train system become competitive with vehicles. this slide we are over capacity on both north and south bound cht we highlight thd north bound slide here and you can see in the low season it sup to 1thry 5 percent and in the high season it is much higher than that. the next slide shows-this is what it looks like on the system with that type of cupsty and these pictures are not of giants games when it is higher than that, this is just a regular day on the system in both direction. we have variety of different customers riding the system from people bringing on bikes to people going to and from work and the ada passenjure. for the average rider they are on the cal train system between 20 and 28 miles and on between 30 and 50 minutes. when this compares to other systems in the bay areas, for bart muni and [inaudible]

passenjures are on those systems for less time than cal trains. for ace it is a commuter rail system and it more so cal train is in the middle for what the riders experience and how long on the system, but when we look at the future for lect fiication we have to keep in mind will the system look more like bart and muni and [inaudible] or ace and capital cor dor. we have to balance that and understand the needs of the riders using our system. our riders have told us a lot about their capacity, wants and desire jz cal train needs to expand to have them use the system. we also heard from businesses as well. the cor dor that cal train runs on between san francisco and san jose has a incredible amount of economic support and vitility to the state. 14 percent of [inaudible] 52 percent of hat patens and 25 percent of the

california state revenue come from this cor dor and because the cor dor is so important for so many businesses they created the cal train commuter system. the point nof system is to advocate for cal train modernizing quicker and increase capacity and work thong 101 cor dor to it see what is done to alleviate that make this is a viable and sustainability economic environment. yoi can see facks about cal train ridesersism 75 percent of the riders use the system to cut commute to work and 63 percent are [inaudible] that means they have access to the car but use cal train. [inaudible] they are able to use cal train as a alternative and good chise for them to get to and from work. what cal train has been doing to address their needs is first of all, do everything we can do now. the first step we bought used

diesel train squz you see in the bottom left corner, that is a picture of the trains. we put them in the system without paint ing them because we knew they needed to get out quickly. those in operation now and helping to eleave some of the congestion on their today, but that is a short term fix. what will be a bigger step in the aability to increase capacity is cal trainect fiication. with that in place we'll have more trains, serve more riders increase station stop and/or reduce trabl time >> i have a question. sorry you were going on to the next slide, you can continue >> after that and something that is also important can work to increase capacity is level boarding and longer trains in the future so those are things we are working towards >> let's go back to the last slide. you may or may not knhoe i sit on the joint powers

board for cal train so i heard this presentation before and sthr a lot of discussion around capacity seating and standing and how we define capacity. for the folks listening and for supervisor kims etfiication can you talk about how you are defining capacity? >> with the met rolink cars or overall? with the met rolink cars we physically pult more cars on the trains. we did have 5 car train [inaudible] and when we added the diesel cars we are able to make up 6 car train [inaudible] in the peek hours so it adds more space. when we did that we added more seat td space and more space for bikes. there was a very large bike community level of support saying they wanted trains that are more

consistent between 2 fleets. one fleet allows 80 bike squz the other 48 but as we add the new [inaudible] now when we talk about lect fiication and i can do it on this slide and a couple slides further i'll get into more details on those different elements, with elect fiication we'll add more trains per hour per direction so not only are they 6 car frains but we ont have 5 in the peek hour and with electra fiication there will be 6. for standing, seats and bikes that will increase dramatically on system. with standing and

seats to bikes we have another presentation [inaudible] this slides does point to the ridership and the increased frequency and quicker trips with lect fiication. the numbers came out of the eir document and it shows there are many different benefits, the green house gas and congestion and noise relief and also the jobs created with this. as dave like tooz say, it is a win win win project. this slide gets a little about at the service benefit and trying to quantify for people how this increases capacity and how this changes so we took this from the perspective of the rider. sometimes we say moir trains per hour. with the diesel trains that are not as high performance as the electric ones, we run fifen in the peek hour and in 60 minutes it makes 5 or 6 stops from saf to san

zose. the electric trains there are more trains per peek hour. another way we can do it because we vacapability to use their performants in different ways and if we theld 60 minute timeframe which is competitive from driving from san francisco to san jose, today we make 6 stops and with the electric vehicleatize can may 13 stops. if you are in red wood city and have 3 trains with the lectifyed vehicle you have 5. you have more choice jz can get on and off the system quicker so isn't just one more train per hour but the performance that we can change the schedule and make different schedules for people and hopefully make that more convenient. with

