Gilroy City Council members probed California High-Speed Rail
officials during a special study session Monday for details about
project costs and environmental impacts related to the bullet
train.
A sampling of noises from various trains
Gilroy City Council members probed California High-Speed Rail officials during a special study session Monday for details about project costs and environmental impacts related to the bullet train.
The council’s initial enthusiasm for the project appeared to shift to cynicism, particularly when regional project manager Gary Kennerley said the city could forge a partnership with a developer to pay for the costs of a 6,600-car parking structure for the project.
“A partnership assumes that there’s two people who want to be partners on something,” said Mayor Al Pinheiro who compared a possible downtown rail line to the former Berlin Wall because of the way in which it would divide the town. “You’ve got to be having a return on a partnership.”
The $45-billion, 800-mile California High-Speed Rail system, expected to begin full operations in 2020, is slated to have routes from San Diego to Sacramento and to the Bay Area, transporting passengers at speeds of up to 220 mph. A 123-mile stretch from Merced to San Jose would run through the Pacheco Pass and will likely include a station in Gilroy.
Parking, ridership numbers and tunneling were just some of the subjects addressed during the meeting, which attracted more than 100 residents from throughout South County.
Attendees applauded when council members and residents took shots at the rail project, even as Pinheiro tried to calm them down. Several audience members lived in rural areas east of Gilroy along one of the possible rail routes for the future bullet train.
Last month, the rail authority released a draft document outlining the possibility of aligning a rail line with the Monterey Street corridor with U.S. Route 101 east of Gilroy or a combination of those two routes.
Kennerley and HSRA regional outreach manager Ben Strumwasser kicked off Monday’s presentation with a description of potential benefits of high-speed rail and an overview of the project from San Jose to Merced.
Kennerley said the bullet train reduces dependence on oil by 12.7 million gallons per year, and would spur the need for about 600,000 construction jobs.
The environmental review process for the San Jose-to-Merced portion of the project, which includes South County, is several months behind the schedule of the San Francisco-to-San Jose leg, which is eligible for federal funding from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, Kennerley said.
As a result, the HSRA has not yet hosted some of the same hands-on workshops that have been available in communities along the Peninsula, project officials said.
More in-depth community workshops on topics such as land use and a future train station will be available in the near future, Strumwasser said. Those hands-on events will allow people to break into small groups for discussions.
Rail authority officials are waiting to see how much state funding they receive before moving forward with the workshops, he said.
Ultimately, the HSRA plans to prepare a draft environmental review document for the San Jose to Merced area by July 2011, with a final document ready by February 2012, Kennerley said. If all goes as planned, the HSRA board should approve final project plans in April 2012, he said.
Councilwoman Cat Tucker expressed concern about the lack of hands-on meetings thus far, worrying that the HSRA was ignoring “context-sensitive solutions” in Gilroy, a process in which those who are going to be impacted by a project can have a say in decisions that are made.
She also questioned the rail authority’s ridership number estimates, which have been challenged by a study by the Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley among others. The HSRA has used its ridership numbers to determine that more than 6,000 parking spaces would be needed in Gilroy.
Several council members also asked where the money would come from for the parking garage, and they complained about the appearance of a model of the garage that was superimposed on an aerial photograph of downtown Gilroy.
Many were unhappy when Kennerley said the HSRA would not be footing the bill.
“In essence, what the authority is saying is they’re setting the baby in our lap, and we’re the ones to find a way to fund it,” Pinheiro said.
Councilman Peter Arellano also asked why the HSRA had not looked into the possibility of running the rail line through Gilroy via “shallow tunnels,” similar to a covered trench. Such an idea had been considered but ultimately rejected for the city of San Jose.
Kennerley responded Gilroy’s City Council had never requested that the HSRA look into the idea.
As for ridership numbers, he said there have been disputes by different professionals on the topic, but he urged people to look at the HSRA’s website for more information. He also told the council that parking could be addressed in phases rather than all at one.
About five community residents spoke up toward the end of the presentation, generally expressing ire regarding the project.
Transportation attorney and project critic Joe Thompson said he was more concerned about the solvency of the project than which route it would take. Taxpayers would be left footing the bill, he said.
“This is going to break the backs of the few remaining small businesses that we have left,” Thompson said.
A few local residents said they felt that they were not getting answers to their questions and complained about the amount of outreach that had taken place.
Rural Gilroy resident Elaine Jelsema said local residents still did not know where the route would go and whether it would run on an aerial line or be trenched.
“We’re losing our patience with the vague non-answer answers,” Jelsema said. “Many people feel like they’re victims.”
Rail representatives said they want to continue the process of hosting meetings such as the one Monday to gather input so they can come up with those answers.
“We’re taking the time to complete the environmental analysis and give everyone time to provide input,” Kennerley said.