DOCSLIB.ORG

San Jose to Merced Project Section State's

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
San Jose to Merced Project Section State's SUMMER 2019 SAN JOSE TO MERCED PROJECT SECTION STATE’S PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE OVERVIEW High-speed rail offers an unprecedented opportunity to modernize California’s transportation system and tie together the state’s economies. The San Jose to Merced Project Section will be the crucial connection between the Bay Area and the Central Valley. This fact sheet discusses the staff recommendation for the State’s Preferred Alternative to be considered by the California High-Speed Rail Authority (Authority) Board of Directors. WHAT IS A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE? Since 2008, numerous alternatives have been considered Alternative. Authority staff is seeking feedback on this for the high-speed rail alignment traveling within and recommendation before it is presented to the Authority outside of the Bay Area. Ultimately, four alternatives Board of Directors in September 2019. are being analyzed for the Draft Environmental Impact Alternative 4 will be referred to as the staff-recommended Report/Statement (EIR/EIS). The alternative determined State’s Preferred Alternative until the Authority Board to best balance tradeoffs between environmental; of Directors concurs with the staff recommendation or community; and performance, operations, and cost factors requests that a different alternative be identified as the will be identified as the State’s Preferred Alternative. State’s Preferred Alternative. The identification of the Planning, design, and analysis of the four alternatives, State’s Preferred Alternative for the Draft EIR/EIS does collaboration with landowners and agencies, and input not express or imply approval or adoption of a preferred from the public and stakeholders has led Authority staff alternative for final design or construction. to recommend Alternative 4 as the State’s Preferred WHAT IS THE PUBLIC’S ROLE IN DEVELOPING AND RECOMMENDING ALTERNATIVES? The Authority coordinates closely with individuals, local governments, tribes, public agencies, and organizations to gather local knowledge and input on project alternatives. Over the last three years, the Authority HOW TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK participated in nearly 500 meetings with stakeholders By email: [email protected] and members of the public. By phone: 800-455-8166 Now the Authority is seeking public feedback on the By mail: Northern California Regional Office staff-recommended State’s Preferred Alternative. A California High-Speed Rail Authority 100 Paseo De San Antonio, Suite 300 summary of feedback provided at community meetings San Jose, CA 95113 and open houses – as well as via telephone or written In person: Attend a Community Open House correspondence – will be presented to the Authority e August 8 in Gilroy e August 21 in Los Banos Board of Directors in September 2019. e August 15 in San Jose e Attend the Board Meeting September 17 in San Jose Social icon Circle Only use blue and/or white. For more details check out our Brand Guidelines. @cahsra facebook.com/CaliforniaHighSpeedRail @cahsra youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail WHAT ARE THE FOUR ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED? SAN JOSE DIRIDON STATION APPROACH LEGEND Alternatives at a Glance San Jose STANISLAUS Scott Blvd Diridon Station San Jose to Merced Alignments COUNTY SUBSECTION/ (Aerial) ALT 1 ALT 2 ALT 3 ALT 4 Aerial Tunnel DESIGN OPTIONS Embankment Trench The Central Valley Wye Study Area is being analyzed and evaluated as a separate effort San Jose Diridon Station Approach West Alma AvenueMONTEREY At-Grade CORRIDOR from the San Jose to Merced Project Section environmental document. Viaduct to Scott Blvd San Jose (Long Viaduct) h h Diridon Station San Francisco to San Jose Alignments (At-Grade) Central Valley Wye Alignments Viaduct to I-880 h (Short Viaduct) Bernal Way HSR Stations MERCED COUNTY Blended, at-grade h Maintenance of Way Facility CENTRAL VALLEY WYE STUDY AREA San Bruno Ave. SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY Monterey Corridor SANTA CLARA US 101 COUNTY Viaduct h h MORGAN HILL McCabe Rd. I-5 Morgan Hill AND GILROY PACHECO PASS Road Carlucci UPRR Dedicated, at-grade h ALTERNATIVE 3 Church Ave. ALTERNATIVE 1 Blended, at-grade h ALTERNATIVE 2 Santa Nella Volta M San Martin ALTERNATIVE 4 Los San Luis Banos Morgan Hill and Gilroy East Gilroy Station Reservoir (Embankment) Embankment to SANTA CRUZ Downtown h Gilroy downtown Gilroy COUNTY Gilroy Station 0 2.5 5 10 (Embankment) N M Miles Viaduct to Downtown ilometers h Gilroy Station Casa