tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post4614672806082216258..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: 2008 Business Plan PublishedRobert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger35125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-52217417996948494882008-11-23T01:26:00.000-08:002008-11-23T01:26:00.000-08:00Thanks for the infoעוסק מורשהThanks for the info<BR/><A HREF="http://www.financialzone.co.il/esek.html" REL="nofollow"><B>עוסק מורשה</B></A>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55628782229681396642008-11-10T16:33:00.000-08:002008-11-10T16:33:00.000-08:00While actual Caltrain wire-stringing will probably...While actual Caltrain wire-stringing will probably be delayed by HSR plans, some things won't: substation design and land purchase, train (locomotive or MU) design and purchase, signalling and safety systems design and purchase, etc. The actual on-the-ground right-of-way design *will* be delayed for HSR most likely, but the choice of what systems to use can (and should) go forward -- it was already going to be "HSR-ready". And that is actually a much larger part of the electrification than you might think.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-56882719352470953162008-11-09T22:12:00.000-08:002008-11-09T22:12:00.000-08:00@ anon-12:32pm and anon-1:13pm, thanks for the inf...@ anon-12:32pm and anon-1:13pm, thanks for the info.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-29534063420305265302008-11-09T19:19:00.000-08:002008-11-09T19:19:00.000-08:00bureaucratic documentation porn!bureaucratic documentation porn!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-25158089775354494882008-11-09T15:10:00.000-08:002008-11-09T15:10:00.000-08:00I believe what you are all griping about is the la...I believe what you are all griping about is the lack of source documentation. According to the official site, "it will not be<BR/>available for viewing <A HREF="http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/news/NewsRelease117.pdf" REL="nofollow"> until next week</A> [from Nov. 7]." So everyone should just hold their horses and wait until Friday. Then you can download and pore over the details all you want.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-16657609108077825742008-11-09T14:31:00.000-08:002008-11-09T14:31:00.000-08:00Really I think they half hearted thought they woul...Really I think they half hearted thought they would be packing boxes for the state archives this week..Now SUPRISE its a project! now for the real business plan since we have our end of the moneyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-78197803051135646222008-11-09T13:13:00.001-08:002008-11-09T13:13:00.001-08:00Ok, so I'm not the only one who thinks the busines...Ok, so I'm not the only one who thinks the business plan is a bit short on details and heavy on gloss. Lets hope they release something more substantial soon.<BR/><BR/>My next question is what happens to all of the currently planned Caltrain capitol projects? I found that Caltrain actually posts very nice <A HREF="http://caltrain.com/quarterly_report.html" REL="nofollow">quarterly reports</A> of everything they're working on. Only a few of the projects will be unaffected by HSR, like some radio stuff and real-time train location / prediction (finally!).<BR/><BR/>Most of the projects if they get done in the next few years will have to be completely redone for HSR. Basically all of the bridge and station improvements are planned for a 2-track system, and will have to be scrapped when going to a 4-track system. Since the bridge improvements are mostly for seismic reasons I could see delaying those a few years until HSR comes through at no great detriment. However the station improvements will have real benefits in the next year or two before HSR starts construction, due to removing the "hold-out rule" where baby bullets can't pass stopped trains at a station and only 1 train can be at a station at a time. Is it worth spending a few million for a few years of upgraded station performance, and then ripping it right out?<BR/><BR/>Then there's electrification of the track, which is the biggest capitol improvement on the list (along with making a Dumbarton caltrain bridge, which is a whole different story). It's unclear from the quarterly report exactly how far along the project is and when they plan to start laying wires, but my guess is that this won't be touched until HSR begins construction, or maybe a bit before with explicit planning to make it completely HSR compatible. I'd really like to see this timeline be pushed as hard as possible, as an electrified corridor will make current caltrain service substantially nicer.<BR/><BR/>-PeterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-4593462713858017422008-11-09T13:13:00.000-08:002008-11-09T13:13:00.000-08:00Looking at Fresno, the UP corridor appears to be w...Looking at Fresno, the UP corridor appears to be wide enough for six tracks *most* of its length (but not all). A number of parking lot demolitions would be needed, but not a lot of building demolitions.<BR/><BR/>CAHSR requires at least two tracks there. I think UP and BNSF are going to demand two tracks each (as they should). CAHSR and BNSF are not going to cooperate on BNSF track relocation if it hurts either of them (which it would if the ROW had insufficient room for six tracks).