# Extending CZ to Oakland/ San Jose?



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 5, 2015)

I believe I suggested this a while ago but couldn't find my post.

Right now the last stop on the CZ is Emeryville. I believe it used to reach Oakland but they moved it back to Emeryville. I also think San Jose/ Santa Clara County would gain from the direct access to SLC/DEN/CHI. San Jose is now the largest city in the Bay Area, bigger than San Fran. In 2014, they estimated the population of the city to be over one million (http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/0668000.html).%C2 Clara County has more people than Alameda County (http://www.us-places.com/California/population-by-County.htm). In any event, why stop an LD train at some small suburb of a major city? I didn't even know where Emeryville was until I arrived there this summer. I seem to remember a fairly small station.

I believe this is by far my shortest "extend a route" proposal I have. It would be 36 miles and less than two hours, according to the Coast Starlight schedule. So you are looking at around a 6pm arrival into SJC and a 7am departure from there. It would "save another transfer" as I always say.

Right now Jack London Square and San Jose Diridon would be the natural two stops as they are the two served by the CS. I'm think maybe Fremont-Centerville and/or Santa Clara-Great America would be the next ideal stop for either the extended CZ or the CS between Oakland and San Jose.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

The Amtrak Oakland yard is between OKJ and EMY. It would require backing the train to OKJ to originate the California Zephyr there, and that's not going to happen. The old 16th Street Station is downstream of the lot and could be the origin. I suppose it might be possible to put the locomotives at both ends and then do a recoupling of the locomotives a OKJ, but that's a lot of work. Right now, EMY is just set a few miles away.

There's no yard in San Jose. Even if they could do something like get access to the Caltrain yard, that's not in the right spot.


----------



## TiBike (Dec 5, 2015)

Emeryville is the quickest bus connection to San Francisco, and Richmond, the stop before, is where you connect to BART. To get further south, to Oakland or San Jose, there's the Capital Corridor. Given that you're not going to get a lot of business travelers on the Zephyr, who might well be more interested in going to Silicon Valley than tourists, I don't see much benefit. Adding another Capital Corridor train would be a greater benefit. You could even make a good argument for adding another CC train and stopping the CZ in Sacramento.

On the other hand, carrying on to LA, or even just to SLO to connect to the Surfliner, would add something useful to the system.

But absent that, there would be a greater benefit to add another CC train and stop the CZ in Sacto than to extend the CZ only to San Jose.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 5, 2015)

BCL said:


> The Amtrak Oakland yard is between OKJ and EMY. It would require backing the train to OKJ to originate the California Zephyr there, and that's not going to happen. The old 16th Street Station is downstream of the lot and could be the origin. I suppose it might be possible to put the locomotives at both ends and then do a recoupling of the locomotives a OKJ, but that's a lot of work. Right now, EMY is just set a few miles away.
> 
> There's no yard in San Jose. Even if they could do something like get access to the Caltrain yard, that's not in the right spot.


Where is the CZ currently serviced in California? And don't the Capital Corridor trains terminate in San Jose? Where are they serviced?


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Dec 5, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > The Amtrak Oakland yard is between OKJ and EMY. It would require backing the train to OKJ to originate the California Zephyr there, and that's not going to happen. The old 16th Street Station is downstream of the lot and could be the origin. I suppose it might be possible to put the locomotives at both ends and then do a recoupling of the locomotives a OKJ, but that's a lot of work. Right now, EMY is just set a few miles away.
> ...


The CZ is serviced north of Oakland as stated in his post (Oakland yard) and the CC is a California train, therefore has it's own yard.


----------



## jis (Dec 5, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > The Amtrak Oakland yard is between OKJ and EMY. It would require backing the train to OKJ to originate the California Zephyr there, and that's not going to happen. The old 16th Street Station is downstream of the lot and could be the origin. I suppose it might be possible to put the locomotives at both ends and then do a recoupling of the locomotives a OKJ, but that's a lot of work. Right now, EMY is just set a few miles away.
> ...


I don't believe the CC trains are really serviced in San Jose. They just turn there. They are all homed out of and serviced in Oakland CC Yard. Not all CC trains run to San Jose.

