{"id":6226,"date":"2017-09-21T15:10:05","date_gmt":"2017-09-21T22:10:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/occupysf.net\/?p=6226"},"modified":"2017-09-21T15:37:12","modified_gmt":"2017-09-21T22:37:12","slug":"california-high-speed-rail-everything-need-know-sf-curbed-com","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/2017\/09\/21\/california-high-speed-rail-everything-need-know-sf-curbed-com\/","title":{"rendered":"California high-speed rail: Everything you need to know (sf.curbed.com)"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

The $64 billion plan to bring 800 miles of track up and down the Golden State<\/h2>\n
\n

BY\u00a0MATT TINOCO<\/a>\u00a0<\/span>

You\u2019ve probably heard that California is trying to build its own shiny and speedy bullet train. After voters approved a\u00a02008 ballot proposition<\/a>\u00a0that kicked off one of the nation\u2019s largest and most ambitious infrastructure projects, the state\u2019s\u00a0High Speed Rail Authority<\/a>\u00a0has been hard at work attempting to will the conflict-ridden yet positively utopian train into existence.<\/p>\n

If construction plays out on schedule (and funds don\u2019t dry up), the train\u2019s first phase should be complete by 2029. Threading the state together from San Francisco down to Orange County, Phase 1 of the California High Speed Rail (HSR) project promises a cheap two-hour-and-40-minute ride between San Francisco\u2019s\u00a0Transbay Terminal<\/a>\u00a0and LA\u2019s Union Station.<\/p>\n

However, as you might have heard, the train is in trouble. As it copes with a persistent volley of antagonistic litigation, a high cost of $64 billion, and even political\u00a0challenges<\/a>enabled by the Trump administration, the bullet train\u2019s boosters and builders have a challenge before them.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n

Welcome to Curbed\u2019s first-ever<\/strong>Transportation Week<\/strong><\/a>!<\/strong><\/p>\n

From how to improve public transportation in cities, ranking the best car-free neighborhoods across the country, and a friendly competition between NYC, San Francisco, and Los Angeles to determine which has the best public transit, this week is all about how we get around in our favorite cities. All aboard!<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Despite the controversy, construction activity for HSR is well under way in many parts of the state. Passenger service between San Jose and Bakersfield is expected as soon as 2025. And cities all across California are incorporating the train into their own long-term regional transportation plans.<\/p>\n

Tracking a project of this magnitude is, of course, a bit of a challenge, which is why we\u2019ve put together this handy explainer:<\/p>\n

What exactly is California trying to build?<\/h3>\n

As outlined in the\u00a0\u201cSafe, Reliable High-Speed Passenger Train Bond Act for the 21st Century,\u201d<\/a>\u00a0which California voters passed 53 percent to 47 percent in 2008, the HSR project will build approximately 800 miles of track up and down the state, connecting together most of the state’s large cities with up to 24 different stations. With an anticipated cruising speed of 220 mph, the train is intended to provide Californians with a fast and convenient option to travel throughout the Golden State without relying on their cars or short-haul airplane flights.<\/p>\n

The project is supposed to open in legs. The first, connecting San Jose to the Central Valley, is scheduled to begin passenger service in 2025. Stops along this leg will include San Jose, Gilroy, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Tulare County, and Bakersfield.<\/p>\n

The second leg, expected to open in 2029, will build out tracks from San Jose to San Francisco\u2019s Transbay Terminal, including a Peninsula stop in Millbrae; and south from Bakersfield to Anaheim, with stops in Palmdale, Downtown Los Angeles, and at Burbank Airport.<\/p>\n

\n
\"Transbay<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Transbay Terminal in San Francisco.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Photo by Patricia Chang<\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n

The proposed timeline on the later extensions of the project are foggier, but the state plans to add a 110-mile Sacramento extension, connecting to Modesto and Stockton on its way, and a 167-mile segment that snakes east from Los Angeles through the San Gabriel Valley to the Inland Empire, and eventually down south to San Diego.<\/p>\n

Altogether, the train\u2019s proponents envision the HSR as a much-needed boost to the state\u2019s aging and overcapacity infrastructure. Though the state\u2019s population continues to grow, our freeways and our airports cannot. And, aside from creating an alternative for long-distance travel, HSR will also provide funds for cities to better develop their own local transportation systems and integrate the HSR station into local transit networks.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\u00a0Union<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Union Station in Los Angeles.<\/p>\n

Photo by\u00a0Benjamin Page<\/a>\u00a0|\u00a0Curbed LA Flickr Pool<\/a><\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n

The train also figures into California\u2019s aggressive goal to\u00a0cut carbon emissions<\/a>\u00a0to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, given the electric train is significantly less carbon-intensive than either driving or flying.<\/p>\n

By 2040, the\u00a0state estimates<\/a>\u00a0the HSR will eliminate up to 10 million miles of vehicle travel daily, as well as up to 180 short-haul flights.<\/p>\n

Has construction already started?<\/h3>\n

Yes<\/a>, it has. The High Speed Rail Authority officially broke ground on the project in Fresno back in early 2015. Since then, construction crews have have been working on a 119-mile segment of track in the Central Valley. For now, this means building out the track\u2019s right of way and its necessary bridges, trenches, and undercrossings. The (sluggish) progress\u00a0can be tracked online<\/a>. But a drive along Highway 99,\u00a0itself being realigned<\/a>\u00a0to accommodate the train, yields some encouraging views of the project\u2019s future viaduct.<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

