27 replies to this topic

[KevinKorell]

During his first State of the State address, Gov. Gavin Newsom discussed plans to scale back two major California infrastructure projects, including the state’s beleaguered high-speed rail project.

The state’s high-speed rail authority will focus now on building only the Central Valley segment of the planned San Francisco to Los Angeles train.

“Right now, there simply isn’t a path to get from Sacramento to San Diego, let alone from San Francisco to LA,” Newsom said during his address. “However, we do have the capacity to complete a high-speed rail link between Merced and Bakersfield.”

He also bristled at the notion that the high-speed rail system was a “train to nowhere.”

RELATED: High-Speed Rail is at a Crossroads

“I know that some critics will say this is a ‘train to nowhere.’ But that’s wrong and offensive,” said Newsom. “The people of the Central Valley endure the worst air pollution in America as well as some of the longest commutes. And they have suffered too many years of neglect from policymakers here in Sacramento. They deserve better.”

The Governor added that high-speed rail is more than a train project, but an economic transformation that could unlock “the enormous potential of the Valley,” before adding that this doesn’t necessarily mark the end of the project’s larger goal.

“Look, we will continue our regional projects north and south,” he said. “We’ll finish Phase 1 environmental work. We’ll connect the revitalized Central Valley to other parts of the state, and continue to push for more federal funding and private dollars. But let’s just get something done.”

Newsom added that for those who want to abandon the project entirely would mean that the state will have wasted billions of dollars with nothing but broken promises and lawsuits to show for it, and wasn’t “interested in sending $3.5 billion in federal funding that was allocated to this project back to Donald Trump.”

RELATED: California's High-Speed Project Charges Up

In closing, the Governor said there will be new transparency measures implemented, including holding contractors and consultants accountable to explain how taxpayer dollars are spent — including change orders, cost overruns, and even travel expenses — which will be available online.

“You’re also going to see some governance changes, starting with my pick for the next chair of the High-Speed Rail Authority, Lenny Mendonca, my economic development director,” Newsom said. “Because at the end of the day, transportation and economic development must go hand in hand.”

Keywords

construction   consultants   contractors   federal funding   Gov. Gavin Newsom   high-speed rail   

 

Follow @lctmag on Twitter

View the full article

[EvergreenRailfan]

So basically the segments outside of the Central Valley are on hold?

[Springfield Pete]

More likely the segments outside the Central Valley are permanently cancelled.

 

To get from San Jose into the Central Valley you have to cross the Diablo Range, and down at the south end you have to cross the Tehachapi range to get from Bakersfield to Los Angeles.  Long tunnels would be necessary for both crossings -- the existing rail route over Tehachapi pass involves steep grades, 3500 ft of climbing, and the famous loop where the track crosses over itself to gain elevation.  Train speeds are not much over 25 mph - back in the sixties when Southern Pacific was still running the San Joaquin Daylight from Oakland to Los Angeles, it took over 2 hours to cover the 65 miles between Bakersfield and Mojave.  Not an option for high speed rail.  Besides, with Union Pacific and Santa Fe jointly using the Tehachapi Pass route, there is so much freight traffic that scheduling passenger trains would be pretty tough.  Up at the north end of the Valley, there is a highway over Pacheco pass, but no rail route across the Diablo range has ever been built.

 

So that leaves two tunnels, each at least 10 miles long, as the only option for high speed rail.  I have ridden high speed trains through mountainous areas in Korea and China, long tunnels are common on these lines.  But in Asia the issues of land acquisition, permitting, environmental impact evaluation, and construction cost are dealt with much more easily than in the USA.   I think Governor Newsom realized that it would be unlikely California could ever commit enough time and money to cross all these hurdles.     

[KevinKorell]

So then why build it at all?  Will HSR really have a tremendous impact to travelers solely within a Merced-Bakersfield corridor?   By Amtrak's current San Joaquins timetable, that distance is 168 miles.   However it would not be a fair comparison to the East Coast, where we have Acela -- but where we also have the nation's major cities with much higher populations than Merced, Fresno, or Bakersfield. The distance is in between those of Boston-New Haven and New York-Baltimore. And with Acela, unless one is travelling a comparatively longer distance -- say Boston-New York or New York-Washington, the time savings that Acela brings over the conventional trains is not that significant.

 

Back to the San Joaquin Valley, the only benefit to an upgrade between Merced and Bakersfield would be higher speeds for the existing San Joaquins as they would be travelling on better track and not having interference from freight trains.   But it will remain of no benefit to people who are travelling between larger metropolitan areas, like the Bay Area and Los Angeles, who still will need to make connections with either buses or conventional trains such as the San Joaquins to get where they are going.  Without benefit of a one seat ride, this method of travel will remain discouraging.  Unfortunately the "train to nowhere" moniker that Governor Newsom bristles at seems quite fitting.  It's sad for California as a whole, given the crowded freeways and the need to travel between its larger cities. However the state's topography, as Pete points out above, renders such a project to connect the cities as cost prohibitive.  

