Lets be clear: the option was never HSR or nothing. HSR is the alternative to spending even more money on other infrastructure related to the movement of PEOPLE across the same area. That does not include mass transit or ports, but yes it does preclude expanding airports much more (but that is happening anyway, see: LAX)

Are they really going ahead with HSR?

I've ever wondered how on earth the ninth economy in the world doesn't have a rapid mass transit system. Hey last year I even dared to try booking a ride from Cisco to LAX and result was something like 1 train and 2 coaches for a 7hrs trip time!

California should have invested in this project back in the '70 or '80s and there would not have been any "carmageddon" crazyness.

Funny, the United States was so motivated to fund ambitious plans like sending a man to the moon or building the strongest nuclear weapons, yet it can't fund something like this?

Actually... it's beyond the point of laughable now. It's embarrassing, really.

Maybe the US should just let that certain country of 1.3 Billion people surpass it. Maybe people in D.C. will start waking up under the realization that the US is no longer the dominant superpower... and will likely NEVER be again.

China is full of holes buddy, don't sweat it. The US is far more innovative, which in the end is all that matters. China is no better off than the Soviet Union once was. The US will be dominant for at least another century, quite possibly more.

While I readily concur that no country is perfect, I find it highly doubtful China's problems are what you think they are. They're no Soviet Union, to say the least. Narratives of denial--such as you specialize in--are not going to change that fact.

Back on topic, please.

Since the 60s, the percent of gdp spent on infrastructure has dropped significantly in the states. This may have been something proposed at a national level back then. Now its states largely spearheading the efforts.

time to start rolling the dice, governor.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la...rce=feedburner

In other California high speed rail news, the independent peer review of Cambridge Systematics passenger forecasting found that their methodology and forecasts were essentially sound.

Independent Peer Review of the California High-Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Process 
http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/as...806c959c4d.pdf

I've posted this in another thread but the Senate Commerce Committee is holding a hearing on high speed rail next Wednesday, September 14. The hearings are broadcast on the website and are web-archived.

Moving Intercity Passenger Rail Into the Future

Sep 14 2011 10:00 AM
Russell Senate Office Building - 253

"WASHINGTON, D.C.—The Senate Subcommittee on Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Infrastructure, Safety, and Security today announced a hearing to review the Federal Railroad Administration’s and Amtrak’s implementation of the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008, including the intercity and high-speed rail grant programs.

Please note the hearing will also be webcast live via the Senate Commerce Committee website at http://commerce.senate.gov. Refresh the Commerce Committee homepage 10 minutes prior to the scheduled start time to view the webcast."

http://commerce.senate.gov/public/in...1-de668ca1978a

Will CAHSR be revising their estimates as suggested in the review? Any idea when these will be available?

Ya think?:haha:

Bill Lockyer is 100% correct.

Btw, Lockyer has worn many hats in state government and he's worn them all very well. He should be Gavin Newsom's Lt Governor.:tup:

High-speed rail: Lawsuits could delay, kill plans


Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MQ8.DTL&ao=all




http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/20...1316316137.jpg

Pretty convinced at this point CHSR is never going to happen. The people don't want it and no one is enthusiastic about it outside transport hobbyists. Outside the bay area, California is a very 'stupid' state with no long term ambitions. We have a 31 page thread about this but its realyl just a bunch of nerds playing with their train sets. The real people don't care about this and are going to kill it at every corner.

Everyone outside of the Bay Area is stupid? Clearly those 'wonderful' people in Menlo Park and Palo Alto are going out of their way to support HSR.

Uh, there are plenty of areas in the state that are intelligent and have long term ambitions. LA is very much in support of this project, and its going to be going through actual urban areas here by thousands and thousands of people's homes but we want it. We already passed 40 billion in taxes for transit improvements by a large majority. That is commitment to the future.

If you cannot or will not make your point without insulting millions of people, then this is not the forum for you.

More rail service could spring from new agency (San Diego Union-Tribune)
 

This isn't high speed rail, so I didn't know which thread to post this article in. I understand the concerns about costs and additional responsibilities but the Pacific Surfliner is the second busiest passenger rail route in the US. I assume anything that improves coordination and planning among the fragmented local authorities will help improve investment.

I'm an absolute strong supporter of high speed rail but someone said the other day on the California High Speed Rail blog that improving the LA-San Diego service to 160 mph average speeds should have been the first priority of the CA HSR Authority. This makes a lot of sense. If you could get from LA-San Diego in an hour or OC to San Diego in 45 minutes, it would have encouraged a lot more support for high speed rail, as well as allowing new commuting and work patterns.

More rail service could spring from new agency


San Diego Union-Tribune
9/24/2011

"A plan is in the works that could lead to a significant expansion of rail service between San Diego and Los Angeles.

Regional transportation agencies are considering joining forces for a super authority that would oversee 351 miles of coastal rail between San Diego and San Luis Obisbo.

Among the many changes forged by that authority could be as many as 27 additional daily train trips along the San Diego-Los Angeles corridor, officials said...."

http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...e-southern-ca/

I know my opinion means little on this issue, but I must say that I wholly endorse this proposal.

Corridor service is incredibly important in a good nationwide transportation system.

I don't think he's hating on this project or insulting anyone. I just think he's so pessimistic (as he should be, what with the cacamamie policies coming out of the House of Congress these days) that he's come to the conclusion that the CHSR is now dead.

This, of course, is untrue. Worst case scenario, we WILL end up with a HSR track from Bakersfield to Fresno (Gov. Brown knows the importance of the project and WON'T divert the state-approved funding).

In fact, I think there's a good chance we could end up with a FUNCTIONING HSR line from Fresno to Bakersfield, complete with stations.

The hilarious irony is that the "enlightened" bay area is the one trying to sue the train away.

If you read closely, youll notice Palmdale is suing...TO GET THE TRAIN!

And Fresno is planning their entire downtown revitalization around the train arriving.


Also, if only the train nerds give a damn...how exactly did the bond proposition pass then?

Some seem to quickly forget that HSR was put to a popular vote...and won.

And then again in 2010, Governor brown ran on a pro-HSR platform. The GOp ran against it. Guess who won with an overwhelming victory?

All true. But what you forgot to mention was that voters only approved $9 Billion for HSR bonds. They did NOT approve $40 Billion for HSR bonds....

Additionally, they didn't vote exclusively for or against HSR, they voted for a Governor with a personality and many more issues, and they voted for selling only so much bonds for HSR.

High-speed rail would test power grid (Fresno Bee)
 

The California High Speed Rail Authority is probably greatly overestimating the cost of procuring renewable energy. The price for solar has been decreasing pretty significantly in recent years and I think there is little doubt that it will continue to do so in the years until the high speed rail system is built. There is also plenty of built real estate in the Bay Area and Southern California on which to put solar panels.


High-speed rail would test power grid

By Tim Sheehan
The Fresno Bee
Sep. 25, 2011

"Trains rolling through the San Joaquin Valley chug along on diesel power, hauling freight and passengers at speeds that range from a seeming crawl -- especially if you're stuck at a crossing -- to upward of 75 mph.

But the 220-mph passenger trains proposed by the California High-Speed Rail Authority would run on electricity, with overhead power lines providing juice along the 800-mile route connecting San Francisco, Sacramento, Los Angeles and San Diego.

If the system is ever built, it's going to take massive amounts of electricity to make those trains fly, raising questions about the power grid's ability to meet the demand. If you think your electric bill is high -- just be thankful you're not the Rail Authority..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/09/25/...est-power.html

Except, of course, if that insult is directed towards conservatives or people who don't agree with progressive social policy, right?

Except you have it backwards; you just quoted me literally addressing an ad hominem directed at people from conservative areas and at those who don't share my support for CAHSR. Read more closely.

When conservatives want to gut all funding for high speed rail, Amtrak, New Starts transit funding, bike paths, and cut the US Department of Transportation's budget by twenty percent, all while maintaining tax loopholes for billionaires and oil companies, there is plenty of reason to criticize them.

Buy stocks in those oil companies, and you too can take advantage of the same tax loopholes. Additionally, the poor qualify for more tax loopholes than the rich.

Gutting funding for HSR isn't a cut, since zero funds were allocated for HSR before Obama became President. The Democrats had two years to pass a new Transportation funding bill when they had majorities in both houses of Congress, but decided to pass on that to concentrate on passing something else. Now they can't get what they want because the Republicans have control of one house.
As for cuts in other programs, what cuts? Increasing budgets from year to year shouldn't qualify as a cut, but it is in D.C. if budgets don't increase as much as some think it should.

Electricron:
Are you one of those people like Dick Perry who think we should raise the payroll taxes on those lucky working families that earn $30,000 a year, while we continue with the Bush tax cuts?

