The Future Scenarios

caltrain_SP_QX4.qxd4The Future Scenarios
Developing the Scenarios Once the policy approach for each scenario was defined, the financial, service, and
capital assumptions were developed further and are detailed in three supporting
plans: the Finance, Service, and Capital Plans. The three plans are currently being
finalized and will be presented to the Joint Powers Board for adoption in Fall/Winter
of 2004. The following are descriptions and objectives of each supporting plan.
FINANCE PLAN OBJECTIVES
The Finance Plan details the funding assumptions and funding strategies for each
scenario. Specifically, the Finance Plan objectives are to:
• Identify available funding over the next 20 years
• Maximize the availability of federal and state revenues in cooperation
with the member agencies
• Match available funding with eligible capital and service programs
• Project funding shortfalls and develop strategies to deliver future programs
SERVICE PLAN OBJECTIVES
The Service Plan outlines the service goals for each of the scenarios as well as a
20–year plan to deliver them. Its main objectives are to:
• Determine future level of service (Trains per day/per hour)
• Design a flexible mix of service (Express/Limited/Local)
• Identify the triggers (productivity or other performance measures)
for changes in service
• Identify the efforts needed to increase market share
As stated in the Guiding Principles, understanding market demand is the key to
retaining existing riders and attracting new riders. It will influence the mix and
CALTRAIN STRATEGIC PLAN 2004 | 2023
THE FUTURE SCENARIOS
29
scheduling of Caltrain service, the nature and timing of capital improvements that
support service and operations, and the overall passenger experience on Caltrain.
Meeting market demand requires:
• Optimizing service levels and reducing overall trip times
• Improving connections between Caltrain and other systems
• Providing better access to stations (pedestrian, ADA, transit, bicycle
and vehicular access)
• Providing amenities to enhance the passenger experience
Universal Design Elements. Market research in the Caltrain service area reveals
that many service improvements to transit will have broad appeal to existing and
potential riders and will substantially increase ridership. These universal design ele-
ments address key traveler attitudes and desires, forming the core of the Caltrain
brand identity:
• Privacy and Comfort is important to all of the service population in varying
degrees. Travelers desire comfortable, stress-free travel and privacy from
other travelers. Lower cost strategies include training and enforcement
policies to control noisy or unruly passengers. Higher cost efforts include
providing spacious seating on all trains and interiors with some separation
from other travelers.
• Personal Safety is perceived as very important to the vast majority of our
service population while accessing or riding the system. Strategies to address
the need for personal safety include zero tolerance policies for aggressive
behavior and well-lighted, graffiti-free shelters with 911 emergency phones.
• Addressing Flexibility, or the need to travel to many locations at times that
vary from day to day, is a challenge for transit. Successful strategies include
mid-day shuttle services at major business parks, station cars and other
personal transport rentals, and improved land use to increase access to
retail and commercial services.
attribute that addresses passengers’
Improving stations to eliminate
“hold-out” delays, providing for
faster boarding of passengers
needing assistance, and increasing
buses, and shuttles.
is possible through service improve-
ments such as universal fare media
or including transfer costs in a sin-
gle fare, providing easy access to
transit information, and implement-
the increasing hassle and cost of
auto use—external factors often
associated with parking and traffic
congestion—make transit a more
attractive option for travelers.
of a wide array of improvements,
categorized by Replacement and
The Capital Plan supports the Service
Plan by including improvements that
are necessary to implement the service
goals of each scenario. The main objec-
tives of the Capital Plan are to:
• Identify the magnitude of system
rehabilitation and replacement
• Develop conceptual cost estimates
of proposed capital programs
• Develop techniques for implementing
the railroad into a good state of repair
and to continue scheduled replacement
of infrastructure and rolling stock.
The major projects in this category
are bridge rehabilitation, rolling stock
overhaul and replacement, and track
rehabilitation, which comprise two-thirds
Replacement and Rehabilitation pro-
the reconstruction of stations to elimi-
nate the hold-out rule at most stations.
The replacement and rehabilitation
scenarios. Any variations are due to
reconstruction projects that occur
Enhancement projects include
31
TA B L E 2 : C A P I TA L I M P R O V E M E N T P L A N P R O J E C T S
REPLACEMENT AND REHABILITATION
Bridge Rehabilitation
Capitalized Maintenance
Communication Equipment
Downtown San Francisco Extension
in this category include electrification
and improvements related to capacity
expansion, such as grade separations
and track construction. Capacity
rehabilitation as well as new construction
and are necessary to increase express
service in the peak periods. The capacity
expansion projects are typically pack-
aged together because it is more
cost-effective to implement them
varies widely between the scenarios
and depends primarily on the inclusion
of electrification and the extent of
capacity expansion along the corridor.
