DOCSLIB.ORG

UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS California Adaptation Planning Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

C A L I F O R N I A ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE UNDERSTANDING REGIONAL CHARACTERISTICS CALIFORNIA ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE Prepared by: California Emergency Management Agency 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655 www.calema.ca.gov California Natural Resources Agency 1416 Ninth Street, Suite 1311 Sacramento, CA 95814 resources.ca.gov WITH FUNDING Support From: Federal Emergency Management Agency 1111 Broadway, Suite 1200 Oakland, CA 94607-4052 California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street, MS-29 Sacramento, CA 95814-5512 WITH Technical Support From: California Polytechnic State University San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 July 2012 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) has benefited from the ideas, assessment, feedback, and support from members of the APG Advisory Committee, local governments, regional entities, members of the public, state and local non-governmental organizations, and participants in the APG pilot program. CALIFORNIA EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY MARK GHILARDUCCI SECRETARY MIKE DAYTON UNDERSECRETARY CHRISTINA CURRY ASSISTANT SECRETARY PREPAREDNESS KATHY MCKEEVER DIRECTOR OFFICE OF INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION JOANNE BRANDANI CHIEF CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION DIVISION, HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KEN WORMAN CHIEF HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION JULIE NORRIS SENIOR EMERGENCY SERVICES COORDINATOR HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION KAREN MCCREADY ASSOCIATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAM ANALYST HAZARD MITIGATION PLANNING DIVISION CALIFORNIA NATURAL RESOURCE AGENCY JOHN LAIRD SECRETARY JANELLE BELAND UNDERSECRETARY JULIA LEVIN DEPUTY SECRETARY FOR CLIMATE CHANGE KURT MALCHOW CLIMATE ADAPTATION COORDINATOR CALIFORNIA POLYTECHNIC STATE UNIVERSITY – PROJECT DEVELOPMENT TEAM PROJECT MANAGEMENT ADRIENNE GREVE, PH.D. PROJECT DIRECTOR, CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR KENNETH C. TOPPING, FAICP CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, LECTURER CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT CINDY PILG RESEARCH SUPPORT COORDINATOR CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT PROJECT FACULTY AND STAFF MICHAEL BOSWELL, PH.D., AICP CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, PROFESSOR CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT WILLIAM SIEMBIEDA, PH.D. CO-PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR, PROFESSOR, CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION INSTITUTE CHRISTOPHER DICUS, PH.D. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES KELLY MAIN, PH.D. ASSISTANT PROFESSOR CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT ROBB ERIC S. MOSS, PH.D., P.E. ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAROL SCHULDT GIS RESOURCES COORDINATOR(RET.) ROBERT E. KENNEDY LIBRARY GRADUATE RESEARCH ASSISTANTS ELIZABETH BRIGHTON CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEGAN ELOVICH CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT MICHAEL GERMERAAD CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING, CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT BRIAN PROVENZALE CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT JEAN LONG CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT, CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING STEVE ROGERS CITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONSULTANTS NATALIE MACRIS PLANNING EDITOR MONICA FISCALINI COPY EDITOR ADAPTATION PLANNING GUIDE – ADVISORY COMMITTEE WILL BARRETT AMERICAN LUNG ASSOCIATION IN CALIFORNIA AMY VIERRA OCEAN PROTECTION COUNCIL MARIAN ASHE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ANDREW ALTEVOGT, PHD. CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ABE DOHERTY CALIFORNIA OCEAN PROTECTION COUNCIL ALEX WESTHOFF DELTA PROTECTION COMMISSION KRISTAL DAVIS FADTKE SACRAMENTO-SAN JOAQUIN DELTA CONSERVANCY CHRIS KEITHLEY CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND FIRE PROTECTION GUIDO FRANCO CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION JANNA FRANKS CALIFORNIA ENERGY COMMISSION JOE GIBSON CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION, CONEJO RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT ELLIOT MULBERG CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION, FLORIN RESOURCE CONSERVATION DISTRICT JON ELAM CALIFORNIA SPECIAL DISTRICTS ASSOCIATION, TALPAIS COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT CARA MARTINSON CALIFORNIA STATE ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES GARTH HOPKINS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ANDREW SCHWARZ CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES JOHN ANDREW CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES DAVE PEGOS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND AGRICULTURE JAY CHAMBERLIN CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION KATHY DERVIN CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC HEALTH AMBER PAIRIS CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME WHITNEY ALBRIGHT CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME KYRA ROSS LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES KATE MEIS LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION SCOTT CLARK LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMISSION BEN RUBIN GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH MICHAEL MCCORMICK GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH SCOTT MORGAN GOVERNOR’S OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH STEVE GOLDBECK SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION WILL TRAVIS SAN FRANCISCO BAY CONSERVATION AND DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ERIC OPPENHEIMER STATE AND REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARDS LINDA ZABLOTNY-HURST SIERRA CLUB CALIFORNIA RACHEL DINNO-TAYLOR TRUST FOR PUBLIC LANDS SARA MOORE SONOMA STATE UNIVERSITY BRIAN HOLLAND ICLEI - LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FOR SUSTAINABILITY STEVE SANDERS INSTITUTE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................................................................i Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................1 What is the APG: Understanding Regional Characteristics document and how should it be used? ................2 How were the regions defined? ...............................................................................................................................................3 What are the designated climate impact regions? ...............................................................................................................4 What is included in the regional profiles? .......................................................................................................................... 11 North Coast Region ................................................................................................................................................................ 13 North Region ............................................................................................................................................................................ 21 Bay Area Region ........................................................................................................................................................................ 28 Northern Central Valley Region ........................................................................................................................................... 37 Bay-Delta Region ...................................................................................................................................................................... 47 Southern Central Valley Region ............................................................................................................................................ 58 Central Coast Region ............................................................................................................................................................. 65 North Sierra Region ................................................................................................................................................................ 73 Southeast Sierra Region ......................................................................................................................................................... 80 South Coast Region ................................................................................................................................................................. 85 Desert Region ........................................................................................................................................................................... 93 References ................................................................................................................................................................................. 99 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. The four California Adaptation Planning Guide (APG) documents. ............................................................2 Figure 2. Adaptation Planning Guide Climate Impact Regions ..........................................................................................5 Figure 3. California Air Resources Board Air Basin and Air District boundaries in comparison to the Adaptation Planning Guide climate impact regions. ..................................................................................................................................6 Figure 4. California Department of Water Resources Hydrologic Regions in comparison to the Adaptation Planning Guide climate impact regions. ..................................................................................................................................7 Figure 5. California Emergency Management Agency Regions in comparison to the Adaptation Planning Guide climate impact regions. ...............................................................................................................................................................8 Figure 6. Adaptation
Recommended publications
  • Elkhorn Slough Estuary