De Fruta 0 5 10 20 downtown Gilroy (At-Grade) Viaduct & embankment Downtown h Gilroy Station to east Gilroy (Viaduct) San Felipe Rd. Blended, at-grade to downtown Gilroy h SAN BENITO Alternative 4 COUNTY MONTEREY Alternative 4 was developed to address feedback from Pacheco Pass COUNTY stakeholders on Alternatives 1, 2, and 3: minimize property Tunnel, viaduct, and h displacements, limit natural resource impacts, retain other structures h h h local community development patterns, improve the San Joaquin Valley Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 efficiency and safety of the existing railroad corridor, and set the stage for extending regional electrified passenger Embankment and The objective of Alternative 1 Alternative 2 features a Alternative 3 was also designed rail service to Southern Santa Clara County. viaduct along Henry h h h h is to minimize land required dedicated high-speed rail to minimize the project footprint Miller Rd for the project, minimize alignment located between by operating on viaducts Alternative 4 is different from the others because it would impacts on the ground, and the existing Union Pacific and going around downtown enable both Caltrain and High-Speed Rail to operate on reduce the need to purchase Railroad (UPRR) corridor Morgan Hill. The objective of the same alignment (this is called a blended system). The right-of-way to build and and Monterey Road. This Alternative 3 is to minimize service would operate on two electrified passenger tracks Pacheco Pass and San Joaquin Valley Subsections operate dedicated, fully grade- alternative would have the the needed right-of-way in alongside one conventional freight track predominantly separated high-speed rail. highest number of property downtown Gilroy by bypassing All alternatives have the same East of the I-5 overcrossing, within the existing Caltrain and UPRR rights-of-way. This would be accomplished displacements (taking downtown and instead serving alignment after Gilroy (starting the alignment through the San by extensive use of viaduct private or public land for rail), an east Gilroy Station. Like The maximum train speed would be 110 mph where near Casa De Fruta). Through the Joaquin Valley Subsection would (raised “aerial”) structures and but would provide grade Alternative 2, Alternative 3 operations would be blended between San Jose and Pacheco Pass Subsection, there be predominantly on embankment bypassing downtown Morgan separations between the features a long viaduct between Gilroy. South and east of Gilroy, speeds would increase up would be a long tunnel around along the south side of Henry Miller the northern arm of the San Luis Road to Carlucci Road, traveling on Hill. By traveling where existing rail corridor and city streets Scott Boulevard and Diridon to 220 mph in the dedicated High-Speed Rail portion of Reservoir and viaducts over the viaduct over major watercourses transportation infrastructure in San Jose, Morgan Hill, Station, but is the same as the alignment. Alternative 4 will require the successful California Aqueduct, Delta-Mendota and through the Grasslands – like rail or highways – exist, San Martin, and Gilroy. Alternative 1 from the Monterey completion of negotiations with UPRR for the use of their Alternative 1 makes use of Corridor Subsection to Church Canal, and I-5. Ecological Area. rail corridor between San Jose and Gilroy. existing rights-of-way whenever Avenue in San Martin. feasible. Social icon Circle Only use blue and/or white. For more details check out our Brand Guidelines. HOW TO STAY INVOLVED www.hsr.ca.gov 800-455-8166 [email protected] @cahsra facebook.com/CaliforniaHighSpeedRail @cahsra youtube.com/CAHighSpeedRail Acronyms, Abbreviations, and Key Terms At-grade An alignment at ground level MOWF Maintenance of way facility: A facility where equipment for nightly maintenance of Aerial An alignment with tracks raised in the air right-of-way and tracks is stored (e.g. on a bridge or viaduct) mph Miles per hour Authority California High-Speed Rail Authority: State agency responsible for planning, designing, NEPA National Environmental Policy Act: A building, and operating the first high-speed Federal law that requires Federal agencies rail system in the US to assess the environmental effects of their proposed actions prior to making decisions Blended A rail system shared between two or more operators (e.g. high-speed rail and Caltrain) NOI Notice of intent: A formal announcement of intent to prepare an EIS; the first step of the CEQA California Environmental Quality Act: NEPA process A California law that requires state and local agencies to identify the significant NOP Notice of preparation: A document stating environmental impacts of their actions that an EIR will be prepared for a particular and to avoid or mitigate those impacts, project; the first step in the CEQA process if feasible PAA Preliminary Alternatives Analysis report: For Dedicated An alignment with only high-speed trains the San Jose to Merced Project Section, this document, released in 2010, provided initial EIR Environmental impact report: A document details of design options in each subsection
