Join the discussion on the following article:
Agency set to approve California high-speed route
And I’m sure the members read every one of the 20,000 (!!) pages and will get it right this time!
It makes sense to start in the valley. The land is flattest and cheapest, so construction costs are lowest. And, the heavy maintenance facility is slated to be in the fresno area is memory serves. Amtrak San Joaquins can use the rails while the reminder of the system gets built.
Let me see if I understand: Only highway projects are not boondoggles. Right?
Fresno to Bakersfield. You got to be kidding me. Another boondoggle here in CA. There is neither the money nor ridership to support this gift to contractors. Private funding is too smart to get into this and the taxpayers do not have it either… CA is broke and I can guarantee you that he Feds will not pay the extra BILLIONS this so called “bullet train” will cost.
Really, one dump to another? California is just wasting money, as usual.
If this were Japan or let’s say some country in Europe this project would be done already. How is it the best country in the world has by far the worst high speed rail in the world . That’s a real head scratcher yo me
The draft environmental documents circulated by the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) did not adequately address any of the issues raised by the Kings County Board of Supervisors, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the State Auditor, the Authority’s Peer Review Group and the University of California’s Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS). These agencies have brought up legitimate questions that have not been properly answered by the CHSRA, and all work on this project needs to stop until these issues can be properly resolved. For example, until accurate ticket prices and reliable ridership information is presented, it is impossible to determine the environmental benefits, if any, of passenger trips diverted from road to rail.
On August 2, 2011, the Kings County Board of Supervisors sent a 21-page letter to Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph Szabo, which lists numerous environmental concerns that need to be addressed as part of this Environmental Impact Report/Statement. For brevity, I will not re-state the issues that the Supervisors discuss in the letter. The letter is clear that the project will have negative on the Central Valley’s residents and natural environment, which in turn will negatively affect me as a taxpayer in the State of California.
Additionally, the ridership projections developed by CHSRA have been called into question by the University of California’s Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS). In their report “Review of ‘Bay Area/California High-Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study’,” ITS writes: "However, the combination of problems in the development phase and subsequent changes made to model parameters in the validation phase implies that the forecasts of high speed rail demand—and hence of the profitability of the proposed high speed rail system—have very large error bounds.” By using a faulty and unreliable travel demand model, any environmental analysis based train ridership and mode shift are dubious. The authority must develop
The draft environmental documents circulated by the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) did not adequately address any of the issues raised by the Kings County Board of Supervisors, the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the State Auditor, the Authority’s Peer Review Group and the University of California’s Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS). These agencies have brought up legitimate questions that have not been properly answered by the CHSRA, and all work on this project needs to stop until these issues can be properly resolved. For example, until accurate ticket prices and reliable ridership information is presented, it is impossible to determine the environmental benefits, if any, of passenger trips diverted from road to rail.
On August 2, 2011, the Kings County Board of Supervisors sent a 21-page letter to Federal Railroad Administrator Joseph Szabo, which lists numerous environmental concerns that need to be addressed as part of this Environmental Impact Report/Statement. For brevity, I will not re-state the issues that the Supervisors discuss in the letter. The letter is clear that the project will have negative on the Central Valley’s residents and natural environment, which in turn will negatively affect me as a taxpayer in the State of California.
Additionally, the ridership projections developed by CHSRA have been called into question by the University of California’s Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS). In their report “Review of ‘Bay Area/California High-Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study’,” ITS writes: "However, the combination of problems in the development phase and subsequent changes made to model parameters in the validation phase implies that the forecasts of high speed rail demand—and hence of the profitability of the proposed high speed rail system—have very large error bounds.” By using a faulty and unreliable travel demand model, any environmental analysis based train ridership and mode shift are dubious. The authority must develop
I guess people like there cars, they want to drive or fly from SF to LA. The HSR will be the only way to go between those two city’s with out using gas(car) or jet fuel. When I started driving gas was 25 cents a gallon and now it is almost 4.50 a gallon. The train is the least polluting of the different modes of transportation because HSR are electric around the world. The teslis car is the only car that is electric that I can think of and I know of no electric airplane that will carry passengers. I am just think from the point of view of what can be done to reduce pollution, I know that people will never give up there car. Here in the US I read somewhere, the US has 5 % of the population but uses 25% of the energy of the world. Just something to think about.
I’m glad that it’s going ahead. From a UK perspective it’s nice to see that the UK isn’t the only country that’s taking an age to get a High Speed line project going. Our HS2 that is desperately needed to provide extra capacity north from London is taking just as long and they are talking about it being 2033 when it reaches Leeds just 180 miles north. Germany took just as long and even France has had problems, particularly when proposed routes went near to famous vineyards.
LOL, California HSR started in the Central Valley as a trade for an Obamacare vote.
Good News! The CA HSR has taken a LONG time. However, it seems like we’re starting to see a little more momentum build. And that’s definitely a good thing. I think once this first segment is underway, it will make the subsequent segments much easier.
Can’t wait to ride it!
“20,000-page environmental impact report”
I must be the only one who finds this absurd.
The CHSRA should have considered the I-5 corridor. that would give the High Speed Train a real purpose and not rely on eminent domain as mush as it does now. The way the line is planned, all it will do is to is become a high speed milk run and compete with Amtrak California’s San Joaquins. A direct run from L.A. to Bakersfield then to Sa Francisco would be a true high speed run. In the processi it will do away with that awful two hour bus trip over the grapevine
20,000 pages and still people have “issues”. No wonder every other country on earth can move ahead while we either stay stuck, or even move backward!
Close the door and turn out the lights…it’s over.
Good grief! Only in California!
Cue Talking Heads song: “We’re on a road to nowhere…”
So let the lawsuits begin.
We are about the only country that thinks it’s a good idea to drag a half-million pound airplane to 20,000 feet for a trip of 400 miles, utilizing billion dollar airports at each end.
I am tired of the Negative Nellies who say “The project isn’t perfect so let’s not do it at all”. Jeez