California High Speed Rail Thread

[Gordo]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

BART wouldnt be every hour, and a peninsula line would be no exception as more people would probably use BART as its more convenient to downtown SF, SFO, soon to be OAK and points east.

You can't say that Caltrain shouldn't be more often because demand doesn't exist and then turn around and say that only BART would generate more demand. More frequent service would generate more demand, regardless of the agency that provides it. Re-badge Caltrain as BART if you think that branding is the big deal. "BART peninsula" with connections to other lines at Millbrae.

Also, BART will not be more convenient in many ways, since you'll still have to take the round-the-mountain approach into SF that adds 20 minutes to get to downtown. How many people transfer to BART from Caltrain now to reach downtown SF? Approximately none?

Furthermore, BART down the peninsula is just a dream---spending $1.5 Billion to electrify CalTrain without any real need(except to try and get support for the bullet train) appears to be a very expensive nightmare come true, even worse now that the updated business plan doesnt even include funding for the Bay Area leg of the system.

The need is for more frequent transit up and down the peninsula and especially connecting SF to Silicon Valley. I don't know about you, but I travel to the South Bay from SF an average of once a week, and the trains are packed. Having them be even faster and more frequent would be a gigantic economic plus for the region, especially as SF and Palo Alto continue to be the two centers of the current tech boom.

[ozone]

I don't support the HSR plan. It doesn't do anything for the economies of the 3rd and 4th largest metro areas in the state. That's ridiculous. The whole thing is about linking LA with SFBA, which is fine but it's way too costly and i doubt there's even going to be enough riders to justify the cost. It's not going to be cheap to ride the HSR. A lot of the N-S back and forth is made by moderate income earners. Also since LA is still such a car-orientated city I just don't believe the projected ridership numbers. People are going rightly reason that when they get to LA they are going to have to have a car to get around... which is another added cost/concern.

We should focus first on connecting the major cities of Northern California together and the major cities of Southern California together with a HSR and then tackle the big N-S link after that.

I think we need to grip on reality. Why should we pay for this boondoggle? LA is still way too car-dependent and San Francisco is still too isolated from it's own region. Sorry if that "demotes" you somehow, but that's reality.

[mfastx]

Originally Posted by ozone

I don't support the HSR plan. It doesn't do anything for the economies of the 3rd and 4th largest metro areas in the state. That's ridiculous. The whole thing is about linking LA with SFBA, which is fine but it's way too costly and i doubt there's even going to be enough riders to justify the cost. It's not going to be cheap to ride the HSR. A lot of the N-S back and forth is made by moderate income earners. Also since LA is still such a automobile-orientated town I just don't believe the projected ridership numbers. People are going rightly reason that once they get to LA they are going to have to have a car to get around... which is another added cost.

We should focus on connecting the major cities of Northern California together and the major cities of Southern California together with HSR first and then tackle the big N-S link after that.

I think we need to grip on reality. Why should we pay for this boondoggle? LA is still way too car-dependent and San Francisco is still too isolated from it's own region. Sorry if that "demotes" you somehow, but that's reality.

You should learn about HSR systems around the world, before you make statements like "bondoggle" and such.

[JDRCRASH]

@dimondpark: Huh, "what's the rush?"

Dude the project HAS to break ground IN the central valley THIS year to qualify for Fed. funds. Not to mention state Republicans are going to present an anti-hsr prop to voters this fall asking for the $9 Billion back.

And in case you haven't noticed, their House Congressional counterparts aren't cooperating...

[202_Cyclist]

ozone:

I don't support the HSR plan. It doesn't do anything for the economies of the 3rd and 4th largest metro areas in the state.

The second phase of the project will contect to both San Diego and Sacramento. Most people would like to see those connections sooner, but as noted above, when you're dealing with a Congress that sees any investment in infrastructure as socialist, these connections will have to wait.

