California High Speed Rail Thread

[MAC123]

I'm subscribed to the Drone Zone. They produce quality, relatively common drone videos of the construction sites.

[jbermingham123]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

https://www.nbcnews.com/science/environm...ared-california-bringing-havoc-rcna75942

jesus.. those pv farms back there are probably totally trashed

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

jesus.. those pv farms back there are probably totally trashed

I didn't see that until you pointed it out. That looks...bad.

Lots of drone footage here:
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/climate-change-tulare-lake/3197517/

It's going to take awhile for scientists to determine exactly how long the reformed lake is going to be around.

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by jmecklenborg

I didn't see that until you pointed it out. That looks...bad.

Lots of drone footage here:
https://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/climate-change-tulare-lake/3197517/

It's going to take awhile for scientists to determine exactly how long the reformed lake is going to be around.

Last time this happened it took about 2 years for the lake to fully go away. I think this time there's even more water from melting snow coming so 2 years might be the minimum here.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by jbermingham123

jesus.. those pv farms back there are probably totally trashed

Probably comrs down to whether water finds its way into areas that are detrimental to corrosion. Isn't the actual panel holding structure made of galvanized steel? I would imagine if water got into cable conduit it wouldn't necessarily ruin it. Whether prolonged soaking of the silica PV panels themselves destroys them is something i dont kbow the answer to.

[edale]

Originally Posted by homebucket

Last time this happened it took about 2 years for the lake to fully go away. I think this time there's even more water from melting snow coming so 2 years might be the minimum here.

Why the hell would they route the HSR through an ephemeral lake? Yet another piece of evidence supporting the I-5 alignment. What a clusterfuck this project continues to be. Even ardent supporters are starting to see the writing on the wall that this project is being mismanaged to all hell.

[sopas ej]

Originally Posted by edale

Why the hell would they route the HSR through an ephemeral lake? Yet another piece of evidence supporting the I-5 alignment. What a clusterfuck this project continues to be. Even ardent supporters are starting to see the writing on the wall that this project is being mismanaged to all hell.

If it followed the 5, then it would bypass all the major towns/cities of central California.

[LAsam]

It looks like historic Lake Tulare is out between the 5 and 99. I thought the rail was being constructed along the 99 corridor. Does the rail further towards the center of the San Joaquin valley at this location?

[jmecklenborg]

It looks like the line is being built along the eastern shoreline of the dead lake. That means if the lake were to fill by 90%, the line would be completely unaffected.

Until human beings die off and the dams and irrigation diversions in the mountains fail a few decades later, lake water will not reach the base of the HSR berms.

[sopas ej]

And I'm sure engineers and the people routing this thing have already studied Historic Tulare Lake, so I'm sure all of this was taken into account.

For reference, per the CAHSR website, the Kings/Tulare Regional Station would be located just east of the center of Hanford, where CA Highways 43 and 198 intersect: https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Historic...c563f490!2m2!1d-119.6456844!2d36.3274502

[jmecklenborg]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

And I'm sure engineers and the people routing this thing have already studied Historic Tulare Lake, so I'm sure all of this was taken into account.

This might slow down construction in the area, but it's not as if this thing is on any sort of deadline.

[edale]

Originally Posted by sopas ej

If it followed the 5, then it would bypass all the major towns/cities of central California.

And I think that would be an improvement. The 'major' towns/cities of the Central Valley would still have access to the HSR. They'd have to drive 30 mins to an hour to reach a station, but how is that any different than people driving to an airport? They would still be getting a huge amenity by having easy, fast access to SF and LA (eventually Sac and SD, too), even if the train didn't pass through the center of town. The whole point of HSR should be connecting the Bay Area to SoCal as fast and easily as possible. When you have mission creep, such as serving every cow town in the CV, the project suffers, as we've seen. Land acquisition and road and utility relocation in the CV has been a HUGE waste of time, money, and resources. These issues would have been much, much simpler had the I-5 alignment been selected. Because these issues were dealt with when the 5 was constructed!

Oh well, that ship sailed long ago. It is what it is at this point. Looking forward to seeing bullet trains connect Madera and Bakersfield in 2030!

[LAsam]

I see. I assumed the rail would go through Tulare and Visalia but it goes through Corcoran and Hanford instead. So yeah, that would put it at the eastern edge of Historic Lake Tulare.

[jmecklenborg]

I just took a look at a topographical map of Tulare Lake. At its deepest, the lake was only 20 feet deep, and the majority of the lake was only about five feet deep. This means the size of the lake must have fluctuated wildly with relatively small changes to the volume of water flowing in.

