Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

The Portal (San Francisco)

The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension, is a planned underground rail infrastructure project in , , led by the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA), that aims to extend commuter rail service from its current terminus at Fourth and King Streets southward to connect with the in downtown San Francisco, while also accommodating future operations. The project represents the second phase of the broader Transbay Program, which transformed the former Transbay Terminal site into a modern multimodal transit hub, fulfilling a long-standing regional goal to bring through-running rail service into the city's core and integrate it with eight other transit systems including , Muni, and Golden Gate Transit. Upon completion, The Portal is projected to enable seamless electrified service spanning 77 miles from to Gilroy, reducing travel times, alleviating surface street congestion by removing dozens of daily diesel trains from the Fourth and King corridor, and supporting up to 125,000 weekday boardings at the expanded transit center. The initiative includes approximately 1.6 miles of twin-bore tunnels, underground stations, and connections to tracks extending southward from the transit center, with environmental clearance achieved in 2023 and anticipated to commence following securing full funding estimated at over $8 billion from federal, state, and regional sources. Despite broad regional support evidenced by endorsements from multiple agencies and recent advancements such as the selection of as program manager in 2024 and public visualizations of integrated service, the project's progress hinges on navigating funding uncertainties amid competing national infrastructure priorities and potential shifts in federal administration policies.

Project Overview

Description and Objectives

The Portal, formally known as the Downtown Rail Extension, is a major rail infrastructure project led by the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) to extend commuter rail service northward from its current terminus at Fourth and King Streets to the in downtown . The extension spans approximately 1.3 miles of primarily underground alignment, incorporating a combination of cut-and-cover and mined tunneling techniques, a new underground station at Fourth and Townsend Streets with two tracks and island and side platforms, and the activation of the Transit Center's pre-built two-level train box featuring six tracks and three center platforms. This infrastructure will accommodate both electrified operations and the northern terminus of the system. The project's core objectives center on closing the longstanding "rail gap" in San Francisco by integrating regional rail directly into the city's downtown core, thereby enhancing connectivity to 11 existing transit systems at the Salesforce Transit Center, including BART, Muni, Golden Gate Transit, and others. By enabling through-running of Caltrain trains and future high-speed services, The Portal seeks to reduce commute times—saving riders nearly an hour daily—shift travel from automobiles to public transit, and lower greenhouse gas emissions to combat climate change. It also aims to support statewide high-speed rail goals, facilitating one-seat rides from San Francisco to Los Angeles in under three hours once the full HSR network is operational. Additional objectives include fostering through improved access to jobs, housing, and opportunities in the Bay Area's economic hubs, while advancing by prioritizing equitable transit benefits for underserved communities. The initiative builds on prior investments, such as the $400 million allocated in 2010 under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act for the Transit Center's train box, positioning The Portal as Phase 2 of the broader Transbay Program to create a unified, sustainable transportation gateway for .

Route and Infrastructure

The Portal extends service northward from its existing terminus at 4th and King Streets in San Francisco's Mission Bay district to the in the downtown core, closing a longstanding gap in the Peninsula Corridor rail line. The total route length measures approximately 2.2 miles (3.5 km), with the core extension comprising a 1.3-mile (2.1 km) underground segment designed to accommodate both conventional and future operations. The infrastructure features a twin-bore mined spanning 3,352 feet (1,022 m) with a cross-section varying from 50 to 60 feet in diameter, supplemented by cut-and-cover sections for integration with surface elements. The tunnel alignment proceeds beneath Townsend Street initially, transitioning under Second Street toward the Transit Center, incorporating mainline trackwork throughout and at-grade connections to Caltrain's existing railyards and tracks at the southern end. Electrified tracks will support Caltrain's ongoing modernization to overhead systems, ensuring compatibility with the agency's fleet of electric multiple-unit trains as well as standards for speeds up to 125 mph in urban sections. Key infrastructure includes two intermediate stations: an underground facility at Fourth and Townsend with a one level below ground and platforms two levels down, served by two tracks and configured with a center flanked by side platforms; and the below-grade at the , featuring six tracks across three center platforms on two levels to handle peak-hour capacities. Ventilation and emergency egress structures are integrated along the alignment, with the overall system tying into nine regional transit modes at eight access points via the Transit Center's multimodal hub. The design prioritizes seismic resilience and flood mitigation, reflecting San Francisco's environmental constraints, while avoiding surface disruption through subsurface construction.

Design and Technical Details

Tunnel Engineering and Construction

The Portal's tunnel engineering employs a hybrid construction strategy, utilizing cut-and-cover methods for shallower segments and mined tunneling for deeper excavations, spanning approximately 1.3 miles (2.1 km) beneath Townsend and Second Streets to extend rail service from the existing terminus at Fourth and King Streets to the Salesforce Transit Center's underground train box. This approach accommodates the urban constraints of , where cut-and-cover enables integration with surface like utilities and roadways, while mined tunneling minimizes surface disruption in areas requiring greater depth or proximity to sensitive structures. Key engineered components include the underground guideway structure, designed to support both electrified operations and future compatibility, along with integrated tunnel ventilation systems for air quality and , and emergency egress provisions compliant with federal rail standards. A new underground station at Fourth and Townsend Streets will feature portal connections to facilitate train entry, incorporating structural reinforcements such as tunnel stub boxes for potential future extensions like the link. As of October 2024, the project remains in the 30% design phase, with a progressive design-build procurement initiated in December 2023 for civil and tunnel works to streamline engineering and construction sequencing. Recent optimizations, announced in November 2024, involve reducing tunnel stub lengths and eliminating the train box extension to lower costs and accelerate timelines without compromising core functionality. AECOM was awarded the program management contract on August 21, 2024, to coordinate geotechnical assessments, risk mitigation for seismic activity in the Bay Area, and phased construction to achieve revenue service by 2035, subject to full funding commitments. The total construction length, including ancillary works, extends to about 1.95 miles, emphasizing durability against local soil conditions through reinforced linings and groundwater management techniques inherent to the selected methods.

Station Integration and Features

The Portal project incorporates two underground stations designed for seamless integration with existing regional rail infrastructure and multimodal transit networks in downtown . The Fourth and Townsend station, located near the current terminus at Fourth and King streets, features street-level entrances leading to a one level below ground and a platform level two levels below, equipped with ticketing facilities, informational maps, restrooms, and other passenger amenities. This station includes two tracks served by a center flanked by side platforms, facilitating efficient passenger flow and operational flexibility for services. At the Salesforce Transit Center, the project's northern terminus utilizes a pre-constructed two-level "train box" in the basement, funded with $400 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act in 2010 and completed ahead of the center's opening in August 2018. The fit-out includes a lower concourse level with ticketing, waiting areas, and retail spaces, connected to a platform level accommodating six tracks and three center platforms to support both Caltrain commuter operations and future California High-Speed Rail services. This design enables direct vertical integration with the above-ground Transit Center, which serves intercity and regional buses from operators including AC Transit, Golden Gate Transit, SamTrans, and Greyhound, as well as proximity to Muni light rail, BART, and ferry terminals, creating connectivity to 11 distinct transit systems overall. Both stations emphasize and , incorporating emergency exits, ventilation structures, and compatible with Caltrain's ongoing transition to electric multiple units, while the platforms are engineered for high-capacity throughput to reduce dwell times and enhance transfers to destinations. The underground configuration minimizes surface disruption and aligns with the Transit Center's role as a regional hub, potentially saving commuters up to one hour daily by eliminating the need for additional bus or connections from the existing Fourth and King station.

