HomeMy WebLinkAbout0471.000. " -' ,""
I)", .. '
"~
-,' .
o
=---
-
August 9, 1990
HONORABLE CITY COUNCIL
Palo Alto~ California
gIJTRAIN EXTENSION TO DOWNTOWN SAN FRANCISCO
Members of the Council:
This is an informational repor"t; no Council action is required.
The Policy and Proced·ures Committee, at its July 11, 1990-lIIeeting.
discussed the ~asman ccrridor Study and related issues including
an extension of the Light Rail Transit (LRTl System to Mountain
View or Sunnyvale~ The Committee discussion incluaed relat.ed
topics concerning CalTrain and, in particular, the possible future
extension of the CalTrain line to downtexm San Francisco. The
Committee asked staff to provide Information regarding the status
of the CalTrain extension to downtown San Francisco~
MCKGRO!JNP
At the pr~sent time~ Cal trans is responsible for the management and
administration of the Peninsula Commute service (PCS), or ~hat is
c~ly referred to as CalTrain. Caltrans does this under a
purchase of service a9reem~nt vith Southern Pacitic Transportation
Company (SP), and by working very closely with the Peninsula
Corridor Study Joint Powers Board CJPB). The JPB is comprised of
~emberB representing santa Clara county~ San Mateo county, and the
City and county of San Francisco. The representatives from Santa
Clara county are superviso~s Rod Diridon and Dianne McKenna, and
Council Kember James Beall from San Jose.
Attachment 1 is an informative, concise summary of the Peninsula
Commute Service and provides a qood overvie ..... of the many and varied
aspects of the PCS as well as the status thereof, including the
extension to downto~n San Francisco.
CHR:f71:0
,
\
•
•
'<-"$" ..
~;~~'
,
. "
..J
'. ~
I ,
j
1
-
o o
EXTEt!;iIOtl TO OOWNTOWN SAN FRANCISCO
:Nearly everyone associated with the Peninsula commute Service
a9rees vit~ the concept of extending t~e Cal Train line from its
present terminus at Fourth and Townsend Streets to a location near
First/second and Kiaslonvaoward (Exhibit 1). in close proximity to
t.he existing 'fransbay Terminal and BART IS Montgomery Street
Station. Doing so, however" :Is neither simple nor inexpensive.
The fact that Santa Fe Pacific Realty Co~ration's plans for its
proposed Mission Bay Development project 60 not accommodate the
existing at-qrade cal Train Station at Fourth and Townsend Streets,
adds further impetus for .. ome change at this locatIon. An
alternative to extending calTraln service to First/Second and
MisslonjBoward that has been ~5idered, is to move it away from
~ dow~town area to Seventh and Channel Streets.
Based upon the results of a number of studies that have eonsidere~
the station relocation issue In downtown San Francisco~ all of the
directly involved public entities~ including the 3PB, cal trans,
the Metropolitan Trans.portation commission.. and... Klost
significantly, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, support the
extension of CalTraln to downtown San Francisco.
In 1981. the JPB <:ontracted with the consultinq fina of Hill
International ... Inc~ to undertake a .pcs Interim Upgrade study· of
the. proposed extension. The purpose of the study was to: develop
and refine ridership projections ... define an acceptable alignment
and estimate capital costs, identify a potential financing plan ...
assess the impact on freiqbt operations, and begin the EIS/EIR
process. This work was completed and.. subsequently. Bill
International 'Was authorized to proceed with tbe preparation of the
alternatives analysis and environmental assessment for the
extension as required b"y the Urban Mass Transportation
Administration of the U4S. Government. The administrative draft
of the EIS is eXpected to be completed in August, and a draft EIS
for public revIew and comment may be available in October~
nINPING
The amounts of money required to fund continuing studies, subsidiz.e
CalTrain operatIons and pay for capital improvements and station
and riq!J.t-of-vay acquisition .. including the extension ... a.re very
larqe.
CUrrently,. net operating expenses are shared as illustrated in
Exhibit 2~ Santa Clara County and San Mateo County have equal and
aajor shares of the local portion .. while San Francisco has only a
slDall portion~ This participation is based upon the number of
riders originati.ng froD each of the respective counties. Some
CMR:411:0 8/9/90
Page 2
•
,
,1
, ' .
I >-
I
"
:;.i
,.-' .... ' " ... ,' J'
.'
--
~ •...
I
I
I
I
,
i •
I
i
i
I . , "
',""1 •.•
. ".
',,< _'":', ,,",C-o.--_ ._~_~ •• _-__
txRu,n 1
r
f
I ~
I
I
I
..
N
!rOO SCALE
------, " .
-
I , ,
;-\
.'
L---""";;' , ·;:l ~'t!",~"-,,,~ " ." :' :"",~;h"'.r'" ',it. . "
'-;-->
"':"r"" , ,
! • ,
:'
I'
~'
:1.
,I
,I,'
~
~.
,j
-~··~'~:i,'-Oiii"&fi.I"'_·_~'~'I'"
SHARES OF NET OPERATING EXPENSES
<SP CONTRACT)
,
'" ;-,
2.3%
SF MUNI
$296.552
FOR FISCAL YEAR 1988-1989
$12,929,190
I
I
,;
,,'"
,,"
" 21.8% ! $AMTRANS
I
UMTA 8.2%
$1,067.115
.... "
" ,
\
\
45.9%
\
\
\
I I $2.617,243 I-_ CAL TRANS I
I
$5.931,037 I
\ SCCTD ;'
\ $2~'7~43 I
\ I
" 21.8% ./ ,.... ,,'" ... -... --. --'
.. ST ATE & LOCAL SHARES
I"I~ nl:'l:V"'1T OF OPERATING DEFICIT
, ,
I
, ,
.. -,--
/ 23.15%
-....
"""" , , ,
\ ,
o
: SAMTRANS
~:s%t: I
I
CALTRANS :
I , , \ SCCTO ,
'-23.75% , ,
" .... .......
50%
~, _ .. .-'
, ,
/
,/ o
• T~8 prollortionll,".r.1 contrlbutt!d by S.F. Muni. Sam
Trl"s 'I,d SCCTO .r. baud on ..,nll.' pa_"ger (lOUnu of
CaITr.ill ridv', originating from lIJach of the rnpeotiv8
cour'ltict,. Fot the 1987-1988 Pisc.1 Year the '981 p81k"1"I
9"" (loullt fi.ed tM percent.ve' shown .bO"., Calt,.",·
contrlhillion of 50% remain, (;On5tant for each fiscal year,
...
i;i
H ..
H ...
....
---------~------------~~.
.1
'\\.'" . '~ H" -', ~}7f ~' '<' .,"
:'l.iff:'t .. ,.:,",. '~' -, '.,'.,
".> -'J ',".-,'
" ",
. > ... '/'
. " r, ,'I
. '.' •
'.
J
I "
1
i
~\
i
I ,
I
• t , ,
I,
~
,~."
•
.'
, .....
" ,.
.
:,-
'L
-
; "
o o
people are interested In what they believe to be a more equitable
basis tor local cost .haring. For example, if botb origIns and
destinations are cOflsldered:, the distribution ~mong the three
counties would be .ore nearly equal.
comments attributed to local officials" a5 reported in local
nowspapers in May, concerning Santa Clara County's lack of
COIIIlI.itment to funding for tile extension of CalTrain to dovntO"'IIIIl San
Francisco" most liJtely reflect an effort to negotIate .. higber
participation rate for S.an Francisco than it does a lack of
commitment or priority regarding the extension.
CONCLUSION
'i'bere appears to be continuing stronq support tor-the extension of
Cal Train to downtown san Francisco: current studies, ~hen
completed, viII leaei to preliBinary engineering design; and efforts
to neqotiate an alternative distribution of the local sbare among
the threa counties appears to have merit and does not necessarily
reflect a l~ck of commit~ent by any of the participating counties.
Staff will continue to monitor progress on the extension issue and
keep the council infor".JlecJ, as appropriate.
Respectfully 5ubmitted~
Official
~fHud.L AlALdrt,,-
KENNETH R. SCHREIBER
Director of Planning and
Community Environment
Excerpt from Rail Passenger Development, 19!9-94
Fiscal Years, state of California" Department of
Transportation (Caltrans)
cc: Alan HirschI Peninsula Rail 2000
Oil" 411: 0
" -
8/9/90
Page )
•
-
o o
-------------
Rail Passen~er __
Development Plan
1989-94 Fiscal Years
ATTACtiMEst 1
....... ""-_-...:.-__ . .-0-_ .. __ ." ...... ---.. -~ '--....... -.. -..
March 1989
State of Carlfomia
Department of Transportaron
•
\
\
\
; .
".'
'i
i
'/~\:" ,
--\
I
I
I
l
.... J.
