Western Railroad Discussion > Gov. Davis, "Future lies w/ trains..."

California governor says no new freeways

California governor Gray Davis couldn’t leave well enough
alone as a cooler than normal summer took the heat off his
state’s energy problems. On August 20, Mr. Davis dedicated
the latest section of freeway to be built in California and
declared that the project would be the last. Mr. Davis used
the ribbon-cutting ceremony to underscore his belief that
California’s transportation future lies with buses and trains,
saying that the primacy of the automobile in transportation
planning was over.

Hardly anyone took governor Davis seriously, though, as
analysts pointed out that revenues from mass transit
projects have lagged far behind the associated costs since
Day One.

that is okay...when is that 210 going to be finished...will expedite my visits to Devore. You can put the opening on TV every night for a week, and in every newspaper for a month, but the freeway will have light traffic for a year after it opens. I figure that by avoiding the 10/210/57 interchange, I can shave 20 minutes off my drive....

and yes, the future of the Central Coast depends on trains....only a nut would purposely sit in that traffic week in and week out.

"Hardly anyone took governor Davis seriously, though, as analysts pointed out that revenues from mass transit projects have lagged far behind the associated costs since Day One."

And perhaps one of the so-called analysts pointed out all the road projects that have paid for themselves (excluding toll ways)?

Don Hall
Golden, CO

Only part of the 210 freeway is open now (and it is being called California State Route 210), and its not open all the way out to the real I-210 in San Dimas.

Shades of Jerry Brown and his infamous Dept of Transportation chief (I can't recall her name Adrian Gian...). Thanks to her (and some other local politicians) Sacramento's Northeast Area never had the I-880 extension from I-80 to Hwy 50 and thus we will have perpetual gridlock in Sacramento (and getting worse). She later sold off the property making it impossible for later administrations to build it.

If the Gov doesn't want to build freeways he's better put a moritorium on ALL development in the State also. I don't think he can do this legally although the Sierra Club and the other Enviro groups are trying. Light rail/buses/highspeed rail will NEVER satisfy the demand for transportation needs of the majority of people. A good majority of people want to live in the suburbs away from busy population centers and transit is just not cost effective unless it's installed in very high density neighborhoods. Also - the extra time it takes to get to work using transit and having to put up with the lowlifes on transit is a major turnoff for most people.

Finally our lifestyles have changed over the past 10-15 years - I don't know about anyone else, but at work I'm surrounding by single mom's and 2 parents working families who can't afford to dilly dally around on transit and need the flexibility to go home on short notice to attend to sick kids.

- the extra time it takes to get to
> work using transit and having to put up with the lowlifes on
> transit is a major turnoff for most people.
>

I totally agree! Who is Davis to say that there will be NO MORE Freeways?
I thought we lived in a democracy - The will of the PEOPLE.
No offense ,but public transit is for the "masses" and not for me. I've had to ride Bart and it's one of the most Depressing ways to travel.

should post on the amtrak board more... i get utterly BLASTED for saying these things... they are so die-hard railfans that they think trains are the only answer, governor davis is obviously ignorant, im glad i dont live in california... sucks to be you all

Hate to agree with ol' whippy Davis but he is absolutely right.. You all are ostriches sticking your heads in the sand if you think otherwise. Building more freeways to cure congestion is like loosening your belt to cure obesity. We have to get people out of their autos and onto other forms of transportation. High speed rail has to be developed, more efficient use of Amtrak has to happen. We need more lite rail and monorail and the busses need to be improved. Bike routs and paths have to be improved and more bike lanes are needed. We are running out of oil folks and the pollution is killing us..

Now... I'll get off my soapbox and fack to railfanning

forcing people to other forms of transportation is not a SOLUTION, its hypocritical and lazy. In fact, the root of all these problems is not lack of roads. Its POOR Urban planning, done (allowed by) politicians who have had their pockets greased by the construction lobby for years, and thats a fact. Atlanta, LA, Sanfran, the northeast and other parts are clear examples of this

Not everybody on TO lives in CA and/or wants to talk about CA politics.

AaronJ wrote:
>
> Not everybody on TO lives in CA and/or wants to talk about CA
> politics.

who cares, is that a reason to delete it?

It's also not a solution to keep building freeway after freeway after freeway only to see them clog up a few days after they're built.

California has more freeway miles than almost any other state I know of, yet still has horrific traffic. To me, that means we need to look for other solutions. There are no panaceas. High speed rail is needed, as are expanded urban transit systems. In some selected areas, freeway and road networks need to be expanded.

It all comes down to the fact that the United States in general has massively underfunded public transportation systems. We're barely beginning to catch up.

Freeways are the most inefficient way to move people and goods, their traffic produces a massive amount of emissions, and they take up vast amounts of valuable and extremely expensive urban land. Freeways are necessary, but they are only one link in a national transportation system.

Building high speed rail between LA and SF would be a major investment, but it would also be a good one. It would remove a huge amount of air traffic from SFO and OAK, possibly removing the need to fill in a chunk of San Francisco Bay for new runways at SFO.

(Lest you think I'm some kind of outside meddler, I live in the San Francisco Bay Area. I deal with the local traffic, and I know it's simply not feasible to expand freeways here any longer. It's time to look for other solutions.)

AaronJ wrote:
>
> Not everybody on TO lives in CA and/or wants to talk about CA
> politics.

