California High-Speed Rail

[Morrigoon]

I guess this topic's in the news again these days. Curious what everyone thinks about it.

This last trip to my Dad's (from which I have just returned), I actually looked into rail options. The biggest problem is, there really isn't a way to take a train directly from LA to San Francisco. All the routes involve switching to buses, and sometimes if you're lucky, back to trains. It's no freaking wonder nobody takes a train in this state. How stupid is it that we don't have a direct route to SF?

What I really don't get is why they're building the first segment of the new high-speed train in the least useful spot (Fresno to Bakersfield).

Recent article about the high-speed rail project (http://taxdollars.ocregister.com/2011/05/31/dam-aqueduct-would-block-high-speed-rail-through-palmdale/84237/)

[Betty]

Well - I guess that answers my question about taking the train to San Fran this summer for a wedding. Damn.

[BarTopDancer]

Meh. I'd prefer they improve the rail system between SD/OC/LA first so I can take some sort of rail to the Honda Center or LA and not have to worry about getting back home before the sun goes down.

[Morrigoon]

I've given up on trying to take the train for local commute distances. Just doesn't pencil out against driving, even with gas prices what they are. Looked at going from here to ABG's once, and extreme inconvenience aside (would have to depart at like 6am and leave like 2 hours after arriving) it was also $20 EACH WAY, which was way more than filling my tank AND would take hours longer.

But a long trip like going to SF gives the train a chance of being worth it. (price dependent)

[Cadaverous Pallor]

I am under the impression that they are building the least useful bit first because it's the easiest bit to build, being mostly in the middle of nowhere. One of the biggest obstacles to the train (other than cost, of course) is all the areas you have to go through. Getting one town on board is bad enough, with all the various property, city policies, elected officials who want to make a point about budgetary concerns, and NIMBYs....it will be a major miracle to get all the cities to go for it.

Personally, I think it's obvious and needs to happen.

[Ghoulish Delight]

$20 each way? Unless you were riding with 2 people I think you might have misread the fare or missed a cheaper way. I made it from Orange to LAX for < $10 via rail and bus, with relative ease (and in less time than it would have taken to drive in mid-day traffic.

I'm fully aware that the high speed rail is impractical, overpriced, and wasteful. But so was the Brooklyn Bridge. I'm okay with a bit of impracticality if it's paid back, even in intangible ways. And in my opinion, the rail has a chance of doing that. California relies on tourism, and as a state hasn't done much of late to keep itself in the tourist spotlight. I love novelty factor of the train. It'll draw attention, and it'll (hopefully) continue the momentum that the concept of train (and other transit) has gained here recently, which we sure as hell need more of (LA transit is a ways away from good, but it's take huge leaps forward).

Do it because it's nifty, damnit! What's wrong with nifty every once in a while?

Of course I have no doubt that the leadership is perfectly capable of turning it along the way from comically impractical to bankruptily disasterous. But if the risk of failure keeps us from trying anything overreaching ever again, than we're pretty well doomed.

[Morrigoon]

I'm actually behind it. I don't understand why there isn't a direct/express train route LA to SF already. The whole train/bus thing is ridiculous. For the right price, I'd take a train.

[Kevy Baby]

Personally I think it would be much easier to build one between LA and Lost Wages. More open space.

[Ghoulish Delight]

But 2 different states involved.

[BarTopDancer]

But a train station in state line. The train stops on the CA side, everyone exits and gets on the next one at the other side of the border. Or um Amtrak goes between states. Why can't they launch a bullet line?

[Not Afraid]

It's not High Speed, but Amtrack goes from Union Station to Oakland and you can take BART from there.

[Ghoulish Delight]

It's not impossible,. but would significantly complicate matters, trying to get 2 state governments to agree.

[Morrigoon]

It's not High Speed, but Amtrack goes from Union Station to Oakland and you can take BART from there.

Without taking bus part way?

[Alex]

I'm actually behind it. I don't understand why there isn't a direct/express train route LA to SF already. The whole train/bus thing is ridiculous. For the right price, I'd take a train.

Well, you can take the train from LA to Emeryville and the shuttle bus there should have you dropped off in San Francisco about 20 minutes later (or get off at Jack London in Oakland (the stop before Emeryville and walk to the opposite end of Jack London Square and take the nice view ferry to the Ferry Terminal). Personally, on a cost basis I have not found Amtrak work it for getting from LA back to the Bay Area but it is a pleasant trip to do for the fun of it.

But a big part of why there isn't direct train service into downtown San Francisco, I'd imagine, is that since the lower deck of the Bay Bridge was converted to car traffic from train traffic, all trains into San Francisco are, by definition, dead end routes and apparently there isn't sufficient justification for a train that that stops in San Francisco without continuing on up the coast (I know that when I've taken the train up only one or two cars out of eight are used for Bay Area drop offs).

[Alex]

Without taking bus part way?

If the Coast Starlight stops at Oakland Coliseum (I can't remember if it does) then yes you can cross the street and get on BART.

If you get off at Jack London Square, you can take the ferry into the city from the other end of the square (if timing is right). But it is about a 15 block walk (or short cab or bus ride) up to the Lake Merritt or 12th Street BART stations. But on the plus side you can walk through Oakland's Chinatown which is, in my opinion better than San Francisco's for not being wall-to-wall tacky crap.

If you get off at Emeryville you can take the Amtrak shuttle into downtown San Francisco. Or you can catch a Transbay Bus there. Or you can take the free Emery-Go-Round bus (10 minutes once on the bus) to the Macarthur BART station.

You can also get off at Richmond and get right to BART, I believe, but at this point you're probably adding an hour to your trip anyway just from longer time on the train and a longer BART ride.

On the negative side, however, I believe the Coast Starlight gets into town relatively late in the evening (I know it was after dark the times I did it but can't remember if there was more than one daily option) which moots several options and if Amtrak is delayed (not at all unlikely) it'll get more complex.

[Cynthia]

I know Brendan has taken to coast starlight from Portland to Seattle, so it goes that far. I am for trains, many many trains, it was grand in the UK, they are clean and for longer routes they serve food, real food cooked by people even. I would like to see trucks only carry locally, but then I would like to see anything that can be done in a more local way - don't worry I am not about to go on a globalization rant.

[Not Afraid]

Several years ago we took the train from Union Station to Seattle. It was one of the best trips we've ever taken!

[RStar]

Do it because it's nifty, damnit! What's wrong with nifty every once in a while?

I have heard that the high speed train project is a boondoggle, but after using the London Underground and seeing how usefull it is in other countries like Japan, I feel we need to get onboard that train (pun intended). Plus, I think if I can get to Las Vegas in a few hours- that would be nifty! And I would travel to the San Fran area as long as the tickets are less than flying.

With the state of the oil industry, global warming, road conditions, etc. how much longer can we put off mass transit, boondoggels and all?

[alphabassettgrrl]

I would love train service between LA and Las Vegas. Love love love. I love trains for just about anywhere, really.

Mass transit is a thing that the oil companies hate and lobby against, one of the reasons we don't have more of it. "Everybody" says nobody will ride trains, yet the Metrolink here has been pretty full when I ride it. The subways in LA are full. Buses are annoying, but it's what they try to ease us into mass transit with, and they will work, especially if you figure out a route that you can use for, say, commuting.

We need to build the mass transits, and then when gas prices jump, people have options. I like options. And every time that happens, some people choose to continue with the mass transit even when the oil companies panic that nobody's buying gas anymore and drop the price.

Progress by tiny little steps, I guess.

[Brendan]

You can currently ride Coast Starlight from LAX (Union Station) to Oakland (Jack London) for $68. The downside? It's an 11 hour ride. That said, it's a rather comfortable 11 hour ride where you can get up, walk to the dining car, have a hot meal, watch the California coast go by, even have a bed (for a bit more money)... but it isn't fast. Considering how awful travel by air is it's almost worth it to take the train. Flying LAX-SFO is usually a 4 hour exercise in misery, so I'm thinking if they can get the train time down to about 6 hours it'll be totally worth it.

[BarTopDancer]

Considering driving to SF is around 10 hours (depending how fast you drive and how often you stop) 11 hours isn't terrible.

[Morrigoon]

Actually Oakland works better for me, since my family is in Danville. But we couldn't find a route that made sense. Maybe Alex was looking in the wrong spot or something.

[Alex]

Yeah, you can definitely get from LA to Oakland on Amtrak with no buses, but you have to take the Coast Starlight.

There is another option it will show sometimes (and often before the Coast Starlight when I've done it) that takes a bus from Union Station to Bakersfield and catches the San Joaquin from there to Oakland.

Note that if your destination is really Danville then in addition to getting off in Oakland (at any of the stops already mentioned), you can also disembark in Martinez, which might be easier if someone is picking you up (though not so convenient for connecting to other public transportation).

[keith - SuPeR K!]

The train situation from Vegas to LA is ridiculous. Instead of holding out and building the route they needed to, Vegas bitched out and is building a crap version. Vegas to Victorville! Yeah, that will be useful...

[Not Afraid]

When I go on vacation, I want to go to Victorville.

[innerSpaceman]

Y Flying LAX-SFO is usually a 4 hour exercise in misery, so I'm thinking if they can get the train time down to about 6 hours it'll be totally worth it.
What makes you say that? I'm flying up later in the month, and I don't see it being a 4-hour process, much less one of misery. What happened to you that was so miserable?


On the real topic at hand (sort of): Is there train service from L.A. to Victorville from which you can catch the wonderful train to Vegas?