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Capitol Corridor Service Performance
    CAPITOL CORRIDOR SERVICE PERFORMANCE In July 2016, the Capitol Corridor had one of its best months in the history of the service. Ridership was the highest ever, with a total of 128,655 passengers, a 1.7% year‐over‐year (YOY) increase. Revenue was up 4.6% compared to July 2015. Compared to June 2016, On‐ Time Performance (OTP) slipped slightly from 96% to 95%, yet was still above the FY16 standard of 90%. The Year‐To‐Date (YTD) results continue to be in positive territory. Compared to FY15, FYTD16 ridership and revenue are up 5.5%, with the System Operating Ratio at 55%, five percentage points above the 50% standard. YTD OTP is 94%, which keeps the Capitol Corridor in the #1 spot for service reliability in the national Amtrak intercity passenger rail network. The FYTD16 customer satisfaction scores (through June 2016) are at 89% “Highly Satisfied”, one point above the FY16 standard of 88%. The following are ridership highlights for July 2016: Average weekend ridership for July was down 7% versus July 2015. To address these continued decreases in weekend ridership, the CCJPA is modifying the weekend/holiday train schedule effective August 22, 2016, to slot trains at times that align with typical weekend travel patterns. Average July weekday ridership yielded a 9% increase thanks to continued growth on the trains serving San Jose/Silicon Valley and Placer County stations. Amtrak has sent detailed performance results (see attached) for June 2016 and provided below is a summary of the attached tables: OTP: June 2016 system end‐point OTP was a stellar 96% compared to 93% for May 2016.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain Governance
    Caltrain Governance JPB Special Meeting #3 on Governance June 25, 2021 Welcome to Special Meeting #3 2 • Review Meeting #3 Objectives and Special Meeting Governance Process Roadmap • Staff Presentations #3 Agenda • Approach to Regional and Non-Self Directed Relationships • Active and Emerging Discussions • Strategic Issues ~ Break ~ • Discussion • Next Steps 3 Special Meeting #3 Objectives and Process Roadmap 4 JPB Governance 2021 Roadmap Goals: Goals: - Exploration and education about the JPB’s range of structural - Discussion of selected option(s) and financial and legal analysis towards developing governance paths. the 2021 governance recommendation. - Selection of governance options and key issues to focus on in Phase 2. - Adoption of governance recommendation at December 2021 JPB meeting. 2021 January February March April May June July August September October November December Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Process Ad Hoc #1 Hoc #2 Hoc #3 Hoc #4 Hoc #5 Hoc #6 Hoc #7 Hoc #8 Hoc #9 Hoc #10 Hoc #11 Board Adoption Special Special Special Special Special of 2021 Meeting #1 Meeting #2 Meeting #3 Meeting #4 Meeting #5 Governance Recommendation We Are Here 5 JPB Governance 2021 Roadmap Goals: Goals: - Exploration and education about the JPB’s range of structural - Discussion of selected option(s) and financial and legal analysis towards developing governance paths. the 2021 governance recommendation. - Selection of governance options and key issues to focus on
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Environmental Setting and Consequences
    CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES This chapter presents information on the environmental setting in the project area as well as the environmental consequences of the No-Electrification and Electrification Program Alternatives. Environmental issue categories are organized in alphabetical order, consistent with the CEQA checklist presented in Appendix A. The project study area encompasses the geographic area potentially most affected by the project. For most issues involving physical effects this is the project “footprint,” or the area that would be disturbed for or replaced by the new project facilities. This area focuses on the Caltrain corridor from the San Francisco Fourth and King Station in the City and County of San Francisco to the Gilroy Station in downtown Gilroy in Santa Clara County and also includes the various locations proposed for traction power facilities and power connections. Air quality effects