Compatibility with Existing Systems

The Portal project is engineered to integrate seamlessly with the existing Peninsula Corridor infrastructure, connecting via at-grade trackwork at the Fourth and Townsend area to the current rail yards and mainline tracks south of the project alignment. This tie-in preserves operational continuity for 's commuter services, which operate on standard-gauge (1,435 mm) tracks already compatible with the extension's specifications. The design avoids disruptions to the legacy diesel-era infrastructure while accommodating the transition to electrified operations under 's Peninsula Corridor Electrification Project, which introduced Plus H electric multiple units (EMUs) in 2024. Electrification systems match 's 25 kV 60 Hz AC overhead standard, ensuring no retrofitting is required for incoming electric services from the south. Signaling and train control incorporate (PTC), mandated and implemented across the corridor since 2020, with provisions for future enhancements to support blended operations sharing tracks between commuter and high-speed services. The intermediate underground station at Fourth and Townsend features two tracks and side platforms optimized for 's EMU dimensions and level boarding heights (approximately 1,100 mm above top of rail), aligning with ongoing platform upgrades on the Peninsula Corridor for and . At the northern terminus, the project interfaces with the Salesforce Transit Center's subsurface train box, retrofitting it with six tracks and three island platforms capable of handling both EMUs (up to 204 meters long) and anticipated trainsets without structural modifications to the existing center. This enables cross-platform transfers to above-ground bus services from operators including Muni, , and , though rail-to-rail compatibility with nearby remains indirect via surface connections due to differing gauges and propulsion systems. The overall design prioritizes to minimize headways and dwell times, supporting projected capacities of up to 16 trains per hour in peak periods once fully operational.

Planned Operations

Service Patterns and Capacity

The Portal is designed to facilitate blended rail operations, extending Peninsula Corridor services from the current terminus at Fourth and King Streets through a 1.3-mile twin-bore tunnel to the , enabling through-running without the need for terminal turnarounds that currently constrain capacity. This configuration supports local, limited, and express patterns originating from points south such as San Jose, Palo Alto, and beyond, while accommodating (HSR) trains terminating at or connecting through the Transit Center for intercity services to and other destinations. The infrastructure includes two tracks in the tunnel expanding to three near the throat, with intermediate stopping at the new Fourth and Townsend underground station (two tracks with center and side platforms) and six tracks at the Transit Center (three center platforms), allowing operational flexibility for mixed commuter and high-speed services. Planned service spans weekdays from 4:30 a.m. to 1:30 a.m. and weekends from 6:00 a.m. to 1:30 a.m., with peak-period frequencies of every 10 to 15 minutes (weekdays, 6:00–9:00 a.m. and 4:00–7:00 p.m.) and off-peak every 30 minutes, transitioning to weekend intervals of 30 minutes. The system's design criteria support minimum headways of 2 minutes 45 seconds per track during peaks, governed by and integrated with 's facilities, to handle combined Caltrain electric multiple units (EMUs) and HSR consists without conflicts. Capacity provisions include platforms at Fourth and Townsend sized to 875 feet for Caltrain's 10-car consists (up to 304 passengers per unit at load factor, including 110 seated and 194 standing) and 800 feet for HSR single consists (900–1,000 seated passengers, no standees), with accommodations for HSR double consists up to 1,345 feet via operational measures. At the Transit Center, enhanced track and platform configurations enable higher throughput, projecting 48,000 daily linked trips by 2045, a tripling from 2023 levels of 16,500, driven by electrification-enabled frequency increases and downtown access improvements. Ventilation, traction power (25 kV AC overhead catenary), and signaling systems are engineered for peak-hour effects and one per zone, ensuring compliance with NFPA 130 standards for and level-of-service C (normal) to D (delayed).

Integration with Regional Transit

The Portal project extends service northward from its current terminus at Fourth and King Streets through a 1.3-mile twin-bore to the (STC), enabling direct integration with the regional transit network at San Francisco's primary downtown multimodal hub. Upon completion, anticipated in the mid-2030s, the extension will also accommodate (HSR) trains, providing a northern terminus for intercity service connecting to in under three hours while facilitating transfers to local and regional operators. This connectivity closes a longstanding gap in Peninsula-to-downtown rail access, projected to support up to 90,000 daily riders through seamless same-level transfers within the STC. At the STC, The Portal's platforms in the basement levels will link to nine existing transit systems spanning eight Bay Area counties, including , Golden Gate Transit, , WestCAT, , and buses on the third-level deck, as well as (Muni) bus lines and nearby ferry services at the Ferry Building. Pedestrian access from the STC provides proximity to BART's Embarcadero , approximately 0.3 miles away, with a proposed 800-foot underground connector beneath to enhance direct transfers to BART and lines. The integration expands to 11 systems overall, promoting one-seat rides from origins to , , and destinations without requiring surface street transfers. An intermediate underground station at Fourth and Townsend Streets will feature two tracks and island platforms, offering local connections to Muni surface routes and the Mission Bay area while serving as a relief point for Mission Bay and commuters before trains proceed to the STC. This station design supports electrified operations and HSR compatibility, with provisions for future platform extensions to handle peak-hour demands and reduce congestion at the existing Fourth and King terminal. By embedding rail within the urban fabric, The Portal enhances overall system resilience and ridership potential, though full realization depends on coordinated operations among agencies like the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board and the High-Speed Rail Authority.

Cost and Funding

Estimated Costs and Budget Breakdown

The Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) updated its capital cost estimate for The Portal in 2023 to approximately $8.25 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, incorporating inflation, extended project timelines, increased labor and materials pricing, and risk assessments that deemed prior estimates overly optimistic. This total encompasses the 1.3-mile twin-bore tunnel, trackwork, station integrations at the and , utility relocations, and systems upgrades, but excludes separate financing costs, additional , and maintenance facilities. Of this amount, $729 million is attributed to the pre-constructed Train Box structure at the Transit Center, which requires federal reimbursement credits to offset prior expenditures. A comprehensive bottom-up estimate developed by TJPA staff in consultation with engineering firms during 2022–early 2023, based on 30% design completion and aligned with Federal Transit Administration Standard Cost Categories, provided the following pre-escalation breakdown (in millions of year-of-expenditure dollars):
CategoryCost (millions YOE$)
Construction Costs3,716
Utility Relocation34
Demolition8
Civil/Tunnel2,336
Station Fit Out698
Systems & Trackwork526
Allowances114
Right-of-Way Acquisition340
Program-Wide Costs904
Design Contingency856
Construction Contingency370
Program Reserve494
Total6,680
This $6.68 billion figure represented an increase from the 2016 estimate of $3.9 billion (in then-year dollars) and served as the basis for initial Full preparations with the , though it predated the full $1.75 billion upward adjustment announced later in 2023. The contingencies and reserves—totaling about 25% of the base costs—account for design uncertainties, geotechnical risks in San Francisco's fault-prone soils, and potential change orders during tunneling. Program-wide costs include , environmental mitigation, and third-party coordination, reflecting the complexity of integrating with electrification and . As of 2024, TJPA continues refining the baseline through advanced engineering phases, with no further public granular breakdown released amid ongoing federal funding negotiations.