<BR/><BR/>Use of eminent domain by Fresno City Council might get a six-track ROW, with extra room for barrier walls etc. It looks like they just have to claim parking lots, mostly anyway.<BR/><BR/>Google Maps shows the only *actual* chokepoint (assuming widened ROW by eminent domain, without knocking down buildings) to be from highway 41 through the railyards, where the UP and BNSF lines already parallel each other. This may mean making an elevated line for high-speed rail over the existing rail lines or over Golden State Boulevard through this section.<BR/><BR/>The other problem is the Fresno station, which needs much greater width. Ideally, an extra two tracks for stopping HSR, to not block the mainline, and an extra two for other passenger trains (so freights can run straight through). Even if the BNSF is left alone, this will be difficult to place in the ROW. Eliminating some *large* parking lots like the one near Grizzlies Stadium could do it; that would probably require building large garages though.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-90601511421121660752008-11-09T12:47:00.000-08:002008-11-09T12:47:00.000-08:00Hmm, so I guess I think they should start running ...Hmm, so I guess I think they should start running the various subprojects independently.<BR/><BR/>How have they broken the corridor down into pieces? I think all the pieces need to progress in parallel, though I'd lay bets that Burbank-Bakersfield actually gets trains running first. (The Central Valley might break ground before that, for the test track.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-72488312610122066602008-11-09T12:32:00.000-08:002008-11-09T12:32:00.000-08:00The Tehachapi connection should be built FAST. As...The Tehachapi connection should be built FAST. <BR/><BR/>As long as the FRA doesn't allow freight on high-speed lines, it won't be suitable for freight (except light fast freight, a special case) -- they're not going to build extra tunnels just for freight, so freight will continue to take the Tehachapi Loop. <BR/><BR/>However, Bakersfield-LA is already a major commuter corridor (horrifying though that is), so the "glorified commuter" aspect will play into getting that part done early. And there is little or no environmental or other opposition to this section. And a vast amount of the preliminary engineering has been done for it (because feasibility studies were necessary thanks to the fault lines). And the preferred alternative not going to require much adjacency to the freight railroads except at the Bakersfield station proper.<BR/><BR/>I would expect that proper agreements could allow an "extended San Joaquins" run to make it to LA until high-speed rail proper starts running.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-59415850809649422192008-11-09T11:52:00.000-08:002008-11-09T11:52:00.000-08:00Eric said...Don't forget that in some of the narro...<I>Eric said...<BR/>Don't forget that in some of the narrow right of ways, the HSR will use areal tramways. There wont be a need to reduce trackage, just build above it.</I><BR/><BR/>My question was not about whether the HSR would be creating bottlenecks, but curiosity on whether there would be any side-effect in relieving the existing bottlenecks. The portions of the alignment that is new rail corridor are one obvious opportunity.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-53950017060798900842008-11-09T09:59:00.000-08:002008-11-09T09:59:00.000-08:00Don't forget that in some of the narrow right of w...Don't forget that in some of the narrow right of ways, the HSR will use areal tramways. There wont be a need to reduce trackage, just build above it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-41650722720931595232008-11-09T08:34:00.000-08:002008-11-09T08:34:00.000-08:00I don't intend to be the Authority's amen corner, ...I don't intend to be the Authority's amen corner, that's for sure. I too would have liked to see a fully detailed plan, but I do not believe one was necessary at this time or that one won't be produced in the future. My guess is the Authority took the legislature literally and produced an "update" to the plan.<BR/><BR/>I do think we need to keep in mind that the HSR deniers are still out there and not going anywhere. We will criticize the Authority from time to time and rightly so. But we should also take care to make those criticisms as constructive as possible. The HSR deniers are going to take ANY criticism we make and say "omg even the supporters think this is fucked up." Which won't be true, and which should NOT mean we bite our tongues. <BR/><BR/>I really want our purpose here to be to build up, and not tear down. There will indeed be times when Kopp and others are, as spokker says, "full of crap." I won't shrink from pointing that out. But I also will be sure to offer ways for the Authority to improve and lobby to make that happen.<BR/><BR/>Like any government project, California High Speed Rail will need persistent citizen oversight and engagement for it to be a success. We are best positioned to provide that. And I hope that we will continue to provide it.Robert Cruickshankhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-63042057112598142672008-11-09T03:30:00.000-08:002008-11-09T03:30:00.000-08:00back @ Rafael ...My main concern in the question i...back @ Rafael ...