-
o 0
CHAPTER VII -THE PENINSuLA COHKUTE SER'llCE
( SAX FRANC I seO-SAN JOSE I
BACKGROUND
Th~ Per.linsula Commute Set'll'i-:e (PeS). wbich consists of a ccute of
•
47 ~iles betveen San Francisco and San Jose, is currently the o~ly
commuter rail service in the State. It is operated foe Calteans ~J
tbe Scutbero Pacific Tra~sF=rtation CompanJ {SP). (See Figure 16
~n ~age 119 for a ~a; 0: ~~e :=u~e.)
... Peninsula Commute Servic:e trai:-, ...,ith ne .. " rollin;! s::ock tr.at
was placed i~to servlc:e i~ 1585.
Passenger sendc::e bas operated over th:is rCt.:te cO!'ltinu<:'.;sly siClce
1864. althoU9b the present entry into Sa:1 Fra:-:.c:'sco frc:Il Sa:"! B:ur.c
via the 3aysb¢re Cutoff has cnly bee~ in secll'ice sl~ce 1907.
Ridersbip on the route gre~ steadily thrcugh the early 19~C's a:1d
reached an all-time peak of 9.'5 million ar-.i':~a1 cIders c~:ir.5 ";,,"torld
Peninsula Commute Se:vice 117
•
"
\
\
\
\
; ,
c ,
.-'-,,-, .,. .
:-,.. -4'-·
"'-'. t~1
'-~
".
-/~.~
\
.-
-
•
o o
Wa~ ]I. Follo~ing a second peak durin; the Kor~an ~ac. ridership
entered a 25-1ear decline. falling from 9.3 million i~ 1952 to
C.) million io 1917. Rising operating costs led to increased
fares. wbich also contributed to the decline.
JQ 1911~ 5? applied: to the Il.'l.terstate Cc'mmerce Commission for::
permission to discontinue the passenger service. citing increasing
financial lasses. But rapidly i~creasing gasoline prices l ~oupled
with pedodic fuel shortages and continuicg high'Way congestion ... had
focused puclic interest on tne necessity of ~ese~vic9 t~e service.
The State Legislature, responding to the needs defined io a tbree
county Peninsula T~aDsit Alternatives Project (PENTAF} Study ...
pessed AB 185J~ which read:
The De~rtment of Tra~sportat!on is authorized t~ ~egotiate
and; if feaslb!e~ contract wi;h the Southern Pacific
Transpo,rtation CQmpan} to provide passecger-rail service
between toe City and Count} of Saa Francisco and the City of
Sen Jose, and points between. ra L'legotiatiog the contract.
the Department sball take into consideration the funding
available aDd the level of service recommended by tbe
Metropolitan Transportation Commission (I<ITC').IO
Jm June 1980. Caltrans signed a ten-year ·purchase of service
agreemect 8ith SP to p~e~ent disconti~uance by provIding public
financio9 for the servlce z effective July lr 1980. The required
funding for operatior.s co~es fro~ Caltrans; the San Francisco
MUnicipal Railway {MUNIJ. the San Mateo County Transit District
(SamTransl. tne Santa Clara County Transit District (SCCTDl r and
the Federal urban ~ss Transportation Administration IUMTA).
ORGAN! ZA1'IOKAL STRO'CroRE
On~er th~ purchase of service agreement~ SP continues to operate
the t~alns~ but Cal trans and the transit districts aemiDister the
service through a cooperative agreement~ A portion oE the
ope-ri:tiflg costs are funded tb~ough mrrA qrarlts. Calt['"ans pays half
tbe remaining deficit while tbe local agencles'd19ide the other
balf accordicg to a percerlta9'e formula. In addition, a maj,or
improvement progra~ has been undertaken, which includes acquiricg
and impcovlng station facilities; e~ten~in9 the line to the new
multi-modal terminal in SaO Jose, de~eloping a centralized
maintenance facility. rehabilitating trac\~ r~vlsing and e~panding
traiQ schedules and frequencies; coordinating connections with
lOcal transit~ providing feeder bus service to areas not served by
tra~sitl and providing an i~cceased level of public information and
marketing. The imp<ovement program also resulted io the purchase
.. California, Statutes of 1911. Chapter 1216.
ll! Ra 11 Passenger Development Plan
•
\
I
f
I
"", ..
~~'« . '-~"';;'-:
" \
--.
o
,
"
/
o
PENlNsaA COMMUTER RAlL SERV1CE
SAN FRANCISCO -SAN .lOR
'\
'\ ---
ALAMEDA CO . .....
N
l ,
\
SANTA CLARA CO.
LEGEND
\
~ DJSTl.'otG AMT,,",K .NQ CI.I.. TRAIfW STATIO'dll o E1l$TIHG CAl TRA~ srAT10,,-S
.. EX1$T1NG UlTAAX SUnolOS L _______________________ __
.FiGure 1'.
F~nj~5ula Commute Ser,fce
:... . ,
11. ..,:
"-"F .•
-
o
~f new locomotives and cars for t~e 5!rvice.
are imp!emected through a P~oject ~nagement
compos~d of ~ember5 from Caltrans. SP~ MUNI,
o
Tbes~ improv~me~ts
Committee rPMe)
SamTr~ns. a~d SCCT~.
The PMC also advlles Ca!trans on the polie! direetioo for the
service and reviews the enoual Pe~icsula Commute Service Five-Tear
P!ac. [13 the past .. the five-year plan has been prepared by
Caltrans. Jegincicg with 1989. h~~tver, the plan will ~ prepared
b1 the Pecinsyla Corridor Study Joict PowerS !oard (JPB). discussed
below. The Eive-Tear Plan presents specific goals for the set9iee~
objectives associated wlth eaco goal .. and .. where possible,
standards wbich sho~ whether ~bjectives ar! beiog met. It also
outlines a specific SH'09ram of capital al1d operati!lg impro'l,l'e:1eC1ts
designed to implerne~t the geals. Objectives haYe also been
u:panded to cover o·ther fun-cticnal areas imvolved ill adminjs:er.:llg
the service. ~a15 and ~bjective5 have been refined in view o~
over eigbt years eaperiel'l.ce with operation under tbe Caltra!'1s/SP
coot:,a:!.
Actual ser~lce chaoge5 and i~~oveme~ts are~ in ma~J case5~ 5ubje~t
to California Public Utilities Commission (POCr approval. since the
PUC retains jurisdiction ove~ non-Amtrai passenger services in the
State. The PUC bas indicated that it maJ require public h~arings
and/or eoYironme~tal impact reports in the process of cO~51deril'lg
some ~oposed changes.
There is also a Citizens Advisory Comr.i~tee (CAe) th~t was
organized in August 1984 .. It is coC'<posed of r:lil'le VO!Ul'ltee: 'r.e~be:5
r-epres!'ot:'ng tlle three counties serwed by tl'Je PeS (four !r::,1t Sar.l:a
Ciars l four from San Mateo~ and one from Sa~ FrancIsco). The CAe
m~~ts mcntbly and provides a forum for reviewing the ~rforma~ce 0:
tbe trains .nd suggesting i~prcve~ects i~ tb~ s~rvice. The
committee also tates positions on policy matters aff~~ting tbe
futyre of the service.
The cr9.nizaticnal structure of the PeS is likely to change within
tbe ~e~t fev f~ars. J~ 198' tbe Legis1.ture~ ie Senate Concurrent
Resolution " {SCR "}~ directed ~~ to d~velcp a mass tra~sit
sYStem plen for the Peni~sula corr:dor. the SCR 74 Study was
completed in ~~11 19B5~ and althougb it d:c n~t ~ak~ ar.y
modal-choice decisloos .. it did r~coIf'Jn~nd that a Jo~nt rclltle:s AgeClcy
(JPA) be formed to oversee and manage the serwice. Tn respor.se to
tllis .r-ecomlf\en.datioll~ represer.t4tiwes of the City a .. nd Cour.ty of Sa:'l
Francisco .. SamTral":ts~ and S-CCTD formed the Penir.5ula Cor["idor Study
Joint povers Board in Julr 19SJ. Tbe JPB is conducting planr.i~g
studies for upgrading tbe ,ervice~ In~ is investigatin9 tbe
purchase of the SP rigbt-of-~a1. Stalf and funding fot the JP9 are
provided primarilr bj SamTrarl.s ar..d SCC'I'D. Additional funding was
provld~d by the legislature in August 1987 with tbe passa9~ of AB
958.
8, the enactme~t of sa 262B in 1988. tbe Legislature redesignateo
the JPB ~s the Peninsula Rail Trar.sit Oistrict (PRTD). and erpar..dej
its po~ers ar..d responsibilities. SpecificallYI the PRTD was given
120 Rajl Passenget Developm~~t Pla~
•
• ",,-. -, '~''''';'-:\o:~4:';<:~~~
"
,\
, ,
, ,
~-";. _.
