Caltrain Viaducts — A Showcase Opportunity:
Save $11B — Attractive- Better SF Stations — Parks Underneath
1 Total Cost: $12.7B and completed within 2 years.
Saving more than $11B over $24.6B current estimates including underground DTX.
2 Attractive elevated grade separations in sections from Gilroy to SF.
Including support for freight and nostalgic / holiday traffic.
3 Better service to high traffic stations along 3rd and 2nd Streets in San Francisco:
Bayview, Arena / UCSF, Giants Park, and Montgomery BART / STC.
4 14+ miles of pedestrian-bike pathways and parks under the elevated tracks.
5 Enhances resilience against rising sea levels.
6 A 21st century showcase of American infrastructure success.
7 Conclusion: Caltrain Viaducts — A Better Approach than Lowering Roadways.
Appendix 1: Construction Cost Basis — No More Than $50M per mile
Appendix 2: Attractive Elevated Railway Viaducts
1 Caltrain Viaducts — Fully Elevated Grade Separations for $12.7B.
The white paper details the Caltrain Viaducts — Fully Elevated Grade Separations approach.
1) Fully elevate Caltrain tracks over crossings to achieve grade separations.
> Do not implement hybrid solutions that partially lower roadways and raise tracks.
> Handle grade separations as one program of 11 projects applying the same technology, rather than many more and smaller independent city-led projects.
2) Complete the viaducts within 2 years of the start of construction.
To eliminate PCEP automobile traffic impacts as quickly as possible.
3) Utilize 21st-century prefabricated sections and modular assembly practices.
To achieve the quickest and most cost-effective result.
Mileage-Based Estimates
New fully elevated viaducts should cost no more than $50M per mile. Typical worldwide costs range from $25M to $40M per mile. (See Appendix 1.)
Caltrain Viaducts fully elevated grade separations costs would tend higher due to: 1) less economies of scale due to longer routes; 2) no grade-level tracks; and 3) more elevated boarding platforms.
However, those higher costs would be more than offset by lower costs due to features not applicable to Caltrain Viaducts: 1) no roadway changes, trenches, tunnels, earthworks (e.g., cuts through hills); and 2) no poles, wires, electrical infrastructure, and rolling stock — provided and already paid for by Caltrain Peninsula Corridor Electrification Program (PCEP).
Fully elevating tracks further reduces cost by avoiding roadway costs and disruptions: lowering roadways, changing intersections, moving utilities, and flood pumps.
Caltrain Viaducts should be buildable within the current right-of-way and so should require no or minimal property acquisition eminent domain costs, disruption, and resident opposition.
Table 1: Caltrain Viaducts Grade Separations — Mileage, Cost
(See Appendix 1 for references for worldwide high-speed rail costs.)
Caltrain Viaducts estimates include elevated and 8-car long boarding platforms at 9 existing stations: Bayshore, Broadway, Burlingame, San Mateo, Redwood City, Atherton, Menlo Park, Palo Alto, and California Ave; and at 4 new stations: Bayview, Arena / UCSF, Giants Park, and STC / BART.
Caltrain Viaducts could fund, start and complete years sooner because the lower cost should enable faster funding. Faster completion would eliminate PCEP automobile traffic impacts as quickly as possible.
Caltrain Viaducts should be buildable in 2 years after the start of construction. Projects active in 2019 construct high speed tracks at an average rate of 36 miles per year. The Caltrain Viaducts project should be able to construct 42.3 miles in less than 2 years. (See Appendix 1, item g.)
The Caltrain Viaducts estimate adds $1B for:
1) aesthetic facings — e.g., Stanford-style arches for Palo Alto;
2) new elevated boarding platforms at more stations than other HSRs have; and
3) the terminal with elevated boarding platforms at BART / STC.
