|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
If high-speed rail ends up running through a covered trench in Palo Alto, it won’t be easy or cheap, new California High-Speed Rail Authority data indicates.
In fact, building a trench for both the high-speed rail tracks and the Caltrain tracks would cost about $1.9 billion, according to a new estimate from the state agency, which released the cost figures as part of its “alternatives analysis” for the San Francisco-to-San Jose segment of the controversial 800-mile line.
The new study evaluates the various design options for the rail system, including a covered trench, an open trench, a deep tunnel, an aerial structure and an at-grade rail system.
The estimates do not include the costs of purchasing the needed right-of-way, which is owned by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board.
Over the past year, placing the train underground has emerged as the popular choice in Palo Alto and neighboring Peninsula communities. But according to the new data, an underground structure such as a covered trench would cost nearly six times more than an aerial structure at some portions of the line as it makes its way through Palo Alto.
The cost of building a covered trench/tunnel for all four sets of tracks (two high-speed rail tracks and two Caltrain tracks) at all four Palo Alto subsections of the Caltrain corridor would cost about $1.9 billion, according to the new estimates. This includes about $599 million for the northernmost segment, which concludes south of Embarcadero Road.
The covered trench would be essentially an underground box, located about 10 feet below the street level to minimize impact on underground utilities, according to the rail authority. Most but not all sections of the line would be covered, allowing for ventilation.
According to the Rail Authority’s report, the project would entail raising University and Homer avenues and Embarcadero Road at this subsection.
The state agency estimates the cost of building a covered trench in the segment between Embarcadero and Churchill Avenue at about $321 million. Between Churchill and East Meadow Drive, the cost is a whopping $694 million, which includes the cost of raising Oregon Expressway; while in the southernmost section, between East Meadow and the Adobe Creek, the cost would be $272 million.
Despite the high costs, the Rail Authority announced at its meeting Thursday morning that it would continue to study the option for high-speed rail as it passes through the Peninsula.
“The tunnel option is still in place,” Robert Doty, director of the Peninsula Rail Program, said at the Thursday meeting. “All the options are in place to be honest.”
According to the report, “Many individuals and communities on the corridor expressed a strong desire that alternatives be carried forward until there was a thorough analysis and discussion of the costs, environmental impacts, and engineering issues of the different vertical options.”
The northernmost section of the Palo Alto corridor presents the Rail Authority with the most obstacles, including the El Palo Alto tree, the San Francisquito Creek and the historic Caltrain station at University Avenue. The Rail Authority concluded that an aerial viaduct, an open trench and a berm would all have major environmental impacts at this section of the Caltrain tracks and eliminated them from further consideration.
The only options considered for this subsection are a covered trench/tunnel, an at-grade system for all four train tracks (in which case roads crossing the track would either have to be raised or lowered) and a stacked system with two Caltrain tracks at grade and two high-speed rail tracks in a deep tunnel. The Authority estimates the at-grade design for four tracks to cost $75 million and the stacked design to cost about $290 million ($242 million for the deep tunnel and $48 million for the two at-grade tracks) for that 1.2 mile stretch of Palo Alto.
The cost of digging deep tunnels through all four stretches of Palo Alto would be about $777 million, the Authority estimates. If it chooses this two-track option, it would also need to either keep two tracks at grade (an additional $177 million) or build an aerial viaduct for two tracks (an additional $209 million).
Putting all four tracks on an aerial viaduct in the three Palo Alto subsections south of Embarcadero Road would cost about $229 million.
The only design option that the Rail Authority eliminated from consideration at all four subsections of the Palo Alto corridor is the “berm” option, which many feared would create a new “Berlin Wall” along the Caltrain tracks. The new report notes “strong local opposition to this type of structure” and that the berm “would create a perceived barrier through this area which is not consistent with the local communities’ character and land uses.” (See related story: No trains on berms in Palo Alto.)
The Rail Authority is more flexible when it comes to the rest of the Palo Alto route, where open trenches and aerial viaducts are listed as alternatives.
Has the City adopted the tunnel or covered trench idea in their official position? Or are we teaming up with NIMBY towns like Menlo Park and Atherton?
A titanium plated door stop is cheaper that a gold plated door stop
Facts are we do not need either of them
Just like we do not need HSR– no market– no need– no future– no money
The project is dead
All that is left is senseless bickering.
The new generation of IT has made most business travel for sales and service obsolete.
Business meetings take place via Cisco- HP etc telepresence tech or in off site locations where trains will never go .
Who is left to travel the fantasy train?
Families will not pay $1000 + when they can drive PA to LA for pennies on the dollar
Who actually stood to benefit from this scam?
