California High Speed Rail Thread

[dl3000]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

just the Vermont portion. though they seemed to insinuate that they will be doing a continuing series on it, so hopefully they feature the true 100mph trains like chicago - St. Louis.

plus they must realize that $10 billion isn't going to get you anywhere with HSR. HSR is insanely expensive.

It's not like freeways and airports are any cheaper...

[phoenixboi08]

Originally Posted by dl3000

It's not like freeways and airports are any cheaper...

I think the better argument is that it's not completely paid for with "tax" money either. Gasoline/oil is heavily subsidized here...

If we're going to invest in something, it may as well be something we'll get a return on. You don't get returns on road (unless you expect people to put up with tolls).

[Busy Bee]

Caltrain seeks new deal with high-speed rail

February 06, 2013, 05:00 AM

By Bill Silverfarb | The Daily Journal



Caltrain and the California High-Speed Rail Authority are crafting a new relationship that embraces the “blended system” on the Peninsula and the two parties are currently looking to scrap two old agreements for a new one.

The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board will hear an informational report Thursday that gives a glimpse into a new memorandum of understanding that is expected to be approved next month.

The current MOU, adopted in 2004, and a 2009 agreement the two parties operate under envision a four-track, grade-separated system often called the “full build-out” that would have caused excessive property takings on the Peninsula as an aerial viaduct was proposed to be constructed.

The new MOU will focus solely on the “blended system” idea first put forward by Assemblyman Rich Gordon, D-Menlo Park, and former Palo Alto state Sen. Joe Simitian almost two years ago.

Although the blended system is expected to have minimal impacts on the Peninsula, about nine miles of passing tracks will have to be constructed somewhere along the corridor between San Francisco and San Jose to allow high-speed trains to pass Caltrain trains. The corridor is expected to be electrified by 2019 but high-speed trains will not access the tracks for many more years after that.

Rest of Story

[202_Cyclist]

New Calif. rail plan to make major improvements in Valley Amtrak

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Mar. 03, 2013


Image Courtesy of the Fresno Bee.

“While many are chattering about high-speed rail these days, state transportation leaders are quietly planning to drop more than $15 billion into California's existing Amtrak train service -- including a big chunk here in the Valley.

Improvements for Amtrak's San Joaquin line are forecast in a draft of a new statewide rail plan that the California Department of Transportation is circulating for public comment through March 11.

The plan offers a vision of how California's system of freight and passenger trains will look in 2020. In addition to high-speed rail -- construction is planned to start this summer in Fresno -- there are improvements to tracks, stations and other features of Amtrak routes and commuter train lines in the Sacramento/Stockton area, the San Francisco Peninsula and Southern California.”

http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/03/03/...ake-major.html

[202_Cyclist]

Diridon Rail Station plans to transform downtown San Jose into 'Times Square of Silicon Valley.'

By Aaron Kinney
03/06/2013
San Jose Mercury


The Diridon train station, at left, flanked by what the new high speed rail station might look like. (Image courtesy of the San Jose Mercury)

"REDWOOD CITY -- The city of San Jose shared its latest vision Wednesday for expanding Diridon Station and transforming the surrounding downtown area into the "Times Square of Silicon Valley."

The ambitious plan calls for a central entertainment district, possibly including a new major league baseball stadium for the Oakland A's, in the midst of new residential and office development.

The Diridon Station Area Plan would add nearly 5 million square feet of office space, 420,000 square feet of retail, roughly 2,600 residential units and 900 hotel rooms to a 240-acre area that includes HP Pavilion. Most of the office space would be situated to the north in an "innovation district" that city officials hope will

Senior planner Michael Brilliot laid out the city's plan for the California High-Speed Rail Authority board of directors at its monthly meeting. Brilliot's presentation highlighted an otherwise anticlimactic session at the San Mateo County seat in Redwood City, where the high-speed rail board had expected to formally approve a key memorandum of understanding with Caltrain. But the matter was postponed when the short-handed board hit an unexpected roadblock and could not produce five "yes" votes..."

[202_Cyclist]

The Government Accountibility Office (GAO) published a report today suggesting the the California high speed rail passenger and revenue forecasts are reasonable.

Project Estimates Could Be Improved to Better Inform Future DecisionsGAO-13-304, Mar 28, 2013

"The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) met some, but not all of the best practices in GAO's Cost Estimating and Assessment Guide (Cost Guide) for producing cost estimates that are accurate, comprehensive, well documented, and credible. By not following all best practices, there is increased risk of such things as cost overruns, missed deadlines, and unmet performance targets. The Authority substantially met the criteria for the accurate characteristic by, for example, the cost estimate's reflecting the current scope of the project. However, the Authority partially met the criteria for the other three characteristics since the operating costs were not sufficiently detailed (comprehensive), the development of some cost elements were not sufficiently explained (well documented), and because no systematic assessment of risk was performed (credible). The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued limited guidance for preparing cost estimates, and this guidance did not reflect best practices in the Cost Guide. The Authority plans to improve its cost estimates.

