HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1301  
Old Posted Nov 10, 2014, 11:27 PM
Qubert Qubert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 506
/\ Makes sense. I still don't know why BART wants to reach San Jose via Fremont versus Millbrae, thus hitting Redwood City, San Mateo, Stanford, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Not to mention, from purely a logistical standpoint, the current plan for the extention forces more ridership through the tube which is already very taxed. Anyone have more insight on this?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1302  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2014, 12:06 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert View Post
/\ Makes sense. I still don't know why BART wants to reach San Jose via Fremont versus Millbrae, thus hitting Redwood City, San Mateo, Stanford, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Not to mention, from purely a logistical standpoint, the current plan for the extention forces more ridership through the tube which is already very taxed. Anyone have more insight on this?
Nothing could possibly justify the astronomical cost of assembling a new right of way and building BART down the Peninsula.

Assembling a right of way would be nearly impossible and insanely expensive in the best case scenario. The flat parts of the Peninsula are entirely developed, and constitute some of the most expensive land in the world. Any potentially affected owners absolutely have the resources to put up a decades-long fight to keep it, or to extract a vast sum in consideration. Meanwhile, BART itself is expensive to build relative to off-the-shelf technology, because it is a custom gauge with custom equipment.

Caltrain, on the other hand, runs on a standard gauge with off-the-shelf technology in a right of way first established in 1863. Freight trains access the Port of San Francisco on the same tracks overnight, after Caltrain service ends, and BART cannot share tracks with freight trains in a similar fashion due to gauge and regulatory issues.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1303  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2014, 2:42 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is offline
TL;DR
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: the city o'wind
Posts: 16,356
BART to San Jose is not a commuter route to SF. It's a commuter route to San Jose and the rest of Silicon Valley. Also a convenient way for HSR riders to reach the East Bay, when that rail line eventually opens.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1304  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2014, 3:41 AM
rawocd rawocd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert View Post
/\ Makes sense. I still don't know why BART wants to reach San Jose via Fremont versus Millbrae, thus hitting Redwood City, San Mateo, Stanford, Mountain View and Sunnyvale. Not to mention, from purely a logistical standpoint, the current plan for the extention forces more ridership through the tube which is already very taxed. Anyone have more insight on this?
I think fflint hit this on the nail, but I wanted to add that post electrification(and subsequent service increase), I do see a strong argument for Caltrain to merge into the BART fare structure and brand. Not that even that would happen - it would require Santa Clara and San Mateo counties to join the BART board, and the joint powers board to cede all ownership to BART. While it might be nice in creating a unified regional system for the Bay Area, it would be politically impossible for many of the same reasons that San Mateo and Santa Clara counties opted out of the BART board in the first place. I live with my kitchen window 30' from the caltrain tracks on the peninsula, and with the amount of trouble my neighbors raise about the slightest construction project, I can't even fathom what they would say to building a new rail line.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1305  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2014, 3:50 AM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 415
One of the few things that fflint left out that's also important to note: BART technology would provide slower service than Caltrain down the peninsula unless if it was also built using skip-stop service or express trains. Travel times on Caltrain Baby Bullet trains and pretty much every non-local train are shorter than the same theoretical distance traveled on a local train even on BART technology.

It's also one of the reasons why the BART extension to SFO has had far lower ridership than what was initially projected. BART's original ridership estimates for the Millbrae line accounted for a high number of Caltrain riders transferring to BART at Millbrae, which, in practice after Baby Bullet service was introduced, is actually a very small number.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1306  
Old Posted Nov 11, 2014, 4:23 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCO View Post
One of the few things that fflint left out that's also important to note: BART technology would provide slower service than Caltrain down the peninsula unless if it was also built using skip-stop service or express trains. Travel times on Caltrain Baby Bullet trains and pretty much every non-local train are shorter than the same theoretical distance traveled on a local train even on BART technology.
Correct. BART and Caltrain have the same allowable top speed--79 mph--which the Baby Bullets sometimes approach when skipping several stations in a row. When electrification is complete, Caltrain's non-local service will technically be faster than BART.

Quote:
It's also one of the reasons why the BART extension to SFO has had far lower ridership than what was initially projected. BART's original ridership estimates for the Millbrae line accounted for a high number of Caltrain riders transferring to BART at Millbrae, which, in practice after Baby Bullet service was introduced, is actually a very small number.
BART to SFO opened in 2003, well into the dot-bomb recession that devastated SFO's annual passenger counts (down 15.6% in 2001, down another 9.2% in 2002, and down yet another 6.8% in 2003). The demand for trips to SFO dropped across the board, but it made the new airport line look really bad. It doesn't look so bad anymore.

