tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post6769952039236231737..comments2023-10-30T09:03:07.163-07:00Comments on California High Speed Rail Blog: Palo Alto: Prop 1A is "Opportunity of a Lifetime"Robert Cruickshankhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06906581839066570472noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-39181835967863205132008-09-28T14:33:00.000-07:002008-09-28T14:33:00.000-07:00The obvious, wise, just and smart solution is not ...The obvious, wise, just and smart solution is not permitted in California.<BR/><BR/>The obvious, wise, just and smart solution is to use taxes on land value to finance common services and infrastructure investment. What do good services and good infrastructure do? They increase land value. So there is a natural virtuous circle in collecting some, most or all of that land value to finance such things.<BR/><BR/>Unfortunately, California's voters 30 years ago, in their cupidity and greed, tied the hands of the future.<BR/><BR/>The "third rail" of California politics is turning into the 3rd rail for California transportation, schools, etc.<BR/><BR/>The benefit of putting the trains underground extends a lot further than the right of way itself, and that value should be socialized, not privatized, gifted to landholders. <BR/><BR/>See "Retrieving Transit's Benefits and Other Advantages of Funding Transit From Land Value" January, 2008, at http://www.hgchicago.org/rn05a.pdf for more about these ideas.<BR/><BR/>Extracting yourselves from Prop 13 won't be easy, but it is truly the only answer. It has to be done, if you want California to ever be the Golden State again, for all, not just its elderly and landed.LVTfanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17172522529549663162noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-83921442862838138172008-09-28T08:22:00.000-07:002008-09-28T08:22:00.000-07:00If the scenario of trenching or undergrounding tra...If the scenario of trenching or undergrounding tracks through Palo Alto, or any other city is studied, Caltrain will certainly consider at some level of thought (internal or b4 Board) long periods of no Caltrain service among ahost of other opetions. <BR/><BR/>However, don't fool yourself, that option will be DOA.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-12647012083026155682008-09-28T03:45:00.000-07:002008-09-28T03:45:00.000-07:00@ brandon in San Diego -Palo Alto city leaders hav...@ brandon in San Diego -<BR/><BR/>Palo Alto city leaders have floated the idea of constructing tracks underneath Alma Street, which could potentially be extended as far north as Oak Grove Ave in Menlo Park before any houses have to be bought or seized via eminent domain. Where the underground structure would re-emerge depends on what solution Menlo Park and Atherton will accept (and potentially, help pay for).<BR/><BR/>In the Alma Street scenario, the tracks would have to dive underneath the San Francisquito Creek, University Ave and Embarcadero Rd. On the southern end, the new tracks would presumably be brought back above ground between Churchill and Oregon Expressway, the primary cross road in the town.<BR/><BR/>Caltrain operations would continue unhindered while work on Alma Street was proceeding one track at a time. Only after the bypass was completed and made available to Caltrain would the existing tracks be moved underground as well. That will involve bringing University Ave and Embarcadero Rd. back up to grade.<BR/><BR/>All told, this would amount to a lengthy and severe disruption of life and traffic flow in Palo Alto and Menlo Park. The upside is that the railroad would no longer bisect these towns, be an eyesore, generate noise and pollution, be involved in deadly grade crossing accidents etc.<BR/><BR/>However, given that Caltrain is heavily subsidized by the counties it serves, it would be possible to shut down rail operations in a section and offer passengers courtesy buses. Yes, ridership would suffer and road traffic would increase for a while. Rolling stock would continue to depreciate and operations costs rise because of the bus service. Even so, this might be a lot faster and cheaper than ripping up Alma Street as well as the Caltrain ROW.<BR/><BR/>Both alternatives deserve to be looked at if the fundamental idea of paying for undergrounding by selling air rights proves feasible.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-21854182564855276472008-09-27T21:02:00.000-07:002008-09-27T21:02:00.000-07:00^^^ Whatever is proposed must be "constructable"....^^^ Whatever is proposed must be "constructable". If construction means closing the alignment altogether for any period of time (other than weekend), well, that is not contructable.<BR/><BR/>If anything happens... it MUST allow existing operations to continue. Weekend disruptions would possibly be the only exception.<BR/><BR/>Phasing is the only way to do that. I can see it occurring hypothetically or generally going along such:<BR/><BR/>* relocate/rebuild/create temporary tracks (2) where needed on one side of the corridor in order to maintain train operations during construction.<BR/><BR/>* Construct trench on opposite side, plus temporary roadway crossings (bridges), and build tracks to readiness for 2-tracks and Caltrain service.<BR/><BR/>* Shift train services to 2-track trench.<BR/><BR/>* Remove at-grade tracks and construct 2nd trench adjacent to first, include temporary roadway bridges.<BR/><BR/>For an example... the Alameda corridor in LA may be a good example of how phasing would occur.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-17413189579924369962008-09-27T10:43:00.000-07:002008-09-27T10:43:00.000-07:00@ morris brown -I understand your point, but putti...@ morris brown -<BR/><BR/>I understand your point, but putting the tracks underground would greatly increase the value of land adjacent to and on top of the current at-grade ROW. How much of an increase? That's the big question.<BR/><BR/>A related issue is how a mile-plus of new commercial property would impact traffic in the area. The idea merits further study with or without HSR, but I'm sceptical it could work.