California High Speed Rail - Page 7

San Marino Guy · February 10th, 2009, 07:18 AM

Yeah. Back when that was completed, CHSR Authority was just born.

croyboy · February 11th, 2009, 06:01 AM

the platforms should be redone or widened or something still and a lot of the inside should as well. our major ports for people here in l.a. (LAX and Union Station) are poor examples of our world status to outsiders of this city/region. i do appreciate however what renovations have taken place for us. makes it easier for us all

San Marino Guy · February 11th, 2009, 07:42 AM

Diridon Station to Be Focus of Harvard Design Group
World-Renowned Urban Planner and Top Graduate Students to Address Future of New Regional Mega Transportation Hub

SAN JOSE, CA - The City of San Jose has entered into an agreement with the Harvard University Graduate School of Design for an Urban Design Studio Project to begin identifying possibilities for the future of San Jose's Diridon Station and its adjacent surroundings.

The project, "New Ways: San Jose/Silicon Valley," will offer a creative vision that will support overall economic development goals, enhance grant funding opportunities for the station expansion, and complement other planning taking place in preparation for the start of California's new high-speed rail service.

"The development of the Diridon Station area into a 21st century transportation center including high-speed rail, BART, Caltrain and VTA light rail is a huge opportunity for downtown San Jose -- and the city as a whole -- that connects our technology and knowledge job centers in North San Jose and Edenvale with the rest of the State," said Paul Krutko, chief development officer for the City of San Jose. "We are pleased the Harvard team has agreed to study this area for the year's student project. We expect to see some very creative approaches to how this area might develop in the future as it grows to be the premier transportation hub of northern California."

The recent passage of Proposition 1A makes possible the construction of the California high-speed rail system, a $33 billion project connecting all of California's major cities and reducing overall travel time throughout the state. For example, travel time from San Francisco to Los Angeles will take 2 hours via the high-speed rail system. And travel between San Jose and San Francisco will take 30 minutes. To serve the same number of travelers as the high-speed train system, California would have to build nearly 3,000 lane-miles of freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates by 2020.

In San Jose, light rail, bus, ACE, Caltrain, Amtrak, and the future BART extension will all converge at the Diridon Station with an estimated 1,200 trains, buses and light rail arrivals and departures per day. This convergence is unique in the Western U.S. and will rival major transportation hubs in Asia, the Eastern U.S. and Europe. It allows riders to get to more geographic destinations in California than anywhere else on the high-speed rail system.

"It's San Jose's goal to build one of the world's great transit stations. High-speed rail at Diridon will be front door to San Jose, Silicon Valley and the Bay Area. Thus, it is very important to plan a 'gateway experience' that welcomes everyone to our City," said Krutko.

Headed by Dr. Rodolfo Machado, professor in Practice of Architecture and Urban Design at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, and Co-Chair of the Department of Urban Planning and Design, the Harvard Urban Design Studio team will formulate innovative views of a next generation transit station, analyze partnerships that could contribute to economic development and educate the public about innovative solutions to land use issues and challenges.

"High-speed rail service has worked as a catalyst to stimulate city growth in cities around the world," said Machado. "Promoting development of areas adjacent to high-speed rail stations can have dramatic positive impacts on San Jose's future. For example, many high-speed rail stations become city centers with transit terminals, hotels, offices, department stores, cultural facilities, restaurants and shopping arcades, while also contributing to redevelopment of surrounding areas."

Machado, who has taught design studios in urban design and architecture at Harvard since 1987, has directed urban planning projects around the globe, including in Dubai, Moscow, Budapest, Seoul, Buenos Aires and Bilbao.

In San Jose, Machado will oversee the design proposals from 12 Harvard graduate students. The City receives these proposals to use for informational and educational purposes.

"As we reflect upon the future of Diridon Station and the addition of high-speed rail service to San Jose, it is important that we consider a variety of perspectives. It's our hope that the Harvard group will provide inspiration and insight that will develop one of the world's best transit hubs for the 21st Century while preserving the character and livability of our neighborhoods," said Hans Larsen, deputy director, San Jose Department of Transportation.

ABOUT SAN JOSE'S GREEN VISION

On October 7, 2007, Mayor Chuck Reed introduced San Jose's Green Vision, which sets 10 ambitious goals for environmental protection and economic development. This 15-year plan envisions: creating 25,000 Clean Tech jobs; building or retrofitting 50 million square feet of green buildings; installing 100,000 solar roofs (1/10 of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's 1 million solar roofs for California initiative); reducing per capita electricity use by half; becoming a zero waste city; recycling and reusing 100 percent of the city's water; and moving to 100 percent renewable energy. A key part of the San Jose Green vision is the creation of a Green Mobility system -- an integrated and sustainable way to get from place to place. This system focuses on long-term land use planning, reducing emissions from vehicles, embracing clean transportation technology, creating smart green streets, providing pedestrian and bicycling opportunities, and creating a green airport.

ABOUT THE CITY OF SAN JOSE

From its founding in 1777 as California's first city, San Jose has been a leader, driven by its spirit of innovation. Today, San Jose stands as the largest city in Northern California and the Capital of Silicon Valley -- the world's leading center of innovation. The city, the 10th largest in the U.S., is committed to remaining a top-ranked place to do business, to work and to live. For more information, visit, www.sanjoseca.gov.

Contact
Steven Brewster
(415) 577-8851 mobile
San Jose Office of Economic Development
Email Contact

djm19 · February 12th, 2009, 01:00 AM

I hope LA Union station gets a nice modern glass canopy of some sort over its news rails. I think that would look very nice against the opaque Union Station.

San Marino Guy · February 12th, 2009, 03:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by djm19

I hope LA Union station gets a nice modern glass canopy of some sort over its news rails. I think that would look very nice against the opaque Union Station.

As of now, that's what they plan to do.

croyboy · February 12th, 2009, 09:18 PM

i'd like to see some official renders rather than go by the years old video

San Marino Guy · February 13th, 2009, 09:05 AM

Did Stimulus Just Give California High-Speed Rail?
By John Boitnott
NBCLosAngeles.com

Suddenly, the state of California may have moved even closer to getting high-speed rail.

The California Public Interest Research group hailed news on Thursday that billions of dollars in President Barack Obama's recently passed stimulus plan could be used to pay for the state's new high-speed rail system.