Certainly not voters or business people who sometimes want to fly or drive to LA
We are glad the project is dead– now lets go after the scammers
The “berlin wall” effect is a metaphor for the aesthetic and physical impacts of putting a train FREEWAY in where there is currently no such thing. They are proposing 20 TRAINS PER HOUR. That’s a constant flow of trains. 4 WIDE TRACKS that will require MASSIVE SOUND WALLS (like a freeway) to mitigate for the terrible noise and wind effects. Anythign at grade will still create a terrible ‘berlin wall’ effect. All the trees that currently shield Palo Alto from the visual and noise impacts from the measly train volume that currently passes through that small row – will be gone.
And ariel structure is nothing but a monsterous freeway overpass structure running through the heart of our neighborhood. And did anyone notice that ariel would require losing TWO LANES OF ALMA? Pure DISASTER.
Eliminated the BERM alternative – who cares? Thats like eliminating a one bullet from the roulette revolver
Sharon, how do you say the project is dead. ARe you kidding – they’ve got China lined up to ‘lend’ the money AND build it.
LEND? Every half wit knows a ‘loan’ comes with collateral, and when this project fails.. (because its useless and idiotic concept and will fail to genera te the kind of ridership revenues the CRIMINALS at the authority are loading up their plan with)… What kind of collateral do you think the Chinese will collect when California defaults on the loan? Well, the only thing California has of value – all the prime real estate in and around the row that the authority will have siezed by eminent domain, in every major city in California. The mother of all forclosures.
Where are you going to put all the dirt you scrape out of a tunnel; transport it all to the Central Valley? Very expensive.
A tunnel would be a one-time cost. The impact to local property values (and thus taxes), negative or positive (depending on the choice), would be long-term and probably a more important consideration to state and local governments and citizens.
Maybe both caltrain and the high speed rail could go underground, then the land on top of the tunnel could be sold for housing which would pay back the cost!!
Why is no one bringing this idea up??
this is GOING to be built NIMBYS…back your little bags!!!!
In Berkeley the people vote to pay each and every citizen to bury the BART underground. Palo Alto can do the same. The result could be an enlarged Alma Street with 6 lanes with flowers in the middle road island, and parking spaces in both sides.
– Put the trains underground
– Above ground, remove the tracks and put in a long park (100 feet wide, 7 miles long) with a bicycle path, benches, playgrounds, flower gardens, vegetable gardens, and dog walks
– Send me an award for civic planning 🙂
Menlo Park, Palo Alto, and Atherton probably need to do this together, since it makes sense for rail to be mostly at/above ground level south of Charleston because of previous local decisions. The cost could be an assessment as much as $1K/year/household to do the full tunnel properly throughout the area, including CalTrain/freight tracks. I would vote for it myself– it would address existing noise, safety, and traffic concerns and would be a property-value enhancing move for most of Palo Alto.
It seems to me that a group should be formed to put together an initiative to kill this project. The project is too expensive, projected ridership numbers are insufficient – and, in this economic environment, I think most people would rather hire teachers than pay the interest on the bonds.
Let me know of a viable group that is putting together a petition to get an initiative on the ballot to kill this project and cut our losses and I will support it!
Bad business plan. Put it back on the ballot so we can kill it now that they have released the correct information about what they really plan to do.
I don’t live near it, but I have read the plan. It is completely unsupportable.
HSRA should be removed from their appointed postions. They have deliberately misled the public and they deserve to be publicly reprimanded for their irresponsible behavior. I hope someone in Sacramento has the chutzpah to put this right.
Totally agree with Rick and Stop HSR, let’s put tegether a petition to stop his madness. CA has very limited resource right now and let’s spend it wisely.
Does anyone reading this trust CAHSR to make an accurate estimate of anything, given the fanciful ridership projections they have put forward?
Why wasn’t all of this taken into consideration BEFORE the November 2008 bond election?
There is a way to stop the insanity (the part of the HSR going from S.F. to San Jose):
Kill off the funding of the high speed rail project by emailing your Assemblyperson in support of Assembly bill AB2121. Also, email the sponsor of the bill, Diana Harkey, even though she isn’t in our district, to let her know she has support.
Google AB2121 high speed rail to find out more.
Anon — ABOVE GROUND SOUTH OF CHARLESTON?????? Where does that come from? I assume you don’t live south of Charleston or you wouldn’t propose something so absurd.
HSR is proving very unpopular in other countries when it goes through residential areas– like Palo Alto
“The high-speed Sapsan train was halted for several hours on Sunday after its power was cut and windshield was broken, in what Russian Railways is calling an act of sabotage.
