Impact of Proposed high speed rail

[AK]

Recent European vacation was a major reality check on high-speed rail and ubiquitous public transportation in general.

It ain’t cheap. A one-day bus pass in, say, Copenhagen runs about $25 US, which coulda got me a full tank of gas not so long ago. A short intercity train trip like Bonn-Amsterdam (about 200 miles) runs $120 US one way, or about the cost of an SAN-SFO flight on Southwest.

It ain’t always convenient. For example, Paris is the hub for all long-distance trains in France … but trains arrive at / depart from different stations and you gotta schlep your stuff through the subway or take a cab. After weighing all the alternatives I booked a trip on an unsubsidized carbon-spewing private bus instead … it was a very proletarian experience and toward the end of the trip a malodorous one too, but I saved a bunch of money and arrived at my destination at noon rather than 1 a.m.

Don’t get me wrong. I think high-speed rail will work well in the right corridors. I’m not entirely convinced SFO-LAX-SAN is the right corridor. And I’m not too encouraged by the fact that we can’t even get conventional train service running again on a no-brainer route like LAX-LAS!

(edit: I meant LAX-LAS … a route I’d love to see in operation again. I mean who actually enjoys the weekend drive out to Vegas?)

[zzz]

I don’t believe it will get built between LA and SD as its not an approved phase from what I could recall. I voted against this prop to build not because I don’t believe in investing in public infrastructure, but because the plan was shoddy. They based the plan on speeds between LA and SF that no train runs at in the world. To recoup any costs, the prices are going to be higher than flying on Southwest and the time difference (1hr flight) versus 6+hours on a train just doesn’t make sense to most people. OR they don’t charge more and they just put it on the taxpayer tab.

People ride the Acela in the NE between NY and Boston because the overall travel time is comparable. By the time you get to the airport in either city, and go through security, etc, you might as well take the Acela. Its more reliably on time than the planes and if youre plane is delayed or you sit on the runway for an hour, you’re better of taking the Acela. But I just don’t see mass numbers of people adopting this high speed train that takes too long and costs too much. So we just keep ringing up the state deficit and the taxpayers just keep paying.

What I think CA should be investing in commuter lines. I-15 is a great example. They are tearing up relatively new HOA lanes on the 15 to expand the freeway. Why don’t we put a high speed line in there for people to commute from Esco/RB/Poway etc to Sorrento Valley and Downtown in instead of spending money tearing up and rebuilding the HOA lanes? If you get critical mass, companies will jump on board and shuttle people. In the Bay Area and CT, there are shuttles that pick people up from the train stations and shuttle them to their offices.

The other thing I find is a joke is that we don’t have a light rail that connects our airport with our train and trolley stations, and to downtown. Likewise, its not all that efficient to take the train from SD to get to LAX as Amtrak doesn’t go to LAX.

The point someone made on SDSU students, our trolley and bus service takes way too long if you are not on a direct line from wherever you live to the campus. We need to have efficient mass transit to see adoption or increase the pain factor with driving your car.

[zzz]

I don’t believe it will get built between LA and SD as its not an approved phase from what I could recall. I voted against this prop to build not because I don’t believe in investing in public infrastructure, but because the plan was shoddy. They based the plan on speeds between LA and SF that no train runs at in the world. To recoup any costs, the prices are going to be higher than flying on Southwest and the time difference (1hr flight) versus 6+hours on a train just doesn’t make sense to most people. OR they don’t charge more and they just put it on the taxpayer tab.

People ride the Acela in the NE between NY and Boston because the overall travel time is comparable. By the time you get to the airport in either city, and go through security, etc, you might as well take the Acela. Its more reliably on time than the planes and if youre plane is delayed or you sit on the runway for an hour, you’re better of taking the Acela. But I just don’t see mass numbers of people adopting this high speed train that takes too long and costs too much. So we just keep ringing up the state deficit and the taxpayers just keep paying.

What I think CA should be investing in commuter lines. I-15 is a great example. They are tearing up relatively new HOA lanes on the 15 to expand the freeway. Why don’t we put a high speed line in there for people to commute from Esco/RB/Poway etc to Sorrento Valley and Downtown in instead of spending money tearing up and rebuilding the HOA lanes? If you get critical mass, companies will jump on board and shuttle people. In the Bay Area and CT, there are shuttles that pick people up from the train stations and shuttle them to their offices.

