Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-1 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

1 PROJECT PURPOSE, NEED, AND OBJECTIVES

1.1 Introduction 

The California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) proposes to construct, operate, and maintain 

an electric-powered high-speed rail (HSR) system in California. When completed, the nearly 800-

mile train system would provide new passenger rail service to more than 90 percent of the state’s 

population. More than 200 weekday trains would serve the statewide intercity travel market.1 The 

HSR system would be capable of operating speeds of up to 220 miles per hour, with state-of-the 

art safety, signaling, and automated train control systems collectively known as the enhanced 

Automatic Train Control system, to include all positive train control functions and to comply with 

the requirements of Code of Federal Regulations Title 49, Part 236 Subpart I. The system would 

connect and serve the major metropolitan areas of California, extending from San Francisco and 

Sacramento in the north to San Diego in the south (Figure 1-1). The National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) lead agency is the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) and the Authority is 

the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) lead agency. The Surface Transportation Board, 

United States Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), and the United States Army Corps of 

Engineers (USACE) are NEPA cooperating agencies.2

1.1.1 The Fresno to Bakersfield HSR Project

Following the completion of a programmatic review of the California HSR system, the Authority

and the FRA initiated project level environmental impact reports/environmental impact statements 

(EIR/EIS) for nine independent project sections of the California HSR System, including the 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section. The Authority published a Notice of Preparation on September 29, 

2009, and the FRA published a Notice of Intent in October 2009. Following public scoping, the 

Authority and the FRA published a Draft EIR/EIS in August 2011. Based on public and agency 

comments, the Authority and the FRA developed new alignment alternatives and analyzed their 

potential impacts in a Revised Draft EIR/Supplemental EIS published for public review in July 

2012. In April 2014, the Authority and the FRA published the Fresno to Bakersfield Section 

California High-Speed Train Final Project Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact 

Statement. These documents are available for review on the Authority’s website (accessible at: 

www.hsr.ca.gov/Programs/Statewide_Rail_Modernization/Project_Sections/fresno_bakersfield.ht

ml) and the FRA’s website (accessible at: www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0468). For further information 

about the development of the Fresno to Bakersfield HSR Project, please see the Fresno to

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS, Chapter 1 (Authority and FRA 2014). 

1 “Intercity rail passenger transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C. 24102(4) as ‘‘rail passenger transportation 

except commuter rail passenger transportation.’’ An intercity passenger rail service consists of a group of 

one or more scheduled trains (roundtrips) that provide intercity passenger rail transportation between bona 

fide travel markets (not constrained by state or jurisdictional boundaries), generally with similar quality and 

level-of-service specifications, within a common (but not necessarily exclusive or identical) set of identifiable 

geographic markets (See the Federal Railroad Administration’s High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail 

(“HSIPR”) Program; Notice (74 Fed. Reg. 29906 (June 23, 2009)). Similarly, ‘‘commuter rail passenger 

transportation’’ is defined at 49 U.S.C. 24102(3) as ‘‘short-haul rail passenger transportation in metropolitan 

and suburban areas usually having reduced fare, multiple ride, and commuter tickets and morning and 

evening peak period operations.’’

2 In 2013, the Surface Transportation Board determined it has jurisdiction over all sections of the proposed 

statewide high-speed rail system, including the Fresno to Bakersfield section. The Authority has prepared 

this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS consistent with both NEPA and CEQA. In undertaking preparation of this 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS consistent with the state environmental review process, the Authority would like 

to make clear that it does not waive any preemption effect of the Interstate Commerce Commission 

Termination Act in the event of a legal or administrative challenge. Further explanation is provided in the 

Final EIR/EIS, Section 1.1.4 (pages 1-3 through 1-5).
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-2 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

This page intentionally left blank
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-3 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

Figure 1-1 Statewide HSR System
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-4 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

This page intentionally left blank
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-5 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

In the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS the Authority and FRA identified a Preferred 

Alternative consisting of portions of the “BNSF Alternative” in combination with the “Corcoran 

Bypass,” “Allensworth Bypass,” and “Bakersfield Hybrid” alternatives. Figure 1-2 shows the 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS Preferred Alternative. Figure 1-3 shows the locations 

of the Alternative Alignments studied in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS, the 

Fresno to Bakersfield Approved Project alignment, the Fresno to Bakersfield Locally Generated 

Alternative alignment, and the May 2014 Project alignment. 

Following publication of the Final EIR/EIS, on May 7, 2014, the Authority certified the Fresno to 

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS and approved the Preferred Alternative south from Fresno to 

7th Standard Road, the northern city limits of the city of Bakersfield. Based on an analysis of 

potential project impacts and substantive agency and public comments including comments filed 

after issuance of the Final EIS, FRA issued a Record of Decision (ROD) on June 27, 2014 

approving the Preferred Alternative in its entirety from the Fresno Station to the Bakersfield 

Station at Truxtun Avenue. 

1.1.2 Fresno to Bakersfield Locally Generated Alternative 

The Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS considered the impacts associated with three 

alternative alignments through Bakersfield, and ultimately the Authority and FRA selected the 

Bakersfield Hybrid as the Preferred Alternative through Bakersfield. On June 5, 2014, the City of 

Bakersfield filed a state lawsuit challenging the Authority’s May 7, 2014, approvals under CEQA. 

The City claimed that the Preferred Alternative identified in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section 

Final EIR/EIS would severely impact the City's ability to utilize existing city assets, including its 

corporation yard, senior housing, and parking facilities at the Rabobank Arena, Theatre and 

Convention Center; would render unusable one of the city's premier health facilities; and would 

affect the Bakersfield Commons project, a retail/ commercial/ residential development. 

In a Settlement Agreement signed December 19, 2014, between the City of Bakersfield and the 

Authority, the two agencies agreed to work together to develop and study a Fresno to Bakersfield 

Locally Generated Alternative (F-B LGA) to address concerns and meet the Authority’s design 

requirements. The F-B LGA described and analyzed in this Fresno to Bakersfield Section LGA 

Supplemental EIR/EIS evolved from this mutual cooperation and subsequent public input.

3 The 

Authority has also collaborated with the city of Shafter and Kern County in developing the F-B 

LGA.

The F-B LGA provides a 23.13-mile alternative alignment between the city of Shafter and the city 

of Bakersfield. The F-B LGA station (F Street Station) would be located at the intersection of 

State Route (SR) 204 and F Street. A maintenance of infrastructure facility would be located 

along the F-B LGA north of the city of Shafter between Poplar Avenue and Fresno Avenue.

1.1.3 F-B LGA Supplemental EIR/EIS

The Authority and the FRA have prepared this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS in accordance with 

CEQA and NEPA. For purposes of understanding the potential impacts of the F-B LGA, this Draft 

Supplemental EIR/EIS compares the F-B LGA to the complementary portion of the Preferred 

Alternative that was identified in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS. That portion 

consists of the portion of the BNSF Alternative from Poplar Avenue to Hageman Road and the 

Bakersfield Hybrid from Hageman Road to Oswell Street (the “May 2014 Project”). (See Figure 2-

30 [page 2-35] of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS for a depiction of the BNSF 

Alternative and the Bakersfield Hybrid from Shafter to Bakersfield [Authority and FRA 2014].) 

3 Although the Authority Board certified the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS, which evaluated the 

alignment from the Fresno HSR Station to the Bakersfield Truxtun Avenue HSR Station, the Authority Board 

only approved a portion of the alignment extending from downtown Fresno to approximately 7th Standard 

Road. 
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-6 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

The Fresno to Bakersfield Section Supplemental EIR/EIS also evaluates potential effects to the 

Buena Vista Lake ornate shrew for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section from East American 

Avenue in Fresno County to Oswell Street in the City of Bakersfield. Since the release of the 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service issued 

an amended Biological Opinion (USFWS 2017a) for the Fresno to Bakersfield Section from East 

