August 2007 www. camsys. com
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership
and Revenue Forecasting Study
Ridership and Revenue Forecasts
prepared for
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
and the California High- Speed Rail Authority
prepared by
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
draft
report
draft report
Bay Area/ California High- Speed
Rail Ridership and Revenue
Forecasting Study
Ridership and Revenue Forecasts
prepared for
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
and the California High- Speed Rail Authority
prepared by
Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
555 12th Street, Suite 1600
Oakland, California 94607
date
August 2007
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. i
7530.008
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction......................................................................................................... 1- 1
1.1 Contents of This Report ............................................................................. 1- 1
1.2 Related Reports ........................................................................................... 1- 1
1.3 Definitions ................................................................................................... 1- 1
2.0 Baseline Ridership Forecasts ............................................................................ 2- 1
2.1 Summary Results for Base Alternatives .................................................. 2- 1
2.2 Mode Share for Interregional Travel Markets ........................................ 2- 2
2.3 HST Ridership by Modal Source .............................................................. 2- 4
2.4 HST Ridership by Trip Purpose ............................................................... 2- 5
2.5 Interregional HST Ridership by Travel Market ..................................... 2- 7
2.6 HST Revenue by Market............................................................................ 2- 8
2.7 Station Boardings........................................................................................ 2- 8
3.0 Sensitivity Tests .................................................................................................. 3- 1
4.0 Pacheco Alternatives .......................................................................................... 4- 1
4.1 Network alternatives.................................................................................. 4- 1
4.2 Alignment and Station Alternatives ........................................................ 4- 3
5.0 Altamont Alternatives........................................................................................ 5- 1
5.1 Network Alternatives................................................................................. 5- 1
5.2 Alignment and Station Alternatives ........................................................ 5- 4
6.0 Altamont with Pacheco Alternatives............................................................... 6- 1
Appendix A. Ridership Tables ............................................................................. A- 1
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. iii
List of Tables
Table 2.1 Annual Ridership Summary – Base Alternatives................................ 2- 2
Table 2.2 Percent Diversion to HST by Mode....................................................... 2- 4
Table 2.3 HST Station Boardings for Baseline Pacheco Alternative ( P1) ........ 2- 10
Table 2.4 HST Station Boardings for Baseline Altamont Alternative ( A1)..... 2- 11
Table 3.1 Level of Service Sensitivity Tests for High- Speed Rail....................... 3- 1
Table 3.2 Cost Sensitivity Tests for High- Speed Rail........................................... 3- 3
Table A. 1 Pacheco Network Alternatives ............................................................. A- 3
Table A. 2 P1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco........................................ A- 4
Table A. 3 P2 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland................................................. A- 5
Table A. 4 P3 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland...................... A- 6
Table A. 5 P4 – Pacheco to San Jose......................................................................... A- 7
Table A. 6 P5 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland via
Transbay Tube......................................................................................... A- 8
Table A. 7 P6 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland via
Transbay Tube......................................................................................... A- 9
Table A. 8 Pacheco Alignment and Station Alternatives ................................... A- 10
Table A. 9 NP1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via GEA North....... A- 11
Table A. 10 NP2 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco ( King Street
Station).................................................................................................... A- 12
Table A. 11 NP3 – Pacheco to San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco............... A- 13
Table A. 12 NP4 – Pacheco to San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco............... A- 14
Table A. 13 NP5 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via Downtown
Modesto.................................................................................................. A- 15
Table A. 14 NP6 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via Castle Air
Force Base............................................................................................... A- 16
Table A. 15 NP7 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th Street Station)........ A- 17
Table A. 16 Altamont Network Alternatives......................................................... A- 18
Table A. 17 A1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco................................... A- 20
Table A. 18 A2 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland ........................................... A- 21
Table A. 19 A3 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco ................ A- 22
Table A. 20 A4 – Altamont to San Jose ................................................................... A- 23
List of Tables, continued
iv Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
7530.008
Table A. 21 A5 – Altamont to San Francisco.......................................................... A- 24
Table A. 22 A6 – Altamont to Oakland................................................................... A- 25
Table A. 23 A7 – Altamont to Union City .............................................................. A- 26
Table A. 24 A8 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco – Peninsula Route.. A- 27
Table A. 25 A9 – Altamont to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland – No
Bay Crossing Route .............................................................................. A- 28
Table A. 26 A10 – Altamont to Oakland and San Francisco via Transbay
Tube ........................................................................................................ A- 29
Table A. 27 A11 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco via
Transbay Tube....................................................................................... A- 30
Table A. 28 Altamont Pass Alignment and Station Alternatives........................ A- 31
Table A. 29 NA1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Pleasanton
Bart .......................................................................................................... A- 32
Table A. 30 NA2 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via I- 580/ UPRR
Station..................................................................................................... A- 33
Table A. 31 NA3 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Tracy Ace
Station..................................................................................................... A- 34
Table A. 32 NA4 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Livermore
Downtown Station................................................................................ A- 35
Table A. 33 NA5 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Briggsmore
Station..................................................................................................... A- 36
Table A. 34 NA6 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via the Fremont
Bridge ..................................................................................................... A- 37
Table A. 35 NA7 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco ( King Street
Station).................................................................................................... A- 38
Table A. 36 NA8 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th Street Station) .... A- 39
Table A. 37 NA9 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland – BNSF Alignment ...... A- 40
Table A. 38 AP1 – Altamont plus Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco ........ A- 41
Table A. 39 AP1 – Altamont plus Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco ........ A- 42
Table A. 40 AP2 – Altamont plus Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland................. A- 43
Table A. 41 AP3 – Altamont plus Pacheco to San Jose, Oakland, and San
Francisco................................................................................................. A- 44
Table A. 42 AP4 – Altamont plus Pacheco to San Jose......................................... A- 45
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. v
List of Figures
Figure 1.1 Regional Groupings in California Statewide Travel Model .............. 1- 3
Figure 2.1 Pacheco Mode Shares for Key Markets................................................. 2- 3
Figure 2.2 Altamont Mode Shares for Key Markets .............................................. 2- 3
Figure 2.3 Source of Interregional HST Trips......................................................... 2- 4
Figure 2.4 Statewide Interregional HST Ridership by Trip Purpose .................. 2- 5
Figure 2.5 HST Ridership by Trip Purpose to/ from the Bay Area ..................... 2- 6
Figure 2.6 Annual Intraregional HST Ridership by Trip Purpose Within
the Bay Area ............................................................................................. 2- 6
Figure 2.7 Total Annual HST Ridership ( Millions) by Travel Market ................ 2- 7
Figure 2.8 Total Annual HST Revenue by Travel Market ( Millions of 2005
Dollars) ...................................................................................................... 2- 8
Figure 2.9 Base HST Boardings by Station ( Millions of Annual Boardings)...... 2- 9
Figure 4.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Pacheco Network Alternatives ................... 4- 2
Figure 4.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Pacheco Network Alternatives...................... 4- 2
Figure 4.3 Annual Boardings, Pacheco Alignment Alternatives ......................... 4- 4
Figure 4.4 2030 Annual Revenue, Pacheco Alignment Alternatives................... 4- 4
Figure 5.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont Network Alternatives................. 5- 3
Figure 5.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont Network Alternatives ................... 5- 4
Figure 5.3 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont Network Alternatives................. 5- 5
Figure 5.4 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont Network Alternatives ................... 5- 5
Figure 6.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont plus Pacheco Alternatives.......... 6- 2
Figure 6.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont plus Pacheco Alternatives ............ 6- 2
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1- 1
1.0 Introduction
1.1 CONTENTS OF THIS REPORT
The purpose of this report is to document and analyze 2030 high- speed rail
ridership for the set of alignment and network alternatives compared in the Draft
Bay Area to Central Valley High Speed Train ( HST) Program Environmental Impact
Report/ Environmental Impact Statement ( DEIR/ S) published in July 2007.
Section 2.0 of this report analyzes for the overall HST system and specific travel
markets served by high- speed rail in terms of geography, original travel mode,
and trip purpose using a base Altamont and Pacheco alignments. Section 3.0
describes results from several sensitivity tests that were conducted to examine
the effects of different level of service and cost assumptions. Sections 4.0 through
7.0 provide an overview of the results from all the network and alignment
alternatives. Detailed output from the 37 modeled alternatives is provided in
tabular form in Appendix A.
1.2 RELATED REPORTS
There are a number of documents that support the work presented in this report.
Operating assumptions for all auto, conventional rail, air, and high- speed rail are
detailed in Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting
Study Levels of Service Assumptions and Forecast Alternatives. Detailed information
on the network and alignment alternatives for HST can be found in Section 7 of
the DEIR/ S.
1.3 DEFINITIONS
Most of the graphs and tables in this report distinguish between “ interregional”
and “ intraregional” travel, with interregional trips also being divided into “ short”
and “ long” travel:
· An interregional trip is one that begins in one region and ends in another.
· An intraregional trip is one that begins in the same region that it ends.
Intraregional HST trips only occurs in regions with more than on HST station
( SCAG, SANDAG, and MTC), but the California Statewide Travel Model for
High- Speed Rail included intraregional auto travel in all regions.
· An interregional short trip is one that is less than 100 miles from origin to
destination as defined by the auto distance.
· An interregional long trip is greater than or equal to 100 miles.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
1- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
California was divided into 14 regions for purposes of California Statewide
Travel Model for High- Speed Rail development and application. These
14 regions, which are displayed in Figure 1.1, are: Association of Monterey Bay
Area Governments ( AMBAG), Central Coast, Far North, Fresno and Madera
Counties, Kern County, South San Joaquin Valley, Merced County, Sacramento
Area Council of Governments ( SACOG), San Diego Association of Governments
( SANDAG), San Joaquin County, Stanislaus County, Western Sierra Nevada,
Metropolitan Transportation Commission ( MTC), and Southern California
Association of Governments ( SCAG).
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 1- 3
Figure 1.1 Regional Groupings in California Statewide Travel
Model
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 1
2.0 Baseline Ridership Forecasts
This section discusses characteristics of year 2030 HST ridership in terms of
geographic markets, trip purposes, and modes from which HST riders are
diverted. It also compares the sources of ridership versus revenue and station
level boardings using base alternatives for Altamont and Pacheco Pass
alignments ( A1 and P2).
Both alternatives have Southern California termini in San Diego and Irvine, with
identical HST alignments and station locations from Fresno southward. Both
alternatives also have Northern California termini in Sacramento and San
Francisco, with service also provided to San Jose. Within Northern California,
common HST station locations were modeled in Merced, Modesto, Stockton,
Sacramento, San Francisco, Millbrae, Redwood City, and San Jose. The basic
HST operating plan in terms of overall service levels is identical.
Key differences between A1 and P1 exist with some station locations, the fare
structure, and the operating plan for the Bay Area termini. In addition to the
station locations mentioned above, the Altamont ( A1) Alternative has HST
stations in Warm Springs, Bernal/ I- 680, Modesto ( Downtown), and Tracy, while
Pacheco ( P1) has stations in Gilroy, Modesto ( Briggsmore), and Morgan Hill.
While the distance- based fare policy is identical for both alternatives, alignment
differences lead to slight fare differences in many station pair. Finally, the
Altamont Alternative ( A1) has dual termini in San Francisco and San Jose, with
HST service from Sacramento and Southern California split to these two Bay
Area termini. Since the Pacheco Alternative ( P1) serves all Bay Area stations on a
single alignment, there is no HST service split within the Bay Area. Ridership
forecasts for the two base alternatives ( A1 and P1) and several sensitivity tests
were prepared for both 2000 and 2030 time periods. Ridership forecasts were
also prepared for other Altamont and Pacheco alternatives for the 2030 time
period.
2.1 SUMMARY RESULTS FOR BASE ALTERNATIVES
The annual boardings forecast for the Altamont and Pacheco baseline HST
alternatives are presented in Table 2.1. Overall the Pacheco alternative ( P1) has
higher projected ridership with over 93 million expected annual boardings
compared to 87.9 million for the Altamont alternative ( A1). The preference of the
P1 alternative is most pronounced in the Bay Area and Southern California due
to quicker travel times between these two regions. The Altamont alternative
suffers from the division of service between San Jose and San Francisco termini
once trains enter the Bay Area. The split effectively doubles the average train
headways into and out of the Bay Area for individual stations resulting in
decreased ridership. The Altamont Alternative produces more boardings in the
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
2- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Sacramento and Stockton area due to shorter travel time to the Bay Area
compared to the Pacheco Alternative.
The P1 and A1 alternatives have similar forecasts for annual intraregional
boardings ( roughly 23 million). Intraregional boardings for the Altamont
alternative are slightly higher since this alternative provides direct service in two
major travel markets ( Bernal/ I- 680 to/ from San Jose; Bernal/ I- 680 to/ from San
Francisco and the Peninsula) in which HST is substantially faster than other
transit options. The Pacheco alternative has a similar magnitude of intraregional
boardings, but instead operates as a complementary express service to Caltrain
between Gilroy and San Francisco while taking advantage of Caltrain’s more
extensive network of stations.
Results for 35 additional alternatives are presented in Sections 4.0 through 6.0 of
this report.
