Transportation Authority, C/CAG Sign Off on Shuttles

patch – excerpt

The TA has been funding shuttles through Measure A funds since 2002, when it started routes serving Caltrain Stations.

From San Mateo County Transpo Authority: The San Mateo County Transportation Authority (TA) Board of Directors approved $9 million in funding for its shuttle program at its May meeting. Last night, the City and County Association of Governments (C/CAG) voted to contribute $1 million to the program, which will run 35 shuttles throughout San Mateo County… (more)

The Crazy Idea of Running Caltrain onto Muni’s Tracks

: streetsblog – excerpt

Maybe it’s not quite as crazy as it sounds

A little over a week ago, the San Francisco Examiner ran the Op-Ed: “Fast and cheap: Getting Caltrain to Transbay Terminal … this year.” Author Stanford Horn proposed extending Caltrain via Muni’s T/N tracks on King Street and building some more tracks on Howard Street to a platform at the new Transbay Terminal, as a stop-gap measure until the DTX tunnel is built

Horn’s assertion, that it would be such a simple project that it could be connected up in a few weeks or months, is as silly as it sounds. As Noel Braymer, editor of the Rail Passenger Association of California newsletter wrote: “Oh dear God, where do I begin! There is no way that the Federal Railroad Administration will allow Caltrain equipment to share tracks with much lighter rail transit trains. The reason is, in the case of a collision Muni cars would be crushed if hit by Caltrain!”

To point out another obvious problem: although the track gauge is the same, Caltrain’s rolling stock is wider than Muni’s. Since Muni uses high-level platforms, that means if you plopped a Caltrain onto Muni’s tracks, it would crash into the platform. Furthermore, Caltrain’s equipment would likely derail on Muni’s track switches. Horn’s piece was savaged in the comments section as totally unworkable… (more)

Roadshow: Why I’ve given up on Caltrain

by Gary Richards : mercurynews – excerpt

Q I read your response to us Peninsula folks that our traffic hopes rest with faster and more Caltrain service. But I have given up on Caltrain. Why?

There are zero places to park at the Mountain View station, as the lot is always full. Surrounding street parking is limited to two-hour and five-hour zones. This is not enough time to go to a Giants game or other event in the city without risking a parking ticket.

Believe me, I’ve tried Caltrain and have given up, hence adding to the gridlock on Highway 101. Nearby stations have the same problem. Faster trains are useless without better parking options.
S B of Los Altos

A Unfortunately, there is only a slim ray of hope. Caltrain has no immediate plans to add more parking spots from Gilroy to San Francisco. The 340 spaces in Mountain View fill up early as ridership now can approach 60,000 people a day… (more)


Muni Fare To Increase Again July 1, Caltrain Considering Fare Hike Too

If you’re a Caltrain rider who would like to voice your frustration with (or support of!) the proposed fare increase, the commuter rail line service will have staffed tables at 11 different stations tomorrow, Tuesday, May 23, to gather your feedback. Additionally, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board will have a public meeting on Thursday, July 6 at 10 a.m. at the Caltrain Administrative Office in San Carlos. You don’t even have to be present at the meeting to speak up, because Caltrain is taking comments online and via email at

But as for Muni riders, that 25-cent fare increase is a done deal and going into effect July 1, 2017 regardless of your feelings on whether the fare’s fair…


U.S. Transportation department executive approved grant days before taking job with rail contractor

By Ralph Vartabedian : latimes – excerpt

A top Obama administration executive at the U.S. Department of Transportation approved a $647-million grant for a California rail project in mid-January and less than two weeks later went to work for a Los Angeles-based contractor involved in the project, The Times has learned.

The grant provides a significant part of the money required to install a $2-billion electrical power system on the Bay Area’s Caltrain commuter rail system, allowing the rail to retire its diesel locomotives.

The power equipment will eventually be used by the state’s bullet train from Los Angeles to San Francisco, making it a critical part of the $64-billion program. The California High-Speed Rail Authority has pledged about $713 million to help install the system, according to state records.

The grant was handled by Carolyn Flowers, the acting chief of the Federal Transit Administration.  Flowers announced the grant approval in a letter, dated Jan. 18,  to congressional leaders. The Times obtained a copy of the letter…

Thirteen days later, Flowers went to work for Aecom, a Los Angeles-based engineering firm. The company news release announcing her hiring says she will head its North American transit practice. Aecom provides program management services to Caltrain for the electrification project, according to Caltrain documents. It was formerly a regional consultant to the high-speed rail project as well.

On Friday, the federal transit agency said it had “deferred” a decision on the grant and said it would look at the matter in the next federal budget cycle. The decision may be an early sign of the Trump administration’s view of the bullet train project. The line is already under construction and will need significant federal funding moving forward.

