11.07.2015 Views

California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

California State Rail Plan 2007-08 to 2017-18

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

<strong>2007</strong>-<strong>08</strong> – <strong>2017</strong>-<strong>18</strong> <strong>California</strong> <strong>State</strong> <strong>Rail</strong> <strong>Plan</strong>In 2000, the CHSRA completed its Business <strong>Plan</strong>, Building a High-Speed TrainSystem for <strong>California</strong>. The Business <strong>Plan</strong> found that a high-speed train system is asmart investment in mobility, an evolutionary step for transportation, and a projectin keeping with <strong>California</strong>’s standards for environmental quality and economicgrowth. The Business <strong>Plan</strong> determined that the next project step is <strong>to</strong> initiate aformal environmental clearance process with the development of a <strong>State</strong>-levelprogram EIR.To implement the environmental process, the CHSRA prepared a Draft Program<strong>California</strong> Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Environmental Impact Report(EIR) and a National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Tier 1 EnvironmentalImpact <strong>State</strong>ment (EIS). The CHSRA is the <strong>State</strong> lead agency for CEQA and theFRA is the Federal lead agency for NEPA. The draft program-level EIR/EIS wasreleased on January 27, 2004. After extensive review, the Final EIR/EIS wasposted on the Federal Register on September 23, 2005. On November 2, 2005, theAuthority certified the Final EIR/EIS.Based on the analysis, the CHSRA and the Federal <strong>Rail</strong>road Administration (FRA)have identified the high-speed train system as the preferred system alternative <strong>to</strong>meet <strong>California</strong>’s future intercity travel demand. Service <strong>to</strong> urban centers wouldbe on shared tracks with other passenger rail services at moderate speeds. Stationswould be in close proximity <strong>to</strong> most major airports, and there would be stationconnections with major transit hubs in metropolitan areas. The EIR/EIS identifiespreferred alignments, as follows:• Northern Mountain Crossing – a broad corridor containing a number offeasible route options have been identified for further study. The corridor isbounded by Pacheco Pass (SR-152) <strong>to</strong> the south, Altamont Pass (I-580) <strong>to</strong> thenorth, BNSF corridor <strong>to</strong> the east, and Caltrain <strong>to</strong> the west.• Southern Mountain Crossing – through the Techachapi Mountain Rangebetween Los Angeles and Bakersfield via a crossing through Palmdale and theAntelope Valley.• Bay Area – service on the Peninsula and in the East Bay.• Central Valley – Highway 99 corridor (mostly BNSF alignment).• San Diego – via I-215/ I-15 corridor <strong>to</strong> down<strong>to</strong>wn.• Orange County – Los Angeles <strong>to</strong> Orange County via Pacific Surfliner Route.The 2006-07 enacted state budget provided $14.3 million "<strong>to</strong> begin projectimplementation". The funding supported the preparation of a project financialplan, project management activities, identification of critical rights-of-wayacquisitions and the initiation of detailed project design and related environmentalstudies. However, bond funding for the project must still be authorized by voters.176

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!