Table 2.1 Annual Ridership Summary – Base Alternatives
Annual Ridership for Base Alternatives
Pacheco Base ( P1) Altamont Base ( A1)
Bay Area 22,375,000 19,115,000
Sacramento/ Stockton 8,758,000 9,551,000
San Joaquin Valley 7,740,000 7,531,000
Southern California 55,017,000 51,713,000
Total Annual Boardings ( Inter and
Intraregional )
93,890,000 87,910,000
Intraregional Boardings 23,045,000 23,374,000
% Boardings Intraregional 25% 27%
2.2 MODE SHARE FOR INTERREGIONAL TRAVEL
MARKETS
Interregional travel shares by mode of travel are shown in Figures 2.1 and 2.2 for
the base Pacheco and Altamont alternatives, respectively1. Mode shares are very
similar between the two alternatives, with Pacheco achieving an overall 8 percent
1 For the remaining figures and tables in Section 2.0, the “ San Joaquin Valley” market
includes San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, and Kern Counties. The
“ Sacramento” market includes the six- county SACOG region. The “ Bay Area” market
includes the nine- county MTC region. The “ Southern California” market includes the
SCAG and SANDAG regions.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 3
HST mode share, and Altamont achieving a 7 percent HST mode share. More
notable differences can be seen for a few specific travel markets. For the Bay
Area to/ from Sacramento market, Altamont exhibits a higher HST mode share
than Pacheco due to Altamont’s more direct alignment and faster travel times in
the market. For similar reasons, Pacheco exhibits a higher mode share for the
Bay Area to/ from AMBAG market. For the Bay Area to/ from SCAG and San
Diego markets, the Pacheco alternative exhibits a higher HST mode share than
Altamont due to Pacheco’s slightly faster travel times between the Bay Area from
Southern California and Altamont’s split of HST service between San Francisco
and San Jose termini.
Figure 2.1 Pacheco Mode Shares for Key Markets
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Bay Area to/ from SCAG
Bay Area to/ from San Diego
Bay Area to/ from AMBAG
Bay Area to/ from Sacramento
Bay Area to/ from San Joaquin Valley
Southern California to/ from San Joaquin Valley
SCAG to/ from San Diego
Within San Joaquin Valley
San Joaquin Valley to/ from Sacramento
All of California
Auto Air HSR CVR
Figure 2.2 Altamont Mode Shares for Key Markets
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Bay Area to/ from SCAG
Bay Area to/ from San Diego
Bay Area to/ from AMBAG
Bay Area to/ from Sacramento
Bay Area to/ from San Joaquin Valley
Southern California to/ from San Joaquin Valley
SCAG to/ from San Diego
Within San Joaquin Valley
San Joaquin Valley to/ from Sacramento
All of California
Auto Air HSR CVR
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
2- 4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
2.3 HST RIDERSHIP BY MODAL SOURCE
Figure 2.3 displays the original modal source of HST interregional ridership. The
modal source pattern is nearly identical for the Altamont and Pacheco
alternatives, with the vast majority of HST trips ( about 75 percent) being diverted
from auto. About 15 percent of HST trips are diverted from air and eight percent
are diverted from conventional rail. About two percent of HST ridership is
induced; these trips will not occur in the absence of HST ridership.
The data in Table 2.2 indicate that about 6 percent of interregional auto trips in
California will divert to HST in year 2030. The diversion rate is 33 percent for air
travel and 27 percent for CVR. It is important to note that the CVR diversion
rates do not reflect potential ridership gains as CVR is used as an access or egress
option for HST, particularly within the Central Valley. Therefore, it is likely that
the net diversion from CVR will be less than 27 percent.
Figure 2.3 Source of Interregional HST Trips
Table 2.2 Percent Diversion to HST by Mode
Percent of Interregional Statewide Trips Diverted
Source Mode Pacheco Base ( P1) Altamont Base ( A1)
Auto 6% 6%
Air 33% 33%
Conventional Rail 27% 27%
Pacheco Base ( P1)
74%
16%
8% 2%
Auto
Air
CVR
Induced
Altamont Base ( A1)
76%
15%
7% 2%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 5
2.4 HST RIDERSHIP BY TRIP PURPOSE
Annual interregional high- speed rail ridership by trip purpose, as shown in
Figure 2.4, is identical between the Altamont and Pacheco baseline alternatives.
For both alternatives, business and commute trips represent about 55 percent of
interregional HST travel, with recreation representing 34 percent and other
purposes representing 11 percent.
This similarity between alternatives is repeated for trips to/ from the Bay Area
( Figure 2.5). However, recreational trips represent 43 percent of inter- regional
HST travel to/ from the Bay Area, an increase from the 34 percent of statewide
travel. Commute trips represent 25 percent of HST trips to/ from the Bay Area
compared to 30 percent statewide. Business trips represent 19 percent of HST
trips to/ from the Bay Area compared to 25 percent statewide.
A comparison of annual intraregional HST ridership by trip purpose within the
Bay Area, as shown in Figure 2.6, shows a large difference between the Altamont
and Pacheco alternatives. Business and commute trips represent 80 percent of
intraregional HST trips for the Altamont alternative, but only 53 percent for the
Pacheco alternative. These trip purpose differences can be traced to the factors
described in Section 2.1 that underlie intraregional boardings. Namely, the
Altamont alternative connects major commute markets between the East Bay and
both San Jose and San Francisco; HST service in these corridors would be
substantially faster than other available transit options and thus is likely to
attract a disproportionate share of commute trips. The Pacheco alternative
serves a corridor that has a greater proportion of non- residential activity, and is
therefore less likely to attract commute trips and more likely to attract
recreational, shopping and other trips.
Figure 2.4 Statewide Interregional HST Ridership by Trip Purpose
Pacheco
11%
30%
34%
25%
Altamont
11%
30%
34%
25%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
2- 6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Figure 2.5 HST Ridership by Trip Purpose to / from the Bay Area
Pacheco
13%
25%
43%
19%
Altamont
13%
25%
43%
19%
Figure 2.6 Annual Intraregional HST Ridership by Trip Purpose
Within the Bay Area
Pacheco
( Total = 4.47 million)
53%
47%
Altamont
( Total = 4.80 million)
80%
20%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 7
2.5 INTERREGIONAL HST RIDERSHIP BY TRAVEL
MARKET
Total annual interregional HST ridership for key travel markets is displayed in
Figure 2.7. Noticeable differences exist between the alternatives in the Los
Angeles to/ from San Francisco and Sacramento to/ from San Francisco markets.
The Altamont alternative has higher ridership in the Sacramento to/ from San
Francisco market, whereas the Pacheco alternative has higher ridership in the
Los Angeles- San Francisco market. These ridership differences arise from
differences in HST travel times and fares between the two alternatives for
station- pairs in these markets. For similar reasons reason, the Other Areas to/
from San Joaquin valley market exhibits slightly higher ridership for Altamont,
and the San Diego to/ from San Francisco market shows slightly higher ridership
for Pacheco.
Figure 2.7 Total Annual HST Ridership ( Millions) by Travel
Market2
0.0
3.0
6.0
9.0
12.0
15.0
18.0
21.0
Los Angeles -
Sacramento
Los Angeles -
San Diego
Los Angeles -
San Francisco
Sacramento -
San Francisco
Sacramento -
San Diego
San Diego -
San Francisco
Major Cities -
San Joaquin
Valley
Other Areas -
San Joaquin
Valley
Altamont ( A1) - 87.9 million total trips
Pacheco ( P1) - 93.9 million total trips
2 In Figures 2.7 and 2.8, “ Sacramento” is defined as the six- county SACOG region, “ San
Francisco” is the MTC region, “ Los Angeles” is the SCAG region, “ San Joaquin Valley”
is San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno and Kern Counties, “ San Diego” is
San Diego County, and the “ Major Cities” are the SCAG and SACOG regions as well as
San Diego.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
2- 8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
2.6 HST REVENUE BY MARKET
Total annual interregional HST revenue for key travel markets is displayed in
Figure 2.8. Some markets contribute more to the total revenue than total
ridership due to the distance- based fare structure. The Los Angeles to/ from San
Francisco market contributes the most to revenue even though it is only the
second or third largest ridership market. Revenue generation in the Sacramento
to/ from San Francisco market is nearly identical between the two alternatives in
spite of the fact that Altamont is projected to have higher HST ridership than
Pacheco in this market. This result arises from the shorter average travel
distance ( and associated lower fare) in this market for Altamont compared to
Pacheco. Pacheco generates higher revenue than Altamont in four of the seven
travel markets, with Altamont having higher revenue generation in one market
and nearly identical revenue generation in the remaining two markets.
Figure 2.8 Total Annual HST Revenue by Travel Market
( Millions of 2005 Dollars)
$ 0
$ 200
$ 400
$ 600
$ 800
$ 1,000
Los Angeles -
Sacramento
Los Angeles -
San Diego
Los Angeles -
San Francisco
Sacramento -
San Francisco
Sacramento -
San Diego
San Diego - San
Francisco
Major Cities -
San Joaquin
Valley
Other Areas -
San Joaquin
Valley
Altamont ( A1) - $ 2.84 billion total revenue
Pacheco ( P1) - $ 3.10 billion total revenue
2.7 STATION BOARDINGS
Annual station boardings for Altamont and Pacheco alternatives are shown in
Figure 2.9 with detailed boardings provided in Tables 2.3 and 2.4). The Transbay
and San Jose stations have noticeably higher boardings for the Pacheco
alternatives compared to Altamont, while the opposite situation exists for
Sacramento and the two San Joaquin County stations ( Stockton and Tracy).
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 9
Stations from Bakersfield southward show lower boardings for the Altamont
Alternative, which is related to the split HST operating plan between San Jose
and San Francisco termini.
Figure 2.9 Base HST Boardings by Station
( Millions of Annual Boardings)
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Transbay
Millbrae
RedwoodCity
Warm Springs
Morgan Hill
San Jose
Bernal
Gilroy
Sacramento
Stockton
Tracy Downtown
Modest Downtown
Modesto Briggsmore
Merced
Fresno
Bakersfield
Palmdale
Sylmar
Burbank
LA/ Union Station
Norwalk
Anaheim
Irvine
City of Industry
Ontario
Riverside
Temecula
Escondido
University City
San Diego
Altamont Baseline Alternative ( A1) Pacheco Baseline Alternative ( P1)
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
2- 10 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table 2.3 HST Station Boardings for Base Pacheco Alternative
( P1)
Station Name Annual Boardings
San Francisco – Transbay 11,699,200
Millbrae 1,180,700
Redwood City 2,014,000
San Jose 5,338,000
Morgan Hill 363,000
Gilroy 1,767,000
Sacramento 7,019,000
Stockton 1,711,000
Modesto Briggsmore 1,290,000
Merced 641,000
Fresno 2,573,2000
Bakersfield 3,210,800
Palmdale 4,355,500
Sylmar 5,681,200
Burbank 1,698,900
Los Angeles Union Station 8,125,200
Norwalk 590,100
Anaheim 3,102,600
Irvine 2,926,700
City of Industry 3,619,600
Ontario 3,584,700
Riverside 6,012,700
Temecula 3,075,300
Escondido 3,382,800
University City 2,279,800
San Diego 6,649,500
Total Ridership 93,890,000
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2- 11
Table 2.4 HST Station Boardings for Base Altamont Alternative
( A1)
Station Name Annual Boardings
San Francisco – Transbay Terminal 8,642,500
Millbrae 1,070,600
Redwood City 1,229,900
Warm Springs 474,000
San Jose 3,052,300
Bernal 4,042,400
Sacramento 7,653,200
Stockton 1,251,800
Tracy Downtown 818,000
Modesto Downtown 1,618,000
Merced 683,300
Fresno 2,568,500
Bakersfield 2,797,000
Palmdale 4,025,100
Sylmar 5,279,800
Burbank 1,633,600
Los Angeles – Union Station 7,700,800
Norwalk 538,000
Anaheim 2,958,100
Irvine 2,771,600
City of Industry 3,483,900
Ontario 3,403,400
Riverside 5,610,600
Temecula 2,884,400
Escondido 3,224,000
University City 2,158,400
San Diego 6,336,800
Total Ridership 87,910,000
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3- 1
3.0 Sensitivity Tests
A series of sensitivity tests were conducted to test the impacts of changes in level
of service on HST rail ridership and revenue. These tests were designed to assist
in developing an improved operating plan and optimum fares, and to
understand the impacts of potential changes in assumptions to the air and auto
modes.
The initial year 2030 HST operating plan used for CSTM development and
testing was derived from the High Speed Rail Authority’s ( HSRA) Year 2000
Business Plan3. Results from various sensitivity tests, which are displayed in
Table 3.1, indicated that modifications and enhancements in HST frequencies can
support higher ridership. Based on these sensitivity test results, a revised
operating plan was developed for use in this alternatives analysis and the
DEIR/ S that included a doubling of HST frequency for local service between the
Bay Area and Los Angeles, the Bay Area and Sacramento, San Diego and
Sacramento, and Los Angeles and the San Joaquin Valley. Targeted increases in
these corridors yielded a total systemwide increase of 30 percent in the number
of daily train operations.
Additional sensitivity tests were run with air and auto travel times increased by
six percent in all travel markets to approximate the assumptions used in
Sensitivity Scenarios 2 and 3 in the Year 2000 Business Plan. Results of this
sensitivity test, also shown in Table 3.1, indicate that boardings and revenue
increased at the same relative rate as air and auto travel times.
3 “ Building a High- Speed Train System for California, Final Business Plan”; California
High- Speed Rail Authority; June 2000.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
3- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table 3.1 Level of Service Sensitivity Tests for HST
Percent Change from Base
Sensitivity Test Change in Level of Service Boardings Revenues
High- speed rail level of service tests
Maintain average
daily headways
Shift HST service from peak to off- peak
periods to reach consistent headways
throughout the day
- 15% - 14%
Universal increase in
HST frequency
HST frequencies doubled in all markets
compared to Year 2000 Business Plan
15% 16%
Targeted increase in
HST frequency
HST frequencies doubled compared to
Year 2000 Business Plan for:
· Bay Area - San Joaquin Valley
· Bay Area - Sacramento
· SCAG – San Joaquin Valley
· San Diego - Sacramento
22% 24%
Air and auto level of service tests
Higher air/ auto times 6% increase based on a 30- minute
increase in travel time from San
Francisco to Los Angeles by car
6% 6%
Assumptions regarding air and auto cost increases remain a difficult issue given
the volatility in these costs in the past five years alone. Results from a series of
cost sensitivity tests are displayed in Table 3.2.4 The sensitivity tests do show
that HST ridership is highly sensitive to the assumptions of air and auto costs,
and can increase as much as 46 percent with a 50 percent increase in air and auto
costs, which seems quite reasonable compared to current trends in these costs.