this i'll run through a couple slides of where we have been for the lect fiication project and turn it over to dave to talk about how our thought process is mod#2350ied base ond stake holder recommendations. the first is recap of where we are. we spent 2 years working orn the environmental process for this project and we got board certification the beginning of 2015. we issued a design build contract for the rp design build contract so that is the contract people build thg poles and wires to lectify the system and we expect the board to award it in the fall of this year. on the emu side, that the electric trains, we want the cal train board to issue a rfp in jul so we have a contract award and keep in place the timeframe of having lectifyed suvs by 2020.

these are important mile stones poomeet in order to get that 20 dwent date which is so important for the riders and business community and board members. this slide is a ricap of what i said frame the last slide. provides a little more detail about the 6 prequalified team squz the time frame we expect to award these contracts. it is important to talk about the plan because we want to be transparent on what woo were doing and where we modify too. we get stake holder feed back as we went to meetings the last couple month squz continue to do it this month to make sure we are on the right sknath if we are not we are hearing from the steak hp holders. to recap what we did on the original plan is last summer went to the car builders and told them, this is what the system looks today and will continue to have a ridership increase and this is how it looks and feels but will have to share this cor dor with

high speed rail in the future so need to be thoughtful with what the cars look like. the car builders came back and said if you want to maximize capacity the phest a bilechblg train burse versus a single train. yes they made options that can meet the u.s. regulation compliance and for the most typical vehicle that is out there, you board between 22 inches at the top of the rail and 5 inches. there is competition of car buildsers interested in bidding on the process. this is what the vehicle would look like. it serves the corridor today and it is bilevel and the doors are at in25 inch level height. if you ada passenjure or carry a bike, you take the steps in and you will be at the bottom level. we continued to use the instrustructure we have today

so this is the 2020 timeframe thmpt top left corner shows it is 2 doors similar to part of the fleet out there today. you have a step to get in, the top right hand corner and the bottom left corner are [inaudible] and way high lifts and that is how the ada passengers board today and how they would in twnt 20. future level boarding is very important for cal trains t. is important for safety, operational capacity, [inaudible] and ada. this is something we want in the future and dependent on which car we get that future level boarding height will need to meet that. so, in our original thinking we would think for level boarding, cal train would have level boarding at 12 inch level and [inaudible] we both have level

boarding and the 2 station that share high speed rail there are level plat forms. there is a lengthy crubz period when you varevenue service you have to build the plat form squz cal train has twaevl of themp. there is also a california waver need said because there is freight on the cor dor and have several [inaudible] ace capetle and amtrak have different height than cal train today and in the future and high speed rail. we have 7 historic stations. there are different ramp jz different site specific needs that have to be taken into consideration for boarding height. today i'll turn that ourfb how that is modified for our thipging and come back to the staff rementdation going forward >> thank you casey. as we pull

forward in conversations with each one of the car buildsers, we are trying to take into account what the requests have been for many of the stake holders. as casey said a few minutes ago, the original process was for cal train to have a 25 inch boarding height and high speed rail to have 50 inch. what was put in front of aus is what wecan we do teat get to that common height and how do modify the emu. we started a 6 munlt process in conjunction of high speed rail [inaudible] send his apology, he is in sacramento, but i cht to assure you we have been [inaudible] we interviewed car buildsers and went through a

process to understand what they have. we did a technical analysis to make sure there were not critical flaws and at the back end we went through what it was that would be constraints or issues on the operational side because this will be a long term effect over a 30 plus year timeframe for each of the vehiclesism the car builders that participated, there were 7 of them, there were different options proposed as part of that process. one of them was to go ahead and add additional doors a that upper and lower level and the other one was basically use something called [inaudible] which would not ree result in the loss of seats but limit the number of doors available to for passener ands to come off and go on the vehicles >> what is a trap? >> a trap is-one more picture.

