$9 Billion California High Speed Rail Route: The Planning is So Inept That it's Souring Residents from North to South

Dram45

If California built a Maglev train connection between LA and San Francisco you could travel from LA to SF in under two hours (a nonstop train would take 1H30M). A Maglev corridor could also be built right over freeways and interstate highways, not taking any other land than what is already used for the roads. Maglevs are also operating with much less sound pollution than regular high speed rail. Maglev also uses 30-40% less energy, are much cheaper to operate and maintain. A Maglev train grips the track making it virtually de-rail safe, important in earthquake areas. California should reject the regular high speed proposal that is on the table in favor the hyper modern Maglev technology.

LA's Urban Nerd

I'm a fan of high speed rail and rail in general, but the handling of this was abhorrent. We need to get some people that know what they're doing managing this.

duende78

Fresno to Bakersfield = 2,212,260 population (Fresno, Tulare, and Kern counties per the recent Census). Why do so many folks keep saying "nowhere to nowhere"? It's very insulting to us in the Central Valley. Also, how do you build a statewide system, that passes through the Central Valley, without building a segment in the Central Valley? It is by far the most logical place to start.

dude1989

Seriously if they said they were building a rail system in wyoming or alaska I would say they have a point but the Central Valley has 5 million plus people. That is most certainly not a train to nowhere. We may not be as densely populated as SF or LA but that does not mean no one actually live hear

Davideflorez

This Just In – Obama’s “High Speed Rail Plan” has been replaced by the federal “High Speed Bus Plan”, saving federal taxpayers from unnecessarily spending $1 Trillion dollars in wasted HSR construction, money the US actually doesn’t have to spend.

http://www.theonion.com/video/...

-Come to think of it, buses already traverse all of America, as do trains and cars, so why is high speed rail needed in Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky or Mississippi? This sounds bunk, like a plan – perhaps?? hhhmmm – to just funnel hundreds of Billions of federal dollars to his Union cronies in the AFL/CIO that keep calling Obama once or twice a day – so Obama can call these wasted Billions “Winning the Future by Investment in HSR”? Hhhhhhmmmmm…..--Sad thing is that this High Speed Bus plan is actually much more thoughtful and useful than Obama’s High Speed Rail Plan, think about it.

Derek Law

In the satellite image above, it's funny how they used that section to claim that "Alhambra slashed in half by high speed rail". The first rail line through this area was built in 1888 (by San Gabriel Valley Rapid Transit). In 1906 Pacific Electric (red cars) further extended the line east towards Covina. This section from Mission Rd & the 10 all the way to El Monte is now used by Metrolink.The rail line was there first, then in 1936 Ramona Blvd was constructed alongside the PE tracks as part of a US-99 extension. The Ramona Parkway came in 1944, extended further east in 1954, and then upgraded to Interstate standards as the San Bernardino Freeway in 1970. This final reconstruction was also when the center median that the double-tracked PE rail line formerly occupied was reduced to one track to offer more room for the new carpool lanes (called Diamond lane at the time).Comparably, the city of Alhambra was incorporated in July 1903. I'd say it's more like the rail line getting slashed in half by Alhambra. And if they were fine with a 10 lane freeway dividing the city, what's wrong with two more tracks?

Dan Bednarski

Oh, and I should note that the three lines shown in the satellite map displayed above are the three options originally presented to the community. My web site has a maps page that separates the three out into options a, b, and c. As of today, the Rail Authority is moving forward with Option C, which would remain entirely in the freeway footprint but an elevated viaduct structure that at times would be over 75 feet from the ground to the bottom of the structure. And it likely would be higher to clear the I-10/710 interchange.

Dan Bednarski

For the record, the complaint is that the high speed rail trains would slash through Alhambra rather than slash the city in half. The original plans presented to Alhambra and its neighboring cities had the trains going through residential neighborhoods outside the freeway footprint. It would require residents to be evicted and homes razed. It was not until we publicly started to oppose those plans that we received promises that the trains would not go outside the freeway. That is just one example of a communication failure. Engineers know how to build but not how about urban planning or how to communicate with communities.

Also, as you said yourself PE built the line that became the I-10 freeway route after the city was incorporated. People in Alhambra did fight the freeway but resistance was minimal largely because land was plentiful and relatively affordable. The 1888 line is Union Pacific's Alhambra line, which runs in a trench along Mission Road. My understanding is that Ramona Parkway and Blvd did not actually enter Alhambra. Rather, US-99 was Garvey. Ramona Parkway began at the intersection of Garvey and Fremont/Monterey Pass Rd. The original bridge that marked the start of the parkway is still in place where Fremont goes under Garvey.

Roger Christensen

After attacking every MetroRail project, even the Orange Line busway, Jill Stewart clumsily goes after High Speed Rail and wants Californians to remain barefoot, pregnant, and stuck on the grapevine.

