California gets federal high-speed rail funds

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Just curious what our friends here who live in California have to say about this one? Are you guys big intra-state, inter-city public transportation users?


latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/05/california-gets-federal-high-speed-rail-funds.html

May 9, 2011 | 10:36 am California, Illinois and 13 other states, along with Amtrak, will share $2 billion in federal grants aimed at developing high-speed rail service, money that had been rejected by Florida, officials announced Monday.

California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer praised the award. In February the senators urged U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to send their state the money Florida had rejected.

"This is great news for Californians, who have already made strong financial commitments to infrastructure projects," Feinstein said. "I applaud Secretary LaHood for responding to our request and allowing the state of California to utilize these funds to advance high-speed rail. No other state is as ready and able to lead the way in demonstrating the viability of high-speed rail."

"I'm thrilled at this latest investment in California's high-speed rail system, which will create thousands of jobs and help us build a cleaner and more efficient transportation system to move people all across our state," Boxer said.

The grant will be awarded to the California High Speed Rail Authority to extend the currently proposed Central Valley route an additional 20 miles, they said. The Central Valley route would eventually provide 220 mph high-speed rail service from Los Angeles to San Francisco.

Read more about federal funds for high-speed rail.

-- Richard Simon and Michael Muskal

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 13:04:49 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

Just curious what our friends here who live in California have to say about this one? Are you guys big intra-state, inter-city public transportation users?


latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/05/california-gets-federal-high-speed-rail-funds.html

May 9, 2011 | 10:36 am California, Illinois and 13 other states, along with Amtrak, will share $2 billion in federal grants aimed at developing high-speed rail service, money that had been rejected by Florida, officials announced Monday.

California Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer praised the award. In February the senators urged U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood to send their state the money Florida had rejected.

"This is great news for Californians, who have already made strong financial commitments to infrastructure projects," Feinstein said. "I applaud Secretary LaHood for responding to our request and allowing the state of California to utilize these funds to advance high-speed rail. No other state is as ready and able to lead the way in demonstrating the viability of high-speed rail."

"I'm thrilled at this latest investment in California's high-speed rail system, which will create thousands of jobs and help us build a cleaner and more efficient transportation system to move people all across our state," Boxer said.

The grant will be awarded to the California High Speed Rail Authority to extend the currently proposed Central Valley route an additional 20 miles, they said. The Central Valley route would eventually provide 220 mph high-speed rail service from Los Angeles to San Francisco.

Read more about federal funds for high-speed rail.

-- Richard Simon and Michael Muskal

Todays Hartford Paper says that Connecticut only got $30 million from that fund, where hoping for 250 million or so, wanted to do a line of 110 miles, New Haven to Springfield Mass. Now it is about a hour give a bit on 91 North, so actually, I don't see the big deal about a hi speed for that line, it's not like a hugh amount going for work in Spring field or New Haven and a bit over 30 minutes once on the hwy, 91, from either city to Hartford, bigger employer , ok, 45 minutes, hour TOPS in bad rush hour, no biggie.

I can see it from LA to San Francisco with stops along the way, much bigger population, built up, real major cities , areas of the country.

Congrats to California, put $ to good use , think it will be a nice thing to have.
[bet ed's against it, what say ed?] ;D

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I can see it from LA to San Francisco with stops along the way, much bigger population, built up, real major cities , areas of the country.

Congrats to California, put $ to good use , think it will be a nice thing to have.

I am also curious that the environmental activists out there will be protesting and bringing lawsuits over the damage to the environment. Surely locals will not want train stations placed in their towns. Anytime a new rail station is proposed for a town the local residents always raise outrage.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 13:25:23 GMT -5 Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ said:

I can see it from LA to San Francisco with stops along the way, much bigger population, built up, real major cities , areas of the country.

Congrats to California, put $ to good use , think it will be a nice thing to have.

I am also curious that the environmental activists out there will be protesting and bringing lawsuits over the damage to the environment. Surely locals will not want train stations placed in their towns. Anytime a new rail station is proposed for a town the local residents always raise outrage.

In was only in LA once , years ago and did the travling around tourist thing, and one of the places that impressed me so was the main Train station with those leather backed high permanent seats, the station in general, the computer trains rolling through, all in open beautiful california weather, I was fo New England back then and wandered over to the cafetaria/restaurant, closed then , and inside , like from a museum, all the fictures in place, tables , equipment, saw through the window, like from "Back to the Future ", like the 40's/50's..wonder if still there.

[Deleted]

But will they hire local, I wonder?? Will be interesting to see who the contracts go to.
Our huge 3 year freeway project came from outside and brought the workers with them. Those workers spending their money here helped our local economy, but the job itself did not put Arizonans to work, and it was SO nasty it cost us MANY high dollar business conventions because it messed up the whole city for 3 years.
It ALMOST cost us our annual HUGE gem show, and Tucson had to spend a ton of money on shuttles, etc, to accommodate the Gem show the best we could BECAUSE of the freeway work inconvenience.
And, of course, the free shuttles to deal with the gridlocked traffic situation put the taxis and other transportation out of the game for those 3 years, and cost us thousands and thousands of dollars we rely on every year to carry us through the dead summer months.
It's nice now, but it was temporarily painful AND costly to lots of workers.
Good luck, CA. Hope it helps you more than it hurts you.

