At Thursday’s Transbay board meeting, Caltrain’s Marian Lee,  Gabriel Metcalf for the SF Mayor’s office, Muni’s Ed Reiskin and other directors opened up a far-reaching conversation about how Caltrain will be governed in the age of electrification and the Downtown Extension to Transbay.  A consultant walked through various options for the DTX project to be built and financed, including a public private partnership, where a private entity would toll riders for the tunnel, and use the revenue to help finance the project and maintain it on an ongoing basis.   Marian Lee then asked the logical question.  If the Downtown Extension tunnel connecting Caltrain to the Transbay Terminal is run by a private company taking a toll for the tunnel, why stop there?  Why wouldn’t you have a single entity operating Caltrain and DTX? Or one entity running High Speed Rail, Caltrain, and DTX.

To explore the far-reaching consequences of these questions, the board agreed that the discussions would need to include the DTX team, Caltrain, the High Speed Rail Authority, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, and eventually the rest of 9 regional partners that are contributing funding for Caltrain modernization and the blended system with High Speed Rail.   Board discussions about the structure to complete DTX are expected to continue over the next several months.

Adding Caltrain’s operations to the picture, in the age of electrification and connection to downtown San Francisco – with lower operating costs and major increase in ridership – would make a very different business proposition for a private operator than taking a $1.25 toll to maintain a short segment of tunnel.    How would this work for transit riders, and for the public agency owners of the infrastructure?  What if a High Speed Rail operator ran Caltrain?  Are there good examples of organizations competently running long-distance train service as well as local commuter and utility transit?   How does putting these options on the table affect the funding of DTX – and potential alternative plans for funding electrification, if High Speed Rail’s roadblocks aren’t cleared up soon?

This is a big deal – agencies, riders, and others who depend on Caltrain will have important choices to understand and evaluate, that will shape how the rail corridor will modernize, how these major projects will be funded, and rail service will work for customers for many years to come.

 

 

At today’s Peninsula Joint Powers Board meeting, the Caltrain board approved the agency making a $4million offer on 11 surplus rail cars from Metrolink in Los Angeles.  The cars would ease the capacity problem that Caltrain has been experienced with recent rapid ridership growth. The purchase would allow Caltrain to add a sixth car to 11 trains, providing 20% more capacity on the crowded trains.  The money comes from Caltrain’s surplus revenue from recent growth in ridership.

Metrolink’s board will need to approve the purchase, and will need to negotiate to get out of a lease agreement for the unused cars. Then, according to head of operations Chuck Harvey, it will take a year and another ~$4million to rehab the cars.  Caltrain has nearly enough room on platforms to fit the sixth car, though it will be tight in a few stations including Burlingame and Menlo Park. Some station changes may be needed, including moving where the train stops, and shifting the wheelchair platforms.

Ridership has doubled over the last decade, and continues to grow.  the most popular peak hour trains are standing room only, and the average ride is over 20 miles, which is uncomfortable for standing. Caltrain plans to electrify by 2019, but it is a long 6 years til then. In the most recent monthly results, ridership was up another 10% over the previous year, and there were over 53,000 riders on an average weekday.

If growth continues – and the transportation and land use trends suggest that it will – that capacity may be filled before Caltrain electrify also.   The Caltrain Citizens Advisory Council will be looking at the capacity issue at its next meeting. Caltrain is looking at other ways to ease the capacity crunch, including some additional service, encouraging riders who can to use “shoulder peak” trains, and more ideas they will present at at the CAC meeting. If you’re interested in learning more and commenting on the topic, come on Wednesday, January 15 at 5:40pm at Caltrain HQ, 1250 San Carlos Ave, a few minutes walk from San Carlos Caltrain.  Or send email to cacsecretary@caltrain.com, or leave comments and we’ll forward them on to the CAC.

In the next year, decisions about Caltrain will shape transit service in our region for decades to come. Your help will be needed for Caltrain to modernize, serve riders, and serve our communities.

Here are 12 ways you can help in the New Year.

1) Strategic Plan: Thanks to everyone who came out on December 16 and who posted comments online – your vision includes more frequent all-day service, level boarding for faster service and better transfers, grade separations for safety and reliability, and of course wifi. Watch for more chances to weigh in this Spring.

2) Capacity Crunch:  the most popular baby bullets have been standing room only. Watch for announcement in early 2014 about new train cars and opportunities to restore service to ease the capacity crunch

3) Downtown Extension to Transbay: The Transbay team had a dramatic proposal to get Caltrain tracks extended to downtown San Francisco by 2022.  Can this be done?   Watch and weigh into the key decisions at the Transbay board this winter.

4) Electrification: The Caltrain electrification environmental impact report is due this winter – with estimates about the financial benefits of electrified Caltrain, tree and traffic impacts in your city, and more.

