Burlingame Broadway train station in jeopardy

Those estimations were far from accurate. Caltrain Design Chief Rob Barnard presented four different options for continuing work on a grade separation to councilmembers, and keeping the design as is would cost nearly around $889 million in total, he said. 

The cheapest option, at $615 million in total, would not include a design for the nearby Broadway train station. Previous plans for the project included refurbishing the train station to incentivize transit usage in the area. 

The enormous cost discrepancies are a serious concern for Burlingame — both because the city is dealing with a funding gap of up to $586 million for the project, and because of the lack of faith in Caltrain’s ability to manage the grade separation. 

“I invest for a living. I would fire you guys,” Vice Mayor Michael Brownrigg told Barnard. “You weren’t off by a little bit, you were off by a lot.” 

Already, around $20 million has been spent on designing the project, and nearly $20 million more is required to come up with further designs, including a million dollars a month for consulting, Bernard said. 

“A decision is needed in the coming months in order to move forward on this project,” he said. 

Funding remains a serious concern with the price increase — with removal of the train station, a current $586 million funding gap remains. If all funding the city is lobbying for comes through — including $15 million from Burlingame, $280 million from the San Mateo County Transportation Authority, $110 million in state funding, as well as federal funding — that still leaves a gap of around $147 million. 

The choice to pour more money into the grade separation is the real difficulty, Brownrigg said. 

“The hard decision is, when this comes back in six or eight or 10 weeks and we have to decide whether to spend real money,” he said. 

That’s further complicated by the current political landscape, Councilmember Donna Colson said. With construction and material costs already high and affected by federal tariffs, as well as an enormous rollback of federal funding, the feasibility of completing the project is tenuous. 

“In an environment of 25% tariffs, in an environment of the Fed pulling back tons and tons of funding, it’s just getting very complicated,” she said. 

Bernard did present two options that would allow for the completion of a Broadway train station at reduced cost. One, at $679 million total, would utilize a side platform design. Another, at $638 million total, would use that design but delay the platform build. 

Putting in that train station comes with its own set of concerns, however. Having transit in the area would automatically qualify the Broadway district as transit-oriented development, meaning dense, parking-free zoning. 

“You can’t have both. If you have a train station, you have to have [transit-oriented development],” Colson said. “That conversation needs to go back to the community.” 

Community members have expressed opposition to zoning that would create dense housing and higher buildings with few parking requirements, Community Development Director Neda Zayer said. 

“They don’t want parking changes, they don’t want development to occur, they don’t want wider sidewalks,” she said. “They are generally happy with the way things are.”  

But some business owners and residents do want the train station to remain, they said, citing the possibility of increased foot traffic in the shopping areas and the reduction of car use. 

“We are a bull’s-eye built around our train station,” resident and business owner Ross Bruce said. “And we’re heading toward our future, where we want to have automobiles be an option, not a necessity.” 

Despite the significant challenges, fixing the intersection — labeled the most dangerous and high-priority grade separation project in the state — remains a priority for the city. 

“I think it would be irresponsible to not move forward with the project, because of the liabilities,” Councilmember Andrea Pappajohn said.