Congress added $9.3 billion in the American Reinvestment and Economic Recovery Act for development of high-speed rail and other intercity rail throughout the U.S.

The amount was a large increase from the Senate version of the bill and came on top of $8.4 billion already designated for other public transit agencies.

“This bill, especially the money for high speed rail, marks a bold step for 21st century transportation,” said John Krieger, with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. “After decades of looking on with envy at efficient bullet trains overseas, American high speed rail is finally leaving the station.”

CALPIRG officials said they cannot yet say just how much of the $9.3 billion will go towards high speed rail in California.

"It cannot be accurately said at this point because the money will go through a competitive grants process, which will be determined by the Federal Transit Administration," said Erin Steva, transportation associate with CALPIRG.

The FTA must make sure that the high-speed rail project is worthy of receiving the money.

"Given the passage of Proposition 1A, I think the state is well positioned to be able to capitalize on this opportunity," Steva said.

Both Democrats, Republicans Supported Public Transportation

The additional high-speed rail funds mark the second time that public transportation has bucked the general trend in the Recovery Act.

When the bill came to the floor of the House, dozens of amendments for additional were all defeated – with the sole exception of a measure to add $3 billion to public transportation.

That amendment passed on a voice vote without opposition and with speeches of support from Republicans.
The money for high-speed rail development and for intercity rail will be spent largely on projects to build and improve tracks, signals, and stations, as well as to make pedestrian, auto and transit crossings safer near corridors.

Some of it will be spent to modernize Amtrak, which has seen six years of record ridership gains.

Californians recently passed a $10 billion ballot measure for a North-South high-speed rail link for trains which will travel over 220 mph.

The project could avoid the need for costly airport and highway expansion and millions of gallons of oil consumption.

The push for rail and other transit comes at a time of record levels of public transportation and Amtrak ridership and growing frustration with airports.

Europe, Japan and China already have thousands of miles of high-speed rail.

Experts have said high-speed rail is a more efficient and time-saving option than airplanes for trips less than 500 miles.

"Funds for transit and other rail will get Americans back to work while reducing dependence on oil and congestion at highways and airports," Krieger said.

AlexTheMartian · February 15th, 2009, 02:45 AM

Sorry to sound this way, but this is just a question. If this speeds up high-speed rail, won't the state have an uproar due to the fact public schools and other things still had a lot cut from it, and yet we are moving on with high-speed rail? I love high-speed rail and actually rail of any kind, but shouldn't we at least wait until our state rebounds a bit?

I know you are all going to say we all voted on this in the election anyways. So did I, but 80% of our state are idiots and not going to remember that, they are just going to be pissed because of this bad timing. It is the look of all of it, not really the details, that piss off people anyways.

S_OC · February 15th, 2009, 07:48 AM

I think this is really neat. I know it's in Anaheim but a big part of it will be the CHSR, among other methods of public transportation. It's a duplicate post from the OC Development thread.

Introducing

The ARTIC Vision

A world-class, joint-development center is being planned in southern California. The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, or ARTIC, is envisioned to be a major transportation gateway for Southern California.

A Growing Community

With a population of more than 3 million, Orange County is the second largest county in California and the fifth largest county in the nation. Population is expected to continue to grow in the coming decades with a population of 3.7 million expected by 2040. The city of Anaheim is California’s 10th largest city with nearly 350,000 residents and is in the heart of the county. ARTIC will serve this growing community – now and into the future.

Premier Location

ARTIC is conveniently situated at major freeways and a short walk from Angel Stadium of Anaheim and Honda Center, home of the 2007 Stanley Cup Champion Anaheim Ducks. The planned state-of-the-art facility will host a transportation hub and a mixed-use activity center on a 16-acre site publicly owned by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the City of Anaheim.

The ARTIC concept is to:

Provide easy connections between the Platinum Triangle, Anaheim Resort,
the southern California region and beyond

Facilitate convenient travel via train, intercity bus, taxi, car, or local transit

Accommodate high speed train service infrastructure

The initial phase of the ARTIC development will be relocating the existing Metrolink station from its current location at Angel Stadium at Anaheim to the ARTIC site across from Honda Center.

Project Development Underway

In February 2009, the OCTA Board of Directors approved an agreement for consultant services to initiate the environmental review process for ARTIC. OCTA will be the lead agency for preparing the environmental document and the city of Anaheim will be the lead for design and construction.

Current Status

Environmental Document Schedule (OCTA Lead Agency):

Initiate environmental review: March 2009
Release draft environmental documents for review: November 2009
Design Services (City of Anaheim Lead Agency)

Release Request for Qualifications: February 2009
Release Request for Proposals (to pre-qualified short list): March 2009
Award A/E contract: Late Spring 2009

Visit the ARTIC site here

saiholmes · February 15th, 2009, 07:57 AM

awesome!

Tri-ring · February 15th, 2009, 08:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexTheMartian

Sorry to sound this way, but this is just a question. If this speeds up high-speed rail, won't the state have an uproar due to the fact public schools and other things still had a lot cut from it, and yet we are moving on with high-speed rail? I love high-speed rail and actually rail of any kind, but shouldn't we at least wait until our state rebounds a bit?

Well the money will take abit of a detour but it will trickle down to the state community in terms of taxes on revenue from local construction companies, income tax from constuction workers, purchase state taxes through transaction of various material for construction and other miscellaneous incomes meaning overall state income will gain from the construction that can be re-invested into other projects.(In theory anyways)

dachacon · February 15th, 2009, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexTheMartian

Sorry to sound this way, but this is just a question. If this speeds up high-speed rail, won't the state have an uproar due to the fact public schools and other things still had a lot cut from it, and yet we are moving on with high-speed rail? I love high-speed rail and actually rail of any kind, but shouldn't we at least wait until our state rebounds a bit?

I know you are all going to say we all voted on this in the election anyways. So did I, but 80% of our state are idiots and not going to remember that, they are just going to be pissed because of this bad timing. It is the look of all of it, not really the details, that piss off people anyways.

um hard to say. the benefit of HSR will most likely off set some of the cuts down the road in higher tax receipts from sales taxes and higher property values which most of the education funds come from property taxes, around the stations. not to mention the thousands of jobs that will be created to replace some of the lost construction jobs recently lost. adding to payroll taxes. the wheels of the HSR have been in motion for years so most of this was planned before the economy REALLY CRASHED, as far as i see it California can't afford not to build this because so many taxes can be recouped. a recent study found that for every $1 spent on infrastructure the state gets back $1.50 in economic return from all the spending. so lets build build build!!!