5) Electric train car shopping.  In 2014 Caltrain will decide what train cars to buy, including decisions about level boarding, high speed rail compatibility, and space for bikes.

6) Electrification funding. About half of the funding for Caltrain electrification comes from the High Speed Rail project.   Watch for updates on HSR seeking routes out of its legal woes, and potential backup plans to fund electrification if needed.

7) Stable funding.  San Francisco is planning a 2014 ballot measure to keep their commitments to Caltrain – and Muni, and safe biking and walking.  Watch for ways to help in SF – and more on plans for Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties.

8) Grade separations.  San Mateo County is giving grants for grade separations to improve safety, reliability, and traffic. Santa Clara County intends to consider grade separations in their next strategic plan. San Francisco is studying a dramatic proposal to turn the end of 280 into a boulevard, extend DTX, and ease Muni to MissionBay – watch for a study that’s getting started now

9) Station area planning.  San Jose Diridon,  Sunnyvale Lawrence, and South San Francisco are planning to take better advantage of Caltrain. Watch for chances to improve the places you live and work.

10) City support: in San Mateo, Redwood City, Mountain View, and maybe Palo Alto and Menlo Park, cities are taking responsibility for traffic, parking, and transit access. Stay tuned and help your community take responsibility for transportation.

11) Do you appreciate these updates about opportunities to save and improve Caltrain?  Click here to donate

12) Do you have skills or referrals for nonprofit accounting services, basic web design help, and blogging/social media? Let me know at adina.levin@friendsofcaltrain.com

Do you have friends who’ll want to help making Caltrain better?  Invite them to join.

Something else important that’s missing from this list?  Add your ideas in comments.

At an event on Monday night in San Carlos, and in comments online, Caltrain riders and stakeholders brainstormed ideas for Caltrain’s strategic plan.  The last time Caltrain did a strategic plan, Caltrain had only 28,000 average weekday riders, the Baby Bullet was about to get started, the Millbrae station was about to open, and San Mateo was still working on their major plans for station area development.    Since then, ridership has nearly doubled, electrification planning is under way, and many cities on the corridor are seeing development near the station.

Do you have more ideas for Caltrain’s strategic plan for improvements over the next 10 years? Leave suggestions in the comments.

More frequent all-day service

The top message – at this event (and in Caltrain’s annual rider survey with 2900 responses p. 14), is to increase frequency without impacting travel times.  Riders mentioned service frequencies of 15-20 minutes, with a predictable clock-based schedule for ease of use.  Richard Tretten from San Jose said it best in blog comments: “Caltrain needs to compete with the automobile throughout the day.”

The ability to increase frequency without proportionately increased costs will be a major benefit of electrification. In the meantime, with revenue from increased ridership, Caltrain could potentially restore some of the mid-day and evening service that was cut during earlier financial hardship.

Several riders mentioned the need to maintain or improve speed.  Speed and frequency involve tradeoffs.  Clem Tillier of the Caltrain-HSR Compatibility blog, and other riders, urged Caltrain to develop and communicate clear metrics about service options and tradeoffs:

The timetable is Caltrain’s “product” and impacts to it should be the starting point of analysis and justification for all major expenditures or infrastructure projects.

For riders, their calculation of travel time is from origin to destination, not from station to station.   To improve travel time, Caltrain can work with cities (like San Mateo, Mountain View and Redwood City and Palo Alto) and employers (like Stanford and Google) that want to improve the rider’s experience from origin to destination.

Major customers, including cities, major employers, and developers want more information from Caltrain about plans and potential scenarios to increase capacity. At the last Local Policy Maker Working Group, Palo Alto City Council Member Pat Burt urged Caltrain to plan to address the current capacity crunch, and to work with cities as it develops the plans.   Even if the information is uncertain, these stakeholders are making major decisions based on the availability of transit, and would welcome a planning partnership with Caltrain.

Safety and reliability

Several riders commented in person and online about the importance of grade separations for more reliable service and to reduce fatal collisions.

Streamlined connections and payment

Caltrain riders are the least satisfied in the region with Clipper, and want the universal payment system to work better.  Challenge include smoother transfers between stations, the ability to reload at more stations, and more conveniently located tag stations. Being able to purchase tickets using a mobile device would help avoid penalties.  Now that the payment system is computerized, integrated, distance-based fares would streamline the experience for users.

Riders want more conveniently timed transfers to other systems.  Level boarding will help improve transfers by making arrivals more reliable.

To help riders connect the first and last mile, bike capacity on the train remains important. More bike share and better bike lockers at stations helps reduce the need to bring a bike onboard. But overall growth in ridership and diversity of destinations means that onboard bike capacity continues to be important.

Riders at the valued carshare at the station to help with connections as well as mid-day trips, and wanted more car share options.

