California High Speed Rail

[phattonez]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

High Speed Rail should not be bogged down by commuters.

How many times have we said this? CAHSR will serve as commuter rail in urban areas and express trains will bypass those stops to take the place of airline flights.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by phattonez

How many times have we said this? CAHSR will serve as commuter rail in urban areas and express trains will bypass those stops to take the place of airline flights.

From the official site:

"The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) is proposing a high-speed train system to provide a safe and reliable mode of travel that links major statewide metropolitan areas in the state."

Linking the Bay to Stockton/Tracy/Manteca/Sprawlton/McTown does not meet that criteria. Furthermore, use as commuter rail disrupts use as an alternative to flying. I don't know of trips that stop 24 times over the course of what is regularly a 45-minute flight.

[YohIMhER]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

High Speed Rail should not be bogged down by commuters. That's why we have Altamont Commuter Express (the name says it all). Frequency of trips from major cities is cut down by Altamont and its spurs. Furthermore, pollution from sprawl should be eliminated at the source: SPRAWL. Not everyone who buys a McMansion in Tracy is going to use HSR anyway. Why should the urban areas pay to put band-aids on bullet wounds?

and san jose doesn't have sprawl? not everyone who buys a McMansion in san jose is going to us HSR anyway, may be we should skip san jose altogether?

[phattonez]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

From the official site:

Linking the Bay to Stockton/Tracy/Manteca/Sprawlton/McTown does not meet that criteria. Furthermore, use as commuter rail disrupts use as an alternative to flying. I don't know of trips that stop 24 times over the course of what is regularly a 45-minute flight.

Express trains do not make any intermediary stops.

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by YohIMhER

and san jose doesn't have sprawl? not everyone who buys a McMansion in san jose is going to us HSR anyway, may be we should skip san jose altogether?

Sprawl in SJ is still closer to the downtown station and to industry than sprawl in the CENTRAL VALLEY. Don't draw irrelevant arguments. Thanks.

Originally Posted by phattonez

Express trains do not make any intermediary stops.

I'm sure they make some, but not every day at every town for thousands of suits. Fresno is an intermediary stop. Please try to see the difference. If you can't, bow out of this debate.

[phattonez]

Express Trains like SF to LA have only two stops, SF and LA. There are no intermediary stops, and there are other trains that will make those stops. The more stations and the more density the line goes through, the better. (Well, not too many so that it doesn't even function as commuter rail).

[arturo]

Originally Posted by YohIMhER

and san jose doesn't have sprawl? not everyone who buys a McMansion in san jose is going to us HSR anyway, may be we should skip san jose altogether?

yes we sprawl, but density around the station is high and getting higher. also, our "sprawl" is dense compared to that of other places especially in the central valley and the altamont alignment. hsr works like airports: people will get to the station (drive, public transit) to go somewhere. the stations don't go to the people. skipping the home of 1.5M people and the companies that are keeping the state financially afloat is not smart. you don't come to sj often, i take it.

Originally Posted by phattonez

Express Trains like SF to LA have only two stops, SF and LA. There are no intermediary stops, and there are other trains that will make those stops. (Well, not too many so that it doesn't even function as commuter rail).

if an la>sf direct route can fill up trains then i'm all for it. same thing with oak>la, sac>la, sf>sd, etc. as long as the major urban metros (sf, sj, sac, fresno, bakersfield, la and sd) are served efficiently i'll be happy.

[metropolismayor]

Originally Posted by YohIMhER

and san jose doesn't have sprawl? not everyone who buys a McMansion in san jose is going to us HSR anyway, may be we should skip san jose altogether?

You don't "skip" Silicon Valley. C'mon...

[krudmonk]

http://www.mercurynews.com//ci_7761859

Board picks Pacheco Pass as primary Bay Area high-speed route
The Associated Press
Article Launched: 12/19/2007 02:33:21 PM PST

SACRAMENTO—The state's high-speed rail board has picked the Pacheco Pass as the primary route for high-speed trains traveling between the San Joaquin Valley and the San Francisco area.

The decision thwarts an effort by San Joaquin Valley and some East Bay officials to convince the board to route the bullet trains farther north through the Altamont Pass.

The board is recommending that the state build a 700-mile rail system linking the state's major cities with trains running at top speeds of more than 200 mph. A decision on how to get the trains through the coastal mountains into the Bay Area was the last routing decision faced by the nine-member panel.

[metropolismayor]

Originally Posted by krudmonk

http://www.mercurynews.com//ci_7761859

Great news! Government finally got it right!

[bluesbrother42fs]

California high-speed rail panel selects Pacheco as primary route
By Gary Richards and Joshua Molina
Mercury News
Article Launched: 12/20/2007 05:39:02 AM PST

If high-speed trains ever run between San Diego and the Bay Area, they'll enter Northern California through Pacheco Pass instead of through the Altamont Pass.

The state's high-speed rail commission selected Pacheco as the primary route Tuesday, thwarting an effort by San Joaquin Valley and East Bay officials to pick a line paralleling Interstate 580.

"I am very happy to get a good decision out of the High-Speed Rail Authority," said San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed. "It was good to see the region come together on this."

"You have a direct connection from the economic powerhouse of Northern California and the economic powerhouse of Southern California," he said. "That is a benefit to the whole state."

Trains along the 700-mile line would run at top speeds of more than 200 mph. They would stop at the Diridon station in San Jose before turning north toward San Francisco along the Caltrain corridor.

