Discussion related to commuter rail and transit operators in California past and present including Los Angeles Metrolink and Metro Subway and Light Rail, San Diego Coaster, Sprinter and MTS Trolley, Altamont Commuter Express (Stockton), Caltrain and MUNI (San Francisco), Sacramento RTD Light Rail, and others...

Moderator: lensovet

  by eolesen
 
lensovet wrote:
eolesen wrote: Fri Oct 07, 2022 2:59 pm Had Newsome and the legislature put most of that money into a rainy day fund, perhaps it wouldn't be so bad in the upcoming couple of years, but they didn't. They chose to spend just about all of it minus some token rebates back to lower income familes.

Illinois and New York are in for similar rude awakenings, but California's will probably be the worst.
It’s always amusing when people who live on another planet keep doubling down on that alternate reality. First off, his name is Newsom. Second, did you even bother to run a quick Google search before posting this?
The Budget reflects $34.6 billion in budgetary reserves … The Rainy Day Fund is now at its constitutional maximum (10 percent of General Fund revenues) requiring $2.4 billion to be dedicated for infrastructure investments in 2022-23.
https://www.ebudget.ca.gov/2022-23/pdf/ ... uction.pdf

But yeah, that damn Newsom and his legislature.
So many words nitpicking about minutae, and yet nothing of substance.


Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  by Gilbert B Norman
 
David Benton wrote: Sun Oct 09, 2022 1:53 pm While Morrocco does have a ruling monarchy, with a royal train, it also has a very functional and relatively modern rail system.
Yes, it seemed like one "poohbah" or the other knew how to get around over there some forty years ago:

https://youtu.be/ZOQ2yd4p0tw

Photos of their contemporary passenger railroads, of which Mr. Google can direct you to plenty of such, certainly have a French influence to them.

These thoughts are on topic to the extent that The Times noted the SNCF was hired to be consultants for the CAHSR project, but were rather quick to bid the "au revivor"
  by eolesen
 
The French aren't dumb when it comes to business. Spending a couple hours in a conference room with officials from California was probably more than enough enough to get the alarm bells sounding.



Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk

  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Likely only of concern to those (i.e. moi) who "read the paper" on paper, the noted article appears front page, "top of fold", column one in today's Times.

Now that I've read the article, "what a boondoggle". Presumably the Amtrak San Joaquins can use the (roundly) Fresno to (roundly) Bakersfield line when complete allowing greater frequencies and returning Uncle Warren's line to him for his use.
  by scratchyX1
 
eolesen wrote: Mon Oct 10, 2022 8:57 am The French aren't dumb when it comes to business. Spending a couple hours in a conference room with officials from California was probably more than enough enough to get the alarm bells sounding.
Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
It's always sounded to me that when SNCF officials saw their report getting creatively reinterpreted, they found that
this was a fecal show waiting to happen.
Then, WSP just made it into a money siphon, instead of pushing back on the ideas.
Anyone else have "the pentagon wars" come to mind?
  by eolesen
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon Oct 10, 2022 9:47 am Now that I've read the article, "what a boondoggle". Presumably the Amtrak San Joaquins can use the (roundly) Fresno to (roundly) Bakersfield line when complete allowing greater frequencies and returning Uncle Warren's line to him for his use.
I read the article this morning... from a pro-Biden/Newsom editorial desk that's also kept a fairly positive view on things like Gateway and Portal Bridge, this is really damning.

Eventually I'll pull some choice quotes out for the CAHSR cheerleaders to try and poke holes in, but I'll start here:
When the California High-Speed Rail Authority issued its new 2022 draft business plan in February, it estimated an ultimate cost as high as $105 billion. Less than three months later, the “final plan” raised the estimate to $113 billion.

The rail authority said it has accelerated the pace of construction on the starter system, but at the current spending rate of $1.8 million a day, according to projections widely used by engineers and project managers, the train could not be completed in this century.

“We would make some different decisions today,” said Tom Richards, a developer from the Central Valley city of Fresno who now chairs the authority. He said project executives have managed to work through the challenges and have a plan that will, for the first time, connect 85 percent of California’s residents with a fast, efficient rail system. “I think it will be successful,” he said.

But there are growing doubts among key Democratic leaders in the Legislature — historically the bullet train’s base of support — and from Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has been cautious about committing new state financing.

As of now, there is no identified source of funding for the $100 billion it will take to extend the rail project from the Central Valley to its original goals, Los Angeles and San Francisco, in part because lawmakers, no longer convinced of the bullet train’s viability, have pushed to divert additional funding to regional rail projects.
For a system that was supposed to be $33B end to end, the overrun failure here is quite spectacular... At what point is there an obligation to go back to the voters who approved this and get a reauthorization?...