    Elkhorn Slough Estuary

    A RICH NATURAL RESOURCE YOU CAN HELP! Elkhorn Slough Estuary WATER QUALITY REPORT CARD Located on Monterey Bay, Elkhorn Slough and surround- There are several ways we can all help improve water 2015 ing wetlands comprise a network of estuarine habitats that quality in our communities: include salt and brackish marshes, mudflats, and tidal • Limit the use of fertilizers in your garden. channels. • Maintain septic systems to avoid leakages. • Dispose of pharmaceuticals properly, and prevent Estuarine wetlands harsh soaps and other contaminants from running are rare in California, into storm drains. and provide important • Buy produce from local farmers applying habitat for many spe- sustainable management practices. cies. Elkhorn Slough • Vote for the environment by supporting candidates provides special refuge and bills favoring clean water and habitat for a large number of restoration. sea otters, which rest, • Let your elected representatives and district forage and raise pups officials know you care about water quality in in the shallow waters, Elkhorn Slough and support efforts to reduce question: How is the water in Elkhorn Slough? and nap on the salt marshes. Migratory shorebirds by the polluted run-off and to restore wetlands. thousands stop here to rest and feed on tiny creatures in • Attend meetings of the Central Coast Regional answer: It could be a lot better… the mud. Leopard sharks by the hundreds come into the Water Quality Control Board to share your estuary to give birth. concerns and support for action. Elkhorn Slough estuary hosts diverse wetland habitats, wildlife and recreational activities. Such diversity depends Thousands of people come to Elkhorn Slough each year JOIN OUR EFFORT! to a great extent on the quality of the water.
  • 140 Years of Railroading in Santa Cruz County by Rick Hamman

