In Monterey, Monterey-Salinas Transit is proposing to build a busway between Marina and Seaside on an abandoned rail corridor adjacent to Highway 1 to support faster bus service between Salinas and Downtown Monterey. The project was awarded federal Small Starts funds, and construction is planned to start at the end of this year. Initially, the California Coastal Commission staff recommended denying the project. However, after a postponement requested by MST, CCC and MST reached an agreement to secure a recommendation for approval by the CCC next week.

The main concern for the CCC staff is the busway’s impact on sand dunes within the right of way. The project initially proposed building a two-lane busway next to the track but within the rail right of way. As part of the agreement, one lane would be shifted to replace the track to reduce the footprint. Although far more trackage would be removed compared to the initial plan, less grading and fewer retaining walls would likely be required.

This agreement appears to be a bad news for train fans anticipating CCC to kill the project to preserve the track for a future rail project. In their comments to the CCC, they suggested that the federal Small Starts funds MST applied for the busway could somehow be redirected to rail and afford a rail project.

Rail advocates should know that most of project funding can’t be easily redirected. Most grants have specific criteria. If a major change to the project occurs (such as changing alignment or mode), the old project would expire and a new project would replace it. Consequently, most grants would likely need to be reapplied for the new project.

Regarding their suggestion to preserve the rail corridor for tourist operations, it’s important to note that this rail corridor has been under public ownership for about two decades. I don’t recall any serious effort to introduce tourist rail services during that time when the corridor was available. It seems disingenuous to present this as a novel idea, rather than an effort to kill a federally funded project at the last minute.

I doubt that rail service could be restored for the same price as the SURF project. The idea of importing used railcars from Europe seems frivolous for a publicly funded project, supposedly to use “redirected” public funds. If it’s as affordable as they suggest, why hasn’t a private entity made a serious offer in the last two decades? Private entities are free to use historic or used railcars.

In the initial CCC staff report recommending against approving the busway, CCC staff suggested converting one of the three lanes on Highway 1 to a carpool/bus lane as a serious alternative, citing an example from San Francisco. I would like to note that the lanes in San Francisco are on Lombard Street, a city street rather than a freeway. That lane is also more of a “suggestion,” as private vehicles and trucks can legally enter the lane (it is near the curbside next to the parking lane) to access parking or to make right turns onto driveways or cross streets. Conversion of freeway lanes to HOV has not been done for decades due to its controversial nature.

Using city streets for BRT infrastructure has several examples in the Bay Area, specifically in San Francisco, Oakland, and San Jose. However, all these lanes involve lengthy and disruptive construction phases for businesses and residents due to the need to dig up the street and replace underground utilities. None of the three cities or transit agencies are proposing more such projects.

I believe that placing a busway adjacent to the track is the better way to preserve future opportunities for rail. If the track is removed and replaced by pavement, as CCC currently recommends, it would make it more difficult, but not impossible. Most likely, the rail mode would be light rail, capable of sharing space with bus traffic. Examples of rail and bus joint-use infrastructure include Tilikum Crossing in Portland, Oregon, and the Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel during 2007-2019, where both light rail and buses shared the tunnel. That light rail would likely be powered by battery or hydrogen, as the current CCC recommendation for the busway stipulates no overhead utilities. If a more serious rail proposal arises, it could also entirely replace the busway with rail.