Cost Summary and Savings
Figure 2: Caltrain Viaducts saves over $11B over current grade separation estimates
Notes:
1 Grade Separations + HSR Investments: Viaducts elevated vs. hybrid reduces this from $9.5B to $1.8B.
2 DTX: Viaducts elevated along 3rd/2nd Streets vs. underground DTX reduces this from $3.3B to $0.4B.
3 Baseline Investments: Viaducts includes platform extensions, level boarding, and rebuilding at 9 existing stations, eliminates the 22nd St station, reducing this from $3.6B to $2.7B (to be reviewed).
4 Moderate Grown: Viaducts reduces Additional Station Enhancements, includes grade crossing investments, and includes station overtakes, reducing this from $2.5B to $1.1B (to be reviewed).
5 Caltrain Viaducts extras: aesthetics; elevated platforms at many stations; and the STC/BART terminal.
DTX = Caltrain underground Downton Extension to Salesforce Transit Center.
3rd/2nd St Route = Caltrain Viaducts elevated route to the Salesforce Transit Center / BART (see section 3).
Cities, San Mateo County, and Caltrain each could save tens to hundreds of millions of dollars each with the Caltrain Viaducts approach.
The Caltrain Viaducts approach applies the same fully elevated prefabricated modular assembly grade separation design across all grade separations. Economies of scale should make 11 same-design and coordinated projects much more cost-effective than independent hybrid track up / road down projects.
The Caltrain Business Plan, April 2019, “City-led Grade Separation and Closure Plans” (pages 27 to 29) lists projects with estimated costs in some Peninsula and South Bay cities. Table 2:
a) summarizes the Business Plan costs by city for those projects; b) allocates to each included city the Caltrain Viaducts estimated project costs from Table 1; and c) the estimated cost savings for each city. Similar proportional savings should be expected in other Caltrain cities.
Table 2: Costs and Savings per City / County
Notes:
1 For Business Plan projects with estimated ranges, the midpoint of those ranges is used.
2 The Caltrain “Long Range Vision” estimates the underground Downtown Extension (DTX) at $3.3B.
The San Francisco Examiner story reports that the DTX Phase 1 cost is now estimated at $4.2B.
The $3.3B estimate is used in this comparison.
References:
Caltrain Business Plan, April 2019, pages 27 to 29 — City led grade separation projects
http://www.caltrain.com/Assets/__Agendas+and+Minutes/JPB/Board+of+Directors/Presentations/2018/Caltrain+Business+Plan+-+April+2019.pdf
Caltrain Business Plan, May 2019, page 45 — Grade crossing moderate grown / medium level estimate
https://caltrain2040.org/wp-content/uploads/CBP_Quarterly_Board_Update_May2019_V2.pdf
Choosing A Long-Range Vision, August 1 2019, pages 23+, 53+ — The Baseline Costs $22.1B
https://caltrain2040.org/wp-content/uploads/Caltrain-BP-Service-Vision-Presentation.pdf
DTX Phase I at $4.2B
https://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/getting-the-downtown-extension-back-on-track/
2 Attractive and quiet fully elevated grade separations.
An elevated railway need not be a berm that divides cities. Many examples exist worldwide of attractive viaducts and the people-friendly places below them. Below are two Caltrain-related artists’ concepts of attractive elevated Caltrain locations. (See Appendix 2 for more examples.)
The Caltrain Viaducts approach would use state-of-the-practice prefabricated modular construction and assembly techniques, and then add attractive facings per each city’s preferences.
Residential privacy can be preserved with lightweight, graceful privacy screens. (See Appendix 2, Palo Alto architect Joe Bellomo’s concept).
Level boarding will be included with new elevated boarding platforms — which is essential for quick passenger and accessible boarding.
As with any electrified railway (or electric automobiles and motorcycles), Caltrain electrified operation will be quiet — it eliminates diesel engine noise.
Fully elevated grade crossings will keep Caltrain quiet by eliminating train horns and crossing gate bells, even at night. To be a modern commuter train, Caltrain must provide some level of service 24 hours per day — perhaps 3 to 4 trains per hour, even between 11 pm and 5 am. Grade-level crossings with quad gates would require train horns and crossing gate bells. In 2019, residents in the North Bay have complained about SMART nighttime train horns, even during testing. Caltrain Viaducts would eliminate such sleep-depriving noise with sleep-preserving fully elevated grade crossings.