may be felt over a wider area. 3.1 AESTHETICS 3.1.1 VISUAL OR AESTHETIC SETTING The visual or aesthetic environment in the Caltrain corridor is described to establish the baseline against which to compare changes resulting from construction of project facilities and the demolition or alteration of existing structures. This discussion focuses on representative locations along the railroad corridor, including existing stations (both modern and historic), tunnel portals, railroad overpasses, locations of the proposed traction power facilities and other areas where the Electrification Program would physically change above-ground features, affecting the visual appearance of the area and views enjoyed by area residents and users. For purposes of this analysis, sensitive visual receptors are defined as corridor residents and business occupants, recreational users of parks and preserved natural areas, and students of schools in the vicinity of the proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain Business Plan
    Caltrain Business Plan JULY 2019 LPMG 6/27/2019 What Addresses the future potential of the railroad over the next 20-30 years. It will assess the benefits, impacts, and costs of different What is service visions, building the case for investment and a plan for the Caltrain implementation. Business Plan? Why Allows the community and stakeholders to engage in developing a more certain, achievable, financially feasible future for the railroad based on local, regional, and statewide needs. 2 What Will the Business Plan Cover? Technical Tracks Service Business Case Community Interface Organization • Number of trains • Value from • Benefits and impacts to • Organizational structure • Frequency of service investments (past, surrounding communities of Caltrain including • Number of people present, and future) • Corridor management governance and delivery riding the trains • Infrastructure and strategies and approaches • Infrastructure needs operating costs consensus building • Funding mechanisms to to support different • Potential sources of • Equity considerations support future service service levels revenue 3 Where Are We in the Process? Board Adoption Stanford Partnership and Board Adoption of Board Adoption of of Scope Technical Team Contracting 2040 Service Vision Final Business Plan Initial Scoping Technical Approach Part 1: Service Vision Development Part 2: Business Implementation and Stakeholder Refinement, Partnering, Plan Completion Outreach and Contracting We Are Here 4 Flexibility and Integration 5 What Service planning work to date has been focused on the development of detailed, Understanding illustrative growth scenarios for the Caltrain corridor. The following analysis generalizes the 2040 these detailed scenarios, emphasizing opportunities for both variation and larger “Growth regional integration within the service Scenarios” as frameworks that have been developed.
    [Show full text]
  • High Speed Rail! R ING
    High Speed Rail! Fast Facts At peak, about 100 trains per day through Gilroy About 25% would stop at new Gilroy station, remaining will pass through Gilroy at high speed Required Gilroy station parking structure would house 6,600-8,000 cars. The California High-Speed Rail project is a planned high-speed rail system in the state of 2010 California and headed byyg California High-Sppy()pjeed Rail Authority (CHSRA). The project was approved by California voters on November 4, 2008 with the passage of Proposition 1A authorizing US$9.95 billion in general obligation bonds for the project. The CHSRA is currently tasked with completing final planning, design, and environmental efforts. When built, high-speed trains capable of 220 mph (350 km/h) are anticipated to link San Francisco and Los Angeles in as little as two and a half hours. The planned system would also serve other major California cities, ING such as Sacramento, San Jose, Fresno, Bakersfield, and San Diego. The City of Gilroy is located R on the Merced to San Jose segment of the system . Plans are to have a station located in Gilroy , with approximately 25 percent of the trains stopping at the Gilroy station, and the other 75 percent going through the Gilroy area at high speed. Construction efforts are anticipated to begin by 2011. An implementation plan approved in August 2005 estimates that it would take eight to eleven SP years to "develop and begin operation of an initial segment of the California high-speed train.” Currently, intercity rail service does not directly serve the city of San Francisco (other than Caltrain, which connects San Francisco to various cities in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties, such as San Jose, Gilroy, Palo Alto, and Belmont).
