Cost & Ridership Estimates for Transit on the Rail Corridor

Study

__________________________

Service

__________________________

Capital Cost (millions)

___________

Annual Operations and Maintenance Cost (millions)

___________________

Ridership: av. weekday boardings

_____________

Rail Transit Feasibility Study (2015)  

 

Diesel Multiple Units; every 30 min, 15 hours/day

Scenario G: Santa Cruz to Watsonville        (20.5  miles)

 

$133 $11 5000
Scenario E: Santa Cruz to Aptos (9.6  miles) same frequency $85 $7.75 4700
________________________ ___________________________ __________ __________________ _____________

Unified Corridors Investment Study (2019)

 

Santa Cruz to Pajaro (21.9 miles) every 30 minutes, 15 hours/day

 Diesel Multiple Units

$324.7*

 

$15.6  (Scenario B)

 

7396 (Scenario B)

 

Same as above,  Electric Multiple Units

 

$474.4*

 

$13.2

 

7396
___________________________ ____________________________
___________
___________________
_____________

Business Plan for Electric Passenger Rail (2021)

 

 

   Santa Cruz to Pajaro (21.9 miles)

 

Light rail electric (no overhead wires)

$465
 $24.7 4000-6000 (Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis)
         

* The Unified Corridors Investment Study indicated that connecting bus service would cost $11.7 million capital cost and $12.1 million annual operating cost. The other studies did not estimate cost for connecting bus service.

 ublic Private Partnership for an Electric Streetcar

In late 2019 TIG/m, an electric streetcar manufacturer, presented a concept proposal to the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC)  for a wireless streetcar system for the Santa Cruz Branch Rail Line which would include an excursion service between Capitola and Davenport, and
a regular commuter service between Watsonville and Santa Cruz. Under that concept, the local share (from whatever source – federal, state
or local) would be about $57 million (includes capital and operating expenses) over a 15-year period in order to keep the fares comparable with current METRO fares. TIG/m also has submitted to the RTC a concept proposal for just the excursion service between Capitola and Davenport which would require no public contribution.  The RTC’s September 3, 2021 agenda includes the TIG/m proposal and discusses the public-private partnership proposed by TIG/m:

“There has been interest by a small hydro-electric streetcar manufacturer
called TIG/m. TIG/m would like to form a public private partnership (P3) for
right to develop passenger rail on the line. Staff has researched the viability
of a P3 on the SCBRL. P3 are built on the concept that private money would
help pay for some of the upfront cost. It is assumed that these upfront
costs will be paid back over time on revenue generated by the project. In
the case of a transit project, revenue can be earned from ticket sales or land
rights for development. Staff concluded that it is not recommended to enter
a P3, until a project has been properly defined as part of the environmental
process. This keeps major decisions that are important to the community in
the control of local public officials, as opposed to in the hands of a private
for-profit enterprise.

Additional public funds will be needed to make any future consideration of a
P3 arrangement work on the SCBRL, especially considering that the
community expects ticket prices to be affordable. An agreement of this
nature would not be a straight assignment of the ACL agreement and might
not need to include freight (see railbanking discussion below). Staff
recommends that the Commission defer seeking additional interest in a P3
arrangement until a time when passenger rail planning is better defined,
including an understanding of the source of local funding needed for the
public contribution.”