Issue date: February 24, 1999

Caltrain faces strategic decisions <z0048.0>Caltrain faces strategic decisions (February 24, 1999)

**Alternative to gridlock: Caltrain has more plans than money, and BART could be a threat.
By MARION SOFTKY

As the Silicon Valley job machine draws more and more people from homes farther and farther away, Peninsula transit agencies are readying plans for improving rail service to give commuters appealing alternatives to gridlock.
Not surprisingly, the problem is money, as Caltrain's wish list far exceeds available funds.
A Caltrain Rapid Rail Study, released in October, identified close to $1 billion in costs to make trains run faster, more often, and more reliably, and only $543 million to pay for them.
The study also identified a number of expansions in service that would cost another $810 million. These include restoration of the old Dumbarton railroad bridge, now closed, and a new Caltrain connection to the light rail system under construction at San Francisco Airport.
In addition, the extension of Caltrain into downtown San Francisco, dropped when San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown opposed it, is again a possibility since the mayor has changed his mind.
Now, the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB), which runs Caltrain, is near a decision on how to spend available funds. Some board members would focus first on rehabilitation and enhancement of the rail line; others see electrification as top priority; still others want a higher priority for reactivating Dumbarton trains to serve commuters from the East Bay.
However, available funds appear to be shrinking from the $543 million discussed in the October report. The JPB staff is readying a financial plan to be presented to the board. It is working with San Francisco and Santa Clara counties, which are also represented on the nine-member JPB, to see how much they will contribute to the capital improvements, said Caltrain Project Manager Andy Nash.
After three delays, the JPB appears ready to discuss priorities for Caltrain upgrades at its meeting at 2 p.m. Thursday, March 4, at the county transportation building, 1250 San Carlos Ave. in San Carlos.
BART a threat?

Meanwhile, Caltrain supporters are looking nervously to the north, as BART moves down the Peninsula toward San Francisco International Airport and on to Millbrae. Many fear that BART may try to come farther down the Peninsula and in the process wipe out Caltrain, which provides the only rail service for communities to the south as far as Gilroy.

"The Millbrae station poises BART to extend along the Caltrain Corridor," said Burlingame Councilwoman Marti Knight, who serves on the board of the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, which allocates money from a half-cent sales tax passed in 1988.

Even before BART gets to Millbrae, possibly in 2001, the San Mateo County Economic Development Association (SAMCEDA) is looking south to gauge voter interest in extending BART down the Peninsula. According to the San Mateo County Times, SAMCEDA conducted a survey of 600 voters in January to find out if they would support extending BART south, and would be willing to pay for it through a new sales tax.

Priorities for Caltrain

The Caltrain Rapid Rail study envisions a future when frequent, fast electric trains would zip along rebuilt tracks through modernized stations, shaving 15 minutes or more from the time between San Francisco and San Jose.

The problem facing the Joint Powers Board will be whether to ratify or change priorities recommended in the study, written by the JPB staff. The study proposes these priorities:

**First, rehabilitate aging track and bridges for greater speed and safety, and lower maintenance; and install a new control system. Estimated cost: $220 million.

**Second, enhance stations to make them safer and more convenient; add an extra rail where possible so trains can pass; and improve access and parking. Estimated cost: $288.5 million.

**Third, electrify trains to provide faster, quieter, less polluting service with lower maintenance. Cost: $376 million.

**Fourth, add extensions, such as the Dumbarton rail bridge, the airport connection, more grade separations, and -- now -- the extension to downtown San Francisco.

The staff recommends planning for electrification now, but doing it later. "Electrification has a lot of positive benefits, but first we have to rehabilitate the railroad," Mr. Nash said.

Art Lloyd of Portola Valley, a lifelong railroad expert and JPB member, agrees up to a point. He favors installing continuous track -- no more clickety-clacks -- and replacing the signal system, but would place electrification ahead of some of the station improvements. "The staff wants to gold-plate the railroad," he said. "I'd settle for silver."

The San Mateo County Transportation Authority has allocated some $200 million of the county's Measure A sales tax money for Caltrain improvements as follows: $84 million for rehabilitation and enhancement; $50 million for Dumbarton rail; $63 million to connect the Airport light rail system to Caltrain; and $5.3 million to engineer for electrification.

Also strongly supporting rail across the old Dumbarton bridge is SAMCEDA, which wants it to be included among first priority projects. "It's one of the most congested corridors in the Bay Area and will continue to get more congested," said SAMCEDA President Denise de Ville.

The shadow of BART

The long-running debate between supporters of Caltrain and BART came into focus again February 10 when the SamTrans board voted 8-1 to lend $72 million to BART to help pay for the extension from Colma to the San Francisco International Airport and on to Millbrae.

The loan was sought when the federal government lagged in providing funds for the $1.5 billion project. The money will bring to $400 million SamTrans' contributions to the eight-mile extension. The no-interest loan is to be repaid from profits from future BART service. SamTrans officials promised there would be no negative effects on existing bus and rail programs.

At the February 10 meeting, most of the 20 speakers urged the board to stop the extension at the airport and save some $300 million needed to take BART on to Millbrae. The speakers worried that somehow the commitment to BART would cut into funds for bus service and Caltrain.

Menlo Park Councilman Steve Schmidt cast the lone no vote. In a vivid image, he likened BART to a brown-headed cowbird who lays her eggs in another bird's nest. Then her babies beat up and often push out the baby birds that belong. "BART is the nest parasite," he said. "It hasn't pushed the other birds out yet, but it's on its way."

County Supervisor Jerry Hill supported the loan. "I'm convinced buses and Redi-Wheels will not suffer," he said. "This is the best deal in town. Where can you get $1.5 billion in benefits for $400 million?"

Although Mr. Lloyd voted for the loan, he said that extending BART farther down the Peninsula is a mistake. "We can electrify the Peninsula to Gilroy for one quarter the cost of a six-mile BART extension," he said, adding that eight miles for $1.5 billion works out to about $200 million per mile.

Mr. Lloyd noted other differences between Caltrain and BART: Because it has a non-standard gauge, BART can neither run express trains nor connect with the web of railroad lines that crisscross the state. And today's new fast-train technology applies to Caltrain-type equipment, and not to BART's unique, 40-year-old technology.

Mr. Lloyd also represents Caltrain at meetings of the California High-Speed Rail Authority, which is planning for high-speed trains from Los Angeles to San Francisco. If a bond measure scheduled for the state ballot in 2000 passes, trains could ultimately speed across the Dumbarton Bridge, and up the Caltrain line into San Francisco.

"The downtown extension will happen when and if high-speed rail comes," Mr. Lloyd said.