Page 1

High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support - ...

Update: Got a new smartphone? Get the Patch App! »

50° F HI:59



Patch Newsletter

Join Sign In


Editor Claudia Cruz: Heard some news you want us to check out? Let me know:





Traffic & Gas





Email the author

December 20, 2011


High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support While High Speed Rail planning has shifted from the Peninsula to the San Joaquin Valley, it stands as an essential element in the context of 2030 California. Recommend






5 Comments About this column: Jarrett Mullen's column "The View From The Mountain" aims to provide foresight and vision in the planning for a sustainable future in Mountain View. Related Topics: High Speed Rail, San Joaquin Valley, Smart Growth, and Sprawl Does the high speed rail project still have a place in California's future? Tell us in the comments.

After the California High Speed Rail Authority released its updated business plan, the new $98.1 billion cost estimate induced criticism and threw the future of the project into question. While the price tag is large, the high speed rail project is an unprecedented opportunity to shape the next generation of California's growth by incentivizing compact development and preserving open space. Over the next 25 years, the Department of Finance projects California's population will increase from 38 million to nearly 50 million. The majority of this growth will occur in the San Joaquin Valley and should these municipalities adopt a "business as usual" approach to growth, over 750,000 acres of farmland will be consumed by sprawl, driving will increase and the Valley's notoriously bad air quality will further degrade. High speed rail is not a panacea for preserving open space and reducing emissions. However, transportation investments are a key element in shaping development; just as freeways enable development on the urban fringe, high speed rail’s centralized stations can catalyze growth in existing urban cores. San Joaquin Valley cities and regional planning organizations have already committed to more compact development plans, but implementation of planned transit projects coupled with high speed rail will make this vision possible. Ironically, critics of high speed rail defined the project as a threat to farmland and existing communities. While the project will require pieces of existing farmland, the project’s ability to centralize development and ultimately preserve farmland outweighs the initial impacts. Within Valley cities, the project will acquire property, but train is less invasive relative to freeway projects like this one in Bakersfield that will erase neighborhoods with monolithic interchanges (PDF). As one of the largest public works projects ever conceived, the cost will be high and the network will not appear overnight. However, the $6 billion available for the initial construction segment in the San Joaquin Valley is an excellent place to start as it will secure right of way and provide these communities with a sustainable framework for growth. Email me updates about this story.

Enter Keep me posted



1 av 3

2012-01-15 22:57

High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support - ...

Follow comments

Submit tip


Other The View From The Mountain Articles

Missing Ingredient for Successful Transit By Jarrett Mullen

Corporate Campus 2.0 By Jarrett Mullen

A Tale of Trash By Jarrett Mullen

A Specious Model of Sustainability By Jarrett Mullen

Think Globally, Plan Regionally By Jarrett Mullen See all The View From The Mountain articles

randy albin

Flag as inappropriate

1:11 pm on Tuesday, December 20, 2011

what about the high-speed rail between monterey and san francisco? people need to live in the central valley to survive and commute Log in to reply

Jarrett Mullen

Flag as inappropriate

2:39 pm on Tuesday, December 20, 2011

Randy, thanks for the comment. The high speed rail line is planned to travel through Gilroy before darting across Pacheco Pass into the San Joaquin Valley. There will be connections there to a planned Monterrey rail or express bus service.


Flag as inappropriate

8:55 pm on Wednesday, December 21, 2011

the ridiculous boondoggle needs to be put back to a ballot. california voters didn't authorize a blank check. even the revised budget plans for this project underestimate the final cost. if we use the bay bridge retrofit as a guide, we should expect five to seven times the initial estimate, which tells me $200 billion and UP. and for what? a faster way to get to visalia? traffic congestion exists WITHIN metroplitan areas, not BETWEEN. this doesn't get anyone out of their cars. air travel will always be cheaper and faster, and airports already have urban centers around them. we'll still have to spend hundreds of billions to update highways and airports, since no one expects people to stop driving or flying. nothing about this project survives even moderate scrutiny, and the advocates for the project have resorted to abstractions to keep people from understanding how we will have to gut state education and healthcare dollars to allocated funds to this project. toy trains or UC for your kids, you decide. we don't have money for both. Log in to reply

Jarrett Mullen

Flag as inappropriate

1:30 pm on Tuesday, December 27, 2011

AR, thanks for sharing your thoughts. I don't think it's fair to compare the HSR project with the Bay Bridge Replacement project. The Bay Bridge cost escalations appear excessively steep since the final design is contrasted with the cheap concrete "causeway" design that never had a chance of being built. Additionally, the self-anchored suspension proposal that was ultimately chosen is an unorthodox design that required additional engineering and raw materials than a traditional suspension design. Finally, the main construction of the span occurred during an economic boom when concrete and steel were scarce and expensive. The HSR project uses established methodologies for tunnels, bridges, and track that are proven around the world on other HSR lines. Since demand for raw materials is low and contractors are desperate for work, now is the time to begin construction to minimize costs. The demand exists now and in the future for HSR travel in California. Amtrak California currently serves 5 million trips/year despite delays, slow trains, and incomplete connections. Given the volatile prices of fuel, I think it's presumptuous to assume air travel will stay cheap forever. Airlines dislike flying trips less than 500 miles and prefer more lucrative long distance flights. As for cost, it's not like this project won't have

Get Patched In Mountain View news, events, and deals, delivered straight to you.

2 av 3

Sign Up


Terms of Service Privacy Policy

2012-01-15 22:57

High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support - ...

Flag as inappropriate It's nice (a rarity) to read an upbeat column on HSR from the Peninsula. For reasons I don't truly understand, HSR seems to arouse fear and contempt in so many Peninsulans (?). Regardless of what one thinks of HSR, I would hope most residents want to see an upgraded Caltrain - at least one that doesn't spew diesel smoke.... 6:47 pm on Tuesday, December 27, 2011

Log in to reply

Leave a comment

Submit ›



Advertise on Patch and reach potential customers in your backyard and beyond. Click here for more information. Learn more »

If you want to help local causes, or your cause needs local help, your next click should be right here. Learn more »

Contribute Send us news tips Put an event on the calendar Announce something to everyone

Patch Info

Get in Touch

Patch Initiatives


About Us Jobs Advertise Terms of Use Privacy Policy

Help Contact Us Patch Blog


Newsletters Widgets

Copyright © 2012 Patch. All Rights Reserved.

Get Patched In Mountain View news, events, and deals, delivered straight to you.

3 av 3

Sign Up


Terms of Service Privacy Policy

2012-01-15 22:57

High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support  
High Speed Rail Remains Worthy of Support  

While the price tag is large, the high speed rail project is an unprecedented opportunity to shape the next generation of California's growt...