Date: 03-Jun-97 22:39 PDT From: Walter Bays > INTERNET:walterb@best.com Subj: Request to attend San Jose hearing To: DLeavitt@trmx3.dot.ca.gov Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 22:38:54 -0700 (PDT) Cc: 76146.1705@compuserve.com, ab@nortel.ca, jimwheeler@aol.com, kors@netcom.com, mrlenk@earthlink.net, rgnpa@peircesw.com, sloan@batnet.com, TRAC@fortransit.org, webmaster@eltoroairport.org, walterb@shell5.ba.best.com (Walter Bays) Dan Leavitt, Executive Director California InterCity High Speed Rail Commission 1130 K St, 4th floor PO Box 942874 Sacramento, CA 94274-0001 DLeavitt@trmx3.dot.ca.gov (916) 324-1541 Cc: 76146.1705@compuserve.com (Lenora Porcella, Citizens Against Airport Pollution) ab@nortel.ca (Adrian Brandt, Peninsula Rail 2000) jimwheeler@aol.com (Jim Wheeler, Peninsula Rail 2000) kors@netcom.com (Whisman Neighborhood Association) mrlenk@earthlink.net (El Toro Airport Info Site) rgnpa@peircesw.com (Rose Garden Neighborhood Preservation Association) sloan@batnet.com (Vanya Sloan, Alliance for a New Moffett Field) TRAC@fortransit.org (Train Riders Association of California) webmaster@eltoroairport.org (El Toro Airport Info Site) Dear Mr. Leavitt, The San Jose City Council will hold its' second and final hearing on airport expansion next Tuesday June 10 at 7pm, and I urge you to come say that high speed rail is possible, distribute brochures to the hundreds of citizens in attendance, and get rail in the news. I fear that statewide airport expansion plans are being finalized before rail even gets a hearing. Though I'm not directly affected by the SJC expansion noise, my work on Moffett Field showed me that similar issues face airport neighbors nationwide. FAA regulations and airport approval processes understate the environmental impacts of airports, amounting to a massive subsidy of air travel by confiscation of private property value adjoining airports. Rail appears too expensive to build because it's expected to pay its' own way. If airports had to pay their own way (or conversely if high speed rail could confiscate a right-of-way from San Francisco to San Diego) then rail might seem cheap by comparison. I understand that any state agency must be very cautious about interfering in local politics, but I believe the issue is wider. Travel demand is forecast to increase substantially, and California must build its' infrastructure to meet the demand. Either air or rail will serve California's transportation needs. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission's shows little need for airport expansion in the Bay Area if high speed rail is built, because 30% of traffic is North-South within California. San Jose will spend $632 million on airport expansion, El Toro $100 million, and so on. If California spends billions to expand all our airports, where will the money come from to build high speed rail? We will have either airport expansion or high speed rail, not both. With expanded air traffic we'll have environmental degradation, inconvenient waits in airport security screening, increased greenhouse gas emissions, and increased dependence on fossil fuels from politically unstable regions of the world. To expand transportation capacity further would require still more environmental and monetary cost. With high speed rail we'll have the most environmentally friendly transportation, quick convenient travel, and reduced dependence on fossil fuels. (And still leave plenty of air capacity for long distance travel.) To expand capacity further would require simply adding more trains to the same tracks. Japan's shinkansen trains carried 350,000 people per day in 1989 at 270 km/hr, with 278 trains daily between Tokyo and Osaka. It would take a thousand B777 jumbo jets daily to carry that many people. If high speed rail advocates remain silent until all the money is already committed to airport expansion, then you cannot be surprised when no money is available to build your proposals. Please consider letting people know you exist. Regards, Walter Bays http://www.best.com/~walterb/moffett/