California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2007-08 – 2017-18 California State Rail PlanThe Department believes this corridor is a good candidate for rail corridor servicebecause:• Amtrak currently operates the California Zephyr on the route so that stations atthe major destination points already exist.• I-80 is extremely congested at tourist peak periods and there is a very stronggaming, skiing, and general recreation market in the Reno/Truckee area.• Current bus ridership on this route is strong.SACRAMENTO TO REDDINGOperation of intercity rail service from Sacramento to Redding would extendState-supported intercity rail service to a fast growing northern California area notpresently served by the State-supported intercity passenger rail network.BackgroundConnecting buses to the San Joaquin and Capitol Corridor trains currently servethe northern Sacramento Valley. Buses connect to four of the San Joaquins inStockton, and one in Sacramento, and travel north through Sacramento,Marysville, Chico, and Redding. Five Capitol Corridor trains in Sacramento alsohave a bus connection to Redding. Ridership on this bus route is the secondhighest of all California dedicated bus routes after Los Angeles-Bakersfield, with104,000 riders in 2005-06. Additionally, the single daily round-trip of theCoast Starlight connects Redding and Chico with Sacramento, the Bay Area, andLos Angeles on its route from Seattle.The most recent study on the Sacramento-Redding corridor is the NorthernSacramento Valley Intercity Passenger Rail Study, Interim Findings Report,produced in 1995 for the Butte County Association of Governments.The Department had planned a further study on this Route in 2005, which wasdeferred due to the UP’s decision not to consider operation of new passengertrains at this time.Operating PlanThe Department’s ten-year operating plan includes one daily round-trip betweenSacramento and Redding in 2015-16. This rail service would be supplemented bybus service that would run over the same route as the train, but at other times ofthe day.170
Chapter X – Potential New ServicesThe Department believes this extension is a good candidate for rail servicebecause:• Amtrak currently operates the Coast Starlight on this Route, with existingstations at Sacramento, Chico, and Redding.• The demographics of the Route are positive: the northern Sacramento Valleyhas a fast growing population; Redding represents the urban hub for thenorthern part of the State; and the California State University at Chico is afocus of activity and population.• Current ridership on this bus route is the second highest of all Californiadedicated bus routes after Los Angeles-Bakersfield.POTENTIAL INTERCITY RAIL ROUTESThis section includes a discussion of three routes where funding is not proposed inthe time period of this plan: Los Angeles to Indio (Coachella Valley),San Francisco to Monterey, and Los Angeles to Las Vegas.LOS ANGELES TO INDIO (COACHELLA VALLEY)State-supported intercity passenger rail service from Los Angeles to Indio wouldextend rail service to a fast growing population center in the southeast of the State.BackgroundCurrently Amtrak’s Sunset Limited provides three-times per week service fromLos Angeles to Pomona, Ontario, and Palm Springs on its route to New Orleans.San Joaquin trains provide once a day connecting buses to the Coachella Valley.Ridership on this route was 32,000 in 2005-06.There has been strong local interest in rail service to the Coachella Valley since1991 when the Riverside County Transportation Commission published theLos Angeles-Coachella Valley-Imperial County Intercity Rail Feasibility Studythat evaluated the feasibility of operating three daily round-trip State-supportedintercity trains on the route. In 1995, the Department published the Calexico-Coachella Valley-Los Angeles Rail Corridor Study for the CaliforniaTransportation Commission.The most recent study titled the Coachella Valley Passenger Rail Feasibility Studywas prepared for the Coachella Valley Association of Governments in 1999.The study included operating and capital cost estimates for the route and proposestwo daily intercity round-trip trains. The study proposed operating fromLos Angeles to the Coachella Valley using the BNSF route between Los Angelesand Colton, and the UP route eastward to Indio. Stations were proposed atLos Angeles, Fullerton, Riverside, Palm Springs, Palm Desert, and Indio.The study estimated $9.3 million in capital costs, not including rolling stock.171
Page 1:
California State Rail Plan 2007-08
Page 4 and 5:
2007-08 - 2017-18 California State
Page 7 and 8:
Table of ContentsTable of Contents(
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Table of FiguresTable of FiguresFig
Page 15 and 16:
California State Rail Plan 2007-08
Page 17 and 18:
CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION PLAN 2025
Page 19 and 20:
during evenings and weekends.• Cr
Page 21 and 22:
ArcataFortunaScotia• Improved Amt
Page 23 and 24:
SouthernCaliforniaCommuterRailChapt
Page 25 and 26:
NorthernCaliforniaCommuterRail• C
Page 27 and 28:
AUBURN-OAKLAND REGIONAL RAIL SERVIC
Page 29 and 30:
AMTRAK PLANNINGIn April 2005, Amtra
Page 31 and 32:
it is in the strategic interest of
Page 33 and 34:
INTRODUCTIONGovernment Code Section
Page 35 and 36:
PART IPASSENGER RAIL ELEMENT3
Page 37 and 38:
Chapter I - California’s Vision f
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Chapter II - Capital ProgramCHAPTER
Page 51 and 52:
Chapter II - Capital ProgramFigure
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Chapter II - Capital Programevaluat
Page 59 and 60:
Chapter II - Capital Programsignals
Page 61 and 62:
Chapter II - Capital ProgramThe Dep
Page 63 and 64:
Chapter II - Capital ProgramIn the
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Chapter II - Capital Programsupplem
Page 69 and 70:
Chapter II - Capital ProgramA numbe
Page 71 and 72:
Chapter III - Operations ProgramCHA
Page 73 and 74:
Chapter III - Operations ProgramFig
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Chapter III - Operations ProgramADM
Page 81 and 82:
Chapter III - Operations Programcon
Page 83 and 84:
Chapter III - Operations ProgramSta
Page 85 and 86:
Chapter III - Operations Programres
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Chapter III - Operations ProgramPro
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Chapter III - Operations Program•
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Chapter IV - Marketing ProgramCHAPT
Page 101 and 102:
Chapter IV - Marketing Programprodu
Page 103 and 104:
Chapter IV - Marketing ProgramGROUP
Page 105 and 106:
Chapter IV - Marketing ProgramThe f
Page 107 and 108:
Chapter IV - Marketing ProgramBEYON
Page 109 and 110:
Chapter V - The California Passenge
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Chapter VI - Pacific Surfliner Rout
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 132 and 133:
Page 134 and 135:
Page 136 and 137:
Page 138 and 139:
Page 140 and 141:
Page 142 and 143:
Page 144 and 145:
Page 146 and 147:
Page 148 and 149:
Page 150 and 151:
Page 152 and 153: 2007-08 - 2017-18 California State
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
Page 260 and 261:
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
Page 294 and 295:
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300:
show all

California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?