Station Access

Riders would like to see stations have easier access for pedestrians, bikes, buses and taxis.

The Downtown Extension to Transbay is the major connection that riders want to see.  The Transbay center will need good connections to Market Street, BART and Muni. Riders online and at the meeting called out 4th and King, 22nd Street, South San Francisco, Lawrence and Mountain View were called out by users at the meeting as needing pedestrian, bike and transit access improvements.

Caltrain users would like to see a better experience with parking as well, including easier payment (including taking Caltrain permits at the Millbrae garage).  To free up space in crowded lots, riders wanted to see better enforcement and congestion pricing.

Station and onboard experience

Riders want stations to be comfortable, clean and safe.  San Mateo and South San Francisco were called out as particularly problematic, as was the wind tunnel at Millbrae.

On the train, wifi is a perennial request. Riders would also appreciate food sold on trains and at more stations.  Riders called out the need for clean restrooms.

On trains and at stations, more informative signs and announcements would help with regular schedule and information in case of problems.

Level boarding with wide doors will help with access to the train. Before then, Caltrain can make improvements to the boarding experience, including giving riders with bikes priority boarding in the bike car.

Community connections

Riders at the event want to see Caltrain work better with cities to achieve transit-supportive and climate-friendly land uses and policies.  For example, VTA has a program to review development proposals, and will identify issues like lack of sidewalks that could keep a development near a station from making good use of the transit.

Caltrain could also work with counties and cities to align with the jurisdictions’ climate goals.   For example, Mountain View has a goal to reduce its drivealone rate to 45%, and San Francisco has goal to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 80%, and plans to double investment in transportation demand management to increase use of transit and other climate-friendly modes.

Next steps

As plan for the next 10 years, values and service goals set in the Strategic Plan will set Caltrain up for more detailed improvement efforts, and the capital investment goals in the Strategic Plan will set Caltrain up to be in line when money becomes available.  The plan will have more public input in the Spring, and is expected to be complete by the summer.

 

 

Yesterday, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission provisionally decided on how to divide $3Billion in Transportation funds in the state’s Cap and Trade program over the next 26 years, in preparation for what is expected to be a budget battle in Sacramento this Spring.

Caltrain and SamTrans did proportionally ok according to our analysis on a regional ridership basis – 3% of regional riders respectively, and 3% of transit funding ($35Million for Caltrain and $44Million for SamTrans over the 26 years).  This wouldn’t fix Caltrain’s operating gap but will be helpful if the funding materializes.

The biggest operators are getting the most certain and soonest funding. Muni, BART and AC Transit had already been awarded a large chunk of the funding for capital equipment replacement, as well as rail cars for the Santa Clara County BART extension.   The argument for these investment priorities were that these operators will serve the largest amount of the region’s growth.   On the basis of ridership, VTA comes out ahead, with 9% of the region’s riders and 16% of the funding.

As several commissioners pointed out during the debate, vote was a bit of an exercise in counting unhatched chickens, since Cap and Trade funding for Transportation, which is planned to be available in 2015, is not a sure thing. There are many uncertainties.  Last year, the governor allocated the Cap and Trade revenue for non-transportation sources to balance the budget.   The High Speed Rail Authority is looking for sources of funding other than Prop 1A bonds which face legal uncertainty.   There will be many other claims on the Cap and Trade funding in Sacramento in the upcoming budget debate.

Multiple commissioners, including Adrienne Tissier who also serves on the Caltrain and SamTrans boards, and Sam Liccardo who serves on the VTA board expressed frustration that the allocation was being done rapidly, without considering the climate change goal of the program.  Overall, commissioners saw the benefit of agreeing on a provisional program, to provide regional unity in Sacramento, as more important than the getting the details right yet.

The debate yesterday focused on whether, how, and how much to allocate for transit operations.  The Capital funding had already been agreed on, with funding going to BART, Muni, and AC Transit to replace aging trains and buses.  Yesterday’s debate added $75 million to buy new cars for the BART-San Jose extension. Because the capital funding was weighted heavily toward the largest operators, the operating funding was allocated somewhat more toward the medium sized and small operators with a 40-60 split.

Over the next 6-9 months, there will be a committee process to work out the details on how the climate and social equity goals of Plan Bay Area will be reflected in the specific criteria actually award grants in all of the categories.  The devil will be in the details.  When guidelines are developed incorporating climate goals, Caltrain has a good chance to do well, since ridership has been increasing, and initiatives on the corridor to reduce the share of driving will have significant climate benefits.

The largest sum of money is slated for the One Bay Area Grant program, which supports transportation and housing in places that have been identified in PlayBayArea for growth.  The Climate Initiatives program, which hasn’t been defined yet, was pared back from $400 million to $275 million.