San Jose Mercury News: "Stop the California bullet train in its tracks" (Los Angeles: 2013, houses)

[mysticaltyger]

Originally Posted by checkup

https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/01/...in-its-tracks/

"Voters in 2008 were promised a system stretching from San Diego to
Sacramento that would cost $45 billion. Now the plans are for linking Los
Angeles and San Francisco at a price of $64 billion, estimated in 2016. That tab
will likely increase when the rail authority releases new numbers in March.

Voters also were told private money would cover much of the construction cost,
but none has come so far. And about a third of the funding would come from the
federal government, which now seems unlikely with the end of the rail-friendly
Obama administration.

Now, the entire ænancing strategy presumes that this federal and private money
will pour in after the authority builds an operating segment.

So, after receiving voter approval for $9 billion of state bonds to use toward a
system running most of the length of the state, the authority plans to blow all
that money and more on a segment from near Bakersæeld to San Jose.
But, according to a Los Angeles Times report, the ærst portion of that segment,
from near Bakersæeld to Madera, is way over budget. It was originally estimated
at $6 billion, but is now forecast to come in at $10.6 billion.

That was supposed to be the easy segment to build. Imagine what happens
when construction involves boring through mountains or entering urban areas
with other railroads and highway systems converging. Private investors will be
hiding their wallets."

This is why I never voted for it in the first place. I knew they were lying about the cost.

For all those people who love to gripe about our crumbling infrastructure--the real reason why we have so many unmet infrastructure needs is corruption and ineptitude.

[2nd trick op]

As both a railroad buff and former railroader, and as the holder of a degree in Transport Economics, I've followed this project for several years; the project can, and should be mothballed, but the grading currently underway should be sufficient to establish a Bakersfield-Stockton rail link at least on a a par with the current Boston-Washington Northeast Corridor (speeds up to 150 MPH, possibly more someday, in open territory; Amtrak can match this only on a small segment of the East Coast route, so small that it's entirely within the state of Rhode Island.

Getting that service across the San Gabriel Mountains and into the Los Angeles Basin will be a challenge, but it's worth noting that Warren Buffet's Burlington Northern Santa Fe currently has to share track with Union Pacific in several locations. and could probably be enticed into a joint public/private project if the higher speeds in the flat Central Valley segment (which was chosen for precisely that reason) prove attainable (and that is about the ONLY issue upon which the Moonbeams and Snowflakes in the CA HSR advocacy are likely to have faced up to the truth).

It's an unfortunate fact that the folks over there in LeftyLand, and their teeny-bopper clientele at msn.com and similar sites, hold an extremely over-optimistic view of what technology can, and can not do when time horizons are short. (I have only slightly more faith in the fantasy of "self-driving cars", BTW.) But once expended, a "sunk cost", such as a new right-of-way of very high standards, has all the time in the world to be proven useful and eventually recovered.

Not much of a positive for those of us stuck with the bill, however.

[SportyandMisty]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

but the grading currently underway should be sufficient to establish a Bakersfield-Stockton rail link

I'm trying to imagine how many people without cars would like to travel from Bakersfield to Stockton. I'm not getting very far.

[2nd trick op]

Originally Posted by SportyandMisty

I'm trying to imagine how many people without cars would like to travel from Bakersfield to Stockton. I'm not getting very far.

Thanks to the "If we build it, they will come" thinking which is common to the Urban Planning Crowd, that is exactly what you're stuck with at present; "partially-completed" big dreams are a favorite tactic by which the taxpayer can be held hostage.

What can be salvaged here is an updated, and considerably faster version of the San Joaquin service (Oakland-Bakersfield, with a bus hub at the latter point serving the entire Southland) which was operated by the Santa Fe rail system until the end of conventional rail service in the early Seventies. The Central Valley is also home to a series of growing communities, centered around Fresno. I'm pretty sure that if the CA HSR project is stymied and mothballed, a 100-150 MPH system in the Valley would be allowed to evolve while a plan to dig new tunnels through the San Gabriels, for both freight (conventional rail) and passengers (HSR) took shape.

Just an educated guess, but it wouldn't surprise me to discover some of the HSR advocates are thinking along those lines.

[citizensadvocate]

Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe

I kind of doubt China paid union wages, either.

Interesting what about Japan?

That country is a high income country, stiff restrictions on purchasing properties from owners for projects, and plenty of mountains to climb over or tunnel through and urban areas to fly over and tunnel under.

Obviously the ticket prices there are amoung the highest in Asia. Though Shinkansen tickets are still normally somewhat cheaper then Amtrak’s northeast corridor. And I am taking about the regional trains, not the twice as expensive Acela Express which are only marginally faster.

While I agree that Central Valley needs better transportation. Though doesn't other places too?
Out of curiosity why I would like to ask why they don't build the test track in places such as between Sacramento and North Bay Area, where the land is pretty much just as empty as the proposed section or between Tijuana and San Diego where we already have existing right of way publicly owned by SDMTA. Or through Camp Pendleton between San Diego and Orange counties where the land is mostly undeveloped and no eminent domain is needed. These routes will carry much much traffic than a route in the Central Valley.

