SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - In what was called a landmark decision, state officials set a course for the proposed high-speed rail that would send a passenger from San Francisco to Los Angeles in just more than 2½ hours, with trains cutting through the heart of the Peninsula and South Bay along the way.

The California High Speed Rail Authority elected Wednesday to route the 700-mile transit line through the Pacheco Pass as the primary route for high-speed trains traveling between the San Joaquin Valley and San Francisco.

The crossing, with trains running at top speeds of more than 200 mph, will connect to San Francisco through San Jose and the Peninsula and it is favored because it follows existing Caltrain tracks and avoids cutting through wetland habitats around the Bay.

The Altamont Pass would have snaked through the Don Edwards Wildlife Refuge in the East Bay and slowed travel between the Bay Area and Southern California.

“From San Mateo County’s perspective, and Caltrains, having that right-of-way follow the existing route as much as possible would definitely be beneficial to Caltrain and San Mateo County,” San Mateo County Supervisor Jerry Hill said.

Leaders from around the state say the decision will pave the way for voter approval of an approximately $10 billion bond in November to pay for one third of the $30 billion initial phase costs. The total project cost is estimated at $40 billion.

“If we’re going to make a case for a bond, we need to link the economic centers of this state directly,” said Mayor Gavin Newsom, who was one of 31 people who spoke during the 3½ hour hearing in Sacramento. “The Bay Area into Los Angeles, with extensions to Sacramento and San Diego makes absolute sense objectively.”

With the route selected, Authority board member Rod Diridon said they can begin the actual engineering and planning phase, and start focusing on a potential bond for the November 2008 election.

To serve the areas an Altamont route would have taken care of, the Authority also elected to study a separate project to upgrade commuter rail lines between the East Bay and Central Valley.

Diridon said he hopes the Pacheco Pass route will encourage approval of the bond in November due to the support of Peninsula and city leaders as well as the 80 percent of projected riders who live in the Central Valley and Southern California.

jgoldman@examiner.com  

Examiner Staff Writer David Smith contributed to this report.

Comments from Examiner Readers

4:40 PM MST on Fri., Apr. 4, 2008 re: "Rail system speeds closer to a reality"

Andre Peretti said:
Tom West is right. Long-haul airlines support HSR. It allows them to reach destinations for which they have no slots. All American airlines code-share with the French TGV. Why shouldn't they do in the U.S. what they have been doing in Europe for years? The ones that will suffer are the local airlines. They will have to be cheaper than the train but fuel prices will make it very difficult. Their flights mostly consist in taking off, then landing: the two kerosene-guzzling phases.

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

1:13 AM MST on Fri., Apr. 4, 2008 re: "Rail system speeds closer to a reality"

Tom West said:
In response to some earlier comments: Airlines will like this, because it will free up slots at airports for more lucrative long distance flights, rather than short-hop shuttle services. Don't believe me? In Texas, the airlines are the ones pushing for high-speed rail. In terms of cost: not building high-speed rail means spending double the amounyt on highway and airport improvments... which won't produce a profit.

1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

12:55 PM MST on Thu., Apr. 3, 2008 re: "Rail system speeds closer to a reality"

Seven said:
Build it. Build it yesterday.

2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

11:54 AM MST on Thu., Apr. 3, 2008 re: "Rail system speeds closer to a reality"

Examiner Reader said:
Are the airlines just going to roll over for such a project while high speed rail pulls from their customer base? I'm thinking not.

1 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

9:09 AM MST on Tue., Apr. 1, 2008 re: "High-speed rail bond has strong Bay Area support"

Andre Peretti said:
As November approaches, you can expect special interests to spread tons of misinformation and the public will believe them and vote "NO". The most common argument: after being built high-speed-lines will have to be heavily subsidized. Yet, as the American public will never know, the French HSL made a $12 billion profit last year and paid a $300 million dividend to their majority stockholder, the French state. I remember Jebb Bush's reasons for killing the Florida project: "This is not France. We have good highways and airlines". Nobody remarked that highway and airport density is actually higher in France, and car ownership is the same. What the special interests know is that HSR has decimated short-haul airlines in France and that the remaining ones have to offer $20 flights to compete. Most projects to add lanes to highways and runways to airports have been abandoned. Do you really think this will be allowed to happen in the U.S.?

3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

7:37 PM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "High-speed rail to run through South Bay"

Examiner Reader said:
My guess is we'll be lucky if this project is up and running by 2040 and nobody really has any idea what the final cost will be. if this project does actually come to fruition, i doubt the airlines are going to quietly sit by while their passengers are drawn off by bullet train service between s.f and l.a.

38 agree | 37 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

11:54 AM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "High-speed rail to run through South Bay"

SFRes said:
Bob: These trains will not be on existing tracks. They will be next to the existing tracks.

38 agree | 37 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

11:40 AM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "High-speed rail to run through South Bay"

Bob said:
Its my understanding that they are going to run these bullet trains on existing tracks; won't work; after the collapse of the wall, East Germany had to replace all of its tracks to accommodate the German Bullet trains; so how can our bullet trains running at 250 mph; operate on old, existing tracks; and i think the costs will evenutally double because all of those public works in California do; look at the Bay Bridge

37 agree | 41 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate

9:03 AM MST on Thu., Dec. 20, 2007 re: "High-speed rail�s path to come through the South Bay"

I can see it now said:
15 years before it will get built, 40 billion in money that should be spent elsewhere, and most likely 100 years behind in technology. And price = costless!

38 agree | 49 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

Report as inappropriate