This is just nonsensical. The Recovery Act provided $8B for high speed rail. In FY2010, there was $2.4B for high speed rail. FY2011 had $1.5B for high speed rail. Despite what Paul Ryan or Rush Limbaugh says, going from $8B to $1.5B to zero (as proposed by the RepuB(P)licans is most definitely a cut in funding.

Again, this is laughable and nonsensical. Both Paul Ryan's proposed budget and the House Appropriations budget have dramatic cuts to transportation, at a time when China is investing 8% of its GDP and European countries are investing 5-6% of their GDP in transportation and at a time when we haven't raised the 18.4 cent per gallon gas tax in nearly twenty years.

"Under spending caps the House Republicans previously announced, transportation and housing programs would receive cuts of 17 percent, while health and education programs would be reduced by 4 percent."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-0...ding-cuts.html

"Ryan’s budget calls for $704 billion to be spent on transportation over the next decade. That’s $318 billion less than if current spending levels were simply extended forward, according to House Transportation Committee Ranking Member Nick Rahall’s office, and $633 billion less than what Obama requested."

http://dc.streetsblog.org/2011/04/06...il-dependence/

So, yes, I stand by my claim that the GO(B)P wants to gut funding for transportation.

What was the HSR budget before Obama came President?
Zero?

All stimulus funds, including HSR, was added onto of an earlier budget, an increase of what was being allocated before. Restoring what was before isn't cutting.

Increasing taxes so they can increase spending was the way liberals once worked. Today, they're just the opposite, they spend money they don't have then demand more taxes to pay for it. What ever happen to spending what money you have?

This is nonsensical logic. It's like saying that changing the top tax rate to 90% isn't "raising taxes," it's "restoring what was there before."

When something is passed into law, it's passed into law. Changes from that are changes, it doesn't really matter what you call them. An increase from the current law is an increase, a cut from the current law is a cut.

But now Governor Brown is not anywhere near as supportive of the HSR in its current state as he was in 2010.

Since then, light has been shed on the financials of this project that are quite troubling to many who initially supported the project as well as to people such as myself, who only tepidly supported it in the beginning.

I might still support it, but only if the HSR leadership was replaced by more moderate, less arrogant voices that actually listen to community concerns and change the route accordingly and wont lie about the projected costs, projected ridership estimates, estimated time to build, estimated ticket fares and basically everything else.

electricron:
It's very interesting this principal is only applied to keeping roads and bridges from crumbling, funding schools, and providing assistance to veterans. The George W. Bush $700B prescription drug bill certainly wasn't paid for, nor was the completely unnecessary $2 trillion Iraq war. On the other hand, if we want to spend $100M to build streetcars or $2B to improve intercity passenger rail, this is required to be paid for-- just not by raising taxes on the wealthiest two percent who have 23 percent of the nation's income.

I am still am still an idealist- but, maintaining that faith is getting harder by the month.

We, the worker bees and those who are on some kind of government dole, are being manipulated by the smartest minds that money can buy. We live in an age where the content of mass media entertainment, and mass media news is simply sold to advertisers and/or stockholder interests. Our age, too, has the most effective propoganda in the history of humanity- when viewed in conjuction with the 1.7 million people in prison- that is successfully managing to keep people passive while our great nation changes from a rich middle class society to a poor facist society.

Very bright people, who understand Jungian imagery, visual technique, timing, voice, etc., are the hired goons of the 21st Century. Physical controls, while lurking in the shadows, are no longer the center piece of how those in power make people obey their will. Today, control does not have to be in the form of police squads, and, hidden prisons. Instead, the tremendous pool of skills learned by Madison Avenue in selling lifestyle, etc., is being applied by agents of those with the money upon the masses with great success.

The fundamental desire of the rich, is, as it always has been, to preserve their capital and then pass that capital to their descendents.

Now, for whatever matrix of reasons, the US essentially has lost it's ability to finance itself, based upon the taxed earnings of the middle class. This reality means that the government has to become smaller while the middle class has to become richer in terms of better paying jobs. In addition, this means that the rich- those whose net worth is over, say $50,000,000- will have to loose some of their freedom to take profits at current, real, tax rates. The historic alternatives- while different due to the technology of their times- is to either have a form of communism, or to have a fascist oligarchy with no middle class.

The uber rich will not give up their money without using every tool that money can buy first. The former middle class, when the pleasures of widescreen TV, pocket PCs, and, processed foods no longer satisfy them, will eventually have courage in the face of an extremely powerful propoganda machine.

