Connection Caltrain
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
May 7, 2019 Media Contact: Dan Lieberman, 650-508-6385 Samtrans and Caltrain Encourage Cycling on Bike to Work Day This Thursday
NEWS May 7, 2019 Media Contact: Dan Lieberman, 650-508-6385 SamTrans and Caltrain Encourage Cycling on Bike to Work Day This Thursday, May 9, Bay Area bicyclists will participate by the thousands in the 25th Annual Bike to Work Day, an annual event that encourages commuters to choose bicycles over cars for their daily commute. SamTrans buses can carry two bikes on racks at the front of each bus, and two additional bikes are allowed inside the bus, depending on passenger loads. Some things to know: only single-rider, two-wheel bicycles are permitted. There is no age limit for riders using the bike racks or bringing bikes on board the bus. However, riders must be able to load and unload their bikes without help from the operator. On Caltrain, every train is equipped with at least two bike cars. Due to the popularity of the onboard bike program, capacity for bicyclists can be a challenge. Cyclists are encouraged to choose local trains with lighter ridership to ensure they are able to board if they want to test out biking to work for the first time. Some express and limited stop trains are already operating at or near capacity for onboard bikes. Each weekday approximately 6,000 bicyclists take a bike on the train, more than any other rail service in the country. While biking and taking public transit can work well together for first- and last-mile connections, as well as getting people out of their cars and off freeways, onboard capacity may be at its limit on Bike to Work Day. -
JPB Board of Directors Meeting of October 3, 2019 Correspondence
JPB Board of Directors Meeting of October 3, 2019 Correspondence as of October 1, 2019 # Subject 1. The Gravity of RWC Station 2. Caltrain Business Plan Long Range Service Vision 3. Redwood trees along San Carlos Station Platform 4. Caltrain 2.0 – Elevated: Save $7B+, Better SF Stations, Bike Path From: Ian Bain To: Jeremy Smith Cc: GRP-City Council; Board (@caltrain.com); Board (@samtrans.com); Warren Slocum; Sequoia Center Vision Subject: Re: The Gravity of RWC Station Date: Friday, September 27, 2019 2:58:18 PM Dear Mr. Smith, On behalf of the City Council, thank you for writing to express your thoughts on the Sequoia Station proposal. If this proposal were to go forward, it would require a general plan amendment. As part of due process, City staff will evaluate the developer's proposal, and I believe it will take a couple of months before this issue comes before the Council to consider whether to initiate an amendment process. When it does, your thoughts and concerns will be considered. Thank you again for writing to us. Respectfully, Ian Bain IAN BAIN Mayor City of Redwood City Phone: (650) 780-7565 E-mail: [email protected] www.redwoodcity.org On Fri, Sep 27, 2019 at 10:06 AM Jeremy Smith <[email protected]> wrote: Esteemed council members, I am one of the “young” people riddled with worry about climate change and how the destruction it poses to our world and local communities. Living densely around transit is one of the best ways we in the Bay Area can reduce our carbon emissions and maintain economic growth per a UC Berkeley report in 2017 and several others since then. -
Caltrain TIRCP Application Jan
PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY APPLICATION FOR 2018 TRANSIT AND INTERCITY RAIL CAPITAL PROGRAM FUNDS PROJECT NARRATIVE A. Project Title Page Project Title: Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project The Peninsula Corridor Electrification Expansion Project (EEP) includes a series of incremental investments in the 51-mile Caltrain Corridor between the 4th and King Station (San Francisco) and the Tamien Station (San Jose). These investments are focused on expanding and fully converting Caltrain’s mainline diesel fleet to electric trains. This investment builds on and leverages the existing Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project (PCEP) and supports the goals of the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), providing increased capacity and service flexibility, supporting state and interregional connectivity, and reducing greenhouse gas emissions through elimination of diesel service from the mainline Peninsula Corridor. In addition to providing immediate, direct benefits, the EEP also represents an incremental step within a larger program of development that will evolve the Peninsula Corridor in a way that supports the ridership, service levels, and connectivity goals contemplated in the draft 2018 State Rail Plan. The central component of Caltrain’s 2018 TIRCP application is the purchase of 96 additional Electric Multiple Units (EMU). This procurement will fully exercise all available options under Caltrain’s current contract with Stadler and will provide sufficient EMUs to fully electrify Caltrain’s mainline fleet, while also sustaining and expanding capacity to accommodate growing demand. In addition to requesting funds for the purchase of EMUs, Caltrain is also requesting a smaller amount funding for a series of associated projects that will equip the corridor to receive and operate a fully electrified fleet in a way that allows the railroad to reap the maximum benefit from its investments. -
