State high-speed rail system held up by flawed environmental report
Revised report to study impacts of all potential routes
by Kathy Switky

As the French and Japanese bullet trains have shown, high-speed rail can provide an attractive alternative to expanded airports and polluting aircraft.

Like these trains, California's proposed 700-mile high-speed rail system (to be built over the next 11 years) would allow commuters to travel between San Francisco and Los Angeles at speeds of up to 220 miles per hour.

While the proposed rail system may offer clean transportation, it will create new environmental impacts. CGF is asking for a complete and fair study of these impacts before a decision is made about whether and where to build the rail. We are working to ensure that studies of the potential routes for the high-speed rail provide a thorough analysis that allows for an environmentally sound decision.

Evaluation must include all routes and all impacts
The High-Speed Rail Authority, the state agency charged with oversight, must weigh the logistical and political practicalities of each particular route, along with the environmental impacts, before the project moves forward.

The Authority earlier this year released a 2,300 page Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR). By law, the DEIR is required to analyze all feasible route alternatives, and consider all permanent negative environmental impacts.

Draft EIR omits one potential route
The DEIR for the high-speed rail project is seriously flawed and stands on weak legal ground. It studied only two Bay Area routes, omitting a third alternative.

One of the routes studied generally follows Highway 152, and the second runs south of Mount Hamilton through Henry Coe State Park.

One of the routes proposed for the high-speed rail would run south of Mount Hamilton and through Henry Coe State Park (above).

The third route crosses Altamont Pass, and is favored by some environmentalists. Because the Altamont route would access San Jose on a spur line, rather than a main route, it is opposed by San Jose politicians and business people - which appears to be the reason it was excluded from the report.

Incomplete report fails to address all impacts
Not only did the DEIR exclude the Altamont route from consideration, it also failed to address the significant and permanent negative environmental consequences of the routes that were analyzed. The resulting incomplete and misleading analysis means that the DEIR as a legal document does not do its job - and makes it difficult for citizens to analyze and compare the consequences of the various proposed routes.

CGF asks for revision and complete environmental analysis
While a number of environmental, citizen and business groups have already spoken up in opposition to various proposed routes, CGF has not yet endorsed any of the potential routes for the rail line. Before we do so, we want a complete DEIR that will allow us to consider and compare the environmental costs of each of the proposed routes.

The public, as well as the High-Speed Rail Authority, requires accurate, detailed and complete information to determine whether the benefit is worth the cost.

Focusing on the need for a complete and balanced analysis of the environmental impacts, Committee for Green Foothills asked the High-Speed Rail Authority to circulate a revised DEIR that considers all of the potential routes and their impacts. Responding to our action alert, many CGF members joined us in asking the Authority to provide a full analysis of our options so that we can make the best decision about which route to support.

Rail Authority backtracks, adds Altamont to analysis
In late September, the High-Speed Rail Authority acceded to our request and decided to expand the study to include the potential route crossing Altamont Pass. This analysis is expected to take another year.

It is unclear at this point whether other deficiencies in the DEIR will be fixed. CGF views this as a necessary step in making an accurate determination of whether the project's benefit is worth its cost.

We will continue to ask the Rail Authority to make other amendments to the DEIR so that it complies with state regulations and provides the information necessary to make an environmentally sound decision on this project.