<BR/><BR/>Note that the cheaper alternative - a covered trench wide enough to support four tracks and supporting columns - is also the more disruptive option. In particular, Caltrain would probably have to employ buses on Alma and/or El Camino Real to bridge the underground section during construction, which could last several years.<BR/><BR/>Tunnels for four tracks would be incredibly expensive.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-27840833593098055502008-09-27T10:26:00.000-07:002008-09-27T10:26:00.000-07:00Rafael writes:Commercial - as opposed to residenti...Rafael writes:<BR/><BR/><B>Commercial - as opposed to residential - real estate on top of the ROW might well fetch $230/sq ft near downtown Palo Alto and up into Menlo Park.</B><BR/><BR/>With regards Menlo Park land values, I can offer these numbers. I presume Palo Alto a bit higher, but not sure about that.<BR/><BR/>Land values in the rail corridor are about $90 / sq. foot. The Derry project used these figures. A block further to the west, right on El Camino got up to about $6 million / acre, which is $136 / sq. foot. Frontage along El Camino is much mosre valuable than along the rail corridor.<BR/><BR/>So quite frankly getting into 200 to 250 / sq. foot at this time is not realistic.<BR/><BR/>As pointed out, tunneling in Palo Alto would require a long stretch. A tunnel possibility has been suggested for Menlo Park and Ahterton. For sure this would mean plenty of eminent domain land takings in these two cities, and also in Palo Alto. In addition there exists a body of water, between the Menlo Park and Palo Alto, the San Francisquito Creek and going through, or under the creek in no cheap matter.<BR/><BR/>Writers on this subject should remember, that Palo Alto and Menlo park are relatively small communities; land value are not what they are in San Francisco.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-85691917734432048572008-09-26T21:35:00.000-07:002008-09-26T21:35:00.000-07:00Property value in downtown San Diego far surpasses...Property value in downtown San Diego far surpasses that $150 to $170 per square foot value. Here, it has been in the $300 to $400 range and up. <BR/><BR/>I believe places like NY, London and Tokyo are closer to $1000. But that is elsewhere.<BR/><BR/>If HSR is put underground, land values adjacent to tracks... and all property in the vicinity, should dramatically increase in value. <BR/><BR/>If CHSRA or Caltrain were permitted to develop on the land above tunneled tracks... I suspect land values could reach and maybe surpass that $150-$170 figure... but it depends on what development is allowed.<BR/><BR/>BUT.... 4.5 miles of tunnelling is gonna cost well over $464 million as cited by the Palo Alto paper and probably closer $1 billion or more assuming a $200 million or more cost per mile cost... which I believe is consistent with other "like" projects. <BR/><BR/>Obviously, before an idea like that moves forward with any seriousness, advanced efforts on costing the project must be completed.Brandon in Californiahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14796810137823230737noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-43120707854544476422008-09-26T20:39:00.000-07:002008-09-26T20:39:00.000-07:00The disruption happens more than 720 times a day a...The disruption happens more than 720 times a day along Alma Street: The lights turn red, and people and cars grind to a halt as tons of SUV approach in the cross direction.<BR/><BR/>Obviously trains carrying hundreds of people are less important than 10 cars.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-37661765390050888532008-09-26T17:14:00.000-07:002008-09-26T17:14:00.000-07:00You don't really want Caltrain and HSR to turn int...You don't really want Caltrain and HSR to turn into a roller coaster, though it can be done (watch <A HREF="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zYXCcvj4ogI" REL="nofollow">this video</A> from the 1:40 mark).<BR/><BR/>Ergo, if it's going underground through downtown Palo Alto it has to stay there for a while in both directions. That could present a problem for sewer mains and storm drains in the area.<BR/><BR/>Commercial - as opposed to residential - real estate on top of the ROW might well fetch $230/sq ft near downtown Palo Alto and up into Menlo Park. It depends on how many storys developers would be allowed to build, rooftop utilization, parking spaces, vibrations from passing trains etc. This applies especially if the concept is basically a pedestrian/bike boulevard adjacent to cafes and other eateries.<BR/><BR/>South of say, Homer and north of Ravenswood, the whole notion would be a tougher sell. I'm not sure putting the tracks underground could be self-financing and, therein lies the rub.Rafaelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05471957286484454765noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-114724886447369302008-09-26T15:44:00.000-07:002008-09-26T15:44:00.000-07:00Note: In case it wasn't clear above, the $150-170/...Note: In case it wasn't clear above, the $150-170/sq ft figure refers to the square footage of the entire lot, not the square footage of the house itself.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4263762637946594105.post-31519146844309203322008-09-26T15:43:00.000-07:002008-09-26T15:43:00.000-07:00This is an interesting idea but I'm not sure if th...This is an interesting idea but I'm not sure if the math really works out. If the Caltrain ROW averages 100' wide through Palo Alto, then putting it underground for 4.25 miles reclaims around 50 acres of land. So that implies that the land is worth up to $10 million/acre ($230/sq ft) which sounds expensive even for Palo Alto. For example, 3 properties appearing on RedFin near the Caltrain ROW are listed for $150-170/sq ft, and that includes a nice house as well as just the land itself (so it should be an overestimate of the land value). So either the land value are pretty optimistic, or burying Caltrain/HSR would free up even more land than just the actual ROW.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com