City of Menlo Park TDM Existing Conditions
City of Menlo Park TMA Options Analysis Study: Existing Conditions ___ Client: City of Menlo Park January 2020 Our ref: 23642101 Content 3 Introduction 4 Existing Travel Options 4 Rail and Transit 5 Public and Private Shuttles 6 Existing TDM Programming 8 Travel Patterns 9 Northern Menlo Park 10 Central Menlo Park 11 Downtown Menlo Park 12 Southern Menlo Park 13 Stakeholder Outreach 13 Interviews 16 Small Business Drop Ins 18 Employee Survey 22 Conclusions 23 Next Steps 2 | January 2020 City of Menlo Park: TDM Existing Conditions Introduction TMA Options Analysis for Menlo Park Menlo Park Focus Area Zones The four zones include: The City of Menlo Park has commissioned an Options This Existing Conditions Report (and subsequent 1. Northern Menlo Park (including Bohannon Dr. Analysis for establishing a Transportation reports and analyses) focuses on four areas or area) Management Association (TMA). “zones” within the City of Menlo Park. Each zone 2. Central Menlo Park faces unique challenges due to both its location and As has been seen across Silicon Valley and generally the specific land uses and industry housed within it. 3. Downtown Menlo Park the Bay Area, recent years have brought an increase 4. Southern Menlo Park (including SLAC area) in congestion in the City of Menlo Park. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) has Figure 1: Map of Menlo Park Zone Analysis been utilized for years to curb congestion by encouraging non single-occupancy vehicle travel across worksites, cities and counties in the Bay Area and beyond. As TDM is implemented in Menlo Park at a variety of levels, the City hopes that a TMA may help to better coordinate the efforts between public and private entities in the city, and potentially region-wide. -
North Central San Mateo Community-Based Transportation Plan
North Central San Mateo Community-Based Transportation Plan DRAFT Appendices Appendix A: Stakeholder Committee .......................................................................................2 Appendix B: Existing Conditions Report....................................................................................3 Executive Summary............................................................................................................................. 8 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 10 Chapter 1 - Profile of the North Central San Mateo Neighborhood.............................................. 11 Chapter 2 - Transportation................................................................................................................ 25 Chapter 3 - City and County Plans .................................................................................................. 48 Chapter 4 - Transportation Plans...................................................................................................... 57 Chapter 5 - Transportation Gaps...................................................................................................... 61 Appendix C: Community Outreach .......................................................................................62 Chapter 1 - Resident Travel Survey Highlights ................................................................................ 63 Chapter 2 - Other Outreach -
New Executive Director Leads Caltrain Authority Board of Directors, Where He Served Most Recently As Vice Chair
Caltrain Spring 2015 ConnectionInformation for Customers New Executive Director Leads Caltrain Authority Board of Directors, where he served most recently as vice chair. "This is personal for me," said Hartnett. "I grew up on the Peninsula. I rode the train before there was a Caltrain. I believe in what transit can do to make a better life for all of us and to preserve those things we so deeply value and treasure about living and working here. I understand the important role our train system plays in main- taining our quality of life and sustaining the economic vitality of our region." Jim Hartnett, veteran trans- Scanlon who retired after more Hartnett's appointment is portation and community than 15 years of service with the result of a nationwide leader, took the wheel of the the District. recruitment that took more San Mateo County Transit Hartnett, a Redwood City than six months. District as the new General resident, served five years on Manager/CEO this spring. He both the Caltrain Board of also serves as Executive Direc- Directors, during which time he Call for Proposals tor of Caltrain and the San also had a stint as chair. He was A significant milestone in Mateo County Transportation appointed four years ago to the electrification of the Authority. He replaced Mike the California High Speed Rail Caltrain corridor has been reached with the release of the Peninsula Corridor Electrifica- Caltrain Asks Supporters to tion Project Design Build Request for Proposals. Six “Stand Up 4 Transportation” previously qualified firms, Shimmick/Alstom, CalMod Caltrain joined transit agen- events around the country, fea- Partners Elecnor/Cobra; Balfour cies from all over the Bay Area tured speakers urging Congress Beatty, Mass Electric/Siemens; at the Temporary Transbay to pass a long-term transpor- Skanska-Comstock-Aldridge, Terminal in San Francisco in tation funding bill before the Peninsula Electrification April for Stand Up 4 Transpor- current bill expires May 31. -
