tool name

Saturday, Nov. 14, 2009

Walter Strakosch: Plans may jeopardize high-speed trains

With the passage of Proposition 1-A in November 2008 and new and encouraging Washington support, high-speed rail may become a reality in California.

I say "may" because the way it is now proposed, the California High Speed Rail Authority may use up the $9 billion in 1-A bonds before we see the benefits of high-speed rail and how really well it can perform.

As now planned, the first phase of the line is to run from San Francisco to Anaheim, with L.A. to San Diego and Merced to Sacramento sections to follow.

The project's currently projected cost is $33 billion but by the time it gets built it will probably exceed $40 billion, if not more.

In addition to some federal funds, the authority hopes for private partnerships that will defray more than $7 billion of the costs. But before that happens, the private investors will have to clearly see a potential profit or they will not be interested.

And there is the hitch: The way the system is proposed to be built that may not happen.

The first phase, now proposed, will be built in nine segments.

The first three will be Los Angeles to Anaheim, San Francisco to San Jose and Bakersfield to Merced.

The cost of building the 26 miles from Los Angeles to Anaheim is estimated by the authority at $3.3 billion or $126.9 million a mile. The 47.5 miles from San Francisco to San Jose is $5.2 billion or $109.6 million a mile. Today's estimated total cost for these two short segments is $8,5 billion.

Again, attracting private money requires the potential for a future return on the investment.

Cutting 20 minutes from present conventional rail time between Los Angeles and Anaheim and 30 minutes between San Francisco and San Jose, I doubt a future return is possible.

If all or most of the $9 billion is spent on these sections and there is little if any private interest, California's high-speed rail system could remain in limbo.

And, yet, the authority is preparing for just such a scenario.

In its Nov. 20, 2008 business plan, the authority states that smaller segments around the L.A. Basin and the Bay Area would be built first, and if further funding were not to materialize, California would be left with improved commuter rail service in the L.A. and S.F. areas.

Almost $9 billion for what?

We already have decent rail service between Los Angeles and Anaheim and San Francisco and San Jose. Are we then going to be left with subsidizing two different commuter rail lines between each city?

Caltrain and Metrolink are not expected to go out of business.

What seems to make sense is the 166-mile stretch between Bakersfield and Merced, priced at $6.9 billion or $41.6 million per mile. (This is meant to be a test track for the new trains.)

A much longer distance at a much less per mile cost than the others.

What appears to make even better sense is to extend the track another 112 miles to Sacramento at an additional cost, based on mileage, of $4.6 billion or less than the cost to build the 47.5 miles between S.F. and San Jose.

High-speed rail becomes a lot cheaper in the Central Valley than in the metropolitan areas.

The largest travel market in this state is between the San Joaquin Valley and the major cities, including San Francisco and Sacramento, and accounts for more than 35 percent of statewide travel.

With this potential, it could generate the outside investment that is needed to complete the system.

I have ridden high-speed rail in France, Spain and Japan and it is a pleasant and exhilarating experience flying over the terrain at nearly 200 mph. It is smooth, comfortable, popular and very safe.

With the Valley leg extended to Sacramento you have a viable way of showcasing high-speed rail cutting the time from Bakersfield to Sacramento to about two hours from the current 5½ hours and to the Bay Area to about 3½ hours from the current six, by using existing track from Stockton until a direct high-speed rail connection can be built.

This is a great project for California and if we allow politics to prevail over common sense and what makes sense than we, the people of this state, are the losers.

Bakersfield to Sacramento should have priority.

Walter Strakosch is retired. He worked for Santa Fe Railroad in the 1960s, the Interstate Commerce Commission from 1969 to 1985 and the U.S. Transit Adminstration from 1985 to 1996, where he was senior planning analyst. You can reach him at strakosc@pacbell.net.