In 2005, SFO was BART's 32nd busiest station (out of 43), with 3,628 exits. So far this year, SFO is BART's 20th busiest station (out of 44)--one rung above Pleasant Hill and two rungs above Walnut Creek--with 6,724 average daily exits. No other station moved higher in the ranking in that timeframe.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1307  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2014, 2:01 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
^Thanks for the info, fflint. I didn't realize SFO traffic had increased so much. I'm glad to hear that.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1308  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2014, 3:52 AM
Folks3000 Folks3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 97
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
BART to San Jose is not a commuter route to SF. It's a commuter route to San Jose and the rest of Silicon Valley. Also a convenient way for HSR riders to reach the East Bay, when that rail line eventually opens.
It certainly allows those who live in Milpitas and East San Jose away from Caltrain an easy option to commute up into the City now. HSR riders may use the line for southern parts of East Bay, but for those going to places like Oakland or anywhere in the northern East Bay it will likely still be faster to stay on the high speed train until it gets downtown.

Though I get what you mean, there is a size-able amount of people reverse commuting to the South Bay these days given the tech boom. The line will probably be one of those oddballs that sees heavy usage in both directions.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1309  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2014, 2:34 PM
Qubert Qubert is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 506
@ FFlint

Good Points, thanks for the info. Out of curiosity, is the Caltrain ROW grade separated? If it isn't, that should be the next major project, which then could allow for almost metro-like frequencies if demand exists.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1310  
Old Posted Nov 12, 2014, 11:13 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Qubert View Post
@ FFlint

Good Points, thanks for the info. Out of curiosity, is the Caltrain ROW grade separated? If it isn't, that should be the next major project, which then could allow for almost metro-like frequencies if demand exists.
Grade separation has been ongoing for decades, and continues apace.

According to this (admittedly dated) chart, 59% of Caltrain crossings were grade separated in 2010. Since then, I know at least 3 new separated crossings in San Bruno have opened, meaning at least 62% of Caltrain road crossings are now grade-separated:


source

I don't know when the entire ROW will be grade-separated, but I do know HSR requires grade separation.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1311  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2014, 2:19 PM
afiggatt afiggatt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Virginia
Posts: 333
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Grade separation has been ongoing for decades, and continues apace.

According to this (admittedly dated) chart, 59% of Caltrain crossings were grade separated in 2010. Since then, I know at least 3 new separated crossings in San Bruno have opened, meaning at least 62% of Caltrain road crossings are now grade-separated:
....
I don't know when the entire ROW will be grade-separated, but I do know HSR requires grade separation.
No, HSR does not. Only track with operating speeds of greater than 110 mph require grade separation. 91 to 110 mph speeds essentially requires quad gates with sensors to detect when a vehicle is stalled or blocking the grade crossing. The FRA does allow grade crossings for track speeds from 110 to 125 mph, but with strong barrier requirements such that no one is likely to seek to have a grade crossing with 125 mph track speeds. Above 125 mph, there can be no grade crossings.

Ideally, the entire San Jose to SF corridor would be grade separated before the CA HSR trains begin operation over it. But the HSR trains will be allowed to operate over it as long the train speed is kept down to that allowed by the grade crossing design and the tracks. The HSR trains were always going to be limited to a max of 125 mph over the CalTrain corridor, so the grade crossings remaining when they begin the "blended" service won't impact HSR trip times by much.

The Northeast Corridor has 11 remaining grade crossings, all in eastern Connecticut on the curvy Shore Line segment and all equipped with quad gates. There were plans to separate and close most of those remaining grade crossings back in the 1990s electrification and NEC modernization project from New Haven to Boston, but the local intense resistance to the propsoed bridges and property taking was such that Amtrak and CT DOT had to drop the grade separation plans. There were a number of other grade crossings closed between New Haven and Boston in the 1980s and 1990s, so the 11 remaining crossings are the hold-outs. The Acela and Northeast Regionals are limited to a max of 90 mph at those grade crossings with most of them slower than that due to curves.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1312  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2014, 7:15 PM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
^This CalTrain document supports that (I bolded the part relevant to speed and grade separation):

Quote:
The California High Speed Rail Authority’s (CHSRA) statewide high speed rail service and Caltrain commuter services will share existing tracks, operating as a “blended system" between San Francisco and San Jose. The blended system will support blended service that will increase train frequency along the corridor impacting gate down time and traffic operations at at‐grade railroad traffic crossings. The purpose of this study is to begin to understand, with a modernized system:
  • How the blended service plans potentially impact gate times; and
  • How the changes in gate down times potentially impact local traffic at existing at‐grade crossings.

