Hollister
– San Benito County’s Council of Governments recently nixed
discussion of an in-county Caltrain station along the anticipated
Gilroy-Salinas extension. But some officials say the county may
still have a passenger rail line in its future.
Hollister – San Benito County’s Council of Governments recently nixed discussion of an in-county Caltrain station along the anticipated Gilroy-Salinas extension. But some officials say the county may still have a passenger rail line in its future.
According to COG Interim Executive Director Bob Davies, Monterey received about $20 million for infrastructure and improvements to extend Caltrain to Salinas along an existing rail line. Three miles of that line, Davies said, enter San Benito County at its “westernmost tip.” COG’s Board of Directors discussed the possibility of building a train station on the Salinas rail extension, but the board members seemed skeptical.
“It doesn’t have any accessible points,” board member Anthony Botelho said. He closed the meeting’s discussion by declaring, “I don’t have any interest in it whatsoever.”
Davies had a similar assessment. He said the proposed station would be inaccessible, due to its placement in the county’s outskirts and the fact that anyone driving to the station would have to cross a walled section of Route 101.
Botelho later said he supports passenger rail in San Benito, “But there are no immediate projects or money.”
The board of directors was more enthusiastic about extending Caltrain to Hollister along a “spur” of the existing Union Pacific line. Davies said COG has considered this possibility in the past, but decided the infrastructure would be too expensive.
DMB – the company behind the proposed Rancho San Benito development – has the option to acquire the rights to provide passenger service on that line. Ray Becker, project manager at Rancho San Benito, said the project’s plans include a central train depot.
“The rail line goes right through our site,” Becker said. “Most historic town centers have a depot. So we’re planning for it, but we’re not sure COG has that interest.”
Pat Loe, who chairs COG’s Board of Directors, said that if DMB proposes partnering with the county to provide rail service, “I think we’d have to look at it.”
Davies said it’s too early in the process to know if a COG-DMB rail team is likely.
“We’re very interested in a public-private partnership, but right now we don’t know what the development will entail,” he said. “In the short term, this has been studied, evaluated and determined to be cost-prohibitive. But if new revenue is identified, such as a public-private partnership, we will evaluate those elements.”
DMB hasn’t seriously discussed the possibility of a partnership with the county yet, Becker said, because it’s more appropriate to wait until the company submits its formal project application in spring or summer of 2007.
“COG is in an uncomfortable position, because we haven’t submitted a formal application,” Becker said. “We don’t want them to feel backed into a corner.”
Anthony Ha covers local government for the Free Lance. Reach him at 831-637-5566 ext. 330 or [email protected].