As mentioned above the CZ is serviced in the Amtrak Oakland yard, in the same area as the CC Yard.

In short there is nothing of Amtrak or Amtrak California in San Jose and there really is no space for anything much either. So pretty much forget about terminating any LD train at San Jose. Won't happen without mucho dinero.


----------



## Eric S (Dec 5, 2015)

Capitol Corridor trains have cab cars and operate push-pull, so there isn't the same issue/concern with backing the train as exists with the California Zephyr.

At first glance, having the CZ originate/terminate in Emeryville rather than Oakland does seem odd. But when you examine the situation, it does make sense. Not much would be gained by running to/from Oakland.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > The Amtrak Oakland yard is between OKJ and EMY. It would require backing the train to OKJ to originate the California Zephyr there, and that's not going to happen. The old 16th Street Station is downstream of the lot and could be the origin. I suppose it might be possible to put the locomotives at both ends and then do a recoupling of the locomotives a OKJ, but that's a lot of work. Right now, EMY is just set a few miles away.
> ...


CC runs in push configuration from San Jose. I've been on the same train to San Jose and got back on when it reversed.

CC gets serviced in Oakland. The last train of the day doesn't make it to San Jose. Quite a few only get to the Oakland Coliseum station and reverse. They'll park those at the Oakland yard overnight. I think there's a place near Sacramento to park some trains overnight, but they don't get serviced there.

The long distance trains will need a way to turn around. There's a wye at the Oakland yard.


----------



## willem (Dec 5, 2015)

Didn't Amtrak build the Emeryville station specifically as the terminus for the California Zephyr?

I do recall boarding the Zephyr at Jack London Square in 1984.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

AmtrakBlue said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > BCL said:
> ...


Technically, I think Amtrak California contracts out for maintenance and storage of Capitol Corridor and San Joaquin at the Oakland yard. I see plenty of California Cars parked and services there.


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Dec 5, 2015)

BCL said:


> AmtrakBlue said:
> 
> 
> > Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> ...


Ok, I was just going by the statement about a Caltrain yard in SJC. I have no idea, myself. Thanks for clarifying.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

AmtrakBlue said:


> Ok, I was just going by the statement about a Caltrain yard in SJC. I have no idea, myself. Thanks for clarifying.


I don't believe Amtrak California ever uses Caltrain facilities. I suppose it might have been different when Amtrak was contracted to run Caltrain.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

willem said:


> Didn't Amtrak build the Emeryville station specifically as the terminus for the California Zephyr?
> 
> I do recall boarding the Zephyr at Jack London Square in 1984.


Amtrak didn't operate out of Jack London Square until 1995. The origin was the 16th Street Station, which was damaged by the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Are you sure it was JLS. I looked at old Amtrak timetables, and the only reference is to the "Oakland Station".


----------



## Seaboard92 (Dec 5, 2015)

The extension I would be more in favor of would be to extend some Capitol Corridor or SJ trains to San Francisco over Caltrain. If it wasn't so far away from maintenance or frequently late I would extend the CZ there and use the equipment as a CC train to Oakland after it comes from Chicago. Except it would almost always be late.


----------



## CCC1007 (Dec 5, 2015)

The CZ is not a corridor train, so running it as one from San Francisco to Oakland is not going to work


----------



## tp49 (Dec 5, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> Right now Jack London Square and San Jose Diridon would be the natural two stops as they are the two served by the CS. I'm think maybe Fremont-Centerville and/or Santa Clara-Great America would be the next ideal stop for either the extended CZ or the CS between Oakland and San Jose.


Not withstanding the issues related to servicing the train which were mentioned by prior posters if hypothetically you routed the CZ to SJC the route it would take would be the same as the CS which bypasses Fremont-Centerville.


----------



## willem (Dec 5, 2015)

BCL said:


> Amtrak didn't operate out of Jack London Square until 1995. The origin was the 16th Street Station, which was damaged by the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Are you sure it was JLS. I looked at old Amtrak timetables, and the only reference is to the "Oakland Station".


Well, there was no doubt in my mind, but I can hardly remember that I have senile dementia. If Amtrak didn't use Jack London Square until 1995, then it's likely that my memory is faulty. I am more sure that it was 1984 when I rode the Zephyr.

