California High Speed Rail Thread

[Busy Bee]

The impression the IOS will make will change all that.

[FromSD]

Originally Posted by TWAK

The proposition limiting how funds can be raised was incredibly dumb (they had to since CA was even more anti-tax back then), but going along 99 instead of another route is great because it serves a lot of people (6 million +) along the route. Ridership will be a lot higher if it goes along populated corridors and I can't really speak on the So Cal route since I know more about the project for nor cal.

My county doesn't even have a regular rail line but I still like the project, because trains are cool and that means no spending limits!

Yeah, the route along 99 does hit the Central Valley population centers, which is a good thing. The downside is that that route is less direct than a route along I-5 would have been. That means more track mileage. To make up the extra miles, Ca HSR has to support higher operating speeds to meet the end to end trip requirement of 2:40. So that means more tunnelling, longer viaducts, even less tolerance for curves. Plus the Highway 99 route often runs along the existing BNSF mainline, which has added construction costs for things like long cantilevers to get HSR from one side of the freight tracks over to the other. The lengthy deviation through the Antelope Valley, however, is even worse. The AV only has about a quarter million people. That deviation was due to a political deal between an LA County Supervisor and a member of the Ca HSR Authority.

[Busy Bee]

The San Andreas fault also had a lot to do with it.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

The station is going to be 5-6 miles south of downtown. That means it isn't serving the public purpose that CAHSR is, which is spending a ton of money building its stations in not just the downtowns of its major cities but also its minor ones. CAHSR will interchange directly with local public transportation in many places.

Have you ever been to Las Vegas?

Downtown has but a fraction of the attractions and hotel rooms located on the Strip. Also, downtown attracts the less affluent--which matters in this discussion because Brighline tickets will be quite expensive relative to driving the family to and from town.

No, the Strip will be the primary destination of the overwhelming majority of Brightline riders. That is where all of the splashy megaprojects are located. So how would Brightline or its riders be better served bypassing the Strip entirely, only to force travelers to somehow backtrack several miles from downtown?

The planned Brightline terminal is less than a mile from the South Strip Transit Terminal, a major 24-hour transit hub just south of the airport. It would be easy for RTC to connect the Brightline station with the SSTT.

[TWAK]

Downtown Paradise? Vegas proper really got the shaft.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by FromSD

T Plus the Highway 99 route often runs along the existing BNSF mainline, which has added construction costs for things like long cantilevers to get HSR from one side of the freight tracks over to the other.

The pergolas are an irrelevant expense as compared to the cosmic expense of the long tunnels.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by MAC123

It is going to break your mind when you find out that California can build more than 1 thing at a time, and in fact does that constantly.

Like if you even taken a second to think before typing that you never would have. California is constantly improving local transit, and while it has its shortcomings, has come a long way from even the 1990s

What a silly response.

Duh. The point is what could that money have done if it were put elsewhere?

[MAC123]

Originally Posted by jtown,man

What a silly response.

Duh. The point is what could that money have done if it were put elsewhere?

The point is that there's more money than that, and it's narrow minded to think that it can only go to one thing.

The money is being put elsewhere; California is investing more into public transit now than ever before. And that includes a lot more than just CAHSR.

[numble]

Originally Posted by MAC123

The point is that there's more money than that, and it's narrow minded to think that it can only go to one thing.

The money is being put elsewhere; California is investing more into public transit now than ever before. And that includes a lot more than just CAHSR.

I do think a comparison instead of speaking in vague terms is worthwhile, though. The State of California has provided CAHSR with $6 billion in bond funding and $6.5 billion from cap-and-trade revenue. In that timeframe, it also passed SB1 to raise gas taxes to fund roads and public transit, but individual transit projects usually only receive $100-$400m in funding from the state.

It is fine to argue about what the state budget allocations for everything should idealistically be going forward, but I think it makes sense to say that the $6.5 billion in cap-and-trade revenue allocated to CAHSR to date from past budgets would have otherwise gone to urban public transit projects (since most of the rest of the cap-and-trade revenue goes to them, and the purpose of the program is to pay for emissions reduction projects).

[TWAK]

The Caltrain portion would count for that, unless the funds came from more than just HSR?

[numble]

Originally Posted by TWAK

The Caltrain portion would count for that, unless the funds came from more than just HSR?

$600 million of the $2.44 billion Caltrain electrification project budget came from HSR bond funding, the rest came from other sources.

