Post by jeisenbe on Dec 23, 2009 0:07:59 GMT -8
Bart Reed had an article in CityWatch about the HSR station plans for Union Station, which currently involve a whole new level of tracks, elevated over the current station and tracks:
Single Union Station: Activists Worry Over Crushing Impacts
LA TRANSPO, December 18, 2009
By Bart Reed
The state High-speed Rail Authority (HSRA), whose board consists largely of former politicians and current lobbyists, has proposed a grandiose expansion of Union Station, including an upper deck with eight tracks crossing over existing tracks diagonally some twenty-eight feet higher in the air.
Many civil engineers laugh up their sleeves at the HSRA Union Station schematic drawings, which in some cases appear to assume the structure is supported by airhooks. There has been no official price tag put on the additional aerial structure and its approaches, but it is easily in the billions of dollars and no funding source has been identified.
Neighborhood activists, justifiably concerned about crushing impacts of this hugely expanded Union Station on park lands and neighborhoods nearby have proposed splitting up the plan and having high speed trains use a separate station across the Los Angeles River from Downtown. It is hard to fault their concerns, but they are just the latest victims of scare tactics by the HSRA, whose standard operating practice has been to overestimate ridership, revenue, and the size of required facilities for high-speed trains.
In reality, there is no need for a bypass of Union Station because all required high-speed tracks can fit inside the spacious current footprint of the station on a single level. Splitting the station into two separated by a mile of urban jungle would make pedestrian connections between trains impossible and destroy the purpose of the facility.
By contrast, putting high-speed trains within easy walking distance of Metrolink, as well as Red Line, Purple Line, and Gold Line Metro trains would maximize traffic on both local systems and high-speed rail. Los Angeles only needs one Union Station, and we do not need a study of multiple Union Stations, no matter how appealing the idea may be to some consultants. A single station will save taxpayers billions of dollars.
Even the exercise of studying innumerable other options would waste up to hundreds of millions of dollars in study funds. If my memory serves me well, one firm retained by HSRA to provide project oversight, had the same business plan when it was running alternatives analyses of Los Angeles subways for over a decade. Los Angeles should have learned from the years-long Red Line torture that we don’t need a firm like that to do that kind of prospecting in Los Angeles again.
The most productive cash cow is to find a new set of alternatives to study. What’s hard on the corporate bottom line is discovering that the drawings aren’t ready to build from in the real world. Those cave-ins and undocumented gas pockets in La Brea can really hurt profit centers, particularly when drawings aren’t signed by engineers.
To be cost effective, high-speed trains should use four tracks running through the station tied in with main lines to Orange County and the San Fernando Valley, shared with Metrolink and Amtrak expresses. Four tracks provide more than sufficient capacity for trains leaving every two minutes northwards and every two minutes southwards, putting the station in the same league for long distance transportation as European terminals like Frankfurt Hauptbahnhof. Paris Gare de Lyons, and London St. Pancras.
A run-through track project has already been environmentally cleared that could serve high-speed and conventional trains approaching from Orange County. Ten additional track slots, four of which are not currently used, can provide departures through Mission Tower on the north side of the station to for local trains to destinations like Riverside, San Bernardino, Lancaster, and Ventura.
There is no need to spend extra billions on a second deck over Union Station. One thing that local politicians forget is that there is no owner or operator of high-speed rail, just an out of control state bureaucratic agency. Union Station has plenty of existing capacity to exploit, and Los Angeles shouldn’t split its terminal.
In fact, there is no justification for building a separate high-speed facility between Anaheim and Los Angeles because the existing Amtrak / Metrolink tracks could be upgraded to 110 mph to provide high-speed service for under $1 billion. By comparison, the HSRA would trash neighborhoods south and east of Downtown with an aerial or tunneled line costing as much as $5 billion.
Los Angeles County has saved billions of dollars by exercising due diligence on its own rail projects and has far more experience than the novices at the state HSRA. We should not let the bureaucrats in Sacramento screw up Union Station with a poorly thought-out fantasy elevated train line.
