From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: SM County Measure B(ART) vs C(alTrain)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1992 17:56:53 GMT


Information on San Mateo County Ballot Measures 

B: negotiate to join BART district and extend BART "throughout" SM county
C: upgrade CalTrain to BART-level service and extend to downtown SF


Peninsula Conservation Center's 
Analysis of San Mateo County Transportation Ballot Measures

No on Measure B: 
BART South of the Airport

We need a Regional Rail Transit System now, but our analysis indicates that
this will not be possible if we restrict ourselves to using BART-type rail
technology.   The 6.4 mile BART extension to the SF Airport was first voted
on in 1987--yet it won't be completed until after the year 2002--15 years
later.  A 17-mile BART extension to Menlo Park would likely not be available
for use for 30 to 40 years due to its high cost and massive construction
requirements--and it still would not circle the Bay.  During BART
construction the current CalTrain service would be disrupted--if not halted
all together--potentially putting 22,000 daily CalTrain commuters on the
highways. 

In contrast, the upgrade of CalTrain to high-speed electric trains and its
extension to Downtown San Francisco could be done by the year 2000.  And as
this upgrade can be done incrementally, it will have minimal impact on
current rail operations and local neighborhoods.  Its conversion from diesel
to electric trains would allow for BART-level service and reduced noise and
energy consumption.

Apart from construction, the reason for the long time frame of a BART
extension is its cost.  The per-mile cost of BART to SFO is $196 million a
mile, so a reasonable estimate for extending BART around the bay would be
over $8 billion dollars--30% more than the entire federal transit budget.
Even with a twenty-cent gas tax, it will take 40 years to raise the local
share of the cost.  In contrast, all the nearly 80 miles of CalTrain, from
Gilroy to San Francisco, can be upgraded to run high-speed electric trains
for about the cost of building the Colma BART station.  Even if we select
the most expensive undergrounding design for extending CalTrain to Market
Street, upgrading the entire CalTrain line would cost a fifth of the cost
of extending BART south to San Jose--under $1 billion.

Even if San Mateo County raised taxes to fund BART to Menlo Park, this
would not be a regional system.  With 40% of San Mateo County residents
who commute out of San Mateo County going south, coordination with Santa
Clara County plans is critical.  Santa Clara County has studied and
rejected BART technology (due to its low cost-effectiveness) as part of its
40 year transit plan--and have committed funds to upgrade CalTrain.  An
upgraded CalTrain, because it uses standard gauge rail, will be compatible
with CalTrain-style commuter train extensions planned from San Jose to
Richmond, across the Dumbarton Bridge, and to Livermore and Stockton--and
with future high speed intercity trains from places like Los Angeles. 

Yes on Measure C: 
CalTrain Upgrade & SF Extension

Measure C would allow for upgrades to the CalTrain system that would
convert the current "commuting" system to a "transit system".  This
includes: 1) Upgrading the line to high-speed electric trains, capable of
BART-level frequency and quiet, energy-efficient operations.  Conversion
of all 80 miles to run off overhead wires would cost about the same or
less than the construction of the Colma BART station.  2) Continuation of
the plans to eliminate road/rail crossings with underpasses--doing the most
important ones first, and others as money is available and local
communities desire.  3) Extend the line to downtown San Francisco, including
forming a transit hub at a joint BART/CalTrain/Muni Station at Market and
Montgomery Street or the Transbay Terminal.  4) Concurrently with these
improvement, operate  more frequent train service as ridership materializes,
with the eventual goal of running trains at frequencies comparable to BART.

This plan will let the 80 miles of CalTrain track link Santa Clara's light
rail system with BART and Muni in San Francisco, building a regional rail
system by the year 2000--for less than one fifth the cost of constructing
BART south of the Airport to San Jose.   This is 20 to 30 years sooner than
waiting for BART--in other words most of us commuting today will be retired
or dead by the time "BART-around-the-Bay" happens--but we will pay taxes
for it and experience the construction while it is being built.

For these reasons, both environmentalists and businesses in Santa Clara and
San Mateo County, including the Santa Clara County Manufacturing Group,
SAMCEDA and most Peninsula Chambers of Commerce all support the CalTrain
upgrade in lieu of the taxes and years of construction needed for
BART-around-the-Bay.  In fact, without the CalTrain upgrade program, local
business will be unable to meet timeframe requirements of the clean air act
to reduce traffic congestion caused by their employees--and may move out
of the area.  Measure C is compatible with Santa Clara County's T2010 40
year transportation plan and MTC's regional rail plan, "resolution 1876."
Measure B/BART is not.



Anti B so far:

Cities of: Menlo Park, Atherton, Woodside, Redwood City, Burlingame,
Millbrae, Hillsborough, Belmont. 

Anti C:

San Mateo County Supervisor and congressional candidate Tom Huening


--------------------------------------

League of Women Voters Debates on Measure B(ART) vs C(alTrain)

San Mateo City Council Chambers-330 W 20th
 Wed Oct. 21 7:30 p.m.

South San Francisco Community Ctr- 33 Arroyo Dr.
  Thus Oct. 22 7:30 pm

Redwood City Hall of Justice- 401 Marshall St.- 
  Sat Oct. 24 10 am



-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation