Jarred wrote on Nov 20, 2008 1:18 PM:
" I encourage everyone to contact their councilperson and tell them they need to lobby the California High Speed Rail Authority to get them to put the station here in Hanford. Having our city on the map, with the likes of Los Angeles, Sacramento and San Francisco is vital to the growth and economy of Hanford.
Amy Leasure said in her "Give me a chance" opinion article that she has had a difficult time finding a decent paying job for an educated person like herself. A high-speed rail station here in Hanford would put anyone in reach of the major corporations, and vice-versa. Could you imagine having biotech companies, financial companies, and more here in Hanford? Highly-skilled labor is exactly what Hanford needs, or else we'll be stuck in the hole that we're in right now.
We'll also have to be prepared for an enormous amount of developers who want to put their strip mall, their suburb, their factory here. Land is cheap in comparison to metropolitan areas, but we'll have to treat ours as such if we want to grow responsibly. We don't want to become another LA in terms of traffic. "
Sid wrote on Nov 20, 2008 2:12 PM:
" This "plan" is still shy a few major components. I wonder if Mr. VonBerg mentioned:
1. Agreements with existing railroads to share their right of way are lacking. The Union Pacific Railroad in fact said "No" to the state.
2. The "new" business plan for HSR hit the street on the 7th, AFTER Proposition 1A was voted on. In a 32 page document of old-repeated pictures and maps leaving little room for text, no specific jobs ,where and what kind, were mentioned.
3. It does say HSR "might" improve ridership in other, existing trains. But that doesn't make sense; the AMTRAK San Joaquin and Coast Startlight service will share the same ridership as the new HSR as they serve many of the same locations and travel parallel paths/tracks. So which ones will survive with associated jobs and service? The one that goes allegedly 200MPH or the one that only goes 55-70MPH?
4. Still, NO timetable, a BASIC passenger railroad must have, has been published which would demonstrate the location of stations and the frequency of service HSR is supposed to provide.
HSR is a good idea, but the planning here has been half-baked. "
LionAround wrote on Nov 20, 2008 2:49 PM:
" "Integration with the Bay Area and Los Angeles". "The project would be a catalyst for growth." What, we will become assimilated and have sprawl and look like LA and SF areas?? Is this what we want? "
Alihandero wrote on Nov 21, 2008 3:51 AM:
" Oh, yeah, "Deb" and Fran Flores will be happy that this overpriced liberal Democrat white elephant - costing billions in taxpayer dollars we ALL DO NOT HAVE - will be built.
The History Channel has a Super Trains program that ran this past week and might still be shown or found on COMCAST On Demand. Watch it as it's really interesting.
The trains are small and don't hold many passengers so the governments have to subsidize them significantly. The are fast, shaped like a ‘bullet'; I could just one whipping at 200 mph through downtown, then 11th, Grangeville, Fargo etc. in the blink of an eye. Why, the train is going so fast it would have to begin to start slowing in Hanford just to glide to a halt by the time it hits Fresno.
And they are too fast for train horns and whistles to work and have to run on their own special tracks kept in tip-top shape every day.
With all of the hoopla about accidents and horns and crossing accidents, I shudder to think of a pedestrian or truck being smashed/squashed/splattered at 200 mph.
Ya just gotta feel the pride! "
Sid wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:38 AM:
" Jarred,
They will not put a HSR station in or near Hanford.
If you look at the HSR proposed route, it is along the Union Pacific Railroad's right of way, which is closest to Hanford at the HWY 99 & HWY 198 interchange.
This POSSIBLE station is called by the HSR authority as the "VisaliaTulare/Hanford" station as it's location is supposed to satisfy the needs of all three cities and the region they imply.
So you will have a 14 mile one way commute to this station from Hanford IF-IF it is even built. Remenber, HSR is supposed to connect LA to the Bay Area quickly. Any stops along the way slow THEM down. And Prop 1A just passed did NOT mention any station near Hanford. "
Jarred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 11:53 AM:
" To Sid:
You're right. Back in June, Union Pacific decided not to sell their right-of-way to CHSRA. This is easily mitigated by purchasing the land adjacent to their tracks. Easily done, and probably much cheaper.
The prior business plan was written in 2000. Of course it was time for a new one to be updated. While the pictures may be old, the data is new and informative.
New jobs:
23,000 new jobs by 2020 in Orange County.
20,000 new jobs by 2030 in Inland Empire.
48,000 new jobs in San Francisco.
These people aren't omniscient, Sid. They can only go off of educated analysis and predictions. "
Jarred wrote on Nov 21, 2008 12:13 PM:
" To LionAround:
Sprawl is what we have in Hanford, Visalia, Fresno, and especially Los Angeles. You need a car to get anywhere, even to a park! Up in the Bay Area, there are individual neighborhoods with shops, restaurants and grocery stores within walking or biking distance. There's also mixed-use development, where people live in apartments and condos above retail stores, offices, etc. This efficient use of space is vital for keeping a city's growth from taking over the infrastructure.
If Hanford does get a stop, there will be a need for more public transportation to help curb traffic. This would mean more buses, or even a smaller verison of an electrified light-rail system like San Francisco's MUNI or Portland's MAX would be great. This could allow people to get to the station without even stepping into their car. "
Carl.Spackler wrote on Nov 21, 2008 5:21 PM:
" I think we should skip over this costly, antiquated technology and go right for a Jetson's style hovercraft. "
Carl.Spackler wrote on Nov 21, 2008 6:48 PM:
" Jarred: With all due respect, I think you are drinking the Kool Aid. This has to be the bibbest make-work project in the states history. Do you think the taxpayers of the state can afford this right now?