    [Show full text]
  • Weekend SF Caltrain Closure Feb
    Weekend SF Caltrain Closure Feb. 22, 2020 – March 29, 2020 San Francisco (4th/King) ZONE st nd to 3rd/20th 22 St 8 1 Daly T 9 City to San Bruno/ BART to Mission/1 Bayshore Arleta So. San Francisco TRANSIT San Bruno OPTIONS to Downtown San Francisco to SFO SFO ZONE Millbrae to San Francisco or East Bay to Daly City Weekend Only Broadway 2 Oakland Coliseum 292 Burlingame BART st San Mateo via SFO Hayward Park Your one-stop phone and to Mission/1 web source for up-to-the 398 Hillsdale minute Bay Area traffic, Fremont/ transit, carpool, bicycling Belmont Warm and parking information Springs BART San Carlos ECR Redwood City Bicycles on Transit Weekend Only ZONE Atherton There will be limited capacity Menlo Park 3 to Daly City for bikes on the buses. ECR Palo Alto California Ave to San Francisco or East Bay San Antonio Mountain View Sunnyvale LEGEND: ZONE Lawrence Red Bold Type - Baby Bullet Station Santa Clara 4 Airport Transfer Station College Park ◊ • Transfer Station San Jose Diridon 181 ◊ Weekday Only Free weekend Shuttle Tamien BART Station Caltrain will NOT provide weekend service to San Francisco or 22nd Street stations February 22, 2020 to March 29, 2020. Trains will terminate at Bayshore Station. Free bus service will be available for Caltrain riders from Bayshore Station to 22nd Street and San Francisco stations. Listed below are some transit options that might work better for you. Connect with BART (bart.gov) at the Use SamTrans Bus Service (Limited Millbrae Transit Center Number of Bikes Allowed) Estimated Travel Time (From Millbrae BART From/To Downtown San Francisco Station): Route 292 (samtrans.com/292) • Approx.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 1 OVERVIEW of TRANSIT SYSTEM
    1 Chapter 1 which SP operated the service, but state and local OVERVIEW OF TRANSIT SYSTEM government agencies subsidized and adminis- tered it. Besides contract administration, Caltrans’ 1.1 BRIEF HISTORY responsibilities included planning, marketing, customer service, engineering and design, fare and Railroad service along the San Francisco Peninsula schedule setting, and performance monitoring. The has a long and storied history and has existed, in commuter service was renamed Caltrain. some form, since 1863. The railroad line, one of the oldest in California, was fi rst proposed in 1851 to connect the booming trade center of San Francis- co and the fi rst state capital of California, San Jose. Ground for the railroad was not broken until May 1861, when construction of the line began at San Francisquito Creek, on the Santa Clara-San Mateo county line. By October 1863, regular service be- gan between San Francisco and Mayfi eld (now the California Avenue station in Palo Alto). The con- struction of the line to San Jose was completed in January 1864, and two trains began operating daily between San Francisco and San Jose. Prior to Caltrain’s current ownership, passenger rail ridership on the Peninsula was at its peak in the In 1987, representatives of the City and County mid-1940s, when more than 9.54 million patrons of San Francisco, the San Mateo County Transit rode the train annually. However, as the cost of District (“District”) and the Santa Clara County operating the Peninsula commuter rail service in- Transit District, now the Santa Clara County Valley creased, and the number of riders began to decline, Transportation Authority (VTA), began the effort to the former Southern Pacifi c Railroad (SP) began to create the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board phase out its less patronized trains, and by the mid- (JPB) to transfer administrative responsibility for 1970s sought to discontinue passenger rail service.