American Avenue in Fresno County (the northern terminus of Construction Package 2/3) to 

Poplar Avenue in Kern County (the southern terminus for Construction Package 4). Pursuant to 

CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, Section 3.7, Biological Resources and Wetlands of this Draft 

Supplemental EIR/EIS evaluates the expansion of the range of species and considers potential 

effects to the Buena Vista Lake ornate shrew. 
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-7 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

Figure 1-2 Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS Preferred Build Alternative
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-8 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

Figure 1-3 Locations of F-B Section EIR/EIS Alternatives, F-B LGA, and May 2014 Project
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-9 

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

The May 2014 Project included a station that would be constructed at the corner of Truxtun and 

Union Avenues/SR 204 as well as a maintenance of infrastructure facility that would be located 

along the alignment just north of the city of Bakersfield and 7th Standard Road. CEQA Guidelines 

Section 15162 and 15163 describes when a supplement to an EIR may be prepared. To 

determine whether preparation of a Supplemental EIR is appropriate, the criteria in CEQA 

Guidelines Section 15162 governing preparation of Subsequent Documents and the additional 

criteria in CEQA Guidelines Section 15163 governing preparation of Supplemental Documents 

must be met. Under NEPA (40 Code of Federal Regulations §1502.9), a supplement to a draft or 

final EIS may be prepared “when the agency determines that the purposes of NEPA would be 

furthered by doing so” or if “1) the agency makes substantial changes in the proposed action that 

are relevant to environmental concerns, or 2) there are significant new circumstances or 

information relevant to environmental concerns and bearing on the proposed actions or its 

impacts”. 

The Authority and FRA have determined that the preparation of a Supplemental EIR/EIS is 

appropriate here because the majority of the prior certified Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final 

EIR/EIS remains relevant. This Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS examines only the 23.13-mile portion 

of the full 114-mile Fresno to Bakersfield Section studied in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section 

Final EIR/EIS that runs between just north of Poplar Avenue to Oswell Street. It evaluates the F-B 

LGA and proposed station at F Street Station in site-specific detail to provide a complete 

assessment of the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects of the proposed action. 

The FRA intends to issue a single Final Environmental Impact Statement and Record of Decision

document pursuant to 49 U.S.C. 304a unless FRA determines statutory criteria or practicability 

considerations preclude issuance of the combined document. 

Public and agency participation in the development of the new alternative has been considered, 

in consultation with resource and regulatory agencies, including the United States Environmental 

Protection Agency, the USACE, the Reclamation4, and the Surface Transportation Board5. The 

FRA and the Authority intend this Supplemental EIR/EIS to be sufficient to support Section 404 

and Section 408 Clean Water Act permit decisions (as applicable) for alteration/modification of 

completed federal flood risk management facilities, as well as any associated operation and 

maintenance, and real estate permissions or instruments (as applicable).

Pursuant to Clean Water Act Section 404(b)(1), the USACE must consider the applicant’s needs 

in the context of the geographic area of the proposed action and the type of project being 

proposed. The FRA, the Authority, the USACE, and the United States Environmental Protection 

Agency signed a memorandum of understanding in November 2010 to integrate the NEPA and 

408/404 permitting processes. The integration process has three checkpoints that emphasize 

ongoing coordination efforts. Checkpoint A defines the Purpose and Need for the project section. 

Checkpoint B identifies the range of alternatives to be studied in the project EIR/EIS. Checkpoint 

4 The Reclamation may issue rights of entry permits for pedestrian surveys and ground disturbing 

investigations, such as geotechnical investigations, or other information gathering activities. It may grant 

temporary construction permits for the relocation of facilities and equipment such as pipes, canals, and 

pumps. If the facilities are relocated outside of Reclamation’s ownership, the Authority will acquire any 

needed land rights necessary for future operations and maintenance needs and/or relocated Reclamation 

features. After construction, the Authority will transfer to Reclamation necessary land rights. Reclamation 

will grant or transfer land rights as appropriate to the Authority. The HSR alignment crosses Bureau lands 

and facilities, one of which is the Friant-Kern Canal. Impacts to Bureau facilities within the F-B LGA project 

footprint are analyzed in this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS.