The other thing I find is a joke is that we don’t have a light rail that connects our airport with our train and trolley stations, and to downtown. Likewise, its not all that efficient to take the train from SD to get to LAX as Amtrak doesn’t go to LAX.

The point someone made on SDSU students, our trolley and bus service takes way too long if you are not on a direct line from wherever you live to the campus. We need to have efficient mass transit to see adoption or increase the pain factor with driving your car.

[zzz]

I don’t believe it will get built between LA and SD as its not an approved phase from what I could recall. I voted against this prop to build not because I don’t believe in investing in public infrastructure, but because the plan was shoddy. They based the plan on speeds between LA and SF that no train runs at in the world. To recoup any costs, the prices are going to be higher than flying on Southwest and the time difference (1hr flight) versus 6+hours on a train just doesn’t make sense to most people. OR they don’t charge more and they just put it on the taxpayer tab.

People ride the Acela in the NE between NY and Boston because the overall travel time is comparable. By the time you get to the airport in either city, and go through security, etc, you might as well take the Acela. Its more reliably on time than the planes and if youre plane is delayed or you sit on the runway for an hour, you’re better of taking the Acela. But I just don’t see mass numbers of people adopting this high speed train that takes too long and costs too much. So we just keep ringing up the state deficit and the taxpayers just keep paying.

What I think CA should be investing in commuter lines. I-15 is a great example. They are tearing up relatively new HOA lanes on the 15 to expand the freeway. Why don’t we put a high speed line in there for people to commute from Esco/RB/Poway etc to Sorrento Valley and Downtown in instead of spending money tearing up and rebuilding the HOA lanes? If you get critical mass, companies will jump on board and shuttle people. In the Bay Area and CT, there are shuttles that pick people up from the train stations and shuttle them to their offices.

The other thing I find is a joke is that we don’t have a light rail that connects our airport with our train and trolley stations, and to downtown. Likewise, its not all that efficient to take the train from SD to get to LAX as Amtrak doesn’t go to LAX.

The point someone made on SDSU students, our trolley and bus service takes way too long if you are not on a direct line from wherever you live to the campus. We need to have efficient mass transit to see adoption or increase the pain factor with driving your car.

[zzz]

I don’t believe it will get built between LA and SD as its not an approved phase from what I could recall. I voted against this prop to build not because I don’t believe in investing in public infrastructure, but because the plan was shoddy. They based the plan on speeds between LA and SF that no train runs at in the world. To recoup any costs, the prices are going to be higher than flying on Southwest and the time difference (1hr flight) versus 6+hours on a train just doesn’t make sense to most people. OR they don’t charge more and they just put it on the taxpayer tab.

People ride the Acela in the NE between NY and Boston because the overall travel time is comparable. By the time you get to the airport in either city, and go through security, etc, you might as well take the Acela. Its more reliably on time than the planes and if youre plane is delayed or you sit on the runway for an hour, you’re better of taking the Acela. But I just don’t see mass numbers of people adopting this high speed train that takes too long and costs too much. So we just keep ringing up the state deficit and the taxpayers just keep paying.

What I think CA should be investing in commuter lines. I-15 is a great example. They are tearing up relatively new HOA lanes on the 15 to expand the freeway. Why don’t we put a high speed line in there for people to commute from Esco/RB/Poway etc to Sorrento Valley and Downtown in instead of spending money tearing up and rebuilding the HOA lanes? If you get critical mass, companies will jump on board and shuttle people. In the Bay Area and CT, there are shuttles that pick people up from the train stations and shuttle them to their offices.

The other thing I find is a joke is that we don’t have a light rail that connects our airport with our train and trolley stations, and to downtown. Likewise, its not all that efficient to take the train from SD to get to LAX as Amtrak doesn’t go to LAX.

The point someone made on SDSU students, our trolley and bus service takes way too long if you are not on a direct line from wherever you live to the campus. We need to have efficient mass transit to see adoption or increase the pain factor with driving your car.

[zzz]

I don’t believe it will get built between LA and SD as its not an approved phase from what I could recall. I voted against this prop to build not because I don’t believe in investing in public infrastructure, but because the plan was shoddy. They based the plan on speeds between LA and SF that no train runs at in the world. To recoup any costs, the prices are going to be higher than flying on Southwest and the time difference (1hr flight) versus 6+hours on a train just doesn’t make sense to most people. OR they don’t charge more and they just put it on the taxpayer tab.

