California High Speed Rail Thread

[MAC123]

I had thought they could try LA to San Diego, but actually looking at a map I see now they are much farther away than I thought

[Busy Bee]

A poll that shows mixed feelings about the direction and current state of the high speed rail program is very different from the likely outcome of a referendum that asks those same voters whether they want to cancel said program after being fully educated on the consequences, just as it is very different from the outcome of the original Prop 1A before any construction had occurred at all.

[jmecklenborg]

Several Tea Party governors cancelled in-progress rail projects in the early 2010s - Scott Walker, Rick Scott, John Kasich, etc. - and some of their rejected federal money made its way to CAHSR.

It's highly unlikely that California - be it the governor/legislature or state ballot issue - will go full Tea Party and act to scuttle active contracts.

BUT, as I noted earlier in this thread, the ridiculous California recall provision that brought us Arnold Schwarzenegger looms over all who occupy that office. Newsom knew he - like all others who have or who will ever occupy that seat - needs to be as uncontroversial as possible in order to avoid a recall, then sit on their hands after the recall process is activated.

So the very thing that gave us CAHSR - California's relatively easy referendum process - has a check that on paper "balances" the state's affairs but in reality creates as many problems as it solves.

Jerry Brown was "all-in" on CAHSR but its unlikely that whomever succeeds Newsom will be anything like Brown. There is too much risk and no possible reward.

[craigs]

Most outsiders don't understand California politics, but this is a very astute post.

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

Several Tea Party governors cancelled in-progress rail projects in the early 2010s - Scott Walker, Rick Scott, John Kasich, etc. - and some of their rejected federal money made its way to CAHSR.

It's highly unlikely that California - be it the governor/legislature or state ballot issue - will go full Tea Party and act to scuttle active contracts.

BUT, as I noted earlier in this thread, the ridiculous California recall provision that brought us Arnold Schwarzenegger looms over all who occupy that office. Newsom knew he - like all others who have or who will ever occupy that seat - needs to be as uncontroversial as possible in order to avoid a recall, then sit on their hands after the recall process is activated.

So the very thing that gave us CAHSR - California's relatively easy referendum process - has a check that on paper "balances" the state's affairs but in reality creates as many problems as it solves.

Jerry Brown was "all-in" on CAHSR but its unlikely that whomever succeeds Newsom will be anything like Brown. There is too much risk and no possible reward.

[blacktrojan3921]

I think it's clear that the full portion of the line will finish. A lot of money has been spent on the project, and it would be insane to cancel it this far in development.

It does highlight the need for reform, as Ezra Klein put it. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/13/o...te-crisis.html

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by blacktrojan3921

It does highlight the need for reform, as Ezra Klein put it. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/13/o...te-crisis.html

The NY Times also did a video op-ed, about a month ago, that criticized the inability of democrat-dominated municipalities and states to solve the problems they purport to champion, especially with regards to public transportation and housing.

[Crawford]

Originally Posted by blacktrojan3921

I think it's clear that the full portion of the line will finish. A lot of money has been spent on the project, and it would be insane to cancel it this far in development.

No, there are a number of scenarios where the first phase can be completed, and the money isn't wasted, but the full buildout never happens. This is absolutely a possibility.

Once the CV portion is completed, existing rail infrastructure could easily incorporate it using dual-mode locomotives. So you could have a fast Amtrak between the Bay Area and SoCal, just not a real bullet train. There's already a train, you know.

This is the risk. No one is talking about the investment going to seed, but rather it not being fully completed. And the LA portion would be more difficult than the Bay Area portion. This is why I don't understand why they didn't start with LA or the Bay Area, since those are the only areas that matter.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Crawford

Once the CV portion is completed, existing rail infrastructure could easily incorporate it using dual-mode locomotives.

Like the Tehachapi Loop?

Originally Posted by Crawford

So you could have a fast Amtrak between the Bay Area and SoCal, just not a real bullet train. There's already a train, you know.

This is the risk. No one is talking about the investment going to seed, but rather it not being fully completed. And the LA portion would be more difficult than the Bay Area portion. This is why I don't understand why they didn't start with LA or the Bay Area, since those are the only areas that matter.

So...they should have begun the project by digging a 20~ mile tunnel to Palmdale?