While increases in the HST fare predictably decrease ridership, the revenue for
interregional HST trips still increases by two percent ( test 14 in Table 3.2). This
finding is important in case higher revenue is needed in order to support the
HST operations and capital costs. However, if the fare increases substantially
( 75 percent in test number 8), the revenues from the increased fares cannot offset
the decrease in boardings enough to provide higher systemwide revenue in spite
of a slightly increased auto operating cost ( 25 percent).
4 The base air/ auto cost assumptions and HST fare structure were used for all model
runs reported in prior and subsequent sections of this report as well as in the DEIR/ S.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 3- 3
Table 3.2 Cost Sensitivity Tests for HST
Change in Level of Service Percent Changea
Test No.
HSR Fare
Increase
Air and Auto Cost
Increaseb HSR Boardings HSR Revenues
1 + 25% + 25% + 35% + 37%
2 0% + 25% + 22% + 22%
3 + 35% + 35% + 35% + 38%
4 + 50% + 25% + 15% + 18%
5 + 75% + 75% + 35% + 43%
6 + 150% + 200% + 72% + 81%
7 + 200% + 150% + 0.1% + 4%
8 + 75% + 25% - 2% 0%
8 + 60% + 20% + 4% + 6%
10 + 20% + 50% + 11% + 13%
11 + 50% + 25% + 15% + 18%
12 + 25% + 50% + 13% + 19%
13 + 100% + 50% - 6% + 1%
14 + 25% 0% - 13% + 2%
15 0% + 50% + 46% + 53%
a Percent change in interregional boardings and revenue from the Altamont Base Alternative ( A1).
b This is an increase in airfares and in the distance- based auto operating cost. There is no change
in tolls or parking costs for these scenarios.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4- 1
4.0 Pacheco Alternatives
Five network alternatives and seven alignment alternatives were tested using the
Pacheco pass. A summary description of the network alternatives is provided in
Appendix A, Table A. 1, while the alignment and station alternatives are
summarized in Table A. 8. A detailed description of each of these alternatives can
be found in Section 7 of the DEIR/ S.
4.1 NETWORK ALTERNATIVES
Detailed ridership at Bay- Area and Central Valley stations and total ridership
and revenue for the network alternatives can be found in Appendix A, Tables
A. 2 through A. 75. For each alternative, the amount of service is held constant in
order to better compare the network changes. In the case of the combined San
Francisco and Oakland alternative ( P3), service from San Jose is split
proportionally between the two Bay Area termini ( based on the ridership of the
P1 and P2 alternatives), which decreases HST frequency to each individual
station north of San Jose compared to the base ( P1). Even though this alternative
directly reaches more travelers in terms of station location, the decreased
frequency to each station is perceived by riders as a service reduction, leading to
lower ridership and revenues. The San Jose terminus ( P4) increases the number
of boardings in Stockton/ Sacramento due to a shift in people from the North and
East Bay now driving to Sacramento or Stockton to access HST service to
Southern California. The Transbay alternatives ( P5 and P6) both have higher
ridership and revenue than the base ( P1) because service is not split and every
train serves all three destinations ( San Francisco, San Jose, and Oakland).
5 Travel model results for the Pacheco network alternatives P1 through P6 reflect CSTM
runs that included HST stations in both Morgan Hill and Gilroy. These model results
are included in this report as well as the DEIR/ S for consistency purposes. The formal
definition of the Pacheco alternatives in the DEIR/ S generally includes an HST station
in either Morgan Hill or Gilroy.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
4- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Figure 4.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Pacheco Network
Alternatives
70,000,000 80,000,000 90,000,000 100,000,000
P6: Pach. To SJ, Oak., and SF via
Transbay Tube
P5: Pach. To SJ, SF, and Oak. via
Transbay Tube
P4: Pach. To San Jose
P3: Pach. To SJ, Oak. And SF
P2: Pach. To SJ and Oak.
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Boardings ( 2030)
Figure 4.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Pacheco Network
Alternatives
$ 2,400,000,000 $ 2,600,000,000 $ 2,800,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000 $ 3,200,000,000
P6: Pach. To SJ, Oak., and SF via
Transbay Tube
P5: Pach. To SJ, SF, and Oak. via
Transbay Tube
P4: Pach. To San Jose
P3: Pach. To SJ, Oak. And SF
P2: Pach. To SJ and Oak.
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Revenue ( 2 0 3 0 )
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 4- 3
4.2 ALIGNMENT AND STATION ALTERNATIVES
The Pacheco Pass alignment and station alternative results are summarized in
Appendix A, Table A. 9 through A. 15. NP1, which uses the GEA north alignment
to the Central Valley, has an overall decrease in boardings due to longer travel
times between the Bay Area and Southern California and a drop in overall
service to the Merced Station. However, there is an increase in the number of
boardings in the Bay Area and Stockton/ Sacramento due to improved travel
times between these two regions. NP6, which uses the Palo Alto station instead
of Redwood City and eliminates the Morgan Hill station near Gilroy, has slightly
higher interregional boardings at Palo Alto.
NP4, which has slightly slower travel times in the Central Valley, has a negligible
decrease in boardings and revenue. Substituting the Modesto Downtown station
for Modesto/ Briggsmore ( NP5) leads to a small increase in ridership. The
overall ridership is similar when using Castle Air Force Base instead of
downtown Merced ( NP6). However, riders are traveling from farther away to
visit Castle AFB. This is evident in the increase in the number of “ long”
boardings at Castle compared to Merced in the P1 alternative. These boardings
are likely coming from the Bay Area, where there is a very slight increase in
ridership.
An Oakland 12th Street station ( NP7) has lower overall system ridership than an
Oakland 7th Street Station or either of the San Francisco termini. Interregional
boardings are substantially lower at 12th Street compared to the 7th Street station,
indicating that interregional travelers may find the 7th Street station more
convenient for regionwide connections such as BART to San Francisco.
However, Oakland 12th Street experiences more intraregional boardings
compared to the P2 alternative ( which uses the 7th Street station).
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
4- 4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Figure 4.3 Annual Boardings, Pacheco Alignment Alternatives
89,000,000 90,000,000 91,000,000 92,000,000 93,000,000 94,000,000 95,000,000
NP7: Pach. To Sj and Oak. 12th St
Station
NP6: Pach. To SJ and SF via Castle
AFB
NP5: Pach. To Sj and SF via Downtown
Modesto
NP4: Pach. To SJ and SF via BNSF
NP3: Pach. To SJ, Palo Alto, and SF
NP2: Pach. To SJ and SF King Street
Station
NP1: Pach. To SJ and SF via GEA
North
P2: Pach. To SJ and Oak.
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Boardings ( 2030)
Figure 4.4 2030 Annual Revenue, Pacheco Alignment
Alternatives
$ 2,920,000,000 $ 2,960,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000 $ 3,040,000,000 $ 3,080,000,000 $ 3,120,000,000
NP7: Pach. To Sj and Oak. 12th St
Station
NP6: Pach. To SJ and SF via Castle
AFB
NP5: Pach. To Sj and SF via Downtown
Modesto
NP4: Pach. To SJ and SF via BNSF
NP3: Pach. To SJ, Palo Alto, and SF
NP2: Pach. To SJ and SF King Street
Station
NP1: Pach. To SJ and SF via GEA
North
P2: Pach. To SJ and Oak.
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Revenue ( 2030)
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5- 1
5.0 Altamont Alternatives
A total of 11 network alternatives and nine alignment alternatives tested that
utilized the Altamont pass. A summary description of the network alternatives
is provided in Appendix A, Table A. 17, while the alignment and station
alternatives are summarized in Table A. 28. A detailed description of each of
these alternatives can be found in Section 7 of the DEIR/ S. Tables detailing
ridership at Bay Area and Central Valley stations, and total ridership and
revenue can be found in Table A. 17 to A. 37.
Several operating assumptions are incorporated into the forecasts for the
Altamont alternatives:
· The total number of train- operations per day is equal to Pacheco alternatives.
· Service to the Bay Area is split between the North ( San Francisco or Oakland)
and South ( San Jose) in many alternatives. It was assumed that any service
would be weighted towards the north 65/ 35. The no- bay- crossing alternative
( A9) is weighted 65/ 35 towards the San Francisco terminus ( versus Oakland).
· In alternative A3 service is split between San Francisco and Oakland termini
according to the total ridership of A5 ( San Francisco- only terminus)
compared to A6 ( Oakland- only terminus).
· The no- bay alternative ( A9) includes a dwell time at the San Jose station that
is required for the train to turn- around.
· All express trains stop at the first station before/ last station after the service
is split. In most alternatives this station is Bernal.
Sections 5.1 and 5.2 discuss the Altamont network and alignment alternatives.
5.1 NETWORK ALTERNATIVES
The network alternative results for the Altamont Pass alternative are detailed in
Appendix A, Table A. 18 to A. 27, with a systemwide summary presented in Table
5.1. Overall, the base Altamont alternative ( A1) performs slightly poorer than
the Pacheco base alternative ( P1). Pacheco performs better in all regions except
for Sacramento/ Stockton, where Altamont outperforms Pacheco due to the
shorter travel times between Sacramento and the Bay Area. A major benefit of
the Altamont alternative over Pacheco is the more direct service to the major
commuter shed east of the Bay Area. While this benefit is not very evident in the
interregional boardings ( other than slightly increased ridership in Stockton and
Sacramento), there is a definite increase in commute riders within the Bay Area
itself. At a station- level, there are almost three- times as many boardings at
Bernal ( the outermost station within the Bay Area for Altamont) than the sum of
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
5- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Morgan Hill and Gilroy boardings in P1 ( the outermost Pacheco stations within
the Bay Area). However, the benefit of servicing this commuter shed in the
Altamont Alternative is mostly offset by the elimination of direct service between
San Jose and San Francisco ( San Jose has 1.2 million annual intraregional
boardings in P1 and only 720,000 in A1).
Altamont to San Jose and Oakland ( A2) performs slightly better than the base
( A1). This result is due entirely to interregional travel, as intraregional travel
within the Bay Area steeply declines when service is switched to the East Bay.
Interregional travel to the Bay Area can still reach San Francisco in comparable
time because the travel time for high- speed trains on the east side of the bay is
much faster. A2 performs slightly worse than the comparable Pacheco
alternative ( P2) and does not appear to have the same intraregional benefit to
commuters that A1 has over P1.
Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco ( A3) has the disadvantage of
service being split in three directions. As such, it performs almost eight percent
worse than the base Altamont alternative ( A1) and worse than the comparable
Pacheco alternative ( P3).
One of the features of the initial Altamont network alternatives is the necessary
division of trains entering the Bay Area to either go north to San Francisco or
Oakland or South towards San Jose. Since service frequency was found to have a
high impact on ridership, several Altamont alternatives were tested without
splitting service. There are three Altamont network alternatives that clearly
perform better than the rest in Figure 5.1. All three ( A5, A6, and A10) do not
have any splits in service in the Bay Area. The splitting of service without the
addition of trains clearly impacts the ridership of most of the Altamont
alternatives. The comparison of the revenues for these alternatives in Figure 5.2
is similar, but the advantage of non- split service is not as pronounced.
Among the Altamont alternatives with a single Bay Area terminal, those
terminating in San Francisco and Oakland perform the best ( A5 and A6)
compared to Union City and San Jose ( A7 and A4). Altamont to San Jose ( A4)
performs slightly better than the comparable Pacheco alternative ( P4). A4 has
more intraregional Bay Area boardings; however, a large portion of the
interregional traffic to the Bay Area is using the Bernal station as opposed to San
Jose, suggesting that San Jose is not their final destination within the Bay Area.
The Altamont alternatives with single destinations to San Francisco and San Jose
show that the major benefits of these alternatives are seen on an interregional
basis and actually lose intraregional trips. A7, with a single terminus at Union
City does not perform as well as the base. It suffers especially from not
providing any substantial intraregional service within the Bay Area.
Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via the Peninsula has increased ridership
compared to the base Altamont alternative ( A1). The increase, however, is
mainly due to intraregional trips, in particular the service to Palo Alto in lieu of
Redwood City. The interregional trips actually decrease in the Bay Area for this
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5- 3
alternative. This result is partially due to the longer travel times associated with
going to San Jose. A9 serves all major Bay Area destinations ( San Jose, San
Francisco, and Oakland) with service only split two- ways. Sixty- five percent of
trains serving the Bay Area go through San Jose to San Francisco, accounting for
the increased ridership at San Jose compared to the base ( normally, San Jose
receives only 35 percent of the trains in the Bay Area). There also is an increase
in intraregional ridership at San Jose, likely due to the availability of non- stop
service between it and San Francisco. This alternative performs poorer than the
base Altamont alternative ( A1). Its most notable deficiency is the increased
travel time to get to San Francisco. Trains are assessed a dwell time when
passing through San Jose to San Francisco to account for the time it takes to turn
the trains around. This dwell time severely degrades the service ( and thus the
ridership) into and out of San Francisco, Millbrae, and Redwood City.
There are two Altamont network alternatives that consider the use of a new
Transbay tube. A10 does not split service, but serves only Oakland and San
Francisco. A11 serves Oakland and San Francisco with one line and San Jose
with another, splitting service between the two 65/ 35. Both alternatives perform
better than the base Altamont alternative. A10 performs better than A11 – likely
due to the superior headways.
Figure 5.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont Network
Alternatives
70,000,000 75,000,000 80,000,000 85,000,000 90,000,000 95,000,000 100,000,000
A11: Alt. to SJ, OAK, SF via Transbay
Tube
A10: Alt. to Oak. and SF via Transbay
Tube
A9: Alt. to SJ, SF, and Oak, no bay
crossing
A8: Alt. to SJ and SF via Peninsula
A7: Alt. to Union City
A6: Alt. to Oakland
A5: Alt. to San Francisco
A4: Alt. to San Jose
A3: Alt. to SJ, Oak. and SF
A2: Alt. to SJ and Oak.
