daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > Infrastructure and Mobility Forums > Subways and Urban Transport

Subways and Urban Transport Metros, subways, light rail, trams, buses and other local transport systems



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old November 20th, 2010, 05:25 AM   #181
manrush
Agenda 21 Advocate
 
manrush's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Urban New England
Posts: 4,150
Likes (Received): 499

It would be interesting to see a 3rd rail version of the Alstom X'trapolis as the future BART rolling stock.

Metro Trains Melbourne 1600mm gauge

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...train-863M.jpg

Valparaiso Metro 1676mm gauge
image hosted on flickr

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2379/...f80972.jpg?v=0

An off-the-shelf design that would need 3rd rail modification seems less expensive than custom-made rolling stock.

Last edited by manrush; November 20th, 2010 at 05:34 AM.
manrush no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old November 20th, 2010, 05:51 AM   #182
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by manrush View Post
snip
While an off the shelf model might be nice, a nasty Federal provision known as "Buy America" will probably nip that in the bud. and from the latest renderings I've seen BART throw around, Siemens is probably in high contention for the contract, given how similar the proposed cars look to the rendering for the Siemens design for Warsaw's new metro trains, and also the fact that Siemens is one of the biggest players in the North American rolling stock market for trains.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2010, 06:07 AM   #183
manrush
Agenda 21 Advocate
 
manrush's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Urban New England
Posts: 4,150
Likes (Received): 499

I thought Alstom had a factory in the US.
manrush no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2010, 06:11 AM   #184
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by manrush View Post
I thought Alstom had a factory in the US.
Yeah, they do. If I remember properly Alstom was responsible for the C1/C2 series of BART trains, so they would certainly be in the running. But again, I don't those off the shelf models would meet the Federal governments bizarre regulations, so some level of customization would be needed to satisfy that.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 20th, 2010, 05:13 PM   #185
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by Falubaz View Post
[IMG]http://i51.************/2j0hxr6.jpg[/IMG]
Might there be a story to insertion of gangway doors into this fleet? If so, why were the cab ends remodelled so clumsily?




Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelferis View Post
Is it moscow?
Yes, but only in calibre.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 21st, 2010, 12:31 AM   #186
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by trainrover View Post
Might there be a story to insertion of gangway doors into this fleet? If so, why were the cab ends remodelled so clumsily?
That BART cab car dates to the 1980's, separate from the original train order. The 1980's cabs (known as the C cars) had those Gangway doors put in so that BART could more easily run shorter trains. BART still runs the original cab cars with the tapered ends (known as the A cars), you just don't see them as often.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old December 10th, 2010, 02:18 AM   #187
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

S.F. finds funds for Central Subway
San Francisco Chronicle (CA) - Saturday, November 20, 2010
Author: Michael Cabanatuan, Chronicle Staff Writer

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom and transportation officials say they have found the $137 million the Municipal Transportation Agency needs to secure $942 million in federal funds for the Central Subway project.

Newsom met Thursday with Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Bay Area's transportation planning and financing agency, and developed a plan to use about $106 million in state bond money along with about $31 million in savings on Muni projects already completed or under way.

The money will be used to plug a funding gap in the financial plan for the $1.6 billion subway from the Caltrain terminal to Chinatown that must be submitted to the Federal Transportation Administration by February.

With the deadline near, and Muni 's financial condition strained, some San Francisco officials feared the agency would be unable to satisfy federal administrators, delaying or endangering the funding of the project itself. On Tuesday, San Francisco County Transportation Authority officials blasted a much sketchier funding plan presented by Muni , expressed doubt the agency could meet the federal deadline, and demanded a more detailed proposal.

Nathaniel Ford, chief executive officer of the Municipal Transportation Agency, said the agency had been searching for ways to fill the funding gap, looking specifically at available state bond funding and savings on projects that have come in under budget or with lower than anticipated bids.

"We feel this is a strong plan that will be a key point in bringing the project through the (federal funding) process," he said. "This project enjoys strong support from the community as well as elected leaders at all levels. We will continue to work closely with our partners at the FTA to ensure the success of the project."