San Marino Guy · February 15th, 2009, 08:47 PM

According to a study for the CHSR, once all phases are complete and the bonds are payed off, the system will make an excess of ONE BILLION DOLLARS a year starting in 2030.

gusbrum · February 21st, 2009, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AlexTheMartian

Sorry to sound this way, but this is just a question. If this speeds up high-speed rail, won't the state have an uproar due to the fact public schools and other things still had a lot cut from it, and yet we are moving on with high-speed rail? I love high-speed rail and actually rail of any kind, but shouldn't we at least wait until our state rebounds a bit?

I don't think we should wait at all. Right now the government is the only engine fueling the economy. And I rather see the government spending money in high speed rail than giving away to car manufacturers, insolvent banks or worse the useless Iraq war where they are spending 340 millions a day.

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

AlexTheMartian · February 22nd, 2009, 04:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gusbrum

I don't think we should wait at all. Right now the government is the only engine fueling the economy. And I rather see the government spending money in high speed rail than giving away to car manufacturers, insolvent banks or worse the useless Iraq war where they are spending 340 millions a day.

http://www.nationalpriorities.org/costofwar_home

we are approved spending much more just in this past year to try and get ourselves out of this recession then the total of what we spent on that war.

Don't get me wrong, I do not think we should have been in the war, but I feel it is a bit pointless to wave that figure around now, that's all.

San Marino Guy · February 24th, 2009, 07:00 AM

Stimulus Puts High-Speed Rail On The Fast Track
by Brian Naylor

Morning Edition, February 24, 2009 · Among the winners in the $787 billion stimulus package that President Obama signed into law last week are backers of high-speed rail. The legislation included $8 billion for fast trains in the U.S. — the most ever allocated for rail at one time.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says high-speed rail could be a signature issue for Obama. "I do think this is the transformational issue for this administration when it comes to transportation," LaHood said. "I think President Obama would like to be known as the high-speed rail president, and I think he can be."

LaHood has sent Obama a memo outlining a half-dozen rail corridors across the country that could be in line to get some of the high-speed rail money.

The state that may be furthest along in planning is California, where voters approved a $9 billion bond issue last fall for high speed trains. Quentin Kopp, a former judge who is chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, expects a lot of the federal money to wind up in the California system, which would link the state's largest cities.

"A trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles, which is about 410, 420 miles, will take two hours and 38 minutes with a one-way fare of $55," Kopp says. That's about half to one-third the cost of a plane ticket for a comparable trip.

Illinois, the home state of both Obama and LaHood, also will likely get a large chunk of federal funds. Chicago is already a major rail hub for the region and the nation. Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, an advocacy group, says his region could use the money to improve and speed existing service.

"What we're hoping the stimulus money gets used for is upgrading the existing route between Chicago to St. Louis, to get the trip down to three-and-a-half or four hours," Harnish said. He also hopes to start the engineering work for "a true high-speed line that would bring that service down to two hours."

High-speed rail advocates also would like to see service between Chicago and Minneapolis. And planners in Texas, Florida and Ohio say lines would work to connect their population centers.

The closest approximation to high-speed rail in the U.S. is currently Amtrak's Acela service, running from Washington, D.C., to New York and north to Boston. The trip to New York is supposed to take 2 hours and 46 minutes, averaging 86 miles per hour. That's about half the speed of France's TGV trains.

Joe Vranich, who has written several books on high-speed rail, says the most effective use of the stimulus money would be to build what he calls a truly high-speed line between Washington and New York.

"That's the place where we clearly need such trains the most," Vranich said.

He jokes that if he were "king of high speed rail," he would beef up Acela service "to the levels we see in France or Japan. And once we've demonstrated what a real high-speed rail system can do, hopefully we can diminish these foolish calls for feeble high-speed rail in the other parts of the country and do this job the right way."

But political realities most likely will mean the $8 billion will be divided among several train corridors, diluting the impact somewhat. But there may be more good news for fast-train backers: Obama is expected to seek an additional $1 billion for high-speed rail in his outline for the 2010 budget later this week.

San Marino Guy · February 24th, 2009, 07:06 AM

Winging It: Stimulus raises hopes for high-speed trains
By Tom Belden

Occasionally, a wise journalism professor once told me, being a reporter is almost like not working because of the fun you can have. If you've covered transportation for decades, the best of those "are they really paying me to do this?" days have come aboard trains going almost 200 miles per hour.
Now, I've taken some pretty exhilarating airplane rides as well. Like the one in a 1929 open-cockpit biplane over Chester County. And two in cockpit jump seats, one in a British Airways 747 between the Philadelphia and Newark airports, the other in a 100-seat Midway Airlines jet bouncing down an ice-covered runway as it landed in Philadelphia.

But nothing quite matches the thrill of watching from the engineer's vantage point on a French TGV train going 180 m.p.h., as another train approaches from the opposite direction at the same speed and then disappears behind you in seconds. It's even better than floating along at 200 m.p.h. aboard an experimental German magnetic-levitation train.

Those land-based experiences make me believe that Americans would fall in love with high-speed trains if they ever got them, first just for fun and then as a practical replacement for short, fuel-guzzling airline flights.

With a new administration in Washington, at least we're in another period of rising hope, similar to ones I've seen come and go repeatedly over the last 30-plus years, when the nation may be ready to invest in high-speed rail.

The $787 billion economic-stimulus bill that President Obama signed into law last week includes $8 billion, the most ever, for high-speed and other intercity passenger-rail projects.

House Minority Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio) tried to characterize the funding as wasteful spending by saying, inaccurately, that it would be used to build a 300-m.p.h. magnetic-levitation, or maglev, line between Las Vegas and Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif. The dreamers who have talked about building that system since the 1980s may apply for some of the federal money. But they certainly won't get it all, and the project may be among the least likely to get any.

There are more than a half dozen other corridors around the country - including Amtrak's line linking Boston to Washington through Philadelphia - where there is keen interest in high-speed trains and where some of the $8 billion could be put to work faster than on a California maglev line.

The legislation and other congressional decisions in recent months also provide hope that funding for Amtrak trains that we already have will grow in the next few years.

The Northeast is the only part of the country that already has relatively high-speed trains, with Amtrak providing sufficient competition to airlines that it has the largest share of passengers traveling between New York and Washington. Other proposed high-speed corridors would use the conventional rail technology of steel wheels on steel rail that Amtrak does.