A1: Alt. to SJ and SF
Annual Boardings ( 2030)
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
5- 4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Figure 5.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont Network
Alternatives
$ 0 $ 1,000,000,000 $ 2,000,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000 $ 4,000,000,000
A11: Alt. to SJ, OAK, SF via Transbay Tube
A10: Alt. to Oak. and SF via Transbay Tube
A9: Alt. to SJ, SF, and Oak, no bay crossing
A8: Alt. to SJ and SF via Peninsula
A7: Alt. to Union City
A6: Alt. to Oakland
A5: Alt. to San Francisco
A4: Alt. to San Jose
A3: Alt. to SJ, Oak. and SF
A2: Alt. to SJ and Oak.
A1: Alt. to SJ and SF
Annua l Re v enue ( 2 0 3 0 )
5.2 ALIGNMENT AND STATION ALTERNATIVES
The alignment and station alternative results for the Altamont Pass alternatives
are detailed in Table A. 29 to A. 37. NA1, with service to the Pleasanton BART
station in lieu of Bernal performs worse than the base Altamont alternative ( A1).
However, it has slightly more Bay Area boardings than A1. While Pleasanton
has more attractiveness within the Bay Area, Bernal is more attractive to riders in
the rest of the State. Livermore/ I- 580 and Livermore/ Downtown, tested in the
NA2 and NA4 alternatives respectfully, are much less popular than Bernal.
Some of the boardings that were going to Bernal are shifted towards San Jose in
these alternatives. NA3 and NA5, predictably, show that the Tracy ACE and
Briggsmore station locations are slightly less popular than the Tracy Downtown
and Modesto downtown station locations. Using the Freemont Bridge, tested in
NA6, has no distinguishable effect on ridership or revenue. Using the King
Street station instead of the Transbay terminal ( NA7) produces lower ridership,
in particular for intraregional trips. The 12th street terminus used in the NA8
alternative has a higher ridership than both the base Altamont ( A1) as well as A2.
Using the BNSF alignment in the central valley is slightly slower, thus yields a
slight decrease in the overall ridership and revenue.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 5- 5
Figure 5.3 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont Network
Alternatives
80,000,000 82,500,000 85,000,000 87,500,000 90,000,000 92,500,000
NA9: Alt. To SJ and Oak. Via BNSF
NA8: Alt. To Sj and Oak. - 12th St.
Station
NA7: Alt. To SJ and SF - King Street
Station
NA6: Alt. To Sj and SF via Fremont
Bridge
NA5: Alt. To SJ and SF via Briggsmore
NA4: Alt. To Sj and SF via Livermore
Downtown
NA3: Alt. To SJ and SF via Tracy Ace
NA2: Alt. To SJ and SF via I-
580/ UPRR
NA1: Alt. To SJ and SF via Pleasanton
Bart
A2: Alt. to SJ and Oak.
A1: Alt. to SJ and SF via Peninsula
Annual Boardings ( 2030)
Figure 5.4 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont Network
Alternatives
$ 2,400,000,000 $ 2,600,000,000 $ 2,800,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000
NA9: Alt. To SJ and Oak. Via BNSF
NA8: Alt. To Sj and Oak. - 12th St.
Station
NA7: Alt. To SJ and SF - King Street
Station
NA6: Alt. To Sj and SF via Fremont
Bridge
NA5: Alt. To SJ and SF via Briggsmore
NA4: Alt. To Sj and SF via Livermore
Downtown
NA3: Alt. To SJ and SF via Tracy Ace
NA2: Alt. To SJ and SF via I-
580/ UPRR
NA1: Alt. To SJ and SF via Pleasanton
Bart
A2: Alt. to SJ and Oak.
A1: Alt. to SJ and SF via Peninsula
Annual Revenue ( 2030)
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 6- 1
6.0 Altamont with Pacheco
Alternatives
Four alternatives were tested using a combination of the Altamont and Pacheco
alignments. These alternatives took advantage of the quicker route between the
Bay Area and Southern California ( Pacheco), as well as the quicker route
between the Bay Area and Sacramento ( Altamont). A summary description of
the network alternatives is provided in Appendix A, Table A. 38. The assumed
number of train operations was increased to take advantage of the expanded rail
network. These assumptions/ changes include:
· The local service between Southern California and the Bay Area is increased
by 50 percent. The service for these local trains is split between Altamont
and Pacheco Alignments;
· Sacramento to Bay Area service uses the Altamont Alignment; and
· Express service between Southern California and the Bay Area uses the
Pacheco alignment.
The ridership for these alternatives is expected to be higher than other
alternatives, both due to improved service, expanded number of stations, and an
increase in the overall number of assumed trains.
Detailed ridership at Bay- Area and Central Valley stations and total ridership
and revenue for the alternatives can be found in Appendix A, Tables A. 39
through A. 42. The Altamont plus Pacheco alternative that terminates in San
Francisco ( AP1) performs better than both the Altamont and Pacheco Base
alternatives ( A1 and P1); however, the projected revenue for AP1 is not as high
as A1 or P1. The combined alternative that terminates in San Jose, San Francisco,
and Oakland ( AP3) performs the worst out of this set. Its service frequency
suffers from train service being split three- ways upon arriving in the Bay Area.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
6- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Figure 6.1 2030 Annual Boardings, Altamont plus Pacheco
Alternatives
82,000,000 84,000,000 86,000,000 88,000,000 90,000,000 92,000,000 94,000,000 96,000,000 98,000,000
AP4: Alt. Plus Pach. To San Jose
AP3: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ, Oak. And
SF
AP2: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ and Oak.
AP1: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ and SF
A1: Alt. To SJ and SF
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Boardings ( 2030)
Figure 6.2 2030 Annual Revenue, Altamont plus Pacheco
Alternatives
$ 2,700,000,000 $ 2,800,000,000 $ 2,900,000,000 $ 3,000,000,000 $ 3,100,000,000 $ 3,200,000,000
AP4: Alt. Plus Pach. To San Jose
AP3: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ, Oak. And
SF
AP2: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ and Oak.
AP1: Alt. Plus Pach. To SJ and SF
A1: Alt. To SJ and SF
P1: Pach. to SJ and SF
Annual Revenue ( 2030)
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 1
Appendix A. Ridership Tables
Definitions for Tables
Interregional trips include all trips with both ends in California and whose
origin and destination are in different regions.
Intraregional trips include trips with both ends in one of the 14 regions in the
State.
Short trips include the interregional trips that are less than 100 miles.
Long trips include the interregional trips that are longer than 100 miles.
List of stations in Southern California
· Bakersfield
· Palmdale
· Sylmar
· Burbank
· Los Angeles Union Station
· Norwalk
· Anaheim
· Irvine
· City of Industry
· Ontario
· Riverside
· Temecula
· Escondido
· University City
· San Diego
List of stations in Bay Area
· San Francisco Downtown – Transbay
· San Francisco Downtown – King Street
· Millbrae
· Redwood City
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix
A- 2 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
· Palo Alto
· Oakland – 7th Street
· Oakland – 12th Street
· Oakland Airport
· Union City
· Shinn
· Warm Springs
· San Jose
· Bernal
· Dublin
· Livermore / I- 580
· Livermore Downtown
· Morgan Hill
· Gilroy
List of stations in the Sacramento Region
· Sacramento
· Stockton
· Tracy Downtown
· Tracy ACE
List of stations in the San Joaquin Valley
· Modesto Downtown
· Modesto Briggsmore
· Merced
· Castle Air Force Base
· Fresno
· Bakersfield
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 3
Table A. 1 Pacheco Network Alternatives
Network Alternative Name and Description
P1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco
From San Francisco to San Jose, this network alternative would use the existing Caltrain rail ROW. The Pacheco and Henry Miller ( to
the UPRR ) alternatives would be used between San Jose and the Central Valley. The BNSF N/ S ( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S
( south of Merced ) alignments would be used in the Central Valley.
P2 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland
From Oakland to San Jose, this network alternative would use the Niles/ I- 880 alignment. The Pacheco and Henry Miller ( to the UPRR )
alternatives would be used between San Jose and the Central Valley. The BNSF N/ S ( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S ( south of
Merced ) alignments would be used in the Central Valley.
P3 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland
From San Francisco to San Jose, this Network Alternative would use the existing Caltrain ROW. From Oakland to San Jose, the
Niles/ I- 880 alignment would be used. The Pacheco and Henry Miller ( to the UPRR ) alternatives would be used between San Jose
and the Central Valley, and the BNSF N/ S ( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S ( south of Merced ) alignments would be used in the
Central Valley.
P4 – Pacheco to San Jose
The Pacheco and Henry Miller ( to the UPRR ) alternatives would be used between San Jose and the Central Valley, and the BNSF N/ S
( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S ( south of Merced ) alignments would be used in the Central Valley.
P5 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland via Transbay Tube
From Oakland to San Francisco, this network alternative would use a Transbay tube crossing. From San Francisco to San Jose, this
network alternative would use the existing Caltrain ROW. From San Jose, this network alternative would use the Pacheco and Henry
Miller ( to the UPRR ) alignment alternatives and the BNSF N/ S ( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S ( south of Merced ) alignments would be
used in the Central Valley.
P6 – Pacheco to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco via Transbay Tube
This network alternative would require a new Transbay tube from San Francisco to Oakland. From Oakland to San Jose, this network
alternative would use the Niles/ I- 880 alignment. From San Jose, this network alternative would use the Pacheco and Henry Miller ( to
the UPRR ) alignment alternatives and the BNSF N/ S ( north of Merced ) and UPRR N/ S ( south of Merced ) alignments in the Central
Valley.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 4 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 2 P1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,140,547 7,904,769 – 10,045,316 10,045,316 1,669,864 11,715,180
Millbrae 104,670 480,444 – 585,114 585,114 591,534 1,176,647
Redwood City 275,913 1,179,659 147,388 1,308,184 1,455,572 557,585 2,013,157
San Jose 630,976 3,473,512 176,977 3,927,511 4,104,488 1,234,039 5,338,528
Morgan Hill 15,534 97,272 185 112,621 112,806 247,649 360,455
Gilroy 884,883 714,009 324,365 1,274,527 1,598,892 171,587 1,770,478
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,915,491 4,842,723 272,400 8,485,814 8,758,214 – 8,758,214
Modesto Briggsmore 878,965 415,534 196,024 1,098,475 1,294,499 – 1,294,499
Merced 235,784 406,843 95,423 547,203 642,627 – 642,627
Fresno 1,291,726 1,289,876 56,588 2,525,014 2,581,602 – 2,581,602
Bakersfield 1,342,396 1,878,874 – 3,221,270 3,221,270 – 3,221,270
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,865,652 9,199,638 102,450 11,962,840 12,065,290 7,880,129 19,945,419
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,625,060 1,271,199 149,052 3,747,206 3,896,259 2,726,052 6,622,311
City of Industry through San Diego 6,050,861 14,432,560 383,542 20,099,879 20,483,420 7,966,193 28,449,613
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 22,374,446
Sacramento / Stockton 8,758,214
San Joaquin Valley 7,739,997
Southern California 55,017,343
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 93,890,000 6.8%
Revenue $ 3,098,000,000 9.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 5
Table A. 3 P2 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other
Short
Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Oakland – 7th Street 2,349,308 8,166,816 – 10,516,124 10,516,124 155,078 10,671,202
Oakland – Airport 147,415 665,842 – 813,257 813,257 485,687 1,298,944
Union City 293,732 1,317,949 147,415 1,464,266 1,611,681 202,860 1,814,541
Warm Springs 86,435 279,632 48,162 317,905 366,066 157,403 523,469
San Jose 539,669 2,917,910 170,306 3,287,273 3,457,579 809,789 4,267,368
Morgan Hill 14,284 93,760 549 107,494 108,044 158,855 266,899
Gilroy 965,617 700,635 365,883 1,300,369 1,666,252 130,663 1,796,915
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,808,629 4,728,832 431,808 8,105,653 8,537,461 – 8,537,461
Modesto Briggsmore 867,096 323,948 195,577 995,466 1,191,044 – 1,191,044
Merced 239,344 422,835 48,162 614,017 662,179 – 662,179
Fresno 1,298,904 1,291,945 48,162 2,542,688 2,590,850 – 2,590,850
Bakersfield 1,338,459 1,866,591 – 3,205,050 3,205,050 – 3,205,050
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,858,212 9,210,994 101,085 11,968,121 12,069,206 7,880,129 19,949,334
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,595,794 1,234,444 148,514 3,681,724 3,830,238 2,726,052 6,556,291
City of Industry through San Diego 6,015,100 14,407,160 343,725 20,078,535 20,422,260 7,966,193 28,388,453
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 20,639,339
Sacramento / Stockton 8,537,461
San Joaquin Valley 7,649,123
Southern California 54,894,078
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 91,720,000 - 2.3%
Revenue $ 3,083,000,000 - 0.5%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 6 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 4 P3 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,050,979 3,883,306 373 4,933,912 4,934,285 591,475 5,525,761
Millbrae 88,405 329,935 – 418,340 418,340 146,602 564,942
Redwood City 127,759 489,400 81,131 536,027 617,159 182,799 799,958
Oakland – 7th Street 923,593 2,659,247 – 3,582,840 3,582,840 43,388 3,626,228