A $9.95 billion bond measure on the November ballot would help pay for the first segment. The cost to build the entire line could run $40 billion.

[arturo]

I'd rather have HSR form LA to the Bay and electrified CalTrain than BART...and they appear to be about the same price (about $10B)

[krudmonk]

Originally Posted by arturo

I'd rather have HSR form LA to the Bay and electrified CalTrain than BART...and they appear to be about the same price (about $10B)

I'd rather have grade-separated light rail all over the valley than BART. It's probably the same cost, but we're stuck with the boondoggle.

[phattonez]

I still don't understand why they didn't pick Altamont. All of the density supported it, this makes no sense.

[arturo]

Originally Posted by phattonez

I still don't understand why they didn't pick Altamont. All of the density supported it, this makes no sense.

I think you misunderstand the purpose of HSR: it is not to connect suburban towns to urban work centers but rather, in this case, to connect the Los Angeles metropolitan region to the Bay Area in order to ease airport congestion and decrease highway repair/delay need for expansion.

The Altamont Alignment failed for the simple fact that once trains entered the Bay Area they would be forced to split into three directions– SJ, SF or OAK– reducing the overall service to each of those cities. By comparison, the Pacheco route guaranteed that San Jose, capital of one of the world's leading economic regions, would be served by all of the trains while the remaining service would be split between Oakland and San Francisco. And in the future, with completion of a new transbay HSR tube, every train entering the Bay Area will be able to stop in all three cities.

At the end, even communities along the Altamont alignment realized they'd be better served by upgraded commuter rail than HSR since HSR would have, at most, made ONE stop in the region. Instead, with upgraded commuter rail they'll get more trains with higher speeds on a wholly electrified system.

[xXFallenXx]

im happy to see they're still moving forward with this.

[phattonez]

Bill seeks to modify high-speed rail bond on California ballot

Feb 28, 2008 6:10 PM (1 day ago) By STEVE LAWRENCE, AP

SACRAMENTO (Map, News) - Two Democrats have introduced legislation sought by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger that could broaden voter support for a twice-delayed, $9.9 billion high-speed-rail bond on the November ballot.

The bill by Assemblywomen Cathleen Galgiani of Tracy and Fiona Ma of San Francisco would allow the bonds to be used for all segments of the proposed 700-mile rail system. The bond's current language dedicates the money only for the proposed segment between the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas.

Their bill also would put a 10 percent cap on the amount of state bond money that could be spent on studies, planning and engineering work instead of construction. In addition, it would require the state's high-speed rail board to have a detailed funding plan in place for each segment of the system before awarding a construction contract for that segment.

The board has recommended that California link its major cities with trains running at top speeds of more than 200 mph as a way to ease increasing congestion on freeways and at airports.

In addition to Los Angeles and San Francisco, the trains would reach Sacramento, Fresno, San Jose, Oakland, Irvine, Riverside and San Diego. The $40 billion rail network would be built over a 20-year period.

Schwarzenegger has been hot and cold on it. He twice supported legislation that postponed the bond measure from going to the ballot, but last May wrote an op-ed piece saying high-speed rail would be a "tremendous benefit" for California.

In January, when he released his state budget proposals, Schwarzenegger dropped a request that lawmakers delay a vote on the bonds a third time. But he said he wanted legislation requiring the rail board to identify federal and private funding to help finance the project before moving ahead with construction.

A spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, Sabrina Lockhart, said Thursday that the administration worked with the rail board to draft the Galgiani and Ma bill.

"As it stands today, it addresses the concerns the governor outlined in his budget proposals," she said. "We are happy that this legislation has been introduced and will be monitoring the bill as it makes its way through the Legislature."

Ma and Mehdi Morshed, the rail board's executive director, said the bill could broaden public support for the bonds by allowing all areas served by the project to compete for money.

The bill would require the board to give top priority for bond funding to segments of the project that could attract the most federal, local government or private financing and that also could be used by other passenger trains.

But those commuter train systems would have to use the same equipment as high-speed rail to mesh with the faster train service once it began, Morshed said.

"Everyone has a fair shot at it," Morshed said. "If they can come up with more money or a better proposal, then they get to the head of the line."

Quentin Kopp, a former state senator who chairs the rail board, said he had been told by Schwarzenegger's chief of staff, Susan Kennedy, that the Republican governor supports the bond proposal.

But Kopp said Schwarzenegger had not agreed to a request that he serve as a co-chair of the campaign to pass the bonds. He hopes to line up a "dream team" of current and former public officials to persuade voters to approve sale of the bonds.

Lockhart said she had no comment about whether the governor would eventually agree to help lead the campaign.

http://www.examiner.com/a-1249096~Bi...ia_ballot.html

[phattonez]

Here is a kind of Metro-style schematic map of CAHSR.



The only thing that it is missing is a line from Sacramento to San Francisco. But I definitely like how it shows all of those possible future extensions.

[metropolismayor]

Originally Posted by phattonez

Here is a kind of Metro-style schematic map of CAHSR.



The only thing that it is missing is a line from Sacramento to San Francisco. But I definitely like how it shows all of those possible future extensions.

SWEET! Thanks for posting.

[DaGaucho]

Although I live in the central coast, I don't think HSR would/should be built along this corridor... too out of the way and too low-density.
Now LA to Vegas... that's a winner right there. This might even generate more traffic than LA-SF given the shorter distance and the projected growth of the LV metropolitan area.