Funding Sources and Commitments

The Portal project, estimated at $8.26 billion as of August 2024, has secured approximately $5.5 billion in commitments, representing over two-thirds of its total funding requirement, with efforts ongoing to close a $2.75 billion gap through additional federal, state, and local sources. Federal funding forms the largest single commitment, with the (FTA) allocating $3.38 billion via its Capital Investment Grants program in May 2024, advancing the project to the engineering phase and positioning it for a potential Full Funding Grant Agreement in 2025. This infusion builds on prior federal support and is contingent on meeting FTA milestones for cost, schedule, and local financial commitment. Local and regional contributions include $340 million from the San Francisco County Transportation Authority's Proposition K and Proposition L half-cent measures, approved by voters in 2003 and extended in November 2022, respectively, to support transportation infrastructure. Additional regional funds total $325 million from Regional Measure 3, a 2018 bridge toll increase dedicated to Bay Area rail expansions, alongside revenues from Measure RR—a 2016 voter-approved $3.5 billion general obligation bond for electrification and related improvements, drawing from retail taxes in , San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. Farebox revenues and other non-operational local sources, including a $400 million underground "train box" provision funded during construction, further bolster the plan. State-level support encompasses potential allocations from Senate Bill 1 (SB 1), the 2017 Road Repair and Accountability Act generating cap-and-trade auction proceeds and fuel taxes for transit projects, as well as integration with funding, though specific commitments remain under negotiation as of 2024. The Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) continues to pursue these avenues, including inter-agency memoranda of understanding, to achieve full funding ahead of construction start targeted for the early 2030s.

Economic Viability Analysis

The Portal's estimated capital cost stands at $8.25 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars, encompassing tunneling, station construction, and integration with the , with annual operating costs projected at $50.8 million upon opening in 2035. This represents a significant escalation from prior estimates of $6.5 billion in 2022, driven by , design refinements, and factors, rendering it among the most expensive rail projects per mile globally at approximately $6.35 billion for 1.3 miles. relies heavily on federal sources (49.4%, including $4.08 billion from the Capital Investment Grants program), supplemented by state ($1.13 billion) and local contributions ($1.73 billion), highlighting dependency on subsidies rather than self-sustaining revenue. Proponents, including the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA), assert economic viability through enhanced regional connectivity, projecting 48,000 daily linked trips by 2045 (up from 16,500 in 2023 baselines) and an additional 5 million annual riders relative to no-build scenarios. Quantified benefits include $360 million in travel time savings, over $120 million in avoided vehicle operating costs, more than $20 million in safety improvements, and broader impacts such as $87 billion in gross regional product growth through 2030, alongside 125,000 jobs (including 27,000 permanent) from the Transbay Program encompassing The Portal. These figures underpin arguments for induced development, with a $3.9 billion property value premium within a 0.75-mile radius, positioning the project as a catalyst for high-income employment in sectors like and . Critics question the project's cost-effectiveness, noting the absence of a publicly detailed benefit-cost ratio exceeding 1.0 in independent analyses and the disproportionate expense relative to alternatives like surface alignments or enhanced , especially amid post-pandemic ridership shortfalls on comparable systems. The per-mile cost surpasses historical precedents, such as New Jersey Transit's Portal Bridge replacement, and ties viability to uncertain integration, whose own projections have halved since 2022. Farebox recovery is expected to cover only a fraction of operations, with long-term sustainability hinging on ongoing taxpayer support amid San Francisco's downtown vacancy rates exceeding 30% in 2024, potentially undermining demand forecasts.

Historical Development

Early 20th Century Proposals

In 1912, the proposed a new passenger depot at its existing Peninsula line terminus on Third and Townsend streets in , reflecting a preference for enhancing facilities at the current station rather than pursuing a northward extension into downtown. The $500,000 project, designed in Mission Revival style with reinforced concrete construction, included waiting rooms, eleven tracks across five platforms, baggage handling, and an electric interlocking system, with groundbreaking planned for March 1913 and completion by late 1914. Company officials explicitly rejected an alternative downtown terminal near Lower Market Street, citing excessive congestion risks, especially ahead of the 1915 Panama-Pacific International Exposition, which would strain city infrastructure. This decision aligned with broader early 20th-century transit discussions in , where underground infrastructure was contemplated primarily for street-level services rather than heavy commuter rail extensions. A 1900 editorial in the advocated an underground high-capacity transit network anchored on Market Street to address growing urban density post-1906 earthquake, though it emphasized electric trolleys over mainline rail. Similarly, engineering consultant Bion J. Arnold's 1913 report to the proposed a dual-level subway under Market Street for streetcars, projecting costs of $7.5 million and aiming to separate surface traffic from subsurface rail, but it did not extend to integrating or tunneling the Southern Pacific's Peninsula service northward. Transbay connectivity ideas also surfaced, potentially implying indirect benefits for Peninsula commuters reliant on ferries to the East Bay. As early as the 1920s, concepts for a submerged rail tube under San Francisco Bay emerged to reduce ferry dependence, predating the 1936 Bay Bridge's lower-deck rail tracks, which ultimately served East Bay electric trains but not Southern Pacific through service. These proposals highlighted causal links between bay crossings and Peninsula line viability—electrification and seamless East Bay links could boost ridership—but lacked specificity for a downtown tunnel portal, deferring such ambitions to mid-century planning amid shifting priorities like bridge construction over tunneling.

Mid-20th Century Plans and BART Conflicts

In the 1950s, (SP) operated the Peninsula Commute Service, terminating at a surface on Fourth and Townsend streets in , amid growing regional planning efforts. Proposals emerged to extend this service underground via a tunnel—often referred to conceptually as a "portal"—to connect directly to a redeveloped , aiming to modernize and integrate it with bus operations after the terminal's conversion from interurban rail use following the 1958 end of trains. These ideas aligned with state and local discussions for improving Peninsula rail as an alternative to expansive new systems, but faced financial hurdles from SP's reluctance to invest amid declining patronage, which dropped sharply post-World War II due to highway expansion and automobile preference. Concurrent planning, formalized by the 1957 Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission report, envisioned a high-capacity electric rail network but initially considered incorporating the right-of-way for southern extensions, including potential linkages. Conflicts arose as San Mateo County stakeholders prioritized upgrading the existing diesel service—potentially including and tunneling—over joining 's district, fearing redundant infrastructure, high taxes, and disruption to proven commuter patterns; voters rejected participation in a by a margin of 61% to 39%. planners ultimately scaled back Peninsula ambitions to focus on core East Bay-San Francisco routes, excluding shared trackage due to incompatible standards like differing gauges and power systems, leaving 's extension proposals unviable without public subsidies. By the late , unresolved tensions contributed to SP's operational cutbacks, including reduced schedules and threats of full discontinuation by , as the railroad cited unprofitable losses exceeding $1 million annually without integrated regional support or downtown tunneling realized. This episode underscored causal disconnects in Bay Area transit governance: localized preferences for incremental SP improvements clashed with BART's centralized, capital-intensive vision, deferring comprehensive Peninsula-downtown connectivity for decades and preserving surface-level terminations at Fourth and (relocated from Townsend in 1957). intervention via subsidies preserved the service in the , but absent unified funding or standards reconciliation, mid-century portal concepts remained conceptual, yielding to BART's prioritization and SP's private-sector constraints.

1980s-1990s Initiatives

In the 1980s, passenger rail advocacy groups, including the predecessor to BayRail Alliance, prioritized extending service from its terminus at 4th and King streets into downtown as a key objective to enhance regional connectivity and reduce reliance on automobile traffic. Early feasibility studies during this decade explored potential routes, including tunneling options and integration with the existing Transbay Terminal site, confirming technical viability but highlighting challenges such as seismic risks and urban disruption. These efforts gained regional momentum in 1989 when the Metropolitan Transportation Commission adopted Resolution 1876, designating the Caltrain downtown extension as a top priority for Bay Area infrastructure investment to support growth amid rising population and employment in San Francisco's financial district. Despite this support, federal funding competitions in the late 1980s favored the extension to over the Caltrain project, stalling substantive progress due to limited resources and competing priorities. The 1990s marked a shift toward formalized planning under new institutional frameworks. Following the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (PCJPB)'s assumption of operations in 1992, the downtown extension was elevated to high-priority status, prompting a dedicated engineering study in 1993 that evaluated alignment options, including a twin-bore under Fourth Street to connect with the area. This study incorporated seismic retrofitting considerations, aligning with broader corridor upgrades initiated in 1998 to address vulnerabilities exposed by the . By 1997, a Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) was released for public review, analyzing environmental, traffic, and cost impacts of the proposed extension but ultimately not certified due to unresolved funding and coordination issues among stakeholders. These initiatives laid groundwork for future phases but were constrained by fiscal limitations and the absence of committed capital, reflecting persistent challenges in aligning local advocacy with state and federal commitments.

