Caltrain and CA HSR Palo Alto Crossing Elimination

Discussion related to commuter rail and transit operators in California past and present including Los Angeles Metrolink and Metro Subway and Light Rail, San Diego Coaster, Sprinter and MTS Trolley, Altamont Commuter Express (Stockton), Caltrain and MUNI (San Francisco), Sacramento RTD Light Rail, and others...

Moderator: lensovet

Caltrain and CA HSR Palo Alto Crossing Elimination

Postby Jeff Smith » Mon Jan 28, 2019 10:17 am

PADailyPost.com: Council reduces rail crossing options, tunnel still alive

The idea of putting Caltrain in a tunnel in Palo Alto is still alive.

City Council on Tuesday (Jan. 22) rejected Ed Shikada’s recommendation to bury the idea of a tunnel north of Oregon Expressway, and voted 5-0 to continue considering whether to bury the train in a citywide tunnel and to fully or partially close Churchill Avenue at the tracks.
...
The city is grappling with how to modify the Churchill Avenue, Palo Alto Avenue, Meadow Drive and Charleston Road crossings to prepare for an increase in trains. The increase is expected when Caltrain switches to electric in 2022 and high-speed rail launches in 2029. Today, the city sees about 92 trains per day. In 2022, Caltrain expects that number to increase to 114, and High Speed Rail expects to send 128 trains per day to and from San Francisco, with an additional 24 trains starting in San Jose.
...
Next stop, Willoughby
~Jeff Smith (fka "Sarge") :: RAILROAD.NET Site Administrator
Jeff Smith
Site Admin
 
Posts: 8098
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 9:28 am
Location: MP 67.2 Georgia Southern Railway

Re: Caltrain and CA HSR Palo Alto Crossing Elimination

Postby Tadman » Mon Mar 11, 2019 9:56 am

If they're fast and short trains, is it worth it? I could see this being useful if slow freights were a problem, but they're not.
User avatar
Tadman
 
Posts: 9043
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2004 10:21 am

Re: Caltrain and CA HSR Palo Alto Crossing Elimination

Postby rohr turbo » Wed Mar 13, 2019 3:49 pm

The motivation for grade separation is not traffic congestion, it is safety. If CAHSR gets built, you really don't want grade crossings (consider NEC.) Plus Palo Alto has a rash of drivers waiting for red lights on the tracks, and sadly, a cluster of teen suicides on the tracks.

There seems to be some momentum growing around an elevated viaduct through the city. Cheaper than tunneling and less obtrusive than a 'Berlin Wall.'

The line is already busy: 92 daily Caltrain plus probably 4 freights. With CAHSR, it would get very busy.
User avatar
rohr turbo
 
Posts: 215
Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 11:44 pm
Location: palo alto, ca


Return to California Commuter & Transit

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest