The Caltrans/California State Transportation Agency 2024 California State Rail Plan (2024-12) is available for review. An earlier draft emphasized hydrogen trains to the exclusion of overhead catenary wire electric trains, but the current version includes catenary, battery electric and hydrogen fuel cell electric.
From the registration page: “The newly released State Rail Plan lays out strategies that can significantly impact how Californians and visitors get around the state – and can make California a place that’s easier for everyone to get around in an affordable, low-carbon, safe, and accessible way. The plan establishes a long-term vision for an integrated, cohesive statewide rail system that offers passenger and freight service and helps achieve California’s mobility, economic, and climate goals. Tune into this webinar to learn about the plan from California State Transportation Agency staff. Researchers and advocates will give their reaction to the updated plan including cost analysis, the political changes needed to implement reforms, and upcoming funding and reform opportunities.”
Whether or not you can attend this webinar, I encourage you to read the 2024 California State Rail Plan, focusing on the routes or concepts that are most important to you.
The Capitol Corridor, Sacramento/Roseville to San Jose, is called out for electrification, but the source power is not defined. Capitol Corridor is not specifically a single project, but part of several projects including Transbay Crossing, Leveraging Mega-Investments, Sea Level Rise, and Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys. In stages, Capitol Corridor service is planned to reach once per hour in the mid-term, and once per 30 minutes in the long term. Current service is one hour at peak times of day, but two to three hours at other times.
Many transportation advocates strongly support catenary electrification of the Capitol Corridor route between Sacramento and San Jose. I have also advanced the idea of state purchase of the rails in heavy passenger rail corridors, which would include Capitol Corridor, either through willing seller or condemnation if necessary. Freight rolling stock would still be owned and operated by the railroads, but passenger trains would now have priority over freight trains, and the freight railroads could not resist catenary electrification.
I hope to provide more detailed analysis of the state plan in the near future.
Dan Allison, author of this blog, took a trip to San Rafael, California, in north bay Marin County, on Monday of Week Without Driving. To be transparent, I have been car-free for over 13 years, and car-light for about 7 years before that, so a trip on bicycle and public transportation is just the way I live life, not an exploration of the challenge that people who can’t drive face. My income is lower middle income, so I have enough money to travel, at least locally. I went to San Rafael to retrieve my phone charger and battery pack that I’d left on a Marin Transit bus last Wednesday. It took three days for Marin Transit to find the item and get it to lost and found. It was entertaining, and sad, to watch the included AirTag travel around on multiple bus routes. AirTags are bluetooth, so only report when they are close to a modern iPhone, but they do keep showing up in new locations.
So, the Monday trip:
bicycle from home to Sacramento Valley Station
Capitol Corridor train from Sacramento Valley Station to Richmond Station, $22.95
BART from Richmond to El Cerrito del Norte, $0.85
Golden Gate Transit bus 580 from El Cerrito del Norte to San Rafael Transit Center, $3.50
bicycle to a local coffee shop, where I worked on Week Without Driving communication
bicycle to Sprouts Farmers Market for lunch supplies
bicycle to Larkspur Ferry
Golden Gate Larkspur Ferry to San Francisco, $7
bicycle to San Francisco Bay Ferry gate G1
San Francisco Bay Ferry to Oakland Ferry, $2.30
bicycle to Oakland Jack London Station
Capitol Corridor from Oakland to Sacramento, $24.65
bicycle from Sacramento Valley Station to home
All of the public transportation was using my senior Clipper Card, on my watch. Capitol Corridor train travel was pre-purchased tickets through the app. The total was $61.25, which is rather expensive for a none day trip, but is quite a bit less than I would have spent driving. At about 83 miles there, and about 105 miles back, using the IRS rate of $0.67 per mile, driving would have cost $126. Plus $17.25 for Golden Gate Bridge and Carquinez Bridge tolls. Most people think only about gas costs, or charging costs, and forget about depreciation, insurance, maintenance, parking, and tolls.
