I have heard somewhere, or read somewhere that when Harriman built this, in 1910, as a DT connection to the East Bay, that he had intended that all long distance trains would then come directly, over Altamont, and into the "City" via the newly rebuilt Peninsula line. This would replace the Oakland mole. It would be interesting to think of what the SP would have looked like, today, had Harriman lived another ten years????

So, given that purported history, and the obvious travel demand today in that I-580 corridor, Spock would not call the option, of saving taxpayers $20 billion over Pacheco, by the use of the Dumbarton/Altamont routing, "illogical".

A Dumbarton/Altamont routing option also serves the very real and significant rail passenger demand that would be generated for express and local services in the north SJ/SR 99 corridor cities into and out of the Bay Area, which we see everyday on the I-580 and SR 120 corridors....


Proper Alternatives Analysis for a "Plan B" Dumbarton/Altamont HSR/IC passenger rail "system" connection, would look at all potential crossing options, including a tube and/or bored tunnel, in any proper screening process, if I was in charge of it.

I agree that tunnel boring technology is a very viable and cost effective option in some cases (I was significantly involved in the cost benefit and feasibility work that developed the 710 tunnel option). But, a new connection would be needed, either a bridge with sufficient ship clearance, or a tunnel for any modern rail passenger connection. Restoring this, in it current state, is problematic, and of very limited use, except for very limited service options.