·w::-·
, ,
'\:
,
.'\:
~-. ,
\
'l.
t
'\ " ~ "i,<
"
-
. -
\
/'
o o
the power to .cq~ire ~opert1 (i~cludi~g the railroad 'igh:-~f-~al
between San Fran<isco and San Jose) and equipmer.t eecessarl to
operate commuter rlil service. It w~s ~150 give~ the power t~
operate the rail service ¢r to contract for the operation of that
service. Additionalll_ the fRTO ~as ~i7en th~ power tc set fares
_ithout the eyrrenel7 required a~oval of the POC.
The leqis13tion cont.i~s the cor.dition that all ri~ht-of-wal.
station'8 facilities. Ind e~uipme~t ~incl~din9 rollieg stock}
cecessarJ for rail operations between San Francisco and the Alma
Ave. station 10 San Jose must be acquired by the PRTD before it can
assume operation of the service. This p~o~i5ion i~cludes the
¢per.tinq righe-af-way whicb is currently cwned by SP. ]~ addition,
before the PBTD can be forllled. the three counties InI.1St det .. rl1:r.;e
t~at .aaeq ... .ate finan-cirlg is available to acquire and operate tJ~.e
service.
OPERAT10NAL AND SERVICE lHPROVEMEMTS
Trait Service
I~ July 19EO. whe~ public fi~a~cial support of the service te;a~~
t~ere ~ere '{ veekdal trai~s~ 24 Saturday train5~ and Ie SU~aa7
tral~S ~er.:icg o~er tne ll~e~ The cumber of weekday trai~5 was
increased to 46 (w:thout i~creasf~9 totai cre~ costs) i~ Oct~be~
1981. At the same time. off-pea~ and weekend trips vere spa~e1 a~
more regulat intervals. and lov ridership off-peak trains vere
discontioued~ The ~ew schedules also doubled the num~er of
·~everle· peal-~~r tcips serving Santa Clara Cou~t7 workplaces.
10 October 1986. the number of wee~oay traios ~as furtner ek~aneed
to the current le~el of 52, with trai~s adOed at the s~oulder5 ~f
the mQrolt'lg anc elO'eoin; peac periods. mes~ll in tbe teVe::5e CCI1"~\.,;::e
direetio-o. The-new schedule a:::tually \,lses eq·uipmet'lt :I'Icre
ef!icie~t11. requiriog one few~r trai~ set.
Ell addition to the regular service, ektra traies are o,perateo for
spe~ial events. such .as tbe University of California-Sta~ford
Oniversity -lig Game-held .at Staofora in .lterna~e NO!embers a~d
toe -S3~ to Ere-akers-foot r~ce beld in San Fra~clse~ in May. A~so.
regular traics make special stops at Bay Meadows durLog tbe~~crse
raciog season and at Stanford Stadium for fcotball games anc o::be~
cajOt sporticg events. Special trains are c~~rat~d on a eha~ter+
basis for events such as the Marti~ Luther 1109 J:. Day cele~ra~10n
in San Francisco i~ Jat'lua~l iIIn~ t~e Gilrol Garlic Festival i~ J~:J~
fe~i~5ula Commute Service 121
•
.
':
I
, I
1
" , , ,
-
o o
Stations
Ia 1980. tbere we-re a total of 26 statio-r:s cn tb.! tir.!', including:
tbe ttrtninals at San Fra!'lcis~o and San J-05e. The total rose to. l7
ia ~tober 1982 when ill new statioo at Lawrence £apreSSV&r in
Sunnyvale opened to serve commuters to. Sili~on Valler wortpl~ee5.
The Lawrence Station has bee~ very 'ucce55f~1 an~ is now served ~y
IKIst tralt!s tbro·ugho·ut the day_ In ,Jllly 15183, the little-used
5tatio~ at Butler Road in South San Francisco. waS closed. ~rir:glog
the station total back dO~D to. ~6.
1m July 1985, Caltrans .ss~ed responsibility from SP for
mai~tenance activities at all stations, regardless of actual
owcersbip status, thereby reducing ~.ioten&nce costs. ,Janitotial
services at tbe sta~ions are %lOW beirlq p·rovided by private vendo~s
~~d.r con:ta== ;~ C~::=a~s. for an annual 5awiD9s of o~.r $lOO~DGO.
Sa. rratlcisco rilla:ocial IHstrict Sbuttle Ius atld
Peuasula 'ass
Toe loc~:ion of the c~rrent Sa~ Francisco s:a:io~ at Fourtb anc
Tow~s~nd Streets is • major deterrent to traio ridersbip.
Passen;ers ~ust transfer to locil tran5it serwices to get tc t~e
Financial Oistri~t. whi:h is about tvo ~lles beyond the station.
Transit SerYlCeS have c¢t always been a~e~uately coordinatea vitb
traim arrival and departure times~ and the a~ailabiljtl of space on
requllr transit scbedules cannot be iuaranteed. Thererore~ ie MaI
19B4, ell trans implemented a peat-hour dedi~ated bus sb~ttle to the
San Francisco Financial District for PeS riders. Tbe Shuttles,
wmicb are operated by Muni, ~o91de reliable connectioos with rusb
bOlJr tui:!5.
Add~tional!I' Caltra~s devel~ped a jol~t ~octhl7 ~ss with tbe
tbr~e transit districts to faeilitate the iQterchang~ of passengers
b~tyeen trains and buies. For $18 • ~octh, mo~th11 ti~ket holoe~s
can purchase a -Peninsula Pass· whicb e~title5 them to ride ~ot
or.11 .t~e bus shuttle~ byt also all regular HUN! and SCCTO se:vi~e5.
The PISS is elso aec~~ted as the SO: base fare O~ Sa~Trans~
~v.luation of PCS ridership figures since tb~ shuttle and pass were
izluQd:·uced is! Ka1 198' sholils a slight but steady ir1crease ie
.oct~11 traim tie~et salel. as well 15 In PeS ridership. This
finding is encoYraginq. because both the sbuttle an~ tbe pass we:e
specifically de~eloped to belp prom¢te ~¢r.thly ticiet sales, wbich
had been decliaing. The average d~117 ridership on the shuttle is
2,800, and average monthly Peni~sula Pass sales are 3,800.
122 Rail Passenger Oevelopme~t Plan
'-. _."
."".~ '\
•
":'1<.:-:~'~ . '
~~;,
',".. ~.
--
o o
AS • result of funding ~rovide~ by AS 1615 of 19S7. several ~e~
he-dec bus r-c\,Ites bave beec initiated. In. Sep-tember ... 1988. three
routts sec¥icg several employme~t areas io San ~teo and Samta
Clara C~untie5 be9a~ running. carrling PCS passengers It co
.dditional charge. A fourth route was added 10 November. These
co'utes .all s!'rwoe industr i.a1 pari'S whicb .. ere tlClt connected to pes
stations ~y eSlstiog transit service. Ser~ice runs during ~c~ning
end .fter~con peat periods O~ weekdays. The routes are:
o Lawrence station to Valleo Business Pare io Cupe=ti~o. T~is
rouee 15 about fo~r miles ea~h waYr and requires or.e veEiele.
Train ccnnec:io~s are made t~ or trom points nortb only.
e San Carlos statioo to ~edwood SherI'S. Tbis ~oute is about two
lIliles each wa7~ and requires one vehicle. T~aio. conne=tlo!".s
are Dade to-Ot ftom poiots both n¢rth and south.
o Castro station to the Nortb Ba}sbore area of Mou~tain view.
This rou,te is about four miles eacb io'a1~ and rec;:u.ires two
~ebicles. T:atn ~cnnections are made io both directic~s.
c San Carlos stat!on to tbe Sa~ Carlos and Harbor Industria~
Par~s. ~b;s r~ute i~ m~c~ sber:er--about a t~~ mile
:'~~--rl!'qu:r::'.'1g O1".e ve~ic:'! to ;>r~v~de :::::onnect1orls 1:"! bet!::.
direct~ons.
Dependi~g on local funding availabilitJ. a fifth route is be:ng
considered which would connect Hillsdale station in Sa~ ~teo w:t~
~rioer'5 Island in Foster City. This .o~l~ be a fou~ lIlile loop
route ..
Tbese feeder bus rou,tes are os:erated un.cler -contract by a pd\;lat!
service provider, Industrial Pas$en~er Ser.ices of San Mateo.
~p.pro .. ::mate:i..1 twO tbir:3s of t::e f·..;.rnH~g t:or._es from ),3 16"'S f:.lnds~
~hile the remainde~ is p~cvided by p~ivate s~t:tcr e~;lc!~rs ~~;ch
benefit from the servlc~. and the lo-cal cities ser~e~. Since these
routes Serve areas wbicb vere inaccessible from the trai~ te!ore
the feeder bus 5~rwiee started. all ricers u5i~g them undoubte:3Iy
are new PCS pass~ngers. attracted by tbe ~e~ fe'!~e~ bus service.