    140 Years of Railroading in Santa Cruz County by Rick Hamman

    140 Years of Railroading in Santa Cruz County By Rick Hamman Introduction To describe the last 140 years of area railroading in 4,000 words, or two articles, seems a reasonable task. After all, how much railroad history could there be in such a small county? In the summer of 1856 Davis & Jordon opened their horse powered railroad to haul lime from the Rancho Canada Del Rincon to their wharf in Santa Cruz. Today, the Santa Cruz, Big Trees & Pacific Railway continues to carry freight and passengers through those same Rancho lands to Santa Cruz. Between the time span of these two companies there has been no less than 37 different railroads operating at one time or another within Santa Cruz County. From these various lines has already come sufficient history to fill at least eight books and numerous historical articles. Many of these writings are available in your local library. As we begin this piece the author hopes to give the reader an overview and insight into what railroads have meant for Santa Cruz County, what they provide today, and what their relevance could be for tomorrow. Before There Were Railroads As people first moved west in search of gold, and later found reason to remain, Santa Cruz County offered many inducements. It was already well known because of its proximity to the former Alta California capital at Monterey, its Mission at Santa Cruz and its excellent weather. Further, within its boundaries were vast mineral deposits in the form of limestone and aggregates, rich alluvial farming soils and fertile orchard lands, and billions of standing board feet of uncut pine and redwood lumber to supply the construction of the San Francisco and Monterey bay areas.
  • California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16

    California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16

    California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16 December 2005 California Department of Transportation ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK, Secretary Business, Transportation and Housing Agency WILL KEMPTON, Director California Department of Transportation JOSEPH TAVAGLIONE, Chair STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER JEREMIAH F. HALLISEY, Vice Chair GOVERNOR BOB BALGENORTH MARIAN BERGESON JOHN CHALKER JAMES C. GHIELMETTI ALLEN M. LAWRENCE R. K. LINDSEY ESTEBAN E. TORRES SENATOR TOM TORLAKSON, Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMEMBER JENNY OROPEZA, Ex Officio JOHN BARNA, Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET, MS-52 P. 0 . BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO, 94273-0001 FAX(916)653-2134 (916) 654-4245 http://www.catc.ca.gov December 29, 2005 Honorable Alan Lowenthal, Chairman Senate Transportation and Housing Committee State Capitol, Room 2209 Sacramento, CA 95814 Honorable Jenny Oropeza, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee 1020 N Street, Room 112 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear: Senator Lowenthal Assembly Member Oropeza: On behalf of the California Transportation Commission, I am transmitting to the Legislature the 10-year California State Rail Plan for FY 2005-06 through FY 2015-16 by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with the Commission's resolution (#G-05-11) giving advice and consent, as required by Section 14036 of the Government Code. The ten-year plan provides Caltrans' vision for intercity rail service. Caltrans'l0-year plan goals are to provide intercity rail as an alternative mode of transportation, promote congestion relief, improve air quality, better fuel efficiency, and improved land use practices. This year's Plan includes: standards for meeting those goals; sets priorities for increased revenues, increased capacity, reduced running times; and cost effectiveness.
  • Of 6 GRADE SEPARATION PROGRAM TITLE 21

    Of 6 GRADE SEPARATION PROGRAM TITLE 21

    I.05-07-016 CPSD/RWC/DAR/RXM APPENDIX 1 - California Administrative Code, Title 21, Division 2, Chapter 13, Grade Separation Projects Page 1 of 6 GRADE SEPARATION PROGRAM TITLE 21. Public Works Division 2. Department of Transportation Chapter 13. Grade Separation Projects -- Applications for Allocation or Supplemental Allocations (Register 82, No. 34, filed 8-21-82) Article 1. Applications §1552. Last Date to File. April 1 of each fiscal year is the last day on which applications for allocation of grade separation funds in that fiscal year can be filed; provided, however, if April 1 is a Saturday, Sunday or a State of California holiday, then the last date of filing shall be the next business day following April 1. Filing is accomplished by filing the application with the Department of Transportation in the manner hereafter stated. §1553. Place to File. The complete application in triplicate must be received in the Office of the District Director of Transportation, State of California, in the transportation district in which the applicant is located, no later than 4:00 p.m. on the last day for filing. §1554. Contents of Application. The complete application must include a written request for an allocation in a specified monetary amount along with copies of each of the following attached to it: (a) All necessary orders of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California. Necessary orders of the Public Utilities Commission include: (1) An order authorizing construction of the project; I.05-07-016 CPSD/RWC/DAR/RXM APPENDIX 1 - California Administrative Code, Title 21, Division 2, Chapter 13, Grade Separation Projects Page 2 of 6 (2) A statement of the applicant's position on the annual priority list established by the Public Utilities Commission pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 2452.
  • CLASSIFICATION of CALIFORNIA ESTUARIES BASED on NATURAL CLOSURE PATTERNS: TEMPLATES for RESTORATION and MANAGEMENT Revised