<BR/><BR/>My main concern in the question is current rail bottlenecks ... eg., LA / Bakersfield. In terms of electrifying STRACNET, an expansion of market share for freight rail will require untangling existing bottlenecks. For example, AFAIU there is not a lot of spare capacity on existing LA / Bakersfield alignments.BruceMcFhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08502035881761277885noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-3785744289730341922008-11-08T22:22:00.000-08:002008-11-08T22:22:00.000-08:00Spoker..Dog.there is alot of work to do..BTW move ...Spoker..Dog.there is alot of work to do..BTW move to the CITY..and help us cut the ribbion on the first trainset out of Grand Central WestAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-50464933688939934342008-11-08T18:57:00.000-08:002008-11-08T18:57:00.000-08:00Now that we have passed the bond measure, after we...Now that we have passed the bond measure, after we have defended the project on blogs, news sites and forums, it's time for we the supporters to start scrutinizing this project.<BR/><BR/>I would hope that if Robert Cruickshank sees something that the Authority is doing that he doesn't like, that he gives them a piece of his mind on this here blog of his. Not to say he shouldn't always be supportive, but we aren't friends of this train unless we can't muster up the balls to say that Judge Kopp might be full of crap once in a while.Spokkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03244298044953214810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-7653846542273818432008-11-08T18:39:00.000-08:002008-11-08T18:39:00.000-08:00^^^ Yeah, I would agree. I feel it must be intend...^^^ Yeah, I would agree. I feel it must be intended for a public audience only. <BR/><BR/>Which, this does not mean anything negative, really. Just that more detail would be appreciated for an interested mind.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-36008639597480965002008-11-08T18:25:00.000-08:002008-11-08T18:25:00.000-08:00I will have to agree that the business plan does n...I will have to agree that the business plan does not look detailed on what is released. However, what I notice on page 30 is references to the economic studies of areas which have already been published to the site, making me wonder if this would be better as a summary rather than an actual business plan?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-33304919885812695132008-11-08T18:12:00.000-08:002008-11-08T18:12:00.000-08:00@ anon @ 5:02 -Peter, my guess is that the VTA lig...@ anon @ 5:02 -<BR/><BR/>Peter, my guess is that the VTA light rail will need to be reduced to single track and moved to the Central Expressway median, with a pedestrian overpass to access the platform.<BR/><BR/>The Castro street grade crossing could theoretically be closed permanently, since there is already an overpass at Shoreline. It might make sense to set up one-way circulation around the downtown area and, convert several blocks of Castro into a pedestrian zone.<BR/><BR/>Note that CHSRA hasn't decided yet if the mid-penisula station should be sited in Redwood City (optimizing access from the East Bay via Dumbarton bridge) or in Palo Alto. Both cities are in San Mateo county.<BR/><BR/>IMHO, Mountain View would make more sense than Palo Alto, because of the proximity to 101, 85, 237, Central Expressway, and a large office campus plus concert venue at Shoreline Park and the VTA line plus some buses and bike routes.<BR/><BR/>Mountain View has also been more proactive than other peninsula cities in anticipating HSR. However, that would give Santa Clara county three HSR stations vs. one for San Mateo county.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-61856338420421073462008-11-08T18:08:00.000-08:002008-11-08T18:08:00.000-08:00I scanned through the new business plan and seemed...I scanned through the new business plan and seemed to see some material on every subject that needed to be addressed, but at an insufficient level of detail. <BR/><BR/>I find it hard to fathom that private sector interests would be interested in financial participation with such shallow detail provided. I can only imagine that what was released was for public consumption and a more detailed version will be provided to financial institutions and other private interests. <BR/><BR/>What was released really does not seem worthy of my time. It seems others here may agree.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-78264877183528505832008-11-08T17:49:00.000-08:002008-11-08T17:49:00.000-08:00"If you look at the original 2000 plan there are 1..."If you look at the original 2000 plan there are 100's of pages of dry text documents on financing, alignments, ridership, etc."<BR/><BR/>I'm hoping that the bond measure will pay for more detailed studies. The Authority has done some things that warrant criticism but it also seems like people are asking for too much.<BR/><BR/>How should Kopp know where the trains are coming from? Why would anyone expect them to pick a vendor this early in the project? The State of California has starved these guys for funds for so long that they could barely pump out these piece of shit business plans and documents.