Caltrain Modernization Program Update Palo Alto City Council

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 1 A (HSR) $105 million from Prop 1 A (Connectivity) “blended system improvements consistent with the MOU” and “shall not be used to expand the system to a dedicated fourtrack 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 Ø Advance design from “Critical” to “Final” – Electrification & Electric Vehicles Ø Update / Recirculate Caltrain EA/EIR Ø 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 * • 4 Track – Full & Short Midline – Evaluated in Capacity Analysis • 4 Track - Northern • 4 Track - Southern • 3 Track Different Service Patterns • Mid-Peninsula HSR Station • Baby Bullet Service • Longer Trains / Less Train Traffic 3 rd Party Future Plans • • • DTX to TBT Dumbarton Rail Future ACE, Capitol Corridor, Amtrak service Future Freight Service Storage/Maintenance Facility

Passing Track 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) Passing Track Options 4 Tracks - Northern 4 Tracks - Full Midline 4 Tracks - Short Midline 4 Tracks - Southern 3 Tracks Considerations Operation s 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 Improvem ent Options Draft & Final Report

Discussion