The delay follows a letter from every Republican member of the California House delegation to Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao, asking that the grant be put off until an audit of the high-speed rail project is completed.
This is exactly what America hates about Washington, D.C… (more)

Don’t they call this the revolving door?

Carolyn Flowers-letter to congress


By Carolyn Tyler : abc7news – excerpt – (video)

Thursday, June 25, 2015 09:19PM
SAN FRANCISCO (KGO) — Work on a regional connection for Bay Area commuters is quickly taking shape. With much of the construction on the Transbay Terminal completed underground, we’re finally seeing it rise above street level.

At First and Mission streets in San Francisco commuters are watching an icon rise, one that might actually make their trip into San Francisco easier someday. “You absolutely get a feel for what that experience is going to be when the transit center opens in late 2017,” Dennis Turchon said.

Turchon is senior project manager of the $1.1 billion new Transbay Terminal project.

It is designed to be the Grand Central Station of the west, a hub for Bay Area transit.

Regional bus lines will carry commuters to and from the city on the upper levels, while underground Caltrain and high speed rail will bring commuters up the Penisula.

“We’ve poured almost 100,000 cubic yards of concrete in the last year for the train box,” Turchon said… (more)

Alternate Caltrain Extension Study is a Waste of Taxpayer Money and Time

As noted in the press, San Francisco’s self-anointed “Planning Triumvirate “, (comprised of SPUR, the Mayor’s staff and Department of City Planning), wants to remove the northern end of I-280 and replace it with a beautifully-landscaped surface arterial, something on the order of the perpetually-congested Octavia extension of 101.  One of the problems with this scheme is that it would dump I-280 freeway traffic onto a new surface arterial somewhere in the vicinity of 16th Street, thereby preempting the space now occupied by the Caltrain main line tracks, and adding billions of dollars and years to a well-thought-out project that is underway.

If San Francisco adopts this new plan, to proceed with rerouting the main line tracks between 22nd Street and Second & King, it will add billions of dollars to the cost of getting Caltrain to downtown San Francisco and delay the Caltrain extension by an estimated 8 to 10 years.  In the process, this momentous set of changes would result in the unraveling of decisions that were studied, publicly debated, environmentally-cleared and approved by many agencies over a decade ago.  In addition, these late coming bright ideas risk losing funding for the Downtown Caltrain Extension (DTX) entirely, with George Miller gone, and Nancy Pelosi possessing less power to send home the bacon.

Here’s some of what’s wrong with the Planning Triumvirate’s plans:

  • First, it would dump northbound I-280 traffic onto SF surface streets much farther south.
  • Second, in part to make way for the new roadway and shave an inconsequential 90 seconds off the high-speed trip, there is a plan to relocate both the tracks and the current Fourth and King Caltrain Station. These changes, reportedly concocted by individuals with no experience in engineering, tunneling or rail operations, would push up the cost of getting Caltrain downtown by billions of dollars.
  • Third, there’s no money for removing the freeway, much less building the surface-level replacement streets, much less relocating and undergrounding elements of the main line railway.  There are claims that these added infrastructure costs will be covered by proceeds from the planned new development.  Many similar claims in recent years have proven to be inaccurate.
  • Fourth, there is also a plan to move Caltrain’s vital Fourth and King rail storage and staging area to a new site outside San Francisco County.  This action would significantly increase both the capital cost of the project and Caltrain’s operating cost, to the point where it could easily kill Caltrain’s San Francisco service all together.  There are at least two less expensive ways of accommodating Caltrain’s train storage and staging needs, neither of which would require relocation and neither of which would blight the Fourth/Mission Bay area.
  • Fifth, if the Triumvirate’s program were adopted, it would send a decidedly negative signal to prospective private and public DTX investors.  The message would be that, despite the fact that in 1999 the people of San Francisco voted 69.3% for Proposition H extending Caltrain to the new First and Mission Street downtown Terminal, San Francisco’s government is prepared to deviate from this mandate.  If the city with the shining, oncoming $2 billion Transit Terminal slows down the process of connecting the trains, then who from the outside will step in and provide the needed leadership?

The plans for developing the Mission Bay Area, electrifying Caltrain and extending it into downtown San Francisco have been ongoing for over 20 years.  A small group of entities, starry-eyed over replacing the end of I-280 with large-scale development has arrived belatedly on the scene.  They bring with them grandiose development plans and poorly thought-out infrastructure adjustments that threaten to bring progress in that part of San Francisco to a screeching halt.  Moreover, their insistence in making light of long-standing DTX decisions and policies is threatening to knock DTX out of the running for New Starts funding.  Given the vigorous competition between States and cities for coveted New Starts grants, playing around in this way is risky.  As the San Francisco voters said loud and clear in 1999, DTX brings great benefits.  Losing it would be a very big loss for San Francisco.

Concerned Muni Riders