[Kevy Baby]

Considering driving to SF is around 10 hours (depending how fast you drive and how often you stop) 11 hours isn't terrible.10 hours is a worst-case scenario IMO. I've done it in 6 and Google Maps puts it at 6:50 (http://maps.google.com/maps?f=d&source=s_d&saddr=brea,+ca&daddr=Embarcadero,+San+Francisco,+CA&hl=en&geocode=FQiHBQId5Pz4-CkXjJ5ohtTcgDHkSgSWt7UYFQ%3BFS2_QAIdHWm0-CmtQzaZZoCFgDF_HprVmYMXdw&gl=us&mra=ls&sll=35.878425,-120.116445&sspn=6.585463,9.876709&ie=UTF8&ll=35.871247,-120.113525&spn=6.586201,9.876709&t=h&z=7).

[Alex]

Missed the 10-hour estimate. How often are you stopping? My average Dublin (10-minutes closer than Danville) to DL time is probably 6 hours.

Also don't consider flying to be a miserable experience but four hours door-to-door probably isn't a huge exaggeration depending on the travel time to and from and airports.

And the Southwest Chief route goes from Union Station through Victorville. But at Barstow it follows the 40 to Needles instead of the 15 to Vegas.

[innerSpaceman]

Well, I live really close to LAX and I'm not checking a bag, so I'm gonna cut half an hour off that misery estimate. Still, that's about a third the time of driving, and my airfare was a bit less than what round-trip gas would cost. Plus what would I do with a car in San Francisco anyway? ;)

But if there were a train there, it would have to be substantially cheaper than driving, for me to choose that option. If a bullet train that would cut the time in half, tho, I'd choose the train over both flying and driving. I don't think I'll live to see that. Maybe some young whippersnapper will enjoy the ride in 2075.

[RStar]

From Samland on Miceage:

Disneyland's Alweg Monorail: Walt Disney's Highway In The Sky
Both companies promised to build the systems for “free” in exchange for the next 40 years of passenger revenues to bond against. The offer meant that the Los Angeles region would have had the backbone of a revolutionary mass transit system for no cost to the taxpayers. Political pressure from the Standard Oil Company dampened the Board of Supervisors and the LAMTA enthusiasm for the project.

Bradbury said in 2001, “Telephone Alweg to accept their offer, made 30 years ago, to erect 12 crosstown monorails – free, gratis – if we let them run the traffic. I was there the afternoon our supervisors rejected that splendid offer, and I was thrown out of the meeting for making impolite noises. Remember, subways are for cold climes, snow and sleet in dead-winter London, Moscow or Toronto. Monorails are for high, free, open-air spirits, for our always-fair weather. Subways are Forest Lawn extensions. Let’s bury our dead MTA and get on with life.” To date, Los Angeles has spent billions of dollars to build 79 miles of fixed rail.

Click here for whole article (http://micechat.com/forums/blogs/samland/1850-disneylands-alweg-monorail-walt-disneys-highway-sky.html)

This ticks me off that they gave this offer up so the oil companies could sell more gas, and now they are spending billions on rail. Shame on them!

[Brendan]

What makes you say that? I'm flying up later in the month, and I don't see it being a 4-hour process, much less one of misery. What happened to you that was so miserable?

Parking, early arrival, security groping, delayed flights, turbulence, baggage claim... flying SouthWest cattle class doesn't help matters, either, but that's my own doing. For an airport, LAX is actually one of the better run ones I've been through, but air travel in the US is hardly a nice experience. Compare with a coach seat on an amtrak train- it's big, comfortable, you can move around, no invasive security measures and the baggage restrictions that comes with. It's really just a much nicer experience.

[innerSpaceman]

Well, I'm flying United instead of Southwest (mostly because I understand their terminal at SFO is close to the BART I have to catch into the city). Um, I'm not checking a bag. I wish, oh wish to be roughly groped by TSA, but it's never happened yet. Maybe I'll be lucky on my way to Gay Pride up there. And I'm getting a ride to the airport from my condo 5 minutes away, so no parking necessary.

Whew, Misery Averted. I am so relieved.

[Snowflake]

Well, I'm flying United instead of Southwest (mostly because I understand their terminal at SFO is close to the BART I have to catch into the city). Um, I'm not checking a bag. I wish, oh wish to be roughly groped by TSA, but it's never happened yet. Maybe I'll be lucky on my way to Gay Pride up there. And I'm getting a ride to the airport from my condo 5 minutes away, so no parking necessary.

Whew, Misery Averted. I am so relieved.

I am sure once you arrive in SF there will be plenty of groping opportunities. ;)

[innerSpaceman]

That reminds me - YOU'RE in SF. Wonder if we'll have time to meet for drink or sumptem?

[mousepod]

Driving to SF usually takes us about 6 hours. Flying from Burbank to Oakland is easy and quick (even Burbank to SFO is preferable to LAX).

Air travel is fast but leaves me without a car in the Bay Area.
Driving is a little slower but gives me greater ability to get around once I'm there.

While train travel is romantic, this trip doesn't have an upside for me.