<BR/><BR/>Now that we passed the bond it's time for the Authority to get to work and really pump out some good stuff about where the actual track is going to be laid and how they are going to deal with LA-Anaheim, the peninsula, etc. I want to know who expressed private interest and in a couple years, yeah, a vendor needs to come on board. <BR/><BR/>I want to see answers coming from these people over the next few years. I voted yes on this thing. This is my money too, and it's time to see some action.Spokkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03244298044953214810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-47723224505646218182008-11-08T17:02:00.000-08:002008-11-08T17:02:00.000-08:00I've been a long proponent of 1A, but I sadly agre...I've been a long proponent of 1A, but I sadly agree with the Jarvis Taxpayers Association guy to an extent. Is what got posted it, or is there more coming? This 30-page document does look more like a glossy propaganda summary than a real business plan. If you look at the original 2000 plan there are 100's of pages of dry text documents on financing, alignments, ridership, etc. That's what I expect form a business plan, not a 30-page glossy handout.<BR/><BR/>In an unrelated note, I'm really curious how the caltrain alignment is going to work in Mountain View, specifically at the Castro St station. It doesn't seem like theres even close to enough space for a Castro St crossing, the Caltrain station, 4 tracks, and Central Expy.<BR/><BR/>-PeterAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-88158939840913795942008-11-08T16:48:00.000-08:002008-11-08T16:48:00.000-08:00@ anon @ 2:01 -afaik, 4th & King will still be...@ anon @ 2:01 -<BR/><BR/>afaik, 4th & King will still be the terminus for some Caltrain trains during the day.<BR/><BR/>If overnight parking for the HSR trains turns out to be a severe constraint on HSR operations, I think they'll try to leverage space wherever they can find it. Perhaps CHSRA could obtain land for a new yard near Channel and 6th and tear down the warehouses there.<BR/><BR/>Also, Google maps satellite view shows what appears to have been a bunch of sidings at some point, located opposite the Caltrain station in Santa Clara.<BR/><BR/>@ eric -<BR/><BR/>maybe you're right, I just don't like it when important details are glossed over. The fact that CHSRA delivered an updated business plan at all when they said they would is a positive sign, but I'm not sure it's detailed enough to attract private investors - especially in the current market.<BR/><BR/>My understanding is that the tracks leading to the Transbay Terminal pass the 4th & King station to the left (when approaching SF). The drawing appears to show multiple possible alignments.<BR/><BR/>@ anon @ 4:05 -<BR/><BR/>I see what you mean now. Chances are, the HSR trains will anyhow be down to standard speed (less than 80mph) by the time they reach the 280 intersection. Perhaps Caltrain and HSR can squeak by on just two tracks for that short section in the approach to the SF stations.<BR/><BR/>It sounds similar to the situation between Fullerton and Anaheim. It'll be interesting to see if FRA has a major problem with mixing traffic as long as there is strict time separation.<BR/><BR/>@ anon @ 4:26 -<BR/><BR/>no, that is a 700 series shinkansen in Fly California livery. If you look at the various videos, you'll also see Alstom TGV and Siemens Velaro trains. The new business plan includes a photo of the new Alstom AGV.<BR/><BR/>Don't interpret this to mean that CHSRA has already decided on a vendor. It's just supposed to illustrate that they intend to purchase proven, off-the-shelf rolling stock from Europe or Asia rather to leverage the work that has gone into them.<BR/><BR/>Whether the designs will have to be modified depends on how FRA handles their request for a "rule of special applicability" wrt mixed traffic in the short sections at either end where it appears to be unavoidable.<BR/><BR/>For reference on why modifications are a bad idea, see <A HREF="http://www.ebbc.org/?q=rail/fra.html" REL="nofollow">here</A> for a take on the saga of the Acela Express. Note that California HSR trains will not require tilt technology.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-55142168506062816112008-11-08T16:26:00.000-08:002008-11-08T16:26:00.000-08:00The cover of that document features a train that l...The cover of that document features a train that looks a lot like the 700 series Shinkansen trainset.<BR/><BR/>Is that merely conceptual, or is there any investigation into using Japanese technology on the line?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-87211283308283308612008-11-08T16:05:00.000-08:002008-11-08T16:05:00.000-08:00Rafael @ 1:49: "It's not clear to me how I-280 is ...Rafael @ 1:49: "It's not clear to me how I-280 is relevant to the Caltrain DTX."<BR/><BR/>The retrofit of the elevated section of 280 in the 1990's resulted in a column smack in front of an unused train tunnel in the vicinity of 23rd and Pennsylvania streets (see maps.google). This permanently eliminated that tunnel for use in expanding the existing service to more tracks. <BR/><BR/>I'll look for a picture, but here's one that shows how constrained the existing pair of tracks are:<BR/>http://www.flickr.com/photos/skew-t/166264130/in/photostream/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com