Rob Anderson

If the HSR project proceeds, the people of California will be the financial equivalent of "barefoot and pregnant," since the states taxpayers will be responsible for the inevitable construction overruns and to operate the system after it's built. Just the debt service on the $9.95 billion in construction bonds authorized by voters in 2008 would be more than $640 million a year. Fortunately for state taxpayers, as State Treasurer Lockyer has admitted, those bonds aren't marketable, since investors understand that without a state-guaranteed return they can't make a profit on them.

Wilton

"Alhambra slashed in half by high speed rail"I'm sorry, but I think whoever wrote that caption fails to realize that the preexisting highway already slashed Alhambra in half. Also, decibel levels from cars on highways are probably greater than from the high-speed trains - they whistle when they pass. But I guess it's hard to recognize the bad about car-dominated transport in southern California.

Dan Bednarski

The trains will be louder (77+ decibels). The freeway was recently measured by Caltrans for a environmental impact report. Max levels were in the high 60's and includes noise measurements from the Metrolink trains. Even after it adds a freeway lane, Caltrans expects noise to be 70 decibels.

btw: The folks in Alhambra did not write that caption. We know the freeway is here. :-)

Andrew

I was just thinking that. I'm not saying that there isn't a lot of bad planning going on, but the freeway system divided populations years ago. At least by choosing the 10 freeway corridor, they aren't ruining a new place. Depending on the final design of the train, it could be much, much quieter than the automotive traffic. Plus it's not like the trains will be going by constantly.

wilfridburrows

The 1.3 million residents of the Fresno and Visalia areas might not agree with your claim that they live in a "Desolate section of the Central Valley".

Also---Could you name some of these "Federal Officials in Washington D. C." who are "pissed off" at California.

Rob Anderson

The story suggests that the high-speed rail project in California is essentially a communication problem, that if the CHSRA was just better at selling the project it would/should get built. Wrong! The Prop. 1A bonds are unmarketable because the state can't guarantee bondholders a return, and investors know the project won't make any money without that. If they were marketable, the annual debt service on $9.95 billion in bonds would be $647 million a year, according to the 2008 voter's pamphlet.http://www.voterguide.sos.ca.g...

But HSR was sold to state voters as a self-sutaining project that wouldn't require a state subsidy. Let's cut our losses and pull the plug on this poorly-conceived project. The ball is in Governor Brown's court. Let's hope he kills HSR in California.

StevieB

Federal officials in the Railroad Administration in Washington DC required the first section of track be built in the Central Valley. It is humorous that you say federal officials are pissed off at California for the selection when it was forced upon them by federal officials. Perhaps you should check your facts before publishing your muckraking.

Jill Stewart

Thanks for the comment StevieB. You refer to the pressure from US Rep. Jim Costa to choose the route to "nowhere" because the feds were holding out $715 million in extra grants if the California High Speed Rail Authority started its first leg in the Central Valley. The California authority could have selected another leg in the Central Valley that went from somewhere to somewhere, but it chose the one from nowhere to nowhere (it takes in Fresno, however, Costa's hometown).

The authority's choice to build a largely dormant leg is now being used by Republicans in Congress, as well as influential transportation experts, to trash California's high speed rail plan in Washington.

The bottom line is that the authority chose a dormant route in order to get at $715 million for a project that could eventually cost $65 billion. It hurt the project's credibility.

As the LA Times reported: "State Sen. Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), who chairs the Senate committee that oversees the high-speed rail project, said the authority board is acting prematurely to meet the federal deadlines and without answering critical questions raised by the state auditor, the Legislative Analyst, the attorney general and the Institute of Transportation Studies at UC Berkeley, which called the project's ridership projections unreliable." -- Jill Stewart

wilfridburrows

Thanks to the governors of Wisconsin and Ohio this route from "Nowhere to Nowhere will be around 100 miles long. If we get a portion of the $2.4 billion that Florida's governor turned back, we may ( with Prop 1-A matching funds) get to Bakersfield.

If this happens, (We will know soon enough) the initial segment will include a 113 mile stretch from Fresno to Bakersfield,

You say that the Authority could have selected another leg in the Central Valley that went from "somewhere to somewhere". So just what leg in the Central Valley would be more "somewhere to somewhere" than Fresno to Bakersfield.

MicheleMilesGardiner

I read the small print! Funny, I do that when I vote. It's nothing but a political BJ between politicians and corporations - screw the taxpaying, dopey citizens.

And I don't get orgasms over trains like those who pine for Old World crap (land polluting behemoth wind mills, included) do. For the price and time, I'll take a plane.

Tycho

It's easy to be short sighted so I'll forgive you. But that Old World Crap is odd, have you ever been on a European or Asian high speed rail in your life? Quality of life is hard to measure, but in California it should be measured by air pollution. And I'm not sure what gives you an orgasm, nor do I care, but I'm sure it's not more cars on our already broken infrastructure. If only an older generation like yours had the balls and foresight to invest before - we might not have needed Prop 1A.