California High-Speed Rail
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
| California High-Speed Rail | |
|---|---|
 |
|
| Info | |
| Locale | California |
| Transit type | High-speed rail |
| Daily ridership | 91-95 million yearly (CHSRA projection)[1] |
| Website | http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/ |
| Operation | |
| Operator(s) | TBD |
| Technical | |
| System length | 700+ mi (1,100+ km) (proposed)[2] |
The California High-Speed Rail project is an expected future high-speed rail system in the state of California and headed by California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). The project was approved by California voters on November 4, 2008 with the passage of Proposition 1A authorizing US$9.95 billion in general obligation bonds for the project. The CHSRA is currently tasked with completing final planning, design, and environmental efforts. When built, high-speed trains capable of 220 mph (350 km/h) are anticipated to link San Francisco and Los Angeles in as little as two and a half hours. The planned system would also serve other major California cities, such as Sacramento, San Jose, Fresno, Bakersfield and San Diego.
Construction efforts are anticipated to begin by 2011.[3] An implementation plan approved in August 2005 estimates that it would take eight to eleven years to "develop and begin operation of an initial segment of the California high-speed train".[2]
Contents |
[edit] Current rail options
Currently, intercity rail service does not directly serve the city of San Francisco (other than Caltrain, which connects San Francisco to various cities in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, such as San Jose, Gilroy, Palo Alto, and Belmont). Amtrak provides bus connections from various San Francisco locations to its stations in Oakland and Emeryville across the bay.
The fastest Amtrak route from Oakland to Los Angeles is the state-sponsored San Joaquin train line to Bakersfield, and then a bus from Bakersfield to Los Angeles or various locations in Southern California. A trip from San Francisco to Los Angeles takes a little more than nine hours -- much slower than travel by private car. The San Joaquin route is not time-efficient as it takes a circuitous route north and east from Oakland through the Sacramento river delta to enter the Central Valley. The Coast Starlight (not state-sponsored) provides a direct rail trip from Oakland/Emeryville to Los Angeles along the Pacific Coast, but is even slower, taking more than 12 hours. In addition, direct air service between either Sacramento or Bakersfield and Fresno, is either non-existent or severely limited and, in either case, always very expensive.
[edit] Route
The system will initially stretch from San Francisco and Sacramento, via the Central Valley, to Los Angeles and San Diego via the Inland Empire. Proposed stations on the route are shown on the right,[4] with stations on the initial San Francisco-Los Angeles-Anaheim route given in bold.[5]
[edit] Track alignment into the Central Valley
One issue initially debated was whether to connect the Bay Area via the Altamont Pass or the Pacheco Pass. On November 15, 2007, Authority staff recommended that the High Speed Rail follow the Pacheco Pass route, rather than the Altamont route. Pacheco pass was recommended because it is the more direct route, allows trains to serve both San Jose and San Francisco on the same route, and the Altamont route poses several engineering challenges. Also, cities along the Altamont route option are not united in supporting the route. Some cities, such as Pleasanton and Fremont, opposed the Altamont route option, citing concerns over possible property taking and increase in traffic congestion.[6] Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, oppose the Pacheco route because the area is less developed and more environmentally sensitive than Altamont.[7]
On December 19, 2007 the Authority Board agreed to have the project proceed according to the staff recommendation for the Pacheco Pass option.[8] Pacheco Pass was considered the superior route for long-distance travel between Southern California and the Bay Area, although the Altamont Pass option would serve as a good commuter route. According to the recommendation, conventional rail improvements will be made to the Altamont corridor to complement the high-speed project.
[edit] Benefits
 |
This article is written like an advertisement. Please help rewrite this article from a neutral point of view. For blatant advertising that would require a fundamental rewrite to become encyclopedic, use {{db-spam}} to mark for speedy deletion. |
The California High-Speed Rail Authority projects that construction of the system will create approximately 150,000 construction jobs and 450,000 permanent jobs by creating "new commuters" that will use the system. The Los Angeles-San Francisco route is also projected to create a profit of $1 billion annually that will initially go back into the high-speed rail system itself for maintenance and further extensions. The high-speed rail system is also projected to be half the cost of building new airport runways, gates and expanding highways for the same capacity of travelers, necessary for future demand due to California's increasing population. Since the trains are completely grade-separated, there is no threat of interfering automobile and pedestrian traffic. The project also involves grade-separation for existing rail lines with which it will share right-of-ways along part of its length, further improving safety on these lines and eliminating car traffic delays. Within station sites, major developments are projected to take place, some of which have already started which include the Sacramento Railyards and the Transbay Terminal Development in San Francisco. Since high-speed trains (based on fossil electricity generation) use one-third the energy of airplanes (per person) and a fifth of that used by cars (with one person),[citation needed] California High-Speed Rail will also eliminate 12 billion pounds of greenhouse gas emissions each year by off-setting passenger car and airplane use. This is the equivalent of removing more than one million vehicles from the state's roads and freeways. It will also lessen California's dependence on foreign oil by up to 12.7 million barrels per year.
