Integrating High Speed Rail, Regional Rail, and Transit Services in California AASHTO SCORT Meeting Washington, DC February 22, 2017

California State Rail Plan Context

2018 California State Rail Plan A multimodal plan with integrated rail, bus and transit services Responsive to federal and state requirements Network Integration Strategic Service Plan Needed to integrate high speed rail, intercity rail, and transit, as well as to amplify ridership and achieve environmental goals Establishes vision for statewide rail network, including multi-state connections Plans for strategic investments in goods movement by rail

Mission Statement The mission of the 2018 State Rail Plan is to provide a path to achieve a safe, sustainable, integrated, and efficient California rail network that successfully moves people and goods while enhancing the State’s economy and livability.

Compliance with Federal Requirements FRA State Rail Plan California State Rail Plan Executive Summary 1 Role of Rail in Statewide 2 Existing Rail System Description and inventory Trends and forecasts Needs and opportunities 3 Proposed Passenger 4 Proposed Freight 5 Investments & Program Effects 6 Coordination and Review Executive Summary 1 Role of Rail in Statewide 2 Existing Rail System Description and inventory Trends and forecasts Needs and opportunities 3 Network Integration Vision 4 Proposed Passenger 5 Proposed Freight 6 Investments & Program Effects 7 Coordination and Review

Network Integration Visioning Process Working toward achieving a shared 2040 Vision for rail in California: Started with understanding our market Analyzed our current and planned-for-construction rail corridors Developed potential rail service alternatives Ongoing, engaged, iterative process, dependent on stakeholder feedback Stakeholder Outreach Mission Statement Network & Market Analyses 2040 Vision Statement Netgraph Design Term Sheets

Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study 2016 FRA Rail Program Delivery Meeting Southwest Multi-State Rail Planning Study

Why is a Statewide Vision Warranted? For trips over 15 miles, about 5% of those trips are longer than 100 miles and generate about 35% of passenger miles

Rail Ridership Under Existing Conditions Rail Ridership Potential by Travel Distance Existing Conditions (Thousand Annual Person Trips) Source: Rail Market Analysis Tool, CalSTA

Potential Rail/Intercity Bus Ridership Rail Ridership Potential by Travel Distance Base Conditions (Thousand Annual Person Trips) Source: Rail Market Analysis Tool, CalSTA

Potential Rail/Intercity Bus Ridership Rail Ridership Potential by Travel Distance HSR Phase 1 Conditions (Thousand Annual Person Trips) Source: Rail Market Analysis Tool, CalSTA

Potential Rail/Intercity Bus Ridership Rail Ridership Potential by Travel Distance HSR Phase 2 Conditions (Thousand Annual Person Trips) Source: Rail Market Analysis Tool, CalSTA

Integrated Network Opportunities: Coachella Valley

Integrated Network Opportunities: Las Vegas

California Rail Services: Both Regional and High Speed

Developing a Statewide Multimodal Passenger Vision Potential Characteristics: Useful and efficient public transportation system System creates a comprehensive network Leverages the opportunities of an expanding high-speed rail system Auto-competitive travel times to offer a reliable alternative to highway travel Seamless door-to-door travel experience The State serving as a coordinator for planning, funding and technology decisions with system-wide impacts Relying on local agencies to know what’s best for their region.

Attributes of an Integrated Network Integrated multimodal transportation network. All services are connected (Local->HSR). Common transfer point locations. Schedule Network-wide coordination through pulsed schedules. Designed connectivity at transfer points. Fare System Integrated ticketing system. Journeys can be made on a single ticket.

Integrated Statewide Rail Network Complementary Long Distance Route Terminus Hub (Time Point) Integrated Rail Routes Stop Commuter Service Urban Mass Transit District Integrated Intercity Bus Route

Investment Strategy Principles used to prioritize investment are under development, and include, but are not limited to: Services Tailored to Market Demand Minimize Freight Interference Avoid Duplication of Services and Investments Minimize “Throw-Away” Interim Investments

French Timetable and Network Restructuring PARIS TGVs radiating from Paris TGVs bypassing Paris InterCity trains Regional trains Transfer Point

Toulouse – Auch: Service Plan Restructuring

Toulouse – Auch: Simplification and Standardization Departure Times Auch Aubiet Gimont-Cahuzoc L’Isle-Jourdai Mérenvielle Brox Léquevin Pibroc Colomiers Lycée Colomiers Les Ramassier St Martin Lardenne Le Toec Toulouse Arè St Agne Toulouse (MA’) Hour Before (2003) After 05:00 06:00 07:00 08:00 09:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 17:00 18:00 19:00 20:00 21:00 11 06 44 43 35 08 58 37 13 25 28 53 18 33 03 48 42 19 10 04 31 52 22 32 07 44 14 24 54 After implementation, demand increased by 130% within the first 3 months Departures: 41 47

Example of an Integrated Network - Wetzikon

Example of an Integrated Network - Wetzikon Multimodal Connectivity: Facilitates Bus-Rail connections Transfers occur half-hourly at minutes 15 and 45 Connections between 3 regional rail lines and 12 bus lines

Example of an Integrated Network - Wetzikon Network Map Zürich

Example of an Integrated Network - Wetzikon 1. Buses arrive in advance of the trains Zürich S14 S 5 Kempten 2. Trains arrive in the station S 3 3. All services are in the station Buses 4. Trains depart from the station 5. Buses depart from the station 5 4 3 2 1 S 14 S 5 Hinwil S5 Bubikon

