SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[easy as pie]

definitely with you on taking the freeway back to 18th, but i'd say go further, to 20th or 22nd, to reconnect lower potrero to the dogpatch.

[fflint]

BART considers rebuilding 2 SF stations

Phillip Matier and Andrew Ross
Monday, February 11, 2013
sfgate.com


An expansion of BART's Embarcadero Station in S.F. would let riders board and exit on both sides of the train. Photo courtesy of BART

Two of BART's busiest San Francisco stations could be on track for a $900 million expansion, complete with new tunnels, elevators and extra platforms to boost rider capacity.

The rebuilding of the Embarcadero and Montgomery Street stations would require tearing out the existing walls, installing new platforms, boring additional tunnels for staircases, and putting in extra elevators.

For added safety, the new platforms would have automated sliding glass doors that would open when the trains arrive.

The whole job could take more than five years, but the stations would remain open during that time.

The plan, floated by staffers at a BART directors retreat last month, is intended to accommodate the transit system's ballooning ridership.
....
Of those, more than a third of the system's total riders - about 150,000 a day - get on and off at the Embarcadero and Montgomery stations.
....
In five years, BART predicts, weekday ridership could hit 500,000 - making the two stations' improvements "mission critical," according to a staff analysis.

BART General Manager Grace Crunican has already proposed buying as many as 1,000 additional cars and a new control system to increase the number of trains that can run through the Transbay Tube to 30 an hour in each direction, from the current 24.

But to speed up the trains, BART needs to relieve the bottleneck in the Financial District stations. Any big glitch in the system, and the platform gets so crowded now at rush hour that service can actually slow down, as operators wait for the crush of people to sort themselves out.

Hence, the idea of new "saddleback" platforms - one in each direction at Embarcadero and one on the eastbound side at Montgomery - to allow riders to board and exit simultaneously from both sides of a train.
....

[ardecila]

I said before that this seems like a waste of money, but now I'm not so sure. I don't think Muni improvements will relieve BART traffic.

BART's such a weird system, it's more like an RER or S-Bahn than a Metro system... and in such regional rail systems, station capacity is critical because each one is a mini-Grand Central. Perhaps this is a sound investment after all.

It does punt on the second Transbay Tube issue, though. It might be wiser to build another one of those and point it at the end of the Transbay train box. Electrified Caltrain units could run through to Richmond or something. Eventually there would be some kind of service from SF to Sacramento, like a high-speed Capitol Corridor, to complete the HSR picture.

[pizzaguy]

Why not Powell too?

[fflint]

BART operates as something of a grade-separated, electrified commuter railway on the single-line routes out in the suburbs, where trains come around every 15 minutes, and as a metro in the urban core, where lines converge in subways and trains roll by every 3 or 4 minutes.

Embarcadero and Montgomery stations are the two busiest in the system, with a combined 150,000 riders each workday. They operate as bottlenecks. Rush hour passengers currently que up for the next train, filling the platforms and clogging the way for exiting riders. That in turn leads to longer boarding times. If passengers can board from both sides of the trains, in theory we can get people in twice as fast and trains moving in half the current dwell time. That, in turn, would allow for higher frequencies.

Powell isn't as busy as Embarcadero or Montgomery.

[biggerhigherfaster]

SF should (1) either build out more underground Muni tunnels (ala Central Subway) and seriously upgrade Muni cars and tracks so they can move at e.g., 40 mph instead of 10-20 mph or (2) expand BART to become an inner city underground subway system for SF. Either way more access is needed for the growing SOMA->Mission Bay->Dogpatch->Bayview->Candlestick area and for the more established North Beach -> Russian Hill -> Pac Heights -> Marina area, maybe stretching into Richmond and Seacliff

[fflint]

Muni: All-Door Boarding Continues to Increase Bus Speeds, Fare Payment

by Aaron Bialick
sf.streetsblog.org



Seven months since Muni changed its policy to allow all-door boarding on all of its vehicles, the agency is reporting continued improvements in service and a drop in fare evasion.

On average, all-door boarding has saved buses up to four seconds of “dwell time” per stop, according to the SFMTA [PDF]. While that amount may sound small, the time savings add up on routes with dozens of stops. The improvement has been most pronounced on local lines, the report says.

Fare evasion, meanwhile, is down by 24 percent, according to the agency. When comparing the seven months of all-door boarding with the same months the previous year, the SFMTA says the fare evasion rate is down from 4.6 percent to 3.5 percent. The SFMTA also added 11 fare inspectors to increase enforcement with the launch of all-door boarding, bringing the total up to 53, since the new policy relies on random fare inspections rather than enforcement by Muni bus operators.

Mario Tanev, who led the all-door boarding advocacy campaign for the SF Transit Riders Union, applauded the SFMTA for implementing the policy change. “SFTRU has been a staunch advocate for all-door boarding and this report shows that when Muni puts its trust in riders, riders will return the favor,” he said. “Dwell times have gone down, and so has fare evasion.”

....

[orulz]

I assume that they plan to implement the Spanish Solution, with the new outside platforms (with platform doors) for boarding passengers, with the existing center platforms for disembarking.

[fflint]

^I don't know, orulz. Nobody has discussed passenger management.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by fflint

^I don't know, orulz. Nobody has discussed passenger management.

Once the new platforms are built, they will start talking about passenger management. They'll have to force passengers to change, or no one would use the new platforms.....

[San Frangelino]

From SF Streets Blog

Subway Station at SFSU? SFCTA Looks to Realign Muni’s M-Line on 19th Ave
by Aaron Bialick
Friday, February 15, 2013

With an influx of residents and students anticipated in the coming years, the city is looking at ways to improve rail service along the southern stretch of 19th Avenue by the Stonestown Mall and SF State University. A new study underway will consider putting Muni’s M-Ocean View on a trackway running above or below the highway to separate it from traffic crossings and route the line into Parkmerced.

Continue Reading..

Download the PDF to see more.

[fflint]

Larkspur Ferry at 'crossroads:' Ridership outgrowing parking

By Mark Prado
Marin Independent Journal
02/21/2013

Larkspur's Golden Gate Ferry service has become a victim of its own success: parking troubles and sold-out boats are daily events during the work week.

Now transportation officials are hoping to develop strategies to address issues that vex the successful system.

That could mean tweaking ferry schedules to add another boat to the busy morning commute, charging for parking and possibly building a parking structure at or near the ferry terminal. The idea is to grow and accommodate the ridership for the system, operated by the Golden Gate Bridge District.

....
In the past decade-plus, Larkspur ferry ridership has grown and today it carries about 5,300 passengers a day. Until September 1998, the lumbering but reliable Spaulding ferries made the trek across the bay in a sluggish 45 minutes. But with the arrival of spry, high-speed catamarans — which make the same trip to San Francisco in 30 minutes — more people have been attracted to the system.

Parking, however, is limited. There are only 1,800 spaces provided to ferry riders and all those are typically filled by 8:30 a.m. during weekdays.

....
Another issue facing the Larkspur ferry is sold-out commuter boats at 7:50 a.m. and 8:20 a.m. The district has a bus available to take anyone who can't get on the ferries into San Francisco during the time period. Between 30 and 80 people end up on that bus daily.

....

[northbay]

The last time I used the ferry it was sold out. Lucky I'm hella paranoid and arrived really early to buy tickets. They should a) build a parking structure b) charge for parking c) try and get SMART extended to the terminal as soon as possible.

Oh yea, and of course the obvious, run more ferries.

[northbay]

SMART construction photos:














https://www.facebook.com/sonomamarintrain/photos_stream

[fflint]

Originally Posted by northbay

The last time I used the ferry it was sold out. Lucky I'm hella paranoid and arrived really early to buy tickets.

The 5:35pm ferry out of Sausalito was sold out yesterday. On a chilly Sunday! The ferries are doing gangbuster business. Is Larkspur where SMART will end?

[northbay]

Originally Posted by fflint

The 5:35pm ferry out of Sausalito was sold out yesterday. On a chilly Sunday! The ferries are doing gangbuster business. Is Larkspur where SMART will end?

That's great to hear that the ferries are so popular. Now they just need to better manage the high ridership.

As for SMART,

The SMART line was originally planned to terminate at Larkspur before the project was broken into phases. The distance from the Larkspur SMART station is to be about the distance from BART to the SF Ferry Building. Phase One will terminate in downtown San Rafael, one stop away from Larkspur. Supposedly, they will be running shuttles to the Ferry until the last southern leg is completed. There is a tunnel which complicates construction and escalates costs in that section, and SMART has made it a priority to go North first instead, since Windsor is projected to be the busiest station. They've already gotten money from the MTC to extend to the Sonoma County Airport, where there will be their maintannence shed and an additional station (they still need more money of course). Doesn't seem like they will be extending the line to Larkspur anytime soon, unless some big pot of money shows up.

Sorry, probably way more than you wanted to know.

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by northbay

The distance from the Larkspur SMART station is to be about the distance from BART to the SF Ferry Building.

If you're really measuring, it's about 1/3 of a mile, 600' longer than the Embarcadero transfer and it runs through a suburban office park, not a beautiful urban plaza. You can either cross busy 6-lane Francis Drake Blvd at grade, or cut through 3 blocks of parking lots to get to a pedestrian bridge. It's not really the seamless transfer that you're implying.

[fflint]

Originally Posted by ardecila

If you're really measuring, it's about 1/3 of a mile, 600' longer than the Embarcadero transfer and it runs through a suburban office park, not a beautiful urban plaza. You can either cross busy 6-lane Francis Drake Blvd at grade, or cut through 3 blocks of parking lots to get to a pedestrian bridge. It's not really the seamless transfer that you're implying.

People will still make that transfer to the ferry, though, because there will not be any other reason to ride the train to Larkspur.

[northbay]

The connection isn't perfect, but the development in the area and the way the rail line is situated makes it difficult.

Even on the SF side you have to go through the Ferry building, cross (at-grade) busy Embarcadero, and cut through Justin Herman plaza.

Again, there is still supposed to be a shuttle connection for those that can't walk.

[fflint]

A five or ten minute walk between a commuter railroad and the ferry is nothing compared to sitting in traffic on 101 and the Golden Gate Bridge and then fighting city traffic to then pay out the nose for parking. Plus, commuters on the boat home can really enjoy those on-board cocktails!