Editor’s note: This post was originally published on the Clean Fleet Report on April 7, 2009.
Intermodal solutions allow people to effectively navigate major cities such as New York, Washington D.C., Paris, Madrid, and Tokyo. Subway and light-rail are especially effective, but expensive to build. As cities grow, change, and morph, not every potential route can be served with subway and light-rail. Bus rapid transit is a cost effective way to duplicate some of the benefits of light-rail, at a fraction of the capital expenditure. Buses, taxis, car sharing, bicycling, and walking are all parts of the solution. For many, cars are their preferred way to get around, yet if all transportation were cars then cities would be frozen in gridlock.
High-speed rail integrates all these systems together and moves people from city to city at high-speed. When the distance is only a few hundred miles, high-speed rail coupled with city transit beats airplane and car every time.
Now an 800 mile high-speed rail network is being started in California. Because it depends on local and public-private partnership funding, as well as state and federal funding, it will be built in sections. First online are likely to be areas that are currently overwhelmed with passenger vehicles crawling on freeways that should be renamed “slowways.” Likely to be among the first in service are the Orange County – Los Angeles section and the San Jose – San Francisco section.
San Jose provides an example of current transportation problems as well as the future promise of high-speed rail integrated with intermodal solutions. Currently, during rush hour, cars crawl from all directions into San Jose, the self-proclaimed capital of Silicon Valley. Vehicles overload some of the nation’s busiest highways – 680, 880, 101, 280, 87, and 17.
Commuters to and from San Jose have a number of options. Many require multiple transit agencies and added time to reach their destination. Caltrain services cities from San Francisco to San Jose, at times taking only an hour, at other times being less frequent and taking much longer. Several transit agencies have special commuter shuttles including AC Transit and Santa Cruz Metro.
Major San Jose employers promote carpool and van pool commute programs. Shuttle buses run to the nearby airport. Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority’s (VTA) light-rail and buses effectively cover major parts of the city and connect to other systems. A variety of private bus, shuttle, car sharing, taxi, and other services all help. A network of bicycle trails and paths helps some enjoy their commute and stay in shape.
A central hub for VTA, Caltrain, and Amtrak is the Diridon Station in San Jose, named after Rod Diridon who provided leadership for the modern transportation system in the greater area as six-time chairperson of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and Transit Board. He has also been chair of the American Public Transit Association; he is the Executive Director of the Mineta Transportation Institute and Chair Emeritus of the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CAHSR).
When I met with Rod Diridon last month he was optimistic about CAHSR breaking ground within two years, and carrying a high volume of riders on at least one segment within ten years. The reasons for success are compelling: high-speed rail is less expensive than freeway expansion, less expensive than airport expansion, secured voter approval during a severe recession, will create up to 400,000 new jobs, integrates all of California’s major transit systems, reduces petroleum use, and helps prevent increased climate change damage. Mr. Diridon feels that support is also strong, because each year of delay could add millions to the ultimate cost of the 800 mile system.
In ten years, the Diridon Station is likely to see high volumes of travelers as high-speed rail shuttles people to and from San Francisco in 30 minutes. The CAHSR system will share the corridor currently in place for Caltrain. The station will allow passengers to board Amtrak and continue on to places like Los Angeles and Sacramento. Eventually, the high-speed rail will continue to those destinations, as all right-of-way and not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) issues are resolved.
Tesla Motors is headquartered in San Carlos, not San Jose.
While you mention bicycles, you do so only in passing. That is a mistake IMHO, as electric cars will be expensive to purchase. There’s a good argument of promoting electric bicycles, especially folding types. So far, only a very few models are available in the US, some consisting of expensive add-on kits. Given California’s reliably good weather and reliably bad air quality problems in the summer months, stowing your personal folding electric bike underneath the seat(s) of a train – commuter or long-distance – is a useful if novel concept.
What’s missing is a commitment to raise gas taxes and build dense networks of bike lanes/paths. The Dutch and Danish have the right idea, though they also have the advantage of flat terrain. It’s common to see businessmen in suit and tie biking to work there. Electric assist makes hill climbs much less strenuous, even in e.g. San Francisco. It’s time to remember that bicycles represent a highly desirable mode of short-distance transportation, not just a form of exercise on the weekend.
We must remember pedestrians as an integral part of the transportation network, along with bikes, skates, trains, buses, light rail, etc.
I’ve been a strong supporter for high speed rail transit for years and can not understand why corporate America has not taken the high road in leading the way for the future with this technology. I was deeply disappointed in Florida when Gov. Jebb Bush fought two times to kill the approval by voters for high speed rail transit in Florida. Florida would have had the system up and running between Miami and Orlando has the governor follwed the approval of the voter.
I knew when California visited France last some time back that high speed rail transit was going to be first in California. I have no problem with that but would like to see additions put to high speed rail transit where water, electricity, natural gas and other elements would be added to the system of transportation.
Take water for example, if you added a specific piping system, water could be transported to area around California that have inadequate supplies from areas that have had excessive rainfalls. If you do this on a national system, you resolve water problems for some areas and relieve them for others going through a drought. I’m sure the farming areas would appreciate this water in drought periods and not mind a specific charge when run by a private company, like a private water company.
Going back to high speed rail transit, regional transportation would be reduced for flying (making the skies safer) increase vacation to surrounding areas with high speed access on both ends of the route. It also has a bit of employment opprtunities for the areas where the rapid transit would drop off transait riders with retail operations that are under utilized. It’s a win-win situation all around.