HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > General Development


View Poll Results: Which transbay tower design scheme do you like best?
#1 Richard Rogers 40 8.05%
#2 Cesar Pelli 99 19.92%
#3 SOM 358 72.03%
Voters: 497. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #3241  
Old Posted Aug 22, 2018, 11:38 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBuildings888 View Post
I think the “Grand Central Station” of the Bay Area should be the Diridon Station in San Jose instead of this transit center. It has all types of rail service and will have BART and High Speed Rail. The architecture and park looks amazing for this building, but the more I think about it, this is not the Grand Central Station of the West.
It probably won't have high speed rail before the TransBay because high speed rail that doesn't go to San Francisco is rather pointless. Meanwhile, the TransBay already has BART a block away and when/if the lower level enters active use I assume they will dig the tunnel between that level and Montgomery BART that was shown in the plans.

For the moment this may be a glorified bus station but Diridon is just a train commuter rail stop.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3242  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2018, 7:51 PM
TowerDude TowerDude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 296
I hope eventually the "Amtrak Busses" will be replaced with actual Amtrak trains ...

Caltrain shouldn't be the only one allowed to use this Transit center's rails ...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3243  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2018, 9:12 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
I hope eventually the "Amtrak Busses" will be replaced with actual Amtrak trains ...

Caltrain shouldn't be the only one allowed to use this Transit center's rails ...
AMTRAK has no desire to come up the Peninsula. It would be a HUGE diversion for the trains that now use Emeryville. But of course eventually CalHSR is supposed to use the same tracks as CalTrain. Not sure if running those trains will contracted to AMTRAK or not.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3244  
Old Posted Aug 23, 2018, 11:52 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is online now
Show me the blueprints
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 10,302
For a number of reasons Amtrak will likely never enter SF. The most obvious reason that would prevent it even if they wanted to would be the required motive power change from diesel to electric to enter the Peninsula ROW and the tunnel to the terminal.
__________________
Everything new is old again

There is no goodness in him, and his power to convince people otherwise is beyond understanding
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3245  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 12:34 AM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Why would Amtrak need to come up the peninsula? It could come across the bay from Emeryville by building another tube. BART is already planning to build another one, perhaps Amtrak could contribute funding for a mixed use tunnel as well.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3246  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 7:13 AM
SFBuildings888 SFBuildings888 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 93
I starting to think maybe they shouldn’t have opened this transit center at all if they were going to only have bus service. Only open it if they had BUS AND RAIL service solved.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3247  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 4:52 PM
1977's Avatar
1977 1977 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bay Area
Posts: 996
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFBuildings888 View Post
I starting to think maybe they shouldn’t have opened this transit center at all if they were going to only have bus service. Only open it if they had BUS AND RAIL service solved.
I beg to differ. I went there for my first time yesterday and was very impressed. The park alone provides a huge boost to downtown and offers an amazing oasis in the middle of the bustle. It was super crowded around lunchtime and all the conversations I overheard, from who I suspect were both locals and tourists, were of nothing but praise.

Go up there, order a coffee from the cart, take a walk, sit for a while, look at and read about the foliage, etc. - I think that might change your tune. If you have done that, and still think this way, then so be it, to each their own.

That being said, I do agree it's still a work in progress - rail, retail, rooftop restaurant, etc - but imo, this was/is a worthwhile endeavor that I truly believe will be a longstanding attraction and new landmark for SF.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3248  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 6:28 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
Why would Amtrak need to come up the peninsula? It could come across the bay from Emeryville by building another tube. BART is already planning to build another one, perhaps Amtrak could contribute funding for a mixed use tunnel as well.
Oh, yeah . . . just build another tube for AMTRAK. Simple enough.


We'll be replacing this terminal with a spaceport before that happens. AMTRAK has trouble getting the funding to maintain its decades old cars and keep its long-distance service in operation. Can we get serious now?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3249  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 6:42 PM
cmak cmak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: SF
Posts: 41
I really like the new Transit center, and even if it's only supporting buses for now that's still a good thing. And I certainly want to see trains into the Transit Center by 2028 (or whatever the optimistic timeframe is now), and don't want to derail the overall vision...