Also, that would explain why nothing looked familiar in Jack London Square when I finally got back to Oakland many years after 1984.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

Seaboard92 said:


> The extension I would be more in favor of would be to extend some Capitol Corridor or SJ trains to San Francisco over Caltrain. If it wasn't so far away from maintenance or frequently late I would extend the CZ there and use the equipment as a CC train to Oakland after it comes from Chicago. Except it would almost always be late.


Again, you need a place to turn the train around. I don't think there are a whole lot of turnarounds available. Maybe a turntable for the locomotive might work. As it stands they probably use a wye with switching equipment at a yard without traffic. There are wyes all around, but they're not used to turn around unless there's an emergency. I remember some conversation about this before, and backing up a little over a mile or using the wye at the yard with passengers isn't much of an option.

Right now I'd think the issues with your proposal would be with equipment availability. That would mean they'd need more equipment and more employees. Then they'd need to negotiate for trackage rights with Caltrain since they own the tracks and the stations. Currently, I think the only Caltrain owned stations used by CC are Santa Clara and San Jose


----------



## jis (Dec 5, 2015)

Who in their right mind would ride a CC service from Oakland to San Francisco via San Jose? Seems like an utterly silly idea to me. Soon you will be able to ride BART from Oakland to San Jose and you can already ride Caltrain from San Jose to San Francisco. And you can ride BART from Richmond to San Fran and Amtrak Thruway from Emeryville to San Francisco.

On the whole this seems like a typical AU solution looking for a non existent problem.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 5, 2015)

jis said:


> Who in their right mind would ride a CC service from Oakland to San Francisco via San Jose? Seems like an utterly silly idea to me. Soon you will be able to ride BART from Oakland to San Jose and you can already ride Caltrain from San Jose to San Francisco. And you can ride BART from Richmond to San Fran and Amtrak Thruway from Emeryville to San Francisco.
> 
> On the whole this seems like a typical AU solution looking for a non existent problem.


From Chicago to San Jose, From Denver to San Jose, From Salt Lake City to San Jose, need I go on?


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

willem said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak didn't operate out of Jack London Square until 1995. The origin was the 16th Street Station, which was damaged by the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Are you sure it was JLS. I looked at old Amtrak timetables, and the only reference is to the "Oakland Station".
> ...


The Jack London station was opened in 1995 to replace the 16th Street station. However, Emeryville built its own station at the same time and opened a little bit earlier. Emeryville was pretty sleepy back then, but they were ambitious building shopping centers and bringing in companies like Pixar. I used to spend a lot of time in Emeryville while I was in college. There was a place at the Emery Bay Public Market where I could a huge $2.50 beans and rice burrito, and they had a then state of the art movie theater. I saw the train station being built. I also remember some lunch times when the Oakland Army Base let out and Emeryille was swarming with base personnel.

This was the 16th Street Station. It was a large classic station building, but right now it's closed off and has lots of graffiti.

http://www.16thstreetstation.com







When it came time to replace the 16th Street station, Emeryville (E'Ville) made more sense as the origin for the CZ given its location relative to the yard.f


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

jis said:


> Who in their right mind would ride a CC service from Oakland to San Francisco via San Jose? Seems like an utterly silly idea to me. Soon you will be able to ride BART from Oakland to San Jose and you can already ride Caltrain from San Jose to San Francisco. And you can ride BART from Richmond to San Fran and Amtrak Thruway from Emeryville to San Francisco.
> 
> On the whole this seems like a typical AU solution looking for a non existent problem.


I don think that's quite the proposal. Perhaps a special train that skips GAC and heads straight for the Peninsula. I don't think it makes sense though. Still, it's kind of a solution in search of a problem. There is the bus connector.

There used to be an annual Big Game Train every other year from Berkeley to Stanford. I don't know how it was arranged, but I don't believe it went as far as San Jose.


----------



## Eric S (Dec 5, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Who in their right mind would ride a CC service from Oakland to San Francisco via San Jose? Seems like an utterly silly idea to me. Soon you will be able to ride BART from Oakland to San Jose and you can already ride Caltrain from San Jose to San Francisco. And you can ride BART from Richmond to San Fran and Amtrak Thruway from Emeryville to San Francisco.
> ...