The Northeast Corridor, however, isn't truly high-speed by today's standards. Amtrak's Acela trains reach their top speed of 150 m.p.h. on only short stretches because of curves in the line and commuter-train congestion; the average speed of Amtrak trains in the corridor is 83 m.p.h.

The state of California has the most advanced high-speed rail (not maglev) project going today, with a plan to link major cities with an 800-mile network of trains traveling as fast as 220 m.p.h. You can find how serious the project is at its Web site, www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/.

If the California system is built, it would rival those in France, Germany, Japan, and other countries that stopped debating the wisdom of high-speed trains in the 1960s or 1970s and just started building them.

In the 1990s, the U.S. Department of Transportation identified California and a dozen other states as places with corridors, with metro areas of sufficient size at either end, where fast trains would work well to take traffic off highways and out of the air.

There is interest in developing systems in several of those corridors, including one in Texas linking Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, and another in the Midwest connecting Chicago to Detroit, Minneapolis, and St. Louis.

The left-leaning Progressive Policy Institute, in a research paper released just before Obama took office, argued for federal aid to high-speed rail as a way to create construction and other jobs, relieve air and highway congestion, save energy, and help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

Paul Weinstein, the senior fellow at the institute who wrote the paper, told me that all $8 billion in new funding could be used on the Northeast Corridor without making trains a lot speedier because of the inherent curvature and congestion issues. He suggested that it would make more sense to spend on a single-state or regional high-speed project elsewhere, where the economic feasibility could be demonstrated and enthusiasm among political leaders and the public generated.

Some of you may recall that the Pennsylvania legislature created a high-speed rail commission in the 1980s that envisioned maglev trains zipping between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh in an hour or two. A few years after it was created, funding ran out and the plan died.

Perhaps this time around will be different.

saiholmes · March 5th, 2009, 05:02 AM

High-speed rail's first leg: Bakersfield-Merced
Associated Press
Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Officials of the California High-Speed Rail Authority say a flat, straight stretch through the San Joaquin Valley connecting Merced and Bakersfield will likely be the first completed.

Regional Manager Thomas Tracy told the Visalia City Council Monday that the 800-mile project will be built in eight phases. The first segment, due by 2015, would stretch from Bakersfield to Merced on an initial run from Anaheim to San Francisco.

"The Bay Area to Anaheim will be the backbone of the system," said Bryn Forhan, who is working with the authority on outreach and communcation.

At its full 220 mph speed, the normally three-hour car trip from Merced to Bakersfield would take 45 minutes.

California voters approved $10 billion in bond financing for the project, and $8 billion more is in the federal stimulus bill.

The train eventually would travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in 2 hours, 40 minutes. Subsequent routes will link with Sacramento.

San Marino Guy · March 5th, 2009, 07:30 AM

Unusual high-speed rail news release of the day
March 4, 2009

Voters approved a $9.95-billion bond for high-speed rail in California in November, but the line is still many years from being built. There are tons of environmental studies and design work that still must be done, plus the little matter of finding at least another $23 billion -- some critics say it will cost more -- to build the initial segment between Anaheim and San Francisco.

With that in mind, here's the release issued today by the California High-Speed Rail Authority:

"Some news reports Tuesday suggested the state's first completed high-speed train segment would connect Bakersfield and Merced. No decision has been made on which section of the backbone link between Anaheim/Los Angeles and San Francisco will be the first to become operational. Current plans anticipate that a test track may be built on a flat stretch in the Central Valley somewhere between Bakersfield and Merced.

"The California High-Speed Rail Authority has begun project-level environmental review in eight sections of the 800-mile statewide system, including the Central Valley. This is among a number of important steps that must be completed before a decision is made on which sections will become operational and in what order."

The story in question came from the Associated Press, which reported that high-speed rail officials told the Visalia City Council that the Merced to Bakersfield leg would be done by 2015 and would give passengers a 45-minute ride between the cities at 220 mph.

Not so, says Kris Deutschman, a spokeswoman for the authority. She said the reporters got it wrong and blamed the confusing nature of the environmental review process for the bullet train. She said that it hasn't yet been determined where the test track will be and that 2015 is a target date to begin testing -- which isn't the same thing as actual service.

Deutschman said it's still possible that ground could be broken for a test track in 2011 or 2012. That would require the state to begin selling bonds to raise money for construction. She did say that the test track stands a decent chance of being in the Central Valley because of geography -- it's the kind of place where it's possible to build a long, straight track.

She also sent along a fact sheet that says it's possible that passenger service could begin between 2018 and 2020 on the S.F. to Los Angeles or Anaheim line. What do you think readers? Will you be boarding the bullet train to the Bay Area before the subway gets built to Westwood (which is projected to be done by 2032)? Or the other way around? Or will both projects still be pipe dreams a decade from now?

The comment board awaits your collective wisdom.

--Steve Hymon

San Marino Guy · March 14th, 2009, 06:46 AM

High-speed rail lays out ambitious scenario
Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer

Friday, March 13, 2009

California high-speed rail officials have laid out an ambitious scenario they say can handle passenger demand in San Francisco 50 to 100 years from now - but would cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than expected.

They want the city's train station to handle up to 12 arrivals and 12 departures an hour during peak periods.

That's three times more service than had been expected, and would add hundreds of millions of dollars in construction costs at the new Transbay Terminal in downtown San Francisco, the preferred location that's supposed to start construction next year.

The new price tag to construct a larger "train box," the skeletal foundation of an underground station, would top $1 billion. Finishing the project would cost even more.

Some local leaders wonder whether such a huge station is needed or merely fantasy.

"We need to see whether high-speed rail's demand of a train every five minutes is bogus, which is what I believe, or if there's actually merit to it. Then they have a money problem," said San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who serves on the Transbay Joint Powers Authority board. That agency is overseeing construction of the new transportation center at First and Mission streets.

The cost to build a train box for 12 incoming high-speed trains an hour would be more than double the projected cost to build a train box for just four trains an hour, which is the number Transbay officials had been planning for, Transbay project manager Emilio Cruz said Thursday.

Twelve trains would require construction of a second underground level of tracks and platforms, Cruz said.