Travel time is hard to compare, since I made so many stops along the way, and did not travel by the most direct route. Looking at the simpler Sacramento to San Rafael trip, driving would be 1 hour 20 minutes, whereas I spent about 2 hours 20 minutes on public transportation.
This is a trip that I’ve taken many times, so there was very little planning involved, and in fact I changed my plans for the leg back home several times on the fly, without problems. Less familiar trips would take more planning.
A few photos from my trip are below, but many parts are missing. I’m not used to documenting my public transportation travels, and even less for selfies.
Capitol Corridor has received more funds from the TIRCP (Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program) for some projects in the Sacramento region. It includes full funding of the Sacramento Valley Station transit hub, additional funds for the Sacramento-Roseville third track project, and contactless readers for Thruway buses (presumable the same readers that have been installed on the trains, which will allow direct payment for trips once the Tap2Ride pilot is complete).
The strike by railroad workers seems to have been averted by the private railroads giving in just slightly. I don’t know enough about labor in the railroads to say much of intelligence on the issues, though I am pretty sure that as huge and very profitable corporations, the interests of the freight railroads are not those of the workers.
The possible strike has reminded me that I have ideas about railroads. I quite often use the Capitol Corridor regional service, Sacramento to the Bay Area, and also use the Amtrak long-distance routes, Coast Starlight and California Zephyr. My experience is that service on these routes has been continuously deteriorating over the years. Amtrak is not really very good at running trains, and they are even worse on maintaining trains. Equipment problems are a daily occurrence, and are often the start of trains falling behind schedule.
Passenger trains are guaranteed, by federal law, right of way over freight trains. But only if the passenger train is on schedule. So if a passenger train falls off schedule, due to equipment problems or slow loading at a station or slow crew changes (Amtrak personnel are often late to the job at crew change locations), the train will fall further and further behind. The long distance trains are either on time, because they never fell behind, or four to six hours late, because they did, and lost priority to freight trains. It is frustrating to sit on a siding, often for quite a while, while a slow and long freight train gets the right of way.
The Martinez rail bridge is a major problem for Capitol Corridor schedules. The only solution is a new high level bridge that would not be delayed by maritime traffic.
But the real issue to me is that maintenance of the rails is unacceptably bad. About two years ago, Union Pacific did a major maintenance project on part of the route between Sacramento and Martinez. The result? The rails were much worse after than before. It used to be I could write, not easily, but acceptably, on the Capitol Corridor. Those times are long gone. It is now difficult, and dangerous, to even get up and walk around. Sharp jolts from poorly maintained rails are a regular occurrence. I’ve seen people thrown to the ground by these jolts. A few years ago, a Capitol Corridor train almost derailed between Sacramento and Davis, with many passengers injured. Amtrak stonewalled the investigation, and Capitol Corridor JPA shrugged and accepted that no one was going to take responsibility.
Transportation advocates have long pushed for electrification of the Capitol Corridor trains, and similar regional rail systems throughout the US. But Union Pacific does not want catenary wires (the overhead wires that power electrified trains) along its tracks. So Capitol Corridor will continue to use diesel locomotives forever. The current model is much cleaner than older ones, but still dirty. If you really want to see dirty, look at the ancient diesel locomotives that Amtrak uses for its long distance trains.
Capitol Corridor JPA has a project to add a third track between Sacramento and Roseville so that more passenger trains can be run on that section. Today, there is one train westbound and one train eastbound, up to Auburn, with a stop in Roseville. The project has been much delayed, and now has been trimmed back so that only part of the route with have a third track. As I see it, Capitol Corridor was extorted by Union Pacific.
So, solutions:
Regional rail services, which are almost entirely funded by the states and not Amtrak, should start separating from Amtrak. The result will be better managed trains and better maintained trains. The only advantage regional rail gets from Amtrak is unified ticketing, so the solution there is to have a separate unified ticketing service that is not controlled by Amtrak.
