In early 2004 the California High-Speed Rail Authority will release the draft Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for train service projected to travel between San Francisco and Los Angeles in less than 3 hours. The details in that report—and California's budget climate—will be major factors in the success of a bond measure to fund the proposed system, now slated for the November 2004 ballot.
Construction of any high-speed rail (HSR) system in California will be a lengthy process, beginning with funding. The November 2004 statewide ballot measure, known as the Safe, Reliable, High-Speed Train Bond Act of the 21st Century, would authorize a $9.9 billion general obligation bond. Plans call for constructing the segment anticipated to have the highest ridership, San Francisco to Los Angeles, first; later segments would serve Sacramento, San Diego and the East Bay. Commuter rail such as the Altamont Commuter Express (ACE) and Capitol Corridor would receive $9 million of the bond money to integrate their service with initial HSR service where possible. The total construction cost for the entire 700-mile system is currently estimated at $25 billion.
Exploration of the potential for high-speed rail in California began in 1996, after legislation (SB1420, Kopp & Costa) created the Authority and mandated preparation of a business plan. The plan, presented in June 2000, examined systems in other countries, described potential routes, projected ridership and revenue, and considered potential financing strategies. The Authority concluded that a high-speed system was both possible and practical for the state and recommended starting the formal environmental review process.
Based on the analysis in the Business Plan, the Authority concluded that it was possible to run the high-speed trains without subsidies by choosing routes with relatively low construction costs and high ridership potential. The plan identified a preferred route and also described several alternative routes which might be better for environmental or cost/benefit reasons (see map). The preferred route and the alternatives were the basis for the EIR/EIS.
In the Bay Area, the preferred route included stations in Gilroy, San Jose, Redwood City, San Francisco International Airport (SFO) and downtown San Francisco, preferably at the Transbay Terminal. The alternative route that was recommended for study would serve stations in Fremont/Newark and Oakland. The decision on which Bay Area cities would ultimately be included was deferred until after the environmental analysis was done.
South of Gilroy, the preferred route would turn east through the Pacheco Pass and Los Banos to join the main north-south route south of Merced. An alternative approach to the Bay Area, through the Altamont Pass and across the Bay on a new bridge to the Peninsula and San Francisco, was not chosen for evaluation. This alignment had been recommended by the Authority's predecessor, the California Intercity High-Speed Rail Commission, but after further analysis by the Authority was not included in the final Business Plan. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), which had discussed both alignments, adopted a resolution in 1999 supporting the Pacheco Pass route. Reasons included faster travel times to San Francisco, higher ridership and fare potential and more direct service and frequent service to San Jose, the region's largest city. While the Pacheco Pass alignment would involve substantial construction costs due to the need to build tunnels, the Altamont Pass alignment would require a new Bay crossing to take the high-speed tracks to the Peninsula.
MTC reconsidered the two alternatives in May 2003 at the request of the Alameda County Board of Supervisors, and decided against further study of the Altamont Pass, concluding that service in that corridor could be provided by commuter rail service such as ACE. However, funding to study how Bay Area rail service would integrate with HSR is contained in Regional Measure 2, an increase in Bay Area bridge tolls, which Bay Area voters will decide in March 2004 (see article in this issue) .
The EIR/EIS will give a clearer picture of how the proposed HSR system would actually be integrated into the current Bay Area transportation network. To reduce construction costs, the Business Plan assumed use of existing rail rights-of-way where possible. However, under current federal regulations, high-speed trains cannot use tracks which are also in use by conventional rail, because of concerns about accidents. This means that unless these regulations are waived, rail right-of-way on the Peninsula which is currently being used by Caltrain, and in some areas by BART, would need to accommodate a separate system of tracks for HSR. A similar situation may be encountered with service between San Jose and Oakland along tracks now used by private freight service as well as the Capitol Corridor commuter trains.
Initial HSR planning assumed that Caltrain electrification would be completed and compatible with HSR electric-powered trains; although Caltrain electrification has been delayed, plans are still moving forward for this step. Grade separations, essential for HSR, have already been partially completed by Caltrain as part of ongoing upgrades and express train implementation, but might need expansion unless HSR uses aerial tracks along part or all of the shared right of way.
Without San Jose and San Francisco, and possibly Oakland, as northern destinations on the proposed system, HSR will not have a chance of being self-supporting in California. Because of the Bay Area's critical importance to the system, voters and decision makers have the opportunity to make sure that the system is right for the region. The responses to the EIR/EIS will shape the campaigns that lead to the November 2004 vote on the bond measure. If the bond measure passes, the information in the environmental studies will also be critical to ensuring that the system is constructed with the greatest possible benefit to the region and the least environmental cost.
Leslie Stewart
For more information: http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov
On Thursday, January 29, from 1-3 pm, high-speed rail experts will be presenting new details on the proposed high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and San Francisco via Silicon Valley. Topics will include alignment options for the train route into Silicon Valley, the location and number of stations in the Valley, and Caltrain system improvements that would result from the new rail service sharing Caltrain's right of way.
The forum will be held at the new Martin Luther King Jr. Library at 150 E. San Fernando St. (at 4th Street) in San José, Room B on the second floor.
The forum is jointly sponsored by the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, the Mineta Transportation Institute, the Commonwealth Club, the Leagues of Women Voters of Santa Clara County, the San Jose/Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce, the City of San Jose, and the San Jose Downtown Association.
