For Peninsula residents supportive of high speed rail “done right,” the recent announcement from Eshoo, Simitian and Gordon may seem like a step in the right direction, but their proposal is short on details and full of conflicting demands. 

At the beginning of their statement, the cohort of lawmakers stressed the importance of conserving limited resources, and they felt the recent Peninsula High Speed Rail (HSR) design “unnecessarily duplicates existing infrastructure” and they propose a “blended” system that integrates the two services. 

While the proposal is rather vague, it appears they’re working to electrify the existing Caltrain corridor and allow HSR onto Caltrain tracks for its jaunt to San Francisco. This idea doesn’t sound so bad. Caltrain gets electrification paid for by high speed rail, while high speed trains continue to San Francisco in a manner that is less invasive to the community.  

Unfortunately, it’s not that easy. When voters passed Proposition 1A, which partially funded the HSR project, some trains were mandated to travel from Los Angeles to San Francisco in 2 hours and 40 minutes. To meet this requirement HSR trains must travel 125mph between San Francisco and San Jose. 

 Train travel at 125mph is typical around the world, but it’s relatively uncommon to have road-train crossings because of the inherent danger of mixing cars, people and fast trains. The Federal Railroad Administration allows grade crossings on tracks with speeds up to 125 mph, but strict safety regulations require expensive detection and barrier systems at every crossing. Additionally, the barriers must seal the crossing well in advance of the train, which delays traffic and causes pollution. 

 Although the complex barrier solution could be implemented along the Caltrain corridor to avoid the perceived blight of the aerial structure, it would likely cause severe traffic headaches on the major roads that cross the tracks given the nature of the “blended” service proposal.

Under Caltrain’s electrification plan, train frequency would increase to 10 trains per hour in both directions. Coupled with HSR service, crossing barriers would close major peninsula streets every 5 to 6 minutes during rush hour. 

It appears that Eshoo et al. realized this potential problem with the “blended” approach, since they later express openness to “below grade” options which would eliminate the danger and delay of level crossings.  However, below grade solutions like tunnels and trenches conflict with their long winded opening statement about scarce resources and limited funding.

With proposals short on practicality, it's difficult to understand what kind of design Eshoo, Simitian and Gordon are actually pushing for. Some speculated that they were implicitly working towards terminating HSR service in San Jose which prompted clarification from Eshoo.

With the San Jose rumor out, the only realistic solution is to reintroduce the aerial viaduct option in some places along the corridor. It's cost-effective, makes Caltain service more reliable, reduces traffic congestion, and silences the dreaded airhorns. While intensely disliked, it's the only proposal that will actually bring twenty-first century train service to the Peninsula.