HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Dec 6, 2010, 11:31 PM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by pesto View Post
Well, suppose I invested my money in a company to build a railroad and the board decided they didn't have enough money or source of money to build 3/4of it but decided to take my money and build-out Corcoran. Would I (and the other shareholders) applaud their boldness or sue them for gross mishandling of a trust? No response needed.

And, yes, the vote is a complete PR disaster. It's hard to imagine the average voter, the GOP controlled House or any of the groups that are looking for mitiagation in their neighborhoods not using this as an example of government power run amok. If you give it to them they will spend it. Shamelessly.

btw, Fresno has a lot of people but 95 percent plus live in spread out single story suburbs or unwalkable 2 story apartment neighborhoods. Its need for transit of this sort is approximately zero. And meanwhile LA and the Bay are choking with traffic and people who want and need mass transit. That's why California is viewed as "broken".
I'd say you're jumping to about a million conclusions long before any worrying is necessary, pesto.

HSR isn't going to do a damn thing for intra-city transit anyhow, so the traffic choking in the Bay Area and the L.A. Basin's not really going to change. HSR is more competition for airlines than cars, anyhow! Or did you suddenly expect a big drop in traffic in those regions when HSR stops will only be every 20 miles or so?

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 12:07 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Did people really think the entire 500 mile system would get built all at the same time?
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 2:00 AM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Did people really think the entire 500 mile system would get built all at the same time?
Apparently about half of them. Problem is, you'd need to hire about 10 million workers, and the costs would be about $5 trillion to build it in one month.

Train tracks are typically built in segments, from one end to the other. Heck, our new Portland streetcar line has been under construction for about a year now, and they've only laid half the track. They do it one block at a time...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #284  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 3:49 AM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
Rhetoric my friend, rhetoric.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #285  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 8:18 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,518
Quote:
Originally Posted by JDRCRASH View Post
I am not making up wild assumptions and tragic events. The backlash against HSR is real, and it's already beginning to take out the less important projects like those in Ohio and Wisconsin.



So how long will the track sit there unused?
Those states are not suffering at a federal level though. Scott Walker, the new governor of Wisconsin, is so anti rail it doesnt stand a chance. Jerry Brown has been in support of HSR for decades. California has the support of both state and federal leadership.

Nobody poses a threat to the California's HSR funding. The governor, the president, California's senators, the new head of the transportation committee. They all support HSR, especially in California.


The track being built will be in use whenever the first phase finishes. Those other parts of phase one will not wait for this section to be finished. Another section will be begin construction while this part recently announced is still being constructed...and another piece...and another piece. There will be work going on all along the line at some point, in various levels of completeness.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #286  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 8:41 AM
jamesinclair jamesinclair is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 865
Hey guys, major problem here.

I'm having a new home built, and the contractor insists on starting with the foundation.

WTF?

It's a multi-year project and he's starting with a useless part. I mean, I'm having carpet put in so people won't even see it! It's the concrete to nowjere!
There won't even be shelter! What use is a home if it doesn't even protect you from the rain!

I demand he either start with the roof or build the entire thing at once.

This is madness!




Seriously, how do people not understand that a project under construction is not useful until it is done....?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #287  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 4:21 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
Because they are motivated to look for any reason to attack it.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #288  
Old Posted Dec 7, 2010, 5:33 PM
ElDuderino's Avatar
ElDuderino ElDuderino is offline
Droppin' Loads
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Ventura, Santa Rosa, California
Posts: 288
Quote:
High-speed rail agency urged to rethink planning

Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer
Tuesday, December 7, 2010

California's nascent high-speed rail program "needs a thorough reassessment" of how it is being planned and managed, a peer review group has concluded.

The eight-person group, created after voters approved the $10 billion high-speed rail bond measure in 2008, includes experts in high-speed rail, transportation, finance and planning. It is headed by former Caltrans Director Will Kempton, now executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority.

The group, which is assigned with analyzing the feasibility of the high-speed train plan, concluded that the California High-Speed Rail Authority lacks sufficient staffing; a clear financial plan; a business model dictating who will plan, build, own and operate the system and how; as well as a plan to manage inevitable cost increases.

