Wow, it takes real leadership, in this day and age of climate change, car congestion, and economic inequality, for Athertonians to say.... "waaaaaah!!!"

We'll really look back on this as a watershed moment. Rick DeGolia, we know how to "thank" you when the time comes. Bravo.

NIMBYism at its best. Way to go, Atherton, for taking leadership and looking out for some very narrow interests at the expense of much, much greater benefits for the rest of the region and state.

I can not fathom the amount of NIMBYism around. Because we live one of the most affluent areas in California, the baby boomer generation needs to get over their high horses and accept the fact that public transit is taken by many, and not only the poor and homeless. That is more of the hidden agenda than your "environmental concerns" you won't even stick around when it happens.

Classic Atherton NIMBY.

Effective advocacy and leadership here should look like "Yes, but...." not "we'll stand in front of the trains", which I can only imagine on the 11:00 news and The Daily Show.

Atherton residents want the property appreciation and prestige that comes with being the elite haven for the successful on the Peninsula, but then seek to obstruct the infrastructure necessary to maintain the growth and prosperity of the region.

Think people, who is going to buy your houses if your obstructionism strangles the growth of Silicon Valley and tech companies decide to grow elsewhere. Or, perhaps, in a selfish way it is good for Atherton because residents will be able to commute more easily on 101 and 280 because the commuter car and bus traffic will move to the faster, more frequent, less polluting, higher-capacity trains.

Given the conservative politics of Atherton, is our mayor a job creator or a job obstructor? More construction and operation jobs at stake here than in the silly Keystone pipeline.

SO replacing polluting noisy diesels with clean quieter electric will invite high speed trains is like saying replacing horse and buggies with automobiles will need wider streets. DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

I applaud Atherton's proactive stance, and hope that other Peninsula cities follow suit. HSR is driving and subsidizing Caltrain electrification, so for the EIR to not address HSR is ludicrous. With gas around $2, the economics around HSR are even more outrageous, as are the greenhouse gas reduction arguments, since construction is so dirty. Caltrain electrification is a Trojan Horse for HSR. It is intentionally naive to look at one without the other.

The "trojan horse" argument loses sight of the fact that Caltrain electrification may justify the cost, while high speed rail all of the way to LA may not. Yes, it's coming from that pool of money, but if they kill the HSR project, we would still be left with something useful. Everything should be justified on its own grounds; a project shouldn't be killed merely because it makes something else more viable.

> Yes, it's coming from that pool of money

It's a violation of Prop 1A to use "that pool of money" for anything other than HSR.

If CalTrain wants to build an electrified rail line, they should start by doing it legally.

If HSR is not put totally underground on the Peninsula it will fundamentally change the character of every community which it goes through. If HSR is placed at grade level most of the current crossings will have to be abandoned and the rest separated vertically from the HSR grade. If HSR is elevated it will create a huge wall between the portions of each community on either side of the right of way.

In my opinion, grade separation is the best thing that happened in San Carlos and Belmont. Quieter, better traffic, etc.. Drives me crazy when I forget and take Whipple instead of Brittain; invariably I get stuck in the traffic that is created at the Whipple crossing, whereas if I went Brittain, I sail under the tracks. When I spend time in SC, the only trains I hear are the ones down south blowing horns when they cross Whipple; further north - nada.

I've heard similar things about further up in San Bruno, but have less experience in those neighborhoods.

In Lindenwood and Lloyden - nothing but train horns and crossing gate bells. All day and most of the night.

Build HSR. Electrify Caltrain.

What I find greatest about the Caltrain electrification project, is its inevitability; its needed, both cities and major companies are behind it, and its not going to be stopped by a small yet loud contingency in the mid peninsula. This makes for an intresting situation where that loud group is going to have to either put up or shut up, i.e. figure out grade separations or don't; you're the ones who are going to be stuck behind the gates with the increase in rail traffic.

I took Bart/Caltrain back from SF this evening. Bart was busy but not completely full. Caltrain had every seat full, every aisle packed the length of every car, every stairwell full and all the spaces by the doors jammed full of people. We desperately need to expand the capacity, and the modernization project will do that.

As far as elevated tracks dividing our communities, the tracks do that already, and I can't see that elevating them will make that situation worse. In fact, if it allows for freer movement of cars, pedestrians and bicyclists, it will help bring the two sides of the tracks together.

It probably speaks more to my naivete than anything, but I remain surprised by how selfish the most fortunate of our society are. [part removed] complaining about character on an existing rail line that already has limited crossings? Versus thinking about how we as a region get people to jobs that pay livable wages? Compared to addressing carbon pollution in a systematic and equitable way? In contrast to reducing particulates that cause cancer?

[part removed.]

Atherton should accept the inevitability of higher-capacity, more-frequent, quieter trains down the Peninsula, which requires going through Atherton. Otherwise the local economic growth will be strangled by highway traffic and the quality of life threats (noise, cutting down trees, etc.) will be much more dramatic.

That said, it is reasonable for Atherton to challenge the engineering plans. Does the right of way need to be widened as much as proposed? Can number of grade crossings be reduced or underpasses/overpasses replace some of the grade crossings?

These issues are reasonable to explore.

The HSR complaint is a red-herring. We need electrification and passing tracks for SF-SJ transport capacity. The fact that HSR uses the same right of way IF it ever gets connected up seems incidental. Starting in Metro SF and Metro LA with projects that benefit local transit is exactly the right way to initiate the building of HSR. Laying track between Fresno and Bakersfield as the first leg, in an area with little congestion, seems ill advised.

Caltrain's plans do little to address both the intermediate and long term transportation issues on the peninsula. THAT is my big issue with the project.

There is a limited carrying capacity to the existing 2 tracks that electrification can't address. And keep in mind Caltrain is not the only trains on the route; Union Pacific is also on the tracks, with HSR potentially on the horizon. Electrification is an expensive approach that provides an incremental increase in carrying capacity that can be better solved in other ways. And it screws all other transportation (private AND public) that needs to go East<->West due to the increase in gate downtimes.

Electrification is a classic cart-before-the-horse. It's massively short-sighted to build electrification without trenching (to ensure E<->W transportation flows without the Caltrain+HSR+UP bottlenecks) and adding a 3rd track (which adds capacity, allows easier passing of other trains).

Think about this people; with 3 trenched tracks, Caltrain can run more bullet trains (which allows SJ<->SF under-1-hour travel, which is a huge goal for Caltrain and psychologically important to passengers) while still supporting local Caltrain stops. You DON'T get all that with Electrification.

And using Prop 1a funding for local transportation projects is a violation of Prop 1a. That's a fact.

You people that are proponents of the current Caltrain solution are ignorant. That's a very fair word to describe your understanding of transportation on the peninsula.

> The HSR complaint is a red-herring.

Wrong, Caltrain wants to say the project is unrelated to HSR, but this project hypocritically requires TAKING money as part of the HSR project. Taking the money MAKES it a part of the HSR project, and the issues surrounding HSR.

Also, keep in mind Caltrain is saying it's not bound by CEQA, but is hypocritically wrapping the project as an environmental solution. If it's an environmental solution, passing CEQA is a no brainier...right?

@peninsula resident, how would Caltrain build 3 trenched tracks? What would be the cost to purchase the extra right-of-way and perform the trenching? The chances of all the cities along the route agreeing to this are zero. Call me ignorant or call me realistic, but the proposed Caltrain modernization program (which is more than just electrification) is the best we can hope for at this time. I would love to see more, but there are too many cities like Atherton that will fight any major changes.

Al wrote:
> the only trains I hear are the ones down south blowing
> horns when they cross Whipple; further north - nada.

You don't need to build a berm to reduce the horn noise, you just need quad gates.

(and "nada" is definitely impossible. Caltrain blows the horn at stations to alert passengers on the platforms that a train is passing-through, which is common for the bullet trains. Caltrain blows the horn at the San Carlos and Belmont stations. Guaranteed).

Donald wrote:
> @peninsula resident, how would Caltrain build 3 trenched tracks?


The right-of-way is wider than you suspect; enough to support a shoo fly track and expansion of their footprint from Electrification without any additional land purchases.

> What would be the cost to purchase the extra
> right-of-way and perform the trenching? The
> chances of all the cities along the route
> agreeing to this are zero.

Keep in mind that SF will not spend a DIME to have HSR (and caltrain) tunnels dug under that metropolis. I'm not buying that it's reasonable for SF to get a free ride for digging that's WAY more expensive than the trench needed in Silicon Valley, while Silicon Valley residents have to pay for their own trenching.

Your approach is a defeatist attitude. Most of the jobs are here. THIS is the center of commerce in the Bay Area. Free tunneling for SF but Silicon Valley residents paying their own way for trenching is backwards.

Why has the Editor removed two whole days of very productive comments?

I found this "missing comments" - they were posted on the quasi duplicate thread.