2000s Transbay and Corridor Developments

In the early 2000s, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA), established in April 2001 by the City and County of , Alameda Contra Costa Transit District, and Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, coordinated efforts to replace the obsolete Transbay Terminal with a modern facility accommodating regional buses, extension, and future . The City and County of and Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board signed a to jointly lead the Downtown Extension (DTX), a proposed 1.3-mile from the existing 4th and King terminus to the new terminal site at First and Mission streets. This initiative built on voter-approved funding from 1999 and aligned the project with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission's Regional Transit Expansion Policy (Resolution 3434) and Regional Transportation Plan, prioritizing multimodal connectivity along the Peninsula Corridor. July 2003 state legislation reinforced these plans by mandating that the Transbay Terminal design incorporate tracks and compatibility, while requiring at least 35% in the adjacent redevelopment zone to address urban density and equity concerns. In March 2003, the TJPA's Locally Preferred Alternative Report evaluated options and selected the subsurface tunnel alignment for DTX, emphasizing integration with and minimization of surface disruptions. The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency adopted the Transbay Redevelopment Plan in June 2005, designating the area for high-density —including office towers and residential units—to generate for the terminal and extension, projected to transform 23 blocks into a new downtown core. Engineering advancements accelerated with a February 2004 Request for Proposals for DTX design services, awarded to a Parsons Brinckerhoff/ARUP , initiating detailed and schematics. The Administration's Record of Decision on February 8, 2005, finalized compliance for the combined Transbay Terminal/DTX project, certifying the that analyzed alternatives like surface alignments against the selected below-grade option. Preliminary engineering for the terminal proceeded from 2005 to 2009, culminating in the September 2007 selection of Pelli Clarke Pelli Architects and developer Hines via international competition for the transit center's iconic design. Temporary terminal started in fall 2008 to bridge service during demolition of the original structure, with official on December 10, 2008, ensuring continuity for Peninsula Corridor commuters amid rising ridership demands. These developments laid foundational planning but deferred full DTX to later decades due to funding dependencies on progress and local revenue bonds.

2010s Studies and Refinements

During the 2010s, the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) advanced preliminary engineering for the Downtown Rail Extension (DTX), refining the project's scope to integrate with concurrent regional rail upgrades, including Caltrain's shift to electrified service and provisions for (HSR) compatibility. These efforts built on the 2004 /Environmental Impact Report, incorporating updated geotechnical assessments, alignment optimizations, and infrastructure standards to minimize conflicts with urban development and ensure seamless connections at the portal entrance near Townsend and Second Streets. A key focus was aligning DTX configurations with the Authority's (CHSRA) evolving design criteria, particularly for the blended system along the Peninsula Corridor. Between 2010 and 2018, TJPA and partners revised track geometries, throat structures, and station interfaces to support dual-track tunneling while accommodating HSR's operational requirements, such as higher speeds and future turnback capabilities, reducing potential bottlenecks at the Fourth and King terminus. In 2018, the County Transportation Authority commissioned an independent panel to evaluate DTX operations scenarios, analyzing peak-hour capacity (up to 12 trains per hour per direction), dwell times at proposed underground stations, and recovery from disruptions. The panel recommended refinements to signaling systems and platform lengths to enhance reliability and interoperability with electrified services, projected to commence by 2024. These refinements also addressed construction sequencing, favoring a approach of mined tunneling for deeper sections and cut-and-cover methods near the portal to manage costs and surface disruptions, with preliminary cost estimates stabilizing around $7-8 billion by decade's end after adjusting for and scope changes.

Recent Status and Challenges

Environmental Review and Approvals

The environmental review for The Portal, formally known as the Downtown Rail Extension (DTX), was integrated into the Program and conducted in compliance with both the federal (NEPA) and the (CEQA). The (TJPA) served as the lead agency, with involvement from the (FTA), (FRA), and other local entities such as the City and County of . An initial Final Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (EIS/EIR) was certified in April 2004, followed by issuance of an FTA Record of Decision (ROD) in February 2005. To address project refinements, a Final Supplemental EIS/EIR was certified by the TJPA on December 13, 2018, with an FTA Amended ROD issued in July 2019. Subsequent design modifications between 2020 and 2023, including updates to the 2.2-mile extension connecting the Salesforce Transit Center to the Fourth and Townsend station, were evaluated through a CEQA Addendum adopted by the TJPA on January 12, 2023, and an NEPA Re-evaluation concurred upon by the FTA in June 2023; these analyses concluded no new significant impacts beyond those previously identified. As a responsible agency under CEQA, the California Transportation Commission reviewed the Supplemental EIS/EIR and Addendum, certifying compliance on October 18-19, 2023. The review identified significant unavoidable impacts, including construction-related noise and vibration, as well as long-term risks from sea-level rise, but adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations citing benefits such as enhanced regional mobility, reduced highway congestion, and economic development. Mitigation measures, including monitoring and reporting plans, were implemented to reduce other impacts—such as air quality, cultural resources, and utilities disruption—to less-than-significant levels. With these approvals, The Portal achieved full environmental clearance under and , enabling advancement to federal funding commitments and implementation planning without further major reviews. No significant legal challenges to the environmental documents have been reported as of late 2023.

Timeline and Milestones

In 2018, the Salesforce Transit Center opened without underground rail connectivity, highlighting the pending completion of the Downtown Rail Extension (DTX), later rebranded as The Portal, to integrate and future services. The project builds on prior environmental clearances, including the Federal Transit Administration's Record of Decision issued on February 8, 2005, which approved the 1.3-mile twin-bore tunnel alignment from Fourth and King Streets to the Transit Center.
  • September 2022: The Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) rebranded the DTX as "The Portal" to underscore its function as a multimodal rail gateway connecting 11 regional lines.
  • November 8, 2022: San Francisco voters approved Proposition L with 62% support, extending a 0.5% sales tax through 2040 to fund transportation projects, including $500 million allocated for The Portal's planning and early construction.
  • August 2023: The TJPA Board endorsed the Governance Blueprint, developed by the San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) and Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC), establishing a framework for interagency coordination, procurement, and delivery of the $8.25 billion project.
  • July 15, 2024: TJPA published the Funding Plan and Schedule, detailing an 18-month onboarding for the progressive design-build contractor on civil works and the 40-foot-diameter tunnel (40-CT), with construction targeted to commence post-environmental and permitting updates.
  • May 2024: Project advanced with refined engineering and alignment studies, emphasizing integration with high-speed rail infrastructure amid ongoing federal and state funding pursuits.
As of October 2025, The Portal remains in pre-construction, with no new environmental impact report required due to the clearance, though supplemental reviews for updated designs are under consideration; full operations are projected no earlier than 2030, contingent on securing the remaining $4-5 billion in commitments beyond local and state pledges.

Funding Fluctuations and Political Influences

The Portal project's funding has experienced significant volatility since its conceptualization in the early 2000s as part of the broader Transbay redevelopment. Initial allocations included $600 million earmarked for the Downtown Rail Extension (DTX), the project's precursor name, but these funds were redirected in the mid-2010s to cover substantial cost overruns on the adjacent , which ballooned from an estimated $4.5 billion to over $7 billion due to design changes and construction delays. By 2018, the TJPA reported incomplete funding for the full Phase 2 scope, prompting renewed pursuits of state, regional, and federal contributions amid escalating total costs projected at $8.2 billion by 2024. A major infusion occurred in May 2024 when the committed $3.4 billion through its Capital Investment Grants program, advancing the project to engineering and covering approximately two-thirds of the budget, with expectations of a Full Funding Grant Agreement in 2025. This followed years of incremental regional funding, including $9 million allocated in January 2025 by the County Transportation Authority for engineering activities, supplemented by state land transfers approved in 2008 and Proposition K amendments. However, a persistent $2.75 billion gap remained as of August 2024, exacerbated by and scope refinements, leading the TJPA to explore additional bonds and grants while facing scrutiny over prior reallocations that delayed tunneling and station work. Political dynamics have heavily shaped these funding trajectories, with strong advocacy from state officials and the TJPA emphasizing regional economic benefits to secure federal support under Democratic administrations. Newsom's September 2025 signing of and bills indirectly bolstered related , aligning The Portal with broader ambitions despite criticisms of fiscal overreach. Conversely, conservative policy analysts, including those at the , have highlighted the 's reliance on federal grants without rigorous cost-benefit scrutiny, arguing in March 2024 that it exemplifies inefficient earmarking in a politically driven process favoring urban Democratic strongholds like over national taxpayer returns. Similar concerns emerged in June 2025 from , linking The Portal's to debates over defunding California's amid analogous issues of unproven viability and ballooning expenses. These critiques underscore a causal between political imperatives for connectivity and broader fiscal realism, with the TJPA's unified regional —stressed in September 2025 board meetings—aiming to mitigate opposition by framing the as essential for multimodal integration.

Controversies and Criticisms

Project Delays and Cost Escalations

The Portal project, conceived in the 1990s as an extension of service into downtown , has endured decades of delays attributed to escalating cost projections and fluctuating political support. Early planning efforts in the mid-2010s aligned with the construction of the , which opened in 2018 without the rail connection due to unresolved funding and alignment issues, leaving the facility bus-only initially. Progress stalled further in late 2018 when the expressed no-confidence in the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) and suspended Phase 2 funding amid concerns over transparency and viability. The project did not enter the Federal Transit Administration's Capital Investment Grants Project Development phase until December 2021, followed by approval into the Engineering phase in April 2024, reflecting prolonged federal reviews and local funding shortfalls. Current timelines project a Full Funding Grant Agreement no earlier than April 2026—delayed from an original spring 2025 target—pushing construction start to 2028 and revenue service potentially beyond 2034. Cost estimates for the 1.3-mile extension have similarly ballooned, rising from approximately $6 billion in 2017 dollars to $8.25 billion in year-of-expenditure dollars by 2023, driven by refined engineering, inflation, and expanded scope to accommodate future compatibility. An earlier 2016 tally placed costs at $3.9 billion in year-of-expenditure terms, underscoring progressive overruns as designs advanced from conceptual to 30% completion. These escalations have widened the funding gap to $2.06 billion, or 25% of the total, necessitating additional state, regional, and local measures such as San Francisco's Proposition L in , which secured $1.06 billion but fell short of closing the deficit. Further delays in securing matching funds could add $300–610 million in escalation costs, per TJPA analyses, highlighting vulnerabilities to fiscal uncertainties and procurement timelines. Critics attribute overruns to factors including complex underground tunneling through seismically active zones, stringent environmental clearances completed only in 2019, and integration challenges with existing infrastructure like the alignment. While TJPA maintains that the project's benefits—such as reduced highway congestion and enhanced regional —justify the investment, skeptics point to systemic issues in large-scale , including optimistic initial projections and post-design refinements that amplify expenses. As of 2025, the project remains over 70% funded, with commitments totaling $3.4 billion, but full realization hinges on resolving remaining financial hurdles amid broader debates over viability.

Feasibility Doubts on High-Speed Rail Linkage

The Portal, officially the Downtown Rail Extension, is engineered to accommodate both electrified service and California's (HSR) trains, extending 1.3 miles underground from the existing Fourth and King station to the . However, its integration with HSR has faced skepticism owing to the extension's staggering cost of $8.25 billion as of 2023 estimates, equating to approximately $6.35 billion per mile—the highest for any rail project globally. This fiscal burden, largely justified by the anticipated HSR linkage, amplifies doubts when considering HSR's own trajectory of cost escalations from an initial $33 billion statewide projection to over $106 billion. Critics, including congressional Republicans, argue that The Portal's value hinges precariously on HSR realization, which remains uncertain amid federal funding reviews initiated in 2025 over compliance failures, persistent delays, and disruptions. The HSR Authority's 2025 Project Update prioritizes the Central Valley segment (Merced to Bakersfield) for potential 2030-2033 service, with Bay Area advancements, including the connection, lagging due to unresolved funding gaps totaling $14.9 billion through 2030 and pending schedule revisions. While $3.9 billion was secured for The Portal in 2024, primarily for extension, HSR-specific infrastructure demands—such as dedicated trackage and higher-speed compatibility—exacerbate integration risks in seismically active urban terrain, where tunneling feasibility has not been immune to broader project critiques. Further compounding feasibility concerns, projected ridership for The Portal assumes robust HSR demand, estimating 48,000 daily boardings by 2045, yet current usage hovers around 7,500 amid post-pandemic declines and competition from alternatives like and autonomous vehicles. Political shifts, including calls to defund HSR's northern extensions under the administration, threaten to relegate The Portal to a -only asset, undermining the dual-purpose rationale that drove its $3.4 billion federal grant pursuit. These factors underscore causal linkages between HSR's empirical underperformance—evident in stalled northern progress and unproven economic returns—and the prudence of committing to an unproven high-speed linkage.

Alternative Visions and Fiscal Critiques

Critics have highlighted the project's escalating costs, which reached an estimated $8.25 billion as of 2024 for a 1.3-mile extension including two stations, rendering it among the most expensive projects per mile globally. This figure exceeds initial projections by several multiples, attributed to tunneling requirements, property acquisitions totaling $340 million for ten parcels and 18 easements, and integration with infrastructure. Funding remains incomplete, with over 70% secured through state, local, and prior federal totaling around $910 million committed, but a projected operations and maintenance shortfall persists into the 2040s, potentially straining Caltrain's budget amid declining regional revenues. Federal approval for a $3.4 billion Full Funding Agreement is anticipated in 2027, though past administrations have withdrawn support, as seen in a $24.6 million CRISI rescission in August 2025. Skeptics question the fiscal justification, arguing that the Transbay Joint Powers Authority's ridership forecasts of 48,000 daily users by 2045 lack empirical grounding, given pre-pandemic peaks of 15,000 weekday boardings system-wide and April 2025 figures of approximately 7,500 paying riders. These projections hinge on unproven assumptions, including full completion—now facing a $15 billion shortfall and potential defunding—and a post-pandemic downtown revival with mandatory office returns, amid California's population stagnation and persistence. Analysts contend the absence of an updated, cost-benefit analysis exemplifies flaws in federal grant processes, where commitments precede rigorous evaluation of opportunity costs, such as reallocating funds to cover Bay Area transit operating deficits exceeding hundreds of millions annually. A 2023 opinion in asserted the extension "costs more than it's worth," citing minimal time savings—equivalent to a short walk or Muni transfer from the existing Fourth and King terminal—for most Peninsula commuters. Alternative visions emphasize leveraging existing infrastructure over costly tunneling. Proponents of restraint argue for enhanced multimodal connections at the current terminus, including , buses, pedestrian paths, cycling, and autonomous vehicles like robotaxis, which already facilitate access to downtown destinations without the need for direct rail penetration. Historical studies considered surface alignments into the South of Market area, potentially avoiding underground disruption to streets like Townsend and Second, though these were discarded amid urban development pressures. Broader critiques advocate redirecting resources from The Portal to scalable options, such as expansions or optimizations, given post-COVID ridership trends and the improbability of linkage delivering projected one-seat rides to before 2040. The California Policy Center has proposed reevaluating the project entirely, favoring fiscal prudence over commitments tied to faltering statewide rail ambitions.

Projected Impacts

Transportation and Mobility Effects

The Portal project is anticipated to extend commuter rail service 1.3 miles from its existing northern terminus at Fourth and King Streets to the in downtown via a twin-bore , incorporating a temporary station at Fourth and Townsend Streets and a permanent underground terminus at the Transit Center. This extension will provide direct rail access to the Financial District for Peninsula Corridor commuters, eliminating the current requirement for bus or transfers from the Fourth and King station, which handles approximately 7,000 daily boardings as of 2023. Service patterns will include peak-hour frequencies of every 10 to 15 minutes, with operations from 4:30 a.m. to 1:30 a.m. on weekdays and adjusted weekend schedules, accommodating electrified trains post-2024 Peninsula Corridor upgrades. Integration with the will connect The Portal to eleven regional transit modes, including , and buses, buses, Golden Gate Transit, , ferries, and long-distance intercity buses, enabling seamless transfers within a single spanning eight directions of service. This linkage is projected to support one-seat rides for passengers to downtown employment centers, potentially increasing system-wide ridership by facilitating access to over 200,000 daily jobs in 's core. For future operations, the Transit Center terminus will allow direct connections from to Central Valley cities like Merced and Fresno upon HSR Phase 1 completion, with eventual extensions toward , though HSR timelines remain subject to funding and construction progress. Ridership forecasts for the extended Caltrain service estimate up to 32,900 weekday boardings on the downtown segment based on pre-COVID travel demand models, though combined Transit Center usage including HSR is projected at 90,000 average daily riders, reflecting anticipated growth in regional travel demand through 2040. These projections assume integration with broader Bay Area initiatives like Link21, a proposed cross-bay rail corridor, which could further amplify mobility by linking The Portal to destinations without ferry dependencies. Overall, the project aims to reduce reliance on automobiles by shortening end-to-end travel times—such as from San Jose to downtown by up to 20 minutes compared to current options—and alleviating congestion on Interstate 280 and U.S. 101, where daily vehicle volumes exceed 200,000 in peak corridors. Skeptics, including analyses from policy think tanks, question the robustness of these forecasts given post-pandemic shifts in and subdued , with Caltrain's current system-wide daily ridership at around 16,500 linked trips in 2023 models, potentially limiting modal shift benefits if HSR delays persist. Nonetheless, empirical precedents from similar urban rail extensions, such as Denver's downtown loop, demonstrate potential for 20-30% ridership uplift through improved accessibility, supporting causal expectations of enhanced mobility equity for transit-dependent populations in underserved communities.

Economic and Urban Outcomes

The Portal project is projected to yield substantial economic benefits by extending and future services directly into downtown , thereby enhancing labor mobility and regional productivity. Analyses commissioned by the Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) forecast that the encompassing Transbay Program, of which The Portal forms a core component, will generate 125,000 jobs through direct construction, operations, indirect supply chain effects, and induced economic activity, alongside contributions exceeding $87 billion to the gross regional product and $52 billion in by 2030. These estimates derive from input-output modeling that accounts for multiplier effects from investment, though they encompass broader program elements like the . For The Portal specifically, anticipated travel time savings are valued at $360 million, with avoided vehicle operating costs surpassing $120 million and safety benefits over $20 million, based on reduced automobile dependency and congestion relief. Construction of the 1.3-mile underground extension and two new stations is expected to sustain approximately 8,300 jobs during the build phase, transitioning to 27,000 permanent positions from operations and spurred developments, including high-income roles in sectors such as , , and . TJPA projections also indicate a $3.9 billion premium in property values within a three-quarter-mile radius of the Transit Center, driven by improved potential and accessibility. Combined average daily ridership for and at the extended terminus is forecasted at 90,000 passengers, facilitating one-seat connections to and amplifying economic spillovers from commuter flows into the city's employment core. In urban terms, The Portal addresses San Francisco's longstanding "rail gap" by integrating Peninsula Corridor services with the multimodal , promoting denser, transit-supported land use patterns and mitigating downtown vacancy rates exacerbated by trends since 2020. This connectivity is anticipated to broaden access to 1.5 million regional jobs and diverse housing stock, reducing commute barriers for lower-income households and fostering mixed-use redevelopment around new underground stations at and near the Center. Electrification synergies with upgrades could boost San Francisco-bound ridership by 184% over two decades relative to baseline diesel service, supporting urban consolidation and curbing sprawl-induced infrastructure strain. However, such outcomes hinge on realizing optimistic ridership assumptions; earlier travel demand models pegged incremental extension usage at 32,900 weekday boardings, a figure potentially understated pre-pandemic but vulnerable to persistent shifts in office utilization.

Environmental and Social Trade-offs

The Portal project, encompassing a 2.2-mile underground rail extension, presents environmental trade-offs primarily between short-term construction disruptions and long-term reductions in regional emissions. Construction activities, including tunneling and station excavation beneath downtown San Francisco streets, are anticipated to generate temporary adverse effects such as elevated noise levels, vibration, air quality degradation from dust and equipment exhaust, and management challenges during excavation. These impacts were analyzed in the 2018 Supplemental /Environmental Impact Report (SEIS/EIR) and subsequent 2023 addendums, which identified them as mitigable through measures like real-time monitoring, dust suppression protocols, and vibration limits compliant with local ordinances; no significant unavoidable impacts were deemed to remain after mitigation. In contrast, operational benefits include a projected shift of commuters from automobiles to electrified rail, yielding net emission reductions by enabling Caltrain's full electrification and future integration; the project aligns with regional climate goals by supporting denser urban land use and decreased vehicle miles traveled. Biological and cultural resource impacts were evaluated as minimal, with no significant effects on habitats or historical sites beyond standard protections under the . Water resources face low risk due to the project's subsurface design avoiding major aquifers, though during construction requires oversight to prevent localized drawdown. Social trade-offs involve interim community disruptions weighed against enhanced long-term and . Tunneling and surface works will necessitate street closures, utility relocations, and traffic rerouting across a dense urban corridor, potentially affecting local businesses, pedestrian flows, and emergency access for several years starting around ; mitigation encompasses phased construction scheduling and public notification to minimize duration. These effects build on findings from the original 2004 Environmental Impact Statement, updated in the SEIS/EIR to confirm feasibility with community input processes. Operationally, the extension promises improved social outcomes by linking the to Peninsula rail services, facilitating access to 4,000 new housing units in the Transbay district—of which 35% are affordable—and broadening job and service connectivity for lower-income and minority communities historically underserved by transit. Ridership projections indicate up to 70,000 daily users by 2040, fostering across the Bay Area while advancing through prioritized service to equity-focused neighborhoods. No substantial long-term social adverse impacts, such as , were identified in reviews, though the project's $8.2 billion cost has drawn broader fiscal scrutiny unrelated to direct social effects.

