SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA | Public Transport

[filos-ippos]

something knows if tram carrello (italian tram) are update in chicago with air conditioning or similar?

[FDW]

Originally Posted by filos-ippos

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?

[bayviews]

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."

[FDW]

Originally Posted by bayviews

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.

[trainrover]

Originally Posted by bayviews

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?

[bayviews]

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]

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]

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.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by bayviews

snip

This is good news.

[trainrover]

Originally Posted by bayviews

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:

Originally Posted by bayviews

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

Originally Posted by bayviews

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

[Animo]

Hi guys!

We finally have a San Francisco sub-section in the North American forum and I invite everyone to also participate and contribute there to make it a vibrant section for an incredible city such as San Francisco.

[FDW]

Originally Posted by trainrover

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

There will be all day Ferry Service in addition to the bus service.

[bayviews]

Originally Posted by FDW

This is good news.

Indeed it is.

Might have happened a decade ago...

...But of course San Jose wanted a gold-platted, high-cost subway into downtown & VTA had big financial shortfalls...And then the tech boom collapsed

While their plenty of hurdles ahead, this time around BART to SJ sounds like a more do-able proposal!

[manrush]

I remember reading a proposal for BART lines that would primarily serve the San Francisco and Oakland urban areas.

It's a great read, actually.
http://wilshirevermont.com/2010/05/1...as-dense-core/

I have a question: is eBART going to be the only railbus connector line to the BART network?

[FDW]

)

Originally Posted by bayviews

Indeed it is.

Might have happened a decade ago...

...But of course San Jose wanted a gold-platted, high-cost subway into downtown & VTA had big financial shortfalls...And then the tech boom collapsed

While their plenty of hurdles ahead, this time around BART to SJ sounds like a more do-able proposal!

I still think that said subway should get built though.

Originally Posted by manrush

I remember reading a proposal for BART lines that would primarily serve the San Francisco and Oakland urban areas.

It's a great read, actually.
http://wilshirevermont.com/2010/05/1...as-dense-core/

I have a question: is eBART going to be the only railbus connector line to the BART network?

His idea is interesting, though I don't quite agree with all of his ideas. (Infill stations, D.T. Oakland bypass, SOMA/Van Ness BART corridor and Macarthur BART corridor yes, His Second Transbay Tube, His Geary BART corridor, and College Ave BART corridor corridor no.)

[bayviews]

Originally Posted by FDW

)

I still think that said subway should get built though.

Yeah, I'm for the BART extension into San Jose.

However, not sure how much of it would be in subway with this proposal, As opposed to surface, open cut, aerial, etc.

If its all or mostly subway (like the earlier proposal or the SFO extension) that may turn out to be a bit too expensive given the current regional financial shortfalls.

[manrush]

Would BART have been less expensive if it was electrified with overhead lines rather than third rail?

[FDW]

Originally Posted by manrush

Would BART have been less expensive if it was electrified with overhead lines rather than third rail?

No, BART's cost comes in large part due to the special rail gauge that it uses, the 1676 mm "Southern/Indian" gauge. Said gauge was chosen back in the heady days when it still assumed that BART would go over to Marin County. The wide gauge was chosen for it's assumed stability in the high winds of the Golden Gate, but alas BART never went over the Golden Gate, thus it is stuck with what it has right now.

[trainrover]

Originally Posted by FDW

There will be all day Ferry Service in addition to the bus service.

Good. Any clue as to service intervals, frequency?

Originally Posted by bayviews

Yeah, I'm for the BART extension into San Jose.

What? along with (possibly dedicated) express tracks? Just what must Bay-area transit advocates be pushing? because nothing necessitates linking those two urban centres over there with a zuped-up metro. I presume the speediness of BART EMUs would make linking the two centres feasible, although linking the two could most definitely be done far better along conventional and thus cheaper means. BART belongs in town (some helluva'n idea to be sending BART outta town )

[manrush]

I wish that the new trains would have different seating arrangements, depending on the service.

That is, one seating arrangement for intraurban/inner suburban services and another seating arrangement for outer suburban/interubran services. Like CityRail in Sydney.