The chance of compromise is rapidly disappearing, and only compromise by all parties could help put the country on the right track.

Don't hold your breath.

Getting back on topic, CHSR, how much are the projected costs up to now?

I'm still interested why streetcars, bike paths, and intercity passenger rail has to be paid for but endless Middle East wars and prescription drug entitlements signed into law by a Republican president doesn't.

California's high speed rail system is estimated to cost between $40B - $60B (the cost of capital and labor, with 12.3 unemployment in CA is relatively less now). The cost of not building high speed rail isn't zero. It's estimated that the alternative to building high speed rail is spending $90B - $100B in highway and airport improvements and capacity expansions.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/bay-...authority-says

Bringing Highway 99 to interstate standards in the Central Valley is estimated to cost $25B. Widening I-5 in San Diego County, alone, is expected to cost between $3.3B - $4.5B.

Spending tens of billions of dollars on more highway/airport projects also doesn't do one thing about the $300B each year we spend on foreign oil, a huge transfer of US wealth to other countries-- many of which are hostile to the US.

The price is not relevant, because the electorate is not in panic mode as of yet. In Sack of Tomatoes, other issues such as medicaid and the very high tax rate are center stage.

That, sir, is why HSR in California is still being fought: most have not seen the "handwriting on the wall" yet, and, IMO, still believe that the auto age will not diminish, that the California economy will recover in the near term, etc.

As I have said before, IMO if the masses of voters thought that this project could be built and bring in tens of thousands of jobs right now, the HSR could be built out at half of the estimated price (say $40 billion) and people could be building it by hand to get a pay check.

Until that point, real estate interests, conservative idealists, etc., will prevent anything concrete from being built (unless they make money out of the deal- and that is what it all about...)

Read "The Octopus" sometime. It talks about railroad corruption in 1900 towards farmers and pricing.

Building HSR today is no different, other than there are more corrupt players who are preominantly in the realestate business and, there appears to be no single ironed willed samaritan.

Hence my point about what is happening in the economy.

The longer the project is postponed, the higher the price will be. I don't understand why people complain about projects going above budget, especially when they are postponed.

^ The fact that people are still arguing whether HSR makes sense in the current environment just shows how clueless Americans are, and how Obama has been a pathetic weenie in defending his mass transit policies.

For once, I wish a certain LA troll (who shall go unnamed, of course) was here to put us out of our misery by telling us how dumb we are.

I still say that if you want to get people to buy into HSR, you should show them that existing regional inter-city rail can work FIRST.

Amtrak needs to be overhauled and reinvigorated. Have that run efficently then you can probably sell the nation on the idea. Afterall, senators in the breadbasket are NOT going to sign off on a fancy train that only services the coasts.

I don't see how complaining on how "clueless" americans are is gonna make any headway. Especially in an era of balooning debts and existing infrastructure that is already crumbling.

waltlantz:
Yes, like how Amtrak's ridership is up 6% in 2011 compared with 2010 and every month Amtrak sets new ridership records. All of this at a time when the vehicle miles traveled by private automobiles decreased 1.5% last year. This doesn't stop RepuB(P)licans from calling Amtrak a "Soviet-style rail system" and wanting to privatize the most valuable routes. Facts don't matter to these people when they have their Ayn Rand-ideology.

Amtrak reports record ridership
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101107149.html

Amtrak rolls toward record ridership
http://overheadbin.msnbc.msn.com/_ne...cord-ridership

Grapevine train route could save $4 billion (Bakersfield Californian)
 

Grapevine train route could save $4 billion

By John Cox Californian
Wednesday, Sep 28 2011
Bakersfield Californian

"Building a high-speed train route over the Grapevine instead of through the Antelope Valley could save up to $4 billion, according to a July progress report released Wednesday.

A conceptual study identified more than one feasible alignment over the mountain pass, prompting engineers on the project to propose a more in-depth study of the Grapevine proposal, originally rejected in 2005.

But missing from the conceptual study, as of July anyway, was a close look at what effect a Grapevine route would have on the project's overall economics..."

http://www.bakersfield.com/news/busi...save-4-billion

This sounds useful. While connecting LA and the Bay by rail is of doubtful benefit, improving rail within the LA and Bay areas should be a high priority. Assuming the absurd HSR route isn't used (which makes it take 1/2 hour longer from Irvine to SD than from LA to SD) this could be a route that competes with cars and air.