this is a trap right here. this is a picture of a nob inwhich sewn the east coast in pennsylvania outside philadelphia. if you look at the picture on the right t is a single door at the end of the train and there are a series of steps that come down so you can get to the lour level platform. in the center is the trap. it is a plate that comes down and closes so when the plate is closed, that platform is at the 50 inch height so you use one door for multiple purposes. on the right you go down a set of step tooz a lower platform and with the trap closed you come out with the level boarding at that point >> understand. you have one door or 2 doors one at each platform height >> if you are at a high level

platform you have 2 doors and when you are at lower level there is one door at the end of each vehicle. so those there 2 different ones we looked at. what we did find is they could redesign a existing vehicle. what we didn't want to start with is a brand new vehicle designed from the wheels up. we believe we could hold delivery in a 36 month time frame that support revenue service in 2020. if we did go with a complete design with the vehicle, in stead of 36 months to get the vehicle it would be about 5 years. this allows us to get something used before.

there is adequate competition from car manufacturers to supplyeter of these 2 types. when we wlook at the operational assessment, and it was basically the 2 modification options i went through a few minute agoand you to take it and divide it in 2 time frames. the first is the 2020 time frame which cal train would start operations and before high speed rail and look that future when high speed rail is there at the platform at the 50 inch level. looking at boarding with bikes and without bike squz also ada accessibility, there are ishis dependent on what the configuration is with circulation inside of the vehicle jz there are operational challenges and thimgs that would have to occur which relate to the things that are there relate ed to the traps. to get on the isame

page with the terminology and difference in levels, we currently have a 8 inch above top rail pratform that is common at all cal train station. the low 4 vehicles come in a range of 22-25 at top of rail. there a intermediate level and that is 50 inch level which is basecry over the top of the trucks or wheel assembly for had vehicles and there is a upper level because we get that capacity by using the bilevel vehicles. on the lower left is a door similar to what you saw in the [inaudible] and on the right is the single door associated with the traps when i get to that piece. as we start through and look at the 2020 timeframe, it is go tg to be a timeframe when we have mixed fleets. we'll have emu's

running and still replace only 75 percent of the vehicles under this program so we'll continue to use the diesel fleet out and into the future. if i look spirfckly at modification a, this was the first one that basically put 2 sets of doors, 2 doors at the lower level which was the original way that we had inventioned in plan for the vehicle jz 2 at the upper level. what would occur in that situation is those 2 upper level doors would be installed at the time the vehicle was manufactureered. they would then be closed and not utileized until the platforms were at the 50 inch level. that would occur once the platform went to 50 inches because there would no longer be access to the lower doors. as we look at that it giveathize better ease of being able to get passengers and bikes on and off. we have to

figure where in the process the ada facilities are whether around the upper or lower level and that will make a difference as we go ahead and move forward into the upper level platforms. to acsosez those, we have a comination if it is the 25 inch platform, the mini blocks we have in place at the stations could be used or the lifts. if we teent the 50 inch level before all the platforms are at the 50 inch heights we heighten the height and bow able to use the way side lifts. this would give you a idea of what each of those looks like. on the top left, this is a pick which are from the east coast, this is a high block that gives you that boarding height at the 50 irch level. the lower left is the existing mini block we have that are currently out on the system. in some cases if we

went to those higher blocks because of constraints on the platforms recollect, we may be force today remove some of the mini high jz use what the picture is on the right which is the lifts. we have those at some of the stations now and dependent on configuration we may have use them at more. this is modification b, this is what i started through a few minute ago with the traps at each end. the upper picture shows you the traps that would be at the far end of each car and those are the 3 pictures at the bottom which shows the steps at the right side with the traps open. the cept rb with the trap closed and the third with the trap door on the left is a trap in the up position and the door opened. so, that is what you have is 3 to 5 stepss going up from had lower level to that 50 inch height and that would be the way that we would go ahead and transition from the 8 inch

height every much erally wael to the point that the all the platforms are at the 50 inch level. in modification b which takes us to the point we are going with the traps and this is really a description of what was on the previous slide, it takes you into the fact that they are single doors. you have traps and step squz this is maintenance intensive. some manufacturers have autoimateic traps and some manual traps. the ada is at the 50 inch level and then you have a series of steps you wind up going up and down again to get to the lower level which is where the bicycle parking area would be. by having the single doors instead of the double it causes a increase in dwell time. i don't have a xckt number of what that would be. it is

basically about half of the door leaves that we currentry have. i woulden say it is doubling of dwell time, but it is a increase of what the dwell time would be. when we go to the future and look at what the blended service is with high speed rail, with modifications to the stations, and in this case it would be scenario one that we have got 2 to 3 stations that have got that common plasform height, 5 oinch with high speed rail and cal train and on the right the 25 inch platform at only the cal train stations. this is a scenario that isn't all the platforms get raise thood 50 inch height. if you go to scenario 2, this is with common height, 50 inch platforms for both high speed rail and also cal train at all of the stations in the peninsula.