At the very least, in the first phase, better integrating the Central Valley cities with the more prosperous coastal mega-regions should indirectly benefit Sacramento. Commuting to jobs in San Jose will be feasible for workers in Fresno. Fresno is also planning billions of dollars of redevelopment downtown around the planned stations. If this encourages significant infill development in Central Valley cities of Merced and Fresno and helps preserve important farmland, this will beneift the entire Valley. As I've said, this is indirect for Sacramento, but as the largest city in the Central Valley, it is only likely to help it.

Why should we pay for this boondoggle? LA is still way too car-dependent

This is not at all true. The 30/10 Plan promises significant improvements in transit for LA County. LA County already has the largest bus system in the US. The westside subway promises something like 60,000 daily passengers. Construction is suppose to begin on a new subway or light rail in LA County every year for most of the next decade. By the time all the Measure R projects are completed, LA County will have a more extensive light rail and subway system than DC and possibly Chicago. There is also something like 500 miles of Metrolink track in Southern California with something like seventy stations. The Surfliner is also either the second or third busiest passenger rail in the US.

The US Census also published data today noting that LA-Long Beach-Anaheim is the densest metropolitan region in the US, denser than the New York-NJ metropolitan region.

[JDRCRASH]

They should start with a segment that connects Metrolink and Caltrain and upgrade .

Surely ending Phase 1 in Palmdale instead of Sylmar (avoiding costly viaducts/tunnels) would save enough money to extend it to San Jose...

[dimondpark]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

@dimondpark: Huh, "what's the rush?"

Dude the project HAS to break ground IN the central valley THIS year to qualify for Fed. funds. Not to mention state Republicans are going to present an anti-hsr prop to voters this fall asking for the $9 Billion back.

And in case you haven't noticed, their House Congressional counterparts aren't cooperating...

This is why it should be criminal to plan infrastructure based on political expediency.

So they are ramming this through so Barack Obama(whom I plan on voting for again btw) can brag about it on the stump?

Regardless to what this is all going to cost to Californians?

[electricron]

Originally Posted by JDRCRASH

They should start with a segment that connects Metrolink and Caltrain and upgrade .

Surely ending Phase 1 in Palmdale instead of Sylmar (avoiding costly viaducts/tunnels) would save enough money to extend it to San Jose...

I would like to agree with you. But Metrolink and Caltrain don't serve the central valley, Amtrak California does. Amtrak California already runs multiple trains from San Jose to Bakersfield and to Sacramento. Amtrak California already runs multiple trains from Los Angeles to San Diego. What's needed first is to connect these Amtrak California train corridors together, and that's the central valley (at least Bakersfield) into Los Angeles.
If the Metrolink, Caltrain, and ACE train tracks are electrified, these new HSR trains can reach downtown San Francisco and Sacramento over the existing rail lines Amtrak California runs over, just not up to the high speeds that will become available once the new tracks are built between Merced to San Jose or to Sacramento.
Building the Bakersfield to northern Los Angeles gap is needed earlier than the gap between San Jose and Merced because there are corridors Amtrak California already uses between San Jose and Merced. I assume once the Caltrain corridor is electrified that California HSR will be able to use them for San Francisco to Los Angeles HSR trains.
This is going to be a project built in phases, mainly because it's so expensive, don't expect everything to be built all at once.

[mfastx]

A lot of critics of the project are saying that LA is too "car dependent." So?? What does that have to do with anything? HSR is a way to get from one city to another, just like airports. If there is high air traffic, then there is demand for HSR.

Do people take their cars with them when they fly? No.
Can people get a rental car at/near a train station downtown? Yes.
Can people take a taxi from a train station? Yes.

So, can someone explain to me what public transportation has to do with HSR??

[Altauria]

Originally Posted by mfastx

A lot of critics of the project are saying that LA is too "car dependent." So?? What does that have to do with anything? HSR is a way to get from one city to another, just like airports. If there is high air traffic, then there is demand for HSR.

Do people take their cars with them when they fly? No.
Can people get a rental car at/near a train station downtown? Yes.
Can people take a taxi from a train station? Yes.

So, can someone explain to me what public transportation has to do with HSR??