5 The Surface Transportation Board is a wholly independent federal agency. The Surface Transportation 

Board was established by the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act of 1995 (49 U.S.C § 10101 

et seq.; P.L. 104-88, December 29, 1995) to assume some, but not all, functions of the Interstate Commerce 

Commission. The Surface Transportation Board has jurisdiction over the construction and operation of new 

rail lines (49 U.S.C. § 10901; 10502).
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-10 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

C determines the preliminary Least Environmentally Damaging Practicable Alternative that 

receives USACE concurrence. In Checkpoint A, the USACE determined that the overall project 

purpose (as stated in Section 1.2 of this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS) allows for a reasonable 

range of practicable alternatives to be analyzed and is acceptable as the basis for the USACE 

404(b)(1) alternatives analysis. The addition of another alternative to the Fresno to Bakersfield 

Section EIR/EIS does not require revisiting Checkpoints A and B, since the F-B LGA would be 

consistent with the project Purpose and Need (refer to Section 1.2) and because a reasonable 

range of alternatives was considered and identified pursuant to the Checkpoint B process. 

However, the Authority and FRA will conduct the subsequent USACE 404(b)(1) analyses for the 

F-B LGA which is completed as part of Checkpoint C. 

1.2 Purpose, Need, and Objectives

1.2.1 Purpose and Need of HSR System, Fresno to Bakersfield Section, and 

F-B LGA

The need for a HSR system exists statewide, and the Fresno to Bakersfield Section is an 

essential component. The purpose, need, and objectives documented in the Fresno to 

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS have not changed and are included below for context and 

readability. The purpose of the HSR system is as follows. 

The purpose of the statewide HSR System is to provide a reliable high-speed 

electrified train system that links the major metropolitan areas of the state, and 

that delivers predictable and consistent travel times. A further objective is to 

provide an interface with commercial airports, mass transit, and the highway 

network and relieve capacity constraints of the existing transportation system as 

increases in intercity travel demand in California occur, in a manner sensitive to 

and protective of California’s unique natural resources. (Authority and FRA 2005)

The purpose of this project is to implement the Fresno to Bakersfield Section of the California 

HSR System to provide the public with electric-powered HSR service that provides predictable 

and consistent travel times between major urban centers and connectivity to airports, mass 

transit, and the highway network in the south San Joaquin Valley, and that connects the northern 

and southern portions of the system. This region contributes significantly to the statewide need 

for a new intercity transportation service that would connect with the major population and 

economic centers and to other regions of the state.

The capacity of California’s intercity transportation system, including the south San Joaquin 

Valley, is insufficient to meet existing and future travel demand. The current and projected future 

system congestion will result in deteriorated air quality, reduced reliability, and increased travel 

times. Moreover, the feasibility of expanding many major highways and key airports is uncertain; 

and some needed expansions may be impractical or may be constrained by physical, political, or 

other factors. The need for improvements to intercity travel in California, including intercity travel 

between the south San Joaquin Valley, the Bay Area, Sacramento, and Southern California, 

responds to the following issues (as documented in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final 

EIR/EIS). Technical Appendix 1-B of this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS further discusses the 

benefits of implementing the F-B LGA and the HSR System as a whole (specifically transportation 

connectivity, land use planning achievements, safety enhancements, and social advantages 

accruing annually and increasing as the level of ridership on the HSR system builds over time). 

• Travel Demand and Capacity Constraints: The existing intercity transportation system has

not kept pace with the tremendous increase in population, economic activity, and tourism in

the state, including the south San Joaquin Valley. The interstate highway system, commercial

airports, and conventional passenger rail system serving the intercity travel market are

operating at or near capacity and will require large public investments for maintenance and

expansion to meet existing demand and future growth over the next 25 years and beyond.