Next, I can guarantee you this will cost 3-4 times the initial estimates. The timing will be double the projections. Do you know how long it takes to do eminent domain on this may parcels and fight them in court?
I don't really see how the central valley will benefit much from HSR. Maybe a few more houses in the northern valley but here in the middle part...I don't know. Factories moving here?? Seems you would need a highly skilled workforce for that and some significant infastructure.
Seems like a boondoggle to me, Jarred. "
LionAround wrote on Nov 21, 2008 8:45 PM:
" To Jarred,
We don't need HSR in order to have more mixed use development in Hanford or any other community. We can do that now. There have been articles in this paper regarding some planning that is being done in the Valley regarding planning for future growth and having more dense development. I think a meeting is planned in Fresno either next month or January to get public comment. Perhaps the Sentinel will have a notice about it? "
Sid wrote on Nov 22, 2008 11:35 AM:
" Jarred,
The devil's in the details, or lack thereof...
A blanket statement on how many jobs will be created means nothing. What job descriptions, how many and at what locations? The "business plan" is mute on this.
The state specifically asked the UP to share/use their private property right of way. They wouldn't have asked if they didn't want it. UP said "NO". They have safety concerns mixing slow freights with fast Pass trains, plus they may need their own land for double or triple track capacity increases.
You're not familiar with the terrain in question: There is no "adjacent land to the UP's right of way" in many locations. Check out both Tehacapi Pass and Soledad Canyon for starters...
Plus, nowhere in any HSR "plan" does it say it will buy land next to existing tracks. It say it will "use" existing railroad rights of way...
Note again: There is NO PLANNED STATION in Hanford. PERIOD. Our existing AMTRAK service will die competing with the parallel, same destinations HSR up & running.
This "plan" is not worthy of a sixth grader, nor the $10 billion in bonds of Prop 1A "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Nov 22, 2008 6:09 PM:
" The best candidates running for election this year couldn't afford to buy theirselves a seat on the City Council. Now we want to waste money on something that is out of tomorrowland, when we could increase ridership on Amtrak and provide the same growth potential. If speed is what you want buy a damn jet and be done with it. You could fly people in and out and save even more time. The technology and equipment is readily available and much cheaper to operate in the long run. There are no rails to maintain in the air where planes fly, just flight patterns and limits on altitude. Has any brain child done the math and actual found out what a ticket will cost on this bullet express from hell? We haven't even got a single train station in place and we are already talking about having to subsidize the stupid thing. We want it built but may not be able to afford to purchase ridership. But rest assured we will help subsidize and defray the cost of the political dream with our taxes. "
Mr X wrote on Nov 25, 2008 1:40 PM:
" Sid:
Out of curiosity, what exactly were UP's safety concerns mixing slow freight with fast Pass trains? Seems to work fine in many other countries throughout the world (freight/HS passenger trains often pass at high speed within feet of one another), so just wondering what factors they feel make this case uniquely hazardous.
Thanks "
Sid wrote on Nov 25, 2008 4:01 PM:
" Mr. X,
The news article I read nearly a year back didn't specify what UP's "safety concerns" were. That doesn't mean they didn't say them, it just means the reporter didn't list them. Safety was mentioned alongside their additional reasons to oppose sharing their property. Deductions:
1. Freights often stop to allow passing traffic. The crew of a stopper train will in close proximity observe the passing train for defects (wheels, brakes, etc). A relatively slow 55 MPH freight is a lot different than a 200MPH passenger train.
2. I don't recall where freight and high speed passenger trains "share" the right of way as you allude. The TGV in France is a totally separate roadbed from freight traffic as is the Shinkansen in Japan. Tracks and roadbed are not shared as freights pound their tracks/roadbeds due to their weight and often out of round/balance wheelsets. A 200MPH plus kight passenger train needs rails/roadbed of glass in comparison.
3. Debris left by freight traffic litter the right of way. Imagine hitting something with your car at 70MPH, then a train at 200MPH...
4. Freight makes money, the UP's profit motive. Passenger trains do not. "
Alihandero wrote on Dec 1, 2008 6:02 PM:
" And since the Governor has now officially declared a fiscal emergency in California, how can we spend these billions of dollars we don't have on this white elephant the liberals have foisted upon us? "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Dec 2, 2008 5:50 PM:
" They predict a one-way ticket to be $45 meaning roundtrip is $90 that is $450 per week for five days a week. Now how much do you need to make to afford to travel on this "George Jetson Express" to make it worth your while for the cost to travel. You would be better off to drive up and stay a week in a motel and then drive home.
Why is the last factor to be factored into this improvement the cost of ridership. Sell them a white elephant and you can charge anything for it, you already sold them on the idea. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Dec 3, 2008 11:04 AM:
" To: Alihandero
Simple answer we just print more worthless money. We haven't been in balance ever since we did away with the silver certificates and the gold standard. "
Watchdog Fred wrote on Dec 6, 2008 2:57 AM:
" Why do we want this? "
Subscribe Now
Mobile Site
Place an Ad
E-Edition
Email Updates
Obituaries
Classifieds
Find a Job
Find a Car
Real Estate
Contact Us
RSS HanfordSentinel.com