Corridors and Services Methodology Service Delivery Options A D B C Corridors and Services Charts 6 System Connectivity High-Level Planning Mid-Level Planning Detailed Planning

Corridors and Services Methodology Detailed Planning Netgraph 5 Minute Precision D B A C 30 00 45 15 35 05 25 55 Mid-Level Planning 35mph 85mph 65mph 55mph 80mph Minute of Departure Minute of Arrival Stop [2] [4] No. Station tracks Average speed Service Delivery Options Corridors and Services Charts 6 System Connectivity High-Level Planning

Methodology High-Level Planning Mid-Level Planning Detailed Planning Netgraph 5 Minute Precision D B A C 30 00 45 15 35 05 25 55 35mph 85mph 65mph 55mph 80mph Minute of Departure Minute of Arrival Stop [2] [4] No. Station tracks Average speed Minute Precision 31 29 28 58 32 42 43 02 18 17 6 48 59 22 49 23 12 01 38 11 37 Detailed Planning Trip Time Analysis String Line Charts Track Occupation

2040 Vision System Map Key Features: Integrated Statewide Network Integrated HSR, Blended Rail, Express, and Local Services with Urban Mass Transit and Express Bus Multimodal connection points at key hubs with regular pulsed service Auto and air competitive service throughout the State

Capital Plan Phasing (Draft Results) 2040 HSR in Phase II corridors New Transbay Tube and service implications of through running rail service in SF Development of regional networks in North Bay, Central Coast and Central Valley Full Blended Rail Service in the Central Valley Completion of hub investments and additional electrification 2027 HSR Phase 1 Line extensions Full utilization of existing and programmed slots Connecting regional networks to HSR Implementation planning Full development of integrated ticketing Key hub investments Palmdale to Las Vegas Corridor 2022 Planned and committed projects with funding identified and available Capacity expansions through grade separations, double tracking, etc. Vision Planning Integrated ticketing investments

Baseline 2040 Ridership (Draft Results) County to County Draw Loads Results show large increase in rail ridership demand due to HSR in 2040 However, market potential for networked services is unrealized Base Year 2040 Baseline 2016 FRA Rail Program Delivery Meeting

Integrated Network 2040 Scenario (Draft Results) Results show huge increase in rail ridership demand Satisfies a hugely large market potential for networked services County to County Draw Loads Base Year 2040 Demonstration 2016 FRA Rail Program Delivery Meeting

Driving Operating and Maintenance Costs Down Changes in rolling stock Changes in speed Changes in turnaround time Changes in travel distances It is important to note that the factors listed here on this slide contribute to drive operating and maintenance costs down on a cost per train mile and cost per seat mile. We will revisit these benchmark metrics in a later slide in this section.

Assumptions – Unit Cost Adjustments Unit costs decrease by 10% - Intercity revenue train crew costs to account for decrease in overtime costs 25% - Intercity costs associated with train frequencies to account for more efficient utilization of terminal-based crews 33% - Intercity marketing-related costs to account for improvements in marketing technology Unit costs increase by 25% - Intercity and commuter MoW costs to account for increased speeds and frequencies 6.8% - Intercity fuel unit cost to account for increased speeds Unit costs calculated in the O&M cost model are based on today’s experience. In the future, certain factors may increase or decrease unit costs. [click] – (Green arrow pointing down, along with “Unit costs decrease by…” appears) Reducing overtime pay hours, having more efficient terminal-based crews, and improvements to technologies decreases unit costs by the percentages shown. [click] – (Orange arrow pointing up, along with “Unit costs increase by…” appears) Increased speeds and frequencies on right-of-way track, as well as increased fuel consumption resulting from higher speeds increase unit costs by the percentages shown. [click] – (Next slide)

Comparing Metrics – Existing versus 2040 (Draft Results) Cost per Train Mile Cost per Seat Mile 45% 65% While the O&M costs for the 2040 integrated network are higher than the O&M costs for existing (i.e., today’s) rail services, increased train speeds and frequencies, newer equipment, longer consists (i.e., higher capacity), longer travel distances, and increased operating efficiencies all contribute to driving the cost per train mile and cost per seat mile down. This slide compares the cost per train mile and cost per seat mile for today’s services (i.e, 2015) and the 2040 integrated network. The blue bars show the existing cost per train mile and existing cost per seat mile. The green bars show the 2040 integrated network cost per train mile and cost per seat mile. The 2040 integrated network has a 45% lower cost per train mile, and a 65% lower cost per seat mile over today’s service. 2015 2040 2015 2040 All costs are in 2015$

Near-Term Tools Supporting Rail Plan Vision State Funding Priority on Transit-Rail Integration Focus of cap and trade funding for transit and rail Guiding future interregional project selection Improved Existing Services Improved network planning & operations Significantly increased capital investment Improved Customer Experience Next generation smart cards and mobile ticketing More extensive ticketing and service integration Long Range Planning with Vision in Mind Not-to-preclude framework for planning and investment Regional strategic planning focused on future service goals

Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Continuous Funding Cap-and-Trade Auction Proceeds Multi-year program (FY14-16, FY16-18, FY 18-23) continuous

Proposed Additional Rail Funding Governor’s Transportation Funding Package Additional $500 million per year from cap and trade, conditioned on extension of cap and trade on a 2/3 vote $400 million Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program $100 million Active Transportation Program Early debt repayment providing over $80 million per year over the next three fiscal years Five Year Program to be adopted by June 30, 2018