The only thing "Stupid" would appear to be AaronJ if he thinks this problem applies only to California!

I don't live in California - although I am a fourth generation Californian with much of my family still living there. I do take an interest in what goes on in California because what happens there frequently indicates what may be happening with rest of the west and sometimes even the east coast.

My $.02 - our failure as a society to identify and assess serious problems, expecting the "free market" to fix things, has led us down some pretty unrealistic paths. Autos, traffic and internal combustion smog is only one. There is no simple solution. Increased public transit is definately one of them - even though low lifes like me and millions of other ride on it offending others. COntinued use of private automobiles isn't going away for a long, long time so we need to address issues related to their use by increasing fuel efficiency and continuing to reduce emmisions. At the same time, down-sizing them will, literally, serve to reduce congestion - at least in a small way (no pun intended, but accepted). We need to slow down a bit - the concept of the rat race was recognized many years ago and yet we in the US continue to think that we have to do things even faster and more efficiently. Gotta have our cell phones, everything has to be instant, so we don't want to waste all that extra time riding transit. Curious, as average traffic speeds in urban areas continue to slow (and they are) those who ride transit will find that their relative commute times will look better and better. Talk to many of the people riding Metro to work in Washington, DC everyday.

End of rant - out of breath - must stop now.

Don Hall
Golden, CO

There are so many variables in California - most of it has to do with bad planning and the rush to develop land into commercial properties to create a tax base for growing communities. In Sacramento we have urban areas doubling and tripling without virtually any upgrade to the current highway system. Light rail and bus can help with comuting but the traffic nightmare is no longer confined to the commute anymore. In certain sections of downtown Sac and Roseville delays have become commmonplace even on the weekends from travelers Heading East/West (I-80 corridor) and North/South (I-5/Hwy 99) corridor.

The main problem is a lack or coordination between communities, the state, and special interest groups (enviro and business lobbies) who have diverging views of how things should be built (and not built). It's a mess and it's going to get worse with or without transit.

anaheim-al wrote:
>
> California governor says no new freeways
>
> California governor Gray Davis couldn’t leave well enough
> alone as a cooler than normal summer took the heat off his
> state’s energy problems Mr. Davis used
> the ribbon-cutting ceremony to underscore his belief that
> California’s transportation future lies with buses and trains,
> saying that the primacy of the automobile in transportation
> planning was over.

I think all this planning and chest thumping is a day late and a dollar short. Is it any wonder why Chicago and New York are so far ahead in Commuter Railroad facilities? It's because the leadership took advantage of the existing lines they have. Mass Transit is a staple in every major metropolitan area that wishes to reduce traffic headaches. Metra as an example, keeps expanding with new lines, and more trains and equipment. Metro North and the Long Island continue to improve their equipment and infrastructure. In those 20 years, California has built expressways. (Yes they did build some commuter services, however they were not satisfied with the off the shelf stuff, costing much more than other agency's).
>
> Hardly anyone took governor Davis seriously.....

That's no surprise to this mid-westerner. His last press gaff; looking to buy Ethanol from a foreign country instead of the U.S. because in his words "the railroads are too costly and ineffecient" left many here laughing.


Someone also mentioned the desirabilty of transit vs. the quality of a car ride. In many cases such as a trip to the mall or the grocery store, this is true. However, when business or legal matters brought me to the downtown area, there was no comparison to riding the rail. For a $6.00 ticket I saved gas, wretched traffic, and parking fees. Even if you had to take a cab to your final destination, you still saved money over driving. The intangible item you save is your sanity. What better way to settle down after a days work than to watch the "others" fighting traffic on the expressway outside your coach window as you zip along at 79 MPH. When I would go out to eat at the many fine resturants in the Downtown area, it was natural to want to sit back and relax after a good meal, and converse with my company, instead of dodging pot holes and lunitics on an expressway.

But such ideas like this may work in the rustic - backwards Mid-West, but it seems too radical in the more sophisticated places in this country.


RRKen

I enjoy riding the rails, the rails being the light rail in Denver. The city is incredably zealous in booting cars at parking meters, towing cars from ``free'' lots and charging high prices at pay lots. I could actually enjoy the Denver Art Musuem and the Lbrary with my wife knowing the car was safe in the Mineral Street parking lot ~ no parking meters, no boots and no tow trucks.
However, one thing concerns me. Following from a distance the antics of Gray Davis makes me wonder that if rail transit has him as a friend does it need enemies. Maybe some of you closer to the scene can set me straight on that.

I, like many others, are tired of many California posters talking on this board like nothing is important outside of California. I'm not saying everyone does this nor everyone feels this way. I am saying that this discussion lies elsewhere. If this site costs Todd money to maintain, I would rather the discussions concentrate on railfanning and not California politics. I stand behind AaronJ and crazy_nip.

is blowing the right direction when you're standing behind them. If a thread like this bothers you, then just say "no" and read something else. No need to gripe about it. As for using up Todd's disc space or bandwidth, I don't think so. Nothing compared to the picture traffic on TO.

Why do people complain about the subject matter of threads? I mean you have a mouse, you have fingers, you clicked on said mouse with said fingers.... whats the deal? Are you the same people who complain about all the spam email, but refuse to use the delete button?

Sorry, getting off my detergent box now.