Capacity constraints will result in increasing congestion and travel delays, including those in

the south San Joaquin Valley, particularly along the State Route (SR) 99 corridor. Some

highway capacity improvements have been funded for the San Joaquin Valley and in
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-11

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

Southern California, but these are basic enhancements intended to improve reliability rather 

than travel time. Programmed and funded highway improvements will not measurably change 

future conditions. For more information on travel demand and capacity constraints in the 

Fresno to Bakersfield region, see Section 1.2.4.1 in the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final 

EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-9 through 1-20). For information specific to the FB LGA, see Section 3.2, Transportation, of this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS. 

• Safety and Reliability: Projected growth in moving California’s people and goods by

automobile, air, and rail over the next two decades underscores the need for improved travel

safety. With more vehicles on intercity highways, the potential for accidents increases.

Weather-related events are an additional source of disruption and delay that affect

transportation reliability and safety. Rain and wind can make the roads dangerously slick,

increasing accident rates. Fog, haze, and glare can distract drivers or cause them to slow.

As delay on the freeway increases, the overall reliability of the system tends to decrease

(Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2007). Refer to Section 1.2.4.2 of the Fresno to Bakersfield

Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-20 and 1-21) for more information

on specific weather conditions in the San Joaquin Valley, including dense fog. For information

specific to the F-B LGA, see Section 3.11, Safety and Security, of this Draft Supplemental

EIR/EIS.

• Modal Connections: The options for connecting from the Central Valley to California’s

largest metropolitan areas include driving the full distance, driving to a regional or larger

airport and then flying, or using an intercity rail and transit bus to the final destination. In the

Central Valley, limited options for direct, fast, and safe connections to the major metropolitan

areas foster economic isolation, limit the area from which to draw customers and employees,

and reduce the accessibility of potential job markets to residents. HSR service to Fresno and

Bakersfield would provide links to a number of bus, light rail, and airport services for intercity

travelers to other areas in the state. Refer to Section 1.2.4.3 of the Fresno to Bakersfield

Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: page 1-21) for more information on modal

connections in the San Joaquin Valley. For more information on modal connections specific

to the F-B LGA, see Section 3.2, Transportation, of this Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS.

• Air Quality and Greenhouse Gases: The San Joaquin Valley Air Basin exceeds federal and

state air quality standards for ozone, particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size, and the

state’s 24-hour standard for particulate matter less than 10 microns in size. The

transportation sector is responsible for about 40 percent of California’s greenhouse gas

emissions (California Air Resources Board 2010). The continued increase in traffic will

exacerbate the existing air quality problems and impede the region’s ability to attain state and

federal ambient air quality standards. Because emissions are directly proportional to the

amount of fuel burned, offering effective transportation choices that can reduce driving will be

critical for reducing these emissions. Compared to automobile travel, an electric-powered

HSR system would reduce carbon dioxide emissions; an HSR trip from Fresno to Bakersfield

would save 170 pounds of carbon dioxide for each car making the same trip. The HSR

system would also provide a more energy-efficient travel mode. A trip on the HSR system

would use one-third the energy of a similar trip by air and one-fifth the energy of a trip made

by automobile (California Office of the Governor 2007). For more information on applicable

greenhouse gas regulations, see Section 1.2.4.4 of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final

EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-21 through 1-23). For information specific to the

F-B LGA, see Section 3.3, Air Quality and Global Climate Change, of this Draft Supplemental

EIR/EIS.