This information should be used to inform future decision‐making on how grade crossings should be improved to support modernization of the corridor and future blended services. Of high interest to all stakeholders is understanding if and where grade separations are needed to support a blended system. Since this corridor is not contemplating speeds over 125 mph, grade separations are not required. The Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board (JPB) with its stakeholders will need to go through a planning process to figure out what makes sense in terms identifying and prioritizing future grade separations.
The two bullet points would appear to be the key criteria for determining future grade separation priorities. I have to think land availability would come into play as well.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1313  
Old Posted Nov 13, 2014, 9:11 PM
neilworms neilworms is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 5
Quote:
Originally Posted by rawocd View Post
I think fflint hit this on the nail, but I wanted to add that post electrification(and subsequent service increase), I do see a strong argument for Caltrain to merge into the BART fare structure and brand. Not that even that would happen - it would require Santa Clara and San Mateo counties to join the BART board, and the joint powers board to cede all ownership to BART. While it might be nice in creating a unified regional system for the Bay Area, it would be politically impossible for many of the same reasons that San Mateo and Santa Clara counties opted out of the BART board in the first place. I live with my kitchen window 30' from the caltrain tracks on the peninsula, and with the amount of trouble my neighbors raise about the slightest construction project, I can't even fathom what they would say to building a new rail line.
If SF is to even put a dent in the housing crisis they need to resolve it would behoove the peninsula to do this. Also, it would require various suburban municipalities to accept that higher densities are needed to meet demand, both of which are very difficult to achieve.

Sadly a lot of this issue really comes down to turfwar politics even though it makes too much sense, just like the tons and tons of different agencies serving the bay area merging into a unified transit system.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1314  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2014, 1:14 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,207
I stand corrected on the requirement for grade separation for HSR.

Caltrain and the various city and county agencies continue to pursue grade separation wherever possible. While total grade separation may never come to be, there will definitely be fewer at-grade crossings when HSR starts running up and down the Peninsula than there are today.
__________________
"You need both a public and a private position." --Hillary Clinton, speaking behind closed doors to the National Multi-Family Housing Council, 2013
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1315  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2014, 1:21 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
^Definitely. That pdf I linked to lays out the candidates by section of the Peninsula. It seems that vetting and prioritizing them is high on the list of things to do.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1316  
Old Posted Nov 14, 2014, 8:10 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
SMART update

SMART update:

Quote:
Marin SMART construction moves forward as service set to begin in two years
Rail work moves ahead non-stop in hopes of launching service in 2016

By Mark Prado
11/13/2014 05:32:10 PM PST#

mprado@marinij.com @MarkPradoIJ on Twitter


A construction crew grades a crossing at Rush Creek Place in Novato for the SMART train. Much of the past six months has been dedicated to putting down rails. (Courtesy of SMART)

Sleek new trains should be running up and down a track in Marin next year as they are tested for commuter rail service.

"A year from now you will see the trains in Marin and that will build some excitement," said Farhad Mansourian, SMART's general manager.

The official launch of the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit system wouldn't come until 2016 after federal authorities give a final OK. That is about two years away. Much of the past six months has been dedicated to putting rails in Marin as part of the $427.9 million SMART project linking downtown San Rafael to the Sonoma airport.

"It's been a lot of work," Mansourian said. "Our contractors have basically been working seven days a week."

As work on 17 miles of rail have been put down in Marin, the train line has started to take shape. Marin SMART stops will include downtown San Rafael, the Marin Civic Center and stations in Novato at Hamilton and Atherton Avenue.

New track has been a priority. Some of the old track, in particular near Novato, was still functional and used by freight service. But that old track could only handle train speeds of up to 25 mph, too slow for commuter service. The newly installed SMART rails will be able to accommodate speeds of up to 82 mph, although the SMART plan calls for a top speed of 79 mph.

Major work has also been completed on the Novato Creek Bridge. That $2.6 million project is critical not only for SMART but communities and areas around the old bridge that were subject to flooding during heavy rains...

