Re:High-speed rail board completes environmental clearance i...
by dragonwriter on Saturday August 20, 2022 @11:29AM
(#32532736)
> They should have gone down the 101 corridor in the central coast area.
You can't even put a decent speed freeway, much less high speed rail, on parts of the 101 corridor.
Of all the armchair alternative route planning for HSR I've heard—and there's been a lot—this is the worst.
> The weather is pleasant and I could see people living along route and commuting to SF or LA. Central Valley was a dumb move.
People do live along the planned alignment (which is why it was chosen) and do already commute to the Bay Area as far as that is practical (and a bit more than most people would think reasonable) with existing transportation options (same on the LA end), and both displacing expected growth in freeway trips from that and extending the viable commute radius along that existing route is part of what HSR is aiming to do.
You can't even put a decent speed freeway, much less high speed rail, on parts of the 101 corridor.
Of all the armchair alternative route planning for HSR I've heard—and there's been a lot—this is the worst.
> The weather is pleasant and I could see people living along route and commuting to SF or LA. Central Valley was a dumb move.
People do live along the planned alignment (which is why it was chosen) and do already commute to the Bay Area as far as that is practical (and a bit more than most people would think reasonable) with existing transportation options (same on the LA end), and both displacing expected growth in freeway trips from that and extending the viable commute radius along that existing route is part of what HSR is aiming to do.