[deziloooooo]

Yep, Union Station, the restaurant was special, been so long ago, thought I might have been imagining it, didn't know they demolished most of "China Town " to build it, station though, but I was right to be impressed, it is/was special.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_Station_(Los_Angeles)

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I was in LA a couple of times 20 years ago? I am not familiar with inter-city rail lines out there.

I guess my real question is are Californians big users of public transportation?
You guys are supposed to be free-spirits and what not; and value your freedom and ability to travel at will by hopping in your car.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 13:34:28 GMT -5 @krickitt said:

But will they hire local, I wonder?? Will be interesting to see who the contracts go to.
Our huge 3 year freeway project came from outside and brought the workers with them. Those workers spending their money here helped our local economy, but the job itself did not put Arizonans to work, and it was SO nasty it cost us MANY high dollar business conventions because it messed up the whole city for 3 years.
It ALMOST cost us our annual HUGE gem show, and Tucson had to spend a ton of money on shuttles, etc, to accommodate the Gem show the best we could BECAUSE of the freeway work inconvenience.
And, of course, the free shuttles to deal with the gridlocked traffic situation put the taxis and other transportation out of the game for those 3 years, and cost us thousands and thousands of dollars we rely on every year to carry us through the dead summer months.
It's nice now, but it was temporarily painful AND costly to lots of workers.
Good luck, CA. Hope it helps you more than it hurts you.

Want to compare disruptions and cost over runs on construction projects, google the 'Big Dig " just finished a few years ago in Boston...

You think Tuscon had Disruptions ? Haaaa, they had that, and graft and over runs and more over runs.. Prison terms..

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig

"The Boston Globe estimated that the project will ultimately cost $22 billion, including interest, and that it will not be paid off until 2038.[7]" Now that is BIG

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

Want to compare disruptions and cost over runs on construction projects, google the 'Big Dig " just finished a few years ago in Boston...

What a nightmare that was.

[Deleted]

Where ARE all our CA people today?? Mad Dawg is probably over at EE...

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

I think it's a boondoggle of epic proportion, but that's just me.

[Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ]

I think it's a boondoggle of epic proportion, but that's just me

Well this is a given. Just payback to unionized construction workers. The bigger point is will residents give up their cars?

[Deleted]

Will people use it, molly, or is public transportation so dangerous in CA these days people prefer to have their own cars when they get where they are going?

[Deleted]

AHH, unions, of course. That went right over my head.......

[Deleted]

No wonder right to work AZ didn't get the freeway contracts..................

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

In California, the high-speed rail system would cost at least $60 billion just to build, then require a subsidy to operate (just like Amtrak.) The rail proposal is shaky because there’s no guarantee either that it would ultimately be built or that it would achieve the optimistic goals for ridership set by its proponents. In the Central Valley of California, the rail plan calls for 14 million rider trips annually, compared with only 750,000 rail or plane trips taken there now each year.

[❤ mollymouser ❤]

For those of us in the central San Joaquin Valley, I don't know how much it would get used. We're a 3 hour drive to San Francisco, and a 4 hour drive to Los Angeles. While you can get around San Francisco somewhat using public transportation, I don't see your average businessman or tourist trying to do that in Los Angeles. As it is now, you can take Amtrak from my city to one of the SF area BART stations ~ but it's not a money-making route (or even break even route) for Amtrak. And that Amtrak ride takes about 5.5 hours .... for a trip you could drive in 3.

High Speed Rail will be built, supposedly, in phases, and the concern is that we'll have multi-billion $$ tracks to nowhere smack dab in the middle of the state, when the government finally wises up and realizes how colossally expensive this is.

[Deleted]

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense, then, except as a union payback, and Amtrak bailout... we have another Amtrak bailout thread going here somewhere today.. oh, yeah-- HLS, terror, etc..

[cme1201]

I am glad Florida sent the money back, Making a "high-Speed" rail to go from Tampa to Orlando (less than a 90 min ride) was going to be a crushing tax burden, cali can have it.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 13:57:12 GMT -5 ❤ mollymouser ❤ said:

For those of us in the central San Joaquin Valley, I don't know how much it would get used. We're a 3 hour drive to San Francisco, and a 4 hour drive to Los Angeles. While you can get around San Francisco somewhat using public transportation, I don't see your average businessman or tourist trying to do that in Los Angeles. As it is now, you can take Amtrak from my city to one of the SF area BART stations ~ but it's not a money-making route (or even break even route) for Amtrak. And that Amtrak ride takes about 5.5 hours .... for a trip you could drive in 3.

or..in 25/35/45 years from now, as the population continues to grow, those alive then will wonder how they had ever gotten along with out it.

High Speed Rail will be built, supposedly, in phases, and the concern is that we'll have multi-billion $$ tracks to nowhere smack dab in the middle of the state, when the government finally wises up and realizes how colossally expensive this is.

or..in 25/35/45 years from now, as the population continues to grow, those alive then will wonder how they had ever got along with out it.

