California High Speed Rail Thread

[fflint]

Originally Posted by Surefiresacto

Would have been awesome if instead of building a whole new eastern span of the bay brigde for both directions of traffic, if they had just built a new single westbound direction bridge and used the other part of the existing bridge for HSR.

Just a random thought as I have no idea how the train would make it to the bridge from the east.

The existing eastern span of the Bay Bridge is anchored by wood posts sunk into the bay mud. It's far too unstable in an earthquake to retain, and too expensive to retrofit.

[ardecila]

Duplicating the Transbay Tunnel would probably be cheaper and easier than building a bridge. Plus, it's easier to earthquake-proof and there are no concerns about aesthetics.

Using the Eastern Span for HSR would only get trains halfway across the bay. You'd still need to get them from Yerba Buena to SF... which would probably be done in a tunnel.

Really, the easiest thing would just be one long tunnel, preferably with four track spaces to allow for an additional set of tracks to be laid in the future, a la the 63rd St Tunnel in NY (but much longer, of course).

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by mfastx

So basically what these people are doing is attempting to prevent a development that will benefit California as a whole in order to stop "a few dozen homes" from getting torn down? LOL do they not realize that when they built the freeways THOUSANDS of homes got cleared out?

That's just selfish.

It's selfish and 90% BS. To quote the article:

...residents and officials worry the bullet trains will be noisy, divide neighborhoods by running atop elevated tracks and force the seizure of dozens of homes along sections of the Caltrain corridor.

Noisy? HSR trains will be much quieter than Caltrain sets are today. And by separating rail completely from road, you will eliminate all the horns and bells that those intersections require. So HSR will actually make the rail corridor quieter than it is today.

And speaking of the corridor, it already divides these neighborhoods...today...without HSR, and has since long before most of these homes were built. Caltrain has been feverishly fencing off the tracks for several years to make sure it's even more effective at separating one side of the tracks from the other. This is just a nonsensical claim.

I can't positively refute the "dozens of seized homes" claim, but it doesn't seem right that that much more space is needed to finish double-tracking the whole Peninsula. I suppose it's possible. But looking at the rest of their arguments, I strongly suspect there is a fair amount of hyperbole in that statement too.

[ltsmotorsport]

Originally Posted by fflint

"[O]ver the Altamont Pass and up the East Bay instead of over Pacheco Pass and up the Peninsula."

Add a second train tunnel under the Bay to SF and I'm in. Let the Peninsula suffocate on its own gas fumes while the rest of the region booms along with new public transit.

Right there with ya.

[202_Cyclist]

Kern Co. wants high-speed rail maintenance yard

Oct. 12, 2010
Fresno Bee

http://www.fresnobee.com/2010/10/12/...peed-rail.html

“The battle to land a Valley high-speed rail maintenance yard intensified this week when Kern County's bid was sweetened with an offer of free land.

At least eight possible sites for a heavy maintenance yard between Fresno and Bakersfield have been advanced, including one south of Fresno and one in Hanford.

Monday, San Joaquin Valley agriculture giant Paramount Farms said it would donate 180 acres to the California High-Speed Rail Authority if it awards the yard to Shafter.

The offer was trumpeted by Kern County high-speed rail boosters as a shot across Fresno's bow….”

[202_Cyclist]

Harry Reid hopeful DesertXpress gets support from next governor
Officials outline federal loan guarantees company will pursue

By Richard N. Velotta
Wednesday, Oct. 13, 2010
Las Vegas Sun

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010...support-next-/


U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, left, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Tom Skancke, president and CEO of The Skancke Company, a transportation consulting company, hold a news conference at UNLV Wednesday, October 13, 2010. LaHood and Reid announced specifics of a federal loan guarantee program for a public-private partnership to expedite development of the DesertXpress high-speed rail system between Las Vegas and Victorville, Calif.
Image courtesy of the Las Vegas Sun

“Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said today that he would meet with Nevada’s new governor after the Nov. 2 election to convince transportation leaders to support the DesertXpress high-speed rail project.

“I think they (the state) better join the team and work on something that is doable,” Reid said in an interview after a press conference at which he and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood gave specifics about federal loan guarantees that would be pursued by DesertXpress Enterprises.

DesertXpress is a $4 billion, 200-mile traditional high-speed rail proposal that would link Las Vegas with Victorville, Calif. Backers have said they would work quickly to build a 50-mile line between Victorville and Palmdale, Calif., to tie into California’s planned high-speed rail network….”

[M II A II R II K]

California High Speed Rail Doesn’t Need to Make a Dime to Make a Difference


October 12, 2010

By Chikodi Chima

Read More: http://alttransport.com/2010/10/cali...-a-difference/

There are a lot of good reasons to build California’s high speed rail system. Few of them are economic. A 100-page, pier reviewed study, “The Financial Risks of California’s High-Speed Rail Project,” concluded that without a massive and continued infusion of cash from the government, the California high speed rail network will never be able to make it on its own. The plan to connect San Francisco to downtown Los Angeles would cost $42.6 billion and so far Californians have come up with $9.95 billion the federal government has chipped in an additional $2.5 billion. That just leaves $30 billion or so to meet the projected costs.