10 November ... 1988 .. tbe Santa C~':.lZ 'CalTraic. Co-r:nector began
operating bet ... ee!:! Sari Jose ane S3nta Cruz. Under cHI a~re-e:1e::-,t 'i(:~::'
the Sa~ta Cru:z. Me-tropolitan Transit District (Santa. £CI,J: ¥.et~.:l.
the serYiee is operated by Sar.ta Cruz Tra~s?Ortation Co~;a,y. :he
bus 81a'tes nine round trips on wee,e:ays a~d eight or. weelends .a",c
boli~a!5. S~rvice is available t~ anyone. not only pes pas~e~ge~s.
Since Amt~at tra:ns ar'1d Amt~al 'thruway connectiru; buse-s use :.~e f':S
depot in San .Jose. tbe service provlee: a waluable ~oll~e=t~o~ •• fc=
Amtrak passengers 015 well. Tne financlog a~rar"lgement 1S s~~:_a= :.c
the Amtrat T~nt .. ay mis.ee-moCe rou:es. Sar,ta Cruz. Met~O~ \.:s:~g 1.3
1675 fu~ding provide:3 by Caltra~s. guaca~tees Sa~ta C~uz.
Penins;Jla Com:tr.ute Service 123
•
o o
Tran5portatio~ Co. I ce~t.in cumber cf passengers eacb ~ootb. ]f
tbe actual cum~er of passengers carried is lesl th.o the iuara~tee.
Sar.lta CrL1Z MrtrQ-will Nte up the reven\,je Iho~tf.l1. It is
eKpe~ted that the letwice vill become 5elf-5~PPQrtin9 vit~i~ o~e
fear. A ?rimarl a!vamt.ge of this service is that it is .i~ed at
non-COMmuters. Recreation and business tr.velers~ as vell .s
Itudects at the University of C.liforDi~ at Santa Cruz. are more
litel, to ride off-peat trai~s wbieb currently ba~e ample capacity
for additional passengers~
CAPlrAL IMPROVEMENTS
Since the start of State and 10<&1 sUPPQrt fo~ the service in 1960.
a su~s:ao:i.l Frog~am of capital improvements bas talen place.
Table IV It the end of this report is • summar: of all the capital
improvements contained in tbe curreot Peninsula Commute Servi~e
Five-Year Plan, _bile A~ndiz C cootalos a 11stln; of ail capltal
prOjects curreotly yndervay or already completed.
Rcllhg Stock
Ic 19S~~ 63 new staiQle55 steel rail cars we:~ o~dere~ !ro~ the
SumItomo Corporation to complete!1 rr-equip tne serwiee. The fi~s:
twelve e~tered service in Mar l~e5, .~d tbe entire order was
completed im December lS6S~ two ~~nths ahead of scbedule. An
additional ten ears vere ordered i~ January 1986. !igbt of these
were delivered l~ late 1986~ the remaimin~ two were damage~ eo
rou-te, but replacemeots were -constructed and added to tbe fleet io:
September 1987. To g~ with the new cars, eighteen new "CPH
locomotives were purc'hased from General Moto-rs' Elei:"trc-Motive
Division (EMD), vbich vere delivered im April and MAy 1985. Tvo
aooitional locomotives were ordered in A?ril 1987 and were
aeliver~d io December of that jea:~
The new collit) Stoct~ ~bicb was purchased with $101 ~illion in
Fe~era1 and State funds~ made possible significant operational
im~ovements because of its he.~-end pow~r CHEF) oesign and pwsh
pull capabilities. Head-end power is • 'lstem wb~rebJ po_er for
beating, lighting, and air conaitionin9 the entire traim is
P«'Dvided by the locomo-tive i05tesd of individually ill each car.
~ifttenance ~csts are lover, because onl! one power unit per train
must be maintained. Push-pull operation eliminates the need for
trains tD be turned at ter_inals, since the trains always face t~e
same direction, regardless of the direction of travel.
lH ~ail Passenge: DeY~lopment Pla~
~---L-."""·"'''''·(''''·· .. ' ..... ~., ..... '"'"
".
-
\ ,>
•
"'," .~ .¥
,
..
.W
>.
/'-
-
o o
Caltrans is cyrrent11 undertaking ~ program of acqulrlog virtual11
.11 of the statiGns 00 the line~ using both State and Federal
funds~ Tbe stations It !arsh¢re~ Xillbrae~ Burlingame (e%cl~ding
tbe parting lot)_ San Mateo~ ael~nt. Sao Carlos. Menlo Park.
MountaiQ Viev. Sunnyvale. Lawre~cei and Santa Clara ba~e alread]
been pureha5ed~ otters wrre made on ten other station5~ includiog
San Francisco and tbe Burlingame par.i~g lot~ but these vere
rej~eted by SP. As a result, Cal trans has submitted the ~atter to
arbitration under tbe ter~s of tnt Caltrans!SP agreement.
Numerous s:ation iln~r~vetr:e~: ;>r:)~er:t' have taken pIae-e. Before tbe
new gallery Clrs vere place= in service. boarding area i~provement5
were cOD!tructed .t all ~. intermed:a~e stations. !m addition.
~an7 station structures havi yndergone rehabilitatio~. and 5ev~!al
stations have ha~ pertiog hc:ilit.ies e .. panded -or upq:-aded. Impro· ... e-=:
lighting has a150 been installed at a number of 5tations4 Finally.
a proqram to impcove srstt~ stsoa;e at all stations i5 near
completion4 In ~tobe~ lSSB. Calt,a~s applied for $SOO,aOo in
State Transit Capital Improve~e~t (Guidewa7) Funds to ccnti~ue
station rehabilitation _ort4 The c~rre~t pcogram inelue~s
laodscapfng~ parking lots, :fgbti~g and mai~cenance.
Tr&ek I.provemeats
leginning im the 19!2/8J fiscal fear. a tract re~abilication
proqram began which iocludeo track reconstcuctioo and re5~r!aciwg.
~rade ~ros5in~ improve-meets and tbe replacement of c~unicatioe
cables4 In 1985/86. the proqram was ezpan~ed to include tie
repleee~eDt, signal rehabilitation and crossi~g gate <ircultr1
improveme~t5. t~ 1ge1/Be~ a pcoqram to re~air the track on four
curves that had shovo wear ~.t~~sive enough to n~cessi~a~~ s:~~
orders was cotl1pleted. Projects prcgra,(IllIied for 19a5/SS ~nd 1985/90
i~~lode cebabilit&tioo of s:atioo area trac~age~ as veIl as
additional yort on tract 5urfaciDq~ qrade cro5si~9 improye~~nts,
curve rehabilitation. anc tie repla~ement.
In October 19SB. CaltrarlS a.pplieCi lor S,ClO~OOO i('1 State Tra~sit
Capital Im~rovemeot (Guld~wa1) Funes to belp fund tbis cngci~g
tract rebabilitatioo pr~ra~. $2.B million io F~deral Cr=a1 ~ass
Transportation Administration (UHTA) funds ~ill also be prcviced.
At the !ame time. Caltrans applild for 5454.000 in State G~~de~ay
Funds for trec. and signa: ~ort resulting from the eli~!~at:cc o!
three control towers (Santa Cler., College Park and Sa~ Jose) a~d
consolidatio~ of tbeir functions ieto tbe San Francisc~ cc~~ro!
station. $3,160.000 in Fed~ral ~~ Funds will be ~at~h~d ~y tbe
State funds. Fil'la11y. Calt:-a;'1s also applied iT.! Oc:tobe=-1955 f,~:
$190,000 in State Guideway F~ncs to ~atch Federal [-28J tra~S!er
funds (Sl.eOS.COO} for im~rovement5 witbi~ Sa~ Francisco. The
P~nin5ula Commute Service l~S
•
'~~"h to
-<'.
,1:?i~E: -
-'-0';< '/"
o o
5p~cifie projects will ~e d~termi~ed by • ~on5ult.nt study. but may
in~lude drai~a;e imp~cvements to three tun~els to eli~inatt
unde~~ioin9 of traet ballast.
Standby ,"ower
I~ 1ge5~ Celtra~s contracted with De Leuw~ Cather and CompanJ to
~e'i9n a standby electrical po~er S15tem at both the San Fr&MCisco
and ,San J-ose termirlals. Standby power provides all u:terl"lal so.uree
of electri.eit.f to the paSStrlger cars i~ • trail:! ..,hell the locomotive
is sbut down o'r Olnc¢'lJpled., 50 that tbe cars :le:r be ser'l'ieed,
cle~~ed. p~e-e~el~~~ or pre-beated without r~q~!ring the locomot;ve
,0 be operat~d. StandQY power _ill significantll reduce loeo~oti~e
fuel consumption, saviog approximatelf $SOO.OOO annualll. The
standby power e-q·tJipment vas icstalled and placed il:l. operat ion in
Sao Francisco durieg 19B8~ and sbould be operational in Sae Jose ~~
early 1989.
