California High Speed Rail Thread

[pesto]

Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist

High-speed rail project likely delayed until 2013

By Tim Sheehan
The Fresno Bee
Tuesday, Feb. 28, 2012

“Construction of a high-speed train line in the central San Joaquin Valley was supposed to start late this year. Now, officials say, it's not likely to start until early 2013, even if state legislators approve billions in bond money this spring.

At its meeting Thursday in Sacramento, the California High-Speed Rail Authority will learn about an updated schedule for the $6 billion construction project.

The slowdown in the schedule is the result of revisions to environmental reports for the 120-mile Fresno-to-Bakersfield section of the rail line -- part of the backbone of a proposed 520-mile system of electric trains connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles. Later extensions would add lines to Sacramento and San Diego.

About $3 billion in federal stimulus and transportation funds earmarked for the project in 2010 and 2011 were based on construction starting by September 2012. But a 2013 start isn't expected to endanger the funds, high-speed rail officials said, because the more important deadline is having the work completed by late 2017…”

http://www.fresnobee.com/2012/02/28/...struction.html

I suspect the delay is mostly political. Easier to rearrange priorities after the election. Especially if you're going to step on the toes of big contributors.

[jg6544]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

I dont know what your trying to imply with this comment, but the AirBART bus service between Oakland Airport and the Coliseum BART station is just fine at night, in fact every 10 minutes during all BART service hours.

Furthermore, this is currently being built between Oakland International Airport and the Coluseum BART station.

http://sf.streetsblog.org/wp-content...09/OAC-pic.jpg

Construction pics:

Friend of mine who lives in Berkeley won't take mass transportation to Oakland International after dark - just too dangerous waiting on those platforms. He uses SFO instead, even though it's a longer train ride.

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by jg6544

Friend of mine who lives in Berkeley won't take mass transportation to Oakland International after dark - just too dangerous waiting on those platforms.

Well, lots of people do take it night and they apparently do okay.

He uses SFO instead, even though it's a longer train ride.

That platform is eerily desolate during most of the day and night--even the walk to that platform from the tram is pretty lonely and feels totally removed from the rest of the airport. I think Id prefer the coliseum bart if I had to choose based on feeling safe. But that's me.

[M II A II R II K]

California’s Bullet Train — A Fresh Start and a Change in Direction


March 7th, 2012

By Ken Orski

Read More: http://www.infrastructureusa.org/cal...-in-direction/

A new strategy is beginning to emerge toward California’s embattled high-speed rail venture. The strategy is designed to rescue the project from a possible defeat at the hands of the state legislature, gain friends and supporters among local transportation agencies, win converts among independent analysts and turn around a largely skeptical public. The plan combines the existing commitment to proceed with construction of the first rail segment in the Central Valley with near-term actions aimed at upgrading rail facilities at both ends of the proposed LA-to-SF high-speed line. Specifically, the so-called “bookend” strategy will involve “blending” high-speed rail service with commuter rail service in existing Bay Area and Southern California rail corridors.

At the northern end of the line, between San Francisco and San Jose, bullet trains would share track with Caltrain commuter trains. Both would benefit from new investments in electrification, signaling systems, bridge replacements, passing tracks and grade crossings elimination. Similar type of improvements would be introduced at the Los Angeles/Orange County/San Diego ends of the line, benefitting LA’s Metrolink and other Southern California commuter rail and transit systems. Improving the urban “bookends” of the system will make it possible to increase the speed of local commuter trains and thus bring immediate benefits to large segments of California’s urban population. It will be a good investment whether or not the overall $98 billion high-speed rail project ever goes forward, said Will Kempton, chief executive of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and Chairman of the independent Peer Review Group advising the High Speed Rail Authority.

The investments will be funded with a portion of Proposition 1A funds, supplemented by matching funds from local government agencies. Up to $2.3 billion in bond money and its $950 million “interconnectivity” fund would be committed to these near term improvements according to well-informed sources. This would provide approximately $1.4 billion for Southern California and $900 million for the Bay Area, assuming a 60/40 split. Another $2.7 billion has been already set aside for the 130-mile Central Valley segment, leaving roughly $4 billion of Proposition 1A money for future HSR construction. The new strategy has evolved from discussions held by the High Speed Rail Authority’s new chairman, Dan Richard with the Governor and his fellow board members. In a conversation we had with Chairman Richard several weeks ago, he was frank to admit that significant changes must be made in the Authority’s way of doing business if the bullet train project is to retain the support of the state legislature, overcome the skepticism of independent critics and turn around public opinion. The Authority must find ways, in the Governor’s words, to do things “better, faster and cheaper.”

