With SB 350 and the new High-Speed Rail....

California will become a car-free and aircraft-free state where all
travel is by
walking, biking, mass transit, airline travel will cease to exist,
and
the freeways and suburbs will be demolished and replaced with
farmland, open space, wilderness, orchards, and wildlife habitat.

Cities in the Bay Area are already doing TOD projects and
Berkeley is banning cars and replacing them with busses.

In article
, Matt
Casey wrote:

California will become a car-free and aircraft-free state where all
travel is by
walking, biking, mass transit, airline travel will cease to exist,
and
the freeways and suburbs will be demolished and replaced with
farmland, open space, wilderness, orchards, and wildlife habitat.

Cities in the Bay Area are already doing TOD projects and
Berkeley is banning cars and replacing them with busses.


Considering the horrible mismanagement these types of projects usually
have in the USA, we don't have much to look forward to. The average speed
of the Portland streetcar is only 6 mph, thanks to "transportation
experts" here, while in France such a line would be operating at nearly 3
times that speed.

--
-Glennl
e-mail hint: add 1 to quantity after gl to get 4317.

Matt Casey writes:

Cities in the Bay Area are already doing TOD projects and
Berkeley is banning cars and replacing them with busses.

=1= First of all, Berkeley is doing no such thing.

=2= Second, TOD (transit-oriented development) is supposed to
mean that live/work amenities are within walking distance of
transit stops, with car parking taking less priority. But in
the Bay Area everything labelled "TOD" is built the other way
around, with car accommodations getting top priority. Clearly
there is much room for improvement.

=v= Your vision is an appealing one, but it's not reality yet
by a long stretch. Perhaps you and Joey Jolley could go on an
envisioneering seminar.
_Jym_

Jym Dyer writes:
=v= Your vision is an appealing one, but it's not reality yet
by a long stretch. Perhaps you and Joey Jolley could go on an
envisioneering seminar.

Is that kind of like a Turkish Bath?

-Miles

--
Rational, adj. Devoid of all delusions save those of observation, experience
and reflection.

"Jym Dyer" wrote in message
...
Matt Casey writes:

Cities in the Bay Area are already doing TOD projects and
Berkeley is banning cars and replacing them with busses.

=1= First of all, Berkeley is doing no such thing.

=2= Second, TOD (transit-oriented development) is supposed to
mean that live/work amenities are within walking distance of
transit stops, with car parking taking less priority. But in
the Bay Area everything labelled "TOD" is built the other way
around, with car accommodations getting top priority. Clearly
there is much room for improvement.

=v= Your vision is an appealing one, but it's not reality yet
by a long stretch. Perhaps you and Joey Jolley could go on an
envisioneering seminar.
_Jym_

Stupid people of this state. We are bankrupt and they pass a $2 Billion
bond issue for a train. They do not use Amtrak now, or buses. How do they
expect a high speed train to pay for itself? BART pays it's drivers and
station agents in excess of $80k a year. Good union that goes on strike
when they do not get the excess salaries they want. How much do you think a
ticket on the high speed rail will need to cost if it is to cover the $2
Billion plus operating costs? Probably more than the $80 airplane ticket.
And the airplane ticket is on a taxpaying entity.

["Followup-To:" header set to ba.transportation.]

On 2008-11-06, Jym Dyer wrote:
Matt Casey writes:

Cities in the Bay Area are already doing TOD projects and
Berkeley is banning cars and replacing them with busses.

[snip]

=v= Your vision is an appealing one, but it's not reality yet
by a long stretch. Perhaps you and Joey Jolley could go on an
envisioneering seminar.

You do realize that ''Matt Casey'' is just another alias for ''Joey
Jolley'', and that he's just trolling, right?

--keith

--

(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://www.therockgarden.ca/aolsfaq.txt
see X- headers for PGP signature information

Stupid people of this state. We are bankrupt and they pass a $2 Billion
bond issue for a train. They do not use Amtrak now, or buses. How do
they expect a high speed train to pay for itself? BART pays it's drivers
and station agents in excess of $80k a year. Good union that goes on
strike when they do not get the excess salaries they want. How much do
you think a ticket on the high speed rail will need to cost if it is to
cover the $2 Billion plus operating costs? Probably more than the $80
airplane ticket. And the airplane ticket is on a taxpaying entity.
If you are ****ed about $2 billion maybe we better not inform you about how
far off your number is off. Let's just say $2B is chump change.

"Walter_Slipperman" wrote in message
...


Stupid people of this state. We are bankrupt and they pass a $2 Billion
bond issue for a train. They do not use Amtrak now, or buses. How do
they expect a high speed train to pay for itself? BART pays it's drivers
and station agents in excess of $80k a year. Good union that goes on
strike when they do not get the excess salaries they want. How much do
you think a ticket on the high speed rail will need to cost if it is to
cover the $2 Billion plus operating costs? Probably more than the $80
airplane ticket. And the airplane ticket is on a taxpaying entity.
If you are ****ed about $2 billion maybe we better not inform you about
how far off your number is off. Let's just say $2B is chump change.

I realise that is just a design drop in the bucket. Be cheaper to give free
airline tickets. Maybe if you could drive your car on to the train and go
to LA cheaper and quicker than driving, they might have something.

Calif Bill wrote:
Stupid people of this state. We are bankrupt and they pass a $2 Billion
bond issue for a train.

Actually, the bond election was for $9.95B.

They do not use Amtrak now, or buses.

They are, in record numbers.

How do they expect a high speed train to pay for itself?

The same way HSR service does everywhere else on the planet. Even the
relatively slow Amtrak Acela pays for operations and its share of the
infrastructure, and CAHSR would be significantly faster and thus able to
attract more riders at lower costs and higher fares.

BART pays it's drivers and station agents in excess of $80k a year.
Good union that goes on strike when they do not get the excess salaries
they want.

If you're unhappy with standard union activity in your state, pass Right
To Work legislation.

How much do you think a ticket on the high speed rail will need to cost
if it is to cover the $2 Billion plus operating costs?

First of all, it is not claimed that fares will cover the initial
infrastructure costs, just operations and maintenance plus a small profit.

Second, if you care so much about this, try reading the published
financial plan, which answers this specific question.

Probably more than the $80 airplane ticket.

No. See above.

And the airplane ticket is on a taxpaying entity.

Barely. The airline is losing money and they're operating from airports
and terminals that cost taxpayers billions of dollars.

S

Calif Bill wrote:
I realise that is just a design drop in the bucket. Be cheaper to give free
airline tickets.

Assuming you didn't have to spend the tens of billions of dollars needed
to expand (or even maintain) airports and highways to handle the same
volume of passengers.

Yes, CAHSR will be expensive. It's cheaper than the alternatives, though.

Maybe if you could drive your car on to the train and go
to LA cheaper and quicker than driving, they might have something.

Nobody in the world has ever built high-speed auto trains, nor are the
economics promising. Lots of places have profitable high-speed
passenger trains, though. Better to build what we _know_ works.

Are you going to suggest that the only way air service will be effective
is if people can drive their cars onto the plane? That is the primary
market that HSR competes with.

S