The plan calls for the agency to use $21 million in funds from the state high-speed rail bond, which included money for transit agencies that would provide connecting service to the fast rail line. Another $85.3 million will come from a different state transportation bond. The final $30.7 million comes from savings or unused funds from five smaller Muni improvement projects, including a radio system replacement, an operators' restroom, construction of a canopy over part of the Muni Metro Geneva yard and construction of the Islais Creek bus maintenance facility.

Randy Rentschler, a spokesman for the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, said the bond money was already set aside for Muni but had not yet been dedicated to a specific project. Neither of the allotments need to be approved by the regional commission, he said, but the high-speed rail funding will require approval by the California Transportation Commission.

"The project has the full support of this commission," Rentschler said.

Jason Elliott, a mayoral aide, said it is important to note that because the $106.3 million in state bond money was not committed, it will not delay any Muni projects. Nor, he said, will the use of the $30.7 million in savings from other projects.

Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, who had been critical of the agency's earlier plans, said he was relieved to see the fleshed-out plan, which was presented to the authority Friday.

"An all-hands-on-deck meeting was imperative if they were going to solve this," he said, adding that funding problems would have emboldened opponents to push for the project to be abandoned and the federal money spent elsewhere.

"It would be real fumble, worse than a fumble," he said, "if we were not able to get the wherewithal to bring this important project home."
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 10th, 2011, 02:14 AM   #188
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

A Transbay Terminal Update:

Looking beyond the rubble
Will Kane. San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco, Calif.: Jan 10, 2011. pg. C.1

Once the hub of transit for downtown San Francisco, the Transbay Terminal building is now a fresh pile of rubble that many hope will eventually become the face of the city's skyline.

Announced in May 2008, the much heralded plan would shift the city's high-density heart from the Financial District to an area south of Market Street. Construction was once scheduled to be under way by 2010.

But construction has idled while planners continue to study the development's impact on traffic on the Bay Bridge, air and water pollution and the shadows that the handful of skyscrapers would cast on the Embarcadero and other public spaces.

Under the most aggressive timeline, the city won't begin debating the details until spring and construction won't begin until late this year or early 2012, said Joshua Switzky, project manager with the city's planning department. And that's assuming the economy picks up and opponents of tall buildings don't further stall the plan.

The delay is understandable, given the scale of the proposed plan, Switzky said.
Besides the marquee 1,200-foot Transbay Tower, the plan also sets the framework for at least six other high-rise buildings in the 600- to 800- foot range that many hope will redefine that area of the city. The Transamerica building - currently the city's tallest - is 853 feet tall.

"The power of the concept of the Transbay comes from bringing such a major transit investment with such a major land-use change," said Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, a pro-development think tank.
The new $1.2 billion Transbay Terminal near First and Mission streets will be the hub of transit for much of downtown San Francisco.

If everything goes according to plan, the terminal will be the site of San Francisco's high-speed rail station, linking regional transportation with local buses. Planners hope that having the transit center as a hub of the new development will allow higher concentrations of housing and offices without a commensurate increase in the number of cars on the road.

The terminal is expected to be finished in six to seven years, Switzky said.
"By then there could be a couple of these buildings on the ground or being built," he said.
But those high-density high rises will redefine the southern cityscape, a concern of many who appreciate the city's low-density character. The current limit for building height in that area is 550 feet.

Sue Hestor, a development attorney who has questioned the impacts of skyscrapers for decades, said she is watching the bureaucratic process.

The market for office space in San Francisco is already oversaturated, she said. Even if a developer finds the funds to construct the 1,200-foot tower, it could end up being vacant for years, she said.

"The market for that tower is no different than anything else going up in this city," she said.

Metcalf, an ardent supporter of the project, said the new towers would center thousands of workers near a transit hub, a practical way to combat the suburban sprawl that breeds gridlock and air pollution.

"It is a powerful idea," he said. "In the renaissance, the tallest building would always be the church steeple; the center of the city. For San Francisco to say our tallest building is going to be our transit center is a more wonderful idea."

"The power of the concept of the Transbay comes from bringing such a major transit investment with such a major land-use change." - Gabriel Metcalf, executive director, San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association, Gabriel Metcalf, executive director, San Francisco Planning and Urban Research Association
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2011, 04:27 AM   #189
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Good News!

Funding fix for Caltrain in the works
Michael Cabanatuan.
San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco, Calif.: Mar 10, 2011. pg. C.6

Caltrain won't have to make the unthinkable service cuts it has proposed, a key regional transportation official said Wednesday.

Steve Heminger, executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, told a committee that a short-term solution to Caltrain's devastating budget problem is in the works, and should eliminate the need to slash all but morning and evening commute service, as the commuter railroad's officials have suggested.

"There's no reason for the Caltrain board to be working on a draconian service change when we are working on a solution that will eliminate the need for, not all of it, but most of it," he said.

Caltrain officials have said they need to cut $30 million from its $102 million operating budget. To do that, they said they will have to cut to the bone, eliminating weekend, evening, midday and special-event trains, ending service south of downtown San Jose, raising fares by 25 cents and bypassing seven stations.

The commuter railroad's woes stem from its uncommon structure as a transit agency controlled and funded by three other transit systems: the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Authority, San Mateo County Transit District and Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.

Caltrain lacks a dedicated funding source, and has to make do with whatever Muni, SamTrans and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority can afford to pay. With all three agencies struggling to balance their budgets, they're expected to cut back their contributions.

Word of Caltrain's financial troubles have spurred business and community leaders to come up with a long-term funding strategy for the agency, perhaps a tax measure that would need voter approval. But that's not likely to happen until November 2012, said Heminger, so the commission, the Bay Area's transportation planning and financing agency, is working on a two-year remedy that would maintain Caltrain service.

That plan could involve the San Francisco and Santa Clara County agencies paying some of what they still owe SamTrans for buying the Caltrain right-of-way 20 years ago, shifting money set aside for future electrification or Dumbarton Bridge rail service, or using some maintenance funds for operations. Details are still under negotiation, with the commission trying to broker a deal, Heminger said.

But that doesn't mean Caltrain riders would be off the hook. Heminger said he expects riders and employees to come up with about $10 million through modest fare or parking fee increases service cuts, and savings from renegotiating the contract to operate the railroad, now held by Amtrak.
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 11th, 2011, 06:11 AM   #190
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
snip
Good news indeed. All Caltrain needs to do is survive long enough to reap the benefits of electrification and it should be fine.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 12th, 2011, 09:36 PM   #191
filos-ippos
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 896
Likes (Received): 3

something knows if tram carrello (italian tram) are update in chicago with air conditioning or similar?
filos-ippos no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old March 13th, 2011, 10:17 AM   #192
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by filos-ippos View Post
something knows if tram carrello (italian tram) are update in chicago with air conditioning or similar?
I'm not quite sure what you're trying to ask. Could you restate your question please?
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 22nd, 2011, 08:29 AM   #193
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Efficient public transit seen as crucial

Will Kane. San Francisco Chronicle.
San Francisco, Calif.: Apr 17, 2011.

(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2011

In 15 years, 19,000 people could be living on Treasure Island, and a good portion of them will be leaving the island each morning for jobs in San Francisco and the East Bay.

They'll be less than a 10-minute drive from San Francisco - a dream commute. But if all 5,300 commuters expected to leave the island every morning get in their cars, they'll jam the already-gridlocked Bay Bridge. The line of cars trying to creep onto the span could stretch across the island.

City planners and the island's developers are convinced that a robust transit network can quickly get people off the island without them ever setting foot in their cars. But others are more skeptical, noting that each apartment or condominium on the island will have its own parking spot - meaning everyone will be tempted to get in their car every morning.

"We think about an island as removed from the rest of the city," said Peter Albert, a transit planner with the city. "But this is actually closer to downtown than the Richmond District."

Express bus planned

The city hopes an efficient, subsidized transit network - along with charges for driving off the island in the morning - will encourage commuters to ditch their cars and ride public transit.

Muni will have an express bus to San Francisco that takes 10 minutes to reach the Transbay Terminal. AC Transit will have a bus to the East Bay that stops at two BART stations. And the marquee way off the island will be a brand-new ferry that will take 10 minutes to get from the western shore of the island to the Ferry Building.

Because the development is a built-from-scratch neighborhood, transit planners say the system is designed to be more efficient and integrated than any other transit network in the Bay Area.

Developers acknowledge that the success of the proposed neighborhood, which goes before the Planning Commission for approval Thursday, depends in large part on its residents' willingness to get out of their cars.

If everyone decides to drive, Treasure Island could become a boondoggle of snarled traffic and angry commuters. But if enough use public transportation, the development could be a model for transit-oriented development in California.

"The innovations that we're piloting here are already starting to be replicated," Albert said.

The key, planners said, is to make public transit the easiest and most efficient way off the island. The first step in that direction will be providing each resident with a subsidized transit pass.

Buses, ferries and shuttles will converge at a transit hub on the southwest corner of the island where riders can move on, off or around the island.

Having all the transit options near the island's lone exit will make the plaza the thriving center of the island, planners said. The hope is that a commuter returning home will get off the ferry, stop at a nearby restaurant for dinner, and then unlock his or her bike for a quick ride home.

Even the most distant home on the island won't be more than a 20-minute walk from the transit terminal, and more than 60 percent of the units will be less than 10 minutes away, Albert said.

Buses will arrive at seven-minute intervals during the morning commute and five-minute intervals in the afternoon. A ferry will arrive every 15 minutes.

Transit service will grow as more and more people move onto the island over the proposed 15- to 20- year development period. The goal is to always have more transit service available than residents need.

"We don't want people to despair that there isn't enough service and turn to their cars," said Rich Hillis, with the Mayor's Office of Economic and Workforce Development.

$5 toll to drive off island

But the iron fist beneath that velvet glove will be a proposed $5 charge to drive off the island every weekday morning.

The toll would be set by a new transit board and could be changed regularly - increased if too many people are driving or decreased if no one is. The revenue from the fee would help pay for the island's transit subsidies.

The goal of the toll is not to prevent people from using their cars, but to always make transit a more attractive opportunity, Hillis said.

"We don't want anyone to feel like they can't drive off the island. We just want them to know the cost," he said.

But some are still worried about the impacts of the traffic.

No matter the cost, many residents of the island will always prefer to drive, said Ruth Gravanis, a member of the city's Commission on the Environment.

Instead of providing 8,000 parking spots, the city would be better off limiting the amount of parking for residents, she added.

But if residents need a car, Hillis said, the hope is just that they don't use it every day.

"We think we have enough carrots and sticks to get people out of their cars," he said. "But this is still an island, so we need to stay realistic."
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old April 23rd, 2011, 06:20 AM   #194
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
snip
The "Express bus to San Francisco" will most likely be a beefed up version of the 108 Treasure Island (which is already an express between the Island and D.T. SF, but not quite as frequent. I'm not sure what two BART stations the East Bay express bus will serve, but these are the most likely candidates: West Oakland, 12th St/Oakland, 19th St/Oakland, Macarthur, and Lake Merritt. Oddly enough Treasure Island had a direct express bus connection until the late 90's, around the time when the base was closed.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 1st, 2011, 09:19 PM   #195
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
Efficient public transit seen as crucial

San Francisco, Calif.: Apr 17, 2011.

(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2011

19,000 people ... ... ... a robust transit network

Wow! do folks there draw from Montreal-speak --in English-- or is the whereabouts of the source of that sort of language yet to be revealed?

Last edited by trainrover; May 14th, 2011 at 07:38 PM. Reason: Mis-saved; no editing induced, ultimately...
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 5th, 2011, 08:38 AM   #196
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Not really sure what your point is.

If you do happen to be from Montreal, Treasure Island is to SF what the Expos 67 site was for Montreal!


Anyway, change of topic, there's stepped up transit security over the past few days.

Big transit authorities increase vigilance
Michael Cabanatuan. San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco, Calif.: May 3, 2011. pg. A.2
Abstract (Summary)

Passengers on the Bay Area's busiest transit systems and at San Francisco International Airport may notice more police officers as the agencies take precautions against potential terrorist responses to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2011

Passengers on the Bay Area's busiest transit systems and at San Francisco International Airport may notice more police officers as the agencies take precautions against potential terrorist responses to the killing of Osama bin Laden.

But neither air travelers nor transit riders should encounter any new security procedures, officials said.

Muni and BART, the region's largest transit systems, are putting more officers on trains and in stations, and have been in contact with the Transportation Security Administration. No threats have been made against either agency, nor against U.S. transit systems in general, but many of the nation's large transit operators, including those in New York, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington, are taking precautions.

Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano said Monday that the agency would not issue an alert at this time. Abroad, U.S. embassies and other foreign facilities were placed on high alert, and strong admonitions were issued against U.S. citizens to be careful if traveling or living overseas.

BART canceled a training session for its Critical Asset Patrol Team of seven officers specially trained in counterterrorism Monday, and brought in extra officers to bolster its forces. The officers are walking trains and stations to provide a visible deterrent. The transit agency has also deployed its transportation supervisors, wearing neon green vests, to assist customers and provide extra eyes and ears.

"If you seen anything suspicious, please let us know," said spokesman Linton Johnson.

Sgt. Edgardo Alvarez, who oversees the special patrol team, said passengers should be on the lookout for abandoned luggage or packages and "people acting differently than the average commuter." That could include someone wearing overly bulky clothing in warm weather or with a tangle of wires under their jacket, he said.

Muni is also deploying extra officers throughout its system, spokesman Paul Rose said.

Both BART and Muni said the stepped-up patrols would continue indefinitely.

Other transit agencies, including Caltrain, the Capitol Corridor, the Altamont Commuter Express and AC Transit either declined to discuss security efforts or said they had not made any changes. All said they've been in contact with the TSA.

At San Francisco International Airport, spokesman Mike McCarron said air travelers won't notice any different procedures at security checkpoints, but will likely see additional police officers inside the terminals.
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2011, 07:18 AM   #197
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Caltrain line option is rejected; Preferred route is to Transbay

Michael Cabanatuan. San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco, Calif.: May 6, 2011. pg. C.1

(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2011

The California High-Speed Rail Authority has put the brakes on a plan that could stop high-speed trains short of San Francisco's new Transbay Terminal.

The authority board told engineers and planners Thursday not to study a phased-implementation plan, which would electrify the Caltrain tracks and use them as a quicker, lower-cost way to bring high-speed rail up the Peninsula to the Caltrain station at Fourth and King streets in San Francisco.

"It's not that we don't want to go" to the Transbay Terminal, said Roelof van Ark, the authority's chief executive officer. "It's a question of how many billions will we have? We have to get to Fourth and King before we can go to the Transbay Terminal."

The phased plan would not only stop short of the Transbay Terminal, it would also lengthen the time it takes to get from San Jose to San Francisco. Instead of running at speeds up to 125 mph on the Peninsula, high-speed trains would travel at Caltrain speeds, which top out at 80 mph.

The first stretch of the $43 billion San Francisco-to-Los Angeles high-speed rail system will be built in the San Joaquin Valley. There is no funding for the Peninsula stretch and the authority is struggling to contain costs and to calm opposition from critics along the Caltrain corridor who want the new trains to either travel underground or be rerouted.

The phased plan would be a stopgap, said Tim Cobb, a project manager. The authority would continue to plan a system with separate rails for high-speed trains and Caltrain, as well as for extending the system the final 1.3 miles from Fourth and King streets to the Transbay Transit Center under construction at First and Mission streets.

