News

Rod Diridon: High-speed rail on track, needed

Transit advocate tells Rotarians that project is too far along to reconsider basic routes

Rod Diridon, a key leader of the high speed rail project to link San Francisco and Los Angeles, told a Palo Alto audience this week that it's $90 million and many months too late to reconsider routes.

Diridon, speaking to the Palo Alto Rotary Club at Ming's Restaurant, said the rail project is too far along to reopen the routing discussion, despite a coalition of Peninsula cities that are suing or threatening to sue to block the route up the Peninsula along the Caltrain right-of-way.

Diridon the week before ruffled feathers at the Palo Alto City Council meeting when he refused to say the project would "negotiate" with local cities, but that their comments would be considered along with other input to a "scoping" process leading to a full environmental impact review and report on the Peninsula segment of the $40 billion-plus rail system.

He said there have been about $90 million in engineering and route-assessment studies done for various segments of the preferred route, selected after many months of public meetings and discussion.

Most of Diridon's presentation focused on how the United States is lagging behind the rest of the world in utilizing high-speed trains. He said the trains have massive environmental benefits over other forms of transportation, using 1/5 the energy of cars and 1/3 the energy of airplanes, which he called the "most polluting" form of transportation per passenger mile.

As envisioned, the trains would speed up and down the Central Valley at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, but would travel through the Peninsula at about 125 miles per hour. They would require grade-separated tracks, with alternatives of either tunneling or elevating the tracks triggering resident protests of a raised "Berlin Wall" through communities.

Diridon said that as a High Speed Rail Authority official he is precluded under federal regulations on environmental reviews from expressing personal opinions about preferred alternatives. He said the scoping sessions will define alternatives to be studied in an extensive environmental review of the project, which will culminate in and environmental impact report with all alternatives listed, with impacts and costs.

The final environmental impact report is expected to be completed by mid-2010, at which point everyone involved will know more precise details of the project so the debate over alternatives will be more strongly based in facts, Diridon said.

He hurried through a PowerPoint presentation showing the sleek trains already in use in Japan, France, Germany, Britain and all other industrialized nations -- save one: the United States.

Diridon, who has focused on transportation issues for decades and has been called the "father of light rail" in Santa Clara County, is a former member of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and a former candidate for the state Assembly. He currently heads the Norman I. Mineta Transportation Institute at San Jose State University, and is chairman of the board of the California High Speed Rail Authority.

Voters approved the rail project last Nov. 4 by a 52 percent majority, authorizing $9.9 billion in startup funds, with the balance of the estimated $40 billion to be raised from major grants and other sources.

Diridon's entire PowerPoint presentation on high-speed-rail projects worldwide can be viewed by clicking here.

SEE ALSO:

High speed rail agency strapped for cash

Comments

Posted by Bruce Karney, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Mar 20, 2009 at 3:37 pm

I'm so glad that I live in Mountain View which is NOT "suing or threatening to sue." Though there is a huge range of diversity in opinions, education, and income here, my general feeling is that Mountain View is both progressive and practical when it comes to planning for change.

I wish the tech visionaries who have created so many jobs, products and wealth in Silicon Valley would get more involved in local political discussions to balance the yelps of those who want everything to stay just as it was the day they moved to town.

The routes for the High Speed Rail were debated extensively and publicly for 2+ years. Let's figure out how to do the best we can as we move forward in the process, not backwards.


Posted by tommygee, a resident of Rex Manor
on Mar 20, 2009 at 3:55 pm

Yes, the routes for the High Speed Rail were definately debated for a long time. And the local newspapers/internet showed the different routes possible coming into the Bay Area. And the route was decided on; The Cal Train corridor. The population at large should know this already so no one should really be surprised.
Mountain View would make a great HSR stop as Cal Train, Light Rail, and the busses all stop at Castro St. at Central Expressway.
So stop the bickering along the peninsula and lets move forward WITH HIGH SPEED RAIL. It is coming.


Posted by Andrew, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Mar 20, 2009 at 9:02 pm

Amen. Mountain View makes way more sense than PA or RWC. Downtown MV is just better connected to the transportation grid...the one exception being the San Mateo buses that terminate at Palo Alto. Couple this with a modification to the light rail, perhaps extending it to the Shoreline area businesses. Remember the debate maybe a year ago about a shuttle to downtown from that area? Do that with light rail and downtown MV makes even more sense.


Posted by Fred, a resident of Monta Loma
on Mar 21, 2009 at 12:45 am

High-speed rail claims (12 arrivals, 12 departures per hour) and two hours to LA probably are as much B.S. as the pre election claims for BART – 90-second headways (time between trains)! Reality, 20 minute headways.

What is for certain, the housing growth by greedy developers around the Central Valley stations will certainly grow to wipe out the agriculture of the valley. Then where will the U.S. get its food?


Posted by Carol, a resident of Monta Loma
on Mar 21, 2009 at 12:51 am

If you can get from Fresno to Silicon Valley people in 1 hour people will commute here to work. Low cost housing solution, cheap land for developers?


Posted by eric, a resident of another community
on Mar 22, 2009 at 1:27 pm

I would love to see a real, non-politicized cost-benefit analysis of running HSR from SJ to SF. Where is the benefit? It will do nothing to decrease traffic on the Peninsula. It will shave <45 minutes off of an SF-LA trip-- a marginal benefit at best. It will cost millions better spent elsewhere on the HSR line. It will drastically increase congestion in whatever small city on the Peninsula gets stuck with a station-- combine that with some very poorly thought out growth being allowed in Shoreline, and getting around our small city will become a joke. It will create horrible blight wherever the tracks are elevated (take a BART trip and look out the window for a preview of what HSR WILL do to some local neighborhoods). It will minimize the potential economic benefit around a more sensible northern terminus.