I can see why the farmers and farm corporations who own large parcels of land are opposed as high speed rail, unlike traditional rail, road, highway, or freeway projects, are basically useless for their future. As I am pretty sure corn, fruits, and vegetable will not be transported on CA High Speed rail.

[Rigeleer]

$64 billion is enough to pay for solar arrays for about 3 million houses. That would be almost half of the single-family detached houses in the state according to the census. That would be more beneficial than this high speed rail (but of course it won't happen).

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hous...ric/units.html

[expatCA]

Originally Posted by Rigeleer

$64 billion is enough to pay for solar arrays for about 3 million houses. That would be almost half of the single-family detached houses in the state according to the census. That would be more beneficial than this high speed rail (but of course it won't happen).

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hous...ric/units.html

Humm, not a bad idea.

Or buy everyone and electric car and reduce the emissions in CA?

HSR is likely to be another failure and just cost the State more and more money.

[Californiaguy2007]

That's what I was wondering if the cost of HSR in countries like Japan and China cost less

It really is amazing how China has caught up rapidly with HSR and with so many other Developed Countries,and yup HSR is very successful in Japan and China.

I think the price tag for California's HSR is outrageous,you would think this HSR is going to connect Alaska all the way down to Argentina with this price tag and growing

Originally Posted by citizensadvocate

China planned their HSR system at similar time as California and now they build the world’s largest system but their cost is still lower than this single line is projected to cost.
Though We cannot not always just say that China is successful because the state owns all land. As in Japan it’s totally the opposite and very difficult to secure an eminent domain permit due to historically strong property right laws, yet they had build such a successful system over the years.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by 2nd trick op

Thanks to the "If we build it, they will come" thinking which is common to the Urban Planning Crowd, that is exactly what you're stuck with at present; "partially-completed" big dreams are a favorite tactic by which the taxpayer can be held hostage.

What can be salvaged here is an updated, and considerably faster version of the San Joaquin service (Oakland-Bakersfield, with a bus hub at the latter point serving the entire Southland) which was operated by the Santa Fe rail system until the end of conventional rail service in the early Seventies. The Central Valley is also home to a series of growing communities, centered around Fresno. I'm pretty sure that if the CA HSR project is stymied and mothballed, a 100-150 MPH system in the Valley would be allowed to evolve while a plan to dig new tunnels through the San Gabriels, for both freight (conventional rail) and passengers (HSR) took shape.

Just an educated guess, but it wouldn't surprise me to discover some of the HSR advocates are thinking along those lines.

What I wanted them to do was construct two segments, one coming out of the Bay Area to around Modesto or even Fresno, and the other from LA to Bakersfield. With an eye to making it more commuter-centric.

Once those were in place, and the benefits were obvious, they could worry about connecting it all up.

[NoMoreSnowForMe]

Ignoring the trolls here - as much as I think it would be cool to upgrade our transportation to be closer to what I understand is a great system in Europe - I think we have other more pressing needs to spend our money on here in CA.

It would just seem to me to be really arrogant to ignore the homeless problem or the healthcare problem or the immigrant problem or the education problem - to put in a high speed rail system that would only benefit people who could afford to ride it to destinations only attractive, most likely, to higher income people.

As much as I have often really liked Gov. Jerry Brown, he has lost me on his obsession with this one. It's like he has some twisted need to have his name on some major infrastructure deal - regardless of whether or not it really helps most of the citizens in CA.

Honestly, Gov. Brown, you've seriously disappointed me on this one. Ask me to help fund healthcare for the homeless, to help DACA recipients, to improve our roads in our neighborhoods - and I'm on board. But, I don't anticipate EVER using a high speed rail to L.A., nor does anyone I know.

So, get over it. I won't vote for it. Most citizens won't, because most won't ever use it. So, why would we fund it?

It's like asking us to fund Trump's border wall. Sorry, but, YES, this is just as bad, as far as asking us to fund something that is such a low priority as to be laughable.

Brown also destroyed the Fair Housing system in CA by dismantling the administrative judges in the fair housing division. So, now low income people who need help with housing discrimination have basically zero enforcement.

So, you balance the budget by screwing people who need help with fair housing, yet expect us to back you on a high speed rail system that will only benefit the rich? Yeah, good luck with that.

This is the kind of crap that gets long-term democrats like myself, to vote Republican. For instance, I voted to oust Gray Davis and voted for Arnold and I'm not sorry I did. I'm not alone in this.

So, just because this state votes mainly democratic, and Brown has the support of most of the state - doesn't mean we'll all get on board with this ludicrous expenditure for the high speed rail project.

It's tiring how democrats get into office and then start acting like republicans, and then expect their voters to follow them wherever they go. Well, Ask Grey Davis how that went for him.