4 ms·

Sadly, Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. Of course I think it's a political stunt on his part where he

Sadly, Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. Of course I think it's a political stunt on his part where he probably figures if we build the Central Valley bit it'll be politically nuts not to complete the ends where all the population state lives later. But basically it's a fiasco. And by the way, liberal blue Peninsula residents from Palo Alto etc have been the primary blocker for this entire project from the very beginning using environmental impact statements to try and kill high speed rail line going through their environments, something that would increase the value of their cities. It's really sad. Basically another version of we don't want to see housing built NIMBYism at its worst.

ZanyProgrammer 8y ago
I think the original idea was to build the CV segment first as a fait accompli, not really Newsom's idea. And yeah, as the most technically demanding parts (as well as benefitting the most people immediately) the bookends should've been built first. See the whole debate several years ago with "technicals" vs "politicals" on the web.
rayiner 8y ago
Hilariously, the folks who likely voted against the bond measure are the ones that are going to be stuck staring at this monument to big government failure.
DennisP 8y ago
What is your evidence that the environmental impact is actually lower than they claim?
- redwood 8y ago
  Re use of an existing rail right of way on the peninsula
dashundchen 8y ago
> Sadly, Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. Is this actually the case though? While so many outlets jumped on the news to say the project was cancelled, looking into it further it looks like design work will continue outside of the central valley, just not construction. There is too much partisan interference being run by the Trump administration at the federal level, construction will hopefully continue with the next administration in 2020. https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/02/13/editorial-california-high-speed-rail-is-still-on/ https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/02/13/editorial-california-h... > Of course I think it's a political stunt on his part where he probably figures if we build the Central Valley bit it'll be politically nuts not to complete the ends where all the population state lives later. From my understanding that was the plan from the start. Start in the central valley where the construction can bring the most stimulus, land acquisition and design would be more open, and force the route to be kept to.
- rayiner 8y ago
  Newsom clearly rejected the existing plan, saying it would "would cost too much and take too long.” It could take an indeterminate amount of time to formulate a new plan and restart construction. The Second Avenue Subway in New York was stalled more than 30 years after construction started.
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. No, he didn't. Newsome announced that construction would proceed on the part that was already an announced as the initial construction segment with federal construction funds committed and that only design and environmental work would proceed on the rest while additional federal and/or private funding was secured for construction. Which was pretty much a big nothing announcement, since that was pretty much already how things were working (sure, it was theoretically possible for the state to fund construction on other segments without outside funds, but it hadn't planned on doing so), but was quickly seized on by enemies of the project (including the Trump Administration) as being something other than it was. Which is all not to excuse Newsome; at best, his handling of the matter was grossly incompetent.
- rayiner 8y ago
  That doesn't sound quite right: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article226151030.html https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-aler... > “Let’s be real,” the new Democratic governor said as he announced a scaled-back plan for high speed rail. “The current project, as planned, would cost too much and take too long.” If there is not a concrete plan that is viable, the project could sit in the "design and environmental review" phase indefinitely without moving forward.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > That doesn't sound quite right: Yes, the non-substantive framing language around the substantive announcements sounds very different than what was actually announced, but what was actually concretely announced—that construction would proceed as committed on the ICS and that design and environmental clearance activities would proceed on the rest while the state sought federal and private funding—is exactly a continuation of the status quo ante. Whether Newsome was trying to be seen as “doing something” about an issue that was perceived as a problem without actually concretely doing anything or whether he was trying to kill the project by giving political fuel to it's enemies while being able to say to supporters of the project that he had take no concrete steps against it is unclear or whether perhaps he planned concrete changes that somehow were below the level described in the announcement but his staff drafted an announcement that was too high level to capture the substance of the change is hard to say.

ZanyProgrammer 8y ago

I think the original idea was to build the CV segment first as a fait accompli, not really Newsom's idea. And yeah, as the most technically demanding parts (as well as benefitting the most people immediately) the bookends should've been built first. See the whole debate several years ago with "technicals" vs "politicals" on the web.

rayiner 8y ago

Hilariously, the folks who likely voted against the bond measure are the ones that are going to be stuck staring at this monument to big government failure.

DennisP 8y ago

What is your evidence that the environmental impact is actually lower than they claim?

redwood 8y ago
Re use of an existing rail right of way on the peninsula

dashundchen 8y ago

> Sadly, Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. Is this actually the case though? While so many outlets jumped on the news to say the project was cancelled, looking into it further it looks like design work will continue outside of the central valley, just not construction. There is too much partisan interference being run by the Trump administration at the federal level, construction will hopefully continue with the next administration in 2020. https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/02/13/editorial-california-high-speed-rail-is-still-on/ https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/02/13/editorial-california-h... > Of course I think it's a political stunt on his part where he probably figures if we build the Central Valley bit it'll be politically nuts not to complete the ends where all the population state lives later. From my understanding that was the plan from the start. Start in the central valley where the construction can bring the most stimulus, land acquisition and design would be more open, and force the route to be kept to.

rayiner 8y ago
Newsom clearly rejected the existing plan, saying it would "would cost too much and take too long.” It could take an indeterminate amount of time to formulate a new plan and restart construction. The Second Avenue Subway in New York was stalled more than 30 years after construction started.

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Newson actually cut off the ends so now that it's going to be only in the Central Valley. No, he didn't. Newsome announced that construction would proceed on the part that was already an announced as the initial construction segment with federal construction funds committed and that only design and environmental work would proceed on the rest while additional federal and/or private funding was secured for construction. Which was pretty much a big nothing announcement, since that was pretty much already how things were working (sure, it was theoretically possible for the state to fund construction on other segments without outside funds, but it hadn't planned on doing so), but was quickly seized on by enemies of the project (including the Trump Administration) as being something other than it was. Which is all not to excuse Newsome; at best, his handling of the matter was grossly incompetent.

rayiner 8y ago
That doesn't sound quite right: https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article226151030.html https://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-aler... > “Let’s be real,” the new Democratic governor said as he announced a scaled-back plan for high speed rail. “The current project, as planned, would cost too much and take too long.” If there is not a concrete plan that is viable, the project could sit in the "design and environmental review" phase indefinitely without moving forward.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  > That doesn't sound quite right: Yes, the non-substantive framing language around the substantive announcements sounds very different than what was actually announced, but what was actually concretely announced—that construction would proceed as committed on the ICS and that design and environmental clearance activities would proceed on the rest while the state sought federal and private funding—is exactly a continuation of the status quo ante. Whether Newsome was trying to be seen as “doing something” about an issue that was perceived as a problem without actually concretely doing anything or whether he was trying to kill the project by giving political fuel to it's enemies while being able to say to supporters of the project that he had take no concrete steps against it is unclear or whether perhaps he planned concrete changes that somehow were below the level described in the announcement but his staff drafted an announcement that was too high level to capture the substance of the change is hard to say.