The phased plan, which could cost $2 billion to $4 billion versus the $6.1 billion projected for the true high-speed system between San Francisco and San Jose, shares similarities with a recent proposal released by state Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, Rep. Anna Eshoo, D-Palo Alto, and Assemblyman Rich Gordon, D-Menlo Park. That proposal would use the Caltrain tracks, but also ban construction of elevated tracks and not allow future construction of separate tracks for the high-speed trains.

Both of the cheaper plans would end high-speed service at Fourth and King streets.

Jim Hartnett, a former Redwood City mayor just appointed to the authority, questioned whether buying land around the Caltrain station and enlarging the depot to accommodate high-speed rail would cost much less than going to the Transbay Terminal. Leroy Saage, a deputy director of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority, agreed, saying the land alone could cost $400 million.

"San Francisco service that stops short of the Transbay Transit Center would require construction of an unnecessary and inadequate station at Fourth and King," he said.

Ending the tracks at Fourth and King streets also could violate state law. Voter-approved Proposition 1A, which permitted the sale of $10 billion in bonds for high-speed rail, requires the first phase of the 800-mile statewide system to connect the Transbay Terminal and Union Station in Los Angeles. Board member Lynn Schenk asked whether the authority can legally ignore that requirement. The state attorney general's office will investigate the issue.

Schenk, a former congresswoman from San Diego, called the Simitian-Eshoo-Gordon proposal to confine construction to the existing tracks "a bailout of Caltrain. I don't want to see our precious high-speed rail funds, which were so hard to come by, to be used to bail out any existing commuter railroads."
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 9th, 2011, 08:36 AM   #198
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Looks like BART to San Jose is back on the burner!

BART San Jose link OKd
Michael Cabanatuan. San Francisco Chronicle. San Francisco, Calif.:
Apr 15, 2011. pg. C.7
(C) San Francisco Chronicle 2011


It won't be ready to ride until 2018, but BART directors approved on Thursday the first phase of the long-awaited extension to San Jose, which will end short of downtown. A second phase will eventually take trains 6 miles farther to Santa Clara.

"I never thought we'd see this in our lifetime," said director Tom Blalock of Fremont, "but here we are."

The Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority will build and pay for the extension, which will cost $5.9 billion for the full 16.1 miles to Santa Clara. The first phase, to the Berryessa neighborhood in east San Jose, is 10 miles from Warm Springs in Fremont. Construction is under way on the 5.4-mile extension from the current end of the line in central Fremont to Warm Springs. It is scheduled to open in late 2014.

Because the Santa Clara County extension will become part of the BART system, it needs the board's approval at several junctures. The board voted to accept required environmental studies and approved construction of the first phase, which will include stations in Milpitas and Berryessa.

The authority has started buying land for the extension and working on relocating a stretch of the Union Pacific Railroad. Construction is expected to begin this year.

BART's extension agreement calls for the authority to buy 60 new BART rail cars and pay for improvements to the core of the existing BART system, including expansion of the Hayward maintenance yard.
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2011, 07:30 AM   #199
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
snip
This is good news.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2011, 07:33 PM   #200
trainrover
:-x
 
trainrover's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 5,787
Likes (Received): 738

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
Not really sure what your point is.
The point was never mine; multiplied, the points appear to actually be your (local?) reporter's over there. Repeat:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
19,000 people ... ... ... a robust transit network



Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
Treasure Island is to SF what the Expos 67 site was for Montreal!
However, now by your additional info, I do have a point: Our own treasure-island Expo Express was --err-- "robust", and not just because it linked three 'treasured' islands with the world's first-ever fully automatic trains





Beyond rush hours, it would appear that SF's Treasure-Island service will be next to nought

Last edited by trainrover; May 14th, 2011 at 07:50 PM.
trainrover no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
bart, muni, sacramento, san francisco, smart

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 11:54 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

tech management by Sysprosium