(11-02) 12:16 PDT Sacramento --

The California High Speed Rail Authority released a blunt business plan Tuesday that boosts the estimated cost of building the nation's first high-speed train system, connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, to $98.1 billion, delays the planned opening by nine years and relies on sharing tracks with commuter trains.

But high-speed rail officials heralded the plan, which needs to be updated every two years, as outlining a realistic, if difficult, path toward building high-speed rail. The plan relies on a phased approach to building the Bay Area-to Southern California fast-rail line, which is itself the first phase of an eventual 800-mile statewide system.

Voters in 2008 approved a $10 billion bond, and plans to run trains up and down the state at up to 220 mph, but as the authority has proceeded with planning the system, it has increasingly angered residents along the rail route who objected to plans and what they considered a heavy-handed approach by the authority. Critics lambasted the cost estimate of $43 billion, ridership estimates and claims that the system could run without an ongoing state subsidy.

The authority's leaders described the new plan as being brutally honest, taking a conservative approach to cost and ridership estimates, and taking into consideration critics' complaints.

"This plan represents a new day, a new train, a new beginning for the California High Speed Rail Authority and for our system," said Tom Umberg, chairman of the authority board.

High-speed rail officials released the plan in front of a 1908 steam locomotive at the California State Railroad Museum in Sacramento, saying they were determined to build a new chapter in the state's rail history.

Although critics have called plans to start construction with a 130-mile segment between Bakersfield and a rural area north of Fresno a "train to nowhere," the business plan sticks with that strategy. Construction of the $6 billion segment - funded with $3.3 billion in federal funding and $2.7 billion in state bonds - is expected to start next year and take three to five years to complete.

Authority board member Dan Richard of Piedmont said the decision to start in the Central Valley makes the most sense since the federal government favors that segment and the land and construction costs are much cheaper.

After the initial valley stretch is built, the plan calls for connecting to either the Bay Area via San Jose or the Los Angeles region via the San Fernando Valley, where the system would connect to local commuter rail networks to reach downtown areas. That phase would cost $27.2 billion to Los Angeles or $24.7 billion to the Bay Area. It could be completed by 2021, according to the plan, and would allow true high-speed train service in the nation for the first time.

The plan calls for the authority to choose between the Bay Area and Los Angeles within the next 18 months.

Once trains start running, the authority would build the other connection, completing a line between the Bay Area and the Los Angeles Basin by 2026 at an additional cost of $21.1 billion to the Bay Area or $24 billion to Los Angeles. With the state's largest regions connected, the authority would then electrify the commuter rail systems to allow shared operations and a one-seat ride from the Transbay Terminal in San Francisco to Los Angeles. Those improvements, expected to cost $23.9 billion, could be completed by 2030.

Board member Michael Rossi, a former financial executive and, with Richard, one of two reformers Gov. Jerry Brown appointed to the authority board, said the new cost estimates incorporated a $16 billion contingency for cost increases, accounted for inflation and took into account operating costs.

"That leads me to believe this is a pretty damn reasonable number," he said.

But is it achievable? The authority, said Richard, won't proceed with a section until it has the funding to complete it.

Officials are counting on federal money and then passenger revenues - the cost of a ticket from the Bay Area to Los Angeles is estimated at $60-80 - to start flowing, and private investors to become interested to pay for the system. The plan says no state subsidy will be needed.

Reaction from critics was mixed. "The good news is the numbers are more realistic; the bad news is they may well be beyond reach," said state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto.

"Even before the first shovel of dirt has turned, the cost estimates have tripled," said state Sen. Bob Dutton, R-Rancho Cucamonga (San Bernardino County).