LA Metro should pay for it.

mook Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> HSR has no money for work in LA anyway, but
> planning continues. In some form. Reading between
> the lines of this LAT article, though, it looks a
> lot like LA will be HSR trains on conventional
> rail tracks (Metrolink) from some point between
> Palmdale and Burbank into LA, much like in the Bay
> Area where HSR has pretty much given up on
> anything better than a fully grade-separated,
> electrified Caltrain. The writer (Ralph
> Vartabedian) has pretty much given up on anything
> better (and probably on HSR as a project); it's
> obvious with this article.
>
> So alternative E2 is dead and E3 is dying. Which
> one is Bob's, or is his something else that's
> still under consideration?
>
> [www.latimes.com]
> -train-river-20160924-snap-story.html#nt=oft12aH-1
> li3
>
> PS: the article makes it look like any planning or
> other work on the route is useless because of
> lackamunny, but there is a point to adopting a
> route way before any real funding appears. Once
> the route's adopted, "hardship and preservation"
> land purchases (voluntary, not eminent domain) can
> be done without jeopardizing future federal
> funding, and local agencies have to include it in
> their General Plans along with whatever land use
> adjustments make sense given the route's presence.
> That makes future work (when/if money appears) a
> little easier. If the project does eventually dry
> up and blow away, not much land has been taken off
> the market (it can be resold) and the General
> Plans can be fixed when convenient to remove the
> route. Has been done with highways, sometimes
> holding the land for many decades, and should work
> the same for HSR.