
The subsidies you talk about ineffective because they are designed to be. Who is going to spend $50,000 when their house is already built to add panels? Instead, there needs to be a realignment of the power grid itself such that all new buildings have a solar component…be it for water heating, or for storing energy in other places.
Think about how much the environment would benefit if you could put solar technology on your roof and have it charge a battery in your garage that you plug your electric car into…. You need to think outside the box…hence the comment about photosynthesis.
joe Reply:
September 4th, 2011 at 5:48 pm
Solar is available during peak demand which reduces the need to spool up plants to meet peak demand.
Solar energy can be stored for 24/7 use.
http://www.bloomenergy.com/benefits/more-benefits-and-applications/
Hydrogen Production: Bloom’s technology … can be used to generate electricity and hydrogen. Coupled with intermittent renewable resources like solar or wind, Bloom’s future systems will produce and store hydrogen to enable a 24 hour renewable solution and provide a distributed hydrogen fueling infrastructure for hydrogen powered vehicles.