• Protection and Preservation of Natural Resources and Agricultural Lands: Since 1990,

urban development (i.e., residential, commercial, industrial, recreational development,

infrastructure development, etc.) has converted 538,000 acres of farmland in California; with

over half of this conversion occurring in the San Joaquin Valley. Central Valley agricultural

lands, with high-quality soils, produce a wide array of food and fiber exported throughout the

U.S. and internationally. The HSR System would ease the pressure on the state’s agricultural

land base and open space by reducing the need to expand airports and freeways which can
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-12 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

lead to urban sprawl and greenfield development. The HSR system provides an opportunity 

to create transit centers in the central business districts, where mixed land uses (residential, 

commercial, and business uses) and urban densities are best suited. The HSR system

provides an opportunity to encourage walkable, more concentrated development patterns 

that meet new growth demands and reduce the rate and occurrence of low-density 

development, which erodes the value of land resources. For more information on San 

Joaquin Valley natural resources, see Section 3.14 of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final 

EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014). For information specific to the F-B LGA, see Section 3.14, 

Agricultural Lands, and Section 3.15, Parks, Recreation, and Open Space, of this Draft 

Supplemental EIR/EIS. 

For more information on each of the issues discussed above, refer to the Fresno to Bakersfield 

Section Final EIR/EIS. 

1.2.2 CEQA Project Objectives of the HSR System, Fresno to Bakersfield 

Section, and F-B LGA 

The Authority’s statutory mandate is to plan, build, and operate an HSR system coordinated with 

California’s existing transportation network, particularly intercity rail and bus lines, commuter rail 

lines, urban rail lines, highways, and airports. In accordance with Section 15124 of the CEQA

Guidelines, the Authority has responded to this mandate by adopting the following objectives and 

policies for the proposed HSR system (as documented in Section 1.2.3 of the Fresno to 

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS [Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-6 and 1-7]): 

• Provide intercity travel capacity to supplement critically over-used interstate highways and

commercial airports

• Meet future intercity travel demand that will be unmet by current transportation systems, and

increase capacity for intercity mobility

• Maximize intermodal transportation opportunities by locating stations to connect with local

transit, airports, and highways

• Improve the intercity travel experience for Californians by providing comfortable, safe,

frequent, and reliable high-speed travel

• Provide a sustainable reduction in travel time between major urban centers

• Increase the efficiency of the intercity transportation system

• Maximize the use of existing transportation corridors and rights-of-way to the extent feasible

• Develop a practical and economically viable transportation system that can be implemented

in phases by 2020 and generate revenues in excess of operations and maintenance costs

• Provide intercity travel that is sensitive to and protective of the region’s natural and

agricultural resources and that reduces emissions and vehicle miles traveled for intercity trips

1.3 Relationship to Other Transportation Projects, Agency Plans, 

Policies, and Programs

The California HSR System objectives include providing an interface between the HSR system

and major commercial airports, mass transit, and the highway network. Other key transportation

projects within the Fresno to Bakersfield area that offer intercity travel benefits and that enhance 

intermodal connections to the proposed HSR system include the following (as documented in the 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS). 

• State Route 99 Corridor Business Plan. SR 99 is the transportation backbone of the San

Joaquin Valley. In recent years, efforts have focused on improving this highway to meet

transportation standards and to serve the expected growth in the valley. The updated Route

99 Corridor Business Plan (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2009)

incorporates these efforts and provides the current plan for the corridor. Projects identified in
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-13

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

the Plan provide coordination opportunities for the Fresno to Bakersfield HSR Section. For 

more information on the Route 99 Corridor Business Plan, see Section 1.4.1 of the Fresno to 

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: page 1-29). 

• California State Rail Plan. The California State Rail Plan is implemented by Caltrans. The

Rail Plan envisions capital and operational improvements to increase annual ridership 66

percent, from 853,000 to 1,417,000, with 90 percent on-time performance. The California

State Rail Plan (Caltrans 2013b) incorporates the ongoing planning for a blended rail

system.

6 For more information on the California State Rail Plan, see Section 1.4.2 of the

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-29 and 1-30).

• Bakersfield Thomas Roads Improvement Program. The Thomas Roads Improvement

Program (TRIP) is a cooperative effort between the City of Bakersfield, the County of Kern,

Caltrans, and the Kern Council of Governments to manage and expedite the completion of

projects designated for funding in the 2005 federal Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient

Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users. These new roadways and capacity

improvements would improve traffic flow from outlying suburban areas into downtown

Bakersfield, where the HSR station would be located. Many of the Thomas Roads

Improvement Program improvements have recently been completed or are currently under

construction. For more information on the Thomas Roads Improvement Program, see Section

1.4.4 of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-

30 and 1-31).

