3 ms·

Does California have something like the following? It could explain some of the cost. In Washington state we have laws that require workers to be paid Prevaili

Does California have something like the following? It could explain some of the cost. In Washington state we have laws that require workers to be paid Prevailing Wage, the premise of which is that working in a county pays the corresponding wage for a position based on the largest city in that county. The reality is often that the wage set is significantly higher than the true market wage, which causes costs to ramp up quickly. http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/PrevWage/WageRates/default.asp http://www.lni.wa.gov/TradesLicensing/PrevWage/WageRates/def...

gwright 8y ago
For projects with federal funding, look at the Davis Bacon Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis–Bacon_Act_of_1931 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis–Bacon_Act_of_1931
WillPostForFood 8y ago
Of course California has a prevailing wage law. https://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/Prevailing-Wage.html https://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/Prevailing-Wage.html
abugheratwork 8y ago
That won't "ramp up" costs unless the initial estimate for the costs included wrong numbers for labor. Ramp up from what? An uninformed guess?
bobthepanda 8y ago
> The reality is often that the wage set is significantly higher than the true market wage, which causes costs to ramp up quickly. Do you have a source for this assertion?
bobthepanda 8y ago
The major cost is land acquisition and infrastructure. Land is not cheap, and the US requires fair market compensation for such acquisition. And high speed rail and other infrastructure projects of this kind tend to need land in areas that are typically more expensive (urban areas, developed areas around existing transport networks, etc.) Elevated railways still need land purchasing for the land you're building on top of. Tunnels are way too expensive to be an alternative to surface construction even with land acquisition considered. And you need to punch through two mountain ranges, to get from SF to the Central Valley and then back to LA. IIRC JR and TGV both expressed interest in a privately funded CAHSR, but balked at the Central Valley alignment.

gwright 8y ago

For projects with federal funding, look at the Davis Bacon Act: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis–Bacon_Act_of_1931 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davis–Bacon_Act_of_1931

WillPostForFood 8y ago

Of course California has a prevailing wage law. https://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/Prevailing-Wage.html https://www.dir.ca.gov/Public-Works/Prevailing-Wage.html

abugheratwork 8y ago

That won't "ramp up" costs unless the initial estimate for the costs included wrong numbers for labor. Ramp up from what? An uninformed guess?

bobthepanda 8y ago

> The reality is often that the wage set is significantly higher than the true market wage, which causes costs to ramp up quickly. Do you have a source for this assertion?

bobthepanda 8y ago

The major cost is land acquisition and infrastructure. Land is not cheap, and the US requires fair market compensation for such acquisition. And high speed rail and other infrastructure projects of this kind tend to need land in areas that are typically more expensive (urban areas, developed areas around existing transport networks, etc.) Elevated railways still need land purchasing for the land you're building on top of. Tunnels are way too expensive to be an alternative to surface construction even with land acquisition considered. And you need to punch through two mountain ranges, to get from SF to the Central Valley and then back to LA. IIRC JR and TGV both expressed interest in a privately funded CAHSR, but balked at the Central Valley alignment.