Like Daly, he questioned the assertion by representatives of the California High Speed Rail Authority that the station needs to accommodate so many trains. Only Tokyo - a city of more than 12 million people, or nearly 15 times larger than San Francisco - has a station that accommodates more high-speed rail service than the authority proposes.

Mehdi Morshed, the former executive director of the authority, who is still helping to lead the project, warned that settling for less would be short-sighted.

"We don't want to design a system that will be obsolete in five years," he said. "We want to build something that will last 50 or 100 years."

California's high-speed rail system would stop in several cities, including Sacramento, San Diego, Fresno and Los Angeles. That, Morshed said, would require frequent service

Transbay officials are under a tight deadline to decide what to do.

As it stands now, the first phase of the Transbay Terminal, which also will be a hub for AC Transit bus service, would be built without the train box. The idea is to build the rail station later, when funding becomes available. It also could serve a Caltrain extension from Fourth and King streets. Building the train box up front, however, would save about $100 million in construction costs.

The price of the current train box design is $490 million. A second level for tracks and platforms would add $500 million to $700 million to the cost, Cruz said.

Officials have yet to secure funding for the cheaper design let alone the pricier one.

Morshed and other high-speed rail proponents were in Washington this week lobbying for money. The federal stimulus bill set aside $8 billion to fund high-speed and inter-city rail projects.

February 11th, 2009, 06:01 AM	#122
croyboy Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,031 Likes (Received): 2	the platforms should be redone or widened or something still and a lot of the inside should as well. our major ports for people here in l.a. (LAX and Union Station) are poor examples of our world status to outsiders of this city/region. i do appreciate however what renovations have taken place for us. makes it easier for us all __________________ just build it, whatever it is

February 12th, 2009, 09:18 PM	#126
croyboy Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Los Angeles Posts: 1,031 Likes (Received): 2	i'd like to see some official renders rather than go by the years old video __________________ just build it, whatever it is

February 15th, 2009, 02:45 AM	#128
AlexTheMartian Registered User Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: San Gabriel Valley, CA Posts: 618 Likes (Received): 0	Sorry to sound this way, but this is just a question. If this speeds up high-speed rail, won't the state have an uproar due to the fact public schools and other things still had a lot cut from it, and yet we are moving on with high-speed rail? I love high-speed rail and actually rail of any kind, but shouldn't we at least wait until our state rebounds a bit? I know you are all going to say we all voted on this in the election anyways. So did I, but 80% of our state are idiots and not going to remember that, they are just going to be pissed because of this bad timing. It is the look of all of it, not really the details, that piss off people anyways. __________________ Help me build la.wikia.com, a wiki I started on the topic of development in Los Angeles County

February 15th, 2009, 07:48 AM	#129
S_OC Registered User Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Anaheim Hills, CA Posts: 172 Likes (Received): 0	I think this is really neat. I know it's in Anaheim but a big part of it will be the CHSR, among other methods of public transportation. It's a duplicate post from the OC Development thread. Introducing The ARTIC Vision A world-class, joint-development center is being planned in southern California. The Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center, or ARTIC, is envisioned to be a major transportation gateway for Southern California. A Growing Community With a population of more than 3 million, Orange County is the second largest county in California and the fifth largest county in the nation. Population is expected to continue to grow in the coming decades with a population of 3.7 million expected by 2040. The city of Anaheim is California’s 10th largest city with nearly 350,000 residents and is in the heart of the county. ARTIC will serve this growing community – now and into the future. Premier Location ARTIC is conveniently situated at major freeways and a short walk from Angel Stadium of Anaheim and Honda Center, home of the 2007 Stanley Cup Champion Anaheim Ducks. The planned state-of-the-art facility will host a transportation hub and a mixed-use activity center on a 16-acre site publicly owned by the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) and the City of Anaheim. The ARTIC concept is to: Provide easy connections between the Platinum Triangle, Anaheim Resort, the southern California region and beyond Facilitate convenient travel via train, intercity bus, taxi, car, or local transit Accommodate high speed train service infrastructure The initial phase of the ARTIC development will be relocating the existing Metrolink station from its current location at Angel Stadium at Anaheim to the ARTIC site across from Honda Center. Project Development Underway In February 2009, the OCTA Board of Directors approved an agreement for consultant services to initiate the environmental review process for ARTIC. OCTA will be the lead agency for preparing the environmental document and the city of Anaheim will be the lead for design and construction. Current Status Environmental Document Schedule (OCTA Lead Agency): Initiate environmental review: March 2009 Release draft environmental documents for review: November 2009 Design Services (City of Anaheim Lead Agency) Release Request for Qualifications: February 2009 Release Request for Proposals (to pre-qualified short list): March 2009 Award A/E contract: Late Spring 2009 Visit the ARTIC site here __________________ CA, NV, AZ, UT, ID, MT, ND, SD, NE, KS, MN, WI, IL, District of Columbia, VA, WV, IA, MO, CO, WY, Canada, Mexico.... Looks like another perfect day.... I LOVE LA...

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

February 10th, 2009, 07:18 AM	#121
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Yeah. Back when that was completed, CHSR Authority was just born.