Automatic Trale Washer
Curret:ly. PeS eq~ipmeo: is man~ally ~asbed by a cre~ o! E!~e
:.!>Orers usil:l.q b·r1.J.sbes .. buciets. and water hoses. Using this
method. a m .... iIlUJD of two traillls ca!! be wasbed. -weatber permitting ..
each weekdal. Thus .. each train set is washed approaimately every
two-wee):s. Sinee mo.r. freQ·ueot. and th-orough w •• hit'lg is %lecessar],
to avoid cortosice. pla~s were developea to install an automatic
train wasber Dear the San 'rencis~o ter~inel. Celtrenl contracted
with ~on5ultant STY/Seelye Stevenson Value ana Xnecbt to desiqn the
washer. (The wesner vas ¢riilnall, a eomponect of the coctract for
~be preliminary aesign of a ce~tralized maietenance facilitl ..
described later in this Chapter.' The procurement co~traet for the
vasber eQui~ect was awarded ic July. 1998; with delivery expe~ted
~n early 1999. A separate contract will be a~ar~.d for e~uipme~:
in5tallatioD~ Soythern Pacific will per!or. anI tract realignment
~nd slqnal modifications .hieb may be cecessary. The projeet is
e .. pected to be ~omplete by June 89.
P •••• ager Equipmeat Acqui.itioa ruad
1m 1984. the leqislature passed AB 36'5. which allowed Cal trans to
participate in 'safe-harbor-leaslci of rail passenger cars .nd
loeomoti~es. Onder this Irranqemect. public agencies are peraittea
to ,ell equ!pmect to private compamies i and tbec lease it bact. The
pt'ivate :-ompal'l i es thel"l obtai ~ t ... benet it S r-e--5\,Tl t ii"l-ij from
de~eci.tion rights. Funds raised by tbe State t~rou9h this means
126 Rail Passenger Oevel~pment Pl.~
." ~ .
..
> ,
".~ .... ". < .. :,;, -.': _-pO, aT . W
'-
. .
• . ".
.:~. -..... '.-
\
l-
!
. ';~~~~C~;li; .
".,:;:,:.'
') , .' .
/'
o o
are placed i~ the Pass~n9~r tquipmeot AcquisitIon Fun~ (P£A1)~
which W.5 created ia 1986 under SB 1'98. The PEAF can ~e used to
purchase new and rehabilitlte eJistinq equipment. and to fund
co~uter rail capital !mprovement5~ The sale-lease bact of the new
cars and. loeo'CftCtiY"s raised a to,tal of $6.500,000. which vas \).se-d
to purchase additional rolling stock.
I~ 1986, Caltrans sold the old cars tnat vere replaced by the
sumitomo cars for $150,0004 These funds also we~t ioto the PEAF,
and vere used tor tbe following projects:
project
~~rchase spare partl from WASCO left over at cearby
storage fa~ilitl sc ~ign:f:cant11 reduc~d eost.
Rebabilitate tract in Townsend Street to facilitate
utiliz.ti~n of Yor~ tract adj~cent to street.
ReimtFurse Sf' for Itorage anc pt"e-bld inspection
~05tS of old rail cars.
Iostall locomotive brak~ bail-off feature to
eoctrol heat build-up on vbe~ls.
?urchas~ ~on~~ctor eab1es ~O~ cars.
?urehase spare par~s from Sumitomo lef~ ove~ a~
Pie~ 50 assemel, site a: s:gnificantly r~duce~ ccst.
$40.965
6a.4~6
29.346
4.5a7
lS~9JO
This leaves appro:lilrlately $5156,00'0 temaining in tbe fund. Ot.her
PEAF ~ojects im pr~res5 or planned {vith estimated costsl e~e:
Move Sf' Mechanical Oepartm!'tlt material sto,rage carS
from ~ia~ Street to Townsend Street to reduce
operaticg costs.
Partial!1 f~nd p~r=~ase c! a~to~a!~~ ~rai~ washer
discussed in the pre~jou5 section.
Partiall! fund standby po~er equipment discussed
in the previous section.
1~stal1 e~eot cecorders on .11 pes locomoti~es.
Fund Cal trans· snare of i~stallaticn cost for cellula:
telepbones in all 21 cab cars~
Demonstration project to tes: ~f!~ctiven~ss of
locomotive truck-mounted flange lubricator.
Installation of two ti,ket ~acbl~es at ~ns~a!fed
!~atioo5 with 5u~stantial ~a~r~nage.
--_.',. ,.,-.
$10.900
3S3~SOO
3.000
5.300
3:~O{)C
15-.0C:
e:).~o~
•
•
-
o o
MAltItU IJiG AlII) O\1TUACB
E~ 196.~ Caltrans ~ired Loye ~rlehalt~ I~e. 'known then .s
Marsehalk and Companl)~ • ~ofessi~nal ~rk~tin9 consult&nt~ t~
establi.h marleting qoa15, objeetives# I~d strategies. The
~onsult.nt is respoDsible for plannio9 and overseeio9 all
advertising. sales p~omotion, public rel.tio~s, and communications
proqrams oytlined in t~e pes Marteting Plan.
The .arketiDg consultant contract vas •• tended tor the 1985/86 and
1986/S7 fiscal rears. Ie riscal Tear 19S7/BS 1 Lowe Marschait. I~e.
WIS again awarded the Ilartetin'9 contract after proposals were
solieited.
'!'he 19B5/SS Nrlet:;..llg budget foot' lIecia: adver:isir.9: is S600~O,ao# toe
same .s in 1986/87 and 19S1/8S. Last year's ~edia plan
concentrated on spot radio commercials during rysh hours (-drive
time-) and outdoor &~d cewspeper advertisioq vbicb emphasized tb~
PeS a. a s=art and econoeic41 alternative to traffic c~ngestioo
along the Beysbore Freewa!. The radio commercials also included
the -Giant', Replal-cootest 00 kNBR. This inclyded a sbort spot
during ea~b baseball game b~oadcas:. and anotbe: spot tbe following
mo·rmin-g wbeo tlu!' contest waS played ~ The 19S5/SS plao elilllrl.a-:es
the Giact~s sponsorship and bi.llboa:-ds .. concentr"atir':; Or'l otr.er
rad~c spo!S an~ ~evspaper .d~e::iseme~t5~
The community outrea~h ~ogram, for wbich an additional $95,000 is
pr09~ammed. inclydes participation in MTC's Regional Transit
<onnection program~ vblcb mates PeS montbl, ticlets available for
sale in the workplace and several other designated location5~ The
outreace PCOi~am also ~ales_ use of tbe static display ynit ano
slide ShoV/Yldeo to publicile the service at sbepping centers t
workplaces. service clubs, ~ofessional orqanizatiorl.!~ ana secior
cl!'cters.
The outrea~b ~09:am also has prod~e~d an i~forza!ional broebute
which provides useful i~fot~a~ion for those who are net regular PeS
ricers. In addition. distribution of PeS timetables was e~pan~ed
to i~clade b¢tels. ~tel5. car rectal aqencies and ~jor emp!oye~s.
PERF01UllUlC!
I_ 197' and 1978. annual ~idersblp on the r~~te vas at a~ a1l-ti~e
low ~f C.l million. It rose quictly to 6.1 millioo in 1980 during
the -.nerq, crisis'. then declioed again over the nezt three years.
The do_oture fina111 halte~ in September 1983~ and patronage qre~
.gaia for several Jearl. While ridership vas wirtua11l tbe same in
19S6/Bl 85 ie the previ~~5 year at a ltvel of S.' million. it
increased 3.2 percent j~ 1987/88.
128 Rail Passenger nevelopment Plan
•
." . ,',
<, --' . -;. " " .. ~
\ \.
\ ,.,. \'
-, .~ .
....•. " .....•.... , .:.iJ
:".~ ,
.j
""':
, -: ~ ~~~zlj
>.'~~'_c-·,:,,;;:. -: -
, , '-
,-. "
;-.:.-
o o
As improvemeots are ~ade io the PeS. Caltrar.s e1pec:s ride~5bip to
conti~ue its recent growth pattern. The ce~ rollin; Stoc~ and the
iotroductjon of the Sail Francisco Fin.ancial District b-us sh'Jt:!e
have i=proved the service's conve~ience and reliability ana lo~ere=
overall travel time. With the eEpansion of the marketing and
outreach pcoqrams and the addition of oe~ feeder bus services to
in4Yltrial parts ia San Mateo ~nd Santa ~la~a counties. I~Q t~
Santa Cruz, (altraoJ .Dticipat~5 that ~idership yill inerease by
thel. percen~ in the 1988/8S fiscal year. Completion of tbe San
~¢Se terminal rehabilitation and extension project is ezpe~ted tc
re5~lt in laCier ridership increases in subsequent years.