(Bart Reed is the Executive Director of The Transit Coalition, a Southern California based non profit watchdog group dealing with transportation and land use planning. Reed is a long time supporter of High Speed Rail and was responsible for the Sierra Club statewide, as well as the City of LA endorsement of the project on the November 2008 ballot. Contact: Bart Reed )
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 103
Pub: Dec 18, 2009
Single Union Station: Activists Worry Over Crushing Impacts
LA TRANSPO, December 18, 2009
By Bart Reed
The state High-speed Rail Authority (HSRA), whose board consists largely of former politicians and current lobbyists, has proposed a grandiose expansion of Union Station, including an upper deck with eight tracks crossing over existing tracks diagonally some twenty-eight feet higher in the air.
Many civil engineers laugh up their sleeves at the HSRA Union Station schematic drawings, which in some cases appear to assume the structure is supported by airhooks. There has been no official price tag put on the additional aerial structure and its approaches, but it is easily in the billions of dollars and no funding source has been identified.
Neighborhood activists, justifiably concerned about crushing impacts of this hugely expanded Union Station on park lands and neighborhoods nearby have proposed splitting up the plan and having high speed trains use a separate station across the Los Angeles River from Downtown. It is hard to fault their concerns, but they are just the latest victims of scare tactics by the HSRA, whose standard operating practice has been to overestimate ridership, revenue, and the size of required facilities for high-speed trains.
In reality, there is no need for a bypass of Union Station because all required high-speed tracks can fit inside the spacious current footprint of the station on a single level. Splitting the station into two separated by a mile of urban jungle would make pedestrian connections between trains impossible and destroy the purpose of the facility.
By contrast, putting high-speed trains within easy walking distance of Metrolink, as well as Red Line, Purple Line, and Gold Line Metro trains would maximize traffic on both local systems and high-speed rail. Los Angeles only needs one Union Station, and we do not need a study of multiple Union Stations, no matter how appealing the idea may be to some consultants. A single station will save taxpayers billions of dollars.
Even the exercise of studying innumerable other options would waste up to hundreds of millions of dollars in study funds. If my memory serves me well, one firm retained by HSRA to provide project oversight, had the same business plan when it was running alternatives analyses of Los Angeles subways for over a decade. Los Angeles should have learned from the years-long Red Line torture that we don’t need a firm like that to do that kind of prospecting in Los Angeles again.
The most productive cash cow is to find a new set of alternatives to study. What’s hard on the corporate bottom line is discovering that the drawings aren’t ready to build from in the real world. Those cave-ins and undocumented gas pockets in La Brea can really hurt profit centers, particularly when drawings aren’t signed by engineers.
To be cost effective, high-speed trains should use four tracks running through the station tied in with main lines to Orange County and the San Fernando Valley, shared with Metrolink and Amtrak expresses. Four tracks provide more than sufficient capacity for trains leaving every two minutes northwards and every two minutes southwards, putting the station in the same league for long distance transportation as European terminals like Frankfurt Hauptbahnhof. Paris Gare de Lyons, and London St. Pancras.
A run-through track project has already been environmentally cleared that could serve high-speed and conventional trains approaching from Orange County. Ten additional track slots, four of which are not currently used, can provide departures through Mission Tower on the north side of the station to for local trains to destinations like Riverside, San Bernardino, Lancaster, and Ventura.
There is no need to spend extra billions on a second deck over Union Station. One thing that local politicians forget is that there is no owner or operator of high-speed rail, just an out of control state bureaucratic agency. Union Station has plenty of existing capacity to exploit, and Los Angeles shouldn’t split its terminal.
In fact, there is no justification for building a separate high-speed facility between Anaheim and Los Angeles because the existing Amtrak / Metrolink tracks could be upgraded to 110 mph to provide high-speed service for under $1 billion. By comparison, the HSRA would trash neighborhoods south and east of Downtown with an aerial or tunneled line costing as much as $5 billion.
Los Angeles County has saved billions of dollars by exercising due diligence on its own rail projects and has far more experience than the novices at the state HSRA. We should not let the bureaucrats in Sacramento screw up Union Station with a poorly thought-out fantasy elevated train line.
(Bart Reed is the Executive Director of The Transit Coalition, a Southern California based non profit watchdog group dealing with transportation and land use planning. Reed is a long time supporter of High Speed Rail and was responsible for the Sierra Club statewide, as well as the City of LA endorsement of the project on the November 2008 ballot. Contact: Bart Reed )
CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 103
Pub: Dec 18, 2009