Town Square

Post a New Topic

Can city catch up with high speed rail?

Original post made on Oct 29, 2009

A three-person City Council committee met this week in the first of a series of regular meetings to discuss the challenges of running high speed trains through Mountain View's Caltrain corridor.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, October 30, 2009, 12:00 AM

Comments (2)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rafael
a resident of another community
on Oct 29, 2009 at 8:12 pm

In Mountain View, the biggest headache is actually VTA light rail. There's not enough room for six tracks side-by-side and elevated rail is not possible because of the nearby Shoreline, CA-85, Whisman and CA-237 overpasses. Something's going to have to give.

In terms of traffic and noise, the best solution would be to put both Caltrain/UPRR and HSR underground and keep VTA light rail at grade. However, this is also the most expensive solution, with possible subsidence risks (depends on geology and construction strategy). Also, UPRR diesel locomotives require large fans for ventilation and present a fire hazard. It's not clear if UPRR might be willing to switch to an electric locomotive for its Mission Bay Hauler trains.

Alternative 1: construct an underpass for VTA light rail, emerging back to grade as single track just west of the bike bridge and just south of the Caltrain right of way. This would separate the VTA light rail/Central grade crossing. Keep Caltrain/UPRR and HSR at grade, but with tall sound walls, either living walls or triple glazing rather than plain concrete in the downtown section. Note that these would shield the downtown area against noise from Central as well. Castro would become a deep underpass with no turnoffs onto or off Central. Motorists would need to use Shoreline + Villa instead.

Alternative 2: put only the HSR tracks underground, leave Caltrain/UPRR + VTA light rail at grade. Implement FRA quiet zone for the retained grade crossings at Castro and Central (VTA light rail). Sufficient room for HSR platforms.

Note that in all three scenarios, there's a potential conflict with gravity-drained conduits crossing the PCJPB right of way, e.g. Stevens Creek. It might be easiest to deal with in Alternative 1, since light rail vehicles can most easily cope with the steep gradients needed to run tracks under the creek.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Old Ben
a resident of Shoreline West
on Oct 30, 2009 at 12:54 am

It'll certainly make suicide by train quicker and easier.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 7 comments | 3,434 views

Ode to Brussels Sprout
By Laura Stec | 20 comments | 2,621 views

Go Giants! Next Stop: World Series!
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 1,948 views