[edit] Funding
On November 4, 2008 California voters approved Proposition 1A, a measure to construct the initial segment of the planned California High-Speed rail network. The measure provides $9 billion for the construction of the core segment between San Francisco and Los Angeles/Anaheim, and an additional $950 million for improvements on local railroad systems, which will serve as feeder systems to the planned high-speed rail system.
Financing plans to complete the initial segment include planned support from federal and local governments, as well as the private sector. Construction costs are projected to be approximately $40 billion. The Authority is currently focused on developing strategies to best position an application for Federal American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding. Prioritized is an emphasis on capital construction projects that will meet obligation criteria prior to September 2012. Projects anticipated to meet this criterion are located in the San Francisco-San Jose and Los Angeles–Anaheim corridors. [9]
The Authority projects the initial operating segment to produce a budget surplus which will be used to finance extensions to Sacramento and San Diego.
[edit] Federal Economic Stimulus Funding
On October 2, 2009 Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled California's offical application for ARRA high-speed rail stimulus funding. The total amount of the application is $4.7 billion, representing more than half of the $8 billion set aside for high-speed rail. The application includes:
- $2 billion for high-speed train facilities at Los Angeles Union Station, Norwalk Station and the Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center; right-of-way acquisition, grade separations, utility relocation, environmental mitigation, earthwork, tunneling and track work between Los Angeles and Anaheim.
- $1.28 billion for station improvements, grade separations, electrification and other work between San Jose and San Francisco;
- $819.5 million for right-of-way acquisition, grade separations, utility relocation, environmental mitigation, earthwork and track between Bakersfield and Fresno;
- $466 million for similar work between Fresno and Merced
[edit] Criticisms of project
In September 2008 Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association and Citizens Against Government Waste published "The California High Speed Rail Proposal: A Due Diligence Report." The report projects that the final cost for the complete high-speed rail system will be $65 to $81 billion, which is higher than official estimates. It also projects there will be fewer riders by 2030 than official estimates: 23-31 million riders a year instead of 65-96 million riders forecast by the Rail Authority. The report states that no existing high-speed rail train currently meets the proposed speed and safety goals, although the safety systems have not been fully specified, and that the reduction in CO2 emissions would be inconsequential. The time required to reach the proposed speeds and the distances between stops indicates that attaining the proposed speeds would be difficult between the majority of stops.[10]
[edit] References
- ^ Cambridge Systematics Inc. (July 2007). "Bay Area/California High Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study" (PDF). California High-Speed Rail Authority. pp. pg. 71-72. http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20080128135423_R9a_Report.pdf. Retrieved 2008-07-17.
- ^ a b California High-Speed Rail Authority. "Implementation Plan" (PDF). pp. pg. 23,25. http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20080123171537_ImplementationPlan.pdf. Retrieved 2008-07-17.
- ^ [1]
- ^ CA High-Speed Rail Authority. "Route Map". http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/map.htm. Retrieved 2008-07-17.
- ^ CA High-Speed Rail Authority. "Phasing Plan" (PDF). http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20080121165954_052307_plan.pdf. Retrieved 2008-07-17.
- ^ CHSRA Staff Recommendation Presentation
- ^ High Speed Rail Authority staff advises Pacheco Pass route to L.A.
- ^ cbs13.com - State Picks Pacheco Pass For High-Speed Rail
- ^ CA High-Speed Rail Authority. "Resolution #HSRA09-008 (Regarding American Recovery and Reinvestment Act)" (PDF). http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/images/chsr/20090602162133_Agenda%20Item%206%20-%20Resolution.pdf. Retrieved 2009-06-04.
- ^ The California High Speed Rail Proposal: A Due Diligence Report September 2008 study by Reason Foundation, Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation and Citizens Against Government Waste
[edit] See also
- Lines proposed in response to the cancellation of Amtrak service to Las Vegas:
- Desert Xpress, a proposed high-speed rail from Victorville to Las Vegas.
- California-Nevada Interstate Maglev, a proposed maglev from Anaheim, California to Las Vegas.
|
|||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
[edit] External links
- California High Speed Rail Authority official website
- California Corridor section of the Federal Railroad Administration website
- High Speed Rail for California State Assemblyperson Fiona Ma's Proposition 1A advocacy and California high-speed rail informational website
- California High Speed Rail Blog discussion website
- California for High-Speed Trains Proposition 1A advocacy website
- The Full Cost of Intercity Transportation, a 1996 study done at University of California, Berkeley examining a state rail system (based on fuel and other cost figures from the early 1990s)