That's not the question Jis raised. Going from Oakland (or points east of Oakland) to San Francisco via San Jose is an absurd routing. Take a look at a map. Extending trains from Oakland to San Francisco via San Jose is most definitely a solution is search of a problem.

Just extending the California Zephyr south from Emeryville to San Jose makes some sense if you're just looking a map. But, given where servicing facilities are, and the relatively small benefit of such an extension, it's not worthwhile. Those passengers desiring to travel Oakland-San Jose only (or from points east of Oakland to/from San Jose) are better served by beefing up Capitol Corridor service south of Oakland. I believe there are plans to do just that, once additional capacity is built.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 5, 2015)

Eric S said:


> Philly Amtrak Fan said:
> 
> 
> > jis said:
> ...


I had never proposed going to San Francisco. I said Emeryville to Oakland to San Jose over the CS route.



Eric S said:


> Just extending the California Zephyr south from Emeryville to San Jose makes some sense if you're just looking a map. But, given where servicing facilities are, and the relatively small benefit of such an extension, it's not worthwhile.


You don't live in San Jose/Silicon Valley. They may argue with you the benefit is small.


----------



## Eric S (Dec 5, 2015)

Just guessing here, but I imagine there is far more support for (and therefore benefit from) beefing up Capitol Corridor service, so that there are approximately the same number of trains SJC-OKJ as there are OKJ-SAC than there is for using one of those slots for the California Zephyr instead.

And that still doesn't solve the issue of the train being serviced in Oakland.


----------



## Philly Amtrak Fan (Dec 5, 2015)

Eric S said:


> Just guessing here, but I imagine there is far more support for (and therefore benefit from) beefing up Capitol Corridor service, so that there are approximately the same number of trains SJC-OKJ as there are OKJ-SAC than there is for using one of those slots for the California Zephyr instead.
> 
> And that still doesn't solve the issue of the train being serviced in Oakland.


I totally understand that the service yard is in Oakland and I get it. I just wanted to point out I have a feeling people think San Jose is a suburb of San Fran and Oakland when in fact it is a city of over 1 million people. Historically San Fran and Oakland were the big cities in the Bay Area but the South Bay/Silicon Valley is pretty big now. It's probably like Baltimore to Washington (40 miles on Silver Star/Meteor routes). You may think that San Fran and Oakland are close enough to San Jose but San Jose and Santa Clara may disagree with you.

In a related topic, does anyone ever complain Amtrak should serve Phoenix? Well Maricopa is closer to Phoenix than San Jose is to Emeryville.

(https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Phoenix,+AZ/Maricopa+Amtrak,+Maricopa,+AZ+85139/@33.2525392,-112.1523286,11z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m13!4m12!1m5!1m1!1s0x872b12ed50a179cb:0x8c69c7f8354a1bac!2m2!1d-112.0740373!2d33.4483771!1m5!1m1!1s0x872afad2d62707d3:0x58723f3934f8517!2m2!1d-112.047137!2d33.056284)

Do you feel Maricopa is good enough for Phoenix? So maybe Emeryville/Oakland isn't good enough for Silicon Valley. I'll admit the solution is difficult and expensive but I think if you just dismiss it as not being a problem you then are saying San Jose doesn't matter.


----------



## jis (Dec 5, 2015)

But San Jose will soon be connected to Oakland and Richmond by BART. That will never happen between Maricopa and Phoenix.

Anyway, until some significant additional doubling work is done between Oakland and San Jose I don't see any significant growth in CC frequency there. And once BART is completed the business case becomes shakier. Perhaps it would just be better to put in a pair of travellators between Oakland Coliseum and BART.

BTW Philly you did not say anything about going from Oakland to San Fran via San Jose. Seaboard did, and that is what I was responding to.


