California high-speed-rail groundbreaking pushed back another few months

[alp227]

Source: San Jose Mercury News

All year, the state billed the summer of 2013 as the season when California's biggest-ever public works project -- a $69 billion high-speed rail line -- would finally leave the station with a groundbreaking that has been decades in the making.

But with autumn arriving this weekend and no bulldozers in sight, rail officials for the first time have acknowledged it will be another "few months" before construction, which has already been delayed a year, begins.

The state still needs to buy more land and equipment, finish designs and hire workers, while a pair of lawsuits set to be decided in the coming months could even force more delays.

A date still hasn't been set for the formal ceremony marking the first shovel in the ground -- the moment when the project should finally seem more real for many dubious Californians, as billions of tax dollars begin flowing and steel starts going up.

Read more: http://www.mercurynews.com/california-high-speed-rail/ci_24117524/california-high-speed-rail-groundbreaking-pushed-back-another

[NYC_SKP]

1. I'll wait. We need to do this.

The resistance is amazing.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

2. Not when you consider the panic level of the opposition.

[ConcernedCanuk]

3. Bad idea - North America's rail safety sorta sucks - even on normal speed rails

.
.
.

69 Billion - we know that price tag will go up, so cost is an issue.

Trains fall off the tracks at low speed, both in Canada and the USA.

The driving distance from Los Angeles to San Francisco is 615 kilometers (382 miles).

The driving time is estimated to be 5 hours 35 mins.

How much time will this track save?

And it's not scheduled to be completed until 2029!

Also, these things tend to run behind schedule, and above budget.

Dealing with companies like Union Pacific and PG&E would give me pause also.

"Since then, officials have more than tripled the rail authority staff to 80 employees, signed the first construction contract with developer consortium Tutor Perini, obtained various government approvals, and reached key deals with private companies such as Union Pacific and PG&E. The state has also reached agreements to buy 50 of the 375 rural properties it needs along the first route."

http://www.mercurynews.com/california-high-speed-rail/ci_24117524/california-high-speed-rail-groundbreaking-pushed-back-another

Bad idea,

BAD.

CC

[davidpdx]

4. As far as I'm concerned they need to push for the development of the vacuum tube idea

LA to SF would be quicker than sitting down to watch CSI. NY to LA probably an hour or two.

[SunSeeker]

5. You will be able to go LA to SF in under 3 hours.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_High-Speed_Rail

When was the last time you tried going LA to SF by car? Last time I tried it, I was exhausted after 7 hours of brutal driving, not to mention the wear on my car. I would love to be able to just sit on a train and do work on the way to SF.

With a less than 3 hour travel time, that means you could go up early in the morning, put in a full day, and come back that night. In other words, you could actually commute to SF from LA and vice versa.

Good idea.

GOOD.

[ConcernedCanuk]

7. "When was the last time you tried going LA to SF by car?" - 1979

.
.
.

Actually - I went from SanFran to SanDee . . in a Volkswagen Thing.

but if I had a job in LA - I'd live close to LA, and conversely,

if I had a job in San Fran - I'd live in or close to San Fran.

I commuted to a job for a few months up here in the 90's . .

Waste of my life and $$ - was a 250 mile 4 hour commute each way (weekly - stayed where I was working during the week).

Figured out the travel time and cost was not worth it, so moved with 2 miles of my work after a few months.

5 minutes to get to work, and 5 minutes to get home.

Retired now, so where I live, is where I work.

Northern Ontario now,

but I remember SanDee fondly - OH -

It's true what they say about California girls

Had the time of my life there!



CC

[Xithras]

8. What route did you take?

I just did a trip from LA to Emeryville last month. Took a smidge over 5 hours. I wasn't doing the speed limit, but who does on the 5?

And given the projected $160 round trip ticket price, I doubt we'll see many commuters. Not many people will be willing to spend $3,000+ a month on tickets.

BTW, you may want to check up on those travel times. The 3 hour estimate is based on the assumption that it will run at full speed constantly, and it's now a given that it will be slowing down in the Bay Area and LA. The new estimate puts the nonstop express runs at 3.5 to 4 hours. The majority of the runs won't be express and will stop at all of the towns in the Valley. Those are expected to take about 5 hours.

[SunSeeker]

9. The 5 to I-580 W; going around 10 mi over the speed limit when I could.

From where I start near Long Beach to downtown SF (City Hall) is 411 miles. And with light traffic, according to Mapquest it should take 6 hours 34 mins. But traffic is never perfect. It will invariably take me at least 7 hours, including bathroom stops.

Don't know how you're doing it in 5 hours without stopping...unless you're one of those people that lobs piss bottles as they're driving in a dexie-fueled 90 mph road burn, attracting cops like flies on shit. Yech.


Of course the express would run early in the morning and later in the evening to accommodate day trippers like me. Taking only 3.5 hours to get to SF while doing work and being able to comfortably eat and use the bathroom would be a godsend.

[avaistheone1]

6. Total waste of money.

Traffic should be addressed in getting in and out of our major metro areas instead.

It is a horror show in most parts of the country. It is terrible for example in places like San Francisco, Silicon Valley, Boston and so on...

[Throd]

10. Just pull the plug on the whole thing.