Oakland – Airport 97,731 232,204 42,338 287,597 329,935 123,582 453,516
Union City 107,056 222,132 58,004 271,184 329,189 88,213 417,402
Warm Springs 53,901 87,846 41,405 100,342 141,747 77,387 219,134
San Jose 504,507 2,698,601 165,434 3,037,674 3,203,108 643,021 3,846,128
Morgan Hill 12,496 96,052 373 108,175 108,548 109,777 218,326
Gilroy 932,546 692,135 385,141 1,239,540 1,624,681 103,076 1,727,757
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,814,671 4,270,499 436,058 7,649,112 8,085,171 – 8,085,171
Modesto Briggsmore 851,974 319,490 197,700 973,764 1,171,464 – 1,171,464
Merced 231,271 334,224 52,596 512,900 565,496 – 565,496
Fresno 1,267,330 1,069,816 51,663 2,285,483 2,337,146 – 2,337,146
Bakersfield 1,319,179 1,615,915 – 2,935,094 2,935,094 – 2,935,094
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,833,074 8,693,750 100,715 11,426,109 11,526,823 7,880,129 19,406,952
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,599,005 1,087,908 161,517 3,525,395 3,686,912 2,726,052 6,412,965
City of Industry through San Diego 6,010,257 13,790,112 387,939 19,412,429 19,800,368 7,966,193 27,766,561
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 17,399,152
Sacramento / Stockton 8,085,171
San Joaquin Valley 7,009,199
Southern California 53,586,478
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 86,080,000 - 8.3%
Revenue $ 2,790,000,000 - 9.9%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 7
Table A. 5 P4 – Pacheco to San Jose
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Jose 1,707,950 9,672,046 189,386 11,190,610 11,379,996 195,374 11,575,370
Morgan Hill 12,614 71,842 183 84,273 84,456 138,178 222,634
Gilroy 484,068 322,469 189,386 617,151 806,537 83,315 889,852
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,169,789 5,384,165 225,399 9,328,555 9,553,954 – 9,553,954
Modesto Briggsmore 606,365 258,121 154,105 710,381 864,486 – 864,486
Merced 125,222 246,604 46,067 325,759 371,826 – 371,826
Fresno 940,716 951,319 12,614 1,879,421 1,892,035 – 1,892,035
Bakersfield 1,191,891 1,718,918 1,097 2,909,712 2,910,809 – 2,910,809
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,680,292 8,297,716 98,166 10,879,841 10,978,008 7,880,129 18,858,136
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,276,292 1,057,346 130,157 3,203,480 3,333,638 2,726,052 6,059,690
City of Industry through San Diego 5,760,561 13,114,453 358,481 18,516,533 18,875,014 7,966,193 26,841,207
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 12,687,856
Sacramento / Stockton 9,553,954
San Joaquin Valley 6,039,156
Southern California 51,759,034
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 80,040,000 - 14.8%
Revenue $ 2,678,000,000 - 13.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 8 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 6 P5 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland via Transbay Tube
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intraregiona
l Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,157,457 4,350,821 – 5,508,278 5,508,278 1,968,398 7,476,675
Millbrae 105,257 483,362 – 588,620 588,620 516,289 1,104,908
Redwood City 215,180 954,034 131,385 1,037,829 1,169,214 459,232 1,628,446
Oakland – 7th Street 1,211,205 4,512,626 – 5,723,831 5,723,831 870,934 6,594,765
San Jose 594,218 3,195,230 178,228 3,611,220 3,789,449 1,048,280 4,837,729
Morgan Hill 15,677 97,046 187 112,536 112,722 169,645 282,367
Gilroy 934,438 766,848 309,613 1,391,673 1,701,286 156,632 1,857,918
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,904,224 4,850,793 317,825 8,437,192 8,755,017 – 8,755,017
Modesto Briggsmore 880,876 378,852 199,504 1,060,224 1,259,728 – 1,259,728
Merced 238,882 420,656 49,269 610,268 659,538 – 659,538
Fresno 1,298,733 1,311,050 49,269 2,560,514 2,609,783 – 2,609,783
Bakersfield 1,355,841 1,913,107 – 3,268,948 3,268,948 – 3,268,948
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,876,286 9,293,620 103,204 12,066,702 12,169,906 7,880,129 20,050,035
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,657,933 1,327,287 156,393 3,828,827 3,985,220 2,726,052 6,711,272
City of Industry through San Diego 6,095,217 14,601,461 389,863 20,306,816 20,696,679 7,966,193 28,662,872
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 23,782,809
Sacramento / Stockton 8,755,017
San Joaquin Valley 7,797,997
Southern California 55,424,178
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 95,760,000 2.0%
Revenue $ 3,160,000,000 2.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 9
Table A. 7 P6 – Pacheco to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland via Transbay Tube
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,195,125 4,653,198 – 5,848,323 5,848,323 1,842,790 7,691,113
Oakland – 7th Street 1,026,151 3,258,329 – 4,284,480 4,284,480 885,786 5,170,265
Oakland – Airport 141,017 635,454 52,046 724,425 776,471 702,468 1,478,939
Union City 263,395 1,133,232 130,818 1,265,809 1,396,627 472,850 1,869,478
Warm Springs 81,586 267,967 46,771 302,781 349,552 244,583 594,135
San Jose 516,065 2,800,816 163,347 3,153,533 3,316,880 1,332,717 4,649,598
Morgan Hill 12,836 87,212 527 99,520 100,048 170,404 270,452
Gilroy 921,180 693,654 392,983 1,221,851 1,614,834 160,793 1,775,627
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,650,608 4,552,974 413,028 7,790,554 8,203,582 – 8,203,582
Modesto Briggsmore 836,077 341,992 187,260 990,809 1,178,069 – 1,178,069
Merced 231,394 400,368 45,540 586,221 631,762 – 631,762
Fresno 1,239,259 1,226,071 45,540 2,419,789 2,465,330 – 2,465,330
Bakersfield 1,289,722 1,796,995 – 3,086,717 3,086,717 – 3,086,717
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,726,967 8,800,705 96,883 11,430,788 11,527,671 7,880,129 19,407,800
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,492,056 1,207,081 150,336 3,548,802 3,699,137 2,726,052 6,425,190
City of Industry through San Diego 5,767,616 13,778,135 329,508 19,216,243 19,545,751 7,966,193 27,511,944
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 23,499,606
Sacramento / Stockton 8,203,582
San Joaquin Valley 7,361,878
Southern California 53,344,934
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 92,410,000 - 1.6%
Revenue $ 3,049,000,000 - 1.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 10 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 8 Pacheco Alignment and Station Alternatives
Alignment / Station Alternative Name and Description
NP1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via GEA North
P1 service using GEA north instead of Henry Miller. This adds Merced to local trains from Southern California to/ from Bay Area.
NP2 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco ( King Street Station ) .
P1 service terminating at 4th and King ( Townsend St ) rather than Transbay
NP3 – Pacheco to San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco.
P1 service eliminating Morgan Hill and substituting Palo Alto for Redwood City.
NP4 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco – BNSF Alignment
P1 service using BNSF alignment between Fresno and Merced.
NP5 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via downtown Modesto
P1 using Modesto Downtown ( 13 ) instead of Briggsmore ( 40 ) .
NP6 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via Castle AFB
P1 using Castle rather than downtown Merced ( 14 ) .
NP7 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th Street Station )
P2 using 12th Oakland City Center terminus instead of 7th Street; eliminates Warm Springs Station.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 11
Table A. 9 NP1 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via GEA North
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,082,912 7,462,429 535 9,544,806 9,545,341 1,523,915 11,069,256
Millbrae 111,910 476,375 – 588,284 588,284 628,285 1,216,570
Redwood City 308,778 1,164,432 141,717 1,331,493 1,473,210 519,716 1,992,926
San Jose 746,600 3,455,099 168,132 4,033,567 4,201,699 1,332,998 5,534,697
Morgan Hill 16,421 95,846 6,068 106,198 112,267 311,385 423,652
Gilroy 851,727 702,871 352,507 1,202,092 1,554,598 229,081 1,783,680
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,947,002 5,220,309 265,942 8,901,370 9,167,311 – 9,167,311
Modesto Briggsmore 941,148 436,394 154,924 1,222,618 1,377,542 – 1,377,542
Merced 142,966 171,880 63,362 251,484 314,846 – 314,846
Fresno 1,236,182 1,212,622 49,976 2,398,829 2,448,805 – 2,448,805
Bakersfield 1,275,449 1,746,290 – 3,021,739 3,021,739 – 3,021,739
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,742,947 8,748,587 97,809 11,393,724 11,491,534 7,880,129 19,371,662
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,523,233 1,190,312 143,858 3,569,686 3,713,545 2,726,052 6,439,597
City of Industry through San Diego 5,799,491 13,762,033 339,834 19,221,689 19,561,524 7,966,193 27,527,717
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 22,020,780
Sacramento / Stockton 9,167,311
San Joaquin Valley 7,162,932
Southern California 53,338,976
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 91,690,000 - 2.3%
Revenue $ 3,066,000,000 - 1.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 12 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 10 NP2 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco ( King Street Station)
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – King Street 2,162,578 7,985,117 – 10,147,695 10,147,695 511,438 10,659,133
Millbrae 100,011 468,883 43,975 524,919 568,894 146,690 715,584
Redwood City 284,447 1,213,307 150,666 1,347,088 1,497,755 166,126 1,663,881
San Jose 633,651 3,485,916 177,014 3,942,553 4,119,567 448,654 4,568,222
Morgan Hill 14,658 92,589 – 107,248 107,248 101,364 208,612
Gilroy 892,492 711,582 327,680 1,276,394 1,604,074 98,663 1,702,737
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,933,647 4,867,888 315,063 8,486,472 8,801,535 – 8,801,535
Modesto Briggsmore 885,071 413,590 197,425 1,101,236 1,298,660 – 1,298,660
Merced 238,431 406,353 50,469 594,315 644,784 – 644,784
Fresno 1,291,609 1,300,330 50,469 2,541,470 2,591,939 – 2,591,939
Bakersfield 1,355,067 1,904,664 – 3,259,731 3,259,731 – 3,259,731
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,878,613 9,247,781 101,310 12,025,084 12,126,394 7,880,129 20,006,522
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,623,112 1,272,312 150,295 3,745,129 3,895,424 2,726,052 6,621,476
City of Industry through San Diego 6,087,318 14,513,672 344,751 20,256,240 20,600,990 7,966,193 28,567,183
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,518,169
Sacramento / Stockton 8,801,535
San Joaquin Valley 7,795,115
Southern California 55,195,182
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 91,310,000 - 2.7%
Revenue $ 3,079,000,000 - 0.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 13
Table A. 11 NP3 – Pacheco to San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,165,538 7,963,722 – 10,129,260 10,129,260 1,298,619 11,427,879
Millbrae 140,321 678,435 – 818,756 818,756 302,125 1,120,881
Palo Alto 303,997 1,315,391 155,268 1,464,120 1,619,389 373,483 1,992,871
San Jose 600,708 3,232,238 173,766 3,659,179 3,832,945 1,180,461 5,013,407
Gilroy 910,124 793,719 329,035 1,374,808 1,703,843 124,129 1,827,972
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,955,142 4,874,048 275,597 8,553,593 8,829,190 – 8,829,190
Modesto Briggsmore 875,557 374,812 201,606 1,048,763 1,250,369 – 1,250,369
Merced 240,844 416,478 96,786 560,536 657,322 – 657,322
Fresno 1,312,589 1,297,641 50,822 2,559,408 2,610,230 – 2,610,230
Bakersfield 1,357,992 1,882,280 – 3,240,272 3,240,272 – 3,240,272
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,900,774 9,289,577 107,062 12,083,289 12,190,351 7,880,129 20,070,480
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,647,785 1,261,019 151,532 3,757,273 3,908,805 2,726,052 6,634,857
City of Industry through San Diego 6,118,064 14,570,013 388,451 20,299,626 20,688,077 7,966,193 28,654,271
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 21,383,010
Sacramento / Stockton 8,829,190
San Joaquin Valley 7,758,193
Southern California 55,359,607
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 93,330,000 - 0.6%
Revenue $ 3,090,000,000 - 0.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 14 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 12 NP4 – Pacheco to San Jose, Palo Alto, and San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,108,887 7,858,653 – 9,967,540 9,967,540 1,532,777 11,500,318
Millbrae 101,751 481,055 – 582,806 582,806 629,227 1,212,034
Redwood City 279,400 1,152,686 147,364 1,284,722 1,432,086 520,815 1,952,901
San Jose 617,339 3,357,600 179,680 3,795,259 3,974,939 1,335,725 5,310,664
Morgan Hill 14,589 84,577 554 98,612 99,166 316,937 416,103
Gilroy 879,750 682,341 327,044 1,235,047 1,562,091 238,268 1,800,359
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,877,989 4,740,195 434,704 8,183,481 8,618,185 – 8,618,185
Modesto Briggsmore 869,778 361,022 196,669 1,034,130 1,230,800 – 1,230,800
Merced 233,787 329,629 53,184 510,233 563,416 – 563,416
Fresno 1,283,430 1,290,632 53,184 2,520,878 2,574,061 – 2,574,061
Bakersfield 1,340,676 1,864,943 – 3,205,620 3,205,620 – 3,205,620
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,860,848 9,174,953 103,782 11,932,019 12,035,801 7,880,129 19,915,930
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,612,841 1,266,440 139,792 3,739,490 3,879,282 2,726,052 6,605,334
City of Industry through San Diego 6,040,615 14,407,469 350,496 20,097,587 20,448,083 7,966,193 28,414,276
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 22,192,378
Sacramento / Stockton 8,618,185
San Joaquin Valley 7,573,898
Southern California 54,935,540
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 93,320,000 - 0.6%
Revenue $ 3,079,000,000 - 0.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 15
