California High Speed Rail May Team With Caltrain In Effort To Save Troubled Project (VIDEO)

When it was announced that two top executives overseeing California's high speed rail project were stepping down from their leadership roles in the span of a single day, it was clear that some big changes were in the works for the increasingly troubled project.

This week, the shape of those changes may finally be becoming clear.

Under a new plan currently being negotiated between the High Speed Rail Authority and a number of regional transit agencies, the proposed high-speed linkage between San Francisco and San Diego would become much more closely integrated with local rail systems--Caltrain in the Bay Area and Southern California Metrolink.

(SCROLL DOWN FOR VIDEO)

Instead of creating an entirely new set of tracks running between San Francisco and San Jose, the California High Speed Rail Authority, working in tandem with local transit agencies, would make extensive improvements on the Caltrain tracks to make them usable for the state's bullet train as well as significantly improving service on existing Caltrain lines.

The project would eliminate a number of rail crossings, provide for the installation of a new train-control system and, most significantly, electrify the rails themselves, a feature that's long been on Caltrain's wish list because it allows the agency to employ lighter, faster trains.

The plan would permit high speed trains to begin running in this densely-populated urban corridor up to ten years earlier than previously envisioned.

Since federal funding restrictions have essentially mandated construction begin in the Central Valley, many critics have argued that for the first few years of the system's life, it will solely serve an area without a strong need for it. Starting to run high speed trains on tracks in regions where a significant number of people will actually use them would likely go a long way in building public support for the program.

This switch would also, at least in part, circumvent another political problem: the opposition of well-heeled Silicon Valley residents, who prefer trains going 125 miles per hour whiz though someone else's back yards.

This antipathy towards the train from a stereotypically liberal, pro-public transit population has put the squeeze on the project's boosters, who have also received significant political pressure from Republicans in Washington that see high speed rail as a prime example of wasteful government spending. A new transit bill proposed by the GOP-controlled House of Representatives explicitly bans the project from receiving a single penny of its $260 billion in appropriations.

While the plan to run high speed rail on Caltrain tracks isn't exactly new, a joint-use system was studied favorably in a report released by Caltrain late last year, what is novel is the increasingly widespread enthusiasm for it.

"Initially, the high speed rail folks weren't real keen on the idea of sharing tracks with Caltrain," the San Francisco Chronicle's Phil Matier said in an interview in KCBS radio. "They wanted their own line that was going to be able to accommodate up to 10 trains an hour."

When the High Speed Rail Authority rejected a similar track-sharing proposal last year, it criticized the plan for stopping short of its ultimate destination, San Francisco's soon-to-be-constructed Transbay Terminal, in favor of the Caltain station near the intersection of 4th and King streets. Ending at the Transbay Terminal is mandated in the state law created in the bond measure funding the rail system passed by California voters in 2008.

The question of funding also remains. The San Francisco Chronicle reports:

Proposition 1A, the $9.95 billion bond measure approved in 2008 that funded the high-speed rail project, would pay for the Caltrain improvements. But the Bay Area would have to match that money with a significant amount of local funds, perhaps as much as $1 billion. According to the plan, $600 million would come from bond money for high-speed rail service with an additional $400 million coming from bond funds dedicated to transit agencies providing connections to high-speed trains.

Caltrain/High Speed Rail soon won't be the only train running between San Jose and the rest of the Bay Area. Just this week, the federal government approved $250 million towards funding a BART extension through to San Jose.

Check out this video simulation of the high speed rail train zooming down the Caltrain corridor near San Francisco:

Comments

[Waterlooboy]

03:08 PM on 02/16/2012

High speed rail is slower than air travel. So who will ride it? For example, I live in Orange County. Do I pick up a train here, transfer to LA, then take a train to San Francisco? No thank you, I'll fly out of the OC airport and be there in an hour. And what about the costs? If they say it will be 100 billion you know it will be 200 billion by the time it's built.

[Stan Osborn]

09:08 PM on 02/16/2012

I'll ride it. The cost will be what it is. Your kids will ask why you were so cheap.

[corwin]

09:07 PM on 02/15/2012

You know (well maybe you don't ) negative times negative is a positive.It's unlikely to work here,though.
But,the Canal! It's shovel Ready

[econ1]

07:14 PM on 02/15/2012

It is difficult to believe that CA has so much money that this is near top of the government's priority list. I thought they were closing parks to save $28m and planning on raising taxes. $28 million wouldn't cover Amtrak's budget shortfall for a week.

[KarmaPatrol]

10:29 PM on 02/14/2012

In today's fiscal environment, bringing it in cheaper and sooner is probably the way to go. Tying into LA's metro line should be a no-brainer.

