Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, April 18, 2011, 4:08 PM
https://n2v.paloaltoonline.com/square/print/2011/04/18/caltrain-eyes-providing-initial-high-speed-rail-service
Town Square
Caltrain eyes providing 'initial' high-speed-rail service
Original post made on Apr 18, 2011
Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, April 18, 2011, 4:08 PM
Comments
Posted by Martin
a resident of Downtown North
on Apr 18, 2011 at 5:04 pm
a resident of Downtown North
on Apr 18, 2011 at 5:04 pm
Kudos to Simitian, Eshoo, Gordon, Caltrain, and "potentially" CHSRA, for working together and trying to create a solution that does not destroy our neighborhoods.
Finally, some common sense in the game.
Posted by No-Way!
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 18, 2011 at 7:34 pm
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Apr 18, 2011 at 7:34 pm
Caltrain is an almost non-existent organization. It's board is made up of amateurs, and the system has absolutely no experience in running a system profitably. The idea that it can take on HSR is ludicrous.
Time for Simitian to take "the long walk". He's been talking to his labor union friends just too darn long.
Posted by Walter_E_Wallis
a resident of Midtown
on Apr 19, 2011 at 9:25 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.
a resident of Midtown
on Apr 19, 2011 at 9:25 am
Walter_E_Wallis is a registered user.
Simitian finally got one right. While no one can predict what will run on the tracks between Gilroy and Frisco, I would rather have electrified, separated Caltrain sooner and 250 mph to LA later.
Posted by Davis FIelds
a resident of Downtown North
on Apr 20, 2011 at 4:23 pm
a resident of Downtown North
on Apr 20, 2011 at 4:23 pm
I appreciate the sentiments from this week's press conference, but I will be watching to see how some apparent contradictions are addresses. Every speaker talked about NOT having an "aerial viaduct" on the Peninsula, but I don't think you can run trains at 150 mph or more on tracks that have ground-level street crossings ("grade crossings")... and the only alternative to a grade crossing is a bridge (which seems like an aerial viaduct to me), a tunnel (already rejected for cost reasons, as I understand it), or just closing some of the streets that currently cross the tracks.
I also don't understand the insistence that a "blended" Caltrain/high-speed system can move trains from San Jose to SF as quickly as one with dedicated high-speed tracks.
So... it all sounds great, but the devil will be in the details. Please let's get on with it - we definitely need both a stable, fast Caltrain system and California high-speed rail.