Among the most damning findings of the study:

- Unmet commitments to the California Legislature diminish the project’s credibility.

- The CHSRA’s ridership forecasts, upon which the system’s financial outcome are determined, are too optimistic.

- The CHRSA’s Phase I capital costs–the price of building the train from San Francisco to Los Angeles–should be significantly higher than have been stated.

- The CHSRA’s operating expenses are too low.

- CHSRA’s job creation forecasts are too vague and too large to be credible.

And so the arguments about the costs versus the benefits begin anew. California’s high speed rail plan should not be sold to the public as a transportation panacea. It sets expectations too high, and there is little chance that the California High Speed Rail Authority, or any transit agency can deliver on such promises. In spite of the high costs, and the high risk, the California High Speed Rail network should still be built.

The problem that politicians and transit buffs face always face is that they’re forced to sell their ideas as a life or death struggle. In order to marshall the public to their cause, they must make the case that all the benefits to the public will accrue with minimal costs or even a surplus, as long as we ACT NOW!

Oxford professor Bent Flyvbjerg calls this “optimism bias,” and says that politicians have a perverse incentive to lie about the low costs while overstating the benefits. Californians have been living without a high speed rail system as long as there has been a state, so the need doesn’t seem quite as urgent. Therefore, since there hasn’t ever been one, it’s not hard to imagine life exactly how it is, without high speed rail. Who cares what politicians say?

[SD_Phil]

Oxford professor Bent Flyvbjerg calls this “optimism bias,” and says that politicians have a perverse incentive to lie about the low costs while overstating the benefits. Californians have been living without a high speed rail system as long as there has been a state, so the need doesn’t seem quite as urgent. Therefore, since there hasn’t ever been one, it’s not hard to imagine life exactly how it is, without high speed rail. Who cares what politicians say?

This argument is ridiculous. Imagine it's the early 1950s: California existed without a highway system as long as there had been people in California...since there hasn't been one...why add one now? It'll cost a fortune...

Run the same argument with ANY form of mass transit or infrastructure for the movement of people or goods. What is it that it's suppose to prove? Don't the changing needs of the state or the strains on current infrastructure and projected strains from increased population mean anything or are we just looking backward and saying "things were okay...why rock the boat?"

If things would only just freeze and never change we would never have to change how we live...am i right folks?

[mfastx]

Originally Posted by SD_Phil

This argument is ridiculous. Imagine it's the early 1950s: California existed without a highway system as long as there had been people in California...since there hasn't been one...why add one now? It'll cost a fortune...

Run the same argument with ANY form of mass transit or infrastructure for the movement of people or goods. What is it that it's suppose to prove? Don't the changing needs of the state or the strains on current infrastructure and projected strains from increased population mean anything or are we just looking backward and saying "things were okay...why rock the boat?"

If things would only just freeze and never change we would never have to change how we live...am i right folks?

I agree. People ask "is it necessary? Uh, no, but neither was all the highways. HSR is by far the most convinient mode of transportation between medium distance cities, and that statement is backed up by the percentage of travelers using HSR in other countries, where their HSR is legit.

[pesto]

As I read the article, after pointing out that the politicians lied about the costs and revenues and efficiency of the HSR system, and that HSR in Europe loses massive amounts of money and always will, it says that we should build it anyway. Why? Because it eventually becomes integrated in the fabric of our lives.

This is no benefit at all. It's just an admission that there is no benefit.

[northbay]

^ there are definitely benefits to hsr (of course we'll 'get used' to those benefits and probably take them for granted). it comes down to more than money and some long-term thinking - something politicians (and the public) have a hard time doing.

its good for the economy, environment, society... read sd phil's post - he sums it up nicely.

[k1052]

Originally Posted by pesto

As I read the article, after pointing out that the politicians lied about the costs and revenues and efficiency of the HSR system, and that HSR in Europe loses massive amounts of money and always will, it says that we should build it anyway. Why? Because it eventually becomes integrated in the fabric of our lives.

This is no benefit at all. It's just an admission that there is no benefit.

The problem is people thinking that the farebox is the end all, be all of the economic benefits of HSR (and mass transit in general). The difference is that the Europeans know better in this case and so do the Chinese. There is a valid reason China is spending vast sums to build an immense HSR network, the increased mobility is a huge boost to the economy.

The fact is that it is no longer politically or financially possible to expand existing highway infrastructure into a lengthening list of major cities in order to satisfy our transport requirements.

[202_Cyclist]

San Gabriel hears from Rail Authority and residents

By Adolfo Flores, Staff Writer
Posted: 10/20/2010
Whittier Daily News

http://www.whittierdailynews.com/news/ci_16391198

"With the possibility of high-speed rail line cutting through portions of the city along the 10 Freeway, Enrique Garcia's kids continually ask him if they will have to move.