The Sapsan train, which travels from Moscow to St. Petersburg at 200 kilometers to 250 kilometers per hour, has provoked the outrage of those who live near the railway, many of whom have vented their anger by pelting the passing train with rocks and ice.
A foreign object was hung from the overhead cable that delivers electricity to the train. When a rod connecting the train with the cable ran up against the object, the cable broke loose at high speed and shattered the windshield in the process.——
In most places throughout the world, high-speed highways and railways are built outside residential areas and are fenced to avoid all kinds of accidents, Blinkin said.
“In this country, they launched a high-speed train to run on a conventional track — the Oktyabrskaya railway.
The project came under fire from experts at the time, but no one would even listen.”
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/business/article/high-speed-moscow-st-petersburg-train-sabotaged/403783.html
HSR is a dead duck, no market, no money, no need–if the consultants want to get paid for just plans— then draw the plans along freeways and away from residential areas– even with that it is not going to happen because there is no environmental nor business case for building such a white elephant
Perpetual motion and Cold Fusion sounded good on paper too–
AB 2121 stops funding for HSR.
I received this note today from Sharon K. Gonsalves, Capitol Director, Office of Assemblywoman Diane Harkey:
“In order to support AB 2121 I would urge you to write letters to the committee members. I would also recommend that you come to the committee hearing if you can on April 19. I would like to see a large number of people show up to the hearing who are opposed to high speed rail. I am expecting the democrats to have a large number of union and labor folks to oppose our bill. We can counter that by having as many residents who are adversely affected by HSR show up to the hearing.
I would also recommend bombarding their offices with phone calls.”
Members of Assembly Transportation Committee (some ph #’s are missing):
Office of Assemblyman Mike Eng
State Capitol, room 4140
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 319-2049
Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries
State Capitol, Room 5128
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 319-2066
Assemblyman Bill Berryhill
State Capitol, Room 4009
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Bob Blumenfield
State Capitol, Room 6011
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan
State Capitol, Room 4167
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Warren Furutani
State Capitol, Room 3126
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani
State Capitol, Room 5155
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblywoman Bonnie Lowenthal
State Capitol, room 5158
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Jeff Miller
State Capitol, Room 3147
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Roger Niello
State Capitol, Room 4139
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Chris Nordby
State Capitol, Room 5126
Sacramento, CA 95814
Assemblyman Jose Solorio
State Capitol, room 2013
Sacramento, CA 95814
Tom Torlankson
State Capitol, Room 5160
Sacramento, CA 95814
I didn’t vote for high speed rail when it was on the ballot two years ago. It still sounds far-fetched. One tiny item I have picked up on the international news in the past 6 months is that the French high speed rail is squirming under bankruptcy proceedings because its ridership had fallen off. It is cutting runs.
In the past I also read that high speed rail did best in places where adequate corridors already existed, AND a well developed local transit system was already in place to disperse the travelers when they arrived. We have neither. Emminent domain is going to tear communities apart. PLUS we can ill afford it at this time.
Then there is the matter of our “new partners”, the Chinese. Didn’t they build a railroad system for us once before and aren’t they building the pieces for our new, improved Bay Bridge? This time they’ll own us, just as they own most of the places in Africa and South America where they are making contributions.
I think this is the wrong time for the wrong project.
Where will the trains go while the trench is bening dug??????????????
Hey all. I started using airplanes a while back to go to LA. It costs around $49-$79 each way on Southwest. They fly really fast. No tunnels need to be built. Tell Arnold to put the IOUs back in his green pockets. If you put all this money into building quality local transit right into the airports and then right into the cities, you’d end up with a much better system. Run the BARTs, Caltrains, and that slow, crappy San Jose bus/train thing that Diridon snookered you into right into the airports. How hard is this to figure out? BTW, don’t make trains that stop at traffic lights.
The financial models require that people who are currently driving (value players or people that need their car on their trip) now will take the train. Why is a value player going to do that? So they can pay $75 a day (after all the taxes) to rent a car??? You need a car to get around LA and the Bay Area. The numbers will NEVER pencil out on this project. The ticket prices will have to rise to try to improve operating deficits. It’s going to make air travel look even cheaper!
Europe’s great and all. The trains are nice. They work well for traveling to and from 2nd tier cities more so than between two major citiies – I’ve ridden the Chunnel train to, that’s a corner case. They’ve both got concentrated downtowns. LA doesn’t and the Bay Area business scene is split between two cities that are 50 miles apart. By the way, Europe uses discount airlines in a huge way now. Easyjet and RyanAir are cleaning up there. This train nirvana is a big freaking green mirage.