References

  1. [1]
    The Portal | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension project, is a transformational infrastructure investment, delivering on the decades-long promise of ...About The Portal · Project Schedule · Environmental Review · Construction Updates
  2. [2]
    The Portal - SFCTA
    The Portal project (also known as the Downtown Rail Extension) will extend Caltrain and future California High-Speed Rail service from the existing 4th and ...
  3. [3]
    About The Portal | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension project, will extend Caltrain service from Fourth and King Streets and deliver the California High-Speed ...Delivering The Portal · A Key Regional Rail... · Regional Collaboration
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Transbay Program
    The Portal will extend Caltrain service from Fourth and King street to the heart of downtown San Francisco and connect to nine transit systems found in eight ...
  5. [5]
    [PDF] Transbay Downtown Rail Extension Project
    Project Purpose: The TJPA believes that the Project will improve public access to bus and rail services in the core of San Francisco Downtown and accommodate ...
  6. [6]
    San Francisco's $8.25B Portal project picks manager
    Aug 26, 2024 · The Portal is the second phase of the Transbay Joint Powers Authority's $12 billion transportation and housing Transbay Program; the first phase ...
  7. [7]
    VIDEO RELEASE: 3D Public Art Demonstrating Future California ...
    Oct 7, 2024 · The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension, will extend Caltrain's 77-mile service from San Francisco Fourth and King Street and the ...
  8. [8]
    Underground SF rail project rolls on as Trump questions loom | Transit
    Jan 3, 2025 · The huge rail-connection project known as The Portal that is being developed to connect deep under the Salesforce Transit Center in downtown San Francisco
  9. [9]
    The Portal project celebrates $3.38 billion in Federal Transit ...
    May 20, 2024 · The 1.3-mile rail extension (1.95 miles of total construction length) will be constructed principally below grade using cut-and-cover and mined ...
  10. [10]
    Project Benefits | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension (DTX) project, will reduce climate change impacts by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and providing ...
  11. [11]
    San Francisco - California High-Speed Rail Authority - CA.gov
    TJPA environmentally cleared The Portal alignment extending rail from Caltrain's San Francisco Station at 4th and King to Salesforce Transit Center as Phase 2 ...
  12. [12]
    San Francisco Downtown Rail Extension Project - Delve Underground
    Feb 27, 2023 · ... length of The Portal is 2.2 miles (3.5 km). The mined tunnel is 3,352 feet long (1,022 m) with a cross section varying from 50 to 60 feet ...
  13. [13]
    AECOM Wins PM Contract for $8.2B Portal Project in San Francisco
    Aug 22, 2024 · The Transbay Joint Powers Authority seeks ways to fill a $2.7B funding gap to build the Downtown Rail Extension in San Francisco.<|separator|>
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Progressive Design-Build for Civil and Tunnel for The Portal
    Dec 8, 2023 · Create a transit-oriented neighborhood featuring housing (35% affordable housing), open space, offices, and shops; and 3. Extend Caltrain and ...
  15. [15]
    [PDF] The Portal Update
    Nov 5, 2024 · ◇ Tunnel Stub Reduction. ◇ Train Box Extension Elimination ... 425 Mission Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. 415.597.4620 www.tjpa ...
  16. [16]
    AECOM to serve as program manager for the Portal rail extension in ...
    Aug 21, 2024 · The Portal is the second phase of the TJPA's Transbay Program. The first phase replaced the former Transbay Terminal in downtown San Francisco ...<|separator|>
  17. [17]
    Caltrain's Plan for Level Boarding
    Nov 10, 2024 · A reasonably well-written document that discusses how the system might be converted to level boarding using the European 550 mm platform standard.<|separator|>
  18. [18]
    [PDF] DTX Design Criteria Manual - Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    Dec 2, 2022 · System safety management, reliability assurance, and safety certification requirements and specific design criteria for project security; ...
  19. [19]
    [PDF] Transbay Program - Railway Age
    The Portal will extend Caltrain service from Fourth and King street to the heart of downtown San Francisco and connect to nine transit systems found in eight ...
  20. [20]
    Components evaluated in the Draft SEIS/EIR
    Contact Transit Center · Transportation · Salesforce Park · Fun Facts · Activities · FAQ · About the Architect · THE PORTAL/DTX · About The Portal · Project ...
  21. [21]
    Cost of San Francisco Downtown Rail Extension swells to $8.2B
    Oct 27, 2023 · A planned Downtown San Francisco rail extension called The Portal is about to get much more expensive, according to an estimate presented at ...
  22. [22]
    Program Manager Selected for San Francisco's $8.26B Portal Project
    Aug 22, 2024 · The Portal Project price tag was estimated in 2023 at approximately $8.26 billion. Of this amount, $729 million reflects the cost of the ...
  23. [23]
    [PDF] San Francisco Peninsula Rail Program
    Jan 20, 2023 · Over the course of 2022 and early 2023, TJPA has prepared a comprehensive “bottom-up” cost estimate ... ▫ TJPA Board adoption of Capital Cost ...
  24. [24]
    TJPA CELEBRATES $3.4 BILLION FEDERAL COMMITMENT FOR ...
    May 20, 2024 · The Portal, also known as the Downtown Rail Extension project, will extend Caltrain's rail system to the multimodal Salesforce Transit Center in downtown San ...
  25. [25]
    Investing in a Connected Transit Network: The Portal Celebrates ...
    May 21, 2024 · The Portal is now two-thirds funded, including $340 million from the Transportation Authority's Prop K and Prop L half-cent sales tax, and other ...
  26. [26]
    [PDF] Next Generation Transit Investments
    Jul 23, 2024 · In November 2022, San Francisco voters approved Proposition L (Prop L), extending the ½-cent sales tax to fund transportation improvements ...
  27. [27]
    [PDF] Project Partners and MOU for Diridon Station and TJPA
    Dec 11, 2024 · Regional Measure 3 includes $325 million for The Portal. The previous San Francisco Peninsula Rail Program Memorandum of Understanding, ...
  28. [28]
    [PDF] Downtown Rail Extension / The Portal Funding Plan and Schedule ...
    Jul 15, 2024 · Potential new/future sources could include pricing, future local measure, etc. Propose to form TJPA - City and County of San Francisco - San.
  29. [29]
    [PDF] The Portal Funding Plan and Schedule
    Apr 26, 2024 · Establishing a target that is ambitious but achievable. ▫ Building urgency and setting foundation for funding advocacy.Missing: breakdown | Show results with:breakdown
  30. [30]
    Economic Impact | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    It will open up a significant number of employment opportunities for people that live in San Francisco and along the Peninsula corridor. The Portal, also ...
  31. [31]
    While Defunding California High-Speed Rail, Don't Forget Its Costly ...
    Jun 18, 2025 · The Portal is illustrative of a broken federal grant process in which funds are committed without a thorough, unbiased cost-benefit analysis ...
  32. [32]
    Congress Can Curtail Expensive California Transit Projects
    Mar 28, 2024 · The project, known as “The Portal,” is a tunnel that extends Caltrain commuter rail service currently terminating at the edge of San ...
  33. [33]
    Southern Pacific's New Depot for San Francisco - 1912
    Artists rendering of proposed 1912 Southern Pacific terminal in San Francisco. In an official announcement made yesterday by the Southern Pacific through ...
  34. [34]
    [PDF] BART - Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco
    a proposal, made in 1900 by the San Fran cisco Chronicle, for an underground high capacity transit system to be centered around Market Street, the city's major ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  35. [35]
    The Lasting Legacy of the 1913 Bion Arnold Report - SFMTA
    Jun 29, 2022 · Bion Arnold's Market Street subway plans were just one of many ideas floated over the years. This drawing from 1937 shows a proposed subway ...Missing: underground 1900s
  36. [36]
    Transbay tube proposal for San Francisco Bay area traffic relief
