SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA | Public Transport

[IrishMan2010]

I like the trams!

[trainrover]

me too

Originally Posted by Falubaz

The speediness that Frisco's trolley busses used to whip on by under the complex overhead wire junctions at trolley route intersections was a spectacle, considering that the models where I'd been living had to reduce said passages to a crummy 5MPH!!!

[FDW]

Originally Posted by trainrover

me too



The speediness that Frisco's trolley busses used to whip on by under the complex overhead wire junctions at trolley route intersections was a spectacle, considering that the models where I'd been living had to reduce said passages to a crummy 5MPH!!!

Yeah, the Trolleybus system here is awesome, it covers most of the city (with the Exception of the Southwestern part), and the system runs really frequently, with 4 lines running all night. BTW, Where do you live?

[jchernin]

thanks for starting this thread. totally under my radar. here's some bad news in my part of the bay:

SMART votes to start train, delay Cloverdale, Larkspur legs


KENT PORTER/The Press Democrat
Matt Stevens of the SMART public outreach holds a times-up placard for David Schonbrunn of San Rafael during a public question period at a SMART special meeting in Santa Rosa on Saturday.

By BOB NORBERG
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 3:31 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 5:48 p.m.

Sonoma-Marin Area Rail District directors, facing a $350 million funding gap, chose Saturday to build an initial line from Railroad Square in Santa Rosa to the Marin Civic Center, with extensions delayed to Cloverdale and Larkspur.

“What we did today was put the SMART train on the tracks for 2014,” said Debora Fudge, SMART chairwoman. “The train is now a reality.”

But it also is significantly less than the 70-mile line promised voters in 2008, when a quarter-cent sales tax hike to help pay for the commute train and accompanying bicycle path was approved by a large margin. Completion of the entire line could take another two to four years.

Directors at the special board meeting said it was important to get a train going, despite the economic downturn that has sliced into tax revenue and bond funding.

“No one saw the tsunami that headed our way and I am saddened we can't do the whole magilla, but we have to get something going,” said Charles McGlashan, a SMART director from Marin County.

The decision was made after a six-hour workshop Saturday that compared the latest cost estimates to build the line to the projections of sales tax revenues and other funds to pay for it. It passed with 10 votes in favor, one no vote and one abstention.

Director Madeline Kellner, a Novato city councilwoman, voted against the proposal, saying the line would be too short to capture significant ridership.

“It doesn't make sense, it is only half a train,” Kellner said.

Director Judy Arnold of San Rafael abstained, saying she wanted the final vote postponed until the board's meeting Wednesday in San Rafael, where Marin residents could get a chance to voice their opinions.

A contingent of Cloverdale residents at the meeting wore “No Taxation without Transportation” placards.

“We are fearful that if you do an initial phase and leave Cloverdale out, we will stay out,” said Elissa Morrash of the Cloverdale of Chamber of Commerce. “People will hear that and not like it....We deserve better.”

Supporters, however, said there was no other choice.

“We have an ambitious plan and we have no choice but to split it up,” said Jim Eddie, a SMART director from Mendocino County. “You can bite off more than you can chew, but you can chew more if you take smaller bites.”

The cost to build a line from Cloverdale to Larkspur is now estimated to cost $695 million, an increase of 18 percent because of unexpected costs, such as having to replace the bridges over the Petaluma River and over the Russian River in Healdsburg.

Because of the decline in sales tax revenues and a weak bond market, however, SMART only has $350 million for construction, which is 25 less than expected.

John Lackey, SMART's capital projects director, said the agency has identified enough savings to bridge the gap between what the first phase of construction would cost, $395 million, and the $350 million that is available.

Under the plan, SMART staff will seek bids on construction of the train stations, a Santa Rosa maintenance facility and all the operational systems needed to run trains from the Civic Center and Railroad Square as the end stations.

It would serve an estimated 57 percent of the ridership along 40 miles.

...

FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article...1349?p=1&tc=pg

[trainrover]

Originally Posted by FDW

BTW, Where do you live?

Montréal.

[Falubaz]

BART - the est of my pics:

[Axelferis]

Originally Posted by Falubaz

Some trams and troleybuses

Is it moscow?

[Falubaz]

hahahha, why should it be Moscow? It's all in San Francisco, in States.

[Axelferis]

never thought a american city would look so like an old soviet republic

[FDW]

Originally Posted by Axelferis

never thought a american city would look so like an old soviet republic

What's so bad about that? I mean the Electric Buses are a Skoda model but those Streetcars were made in the US, in fact that streetcar design actually went on to influence streetcar design big time on both sides of the Iron Curtain. And the big reason why SF kept those streetcars and trolleybuses was that the electricity needed to power them is essentially free.

[manrush]

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.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by manrush

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.

[manrush]

I thought Alstom had a factory in the US.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by manrush

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.

[trainrover]

Originally Posted by Falubaz

Might there be a story to insertion of gangway doors into this fleet? If so, why were the cab ends remodelled so clumsily?

Originally Posted by Axelferis

Is it moscow?

Yes, but only in calibre.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by trainrover

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.

[bayviews]

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]

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]

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.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by bayviews

snip

Good news indeed. All Caltrain needs to do is survive long enough to reap the benefits of electrification and it should be fine.