 California high speed rail, Engineering to get underway |
  |
| Sloan |
 Jan 30 2007, 01:39 PM
Post
#1
|
|
Moderator  Group: Global Moderator Posts: 6,867 Joined: 30-July 03 From: Harrisburg, PA Member No.: 55  |
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/prda...ws.asp?id=10142
Looks like California will be the first state to benefit from true high speed rail. Florida had its chance which Jeb Bush killed. Let's hope Illinois and Texas pay heed. Long term, Carolinas and Virginia may get into the act too. Sloan |
   |
 
|
| Sloan |
Jan 30 2007, 07:15 PM
Post
#2
|
|
Moderator Group: Global Moderator Posts: 6,867 Joined: 30-July 03 From: Harrisburg, PA Member No.: 55 |
QUOTE(Sloan @ Jan 30 2007, 01:39 PM)  http://www.progressiverailroading.com/prda...ws.asp?id=10142 Looks like California will be the first state to benefit from true high speed rail. Florida had its chance which Jeb Bush killed. Let's hope Illinois and Texas pay heed. Long term, Carolinas and Virginia may get into the act too. Sloan .........But it doesn't look like Arnold is a high speed rail fan.  http://www.masstransitmag.com/article/arti...n=3&id=2504 Sloan |
|
|
|
| ICGsteve |
Jan 30 2007, 08:00 PM
Post
#3
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,540 Joined: 15-July 03 Member No.: 41 |
Yet another round of study contracts does not mean the HSR is any closer to reality. These studies have been going on for about ten years, have you seen anything built yet?
The authority is kept alive with small federal and state grants, they keep "busy" with endless studies, but the project is dead until there is a change in transit policy in Washington. |
|
|
|
| Sloan |
Dec 20 2007, 09:36 AM
Post
#4
|
|
Moderator Group: Global Moderator Posts: 6,867 Joined: 30-July 03 From: Harrisburg, PA Member No.: 55 |
|
|
|
|
| Rumpled |
Dec 21 2007, 11:43 AM
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 162 Joined: 13-December 07 Member No.: 1,606 |
I think someone is misquoted, saying 1000 trains a day at Diridon station. A hundred maybe; but certainly not a 1000.
Altamont would be the better route in my opinion. Pacheco would almost certainly have to cut through a state park or two. |
|
|
|
| EllisSimon |
Dec 25 2007, 09:44 AM
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 344 Joined: 3-July 03 Member No.: 18 |
From a market standpoint, the route through Pacheco is the right call since it will provide direct access to San Jose, Silicon Valley (Palo Alto) and the City of San Francisco. The environmental harm to Pacheco will be somewhat offset by the additional travelers who opt for rail instead of less environmentally friendly modes.
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: 22nd May 2013 - 05:05 PM |
Invision Power Board
© 2013 IPS, Inc.
Licensed to: On Track On Line