Hont~11 ridership for the last seqeo years is detailed i~ Figure 17
Oil page 13-0'. while the rlest chart (Figure la on pa;e l3l) is a
graphical illostration of act~al and ev*rage monthly :ide:s~:;
sirlce January 1979. Figure 19 on page 132 5~mmarizes ridersoip a~c
fi~ancial perfor~nce da~a on a~ a~~~al basis since the sta:t of
State involvemeet i~ JQly 1960.
r ..... nOI RAT 10 REQUIUMENT
AB 1010. enacted in 1981~ requires commuter rail se:vlces t~
~aiDtalm ·a ratio of fare reveoues to operati~g COStS of at leas:
.0 percent during the p~e7ious year of oper!tioo· lu or~er ~o ce
eligible for State ope::a<:.i::Jg s:.Jbs:'d~es in the 19801 95 a:"',c
subse~~e~t fisca: years.:: The Ca:iforo!a Transpc::taticn C:~~iss:'~~
(C':'C~ ;,;las g:,v!'!l author:'t] to g~a~~ a waive:~ r.ot ~::: escee:l t::.:ee
rears. to any service net acbi!!wi~g the 40 per~e~t ratio i~ a
specific year~ in o~de~ to allow co~tinui~g State operatln~
5ubsidies.
I~ the 1986/81 Fiscal Year~ all tbree of the permitted f~reboz
recover7 waivers bao been granted. To avoid cessation of Sta~~
subsidy for the 5erviee~ legislatioc vas passed (58 2187) that
allows tbe Penimsula transit districts to ~ate ~p t~e di!fere~ce
between the actual ratio e~~ t~e ,~ percent 5ta~card by
contribu~!cg adc~t~=~aI !~~ds f=a:~e~ ·:~ca: :~er~:!~; s~~;c::·\
whicb are cor,Sidered to be -fare reqe::lues" for the pur-pes/!' ef
calculating tbe fareb¢. ratior The three tra~sit districts
subseql.1ellt11 allocated the necessar.r fur,ds# and as a res,,"lt the 4:1
perc-ect fareOox ratio requirement-was lrIet in tbe 1986/87 ar,d
1997/S8 fiscal years.
.. Califor~ia. Governme~t Code. Secti~~ 14J3~.9. (19B1) •
Peni.!"lsula C¢mli1ute Se:"'::ce 129
.'
,
I
-
~ ~z : .. ! .. : .. : ~ ~ .. ~ .. : =. t .. ! .. ~.: : :: !
.:: ..... , ... ". .................... -.1 ••
lIP", •• _,.$.,.,.,., -,., -,., .•
.. .: II. ..... I .. I " I 0 .... I ... 1_ ... ~ CO .... I _ ..
CU_ ••• t.-r I ,-••• -.-, ..... ,I.tr.*.,~.
I • • , .. t , I • I • I
~ ... , ... ,,,'.r,,,,,,,rl""""",,,"I'"
C ...... ,C ..... ' ........ -I .. '''''''''.,-.. .......... , .......... "' ........ '_'11' .... , ... ' _::II ..... _ ••• _, .. , _J -... ~.,. -,-,
.. CI ~ I ..... I 00 .... I Ir"-I 011 ... ~ ....... 1 ...... I
-1::-: .. I ., I III I ... I <CO ,''' I .... I •• \II." .... I 1:., ................. ' ...... 1 •••• •• "1",,,'1 • I .. I • • • .. I .. I •
• : • • : • • • i • • •
/
· . -. .. ..
~ . -i
~ . • • • • .. -. · . ~: • •
"lor--I .. t .. I ......... I .. '" I .. I ...... ,. I ..... I
I:: IP'''' • _ I .. I I * .. • I • I •• I
.. C ..... , .... I ....... , .............. , ... , ..... CIO~ ....... ,
C _"". _ I ... _I .J ••• ,. -I .... , • I •• _. • I
.. ~.I ... 'Olo·OI ........... , ••• ,~.~ ...... ~I
CU""-' .. I • I • I • I •••• .. _r I ... I I , I I I , I. .,
." ••• ,.,.," I .c .. ·_.C .... , ... ,"', ... ,.." ........ ' ... '·.OI "'C .... , ....................... , ........ ,.rc .. nl
:~~:~,~:~\~~~I~~~:~~~~~\~:~: ~:
::~~::;::::~::;:;:;:~:;:::r;:;;:::::;: ;:
r::.1 ............. , .. ,., ...... , ... ,· ....... • '"'I .II .. t: ,. , , I , I , , I • 'OJ
••• 1 •• 1).' ...... ·1
'"'8 ......... ' .. 1.1 ......... ' .. ' .......... , ..... . 1::'-.1 1 , I 1 I 1_'_'_' 1_1_' • t~~~~:~~~!~~~~~'~~~:~:~:~~~: ~:
"':Q ~ C' Jr .• ".. _. C. 1 ~ , .......... , _. _, .... = ~ c:.
l~!~ ~ ~ ! ~ : ,-:-:-: ;-:-~ :
.. 1 , ~ r • • j • 1 •• , '=''"'rcl'"'r..,I'E ... '~ ..... O::-l ....... i .... 1 .. ..:'Cl..:.I""c.:IC. .......... loQ._._'_r_. C. ... ~ ... "" ....... ~I ... _r .. '".I .... 'r-.'.I .... 1 ..,. __ =I1.·}.I.I., •• 'O •••• f ••• I.' .•.• ,,". c: 01 .... t '" I _ I .. I .., r .., • ~ 1 .., I '" , ... r ... • .... .. 1 _= ... , ... I .... ,...I ..... ,f .... I~I ... ' ... ' .. r.,,' .... _I = ... 1 .... 1.' ... 1 ...... ' ... ,., .......... 1 ......... ,"1' ...... 1
• O.C~:-O: ~.;-7:C.;-7:C.,.-;:".,.-;:;..:::-:;-:.C·O. ~.:-O:C.;-7:C.;-7:-.,.-;:C.=-'::-:.:-O: -::: : = t)'.' 1 _. .. • .. • ~ • ... -• r I r
€~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~:~; ~!
~~:~ .. ie~-!·: .. i~i·:~:.,,:~f ... :..,: ~f
~.t;!;l;!~~:i,i~l~!:~~i:l~t =;
.: ... _',.,..'_I ... , .. , ... ''''I;r.II" ..... ' ... ,=~_, C • .:0::.::,.' •• 4.·,· ... ,· ... 1 .. ' ...... -, •• = C -= , '" , ._ • 'E • Co • '"' : _ I _ , ... 1 '". , or 1 ,.. , -=, .. ,
_t:._ 1'-.0;. ..... , .. , ........ ,.1...-'1'-1':, .. , ;r. 1
o::t""~ .. : .. : ... ~ .. ~ .. : .. ! ... ; .. ! .. :"":..,~ .... :
I ~ ~ t I • ~ ~ ••• , I "., ..
..,~ ... 1.1""" I., t ...... , '" ~O6 I ... 1 4'! .. I .. I ., ~
=t.;~ ••• t .. " , • I ._. -I •
• ... "l I ... 1 ....... ~ .... I .cr, , .. 1 _ ... 1 ... " r-_ 1 ..,. ... ;>"".-. ......... I.I·,~1:· ••• ·I·r·t·~ •• .. .c .. ~ ... , '" ,." C, .... , .. , '''' 1 061 1 til ,,,, It I.', .. II
~~ 0>' ~ ~ ~ 1: 1 .. _. • .. ,_. -~ 1: 110,_11,':1.'" .. " •• , •• ., .... t ••••• ,. I
.... l.,l ... l.,C..~ ....... , ... ' ....... ~1 ~r-
.... ,.",or>o • ." ........ ' ..... .-. • .,r ............ Dr
(; ...... , ." I .. I Jr .... , ... I .... 1 .-. I .... 1 ., I .. • ..... .... .............. r~.~I .. ,·, .. ,·.'OI~.·'" ••
_=~'~' •• ~I=·.~'~.~l='~r~ •• '~. _, .. ~~.~.DI .. ,N.~tCI~I ... ,~ .... ,..,l.-.1 ~I
_;:.._ I .... , ...... ..-........ I ........... 1 .. I .... . ,. r .... , I •• , l •• I ., .: 1:~;:~:!::"'~ :;. .. ::~~;;·!:.:·i::!.',-;;::';:\~:!::::: ~~ "' ....... "'I ...... ·I'03I, ........ ."I ... ~ ... I ... ' ... ,c:. -,
==~ •••. ~ _, .• ~'.'·'.I·'·''''~ •. ,
0-C t , l"-... I II:: , ...-1 .." I ~ 1 '"' I .., I IT I "" , ... 1 "" ... ... :=_i ..... C._I~: ... I"..='C'c ......... , .... =1 I::: .. ~ .. ·: ... !..,i·~'"": ..... : ... : .. ~ .. ~"': ... : =::
I~III ., ••••• "'.
figur. J7.
lSI lail P~ssenger C.w.lDpme~t Pl.~
-F
· . ..~ : · . -. I • · . ... .,..
~ • •
.;
~
~ -. -. ~ . .. • • · . · · . -.
< ~ ,
• = • • ~. -. -. • • .. :
• • • • • · . -. • • • .. : ~ · . · · , • •
• I • • · . •• • • • • • ~ . < • -. ...