If you've blown your budget by 300%, something says that original mandate is null and void...
  by frequentflyer
 
Gilbert B Norman wrote: Mon Oct 10, 2022 9:47 am Likely only of concern to those (i.e. moi) who "read the paper" on paper, the noted article appears front page, "top of fold", column one in today's Times.

Now that I've read the article, "what a boondoggle". Presumably the Amtrak San Joaquins can use the (roundly) Fresno to (roundly) Bakersfield line when complete allowing greater frequencies and returning Uncle Warren's line to him for his use.
San Joaquins will stop at Modesto, coming from Sacramento and San Fran area. Connect to the electrified completed CAHSR to Bakersfield.
  by west point
 
The more that is disclosed. Much of the money is going to projects just as side lines such as the latest eliminating6 BNSF grade crossings. Highways are getting upgrades as well from CA HSR funds.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
frequentflyer wrote: Tue Oct 11, 2022 8:25 pm San Joaquins will stop at Modesto, coming from Sacramento and San Fran area. Connect to the electrified completed CAHSR to Bakersfield.
Mr. Flyer, that is presuming the project is ever completed, something about which I have my doubts.

Obviously, the 135mi Chowchilla-Shafter segment under construction will be completed non-electrified. This will relieve congestion on Uncle Warren's road and permit schedule time reductions for the San Joaquins. Beyond that, it's a "that's all folks". Gavin is already thinking about POTUS48, and there goes the project's biggest cheerleader.
  by Matt Johnson
 
It seems to me the one useful thing they could have done is connect LA to Bakersfield with a new passenger right of way, either extending the diesel powered San Joaquin to LA or having a connection between a high speed train and the San Joaquin service. Now it looks like whatever we end up with, it likely won't include filling the LA to Bakersfield gap.
  by Gilbert B Norman
 
Mr. Johnson, Chow-Shaft was probably the cheapest and NIMBY-free way to get shovels in the ground.

As an aside, I think both Uncles - Pete and Warren - should be happy. Warren gets his 1:1 Lionel back all to himself and both he and Pete can explore the possibility of a paired track arrangement, i.e. trains of both roads use UP North, BNSF South.
  by lpetrich
 
Project Sections - California High Speed Rail - status:
  • SF - SJ - Merced -- Final EIR/EIS
  • Merced - Fresno - Bakersfield -- under construction
  • Bakersfield - Palmdale -- Final EIR/EIS
  • Palmdale - Burbank -- Draft EIR/EIS - 6 alternatives
  • Burbank - LA -- Final EIR/EIS
  • LA - Anaheim -- (Draft EIR/EIS: 2023, Final EIR/EIS: 2024)
Seems like the next parts likely to be funded are SJ - Merced and B'fld - Palmdale

LINK: Californian high-speed rail authority applies for 1.3 billion dollars of federal funding | RailTech.com

Among other things, that money would fund a second track for the parts now under construction.
  by John_Perkowski
 
lpetrich wrote: Sun Dec 11, 2022 7:03 pm Project Sections - California High Speed Rail - status:
  • SF - SJ - Merced -- Final EIR/EIS
  • Merced - Fresno - Bakersfield -- under construction
  • Bakersfield - Palmdale -- Final EIR/EIS
  • Palmdale - Burbank -- Draft EIR/EIS - 6 alternatives
  • Burbank - LA -- Final EIR/EIS
  • LA - Anaheim -- (Draft EIR/EIS: 2023, Final EIR/EIS: 2024)
Seems like the next parts likely to be funded are SJ - Merced and B'fld - Palmdale

LINK: Californian high-speed rail authority applies for 1.3 billion dollars of federal funding | RailTech.com

Among other things, that money would fund a second track for the parts now under construction.
With the new Congress, I would be very skeptical of any funding happening before the Congress that begins in 2025.
  by lensovet
 
That application was for funding already passed under last year's infrastructure bill, so the current Congress's actions (or inactions) are fairly irrelevant here.
  by eolesen
 
Maybe somebody else can clarify, but I don't believe everything in the infrastructure bill has been fully approved. Some was authorized, some was appropriated. So there may still be a role for the current Congress with regard to the full value of the infrastructure bill.

Unless Lensovet is referring to the $25M for CAHSR design work, I wasn't aware that any of the FRA grants for projects have actually been awarded yet.

The $1.3B certainly has not been awarded, and I seriously wonder if California wants to get that money or not given the way that the costs continue to explode to over the $100B mark.
  • 1
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43