BUT— since that's at least 10 years out (and likely longer), I'm wondering if it might be feasible to at least build the Bart/Muni connector before the overall Phase 2, and at least have a kinda-connected infrastructure until then. Because I also agree it would make the Transit Center far more integral (esp in people's minds about what a 'transit center' is), and it seems like the underground connection was lumped in with the Phase 2 stuff back when there was better faith this would happen in a reasonable timeframe.

I found the TJPA study from 2007 evaluating the various underground connectors. The Beale street connection they ultimately chose was expected to cost $105M— so even assuming overrun / increases over the past 10 years, $150-$200M doesn't seem like "that much" to fund and get build before 2028.


Yes it was going to connect to the train level, so there might be some new work to build connections to the street level/ parks that aren't accounted. And yes, maybe some of this will work will be redundant / need to be modified when the trains come in. BUT, I would love to see a push to re-evaluate the connector plan in light of 2018 realities and see if the costing/benefits of the connector might make more sense to support apart from the DTX phase.














I believe it's important to have 'connected' transit, and this bridge will have a huge impact on people view the import of the transit center.

That said, the connection could potentially even be done better above-ground but imo Muni / transit here really haven't shown an ability w/r/t signage / paths that make it understandable to know where to go (e.g., the new Muni 'signage' are so ridiculously blah / understated / not obvious, I still don't know why we can't have bright colored signs corresponding to lines, etc.).



source: http://tjpa.org/uploads/board-meetin...es-revised.pdf
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3250  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 7:10 PM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Oh, yeah . . . just build another tube for AMTRAK. Simple enough.


We'll be replacing this terminal with a spaceport before that happens. AMTRAK has trouble getting the funding to maintain its decades old cars and keep its long-distance service in operation. Can we get serious now?
I had been thinking exactly the same thing—well stated Pedestrian! Some of these simplistic posters suspiciously remind me of others from the past.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3251  
Old Posted Aug 24, 2018, 7:49 PM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Oh, yeah . . . just build another tube for AMTRAK. Simple enough.


We'll be replacing this terminal with a spaceport before that happens. AMTRAK has trouble getting the funding to maintain its decades old cars and keep its long-distance service in operation. Can we get serious now?
And Transbay can't even get funding for HSR or Caltrain, is way over budget and in the hole, yet here you all are, talking about it as if it's a serious proposal.

I didn't say to build another separate tube for Amtrak. Hence the word "mixed use." Talk about simplistic posters. Perhaps the glory days of the 60's were too good to you
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3252  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 1:48 AM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
And Transbay can't even get funding for HSR or Caltrain, is way over budget and in the hole, yet here you all are, talking about it as if it's a serious proposal.

I didn't say to build another separate tube for Amtrak. Hence the word "mixed use." Talk about simplistic posters. Perhaps the glory days of the 60's were too good to you
BART uses a different track gauge and power source than AMTRAK so that is impossible or very difficult.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #3253  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 2:33 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
And Transbay can't even get funding for HSR or Caltrain, is way over budget and in the hole, yet here you all are, talking about it as if it's a serious proposal.