----------



## Seaboard92 (Dec 5, 2015)

I suggested it because SFO is a really big market and I was thinking of the long haul traffic more so then local traffic. Then I worked on fixing the equipment deadhead problem by suggesting making it a short corridor train back to Oakland revenue train. I've always found it odd that no long hauls have gone to SFO


----------



## keelhauled (Dec 5, 2015)

Even back in the heyday of passenger trains San Francisco proper didn't have much in the way of long distance trains. The California Zephyr and other trains off the Western Pacific terminated at Oakland, as did trains from the north and east off the Southern Pacific, and the Santa Fe's trains from the south ended in Richmond.


----------



## chakk (Dec 5, 2015)

willem said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak didn't operate out of Jack London Square until 1995. The origin was the 16th Street Station, which was damaged by the Loma Prieta Earthquake. Are you sure it was JLS. I looked at old Amtrak timetables, and the only reference is to the "Oakland Station".
> ...


16th street station closed due to earthquake damage from the Loma Prieta 6.9 quake in October 1989. I suppose it is possible that the CZ used the Jack London Square Oakland station as a short-term substitute after the earthquake, but I don't think it was published in a formal timetable. Having lived in the Bay Area since the mid-70s -- and living through Loma Prieta -- I don't remember any news about the CZ moving into Jack London Square station at that time.


----------



## BCL (Dec 5, 2015)

keelhauled said:


> Even back in the heyday of passenger trains San Francisco proper didn't have much in the way of long distance trains. The California Zephyr and other trains off the Western Pacific terminated at Oakland, as did trains from the north and east off the Southern Pacific, and the Santa Fe's trains from the south ended in Richmond.


Basically the Coast Daylight. There was just a huge impracticality of trying to get a train across that much water. I suppose the Key System ran on the Bay Bridge, but it only connected to the Transbay Terminal. It would have been interesting if anyone proposed using their rails, although the catenary might have been an issue along with whether they had rails that could support heavy rail.

That's why pretty much all the services used a bus or ferry to get to San Francisco.

Heck - the rail bridge across the Carquinez Strait took a lot of work. I didn't even realize that Southern Pacific used a couple of (paddlewheel driven) rail ferries before the rail bridge was completed. Must have taken a while to disassemble and reassemble the consist if it was long.







http://cprr.org/Museum/Solano/

The following claims that the California Zephyr was inaugurated in San Francisco near the Ferry Building, but doesn't clarify how it got across the Bay. I suppose it could have gone south, but the San Francisco Belt Railroad apparently had a train ferry at Pier 43. I've been there so many times, but I never really thought too much of why there were rails that seemed to end at the edge. I do remember seeing a lot of rails that seemed to go everywhere over streets in San Francisco, but now they've been removed and paved over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Belt_Railroad

http://sanfranciscotrains.org/SBRR-Visitors.html


----------



## BCL (Dec 6, 2015)

chakk said:


> 16th street station closed due to earthquake damage from the Loma Prieta 6.9 quake in October 1989. I suppose it is possible that the CZ used the Jack London Square Oakland station as a short-term substitute after the earthquake, but I don't think it was published in a formal timetable. Having lived in the Bay Area since the mid-70s -- and living through Loma Prieta -- I don't remember any news about the CZ moving into Jack London Square station at that time.


I could have sworn my cousin said that he took an Amtrak trip (a field trip) to Jack London Square back when we were kids, but now that I think of it, that trip was probably to the 16th Street station. I'm not even sure what route swould have gone from Richmond to 16th Street on a schedule convenient for a school field trip in the late 70s.

All the history I can find about the 16th Street Station and the Jack London Station is that the latter opened in 1994 and basically replaced the former. Apparently after the earthquake damage closed the 16th Street station building, they used a nearby building (former SP superintendent's building) as a waiting room until the JLS station was ready. Emeryville opened in 1993 but apparently the 16th Street Station remained the terminus of the CZ until OKJ was ready. That must have been when the CZ terminus was changed to Emeryville.

http://www.greatamericanstations.com/Stations/OKJ


----------



## Eric S (Dec 6, 2015)

Philly Amtrak Fan said:


> Eric S said:
> 
> 
> > Just guessing here, but I imagine there is far more support for (and therefore benefit from) beefing up Capitol Corridor service, so that there are approximately the same number of trains SJC-OKJ as there are OKJ-SAC than there is for using one of those slots for the California Zephyr instead.
> ...