Due to inflation, the timing of projects
will also affect costs; however, only
constant dollars (2003) are shown in
the Strategic Plan. In the case of elec-
trification, the timing and coordination
with other improvements is also criti-
cal. Estimates show that electrifying
the railroad prior to the construction of
a grade separation can increase capital
costs (of electrification and the grade
separation) in the vicinity of the grade
separation project by 65 percent.
The Support program includes capital
program development and project
sion to Downtown San Francisco to a
rebuilt Transbay Terminal, the
sion to Monterey/Salinas. These exten-
sions are considered to be third-party
projects, and their capital costs are not
included in the Caltrain Capital
Improvement Plan. Additional operating
Downtown San Francisco have been
included in the Enhanced Scenario
beginning in 2010 and Build-Out
Scenario beginning in 2014. Operating
costs that would be incurred by the
Joint Powers Board for the Dumbarton
and Monterey/Salinas projects have not
been determined.
summarized in Tables 3 and 4 (pages
33 and 34) and are described further
on the following pages, followed by a
comparison and evaluation of all three
scenarios. All costs and revenues are
shown in 2003 dollars and shortfalls do
not include potential revenue from
innovative funding sources.
TA B L E 3 : S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S S U M M A R Y— S TAT U S Q U O A N D M O D E R AT E G R O W T H
FINANCE (IN 2003 $) STATUS QUO MODERATE GROWTH
Operations Farebox Revenue Historical Some Growth
Member Contributions Stabilized* Stabilized* or Decrease
Capital Federal/State/Local Historical Historical
High-Speed Rail Bonds None None
Innovative Techniques None None
Express Service Goal 10 trains/weekday 20 trains/weekday one-hour headways one-hour headways
Weekday Total Trains 86 100
Saturday/Sunday Trains 32/30 32/30
Customer Amenities Low Low
Annual Ridership 14,369,000 19,484,000
CAPITAL (IN 2003 $) STATUS QUO MODERATE GROWTH
Replacement & Rehabilitation Same Rehabilitation needs in all scenarios
Capacity Expansion North quadrant North and (partial) (SM County grade South quadrants
separations) by 2011
Regional Extensions (Third-Party Projects) Downtown San Francisco No No
Dumbarton No No
Salinas/Monterey No No
Total Capital Program Cost $1.151 Billion $2.000 Billion
(Shortfall) without innovative sources $0M Assumes ($217M) Assumes and HSR bonds $159M local match $164M local match
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized. *Member contributions that are stabilized are constant year-to-year with the exception of increases due to inflation.
TA B L E 4 : S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S S U M M A R Y— E N H A N C E D A N D B U I L D - O U T
FINANCE (IN 2003 $) ENHANCED BUILD-OUT
Operations Farebox Revenue Growth Growth
Member Contributions Growth Growth
San Francisco Sales Tax Through 2034 Through 2034
San Mateo Sales Tax Through 2029 Through 2029
Santa Clara Sales Tax Through 2036 Through 2036
High-Speed Rail Bonds None Passes in 2006 or 2008
Innovative Techniques Yes Yes
Express Service Goal 36 trains/weekday 36 trains/weekday half-hour headways half-hour headways
Weekday Total Trains 136 138
Saturday/Sunday Trains 32/32 32/32
Customer Amenities Medium-High High
CAPITAL (IN 2003 $) ENHANCED BUILD-OUT
Replacement & Rehabilitation Same Rehabilitation needs in all scenarios
Capacity Expansion North, Central, and South Entire route four-tracked quadrants by 2013 and grade separated by 2016
Electrification (Revenue Service) 2008 2014 or earlier
Regional Extensions (Third-Party Projects)
Dumbarton Yes Yes
Salinas/Monterey Yes Yes
Total Capital Program Cost $2.490 Billion $4.972 Billion
(Shortfall) without innovative ($629M) Assumes ($3B) Assumes approx. sources and HSR bonds $181M local match $180M local match
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized.