GAO found the Authority's ridership and revenue forecasts to be reasonable; however, additional updates are necessary to refine the ridership and revenue model for the 2014 business plan. GAO also found the travel-demand-modeling process used to generate these forecasts followed generally accepted travel- demand-modeling practices. For example, the Authority revised several assumptions, such as gasoline price forecasts, to reflect changes in current and anticipated future conditions. However, additional updates, such as the development of a new travel survey, will be necessary to further refine these forecasts and improve the model's utility to make future decisions. External peer review groups have also recommended additional updates.

The project's funding, which relies on both public and private sources, faces uncertainty, especially in a tight federal and state budget environment. Obtaining $38.7 billion in federal funding over the construction period is one of the biggest challenges to completing this project. In the latter stages, the Authority will also rely on $13.1 billion in private-sector financing, but will require more reliable operating cost estimates and revenue forecasts to determine whether, or the extent to which, the system will be profitable. The Authority's plan recognizes the uncertainty of the current funding environment and is building the project in phases. The Authority has also identified an alternative funding source. However, that funding source is also uncertain.

The Authority did a comprehensive job in identifying the potential economic impacts of the high-speed rail project. This includes identification of user impacts, such as effects on travel time reliability, and non-user impacts, such as effects on highway congestion. However, the nature of specific economic impacts will depend on a number of factors, including future project decisions. GAO also found limitations in the Authority's benefit-cost analysis of the project that could limit its usefulness to decision makers. Finally, GAO found that construction of the high-speed rail project will not eliminate the need for additional improvements to meet future statewide-travel demand, but current statewide- transportation assessments and planning have given little consideration to this issue."

Here is a link to the report: http://gao.gov/assets/660/653401.pdf

The LA Times also has an article about the report.

U.S. report backs bullet train revenue forecasts
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,3625147.story

[Ragnar]

High-speed rail's strongest backers now express reservations

The California bullet-train project has collided with farmers, political conservatives and wealthy suburbanites who would like to see the $68-billion system killed. Now it is facing tough criticism from an unlikely quarter: within the ranks of high-speed rail's true believers.

Some longtime backers of the project are objecting to political compromises that they say undermine legal safeguards for the massive investment, notably a design that would move passengers between urban destinations faster than air travel, as well as requirements intended to prevent a half-built system.

Among those raising objections is a Bay Area high-speed rail trailblazer who for decades played a pivotal role in building public and political support for the system. Quentin Kopp chaired the state Senate transportation committee for years and co-wrote legislation that launched the bullet-train project. He later served as board chairman of the state agency overseeing construction of the system.

But in a recent legal declaration, filed in a civil suit seeking to halt the project, Kopp, a retired judge, said the project as now planned violates the law underpinning $9.95 billion in state financing approved by voters in 2008. The declaration puts Kopp in the improbable position of supporting a suit by key rail antagonists: officials in Kings County and two farmers supported by powerful agriculture interests.

"They have just mangled this project," Kopp said. "They distorted it. We don't get a high-speed rail system. It is the great train robbery."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,6470905.story

[Rail>Auto]

Will Amtrak still operate in California after this system is built?

[202_Cyclist]

Originally Posted by Rail>Auto

Will Amtrak still operate in California after this system is built?

Yes, Amtrak service will still continue in California.

New Calif. rail plan to make major improvements in Valley Amtrak

By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Sunday, Mar. 03, 2013

"While many are chattering about high-speed rail these days, state transportation leaders are quietly planning to drop more than $15 billion into California's existing Amtrak train service -- including a big chunk here in the Valley.

Improvements for Amtrak's San Joaquin line are forecast in a draft of a new statewide rail plan that the California Department of Transportation is circulating for public comment through March 11.

The plan offers a vision of how California's system of freight and passenger trains will look in 2020. In addition to high-speed rail -- construction is planned to start this summer in Fresno -- there are improvements to tracks, stations and other features of Amtrak routes and commuter train lines in the Sacramento/Stockton area, the San Francisco Peninsula and Southern California..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/03/03/...ake-major.html

[202_Cyclist]

Brown wants China aboard California's high-speed rail project
His trade mission is intersecting with one of the most controversial issues of his governorship: the state's $68-billion bullet train. He'd love China to pump some money into the troubled project.

By Anthony York
Los Angeles Times
April 11, 2013

"SHANGHAI — Gov. Jerry Brown's trade mission to China this week is intersecting with one of the most controversial issues of his governorship: California's $68-billion bullet train.

The governor has staked part of his legacy on the rail network, a centerpiece of his vision for California. He is hoping that China, which is enjoying an economic boom and spent $77.6 billion on overseas investments last year, according to official figures, will pump some of its cash into the troubled project.

