HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1241  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2014, 10:29 PM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 19,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthd View Post
I rode metrolink last week from union station and was pleasantly surprised at the quality of the car. very clean and lots of AC outlets! other than livery I wonder what they need to do.

metrolink has a pretty extensive network and relatively good schedules. I don't understand why the ridership isn't higher.
I was wondering about the rehab as well. It's going to take a year, so it's clearly more than just painting the cars.
__________________
2014: the United States Supreme Court Imposes Corporate Sharia
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1242  
Old Posted Sep 7, 2014, 5:12 PM
rawocd rawocd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: San Mateo
Posts: 15
I know when Metrolink decided to ditch the bombardiers they had a wide range on them in varying degrees of age and condition. Depending on which ones LA is selling them, I can see a significant amount of rehab needed.

The other thing (and perhaps more exciting and permanent) is that Caltrain has said that some platforms will not be long enough for the new trains and therefore they will be extended. While some (Menlo Park, Burlingame, possibly DT San Mateo at least to the south) don't have room to be extended, its great to see that they are biting the bullet and doing this. Waiting for electrification just isn't viable with surging ridership.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1243  
Old Posted Sep 10, 2014, 2:36 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 33,923
2nd Transbay Tube needed to help keep BART on track

Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/default/articl...on-5737004.php

Quote:
.....

The system can barely meet existing travel demand, let alone serve future transbay demand. That’s why the Bay Area must invest in a second Transbay Tube and why BART, in partnership with other agencies, is expected to commission in the coming several months a study that looks at increasing transbay transit capacity.

- A fundamental purpose of a second Transbay Tube is to increase the number of trains that can cross the bay. Trains already are crossing the bay just 2.5 minutes behind each other during commute hours, and very limited potential exists to reduce that spacing with just one set of tracks. Only a second Transbay Tube would allow BART to as much as double the number of trains it pushes across the bay.

- This would require constructing a new set of tracks to separate some BART routes from the existing tracks before the Oakland Wye (the junction point between the downtown Oakland and Lake Merritt stations and the West Oakland station, where all routes converge into one main line). It would also require a second BART alignment through San Francisco so that trains using the new Transbay Tube could remain separated from the existing tracks.

- The most frequently referenced alignment option for a second tube is one that would serve Alameda, San Francisco’s South of Market area via Mission or Third streets, and the western districts via Geary Boulevard.

I have reservations about this concept:

- While San Francisco has prioritized development in its SoMa and South Beach neighborhoods, and some interests would like to use a second BART alignment to further spur that development, that’s not what BART is for. Furthermore, regardless of whether economic activity increases to the degree envisioned, for the foreseeable future, transbay travel demand will continue to be primarily concentrated near the Market Street corridor.

- Today, two-thirds of all BART trips begin or end in downtown San Francisco, and there aren’t frequent-enough trains to comfortably accommodate these riders now. Why serve a new area when BART doesn’t have the capacity and flexibility to meet existing demand?

- The reservation I have with a SoMa alignment is that it skews BART service south of the Market Street corridor, San Francisco’s center of economic activity. While a SoMa alignment would serve new neighborhoods, it would do little to alleviate the crushing passenger loads at the existing BART stations along Market Street.

- Proponents of the SoMa alignments point out that other subway systems have multiple service lines to the metropolitan center; not just one. This is true. --- But that’s because in most cities, the multiple subway routes collectively circle around the metropolitan center. Riders can take a variety of routes to get to their destination without transferring because the destinations are concentrated between the various routes.

- BART, on the other hand, has several routes that converge into one line that spurs through the metropolitan center. Any alignment north or south of Market Street would take service away from San Francisco’s center of economic activity and encourage or even require riders to transfer to get to their final destinations.

- An alternative is to duplicate existing downtown San Francisco service with a second bore of tracks. A second level of tracks would be constructed from points near the Oakland Wye and follow BART’s existing service to a point south of the Powell Street Station. Here, this second set of tracks would diverge — perhaps following Fulton Street, with stations at Van Ness Avenue, the University of San Francisco and Golden Gate Park, then following 19th Avenue out to the Sunset District, San Francisco State University and a remodeled, four-platform, Daly City Station.

- Between the West Oakland and Powell Street stations, traffic on the upper- and lower-level platforms would be organized by destination. For example, northern East Bay and Mission District routes could use the upper-level platform, while southern East Bay and western loop routes could use the lower-level platform. Junctions would be constructed so that trains could be rerouted to other tracks as needed.

- This alternative protects the need to serve existing travel demand by providing additional throughput capacity along the Market Street corridor and not due-south of Market Street. Also, by serving regional points of interest along the western extension, it better maintains BART as a regional service rather than a local service alternative, as a Geary Boulevard alignment would.

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1244  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 2:52 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 19,932
The Chronicle reports: "In August alone, BART averaged 418,000 riders per weekday - 27,000 more than a year earlier. Last week, there were three days when ridership topped 430,000." That's not a bad average for a month when schools are still out and so many people take their summer vacations--and those three big days last week would have been unimaginably high even just a few years ago.

Meanwhile, the LA Times reports ridership on the Southland's Metrolink commuter rail system continues to tank.
__________________
2014: the United States Supreme Court Imposes Corporate Sharia
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1245  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 3:55 AM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,497
I like the idea that the new BART line would include a southern leg down to Daly City, but the rest of this proposal is awful. Market Street is the spine of the city, but why should does it need to be the spine forever and ever?

A north-south orientation is probably a good idea, but why not run it under Mission or Howard and get a direct connection to Transbay in the process?