Want to discuss Phoenix/Maricopa? Feel free to start another topic, but I'm not touching that one here.

Not every LD train needs to serve every major city in a metropolitan area/region. LD trains are such a minor part of passenger rail service in the Bay Area anyway that it's bizarre this is even a "problem" to anyone. The cost of extending the California Zephyr from Emeryville to San Jose far exceeds any benefits of such an extension.

Want to improve Oakland-San Jose service? Let's beef up Capitol Corridor service between the two cities (as is planned). Let's speed up the BART extension to downtown San Jose (as is planned and partially under construction).


----------



## west point (Dec 6, 2015)

The only way downtown San Fran will ever get LD service is one of three ways.

1. A coast daylight train LAX to downtown.

2. California HSR service is complete LAX - SFO.

3. The proposed second set of BART tubes under the bay are built with a tube(s) for Caltrain from the new Transbay terminal to connect somewhere on the Oakland side to Capitol corridor tracks. Then the Coast starlight could route thru down town San Fran.


----------



## jis (Dec 6, 2015)

Dual gauge track in second set of BART tubes after BART choosing a different gauge so it never has to deal with a mainline railroad? That will be the day!


----------



## Eric S (Dec 6, 2015)

You occasionally see it mentioned by transit advocacy groups that any future Transbay tube should include mainline rail. I'm not sure it's ever made into any formal planning studies, but IMO it's worthy of consideration. However, the reason to consider it is to run CAHSR through San Francisco to the East Bay and wherever beyond that and/or to link Caltrain and Capitol Corridor (and ACE and Dumbarton Rail) into a coordinated S-Bahn/RER type system. The California Zephyr and Coast Starlight should be just about at the bottom of the considerations though.

And, with Caltrain moving to high level platforms as part of the electrification/EMU/CAHSR projects, traditional Amtrak service into San Francisco becomes even less likely.


----------



## neroden (Dec 6, 2015)

It would be ideal to have a second Transbay Tube for high-speed rail which connects to Caltrain in San Francisco, runs from San Francisco to Oakland, and then onward to Martinez directly in tunnel, before rejoining the surface lines to Sacramento and Stockton. (The Capitol Corridor is pretty fast northeast of Martinez, but very slow southwest of there.) For some reason this never makes it out of study phase.

If this happened (I wish) the CZ might well be terminated in Sacramento with connections there to the express to San Francisco.


----------



## west point (Dec 6, 2015)

Please read my post more carefully. Propose a separate tube for Caltrain / HSR / Amtrak not to share with BART. BART needs the capacity of two more tubes and standard rail needs a couple tubes ( not to confuse tubes definition with tunnel.)


----------



## afigg (Dec 6, 2015)

jis said:


> Dual gauge track in second set of BART tubes after BART choosing a different gauge so it never has to deal with a mainline railroad? That will be the day!


Regardless of the track gauge, I think most here recognize that BART as a rapid transit system would never share tracks with a HSR and intercity passenger train system. So a comprehensive new Transbay tube/tunnel project would be 2 tunnels/tubes/tracks for BART and 1 or 2 tracks for HSR and intercity passenger trains. But if it were a joint project, a new Transbay BART line would have different objectives on where the route should go on the SF side than a intercity passenger rail line which presumably would connect to the CalTrain corridor.

But either as a BART only 2 tunnel project or a joint BART and HSR 4 tunnel giga-project, the price tag has to be substantial, in the multiple of billions of dollars. Something that big would take 10 to 15 years just for the studies, public debate, and lining up the money. WAY beyond the scope of, hey, why not extend the California Zephyr to San Jose?


----------



## afigg (Dec 6, 2015)

TiBike said:


> On the other hand, carrying on to LA, or even just to SLO to connect to the Surfliner, would add something useful to the system.


Extending the CZ over slow tracks to end its route at a small community well away from the major markets? Not really a viable idea. Service over that route is best provided by a Coast Daylight service along with the Coast Starlight. However, given the mid to late afternoon arrival of the westbound CS at Emeryville, unlikely to ever have a same day connection via BART or Capitol Corridor to a Coast Daylight. In 15 years, CA HSR may transform SF to LA connections and trips, with some spillover effects on the LD trains. With regards to the prospects for the Coast Daylight, I saw that the FRA posted the Final EIS and a Record of Decision for the Coast Corridor study several weeks ago, so the Coast Daylight plans have cleared one hurdle. But that is a bit off-topic for this thread.