Plans and programs that have been considered in the development of the Fresno to Bakersfield 

Section alignment and station location options, or that already include recommendations for an 

HSR project, include the following: 

• San Joaquin Valley Blueprint. The San Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies’ Policy

Council (Policy Council) made up of seven Valley Council of Governments (COGs) (San

Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Fresno, Tulare, Kings, and Kern) and one regional

transportation planning agency (the Madera County Transportation Commission) prepared a

consolidated “blueprint” for development through 2025. One of the smart growth principles

adopted by the Policy Council provides a variety of transportation choices. As part of this

smart growth principle, the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint envisions HSR service in the San

Joaquin Valley, with stations in Fresno, the Kings/Tulare region, and Bakersfield (San

Joaquin Valley Regional Planning Agencies’ Policy Council 2010). For more information on

the San Joaquin Valley Blueprint, see Section 1.3.1 of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final

EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-24 and 1-25).

• San Joaquin Corridor Strategic Plan and Service Development Plan. The San Joaquin

Corridor Strategic Plan (Caltrans 2008) formalizes the short-term (3 to 5 years), medium-term

(6 to 10 years), and long-term (11 to 25 years) vision for passenger rail service through the

Central Valley. In 2013, Caltrans published the San Joaquin Corridor Service Development

Plan (Caltrans 2013a). Both plans recognize that the existing passenger trains, referred to as

the San Joaquins, could interface with the HSR System by serving as a collector/distributor.

This opportunity would rely on joint stations at major cities such as Fresno, Bakersfield,

Sacramento, and Merced. These interchange points would allow passengers to transfer to

and from the San Joaquins to the HSR system (Caltrans 2008). For more information on the

San Joaquin Corridor Strategic Plan and Service Development Plan, see Section 1.3.2 of the

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: pages 1-25 and 1-26).

6 The term “blended rail system” refers to an HSR system that will “blend” with regional and local 

transportation operations. A “blended” approach would run high-speed trains on existing rail as well as on 

new, dedicated tracks. (Note: The Fresno to Bakersfield project of the California State Rail Plan is a fully 

grade-separated and blended service is not proposed in this section of the HSR system.)
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-14 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

• Kern Council of Governments Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities

Strategy. The Kern Council of Governments adopted the 2014 Regional Transportation

Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS) in June 2014. The plan outlines the

expenditure of approximately $11.6 billion in anticipated federal, state, and local

transportation funds in Kern County over the next 26 years. Over half, $20 billion, is unfunded

HSR construction in the Kern region. The Kern RTP includes a SCS to reduce greenhouse

gas emissions from passenger vehicles and light-duty trucks by 5 percent per capita by 2020

and 10 percent per capita by 2035 as compared to 2005. As part of this reduction, the Kern

Council of Governments RTP/SCS assumes a reduction in county trips due to an increase in

passenger rail use, including HSR. For more information on the Kern Council of Governments

RTP/SCS, see Section 1.3.6 of the Fresno to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority

and FRA 2014: pages 1-27 and 1-28).

• Meadows Field Airport Master Plan. In June 2006, the Kern County Board of Supervisors

adopted the Airport Master Plan for Meadows Field Airport: Bakersfield, California (Kern

County Board of Supervisors 2006). This plan forecasts airport development to 2025. The

Kern County Council of Governments RTP/SCS proposes that the county’s main airport,

Meadows Field, be linked into the planned Los Angeles Basin reliever network of airports.

The RTP/SCS indicates that this could be done through the HSR system. For more

information on the Meadows Field Airport Master Plan, see Section 1.3.8 of the Fresno to

Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS (Authority and FRA 2014: page 1-28).