[Busy Bee]

^ Yes, I think that's what he's saying, which is why he's so wrong. Unless of course he doesn't mean that either which means his entire argument regarding the project is bad faith designed to mask either support for some myopic point to point superexpress, like I-5, serving only elite business class riders and ignoring all others, or opposition to the project entirely.

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^ Yes, I think that's what he's saying, which is why he's so wrong. Unless of course he doesn't mean that either which means his entire argument regarding the project is bad faith designed to mask either support for some myopic point to point superexpress, like I-5, serving only elite business class riders and ignoring all others, or opposition to the project entirely.

In the current context, there is a tiny argument for building the LA>Palmdale tunnel first, since there has been real movement by private enterprise toward construction of high(ish) speed rail to Las Vegas. But Xpress West/Brightline didn't exist back in 2008, plus the Las Vegas metro area has experienced significant growth over the past 14 years.

But as I pointed out to Crawford, et al., in a previous post, the Brightline proposal will be built on one side or the other of the interstate, not in the median. The same would happen for most of all of the I-5 corridor - the line would be built next to it, not in the median. CAHSR's hypothetical cost savings aren't going to be found by comparing what is being built in the Central Valley to what might have been built instead.

[TowerDude]

I think the lead LA-Las Vegas connector should be given to Amtrak over Brightline ...

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by TowerDude

I think the lead LA-Las Vegas connector should be given to Amtrak over Brightline ...

...it should also have a station at the Las Vegas airport terminals and then continue to a terminal station in or near the downtown.

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by Crawford

No, there are a number of scenarios where the first phase can be completed, and the money isn't wasted, but the full buildout never happens. This is absolutely a possibility.

Once the CV portion is completed, existing rail infrastructure could easily incorporate it using dual-mode locomotives. So you could have a fast Amtrak between the Bay Area and SoCal, just not a real bullet train. There's already a train, you know.

This is the risk. No one is talking about the investment going to seed, but rather it not being fully completed. And the LA portion would be more difficult than the Bay Area portion. This is why I don't understand why they didn't start with LA or the Bay Area, since those are the only areas that matter.

There is not currently a passenger train connecting the Central Valley with DTLA. The existing AMTRAK San Joaquin trains take passengers BY BUS between Bakersfield and DTLA.

There is a coast route between SF and DTLA but that's also slow and would be near impossible to connect to the new HSR Central Valley tracks.

Finally, there is the Tehachapi Loop freight tracks by which the HSR Central Valley tracks could be extended to DTLA but it's agonizingly slow and problematic for passenger travel. Imagine going 200 MPH down the CV and then less than 10 MPH over the mountains into the LA basin. It's just a non-starter.

They didn't start with LA because they wanted the most track for the available dollars and because much of the opposition to the project comes from conservative CV counties. It was hoped having over 100 miles of track in place they could see and use would mute the opposition. The CV tracks do have a use, connecting residents of CV towns to the Bay Area and especially Bay Area airports. Unlike on the southern end, the Sacramento River Valley provides a flat(ish) connection between the CV and the coast so the HSR tracks could link up with existing rail lines being used by the existing AMTRAK San Joaquin trains.

I think at least on the northern end the HSR will eventually be completed (with a connection over Pacheco Pass between the CV and San Jose). Digging the tunnel to LA is the most complex and expensive part of the project and I don't know if that will get done or not. If HSR remains a viable, modern mode of transportation a couple of decades from now, I suspect it will.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by Pedestrian

Digging the tunnel to LA is the most complex and expensive part of the project and I don't know if that will get done or not.

Of course it will. The only real question is how soon. Anyone who thinks full build of Phase One won't happen is seriously underestimating the abilities and tenacity of the CHSRA and the ungrasped commitment from California leaders. When armed with funding the tunnels will be built. Any belief they're just going to run out of steam and give up is incredibly cynical and contrary to the massive amount of evidence of construction already complete and underway. Big things are still possible. Don't let the dark scud of pessimism prevent you from seeing that.

[William Van Alen]

This may have already been posted before, so apologies if this is a double post, but RM Transit did a video on this a while back that spoke to a lot of the concerns Crawford voiced here. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTt_mk86bAw

I'm admittedly not super familiar with this project, but I don't think it's immune to criticism and I don't think it's fair to say that non-Californians can't or shouldn't speak up about this. If CAHSR came in on budget and on time, that would have massive implications for the future of high speed rail in the rest of the country. At the moment, all it's doing (until it actually delivers service) is showing that Republicans are right and that the US is, in fact, incompetent at building large projects like this and that future funding shouldn't be given to HSR projects because they'll come in billions over budget and won't deliver results for decades. I don't think any of us want that to be the state of the national HSR debate.