The authority also needs to acknowledge that it could have problems with obtaining access to rights-of-way from other railroads, and needs to determine how much of the system will be built using tunnels and elevated structures to accurately estimate costs, the report concluded.

"We appreciate the peer review group's feedback to the authority and the Legislature, including its clear call to lawmakers to support the project by providing the authority the resources necessary to create the nation's first high-speed rail system," said Jeff Barker, authority deputy director.

Kempton, in a letter submitting the report to the Legislature, said the group "appreciates the challenge the state faces in planning and managing a project of such immense complexity and long time horizon." The authority is charged with building an 800-mile statewide system with a first phase from San Francisco to Los Angeles. The estimated cost is $43 billion.

Many of the issues identified in the report have been raised earlier by critics and overseers. But the peer panel focuses much attention on the importance of a business model. It lays out five models that range from running the system like BART, with the authority handling all planning, construction and operation, to simply buying the right-of-way and turning over all responsibilities for construction and operation to a private entity.

Elizabeth Alexis, a member of Californians Advocating Responsible Rail Design, a Peninsula group that has been critical of the authority, said the report sends a strong message to the authority.

"The message isn't that different" from other critical reports, she said, "but the messenger is. The High-Speed Rail Authority would be well-advised to heed their recommendations."
source: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...MN0B.DTL&tsp=1
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #289  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2010, 1:05 AM
llamaorama llamaorama is offline
Unicorn Wizard!
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,204
Quote:
Hey guys, major problem here.

I'm having a new home built, and the contractor insists on starting with the foundation.

WTF?
That's a shitty analogy and you know it.

Here's how I think and I want you to prove me wrong.

I don't know, it just seems like a gamble. What will happen is that money gets spent to build a high speed line in the Central Valley. Then, HSR dies forever because of politics and that line gets used by a handful of crappy conventional Amtrak trains which may or may not even be able to go all the way to LA. Actually, the part about going to LA seems like the biggest deal to me, after all the reason why no passenger services continue south going that way is because freight has clogged the famous railfan photo spot loopy loop route through the mountains at Tehachapi pass. A tunnel from there to Sylmar would cost 823 gazillion dollars and take 20 years because the environmentalists want to save the mountain lions or something, then fuck it all, am I right?

My question is whether or not it is worth it to tie up a couple billion on something like this, if it was at all possible to take that money and fund something elsewhere. On the East Coast where results would be immediate and would show how HSR could work, and fix the political problem.

Planning anything is a long term thing that is not for the impatient, as I have heard before. But politics change rapidly, elections every couple years and public opinion comes and goes. Attempting a megaproject in the good ol' USA of 2010 seems like an enormous waste of effort.

Last edited by llamaorama; Dec 8, 2010 at 1:17 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #290  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2010, 2:59 AM
glowrock's Avatar
glowrock glowrock is offline
Becoming Chicago-fied!
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Chicago (West Avondale)
Posts: 19,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamaorama View Post
That's a shitty analogy and you know it.

Here's how I think and I want you to prove me wrong.

I don't know, it just seems like a gamble. What will happen is that money gets spent to build a high speed line in the Central Valley. Then, HSR dies forever because of politics and that line gets used by a handful of crappy conventional Amtrak trains which may or may not even be able to go all the way to LA. Actually, the part about going to LA seems like the biggest deal to me, after all the reason why no passenger services continue south going that way is because freight has clogged the famous railfan photo spot loopy loop route through the mountains at Tehachapi pass. A tunnel from there to Sylmar would cost 823 gazillion dollars and take 20 years because the environmentalists want to save the mountain lions or something, then fuck it all, am I right?

My question is whether or not it is worth it to tie up a couple billion on something like this, if it was at all possible to take that money and fund something elsewhere. On the East Coast where results would be immediate and would show how HSR could work, and fix the political problem.

