

Caltrain July Proposed Service Changes - megaframe
http://www.caltrain.com/riderinfo/Proposed_Service_Changes.html

======
ghshephard
Wow - this is a huge, and, if it goes through, will completely reshape how
CalTrain is used.

For those not familiar with Silicon Valley, we have several major mass transit
systems, "Muni" - which is a light rail system that serves the City (aka "San
Francisco"), BART, which is a traditional mass transit system, that spans
fairly broadly around the Bay, but does _not_ go all the way down the
peninsula, or to San Jose. And finally CalTrain, which is responsible for
covering San Francisco all the way down to San Jose (And a few cities
afterwards - I've never been further south than San Jose)

Right now - when I'm coming home, or heading to the City, I only have to wait
a bit longer outside of commuting hours. During Commuting hours, I usually
just walk onto the train, and, if it's a bullet, I will be home faster than
any car can get me there.

The elimination of the local stations, is _not_ a good thing. People who
wanted to avoid those would take the express anyways. Now - you have no
ability to get to those cities with caltrain.

Also, look at the Southbound schedule (Northbound is a reflection):

11 Trains Leaving, from 5:45 AM to 6:55 AM, And in the afternoon, 11 Trains
leaving from 3:45 to 4:55 PM.

This is not a "drastic service cut" - this is a complete gutting of the
peninsula transit system. These changes are so severe, I'm wondering if it's a
bluff, and they will walk it back after public outrage.

------
joeybaker
I'm a daily user of CalTrain (Mt. View → SF), I'm not at all sorry to it go.

The system is very broken, and is due for a reboot.

1\. Payments. Using conductors to check tickets on a mass-transit system is
asking to loose on fares. My commute is long enough (3 zones) that I get my
ticket checked nearly every time. But many commuters who only travel one zone
could easily avoid paying altogether. Conductors simply don't have the time to
canvas the whole train between each stop. CalTrain ought to realize that it's
in the business of mass transit, not leisurely travel and implement a tag
on/off system (i.e. Muni).

That aside, tickets are far too expensive. I pay for monthly parking and a
monthly pass. That monthly fee is not much cheaper, if at all, than driving –
and I don't have a hybrid or anything. Oh, and driving saves me at least 2
hours of commute time/day.

Mass transit is a failure if it's neither faster nor cheaper.

2\. Costs. I know nothing about trains, but I can't imagine that the full
diesel engines they use for these 6~ish car commuter trains are necessary.
There's got to be a lot of wasted fuel there. Further, do they really need to
attach all those cars to every train? I have to think that less cars = less
fuel use & less staff needed = cost savings.

3\. Logistics. Again, I don't know much about mass-transit systems, but some
simple logic and personal experience states that a two-track system means that
if one things goes wrong the entire system gets badly backed up. CalTrain has
been a lot more reliable lately, but I can testify that when it gets backed
up, it gets really backed up.

Tangentially, Caltrain relies on other systems to be useful – you have to
either drive, bus, or BART to one of their stations. It's an incomplete system
from inception.

============

My point: CalTrain is broken, I'd gladly suffer the hassle of not having it
for a few years if it could be shut-down and reborn as an extension of BART or
somesuch.

~~~
dasil003
> 1\. Payments. Using conductors to check tickets on a mass-transit system is
> asking to loose on fares. My commute is long enough (3 zones) that I get my
> ticket checked nearly every time. But many commuters who only travel one
> zone could easily avoid paying altogether. Conductors simply don't have the
> time to canvas the whole train between each stop.

I travel one zone (MV to PA) and they ask for my ticket 10-20% of the time.
What is the fine if you get caught without a ticket? $200?

> CalTrain ought to realize that it's in the business of mass transit, not
> leisurely travel and implement a tag on/off system (i.e. Muni).

Uh, isn't that exactly what they've been pushing for the last 6 months, and
now just stopped selling 8-ride tickets, and soon, monthly passes as well?

> Oh, and driving saves me at least 2 hours of commute time/day.

Are you telling me you can drive from MV to SF faster than the bullet train
during rush hour?

------
il
No weekend service at all is troubling. I'm not clear as to whether these are
just random proposals, or if they will actually be implemented. A fare
increase might be the most palatable solution.

------
sedev
It's worth noting that mismanagement (I don't think there has been significant
mismanagement, but it's up for debate) is not the main cause of the
requirement for cutbacks. The main issue is that CalTrain is no-one's
responsibility in particular. Almost half of CalTrain's funding comes from
ticket sales, which is not the normal pattern for public transit. The other
local transportation agencies (GGT, SamTrans, and BART) have dedicated
sponsors from municipal governments. CalTrain, as the name implies, used to be
state-funded. A couple of decades back, CalTrans, the state agency, stopped
funding it, and municipal governments stepped in. However, their funding has
always fluctuated - and this year, has pretty much evaporated.

Remember, public transportation runs the way it does because it's a public
good - it is pretty much by definition something that the market is bad at
providing, but which people need anyhow. If CalTrain had to survive off of
ticket revenue alone, it would cost more than twice as much to ride, and would
thus exclude some riders, harming revenues further. On top of this, CalTrain
relieves traffic - it provides a significant positive externality instead of
capturing value. Government subsidies to public transportation agencies
address this externality.

CalTrain is dying because of the tragedy of the commons: a great many people
can benefit from it (traffic, air quality) without paying for it, and will
resist any attempt to require that they contribute to it. This is the
situation that many, many public agencies are in.

------
magicseth
This is seriously disconcerting. As someone just considering moving into San
Francisco, and using Caltrain to commute to work, it makes me have serious
second thoughts.