High-speed rail route to be revised (LA Times)
 

High-speed rail route to be revised


By Ralph Vartabedian
Los Angeles Times
October 6, 2011

"The proposed California bullet train will undergo major design changes, involving more than half of the route that traverses the Central Valley, the authority building the system said Wednesday.

The plan for building a 114-mile segment of the system between Fresno and Bakersfield was released in August, but encountered heavy criticism from citizens groups, local cities, major land owners and financial experts. The California High-Speed Rail Authority, responding to public feedback, said it would issue a new plan for that section next spring..."

http://www.latimes.com/news/science/...Environment%29

The California High Speed Rail blog also has a post about this here:
http://www.cahsrblog.com/2011/10/chs...bypass-option/

Thank you Jerry Brown! Hopefully this is just the first step in changing over the management and direction of this project.

The problem is, most Americans have not experienced HSR first hand. If they did, they would be in love and demanding it. Come to Europe or Asia, you will see how badly you are missing out. There is nothing better, it is the civilized way to travel.

Fullerton could be home to new Vegas train (OC Register)
 

This looks like a 100% scam. I’m far from certain about the Desert Xpress, and this make the Desert Xpress look like a pretty solid proposal. I hope not one cent of public money is spent on this.

Fullerton could be home to new Vegas train

By MICHAEL MELLO
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER
10/7/2011

"FULLERTON – City officials have jumped on board with a proposal to run regular train service between Southern California and Las Vegas.

http://images.onset.freedom.com/ocre...ji12jrm5.2.jpg
Fullerton city officals are moving ahead with talks to make Fullerton's train station the home of a new Vegas-bound train line. Dubbed the "X Train," the service is planned to feature first-class style seating. The trip from Fullerton to Las Vegas would be about 4 1/2 hours. (Image courtesy of the OC Register)

Fullerton's downtown station is one of the few stops on the proposed service's route, and city officials see an opportunity to hit the jackpot with Vegas-bound travelers taking advantage of downtown businesses.

The service has been dubbed the "X Train" by Las Vegas Railway Express Inc., the private company looking to start trains rolling in late 2012..."

http://www.ocregister.com/news/vegas...fullerton.html

Seems like the last thing this project needs is more redesigning and navel-gazing and more committees and meetings. If construction doesn't start soon, inflation and rising building costs will make the bond issue too small to do any meaningful construction. That will be followed by politicians revoking the bond issue, and the project disappearing back into the ether.

Ridership key to high-speed rail's green success (Fresno Bee)
 

This article misses several points. First, the development of high speed rail is going to be built as the same time as LA County's 30/10 transit investments are built and other rail projects throughout the state like San Francisco's central subway is developed. High speed rail, along with all the other transit investments throughout the state will give CA residents more options if they choose to forego a car. Second, high speed rail serving cities throughout CA and, especially the Central Valley, will encourage much denser infill development (see Fresno's ambitious plans) around the stations. This will encourage walking and further transit ridership rather than driving. This article absolutely misses the trip reduction impact through better land-use planning.

Ridership key to high-speed rail's green success


By Tim Sheehan
Fresno Bee
Oct. 08, 2011

"High-speed rail could help cut air pollution in California -- if the system succeeds in getting enough people out of their cars.

Planners with the state's High-Speed Rail Authority expect that the electric trains could reduce traffic on the state's roadways by 2.5% by 2035.

Each vehicle-mile traveled creates emissions that foul the air with greenhouse gases, smog-forming chemicals and fine particles such as soot and dust..."

http://www.fresnobee.com/2011/10/08/...uestioned.html

A couple of comments:

It must be the final death agonies of HSR when we talk about increasing density around the one train station in Fresno and the one train station in Bakersfield. First, it's not going to happen; second, it's immaterial; make that less than immaterial; third, what kind of idiot is going to want to get packed into high-density housing in Bakersfield so that you can be near the HSR to take you to, say, San Jose, which you will use once a decade?

And the central subway in SF? Please, two of the candidates for mayor want to kill it outright in mid-development and the others are hemming and hawing. Even the transit crowd thinks it's a mistake. It's about a mile long and goes pretty much nowhere, for billions of dollars and with essentially zero net increase in ridership over what is now on the bus. How is this material to building a 600 mile rail system across the length of the state? Actually, the two projects are probably more similar than I give it credit for.

They never was. I am never rode on HSR before. Is that 300 or 400mph? Is that a fastest train? It will save the time. I think HSR will be very successful. Is that nonstop from LA to Bay Area? Can they have a express line?