Critics of high-speed rail prepare for next chapter Palo Alto Issues, posted by Editor, Palo Alto Online, on Jul 13, 2012 at 10:53 am
California's contentious drive to build a high-speed-rail system between San Francisco and Los Angeles sped ahead last week, when state lawmakers approved funding for the first construction phase. But the $68 billion project still has to pass through a gauntlet of legal, financial and political obstacles before it becomes reality.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, July 13, 2012, 8:13 AM
Posted by Ronnie, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 13, 2012 at 10:53 am
Just for clarification, can someone quickly explain in a few words the difference between the "blended system" and what this article calls the "deeply unpopular four track alternative?" I think the budgetary objections are well explained in this article, but I was a bit confused by the 2 different track systems.
Posted by Jenny, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 13, 2012 at 12:58 pm
Ronnie: the blended system means that HSR will run on the same two track system with Caltrains. "Deeply unpopular four track alternative" speaks for itself meaning the existing two track for Caltrains and two additional tracks, presumably taking lanes from Alma, may be built along side the existing Caltrains tracks.
So, $1 Billion will go to electrifying Caltrains but there will be no property taken by eminent domain, which means there will be no grade separation. Only with grade separation and a trench system can a third rail for electrification be built. OK, then how will the system be electrified, presumably with ugly overhead wires. Are you guys happy with that?
Posted by Martin Engel, a resident of Menlo Park, on Jul 13, 2012 at 3:16 pm
Ronnie and Jenny, it's more complicated than that. "Blended" means blending both HSR trains and Caltrain trains on the same two tracks. That's practically impossible. Will HSR's trains go no faster than Caltrain's trains on these two tracks? Will HSR fit into the Caltrain schedule? Since they will never stop there, won't HSR need passing tracks at each and every train station?
The fact is, "blended" is a smoke-screen to shut up all us NIMBYs. And, it's one of the fake cost reductions in the total tab for this monstrosity. Once there's more money, there'll be four tracks (if not more) on the Caltrain corridor. That's what both Caltrain and HSR want.
And, when will those HSR trains start running? Will they, for the time being, go only between SF and SJ? There can be no connection from San Jose to the Central Valley tracks (electrified or not) until there are far more funds available. So, there's no point in putting HSR trains on the Caltrain tracks until then. And once there's funding to connect San Jose to the Central Valley, there will also be funding to build out the Caltrain corridor with a four-track elevated viaduct.
Last point. Blended supposedly means two tracks. In fact, that won't be enough even for the anticipated faster operation of Caltrain. The issue of grade separations will come up again if there is an increase in Caltrain's number of trains, as expected. Therefore, the question of elevated viaducts will surface again because these solve the grade crossing problem at the least cost, especially in cities like Menlo Park and Palo Alto.
If and when HSR gets more funding to continue the project beyond the current plan for the token rails for the Central Valley, they will surely revisit Caltrain's corridor with the four elevated track design that they have not abandoned. At best, "blended" is an interim, low cost band-aid for what both Caltrain and HSR wish. It's only a matter of time and money.
Whether they know it or not, admit it or not, friends who seek to "improve" Caltrain with electrification are promoting the arrival of high-speed rail on the corridor. And you know what that will bring.
Posted by morris brown, a resident of Menlo Park, on Jul 13, 2012 at 3:50 pm
The leadership in the State Assembly and Senate, taking their lead from Gov Brown, used all their power to push through this appropriation.
The bill was written behind closed doors, with no Republican representation and only delivered to the State Legislature late on July 3rd. With the 4th being a holiday, the members of the Legislature and their staff really had no time to see what they were voting for, and just took the advice of their leaders. In the Senate that was Senator Mark Leno and Senator Darrell Steinberg. They didn't want their Democratic Senators to know what really was in the bill.
They had added $2 billion in PORK to fund "bookend" projects, to make sure Senators in the Bay Area and LA area would sign on.
The question of this PORK being legal under Prop 1A was not even examined and is surely questioned by the just released Legislative Counsel ruling / opinion that itself was just released on Tuesday July 2sd.
So by 1 vote in the State Senate, the Democratic Senators, like sheep, followed their leader and passed the bill.
What they didn't understand is that contained in the bill is language tha allows the Department of Finance, which controlled by the Governor, to with a stroke of a pen move these "bookend funds" elsewhere. Typical of how Pelosi ran through bills in the Federal House when she was Speaker.
