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 January 9th, 2013, 05:38 AM   #601
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
In my free time over the past two weeks, I've been working on a fantasy map for Muni Metro... Sort of a "What if most of the former Market Street Railway streetcar lines survived bustitution and there had been continued improvement of the network by Muni, what would it look like in 2050?" deal. As part of this, I took plenty of liberties in normalizing the stop spacing to speed up service, as well as add a few new lines to serve future development (Parkmerced, CPHPS, etc.) and regroup / reorganize line segments. I wouldn't take it too seriously, as LRVs probably wouldn't be able to tackle the grades along Castro / Noe, Fillmore, Sacramento, Mansell, etc.

There's a saying that San Francisco is "a city of neighborhoods"... To take advantage of this, I also exercised some creative license by giving each stop a unique name instead of the standard "X Street & Y Avenue" deal. Sometimes it's the name of the neighborhood, other times a local landmark, or some reference to the historical significance of the area. Wasn't necessarily easy, particularly out in the nondescript, monotonous Outer Sunset, but was interesting to take a peek into the "micro-history" or "micro-geography" of these places.

Anyways, enough squawking... You can download the .svg here. I angled the text, but didn't vectorize it, so sorry if it's a little hard to read. Definitely not a "polished" map, but I don't expect to ever go back and work on it again:
https://docs.google.com/uc?export=do...XdZZDZwOHB3elU
I know it's not serious, but that doesn't prevent from thinking that this map is rather flawed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
Oh ok. Got it. I thought it would be a return to the rails (thus I might call it LR substitution) from buses, which would be much more awesome, but with increasing costs, may not be feasible.
It's not the costs that are the problem, it's a lack of political will and a fear of big numbers.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 9th, 2013, 06:09 AM   #602
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

I'm curious what you think could be so grossly "flawed" with a fantasy map...
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 9th, 2013, 06:40 AM   #603
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

The text is indeed quite small, and even though I opened the image link, the text is still too small (although I have a general idea of how the bus-titutions are like).
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 01:33 AM   #604
Nexis
Dark Wolf
 
Nexis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Along the Rails of North Jersey..
Posts: 15,688
Likes (Received): 17037

__________________
My FLICKR Page < 54,100+ Photos of Urban Renewal , Infrastructure , Food and Nature in the Northeastern US
Visit the Reorganized New York City Section
My Photography Website
Visit the New Jersey Section
Nexis no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 02:13 AM   #605
bayviews
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 5,535
Likes (Received): 51

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
It's not a Muni map per se... It's a Muni Metro map. Bus routes and cable car routes are not shown.
We realize that.

Its just that next time they get around to updating the real system map...
bayviews no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 02:55 AM   #606
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

Perhaps that would mean providing "real" schedule guides to begin with so that customers will have less guesswork on what times the buses come by... Everything with Muni seems to be reliant with NextBus, but when reading the schedules on 511.org, it seems like they indeed run on a set schedule.

I would highly suggest a high-frequency map, which will include all limited-stop buses (but exclude most of the express buses, the exception being the 8x-Bayshore Express) so that customers can familiarize themselves which buses run every 15 minutes or better everyday.
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 04:10 AM   #607
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Quote:
Originally Posted by bayviews View Post
We realize that.
Sorry, your comment was a bit ambiguous... You segued with a "However..." and ended up inadvertently connecting two completely separate line of thoughts.

Anyways, I actually think the color-coding on the current Muni map is pretty good... It's not by mode per se, but more function (trunk, crosstown, community service, etc.) and service type (local / limited vs. express), which are more important than mode. I think the fact that non-railfans will call a streetcar a bus just goes to show that they don't care what it is they're riding, as long as it gets them where they're going.