~. .. • • ~ I '" . ~: E: • •
I V .-:,l~'~':".};i~)~,!+'. ·'::ti,li:;,;ti<i'il~!?' 'l€~';;l',!;f: ')i
,.
//'
J
r
f
i
..
~ .. c ,
• ..
.. • ,
~ ,
~
c
~ •
n
0 • B
C .. •
'" • , .. • • ~
" n
~ • ,
• ..
c ~
~ " • • ,
" • 0 " • ", • " c .. en • ,
• '" " • .. , • ..
n •
....
'" ....
PENINSULA COMMUTE SERVICE RIDERSHIP GRAPH
BASED 01< OlflCIAl SOUTHERN PACWIC RIDERSHIP OATA
RID~:::: I~ -~ _I I I I I
52~ , fr1 ~f1 'It-"
500000 I~ Iok-- -'-. ;--"ITI ,A
mooo I---Ulr.: \ 7\1~. 1\ ~-_ "TIll V'I .
450000 f--7 -.. - \ ~ L.d >i1T 'i;J II
mooo 1--. 7 -~I\ ~ LI'rr1' I
400000 f---/ ... ... -'1/ . -'-
375000 U±.~ J .... f
350000 FIJ' -. --',
325000 --t--.. -->\---~... .--
I--1----.. " . __ i . _
.300000 !"''''-'I~~t. ~', ,n'rI'n. , nnTTTTT'f1-tT.... ~
JAH7S JAN79 JA~eO JAil"' J~N~2 JAN83 JANS' JAN85 JAN86 JAN87 JANee JAN89
MONTH ond VEAR
fJota IndfCiote Actual Monthly r.-:ider'Jt1ip 0010,
Bold Line Shows 12 Month MOl,'lng Alo'6.(oge ~ider6hip Trel"ld,
Ilorilontal ~f'lfll'!renC6 by Inttuvol of 25,000, Vertioal Reforence ()n Each January.
'}--~-------"l~">--~-" ~~~ 4.
;'t -,
",j'-
'.
•
:'?
'. -,
','"
'" .'
-,_/ .. ' •
(
'0,',
•
, I,
/
r-__________ ~c~------------~~,.--------_.
.
!
figure I •.
'.' -,".
!
I
"-
-, -
.......
o
PROPOSED J XPROVZMEIITS
/
o
\ \
Caltr.ns co~tracted with Pric~ Waterbouse to cor.cuct an eval~ation
of tbe fare structure end tict~tin9 proeec~re5 used ~ the PCS~ The
Itudr, completed io September 196a~ ~ade re~ommendation5 r~gardin9
the level of fares and parting fees that sbould be charq~d~ the
types of tickets that sbould be offered. a~d the method by which
fares should ~e COllected. ie crder to o~timlze reveDue5. T~e 5~~c7
also included the developme~t cf a model for ~redi~ti~g riders~ip
cbanqes re,ultiDg teom changes lr, fare levels.. Specifk
reco~endations incluce:
Self-service fare collection.
Realigned zone boundaries.
Simplified tariff structure •
.Rounded rares.
routh tictet (mo~thlJ pass cnly} replacing student tic~e~s.
These recommendations were the sub:ect of public hesriogs held in
eacb of tbe tbree PCS-served counties i~ m:d-Decemb~~. 1~88. As a
r~sult ef tbe bearings some minor modif~catie~5 were ~ad~ t= the
con3u:ta.nt~s recommer,da.:::ior.s~ T~e ~e"" !are struct:Jre wI:l be p\,,;t.
int~ effect in Spri~g :ses.
AeCl'ssibility
Currently, the PeS is ~ot a~ce5sible to passengers im wheelchairs.
To a~res5 tbis issu~, Caltra~s bas ccotracted vitb Crai~ a~d
Associates to investigate alte:-t'lat:ve l:1ethods o! pro'lidl:-:g f"Jll
accessibilitYr The first ~hase of the 5tuC7 •• h;ch lcen:if:es ar.c
evaluates ~~~~rous alternatlves p has been eo~plet~d. It ide~ti~ies
tbe use of -mini-high level ~latforms· at most stati~ns as tbe
p-rererred alternative. These .o,uld -be used in conjun.ctiol'l witb a
brid9ing device to 98io access to the ear vestibules at flOQr
level~ At stations vbere platform areas are restricted. t~e
installation of ·scissor lifts-yas recommended. Because of
pcoblems with access to the s!atio~ itself~ tbe consolta~t
recommended that South San F:-ancisco remain inaccessab!e.
The second phase of the study involve5 the d~monstration and
eqaluatio~ of the pre!~rred alternatives. CcmplecioD of t~is pnase
is contiDgent ~pon a~ asr~ement bet_eec Caltrans and SP fer ~e5~S
to si~ul.te the stopping cf trai~s at ~lni-biqh l~v~l platfcr~s.
At p.reseot .. this .agreemerlt has bee~ de!a.l'ea due .to .an impasse Oil
liability arran;ements for the ~se of S? perso~~el and t[ac~a;e f~~
S'..lCb. t~sts. la the meantime. C .. lta,ns has developea conceptual
Pe~i~sula Commute Service 133
•
.. ~.'
c~, __ c
~"?~~~~.:.
jm&" .;
-
o o
pla~s a~d spe~ificctior.s fer two alttrnatives: ~ioi-bi;h level
plat!orms, and a lift mechaoism (such as the Ricon lift' on the
traia.
Separately. all station Etccnstr~:tion proje~ts bave be~c Qr will
be designed to p~QYidt w~eelcbair a~cess to facilities and
pl.tfor~s. Until tbese projects are completed and the service is
made accessible, wbeelchalr users and other passenger5 wno cannot
climb steps, must use alter~ative public tr.~sportation wbich is
accessible. 5~eh .5 lcc.l bus service. Ose of local bus service
Ma7 require multiple bus transfers. if traveling the ler.gth of the
PeS.
Su Jon Ter-m:i •• l [ltp·rovemeats
A program Qf projects 10 the Sa~ Jose area is under dev~l~ect
that will provlde PCS riders with improve~ transit co~nectio~s and
a much-needed ezpension of parking f.eilities~ The ~jmary element
of t!lis prQ9ram is the construction of a tlew terll.;'nal located at
Alma Avenye. about two .iles s~utb of the ezisti~9 ter~inal on
Cahill Street. The new station _ill ~owide direct interface wi to
the Guada!upe Co,rridor L!9b~ Rail T.an")t. and .... ill he';!'e 400
pariing spa~es witb provisions which viII allow ultima~e expansion
to 1700 spaces. II'l additicn. a cbilel care cellter for trai[j users
at or ~ear the station has been ~opoled~ At Cahill Street. t~e
eIisti~~ sta:ion will be rehabilitateo and the number of par~i~g
spaces will be i~[ea5ea from 4S0 to aBO~
CocstructioD of the Alma Avenue statio~ is expected to begie in
June 1989. with c~pletioe in june 1990~ RehabilitatioD of tbe
Cahill station ~ildinis and ezpanlion of the parking facilities is
ezpected t~ begin in late 1991 and completed ia late 1992~ An
imte:'illl parlirl.g lot vill be constructed in riscal Year 19BB/a:a to
alleviate currect overcroviog at tbe stetion~ The San Jose
terminal improvemeot projects art expected to ge~ere:e a
s~bst.oti.l increase in Eidership to ano from the S~n Jose area.
1m Oct~ber 1988 6 Caltrans applied for $5.4 million i~ State
Guidewa,. Funes to help fund implemer.lUtion of those San J'ose
Terminal Im~ove~ent projects ia ~onjunction with pr~viouslJ
committed local an~ Federal fund5~
A proposed centrali%ed ~aictenance fa~ilitJ could significa~tly
reduce ~rating costs and i~prove ~q~ipmeot utiliz8tiorl.. The
5erYice curreotly 1acts s~h • faeilitr. ana e~uipaieat ".latenanee
.lS performed by SP at tbr~e se~rate locations: San Francisco and
134. lIa i 1 .Pilsser1g~r Develo·pmel".lt Plan
...... , .. ,
. :
,.., .. " ,,,,,<,
-
,/
o o
San ~ose~ wbere periodic imspections ana ~:~or ~i~tenance
functions art performeQ$ and Roseville (near Sacra~ento}. where
more •• tensive maiotenance takes pl.ce. Movemect of equipmer.t tc
and from Rosevtlle tat., tvo days in each dire~tion. [t is
estieated that equipment trensportatio~ costs .lo~e could be
r.d~.d by S425~COO to $530.~OO an~u.ll, _ith a nev o~-line
f •• Ultr_
PreliminarJ desigo. whicb wa3 perfor~ed by STV/Seelye Steve~s~n
V.lye an~ ~ecbt under a coctract with C.ltrans~ bas been
completed. ESA Cocsultaots •• 5 se~ected i~ Februa~7 19B? tc
perfora an eoviro~mental assessment of potential 5it~s for t~~
facility. Phase [ of the e~vironme~t81 vert was complete! in
)u9ult~ 1988. Tbe Newhall Stree~ site. near the College Fa~~
~tatioQ. vas selected as the e~wiron~eota!l. preferred site, with
Lie'" Ouart'J' (sollth of Alma A'i1e. t as the alu'~na:e 5itl!:--a.lt~cugb
.tais does Dot constityte fi~al site selectio~. Salsbere Ya=~ (nea=
Brisbane', Cahill/Del Monte (opposite the 5.~ Jose ~e?Ot). and
Gilro1 vere eliminated from forther cO~5id~ration~ Phase II of
ESA's contract includes additional ec~ironmental a~alIsis cf the
p~eferred and Ilte~r.ate sites ~e~es5arl for preyaratior. of an
Enwironmental Impa~t Report ~E!R)/Environmental Assessment (fA}.