 

It's just unfortunate that California already put money into infrastructure assuming that a massive HSR network would eventually take place.  Look at the money spent on the ARTIC station in Anaheim, which assumes a second phase of the network south of the Los Angeles area to San Diego will be built.   The improvements to the CalTrain route to approach downtown San Francisco through San Jose at least can benefit CalTrain but the line could never see HSR.

 

Higher speed rail, rather than high speed rail, might be a better answer, much like has been done in Illinois and Michigan.   

[KevinKorell]

And now here is a totally botched news item where the writer refers to this as Light Rail.  From San Francisco, CA News, 2/13/19:

 

 

 

 

Governor Newsom Derails Light-Rail Plans

 

 

California Governor Gavin Newsom has changed his mind on the California light rail during the California State of the State Address on Tuesday, February 12.

 

 

WHAT California light rail?    Read here.   I've written to this publication to correct and re-publish, explaining the differences between modes.

[Lightning]

So then why build it at all?  

 

Higher speed rail, rather than high speed rail, might be a better answer, much like has been done in Illinois and Michigan.   

 

I agree.  I have never been a supporter of long-distance "high speed" rail.  The US simply can't make a go of it, for a multitude of reasons.  I AM a supporter of higher speed rail.  Why must be go from 79 mph to a totally unrealistic (for the US) of 150 mph?  Why must it be all or nothing?  Why can we not be satisfied with 100 or 110 miles per hour?  Decades ago, way before jet travel for the masses, trains were traveling in the high double digits, so we're not reinventing the wheel at 100 (mph).  Let's aim for something within the realm of the possible and not throw billions into pipe dreams.

[Springfield Pete]

Kevin wonders "why build it at all?" if the High Speed line is only going to serve the lightly populated corridor between Merced and Bakersfield.  It's a good question -- I guess there are three possible answers:

 

The cynical answer is that building the 168 miles of High Speed Rail is strictly a face-saving gesture, so the Governor and the High Speed Rail Authority are not accused of throwing away millions of dollars with nothing accomplished. 

 

The optimist's answer is that someday the High Speed Line could be extended north to Antioch via Tracy (bypassing Stockton) & link up to the existing line from Antioch to Oakland used by the Amtrak San Joaquin trains.  Then, if the High Speed Authority could pay Union Pacific to double track the line over Tehachapi Pass (most of the line is already double tracked) trains could run from Bakersfield to LA via Tehachapi pass and Lancaster.  It would be a mix of Medium Speed at the north end, High speed in the Valley, Low Speed over the pass, and Medium Speed into LA.  But it would at least provide a one-seat ride from Oakland to LA.   About 8 hours for the trip vs 12 hours for the old SP San Joaquin Daylight.  Probably not fast enough to attract many Oakland - LA thru passengers, but it would be a big benefit for travelers to or from intermediate points.

 

The starry-eyed idealist's answer would be to extend the High Speed Line to Antioch at the north end & contract with Elon Musk to build a tunnel under Tehachapi Pass south of Bakersfield.  Musk has actually established a tunnel drilling firm called the Boring Company  (no, I am not kidding) and he claims he can economically build long tunnels.  Of course no experience to demonstrate that yet, but a tunnel connecting downtown San Jose to the airport is in the planning stages .  The one-seat ride from Oakland to LA would take about 6 hours.      

 

Which answer is correct?  Take your pick.  

[CNJRoss]

Gov. Gavin Newsom: 'Let's level about the high-speed rail'

 

Sacramento Bee

Published on Feb 13, 2019

 

Governor Gavin Newsom in Tuesday's State of the State address gave his vision for building high-speed rail in California.

 

 

[KevinKorell]

San Jose, CA Mercury News, 2/14/19:

 

 

  Is California’s controversial bullet train still headed to the Bay Area?  

 

 

The bullet train to the Bay Area might not be dead after all.

 

Gov. Gavin Newsom sowed confusion this week about the future of California’s controversial high-speed rail project, suggesting that the state must focus on a much-abbreviated Central Valley route instead of the long-heralded San Francisco-to-Los Angeles vision.

 

Details

[CNJRoss]

RPA news release:

 

Rail Passengers Statement on Gov. Newsom's HSR Announcement

 

February 13, 2019

 

For Immediate Release (19-4)

 

 

Washington, D.C.—The Rail Passengers Association welcomes clarifying comments from Governor Gavin Newsom that he is fully committed to building a high-speed rail line between San Francisco and Los Angeles. Our Association is eager and willing to work with the Newsom Administration to identify steps—in both the near- and long-term—to effectively deliver a world class passenger rail system to all Californians.

 

“Gov. Newsom’s new strategy recognizes the simple fact that the Californian public, while enthusiastic about access to high-speed rail, has lost faith in project managers to deliver it in a reasonable fashion,” said Rail Passengers President Jim Mathews. “By delivering on 200mph-plus service along an Initial Operating Segment (IOS), the Authority can restore public trust.

 

“There is no question that the IOS must eventually connect to major metro areas in the north and the south of the state for it to have value,” continued Mathews. “We expect to hear from the Newsom Administration and the Authority in the coming weeks about developing low-cost paths to connect the IOS to the San Joaquin corridor.”