[jtown,man]

Originally Posted by MAC123

The point is that there's more money than that, and it's narrow minded to think that it can only go to one thing.

The money is being put elsewhere; California is investing more into public transit now than ever before. And that includes a lot more than just CAHSR.

Resources are finite.

[Busy Bee]

I would recommend to all who question California's ability to finance this project to remind themselves just how utterly enormous the economy of California is. The insinuation that California can't afford this is insulting and laughable. The politics of this project is what has held back it's full aggressive support. Once the awe of the IOS is on full display there is going to be a paradigm shift in political perception and public awareness that will fundamentally change the trajectory of Phase 1. It is my prediction you'll be hard-pressed to find many that will want to pull the plug after seeing the future with the IOS streaking across the Central Valley and departing gorgeous stations unlike anything most American's have personally seen. Fence walking politicians and even Repugs won't be able to get on board fast enough to chase public enthusiasm by throwing their full support behind aggressive completion of Phase 1.

Have some confidence.

[hughfb3]

Upon opening day of the IOS, the CAHSR Authority should also open an express service from San Francisco to San Jose with actual high speed rail trains in full livery so people can see that more has been done than just the Central Valley segment.

This could build even more support for the connection tunnels between the Bay and Central Valley segments

[craigs]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

Upon opening day of the IOS, the CAHSR Authority should also open an express service from San Francisco to San Jose with actual high speed rail trains in full livery so people can see that more has been done than just the Central Valley segment.

This could build even more support for the connection tunnels between the Bay and Central Valley segments

I know a lot of intersections along the Caltrain route have been overhauled with under- and overpasses, but are there still at-grade crossings? If so, IIRC it would limit how fast the HSR trains can run on between San Jose and San Francisco.

[Busy Bee]

^Good idea

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by craigs

I know a lot of intersections along the Caltrain route have been overhauled with under- and overpasses, but are there still at-grade crossings? If so, IIRC it would limit how fast the HSR trains can run on between San Jose and San Francisco.

I think he just means as a promotional type thing, plus Caltrain and HSR trains won't be dramatically different speed wise up the Peninsula under the blended system - for bettter or worse.

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by craigs

I know a lot of intersections along the Caltrain route have been overhauled with under- and overpasses, but are there still at-grade crossings? If so, IIRC it would limit how fast the HSR trains can run on between San Jose and San Francisco.

The peninsula corridor is shared with Caltrain, that was the compromise the authority made with the Peninsula cities as the cities didn’t want complete grade separation or a completely new set of tracks exclusive to HSR.

One of the main critiques that detractors like to say about CAHSR is that California has spent X years and X dollars and “not a single track has been laid.” The idea of Opening the Peninsula corridor CAHSR with full livery the same day or earlier than the IOS; operating roughly the same service pattern as envisioned, will go along way to demonstrate that this project is more than just laying new track, its upgrading Caltrain’s entire rail infrastructure and portions of Metrolink’s

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by hughfb3

The peninsula corridor was always going to be shared with Caltrain and was never going to have full grade separation, that was the compromise that the authority had to make with the Peninsula cities as they didn’t want complete grade separation or a completely new set of tracks.

One of the main talking points that people like to say when downing CAHSR is that we’ve spent X years and X dollars and “not a single track has been laid.” Opening the Peninsula corridor from opening day operating the service pattern that CAHSR would operate once the system is complete will go along way to demonstrate that this project is more that just laying new track, its upgrading Caltrain’s entire rail infrastructure and part of Metrolink’s

Has there been any prep done on the LA end of the initial CAHSR route? I don't recall if they've started work on the Bakersfield to Palmdale segment, Palmdale to Burbank segment, or the Burbank to Union Station segment or not. Will it be sharing tracks with the Metrolink Antelope Valley Line?

[hughfb3]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Has there been any prep done on the LA end of the initial CAHSR route? I don't recall if they've started work on the Bakersfield to Palmdale segment, Palmdale to Burbank segment, or the Burbank to Union Station segment or not. Will it be sharing tracks with the Metrolink Antelope Valley Line?

No construction on anything south of Bakersfield. Final EIR will be complete by next year for Southern California segment as the Palmdale to Burbank section will require brand new tunnels through the mountains, then will share track with Metrolink from Burbank to Anaheim. Metrolink from Union Station to Anaheim could have been electrified by now partially using CAHSR funds just like Caltrain, but they have been “dragging their feet” and toying with Hydrogen trains. They don’t want to spend money on overhead electrical systems.