 |
Re: I was to to declare myself dictator, what would I do with the CHSRA
Author: BOB2
Date: 03-17-2018 - 15:32
What to do about the mess?
Take responsibility for my own critique....well....
In my first 30 days as Governor, I would want to have the answers to a number of questions:
!. How much have we spent or are committed to spend to date?
2. What will we have for the money we are committed to spending?
3. When will that be finished?
4. What have we bought for this very expensive investment?
5. Are the current as built or committed segments capable of running full FRA compliant San Joaquin equipment?
6. What is the projected operating cost, passenger volume, and impact on aviation and auto travel in CA?
Note: I would have them do a full audit of existing intrastate aviation, rail, and auto travel demand between all of the city pairs and "catchment" areas which are to be served. That may involve doing highway cutline surveys to update current travel on the affected corridors. Now you have enough data to do demand modeling for various operational and price structures to determine ridership.
7. If there is a cap on funding, what can we do with what we have?
8. I wound want to know what work has been completed for next phases, what work is under contract, and what work has been completed? I would want to know, which contracts can be delayed, and which contract can be cancelled, or redirected to an alternative work program?
9. I would put together an expert panel of no more than seven folks, and, based upon the answers to the questions above, to identify alternative options.doi
Right now, most of the answers for these questions, are baloney, malarkey, horse manure, or nonsensical spin from the self serving PR contract, then ors for the CHSRA. Once, weL have some answers and the data I suggest, then we can look at other alternatives, assessing real operation scenarios, operating costs, construction costs, ridership numbers, and market share. Since this was never done, and only LA to SFO in 2:40 minutes, regardless of costs or benefits to taxpayers, none of those questions were ever really answered.....
Form follows function....is this being designed to meet our travel demands in a cost competitive and cost effective way? Or, are we only building something that can go fast, that meets none of those other "real" travel needs?
LAUPT Phase I run-through and Caltrain electrification would be funded and continue as projects to be funded based on the independent utility and cost effectiveness of those projects.
As "Governor" I would direct my new Caltrans Director to go back, and do a real State Rail Plan, which identifies interregional and intrastate rail demand, using a formal alternatives analysis and preferred alternative process, as highway and transit projects are required to use, and not the touchy feely feel good pile of political horse manure and vague promises that is the current plan.
What is scary is that we've pissed so much away without any of those answers. And, may have to "eat" a lot of wasted money.
Take responsibility for my own critique....well....
In my first 30 days as Governor, I would want to have the answers to a number of questions:
!. How much have we spent or are committed to spend to date?
2. What will we have for the money we are committed to spending?
3. When will that be finished?
4. What have we bought for this very expensive investment?
5. Are the current as built or committed segments capable of running full FRA compliant San Joaquin equipment?
6. What is the projected operating cost, passenger volume, and impact on aviation and auto travel in CA?
Note: I would have them do a full audit of existing intrastate aviation, rail, and auto travel demand between all of the city pairs and "catchment" areas which are to be served. That may involve doing highway cutline surveys to update current travel on the affected corridors. Now you have enough data to do demand modeling for various operational and price structures to determine ridership.
7. If there is a cap on funding, what can we do with what we have?
8. I wound want to know what work has been completed for next phases, what work is under contract, and what work has been completed? I would want to know, which contracts can be delayed, and which contract can be cancelled, or redirected to an alternative work program?
9. I would put together an expert panel of no more than seven folks, and, based upon the answers to the questions above, to identify alternative options.doi
Right now, most of the answers for these questions, are baloney, malarkey, horse manure, or nonsensical spin from the self serving PR contract, then ors for the CHSRA. Once, weL have some answers and the data I suggest, then we can look at other alternatives, assessing real operation scenarios, operating costs, construction costs, ridership numbers, and market share. Since this was never done, and only LA to SFO in 2:40 minutes, regardless of costs or benefits to taxpayers, none of those questions were ever really answered.....
Form follows function....is this being designed to meet our travel demands in a cost competitive and cost effective way? Or, are we only building something that can go fast, that meets none of those other "real" travel needs?
LAUPT Phase I run-through and Caltrain electrification would be funded and continue as projects to be funded based on the independent utility and cost effectiveness of those projects.
As "Governor" I would direct my new Caltrans Director to go back, and do a real State Rail Plan, which identifies interregional and intrastate rail demand, using a formal alternatives analysis and preferred alternative process, as highway and transit projects are required to use, and not the touchy feely feel good pile of political horse manure and vague promises that is the current plan.
What is scary is that we've pissed so much away without any of those answers. And, may have to "eat" a lot of wasted money.