Brown's top economic advisor and rail commission appointee, Mike Rossi, met in Beijing with Chinese investors eager for an update on its progress. And China's vice minister of commerce told a hotel ballroom packed with California government and business officials that his country wanted to explore "the possibility of investment in the high-speed rail project in California..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...,1126817.story

[dl3000]

Bad timing since it sounds like HSR is pretty unpopular in China these days what with the corruption and shoddy construction.

[Busy Bee]

The corruption and construction quality issues are a major issue and there is concern about access due to ticket costs, but that hardly makes their transformational hsr system "unpopular" w/ the Chinese public.

[ardecila]

America is pretty much the only country where a significant number of people think rail is obsolete.

In pretty much every other developed country, the question is not "should we invest in our rail system?" but instead "how much can we afford to invest in our rail system?"

As I've pointed out elsewhere, the ye olde Amtrak station phenomenon doesn't help this perception... much as Americans desire traditional architecture for their homes and town centers, they also expect modern, efficient systems of transportation to have modern design. American airports are pretty uniformly modern, because air travel is viewed as a quintessentially modern thing. I'm glad, too... our airports are world-class.

[easy as pie]

^ i'll vote for you

[blackcat23]

http://www.cahsrblog.com/2013/04/chs...alley-section/

CHSRA Selects Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons Bid for Central Valley Section

by Robert Cruickshank

Yesterday the California High Speed Rail Authority announced it had selected the bid from Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons for the Central Valley section of the construction project. Their bid was the lowest of the five, coming in at $985 million. It also received the lowest technical ranking.

The initial estimate from the Authority for the project cost was $1.2 billion to $1.8 billion. Three of the five bids did indeed fall into that range. A $985 million bid would be a big savings – assuming the cost estimate wasn’t low-balled in order to win the bid with the intent to make it up on the back end with change orders and cost overruns.

For some background on the bid groups, see this CAHSR blog post from last year. As to the bids themselves, based on the “Apparent Best Value Ranking” document, here’s how they stacked up:

Tutor Perini-Zachry-Parsons

Price: $985 million
Price score (70 points possible): 70
Technical score (30 points possible): 20.55
Total score (100 points possible): 90.55

Dragados-Samsung-Pulice

Price: $1.085 billion
Price score: 63.55
Technical score: 26.13
Total score: 89.68

California Backbone Builders (Ferrovial and Acciona)

Price: $1.365 billion
Price score: 50.49
Technical score: 27.71
Total score: 78.20

California High Speed Rail Partners (Fluor, Skanska, PCL)

Price: $1.263 billion
Price score: 54.59
Technical score: 27.71
Total score: 78.20

California High Speed Rail Ventures (Kiewit, Granite, Comsa)

Price: $1.537 billion
Price score: 44.87
Technical score: 21.41
Total score: 66.27

Perhaps their model places too much weight on the cost? $985 million is quite a bit under the anticipated budget, which makes you wonder if they'll try to make up some of the difference with cost overruns. They also selected the bid with the lowest technical score.

The second lowest bid was an extra $100 million, but seems like a much better value given the significantly higher technical score.

Then again, I'm just a layman observer. Perhaps the technical score isn't that important for this leg of the project?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by blackcat23

The second lowest bid was an extra $100 million, but seems like a much better value given the significantly higher technical score.

Then again, I'm just a layman observer. Perhaps the technical score isn't that important for this leg of the project?

Companies having foreign experience with HSR are preferable, but the Central Valley segment is entirely over flat land and is not materially different from a highway project, other than the tighter curve restrictions (vertical/horizontal).

This contract is only for earthwork - grading, basically, including any berms or retaining walls, bridges, and viaducts. So, like a really narrow highway project. Track, signals, communications, electrification - not included.

[Busy Bee]

Yeah, i d wouldn't get too worried about the qualifications of this bid. Like said above, this contract has little to do with the expertise needed to actually make a hsr train go. If CHSRA can save 2/3 billion here, i cheer that.

[202_Cyclist]

Next time Republican$ blather on and on and on about 'job-killing red tape,' feel free to ignore them. Similarly, when you here the GO(B)P go on and on and on about the environmental reviews for the Keystone Pipeline, similarly ignore them.


Rep. Valadao erects another hurdle to high-speed rail

Sacramento Bee
6/27/2013

http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalert...peed-rail.html

[Alon]

I just saw this now, a few months too late, but:

Originally Posted by blackcat23

Perhaps their model places too much weight on the cost? $985 million is quite a bit under the anticipated budget, which makes you wonder if they'll try to make up some of the difference with cost overruns. They also selected the bid with the lowest technical score.

The second lowest bid was an extra $100 million, but seems like a much better value given the significantly higher technical score.

Then again, I'm just a layman observer. Perhaps the technical score isn't that important for this leg of the project?

The bids were weighted 70% on cost and 30% on technical score.

For comparison, Madrid Metro's contracts are 50% technical score, 30% cost, and 20% construction time.

[ardecila]

As I mentioned, grading and earthwork for an HSR line across the Central Valley is not anywhere near the complexity level of an urban tunneling project.