Extend California Zephyr & Capitol Corridor to San Jose by 2025?

OK, this may sound odd, but there's a solid reason for it.

http://www.cahsrblog.com/2016/02/chsra-unveils-2016-business-plan-and-a-northern-ios/

The latest California High Speed Rail plan proposes that the initial operating segment will run from San Jose to just north of Bakersfield.

Making direct connections at San Jose would seem to be highly valuable under such a scenario. It should allow two-seat rather than three-seat rides for a number of destinations.

Doesn't the Capitol Corridor already go to San Jose?

CCC1007 said:

Doesn't the Capitol Corridor already go to San Jose?

Click to expand...

Kind of. From Bakersfield, you take the San Joaquin to Stockton, then get on the Cap Corridor through Martinez, Emeryville, etc., to San Jose.

The San Jose paper had an editorial against the new plans, basically it won't serve locals and residents along the peninsula (current CalTrain route) will likely sue. They are discounting that the route will do wonders for the central valley economy and HSR will be running at regular speed along the CalTrain stretch. CalTrain is getting HSR $ to electrify, which benefits everybody.

High-speed rail still a boondoggle

CCC1007 said:

Doesn't the Capitol Corridor already go to San Jose?

Click to expand...

Only some trains -- about half of them.

Rich Nimbys are against Rail everywhere!

Can't you also ride an Ambus and take ACE to/from San Jose even though ACE only has directional running in the morning and evening IINM?

I could be wrong but doesn't riding an Ambus require that part of the total trip be on Amtrak?

Think what will happen if the CZ went to San Jose. There is no maintenance at SJC. CZ Emeryville stops go to Oakland maintenance and most days one or more cars are swapped out due to inbound bad orders. Chicago certainly cannot do heavy maintenance especially in winter.o

So it'll have to deadhead to Oakland. Like it already does. Whatevs.

The existing deadhead is pull out *in the same direction* and continue for a mile or two, the new one would involve 43 miles *backtracking* to get there. We're talking about adding probably two hours each way and 172 miles of excess fuel use age and wear and tear every round trip to the single longest current route.

neroden said:

So it'll have to deadhead to Oakland. Like it already does. Whatevs.

Click to expand...

The only thing common between the two situations is the use of the word "deadhead". A deadhead from SJC to Oakland yard is a completely different thing from a deadhead from EMY to Oakland Yard. So yup.... whatevs covers it.

Well if the yard is in Oakland why not go to Jack London Square? At least have the CZ end at a city people outside of the Bay Area actually heard of. I never heard of Emeryville until I reached there and the station I believe is tiny for being a major endpoint for a train (not that San Jose is that much bigger).

Backing the train through the four blocks of street running is the reason that the train was cut back to emeryville in the first place.

neroden said:

CCC1007 said:

Doesn't the Capitol Corridor already go to San Jose?

Click to expand...

Only some trains -- about half of them.

Click to expand...

Don't the plans for the Capitol Corridor include capacity upgrades between Oakland and San Jose, so more CC trains can run to San Jose? If so, upgrading the CC corridor and service for connections to CA HSR initial operating segment at San Jose would be done in conjunction with the HSR project.

As for extending the CZ, expanding the CA HSR system to Sacramento is part of its Phase 2 plans. Once (or if) the CA HSR is running from SF/SJ to LA, building the split off line to Sacramento should be cheaper, less challenging, and quicker than the proposed LA to San Diego route, so it would be likely that the Sacramento extension gets built next as a Phase 2 with LA to San Diego becoming Phase 3. So, people taking the CZ (assuming it is still running by then) could transfer to the CA HSR system at Sacramento and get to LA in 3+ hours.

For that matter, BART could be running to San Jose by the time CA HSR starts service over the IOS. Which would provide another option for a passenger on the CZ to get to San Jose.

Phase 2 of CAHSR is probably going to be in the 2040s or *later*.

It would be worthwhile to extend the CZ to San Jose in the interim.

If the Capitol Corridor is being upgraded to send more CC trains to San Jose anyway, we'll probably end up with a maintenance facility at San Jose after a while.

So wasting thousands of dollars in fuel and wages every day is worth the dozens of passengers every day at best that this would generate, who would be paying only a few extra dollars each for the privilege? I find that hard to believe.

CCC1007 said:

So wasting thousands of dollars in fuel and wages every day is worth the dozens of passengers every day at best that this would generate, who would be paying only a few extra dollars each for the privilege? I find that hard to believe.

Click to expand...

If the CZ did serve SJC, just run one fewer train between EMY and SJC each way. No fuel increase and no wage increase.

And a less useful service. Not to mention it's not Amtrak's decision to fuss with Capital Corridor scheduled.

Again, the CZ does not serve the same purpose as the CC does. A long distance train is nowhere near the same as a push pull corridor train.

There are 4 trains each way Oakland - Bakersfield ( page 106 national timetable ). There are 7 trains SAC - SJC each way ( Pages 108 - 111 ). Granted there are only 2 at present that allow southbound to SJC and 1 northbound Capital corridor train at Emeryville. CZ to SJC wand Dead head to Oakland would require another train set for proper maintenance. Ain't going to happen

Once the joint powers board finishes its updates there will be 4 or 5 connecting trains available to SJC. Note CC trains are unreserved.

Palmetto said:

I could be wrong but doesn't riding an Ambus require that part of the total trip be on Amtrak?

Click to expand...

By law, Amtrak California subsidized bus rides must be booked with a train segment. The rationale is to protect private bus operators that provide service to lots of small towns.

There are a couple of exceptions. I remember bus trips to South Lake Tahoe, which aren't available from any private bus service. It's all in California Government Code 14035.55.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=gov&group=14001-15000&file=14030-14052

(2) Service is provided only for passengers on trips where the passengers have had prior movement by rail or will have subsequent movement by rail, evidenced by a combination rail and bus one-way or roundtrip ticket, or service is also provided on State Highway Route 50 between the City of Sacramento and the City of South Lake Tahoe and intermediate points or on State Highway Route 5 between the community of Lebec in Kern County and the City of Santa Clarita for passengers solely by bus if no other bus service is provided by a private intercity bus company.

Thank you. I asked that question in post #6.