~~~
beoba
"Just work harder, then you can get a car!" - the peninsula

~~~
sdbbp
Blame San Mateo County for rejecting BART 50 years ago.
<http://www.bart.gov/about/history/>

------
rottencupcakes
Maybe BART will finally be able to complete the loop and we can cut the awful
Caltrain out of the transportation scene entirely. BART is so on-time and
reliable.

It would be amazing if the Fremont line and the Colma line met up in San Jose.

------
jwatzman
With all the trouble that the Caltrain is having, and with all the good that
it does for employees at Valley companies, why don't they do something about
this? Google could certainly buy the train outright, though they probably
don't want to run it... but a group of companies such as Google, Facebook,
VMWare, Oracle, NVidia, etc etc together easily have enough money to donate to
help fix the Caltrain's financial issues.

~~~
zasz
The nice thing about being a multibillion dollar company is that you can run
private shuttles and allow your employees to isolate themselves from the
masses.

~~~
jwatzman
Yes, but that doesn't help their employees get around when one of their
destinations isn't work. Having functioning public transit is a major selling
point of the area and thus for those working for these companies.

------
tlrobinson
The last morning train leaves SF at 8:30am?! Did they forget this is Silicon
Valley, not Wallstreet? We don't all get to work by 9am!

~~~
dasil003
Yeah the note about "commute hours" cracked me up. Did they mean the time
Caltrain employees go and leave work?

------
megaframe
A while back Caltrain had proposed cuts that actually gave me better commuting
trains (SF to Santa Clara). Those never went through and now these are way
more extreme. If this goes through I'll have to either start driving (45min to
an hour each way) or move somewhere closer, and while I have that option not
everyone does. I really hope this is just a scare tactic intended to force
municipalities to change the way Caltrain gets funded so it stops getting
jerked around by the various counties that fund it every time they need
somewhere to cut costs, even as ridership increases. I also don't understand
how places like SF can allow Caltrain to cut service to games and holiday
events. I'd think that would cost them a lot of people who would go if they
didn't have to drive, while in turn creating a real problem to figure out how
to deal with the increased influx of all the extra cars from those who still
go.

------
fludlight
CalTrain publishes annual financial reports just like publicly listed
companies. Compare fiscal 2007 with 2010. Then check out how much of their
total revenue comes from subsidies vs fares.

[http://www.caltrain.com/about/statsandreports/Comprehensive_...](http://www.caltrain.com/about/statsandreports/Comprehensive_Annual_Financial_Reports.html)

They also provide a quarterly CapEx breakout:

[http://www.caltrain.com/about/statsandreports/Quarterly_Capi...](http://www.caltrain.com/about/statsandreports/Quarterly_Capital_Program_Status_Report.html)

And a breakout of ridership per station (check out page 11 of the 2010
report):

<http://www.caltrain.com/about/statsandreports/Ridership.html>

------
impendia
I see something distinctly odd about their proposal.

It would actually make my commute (home at 22nd Street in SF) to work
(Stanford, via Palo Alto) much _more_ convenient. I could catch a train every
fifteen minutes.

I don't need this convenience. As it is now, I can catch express trains down
every half hour (during commute hours) and back up at 5:06, 6:06, or 7:10.
That is quite adequate.

However, under the proposed plan, I'm screwed if I decide to stay late, and of
course some of my friends who make do without cars are much more screwed. It
seems that's more important, and that there is room to accommodate this by
thinning out the commute hour schedule.

------
erik_p
Of course my stop is one of those on the docket to be eliminated :(

How am I not surprised that Caltrain, who can't even process a credit card
payment over the web and apply it to my Clipper card in 24, natch 48, or even
72 hours... can't seem to run their company at a profit. I'm shocked, SHOCKED!

San nothing of the asanine way they handle tagging on and off for 8-ride
tickets within a given zone.

 _Sigh_

~~~
beoba
Isn't Clipper a separate entity from Caltrain? Or is Caltrain somehow handling
that transaction for you on Clipper's behalf?

Still smugly using my Translink-branded card.

~~~
shaddi
Yup. To be fair the intended payment model for the Clipper is to link it to a
credit card and do autoload whenever your balance crosses below a threshold.
Kind of silly in some ways but it works just fine after you get it set up.

------
mayank
Although these are drastic service cuts, at least one proposal might mean
faster commutes to SV:

\-- Suspension of weekday service at up to seven of the following stations:
Bayshore, South San Francisco, San Bruno, Burlingame, Hayward Park, Belmont,
San Antonio, Lawrence, Santa Clara and College Park

