Search title image

TRANSACTIONS NEWSLETTER ONLINE

April 1999: Focus on High-Speed Rail


John Mattos

High-Speed Rail Picks Up the Pace

Less than two years from now, California voters may get a chance to give the green light to a brand new transportation mode for the state -- or stop it in its tracks. Proponents view the project -- a sleek, futuristic high-speed rail system -- as a way to take some of the stress off the busy Los Angeles-to-Bay Area travel corridor. Opponents ask, at what cost?

With highways and airports already operating at close to capacity, there is general agreement that new transportation solutions are needed. But lawmakers and taxpayers alike must decide whether the major new commitment high-speed rail represents is the best use of limited transportation dollars.

A detailed plan for financing, constructing and operating a high-speed rail system currently being developed by the California High-Speed Rail Authority may help answer that question. Established by Senate Bill 1420 to "direct development and implementation of an intercity high-speed train service that is fully integrated with the state's existing intercity rail and bus network," the authority is the successor to the California Intercity High-Speed Rail Commission, which issued a set of baseline recommendations in 1996. The nine-member authority now must deliver a complete, workable plan to the governor and the Legislature no later than the November 2000 general elections. If it successfully clears the various hurdles in its path -- including voter approval of a statewide tax to pay for it (see story) -- the high-speed rail system could be racing down the track as early as 2010.

restaurant car
The restaurant car of an Italian high-speed train is a comfortable spot from which to watch the scenery whiz by.
(Photo: Michele Benda)

The State of the Art
Although it would be new to California, high-speed rail is well-established elsewhere -- Japanese bullet trains have been in service since 1964, and the TGV (train a grande vitesse) line has been carrying passengers in France since 1981. Each system's trains travel at speeds of up to 186 miles per hour (mph). High-speed rail also operates in Belgium, Germany, Holland, Italy, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland, and is being seriously considered in at least six other countries worldwide.

In the U.S., no high-speed rail line has yet been successfully launched, although Amtrak's "Acela" service is scheduled to get under way between Boston, New York and Washington, D.C., by the end of this year, its trains traveling at speeds of up to 150 mph in the congested Northeast corridor. Making this feat possibleis a $2 billion investment in electrifying the line, straightening curves and purchasing special "tilt" trains that can take curves at high speed.

Acela is a major improvement over standard Amtrak trains, most of which operate at a top speed of no more than 79 mph. It fits the basic definition of high-speed rail as a steel-wheel-on-steel-rail system with trains that can travel at over 100 mph. A second category of steel-wheel trains, sometimes referred to as "very high speed," tops out at more than 200 mph. Faster still are the much-tested -- but never put into revenue service -- magnetic levitation (or maglev) trains that hover over a guideway and have reached speeds of close to 310 mph in experimental runs on test tracks in Germany and Japan.

Gateway to the Bay Area
For Californians, zooming along at more than 100 mph -- much less 200 mph -- is just a dream, unless they've visited Europe or Japan (see article). But it is a dream that the California High-Speed Rail Authority is working hard to turn into reality. By June of this year, the authority, its staff and consultants are expected to present the first major result of these efforts: their draft recommendations for what a high-speed rail system in California would look like.

One of the most contentious issues is the specific route of the high-speed rail line in the Bay Area. The 676-mile network recommended by the authority's predecessor would run from Los Angeles to the Bay Area through the Central Valley, following the path of State Route 99, and enter the Bay Area via the Altamont Pass. The main line would branch at Newark, with one segment proceeding up the Peninsula to San Francisco, and the other continuing south to San Jose.

City of Oakland officials have advocated that their East Bay city would be the best terminus for the line, while San Jose Mayor Ron Gonzalez has expressed his city's "continued interest in being the Bay Area's gateway for the...system," most likely by way of the Pacheco Pass. In a January 1999 letter to the chair of the authority, Gonzalez pointed out that "San Jose is the Bay Area's largest city. We are the capital city of the Silicon Valley, which continues to be the center of the Bay Area's economic engine...."

According to the authority's executive director, Mehdi Morshed, the alignment decision will be made sometime this summer on the basis of cost and ridership. In making that decision, however, Morshed emphasized, "Our desire is to work as closely as we can with MTC in terms of considering the region's plans for transportation investments in the future, how well they coordinate with the intercity system, and to make sure that the combined system functions in as complementary a fashion as possible."

At the authority's next regularly scheduled meeting on May 19, the topic of discussion will be Northern California and Central Valley route options, as well as station locations, financing, freight capability, growth and economic impacts, level of service, and technology.

Thalys
A Thalys high-speed train pulls into the station at The Hague, in the Netherlands, on its route between Amsterdam and Paris.
(Photo: Peter Schokkenbroek)

MTC Is on a Parallel Track
MTC has suggested that the region's "Transportation Blueprint for the 21st Century" planning effort be the vehicle for analyzing the question of where high-speed rail would enter and terminate in the Bay Area, how it would connect to the region's existing rail systems, and what its place in the region's transportation priorities would be. A year-long undertaking, MTC's Blueprint is exploring technological and financial questions related to a range of potential improvements to and expansions of the Bay Area's transportation network that are currently unfunded.

The ultimate goal of the Blueprint is to develop a financial plan that ties together proposed new transportation funding measures with specific projects, to help guide what is submitted to local and statewide voters in the 2000 elections and beyond.

Among the capital investments being considered in the Blueprint are rail projects that could link with the high-speed rail line, such as extensions of BART, Caltrain and various light-rail lines, as well as expansion of the Altamont Commuter Express and other intercity rail services.

"MTC believes that the possibility of upgrading and extending the Bay Area's existing rail network should be considered part and parcel with the planning of high-speed rail service in our region," MTC Executive Director Lawrence D. Dahms stated. In fact, the authority's final business plan -- to be released by the end of the year -- is expected to include not only the very high-speed (200+ mph) rail spine through the Central Valley, but also its connections to a network of improved or expanded intercity and commuter rail services all along the corridor.

In addition to the Blueprint, two other current efforts spearheaded by MTC dovetail with the high-speed rail proposal. The Transbay Terminal Improvement Study -- under way since December 1998 -- is looking at the potential reintroduction of rail service into that facility, possibly including high-speed rail. Appended to this study is one exploring the possibility of restoring rail service on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge, which will analyze, among other options, a high-speed rail connection to San Francisco from the East Bay.

"High-speed rail is essentially an intercity service, and in Europe is fully compatible with conventional rail operations," the authority's Morshed pointed out. "In California, trains operating on fast new tracks could come north as far as the Bay Area and then follow a rebuilt, multitracked Caltrain alignment, usable by both commuter and high-speed trains, into the heart of San Francisco."

TGV
The needle-nosed, scarlet TGV (French for "high-speed train") serves France's south-east route to Lyon, one of three dedicated high-speed lines radiating from Paris.
(Photo courtesy of the California High-Speed Rail Authority)

Weighing Costs & Benefits
The price tag for the high-speed rail project ($23 billion for the steel-wheel option, and even higher for maglev) has been estimated by the Wall Street Journal to be twice that of the 1960 California Water Project (adjusted for inflation), and a third higher than the high-speed rail tunnel under the English Channel. Local newspapers recently quoted Southern California Assemblyman Tom McClintock as saying, "You're asking us to spend as much as we would to build a new highway system on just this one project. Do we really think this is a wise choice for California?"

California's new governor, Gray Davis, addressed the issue of high-speed rail in a March 1999 interview with the Sacramento Bee. According to the newspaper, Davis wants to focus on localized commuter rail rather than the statewide system the authority is proposing, saying, "I would like to see this administration start high-speed rail projects that would serve the major commuting corridors of the state."

The article went on to mention that Davis' administration has launched discussions with Amtrak about improving rail service between Los Angeles and cities to its east, as well as the Capitols route between San Jose and Sacramento. "There's a lot of traffic every day, and to the extent that you can relieve congestion in those areas, you do everyone a service," Davis was quoted as saying. "You reduce pollution, and allow everyone to ride in relative comfort."

Congestion reduction and environmental benefits are among the pluses cited by the authority for the statewide line as well. Its Web site touts a number of other advantages, from time savings over driving to ticket prices lower than current airfares.

As project planning continues for the high-speed rail system, the public is invited to share in the decision-making process (see timeline below). And even after the final business plan is submitted to the governor and the Legislature, the state's residents may have the final say on the project: By voting "yes" or "no" on a financing ballot measure, they can derail high-speed rail or speed it on its way.
-- Reka Goode

Route map

Contents

Special Web Feature