That's setting aside the practical considerations of adding two more tracks below Market - already a three-level subway. The new subway would have to deep, even deeper than the Central Subway. Unless you kicked Muni out of the middle level and allowed BART to run there...
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1246  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 6:23 AM
mthd mthd is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 670
Quote:
Originally Posted by ardecila View Post
I like the idea that the new BART line would include a southern leg down to Daly City, but the rest of this proposal is awful. Market Street is the spine of the city, but why should does it need to be the spine forever and ever?

A north-south orientation is probably a good idea, but why not run it under Mission or Howard and get a direct connection to Transbay in the process?

That's setting aside the practical considerations of adding two more tracks below Market - already a three-level subway. The new subway would have to deep, even deeper than the Central Subway. Unless you kicked Muni out of the middle level and allowed BART to run there...
I feel the other way - adding a Bart line through the sunset and to Daly City adds more rail service to an area which already has it. Geary has none and needs it. it should definitely connect to Transbay and connecting to or close to mission bay might make more sense than running entirely parallel to market street, unless it was as far south as Folsom.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1247  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 6:43 AM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is online now
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lafayette, CA / Denver, CO
Posts: 212
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthd View Post
I feel the other way - adding a Bart line through the sunset and to Daly City adds more rail service to an area which already has it. Geary has none and needs it. it should definitely connect to Transbay and connecting to or close to mission bay might make more sense than running entirely parallel to market street, unless it was as far south as Folsom.
I agree with this. I was also under the impression that the Transbay Tube still isn't at its theoretical capacity and that even more trains could run with a new mass control computer system and Spanish solution platforms in the downtown stations. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it seemed like it was a pretty profound increase from today's frequencies.

Pretty troubling if a BART board member sounds the way he did in this op-ed. Their meeting is tomorrow at 9 following a press conference at 11.

EDIT: This essay is an old one but a good one:
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...ily-with-bart/
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1248  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 5:33 PM
Eightball's Avatar
Eightball Eightball is online now
Limousine Liberal
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: FL/NOLA/DC/Cali
Posts: 773
Quote:
Originally Posted by fflint View Post
Meanwhile, the LA Times reports ridership on the Southland's Metrolink commuter rail system continues to tank.
Brutal, though the article ends on a positive note with:
Quote:
Michael DePallo, Metrolink's chief executive, says the effort is paying off. Preliminary figures for July and August show an uptick in riders of about 1.7% compared with the same period last year.

Railroad officials expect more boardings as the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority expands light rail and subway service to the Westside, which will provide commuters better access to job centers and popular destinations there.

To enhance regional travel, work is underway to build run-through tracks at Los Angeles' Union Station that will allow Metrolink trains to either make shorter stops or pass through the terminal without stopping....
Super excited to see BART continue to have big ridership increases.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1249  
Old Posted Sep 11, 2014, 6:00 PM
alchemist redux alchemist redux is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 163
Instead of a second BART tunnel, would it make sense to extend a heavy rail HSR/Caltrain tunnel across the Bay instead? This would turn Transbay into a through station. At the east portal, it could effectively become a wye, where the current Capitol Corridor - in both directions - could be electrified.

I don't know the logistics or cost differential of this, but some of the things this would allow would be more direct SF-Sacramento HSR service, and an alternative one seat route from the East Bay through Silicon Valley to San Jose.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1250  
Old Posted Sep 12, 2014, 9:04 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 6,561
Quote:
Originally Posted by M II A II R II K View Post
2nd Transbay Tube needed to help keep BART on track

Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/default/articl...on-5737004.php
Isn't it likely many of the people riding BART to the Market Street stations are walking a few blocks over to their jobs in SOMA? If a new subway is built there, those people could switch to that line, thereby freeing up space on the original BART line under Market Street for new riders with destinations along and to the north of Market.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCO View Post
EDIT: This essay is an old one but a good one:
http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2...ily-with-bart/
Yup, I like that idea. I think I've posted it here before as well. Opens up new service to not only areas under served by rail transit in SF, but also under served by frequent rail transit in the East Bay.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1251  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2014, 3:58 PM
ardecila's Avatar
ardecila ardecila is online now
vertical
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: unconventionally bicoastal
Posts: 10,497
Quote:
Originally Posted by mthd View Post
I feel the other way - adding a Bart line through the sunset and to Daly City adds more rail service to an area which already has it. Geary has none and needs it. it should definitely connect to Transbay and connecting to or close to mission bay might make more sense than running entirely parallel to market street, unless it was as far south as Folsom.
Extending a south branch to Daly City provides an express alternative to Muni and also allows BART to link the Richmond and Sunset with Millbrae where there is an easy Caltrain transfer. Great for the many, many reverse commuters.

The east-west leg through SF could be on Geary or Fulton - Geary is probably better since half of the land around Fulton is park space, and Geary is more commercial.
__________________
la forme d'une ville change plus vite, hélas! que le coeur d'un mortel...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1252  
Old Posted Sep 13, 2014, 7:24 PM
OhioGuy OhioGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: DC
Posts: 6,561
BTW, has there ever been any consideration for a BART infill station in Oakland at 27th Street? The gap seems somewhat large between 19th Street and MacArthur stations. It would serve the very northern periphery of downtown Oakland, as well as the residential areas to the north and to the west. Or would it be too difficult/expensive to squeeze in a new station due to the interstate there?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1253  
Old Posted Sep 14, 2014, 2:09 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 19,932
There has been talk of building an infill BART station in Oakland's San Antonio district (between Lake Merritt Station and Fruitvale Station), but nothing north of downtown.
__________________
2014: the United States Supreme Court Imposes Corporate Sharia
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:28 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.