Planning anything is a long term thing that is not for the impatient, as I have heard before. But politics change rapidly, elections every couple years and public opinion comes and goes. Attempting a megaproject in the good ol' USA of 2010 seems like an enormous waste of effort.
I think your pessimism is well-founded, but out of place in this situation, llamaorama. While yes, elections are every few years, political winds shift directions and all that jazz, planning for high speed rail is something that needed to be done decades ago, and at least is going pretty well in California. I think it's important to start with the "easier" sections first, especially given that the Central Valley is in such dire economic straits right now, the thousands of construction and engineering jobs will be a godsend for places like Fresno, Bakersfield, Corcoran, Hanford, Visalia, Tulare, etc... Obviously the biggest challenges are connecting the Central Valley with Southern California as well as the Bay Area, but plans are in place, and funding is coming together, albeit slowly.

This is NOT a waste of effort, my friend. Give it time, things will turn out. After all, who the hell thought that the L.A. Basin would have so many transit projects either being constructed or planned at this time? Patience, young grasshopper. Patience.

Aaron (Glowrock)
__________________
"Deeply corrupt but still semi-functional - it's the Chicago way." -- Barrelfish
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #291  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2010, 5:14 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,518
The main point of this line is to get from LA to SF. That sort of the genesis of why it was considered in the first place. No matter where is starts in that area, it will be pretty useless if not completed. I suppose a train from LA to Bakersfield could be cool, but not what we desire to build.

If you are complaining that it might not ever finish, it doesnt matter where it starts. An unfinished line wont achieve its top goal by far of connecting LA to SF.

Then consider it HAS to start in the central valley. Thats federal mandate.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #292  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2010, 6:50 AM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
I have no problem with it starting in the central valley. A commute from Fresno to Bakersfield where it's top speed (220 Mph) will be easily achieved, sounds pretty awesome.
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #293  
Old Posted Dec 8, 2010, 3:39 PM
ProTram ProTram is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 99
Agreed, and they need a place where they will be able to let the train flex its proverbial muscles. Plus the Central Valley is probably where they are going to get the most bang for their buck, and I feel that once the immediate effects of its construction shows itself(jobs, economic surge, etc), then I think that more funding should become available a little easier.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #294  
Old Posted Dec 9, 2010, 5:11 AM
jamesinclair jamesinclair is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 865
Quote:
Originally Posted by llamaorama View Post
That's a shitty analogy and you know it.

Here's how I think and I want you to prove me wrong.

I don't know, it just seems like a gamble. What will happen is that money gets spent to build a high speed line in the Central Valley. Then, HSR dies forever because of politics and that line gets used by a handful of crappy conventional Amtrak trains which may or may not even be able to go all the way to LA. Actually, the part about going to LA seems like the biggest deal to me, after all the reason why no passenger services continue south going that way is because freight has clogged the famous railfan photo spot loopy loop route through the mountains at Tehachapi pass. A tunnel from there to Sylmar would cost 823 gazillion dollars and take 20 years because the environmentalists want to save the mountain lions or something, then fuck it all, am I right?

My question is whether or not it is worth it to tie up a couple billion on something like this, if it was at all possible to take that money and fund something elsewhere. On the East Coast where results would be immediate and would show how HSR could work, and fix the political problem.

Planning anything is a long term thing that is not for the impatient, as I have heard before. But politics change rapidly, elections every couple years and public opinion comes and goes. Attempting a megaproject in the good ol' USA of 2010 seems like an enormous waste of effort.

I think it's a great analogy.

As others have mentioned, to finish the system, we need every bit of track built. The goal is not a half-finishes system, it's 100%.

California has been working on this since the 1970's. Complaining at every step of the way that "it will never happen" is easy but counterproductive.

I don't understand how the east coast is even relevant, considering California voters put up 10 billion, something no one else has done.

You also say:
"On the East Coast where results would be immediate "

False. The east coast didnt even get money because they weren't prepared. Building rail is far from immediate, it takes years of planning.

I agree that I would have preferred phase 1 to be between Bakersfield and Palmdale. But it wasn't even considered because that section isn't ready, the studies haven't been finished.

Here are the reasons why it was a good choice:

-Every portion of the system needs to be built, might as well start where you get the longest track for your dollar.
-The Valley has an unemployment rate of 18%, 26% when you include underemployment.
-Very little resistance. The counties are on board, the mayors are on board, the people are on board.
-Worst case scenario, amtrak can use it.


You say:
" line gets used by a handful of crappy conventional Amtrak trains "

These "crappy" trains are the number 5 most popular amtrak line in the country. 12 trains a day (6 each way).

100,000 people a month ride the San Joaquin.

For a place where "nobody" rides transit, that's a lot of people.

Even if HSR fails, we get:

Speed increase from 79 to 125mph
Double tracking
Dedicated ROW, no freight, no intersections

=Faster speeds, less delays, ability to schedule more trains a day.

That's pretty much the investment getting thrown at Ohio, upper New York state, georgia etc. Take conventional trains and make them better.


Note: If money allows, Amtrak/Caltrans plan on adding a round trip in 2012 and another in 2013 to the San Joaquin line, for 16 trains a day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #295  
Old Posted Dec 10, 2010, 1:40 AM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
one state's loss is california's gain:

Quote:
CA HSR to get up to $624m from other states' rejected HSR cash
Published Thursday, December 9, 2010, by the New York Times

More U.S. Rail Funds for 13 States as 2 Reject Aid

By Michael Cooper

Ohio and Wisconsin's loss of $1.2 billion in federal stimulus money for rail
projects will be California, Florida and 11 other states' gains, federal
officials said on Thursday.

Ohio and Wisconsin were among the biggest winners of federal stimulus money this
year to build new rail lines in their states; officials in both states had
lobbied aggressively for the money in the hopes that it would create thousands
of jobs and improve their transportation systems.

But that all changed last month when both states elected Republican governors
who vowed to kill the train projects, arguing that they were boondoggles that
would leave their states on the hook for subsidies each year to operate the
trains.

Now both states, which have been hit hard by the economic downturn, are losing
the money. The federal Department of Transportation announced Thursday that it
was taking back the $810 million that had been awarded to Wisconsin to build a
train line from Milwaukee to Madison, and the $385 million that was awarded to
Ohio to build a train line linking Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland. The money
will be redistributed to 12 other states, with the biggest winners being
California and Florida, which are building high-speed trains.

"High-speed rail will modernize America's valuable transportation network, while
reinvigorating the manufacturing sector and putting people back to work in
good-paying jobs," Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said in a statement
announcing the redistribution of the rail money. "I am pleased that so many
other states are enthusiastic about the additional support they are receiving to
help bring America's high-speed rail network to life."

Neither Ohio nor Wisconsin were getting high-speed trains. They were simply
getting new train routes that the federal government hoped would form the basis
of a new national network of trains, which could eventually be upgraded to
high-speed rail. But the new governors-elect questioned who would ride the new,
not-terribly-fast trains.

...

Mr. Walker worried that the new $810 million train route would leave the state
with subsidies of $7 million to $10 million a year to run the trains.
Exasperated train supporters, who saw a lucrative jobs project and an
environmentally friendly way to travel, complained that Mr. Walker's position
was analogous to turning down a free new car, simply because it would cost money
for gas and insurance.

John Kasich, the governor-elect of Ohio, declared "this train is dead" after
being elected, and mocked the slow speeds the train was expected to travel.

Both men expressed interest in using the stimulus money to fix and maintain
highways and roads in their states instead. But the money was part of $8 billion
in the stimulus bill that was directed for building trains and paving the way
for high-speed rail in the United States.

Now they are about to find out if the electorate that supported their antirail
platforms will still support them, now that it has cost their states $1.2
billion.

This fall, Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, a Republican, killed a
long-planned commuter train tunnel under the Hudson River that had received
pledges of $3 billion from the federal government. He cited concerns about the
strapped state's share of the project's rising costs. Now the federal government
is weighing how to redistribute that money to other transit projects, and has
asked New Jersey to return the approximately $271 million already spent on the
project.

