SERIES: How Viable is High Speed Rail in California

Wednesday, November 10, 2010 - 07:36 PM

The proposed California rail plan, courtesy of the California High Speed Rail Authority

If high-speed rail is going to happen anywhere on a bigger scale than the current Northeast Acela service, it's going to be in California. In 2008, voters approved a $10 billion bond measure to fund a train that can zip people from L.A. to San Francisco in just two-and-a-half hours.

But the train would also be noisy, and to some residents, and unwanted eyesore. Palo Alto and two other cities are suing the state to stop California's plan. It's by no means a sure thing.  KALW's Casey Miner examines the real prospects of the biggest rail project in the country. Listen to the full story here on Marketplace.

And you can see the whole Marketplace series on the Future of Transportation here.


Comments [1]

Christopher Kaprieli

Towns suing to keep the train out reminds me of Chicago when steam railroads were just being built. Chicago sued to keep them out and to protect their board roads from competition. So one of the railroads built to the border and started running goods trains to that point and dumping the cargo on the ground there. When Chicago realized the gold mine they were sitting on, they repealed all the laws preventing trains and now it is the most rail connected city in the world and the center of all sorts of commerce.
IF the high speed rail must go to San Francisco, the elevated line should be built down Highway 101. Land is owned by the state, goes where you want to go, is already improved and won't go through the center of NIMBY towns...

Nov. 10 2010 07:21 PM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.