The states and/or federal government should take ownership of all rail lines that serve more than one passenger train per day. Freight railroads would still own their rolling stock, and could buy passage on the routes, but the routes would be managed (dispatched) to prioritize passenger rail at all times. If the freights are willing sellers, then fair market value, but condemnation would be used where they are not.
All regional passenger service should be considered for electrification. The passenger service would be cleaner and quieter and faster (better acceleration than diesel). Not all would be electrified. Freight railroads would have to accept running under catenary, or better yet, just start running electric locomotives as well.
California should commit to and fully fund a high level bridge at or near Martinez.
Capitol Corridor should terminate the third track project as currently designed, and demand that Union Pacific provide the right of way for a third track without any freight use at any time. I’m sure UP would refuse, which takes us back to item 2 above, public ownership of the right of way and rails.
TIRCP (Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program) grants for 2022 have been announced, with two in the Sacramento region. One is a joint application from Capitol Corridor JPA, City of Sacramento, SACOG, SacRT, and Downtown Railyard Ventures, for work related to Sacramento Valley Station realignment of light rail and buses. The second is for SacRT to purchase eight more modern low floor rail cars.
4. Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA), with the City of Sacramento, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG), Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT), and Downtown Railyards Venture, LLC (DRV)
Project: Sacramento Valley Station (SVS) Transit Center: Priority Projects Award: $49,865,000 Total Budget: $95,050,000 Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions: 156,000 MTCO2 e
This project delivers a set of interrelated projects to introduce better connectivity between modes at the Sacramento Valley Station, as well as redesigned commuter and intercity bus service to the SVS and Downtown Sacramento, that will increase ridership on both trains and buses. Project elements include design of a new bus mobility center to facilitate convenient transfers between modes, realignment of existing light rail tracks and construction of a new platform, construction of a new cycle track on H Street to improve access to the station, and construction of a new pick-up and drop-off loop.
The light rail tracks will be realigned into a loop with a new north-south oriented platform just south of the Steve Cohn Passageway entrance (about 450 feet closer to the rail tracks than currently, and only 100 feet from the future Bus Mobility Center), as well as a new double track alignment from the new platform to the intersection of F Street and 6 th Street. The construction of the new pick up and drop off loop at the station will allow more efficient transfers. The project includes installation of a new storm drain trunk line which will enable new transit-oriented development on key parcels next to SVS.
A new regional bus layover facility will be built in a 2-block portion of X Street between 6th and 8 th Street. The proposed facility will allow buses to layover in Sacramento between runs, improving bus efficiency and reducing vehicle miles traveled, as well as fossil fuel consumption. Initial users of the facility are expected to include El Dorado Transit, Galt-Sacramento SCT Link, Placer Transit, Roseville Transit, San Joaquin RTD, and Yuba-Sutter Transit.
The project will also support the consolidation of downtown regional bus routes, building on the study SACOG completed with 2020 TIRCP funding. Construction of shared stops between SVS and the future Midtown Amtrak San Joaquin and Altamont Corridor Express station will be completed, including the reuse of seventeen bus shelters from the Temporary Transbay Terminal in San Francisco. This component will also complete an unfinished portion of 5 th Street between Railyards Boulevard and North B Street as the most efficient connector for all north area buses to access the freeway to SVS and serve the new state office complex on Richards Blvd. That will provide the connectivity to implement 10 additional bus stops (5 northbound and 5 southbound) north of H Street. Commuter buses operated by Amador Transit, Butte Regional Transit, El Dorado Transit, Soltrans, Galt-Sacramento SCT Link, Placer Transit, Roseville Transit, San Joaquin RTD, Yolobus and Yuba-Sutter Transit will be routed along new shared northbound and southbound routes. This work will complement SacRT’s TIRCP-funded network integration to better integrate its service with intercity rail at both SVS and the future Midtown station.
The project will also purchase and install contactless EMV readers coordinated with the California Integrated Travel Project on rail and bus vehicles to allow fares to be collected through contactless bank cards and mobile wallets.