To complete the quiet operation and eliminate railroad emissions along the corridor, Union Pacific should be encouraged to change to fuel cell locomotives for freight traffic.
3 Better service to high traffic stations
along 3rd Street in SF
Fully elevating tracks enables the option to reroute Caltrain in San Francisco along 3rd and 2nd Streets. This route:
* Serves more high-traffic destinations in San Francisco; and
* Connects to Montgomery BART and Salesforce Transit Center without the costly underground DTX (Downtown Extension).
The route details are:
a) the Caltrain right-of-way from San Jose to near the Bayshore station;
b) up Tunnel Street to Bayshore Blvd and along 3rd Street above Muni;
c) across McCovey Cove to Giants Park;
c) along 2nd Street, over I-80 to a terminal elevated above 2nd St centered on Mission St;
d) with stations at:
Bayshore, Bayview, Arena / UCSF, Giants Park, and STC / BART.
The STC / BART station would have direct access to Montgomery BART and to the Salesforce Transit Center (STC)
This route would free up land under I-280 for other uses. If I-280 extension were also dismantled as has been suggested, a large area would become available for redevelopment.
This route would also eliminate the web of guy wires along 3rd St that support the overhead Muni catenary power wires. The Muni power wires would be attached under the elevated Caltrain Viaducts structure.
4 14+ miles of pedestrian-bike pathways and parks underneath
Caltrain Viaducts would create more than 14 miles of open space along the Peninsula beneath the fully elevated tracks. This enables lengthwise pathways and parks, and opportunities for additional pedestrian and automobile crossings currently blocked by grade-level tracks.
5 Enhances resilience against rising sea levels.
The 26 miles that are fully elevated tracks will avoid sea level rise issues that could impact ground-level tracks.
Also, fully elevating tracks avoids sea level rise and rain flood issues that would occur by lowering roads or trenching or tunneling the tracks.
6 A 21st century showcase of American construction success
Caltrain’s situation is a 21st century showcase opportunity.
The Caltrain Peninsula Corridor provides a key opportunity to be a 21st century showcase of American construction success in speed, quality, and cost-effectiveness.
Caltrain’s medium distance route provides the excellent opportunity to be such a showcase because it has few complications: the route is already graded, has no major elevation changes, no new tunnels, and no roadway changes or earthworks (i.e., grading or berms) with a fully elevated approach.
California and the Bay Area could choose to find ways to fast-track government reviews to move quickly to the start of prefabricated manufacturing and on-site assembly. Our supportive local organization SPUR encourages Caltrain to take a bold vision, including building capital projects quickly and cost-effectively.
We Peninsula and California residents should not take it as a given that construction costs in California and the US must be high and must always remain so. Caltrain has the opportunity to learn and apply proven best practice prefabricated manufacturing of sections and modular railway construction techniques from China and Europe.
China’s construction expertise.
In the meantime, China has taken the lead in prefabricated manufacturing and modular assembly for rail lines. China and the UK have the lead in the prefab modular construction of large commercial and residential buildings. A famous example compares a Washington Metro crew that took 24 weeks to repair two escalators of 21 steps each with China’s Teda Group that took only 32 weeks to build a world-class convention center from the ground up.
The challenge of China and the American response.
China is leveraging its construction expertise in its Belt and Road Initiative to lock up contracts and influence countries around the world (harkening back to America from the 1940s to 1970s or so). For California and the US to compete with China, we must become better, faster, and more cost-effective than we have been recently. Caltrain Viaducts is one opportunity to do so.
References:
Thomas L. Friedman and Michael Mandelbaum: That Used To Be Us (the escalator story)
SPUR: It’s Time to Think Bigger About the Future of Caltrain
https://www.spur.org/news/2019-09-26/it-s-time-think-bigger-about-future-caltrain
7 Conclusion: Caltrain Viaducts — A Better Approach
Table 3 lists and gives weights to key criteria for Caltrain grade separations, scores each approach on those factors, and summarizes the results.
