4 ms·

Because that is the part of the track that doesn't have significant geographic/tunneling requirements, nor does it require seizure via eminent domain of signifi

Because that is the part of the track that doesn't have significant geographic/tunneling requirements, nor does it require seizure via eminent domain of significant amounts of urban property to cut new tracks through LA/SF, nor does it require building hundreds of overpasses/tunnels through cities to eliminate level crossings. You can't run a train at 210 mph through a city at the level of the road. There's too much risk of collision. Instead you have to tunnel under or bridge over every single road. All of those things take time to design, negotiate, fight legal challenges, etc. The idea was to start building in the empty central valley now, while they work through non-building work in the urban and mountainous areas.

niftich 8y ago
This project is already grade-separated in the sense that there are no level crossings: even though they're in the "empty" central valley, there's still hundreds of grade-separated crossings that need to be built, not just through the cities, but also rural roads as well. So while it's cheaper out in the Valley than in LA or SF, it's still significantly more expensive than a non-grade-separated, say, ~75-100 mph-rated track would entail, the sorts of which are common in Europe and do a decent job moving people around cities spaced at such distances.
solatic 8y ago
I think your comment serves as great proof why building large public works projects in the US is now impossible. Rationally speaking, you're 100% right. Those are all true impediments. From a realpolitik perspective, it makes total sense to start building where it's not controversial so that parallel non-engineering work can be undertaken. There are rational reasons why labor is so expensive, why planning committees take so much time, and why things take as much time as they do. But this isn't how large public works can get done quickly. Any sufficiently large project is less technocratic and more political. Allowing large projects to be governed entirely technocratically has shown that timelines stretch so far out as to render the project impossibly expensive to finance and too limited in scope by project's end. There needs to be a single authority (with checks on it...) that can get things done, governed by a politician who can ensure that the authority's efforts are directed to popular projects. An agency with a planning body that makes community-approved blueprints ready before funding comes in, and with the authority to exercise eminent domain on approved plans and start work quickly and immediately.
- jfnixon 8y ago
  I suspect the EPA paperwork, which can't be bypassed at the State level, will kill your single authority proposal dead in its tracks, so to speak.

niftich 8y ago

This project is already grade-separated in the sense that there are no level crossings: even though they're in the "empty" central valley, there's still hundreds of grade-separated crossings that need to be built, not just through the cities, but also rural roads as well. So while it's cheaper out in the Valley than in LA or SF, it's still significantly more expensive than a non-grade-separated, say, ~75-100 mph-rated track would entail, the sorts of which are common in Europe and do a decent job moving people around cities spaced at such distances.

solatic 8y ago

I think your comment serves as great proof why building large public works projects in the US is now impossible. Rationally speaking, you're 100% right. Those are all true impediments. From a realpolitik perspective, it makes total sense to start building where it's not controversial so that parallel non-engineering work can be undertaken. There are rational reasons why labor is so expensive, why planning committees take so much time, and why things take as much time as they do. But this isn't how large public works can get done quickly. Any sufficiently large project is less technocratic and more political. Allowing large projects to be governed entirely technocratically has shown that timelines stretch so far out as to render the project impossibly expensive to finance and too limited in scope by project's end. There needs to be a single authority (with checks on it...) that can get things done, governed by a politician who can ensure that the authority's efforts are directed to popular projects. An agency with a planning body that makes community-approved blueprints ready before funding comes in, and with the authority to exercise eminent domain on approved plans and start work quickly and immediately.

jfnixon 8y ago
I suspect the EPA paperwork, which can't be bypassed at the State level, will kill your single authority proposal dead in its tracks, so to speak.