    [Show full text]
  • Paradas Del Tránsito 公車站地圖
    Transit Stops Paradas del tránsito 公車站地圖 N Transit Information W E Fremont S Station 0 50 ft Fremont 215 0 15m Map Key 216 • 232 You Are Here 3-Minute Walk 500ft/150m Radius 217 Bus Transit Stop BART Parking 99 • 801 Bike Parking U Elevator Escalator Passenger Pick-up/Drop-off Restrooms Stairs Fremont East Plaza Station Agent Booth Station 212 Station Entrance/Exit Taxi Stand 140 Telephone West Plaza Ticket Vending: 200 Clipper / Add Cash Value Addfare Transit Information 251 Transit Lines AC Transit Local Bus Lines 181 99 Bay Fair BART 200 Union City BART 200 Fremont BART 212 Fremont BART 239 NewPark Mall (weekdays) 212 Paci c Commons (weekends) 215 Fremont BART 215 Benicia St. at Kato Rd. 180 216 Union City BART To Washington Hospital, Kaiser, City Hall 216 NewPark Mall 217 Fremont BART 217 Great Mall 232 Fremont BART 232 NewPark Mall 120 239 Fremont BART 239 Millmont Dr. at Kato Rd. 251 Fremont BART Ohlone College Newark campus (weekdays) 251 Silliman Recreation Center (weekends) All Nighter Bus Lines (Approx. 1 am–5 am) Local Area 801 Downtown Oakland Transbay Bus Lines BART TRACK U Stanford University Tri-Valley Santa Clara Valley Transportation Medical Center Authority (VTA) 120 Lockheed Martin/Shoreline 140 Mission College & Montague Expy. Washington 180 Great Mall Transit Center Outpatient Washington Hospital 181 San Jose Diridon STIVERS ST Surgery Healthcare System WARM SPRINGS EXTENSION Center MOWRY AVE Note: Service may vary with time of day or day of week. Please consult transit agency schedule DYER LN or contact 511 for more information.
    [Show full text]
  • Transit Information San Jose Diridon Transit Center San Jose
    Transit SANTA CRUZ Amtrak Thruway Information GA Santa Clara Valley Schedule Information e ective February 8, 2021 Amtrak Capitol Corridor Monterey-Salinas Transit Santa Cruz METRO operates San Jose Transportation Authority Capitol Corridor intercity rail operates the Monterey-San Jose the Highway 17 Express, an inter- Times are approximate (VTA) provides bus, light rail, and serves 18 stations along a 170- Express service, an interagency county express service between San Jose Diridon paratransit service throughout Santa Clara & Santa Clara & Santa Clara & Santa Clara & San Jose Diridon Bus Stops mile rail corridor, and offers a express service, under an Santa Cruz and San Jose, under Montgomery Cahill Montgomery Cahill Light Rail Station convenient way to travel between the agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Diridon Transit Santa Clara County and to Milpitas an agreement with the Santa Clara Valley Bus Stop Bus Stop Bus Stop Bus Stop Sierra Foothills, Sacramento, the San Transportation Authority and the Capitol BART, Berryessa BART, and Caltrain Transportation Authority, San Joaquin Routes Francisco Bay Area and Silicon Valley/San Corridor Joint Powers Authority. For more Joint Powers Authority and the Capitol stations. For more information visit vta.org, Route Route Route Route Route Route Route Route Route Green 64A Jose. For information call 1-877-9-RIDECC information call 1-888-MST-BUS1 or visit Corridor Joint Powers Authority. For more Center or call 408-321-2300 or 408-321-2330 (TTY). 22 22 522 522 64A 64B 68 168 500 Line 64B or visit capitolcorridor.org. www.mst.org. information go to www.scmtd.com or call RD, CO, GA, SJD to to to to 1-831-425-8600.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix a of the Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan
    THE CALTRAIN CORRIDOR VISION PLAN Appendix A Rail: Existing Conditions and Vision Plan Methodology Appendix A describes today’s Caltrain rail system and service. It also explains the assumptions and methodology used to develop the Caltrain Corridor Vision Plan recommendations for future rail service in the corridor. 1. Caltrain Today The following existing conditions form what this study assumes to the baseline conditions that the Vision Plan elements are built upon. This information and the assumptions were based on what was available in 2016. 