Caltrain is about to make decisions about the design of electric rail cars that will affect the service for many decades to come. At the last board meeting, David Couch, who is managing the electrification project, talked about the set of decisions that Caltrain will make this year. For more about the decisions, and opportunities to weigh in – including a Citizens’ Advisory Committee Meeting tonight – read on.
The good news is that Caltrain is thinking seriously about how to migrate to level boarding, and the discussion is much more about how than whether. Level boarding is expected to provide 50% again as much speed improvement as electrification itself, above and beyond to improving accessibility for disabled and elderly folk.
There are important questions about how the migration is going to work -how the transition will be done technically, how the platform changes will be paid for, and how the obsolete San Francisco Public Utilities Commission rule requiring un-necessary stairs will be addressed.
The bad news is that Caltrain and High Speed Rail are leaning heavily toward platform incompatiblity. This is unfortunate, because having platform compatibility would help with greater capacity for the blended system in the long run.
There are other important decisions that will affect service for riders for decades to come:
Standing room. Today, Caltrain’s goal is to have a seat for every rider. But there clearly hasn’t been enough room. The average Caltrain ride is 20+ miles, but some people have shorter rides. Should there be more comfortable standing space for at least some people with short rides?
How much space to allocate for bicycles, and how to think rationally about bikes. In our area, 80% of jobs are within 2-3 miles of Caltrain – people use bicycles to make the last-mile connection. If Caltrain wants to save some space on the train, there’s no free lunch -the alternative is providing shuttle or bike share services (or more traffic congestion)
How much space to allocate for bathrooms? Average trips are 30-50 minutes, and Caltrain has bathrooms in only two stations.
There is a set of upcoming events where you can learn more and weigh in. In addition to the events below, there will be a Friends of Caltrain panel discussion, with a date TBD shortly.
Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
Aug. 20, 2014 at 5:40pm
Caltrain HQ, 1250 San Carlos Ave, San Carlos
Community Meeting
1250 San Carlos Ave, San Carlos
Sept. 8, 2014 at 11am and 6pm
Bicycle Advisory Committee (BAC)
1250 San Carlos Ave, San Carlos
Sept. 18, 2014 at 5:45pm
Local Policy Makers Group (LPMG)
1250 San Carlos Ave, San Carlos
Sept. 25, 2014 at 6pm
Caltrain Access Advisory Committee
1250 San Carlos Ave, San Carlos
Sept. 22, 2014 at 11am
I normally get around by bike and am not a regular CalTrain user but have a lot of experience taking trains in the Czech Republic, Germany and the Netherlands, also with a bike… or pet dogs.
Without getting bogged down into too many details (lie), here are some thoughts on bikes:
* Goal: It should be the responsibilty of the CalTrain/HSR system to provide reasonable access to bicycles. The system, not the trains themselves. Ideally, this means that in the current context there would be enough “bike slots” for everyone who gets to or from the train by bike.
Current situation/inspiration:
* The typical bi-level EMU design that includes bicycle access is common in Europe and it features lateral fold-up seating on part of the lower level of vehicles with direct access to doors, and sometimes separated by the area with normal seating with a glass partition. My understanding is that the Federal guidelines prohibit lateral fold-up seating. This is a huge problem.
* Current CalTrain + bike customers expect too much on-board access. This is not sustainable. They also don’t want to pay extra. Systems that have 15% bike-to-train share in Europe with projected increases do not solve it on-board.
* Bay Area Bike Share’s current offer is clearly not compatible with Peninsula densities/final destinations, at least in an economically-reasonable fashion.
Some ideas:
* Implement an OV-fiets type system on Peninsula stations that would work in parallel with the existing bike share. This would be used for longer range trips outside of the BABS service area. (There will need to be a solution which keeps use appropriate — e.g. a single membership for both but which requies a min. payment for the OV-type system might do it. This payment would ideally be paid by employers)
* Implement an adequate amount of bike parking which allows people to keep a bike at the station.
* Changed the Federal law about seating as necessary.
* Once owned bike parking, the OV-type system and some expanded BABS is in place:
+ Implement a mix of cozy normal seating with tables etc & fold-up lateral seating.
+ Restrict access to all full-size bikes during commuter hours, even with payment. Allow folding bikes and special bikes not available via bike share stations on board at all times.
+ The mix above should be set up so that the lateral seat spaces – typically called a multi-function space in European train design – are adequate for short-distance trips during commute hours, and for bikes (or other allowed large objects) at other times.
+ Fit in ADA required seating into the above as necessary.
Dogs:
* Taking pet dogs of any size only on leash and sometimes with a muzzle, sometimes free and sometimes half-fare is completely normal in much of Europe and there are few problems with anything from allergies to fights to soiling the floor. The multi-function section on trains is ideal for this because of open space, but dogs should also be allowed during commute hours. There will never be more than a few percentage points of people who want to take dogs, though there are a number of dog-friendly workplaces. SF Muni allows one dog per vehicle, BART seems to sometimes unofficialy tolerate it but the best examples in North America on commuter or regional trains are in NY where Metro North allows full size pets dogs as does MBTA in Boston, though the latter not during commute hours. Both for free.
* There is legislation, the “Pets on Trains Act”, introduced by rail advocate Jeff Denham (R-Modesto) that would mandate that Amtrak nationally allows pet dogs on trains, but the proposed regulation excludes 50 to 60% of individuals or families who want to bring a dog due to its 20/25 lb. size restrictions (and necessity to use a crate). There is also a 25 dollar flat fee, and a signing an indemnification every trip. I have not been able to find out exactly how they came up with all of this, but clearly a one-size-fits-all-services approach does not make sense. The main goal, however, seems to be to compete with short-distance air travel (up to 750 miles) rather than to get people out of cars (and 16-17 year olds are also excluded). There is currently a pilot on two Amtrak services in Illinois that terminate in Chicago.
To see my dogs-on-board promotion in my blog from a few years back, click on: http://greenideafactory.blogspot.com/2009/02/dogs-on-board-1-of-4.html
Consist length is also discussion point and 3-car consist is under consideration. BART and VTA operates shorter consist in midday, night and weekend to maintain frequency. I hope Caltrain to follow same direction and provide more frequent service in midday, night and weekend.
[…] http://www.greencaltrain.com/2014/08/caltrain-considers-level-boarding-car-design/ […]