It should be noted that there are no new plans apart from those previously analyzed in the Fresno 

to Bakersfield Section Final EIR/EIS that are being included in this F-B LGA Draft Supplemental 

EIR/EIS.
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

California High-Speed Rail Authority November 2017 

Fresno to Bakersfield Section Page | 1-15

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

1.4 References 

California Air Resources Board (CARB). 2010. Greenhouse Gas Inventory Data-Graphs. 

Reviewed on May 28, 2010.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2008. San Joaquin Corridor Strategic Plan.

Sacramento, CA: Caltrans, March 2008

———. 2009. 2008 Annual Average Daily Truck Traffic on California State Highway System. 

Sacramento, CA: Caltrans, September 2009. http://trafficcounts.dot.ca.gov/docs/2008_aadt_truck.pdf

———. 2013a. San Joaquin Corridor: Service Development Plan. Final Submittal, May. Prepared 

by AECOM, with Cambridge Systematics, Inc., and Arellano Associates; 

http://californiastaterailplan.dot.ca.gov/docs/Final_2013_San_Joaquin_SDP.pdf, Last 

accessed March 17, 2014.

———. 2013b. 2013 California State Rail Plan. May. Prepared by AECOM, with Cambridge 

Systematics, Inc., and Arellano Associates; 

http://californiastaterailplan.dot.ca.gov/docs/Final_Copy_2013_CSRP.pdf, Last accessed 

March 17, 2014.

California High-Speed Rail Authority(Authority) and USDOT Federal Railroad Administration

(FRA). 2005. Final Program Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact 

Statement (EIR/EIS) for the Proposed California High-Speed Train System. Vol. 1, 

Report. Sacramento, CA, and Washington, DC: California High-Speed Rail Authority and 

USDOT Federal Railroad Administration, August 2005. 

www.hsr.ca.gov/Programs/Environmental_Planning/EIR_EIS/index.html.

———. 2014. California High-Speed Train Project Fresno to Bakersfield Section Environmental 

Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement. Sacramento, CA, and Washington, DC: 

California High-Speed Rail Authority and USDOT Federal Railroad Administration, 2014.

California Office of the Governor. 2007. The Role of a Low Carbon Fuel Standard in Reducing 

Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Protecting Our Economy. January 9, 2007.

Cambridge Systematics, Inc. 2007. Bay Area/California High-Speed Rail Ridership and Revenue 

Forecasting Study: Statewide Model Validation. Prepared for the Metropolitan 

Transportation Commission and the California High-Speed Rail Authority. Oakland, CA: 

Cambridge Systematics, Inc., July 2007. 

http://cdm15025.contentdm.oclc.org/cdm4/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/p266401coll4&

CISOPTR=1317&CISOBOX=1&REC=4.

Kern County Board of Supervisors. 2006. Airport Master Plan for Meadows Field Airport: 

Bakersfield, California. Bakersfield, CA: Kern County Board of Supervisors, December 

2006.

Kern Council of Governments (Kern COG). 2014 Final Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable 

Communities Strategy. Bakersfield, CA: Kern COG, June 19, 2014.

www.kerncog.org/images/docs/rtp/2014_RTP.pdf

San Joaquin Valley Regional Policy Council. 2010. San Joaquin Valley Blueprint Public Review 

Draft Summary Report. September 2010.

Surface Transportation Board, Surface Transportation Board Decision, Docket No. FD 35724 

(Sub-No. 1), California High-Speed Rail Authority – Construction Exemption – In Fresno, 

Kings, Tulare, and Kern County, CAL. www.hsr.ca.gov/docs/programs/fresno-bakereir/F_B_STB_Decision_20140811.pdf. August 12, 2014. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). 2009. “High-Speed Intercity Passenger 

Rail (‘‘HSIPR’’) Program." Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 119, page 29906. June 23, 

2009. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2009-06-23/pdf/E9-14692.pdf. 
Chapter 1 Project Purpose, Need, and Objectives

November 2017 California High-Speed Rail Authority

1-16 | Page Fresno to Bakersfield Section

Draft Supplemental EIR/EIS

This page left intentionally blank