|
Post by rayinla on Aug 7, 2010 8:20:15 GMT -8
With the proposed relocation of the Gold Line platform, I wonder if it is possible to make a direct connection via elevator to the Red Line platform below? I also hope they make a better connection between the Gold Line platform and the pedestrian tunnel - those stairs are terribly crowded at rush hour.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Aug 7, 2010 14:41:59 GMT -8
Why didnt they do it right the first time? Its not like HSR was a surprise. I too wish concurrent planning had occurred but we do need to consider the timeline of these events. Metro completed environmental review of the Gold Line Eastside Extension in 2002 and broke ground on the project in 2004. Back then, most people regarded HSR as a remote possibility for the distant future. The High-Speed Rail Authority didn't event complete its first EIR/EIS until 2005. But california has been talking about HSR before LA even had a metro rail line. Even if something is extremely unlikely, it costs nothing to say "lets put the gold line station 15 meters that way.....just in case HSR happens, because if it does, then they will need to expand union station" And as a bonus, they wouldnt have had such a ridiculous s curve. What bothers me is that the review process for these products can take so long and be so detailed....and yet they still miss these obvious problems.
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Aug 7, 2010 17:33:54 GMT -8
With the proposed relocation of the Gold Line platform, I wonder if it is possible to make a direct connection via elevator to the Red Line platform below? I also hope they make a better connection between the Gold Line platform and the pedestrian tunnel - those stairs are terribly crowded at rush hour. Let's hope so. But I'm also struck by how little space Metro is left for the gold line tracks. I had kind of assumed that an additional platform would be constructed to allow trains to be turned back to the connector once that gets built. They can't really be planning to run 3-car trains every 5 minutes from the blue line all the way to Fontana, Perris, Blythe or wherever the current proposed terminus is can they?
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 7, 2010 19:29:31 GMT -8
I heard they added a Zzyzx Station to the Foothill Extension.
|
|
|
Post by tobias087 on Aug 8, 2010 3:33:31 GMT -8
I sort of suspect that they will be turning back trains, but on the other side of Pasadena
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Aug 11, 2010 13:46:18 GMT -8
They broke ground today on the new Transbay Terminal up in SF. Actually, the demolition of the old terminal is what they really broke ground for, but you have to milk these things for what they are worth. You have to love the catchy headline though: "Historic Groundbreaking of First New High-Speed Rail Station in United States"... www.businesswire.com/portal/site/home/permalink/?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20100811006558&newsLang=en7 years does seem like a long project, even in the middle of SF. Exciting stuff none the less. If the demolition takes 6 months as expected, presumably the digging would then start sometime after that for the $400 million train box at the bottom that will be the SF terminus of the HSR system, as well as Caltrain. The actual tunnel from 4th and King to the TBT will be done later. RT
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Aug 11, 2010 17:25:39 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by jejozwik on Aug 13, 2010 7:57:21 GMT -8
does anyone have any detailed information about the alternatives considered for CHSR along the 10 freeway and fremont street in alhambra? no boards or graphics have been posted anywhere that i can find.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Aug 13, 2010 8:14:23 GMT -8
Those having some time to kill, looking for some cool webcam shots, can head over to the Transbay Temporary Terminal construction webcam: temporaryterminal.org/the-terminal/webcam/As part of the demolition of the Transbay Terminal, tomorrow they start tearing down the ramp that is over the temporary terminal, to allow completion of the temporary terminal. That starts tomorrow. The webcam shows them already lining up the equipment on the structure, that will be used to tear it down. On the webcam you can select the "last 2 hours" and play it back at a slow speed to keep up with the staging. Enjoy. RT P.S. All projects start with the arrival of the porta-potty, 7:27am
|
|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Mar 10, 2011 10:55:48 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 15, 2011 15:32:25 GMT -8
Well, The demolition of the old Transbay Terminal is pretty much complete, at least toward the East end of the site, and the digging has started. Here is a YouTube video of the drilling of the first hole that will be receiving a large steel beam used for shoring the site. The small size of the YouTube screen makes it hard to see, but the drilling rig is in the lower left corner barely visible. You can see the large stockpile of beams that they have been welding together in the central portion of the site, which is the block behind the one in the immediate front of the video. They even switched the webcam mid-day to capture the area being worked on: And a link to a slightly larger video: www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxMNYovBTP0A better screen shot of the site. When the trains pull in, they will come from the distance and the front of the train will be in the area that is at the bottom of the picture: And another of the central area where the steel beams are being welded together from two smaller ones. Apparently they are too large to be delivered in a single piece. These guys have been welding for about 2 months now: And here is a picture showing the site area. The camera is in the Providian Financial building toward the top, looking SouthWest into the train box area in green. The red box in the upper right is the now finished Temporary Terminal. The larger dark blue box is the entire site, not all of which is under construction. And finally, the green box is what I estimate to be the actual train box that will be excavated, somewhat deeper than 65 feet, and about 150' by 1450': This is partly paid for by the $400 million stimulus grant to pay for the train box. In essence, this is the actual first construction on the California HSR system. RT
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Jun 15, 2011 22:39:34 GMT -8
Are there provisions to allow future excavation across the bay, or will it be a terminus forever?