Individual cities across California have started preparing for HSR\u2019s arrival. Notably, Fresno has rezoned the area around the city\u2019s future station to accommodate buildings up to 15-stories tall, and has begun work on a pair of Bus Rapid Transit lines to connect the city\u2019s northern and eastern flanks.<\/p>\n

Los Angeles<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Anaheim<\/a>\u00a0are moving forward upgrades to their one-day high-speed rail stations, and Caltrans is\u00a0close to releasing its assessment<\/a>\u00a0of how to best integrate the HSR into the state\u2019s transportation grid.<\/p>\n

Closer to home,\u00a0Caltrain\u2019s electrification upgrade<\/a>\u00a0is being built with the expectation that the corridor will one day serve the HSR. And the Transbay Terminal is being built with the expectation (err,\u00a0legal mandate<\/a>) that the bullet train will one day arrive, though exactly how and when is one of the bullet train\u2019s (many) unresolved sticking points.<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\"Conceptual<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

Rendering of the California High-Speed Rail in Burbank.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Rendering via\u00a0California High Speed Rail<\/a><\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n

\n
\"Rendering<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Rendering of the California High-Speed Rail project in San Jose.<\/p>\n

\u00a0Rendering via\u00a0California High Speed Rail<\/a><\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve heard it\u2019s not going well. Is that true?<\/h3>\n

Funny you should ask. The California High-Speed Rail project is arguably state\u2019s most controversial big public-infrastructure project. The fact that the train\u2019s projected cost has mushroomed from approximately $40 billion when voters first approved the project in 2008 to about $64 billion in 2016 means a lot of people feel ripped off.<\/p>\n

Doubly so for the fact that construction seems to be progressing at a painstakingly slow rate. An unreleased Federal Rail Administration risk analysis from earlier this year said the project was running significantly over budget and behind schedule, according to the\u00a0Los Angeles Times<\/em><\/a>.<\/p>\n

Thanks to the deadly combination of California\u2019s strict environmental laws, under which any individual or organization may file a lawsuit saying a project is violating the California Environmental Quality Act, and lots of very ticked-off people, the bullet train has been a magnet for litigation.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

California Gov. Jerry Brown\u2019s signature on the track at the 2015 groundbreaking.<\/p>\n

Photo via\u00a0California High Speed Rail<\/a><\/cite><\/span><\/p>\n

About\u00a0six suits have been filed<\/a>\u00a0relating to the Central Valley portion of the route, and it\u2019s only natural to expect more will come as plans for exactly how the train will snake through the Bay Area and\u00a0Southern California<\/a>\u00a0materialize over the next year or so. In July, the\u00a0state Supreme Court affirmed<\/a>\u00a0that state environmental law definitely applies to the train, despite an argument made that more lax federal law should usurp state environmental regulation for state-owned projects.<\/p>\n

Also, the train has fallen victim to abjectly political attacks. Earlier this year, a cabal of California Republicans lead by Bakersfield Congressman Kevin McCarthy\u00a0penned a letter to Secretary of Transportation<\/a>\u00a0Elaine Chao, asking her to withhold roughly $650 million of federal grant money allocated for Caltrain\u2019s electrification because of the corridor\u2019s eventual intended use with the HSR.<\/p>\n

In McCarthy\u2019s words, “We think providing additional funding at this time to the [California High Speed Rail] Authority would be an irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars.”<\/p>\n

Aside from that, the train is a frequent target for more sweeping legislative change on the state level. A\u00a0statewide ballot proposition last November<\/a>\u00a0not-so-subtly targeted the train by proposing a constitutional amendment to require voter approval for \u201cmegaprojects\u201d costing more than $2 billion. Another\u00a0potential amendment on the ballot next June<\/a>\u00a0could derail the one of the train\u2019s funding mechanisms.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"<\/span><\/span><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

Should we be hopeful?<\/h3>\n

If there’s one certain thing about the bullet train, it’s that its future has been clouded in uncertainty from almost the very beginning\u2014at least judging by its treatment by the state\u2019s press.<\/p>\n

It’s important to remember, however, that voters approved the project by a comfortable 600,000-vote margin. And\u00a0an opinion poll<\/a>\u00a0conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California in May of 2016 found that 63 percent of Californians still considered the bullet train \u201cimportant\u201d for the \u201cfuture quality of life and economic vitality of California,\u201d compared with just 35 percent who did not think it is important.<\/p>\n

The biggest question for the train, however, is money. Litigation, aside from being costly in its own right, leads to construction cost increases from contract change orders and the prevailing cost increase of labor and materials. Add in the combination of lower-than-expected revenue from California\u2019s cap-and-trade program and a presidential administration that, at times, seems hostile to California\u2019s very existence, and things start looking grim for the bullet train.<\/p>\n

The state ultimately hopes the high-speed rail project will generate enough revenue to cover operating costs once construction is complete. Once the plan moves closer to completion, they anticipate funds from private donors.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s be optimistic.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The $64 billion plan to bring 800 miles of track up and down the Golden State BY\u00a0MATT TINOCO\u00a0\u00a0SEP 19, 2017, 1:04PM PDT You\u2019ve probably heard that California is trying to build its own shiny and speedy bullet train. After voters approved a\u00a02008 ballot proposition\u00a0that kicked off one of the nation\u2019s… Continue reading → <\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6226"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=6226"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":6234,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6226\/revisions\/6234"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=6226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=6226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/occupysf.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=6226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}