trains vs. planes: the HSR concedes that very little of their ridership will come form airplane traffic; almost all from car trips (see their website).

I would guess that zero percent of SD to Bay Area and Sacto. travellers would switch to train (4 hrs. if you can find expresses, which will be rare). And about zero percent of traffic to the OC or the south part of LA county because you will have to connect through Union Station and then circle back south.

IE traffic is not taking airplanes to begin with so really only the Central and SGV part of LA County would be pulled out of airplanes.

Love the stadium dialog here, been awhile since we've seen this type of action on this left-for-dead-not-long-ago-forum. Keep it up.

Another Stadium update... Seems this on a fast track now... Don't you love how they can design a stadium overnight.



=======

Voice of San Diego.

Chargers Near to Releasing Downtown Stadium Drawings

To prepare for my interview on the Chargers stadium search today on KPBS' "San Diego Week," I called team special counsel and stadium point man Mark Fabiani. He ran down what's been a busy couple of weeks for the team and downtown San Diego site. The site is about 15 acres, located east of Petco Park and is the current home to the Wonder Bread building.

Here's what he had to say:

Fabiani met this week with Mayor's Office policy man Phil Rath and downtown redevelopment agency head Fred Maas. Maas, the chairman of the city-run Centre City Development Corp., is the team's main contact with the city, Fabiani said.
"It was important to us because Fred has pulled off big projects like this," Fabiani said.

Maas' participation also is significant because his agency could be involved in the stadium's financing through redevelopment tax revenue.



Fabiani pegged the cost of the project as $750 million to $1 billion. He has long touted that a site downtown saves money because transportation infrastructure, such as roads and parking, are already in place.

The team is having its environmental consultants examine the site. There's likely to be some level of contamination because of the San Diego Transit Corp.'s bus yard included in the site. The team isn't concerned about a geological fault line that runs through the western portion of Tailgate Park, also included in the site plans.


Fabiani also met this week with the team's Kansas City-based stadium architects, Populous (formerly HOK). The plans are for 64,000 seats. Preliminary designs put all the luxury boxes on one side of the stadium. Shops, bars and restaurants will be on the first floor. Unlike other football stadiums, this one would be right along the city street.

"We're not that far away from releasing drawings," Fabiani said.


The team hopes to complete a preliminary financial analysis in two months, Fabiani said. For context's sake, that's around the time, L.A. developer Ed Roski plans to shop financial plans to the Chargers and other team for his stadium project in the city of Industry.

Interesting...because that's not the case in Europe: Many flights have been canceled due to HSR. Personally, even if the times were comparable, I'd choose HSR over the hassle of the airport--the being frisked, taking off one's shoes, the having to be there 2 hours early...If it's 4 hours from SD to Sac by HSR, it's certainly not less by plane, given the travel time to/from airports, the being there 2 hours early, and the flight time itself. Also, my guess is that there'd be far more traffic between SD and Silicon Valley than to Sac. On that trip HSR would easily beat planes(time-wise).

Additionally, I think there's a perception by many that traveling through the air is riskier than travel on the ground. It may be unwarranted statistically, but ancdotally it's a common enough perception.

As for an idea of a station at a ballpark instead of downtown--that's inane. How many people travel from LA or SF to watch the SD sports team? Why would they unless their home team was playing them--and that would still be just the small percentage of uber-fans. DT to DT is the proven track record when it comes to HSR which has been around for decades in other nations.

Interesting; my sense is just the opposite. 18 stops from SD to SF by HSR (more if the East LA and Central Valley stops are added); zero by plane. In either case you have to get to the station with luggage, check luggage, get seated, off-board, pick-up luggage, arrange for transportation. But the plane does it in 1 ¼ hrs. and the train in 4 IF you aren’t delayed at one of the many stations and make your connection onto an express.

HSR figures 5 out of 6 riders will not be from planes (mostly former car users). This is also a tough competition for the train since cars are so much cheaper for families and take you door to door and don’t require a rental on arrival. But this is more for the transit discussions.

I would personally rather go by HSR then plane any day. I used to live in Germany and would hop on the train often for short trips to other European cities.

It's an easier way of travel, you don't feel cramped, you can get up and walk around, cell phone/pc internet works since you are on the ground, and pesto - you have to lug your luggage around in an airport, and check it as well, so I'm not understanding your statement.

This is more for the transport threads, so my final post:

You took a train with 18 stops in Europe? From where to where? The three big differences between the US and Europe: air fares are kept artificially high; cars are impractical in most large European cities, so they don't compete; stops are very few (not 18+ like from SD to SF).

Even then, check how long it takes to go 300-400 miles in northern Europe (say, Berlin to Munich or Frankfurt; Munich to Paris; etc. Most trains will be 5 hrs. plus. The Paris-Lyon-Marseilles TGV trip is 200 mile legs; these make sense for rail. HSR in Spain is legitimately very successful.

There are about 9 or 10 stops between Gothenburg and Copenhagen (200 miles). The trip takes a little less than four hours. There are probably more if you go from Copenhagen to Oslo (around 380 miles).

As for AVE in Spain, that service has not reached Alicante (2012) so I can't judge it yet. Alvia lines are okay. If I'm going to Madrid I'll take it; for Barcelona I'll fly.

Many of the HSR rail lines in Europe have 15+ stops. Note, there are 10 different HSR trains in Europe and I think you are only thinking about the Eurostar which is limited in stops.

I've been on the the Thalys probably 50 times from Koln to St. Maurice which has about 15 stops, the Eurostar Italia has numerous stops on lines from Brindisi to Bolzano, and the AVE from Malaga to Barcelona has 13 stops.

I travel to various locations in Europe roughly every 6 weeks or so. And whoever is stating the rail doesn't have numerous stops is flat out wrong.

And I personally love the rail over there. It's roomy, allows for me to relax or do some work while awaiting my destination.

When I'm in the EU I choose to take rail over plane any day. It's easier for me, they don't get delayed like planes, the hauling around of bags is pretty much the same as you'd have to do in any airport, it's easier to get on and off due to the multiple doorways, but most important to me is that I don't like being in cramped spaces, and I love that I can get up, walk around, check out the other compartments.

Damn it's moving very fast I'm loving it. :D

Perhaps the HSR rail at Qualcomm is an olive branch to Fry for support for a new downtown stadium. Once the new stadium is built they will turn Qualcomm into a transit oriented development of some sort with the HSR and the trolley as the centerpiece, plus a San Diego State addition.

^ Having dealt with Donna Frye on numerous occasions I'd be surprised if she'd like anything get built at the Qualcomm site -- even a nature preserve.

I believe her term is up soon as well and she is termed out. I understand she was considering the Board of Supervisors...

I don't think she would make concessions or a compromise. Downtown should get both the stadium and transit hub. Somehow she let Fenton Marketplace get built and thats in her district. Anybody know how that was pulled?

The Qualcomm site will never be a hub of any sort. It's too suburban for anything practical.

A football stadium is debatable for downtown, but the central station for HSR in the county makes perfect sense. Buses, light rail, freeways, hotels, the airport, cruise ship terminal -- everything is there. I'm not crazy about the scenic route San Diego gets to Riverside on HSR, but from my understanding some funds from Prop 1A will be used to upgrade the existing rail connection to Orange and Los Angeles Counties.

I'm flat out against moving the HSR line to follow the 15 to Qualcomm from the current proposed route through UTC/Rose Canyon, mainly for the following reasons:

* Improvements to the trolley lines (tunneling, canyoning, raised rail) through around I-8 to downtown are to be included as part of the building of the HSR line. If the HSR line is moved to the I-15 we will lose all of the improvements to the trolley lines which are designed so traffic would no longer be affected by rail.
* UTC is the 2nd largest business center outside of downtown, and should be served by rail.
* The council has already approved for the new Westfield/UTC to serve as the area's transit center. The dollars spent are to be incorporated in the rebuilding of Westfield, and is to include a rail stop.
* The Mid-Coast Extension of the Trolley is to follow the same lines from Old Town to UTC, and is scheduled to take advantage of the HSR construction so that it could all be done at the same time to lessen the financial burden. Should the HSR be moved, the Mid-Coast extension will most likely not happen.
* Downtown should have a direct stop on the HSR line.
* Traffic in the Qualcomm area is already a nightmare. Should this serve as a future terminus for HSR the traffic problem will only increase.

They are asking that everyone who is against the change of HSR to I-15 email the following as those who are in favor of the change are sending in a large number of emails:

comments@hsr.ca.gov
rosecanyon@san.rr.com
JerrySanders@sandiego.gov
SherriLightner@SanDiego.gov
benhueso@sandiego.gov

I can't believe we're having a lot of discussion about this...it just doesn't make sense at all...

I seriously hope that they don't build a charger football stadium downtown.