While your points are totally correct, to me it's more like a "cart before the horse" act. If the HSR project is simply the beginning (and intermingling) of a grand, visionary, public transit system then I'm for it. I believe inner-city networks need to be vastly improved, first.

As for flying, unless absolutely necessary, I would never fly from L.A. to San Francisco. Your perspective is very different in Boston. I lived in Boston and grew up in Chicago. Driving 'out East' is a completely different experience in California. I've flown from Boston to Philadelphia, which is a shorter distance, because driving it is absolutely miserable! Driving in general is miserable on the East Coast, but they have the best public transit! Inter/Intra-city travel is amazing in Boston, New York, etc.

I live pretty geographically centered in L.A. at the moment. To drive from here to San Francisco (Fisherman's Wharf to be exact) would take 6 1/2 hours, and $80 in gas. I drive a Corolla, and half of L.A. has already been suckered into the Prius. California's HSR website claims a trip from L.A. to S.F. "under 2 hours 40 minutes". I'd have to be a naive fool to believe a figure given about an unproven system, by an organization whose purpose is to desperately convince people of something.

After creeping through the suburbs and odd mountain turns, and unexpected cow-dung on the tracks, I wouldn't be surprised if it ends up being well over 3 hours. But, just like them, I can't prove a damned thing and shouldn't make up my own conjecture, so I'll give them an extra 10 minutes and say 2 1/2 hours! Or maybe I just suck at math, haha.

Anyway, I will give AT LEAST 1 1/2 hours travel time just to get to the station (traffic, bag checks, ticket checks, shuttle/walk from parking lot, etc.). We're already up to 4 hours when we arrive a station in S.F. The worst part about transportation that is not rapid-transit (subways, city buses, etc.) is that on regular trains and plains, people take their sweet-ass time getting off. If you don't need a car, great, you saved a couple of hours versus driving - and then figure the added cost of a Taxi. If you need to rent a car, that takes time. You may have shaved an hour off when everything is done. And this is if everything goes smoothly.

Also, how much are the ticks for HSR going to cost. Likely more than the $80 in gas for my car. Perhaps a little more with passengers.

That being said, I hate driving. I miss having the transit systems like Boston and New York, but I just find this to be a cart before the horse silliness for a time savings of 1 - 2 hours (maybe). Bring the 'T' to L.A., then we'll be ready for the rest.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by mfastx

So, can someone explain to me what public transportation has to do with HSR??

Buses also count as public transportation of which Los Angeles has many.
I think many believe far more people would use the HSR line if more could get to the station. There are few parking garages around downtown train stations as large as you'll find at the various airports. But I agree with you, taxis are used world wide to get to and from train stations and airports. And there certainly isn't a lack of taxis in either San Francisco or Los Angeles.

[ardecila]

-dp-

[ardecila]

Why not just buy dual-mode locomotives for the San Joaquin's Oakland trains and run them on the high speed line through to Santa Clarita/LA? There's no need for a transfer at Merced. Amtrak can continue to run a set of normal San Joaquin trains that run Bakersfield-Sacramento on the legacy line.

I do like the idea of building to Merced, though. It punts on the issue of Pacheco vs. Altamont, which is another potential source of cost savings.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by ardecila

Why not just buy dual-mode locomotives for the San Joaquin's Oakland trains and run them on the high speed line through to Santa Clarita/LA? There's no need for a transfer at Merced.

I do like the idea of building to Merced, though. It punts on the issue of Pacheco vs. Altamont, which is another potential source of cost savings.

Excellent idea for maximum speeds up to 100 mph, or whatever the existing Amtrak California dual level coaches are rated at. But you'll need HSR train sets to ride at 200 mph on the brand new HSR corridor in the central valley. That's why I suggested electrifying the existing lines for the blended system.

[ardecila]

At least in the Initial Operating Segment, the time savings will not come from running at 200mph. If you can average 100mph, you're already traveling lightning-quick. On the high-speed line, there will be no grade crossings and no signal interference with other trains, so there should be no obstacles to sustained 110mph travel between stations. With station stops factored in, the average speed is reduced to 100mph. The bilevel coaches are rated at 110mph, so that shouldn't be a problem.