People ride the Acela in the NE between NY and Boston because the overall travel time is comparable. By the time you get to the airport in either city, and go through security, etc, you might as well take the Acela. Its more reliably on time than the planes and if youre plane is delayed or you sit on the runway for an hour, you’re better of taking the Acela. But I just don’t see mass numbers of people adopting this high speed train that takes too long and costs too much. So we just keep ringing up the state deficit and the taxpayers just keep paying.

What I think CA should be investing in commuter lines. I-15 is a great example. They are tearing up relatively new HOA lanes on the 15 to expand the freeway. Why don’t we put a high speed line in there for people to commute from Esco/RB/Poway etc to Sorrento Valley and Downtown in instead of spending money tearing up and rebuilding the HOA lanes? If you get critical mass, companies will jump on board and shuttle people. In the Bay Area and CT, there are shuttles that pick people up from the train stations and shuttle them to their offices.

The other thing I find is a joke is that we don’t have a light rail that connects our airport with our train and trolley stations, and to downtown. Likewise, its not all that efficient to take the train from SD to get to LAX as Amtrak doesn’t go to LAX.

The point someone made on SDSU students, our trolley and bus service takes way too long if you are not on a direct line from wherever you live to the campus. We need to have efficient mass transit to see adoption or increase the pain factor with driving your car.

[Jazzman]

Trains impact values where they reduce quality of living, ie noise, rail tracks crossings etc. They increase values where they provide better public transportation. I live half a mile away from a rail track, and the main disturbance is the incessant tooting starting quite early in the morning, presumably due to people walking on the tracks. There needs to be much tighter control over public access to rail tracks.

[Jazzman]

Trains impact values where they reduce quality of living, ie noise, rail tracks crossings etc. They increase values where they provide better public transportation. I live half a mile away from a rail track, and the main disturbance is the incessant tooting starting quite early in the morning, presumably due to people walking on the tracks. There needs to be much tighter control over public access to rail tracks.

[Jazzman]

Trains impact values where they reduce quality of living, ie noise, rail tracks crossings etc. They increase values where they provide better public transportation. I live half a mile away from a rail track, and the main disturbance is the incessant tooting starting quite early in the morning, presumably due to people walking on the tracks. There needs to be much tighter control over public access to rail tracks.

[Jazzman]

Trains impact values where they reduce quality of living, ie noise, rail tracks crossings etc. They increase values where they provide better public transportation. I live half a mile away from a rail track, and the main disturbance is the incessant tooting starting quite early in the morning, presumably due to people walking on the tracks. There needs to be much tighter control over public access to rail tracks.

[Jazzman]

Trains impact values where they reduce quality of living, ie noise, rail tracks crossings etc. They increase values where they provide better public transportation. I live half a mile away from a rail track, and the main disturbance is the incessant tooting starting quite early in the morning, presumably due to people walking on the tracks. There needs to be much tighter control over public access to rail tracks.

[EconProf]

The fatal flaw in high speed rail (and, arguably, all forms of mass transit) is ignoring the time to get from your house or apartment to the station, and then to get from the destination station to your job (or store, etc.)…plus the parking problem at the station. Americans love to go from their own driveway to the parking lot at their destination. This is a luxury we have that the Japanese, Chinese, and europeans envy.

[EconProf]

The fatal flaw in high speed rail (and, arguably, all forms of mass transit) is ignoring the time to get from your house or apartment to the station, and then to get from the destination station to your job (or store, etc.)…plus the parking problem at the station. Americans love to go from their own driveway to the parking lot at their destination. This is a luxury we have that the Japanese, Chinese, and europeans envy.

[EconProf]

The fatal flaw in high speed rail (and, arguably, all forms of mass transit) is ignoring the time to get from your house or apartment to the station, and then to get from the destination station to your job (or store, etc.)…plus the parking problem at the station. Americans love to go from their own driveway to the parking lot at their destination. This is a luxury we have that the Japanese, Chinese, and europeans envy.

[EconProf]

The fatal flaw in high speed rail (and, arguably, all forms of mass transit) is ignoring the time to get from your house or apartment to the station, and then to get from the destination station to your job (or store, etc.)…plus the parking problem at the station. Americans love to go from their own driveway to the parking lot at their destination. This is a luxury we have that the Japanese, Chinese, and europeans envy.

[Author]

Posts