Today’s Headlines

  • Governor Schwarzenegger a “Formidable Weapon” in Fight Against Prop. 23 (Merc)
  • More Bicyclists on the Streets Means Safety in Numbers (Grist)
  • Roadshow: Drivers Attempt to Get Around Cell Phone Law by Using Speaker
  • Redwood City Likely to Welcome High-Speed Rail Station (Merc)
  • Sacramento Regional Transit GM Rides Light-Rail, Buses to Get Rider Feedback (Sac Bee)
  • San Mateo Planning Commission Considers Housing Development on Delaware (SM Daily Journal)
  • LA Mayor Asks Feds for Help with City’s 30/10 Plan (KNBC, Daily News, LAT, The Source)
  • Columnist: LA City Planning Completely Out of Control (City Watch via Sblog LA)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • HSR: I’d prefer a RWC stop since I work here and I think they’ll be doing some great stuff with their downtown, but Palo Alto would be a MUCH better decision. Stanford having direct access to HSR would be a huge boon to both the campus and the train. Sadly, the peninsula is only as green as the latest hybrid car.

  • I have to agree that Palo Alto would be a much better choice for the mid-penisula high speed rail stop, and I’m mystified by the lack of enthusiasm on the part of the residents there. By the time HSR actually goes into service, our transportation patterns will have radically changed. Plane travel will be significantly reduced; most people will rely on bicycles, public transit, and limited range electric cars to get around. Gasoline-powered internal combustion engines will be rare outside museums and hobbyists’ garages.

    In such an energy-slim future, I would think Palo Altans would be delighted with the prospect of getting to the city in 20 minutes or San Jose in 15, not to mention LA in 2 hours and 21 minutes. Instead, they will be obliged to take a slow local train to Redwood City and then transfer, adding an extra 30 – 40 minutes to their journey.

    In contrast, by being the peninsula’s HSR stop, Redwood City will quickly find itself an economic hub. Meetings and conventions will be scheduled there, companies will locate themselves there, and medium to high density housing will spring up, fostering vibrant city life. Perhaps it’s Palo Alto’s strategy to provide its citizens with the comfort of being a sleepy, hard-to-get-to backwater? Certainly Stanford would find it easier to fill its 50,000 capacity stadium if Palo Alto were a HSR stop.


    What a joke of a column. Why waste the internets on such drivel. Not to mention the MTA should be taken to task for their MISLEADING maps that lead people to believe that a North Beach stop is either included or will be shortly.

    1) Muni plans on serverly cutting the 30/45/8x when the CS opens since they consider those routes to be a duplication of service. So in reality, it there won’t be added capacity along the Stockton corridor. Add in the fact that the 30/45 also service areas north and west of the Washington/Stockton stop, many parts of Northeast SF will see a major decline in service.

    2) Getting federal money to build the CS is all well and good, but there is still a major local and state funding gap. Muni is going to be looking for a big chunk of change in the next year and will most likely find that money through further deferments of maintenance. Furthermore, once the CS is built,
    the Feds aren’t going to chip in to cover the cost of running it. This will mean that system wide Muni service may, and probably will, suffer as a result of increased operating costs.

    3) This was the same argument about the T-Third segment. Just wait and it’ll get better. So while Muni slowly slips down the slope now, and falls off the cliff after the CS is built, we can comfort ourselves in knowing that the good times are just around the next $1 Billion (and 30 yr) corner. And I’m sure Ed Parrilon knows that the T-Third already connects to Caltrain, BART and other Muni Metro lines so Mission Bay is already in the loop and forcing the T up 4th will actually break many of those connections since the Union Square stop is over 90′ down and 1000′ from the Powell Station.

    SPUR, you are on the wrong side of this project, hands down.

  • Alex

    Oh come on, 1000ft is nothing. That’s, what, from one end of Van Ness station to the other? The capacity thing is an issue… and wouldn’t be if the system were designed for >1 car trains…

    SPUR’s support is the least of my concerns. I’m far more angered at the so-called progressive so-called transit friendly supervisors like Eric Mar who shill for this bullshit.

  • @Alex – 1000 feet is three football fields plus. 40 seconds for a World Class sprinter. Me, flat out, probably 2.5 minutes. And then I’d vomit.

    How long for a 68 year old woman from Chinatown?

  • SPUR’s argument is a great example of why we need to stop channeling money for transit through federal redistribution.

    “2. We need to do this project that doesn’t make any financial sense, because the feds will pay for most of it!”

  • Worse part is SteveS, the state and local funding are still significantly short, to the tune of $200+ mil. So that federal money is still not guaranteed.