Ridership at Sacramento Valley Station is also expected to be positively impacted by the city’s housing policies, confirmed with a Pro-Housing designation by HCD, the first city to receive such a designation in the state. A significant amount of housing is expected to be added in the Railyards District, adjacent to the station area.
These plans will be developed in cooperation with many transit partners and agencies throughout the Sacramento region, and with additional technical assistance provided by the California Department of Transportation, in order to ensure integration of regional and interregional capital improvements and service.
Project is expected to be completed by 2025.
Key Project Ratings: Medium-High Cost per GHG Ton Reduced: Medium-High Increased Ridership: High Service Integration: Medium-High Improves Safety: Medium Project Readiness: Medium Funding Leverage:High Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration: Priority Population Benefits: Medium-High Housing Co-Benefits: High
15. Sacramento Regional Transit District (SacRT)
Project: Fleet Modernization Project Award: $23,600,000 Total Budget: $47,200,000 Estimated TIRCP GHG Reductions: 44,000 MTCO2 e
Purchases 8 new low-floor light rail vehicles (LRVs) to further expand low-floor fleet operations on the light rail system. Over one-third of SacRT’s light rail fleet has reached the end of its useful life, and this investment leverages past TIRCP grants, as well strong local match, to help modernize the fleet.
Low-floor LRVs will produce operational efficiencies by speeding up train times and optimizing boarding convenience and safety along with increased capacity. They also will increase fleet reliability and reduce the number of shorter than planned trains need to be operated on the system. These are significant benefits to persons with disabilities, seniors, parents with strollers, and bicyclists, who will have more boarding options and increased boarding and alighting safety. These improvements are expected to support retaining and attracting new light rail riders, including residents of disadvantaged communities, who make up 30% of the population within SacRT’s service boundary.
The project also supports sustainable housing and land use development while providing meaningful benefits to priority populations by improving mobility and access to transit options. The project complements several TOD/joint development projects underway along the light rail corridors, including a surplus SacRT property near a station that was sold to an affordable housing developer who has entitlements and plans to begin construction on 128 units.
Ridership on SacRT is also expected to be positively impacted by further rollout of integrated contactless payment throughout the light rail and bus system, as well as by the city’s housing policies, confirmed with a Pro-Housing designation by HCD, the first city to receive such a designation in the state.
19 Project completion is expected by 2027.
Key Project Ratings: Medium-High Cost per GHG Ton Reduced: Medium Increased Ridership: Medium-High Service Integration: Medium-High Improves Safety: High Project Readiness: High Funding Leverage: Medium-High Multi-Agency Coordination/Integration: Priority Population Benefits: High Housing Co-Benefits: High
Forty on-demand bike lockers have been installed at Sacramento Valley Station by Capitol Corridor. They are located between the station exit to the platforms and the thruway bus area. These lockers use the BikeLink chip-card system, which I wrote about in 2013 (BikeLink). These join long-term lockers and the Pedal Stop bike station, and new lockers at the Amtrak/Capitol Corridor station in Davis.
Unfortunately, you can’t purchase a BikeLink card in the station, at least not yet. You can purchase them in the Cafe Car onboard all Capitol Corridor trains, but of course if you arrive at the lockers without a card, that doesn’t help you for this trip. You can also order cards via BikeLink. I am not sure how long it takes to get cards through the mail, but I think I remember about a week. The BikeLink map shows three vendor locations in Roseville, since Roseville now has BikeLink locker locations, though I have not used these. The cards cost $20, and that full value is available for locker rentals, though if you use a bike station location with multiple bike racks, such as the Folsom station and several in the bay area, you do have to pay a one-time $5 fee.
The lockers cost 5 cents per hour. That’s a pretty incredible deal given how much car parking costs, and the peace of mind knowing your bike is very unlikely to be stolen or vandalized. Even your seat will be dry!
Hopefully this will be the beginning of more installations showing up around Sacramento and the region, as business and agencies realize what a convenience and encouragement for bicycling the lockers are.
Getting Around Sacramento 