The deepest point was roughly 170 feet above sea level and the highest point was roughly 190 feet above sea level, with exponentially more water necessary to rise each foot above 190. It might have been the case that 2X as much water was necessary to get it from 185 to 190, and maybe 4X as much to get to 195.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by LAsam

I see. I assumed the rail would go through Tulare and Visalia but it goes through Corcoran and Hanford instead. So yeah, that would put it at the eastern edge of Historic Lake Tulare.

I wonder if they chose the other route since there's larger farm lots and probably less expensive than directly off 99?

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by edale

And I think that would be an improvement. The 'major' towns/cities of the Central Valley would still have access to the HSR. They'd have to drive 30 mins to an hour to reach a station, but how is that any different than people driving to an airport? They would still be getting a huge amenity by having easy, fast access to SF and LA (eventually Sac and SD, too), even if the train didn't pass through the center of town. The whole point of HSR should be connecting the Bay Area to SoCal as fast and easily as possible. When you have mission creep, such as serving every cow town in the CV, the project suffers, as we've seen. Land acquisition and road and utility relocation in the CV has been a HUGE waste of time, money, and resources. These issues would have been much, much simpler had the I-5 alignment been selected. Because these issues were dealt with when the 5 was constructed!

Oh well, that ship sailed long ago. It is what it is at this point. Looking forward to seeing bullet trains connect Madera and Bakersfield in 2030!

You generally put rail where population density is (does it make more sense to put train lines and stations in the middle of the 10 bc it already exists or does it make more sense for it to go under Wilshire Blvd where all the people are?), especially if one of the goals is to reduce personal vehicle utilization which contributes to congestion and emissions. The 5 is actually about an hour away from Fresno. Both Fresno MSA and Bakersfield MSA are around a million people. Sure, their residents are likely to drive to their respective HSR stations rather than walk or take transit there, but placing the stations in a central location vastly reduces auto usage and its side effects. And perhaps it spurs these cities to actually build some TOD around these stations and invest in high density urban development in its core.

And these aren't cow towns, unless by your personal definition, Fresno and Bakersfield aren't "real" cities.

There will also be express trains that bypass all the Central Valley stations for those that want to get from LA to SF nonstop.

[ssiguy]

This has become such an embarrassment for the state and reeks of corruption, incompetence, and a complete disregard for tax payer money. This is the poster child of how NOT to built rail.

If it was only California's problem then that's their business but the incompetence of CHSR has set other viable HSR corridors back decades. Opponents will always rightly point to this endless financial pit being built on the never-never time frame as a reason that HSR should not be built in their jurisdiction.

[38 Geary]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

This has become such an embarrassment for the state and reeks of corruption, incompetence, and a complete disregard for tax payer money. This is the poster child of how NOT to built rail.

If it was only California's problem then that's their business but the incompetence of CHSR has set other viable HSR corridors back decades. Opponents will always rightly point to this endless financial pit being built on the never-never time frame as a reason that HSR should not be built in their jurisdiction.

They said the same thing about Japan's Shinkansen when it was first being constructed, with the eventual project being double the initial budget.

The naysayers then ended up being wrong about it, just like the naysayers now will too be wrong.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by homebucket

They said the same thing about Japan's Shinkansen when it was first being constructed, with the eventual project being double the initial budget.

The naysayers then ended up being wrong about it, just like the naysayers now will too be wrong.

As you know, they said the vote wouldn't pass and that construction wouldn't start; both of these things happened! That is two strikes against the naysayers.
Is it newsworthy that 2008 money is not the same as 2023 money? It's also odd that on an urbanist forum, folks would be upset that a route covering more people (and in theory would increase ridership) is somehow a bad thing. If I was a contractor I wouldn't want to be paid in 2008 money...lol.
I think it's because forumers didn't know that millions of people live in the Central Valley? There's more people living there than in their states or provinces lol.

[tech12]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

This has become such an embarrassment for the state and reeks of corruption, incompetence, and a complete disregard for tax payer money. This is the poster child of how NOT to built rail.

If it was only California's problem then that's their business but the incompetence of CHSR has set other viable HSR corridors back decades. Opponents will always rightly point to this endless financial pit being built on the never-never time frame as a reason that HSR should not be built in their jurisdiction.

CA is the only state building HSR. No other state is building it, and this is somehow the fault of the one state that is building it? lol

Also, the system was approved by CA residents. Kinda hard for the project to be disregarding their money, when they themselves voted for it.

The only things embarrassing about CA HSR are the shitty PR, and how many people completely misunderstand the project, and misunderstand rail transit, and don't know how things like large construction projects and politics work in America, who fail to avoid the multitude of propaganda sources that take advantage of that ignorance in order to convince them that CA HSR is a doomed fail train to nowhere.