Table A. 13 NP5 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via Downtown Modesto
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,807,863 6,676,208 – 8,484,072 8,484,072 1,669,864 10,153,936
Millbrae 116,388 500,499 – 616,887 616,887 591,534 1,208,421
Redwood City 233,031 996,316 124,481 1,104,866 1,229,347 557,585 1,786,932
San Jose 532,910 2,933,658 149,471 3,317,097 3,466,568 1,234,039 4,700,607
Morgan Hill 13,120 82,154 156 95,118 95,274 247,649 342,923
Gilroy 747,354 603,038 273,952 1,076,440 1,350,392 171,587 1,521,978
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,115,046 5,056,134 496,221 8,674,959 9,171,180 – 9,171,180
Modesto Downtown 689,468 864,028 53,497 1,499,999 1,553,496 – 1,553,496
Merced 247,688 431,436 2,857 587,450 678,273 – 678,273
Fresno 1,354,225 1,368,635 1,338 2,721,521 2,722,859 – 2,722,859
Bakersfield 1,426,569 1,984,153 – 3,410,722 3,410,722 – 3,410,722
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,996,921 9,698,803 105,879 12,589,845 12,695,724 7,880,129 20,575,853
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,779,445 1,349,001 142,147 3,986,299 4,128,446 2,726,052 6,854,498
City of Industry through San Diego 6,356,107 15,166,021 398,635 21,123,493 21,522,129 7,966,193 29,488,322
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,714,797
Sacramento / Stockton 9,171,180
San Joaquin Valley 8,365,351
Southern California 56,918,672
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 94,170,000 0.3%
Revenue $ 3,107,000,000 0.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 16 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 14 NP6 – Pacheco to San Jose and San Francisco via Castle Air Force Base
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,130,102 7,880,545 – 10,010,646 10,010,646 1,532,993 11,543,639
Millbrae 105,813 478,834 – 584,647 584,647 629,366 1,214,013
Redwood City 277,366 1,175,942 147,731 1,305,576 1,453,307 521,096 1,974,403
San Jose 629,520 3,468,363 177,462 3,920,421 4,097,883 1,336,506 5,434,389
Morgan Hill 14,588 97,503 – 112,091 112,091 317,831 429,922
Gilroy 883,434 712,065 325,194 1,270,305 1,595,499 238,958 1,834,457
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,909,710 4,828,784 314,668 8,423,827 8,738,495 – 8,738,495
Modesto Briggsmore 876,970 418,080 206,455 1,088,595 1,295,050 – 1,295,050
Castle Air Force Base 228,430 393,335 44,689 577,076 621,764 – 621,764
Fresno 1,289,141 1,290,618 44,689 2,535,070 2,579,759 – 2,579,759
Bakersfield 1,343,617 1,878,035 – 3,221,652 3,221,652 – 3,221,652
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,858,417 9,192,214 101,935 11,948,697 12,050,632 7,880,129 19,930,760
Orange County: Norwalk through
Irvine
2,625,371 1,271,967 145,885 3,751,453 3,897,338 2,726,052 6,623,390
City of Industry through San Diego 6,041,289 14,410,825 382,070 20,070,044 20,452,114 7,966,193 28,418,307
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 22,430,823
Sacramento / Stockton 8,738,495
San Joaquin Valley 7,718,225
Southern California 54,972,458
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 93,860,000 0.0%
Revenue $ 3,098,000,000 0.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 17
Table A. 15 NP7 – Pacheco to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th Street Station)
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Oakland – 12th Street 1,755,460 6,366,369 – 8,121,829 8,121,829 1,212,807 9,334,636
Oakland – Airport 134,906 579,610 50,076 664,440 714,516 300,209 1,014,725
Union City 376,504 1,565,246 189,466 1,752,284 1,941,750 308,286 2,250,036
San Jose 566,531 3,053,510 178,629 3,441,412 3,620,041 989,811 4,609,851
Morgan Hill 12,145 97,723 – 109,868 109,868 143,204 253,072
Gilroy 879,131 603,153 418,171 1,064,113 1,482,285 122,282 1,604,567
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,880,227 4,817,728 439,926 8,258,029 8,697,955 – 8,697,955
Modesto Briggsmore 884,922 330,607 199,598 1,015,931 1,215,529 – 1,215,529
Merced 244,230 431,466 49,145 626,551 675,696 – 675,696
Fresno 1,324,564 1,317,468 49,113 2,592,918 2,642,031 – 2,642,031
Bakersfield 1,354,196 1,888,538 – 3,242,734 3,242,734 – 3,242,734
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,911,601 9,383,047 102,973 12,191,675 12,294,648 7,880,129 20,174,776
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,658,242 1,264,142 152,087 3,770,297 3,922,384 2,726,052 6,648,437
City of Industry through San Diego 6,123,342 14,666,418 349,911 20,439,849 20,789,760 7,966,193 28,755,953
Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,066,888
Sacramento / Stockton 8,697,955
San Joaquin Valley 7,775,991
Southern California 55,579,166
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 91,120,000 - 3.0%
Revenue $ 3,007,000,000 - 2.9%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 18 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Altamont Alternatives
Table A. 16 Altamont Network Alternatives
Network Alternative Name and Description
A1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco
From San Francisco to Redwood City, this network alternative would use the existing Caltrain rail ROW, and would cross the San Francisco Bay in
the Dumbarton corridor. To San Jose, the Niles/ I- 880 alignment would be utilized south of Niles. The Altamont Pass would use the UPRR alignment
through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A2 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland
From Oakland to San Jose, this network alternative would use the Niles/ I- 880 alignment. The Altamont Pass would use the UPRR alignment through
downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A3 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco
From Oakland to San Jose, this network alternative would use the Niles/ I- 880 Alignment. From San Francisco to Redwood City, this network
alternative would use the existing Caltrain rail ROW. This network alternative would cross the San Francisco Bay in the Dumbarton corridor. The
Altamont Pass would use the UPRR alignment through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A4 – Altamont to San Jose
From San Jose, this network alternative would use the Niles/ I- 880 alignment between San Jose and Niles. The Altamont Pass would use the UPRR
alignment through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A5 – Altamont to San Francisco
From San Francisco to Redwood City, this network alternative would use the existing Caltrain rail ROW north of Redwood City and would cross the
San Francisco Bay in the Dumbarton Corridor. The Altamont Pass would use the UPRR alignment through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley
would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A6 – Altamont to Oakland
From Oakland to Union City, this network alternative would use the Niles/ I- 800 alignment north of Niles. The Altamont Pass would use the UPRR
alignment through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A7 – Altamont to Union City
From Union City, the Altamont Pass alignment would follow the UPRR through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S
alignment.
A8 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco – Peninsula Route
This network alternative would cross the San Francisco Bay in the Dumbarton corridor. From San Francisco to San Jose, this network alternative
would use the existing Caltrain alignment The Altamont Pass alignment would follow the UPRR through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley
would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A9 – Altamont to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland – No Bay Crossing Route
This network alternative would not cross the San Francisco Bay. From San Francisco to San Jose, this network alternative would use the existing
Caltrain ROW and the Niles/ I- 880 alignment south of Niles in the East Bay. The Altamont Pass alignment would follow the UPRR through downtown
Tracy, and the Central Valley would use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A10 – Altamont to Oakland and San Francisco via Transbay Tube
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 19
Network Alternative Name and Description
From San Francisco to Oakland, this network alternative would use a new Transbay tube between San Francisco and Oakland and would use the
Niles/ I- 880 Alignment north of Shinn. The Altamont Pass alignment would follow the UPRR through downtown Tracy, and the Central Valley would
use the UPRR N/ S alignment.
A11 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco via Transbay Tube
From San Francisco to Oakland this network alternative would use a new Transbay tube. The Niles/ I- 880 alignment would be used between
Oakland and San Jose, with the UPRR Alignment through the Tri- Valley to Tracy, and the UPRR N/ S alignment through the Central Valley.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 20 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 17 A1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,896,607 5,447,852 104,407 7,240,052 7,344,459 1,892,007 9,236,466
Millbrae 127,687 388,351 26,278 489,760 516,038 415,125 931,163
Redwood City 187,650 588,523 46,560 729,614 776,173 378,863 1,155,036
Warm Springs 90,121 126,276 57,671 158,727 216,397 160,662 377,059
San Jose 542,669 1,368,577 93,296 1,817,949 1,911,245 739,045 2,650,290
Bernal 1,125,019 2,424,285 198,056 3,351,249 3,549,305 1,215,779 4,765,083
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,330,416 4,417,010 390,644 8,356,783 8,747,427 – 8,747,427
Tracy Downtown 442,318 361,191 381,120 422,389 803,510 – 803,510
Modesto Downtown 1,315,315 274,068 233,505 1,355,878 1,589,383 – 1,589,383
Merced 447,256 223,981 321,333 349,904 671,237 – 671,237
Fresno 1,484,623 1,038,425 270,364 2,252,684 2,523,049 – 2,523,049
Bakersfield 1,232,248 1,515,311 – 2,747,559 2,747,559 – 2,747,559
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,697,295 8,115,871 101,232 10,711,934 10,813,166 7,880,129 18,693,294
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,511,585 1,027,491 138,445 3,400,631 3,539,076 2,726,052 6,265,128
City of Industry through San Diego 5,679,064 13,109,059 349,904 18,438,219 18,788,123 7,966,193 26,754,316
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,115,098
Sacramento / Stockton 9,550,936
San Joaquin Valley 7,531,228
Southern California 51,712,738
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from P1
Total Ridership 87,910,000 - 6.4%
Revenue $ 2,844,000,000 - 8.2%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 21
Table A. 18 A2 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland
Business /
Commute
Recreational /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Oakland – 7th Street 2,887,758 6,994,365 146,392 9,735,730 9,882,123 137,879 10,020,002
Oakland – Airport 152,197 430,107 52,607 529,697 582,304 364,434 946,739
Union City 427,023 1,027,649 72,743 1,381,930 1,454,673 107,945 1,562,618
San Jose 593,370 1,517,257 105,032 2,005,594 2,110,627 545,193 2,655,820
Bernal 538,949 1,087,331 124,080 1,502,200 1,626,280 324,894 1,951,174
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,644,648 4,479,934 368,430 8,756,153 9,124,583 - 9,124,583
Tracy Downtown 482,895 349,564 431,377 401,083 832,459 - 832,459
Modesto Downtown 1,387,372 275,552 204,623 1,458,301 1,662,923 - 1,662,923
Merced 458,406 226,391 330,698 354,099 684,797 - 684,797
Fresno 1,535,397 1,092,047 279,542 2,347,902 2,627,444 - 2,627,444
Bakersfield 1,292,317 1,622,833 - 2,915,150 2,915,150 - 2,915,150
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,797,782 8,490,397 101,949 11,186,231 11,288,179 7,880,129 19,168,308
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,576,470 1,071,186 157,277 3,490,380 3,647,656 2,726,052 6,373,709
City of Industry through San Diego 5,890,345 13,627,737 394,915 19,123,166 19,518,081 7,966,193 27,484,274
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 17,136,352
Sacramento / Stockton 9,957,042
San Joaquin Valley 7,890,315
Southern California 53,026,291
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 88,010,000 0.1%
Revenue $ 2,881,000,000 1.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 22 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 19 A3 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 962,735 2,765,378 52,998 3,675,115 3,728,113 670,159 4,398,272
Millbrae 94,342 286,934 19,416 361,860 381,276 102,882 484,158
Redwood City 82,221 257,867 20,401 319,687 340,087 124,207 464,294
Oakland – 7th Street 1,016,720 2,462,570 51,542 3,427,748 3,479,290 38,576 3,517,865
Oakland – Airport 63,808 180,321 22,055 222,073 244,129 92,729 336,858
Union City 90,133 216,910 15,354 291,689 307,043 46,940 353,983
San Jose 277,283 1,483,184 90,924 1,669,543 1,760,467 404,041 2,164,508
Bernal 542,585 1,080,947 127,347 1,496,185 1,623,532 944,032 2,567,565
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,131,159 4,213,768 372,669 7,972,258 8,344,927 – 8,344,927
Tracy Downtown 473,628 361,317 421,696 413,249 834,945 – 834,945
Modesto Downtown 418,266 209,463 300,505 327,224 627,728 – 627,728
Merced 406,720 203,681 292,210 318,191 610,401 – 610,401
Fresno 1,388,934 971,494 252,938 2,107,490 2,360,428 – 2,360,428
Bakersfield 1,160,277 1,426,807 – 2,587,084 2,587,084 – 2,587,084
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,662,986 8,012,639 99,945 10,575,681 10,675,626 7,880,129 18,555,754
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,456,018 1,004,758 135,382 3,325,394 3,460,776 2,726,052 6,186,828
City of Industry through San Diego 5,673,044 13,095,163 349,533 18,418,673 18,768,207 7,966,193 26,734,400
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 14,287,504
Sacramento / Stockton 9,179,872
San Joaquin Valley 6,185,642
Southern California 51,476,982
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 81,130,000 - 7.7%
Revenue $ 2,625,000,000 - 7.7%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 23
