SOCIAL: [Party_Car] DETAILS: 'Deep Slate November 2008: VOTE TUESDAY NOVEMBER 4TH

[jennie day]

I like the New-Dealiness of it - if we are heading into a depression (eek!),
then imagine the jobs that will come out of this - assuming the funding is
secured ahead of the economic decline (not likely).  Other than that, tho, I
agree with Aaron on a lot of points. And then there's the carbon question.
I haven't seen a carbon analysis of the project, but it's very possible - as
happened with BART - that there could be more carbon emitted in the
construction than the system will ever save in its operations (over air
travel).

 

And bear in mind: ridership projections are ALWAYS waaaaay overblown,
usually to justify the project costs.  The riders on this system prolly
won't even amount to half of the projected riders.      

 

Also, I'm waiting until the land-use studies from the Central Valley cities
are in before I pass judgement.  

Jennie D

 

Jennifer Day

Doctoral Candidate

Department of City and Regional Planning

University of California, Berkeley

415 613 4969 (mobile)

 

From: social-bounces at lists.deeptrouble.com
[mailto:social-bounces at lists.deeptrouble.com] On Behalf Of Eric Arons
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 1:52 PM
To: Amandeep Jawa
Cc: Social; partycar
Subject: Re: SOCIAL: [Party_Car] DETAILS: 'Deep Slate November 2008: VOTE
TUESDAY NOVEMBER 4TH

 

I do feel like I need to comment on (at least, and at this point, no more
than) one of these recommendations.  
High Speed Rail.  I've had a lot of conversations down here with a co-worker
and vice-mayor of Menlo Park, and we're not so sure high speed rail makes
much sense in its current incarnation (beyond the sexiness of it).  It will
be ridiculously expensive, and ultimately it does exactly what Deep says,
gives people a convenient way to get from here to LA and back.  It requires
major rework of the infrastructure (grade separation all the way up and down
the peninsula), and integration of current use of the rail (Caltrain and
freight) with this new use.  Do we need this long distance transit solution
for lots of money?  Or would that money be much better spent for regional
transit planning that would allow us to get around the Bay Area more easily?
Would a better plan be to stop the train in SJ and then let it connect to
better local service, saving billions?  A large part of the cost will be in
revamping the current rail line.  Yes, I know that money is not immediately
transferable from project to project, but there is a massive budget
shortfall right now.  And there are some real concerns about the particular
plan for this potential boondoggle.  Anyway, I'm not necessarily opposed to
it, and we were actually hoping to have a debate on it here at SRI, but it's
worth looking into more carefully.  Maybe this isn't the right plan.

A few relevant links (some from people actually supporting the prop, but not
the current plan):
http://service.govdelivery.com/docs/CAMENLO/CAMENLO_1/CAMENLO_1_20080925_en.
pdf
http://www.transdef.org/HSR/HSR.html
http://www.bayrailalliance.org/statement_on_high_speed_rail_and_lawsuit_agai
nst_hsra

And a debate on the issue on the radio Wednesday:

http://www.kalw.org/listen.html





KALW Radio, 91.7 FM, on Wednesday, Oct. 22, debating Quentin Kopp, the Chair
of the CA High-Speed Rail 






Authority.  Please call in with questions and comments during the second
half of the show.  


The number is 415-841-4134.   

 

State Initiatives:

1A: YES  - HIGH SPEED RAIL

This much delayed bond measure will start the funding for California to
build a new High Speed Rail system connecting SF to LA but eventually
Sacramento to SF to LA to San Diego.  If I didn't love it because it was a
great way to get people out of cars, or love it because it would represent a
hugh Green House Gas emissions win (it will reduce instate plane flights
DRAMATICALLY as well as reduce car trips), or love it because it represents
a big investment in CAs decaying infrastructure & will dramatically improve
service on our very own CalTrain, I'd vote for it because it will get me to
LA in 2 & a 1/2 hours door to door (4 by air? 8 by car?) & I'll probably be
able to bring my bike :-) YES YES YES

 

 

 

Internal Virus Database is out of date.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.138 / Virus Database: 270.4.8/1547 - Release Date: 7/11/2008
6:05 PM

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.deeptrouble.com/pipermail/social-deeptrouble.com/attachments/20081021/e4e1602d/attachment.htm>