Hillsdale Station Temporary Closure
Hillsdale Station Temporary Closure Virtual Town Hall April 9, 2020 Agenda All plans are subject to change based on COVID-19 service changes and funding ▪ Project Overview ▪ Development of Rider Closure Plan ▪ Rider Closure Plan ▪ Customer & Community Communication 2 Project Overview Rafael Bolon Project Manager, Caltrain 3 25th Ave Grade Sep Project Benefits Overall Project Benefits • Pedestrian, cyclist, and motorist safety • Safe rail operations and fewer system-wide delays • Improved traffic flow and enhanced east-west connectivity • Reduced train horn noise New Station Benefits • Centerboard platform: Convenient access to both north and southbound trains • Additional and improved shelters • New landscaping, mosaic wall, aesthetics inspired by Bay Meadows 4 Elevated Track & New Station Location 5 Station Improvements 6 Hillsdale Station Closure Part of Larger Project Closure Begins: May 16, 2020 ▪ Duration: Up to 6 months ▪ Closure Needed – Transition ground-level tracks to elevated tracks – Create east-west connection at 28th Avenue – Build new Hillsdale Station (closer to 28th Avenue) ▪ Caltrain will continue overall passenger service for its daily commuters during the closure 7 Development of Rider Lori Low Gov/Community Affairs Officer, Closure Plan Caltrain 8 Process: Plan Development ▪ Analyzed Survey Data and Annual Counts ▪ Reviewed train timetables and bus / shuttle frequency ▪ Analyzed rider bus / shuttle needs and capacity ▪ Reviewed public feedback ▪ Focused on rider experience during the closure ▪ Acknowledged challenges -
Transportation and Traffic
4.13 TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC This chapter describes the existing traffic conditions of the EA Study Area and evaluates the potential envi- ronmental consequences of future development that could occur by adopting and implementing the pro- posed Housing Element Update, General Plan Consistency Update, and associated Zoning Ordinances amendments, together referred to as the “Plan Components” on transportation and traffic. A summary of the relevant regulatory setting and existing conditions is followed by a discussion of Plan Components and cumulative impacts. The chapter is based on the traffic analysis prepared by TJKM Transportation Consultants dated March 8, 2013, herein referred to as “Traffic Study.” The future baseline traffic volumes have been developed from output of the City/County Association of Governments of San Mateo County (C/CAG) travel demand model run by the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA). The travel demand associated with the Plan Components have been obtained from the C/CAG Model based upon the anticipated future land uses that have been developed resulting from the land use controls under Near-Term 2014 and 2035 condi- tions. The complete Traffic Study and technical appendices are included in Appendix F of this EA. A. Regulatory Framework 1. Federal Laws and Regulations a. Federal Highway Administration The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the agency of the United States (U.S.) Department of Transportation (DOT) responsible for the federally-funded roadway system, including the interstate high- way network and portions of the primary State highway network, such as Interstate 280 (I-280). b. Americans with Disabilities Act The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 provides comprehensive rights and protections to indi- viduals with disabilities. -
March 1, 2017 Samtrans Board Meeting
MARCH 1, 2017 SAMTRANS BOARD MEETING BOARD OF DIRECTORS – PART 1 LINK COMMUNITY RELATIONS COMMITTEE LINK FINANCE COMMITTEE LINK LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE LINK STRATEGIC PLANNING, DEVELOPMENT AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE LINK BOARD OF DIRECTORS – PART 2 LINK BOARD OF DIRECTORS 2017 ROSE GUILBAULT, CHAIR CHARLES STONE, VICE CHAIR JEFF GEE CAROLE GROOM ZOE KERSTEEN-TUCKER KARYL MATSUMOTO DAVE PINE JOSH POWELL PETER RATTO A G E N D A JIM HARTNETT GENERAL MANAGER/CEO BOARD OF DIRECTORS San Mateo County Transit District Administrative Building Bacciocco Auditorium - Second Floor 1250 San Carlos Ave., San Carlos, CA WEDNESDAY, MARCH 1, 2017 – 2:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 3. ROLL CALL 4. PUBLIC HEARINGS/CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS OF NECESSITY a. Property Location: 3025 S. El Camino Real, San Mateo, CA 94403 APN: 039-360-060 and 039-360-070 Property Owner: Bohannon Development Company b. Property Location: 2925 S. El Camino Real, San Mateo, CA 94403 APN: 039-360-120 Property Owner(s): Sandra R. Weil, Trustee of the Sandra R. Weil Trust Agreement Dated April 1, 1993; Karen Weil Morris; Susan Weil Lakatos, Trustee under the Susan W. Lakatos Separate Property Trust Agreement Dated February 8, 1993; Uri Rot and Evelyn Weil Rot, Trustees under the Rot Family Trust Dated August 23, 1991, all as Tenants in Common c. Property Location: 2825 S. El Camino Real, San Mateo, CA 94403 APN: 039-351-110 Property Owner(s): M. & N. Schmelzer, LLC, and BFP El Camino LLC 5. RECESS TO COMMITTEE MEETINGS Note: All items appearing on the agenda are subject to action by the Board. -
Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover Menlo Park Fire Protection District, CA
