Asides, California, High-Speed Rail, Transit Maps

High Speed Rail Interactive Map

High Speed Rail Interactive Map. One major hurdle to overcome when communicating to voters about the importance of the California High Speed Rail project is lack of familiarity. Unless you are talking to someone who has visited a foreign country and actually ridden a high-speed train, or perhaps to a train geek, it is entirely likely that the phrase “high speed train”, at least in the context of California, could simply bring to mind an Amtrak train that runs a bit more on schedule. Many voters will not realize immediately that high-speed rail — a civilized and just plain cool type of ground transportation that will link California’s cities with a downtown-to-downtown level of connectivity that air travel will never enjoy — is really an entirely different travel mode for the state of California. We have nothing like it here now, so visualizations depicting what the system might look like could be instrumental in bridging the familiarity gap. The High Speed Rail Authority is on it, with its new interactive map of the proposed system. Choose a start point, an end point, and watch the train zip through the countryside, stopping in active, high-density downtown centers. Okay, okay: so the map does mark Pacheco as the default route, though at least with no Los Banos station — but it is still fun to play with. Give it a whirl.
[California High Speed Rail Authority]



9 thoughts on “High Speed Rail Interactive Map

  1. that looks awesome – though it would seem the CHSRA spent all their money building that website :)

    Posted by Doug Cress | 15 May 2008, 6:16 am
  2. The interactive map shows that SF to Sacto via Pacheco would take 1 hr 53 mins. Amtrak currently takes 1 hr 50 mins from Emeryville to Sacto.

    So the map does have the advantage of documenting just how stupid this routing is :)

    Posted by Nick/295bus | 15 May 2008, 7:37 am
  3. But Nick, you’re missing the point! The point is not to see how long it takes to get to Sacramento; the only point you need to know is that it takes 2h 38 min from SF to LA. That is the only leg of the trip that matters. :)

    Posted by Eric | 15 May 2008, 8:26 am
  4. Eric, the only thing that matters is that EVERY train go through San Jose. That’s the ONLY thing that matters.

    Posted by Chris | 15 May 2008, 3:33 pm
  5. Nick,

    I agree with you the routing is stupid, but you’re comparing apples to oranges with your example. Amtrak doesn’t currently offer direct service from SF to Sacramento, and you need to add 30 minutes for the shuttle bus from the Ferry Building to Emeryville.

    A trip from San Jose to Sacramento drops from 3:05 to 1:24, but that is part of the second phase and you’ve pointed out there is already reasonable Amtrak service to Sacramento.

    From SF to LA today you’re looking at a 9+ hour trip including at least one lengthy bus transfer or 12:40 hour trip (including that shuttle bus again) on the Coast Starlight.

    I hope when the time comes to extend service to Sacramento, the Altamont Pass will be back on table to fix the route, but the critical part is still the initial SF-LA segment.

    Posted by Jamison@adventuresin | 17 May 2008, 10:27 am
  6. I’m pretty sure Nick fully realizes that Amtrak trains don’t go to SF now. The point is that SF->Sacto routed through Altamont would enjoy still shorter travel times. And the critical SF-LA segment is of course well served through Altamont.

    As for SF->LA now, just do Megabus all the way. :)

    Posted by Eric | 17 May 2008, 2:21 pm
  7. Altamont was the wrong choice, and Pacheco the right choice, and Pacheco won. Get over it. High Speed Rail is for North/South Travel between Southern California and the Bay Area, and specifically, L.A. to SF, NOT COMMUTER TRAFFIC. And yes IT IS important that CHSR stop in San Jose. To not stop in San Jose would be sheer idiocy. I’m so glad that the Altamont proposal died, like it should have.The right and sensible choice won.

    Posted by JL | 17 May 2008, 2:56 pm
  8. @Eric I didn’t mean to imply support for the Pacheco route. Altamont is the logical choice for all the advantages.

    Posted by Jamison | 19 May 2008, 9:35 pm
  9. I have to agree with JL. The HSR is designed to served longer routes. There are already upgrades being planned as ridership increases, in regional services. The main goal for HSR has always been to connect No Cal with So Cal.

    Posted by JETSF | 6 June 2008, 6:39 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


RSS Feed Facebook Twitter Flickr

Archives by Month

Archives by Topic

Archives of all blog posts, organized by topics and themes. Click here for more.


Links to some of our favorite urbanist and transit blogs, websites, advocacy groups, news sources, and government agencies. Click here for more.

If you are interested in California water issues, you may want to check out my other blog on that topic.

Copyright © 2007-2021 Transbay Blog.
%d bloggers like this: