California High-Speed Rail (CAHSR) System

High-speed rail agency pushes back deadline for construction bids in Valley - High Speed Rail - fresnobee.com

Authority CEO Jeffrey Morales said Tuesday that questions from five consortiums of building firms have prompted the authority to set Jan. 18 as the new date by which bids must be submitted for a 28-mile stretch of the high-speed rail line from Avenue 17, northeast of Madera, to American Avenue at the south end of Fresno.

"The bidders have been asking for more information and more time to analyze the information," Morales said. "If we take our time at the front end to get it right, it will ultimately be to the benefit of the project" through better bids and possibly lower prices.

This segment is expected to cost between $1.2 and $1.8 billion, giving about $40 to $60 million/mile. Awarding a contract and starting construction ought to happen by June 2013. If it does happen, it will be a most welcome sight.

It's one of four segments between Madera and Fresno that must be done by Sept. 30, 2017, because of Federal funding requirements.

California High Speed Rail Blog » CHSRA Postpones Central Valley Bids to January
got these comments:

Tom McNamara: Sort of convenient that the deadline switches from one week before the Presidential election to the Friday before the Inauguration…..

swing hanger: Indeed, I’m sure many bidders and potential investors are holding off on passenger rail projects until the political climate is more certain post election.

Alon Levy: Tom beat me to it. “More time to analyze the information” = “we want to know whether you’re going to get $5-8 billion in the two years or 0.”

I'm playing a bit of catch-up, and my find the alert later in my email, but did Bakersfield decide to sue?

http://www.kget.com/news/local/story/Hi ... Cpkug.cspx

o sue or not to sue, that's the decision the Bakersfield City Council will have to make Wednesday night regarding the High Speed Rail project. City officials say the High Speed Rail Authority glossed over California Environmental Quality Act standards and that could cost the city millions and create problems for residents.

Residents who live near 16th Street, right next to one of the proposed high speed rail lines, have many concerns. "More worried about the noise, more worried about the demolition. That's really what they're worried about," said Mario Salazar, who lives on 16th Street.

Or a few blocks away on 18th Street. "I'm against it completely. Have been from the beginning. I don't think our town will profit by it," said Reta Bidwell, who lives on 18th Street.

California High Speed Rail Blog » CHSRA Says July 2013 Groundbreaking Still On Track
San Francisco: California High-Speed Rail on track to start construction in July | abc7news.com

However, the California High-Speed Rail Authority has not awarded a construction contract yet, so I'm inclined to believe it when I see it.

CAHSR and Amtrak will join on an RFP for trainsets: Progressive Railroading

Amtrak, California high-speed authority to announce plans for next-generation trainsets

This morning, Amtrak and the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) officials are scheduled to hold a news conference in Washington, D.C., to announce a joint effort to pursue next-generation high-speed trainsets.

At the event, Amtrak President and Chief Executive Officer Joseph Boardman, and CHSRA Chairman Dan Richard were expected to be joined by U.S. Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari. Amtrak and authority officials have been talking about how their respective programs can work together to advance high-speed rail in the United States, Amtrak officials said in a prepared statement.

Amtrak recently announced plans to issue in early 2013 a request for information (RFI) to begin the process to acquire new high-speed trainsets that will provide more frequent high-speed service on the Northeast Corridor. The CHSRA will join in the RFI process as it seeks its own equipment for its plan to build a statewide high-speed rail system, authority officials said.

Hurt or Help: Fresno Bee

High-speed rail critic Jeff Denham to chair House railroad panel

WASHINGTON -- High-speed rail skeptics gained new traction Wednesday with the promotion of Rep. Jeff Denham, R-Turlock, to chairmanship of the House panel that oversees railroads.

A sharp critic of California's ambitious high-speed rail plan, Denham can use his post to challenge one of the Obama administration's top public works priorities. Future rail legislation must pass through Denham's subcommittee, which can also hold hearings to shed potentially unflattering light on specific projects like California's.

"I'm opposed to it, but I'm going to work with the California High-Speed Rail Authority on going forward," Denham said Wednesday. "I want to work together with them, though I still have doubts about their funding and ridership numbers."

Underscoring his new leadership position, as well as his stated willingness to keep an open mind, Denham met early Wednesday morning on Capitol Hill with the California High-Speed Rail Authority's two top officials, board chairman Dan Richard and chief executive officer Jeff Morales. In a statement, Richard described the meeting as "collegial and productive."

Read more here: http://www.fresnobee.com/2013/01/16/313 ... rylink=cpy

Given the news that Amtrak and California's high speed rail authority are planning a joint order for high speed trains, does that mean California is planning on operating 220 mph service on the initial segment? I'm confused as to how a near-term rolling stock order meshes with the plans to build the infrastructure in phases, with the initial segment being used by existing Amtrak trains until additional high speed line is built.

Matt Johnson wrote:Given the news that Amtrak and California's high speed rail authority are planning a joint order for high speed trains, does that mean California is planning on operating 220 mph service on the initial segment?

I can understand the thinking here, but such a move is only possible when the agencies involved are both unanswerable to the discipline of the marketplace, and more concerned with public perception than immediate, but hopefully, not insurmountable obstacles.

I believe that there is virtually no chance that the infrastructure to take any reasonable degree of advantage of the potential of the proposed new locomotives can be developed within twenty years. Limited improvements are possible, however, and I believe that the first consideration in opting for technology which may not be utilized for a long time, if ever, is to attempt to further entice public support for the major capital projects which would be required for a true (Southland to San Francisco Bay) HSR Corridor -- in particular, the breaking of the Tehachapi bottleneck, which might be more easily realized if Warren Buffet, who is not a strident conservative, could be bargained into cooperation in development of a parallel conventional-rail project for freight and ending the strained pseudo-partnership with Union Pacific.

There's also a possibility that the new power could be adapted for Northeast Corridor improvements, but the entire HSR concept remains a subject which feeds the fires of extreme polarization, and most of its advocates are so firmly linked to one camp that they have little incentive to dispell the misconceptions being sold to the public by a zealous minority. And in the remote, but not completely impossible occurrence of a stabilization in the fuel markets in the manner of 1981-1998, all bets are off..

2nd trick op wrote:

Matt Johnson wrote:Given the news that Amtrak and California's high speed rail authority are planning a joint order for high speed trains, does that mean California is planning on operating 220 mph service on the initial segment?

I can understand the thinking here, but such a move is only possible when the agencies involved are both unanswerable to the discipline of the marketplace, and more concerned with public perception than immediate, but hopefully, not insurmountable obstacles.

I believe that there is virtually no chance that the infrastructure to take any reasonable degree of advantage of the potential of the proposed new locomotives can be developed within twenty years. Limited improvements are possible, however, and I believe that the first consideration in opting for technology which may not be utilized for a long time, if ever, is to attempt to further entice public support for the major capital projects which would be required for a true (Southland to San Francisco Bay) HSR Corridor -- in particular, the breaking of the Tehachapi bottleneck, which might be more easily realized if Warren Buffet, who is not a strident conservative, could be bargained into cooperation in development of a parallel conventional-rail project for freight and ending the strained pseudo-partnership with Union Pacific.

There's also a possibility that the new power could be adapted for Northeast Corridor improvements, but the entire HSR concept remains a subject which feeds the fires of extreme polarization, and most of its advocates are so firmly linked to one camp that they have little incentive to dispell the misconceptions being sold to the public by a zealous minority. And in the remote, but not completely impossible occurrence of a stabilization in the fuel markets in the manner of 1981-1998, all bets are off..

I agree. Having technology that supersedes current infrastructure helps build a political case in favor of capital improvements. It has clearly worked well in the Northeast. The New Jersey improvements wouldn't be happening without it. I'm quite sure Amtrak is going to ensure the dimensions of their new high speed trainsets are compatible with Metro North dimensions as well. This could mean higher speeds in those areas as well.

i would think it more likely an extension of the NEC is built in the next 20 years , capable of 220 mph , rather than the nec itself been capable of 220 mph .
My bet would be WAS -Richmond , or part thereof .

David Benton wrote:i would think it more likely an extension of the NEC is built in the next 20 years , capable of 220 mph , rather than the nec itself been capable of 220 mph .
My bet would be WAS -Richmond , or part thereof .

WAS-Richmond tracks are owned by CSX, not by Amtrak. Presently, there's a agreement to increase speeds of this specific corridor to 90 and 110 mph, which will take 10 years or so to accomplish. There's no way anyone will finance a new 220 mph HSR line through Virginia in the following 10 years.
Why does everyone from afar forget there's valid reasons why 90, 110, and 125 mph rail line exist elsewhere in the world besides the USA? There's a reason why Australia and New Zealand don't have 200 mph trains, and their corridors are owned by the government - not by private corporations as they are in the USA. The only reason why most of the NEC is owned by the government is because the privately owned PRR went bankrupt and the Federal government stepped up to keep the trains running. Amtrak runs passenger trains over 20,000 miles of track. At $1 Million per mile, it would cost Amtrak $20 Billion, money Amtrak doesn't have, to buy all the tracks it operates on. And I don't think the freight companies will sell their corridors for that little a sum. Start adding zeros to the $20 Billion, the question is how many zeros should be added? And that's the price before the costs of any construction to upgrade any tracks.
How fast is fast enough? The existing NEC max speeds can be increased far cheaper than building an entirely new corridor with properly planned upgrades. Amtrak is increasing max speeds from 135 mph to 165 mph in central New Jersey simply by replacing the catenary poles and wires, and upgrading the power grid - very little track work is being done in central NJ. Even if Amtrak built an entirely new rail corridor, they aren't going to be able to go 200 mph in urban and suburban cities, and there isn't much rural areas left where they could achieve 200 mph between Boston and D.C.
There are rural areas in Virginia between D.C. and Richmond where a new 200 mph HSR corridor could be built. But there are many suburban areas surrounding D.C. and Richmond a new rail corridor will have to push through. Northern Virginia isn't flat, there's hills between the many river valleys that will make building a brand new straight and level HSR corridor difficult and expensive. It's those same hills and river valleys that allowed Robert E Lee to prolong the American Civil War 5 years. Maybe that's the reason why Virginia and North Carolina studies recommended upgrading the existing corridors instead of building a brand new one.
Getting this back to California, that's why CHSR is following adjacent to the existing rail corridors. That's why they building brand new tracks in the central valley sections first. They have postponed building the new corridors through the mountains, and they have two different ranges to build through. And why they have decided to use the existing corridors to get into San Francisco and Los Angeles once they have penetrated the mountains. Geology plays a part too!

Fred Frailey , in May trains magazine , predicts the CAHSR will be built . a turnaround from a year ago .

Jerry Brown seeks Chinese investors for high-speed rail - Transportation - The Sacramento Bee

The 5:38 p.m. bullet train from Beijing to Shanghai hurtled through the exurbs of the Chinese capital on Thursday, and in the No. 4 car stood Gov. Jerry Brown, leaning on a seat back and peering outside for inspiration. "Look out there," Brown said. "Look at all the building." ...

Asked if he planned to accelerate the schedule of the already-controversial effort, Brown said, "I don't want to say that yet, but I'm going to look for every way that I can." ...

In a staggering burst of activity, Chinese officials built more than 5,000 miles of track in just over five years, vastly improving transportation infrastructure in China. The program was made possible in part by China's one-party political system and its lack of environmental and other regulatory impediments that Brown faces in California. "They think so big," Brown said before leaving for China. "I mean, just build 5,000 miles. I mean, to some of those folks who say, 'God, you're building a few hundred miles of high-speed rail,' it's almost like you're Don Quixote or something."

Calif. Gov. Jerry Brown looks to China for investments - Daily Democrat Online

The governor of the most populous U.S. state heads to China next week to begin a weeklong trade mission that he hopes will produce investments on both sides of the Pacific. Brown will lead a delegation of business leaders in search of what he calls "plenty of billions."

"They've got $400 billion or $500 billion they're going to invest abroad, so California's got to get a piece of that," Brown said in an interview last week ahead of his seven-day trip to China.

The governor and business leaders accompanying him are trying to rebuild the state's official relationship with China after the state closed its two trade offices and others around the world a decade ago in a cost-cutting move. California finds itself playing catch-up to other states that have had a vigorous presence in China for years.

Governor Jerry Brown praises Chinese for bullet train - San Jose Mercury News

Gov. Jerry Brown got a firsthand look on Thursday at the world's most extensive high-speed rail system and praised the initiative that created the Chinese railway, saying he was anxious to start building similarly ambitious projects in California. During a five-hour ride covering more than 800 miles, the governor also touted the possibility of Chinese investment in the $68 billion high-speed rail project he is pushing in California. ...

The Democratic governor walked the aisles during the trip between Beijing and Shanghai, shaking hands with Chinese passengers and marveling at how much the country has developed since his only other visit to China in 1986. "We sit around and mope. And process. And navel gaze," Brown said, according to KXTV-ABC in Sacramento, which sent a reporter on the trade mission. "And the rest of the world is moving at Mach speed. So when we go back, we'll emulate some of that."

Talk about showing a lot of initiative. Going to China and directly experiencing its high-speed trains. However, he's been willing to be critical: Brown urges China to cut air pollution - Gov. Jerry Brown - The Sacramento Bee

I have good news about the project - it's taken another step forward.

I learned of it from a tweet by Yonah Freemark (The Transport Politic, @ttpolitic). I checked on California High-Speed Rail Authority and I discovered California High-Speed Rail Authority Announces Bid Results on Central Valley Construction Project (PDF)

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) has identified Tutor Perini/Zachry/Parsons, a Joint Venture, as the best scoring team for the design-build contract to begin construction of the Madera to Fresno segment, the first section of the high-speed rail system.

The Authority had estimated the cost for the design-build contract to be between $1.2 billion and $1.8 billion. The Authority determined that Tutor Perini/Zachry/Parsons, a California-based Joint Venture, who bid $985,142,530, was the “apparent best value.” The ranking and score of all five proposals are attached.

However, it has the lowest technical score, 20.55, with the others having scores 20.70, 21.41, 26.13, 27.71 out of a maximum of 30. YF: "Let's hope project doesn't go over initial estimates for cost"

Since this segment will be about 25 miles long, this gives $39 million/mile. YF: "But $40 million per mile is definitely within international HSR standards, so it can be done in CA"

Op-Ed in the Journal, and one of the supporters is not happy with CA: [url=http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142 ... p_newsreel]online.wsj.com subscription may be req'd

Can California Taxpayers Dodge the Bullet Train?

California's bullet train was conceived 20 years ago from Quentin Kopp's infatuation with European high-speed rail. His beautiful brainchild, however, has since morphed into a monstrosity. Mr. Kopp seems more and more like the protagonist Victor Frankenstein of literary lore, disillusioned by what his ambitions have wrought.

Testifying in a lawsuit filed by Kings County, the 84-year-old retired judge of San Mateo County Superior Court says that California's present high-speed rail plan violates the ballot measure that he helped craft and voters approved in November 2008. In essence, he argues, the state pulled a bait-and-switch on voters.

Kings County wants the court to enjoin the release of state bond funds until the rail authority's plan adheres to the letter of the initiative. The lawsuit is scheduled for trial in May. If it succeeds, state taxpayers may finally dodge the bullet train. Without state bond money, the rail authority has no fuel to burn. So the good news for California—finally—is that compliance with the initiative's original terms is unlikely if not impossible.

California High Speed Rail Authority - State of California is now at a new site: http://www.hsr.ca.gov/

High-Speed Rail Authority Launches New Website: "Preserves Content, Conforms to State Standards and Saves Money". The new site is hosted by Office of Technology Services (OTech) - California Technology Agency, an agency which already hosts the sites of numerous California state, county, and local gov't agencies and universities.

The new site has some additional content, like Multimedia Maps - California High-Speed Rail Authority. Its Project Section Maps currently include all those but San Jose - Merced and Sacramento - Merced.

The Statewide Rail Modernization map lists the San Joaquins, Capitols, and ACE commuter trains as run by the Northern California Unied Service.

It also shows the Initial Operating Segment (Merced - San Fernando Valley) of the HSR system, and Phases 1 and 2 of it.

The Project Section Maps that are present:

SF - SJ: Caltrain route, of course. It has Redwood-City, Mid-Peninsula, and Mountain-View options for a station, along with a SFO station.

Merced - Fresno: route settled except for the wye with the line to Gilroy and the Bay Area. Will follow Hwy. 99 except for going east of Madera.

Fresno - Bakersfield: route mostly along the BNSF route with 4 alternatives along the way.

Bakersfield - Palmdale: route mostly settled.

Palmdale - LA: route has some some variation, especially near Palmdale. It has San-Fernando-Valley, Branford-St., and Buena-Vista options for a station, along with LA station. The SFV option is near Sylmar, while the BV option is near Burbank Airport.

LA - Anaheim: route settled. It has Norwalk-Santa-Fe-Springs and Fullerton options for a station, along with LA and Anaheim stations.

LA - San Diego: lots of options for both the route and the stations.