    CLASSIFICATION of CALIFORNIA ESTUARIES BASED on NATURAL CLOSURE PATTERNS: TEMPLATES for RESTORATION and MANAGEMENT Revised

    CLASSIFICATION OF CALIFORNIA ESTUARIES BASED ON NATURAL CLOSURE PATTERNS: TEMPLATES FOR RESTORATION AND MANAGEMENT Revised David K. Jacobs Eric D. Stein Travis Longcore Technical Report 619.a - August 2011 Classification of California Estuaries Based on Natural Closure Patterns: Templates for Restoration and Management David K. Jacobs1, Eric D. Stein2, and Travis Longcore3 1UCLA Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology 2Southern California Coastal Water Research Project 3University of Southern California - Spatial Sciences Institute August 2010 Revised August 2011 Technical Report 619.a ABSTRACT Determining the appropriate design template is critical to coastal wetland restoration. In seasonally wet and semi-arid regions of the world coastal wetlands tend to close off from the sea seasonally or episodically, and decisions regarding estuarine mouth closure have far reaching implications for cost, management, and ultimate success of coastal wetland restoration. In the past restoration planners relied on an incomplete understanding of the factors that influence estuarine mouth closure. Consequently, templates from other climatic/physiographic regions are often inappropriately applied. The first step to addressing this issue is to develop a classification system based on an understanding of the processes that formed the estuaries and thus define their pre-development structure. Here we propose a new classification system for California estuaries based on the geomorphic history and the dominant physical processes that govern the formation of the estuary space or volume. It is distinct from previous estuary closure models, which focused primarily on the relationship between estuary size and tidal prism in constraining closure. This classification system uses geologic origin, exposure to littoral process, watershed size and runoff characteristics as the basis of a conceptual model that predicts likely frequency and duration of closure of the estuary mouth.
  • United States of America Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C

    United States of America Department of Transportation Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C

    Order 2021-7-8 Served: July 16, 2021 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY WASHINGTON, D.C. Issued by the Department of Transportation On the 16th day of July, 2021 Essential Air Service at MERCED, CALIFORNIA DOCKET DOT-OST-1998-3521 (FAIN 69A3456021378)1 under 49 U.S.C. § 41731 et seq. ORDER EXTENDING CONTRACT Summary By this Order, the U.S. Department of Transportation (the Department) extends the terms of Order 2017-6-19 to the earlier of (i) December 31, 2021; or (ii) the conclusion of the current air carrier-selection case at Merced, California. Boutique Air, Inc. (Boutique Air) will continue to provide Essential Air Service (EAS) at Merced from August 1, 2021, through December 31, 2021. During the extension period, Boutique Air will continue to receive the existing annual subsidy rate and will operate the existing service pattern. Background By Order 2017-6-19 (June 26, 2017), the Department selected Boutique Air to provide EAS at Merced for the four-year period from August 1, 2017, through July 31, 2021. Under the terms of that Order, Boutique Air was selected to provide 19 nonstop round trips per week to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) and 12 nonstop round trips per week to Oakland International Airport (OAK), using 8- or 9-seat Pilatus PC-12 aircraft, at the annual subsidy rates indicated below: Ye ar Subs idy Year 1$ 3,186,220 Year 2$ 3,249,944 Year 3$ 3,314,943 Year 4 $ 3,381,242 Total$ 13,132,349 1 Federal Award Identification Number (FAIN).
  • Train Sheet #71 January/February 1995

