SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY BLUEPRINT FOR A HIGH SPEED-GROUND TRANSPORTATION SERVICE

Ever since coming to California one hears continually of the argument to expand the passenger rail service while the freight rail service claims – “do not disturb”! The one does not offer good passenger service while the other offers to expand freight due to increasing traffic volumes.

Any “bold and visionary plan” for either or does not seem to be forthcoming. Examining the lacerey of lines across the USA and the recommendations made last month by “Vision for the Future: US Intercity Passenger Rail Network Through 2050” suggests that $375.2 Billion in investments are needed to expand and enhance the national passenger-rail system.

The Association of American Railroads responded that the future of passenger rail cannot “piggyback” on the freight railroad assets. Meanwhile the National Freight Infrastructure Capacity and Investment Study identified $135 Billion over the next 30 years.

All this submitted to President Bush and Congress for an 80/20 federal state matching program for the needs and ways to fund them on the next Federal transportation authorization bill.

Observing the future stance of these two organizations from the outside one is amazed that “rail system thinkers” need simply to continue forward into the future by only upgrading the existing rail system. This might be naïve but based upon the network of land ownership of a average 100-foot Right of Way (R.O.W.) and the assessed value per foot run, including land holdings external to these corridors any alternative question about a concept for a business “Plan B” should be considered.

Imagine the private rail corporations working cooperatively on their property holdings nation wide. Consider further freight lines added to and formed inside of the existing R.O.W. to cater for goods movement. Imagine allowing another more advanced technology to bid for passenger service on the same R.O.W. Would it be impossible to then forge an agreement between these Railroad Company Owners together with a New Technology – say Maglev? If the founders of the Railroad Companies were willing to open up America for development as they did in the past – why not the future? Profit sharing of land underneath the lines, as well as, alongside them then becomes possible.

Transportation Oriented Development is working somewhat on a micro scale why not shift to a macro scale and connect regional cities together? Would this future not be in the community of self-interest to both technologies? The simple addition a new technology would transform the existing focus toward a “bridge of unison” for progress. No more bickering between freight and passenger lines, but a collaboration of planning for America to advance of High-Speed Ground Transportation in the USA – at last!

The cost associated with having two private technologies working together rather than one upgrading and “old technology” and the other trying to find a R.O.W. for a “new technology” has never answered the problem of High-Speed Ground Transportation in the United States.

This “Plan B” is the only logical step for private and political leaders to examine both the nation’s and California’s transportation needs and then to find ways to fund them. Let’s not listen continually to the improbable arguments of expanding the passenger rail service while the freight rail service claims – “do not disturb”!

A place to begin would be to design, fund and connect Merced County to Kern County as a demonstration project for the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint High-Speed Ground Transportation service.

Graham Kaye-Eddie

Master Urban Designer