 |
Re: California high-speed rail: The next stop is bankruptcy
Author: David R
Date: 04-05-2011 - 16:28
Rail in the east and rail in the west is an apple-and-orange comparison. The distances between major cities in the west, even California, are much longer than in the east.
The distances between DC and Boston is about 430 miles. In that space you have Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Hartford, and many other major cities.
The distance between San Francisco and San Diego is about 500 miles. In the space, assuming the absurd eastern Central Valley route, the only large is Fresno. Merced, Modesto, and Stockton, the other 3 largest cities in the Central Valley between Fresno and Sacramento, are completely bypassed unless the Sacramento extension is built.
They say that the HSR will relieve traffic congestion. I drive the central valley highways (I5 and CA99) at least once a week. The only bad portions are in the Bay Area and in LA. The traffic thins out greatly once you get out of the urban area because a lot of the traffic is people traveling between these cities and their suburbs.
It could relieve congestion between LA and San Diego except for the fact that the proposed route between these two cities completely bypasses a major portion of the Southland's population - Orange County.
You can't put the HSR rail in the median of either I5 or CA99 because of the cost, as mentioned elsewhere, of having to redo the bridges. Additionally, the median of CA99 in most places it not much wider than about 10-15 feeet.
It's pure BS to say that one of the hidden costs of transportation by car is the cost of the accidents. What about the cost of train accidents?
While HSR does serve the SF Peninsula, it completely bypasses the East Bay area where there is a large population.
Finally, the cost, even at the very optimistic fare of about $50-$60 dollars between San Francisco and LA, is higher than traveling by car if you go with travel with one or more passengers.
The distances between DC and Boston is about 430 miles. In that space you have Baltimore, Philadelphia, New York City, Hartford, and many other major cities.
The distance between San Francisco and San Diego is about 500 miles. In the space, assuming the absurd eastern Central Valley route, the only large is Fresno. Merced, Modesto, and Stockton, the other 3 largest cities in the Central Valley between Fresno and Sacramento, are completely bypassed unless the Sacramento extension is built.
They say that the HSR will relieve traffic congestion. I drive the central valley highways (I5 and CA99) at least once a week. The only bad portions are in the Bay Area and in LA. The traffic thins out greatly once you get out of the urban area because a lot of the traffic is people traveling between these cities and their suburbs.
It could relieve congestion between LA and San Diego except for the fact that the proposed route between these two cities completely bypasses a major portion of the Southland's population - Orange County.
You can't put the HSR rail in the median of either I5 or CA99 because of the cost, as mentioned elsewhere, of having to redo the bridges. Additionally, the median of CA99 in most places it not much wider than about 10-15 feeet.
It's pure BS to say that one of the hidden costs of transportation by car is the cost of the accidents. What about the cost of train accidents?
While HSR does serve the SF Peninsula, it completely bypasses the East Bay area where there is a large population.
Finally, the cost, even at the very optimistic fare of about $50-$60 dollars between San Francisco and LA, is higher than traveling by car if you go with travel with one or more passengers.