Table A. 20 A4 – Altamont to San Jose
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Jose 1,245,336 3,681,775 141,150 4,785,961 4,927,111 289,237 5,216,348
Warm Springs 505,986 1,559,591 51,311 2,014,267 2,065,578 123,107 2,188,685
Bernal 2,860,986 8,695,622 142,428 11,414,179 11,556,608 215,456 11,772,063
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,888,217 5,516,363 404,460 10,000,120 10,404,581 – 10,404,581
Tracy Downtown 348,219 386,748 280,840 454,128 734,967 – 734,967
Modesto Downtown 1,373,339 278,283 133,298 1,518,324 1,651,622 – 1,651,622
Merced 451,023 335,802 329,046 457,780 786,826 – 786,826
Fresno 1,502,803 1,281,308 275,909 2,508,201 2,784,111 – 2,784,111
Bakersfield 1,341,201 1,935,566 – 3,276,767 3,276,767 – 3,276,767
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,937,861 9,431,685 100,796 12,268,750 12,369,545 7,880,129 20,249,674
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,747,956 1,368,409 146,628 3,969,736 4,116,365 2,726,052 6,842,417
City of Industry through San Diego 6,056,861 14,718,884 337,263 20,438,482 20,775,745 7,966,193 28,741,938
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,177,096
Sacramento / Stockton 11,139,548
San Joaquin Valley 8,499,326
Southern California 55,834,029
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 94,650,000 7.7%
Revenue $ 3,176,000,000 11.7%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 24 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 21 A5 – Altamont to San Francisco
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,340,549 6,824,578 115,371 9,049,756 9,165,127 153,417 9,318,544
Millbrae 174,621 551,280 27,417 698,485 725,901 43,680 769,581
Redwood City 982,037 2,824,116 132,668 3,673,485 3,806,153 102,021 3,908,174
Bernal 1,582,999 3,424,525 330,290 4,677,234 5,007,524 92,163 5,099,687
Sacramento/ Stockton 5,181,593 5,431,105 453,389 10,159,309 10,612,698 – 10,612,698
Tracy Downtown 437,013 393,220 373,531 456,702 830,233 – 830,233
Modesto Downtown 1,512,157 327,346 284,656 1,554,846 1,839,502 – 1,839,502
Merced 463,878 346,850 329,186 481,542 810,728 – 810,728
Fresno 1,555,398 1,263,933 277,664 2,541,667 2,819,331 – 2,819,331
Bakersfield 1,325,207 1,811,166 – 3,136,373 3,136,373 – 3,136,373
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,869,565 9,124,462 102,675 11,891,352 11,994,027 7,880,129 19,874,156
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,569,636 1,211,124 155,485 3,625,275 3,780,760 2,726,052 6,506,812
City of Industry through San Diego 5,986,433 14,401,554 378,499 20,009,488 20,387,988 7,966,193 28,354,181
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,095,986
Sacramento / Stockton 11,442,931
San Joaquin Valley 8,605,935
Southern California 54,735,149
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 93,880,000 6.8%
Revenue $ 3,127,000,000 10.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 25
Table A. 22 A6 – Altamont to Oakland
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Oakland – 7th Street 3,441,733 8,282,204 154,322 11,569,614 11,723,937 62,313 11,786,250
Oakland – Airport 223,558 563,723 27,330 759,951 787,280 122,549 909,829
Union City 1,473,258 3,728,695 144,301 5,057,652 5,201,954 41,457 5,243,410
Bernal 529,287 1,044,727 124,806 1,449,208 1,574,014 157,786 1,731,800
Sacramento/ Stockton 5,431,160 5,187,013 359,296 10,258,877 10,618,173 – 10,618,173
Tracy Downtown 454,768 366,766 402,295 419,239 821,534 – 821,534
Modesto Downtown 1,553,790 303,907 178,919 1,678,778 1,857,697 – 1,857,697
Merced 455,679 341,258 323,220 473,716 796,937 – 796,937
Fresno 1,553,790 1,251,887 275,484 2,530,193 2,805,677 – 2,805,677
Bakersfield 1,334,787 1,828,910 – 3,163,697 3,163,697 – 3,163,697
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,872,362 9,160,584 104,764 11,928,181 12,032,946 7,880,129 19,913,074
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,543,129 1,179,190 148,492 3,573,827 3,722,318 2,726,052 6,448,371
City of Industry through San Diego 5,968,646 14,358,711 338,343 19,989,014 20,327,357 7,966,193 28,293,550
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,671,289
Sacramento / Stockton 11,439,707
San Joaquin Valley 8,624,009
Southern California 54,654,995
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 94,390,000 7.4%
Revenue $ 3,153,000,000 10.9%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 26 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 23 A7 – Altamont to Union City
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Union City 2,083,249 6,979,365 142,396 9,175,703 9,315,471 17,024 9,882,753
Bernal 932,085 2,154,064 125,489 2,960,660 3,086,149 17,024 3,283,109
Sacramento/ Stockton 3,945,317 4,312,634 279,653 7,978,298 8,257,951 – 8,748,871
Tracy Downtown 243,058 300,954 194,583 349,429 544,012 – 576,353
Modesto Downtown 1,058,803 215,338 152,935 1,121,206 1,274,141 – 1,349,886
Merced 335,501 243,604 243,740 335,365 579,105 – 613,532
Fresno 907,098 730,848 160,827 1,477,119 1,637,946 – 1,735,319
Bakersfield 779,245 1,067,712 – 1,846,957 1,846,957 – 1,956,755
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
3,052,208 9,734,152 111,324 12,675,035 12,786,359 7,880,129 19,793,022
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,702,361 1,253,022 157,789 3,797,593 3,955,382 2,726,052 6,351,450
City of Industry through San Diego 6,342,358 15,257,747 359,527 21,240,578 21,600,105 7,966,193 29,198,951
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 12,435,667
Sacramento / Stockton 8,801,963
San Joaquin Valley 5,338,149
Southern California 56,914,221
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 83,490,000 - 5.0%
Revenue $ 2,701,000,000 - 5.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 27
Table A. 24 A8 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco – Peninsula Route
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,621,292 4,962,161 – 6,583,453 6,583,453 2,022,465 8,605,918
Millbrae 132,397 468,225 31,121 569,500 600,622 564,743 1,165,364
Palo Alto 484,049 1,404,498 47,649 1,840,898 1,888,547 1,164,814 3,053,361
Shinn 435,169 809,327 165,276 1,079,220 1,244,496 418,129 1,662,626
San Jose 412,839 1,211,617 59,957 1,564,500 1,624,456 1,050,809 2,675,266
Bernal 944,361 2,116,066 163,694 2,896,733 3,060,427 1,136,201 4,196,629
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,480,047 4,746,071 399,301 8,826,817 9,226,118 – 9,226,118
Tracy Downtown 419,169 360,267 271,300 508,137 779,437 – 779,437
Modesto Downtown 1,396,234 267,256 257,058 1,406,432 1,663,490 – 1,663,490
Merced 449,060 252,134 323,344 377,850 701,194 – 701,194
Fresno 1,457,773 1,072,011 270,069 2,259,716 2,529,785 – 2,529,785
Bakersfield 1,200,364 1,546,390 3,165 2,743,589 2,746,754 – 2,746,754
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,669,215 8,222,327 96,528 10,795,013 10,891,542 7,880,129 18,771,670
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,456,817 980,230 139,957 3,297,089 3,437,047 2,726,052 6,163,099
City of Industry through San Diego 5,642,608 13,200,489 333,366 18,509,731 18,843,097 7,966,193 26,809,290
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 21,359,163
Sacramento / Stockton 10,005,555
San Joaquin Valley 7,641,222
Southern California 51,744,060
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 90,750,000 3.2%
Revenue $ 2,743,000,000 - 3.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 28 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 25 A9 – Altamont to San Jose, San Francisco, and Oakland – No Bay Crossing
Route
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 39,885 103,200 12,699 130,386 143,085 435,587 578,672
Millbrae 51,511 151,849 15,382 187,978 203,359 401,080 604,440
Redwood City 1,525,821 3,901,209 54,372 5,372,659 5,427,031 137,433 5,564,464
Oakland – 7th Street 151,849 401,711 65,998 487,562 553,560 233,494 787,054
Oakland – Airport 217,489 404,751 88,891 533,349 622,240 109,971 732,211
Union City 587,542 1,588,600 103,200 2,072,942 2,176,142 1,341,105 3,517,247
San Jose 526,195 1,060,259 122,695 1,463,758 1,586,454 359,981 1,946,435
Bernal 4,125,316 3,938,054 348,948 7,714,422 8,063,370 – 8,063,370
Sacramento/ Stockton 403,857 345,729 350,200 399,386 749,586 – 749,586
Tracy Downtown 1,248,773 238,236 223,570 1,263,440 1,487,010 – 1,487,010
Modesto Downtown 452,685 212,839 326,949 338,575 665,524 – 665,524
Merced 1,461,970 1,027,171 276,154 2,212,987 2,489,140 – 2,489,140
Fresno 1,214,970 1,451,775 – 2,666,745 2,666,745 – 2,666,745
Bakersfield 2,683,378 8,065,695 100,159 10,648,914 10,749,073 7,880,129 18,629,202
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station 2,493,254 1,001,594 141,117 3,353,731 3,494,848 2,726,052 6,220,901
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 5,701,575 13,083,861 335,176 18,450,260 18,785,436 7,966,193 26,751,629
City of Industry through San Diego 39,885 103,200 12,699 130,386 143,085 435,587 578,672
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 17,496,894
Sacramento / Stockton 8,812,956
San Joaquin Valley 7,308,418
Southern California 51,601,732
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 85,220,000 - 3.1%
Revenue $ 2,733,000,000 - 3.9%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 29
Table A. 26 A10 – Altamont to Oakland and San Francisco via Transbay Tube
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,786,578 4,927,385 95,361 6,618,602 6,713,963 2,258,631 8,972,594
Oakland – 7th Street 1,375,498 3,210,541 54,218 4,531,820 4,586,038 805,548 5,391,586
Oakland – Airport 213,037 539,739 55,090 697,686 752,776 571,353 1,324,128
Union City 1,353,357 3,376,681 135,458 4,594,581 4,730,039 292,978 5,023,017
Bernal 511,148 1,004,689 122,383 1,393,454 1,515,837 1,563,171 3,079,008
Sacramento/ Stockton 5,037,216 5,042,271 342,393 9,737,094 10,079,487 – 10,079,487
Tracy Downtown 433,744 349,715 384,756 398,703 783,458 – 783,458
Modesto Downtown 1,477,309 296,543 173,811 1,600,040 1,773,852 – 1,773,852
Merced 437,579 327,051 311,012 453,618 764,630 – 764,630
Fresno 1,491,256 1,203,604 263,593 2,431,266 2,694,860 – 2,694,860
Bakersfield 1,271,246 1,739,682 – 3,010,928 3,010,928 – 3,010,928
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,745,068 8,727,001 99,719 11,372,350 11,472,069 7,880,129 19,352,198
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,435,973 1,138,054 141,211 3,432,817 3,574,028 2,726,052 6,300,080
City of Industry through San Diego 5,708,403 13,715,578 323,739 19,100,242 19,423,981 7,966,193 27,390,174
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 23,790,333
Sacramento / Stockton 10,862,945
San Joaquin Valley 8,244,270
Southern California 53,042,452
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 95,940,000 9.1%
Revenue $ 3,164,000,000 11.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 30 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 27 A11 – Altamont to San Jose, Oakland, and San Francisco via Transbay Tube
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,487,672 4,099,943 89,940 5,497,675 5,587,615 2,319,863 7,907,478
Oakland – 7th Street 1,177,936 2,706,220 49,153 3,835,003 3,884,157 471,408 4,355,565
Oakland – Airport 153,038 413,097 49,676 516,458 566,134 578,602 1,144,736
Union City 378,759 841,881 69,024 1,151,617 1,220,640 322,645 1,543,286
San Jose 567,703 1,469,021 100,573 1,936,152 2,036,725 936,973 2,973,698
Bernal 514,890 1,050,695 117,654 1,447,931 1,565,585 1,503,705 3,069,290
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,348,847 4,401,486 349,476 8,400,857 8,750,333 – 8,750,333
Tracy Downtown 458,067 335,707 408,739 385,034 793,774 – 793,774
Modesto Downtown 1,327,836 268,600 196,962 1,399,475 1,596,436 – 1,596,436
Merced 442,554 217,704 317,231 343,027 660,258 – 660,258
Fresno 1,481,745 1,051,218 268,252 2,264,712 2,532,964 – 2,532,964
Bakersfield 1,239,116 1,535,779 – 2,774,896 2,774,896 – 2,774,896
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,691,928 8,092,341 95,866 10,688,403 10,784,269 7,880,129 18,664,398
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,474,747 1,028,210 141,185 3,361,772 3,502,957 2,726,052 6,229,009
City of Industry through San Diego 5,639,383 13,018,304 349,476 18,308,210 18,657,687 7,966,193 26,623,880
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 20,994,053
Sacramento / Stockton 9,544,107
San Joaquin Valley 7,564,554
Southern California 51,517,287
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 89,620,000 1.9%
Revenue $ 2,884,000,000 1.4%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 31
Table A. 28 Altamont Pass Alignment and Station Alternatives
Alignment and Station Alternative Name and Description
NA1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Pleasanton BART
Pleasanton Bart Station instead of Bernal/ I- 680.
NA2 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via I- 580/ UPRR station
I- 580/ UPRR station instead of Bernal/ I- 680.
NA3 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Tracy ACE station
A1 using Trace ACE instead of Tracy downtown.
NA4 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Livermore downtown station
A1 using Livermore downtown ( 34 ) instead of Pleasanton Bernal/ I- 680 ( 35 ) .
NA5 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Briggsmore station.
A1 using Briggsmore/ Modesto ( 40 ) rather than downtown Modesto ( 13 ) .
NA6 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via the Fremont Bridge
A1 using Fremont Bridge instead of Dumbarton Bridge.
NA7 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco ( King St station )
A1 terminating at 4th and King ( Townsend St ) instead of Transbay Transit Center.
NA8 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th St station )
A2 termination at Oakland 12th St City Center instead of West Oakland.
NA9 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland – BNSF alignment
A1 using BNSF alignment instead of UP alignment between Merced and Fresno.
