Palo Alto is insisting on a planning study that is not a priori skewed toward elevated structures.

What I find interesting is that there is never any mention of the vulnerability of these viaducts to earthquake damage. I don't believe any long, continuous elevateds(like the Cypress) have been tested in a major quake in California. By major I mean at least the intensity of 1906.

China might be the place to watch. Some regions are prone to severe and relatively frequent temblors and from what I have seen from the depictions in the news releases China is planning extensive viaducts very similar to the ones envisoned by the California HSR.

It is curious that the HSR is so concerned about earthquake dangers at either the Tehachapis or the Grapevine while at the same time envisioning miles of elevated structures that could be wrecked even tho they are not crossing a fault.

Another issue is just what constitutes a major quake. It is possible that 1906 is only a middling by historical standards. I believe the Pacific Northwest quake of 1700 is estimated to have been about a 9. 1700 is like yesterday geologically.

[www.contracostatimes.com]