1.1 Physical Infrastructure The Caltrain Corridor is an approximately 48-mile rail corridor between the San Francisco 4th and King Station and San Jose Diridon Station. Between San Francisco and CP (Control Point) Coast1, a short distance north of the Santa Clara station, the corridor is owned and controlled by the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (i.e., Caltrain). Between CP Coast and Diridon Station, the corridor is a portion of Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) Coast Subdivision (i.e., its rail line from Oakland to San Luis Obispo). The entire right-of-way and all main tracks in this section are owned by Caltrain, with the exception of Main Track 1, which is owned and maintained by UP2. Caltrain owns all stations in the corridor, all of which it received from the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in 19933. The corridor is primarily a two main track corridor. Major track infrastructure components and stations are shown in Figure 1. At eight locations, the corridor includes main tracks or sidings other than two main tracks, also shown in Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • SAN JOSÉ DIRIDON INTEGRATED STATION CONCEPT PLAN LAYOUT DEVELOPMENT REPORT San José Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan
    SAN JOSÉ DIRIDON INTEGRATED STATION CONCEPT PLAN LAYOUT DEVELOPMENT REPORT San José Diridon Integrated Station Concept Plan Acknowledgements Executive Directors Nuria Fernandez, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Brian Kelly, California High-Speed Rail Authority Dave Sykes, City of San José Jim Hartnett, Caltrain Project Directors Ron Golem, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Scott Haywood, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Boris Lipkin, California High-Speed Rail Authority Kim Walesh, City of San José John Ristow, City of San José Jim Ortbal, City of San José Michelle Bouchard, Caltrain Working Group Members Jason Kim, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Kelly Doyle, California High-Speed Rail Authority Eric Eidlin, City of San José Bill Ekern, City of San José Melissa Reggiardo, Caltrain Jill Gibson, VTA’s BART Silicon Valley Phase II Program Former Project Staff Members Chris Augenstein, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Carolyn Gonot, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Jim Unites, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Prepared by Arcadis U.S., Inc. Arcadis Nederland B.V. Benthem Crouwel Architects 2839 Paces Ferry Road P.O. Box 220 P.O. Box 9201 Suite 900 3800 AE Amersfoort NL-1006 AE Amsterdam Atlanta, GA 30339 The Netherlands The Netherlands 2 Layout Development Report Table of Contents 1. INTRODUCTION ........................................... 4 6. SUMMARY OUTREACH .............................. 41 1.1 Project Purpose ��������������������������������������������������������5
    [Show full text]
  • Item No. 1 Town of Atherton
    Item No. 1 Town of Atherton CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT – STUDY SESSION TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL RAIL COMMITTEE GEORGE RODERICKS, CITY MANAGER FROM: ROBERT OVADIA, PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR DATE: JANUARY 9, 2019 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION AND FEEDBACK REGARDING THE CALTRAIN BUSINESS PLAN, FUTURE TRAIN SERVICE IN ATHERTON, AND RAIL POLICY RECOMMENDATION Discuss and provide feedback regarding the Caltrain Business Plan (currently under development), service scenario alternatives at the Atherton Caltrain Station, and Rail Policy in Atherton. BACKGROUND In 2018, Caltrain launched the development of its 2040 Business Plan with a goal of addressing the future potential of their rail service over the next 20-30 years. The Business Plan is intended to assess the benefits, costs, and impacts of different service visions and ultimately build the case for investments and a plan for implementation. Caltrain discontinued weekday train service at the Atherton Caltrain Station in August 2005. Weekend service at the Station continues. The Caltrain Modernization Program (CalMod) includes electrification and other projects that are intended to upgrade the performance, efficiency and capacity of Caltrain service along the service corridor. Construction of the electrification project has begun along the corridor, including the installation of pole foundations in Atherton. Caltrain intends to begin passenger service with electric trains in early 2022. Previously, Caltrain had committed to resume weekday service in some form with the implementation of their electric passenger train service. This service commitment is echoed in its environmental documents for the electrification project. In May 2018, the Council adopted Resolution 18-11 rescinding and replacing Resolution 15-10 titled “A Resolution of the City Council of the Town of Atherton Establishing and Governing Town Committees” including an attachment of the City Council’s adopted Rail Related Policy Issues.
    [Show full text]