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 32 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 29 NA1 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Pleasanton Bart
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,639,673 5,060,942 85,119 6,615,496 6,700,615 2,054,027 8,754,641
Millbrae 103,185 354,374 23,451 434,108 457,559 446,873 904,432
Redwood City 159,294 538,509 41,865 655,939 697,803 390,240 1,088,043
Warm Springs 74,523 100,580 36,306 138,796 175,102 216,281 391,383
San Jose 479,273 1,319,521 77,997 1,720,797 1,798,794 781,425 2,580,218
Dublin 1,277,135 2,757,687 251,362 3,783,460 4,034,822 1,480,838 5,515,660
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,199,501 4,214,267 377,651 8,036,117 8,413,768 – 8,413,768
Tracy Downtown 380,257 220,441 347,078 253,620 600,698 – 600,698
Modesto Downtown 1,275,745 255,357 246,324 1,284,778 1,531,103 – 1,531,103
Merced 437,756 217,488 315,983 339,261 655,244 – 655,244
Fresno 1,445,115 1,014,655 267,865 2,191,905 2,459,770 – 2,459,770
Bakersfield 1,200,875 1,470,129 – 2,671,004 2,671,004 – 2,671,004
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,627,403 7,922,162 96,237 10,453,327 10,549,564 7,880,129 18,429,693
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,458,033 989,988 138,275 3,309,746 3,448,021 2,726,052 6,174,073
City of Industry through San Diego 5,570,788 12,823,288 353,331 18,040,745 18,394,076 7,966,193 26,360,269
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,234,378
Sacramento / Stockton 9,014,466
San Joaquin Valley 7,317,121
Southern California 50,964,035
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 86,530,000 - 1.6%
Revenue $ 2,806,000,000 - 1.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 33
Table A. 30 NA2 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via I- 580 / UPRR Station
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,834,612 5,613,149 – 7,447,761 7,447,761 1,171,865 8,619,626
Millbrae 104,860 361,760 22,076 444,544 466,620 422,166 888,786
Redwood City 156,133 552,075 38,989 669,220 708,208 369,307 1,077,515
Warm Springs 124,622 157,558 73,171 209,009 282,180 190,932 473,111
San Jose 511,840 1,340,576 86,523 1,765,892 1,852,416 556,775 2,409,190
Livermore/ I- 580 801,141 2,193,345 131,565 2,862,921 2,994,486 413,582 3,408,068
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,157,743 4,241,061 360,157 8,038,647 8,398,804 – 8,398,804
Tracy Downtown 358,555 52,519 254,763 156,311 411,074 – 411,074
Modesto Downtown 1,252,272 304,968 220,225 1,337,015 1,557,240 – 1,557,240
Merced 450,241 249,956 327,934 372,263 700,197 – 700,197
Fresno 1,468,402 1,032,225 272,032 2,228,596 2,500,627 – 2,500,627
Bakersfield 1,209,189 1,471,429 – 2,680,617 2,680,617 – 2,680,617
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,677,947 7,846,195 96,315 10,427,827 10,524,142 7,880,129 18,404,270
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,494,930 1,128,006 141,001 3,481,936 3,622,937 2,726,052 6,348,989
City of Industry through San Diego 5,660,861 13,004,830 331,672 18,334,018 18,665,691 7,966,193 26,631,884
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 16,876,297
Sacramento / Stockton 8,809,878
San Joaquin Valley 7,438,681
Southern California 51,385,143
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 84,510,000 - 3.9%
Revenue $ 2,693,000,000 - 5.3%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 34 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 31 NA3 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Tracy Ace Station
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,909,861 5,397,685 112,737 7,194,810 7,307,546 1,889,934 9,197,480
Millbrae 125,886 383,796 30,858 478,824 509,682 415,388 925,070
Redwood City 194,966 581,392 52,073 724,285 776,358 379,392 1,155,750
Warm Springs 93,450 126,588 61,891 158,147 220,038 161,304 381,343
San Jose 544,923 1,358,801 101,165 1,802,560 1,903,725 741,764 2,645,489
Bernal 1,193,291 2,712,518 217,584 3,688,225 3,905,809 1,219,633 5,125,442
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,315,729 4,400,237 371,347 8,344,619 8,715,966 – 8,715,966
Tracy ACE 460,765 115,893 321,203 255,455 576,658 – 576,658
Modesto Downtown 1,311,813 270,708 244,760 1,337,762 1,582,521 – 1,582,521
Merced 446,213 226,876 324,885 348,204 673,089 – 673,089
Fresno 1,471,713 1,058,112 269,130 2,260,695 2,529,825 – 2,529,825
Bakersfield 1,223,097 1,516,773 – 2,739,870 2,739,870 – 2,739,870
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,671,667 8,056,202 100,639 10,627,230 10,727,869 7,880,129 18,607,997
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,501,071 1,029,358 136,581 3,393,848 3,530,429 2,726,052 6,256,481
City of Industry through San Diego 5,625,788 13,015,038 347,152 18,293,675 18,640,827 7,966,193 26,607,020
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,430,573
Sacramento / Stockton 9,292,624
San Joaquin Valley 7,525,305
Southern California 51,471,498
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 87,720,000 - 0.2%
Revenue $ 2,846,000,000 0.1%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 35
Table A. 32 NA4 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Livermore Downtown
Station
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,030,776 5,725,034 108,515 7,647,296 7,755,810 1,800,483 9,556,293
Millbrae 122,784 383,149 24,310 481,622 505,932 456,027 961,960
Redwood City 187,435 597,360 44,921 739,873 784,794 404,668 1,189,462
Warm Springs 128,773 179,331 80,858 227,247 308,104 150,931 459,036
San Jose 536,584 1,346,922 90,723 1,792,784 1,883,506 1,025,957 2,909,463
Livermore Downtown 776,162 1,943,225 132,825 2,586,562 2,719,387 795,156 3,514,543
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,275,939 4,281,753 349,502 8,208,190 8,557,692 – 8,557,692
Tracy Downtown 397,594 79,448 280,271 196,771 477,042 – 477,042
Modesto Downtown 1,327,016 292,778 212,097 1,407,697 1,619,794 – 1,619,794
Merced 469,467 256,842 320,788 405,521 726,309 – 726,309
Fresno 1,498,596 1,025,077 267,235 2,256,438 2,523,673 – 2,523,673
Bakersfield 1,211,983 1,484,855 – 2,696,838 2,696,838 – 2,696,838
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,685,036 7,783,644 94,246 10,374,434 10,468,679 7,880,129 18,348,808
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,607,349 1,125,664 136,877 3,596,137 3,733,013 2,726,052 6,459,066
City of Industry through San Diego 5,617,048 12,916,779 357,077 18,176,750 18,533,827 7,966,193 26,500,021
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 18,590,757
Sacramento / Stockton 9,034,734
San Joaquin Valley 7,566,614
Southern California 51,307,894
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 86,500,000 - 1.6%
Revenue $ 2,786,000,000 - 2.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 36 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 33 NA5 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via Briggsmore Station
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 2,276,578 6,539,287 125,324 8,690,541 8,815,865 1,892,007 10,707,871
Millbrae 122,780 373,426 25,268 470,938 496,206 415,125 911,331
Redwood City 225,244 706,429 55,888 875,786 931,674 378,863 1,310,536
Warm Springs 82,964 116,247 53,090 146,120 199,210 160,662 359,872
San Jose 651,388 1,642,760 111,987 2,182,162 2,294,149 739,045 3,033,193
Bernal 1,035,666 2,231,739 182,325 3,085,079 3,267,404 1,215,779 4,483,183
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,192,430 4,276,264 378,196 8,090,498 8,468,694 – 8,468,694
Tracy Downtown 428,224 349,682 368,976 408,930 777,906 – 777,906
Modesto Briggsmore 1,111,136 231,524 197,257 1,145,403 1,342,660 – 1,342,660
Merced 429,592 215,135 308,642 336,085 644,727 – 644,727
Fresno 1,427,007 998,125 259,872 2,165,261 2,425,133 – 2,425,133
Bakersfield 1,179,844 1,450,869 – 2,630,713 2,630,713 – 2,630,713
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,598,691 7,819,180 97,532 10,320,339 10,417,871 7,880,129 18,298,000
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,403,006 983,071 132,460 3,253,617 3,386,077 2,726,052 6,112,130
City of Industry through San Diego 5,479,486 12,648,371 337,608 17,790,249 18,127,857 7,966,193 26,094,050
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 20,805,988
Sacramento / Stockton 9,246,600
San Joaquin Valley 7,043,233
Southern California 50,504,179
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 87,600,000 - 0.4%
Revenue $ 2,834,000,000 - 0.4%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 37
Table A. 34 NA6 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco via the Fremont Bridge
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,883,561 5,336,406 103,942 7,116,024 7,219,966 2,036,003 9,255,969
Millbrae 125,291 381,647 25,023 481,914 506,938 445,921 952,858
Redwood City 188,286 596,181 44,272 740,195 784,467 403,862 1,188,329
Warm Springs 93,268 113,742 62,120 144,889 207,010 161,089 368,099
San Jose 531,961 1,318,528 92,043 1,758,445 1,850,488 936,210 2,786,699
Bernal 1,143,190 2,391,898 200,010 3,335,078 3,535,089 1,218,282 4,753,371
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,410,724 4,324,805 373,772 8,361,757 8,735,529 – 8,735,529
Tracy Downtown 440,092 378,672 383,747 435,018 818,764 – 818,764
Modesto Downtown 1,337,426 292,228 238,682 1,390,972 1,629,655 – 1,629,655
Merced 466,691 267,030 315,152 418,569 733,721 – 733,721
Fresno 1,507,164 1,034,524 266,330 2,275,357 2,541,687 – 2,541,687
Bakersfield 1,218,785 1,509,263 – 2,728,048 2,728,048 – 2,728,048
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,687,101 7,824,897 93,268 10,418,730 10,511,998 7,880,129 18,392,127
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,610,457 1,158,064 133,690 3,634,831 3,768,521 2,726,052 6,494,574
City of Industry through San Diego 5,614,810 12,949,568 325,651 18,238,727 18,564,378 7,966,193 26,530,571
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,305,324
Sacramento / Stockton 9,554,294
San Joaquin Valley 7,633,111
Southern California 51,417,271
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 87,910,000 0.0%
Revenue $ 2,843,000,000 0.0%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 38 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 35 NA7 – Altamont to San Jose and San Francisco ( King Street Station)
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – King Street 1,572,007 5,804,489 – 7,376,495 7,376,495 579,475 7,964,141
Millbrae 87,695 411,143 38,560 460,278 498,838 102,944 602,058
Redwood City 150,804 643,254 79,878 714,180 794,058 112,878 907,596
Warm Springs 94,107 131,861 60,221 165,747 225,968 168,741 394,306
San Jose 470,661 1,186,977 80,916 1,576,722 1,657,638 644,700 2,301,945
Bernal 1,174,775 2,531,503 206,815 3,499,463 3,706,278 1,276,917 4,983,031
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,305,426 4,391,520 388,390 8,308,556 8,696,946 – 8,709,538
Tracy Downtown 439,766 359,107 378,921 419,952 798,873 – 800,029
Modesto Downtown 1,307,724 272,486 232,157 1,348,054 1,580,211 – 1,582,499
Merced 444,675 222,688 319,479 347,885 667,364 – 668,330
Fresno 1,476,056 1,032,432 268,804 2,239,684 2,508,488 – 2,512,120
Bakersfield 1,225,137 1,506,566 – 2,731,703 2,731,703 – 2,735,658
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,681,729 8,069,034 100,648 10,650,115 10,750,764 7,880,129 18,612,326
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,497,091 1,021,561 137,646 3,381,006 3,518,652 2,726,052 6,237,991
City of Industry through San Diego 5,646,290 13,033,407 347,885 18,331,812 18,679,697 7,966,193 26,638,432
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 17,144,930
Sacramento / Stockton 9,495,818
San Joaquin Valley 7,487,765
Southern California 51,521,487
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 85,650,000 - 2.6%
Revenue $ 2,771,000,000 - 2.6%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
Cambridge Systematics, Inc. A- 39
Table A. 36 NA8 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland ( 12th Street Station)
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
Oakland – 12th Street 3,150,167 7,629,938 159,695 10,620,410 10,780,105 148,909 10,929,014
Oakland – Airport 155,215 438,634 53,650 540,199 593,848 1,469,598 2,063,446
Union City 411,492 990,273 70,097 1,331,668 1,401,765 362,306 1,764,072
San Jose 616,004 1,575,133 109,039 2,082,099 2,191,138 666,393 2,857,531
Bernal 580,783 1,171,732 133,711 1,618,804 1,752,515 353,094 2,105,609
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,628,205 4,464,074 367,126 8,725,154 9,092,280 - 9,092,280
Tracy Downtown 481,186 348,326 429,850 399,663 829,512 - 829,512
Modesto Downtown 1,380,077 274,103 203,547 1,450,633 1,654,180 - 1,654,180
Merced 456,061 225,233 329,006 352,288 681,294 - 681,294
Fresno 1,528,527 1,087,161 278,292 2,337,397 2,615,688 - 2,615,688
Bakersfield 1,296,703 1,628,342 - 2,925,045 2,925,045 - 2,925,045
Palmdale through Los Angeles Union
Station
2,788,205 8,461,333 101,600 11,147,939 11,249,538 7,880,129 19,129,667
Orange County: Norwalk through Irvine 2,554,165 1,061,913 155,915 3,460,162 3,616,078 2,726,052 6,342,130
City of Industry through San Diego 5,874,126 13,590,213 393,827 19,070,511 19,464,338 7,966,193 27,430,532
Total Annual Ridership for Regions
Bay Area 19,719,672
Sacramento / Stockton 9,921,792
San Joaquin Valley 7,876,207
Southern California 52,902,328
Total Annual Ridership Percentage Deviation from A1
Total Ridership 90,420,000 2.9%
Revenue $ 2,925,000,000 2.8%
Bay Area/ California High- Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue Forecasting Study
Appendix A
A- 40 Cambridge Systematics, Inc.
Table A. 37 NA9 – Altamont to San Jose and Oakland – BNSF Alignment
Business /
Commute
Recreation /
Other Short Trips Long Trips
Subtotal
Interregional
Intra-regional
Total
San Francisco Downtown – Transbay 1,844,645 5,298,594 101,546 7,041,693 7,143,240 1,892,007 9,035,246
Millbrae 124,664 379,158 25,656 478,166 503,821 415,125 918,947
Redwood City 180,965 567,558 44,901 703,622 748,523 378,863 1,127,386
Warm Springs 109,506 153,437 70,075 192,867 262,942 160,662 423,604
San Jose 515,131 1,299,127 88,562 1,725,696 1,814,257 739,045 2,553,302
Bernal 1,367,001 2,945,727 240,656 4,072,072 4,312,727 1,215,779 5,528,506
Sacramento/ Stockton 4,176,773 4,260,295 376,784 8,060,284 8,437,068 – 8,437,068
Tracy Downtown 426,625 348,376 367,598 407,403 775,001 – 775,001
Modesto Downtown 1,268,648 264,344 225,220 1,307,772 1,532,992 – 1,532,992
Merced 431,388 216,034 309,932 337,490 647,422 – 647,422
Fresno 1,431,949 1,001,582 260,772 2,172,759 2,433,531 – 2,433,531
Bakersfield 1,188,528 1,461,547 – 2,650,075 2,650,075 – 2,65