[Busy Bee]

Reece Martin from that channel is mistaken. I agree with 90%+ of the videos he puts out but in the instance of his CaHSR explained opinion video I think he is totally incorrect. I got the distinct impression he doesnt have the depth of knowledge of the project as he purports to have.

[jmecklenborg]

^The guy is all over the place. In his anti-CAHSR video, he applauds Spain for not connecting its HSR lines beneath Madrid. But then in his "Longest Tram Line" video, he calls the underground LA Regional Connector "quite cool".

He's just another one of those the trains are too fast, the trains are too slow guys. They spent too much money but they didn't spend enough.

I take particular umbrage with his failure to mention how CAHSR was the thing that motivated Caltrain to finally electrify and upgrade its corridor into something resembling rapid transit service, and that plans for LA commuter rail upgrades are nearly identical. So he suggests that CAHSR money could have been better spent investing in local transit when in fact is is investing in local transit.

He also riffs on the LOSSAN corridor, as if CAHSR didn't consider it as a cheaper alternative. As if super-wealthy cities like Santa Barbara are eager to approve the demolition of areas of their city so that curves can be reduced. As if there isn't already a need for a very expensive tunnel in San Diego to get the line away from the collapsing coast.

He also dismisses the Central Valley's population by using city population figures, not metro, or acknowledging that the combined population of metro Sacramento, Stockton, and Modesto is almost exactly the same as metro San Diego. Also, the "spurs from the I-5 mainline to Fresno" suggestion made by a consulting firm are terrible. Such a spur would be almost 40 miles long, or roughly the total length of track the current as-built Central Valley alignment added relative to the I-5 alignment.

He also makes no mention of the Palmdale alignment enabling a high-speed connection between Los Angeles and Las Vegas, because I don't think he's capable of thinking that far ahead.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Crawford

So you could have a fast Amtrak between the Bay Area and SoCal, just not a real bullet train. There's already a train, you know.

WTF?

Yeah--we know. We know that your claim is false, as there is no train service between the Central Valley and Los Angeles, and if you weren't so completely and laughably ignorant about this state, you would know that, too.

Pathetic.

[William Van Alen]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

^The guy is all over the place. In his anti-CAHSR video, he applauds Spain for not connecting its HSR lines beneath Madrid. But then in his "Longest Tram Line" video, he calls the underground LA Regional Connector "quite cool".

He also dismisses the Central Valley's population by using city population figures, not metro, or acknowledging that the combined population of metro Sacramento, Stockton, and Modesto is almost exactly the same as metro San Diego. Also, the "spurs from the I-5 mainline to Fresno" suggestion made by a consulting firm are terrible. Such a spur would be almost 40 miles long, or roughly the total length of track the current as-built Central Valley alignment added relative to the I-5 alignment.

It's hard to equate the LA Regional Connector and the Madrid HSR connection. One will make daily commutes for thousands of riders significantly easier and simplify a system that is getting ready for huge expansions over the next several decades. The other (though I'm not familiar with it) is an HSR connection that I'd imagine is already connected via local rapid transit and probably doesn't need a direct connection. Doesn't seem like a fair comparison to me.

I also think that the point about the I-5 alignment was that this was not made by a consultant, it was made by the TGV, one of the best-run HSR authorities in the world. Again, I don't know enough about the particulars of this, but it seems like it would have been a lot easier, even if the total track amount was the same, because of the massive money and time savings during the land acquisition process. Not to mention that by avoiding the freight railroads, they probably could have avoided some of the huge pergolas and grade separations that are costing money and time.

I know folks have been debating this for a very long time, I'm no expert, but I gotta defend my boy Reece

[slock]

I don't think I've seen it mentioned, but starting in the Central Valley was a requirement of the federal ARRA funds. Both High Speed Rail Authority staff and Obama Administration officials have confirmed this.

In retrospect, it also might be what helps completion of the project. If work had only occurred in the Bay Area and Los Angeles metro to start, there might not have been the political will to link the two. I expect that for political reasons, investments will pivot to upgrading the stretch from SF to Gilroy and the Burbank to Anaheim alignment. This will help get the votes to push it through and will leave the complex and expensive tunnels as the final links.