February 11th, 2009, 07:42 AM	#123
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Diridon Station to Be Focus of Harvard Design Group World-Renowned Urban Planner and Top Graduate Students to Address Future of New Regional Mega Transportation Hub SAN JOSE, CA - The City of San Jose has entered into an agreement with the Harvard University Graduate School of Design for an Urban Design Studio Project to begin identifying possibilities for the future of San Jose's Diridon Station and its adjacent surroundings. The project, "New Ways: San Jose/Silicon Valley," will offer a creative vision that will support overall economic development goals, enhance grant funding opportunities for the station expansion, and complement other planning taking place in preparation for the start of California's new high-speed rail service. "The development of the Diridon Station area into a 21st century transportation center including high-speed rail, BART, Caltrain and VTA light rail is a huge opportunity for downtown San Jose -- and the city as a whole -- that connects our technology and knowledge job centers in North San Jose and Edenvale with the rest of the State," said Paul Krutko, chief development officer for the City of San Jose. "We are pleased the Harvard team has agreed to study this area for the year's student project. We expect to see some very creative approaches to how this area might develop in the future as it grows to be the premier transportation hub of northern California." The recent passage of Proposition 1A makes possible the construction of the California high-speed rail system, a $33 billion project connecting all of California's major cities and reducing overall travel time throughout the state. For example, travel time from San Francisco to Los Angeles will take 2 hours via the high-speed rail system. And travel between San Jose and San Francisco will take 30 minutes. To serve the same number of travelers as the high-speed train system, California would have to build nearly 3,000 lane-miles of freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates by 2020. In San Jose, light rail, bus, ACE, Caltrain, Amtrak, and the future BART extension will all converge at the Diridon Station with an estimated 1,200 trains, buses and light rail arrivals and departures per day. This convergence is unique in the Western U.S. and will rival major transportation hubs in Asia, the Eastern U.S. and Europe. It allows riders to get to more geographic destinations in California than anywhere else on the high-speed rail system. "It's San Jose's goal to build one of the world's great transit stations. High-speed rail at Diridon will be front door to San Jose, Silicon Valley and the Bay Area. Thus, it is very important to plan a 'gateway experience' that welcomes everyone to our City," said Krutko. Headed by Dr. Rodolfo Machado, professor in Practice of Architecture and Urban Design at the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, and Co-Chair of the Department of Urban Planning and Design, the Harvard Urban Design Studio team will formulate innovative views of a next generation transit station, analyze partnerships that could contribute to economic development and educate the public about innovative solutions to land use issues and challenges. "High-speed rail service has worked as a catalyst to stimulate city growth in cities around the world," said Machado. "Promoting development of areas adjacent to high-speed rail stations can have dramatic positive impacts on San Jose's future. For example, many high-speed rail stations become city centers with transit terminals, hotels, offices, department stores, cultural facilities, restaurants and shopping arcades, while also contributing to redevelopment of surrounding areas." Machado, who has taught design studios in urban design and architecture at Harvard since 1987, has directed urban planning projects around the globe, including in Dubai, Moscow, Budapest, Seoul, Buenos Aires and Bilbao. In San Jose, Machado will oversee the design proposals from 12 Harvard graduate students. The City receives these proposals to use for informational and educational purposes. "As we reflect upon the future of Diridon Station and the addition of high-speed rail service to San Jose, it is important that we consider a variety of perspectives. It's our hope that the Harvard group will provide inspiration and insight that will develop one of the world's best transit hubs for the 21st Century while preserving the character and livability of our neighborhoods," said Hans Larsen, deputy director, San Jose Department of Transportation. ABOUT SAN JOSE'S GREEN VISION On October 7, 2007, Mayor Chuck Reed introduced San Jose's Green Vision, which sets 10 ambitious goals for environmental protection and economic development. This 15-year plan envisions: creating 25,000 Clean Tech jobs; building or retrofitting 50 million square feet of green buildings; installing 100,000 solar roofs (1/10 of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's 1 million solar roofs for California initiative); reducing per capita electricity use by half; becoming a zero waste city; recycling and reusing 100 percent of the city's water; and moving to 100 percent renewable energy. A key part of the San Jose Green vision is the creation of a Green Mobility system -- an integrated and sustainable way to get from place to place. This system focuses on long-term land use planning, reducing emissions from vehicles, embracing clean transportation technology, creating smart green streets, providing pedestrian and bicycling opportunities, and creating a green airport. ABOUT THE CITY OF SAN JOSE From its founding in 1777 as California's first city, San Jose has been a leader, driven by its spirit of innovation. Today, San Jose stands as the largest city in Northern California and the Capital of Silicon Valley -- the world's leading center of innovation. The city, the 10th largest in the U.S., is committed to remaining a top-ranked place to do business, to work and to live. For more information, visit, www.sanjoseca.gov. Contact Steven Brewster (415) 577-8851 mobile San Jose Office of Economic Development Email Contact

February 12th, 2009, 01:00 AM	#124
djm19 Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 453 Likes (Received): 0	I hope LA Union station gets a nice modern glass canopy of some sort over its news rails. I think that would look very nice against the opaque Union Station.

February 13th, 2009, 09:05 AM	#127
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Did Stimulus Just Give California High-Speed Rail? By John Boitnott NBCLosAngeles.com Suddenly, the state of California may have moved even closer to getting high-speed rail. The California Public Interest Research group hailed news on Thursday that billions of dollars in President Barack Obama's recently passed stimulus plan could be used to pay for the state's new high-speed rail system. Congress added $9.3 billion in the American Reinvestment and Economic Recovery Act for development of high-speed rail and other intercity rail throughout the U.S. The amount was a large increase from the Senate version of the bill and came on top of $8.4 billion already designated for other public transit agencies. “This bill, especially the money for high speed rail, marks a bold step for 21st century transportation,” said John Krieger, with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. “After decades of looking on with envy at efficient bullet trains overseas, American high speed rail is finally leaving the station.” CALPIRG officials said they cannot yet say just how much of the $9.3 billion will go towards high speed rail in California. "It cannot be accurately said at this point because the money will go through a competitive grants process, which will be determined by the Federal Transit Administration," said Erin Steva, transportation associate with CALPIRG. The FTA must make sure that the high-speed rail project is worthy of receiving the money. "Given the passage of Proposition 1A, I think the state is well positioned to be able to capitalize on this opportunity," Steva said. Both Democrats, Republicans Supported Public Transportation The additional high-speed rail funds mark the second time that public transportation has bucked the general trend in the Recovery Act. When the bill came to the floor of the House, dozens of amendments for additional were all defeated – with the sole exception of a measure to add $3 billion to public transportation. That amendment passed on a voice vote without opposition and with speeches of support from Republicans. The money for high-speed rail development and for intercity rail will be spent largely on projects to build and improve tracks, signals, and stations, as well as to make pedestrian, auto and transit crossings safer near corridors. Some of it will be spent to modernize Amtrak, which has seen six years of record ridership gains. Californians recently passed a $10 billion ballot measure for a North-South high-speed rail link for trains which will travel over 220 mph. The project could avoid the need for costly airport and highway expansion and millions of gallons of oil consumption. The push for rail and other transit comes at a time of record levels of public transportation and Amtrak ridership and growing frustration with airports. Europe, Japan and China already have thousands of miles of high-speed rail. Experts have said high-speed rail is a more efficient and time-saving option than airplanes for trips less than 500 miles. "Funds for transit and other rail will get Americans back to work while reducing dependence on oil and congestion at highways and airports," Krieger said.

February 15th, 2009, 07:57 AM	#130
saiholmes Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,315 Likes (Received): 21	awesome!

February 15th, 2009, 08:47 PM	#133
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	According to a study for the CHSR, once all phases are complete and the bonds are payed off, the system will make an excess of ONE BILLION DOLLARS a year starting in 2030.