In October 1ge5, Caltra~5 applied for S1.S million in Sta~e
Guideway Funds f~r des!gn and rigb~-of-~aJ purchase fgr the ~e~
~e~trali~ed main~enanc~ facili~l. to be 5upplementec by $:.5
'!DHlioo i!'l local funds ar:d $9.0 ~il1io[l in F~dera: i.."Jri!:A. f'..ln,:s.
11.$ meotioned ~eviou511. tbe failure to p·rovide direct service to
tbe San Francisco Financial District is oee of the primary
deficiencies of the setTice. Hac1 studies have b~en pe=f~r~ej 10
receot years wbicb have e'Jalwa~e1 iI varietJ of ~rcpc5als to ute:",c
tbe line to a new downtow~ te~mi~al. The ~ost rec@~t of t~es~ was
the "Icter!:I t:pg~ade S':·JC1" c:.:-.cl:.e:e'5 ~1 E:'11 Ir'lte=ni!':i')r.~l f:lr t~e
JPB, vbicb vas completed in Octo~er 1997. lt cc~tained an a~al~sis
of eztendiog the lice to a location b~hind the !ra~sbay T~rm~r.al in
covetown San Eran~iseo.
Some 8;encies. includicg the CaliforDia Transportatiol1 CC1t~::'ss:c::
(eTC). have opposed the eltension on tbe tasis that tee c~s~ _c~:c
not be jcstified by th~ elpected riderShip i~rease. and that it
.ould be redundant in li9ht of t~e ~ropcse~ eIten5io~ of t~@ Bay
Area Rapid Transit (8JoSiT) sys:'e!ll. wbich is planned to ccn:1e':<:, wit~
tbe PCS near t~e San Francisco Airport. Accordfc;ly. ttl! eTC cas
determined Dot to alloc.ate .ny State funds for this ~roje·:,:. '!':-:~
SCI 741 Study. while COt specifically recommendil'lg an el.::f'r1sicn, C:id
recommend tbat right-af-wa), for a pc·ssiele eItet"sion of tb.e servi::e
be preserved. Caltrar.s" position is that the Question ef e.l::er-lc:'ng
Pe~insu!a C~mute Ser~Ece 135
'~.'
~ . -:-~~ . . ,
.. ,.; ;
."
I
t .
l ,
i
I
1
1
I
1
I
.1
>
o o
tbe pes to th~ San Francisco Financial District s~ould ~e dec ideo
at t~e loc.l Ind regional level~
Ie ~tch 1988. the Metropolitan Transportation Commissio~ vot~~ to
.uol the e:rtension on the Same regio".l p·e-ioritr list .s several
aART exteolions ic the East Ba, and SaD ~t!O Count,. As. r~5ult~
• regional transit financing pla~ hiS been developed to fund all
pcoje-ctS 00 tbe list. The plan depended 00 passage of I half-ct:r~t
count, seles tax me.s~res in San ~teo and Contre Costa ~ounties.
Sin ~teo·, ~easure pBssed ia June, 1989. and Co~tr. Costa"! was
appcoved in November, 19S8. The plan also required passage of a
bridqe toll increase lIealyre (passed in November. 19S5). and will
~equire receipt cf the specified level of State a~~ ~~~~~~l f~nds_
MTt¥ thr~ugb I Fiscal rear 1988/89 UMTA Seetio~ g ;raDtl vill
pcoyide the ~PB vltb 51.5 milli~c to fi~~nce ~ep&rati~~ of a~ EIS~
The JPB it currently writiog the scope of wo·rt for the c-ootract
coY~rio9 thit task.
RECOICMEJrfDA 1'1 OMS
':"he PellloslJla CON'.\J':e Service provides an illlD1l!'diate answer to a
se:ious ana ~~ovi~q conges~ioD prob=em on the Sa~ Fra~cisco
pe~iDs~la. Tbe freeva! system on the Pen~o5ula is hea.ily
cocge$te~ ~ucb ~f tbe time. and there are no ~eali5tic means to
si3~ificactl, e~pand its capacity. YetI devl!'lopme~t along tbe West
Ba, Co·rridor f('om San Jose to San Francisco cootiX'lues to OCCl.lr at a
l'apid rate. KTC·s current: 101. Corridor Study projects a 30 percent
iecrelse im"travel demano i whicb cannot be met by the e~ist[og
hi;bwa5 sYltem. The PeS preseots a valtlr underutilized element of
the West ~1 trans~rt.tion c~rridor. and it currently offers the
only siqnificant opportunit~ to incr~a5e people-carrlie~ capacity
in tbis corridor.
Fol10yicg is a summary of the Pe~i~s~la Commyte Se~vice
recommendations zed. in tbis Chayter for impleme~tation over the
five-lear period of this Plan.
o To maitltain State suppa·ct. it vill be necessar, for the
Legislature to appr~riat~ $;.068 million as the State'S s~are
of the budgeted operating costs ic the 1~8;/90 fiseal year. and
$19.08 aillion from Transit Capital Imp~ovemt~t 'Ttll FYnds for
capital projects Cas shown on Table IV ia Cha~~r IS).
o ~lltran5 s~pp¢rts the findings of the sea 7& fe~insul. Mass
Transit Styoy ano recommends that the necessarl steps be taken
to form tbe P~ninsula Rail Transit District (PRTCJ. The PRTD
sb~uld nan.ge and operate the service and devl!'lop specific long
range plans for rail transit on the Peoi~sula. Howeger. becal.lS~
tbe PeS is a regional service~ C.ltrans-relationship with it
sbould be the same as with all other transit properties. i.e ••
136 R~il passe~ger Degelopment Plan
. -. -' ',.>
_. ~ ::f:.: ";·:i,·' ,
-
.'-:-
.';f"",
•
-
;; ,
o o
administe~ic; State and federal t~a~sit funds on a sta~e~i~e
'baliI-.
~\
o C.ltrlns sh~uld continue to admioistet the service and
implement the cyrrent c.pital improvemect pr~ram whil~ the
PRTD is being est.blished~ but ~esponsi~ilitl toc coctrol and
manaqement of the s~r.ice should be tran5fer~ed to the n~w
agency .s soon .s p~actical after it is formal I! establisbed.
To facilitlte the transfer, and to allow for an QtderlJ
transition. Celtrans recommends that State funding foc
operation of the service continue to be provided i~ the present
~anner throu~h the 1989/90 f~s~al year (the las: year of th~
currect te~-year contract with Seutbern Pacific). suc~
conticuea funding is subject to the ~ervice recoverin~ a~ least
40 percent of its operating COSt f~om service revenues
(includicg anr loca: .ge~~! augmentations under SB 2187), as
required by statute.
o C.ltrans .1so recommencs tbat the e.isting SP risht-of-way
~urrent17 u,ed by the s~r.ice be acquired on behalf of the
PRTD. IB October 19ae~ Calttans applied tor $10 mi1!i~n ic
State Transit Capital ImprDve~ect (GuidewaJ) Fu~ds to pa:tially
fund acquisition of this rigbt-of-way. ~ith a~ additional $10
million to be provided loca!!y and $20 million from the Fede~al
Orba~ Ma5S Transportation Admicist:atiooa
T~e impco'il'emect.5 desc:-ibed :':1 ::":5 C~a?t!!'!' sncu:t! :;:r::c\.:~!!' !~c:'"!!a~e::
ridership and revenue while c~nt:~lli~g coStS r and ~i:b loea:
operatiaq s~ppo~t ~nder sa 21B7. the servic~ ~ill a:tai~ ~~e .0
~rcf~t f.~ebo~ ratio im the 196i/90 fiscal lear. Capital
improvements are funded tbrougb tbe Tra~5it Capital Im~rov~me~t
ittl) allocation pf'ocess. and after formatior.: of the PRTD,
i~ov.meats will co~tinue to compete O~ tbeir merit for Tel Fune5.
At this time. tb. current Five-Year Capital Im~ovement Plan shc~ld
be rec09nized as the best estimate of resources n~eded to support
the service ..
Peol~sula Commute S~rvice 137
•
~ ..
""""'-o~'k_,,,,:
,
. i
I
.,