The only problem is getting the trains up to sustained speeds of 110mph, which the F59PHIs cannot do easily. That's why Amtrak would need new locos.

[Busy Bee]

From CHSR Blog.

Darrell Issa To Use HSR to Bash Obama Administration

Apr 10th, 2012 | Posted by Robert Cruickshank


Darrell Issa, a Republican Congressman from San Diego County, has decided to launch a politically-motivated investigation into the high speed rail project:

Rep. Darrell Issa has launched a probe into the California high-speed rail project, asking for the preservation of documents that relate to federal funding for the project.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman outlined a range of concerns in a letter Monday addressed to newly installed California High-Speed Rail Authority Chairman Dan Richard. Those questions include whether the $3.9 billion in federal money the project has received has prevented work on other important transportation projects. Issa requested a specific accounting of that money.

Issa’s letter makes it obvious what’s behind this:

“CHSRA has earned high-profile support from the Obama Administration,” Issa wrote to Richard. “But this praise has yet to be matched with tangible results.”

Ever since Solyndra, a Bay Area solar power company that received federal loans, went bankrupt and became the subject of a right-wing manufactured scandal, Republicans have been searching for a “new Solyndra” that can make President Obama’s green energy push again look like wasteful spending. Issa is clearly hoping that California’s high speed rail project will fit that bill.

Continue reading...

[JDRCRASH]

Shenanigans or not, it'll work if CHSR doesn't break ground soon.

[Ragnar]

Why don't they connect Bakersfield to L.A. with Amtrak today? I'm assuming Amtrak could do it. Does BNSF not let them? Or is there no demand on that circuitous route via Tehachapi/Palmdale?

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by Ragnar

I'm assuming Amtrak could do it. Does BNSF not let them? Or is there no demand on that circuitous route via Tehachapi/Palmdale?

The route through the Tehachapis is one of the most congested freight segments in the country. It's only one track, has steep grades, and it even loops back over itself.

Since freight trains pass over the Tehachapis at an absurdly slow speed, and there are 40 trains/day, there is literally no room in the schedule for a passenger train.

The San Joaquins cannot be extended south without a new rail line over the Tehachapis. Fortunately it sounds like there will be a new line, going as far as Palmdale where it will tie into the existing Metrolink Antelope Valley Line.

[pesto]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

From CHSR Blog.

Darrell Issa To Use HSR to Bash Obama Administration

Apr 10th, 2012 | Posted by Robert Cruickshank


Darrell Issa, a Republican Congressman from San Diego County, has decided to launch a politically-motivated investigation into the high speed rail project:

Rep. Darrell Issa has launched a probe into the California high-speed rail project, asking for the preservation of documents that relate to federal funding for the project.

The Oversight and Government Reform Committee chairman outlined a range of concerns in a letter Monday addressed to newly installed California High-Speed Rail Authority Chairman Dan Richard. Those questions include whether the $3.9 billion in federal money the project has received has prevented work on other important transportation projects. Issa requested a specific accounting of that money.

Issa’s letter makes it obvious what’s behind this:

“CHSRA has earned high-profile support from the Obama Administration,” Issa wrote to Richard. “But this praise has yet to be matched with tangible results.”

Ever since Solyndra, a Bay Area solar power company that received federal loans, went bankrupt and became the subject of a right-wing manufactured scandal, Republicans have been searching for a “new Solyndra” that can make President Obama’s green energy push again look like wasteful spending. Issa is clearly hoping that California’s high speed rail project will fit that bill.

Continue reading...

Solyndra was a "manufactured" scandal? Better read the lengthy stories in the NY Times, WSJ, SJ Mercury, etc. You may be interested that the federal report on it basically criticized every part of the decision process and the administration has implemented new regs. to keep this sort of decision process from ever happening again.

It would be very interesting to see if Transportation has similar criteria for approving projects as Energy did. If so, it will be quite a show.