Menlo Park Fire Protection District California COMMUNITY RISK ASSESSMENT: STANDARDS OF C2019OVER Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover Menlo Park Fire Protection District, CA Introduction The following report serves as the Menlo Park Fire Protection District’s Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover. It follows the Center for Fire Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) 6th Edition Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover model that develops written procedures to determine the distribution and concentration of a fire and emergency service agency’s fixed and mobile resources. The purpose of completing such a document is to assist the agency in ensuring a safe and effective response force for fire suppression, emergency medical services, and specialty response situations. Creating a Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover document requires that a number of areas be researched, studied, and evaluated. This report will begin with an overview of both the community and the agency. Following this overview, the plan will discuss areas such as risk assessment, critical task analysis, agency service-level objectives, and distribution and concentration measures. The report will provide an analysis of historical performance and will conclude with policy and operational recommendations. ESCI extends its appreciation to the elected officials, business members, and community members of the District and the cities they protect, the members of the Fire District, and all others who contributed to this plan. Menlo Park Fire Protection District Board of Directors Robert Jones President Jim McLaughlin Vice President Chick Bernstein Director Virginia Chang Kiraly Director Rob Silano Director PAGE i Community Risk Assessment: Standards of Cover Menlo Park Fire Protection District, CA Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................i Table of Contents .................................................................................................. -
Press Release
NEWS Coronavirus (COVID-19) Advisory: While this announcement describes planned service adjustments, be advised that future rail operations and/or capital projects may continue to be impacted by COVID-19. For the latest Caltrain schedule updates, please visit www.caltrain.com or call Caltrain Customer Service at 1.800.660.4287. For the latest SamTrans schedule updates, please visit www.samtrans.com or call SamTrans Customer Service at 1.800.660.4287. April 6, 2020 Media Contact: Alex Eisenhart, 650.622.7850 Hillsdale Station to Temporarily Close for Construction Starting May 16, Caltrain’s Hillsdale Station in San Mateo will temporarily close for up to six months as part of the 25th Ave Grade Separation Project. During the closure, trains that currently stop at the Hillsdale Station will now serve the Belmont Station instead. A new weekday and weekend timetable, effective May 16, will be made available online as soon as possible, pending service updates related to COVID-19. Upon completion of construction, the Hillsdale Station will be relocated about one block north of its current location, between 28th and 31st Avenues. The new station will have an elevated center-boarding platform allowing for safer, more convenient pedestrian access. In addition to the new station, the overall project will create three new grade separated east-west connections for vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists at 25th, 28th and 31st Avenues. Grade separations reduce horn noise while also improving safety and traffic flow. Caltrain will conduct a virtual town hall on Thursday, April 9, from 12 p.m. to 1 p.m. to inform customers about the closure and station access alternatives during construction. -
San Francisco to San Jose Project Section
California High-Speed Rail Authority San Francisco to San Jose Project Section Deliberative and Confidential Draft Draft Historic Architectural Survey Report May 2019 Table of Contents Deliberative and Confidential Draft TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ....................................................................................1-1 1.1 Section 106 and CEQA Cultural Resources ............................................... 1-3 1.2 CEQA-Only Cultural Resources ................................................................. 1-4 1.3 Properties in the Area of Potential Effects that Require Phased Identification ............................................................................................... 1-4 2 REGULATORY SETTING .....................................................................................2-1 2.1 National Historic Preservation Act (54 U.S.C. § 300101 et seq.) ................ 2-1 2.1.1 Implementing Regulations for Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (36 C.F.R. Part 800) ............................. 2-1 2.2 National Environmental Policy Act .............................................................. 2-2 2.3 Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. § 303) ..... 2-2 2.4 California Environmental Quality Act (Cal. Public Res. Code § 21083.2) and CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 15064.5) ........ 2-3 2.5 California Register of Historical Resources (Cal. Public Res. Code § 5024.1 and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 4850) .............................................