.....

[electricron]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

California’s Bullet Train — A Fresh Start and a Change in Direction
http://www.infrastructureusa.org/cal...-in-direction/
The Authority must find ways, in the Governor’s words, to do things “better, faster and cheaper.”

I like the Bookends solution for moving forwards. CHSR never intended to run 200 mph where commuter rail agencies operated anyways.

[DJM19]

Well the bookends were always going to be built, but I guess this just assures people. People just need to understand that track building must begin in open land where the trains can be tested. They will never be able to test up to 250mph in a metropolitan area.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by DJM19

Well the bookends were always going to be built, but I guess this just assures people. People just need to understand that track building must begin in open land where the trains can be tested. They will never be able to test up to 250mph in a metropolitan area.

There's a difference to what is proposed now than in the past. Now, Bookends means using share tracks in a common right-of way, in the past it was using dedicated tracks in an expanded common right-of way.
If that is confusing, that the equivalent to the difference between a street having up to four lanes vs two parallel two lane streets. And that one street doesn't necessarily have four lanes, it could be as little as two lanes.

Using shared tracks in urban areas is a significant difference than using dedicated tracks.

[pesto]

The logic is still to build ONLY the bookends. The part in the middle is useless until there is real evidence that cars and air can't handle the load faster and cheaper.

But delaying the middle should give the people a good view of how long it really takes for HSR to travel through huge metro areas vs. what the proponents claim. Maybe we'll all be positively impressed.

[aquablue]

How much time will this new approach add on to the SF-LA trip time?

I hope to God that they keep it competitive with airlines and that this cheaper solution won't slow the trains down too much.

I hate to see this value engineering. If you are going to build a HSR line, just build it properly, otherwise don't bother.

[DJM19]

Originally Posted by aquablue

How much time will this new approach add on to the SF-LA trip time?

I hope to God that they keep it competitive with airlines and that this cheaper solution won't slow the trains down too much.

I hate to see this value engineering. If you are going to build a HSR line, just build it properly, otherwise don't bother.

Legally, it cant add any time. The legislation has very specific time requirements on how long it can take to go from LA to SF. The blended method is only being used in "urban" areas as far as I can tell...Areas where the track will be upgraded to handle speed of up to 110mph most likely. Though the train will still not go that fast through a neighborhood. The real time saving is in the open areas.

[fflint]

CAHSR trains have never been planned to barrel down the Penninsula or through the San Fernando Valley at 220mph anyway. As noted, the high speeds will be attained outside the metropolitan 'bookend' corridors.

[JDRCRASH]

Recently i've occasionally come across sources that say the trains will actually be capable of 240 mph in the central valley rather than the original 220 mph speed. Perhaps they will be able to make up for time lost running at absurdly low speeds. BTW this is why I think stations at places like Norwalk, Industry, and Burbank are a complete waste of time and money because not only do they duplicate Metrolink service, but they are unable to reach their max speed allowed in urban areas.

[ardecila]

Does anybody understand what the interim alignment in the Bay is? Obviously there's no rail through Pacheco right now, so LA-SF trains will have to go over Altamont. But then how do they reach SF? Do they somehow go south to SJ then turn north up Caltrain? Or do they go up to Emeryville with bus connections to SF and a BART connection at Coliseum?

JDR, 240mph is faster than any revenue rail service in the world (the Shanghai Maglev is faster). Nobody has figured out how to run steel-wheel on steel-rail trains at 240mph regularly. SNCF has gotten trains to go faster, but only under very controlled circumstances.

[fflint]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Does anybody understand what the interim alignment in the Bay is? Obviously there's no rail through Pacheco right now, so LA-SF trains will have to go over Altamont. But then how do they reach SF?

No. As noted dozens of times in this thread, CAHSR will be going through the Pacheco Pass and trains will reach San Francisco via the Penninsula.