The biggest winners of Ohio and Wisconsin's money were California, which will
receive another $624 million on top of the nearly $3 billion it has received so
far toward the construction of a high-speed train from Los Angeles to San
Francisco
, and Florida, which will get another $342 million on top of the
roughly $2 billion it has received to build a high-speed train between Orlando
and Tampa.

Florida's governor-elect, Rick Scott, a Republican, has said he would take
another look at the numbers to see if that train is still viable -- at only 84
miles, the route is not considered long enough by many rail experts to be
optimally served by high-speed rail.

The other states that will get Ohio and Wisconsin's money will be Washington,
which will get up to $161 million; Illinois, which will get $42.3 million; and
Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, North Carolina, Oregon
and Vermont, which will all get less than $10 million.

Wisconsin will be able to keep about $2 million for work on its Hiawatha line,
which Governor-elect Walker has said he supports.
source: http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/newr...reply&t=180558
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #296  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2010, 1:06 AM
ocman ocman is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Burlingame
Posts: 2,687
Quote:
Originally Posted by DJM19 View Post
The main point of this line is to get from LA to SF. That sort of the genesis of why it was considered in the first place. No matter where is starts in that area, it will be pretty useless if not completed. I suppose a train from LA to Bakersfield could be cool, but not what we desire to build.

If you are complaining that it might not ever finish, it doesnt matter where it starts. An unfinished line wont achieve its top goal by far of connecting LA to SF.

Then consider it HAS to start in the central valley. Thats federal mandate.

If you wanted a starting route that would function right off the bat, it would be SD-LA. It would have the highest ridership of any other starting route, but the problem is that it would be costly and untimely and politically difficult to dig through such a highly urbanized area. There would be inevitable cost overruns. You don't want backlash or give ammo to opposition when you've barely started. And it's outside of the main SF-LA route, so sensitive Norcal would throw a political fit.



So the Central Valley is a logical place to start. It's still within the LA-SF route, (which SD-LA isn't) yet it's politically neutral with much less local opposition then you'd get in SoNorCal. And it's mostly cows (which you can move) and large swaths of lands, so you can get more rail for your time and buck, and politically, the project will give the appearance of being less expensive than it will eventually be when it gets the ends of the full route.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #297  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2010, 3:05 AM
DJM19 DJM19 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,518
Its logical and its mandated by the federal government that their money be spent there. Kind of made it easy for the rail authority to decide.

Now that California just got more money, this initial segment may go to Bakersfield, thus covering the two big central valley cities.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #298  
Old Posted Dec 12, 2010, 3:11 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Fresno to Bakersfield is a big deal for grade-separate double-trackage. It will improve passenger rail service no matter what ultimately gets run on the rails there.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #299  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 12:20 PM
202_Cyclist's Avatar
202_Cyclist 202_Cyclist is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 5,913
At Start of Rail Project, a Tussle Over Where to Begin (WSJ 12/13/2010)

At Start of Rail Project, a Tussle Over Where to Begin

By JOSH MITCHELL
Wall Street Journal
12/13/10

"California's plan for high-speed rail service envisions bullet trains zooming from Sacramento to San Diego. To start off, the state intends to spend $4.3 billion to build a 65-mile stretch of track and stations linking two small towns in rural Central Valley.

Proponents of high speed rail say building this portion of track is a good way to launch a multiyear building program. Critics call the project the "train to nowhere" and are using it to fuel a broader attack on the Obama administration's rail strategy.



"It defies logic and common sense to have the train start and stop in remote areas that have no hope of attaining the ridership needed to justify the cost of the project," U.S. Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D., Calif.) wrote in a Nov. 30 letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood..."

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...825514428.html
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #300  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2010, 10:01 PM
JDRCRASH JDRCRASH is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: San Gabriel Valley
Posts: 8,087
^ Don't build anything north of Fresno, and instead use the money to extend the first segment's southern end to Bakersfield. Common sense, really.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 202_Cyclist View Post
Critics call the project the "train to nowhere" and are using it to fuel a broader attack on the Obama administration's rail strategy.
I knew it.....
__________________
Revelation 21:4
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:09 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.