February 24th, 2009, 07:00 AM	#136
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Stimulus Puts High-Speed Rail On The Fast Track by Brian Naylor Morning Edition, February 24, 2009 · Among the winners in the $787 billion stimulus package that President Obama signed into law last week are backers of high-speed rail. The legislation included $8 billion for fast trains in the U.S. — the most ever allocated for rail at one time. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood says high-speed rail could be a signature issue for Obama. "I do think this is the transformational issue for this administration when it comes to transportation," LaHood said. "I think President Obama would like to be known as the high-speed rail president, and I think he can be." LaHood has sent Obama a memo outlining a half-dozen rail corridors across the country that could be in line to get some of the high-speed rail money. The state that may be furthest along in planning is California, where voters approved a $9 billion bond issue last fall for high speed trains. Quentin Kopp, a former judge who is chairman of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, expects a lot of the federal money to wind up in the California system, which would link the state's largest cities. "A trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles, which is about 410, 420 miles, will take two hours and 38 minutes with a one-way fare of $55," Kopp says. That's about half to one-third the cost of a plane ticket for a comparable trip. Illinois, the home state of both Obama and LaHood, also will likely get a large chunk of federal funds. Chicago is already a major rail hub for the region and the nation. Rick Harnish, executive director of the Midwest High Speed Rail Association, an advocacy group, says his region could use the money to improve and speed existing service. "What we're hoping the stimulus money gets used for is upgrading the existing route between Chicago to St. Louis, to get the trip down to three-and-a-half or four hours," Harnish said. He also hopes to start the engineering work for "a true high-speed line that would bring that service down to two hours." High-speed rail advocates also would like to see service between Chicago and Minneapolis. And planners in Texas, Florida and Ohio say lines would work to connect their population centers. The closest approximation to high-speed rail in the U.S. is currently Amtrak's Acela service, running from Washington, D.C., to New York and north to Boston. The trip to New York is supposed to take 2 hours and 46 minutes, averaging 86 miles per hour. That's about half the speed of France's TGV trains. Joe Vranich, who has written several books on high-speed rail, says the most effective use of the stimulus money would be to build what he calls a truly high-speed line between Washington and New York. "That's the place where we clearly need such trains the most," Vranich said. He jokes that if he were "king of high speed rail," he would beef up Acela service "to the levels we see in France or Japan. And once we've demonstrated what a real high-speed rail system can do, hopefully we can diminish these foolish calls for feeble high-speed rail in the other parts of the country and do this job the right way." But political realities most likely will mean the $8 billion will be divided among several train corridors, diluting the impact somewhat. But there may be more good news for fast-train backers: Obama is expected to seek an additional $1 billion for high-speed rail in his outline for the 2010 budget later this week.

February 24th, 2009, 07:06 AM	#137
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Winging It: Stimulus raises hopes for high-speed trains By Tom Belden Occasionally, a wise journalism professor once told me, being a reporter is almost like not working because of the fun you can have. If you've covered transportation for decades, the best of those "are they really paying me to do this?" days have come aboard trains going almost 200 miles per hour. Now, I've taken some pretty exhilarating airplane rides as well. Like the one in a 1929 open-cockpit biplane over Chester County. And two in cockpit jump seats, one in a British Airways 747 between the Philadelphia and Newark airports, the other in a 100-seat Midway Airlines jet bouncing down an ice-covered runway as it landed in Philadelphia. But nothing quite matches the thrill of watching from the engineer's vantage point on a French TGV train going 180 m.p.h., as another train approaches from the opposite direction at the same speed and then disappears behind you in seconds. It's even better than floating along at 200 m.p.h. aboard an experimental German magnetic-levitation train. Those land-based experiences make me believe that Americans would fall in love with high-speed trains if they ever got them, first just for fun and then as a practical replacement for short, fuel-guzzling airline flights. With a new administration in Washington, at least we're in another period of rising hope, similar to ones I've seen come and go repeatedly over the last 30-plus years, when the nation may be ready to invest in high-speed rail. The $787 billion economic-stimulus bill that President Obama signed into law last week includes $8 billion, the most ever, for high-speed and other intercity passenger-rail projects. House Minority Leader John Boehner (R., Ohio) tried to characterize the funding as wasteful spending by saying, inaccurately, that it would be used to build a 300-m.p.h. magnetic-levitation, or maglev, line between Las Vegas and Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif. The dreamers who have talked about building that system since the 1980s may apply for some of the federal money. But they certainly won't get it all, and the project may be among the least likely to get any. There are more than a half dozen other corridors around the country - including Amtrak's line linking Boston to Washington through Philadelphia - where there is keen interest in high-speed trains and where some of the $8 billion could be put to work faster than on a California maglev line. The legislation and other congressional decisions in recent months also provide hope that funding for Amtrak trains that we already have will grow in the next few years. The Northeast is the only part of the country that already has relatively high-speed trains, with Amtrak providing sufficient competition to airlines that it has the largest share of passengers traveling between New York and Washington. Other proposed high-speed corridors would use the conventional rail technology of steel wheels on steel rail that Amtrak does. The Northeast Corridor, however, isn't truly high-speed by today's standards. Amtrak's Acela trains reach their top speed of 150 m.p.h. on only short stretches because of curves in the line and commuter-train congestion; the average speed of Amtrak trains in the corridor is 83 m.p.h. The state of California has the most advanced high-speed rail (not maglev) project going today, with a plan to link major cities with an 800-mile network of trains traveling as fast as 220 m.p.h. You can find how serious the project is at its Web site, www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/. If the California system is built, it would rival those in France, Germany, Japan, and other countries that stopped debating the wisdom of high-speed trains in the 1960s or 1970s and just started building them. In the 1990s, the U.S. Department of Transportation identified California and a dozen other states as places with corridors, with metro areas of sufficient size at either end, where fast trains would work well to take traffic off highways and out of the air. There is interest in developing systems in several of those corridors, including one in Texas linking Dallas, Houston and San Antonio, and another in the Midwest connecting Chicago to Detroit, Minneapolis, and St. Louis. The left-leaning Progressive Policy Institute, in a research paper released just before Obama took office, argued for federal aid to high-speed rail as a way to create construction and other jobs, relieve air and highway congestion, save energy, and help reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Paul Weinstein, the senior fellow at the institute who wrote the paper, told me that all $8 billion in new funding could be used on the Northeast Corridor without making trains a lot speedier because of the inherent curvature and congestion issues. He suggested that it would make more sense to spend on a single-state or regional high-speed project elsewhere, where the economic feasibility could be demonstrated and enthusiasm among political leaders and the public generated. Some of you may recall that the Pennsylvania legislature created a high-speed rail commission in the 1980s that envisioned maglev trains zipping between Philadelphia and Pittsburgh in an hour or two. A few years after it was created, funding ran out and the plan died. Perhaps this time around will be different.

