Capitol Corridor Service Expansion Program

Program Environmental Assessment (EA)

BART Boardroom Presentation October 26, 2010

Capitol Corridor Route Map

• • • •

Background

Capitol Corridor is one of the State’s three Intercity Passenger Rail systems Capitol Corridor service is managed by the Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA) Capitol Corridor (3 rd busiest route in the Amtrak system) is an important regional and inter-regional transportation alternative reducing traffic congestion and improving air quality Capitol Corridor operates on Union Pacific’s rail system

The CCJPA Board

• The CCJPA is governed by a Board of Directors comprised of 16 elected officials from six member agencies along the 170-mile Capitol Corridor rail route – – P LACER S OLANO C OUNTY T RANSPORTATION T RANSPORTATION P LANNING A UTHORITY (STA) A GENCY (PCTPA) – – Y OLO C OUNTY S ACRAMENTO T RANSPORTATION R EGIONAL T RANSIT D ISTRICT D ISTRICT (YCTD) (S AC RT) – – S AN F RANCISCO S ANTA C LARA B AY V ALLEY A REA R APID T RANSIT T RANSPORTATION D ISTRICT A UTHORITY (BART) (VTA)

• • • • •

Presentation Outline

Discuss current program of projects to support service expansion plans Identify phasing plan to implement planned track improvements to achieve service expansion plans Discuss the environmental documentation process with the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) Describe the CCJPA’s Program Environmental Assessment (EA) and discuss the summary of impacts, if any Answer questions

State Rail Plan

(FY 2007/08 - 2017/18)

and CCJPA Vision Plan

• • • Frequency: Expanding service incrementally – Auburn – Sacramento: 4 round trips (currently 1) – Roseville – Sacramento: 10 round trips (currently 1) – Oakland – Sacramento: 18 round trips (currently 16) – San Jose – Sacramento: 16 round trips (currently 7) Travel Time: Reduce average travel time by 12 percent (past and future reductions coming) Reliability: Standard of 90% or better for on-time performance (currently 93% - tops in the nation)

FRA HSIPR Funding – Requirements

• • • • FRA administers the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) High Speed Intercity Passenger Rail (HSIPR) Program – a five-year capital grant program to fund high speed and intercity passenger rail To be eligible for HSIPR funding – Complete a Service Development Plan – Complete a full HSIPR application – Complete Tier 1 Environmental Review – i.e., this Program EA If awarded funding, subsequent projects must go through detailed project level (Tier 2) Environmental Review

NEPA Program EA

• • The Program EA evaluates the potential environmental effects of implementing an increase in Capitol Corridor Intercity Passenger Rail service as follows: – From 1 to 2 daily round-trips between Auburn and Sacramento – From 7 to 11 daily round-trips between Oakland and San Jose The Program EA provides information that can be used to evaluate program alternatives when preparing project level Categorical Exemption or Environmental Assessments.

Why, What, and How?

• • • Why must a program environmental document be completed ?

– FRA requires a Program NEPA document before awarding service program funding What level of program documentation is required?

– FRA indicated that for limited corridor development a Program EA is appropriate How should the public be involved in the Program EA?

– FRA consulted with CCJPA to structure a public involvement process (document circulation, public meetings)

Projects in/around Fremont and Niles Project Number 1 2 3 4 5 Project Name

Reno Railyard to Sacramento Track Capacity Enhancement Project San Pablo to Oakland Restore Existing Third Track to Mainline Project Hayward Double Track (Elmhurst to Industrial Parkway) Newark-Albrae Siding Connection including South Switching Lead Extension for Newark Yard CP Coast-Rte 237 (Gold Street) Double Track Project

Anticipated Project Level NEPA Environmental Document

CE CE CE

Rail Network Location

Martinez Subdivision/ Roseville Subdivision Niles Subdivision Niles Subdivision EA CE Coast Subdivision Coast Subdivision

Capacity Improvements and Service Increases

From one to two daily round trips (Auburn to Sacramento).

Reliability/not capacity

6 7 8

9A Change of route alignment from the UPRR Niles Subdivision to the UPRR Oakland Subdivision (Industrial Parkway to Shinn) Union City Station and Track Work Improvements on the UPRR Oakland Subdivision (including reconnection with UPRR Niles Subdivision near Shinn Street crossing) Fremont Full Platform Extension (on Track 2) Niles Canyon Railroad Mainline Track Upgrade (New Niles Wye to Former SP Main at CP-Hearst) and Radum Second Main Track Upgrade on UPRR Oakland Subdivision (near Pleasanton) EA EA* CE CE Oakland Subdivision Oakland Subdivision Niles Subdivision Niles Subdivision/ Oakland Subdivision From 7 to 11 daily round trips collectively.

Incrementally, reliability projects with an interim capacity of several projects to increase to 9 daily round trips.

9

9B Add Third Main Track on Niles Subdivision between Niles Junction and Newark Junction (in Fremont) or between Shinn Connection and Newark Junction CE Niles Subdivision/Oaklan d Subdivision Caltrain Track

10

San Jose Diridon Station Track and Platform Upgrade CE**

11

Fourth Track Project CE Caltrain Track * The study area of Project 7 is analyzed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in the Union City Intermodal Station EIR, which was adopted in February 2006 by the City Council of Union City.