    Jul 2, 2024 · Transbay Tube Proposal. In order to relieve ferry traffic on the bay, ideas for a transbay tube come as early as 1920.Here's a map of how BART was originally going to be built - FacebookConstruction of the BART Transbay Tube in San Francisco - FacebookMore results from www.facebook.comMissing: underground 1900s
  37. [37]
    History of Bay Area Rapid Transit - Wikipedia
    The idea of an electric rail tube under San Francisco Bay was first proposed in the early 1900s by Francis "Borax" Smith – the San Francisco Chronicle ran a ...
  38. [38]
    [PDF] Short History of the Transbay Transit Terminal and the Relocation of ...
    After years of neglect the California Department of Transportation plans to completely renovate and refurbish the structure. Coupled with the relocation of the ...
  39. [39]
    A History of BART: The Concept is Born | Bay Area Rapid Transit
    BART's concept began in 1946 with informal gatherings, a 1947 Army-Navy review, and a 1951 commission, leading to the 1957 formation of the rapid transit ...Missing: 1900s | Show results with:1900s
  40. [40]
    What We Need to Get Right on VTA's BART Extension to Silicon Valley
    Dec 19, 2014 · The reasoning was that the Southern Pacific commuter line (now Caltrain) provided adequate rail transit for the peninsula and South Bay. In ...Missing: conflicts | Show results with:conflicts
  41. [41]
    Caltrain DTX – BayRail Alliance
    Getting the downtown extension built was one of our organization's primary goals in the early 1980's ... San Francisco Downtown Rail Extension federal funding ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  42. [42]
    Transbay Terminal - BayRail Alliance
    Early studies completed in the early 1980s indicated feasibility of using the Transbay Terminal site for a new Caltrain station. ... BayRail Alliance and ...
  43. [43]
    Timeline | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    The Transbay Program is based on a legacy of improving connections across the Bay Area and providing service to millions of people who come to live in and ...
  44. [44]
    Extending CalTrain Into Downtown San Francisco - BayRail Alliance
    A few studies of possible extension routes were made in the 1980s but no real progress was made towards the goal of a CalTrain downtown extension until February ...
  45. [45]
    Transbay - Office of Community Investment and Infrastructure
    The Transbay Redevelopment Plan (“Transbay Plan”) was adopted in June 2005. ... Zone Two falls under the land use authority of the San Francisco Planning ...Missing: date | Show results with:date
  46. [46]
    [PDF] (“2004 EIS”) for the Transbay Terminal/Caltrain Downtown/Extension
    Phase 2 includes the construction of the Caltrain Downtown Extension (“DTX”), the rail tunnel that will also accommodate high-speed trains. The 2004 EIS ...Missing: 2000s | Show results with:2000s<|control11|><|separator|>
  47. [47]
    [PDF] Transbay Program Downtown Rail Extension Phasing Study
    Aug 20, 2021 · Based on the timeline of the planned service levels by both operators, the DTX tunnel will be required to accommodate up to six Caltrain trains ...
  48. [48]
    [PDF] Peer Review Panel Report on Findings Review of Three Operations ...
    Jan 25, 2018 · The DTX connects the Transbay Transit Center (TTC) [recently re-named the. Salesforce Transit Center (STC)], being built in downtown San ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] Baseline Budget Phase 2 - Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    Phase 2 of the Program would involve two primary elements: 1) the construction of the Caltrain Downtown Extension (DTX) and 2) the. Transit Center below ...
  50. [50]
    Environmental Review | Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    Beginning in 2020, the TJPA engaged in further design development of The Portal project, which resulted in modifications to the environmentally cleared project ...
  51. [51]
    [PDF] 2.2c.(5), Action | California Transportation Commission
    Oct 6, 2023 · The Project includes design and construction of the 2.2-mile Downtown Rail Extension, also called The Portal, build-out of the below-grade ...<|separator|>
  52. [52]
    CEQA Approval For San Francisco Transbay Downtown Rail ...
    Oct 27, 2023 · The Portal will connect the city's existing 4th Street Train Station to the Salesforce Transit Center. Once complete, the connection will ...Missing: integration | Show results with:integration<|separator|>
  53. [53]
  54. [54]
    San Francisco's Downtown Rail Extension Is Now “The Portal”
    Sep 9, 2022 · Assuming funds and clearances for the extension can be secured, “The Portal” isn't likely to be completed before 2028/2029, at the earliest. We' ...Missing: compatibility | Show results with:compatibility
  55. [55]
    [PDF] Caltrain Downtown Rail Extension and Pennsylvania Alignment
    As its centerpiece, each 5YPP contains a 5-year Program of Projects (or project list), ideally including project descriptions, schedule milestones, cost ...Missing: frequency | Show results with:frequency
  56. [56]
    Report: The Portal Project Advances in California - Railway Age
    May 15, 2024 · According to TJPA, the 1.3-mile rail extension (1.95 miles of total construction length) ... San Francisco Examiner, The Portal, TJPA, Transbay ...
  57. [57]
    [PDF] 2025 Project Update Report - California High-Speed Rail Authority
    Feb 28, 2025 · Since the 2024 Business Plan, the following shared corridor projects have reached significant milestones. THE PORTAL. The Downtown Rail ...Missing: compatibility | Show results with:compatibility
  58. [58]
    Transbay Program
    The Portal will extend Caltrain and bring high-speed rail service to the Salesforce Transit Center in downtown San Francisco. Completion of the multimodal ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  59. [59]
    Newsom signs climate, energy bills boosting transit, housing
    Sep 20, 2025 · The Transbay Authority is spearheading the huge project known as The Portal that aims to bring Caltrain and high-speed rail under the Salesforce ...Missing: influences | Show results with:influences
  60. [60]
    [PDF] transbay joint powers authority
    Sep 11, 2025 · Chair Gee emphasized the importance of speaking with one voice to strengthen the region's position for The Portal, particularly in ...
  61. [61]
    “The Portal” is downtown San Francisco's future Caltrain - Facebook
    Aug 22, 2025 · “The Portal” is downtown San Francisco's future Caltrain & HSR station Extending Caltrain to downtown via The Portal is expected to slash daily ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  62. [62]
    Down the Tubes with DTX! - Caltrain HSR Compatibility Blog
    Sep 19, 2021 · A two-mile tunneling project to extend the peninsula rail corridor from its existing terminus in the Mission Bay neighborhood to the purpose-built basement ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  63. [63]
    California High-Speed Rail Faces Federal Funding Review
    Feb 21, 2025 · California High-Speed Rail funding is under review as officials assess delays, costs, and compliance with federal grant agreements.
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Joint Ad Hoc - Transbay Joint Powers Authority
    May 30, 2024 · The Financial Plan provides a 20-year forecast of the sources and uses of capital funds and O&M funds for both TJPA and Caltrain, for both the.Missing: breakdown | Show results with:breakdown<|separator|>
  65. [65]
  66. [66]
    Opinion: Caltrain's San Francisco extension costs more than it's worth
    Nov 8, 2023 · The project, to lengthen service just 1.3 miles to the Salesforce Transit Center, is now expected to cost $8.25 billion.
  67. [67]
    The $8.25 Billion San Francisco Train that Couldn't (or at least ...
    Oct 15, 2025 · Instead of spending even more taxpayer money on transit, now is the time to rethink costly transit projects like The Portal. Marc Joffe is a ...
  68. [68]
    AECOM to serve as program manager for the Portal rail extension in ...
    Aug 21, 2024 · The project includes an underground station at Fourth and Townsend Streets along with the Salesforce Transit Center's basement levels, utility ...
  69. [69]
    [PDF] TRANSIT STRATEGY - San Francisco - ConnectSF
    Caltrain estimates that electrified service and the DTX would increase San Francisco ridership by 184% over the next 20 years.33 A Bayview. Station would ...<|control11|><|separator|>