Certainly where this all ends is not yet clear. I will certainly have to be played out in the courts.
Assembly men Jerry Hill and Rich Gordon certainly don't deserve to be re-elected to any position in the State legislature after their YES votes on this issue.
Senator Simitian, along with Senator Lowenthal, and Senator DeSaulnier, the three Senators who led committee work on the HSR project and really know what it is all about, all voted no.
Senator Simitian was particularly elegant in a 17 minute made on the State Senate floor. You can view his statement at:
Posted by Jenny, a resident of the Meadow Park neighborhood, on Jul 13, 2012 at 6:29 pm
This is no longer a HSR there are now so many stops along the way both on the Peninsula and in the Central Valley that a sustained 210 MPH will be impossible. All these stops are to please the legislators who gave their "Yes" vote for the Billions appropriated. Now the farming community is up in arms because land will be taken away from them for the building of the rail lines.
Meanwhile, a little known committee was set up by Governator Arnold to assess how development and construction could be substantially increased along the farming belt in the Central Velley and over the Pacheco Pass, to increase the population to ride the HSR!!!
Posted by Charles , a resident of the Charleston Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 13, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Good points, Jenny.
There are two things that are not addressed in any statements by the HSR Authority. The first is that Prop 1A said there must be private funding - there hasn't been a whiff of this funding ever appearing. No profit, no private funding.
The second is ridership. With only a handful of stops, people will have to drive some distance to get to one. Then huge parking structures rear their heads as it did with BART. Of course to increase ridership there must be more stops, and there goes the 200 mph average out the window.
Posted by morris brown, a resident of Menlo Park, on Jul 14, 2012 at 12:49 pm
The language mentioned in the article
"The specific language of the budget-trailer bill only adds to the anxiety. For example, the bill allocates $1.1 billion for a "blended system" on the Peninsula -- a design under which high-speed rail and Caltrain can share two tracks between San Jose and San Francisco. But the bill also states that the $1.1 billion can be transferred to other items, including construction in the Central Valley (known in the bill as Item 2665-306-6043), with approval from the state Department of Finance. "
has apparently been miss-interperted. I and others were under the impression that the funds could be moved, but the issue was addressed in the Leno Committee hearing of July 5.
State Senator Alquist brought up this exact issue and at least to the satisfaction of her and others on the committee it seems that such a moving of funds is not legal under the appropriation bill language that was passed.
Posted by Feed up, a resident of the Midtown neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2012 at 3:31 pm
Blended vs dedicated 4 track, bait and switch. And what leadership have you seen, thus far, from the heads of either high speed rail or Caltrain? When we suffered an unacceptable level of death in our community by persons on the rails, what was Caltrain's answer? The silence was deafening.
Yes, we got lip service by Mike Scanlon and his shill communications director, Mark Simon, but did they offer any real substantive solutions or resource any? No. This is the same executive who drove Caltrain into the financial hole with the pipe-dream Milbrae station. And have you ever seen him at meetings, the same old repetitive line.
And now they would have us trust him with monies from high speed rail. He'll only use them to bail out Caltrain and, if history is any indicator of future performance, botch that as well.
And who will be left with holding the bag? We the residents, both in terms of carnage, diminished quality of life, and financial burden suffered.
Where did they get this guy anyway? He's paid an outrageous salary ($400 k) and receives an executive benefit package for what? Lip service by his taxpayer funded shill, mediocre performance, and spending our money on what can only be described as a modern day Edsel. And what about the tangle of wires, electric pollution, and nonstop cost overrunning construction that will be brought to our communities?
Wake up, he'll be just as responsive to the community as he was to rail deaths on his watch. Pathetic!
Posted by Jordan DeStaebler, a resident of another community, on Jul 18, 2012 at 12:25 pm
I live in the East Bay (Berkeley) and earlier in the planning process there was supposed to be a HSR line up the East Bay, which already has a substantial rail right-of-way to Oakland. I think that if this line was constructed, it would eliminate the need for a 4-track right-of-way up the Peninsula. A terminus in West Oakland at/next to the W. Oakland BART station would enable passengers from both San Francisco and the East Bay to board HS trains going down the East Bay corridor instead of the Peninsula. With both the Peninsula blended line and the East Bay line, the Bay Area would be well served.