The scoping for this proposal makes interesting reading, in that it looks to me like they have for some reason proposed this SP side option, without considering the costs of the alternative of double tracking the WP line and widening the tunnel.

The extra distance of track work (all would presumably be new)on the SP side might even offset the cost of tunnel widening, it being, (using that "Pi" thing), nearly 3 times as long for the extra track work. Fear of tunneling costs for widening, should not preclude studying that option, as the reason the WP side is still in operation is that it is slightly shorter, newer, and better designed, than the 1862 SP alignment.

Here is another good example, along with ACE "pipe dream" for the proposed "new" Altamont tunnel, of how the giant sucking sound coming from the CHSRA fiasco in Fresno, prevents us from moving ahead in a timely fashion with many of these projects that would and could benefit regional travelers and commuters.......in our lifetime.....?