I agree with fieldsofdreams that what they really need is a high-frequency map (I would probably cut it off at 7-8 minutes instead of 10), although they tried to sort of do that in recent versions of the map by having yellow highlighting on "major transit corridors". But it ignores corridors with very good service like Sutter, Fulton, Hayes, The Embarcadero, etc., and highlights comparatively minor corridors (the 28 in GGB... Really?). Of course, the big problem with this approach is that it's just hard to see the highlighting under everything... Probably better to just do a separate map for high-frequency service.
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 04:28 AM   #608
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
I'm curious what you think could be so grossly "flawed" with a fantasy map...
The inconsistent naming was one peeve of mine, I think it would been better for there to be all numbers rather a mix of letters and numbers that you had. The second big peeve was the grand loop, I really don't think SF lends itself to loops at all. The third peeve was send too many lines down market. (I always envisioned that the really high ridership Geary corridor would segregated from the rest of the Market lines had it survived for purposes of capacity, and 22 Fillmore could've been divvied up between the J and N, transforming them into Inner-crosstown lines.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
Sorry, your comment was a bit ambiguous... You segued with a "However..." and ended up inadvertently connecting two completely separate line of thoughts.

Anyways, I actually think the color-coding on the current Muni map is pretty good... It's not by mode per se, but more function (trunk, crosstown, community service, etc.) and service type (local / limited vs. express), which are more important than mode. I think the fact that non-railfans will call a streetcar a bus just goes to show that they don't care what it is they're riding, as long as it gets them where they're going.

I agree with fieldsofdreams that what they really need is a high-frequency map (I would probably cut it off at 7-8 minutes instead of 10), although they tried to sort of do that in recent versions of the map by having yellow highlighting on "major transit corridors". But it ignores corridors with very good service like Sutter, Fulton, Hayes, The Embarcadero, etc., and highlights comparatively minor corridors (the 28 in GGB... Really?). Of course, the big problem with this approach is that it's just hard to see the highlighting under everything... Probably better to just do a separate map for high-frequency service.
The 28 actually more important than you might think, that line is routinely crushloaded along most of it's route, and could badly use more service hours.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 04:45 AM   #609
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

I will tell you, personally, the 28-19th Avenue is one of my key backbone routes I use on Muni because it is the main bus line I use to get between the Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco State University. Plus, the 28 provides major regional connections to Golden Gate Transit (on Lombard, Richardson, and the Golden Gate Bridge), SamTrans (at Stonestown and Daly City BART), PresidiGo (for the Presidio), and BART (in Daly City), all of which provide commuters opportunities to actually bypass Downtown San Francisco to and from the Peninsula.

The 28 line is a crucial crosstown service that provides multiple transfer opportunities, including at least seventeen bus and three Muni Metro lines, and it is prone to overcrowding; in fact, I have been, on several instances, riding the 28 with loads exceeding 60 passengers on a 40-foot standard size (NABI or Neoplan) bus. And, there have been some instances that even though the 28L-19th Avenue Limited runs at limited times (7-9am and 2-4:30pm), some buses do not operate as advertised (e.g. During the PM rush hour, buses are supposed to run every 10 minutes; in truth, I've waited at least 15 minutes just to get the next bus, and the bus fills up very, very quickly).
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 04:56 AM   #610
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
I will tell you, personally, the 28-19th Avenue is one of my key backbone routes I use on Muni because it is the main bus line I use to get between the Golden Gate Bridge and San Francisco State University. Plus, the 28 provides major regional connections to Golden Gate Transit (on Lombard, Richardson, and the Golden Gate Bridge), SamTrans (at Stonestown and Daly City BART), PresidiGo (for the Presidio), and BART (in Daly City), all of which provide commuters opportunities to actually bypass Downtown San Francisco to and from the Peninsula.

The 28 line is a crucial crosstown service that provides multiple transfer opportunities, including at least seventeen bus and three Muni Metro lines, and it is prone to overcrowding; in fact, I have been, on several instances, riding the 28 with loads exceeding 60 passengers on a 40-foot standard size (NABI or Neoplan) bus. And, there have been some instances that even though the 28L-19th Avenue Limited runs at limited times (7-9am and 2-4:30pm), some buses do not operate as advertised (e.g. During the PM rush hour, buses are supposed to run every 10 minutes; in truth, I've waited at least 15 minutes just to get the next bus, and the bus fills up very, very quickly).
The 28 is one of several lines that have badly needed artics for years now (along with the 1, 5, 22, 24, 29, 44, 47 and 71), and I consider it an ongoing failure that MUNI has failed to address that. (It was particularly infuriating when I found out that MUNI dropped the ball on the Double-deckers)
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 05:15 AM   #611
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

I asked a Filipino Muni driver (yes, I am indeed from the Philippines, born and raised for 18 years) about why the 28 isn't operated with the articulated buses, and the explanation was simple: there are two very tight turns that would make operating such articulated buses on a regular basis difficult, and both of them are at the Golden Gate Bridge: first, the left turn from under the tunnel, and second, the left turn right after the bus stop at Golden Gate Bridge at Merchant Road (the raised, cemented median with a Y loop makes the turn particularly difficult). He told me that Muni has tried operating articulated buses on that portion of the route, and it is difficult to make the turns right... And they say, it's the responsibility of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District that would need to make the adjustments on their roadway to make such operations possible.

And besides, the really busy corridor (periodically), would be the portion between California and San Francisco State University. But, even in the AM commute, buses heading to Fort Mason are jam packed too, I'd rather stick with Golden Gate Transit in the AM until I get to the Financial District and take either BART or Muni Metro. Plus, being a Clipper Card holder, I get two free transfers from Daly City BART to Muni (one valid 23 hours after getting off from BART, the other 24 hours after the first free pass is used), and it is only valid on the 14L-Mission Limited, 28-19th Avenue, 28L-19th Avenue Limited, and 54-Felton.
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 05:25 AM   #612
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
I asked a Filipino Muni driver (yes, I am indeed from the Philippines, born and raised for 18 years) about why the 28 isn't operated with the articulated buses, and the explanation was simple: there are two very tight turns that would make operating such articulated buses on a regular basis difficult, and both of them are at the Golden Gate Bridge: first, the left turn from under the tunnel, and second, the left turn right after the bus stop at Golden Gate Bridge at Merchant Road (the raised, cemented median with a Y loop makes the turn particularly difficult). He told me that Muni has tried operating articulated buses on that portion of the route, and it is difficult to make the turns right... And they say, it's the responsibility of the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway, and Transportation District that would need to make the adjustments on their roadway to make such operations possible.
I guess that's another reason why GGT are dicks. I swear I hate all this pointless bureaucracy in this region regarding transit.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 05:28 AM   #613
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

Perhaps we will need to have a good conversation on this since I use transit so frequently, I get to hear a lot of passenger "complaints" and "concerns" from the emotions and actions I observe from them. I mean, I have been living in the Bay Area for over 6.5 years, I really love the transit system here, but its the policies and management that make me want to just from even talking about the best possible policies.
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 07:04 AM   #614
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
there are two very tight turns that would make operating such articulated buses on a regular basis difficult, and both of them are at the Golden Gate Bridge: first, the left turn from under the tunnel, and second, the left turn right after the bus stop at Golden Gate Bridge at Merchant Road (the raised, cemented median with a Y loop makes the turn particularly difficult).
The second one is easy to fix. The first one is not, and it's easy to see why on Google Streetview.

Anyways, my experience with the 28 has been not so much that it needs artics (although this would help), but moreso that it just needs better on-time performance. There's just too many sources of delay on the line along 19th Avenue and on both approaches to the GGB, which results in bunching and non-uniform loads across runs.
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 07:07 AM   #615
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The inconsistent naming was one peeve of mine, I think it would been better for there to be all numbers rather a mix of letters and numbers that you had.
The reasoning behind the naming convention is actually pretty simple... There were simply too many lines to do single letters. To solve this, letters were reserved for Market Street Subway lines, numbers for the other lines. That being said, I didn't think much about the naming convention beyond that, else I would have renumbered the numbered lines along some sort of scheme.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The second big peeve was the grand loop, I really don't think SF lends itself to loops at all.
I can sort of understand this, but a city loop is really just a natural extension of all those listed lines, all of which happen to be important corridors. There is already heavy ridership in many of the individual line segments, but also consider the following:
  • TEP will be extending the 28L to Balboa Park and Geneva / Naples, this with two lines already connecting Balboa Park and SFSU / Stonestown—M (J in post-TEP) and 29. The 29 in particular is very heavily-used for SE ↔ SW traffic.
  • The Candlestick Point redevelopment will extend 28L from Geneva / Naples as a BRT along Geneva and Harney into their site.
These travel patterns will become even more important with the continued buildout in southeastern SF. You will basically have two giant outer crosstown loops in the 28 and 29, at which point it's only natural to consider just combining them with the already well-established 8X / T / 30 corridors in a single loop.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The third peeve was send too many lines down market.
In what sense? Virtually all of these lines already go down Market. Perhaps I could have been more clear, but part of the "fantasy" was retaining the quadruple-track on Market at surface level. Combined with the subway, that's plenty of track to spread around.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The 28 actually more important than you might think, that line is routinely crushloaded along most of it's route, and could badly use more service hours.
Not saying it's not important… I’ve ridden it plenty of times.
But I wouldn't necessarily have highlighted that particular segment of the line before highlighting some of the other trunk corridors I mentioned. And at an absolute level, we can compare overall corridor daily ridership:

19th Avenue corridor (28 / 28L) = 11,447
Sutter / Post corridor (2 / 3 / 4) = 13,026
Fulton corridor (5) = 14,039
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 07:15 AM   #616
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

Indeed. And bus bunching persists a lot on the 28, especially when massive delays occur along 19th Avenue and Doyle Drive. The PM commute can be particularly bad indeed: one time, I stayed on a 28 bus for 65 minutes instead of a usual 30-35 minutes... The reason: the traffic signals were out at Park Presidio and Geary. And the backup went all the way back from 19th and Noriega NB and Park Presidio and California SB.
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 08:07 AM   #617
fieldsofdreams
PH + SF Super Moderator
 
fieldsofdreams's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Manila • San Francisco
Posts: 18,821
Likes (Received): 11255

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
The reasoning behind the naming convention is actually pretty simple... There were simply too many lines to do single letters. To solve this, letters were reserved for Market Street Subway lines, numbers for the other lines. That being said, I didn't think much about the naming convention beyond that, else I would have renumbered the numbered lines along some sort of scheme.

[...]

There is already heavy ridership in many of the individual line segments, but also consider the following:
  • TEP will be extending the 28L to Balboa Park and Geneva / Naples, this with two lines already connecting Balboa Park and SFSU / Stonestown—M (J in post-TEP) and 29. The 29 in particular is very heavily-used for SE ↔ SW traffic.
  • The Candlestick Point redevelopment will extend 28L from Geneva / Naples as a BRT along Geneva and Harney into their site.
These travel patterns will become even more important with the continued buildout in southeastern SF. You will basically have two giant outer crosstown loops in the 28 and 29, at which point it's only natural to consider just combining them with the already well-established 8X / T / 30 corridors in a single loop.

[...]

Not saying it's not important… I’ve ridden it plenty of times.
But I wouldn't necessarily have highlighted that particular segment of the line before highlighting some of the other trunk corridors I mentioned. And at an absolute level, we can compare overall corridor daily ridership:

19th Avenue corridor (28 / 28L) = 11,447
Sutter / Post corridor (2 / 3 / 4) = 13,026
Fulton corridor (5) = 14,039
Hmmm, so the 28L will end up as being rerouted from its current terminal at Daly City BART to Balboa Park BART? That would be interesting as it can help reduce the crunch experienced on the 29-Sunset, in which sometimes, at midday, buses on that line get so stuffed, sometimes, passengers bound for either SF State or City College need to wait for the next bus just to ride. Plus, should the 28L be extended further to Geneva & Munich (sharing the terminal with the 43-Masonic), that would effectively help the 8x-Bayshore Express as well, in which passenger crowding heading inbound on that line actually starts at Balboa Park station.

Question, though: if the J will be reallocated to the current M service (Embarcadero to Balboa Park via Stonestown, SF State, and Randolph), what will the J operating along Church and San Jose Avenue be called? And will it effectively run as a loop service, similar to the K/T combination?
__________________
Anthony or FOD the MOD • Urban Studies & Planning, SF State, UC Berkeley, and San Jose State
Philippine Forums • SF Bay Area Forums • Bay Area Transit • NEW! SF Bay Area and NorCal in Pictures
Photo Albums: Flickr • Photobucket • Instagram

Rohnert Park • Rio Vista • Richmond • Redwood City • Portola Valley • Pleasanton • Pleasant Hill
fieldsofdreams no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 10:17 AM   #618
FDW
Registered User
 
FDW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 532
Likes (Received): 34

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
Perhaps we will need to have a good conversation on this since I use transit so frequently, I get to hear a lot of passenger "complaints" and "concerns" from the emotions and actions I observe from them. I mean, I have been living in the Bay Area for over 6.5 years, I really love the transit system here, but its the policies and management that make me want to just from even talking about the best possible policies.
You've been here for 6.5 years? Then you probably don't know about massive cuts the regional agencies made between 2002-04. Service outside of SF used to be a whole better than it is now. For example, GGT pre-2002 had 7 buses per hour (per direction) operating between DTSF and San Rafael. (compared to 3 per hour now)

Quote:
Originally Posted by quashlo View Post
The reasoning behind the naming convention is actually pretty simple... There were simply too many lines to do single letters. To solve this, letters were reserved for Market Street Subway lines, numbers for the other lines. That being said, I didn't think much about the naming convention beyond that, else I would have renumbered the numbered lines along some sort of scheme.
I would've just gone with all numbers, less chances for confusion.

Quote:
I can sort of understand this, but a city loop is really just a natural extension of all those listed lines, all of which happen to be important corridors. There is already heavy ridership in many of the individual line segments, but also consider the following:
  • TEP will be extending the 28L to Balboa Park and Geneva / Naples, this with two lines already connecting Balboa Park and SFSU / Stonestown—M (J in post-TEP) and 29. The 29 in particular is very heavily-used for SE ↔ SW traffic.
  • The Candlestick Point redevelopment will extend 28L from Geneva / Naples as a BRT along Geneva and Harney into their site.
These travel patterns will become even more important with the continued buildout in southeastern SF. You will basically have two giant outer crosstown loops in the 28 and 29, at which point it's only natural to consider just combining them with the already well-established 8X / T / 30 corridors in a single loop.
Pretty much all of the lines you mention suffer from nasty reliability issues, and I've got my own preferences for what to do with some of them. (For one, I'd split the 29 once Samtrans gets folded into MUNI, and I'd prefer hooking the Geneva corridor into Ocean and Taraval, establishing a major crosstown route there.)

Quote:
In what sense? Virtually all of these lines already go down Market. Perhaps I could have been more clear, but part of the "fantasy" was retaining the quadruple-track on Market at surface level. Combined with the subway, that's plenty of track to spread around.
I've tended to envision most of "San Francisco keeps it streetcars" scenarios having four Streetcar tracks in the Subway and two on the surface, save where the Geary line merges onto Market. (There was a 1930's Market Subway plan that envisioned exactly this)

Quote:
Not saying it's not important… I’ve ridden it plenty of times.
But I wouldn't necessarily have highlighted that particular segment of the line before highlighting some of the other trunk corridors I mentioned. And at an absolute level, we can compare overall corridor daily ridership:

19th Avenue corridor (28 / 28L) = 11,447
Sutter / Post corridor (2 / 3 / 4) = 13,026
Fulton corridor (5) = 14,039
Actually, the 4 doesn't exist anymore and Sutter only has frequent service all day East of Fillmore. I don't deny that the Sutter corridor gets a fair amount of ridership, but it's literally 650 feet from the juggernaut that is the Geary corridor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by fieldsofdreams View Post
Hmmm, so the 28L will end up as being rerouted from its current terminal at Daly City BART to Balboa Park BART? That would be interesting as it can help reduce the crunch experienced on the 29-Sunset, in which sometimes, at midday, buses on that line get so stuffed, sometimes, passengers bound for either SF State or City College need to wait for the next bus just to ride. Plus, should the 28L be extended further to Geneva & Munich (sharing the terminal with the 43-Masonic), that would effectively help the 8x-Bayshore Express as well, in which passenger crowding heading inbound on that line actually starts at Balboa Park station.
The 28L is going to become an all-day service, AND it's going to terminating at Van Ness and North Point (The 28's Marina terminus is one of the maddening things about MUNI routing as is).

