Judge gives Caltrain electrification green light: Atherton loses lawsuit, claims local project was too closely tied to high-speed rail

The Transportation Solutions Defense and Education Fund, or TRANSDEF, and Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail joined the lawsuit that was eventually moved to Contra Costa County Superior Court.

On Monday, Superior Court Judge Barry Goode sided with Caltrain arguing electrifying the local tracks does not inherently pave the way for the state’s controversial bullet train.

“Petitioners are simply wrong when they say ‘[n]either project can be implemented without the other.’ … The Electrification Project can be implemented successfully even if the HSR project never takes another step forward. It is a project of independent utility that Caltrain has been seeking to implement for nearly twenty-five years,” Goode wrote in his order.

Caltrain is slated to receive $713 million from high-speed rail since the two agreed to a blended system whereby they would share the Peninsula tracks between San Jose and San Francisco.

“Indeed, at bottom [California High-Speed Rail] is providing funds to Caltrain while hoping that the rest of CHSRA’s plans work out well enough that, someday, it can bring the blended system to fruition. But if CHSRA is unable to do that, Caltrain will still have a successful project. Put another way, HSR may need to have Caltrain’s Electrification Project completed. But Caltrain does not need to have High Speed Rail completed for the Electrification Project to be a success,” Goode wrote.

Parties react

Atherton Vice Mayor Mike Lempres said the city would review the judge’s ruling and discuss possible next steps.

Stuart Flashman, an attorney representing the plaintiffs, and TRANSDEF President David Schonbrunn said the decision was disappointing but it was too early to determine whether they’d file an appeal.

Caltrain is well on its way toward electrifying its corridor and purchasing new electric trains, which officials say is critical to reducing greenhouse gas emissions as well as accommodating future ridership growth.

Its board of directors recently approved design-build contracts and is awaiting word on its final portion of necessary federal funding before giving the green light on construction. The agency hopes to replace 75 percent of its fleet and begin running electric trains by 2021.

“It has always been Caltrain’s position that the electrification project was separate from the high-speed rail project and therefore would require high-speed rail to complete their own environmental review,” said Caltrain spokeswoman Jayme Ackemann. “We continue to work on electrification so as not to delay the project. We have always held the position that we’d be able to litigate these matters successfully.”

Per the California Environmental Quality Act, Caltrain issued a lengthy report studying potential impacts its project might have on the environment and surrounding communities.

One area for which Atherton originally sought further mitigations was the number of trees that would need to be cut down. Flashman noted Caltrain committed to, when possible, using center poles in between the tracks to support overhead electrical wires. That, he said, helps reduce the number of trees that might need to be cut down.

“We may not have won in court, but the project is now a better project because of my clients pushing on it,” Flashman said, emphasizing no decision has been made on whether to appeal Monday’s decision.

Changes ahead

Flashman said Caltrain’s project is clearly dependent upon high-speed rail, as its electrification plans sat stagnate for decades until the state bullet train offered up funds.

Ackemann noted high-speed rail must conduct its own environmental review — which the state recently initiated — and there are benefits to Caltrain electrification regardless of the state’s project.

Caltrain’s electric trains could increase speeds up to 79 mph while running up to six trains per hour in each direction.

But the blended system envisions high-speed rail hitting up to 110 mph with another four trains in each direction every hour.

High-speed rail has faced its own legal hurdles since voters approved nearly $10 billion in bonds. The California High-Speed Rail Authority recently announced it would focus its efforts to beginning service on the northern segment running through the Bay Area where tracks already exist, before initiating service further south.

Schonbrunn said one reason TRANSDEF, a transit advocacy group, got involved in the lawsuit was to ensure the interests of Bay Area residents remain top priority.

“We saw that this plan makes no sense on behalf of Caltrain passengers. The EIR for the project shows them running out of capacity in the year 2040 after they gave all that capacity to high-speed rail,” Schonbrunn said.

Ackemann said the entire Modernization Program — which also includes a new control system — will be an improvement to a heavily-used rail system. And Monday’s court ruling, she said, is another milestone.

“Caltrain is operating at, and beyond, its capacity during much of the peak commute,” Ackemann said. “And electrification really sets the table for long-term capacity increases on our system. It also does some other important things for the Bay Area; it nearly eliminates diesel emissions along the Caltrain corridor, it operates much cleaner and much more quietly than the current service does. So it’ll be a benefit to those living along the route. And of course, it allows us to operate not just expanded capacity, but potentially on a faster schedule as well.”

samantha@smdailyjournal.com

(650) 344-5200 ext. 106