March 5th, 2009, 05:02 AM	#138
saiholmes Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 2,315 Likes (Received): 21	High-speed rail's first leg: Bakersfield-Merced Associated Press Tuesday, March 3, 2009 Officials of the California High-Speed Rail Authority say a flat, straight stretch through the San Joaquin Valley connecting Merced and Bakersfield will likely be the first completed. Regional Manager Thomas Tracy told the Visalia City Council Monday that the 800-mile project will be built in eight phases. The first segment, due by 2015, would stretch from Bakersfield to Merced on an initial run from Anaheim to San Francisco. "The Bay Area to Anaheim will be the backbone of the system," said Bryn Forhan, who is working with the authority on outreach and communcation. At its full 220 mph speed, the normally three-hour car trip from Merced to Bakersfield would take 45 minutes. California voters approved $10 billion in bond financing for the project, and $8 billion more is in the federal stimulus bill. The train eventually would travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles in 2 hours, 40 minutes. Subsequent routes will link with Sacramento.

March 5th, 2009, 07:30 AM	#139
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	Unusual high-speed rail news release of the day March 4, 2009 Voters approved a $9.95-billion bond for high-speed rail in California in November, but the line is still many years from being built. There are tons of environmental studies and design work that still must be done, plus the little matter of finding at least another $23 billion -- some critics say it will cost more -- to build the initial segment between Anaheim and San Francisco. With that in mind, here's the release issued today by the California High-Speed Rail Authority: "Some news reports Tuesday suggested the state's first completed high-speed train segment would connect Bakersfield and Merced. No decision has been made on which section of the backbone link between Anaheim/Los Angeles and San Francisco will be the first to become operational. Current plans anticipate that a test track may be built on a flat stretch in the Central Valley somewhere between Bakersfield and Merced. "The California High-Speed Rail Authority has begun project-level environmental review in eight sections of the 800-mile statewide system, including the Central Valley. This is among a number of important steps that must be completed before a decision is made on which sections will become operational and in what order." The story in question came from the Associated Press, which reported that high-speed rail officials told the Visalia City Council that the Merced to Bakersfield leg would be done by 2015 and would give passengers a 45-minute ride between the cities at 220 mph. Not so, says Kris Deutschman, a spokeswoman for the authority. She said the reporters got it wrong and blamed the confusing nature of the environmental review process for the bullet train. She said that it hasn't yet been determined where the test track will be and that 2015 is a target date to begin testing -- which isn't the same thing as actual service. Deutschman said it's still possible that ground could be broken for a test track in 2011 or 2012. That would require the state to begin selling bonds to raise money for construction. She did say that the test track stands a decent chance of being in the Central Valley because of geography -- it's the kind of place where it's possible to build a long, straight track. She also sent along a fact sheet that says it's possible that passenger service could begin between 2018 and 2020 on the S.F. to Los Angeles or Anaheim line. What do you think readers? Will you be boarding the bullet train to the Bay Area before the subway gets built to Westwood (which is projected to be done by 2032)? Or the other way around? Or will both projects still be pipe dreams a decade from now? The comment board awaits your collective wisdom. --Steve Hymon

March 14th, 2009, 06:46 AM	#140
San Marino Guy Registered User Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 427 Likes (Received): 0	High-speed rail lays out ambitious scenario Rachel Gordon, Chronicle Staff Writer Friday, March 13, 2009 California high-speed rail officials have laid out an ambitious scenario they say can handle passenger demand in San Francisco 50 to 100 years from now - but would cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than expected. They want the city's train station to handle up to 12 arrivals and 12 departures an hour during peak periods. That's three times more service than had been expected, and would add hundreds of millions of dollars in construction costs at the new Transbay Terminal in downtown San Francisco, the preferred location that's supposed to start construction next year. The new price tag to construct a larger "train box," the skeletal foundation of an underground station, would top $1 billion. Finishing the project would cost even more. Some local leaders wonder whether such a huge station is needed or merely fantasy. "We need to see whether high-speed rail's demand of a train every five minutes is bogus, which is what I believe, or if there's actually merit to it. Then they have a money problem," said San Francisco Supervisor Chris Daly, who serves on the Transbay Joint Powers Authority board. That agency is overseeing construction of the new transportation center at First and Mission streets. The cost to build a train box for 12 incoming high-speed trains an hour would be more than double the projected cost to build a train box for just four trains an hour, which is the number Transbay officials had been planning for, Transbay project manager Emilio Cruz said Thursday. Twelve trains would require construction of a second underground level of tracks and platforms, Cruz said. Like Daly, he questioned the assertion by representatives of the California High Speed Rail Authority that the station needs to accommodate so many trains. Only Tokyo - a city of more than 12 million people, or nearly 15 times larger than San Francisco - has a station that accommodates more high-speed rail service than the authority proposes. Mehdi Morshed, the former executive director of the authority, who is still helping to lead the project, warned that settling for less would be short-sighted. "We don't want to design a system that will be obsolete in five years," he said. "We want to build something that will last 50 or 100 years." California's high-speed rail system would stop in several cities, including Sacramento, San Diego, Fresno and Los Angeles. That, Morshed said, would require frequent service Transbay officials are under a tight deadline to decide what to do. As it stands now, the first phase of the Transbay Terminal, which also will be a hub for AC Transit bus service, would be built without the train box. The idea is to build the rail station later, when funding becomes available. It also could serve a Caltrain extension from Fourth and King streets. Building the train box up front, however, would save about $100 million in construction costs. The price of the current train box design is $490 million. A second level for tracks and platforms would add $500 million to $700 million to the cost, Cruz said. Officials have yet to secure funding for the cheaper design let alone the pricier one. Morshed and other high-speed rail proponents were in Washington this week lobbying for money. The federal stimulus bill set aside $8 billion to fund high-speed and inter-city rail projects.