[ardecila]

I said interim. There's no money to build a line over Pacheco right now, and presumably CHSRA will want to run some kind of service in the meantime over the billion-dollar line they're about to build in the Central Valley. Currently there is no rail line of any kind through the Pacheco Pass, so it's not even an option until CHSRA finds the mega-billions to build it from scratch.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I said interim. There's no money to build a line over Pacheco right now, and presumably CHSRA will want to run some kind of service in the meantime over the billion-dollar line they're about to build in the Central Valley. Currently there is no rail line of any kind through the Pacheco Pass, so it's not even an option until CHSRA finds the mega-billions to build it from scratch.

True. But how many $Billions is it going to take to lay HSR tracks in the Pacheco Pass? California voters have approved $9 Billion of bonding capacity.
So far, they've allocated approximately $2.5 Billion for the bookends and $2.5 Billion for the central valley. The Feds have allocated approximately $2.5 Billion for the central valley too. That still leaves $4 Billion of California bonding capacity left.

[DJM19]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

Recently i've occasionally come across sources that say the trains will actually be capable of 240 mph in the central valley rather than the original 220 mph speed. Perhaps they will be able to make up for time lost running at absurdly low speeds. BTW this is why I think stations at places like Norwalk, Industry, and Burbank are a complete waste of time and money because not only do they duplicate Metrolink service, but they are unable to reach their max speed allowed in urban areas.

I think they have always planned on them being capable of that, but operationally it will probably be more like 220...

[fflint]

Originally Posted by ardecila

I said interim. There's no money to build a line over Pacheco right now, and presumably CHSRA will want to run some kind of service in the meantime over the billion-dollar line they're about to build in the Central Valley. Currently there is no rail line of any kind through the Pacheco Pass, so it's not even an option until CHSRA finds the mega-billions to build it from scratch.

The epic Altamont v. Pacheco battle was very hard-fought and drawn-out, but has been a settled issue for years now. When CAHSR comes to the Bay Area, it will enter the region via Pacheco, roll up through San Jose and along Caltrain's Penninsula corridor on the west side of the Bay.

Now, it's not that I don't see the merit in the Altamont alignment--that was my preferred path--but there's no good reason to believe anything will induce the CAHSR Authority to re-litigate every single hard-fought battle of the last several years. And you're mistaken in believing re-routing CAHSR into the East Bay, well north of San Jose and across many miles of water from the Caltrain corridor, would save any time or any money whatsoever. That's just not how things work here--any new alignment would require decades' of process, and total failure would be much more likely. There's a reason the NIMBYs' first big attempt to kill CAHSR came in the form of kicking HSR off the Caltrain corridor--because they knew any alternative was much, much less viable and would engender tremendous, perhaps fatal, delay.

[202_Cyclist]

High speed rail chief: Bullet train won't cost $100 billion

Agency leader says train will cost less and launch sooner under revision

By Mike Rosenberg
San Jose Mercury
03/13/2012


Neil Struthers, on left, of Santa Clara and San Benito Counties Building and Constructions Trades Council, speaks during rally held out-side before the Senate select committee on high-speed rail hearing hosted by legislative Democrats at Mountain View Center for the Performing Arts in Mountain View, Calif., on , Saturday, March 10, 2012. (Josie Lepe/Staff)

"Promising "improvements" to the state's controversial bullet train plan, the new head of the project told a Senate hearing in Silicon Valley on Tuesday he now believes building high-speed rail would cost less than the alarming estimate of nearly $100 billion.

"I believe the number's coming down," Dan Richard told a packed auditorium Tuesday night. "Obviously the $98 billion was sticker shock for a lot of people."

Using existing tracks like Caltrain and speeding up the construction schedule would bring down the costs of the project, Richard said in defending the much-criticized plan that Gov. Jerry Brown has appointed him to revive. He also promised quicker upgrades to Bay Area and Los Angeles commuter lines that would share the track and upgrading the initial leg of track in the Central Valley..."

http://www.mercurynews.com/californi...ost?source=rss

[Misterfreeman87]

I ve just stumbled across this thread. Is there any decision made yet about which system will be used ? French TGV, Japanese Shinkansen, German ICE or another system ?