Transcript Caltrain Modernization Program Update Palo Alto City Council Rail Committee August 10, 2012

Caltrain Modernization Program Update
Palo Alto City Council Rail Committee
August 10, 2012
Presentation Topics
1.
State Legislature Update
2.
Next Steps for the Peninsula
3.
Blended System Planning Analysis Update
4.
Discussion
State Legislature Update
Green Light for HSR & Blended System
•
Bay Area State Assembly and Senate support
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Elaine Alquist, D-San Jose
Tom Ammiano, D- San Francisco
Jim Beall, D-San Jose
Nora Campos, D-San Jose
Paul Fong, D-Mountain View
Rich Gordon, D-Menlo Park
Jerry Hill, D-San Mateo
Mark Leno, D-San Francisco
Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco
Leland Yee, D-San Francisco
SB 1029
•
Appropriates $705 million for Caltrain Modernization
–
–
•
Funds available for:
–
–
•
$600 million from Prop 1A (HSR)
$105 million from Prop 1A (Connectivity)
“blended system improvements consistent with the MOU” and
“shall not be used to expand the system to a dedicated four-track system”
Bonds sold and allocated to project by State Controller
Next Steps for the Peninsula
Project Delivery Focus
• Early Investment (2019)
– Define outreach/decision-making structure and process
– Advanced Signal System
 Advance design from “Critical” to “Final”
– Electrification & Electric Vehicles
 Update / Recirculate Caltrain EA/EIR
 Define project delivery approach/team
• Blended System (2029)
–
–
Complete current planning studies
Schedule for completing planning process
Blended System Planning Update
Blended System Planning Process
Capacity Analysis
Service Plan / Operations
Considerations
Grade Crossing &
Traffic Analysis
Service Plan Options
Infrastructure Need
Fleet Need
Decision-Making Matrix
Blended System Alternatives
Design & Environmental
Review
Revenue / Cost
Blended System
Service Plan/Operations Considerations Analysis
Purpose / Goals
•
Consider service / operations variables
not included in capacity analysis
•
Requested by stakeholders
•
Inform development of service plan
options
Scope of Work
Passing
Track
Options*
•
•
•
•
Different
Service
Patterns
• Mid-Peninsula HSR Station
• Baby Bullet Service
• Longer Trains / Less Train Traffic
3rd Party
Future
Plans
•
•
•
•
•
4 Track – Full & Short Midline – Evaluated in Capacity Analysis
4 Track - Northern
4 Track - Southern
3 Track
DTX to TBT
Dumbarton Rail
Future ACE, Capitol Corridor, Amtrak service
Future Freight Service
Storage/Maintenance Facility
Passing Track Options
Options
4 Tracks – Northern
4 Tracks - Full Midline
4 Tracks - Short Midline
Locations
Milepost 5 to 15.2
(Bayshore to Millbrae stations)
Milepost 18.1 to 27.2
(Hayward Park to Redwood City stations)
Milepost 18.1 to 24.2
(Hayward Park to Whipple Ave.)
4 Tracks - Southern
Milepost 33.8 to 41.6
(San Antonio to Lawrence station)
3 Tracks
Milepost 18.1 and 33.7
(Hayward Park to California Ave. )
Simulation Model Results
4 Track Options
•
Operational Performance Ranking
High:
Medium:
Full Midline
Short Midline & Southern
Low :
Northern
3 Track Option
•
–
–
Model: high performance
Practice: further evaluation
Decision Matrix (work in progress)
Considerations
Passing Track Options
4 Tracks - Northern
4 Tracks - Full Midline
4 Tracks - Short Midline
4 Tracks - Southern
3 Tracks
Operations
E&C
ROW
Cost
City /
County
Blended System
Grade Crossing & Traffic Analysis
Study Purpose & Goals
•
40 at-grade crossings
•
Identify relationship between:
–
–
–
•
Analyze future scenarios (2035):
–
–
•
Train service levels
Gate down time
Local traffic
Impacts from Caltrain versus future growth
Difference between service plan options
Improvement recommendations
Key Tasks and Status
Inputs
Existing
Conditions
Future
Conditions
Improvement
Options
Draft & Final
Report
Discussion