[ed1066]

Nothing but dirty money to pay off union leaders and thugs who got Dems elected. Not a penny of it will ever go to a rail project, it will all be pissed away on "environmental impact studies", "feasibility reports" and "requests for proposals" (aka union paybacks)...pure graft of taxpayer monies...SOP for California...

[Mad Dawg Wiccan]

Yes, it's a huge boondoggle. They are already cutting back parts of it due to budget, like sharing the same tracks regular trains use. This, of course, means reduced speed.
As to city mass transit, San Francesspool has a good one. The system here in Sacramento is a joke.

[ugonow]

Nothing but dirty money to pay off union leaders and thugs who got Dems elected. Not a penny of it will ever go to a rail project, it will all be pissed away on "environmental impact studies", "feasibility reports" and "requests for proposals" (aka union paybacks)...pure graft of taxpayer monies...

So now it is a union thing? Is that why Scott Walker,governor of Wi., put in for some of the rail funds?

[ed1066]

May 9, 2011 15:01:49 GMT -5 ugonow said:

Nothing but dirty money to pay off union leaders and thugs who got Dems elected. Not a penny of it will ever go to a rail project, it will all be pissed away on "environmental impact studies", "feasibility reports" and "requests for proposals" (aka union paybacks)...pure graft of taxpayer monies...

So now it is a union thing? Is that why Scott Walker,governor of Wi., put in for some of the rail funds?

I'm talking about how things work in California, I don't know and don't care about Wisconsin. The public employee unions purchased the Democratic Party in California twenty plus years ago, and the return on investment has been very, very good for them...

[floridayankee]

May 9, 2011 13:41:28 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

"The Boston Globe estimated that the project will ultimately cost $22 billion, including interest, and that it will not be paid off until 2038.[7]" Now that is BIG

The best part....it'll be obsolete and completely inefficient before they pay it off. What a great deal for them Bostonians!

[straydog]

I don't think that high speed rail will work in this country like it does in China or Europe.

Europe has smaller countries so it's more suited to their size.

China may be large, but they don't have the same amount of cars on the road, and they don't have an, EPA, OSHA, or an army of environmental lawyers ready to sue over every little thing, as other have mentioned here.

When it comes to getting things done, China today is probably like we were when they were building the NYC subway system. No BS, just get it built. And we wonder why they are eating our lunch.

[ugonow]

I don't think that high speed rail will work in this country like it does in China or Europe.

Ahhhh ..China?Europe?... maybe it is part of Obamas communist takeover agenda..... ;)My thinking is even if it was a good idea,the timing is wrong. We can't afford it right now.

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 15:05:35 GMT -5 @ed1066 said:

May 9, 2011 15:01:49 GMT -5 ugonow said:

So now it is a union thing? Is that why Scott Walker,governor of Wi., put in for some of the rail funds?

I'm talking about how things work in California, I don't know and don't care about Wisconsin. The public employee unions purchased the Democratic Party in California twenty plus years ago, and the return on investment has been very, very good for them...

poor ed, "don't care about Wisconsin.", part of the union ed. your brothers/sisters, lots of pubs, got something against cheese ed?

[deziloooooo]

May 9, 2011 15:07:50 GMT -5 floridayankee said:

May 9, 2011 13:41:28 GMT -5 deziloooooo said:

"The Boston Globe estimated that the project will ultimately cost $22 billion, including interest, and that it will not be paid off until 2038.[7]" Now that is BIG

The best part....it'll be obsolete and completely inefficient before they pay it off. What a great deal for them Bostonians!

actually, not bad to get to Air Port now, lots of open green space up on top, but from a $2.2 bill to $22 bill, granted interest is in there...but still..that's Billions, for any city, not the Fed it's heavy.

They did a good job cleaning up the harbor too, remember, one of our oldest cities, old, old, sewer and storm drain system anywhere else in the country, think still working on it.

[floridayankee]

Interesting article I ran across while searching for cost per mile info on high speed rail a while back.
www.thehispanicconservative.com/Madison/doyles-high-speed-rail-problem-cost-effectiveness.html

In 2000, Florida voters passed an amendment to the state’s constitution forcing the construction of a high-speed rail system that could run at speeds of 120 mph. Florida’s High Speed Rail Authority planned to build a 92 mile rail line from Orlando to Tampa. The project would cost about $2.5 billion, which represents $27 million per mile of track laid. Apparently, building a track for high speed rail in Florida is nearly 40 times more costly than building a highway of similar lengths. When the costs were revealed to Florida citizens, they repealed the measure.

In 2000, the California High Speed Rail Authority published a plan to build a rail line in the San Francisco Bay area (the plan itself cost $58 million). To build the rail line, it would cost anywhere from $33 to $37 billion, which is about $47 to $52 million per mile of track laid. The California high-speed rail system is estimated to represent $2.30 per annual passenger mile. This is still more than 3 times the cost efficiency of rural highways of similar lengths. Also, if building railroad track is roughly 3 times as costly as building highway, then the continuing maintenance costs should be similarly proportional. These examples are sufficient to support the conclusion that high speed transit is a flawed idea that liberals just can’t seem to let go.