    Train Sheet #71 January/February 1995

    The @@ Preserving "The Feather River Ro ute " ... news from The Feather River Rail Societl/ and The Portola Railroad Museum Issue No. 71 January/February 1995 Cahoose WP 614 Looks Creat With Its New Paint Joh! WP Caboose 6Jl+ is shown on the M~seum grounds looking striking in its new silver and orange paint scheme! These cabooses were nicknamed "Canyon Cabooses" since the extended ends helped protect the crews from wind. rain and snow while standing on the back platform. Although it is over 5Tyears old {built in 1937-retired sometime after June 1953). our caboose still retains its original handrails. bunks. toilet and wood burning stove! After mounting on a new set of Andrews leaf spring trucks and repairs to the roof. WP 61'1 will hopefully be back on her feet again this summer! Caption by John S. Walker. Photo by Ed Warren. Inside this Issue: • Report of Starting 44-ton Locomotive. • Notice of FRRS Operating Crew Training. • Announcement of Upcoming 805-A Re-dedication Ceremony. Jan ./Feb. 1995 Issue No. 7 1 As the Society begins preparations for our 11 th operating season, those of us here in the immediate vicinity of the Museum must mentally "shift gears," writing and thinking ahead toward longer days and warmer weather that will eventually come. This issue of the Train Sheet brings news and information of Significant events scheduled to take place at the Museum In April and May, conjuring up thoughts of springtime and increasing visitor counts, while outside it's still all too February-ish, snow Feather River deepening by the hour.

  • Declining Biodiversity: Why Species Matter and How Their Functions Might Be Restored in Californian Tidal Marshes

    Features Declining Biodiversity: Why Species Matter and How Their Functions Might Be Restored in Californian Tidal Marshes JOY B. ZEDLER, JOHN C. CALLAWAY, AND GARY SULLIVAN pecies diversity is being lost in habitats that are Sincreasingly diminished by development, fragmenta- BIODIVERSITY WAS DECLINING BEFORE tion, and urban runoff; the sensitive species drop out and a few aggressive ones persist, at the expense of others. Alarmed OUR EYES, BUT IT TOOK REGIONAL by declining biodiversity, many conservationists and re- CENSUSES TO RECOGNIZE THE PROBLEM, searchers are asking what happens to ecosystem functioning if we lose species, how diverse communities can be restored, LONG-TERM MONITORING TO IDENTIFY which (if any) particular species are critical for performing ecosystem services, and which functions are most critical to THE CAUSES, AND EXPERIMENTAL ecosystem sustainability. In southern California, 90% of the coastal wetland area has been destroyed, and remaining wet- PLANTINGS TO SHOW WHY THE LOSS OF lands continue to be damaged; even the region’s protected re- SPECIES MATTERS AND WHICH RESTORA- serves are threatened by highway and utility-expansion pro- jects. The fate of biodiversity in these diminished wetlands TION STRATEGIES MIGHT REESTABLISH serves to warn other regions of the need for continual as- sessment of the status and function of both common and rare SPECIES species, as well as the need for experimental tests of their importance—before they are lost. This article synthesizes data for tidal marshes of the Cali- fornian biogeographic region, which stretches from Point Conception near Santa Barbara south to Bahía San Quintín Joy B. Zedler, Aldo Leopold Chair of Restoration Ecology, Botany De- in Baja California.
  • Lynchburg Regional Connectivity Study

    Lynchburg Regional Connectivity Study

    Lynchburg Regional Connectivity Study Prepared for: Virginia Department of Transportation – Lynchburg District & Virginia Office of Intermodal Planning and Investment Prepared by: Economic Development Research Group, Inc. Michael Baker International and Renaissance Planning March 2, 2017 INSERT DUE DATE TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................ 1 Approach .......................................................................................................................................... 1 Findings ............................................................................................................................................ 2 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 5 Motivation and Context ................................................................................................................... 5 Study Approach and Outcomes ....................................................................................................... 5 Report Organization ......................................................................................................................... 8 2. Lynchburg Regional Economy ................................................................................................. 9 Population Trends ...........................................................................................................................
  • California Rail Plan

    California Rail Plan

    HE 2771 .C2 C42 2001/02 2001 -02 to 2010-11 LIBRARY COPY CALIF. DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION LIBRARY 1120 N STREET, SACRAMENTO March 2002 California Department of Transportation GRAY DAVIS, Governor MARIA CONTRERAS SWEET, Secretary . Business, Transportation and Housing Agency ;_ --~--.-JEFF MORALES;~reaor · :--. j'·California'be': ·n~emofT iarlooifaoon rlil \ r ~TE OP CALJ1:QRWA-BUSINESS. TRANSPORTATION AND HQUSlNG AGENCY GRAY DAVIS Governor DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR ~ 1120 N STREET ~ P. 0 . BOX 942873 Flex your power! SACRAMENTO, CA 94273-0001 Be energy effic1enU PHONE (916) 654-5267 FAX (916) 654-6608 ITY (916) 654-4086 March 1, 2002 Members, California LegisJature State Capitol Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Members: I am pleased to submit to you the California Department of Transportation's (Department) California State Rail Plan 2001-02 to 2010-11. The Department has prepared the Plaa as an examination of intercity passenger rail and freight rail transportation in California, in accordance with Section 14036 of the Government Code. The passenger element of the Plan reviews the current operations of the three State-supported intercity rail passenger routes (Pacific Surfliner, San Joaquin, and Capitol), and outlines ten-year plans for capital improvements and service expansions. This element aJso addresses the Depanment's vision for intercity rail and its standards for achievement of ten-year goals, and discusses potential new routes including high-speed rail. ~ The freight element of the Plan is an overview of the State freight rail system, looking at commodities and volumes of goods moving in and out of the State. This element aJso looks at freight issues like capacity concerns, intermoda] traffic, passenger and freight trains sharing right of way, short line railroad issues, funding programs, environmental issues, new technology, and future needs and objectives.
  • Railroad Industry Modal Profile an Outline of the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities

    Railroad Industry Modal Profile an Outline of the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities

    Railroad Industry Modal Profile An Outline of the Railroad Industry Workforce Trends, Challenges, and Opportunities October 2011 Version: Release_v3.0 DOT/FRA/ORD-11/20 The opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect the views, positions, or policies of the U.S. Department of Transportation or the Federal Government. Reference to any specific programs does not constitute official Federal Government endorsement or approval of the programs, the views they express, or the services they offer. TABLE of CONTENTS 1. Overview of the Railroad Industry ....................................................................................... 7 2. Current Railroad Workforce ................................................................................................ 9 2.1 Total Estimated Railroad Workforce ............................................................................11 2.1.1 Class I Freight Railroad Companies .....................................................................12 2.1.2 Class I Passenger Railroad: Amtrak ...................................................................13 2.1.3 Regional and Short Line Railroad Companies......................................................14 2.1.4 Manufacturers and Suppliers ...............................................................................14 2.1.5 Union Representation ..........................................................................................14 2.1.6 Major Associations ...............................................................................................14
  • Planning for Complementarity

    Planning for Complementarity

    MTI Planning Complementarity: for Opportunities Cities for High-Speed Along California’s Rail Network Planning for Complementarity: An Examination of the Role and Funded by U.S. Department of Transportation and California Department of Transportation Opportunities of First-Tier and Second-Tier Cities Along the High-Speed Rail Network in California Report Number 11-17 MTI Report 11-17 March 2012 March MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER Hon. Norman Y. Mineta The Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies (MTI) was established by Congress as part MTI BOARD OF TRUSTEES of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991. Reauthorized in 1998, MTI was selected by the U.S. Department of Transportation through a competitive process in 2002 as a national “Center of Excellence.” The Institute is funded by Con- Honorary Co-Chair Rebecca Brewster Steve Heminger Stephanie Pinson gress through the United States Department of Transportation’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration, the Califor- Hon. James Oberstar ** President/COO Executive Director President/COO nia Legislature through the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and by private grants and donations. Chair American Transportation Metropolitan Transportation Gilbert Tweed Associates, Inc. House Transportation and Research Institute Commission New York, NY Smyrna, GA Oakland, CA Infrastructure Committee The Institute receives oversight from an internationally respected Board of Trustees whose members represent all major surface Hans Rat House of Representatives Donald H. Camph Hon. John Horsley # Secretary General transportation modes. MTI’s focus on policy and management resulted from a Board assessment of the industry’s unmet needs Washington, DC President Executive Director Union Internationale des and led directly to the choice of the San José State University College of Business as the Institute’s home.