Table 3: Caltrain Viaducts is the better approach.
Notes:
1 This table assigns this author’s opinion of: a) the weight (relative importance) of each criterion;
and 2) of each approach’s raw score on each criterion.
2 Both approaches provide full electrification from SJ to SF.
3 Caltrain PCEP + Viaducts cost is much lower than Caltrain PCEP + grade separations + DTX.
4 In 2019, CA HSR compatibility is viewed as essential. (This may change with new technologies.)
5 Hybrid grade separations may involve eminent domain acquisitions depending upon city decisions.
Caltrain Viaducts should be buildable within the Caltrain ROW, with no or minimal eminent domain acquisitions.
6 Caltrain Viaducts would avoid all of the disruption and cost of lowering roadways and reduce other disruptions and durations.
7 Resident acceptability of PCEP to-be-determined grade separations or Caltrain Viaducts elevated tracks is unknown at this time.
8 Caltrain Viaducts fully elevating some grade crossings creates some more resiliency than hybrid raising tracks / lowering roadways.
Appendix 1: Construction Cost Basis — No More Than $50M per mile
Below are double-track high-speed rail (HSR) examples from around the world that support a Caltrain Viaducts initial capital cost of no more than $50M per mile, or $2.2B for 42.3 miles.
(The total includes 2 pedestrian-bike underpasses with separate costs.)
Caltrain Viaducts costs should be less than the HSR projects listed. Caltrain only needs to be a moderate speed system of up to 110 miles per hour to satisfy the CA HSR 30-minute SJ to SF constraint. Also, these examples typically include items with little or no applicability to Caltrain Viaducts: 1) land acquisition; 2) tunnels; and 3) earthworks (e.g., berms, grading).
a) Worldwide — HSR / 16 projects, 1964–2016,+inflation: avg $37.4M/mile. Full project cost.
https://reason.org/wp-content/uploads/files/high_speed_rail_lessons.pdf
b) France — HSR / LGV Mediterranean, 2014,+inflation: $37.6M/mile. Full project cost.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/764486/cost-construction-lines-lgv-by-kilometer-la-france/
c) China — HSR / 2019: $28M-$35M/mile x 1.5 countries’ factor = $42M to $52M/mile.
Rail cost only. A high percentage of tunnels. Notes World Bank Western factor of 1.5.
https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/press-release/2019/07/08/chinas-experience-with-high-speed-rail-offers-lessons-for-other-countries
d) China — HSR / 2003–14: $28.315B, 1,821 mi, $15.55M/mi+inflation = $18.4M/mile.
Analysis of 12 projects rated 250km/h in section 3.3, HSR construction financing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-speed_rail_in_China
e) Spain — HSR / 2012–15: $23.38M/mile+inflation = $25.8M/mile. Full project cost.
https://www.railway-technology.com/projects/madrid-levante-high-speed-rail-spain/
f) France, Germany, Japan, Spain — HSR / 2017: Euro 26.6M/km+inflation = avg $49.2M/mile.
https://www.frontiersin.org/files/Articles/449077/fbuil-05-00079-HTML/image_m/fbuil-05-00079-t007.jpg Table 7 (Janic, 2017)
g) Worldwide — HSR / 2019: average $24.1M/mile and 52.7 miles/year. Full project costs.
Worldwide without China — HSR / 2019: average $28.3M/mile and 36.6 mile/year.
Includes 9 passenger and 1 freight rail projects completing, in progress, or starting in 2019.
Excludes 7 underground metro projects averaging $212.6M per mile.
Also excludes 2 China underground metro projects, outliers at $1.2B and $3.2B/mile.
https://www.railjournal.com/in_depth/19-rail-projects-to-watch-in-2019
Appendix 2: Attractive Elevated Railway Viaducts
