California High-Speed Rail
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article or section contains information about a proposed, planned, or expected public transportation infrastructure in the United States. It may contain information of a speculative nature and the content may change dramatically as the construction and/or completion of the infrastructure approaches, and more information becomes available. |
 |
| California High-Speed Rail | |
 |
|
| Locale | California |
|---|---|
| Transit type | High-speed rail |
| System length | 700+ mi (1,100+ km) (proposed)[1] |
| Daily ridership | 91-95 million yearly (projected) [2] (249,315-260,274) |
| Operator(s) | TBD |
The California High-Speed Rail project is a proposed high-speed rail system in the state of California. The system is being planned by the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which will design, build, and operate the system.
It is currently in the Environment Impact Report (EIR) and route selection stages, with the second of two Draft Environmental Statements released to the public on July 20, 2007. An implementation plan approved in August 2005 estimated that it would take 8 to 11 years to "develop and begin operation of an initial segment of the California high-speed train."[1]
If built, high-speed trains will be able to travel across California at speeds of up to 220 mph (350 km/h), potentially linking San Francisco to Los Angeles in under two and a half hours.
Contents |
[edit] Route
The system will initially stretch from San Francisco and Sacramento, via the Central Valley, and onward to Los Angeles and San Diego via the Inland Empire. Proposed stations on the route are shown on the right,[3] with stations on the initial San Francisco-Los Angeles-Anaheim route given in bold [4].
One major issue that was initially debated was whether to connect the Bay Area via the Altamont Pass or the Pacheco Pass. On November 15, 2007, the Authority issued a recommendation 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, 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, even opposed the Altamont route option, citing concerns over possible property taking and increase in traffic congestion[5]. Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, oppose the Pacheco route because the area is less developed and more environmentally sensitive than Altamont.[6]
On December 19, 2007 the Authority Board agreed to have the project proceed according to the staff recommendation for the Pacheco Pass option.[7] 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] Funding
A statewide bond measure to fund the core segment of the system was initially scheduled for the 2004 general election. It was delayed until 2006 due to budget concerns raised at the time by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. In January 2006, the Governor chose to omit the initial funds for the project from his $222.6 billion dollar Public Works Bond over the next 10 years. The Governor did include $14.3 million in the 2006-07 budget for the Authority, enough for it to begin some preliminary engineering and detailed study work.[8] The separate high-speed rail bond measure was delayed[9] from 2006 to 2008 to avoid competition with the huge infrastructure bond, which passed in the 2006 General Election. Currently, it is scheduled for the 2008 general election, but the Governor has yet again proposed shelving the measure, this time "indefinitely."[10] In addition, the Governor refused to fund the Authority to the level that it requested for the 2007-8 fiscal year. In July, the State Legislature's conference committee came out with an appropriation of $41[11][12] of the requested $130 million, but that number then diminished to a mere $4.7 million[13] during the seven-week budget stalemate. The final budget included nearly $20.7 million for the Authority,[14] enough for the Authority to decide its preferred route between the Central Valley and the Bay Area, continue "engineering and environmental work in the LA-Anaheim corridor, and continue engineering and design work needed to receive the regulatory approvals to build the system."[15][16]
If passed, the ballot measure would provide $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 would serve as feeder systems for high-speed rail mainline. However, the project would still depend on federal matching funds, since a $9.95 billion bond issue would cover at most half of the estimated cost of the initial core segment. According to a 2004 estimate, the complete system from Sacramento to San Diego would likely have a cost of more than $30 billion. The California High-Speed Rail Authority plans to use the projected operating profit from the initial San Francisco-Los Angeles line to finance further extensions to Sacramento and San Diego.
Governor Schwarzenegger has encouraged lawmakers to tour existing high-speed rail systems, with expenses paid by special interests, so that they could gain a better understanding of the system and would be more willing to support it.[17]
[edit] See also
- Desert Xpress, a proposed high-speed rail from Victorville, California to Las Vegas, Nevada.
[edit] References
- ^ a b California High-Speed Rail Authority. Implementation Plan (PDF). Retrieved on 2007-03-28.
- ^ Cambridge Systematics Inc. (July 2007). Bay Area/California High Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study (PDF) pg. 71-72. California High-Speed Rail Authority. Retrieved on 2007-07-01.
- ^ CA High-Speed Rail Authority. Route Map. Retrieved on 2007-03-24.
- ^ CA High-Speed Rail Authority. Phasing Plan. Retrieved on 2007-12-25.
- ^ 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
- ^ http://bayrailalliance.org/issueupdate/past_updat.html
- ^ Private equity firm purchases TydenBrammall parent Tyden Group
- ^ http://www.contracostatimes.com/opinion/ci_5862070
- ^ Governor should make high-speed rail part of his legacy
- ^ Full text of S 77, Section 2.00, Item 2665-001-0046
- ^ Full text of S 78, as amended; see section 25, relating to Item 2665-001-0046
- ^ Enacted Budget Detail – Business, Transportation & Housing – 2665 High-Speed Rail Authority
- ^ California High-Speed Rail Authority forges ahead. North County Times (2007-08-25). Retrieved on 2007-08-28.
- ^ California High-Speed Rail Authority Forges Ahead While Adjusting Work Program to Fit Constricted Budget
- ^ Halper, Evan. "See the world, let special interests pay, Schwarzenegger urges lawmakers", Los Angeles Times, April 30, 2008. Retrieved on 2008-05-01.
[edit] External links
- California High Speed Rail Authority official website
- The Full Cost of Intercity Transportation, a study done at University of California, Berkeley examining the system
|
|||||||||||