----------



## BCL (Dec 6, 2015)

afigg said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Dual gauge track in second set of BART tubes after BART choosing a different gauge so it never has to deal with a mainline railroad? That will be the day!
> ...


Besides the gauge issue, BART also uses a third rail. Not sure if it would interfere.

And again, it's the infrastructure reason for why the CZ doesn't make it to San Jose. I've heard a suggestion to maybe extend it to Los Angeles. That would make it the longest route for Amtrak.


----------



## BCL (Dec 6, 2015)

willem said:


> Didn't Amtrak build the Emeryville station specifically as the terminus for the California Zephyr?


Technically the city of Emeryville built the station. I suppose having it as an endpoint was a prime consideration. However, I don't recall if a retrofit of the 16th Street Station was proposed.


----------



## neroden (Dec 6, 2015)

BART absolutely does not need a second pair of tracks under the Bay -- and frankly BART should never be extended again, since BART projects routinely cost several times more than otherwise-identical standard-gauge projects. If electrified Caltrain had a pair of tracks under the Bay, that would be quite sufficient for the local cross-bay capacity needs.


----------



## BCL (Dec 6, 2015)

Seaboard92 said:


> I suggested it because SFO is a really big market and I was thinking of the long haul traffic more so then local traffic. Then I worked on fixing the equipment deadhead problem by suggesting making it a short corridor train back to Oakland revenue train. I've always found it odd that no long hauls have gone to SFO


That issue is already solved with a bus. Using a bus or ferry goes back to before Amtrak.

It's not really odd when you look at San Francisco on a map. The bridges and tubes were huge undertaking.


----------



## west point (Dec 6, 2015)

But BART is already planning for a second set of transbay tubes.

See the BART long range plans page 65 noting a second set transbay tube.


----------



## jis (Dec 7, 2015)

Yeah. If you consider the likelihood of things happening .... Caltrain tunnel under the bay 2%, BART second tube pair under the bay more like 98%. Also BART will get extended in several directions irrespective of what a few here might feel.  The politics of it is highly favored towards BART in the bay area, since it was conceived as the primary body for providing transit service for the entire region. And frankly, there is no reason to change that at all.. Indeed, it took a bit of work to keep Caltrain in existence while the BART juggernaut rattled along. It is almost like really it is Caltrain that is the odd one in the big picture.


----------



## neroden (Dec 7, 2015)

BART does seem to be a bit of a money-wasting juggernaut. Burns money faster than any transit system outside New York City, and for less benefit.

In New York, there are quite a lot of advocates trying to get some prioritization and cost control into the system. Are there any in San Francisco? Maybe it'll just keep setting fire to money. It would probably be more efficient and useful to just pile up the money and burn it as an entertainment, though. Certainly more useful than the Warm Springs extension.

The primary problem is extremely bad planning, trying to be an extreme suburban line and an urban subway at the same time. (If BART wants to be an urban line, Caltrain should go under the Bay. If BART really wants to be a suburban line, Muni should go under the bay.) But the cost issues arise from a bunch of unutterably stupid design decisions made early on, from the stupid track gauge to the stupid wheel profile... This is stuff which they could actually fix if they cared to (regauging has been done many times throughout history).


----------



## west point (Dec 7, 2015)

A big cost item for BART is earthquake protection. When you have to plan for the big one costs go up very fast. Other systems other than LA do not have to do the same although maybe some should do more. But in BART's defense you will note that much infrastructure has not needed as much repair work as other systems of the same size.

Look at how much work and cost is going into the Transbay terminal under construction.


----------



## BCL (Dec 7, 2015)

neroden said:


> The primary problem is extremely bad planning, trying to be an extreme suburban line and an urban subway at the same time. (If BART wants to be an urban line, Caltrain should go under the Bay. If BART really wants to be a suburban line, Muni should go under the bay.) But the cost issues arise from a bunch of unutterably stupid design decisions made early on, from the stupid track gauge to the stupid wheel profile... This is stuff which they could actually fix if they cared to (regauging has been done many times throughout history).


