1 / 31

Capitol Corridor 2012 Vision Plan Short-Range Plan/ Long-Term Vision

Capitol Corridor 2012 Vision Plan Short-Range Plan/ Long-Term Vision. CCJPA Board of Directors Workshop | February 15, 2012. Photo by Todd Evans. Overview of Vision Plan Workshop. Existing Issues and Opportunities Current Vision Plan Goals & Objectives Short-Term Service Plan(0-10 Years)

eagan
Download Presentation

Capitol Corridor 2012 Vision Plan Short-Range Plan/ Long-Term Vision

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Capitol Corridor 2012 Vision PlanShort-Range Plan/ Long-Term Vision CCJPA Board of Directors Workshop | February 15, 2012 Photo by Todd Evans

  2. Overview of Vision Plan Workshop • Existing Issues and Opportunities • Current Vision Plan Goals & Objectives • Short-Term Service Plan(0-10 Years) • Long-Term Vision (10+ Years) • Next Steps/Action Plan Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  3. Existing Issues and Opportunities • Context of Today’s Environment • Federal • State • Regional/Local • Opportunities • Prop 22 protects state transportation funds; primarily 0p costs • Community/legislative support, rider advocates • Federal/state administrative recognition • Challenges • Funding: capital infrastructure [SOGR, capacity] • Broader awareness Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  4. Current Vision Plan (June 2005) Goals & Objectives • Core Service • Maintain 90% OTP: 94% [actual] • Increase service frequency • Auburn-Sac: 8 trains vs. 2 trains [actual] (2 trains, 2005) • Roseville-Sac: 20 trains vs. 2 trains [actual] (2 trains, 2005) • Oak-Sac: 36 trains vs. 32 trains [actual] (24 trains, 2005) • San Jose-Sac: 32 trains vs. 14 trains [actual] (8 trains, 2005) • Reduce travel time by 12% • 3.4% [actual San Jose-Auburn] (175 min. in 2005 vs. 169 min in 2012) • Improve intermodal connectivity • Oakland Coliseum (BART) [2006] • Santa Clara/University (Caltrain/VTA) [2012] Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  5. Current Vision Plan (June 2005) Goals & Objectives [continued] 2) Additional Objectives • Improve op efficiencies: $o.20 vs. $0.25 [actual] • System (Farebox) Op Ratio: 50% vs. 50% [actual] • Enhance customer satisfaction by 5%: 8% [actual] • Increase market share of trips: N/A • Strengthen community partnerships: Placer County • Strengthen political support: N/A • Increase brand awareness: CCJPA logo, co-branding with Amtrak, earned media Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  6. Short-Term Service Plan (0-10 Years) • Funding Outlook • Limited over next 3-5 years [Prop 1A, 1B, TIGER, FRA HSIPR?] • Unknown for Rail Title in Surface Transportation Reauthorization • Need to secure other, non-traditional sources • Service Characteristics • Capital Improvement Program (Nov. 2011) path to continue/expand success • Balance frequencies southern, northern frequencies with core Sac-Oak • Passenger amenities and safety/security initiatives • Station development Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  7. Short-Term Service Plan (0-10 Years) [continued] 3) Establish Goals & Objectives • Cost Effective/Efficiency: System (Farebox) Op Ratio; Net Cost/Pass Mi • Share of Mode Split • Customer Experience: Satisfaction, Safety • Environmental: Reduced GHG/VMTs; Carbon footprint; Other • Community: Regional Economies; Joint Campaigns; Earned Media; Awareness/Recognition 4) Assignments/Take-Aways Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  8. (2010-2019) Train Miles Projections 44% increase over 10 years

  9. (2010-2019) Ridership Projections 118% increase over 10 years

  10. (2010-2019) Revenue Projections 155% increase over 10 years

  11. The Capitol Corridor’s Long-Term Role in the Region’s Future What is the Capitol Corridor’s place? Photo by Robert Couse-Baker

  12. The Emerging "Megaregion" Pop. 15 million By 2030

  13. The “Spine”

  14. The “Spine”

  15. The “Spine”

  16. The “Spine”

  17. Capitol Corridor Connections RT Sacramento CAHSR San Francisco Oakland BART VTA Caltrain San Jose CAHSR

  18. The Way Forward 1) Faster – 90 mph; up to 110 mph • 2) More frequent – Every 30 minutes • 3) Better connected – Seamless integration

  19. Regional/Multimodal Integration State 220 mph 110-150 mph Regional Metro 80 mph Local

  20. Regional/Multimodal Integration Berlin S-Bahn ICE Photo by Flickr user 'vxia"

  21. Regional/Multimodal Integration Tokyo Shinkansen IE Yamanote Line Photo by Flickr user 'tokyoform" Photo by Flickr user 'vxia"

  22. Regional/Multimodal Integration Northern California BART Capitol Corridor

  23. Regional/Multimodal Integration Photo by Flickr user “matthiasfeusi”

  24. Regional/Multimodal Integration From "Inter-City Rail Fixed Interval, Timed Transfer, Multihub System" by Ross Maxwell (1999)

  25. Express and Limited-Stop Service

  26. Cleaner, Quieter, Faster Trains Australia

  27. Protection from Sea Level Rise Photo by Jerry Huddleston

  28. Segments for Discussion Placer County Suisun/ Fairfield -Richmond Richmond -Oakland Oakland -San Jose Monterey County

  29. South Bay

  30. East Bay

More Related