SERVICE 2003 2005 2010 2015 2020 2023
Weekday Express Trains 0 10 10 10 36 10
Weekday Limited Trains 14 37 37 37 37 37
Weekday Local 62 39 39 39 39 39
Weekday Total Trains 76 86 86 86 86 86
Saturday/Sunday Trains 0 32/30 32/30 32/30 32/30 32/30
Shuttle Buses (station access) 40 41 45 45 45 45
Average Weekday Ridership 28,000 29,300 33,100 37,300 41,200 43,700
Annual Ridership (Caltrain) 7,362,000 14,369,000
OPERATIONS (MILLION 2003 $) 2004-2008 2009-2013 2014-2018 2019-2023 TOTAL
TOTAL Operating Costs A 407.7 421.0 421.0 421.0 1,670.5
Operating Revenue
Member Contributions (all) 232.0 232.2 213.6 195.5 873.3
TOTAL Operating Revenue 407.7 421.0 421.0 421.0 1,670.5
Avg. Annual Member Contributions (all) 46.4 46.4 42.7 39.1 43.7
CAPITAL (MILLION 2003 $) 2004-2008 2009-2013 2014-2018 2019-2023 TOTAL
Maintenance Facility (Committed Project) 53.0 0 0 0 53.0
Replacement & Rehabilitation 150.0 279.0 224.2 177.6 830.7
Enhancements 232.6 0 0 0 232.6
Support 6.5 6.0 11.5 11.0 35.0
TOTAL Capital Costs 442.0 285.0 235.7 188.6 1,151.3
Average Annual Cost 88.4 57.0 47.1 37.7 57.6
Capital Funding
Local Match (Member Agencies) 43.8 48.7 37.9 28.4 158.7
Other B 179.1 0 0 0 179.1
TOTAL Capital Revenue 442.0 285.0 235.7 188.6 1,151.3
Surplus/(Shortfall) 0 0 0 0 0
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized. A Operating costs in the first five-year period are lower because the first year includes service levels of 76 trains per day (no express service). Operating costs include electrification and extension to Downtown San Francisco starting in 2014. B Other Capitol Funding consists of San Mateo Measure A funds remaining minus San Mateo local matching funds.
CALTRAIN STRATEGIC PLAN 2004 | 2023 35
TA B L E 5 : S TAT U S Q U O S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S
A
Keep the railroad operating at current levels of service and limit investment in
improvements other than normalized rehabilitation and replacement.
The Status Quo Scenario is the most fiscally conservative of the four scenarios. It
assumes that current levels of funding will support 86-train weekday service
planned for 2004, normalized infrastructure rehabilitation and replacement, and
some capacity expansion in San Mateo County. It does not include the extension to
downtown San Francisco, extensions across the Dumbarton Bridge or to Salinas/
Monterey, or High-Speed Rail in California. Details of the Staus Quo Scenario charac-
teristics in five-year increments are shown in Table 5 (page 35).
The primary service goal is to maintain existing (2004) levels of service1, including
initial Caltrain Express or “Baby Bullet” service, through the 20-year period. The Status
Quo level-of-service on a typical weekday is capped at 86 trains per day, which includes
10 express trains. A flexible mix of local, limited, and express trains would have to be
scheduled to optimize service with existing infrastructure. Weekend and Gilroy service
would not change. Up to 45 shuttle bus routes would provide station access services.
The capital improvements in the Status Quo Scenario consist primarily of scheduled
replacement and rehabilitation projects, some station and platform improvements to
remove the hold-out rule2, programmed capacity expansion projects (grade separa-
tions in San Mateo County), and construction of the Caltrain Maintenance Facility.
These are projects with committed or programmed funds. There would be no High-
Speed Rail system along the Caltrain corridor in the Status Quo Scenario. In this sce-
nario, Capacity Expansion projects including track rehabilitation, grade separations,
signal construction, and track construction, comprise approximately $259 million (in
2003 dollars) of the total expenditures. These improvements, with the exception of
track rehabilitation, are funded by existing San Mateo County Measure A sales tax
revenue.
F U T U R E S C E N A R I O A
The Status Quo Scenario
1 Caltrain Express or “Baby Bullet” is a limited stop service which serves key stations along the Caltrain route. Express service offers travel times of less than one hour between San Jose and San Francisco, compared to the one-and-a-half hour travel time on local trains.
2 The hold-out rule is a safety measure that prevents a train from entering a station while another train is at the station boarding or unloading passengers. The hold-out rule is enforced at stations where passengers must cross active tracks to access a train, and can result in delays. Improvements associated with the Caltrain Express project will remove the hold-out rule at four stations leaving a total of 12 hold-out stations by June 2004.
OBJECTIVE
FUTURE SCENARIOS
The capital program in the Status Quo Scenario assumes only current levels of
funding would be available through the 20-year period. Federal, State, and local
match funds for capital improvements are assumed to remain at historic levels.
Remaining funds from existing San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara
county sales tax measures would remain through 2008 and 2036, respectively.
Funds from the reauthorization of the sales tax measure in San Mateo County
are not included in the Status Quo assumptions.
Operating funds consist primarily of contributions from the member agencies
and farebox revenues. In the Status Quo Scenario, projected ridership and
farebox revenues would experience some growth, primarily as a result of popu-
lation and job growth in the area, since the level-of-service on Caltrain would
not change. Member agency contributions would remain constant or decrease
as ridership and farebox revenues increase.
Caltrain Express, included in all scenarios, will improve travel times for passen-
gers using this service. Passengers using the local service will experience no
service increases over time. In the Status Quo Scenario, most of the capital
program would consist of rehabilitation and replacement, which would not
make a noticeable difference to the passenger experience.
