We're hearing a lot about and from MTC lately. If there is one
organization that ought to take the lead in creating a comprehensive
urban mass transit system for the Bay Area, this is it. Nelson's
article pretty much tells us why that will never happen. The fact
is, they are rail promoters with little interest in multi-modal
transit systems. More rail is better, period.

Note that MTC is not adopting a rail plan, not a transit plan. Isn't
that actually their job? Cannot they be something more than rail
lobbyists? We already know that all the transit carriers in the Bay
Area compete with each other. BART, with it's secret fantasies of
someday going up the Peninsula, "bemoaned Caltrain's baby bullet
express trains."

Here is MTC's essential position. Push for the California high speed
rail system bond issue in '08 to get all that money spent on
expanding rail lines in the Bay area. Please understand that all
these rail meetings being held, and plans being published are the
equivalent of proposal writing; proposals to the CHSRA to drop a very
big bunch of money on our local competing rail operators.

Just one minor counterpoint. Unless the FRA (Federal Railroad
Administration) changes its mind (and old white guys tend not to do
that), there will be no lightweight electrified rail if those tracks
are to be shared with freight trains. That includes Caltrain and
Dumbarton. BART's tracks are already incompatible with standard
gauge freight rail. MTC knows that. When people at Caltrain are
asked about that, they say "We are working on it." Well, that's good
enough for me!

Oh, and by they way, MTC and ABAG are joined at the hip. Hello?

Martin
====================================
MTC adopts first regional rail plan
Proposal maps out what Bay Area system should look like
By Erik N. Nelson, STAFF WRITER
Inside Bay Area
Article Last Updated:09/27/2007 02:43:16 AM PDT

There may or may not be high-speed "bullet trains" whizzing around
the Bay Area in 2050, but the region's first plan for a unified
commuter rail system since BART was envisioned in the 1950s would
connect Antioch with Tracy, feature a second BART tube under the Bay
and extend all the way to Monterey in the south and Cloverdale in the
north.

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission unanimously adopted its
first regional rail plan Wednesday, brushing aside criticism from
public transportation advocates and a Central Valley delegation that
the plan was incomplete without more public input, deliberation and
research on future ridership.

The 121-page document, assembled by representatives of the MTC, BART,
Caltrain and the California High-Speed Rail Authority over two years,
is more of a "concept plan," explained MTC Executive Director Steve
Heminger, and not something that would dictate or preclude any future
rail improvements.

Still, it represents a major step forward for a region where
different and sometimes competing agencies have developed separately.
Most recently, BART managers have bemoaned Caltrain's "Baby Bullet"
express trains from San Jose to San Francisco, introduced just as
BART hoped to attract commuters on its 2003 San Francisco
International Airport extension into San Mateo County.

"There hasn't really been a good comprehensive assessment of rail
needs in the Bay Area since the original BART plans in the late
'50s," said MTC Planning Director Doug Kimsey. "It's a look, it's a
snapshot of what we think the Bay Area regional rail system should
look like," regardless of financial and other constraints.

The plan was one of the requirements of Regional Measure 2, approved
by voters in 2004, which raised tolls on seven state-owned area
bridges by $1 to help pay for congestion-relieving transportation
projects.

In addition to looking at the area's regional rail network, planners
were also told to look at how the network would dovetail with the
state's high-speed rail network.

While the rail plan has a lot to offer, "it's still inadequate," Andy
Katz of the Sierra Club told the commissioners before they approved
the plan. "It looked at where the ridership is, but not where the
ridership is going."

He urged the commissioners to revisit the plan after the High-Speed
Rail Authority established a route.

Stuart Cohen, executive director of the Oakland-based Transportation
and Land Use Coalition, said that while he thought "the process did
not work that well," he liked several aspects of the plan, including
its acknowledgment that different corridors would be better served by
different types of rail systems.

For instance, Caltrain's corridor up the Peninsula would benefit from
the rapid acceleration of lighter-weight, self-propelled electric
rail cars, while the corridor between eastern Contra Costa County and
Tracy could more easily be outfitted with conventional, heavier
locomotive-pulled trains.

Among the plan's recommendations are:
-Connecting Union City and Redwood City at the Dumbarton Bridge with
lightweight, electric train service.
-For BART, a second Transbay Tube, a fourth parallel track through
downtown Oakland and express trains to increase capacity.
-Building already-planned BART extensions to San Jose and Eastern
Contra Costa County.
-Building the so-called SMART train through Marin and Sonoma Counties.
-Adding extra tracks along the existing Capitol Corridor commuter
route from Oakland to Richmond and in Solano County to cut freight
and passenger congestion.
-Adding and electrifying Caltrain tracks.
-Extending commuter rail to Salinas and Monterey in the south.

-- 
**********************
Martin Engel
1621 Stone Pine Lane
Menlo Park, CA 94025
650:323-1670
martinengel@earthlink.net
**********************