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 16, 2011 4:13:04 GMT -8
James, At one time they had considered installing tail tracks, which I believe would have made a right turn and gone underneath the street. But as it stands now, the plan is to have it as a terminus forever. Going from SF to Sacramento will require going down the peninsula and then up through Merced. Oakland is out of luck for the foreseeable future. I do remember seeing some discussion on the CSHRA blog about that decision and they were weighing the pros and cons of it. If the system actually does get built, and it generates the kind of ridership to warrant further expansion along those lines, then you might see a study done to estimate the cost. A friend in the construction industry has a nice saying: "Money solves all problems". RT Here is a link to one of the many posts, and at the end of it Rafael provided links to the 15 (!) previous Transbay Terminal discussions: cahsr.blogspot.com/2009/09/compromise-proposal-for-tjpa-and-chsra.htmlAnd a link to all of Clem's Transbay Terminal posts: caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/search/label/transbay%20terminal
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jun 16, 2011 15:13:24 GMT -8
Well, saying that Oakland is out of luck is like saying that the Westside or Pasadena is out of luck. Right now, to get across the bay quickly, you can take BART or one of Amtrak's buses. There's also the ferry for the slow, but fun ride ;D When it reaches Los Angeles and San Francisco, HSR will definitely rely on BART, Muni, Metro and other services for the last mile of many trips, just as the Shinkansen does. There really ought to be Oakland to Sacramento or L.A.-Fresno-Sacramento links, but that's a question of money and time.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Jun 16, 2011 18:06:38 GMT -8
I was thinking less about Oakland and more about
Sf-Oakland-Sacramento-Reno HSR
|
|
|
Post by bobdavis on Jun 16, 2011 18:42:41 GMT -8
Not sure what the geology for this part of SF is, but in some parts of The City, one must go down quite a ways to built a firm foundation. I remember the construction of a hotel on 3rd St. back in the 1980's; the concrete work for the foundation was truly impressive. The only place I've seen construction more robust than that was at a nuclear power plant.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 17, 2011 7:13:06 GMT -8
Good point James, "out of luck" in this context means that after the ride up from LA, riders will have to switch to BART for the last jog into Oakland, or anywhere else BART reaches, which covers a lot of territory to be sure. There is something I don't get about the shoring. Maybe someone more familiar with construction can chime in. In looking through the June construction update on the TJPA site (quite well hidden BTW), they refer to: 1. fabrication of shoring steel (presumably the big beams). 2. CDSM shoring wall Wasn't sure what this was, then I checked back in the May update and it stands for Concrete Deep Soil Mix. And they show the following picture: From the picture and a Wikipedia description it looks like they dig deep vertical holes and then inject a concrete mixture: "CDSM is a method where augers are used to mix cement with in-situ soil to form in-place soil-cement columns". Ok, all well and good, but where do the steel beams come into the picture then? Back when they dug the large hole for the Del Mar station underground parking, they spaced the steel beams about 8 feet apart. When they did the excavation, they then placed wooden planks between the beams to hold the external soil back. When they built the actual walls, they just built them right next to the steel/wood shoring wall. The steel/wood was then left in place. I thought that would be the plan here, but I'm obviously missing something. Maybe the steel beams are then pounded into the ground on the "inner side" of the concrete wall, so the concrete wall takes the place of the wood panels between the steel beams, just that it is now on the "outside" of the beam perimeter? RT
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jun 17, 2011 7:25:33 GMT -8
May have answered my own question here, looks like they drop the steel beams into the freshly poured concrete. From another article:
The structural wall was constructed in two main steps. The first step consisted of drilling and in-situ mixing of the soils with cement-bentonite grout. This was followed by installation of steel soldier beams on 1.37-m centers within the freshly mixed (i.e.; prior to curing) columns.