On Tuesday, the City Council listened to a presentation from the California High-Speed Rail Authority and complaints from residents who believe the proposed train will change the quality of life in their small and historic town.

"I'm here because I have to look at my 10-year-old son when he asks me `are they going to take our house away?"' Garcia said.

A longtime resident, Garcia said he understands the need for the project, but "I want to make sure we're moving forward in the right direction," he said..."

[JDRCRASH]

I don't care what UP thinks. Let us share their ROW.

[SD_Phil]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

San Gabriel hears from Rail Authority and residents

"I'm here because I have to look at my 10-year-old son when he asks me `are they going to take our house away?"' Garcia said.

A longtime resident, Garcia said he understands the need for the project, but "I want to make sure we're moving forward in the right direction," he said..."

I honestly don't know how to respond to someone like this sometimes. I mean the appeal to sympathy wrought on us by making it seem like we're hurting a 10 year old is really indicative, to me, of the mindset behind complains of this kind.

For example:

1. It's really unlikely ANYONE will take be 'taking' a house away. They may choose to move, which is their prerogative, but that's very different from the big bad government taking a house away. Only a child would think this. If any homes will be rendered unlivable by this project then homeowners will be compensated, of course. I won't pretend like compensation is always fair but I have no indication that it won't be if it needs to happen.

2. This whole 'right direction' claim is also equally nebulous. Right for who? You and your son Mr. Garcia? It's likely that it is the right direction for EVERYONE if it increases the economic viability and productivity of the region.

At worst the sound barriers on the 10 would be heightened to increase dampening though the 10 is already so large and loud it seems like a drop or two in the ocean to worry about additional noise from the train.

I mean...I understand the guy, kind of. He's going to be affected (possibly) by this. But blaming his son and vaguely gesturing that this is bad is just emotional pandering.

I feel like a heartless SOB here...I think I should tone it down.

[DJM19]

Indeed. Theres probably not very many homes going to be taken. There will be takings but mostly along existing ROWs. And hey, you can tell your son, in the unlikely chance that your home does need to be taken, "Its ok, we will be paid full value of the home, and just buy another comparable house.". Sorry for the touble, but its not a great moral crime against your family.

[mfastx]

The amount of homes taken will be nothing compared to when they built the freeways. Get over it people.

[202_Cyclist]

Feds give California nearly $1 billion for high-speed rail and related train projects

Los Angeles Times
10/25/2010

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lano...-projects.html

"The federal government on Monday awarded $902 million for rail projects across California, including $715 million to help design and build a section of the proposed bullet train system in the Central Valley.

Officials for the U.S. Department of Transportation said the money would be distributed to 18 rail projects, including $100 million to buy rolling stock and almost $25 million for the installation of an automated braking and train control system from San Onofre to San Diego.

Another $16 million was earmarked for a length of the high-speed rail project between San Francisco and San Jose, and $7 million for signal, bridge and track improvements in Del Mar, a coastal town in northern San Diego County..."

[SnyderBock]

Is there an ETA on the first groundbreaking ceremony yet?

[northbay]

important news, the central valley will be first to start construction, by order of the federal government:

HSRA announces $4.3b must fund Merced-Bakersfield segment
Published Thursday, November 4, 2010, by the California HSRA

FEDERAL FUNDING FOR HIGH-SPEED RAIL DEDICATED TO THE CENTRAL VALLEY
$4.3 Billion Will Go Toward Establishing Core of California System

Following last week's announcement of an additional $715 million award for the
development of California's high-speed rail system, federal officials have
clarified that the entirety of federal funding California has received so far
must be spent in one of the two Central Valley sections of the project --
meaning approximately $4.3 billion in infrastructure investment will be directed
somewhere in the region between Merced and Bakersfield.

California High-Speed Rail Authority CEO Roelof van Ark announced today that a
letter received Wednesday from Federal Railroad Administrator Joe Szabo outlines
the federal agency's requirement that all federal funds for the project must be
directed to either the Merced-to-Fresno or to the Fresno-to-Bakersfield portion
of the project. The available funding total incorporates the Authority's January
2010 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) federal funding award,
matched dollar-for-dollar with state funds, and last week's award of $715
million matched with an additional 30 percent in state funding.

"The Central Valley is indeed key to creating the core of a true high-speed rail
system in California, as that is where our trains will travel truly high speeds
of 220 miles per hour," van Ark said. "But no matter where we start building,
the goal remains the same: a statewide high-speed rail system up and running in
2020 connecting the Bay Area with the metropolitan area of Los Angeles and
Anaheim, that creates thousands of jobs, improves air quality, and provides us
all with a cheaper, faster and more convenient way to travel."

...

The Board is scheduled to select the project section which is first to be
constructed at its December meeting. The selection of a heavy maintenance
facility will not be a part of that decision, and will not be decided until
after the environmental review process has been completed.

for full article: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/46985

more info: http://www.cahsrblog.com/2010/11/fed...entral-valley/