The Status Quo Scenario will result in an increase in annual ridership and rev-
enues. Ridership is projected to increase by approximately 100 percent over
the 20-year period and operating costs will stabilize. Member subsidies will sta-
bilize or gradually decrease in the future if farebox revenues increase. Most of
the $1 billion capital program would support rehabilitation and replacement to
keep the railroad in a good state of repair and avoid a system of deferred
maintenance.
Suggested triggers for switching from the Status Quo to the Moderate Growth
Scenario would include the availability of additional funding resources,
increased demand as measured by productivity criteria (load factors), or
demand for improved service that require additional capacity expansion. The
member agencies would have to agree on the level of service and associated
operating costs and capital investment required to provide this service.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
PASSENGER EXPERIENCE
KEY FINDINGS
FUTURE SCENARIOS
FUTURE SCENARIOS
Optimize the operating and capital programs with limited increases to funding
resources, service, and capital improvements.
The Moderate Growth Scenario is a steady growth scenario. It assumes that commit-
ted and programmed funding will allow for normalized infrastructure rehabilitation,
some capacity expansion projects to improve the reliability of Caltrain Express, a
nominal increase in service, and electrification of the Caltrain line.3 It does not
include the extensions to downtown San Francisco, across the Dumbarton Bridge or
to Salinas/Monterey; or High-Speed Rail in California. A summary of the Moderate
Growth Scenario characteristics are shown in Table 6 (page 40).
The primary service goal is to deliver reliable express service at one-hour headways,
primarily in the peak periods. The Moderate Growth level-of-service by 2023 on a
typical weekday is capped at 100 trains per day, which includes 20 express trains.
A flexible mix of local, limited, and express trains would have to be scheduled to
optimize service with existing and planned capacity expansion. Gilroy service will
increase gradually over time, with trains added to the peak-direction, to the reverse-
direction, and possibly one train in the mid-day, for a total of ten trains in each
direction by 2023. Up to 59 shuttle bus routes would provide station access services.
The capital improvements in the Moderate Growth Scenario include critical replace-
ment and rehabilitation projects, station and platform improvements to remove the
hold-out rule, and capacity expansion projects to meet the one-hour headway and
service reliability goals. Also included in the capital program are enhancements,
such as construction of grade separations in key locations to improve safety, accom-
modate Caltrain Express, and accomodate increases in Gilroy service; electrification
of the line and replacement of rolling stock; ADA compliance through station improve-
ments; replacement and installation of fencing in select locations along the rail corri-
dor; and moderate improvements to communications and station access for all
modes. It is anticipated that electrification would come on line later in the Moderate
Growth Scenario than in other scenarios due to the time required to accumulate ade-
quate funding. Parking expansion would be limited, and it is anticipated that an
aggressive parking management plan would be necessary to address the high
demand for parking at specific stations. In this scenario, Capacity Expansion projects
including track rehabilitation, grade separations, signal construction, and track construc-
tion, comprise approximately $298 million (in 2003 dollars) of the total expenditures.
B F U T U R E S C E N A R I O B
The Moderate Growth Scenario
3 The electrification project would convert Caltrain from a diesel engine-powered rail system to an electrified system.
OBJECTIVE
FUTURE SCENARIOSFUTURE SCENARIOS
The capital program in the Moderate Growth Scenario assumes a “pay-as-you-
go” approach. Federal, State, and local match funds for capital improvements
are assumed to remain at historic levels for the 20-year period. Remaining
funds from existing San Mateo and Santa Clara county sales tax measures are
assumed to remain, as well as the new sales tax measure in San Francisco.
However, the reauthorization of the sales tax measure in San Mateo County is
not included in the Moderate Growth assumptions. The electrification project is
included in Track 1 of MTC’s Regional Transportation Plan and has a funding
plan under MTC’s Regional Transit Expansion Policy, Resolution 3434. The timing
of the availability of electrification funds varies among the member agencies,
therefore, in this scenario it is assumed that funding for the project from MTC
and the member agencies will not be available until 2014.
Caltrain Express, included in all scenarios, will improve travel times for passen-
gers using this service. Passengers using the local service will experience nomi-
nal service increases over time. Programmed capital improvements are
designed to reduce delays and improve travel time for all passengers. These
projects will require up to ten years to complete, therefore, time-savings relat-
ed to these improvements will be realized gradually. Passengers could benefit
from a combination of local, limited, and express service once these improve-
ments are in place.
In the Moderate Growth Scenario, ridership is projected to increase by nearly
165 percent between 2004 and 2023. The additional increase over the Status
Quo ridership is primarily due to the increase in peak period express service, in
addition to more Gilroy service and better station access via shuttle buses. While
operating costs will increase over time, it is estimated that average annual
operating subsidies will eventually decrease due to growth in farebox revenues.