In addition to track and bridge work, the Puerto Suello Tunnel in San Rafael will be strengthened. Slopes along the north portal of the tunnel have been trimmed and readied for installation of a mesh retaining wall. A traffic control system in downtown San Rafael will be put in and sewer relocation is already complete in that area.

Another segment of work to occur is the replacement of the Haystack Landing Bridge over the Petaluma River near Novato. SMART purchased a 27-year-old drawbridge from Galveston, Texas, for $4.2 million. It is expected to have a life span of 75 to 100 years. It now sits in a Napa yard waiting to be deployed. At the river site piles have been driven in preparation for the span.

When voters in Sonoma and Marin counties approved a quarter-cent sales tax in 2008 to fund SMART, the project was for train service from Cloverdale to Larkspur. But the downturn in the economy left the effort without full funding and the ability to borrow the needed money to complete all the work as promised. Now the project is being phased, but if $20 million can be found, an extension to Larkspur will also be built.

"We continue to work with our local and federal partners to get that funding," Mansourian said.

In the spring of 2015 trains are expected to arrive in the North Bay and will be tested and inspected before they go out on the rails in Marin. It will mark the first time there will be passenger trains in the county in more than half a century.

"The work in Marin has gone well," Arnold said. "We have tried to get out and let the community know when work was happening. It's getting closer and I think people are excited to see the progress."


Construction crew places ties parallel to Highway 101 in Novato for the SMART train. (Courtesy of SMART)


Workers drive bolts on the new Novato Creek railroad bridge built for the SMART train. (Courtesy of SMART)


The Novato Creek railroad bridge was rebuilt for the SMART train. (Courtesy of SMART)


Construction crew grades crossing at Roblar Drive for the SMART train in Novato. (Courtesy of SMART)

http://www.marinij.com/novato/ci_269...vice-set-begin
__________________
"I firmly believe, from what I have seen, that this is the chosen spot of all this Earth as far as Nature is concerned." - Luther Burbank on Sonoma County.

Pictures of Santa Rosa, So. Co.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1317  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2014, 1:00 AM
peanut gallery's Avatar
peanut gallery peanut gallery is offline
Only Mostly Dead
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Marin
Posts: 5,234
^Can't wait to see actual trains on the rails. There has been lots of grading work in the area around the Civic Center and into downtown San Rafael.

northbay - since they are working north-to-south, I'm wondering if you have seen progress on the bike path up there. There's nothing to see down here on that front yet.
__________________
My other car is a Dakota Creek Advanced Multihull Design.

Tiburon Miami 1 Miami 2 Ye Olde San Francisco SF: Canyons, waterfront... SF: South FiDi SF: South Park
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1318  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2014, 2:41 AM
rawocd rawocd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 23
Looks like SMART is coming along.

Though, I'm seeing a lot of what looks to be single tracking here. How much of the line will be double tracked vs single tracked, and are they leaving room to upgrade if needed for more frequency later?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1319  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2014, 1:25 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 7,649
If they're able to secure that final $20 million needed for the extension to Larkspur, how will the actual construction take? Depending on when the money is secured, is it still possible to get the extension constructed in time for the line's opening in 2 years?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1320  
Old Posted Nov 15, 2014, 9:20 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,523
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by rawocd View Post
Looks like SMART is coming along.

Though, I'm seeing a lot of what looks to be single tracking here. How much of the line will be double tracked vs single tracked, and are they leaving room to upgrade if needed for more frequency later?
They are leaving room to add more double track later. As I understand what's proposed, there will be four passing sidings along phase 1 construction;
(1) Hamilton
(2) Petaluma
(3) Cotati
(4) Santa Rosa
Note: the San Rafael Station will have two tracks, and when the extension is built to Larkspur that will complete the fifth passing siding.
Page 50 of the following pdf shows the passing sidings locations on a map.
http://your.kingcounty.gov/mkcc/agen...additional.pdf

Another concept to realize is that the number of passing sidings required depends upon the number of trains you plan to operate at any instant in time. You will need at least one less passing siding as number of trains operating. Presently, they're planning on having 6 trains operating to maintain 30 minute headways - therefore the need for 5 passing sidings to reach Larkspur - even though they haven't quite found all the funds needed to reach Larkspur. As an example, two trains require one passing siding, three trains require two passing sidings, four trains require three passing sidings, etc. Siding placement and maintaining schedules is important to keep the trains meeting properly so the minimum number of sidings work.

Last edited by electricron; Nov 15, 2014 at 11:01 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:23 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.