[corwin]

09:08 PM on 02/15/2012

Well, I would always defer to you in that category,KP

[Vintage59]

08:55 PM on 02/14/2012

It's too bad this thing probably won't be finished in my lifetime. If you think this is expensive, try to imagine LA and San Francisco trying to build new airports. They are already needed but they won't have to be built if you can hop on a train and get from city center to city center in less time than it takes to get through security and get clearance to take off.

[KarmaPatrol]

10:32 PM on 02/14/2012

Avoiding the pick-up terminal at LAX for Bay Area (and other CA flights) should make this a priority.

[corwin]

09:08 PM on 02/15/2012

And,a 'no brainer'.

[Davide Florez]

10:03 PM on 02/19/2012

There will be security, probably much much more than TSA at airports. Imagine the worries California HRS riders would have to contemplate once the first HSR train is blown up via an IED carried about the train, all because you HSR pushers believe there won't be any pat downs or TSA at HSR stations. Can you image, the terrorists will realize that CA has spent $230 billion in CA taxpayer dollars to build this - i.e. $2 paid back for every $1 borrowed, and since the "current" high end estimate from CAHSRA is $117.5 billion, and CA only has $3 billion from the feds, then CA is responsible for the other approximate $115 billion, which paid back at $2 for every $ 1borrowed is really $230 billion) and the terrorists realize that $230 billion will essentially be flushed down the toilet the first time a train pulls into San Francisco's new $6-15 billion HSR/Caltrain/BART terminal and blows up. Or, at the other end, if a HSR train blows up in LA in the city center or in transit. Can you image the headlines that will make, and the type of pat downs and security that would result from that? Can you image how the terrorists will feel if they know they can simply walk aboard any HSR train, in any station in California and carry an actual bomb set and ready to explode wherever they want to explode it.

[Vintage59]

10:19 AM on 02/20/2012

That's as lilly livered as anything I've seen since 9/11. Buck up! Get some courage and stop shaking about what someone might do. Live goes on for those that survive and ends for those that don't.

Either way, it is stupid to live in fear. It won't help you. You are going to die before you leave this planet.

[bobtrain]

07:20 PM on 02/14/2012

I was a passenger on the very first French TGV (Train of Great Velocity) in the early 1980's. It moved rather slowly (~90 mph) as it moved out of Paris on the conventional rails and then gathered speed when it reached the section of right of way built specifically for high speed. It was quite exciting when the train rapidly accelerated to 160 mph. I remember looking at my coffee cup for ripples and slosh and finding none. At the time, I believe only about 90 miles of the high-speed rail was in service, and, too soon, we were back on conventional tracks at about 100 mph. But the die was cast. The time required between Paris and Lyon was cut by 30%, and it was not too many years before it was cut further and the air/rail passenger ratio was reversed. Since that time, the trackage has been upgraded (still shared by slower trains) and high-speed rail is ubiquitous in Europe. The connections to cities by using existing tracks, not available when flying, maintains the viability of European, Japanese and Chinese cities, and eliminated three-part trips using planes. I also took a trip on the very first Acela round trip between Washington and Boston. We did exceed 100 mph a few times, but the improvements since its introduction have been very slow. Even so, use of the AMTRAK train has had a significant effect on air service between DC, NY and Boston. Go California!.

[muthaiga]

02:55 PM on 02/15/2012

I rode the Shinkensan, in 1978. How exciting, right? The one memory that stands out in my mind is that of a woman standing in her back yard right next to the tracks trying to hang her laundry when the blast of the 200mph train tore the laundry from her hands. I thought to myself how awful. Not too many years before, there was no train in her back yard and look how her life has changed. Every day she has to deal with this, and yet I have been told by the CA HSR Authority that noise, vibration and wind won't be a problem. I have since taken the Italian high speed rail (the AV) several times between Florence and Venice and the graffiti all along the HSR right-of-way is horrible, and yet I've had the CA HSR Authority tell me graffiti won't be a problem with their elevated structures. How dumb do they think we are?? I write this as a cautionary tale. Let's not wax too poetic about HSR. While HSR may be a pleasant ride for those on the train, it has a tendency to not be so friendly for those it passes through. In the US we should do better by our communities. In the push to spend what little money we have and get the proverbial HSR shovels in the ground, CEQA should not be ignored for HSR. I love trains, but am not so wowed as to ignore the realities.

[Davide Florez]

09:50 PM on 02/19/2012

Bob, CA is broke. We can't afford this. Do you have $230 billion available to fund this boondoggle? (that is $115 borrowed in bonds, then paid back at $2 for every $1 borrowed, so $230 billion to be paid back.) What part of "spend and live within your means" is lost on Sacramento Democrats, or Obama for that matter ($10.2 trillion deficit when Obama came in, now currently at $15.6 trillion, with another projected $1.3 trillion in "overspending" for this year, and if he's elected, another $3 trillion for his fifth year in office.)