The $2 billion capital program will result in an estimated $217 million shortfall.
The potential triggers for shifting from the Moderate Growth to the Enhanced
Scenario include availability of additional funding sources, increased demand
as measured by productivity criteria (load factors), or demand for improved
service that requires additional capacity expansion and customer amenities.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
KEY FINDINGS
FUTURE SCENARIOS
TA B L E 6 : M O D E R AT E G R O W T H S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S S U M M A R Y
SERVICE 2003 2005 2010 2015 2020 2023
Weekday Local 62 39 40 40 40 40
Operating Revenue
Member Contributions (all) 233.4 237.7 205.0 196.0 872.1
Avg Annual Member Contributions (all) 46.7 47.5 41.0 39.2 43.6
Enhancements 232.6 89.0 648.7 48.2 1,018.5
Support 6.5 6.0 11.5 11.0 35.0
TOTAL Capital Costs 442.0 396.7 912.7 248.2 1,999.5
Capital Funding
OtherB 179.1 0 417.0 0 596.0
Surplus/(Shortfall) 0 (92.6) (65.4) (58.8) (216.8)
Notes: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized. A Operating costs in the first five-year period are lower because the first year includes service levels of 76 trains per day (no express
service). Operating costs include electrification starting in 2018. B “Other” Capital Funding consists of funds from and remaining San Mateo Measure A minus local matching funds and VTA 2000 Measure
A funds. It also includes funds from CARB/AB434 and Salvage Value for diesel locomotives replaced with electric locomotives.
FUTURE SCENARIOS
Weekday Local 62 39 42 45 48 50
Operating Revenue
Member Contributions (all) 237.6 289.2 306.4 301.2 1,134.2
Avg Annual Member Contributions (all) 47.5 57.8 61.3 60.2 56.7
Maintenance Facility(Committed Project) 53.0 0 0 0 53.0
Rehabilitation & Replacement 150.0 289.1 241.3 186.5 866.9
Enhancements 841.1 505.6 163.6 77.9 1,588.2
Support 6.5 6.0 11.5 11.0 35.0
TOTAL Capital Costs 1,050.5 800.7 416.4 275.4 2,543.0
Capital Funding
Other B 179.1 107.5 417.0 0 703.5
Surplus/(Shortfall) (608.4) (363.4) 430.6 (87.9) (629.2)
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized. A Operating costs in the first five-year period are lower because the first year includes service levels of 76 trains per day (no express
service). Operating costs include electrification starting in 2008 and extension to Downtown San Francisco in 2010. B “Other” Capital Funding consists of funds from remaining San Mateo Measure A minus local matching funds, San Mateo Reauthorization,
and VTA 2000 Measure A funds. It also includes funds from CARB/AB434 and Salvage Value for diesel locomotives replaced with electric locomotives.
TA B L E 7 : E N H A N C E D S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S S U M M A R Y
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
FUTURE SCENARIOS
Capture latent market demand by providing optimal levels of service, improve
station access and regional connectivity, and invest in key system improve-
ments and amenities that will attract passengers and build ridership.
The Enhanced Scenario embodies the vision of Caltrain by encompassing most
of the improvements and passenger amenities that would begin to transform
Caltrain into a “world-class” railroad. It includes major improvement projects that
will improve service and the passenger experience. It assumes that route exten-
sions to downtown San Francisco, across the Dumbarton Bridge to the East Bay,
and to Salinas/Monterey will be constructed. Table 7 (page 41) details the charac-
teristics of the Enhanced Scenario.
The service goal in the Enhanced Scenario is to improve express train service
by providing half-hour headways (from one-hour headways in the Status Quo and
Moderate Growth Scenarios) primarily in the peak periods and part of the off-peak
periods. The Enhanced Scenario would also include improvements in connectivity
and passenger amenities that will build ridership. A flexible combination of local,
limited, and express service will be provided to meet a variety of travel needs.
Target increases in service will include an average of two additional weekday trains
each year, with a goal of 136 weekday trains by 2023, and additional Gilroy service.
Up to 78 shuttle bus routes would provide station access services.
The Enhanced Scenario includes all of the capital improvements in the Moderate
Growth Scenario, as well as access improvements, enhanced passenger amenities,
and route extensions. In conjunction with the electrification project, both the pas-
senger cars and diesel locomotives would be replaced, giving Caltrain an entirely
different look and feel, as well as a new image. Route extensions to downtown San
Francisco, across the Dumbarton Bridge to the East Bay, and to Salinas/Monterey
would improve regional connectivity. This scenario assumes there would be no
high-speed rail in California in the 20-year timeframe. In this scenario, Capacity
Expansion projects comprise approximately $610 million (in 2003 dollars) of the
total expenditures.