Quote:
Question, though: if the J will be reallocated to the current M service (Embarcadero to Balboa Park via Stonestown, SF State, and Randolph), what will the J operating along Church and San Jose Avenue be called? And will it effectively run as a loop service, similar to the K/T combination?
No, The M will terminate at Parkmerced, and the J will be extended through Ocean View to Parkmerced and SF State under the TEP.
FDW no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 07:31 PM   #619
quashlo
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 14,835
Likes (Received): 3215

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
I would've just gone with all numbers, less chances for confusion.
Perhaps... I wanted to at least make it mostly similar to the current naming conventions, so this is the end result. Everything should look fairly familiar to current passengers, other than entirely new lines, or a few lines where I went with an old MSRy number that wasn't carried over.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
Pretty much all of the lines you mention suffer from nasty reliability issues, and I've got my own preferences for what to do with some of them. (For one, I'd split the 29 once Samtrans gets folded into MUNI, and I'd prefer hooking the Geneva corridor into Ocean and Taraval, establishing a major crosstown route there.)
I assumed most of my network is in exclusive median ROW, which should help address reliability issues.

As for your Geneva / Ocean / Taraval and J / N / 22 ideas, I agree they have merit... I think some less-frequent service would be warranted on them, but I still think the primary design of the network will remain single corridor (Market) with trunks peeling off, supplemented by crosstown arcs (22, 24, 43, 44, 28 / 28L, 29), as into and out of Downtown is the fundamental travel pattern.

Anyways, I think this just illustrates my initial point... When it comes to fantasy maps, there are opinions, ideas, even "preferences", but not "flaws".

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
Actually, the 4 doesn't exist anymore and Sutter only has frequent service all day East of Fillmore. I don't deny that the Sutter corridor gets a fair amount of ridership, but it's literally 650 feet from the juggernaut that is the Geary corridor.
Yes, I know, but the only ridership SFMTA publishes on their website is pre-cancellation (2006-2007), so if you want to quote ridership for the Sutter / Post corridor, you need to include the 4. Obviously, post-cancellation things will be slightly different, but the only ridership numbers I have access to post-cancellation are peak hour ridership at maximum load points, not daily numbers.

Anyways, my basic point is that a high-frequency map would have a lot more lines on it than what Muni highlighted as "major transit corridors", and that I think they missed highlighting corridors that still offer very good service, for various reasons.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The 28L is going to become an all-day service, AND it's going to terminating at Van Ness and North Point (The 28's Marina terminus is one of the maddening things about MUNI routing as is).
A city loop eliminates the 28 / 30 transfer at Laguna / Chestnut by providing a direct connection between GGB and Fisherman's Wharf, Chinatown, and Union Square...
__________________
San Francisco
Japan 2013; Japan 2011
: Tōkyō I, II, III (Kamakura), IV (Yokohama), V; Ōsaka I (+Kyōto +Kōbe), II (Kyōto), III (Nara); Hiroshima; Fukuoka; Nagasaki; Kita-Kyushu + Shimonoseki; Nikkō
quashlo no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 10th, 2013, 08:49 PM   #620
ode of bund
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Shanghai-Edmonton, Places where ETBs are molested.
Posts: 228
Likes (Received): 70

Quote:
Originally Posted by FDW View Post
The 28 is one of several lines that have badly needed artics for years now (along with the 1, 5, 22, 24, 29, 44, 47 and 71), and I consider it an ongoing failure that MUNI has failed to address that. (It was particularly infuriating when I found out that MUNI dropped the ball on the Double-deckers)
The grade on Noe Street between 26 Street and Cesar Chavez on 24-Divisadero line is 22.8%, it is the steepest grade travelled by trolley-bus in the world. It would be really interesting to see what repeated verticle bending can do to the articulation joint.
ode of bund 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 05:13 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