Who can see your viewing activity?
Michael Schabas FCP/CPCS London
Michael Schabas CPCS London looking for lessons for Toronto
Hi all, welcome! Now and throughout the conversation, feel free to put any thoughts or questions you have about today's topic in the chat.
What Caltrain issues are you thinking about? What are your concerns? Please feel free to put your thoughts and questions in the chat.
Yes, slides and a recording of today's session will be shared with everyone!
For more details about Seamless' position on a BART-Caltrain merger, read Ian's detailed blog: https://www.seamlessbayarea.org/blog/2021/6/16/merging-bart-and-caltrain-is-an-opportunity-to-create-the-world-class-regional-transit-system-the-bay-area-deserves
why wouldn’t the logistically simpler solution of a BART-Caltrain merger be to give the governance of Caltrain to BART, annex SMC and SCC into the BART District, and then abolish the PCJPB?
Logistically simpler than creating a whole new entity to manage them both***
What happened to Valley Link, ACE and Capitol Corridor (AKA "BART Baby Bullets")
@EthanMizzi one concern I have is that retaining the BART structure may lead to overrepresentation of suburban areas and lack of representation in the urban core.
@Shotokan Karate don’t the BART directors represent areas of equal population sizes?
How would this merger affect Bart capital projects in SCC? Would the new entity take over San Jose and Santa Clara Bart extensions from VTA? (which seems like it would be a good outcome)
In Ian's blog about a possible BART-Caltrain merger, he addresses the concern that suburban interests would dominate the board of a unified agency and would starve dense areas of transit: https://www.seamlessbayarea.org/blog/2021/6/16/merging-bart-and-caltrain-is-an-opportunity-to-create-the-world-class-regional-transit-system-the-bay-area-deserves
@EthanMizzi I'm not sure, but I guess assuming it is an issue, it would make sense to propose a new governance structure, as suggested by seamless above (and this is Raayan, sorry!)
omg hi Raayan
i think so long as it’s directly elected and each Director’s district is of equal representation than it’s not an issue
Here are a few reports that I’ll be referencing:
Is there any reason why this panel has not studied Transport for London (TfL)? Are there any issues with TfL that we should know about?
How about BART Administration without BART Governance? Would that work?
who will run said administration if you take away the BoD
eBART (Pittsburg to Antioch) runs on standard gauge rail (just like Caltrain)
@Ethan. No changes to the BOD (to start with).
@Roland were you saying have BART run Caltrain at the direction of the PCJPB?
Why is this set up so that the Chat cannot be saved?
@Pamela Right-click->Select All->Copy
@Ethan, Yes: just like Capitol Corridor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitol_Corridor#Governance
No, @Roland, Select All is blanked out.
San Mateo and Santa Clara Counties would still lack representation on the BART Board despite BART serving both counties. The PCJPB is archaic and represents the wants and need of municipalities when it should represent the people who live here. if BART was to run Caltrain then the PCJPB should just be abolished and let SMC and SCC get seats on the BARTD Board
Going back to London, All the railway lines have separate management (operating concessions). Same with the bus lines (60% farebox recovery!!!) but schedule coordination is handled by TfL who are responsible for the London Underground
Running buses as a precursor to rail is a great idea - also what Sound Transit does (they have ST Express buses along all their future extension corridors)
Would a Caltrain + BART merger (or just the creation of a regional network manager) have large implications on Caltrain frequency or levels of service?
MTC is the entity responsible for planning, prioritizing and funding regional projects. Are there any plans to replace MTC????
i believe the MTC and ABAG will merge in the long run
Roland - options for network management, including changes to MTC, will be looked at at an upcoming business case that will follow from the current Blue Ribbon task Force. I expect there will be more discussion at next monday’s BRTF meeting. But, no plans that we’re aware of to replace MTC
simon - great example of Sound Transit, they also do a good job of jointly operating regional buses and trains to build ridership over time
@Davis going back to the TfL analogy, yes, BART could (and probably should) be the network manager (BART is the equivalent of the London underground).
@Laura: watch the Megaproject Delivery Task Force.
Some of the Capitol Corridor Board members are BART directors.
None of London's Rail lines are integrated but they are fully coordinated by TfL
Jeff - in a merger scenario BART could not take charge of Caltrain voter-approved funding to spend on any non-caltrain uses. Our recent blog further discusses this: https://www.seamlessbayarea.org/blog/2021/6/16/merging-bart-and-caltrain-is-an-opportunity-to-create-the-world-class-regional-transit-system-the-bay-area-deserves
I respectfully disagree: MTC's role should be to achieve regional consensus on who the network manager should be.
Also, Jeff, we don’t support a BART takeover of Caltrain, we’d want a merger to have a brand new board that is set up to oversee an integrated system
thank you all for the great questions!