C F U T U R E S C E N A R I O C
The Enhanced Scenario
FUTURE SCENARIOSFUTURE SCENARIOSFUTURE SCENARIOS
The Enhanced Scenario assumes there will be enhanced levels of funding from
Federal, State, and local sources, as well as innovative financing techniques, to fund
and implement capital improvements. San Mateo County will introduce a measure
to add to/reauthorize the half-cent countywide sales tax on its 2004 ballots. In the
Enhanced Scenario, it is assumed that this ballot measure will pass4. The sales tax
expenditure plans for the measures will specify the amounts available for Caltrain
improvements. All three route extensions would be funded by third parties.
Additional funding advocacy would be required to pursue accelerated implementa-
tion of all the capital projects in the Enhanced Scenario. The feasibility of various
state and federal innovative financing techniques will require further investigation.
Revenues from potential innovative sources are not included in the estimates of cap-
ital shortfalls.
Once the “Enhanced Caltrain” is operational, there will be frequent express service
every half-hour in the peak periods as well as some service in the off-peak.
Passengers will be riding sleek, modern trains that are more comfortable, quieter,
faster, and reliable. Many of the stations would be rehabilitated or reconstructed to
facilitate rapid boarding, include passenger amenities, improve station access, and
expand parking at selected locations.
Passengers will be able to travel further on Caltrain with route extensions to
downtown San Francisco, the East Bay via the Dumbarton corridor, and Salinas/
Monterey. Important connections with other transit operators will be available at
a new northern terminus at the Transbay Terminal in downtown San Francisco
(AC Transit, BART, Muni, Golden Gate, and intercity bus), at the Dumbarton Terminus
in Union City (ACE, AC Transit, BART, Capitol Corridor), at the Santa Clara station
(BART), and Diridon Stations (ACE, Amtrak, BART, Capitol Corridor, VTA).
Ridership is projected to increase by about 200 percent over the 20-year period.
Operating costs will increase over time as well as member subsidies.
In the Enhanced Scenario, the electrification project has a completion date
of 2008. Due to an inconsistency in programming of electrification funds by
the member agencies, funding for the electrification project will not be available
until 2014. A plan to fund electrification in the near-term will need to be devised.
The total capital program cost is nearly $2.5 billion with an estimated shortfall
of approximately $629 million. This does not include potential resources from
innovative financing techniques. These innovative sources will take time to establish.
The potential trigger to shift from the Enhanced to the Build-out Scenario is the
passage of the statewide high-speed rail bond measure in November 2006.
4 The San Francisco Measure passed in November 2003.
FINANCIAL RESOURCES
KEY FINDINGS
Capture a significant market share of trips by providing enhanced “world
class” service, complemented by the intra-state connectivity and amenities
offered by the connection to High-Speed Rail.
The Build-Out Scenario is the “ultimate” future scenario for Caltrain and assumes
that High-Speed Rail (HSR) would operate on the Caltrain right-of-way. It includes
all the characteristics and amenities of the Enhanced Scenario and rail connectivity
with all the major metropolitan areas in California via HSR. The Build-Out Scenario
includes improvements that will allow HSR to operate on the Caltrain right-of-way
and assumes major funding resources for these improvements would be made
available through high-speed rail bonds and other innovative financing techniques.
The characteristics of the Build-Out Scenario are summarized in Table 8 (page 46).
The Build-Out Scenario is very similar to the Enhanced Scenario in many ways in
terms of Caltrain service. One of the added service benefits would be that the HSR
system would be accessible through two or more Caltrain stations, making
statewide intercity rail travel available to Caltrain passengers as early as 2016.
Caltrain would function as a feeder system for HSR passengers as well, with trans-
fers taking place between HSR and Caltrain. Additional work must be performed to
optimize the integration of HSR and Caltrain. Up to 78 shuttle bus routes would
provide station access services.
The Build-Out Scenario includes several major infrastructure modifications that
would allow HSR and Caltrain to operate on the same line. The Build-Out Scenario
includes a fully grade-separated alignment and widening of the entire route to
accommodate four tracks. Some stations would have to be relocated or recon-
structed. Platform configurations would have to be optimized to accommodate
HSR and Caltrain. A new signal and communications systems would also be
required. The electrification project and extension to Downtown San Francisco
begin operation by 2014 at the latest but could be accelerated depending on the
coordination with other projects such as grade separations and track capacity
improvements related to HSR. In this scenario, capacity expansion projects includ-
ing track rehabilitation, bridge construction, grade separations, signal construc-
tion, station improvements, track construction and tunnel construction comprise
approximately $3 billion (in 2003 dollars) of the total expenditures.
