Hi Speed Rail in California

The Chronicle is reporting that the "California High Speed Rail Authority staff is recommending crossing from the central valley into the bay area using the Pacheco Pass instead of the Altamont pass

Neither plan makes any sense.  Among the arguments for the Pacheco route include 

-- Require branch tracks and splitting service to reach Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose, which would make operating the system more complex and costly

-- Necessitate construction of a costly and undoubtedly controversial new transbay bridge or tube.

-- Involve running four to six tracks through populated areas of the Tri-Valley, probably requiring homes to be seized by eminent domain and construction of elevated tracks.

-- Require construction in sensitive wetlands areas.

The Altamont alignment also offers many benefits, Morshed said, including shorter travel times between the Bay Area and Sacramento and the northern San Joaquin Valley, and access to large numbers of long-distance commuters.

The bay area already has a trans-bay tube ... and rail that will not be destructive to sensitive wetlands.  BART needs to be extended from Milbrae in the peninsula to San Jose, and back up to Freemont in the East Bay.  Then "simply" (as if anything is simple) and connect the existing system at perhaps Pittsburg Bay Point to the High Speed rail system.  

The BART system needs to be extended to San Jose anyway.  Lets not forget the less expensive housing in east bay that should be connected to the BART from Freemont to San Jose - thus completing a circular pathway for all of the Bay Area to utilize.  Union Station in San Francisco would be a feather in SF's cap, and I'm sure a lot of power and money people want it there, but having a connecting system that we already have makes more sense than creating an entirely new infrastructure.  Further, the BART will be due for major repairs and upgrades in the next 20-30 years.  This should ALL be included in transportation infrastructure upgrades.