|
|
|
Post by wad on Jul 4, 2011 3:17:26 GMT -8
Sf-Oakland-Sacramento-Reno HSR Topography works against a Reno route. The I-80 passage would require a lot of tunnels. To make a route pencil out, it would have to horseshoe to Lake Tahoe and approach Reno via Carson City. It wouldn't be speedy, either.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Nov 11, 2011 13:52:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 18, 2012 10:56:34 GMT -8
The Governor spent several minutes discussing HSR in todays "State of the State speech", he is, as ever, fully on board:
Just as bold is our plan to build a high-speed rail system, connecting the Northern and Southern parts of our state. This is not a new idea. As governor the last time, I signed legislation to study the concept. Now thirty years later, we are within weeks of a revised business plan that will enable us to begin initial construction before the year is out.
President Obama strongly supports the project and has provided the majority of funds for this first phase. It is now your decision to evaluate the plan and decide what action to take. Without any hesitation, I urge your approval.
If you believe that California will continue to grow, as I do, and that millions more people will be living in our state, this is a wise investment. Building new runways and expanding our airports and highways is the only alternative. That is not cheaper and will face even more political opposition.
Those who believe that California is in decline will naturally shrink back from such a strenuous undertaking. I understand that feeling but I don’t share it, because I know this state and the spirit of the people who choose to live here. California is still the Gold Mountain that Chinese immigrants in 1848 came across the Pacific to find. The wealth is different, derived as it is, not from mining the Sierras but from the creative imagination of those who invent and build and generate the ideas that drive our economy forward.
Critics of the high-speed rail project abound as they often do when something of this magnitude is proposed. During the 1930’s, The Central Valley Water Project was called a “fantastic dream” that “will not work.” The Master Plan for the Interstate Highway System in 1939 was derided as “new Deal jitterbug economics.” In 1966, then Mayor Johnson of Berkeley called BART a “billion dollar potential fiasco.” Similarly, the Panama Canal was for years thought to be impractical and Benjamin Disraeli himself said of the Suez Canal: “totally impossible to be carried out.” The critics were wrong then and they’re wrong now.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Jan 25, 2012 9:07:48 GMT -8
I'll note in passing that the president in last nights SOTU address did not mention HSR at all. This is a departure from the past, and most likely due to the current economic situation, and his not being willing to expend political capitol on an issue that the other party likes to demonize. Contrast this to the Governors SOTS speech, where about 10% of the time was spent discussing the bullet train. I really don't get it. Most other developed and even undeveloped countries are pouring money into HSR. The only time it gets mentioned here in the US is when people who are against it use it as an example as the biggest boondoggle ever conceived. Apparently all the other countries investing in HSR are full of completely stupid people who don't realize that oil is an infinite resource. Also now looks like some central valley lawmakers are looking to get an initiative on the 2012 ballot to repeal Prop 1A... ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/initiatives/pdfs/i1052_12-0004_bullet_train.pdfAnd Clem makes a good case for building the HSR system using the "bookend" approach versus starting in the Central Valley. He shows what the money will buy with respect to the SJ-SF Caltrain corridor: caltrain-hsr.blogspot.com/2012/01/bookend-approach.htmlRT
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Jan 25, 2012 12:27:40 GMT -8
The president gave a republican speech last. According to some political analysts, the strategy is to take what the GOP has been doing (opposing anything a democrat proposes) and using that against them. Obama set up what would have been considered the 2008 GOP platform, an to oppose it, the GOP has to move even further right, alienating the swing voters an handing the democrats a 2012 win.
It was a campaign strategy speech, not a policy speech.