moving to the future, what that means for modification a, is ui see ifio go ahead and stay with 2 or 3 of the stations at the higher platform level, both the upper and lower doors would have to remainope toon be able to serve both the 25 inch height and also the 5 oinch height platform. scenario 2 which is the picture otthe ought bam this shows all the platform at the 50 inch height with the common boarder we can close the 2 lower doors basically regaining seats >> i have a couple questions. i'm not sure if i direct it toward youo casey, but i want to know if cal train had the money for a level boarding at any height? >> no there currently not

anything in the budget for modifications and nothing cleared in the environmental process for change tooz the platforms. as casey said there are a series of historic stations on the peninsula that could chalsh challenge making the platform stations >> i want to know if the disability community was contacted on these plans whether they vacomfortability level when it come tooz getting on to these trains? >> the key is level boarding. that is what gets you the shorting dwell time. it is what gets you to the ability to not have customers go up and down stairs. that is always a safety issue. you don't want people to be tripping getting off and on. level boarding also gives better access to go ahead and get the bikes on and also for ada so you eliminate the use of the lift jz the maxy

high platforms >> thank you >> supervisor kim >> thank you spl visor cohen. follow up question of the raising of the platform. regardless cal train has to raise the platform to troiv twenty-five enchls is that correct? >> that is the future plan is go to to the l the woiv erch level. the vehicles we were currently pure curer could be utloadsed with the 8 inch platform and at a later point in time when the platform goes to 25 irchs you put a filler in if to cover the step so there is level boarding from the platform to the car. there was a trnzition that could be made to go to that point >> and how would you do that from 8 inch tooz 25, is it just staircases you put in place and ramps? >> are you talking about the platform?

>> the platform >> you raise the existing 8 inches tupe 25 so it is basically a 18 inch difference >> in the mean time. you said you don't have funding to raise the plantform to 25 or 50 but you said you can still use the 25 inch platform vehicles on the 8 inch platform and how would you do that? >> there are a set of steps that go in mpt you would use 2 steps to get into the vehicles and when you went to had 25 irch platform in the future you would then put a filler in where that step was so you can do level boarding. that fts the approach that was there in the buginning with cal train >> do you anticipate a significant difference in cost between build ag25 irch or 50 inch platform? >> there will be a difference in cost, i won't say it is a doubling of cost, but there will be a difference of cost. part thf problem with some of the stations on the peninsula

is they have been there so long. whatever the founication structure is or if it is earthquake resistance are things that have to be taken into consideration. whether we go to a 25 or 50 a lot is dependent on what is there and what type of structure has to be installed >> thank you. please continue >> sfgov tv, with with over head. thank you. >> that would allow [inaudible] what this does with all platforms is you close the lour doors which regains the seats. that shows you what that modification and scenario 1 does and it is basically what i described in the previous slide. modification b and this

goes back to the vehicles with the traps, at the point in time that you only had 2 or 3 stations that were at the upper level, you would continue to go ahead i use the traps at the point you can go ahead and get access from the 8 inch or 25 inch platform so you would have both of thois sets of doors with the traps still active. if you went to the second scenario which is shared boarding at the 50 inch level with the high speed rail locations, in esens what you do is close off the bought of the traps and seal the doors so you have 2 single leaf doors at each end of the car to have entrance exit for any of the customers. that sadis crypter of what would occur as you go through the process to go ahead and seal the traps and some of the pieces that are there in

terms of the impacts are in terms of dwell time, challenges for passenjure and bike circulation. each of the scenarios has iits own pluses and minuses. potential path forward, i'll let casey come back up nols you have any other questions at this point? >> we have no questions at this time, thank you >> okay, i'll go 33 the next couple slides on the path forward and we have met with lots of groups including ada. for the potential path forward we have to keep in mind the framework which is makes this more complicated. the blending system is not yet defined. there needs to be more community planning and environmental [inaudible] right now we vaconceptual idea of what the blended system is but we do have is the early investment program and it is