I didn't say to build another separate tube for Amtrak. Hence the word "mixed use." Talk about simplistic posters. Perhaps the glory days of the 60's were too good to you
Niether HSR nor, I believe, CalTrain are AMTRAK routes. HSR is a state project with, they hope but haven't yet arranged, a private partnership and CalTrain, like the Capital Corredor and ACE (and other lines in the Southland) are, I believe, state funded but contracted to AMTRAK to operate. Generally speaking AMTRAK doesn't fund commuter services around the country but they do operate many of them under these contracts, especially when sharing the tracks with actual AMTRAK trains.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3254  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 2:45 AM
TowerDude TowerDude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 296
A joint BART-AMTRAK tunnel would be the ideal system ...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3255  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 2:51 AM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
Quote:
Originally Posted by TowerDude View Post
A joint BART-AMTRAK tunnel would be the ideal system ...
Just look at the chaotic catastrophe that is the new tunnel required under the Hudson, which is needed much worse than anything in the Bay Area, before you suggest there's any funding for any new tunnel, especially one depending on anything on the national level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3256  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 7:32 AM
viewguysf's Avatar
viewguysf viewguysf is offline
Surrounded by Nature
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Walnut Creek, California
Posts: 2,028
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
I didn't say to build another separate tube for Amtrak. Hence the word "mixed use." Talk about simplistic posters. Perhaps the glory days of the 60's were too good to you
Sorry, that comment wasn’t directed at you...and I’m not old enough to have experienced those 60s glory days.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3257  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 3:14 PM
mt_climber13 mt_climber13 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,287
Quote:
Originally Posted by northbay View Post
BART uses a different track gauge and power source than AMTRAK so that is impossible or very difficult.
Again... mixed use tunnel does not equal using the same tracks. Separate tracks obviously by widening the new tube. Perhaps Amtrak could at somepoint transform itself into a nationwide HSR system and use their existing tracks and ROW.Of course that would take a visionary presidential administration. Hopefully Future Gov. Gavin Newsom can expedite Cal. HSR
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3258  
Old Posted Aug 25, 2018, 6:18 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by mt_climber13 View Post
Again... mixed use tunnel does not equal using the same tracks. Separate tracks obviously by widening the new tube. Perhaps Amtrak could at somepoint transform itself into a nationwide HSR system and use their existing tracks and ROW.Of course that would take a visionary presidential administration. Hopefully Future Gov. Gavin Newsom can expedite Cal. HSR
For that to be practical would require 2 tracks for BART and at least one, probably 2 for AMTRAK. That’s a very wide tunnel that would be prohibitively expensive.

Maybe in Fantasy Land that IS the best system. But better to focus on what CAN actually be done, which is I think the point some on the forum have been trying to make. Of course if we had unlimited resources we could do this, that and the other. But the sad reality is there are very few dollars, especially on the national level (AMTRAK).

There are so many other needs.
__________________
"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
     
     
  #3259  
Old Posted Aug 26, 2018, 6:28 PM
Pedestrian's Avatar
Pedestrian Pedestrian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 24,177
There is about zero evidence AMTRAK is interested in expanding its service in any way, mainly because it has zero dollars to do it. In those few places it actually is ceating new service or extending existing lines, mainly in the midwest around Chicago, the changes are being funded by the state or a combination of states. On the national level, AMTRAK has or is considering ending the Southwest Chief (Chicago to LA) and the Cardinal segment between NY and Washington. And, of course, it hasn't run the Sunset Limited segment between New Orleans and Orlando since Hurrricane Katrina gave them an excuse to drop it, in spite of substantial political pressure from Gulf Coast Congressmen.

The typical AMTRAK train picking up or discharging passengers in Emeryville now probably has fewer than 100 boarding or departing passengers headed to downtown San Francisco (one, maybe 2 busloads). The concept of spending billions--and that's what it would be--to negate a bus ride over the Bay Bridge is just not on the table.

Anybody who is terribly averse to bus rides today could, if they wished, take BART to Richmond and cross platform there to AMTRAK (although AMTRAK doesn't always stop at Richmond's platform to allow that any more though it could).
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3260  
Old Posted Aug 27, 2018, 3:04 AM
TowerDude TowerDude is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
Anybody who is terribly averse to bus rides today could, if they wished, take BART to Richmond and cross platform there to AMTRAK (although AMTRAK doesn't always stop at Richmond's platform to allow that any more though it could).
I want to be able to get on a Train in Downtown San Francisco and not have to get off it till I reach New York's Penn Station ...
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 > Global Projects & Construction > General Development
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 9:43 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

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