** This project has been cleared under CEQA and NEPA.

Program EA adheres to CEQ regulations and FRA Procedures for Considering Environmental Impacts Resource Area Air quality Water quality Noise and vibration Solid waste disposal Ecological systems Impacts on wetlands areas Impacts on endangered species or wildlife Flood hazards and floodplain management Coastal zone management Use of energy resources Use of other natural resources (e.g., water, minerals, or timber) Aesthetic and design quality impacts Possible barriers to the elderly and handicapped Land use, existing and planned Impacts on the socioeconomic environment Environmental Justice Public health Public safety, including any impacts due to hazardous materials Recreational opportunities Use of 4(f)-protected properties Impacts on transportation Locations of archaeological or architectural cultural resources Construction period impacts Program EA Section

Section 4.5

Section 4.9

Section 4.4

N/A Section4.8

Section 4.8

Section 4.8

Section 4.9

N/A Section 4.6

N/A Section 4.7

Section 4.15

Section 4.2

Section 4.15

Section 4.15

Section 4.14

Sections 4.13 and 4.14

Section 4.10

Section 4.10

Section 4.3

Section 4.11

Within each section

Program Benefits

• • •

Additional service frequency

– One additional Auburn frequency (1 to 2) – Four additional to/from San Jose frequencies (7 to 11)

Direct Benefits

– Improvements in ridership - incremental about 12% – Improvements in revenue (offsetting State subsidy) – incremental about 14%

Indirect Benefits

– Reduction in greenhouse emissions – Reduction in projected highway congestion

• •

Projects on the Map

FY 2010 HSIPR Application – Project 1: Donner Pass – Project 4: Newark Albrae Siding – Project 8: Fremont Platform Future HSIPR funding – Remaining projects based on HSIPR funding levels and coordination with California request

Port of Oakland

Rail: East Bay and Beyond

Freight traffic to/from the Port of Oakland heads primarily northeast to the Roseville Yard (north of Sacramento), or via the Central Valley by the Altamont Pass route. Secondary usage goes south along a coastal route Niles Subdivision Coast Subdivision Oakland Subdivision

Niles/Fremont: Current Routing and Traffic

Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)

Capitol Corridor (yellow line) ACE (blue line)

Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)

14 6 Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction) Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass route) Niles Subdivision (Centerville area) 6 10 11

Fremont Amtrak Station

Niles/Fremont: Project 9A Routing and Traffic

Project 9A can work under either an Oakland Subdivision or Niles Subdivision alignment for Capitol Corridor service

Fremont Amtrak Station

Port of Oakland

Rail: Routing under Project 9A

Freight traffic to/from the Altamont route could go over an upgraded Niles Canyon route (keeping Niles Canyon Railway whole and able to operate) thus reducing the need to accommodate freight traffic growth through Centerville. This allows capacity for increased Capitol Corridor service.

Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)

Capitol Corridor (yellow line) ACE (blue line)

Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)

Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction) Oakland Subdivision/Niles Canyon (Altamont Pass route) Niles Subdivision (Centerville area) Existing 14 6 6 ->12 10 11->5 Planned 22 6 ??

??

??

Rail: Routing under Project 9B

Port of Oakland Freight traffic to/from the Altamont route could be increased by triple tracking through Centerville. In addition to freight growth, this allows capacity for increased Capitol Corridor service. This option is operationally worse for all concerned.

Existing Planned

Passenger Rail Traffic (daily trains)

Capitol Corridor (yellow line) ACE (blue line)

Freight Rail Traffic (green line - UPRR levels are estimated)

Niles Subdivision (North of Niles Junction) Oakland Subdivision (Altamont Pass route) Niles Subdivision (Centerville area) 14 6 6 10 11 22 6 ??

??

??

• • • • •

Program Schedule

Projects will be implemented based on funding availability – FRA – HSIPR now in 2 nd year of 5 years (FY 2010 request is pending) – State – Funding dependent on State budget Apply for funding in each remaining HSIPR year (FY 2011 2013) If funded steadily, projects will commence in FY 2011 and be completed in FY 2016 or FY 2017 Capitol Corridor service expansion will be incremental as projects are completed Freight train growth is expected to increase independently of the improvements

No Action Alternative

•

Not implementing the program is impact-free to all resource categories except air quality

– Under the No Action alternative for Air Quality, the project benefits to reduce in CO 2 and general traffic congestion relief will not occur

Action Alternative – Implement Program EA

• •

Across all resource categories, there are either

– No impacts – Minimal impacts that can be fully mitigated

Approved Program EA will be used to advance specific projects incrementally as part of an application(s) for federal or state capital grants

Passenger-Freight Rail Partnership

•

CCJPA’s plan is to partner with UPRR to accrue public benefit from its investments

• Added Capitol Corridor trains • Reduced truck traffic and greenhouse gas emissions

Summary

• • • Program EA identified either no impacts, no impacts with mitigation, or benefits Detailed project level environmental review will commence once we receive any FRA HSIPR funding The CCJPA will be engaged with the communities along the route and agencies as CCJPA looks to advance the Capitol Corridor Service Expansion Plan THANK YOU