D F U T U R E S C E N A R I O D
The Build-out Scenario
FUTURE SCENARIOS
The Build-Out Scenario includes the enhanced levels of funding in the
Enhanced Scenario plus new sources of funding, primarily from the
proposed high-speed rail bond measure scheduled for voter consideration in
November 2006. While the high-speed rail bonds would not supplant other
innovative financing techniques, they would guarantee a significant portion of
funds for major Caltrain improvements. Revenues from high-speed rail bonds or
potential innovative sources are not included in the estimates of capital short-
falls.
The total number of system improvements included in the Build-Out Scenario
would be greater than in the other scenarios. In addition to the passenger
experience benefits of electrification and service extensions, the Build-Out
includes extensive grade separations, track capacity improvements, and
station reconstruction that will dramatically affect the passenger experience. A
grade-separated route will increase service reliability, reduce delays, improve safe-
ty, improve local pedestrian and traffic circulation, and reduce noise.
Additional track capacity provided by four-tracking will allow the flexibility
required for high levels of express service. With statewide High-Speed Rail
service available in 2016, it is anticipated that regional and intrastate
connectivity will be greatly improved.
In the absence of constructability issues, funding for High-Speed Rail could
accelerate the timing of many improvements along the Caltrain route. It is pro-
jected that ridership and farebox revenues will grow, however, the full potential
of this growth would probably be realized outside of the 20-year time horizon
of this plan. Ridership is projected to increase by over 220
percent between 2004 and 2023, which does not include potential ridership
gains from transfers between HSR and Caltrain. Operating costs and
member agencies contributions are expected to increase, but will depend ulti-
mately on how the systems are operated and coordinated.
The capital program totals approximately $5 billion and will result in a
$3 billion shortfall. The shortfall does not include the potential revenues from
high-speed rail bonds or other innovative financing techniques.
FUTURE SCENARIOSFUTURE SCENARIOS
FUTURE SCENARIOS
TA B L E 8 : B U I L D - O U T S C E N A R I O C H A R A C T E R I S T I C S S U M M A R Y
SERVICE 2003 2005 2010 2015 2020 2023
Weekday Local 62 39 40 40 48 51
Annual Ridership (Caltrain) 7,362,000 23,626,200
OPERATIONS (MILLION 2003 $) 2004-2008 2009-2013 2014-2018 2019-2023 TOTAL
Operating Revenue
Member Contributions (all) 236.9 230.4 287.1 301.7 1,056.1
Avg. Annual Member Contributions (all) 47.4 46.1 57.4 60.3 52.8
Enhancements 232.6 804.9 2,945.0 27.9 4,010.4
Support 6.5 6.0 11.5 11.0 35.0
TOTAL Capital Costs 443.3 1,096.0 3,207.3 225.4 4,972.0
Capital Funding - - - - -
Other A 179.1 13.7 525.8 0 718.6
Surplus/(Shortfall) (1.3) (752.4) (2,247.5) (41.7) (3,042.9)
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized. A Operating costs in the first five-year period are lower because the first year includes service levels of 76 trains per day (no express service). Operating costs include electrification and extension to Downtown San Francisco starting in 2014. B “Other” Capital Funding consists of funds from remaining San Mateo Measure A minus local matching funds, San Mateo Reauthorization, and VTA 2000 Measure A funds. It also includes funds from CARB/AB434 and Salvage Value for diesel locomotives replaced with electric locomotives.
Evaluating the Scenarios There are several ways in which the
scenarios can be evaluated: by how well
they promote the vision or follow the
five guiding principles, by return-on-
investment or by customer satisfaction.
Vision & Guiding Principles. Each
to meet the Vision for Caltrain to
become the preferred mode of travel
along the Peninsula. The Vision has
three components at the individual,
local and regional levels which are to (1)
provide passengers with a world-class
travel experience; (2) act as a major
catalyst for redevelopment and eco-
nomic activity in communities along its
route; and (3) play a key role in mobility
management along the Peninsula
a whole.
will be the most effective in promoting
the Vision because of the market-
driven investments in service and capital
improvements and customer amenities,
ment, and in support of regional con-
nections with other transit systems.
When evaluating the potential perform-
ance of each scenario according to the
five guiding principles, the Enhanced
and Build-Out Scenarios are the most
effective in meeting the objectives of
the first and third principles—to satisfy
passengers and build ridership and pro-
mote regional connectivity. In terms of
the second principle, “invest wisely in
system improvements,” the Status Quo
Scenario has the lowest total operating
and capital costs, but is the least effec-
tive in attracting new riders to the sys-
tem. This is because over the 20-year
period and beyond, the Status Quo has
the lowest investment in system
improvements which build ridership.
appear to do as well in the arena of
cost effectiveness, as presented in the
next section, it has the greatest poten-
tial for inducing ridership growth well
beyond the 20-year horizon.
apply to the way Caltrain does business
on a daily basis. Regardless of which
scenario or continuum of scenarios that
Caltrain pursues developing strong
community and business relationships,
are paramount. Likewise, Caltrain must
pursue a secure financial future by
building a foundation of long-term sus-
tainability so that the Caltrain Vision
can become a reality.
FUTURE SCENARIOS
The figures in the following tables were
calculated using projected expenses
on ridership projections and traditional
funding formulas. These do not include
potential revenue from innovative
are in 2003$.
Quo Scenario. Even though the total
operating costs in the Moderate Growth
Scenario are slightly higher, projected
ridership and thus farebox revenues
increase over time, offsetting a greater
portion of operating costs and resulting
in a similar level of member subsidies as
the Status Quo Scenario. Although aver-
age operating costs in the Build-Out
Scenario are lower than the Enhanced
Scenario, they are greater then the
Enhanced Scenario in the outer years.
As shown in Table 10 (opposite, above),
the Status Quo Scenario is the only
alternative that does not result in a
shortfall over the 20-year period of the
capital program. These amounts were
calculated based on the assumption
that the local match amounts shown in
column (B) would be available. The local
match required is lowest in the Status
Quo Scenario, but caps out around
$180 million as evident in the other
scenarios. Although the shortfalls are
significantly greater in the Enhanced
and Build-Out Scenarios, these figures
do not include potential revenues that
might become available from innovative
finance techniques or high-speed rail
bonds.
scenarios by cost per passenger trip and
cost-per-new-passenger trip gained.
OPERATIONS (A) SERVICE LEVEL (B) ANNUAL (C) OPERATING (D) MEMBER
IN 2023 RIDERSHIP COST (AVERAGE SUBSIDY
(WEEKDAY, EXPRESS IN ANNUAL, (AVERAGE ANNUAL,
HEADWAYS) 2023 TOTAL) TOTAL)
Status Quo 86 trains 14,369,000 $83 Million $44 Million 1 hr $1.67 Billion $873 Million
Moderate Growth 100 trains 19,483,700 $90 Million $44 Million 1 hr $1.81 Billion $872 Million
Enhanced 136 trains 22,749,700 $109 Million $57 Million hour $2.18 Billion $1.13 Billion
Build-Out 138 trains 23,626,200 $105 Million $53 Million hour $2.09 Billion $1.06 Billion
TA B L E 9 : O P E RAT I N G COSTS A N D M E M B E R S U B S I DY BY S C E N A R I O
FUTURE SCENARIOS
costs and ridership, and shows that the
Status Quo Scenario is most cost-
effective using this evaluation criterion.
However, when comparing total cost per
new passenger gained over the 20-year
period in column (B), the Status Quo
Scenario is the least effective in attract-
ing new passengers to the system. The
Enhanced Scenario is the most cost-
effective scenario using this perform-
ance measure as shown in Column (D).
The ridership projections for the Build-
Out Scenario do not include potential
transfers between high-speed system
pass the Enhanced Scenario in ridership
gains. In comparison with the Status
Quo, the Enhanced Scenario is 1.7 times
the cost, but yields almost twice as
many new riders over the 20-year period
than the Status Quo.
+ CAPITAL [RIDERSHIP ANNUAL COST-PER- PER-NEW-
COST PER COSTS [AVG. AVG., NEW PASSENGER PASSENGER
PASSENGER ANNUAL, TOTAL] PASSENGERS*] TRIP TRIP GAINED
Status Quo $141 Million 11,816,000 $11.94 $31.68 $2.82 Billion 89,085,000
Moderate Growth $190 Million 14,425,000 $13.19 $26.95 $3.81 Billion 141,260,000
Enhanced $236.0 Million 16,155,000 $14.60 $26.83 $4.72 Billion 175,860,000
Build-Out $353 Million 16,096,000 $21.95 $40.45 $7.1 Billion 174,670,000
Based on estimated 2003 ridership of 7,362,000 passengers per year.
CAPITAL (A) CAPITAL COSTS (B) LOCAL MATCH ALL (C) SURPLUS/
[AVERAGE ANNUAL, MEMBER AGENCIES (SHORTFALL)
TOTAL] [AVERAGE ANNUAL, TOTAL]
Status Quo $57.6 Million $8 Million $0 Million $1.151 Billion $159 Million
Moderate Growth $100 Million $8.2 Million ($217 Million) $2.000 Billion $164 Million
Enhanced $127 Million $9 Million ($629 Million) $2.543 Billion $181 Million
Build-Out $249 Million ($9 Million) ($3 Billion) $4.972 Billion ($180 Million)
Note: Some figures may be revised once the Service and Capital Plans are finalized
TA B L E 1 0 : C A P I TA L C O S T S , L O C A L M AT C H , A N D S H O R T FA L L B Y S C E N A R I O
TA B L E 1 1 : C O S T P E R PA S S E N G E R T R I P B Y S C E N A R I O
Developing the Scenarios

The Future Scenarios

Documents