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Jan 25, 2012 16:48:50 GMT -8
The "bookend" approach makes political sense, because all of the state's political power is in Southern California and the Bay Area. However, the Central Valley "backbone" makes a lot more sense for construction. It is the flatest, straightest section of the route, and the only part which can get started quickly. It is also the area where trains will be able to get up the most speed for revenue service or for even a test track, which the FRA will demand before a single American Shinkansen or TGV gets built. Trains will have to slow down as they approach Los Angeles and San Francisco. Southern California can afford to make improvements to Metrolink or expand Metro Rail without circling around the Cal HSR project. And Silicon Valley NIMBYs have been battering Caltrain, BART and HSR for years.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Feb 20, 2012 8:51:45 GMT -8
This almost deserves a topic of it's own, and no doubt will if the plans actually materialize. The LA Times finally picked up on a story that has been circulating for a few weeks now, and that I just got wind of a couple days ago. Here is the link: www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-train-plan-20120220,0,2256852.story There is another story in todays paper too: latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/california-bullet-high-speed-train-funding-shift-los-angeles-bay-area.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lanowblog+%28L.A.+Now%29It looks like the plan is to essentially spend some of the money on the bookend approach, improving local commuter feeder system on both the North and South end. The original segment in the Central Valley will still be constructed starting this year. The money would come from the $950 million of prop 1A set aside for this purpose, plus another $2 billion each in SF and LA, with 50% of that being locally generated matching funds, with the other 50% coming from the prop 1A $9 billion bond. This is a complete acceptance of the blended approach. The SF portion would include completion of the DTX tunnel to bring Caltrain into the under construction Transbay Terminal, and the electrification of Caltrain. Up there this is being proposed as the "Fast Start" project: www.sfmta.com/cms/cmta/documents/2-7-12item12bhsrcaltrainsfctappt.pdfDown here the agencies involved are: CSHRA, SCAG, SCRRA, SANDAG, Metro, OCTA, RCTC, SANBAG. Here is a link to the RCTD description of the coming MOU agreement: rctc.org/downloads/workshop/RY.draft%20Rail%20Action%20Items.pdfThey are trying to get this all finalized by June of this year. With construction of all the projects completed by 2020. The list of work is astonishing, and include LAUS run through tracks for $350 million. Here is the list pasted from the above link: If these guys can pull this off, this will be the biggest boon to regional rail transit in recent history, if not ever. It should also go a long way toward appeasing those who do not support HSR because it doesn't take advantage on the system already in place. If this gets done, you are looking at electric rail service possibly all the way from the Transbay Terminal to at a minimum of Bakersfield. Then you have improved Metrolink service from Palmdale to LAUS. All thats missing then is the Bakersfield/Palmdale segment. This could all be done by 2020 RT
|
|
|
Post by carter on Feb 20, 2012 9:39:47 GMT -8
Thanks for putting that all together, Rubbertoe! I'd definitely agree that this could be a huge boon to regional rail, in part because of all the improvements it'll bring to the Antelope Valley and Orange County Metrolink/Amtrak lines.
I'd certainly hope they'd be able to electrify the whole route in the first go around, but there are ways around that need be. I believe some HSR routes use a diesel locomotive to two trains over certain stretches.
My one lingering question is can this train make the route in 2h40m? Or is there a way around that legal requirement, because even 4 hour train service would be a huge boon and probably cost considerably less.
|
|
|
Post by Justin Walker on Feb 20, 2012 11:42:50 GMT -8
Don Sepulveda talked a great deal about the "Bookend Approach" at the most recent Transit Coalition meeting: See also Metro's report on the high-speed rail MOU and the Bookend Approach.
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Feb 20, 2012 14:14:00 GMT -8
"If this gets done, you are looking at electric rail service possibly all the way from the Transbay Terminal to at a minimum of Bakersfield. Then you have improved Metrolink service from Palmdale to LAUS. All thats missing then is the Bakersfield/Palmdale segment. This could all be done by 2020 " How would trains get from San Jose to Merced with this approach? There are no tracks from Gilroy across the mountain.
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Feb 20, 2012 16:35:12 GMT -8
"If this gets done, you are looking at electric rail service possibly all the way from the Transbay Terminal to at a minimum of Bakersfield. Then you have improved Metrolink service from Palmdale to LAUS. All thats missing then is the Bakersfield/Palmdale segment. This could all be done by 2020 " How would trains get from San Jose to Merced with this approach? There are no tracks from Gilroy across the mountain. James, my excitement and the lack of Caffeine led to forget about that hop under the mountains. RT
|
|
|
Post by jamesinclair on Feb 21, 2012 0:05:03 GMT -8
Just a minor detail!
|
|