LA Times Covers HSR
03/29/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
The Los Angeles Times
has given excellent coverage to questions about the
legality of the HSRA’s Central Valley project.
TRANSDEF’s David Schonbrunn was interviewed in this
article about the Governor’s attempt to get other
environmental groups to go easy on this
project.
Other HSR articles in the LA Times:
A detailed look into whether the blended system would comply with Proposition 1A.
Peter Calthorpe’s Vision California vs. right-wing defenders of the status quo.
Other HSR articles in the LA Times:
A detailed look into whether the blended system would comply with Proposition 1A.
Peter Calthorpe’s Vision California vs. right-wing defenders of the status quo.
Hospital Required to Mitigate GHGs
03/28/12 Filed in: Climate
Change
TRANSDEF, along with
fellow litigants the Sierra Club and the California
Nurses Association, prevailed in a challenge to
Sonoma County’s approval of a new Sutter Hospital on
the fringe of Santa Rosa. They challenged the
Environmental Impact Report as being inadequate in
mitigating greenhouse gases, because of the site
being totally auto-dependent. After several hearings
and appearances before a judge, the County agreed to
require Sutter Hospital to provide a shuttle to the
hospital from the nearest SMART rail station. Sutter
will also provide free bus and train passes to its
employees, in addition to other incentives for
vanpooling and carpooling.
These may possibly be the first mitigations in California imposed specifically for GHG impacts. Check out the Press Democrat story.
These may possibly be the first mitigations in California imposed specifically for GHG impacts. Check out the Press Democrat story.
TRANSDEF talks HSR on KPFA
03/19/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
A lively interview on
KPFA’s Morning Mix where TRANSDEF’s David Schonbrunn
details what’s wrong with the HSR project, and how to
fix it. The program runs 12:00.
Reflections Following the Senate Hearing
03/14/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
I think TRANSDEF is
onto something that no one else is stressing: Because
of the way Proposition 1A, AB 3034, was written, there can be no
project without private capital and/or a huge
federal commitment.
So far, the Authority has been allowed to frame the consideration of its plan, which makes it seem reasonable. Here's why it is necessary to pull back and look at the bigger picture:
The strictures of AB 3034 prohibit the very kind of incremental improvements that would be most sensible (and which are standard practice everywhere else in the world): building a HSR-compatible but unelectrified connection between Bakersfield and LA and improving the bookends to enable shared use. Doing all this would demonstrate the ridership potential of decent train service, which would allow an entirely different kind of discussion--a grounded one, rather than a theoretical one--of a statewide HSR system. Read More...
So far, the Authority has been allowed to frame the consideration of its plan, which makes it seem reasonable. Here's why it is necessary to pull back and look at the bigger picture:
The strictures of AB 3034 prohibit the very kind of incremental improvements that would be most sensible (and which are standard practice everywhere else in the world): building a HSR-compatible but unelectrified connection between Bakersfield and LA and improving the bookends to enable shared use. Doing all this would demonstrate the ridership potential of decent train service, which would allow an entirely different kind of discussion--a grounded one, rather than a theoretical one--of a statewide HSR system. Read More...
TRANSDEF's Testimony at Senate HSR Hearing
03/13/12 Filed in: High-Speed
Rail
I’m David Schonbrunn of
TRANSDEF. We’re transit advocates that have been
litigating HSR EIRs for the past 5 years, and have
been highly critical of the Authority’s route
decisions, their engineering and their ridership
modeling. We see the Authority slowly changing
direction and heading in a more viable direction. We
give great credit to the Peer Review Group for their
courageous comments, which were instrumental in
bringing that about. But we are more outspoken: we
vigorously oppose the Central Valley project and urge
you to not fund it. Many environmental groups, under
the aegis of the Planning and Conservation League,
sent the Governor a letter opposing the project, for
the reasons identified by the Peer Review Group and
Legislative Analyst. That creates credibility
problems for the Governor, who is touting this
project for environmental reasons.
Read
More...