It's a matter of political boundaries. MUNI serves the needs of San Francisco. BART serves the needs of the Bay Area.

MUNI is already blowing what they can on the Central Subway.


----------



## neroden (Dec 9, 2015)

There is something rotten in San Fransisco transit planning. It's not earthquake protection which is driving the costs up.


----------



## Anderson (Dec 9, 2015)

No, I suspect it's an entirely different sort of "protection"


----------



## capltd29 (Dec 10, 2015)

What are the load factors on the CZ and how much would they improve by extending the train to San Jose? Would the additional revenue even approach covering 50% of the costs?


----------



## jis (Dec 11, 2015)

No


----------



## BCL (Dec 11, 2015)

capltd29 said:


> What are the load factors on the CZ and how much would they improve by extending the train to San Jose? Would the additional revenue even approach covering 50% of the costs?


There's a higher priority for getting one or two more daily Capitol Corridor trains to San Jose. Have fun trying to negotiate that with Union Pacific.


----------



## TiBike (Dec 11, 2015)

There's a fundamental error behind the original question: the assumption that downtown San Jose is a particular destination. San Jose is just one city, albeit the biggest, among many (and among many unincorporated areas) that form a continuous urban crescent from San Francisco south to San Jose, then back north to Richmond. From a tourist perspective, there's not a lot of attraction south of San Francisco. Some, but it's thin on the ground. From a business traveler's perspective, the destination could be anywhere in that crescent. Silicon Valley stretches from downtown San Francisco now, all the way down the peninsula and around back up to Fremont.

So getting off the Zephyr in Richmond or Emeryville and onto a route that'll get you where you need to be -- which might even be San Jose, but miles away from the Amtrak station -- is the smart move for nearly everybody. San Jose is at the far end of everything. Going there means backtracking on those same systems in order get where you're going. I'm an exception because San Jose is where I make connections to get home to Monterey, but there are very few who would be going or coming from east of Sacramento via train.

The need for travellers to go from Chicago, Denver or Salt Lake to downtown San Jose is near enough to zero to be reckoned as zero.


----------



## BCL (Dec 11, 2015)

TiBike said:


> There's a fundamental error behind the original question: the assumption that downtown San Jose is a particular destination. San Jose is just one city, albeit the biggest, among many (and among many unincorporated areas) that form a continuous urban crescent from San Francisco south to San Jose, then back north to Richmond. From a tourist perspective, there's not a lot of attraction south of San Francisco. Some, but it's thin on the ground. From a business traveler's perspective, the destination could be anywhere in that crescent. Silicon Valley stretches from downtown San Francisco now, all the way down the peninsula and around back up to Fremont.
> 
> So getting off the Zephyr in Richmond or Emeryville and onto a route that'll get you where you need to be -- which might even be San Jose, but miles away from the Amtrak station -- is the smart move for nearly everybody. San Jose is at the far end of everything. Going there means backtracking on those same systems in order get where you're going. I'm an exception because San Jose is where I make connections to get home to Monterey, but there are very few who would be going or coming from east of Sacramento via train.
> 
> The need for travellers to go from Chicago, Denver or Salt Lake to downtown San Jose is near enough to zero to be reckoned as zero.


I've worked in and around San Jose for years. When I mention Amtrak, most think of vacations or commuting. There was one coworker who said that he was recruited out of college in the Midwest, and he took a variety of trains to get to Silicon Valley in a roomette. I think it was primarily the CZ, but he wasn't specific.

For the most part, Silicon Valley is one big suburb. San Jose has a small downtown. I suppose there is demand or I wouldn't have seen people boarding or disembarking on the CS a few times in San Jose. I do suppose there are some people who might want to take the train and there are ways like the Empire Builder to the Coast Starlight. I wouldn't say that there's zero possible demand for a CZ to San Jose, but not likely enough to justify the costs of negotiating with UP for the trackage rights as well as deal with the impracticality regarding the yard locations.

However, for most there is the airport.


----------