Rod Diridon is a bully, a thug, and a small-minded politican who has no concern for the public or the Peninsula.


Posted by smart growther, a resident of Old Mountain View
on Mar 22, 2009 at 6:03 pm

Seriously, where will we get our food? Walk into a grocery store. Land in the valley is the least of our problems. The one thing I know for sure about public projects is that they will cost more than officials state and provide fewer benefits. I like the concept but i bet it will be 20 years before we see the project completed.


Posted by HSR bankrupt, a resident of Blossom Valley
on Mar 24, 2009 at 7:59 am

High-speed-rail agency strapped for cash
Rail authority looks for a state loan for 800-mile high-speed-train line

by Gennady Sheyner
Palo Alto Online Staff

Share
ADVERTISEMENT
Free Hotel Stay
Just months after California voters approved the sale of $9.95 billion in bonds to build a high-speed rail line between San Francisco and Los Angeles, the agency in charge of the project says it's running out of funds and is banking on a state loan to keep the work on track.

So far, several contractors have already halted their engineering work on the 800-mile rail line, which the California High-Speed Rail Authority plans to build and operate by 2020, rail authority officials said last week. According to a report issued last month by the state treasurer's office, the high-speed rail project had about $4.2 million in unpaid bills for work already performed.

Given the tight fiscal situation, the agency's Executive Director Mehdi Morshed said the agency will have to "do the responsible thing and stop work" if it doesn't receive state funds in the next few months, according to an Associated Press report.

"If we do not have any money for the next few months, we can't in good conscience ask people to keep working," Morshed said, according to the AP.

But Judge Quentin L. Kopp, chairman of the agency's board of directors, said this week he expects the project to overcome the temporary financial setback and meet the agency's projected timeline. Though he acknowledged that some contractors stopped working because of the funding shortage, he said he expects the rail authority to soon get an injection of funds from the state's infrastructure fund, which is managed by the Pooled Money Investment Board.

"Only a few contractors slowed their work," Kopp told the Palo Alto Weekly. "Many contractors are continuing to work, on the promise that they will be paid as soon as the treasurer derives proceeds from the Pool Money Investment Fund or we get some other type of financing."

The treasurer's office has placed the high-speed rail project on a list of infrastructure projects that could get a state loan, even if the bulk of the infrastructure fund remains frozen. The loan would then be repaid with proceeds from the $9.95 billion in bonds, which have not yet been sold. But the board has yet to release the money for any of the projects on the list.

The rail authority is banking on a mix of federal funds, private investments, bond money and contributions from local agencies to finance the $45 billion rail line, which would allow passenger trains to reach speeds of 220 mph and travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in 2 hours and 40 minutes.

The San Francisco-to-San Jose section would cut through the Peninsula along the Caltrain corridor. Rail officials are expected to begin putting together an Environmental Impact Review for this section. The document is expected to analyze the various track alternatives for the train (elevated, underground or trenched) and consider locations for rail stations.

The project has stirred controversy in Palo Alto and neighboring cities, some of whose residents are concerned that the Rail Authority will take their properties by eminent domain to make room for new railroad tracks.

Rail officials have consistently warned that delays would add major costs to the rail project. Rod Diridon, who sits on the rail authority's board of directors, told the Palo Alto City Council on March 2 that delays could cost the authority about $2 billion per year.

"When you're talking about a $40 billion project, if you lose a year you lose $2 billion worth of buying power," Diridon said.

But agency officials aren't panicking yet. The rail authority is just beginning its engineering work for the eight sections of the 800-mile line and actual construction won't begin for about two years. This gives the state time to sell bonds from Proposition 1A and make the $9.95 billion available to the authority.

"We're still in the front end of the whole project," said rail-authority spokesman Jeff Raimundo. "The delay does threaten to raise costs, but if the money is released in a few months, it's not a big deal."

The rail authority also hopes to land a sizeable chunk of the $8 billion President Barack Obama included in the economic stimulus bill for nationwide high-speed rail projects. To do that, it has to demonstrate the project could be "shovel ready" by 2012.

But rail officials hope the state infrastructure fund will address the authority's immediate needs. The state's Pooled Money Investment board is scheduled to meet on March 18 to discuss the infrastructure fund. At that time, the board will decide whether to open up the fund, keep it frozen or release a portion of the funds, said Tom Dresslar, spokesperson for the state treasurer's office.

"We don't know when the final freeze on all infrastructure projects will be lifted to any extent," Dresslar said.

Kopp said he was confident that once the money is released, the halted work would resume and the project would proceed as planned. The high-speed project, he said, is in no way in danger.

"This does not threaten the overall project in any way, shape or form," Kopp told the Weekly. "And it does not delay the eventual timeline because we have about two years of engineering to complete."


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Indian street food and ... bitcoins?
By Elena Kadvany | 4 comments | 2,799 views

Analyze data yourself with R - a fast growing language for statistics, forecasting and graphs
By Angela Hey | 2 comments | 2,269 views

. . . Loved in Spite of Ourselves
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 2,116 views

"The Galapagos Affair: Satan Came to Eden"
By Anita Felicelli | 0 comments | 975 views

Crittenden Hosts Startup Weekend
By Ms. Jenson | 1 comment | 111 views