SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by Gordo

Ohioguy, there is at least some level of coordination between BART and Muni, and BART and the ferries (you can get a discount going from one to the other), but that's it. No shared farecards or anything fancy like that. (you know, that fancy stuff that has existed elsewhere since the 70's and 80's - but hey, what the hell does the Bay Area know about technology? Oh...wait.)

You can also get a free transfer to Muni from Golden Gate ferries. I'm not sure about the other ferries.

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by Frisco_Zig

Translink increases convenience but not the transfer penalties with our transit systems

Yep, it seems we have to take one excruciatingly slow step at a time. Perhaps someday we'll be able to buy system-wide monthly passes that are reflected on our TransLink cards. You know, like in 30 years or so.

[northbay]

i feel very strongly about this train, so im posting this article:

Is the time right for rail?

MEASURE Q: In less than two weeks, voters will decide if a 70-mile SMART line from Cloverdale to Larkspur is a waste of money or an investment in our future

By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 4:04 a.m.
Last Modified: Thursday, October 23, 2008 at 11:12 a.m.

It's either SMART or a waste of money.

Proponents and critics differ -- dramatically so -- on whether the $450 million Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit project, a 70-mile commuter rail line from Cloverdale to Larkspur, is a sound investment.

On Nov. 4, voters in Sonoma and Marin counties will give SMART a red or green light via Measure Q, a quarter-cent sales tax that would help pay for the train, reaping an estimated $890 million over 20 years.

The tax needs two-thirds approval, which it narrowly missed in 2006. Measure Q is a revival of the 2006 campaign, with the same protagonists and essentially the same project at stake -- but with one big difference. The economy was flourishing two years ago, while today the North Coast is mired in an economic slump.

High voter turnout in the two counties, where typically train-friendly Democrats vastly outnumber registered Republican voters, may help pass the measure this year, political analysts said.

The wild card is whether the downturn will depress the vote for a new tax.

Measure Q "may be the one exception," said Brian Sobel, a Petaluma political consultant, because SMART is well-known to voters and may be seen as "an investment in the future."

Polling by the North Bay Transportation Alliance, the Yes on Q campaign organization, indicates the weak economy is not souring the tax measure's prospects.

A poll about 10 days ago found 73 percent of Sonoma and Marin voters in favor of SMART, hardly changed from the 74 percent support in a poll conducted in late May to early June, said Cynthia Murray of Petaluma, co-chair of the alliance.

"We were relieved to see that," Murray said Wednesday.

In 2006, 70 percent of Sonoma voters said "yes" to the train tax. But a 57.5 percent assent in Marin pulled the two-county total down to about 65 percent, just 1.4 percent short of the mark.

The commuter trains will "give people an economic way to get around," Murray said. "We have to figure out a way not to drive on the freeway," she said, noting that Highway 101 is the Bay Area's fourth most congested corridor.

Mike Arnold of Novato, a leader of the North Bay Citizens for Effective Transportation, the No on Q group, said that SMART "just doesn't make a lot of sense."

"There are a lot better ways to spend $800 million," Arnold said, contending that he is not anti-train, but favors an expanded bus system instead. "That's been our point all along," he said.

At the heart of the dispute are SMART's forecasts that the diesel-powered trains will take 5,300 car trips off the freeway and eliminate 124,000 pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per day.

"She tries to make the numbers look good; we try to make the numbers look bad," Arnold said at forum Wednesday sponsored by the Leadership Santa Rosa Alumni Association and attended by about 60 people.

SMART won't make a dent on traffic congestion or the fight against global warming, Arnold said. The train won't pay off simply because there is no critical mass of housing or job centers along the route.

"Doing nothing is not an option," Murray said, calling SMART the "spine" of an alternative transportation network for the North Bay.

The 5,300 daily trip estimate, SMART officials say, was calculated when gasoline cost $1.60 a gallon, half the current price.

Nearly everyone attending Wednesday's forum indicated, by a show of hands, they had already voted or made up their minds about SMART.

Environmentalists are divided over the train.

The Marin Conservation League is opposed, as it was in 2006. "The environmental benefits are not commensurate with the cost of the system," said Roger Roberts, the league's second vice president.

Ernie Carpenter of Sebastopol, a former Sonoma County supervisor, said the train "doesn't take enough cars off the road." The project is also "growth-inducing," he said, triggering development of "transit villages" along the 70-mile line.

A contrary view was offered by Denny Rosatti, executive director of Sonoma County Conservation Action. He said that SMART will focus development within cities, where it belongs. The county has adequate policies, including urban growth boundaries and community separators, to prevent rampant development, he said.

Rosatti serves as a co-chair of the Yes on Q's Sonoma County Committee, along with Lisa Wittke Schaffner, mayor of Healdsburg and executive director of the pro-business Sonoma County Alliance.

"Strange bedfellows," Murray said, describing the business and green collaboration on Measure Q.

The Sierra Club's Sonoma and Marin groups took no position on SMART.

The Santa Rosa City Council stood behind SMART in July, dropping plans to put its own quarter-cent sales tax on the Nov. 4 ballot, even though it would offset about $7 million in budget cuts.

"Santa Rosa is making a gesture," Mayor John Sawyer said at the time, noting that the SMART train "could be at risk" with two tax measures on the ballot.

Plans for a 5.5-acre development around the SMART station at Railroad Square are still in the works.

SMART owns the entire railroad right-of-way, an asset that Murray said is worth $1 billion and is "going to waste right now."

If the tax measure fails next month, she said, "we may never have the chance for green transportation solutions."

If it fails, Arnold said, "we've had enough debate over rail." He would start work, he said, on a sales tax measure to put more buses on the road.

You can reach Staff Writer Guy Kovner at 521-5457 or [email protected].

for source: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/200...350?Title=Is_it_a_SMART_time_for_a_rail_

this better pass.

this train obviously has huge support - damn the two-thirds rule!! the north bay is the only part of the bay w/o rail transit. that needs to change NOW!

[peanut gallery]

The good news (and I didn't realize this before) is that the 65% requirement is totaled between both counties. So if Sonoma gets enough votes, it can make up the difference if Marin falls short. The only signs against it I've seen around here are on homes near the tracks. It's obvious why those folks are against it. I am voting for it.

[CHapp]

From northbay's Pressdemocrat article:

The Sierra Club's Sonoma and Marin groups took no position on SMART.

Hmmm ... bizarre ... I wonder why? They're gung ho on the San Leandro/Oakland/Berkely BRT system and silent on the SMART? I thought they were totally in favor of getting cars off the roads?

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by peanut gallery

The good news (and I didn't realize this before) is that the 65% requirement is totaled between both counties. So if Sonoma gets enough votes, it can make up the difference if Marin falls short. The only signs against it I've seen around here are on homes near the tracks. It's obvious why those folks are against it. I am voting for it.

I still cant believe how close this measure came to passing last time. I dont live in Sonoma or Marin, but I do go there somewhat frequently sometimes as an alternative to I-80 to San Fran, and sometimes while driving up the North Coast. Those times of sitting in traffic on 101 make me wish we had this already, even if it doesnt connect to SF. I also hope this passes.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

I still cant believe how close this measure came to passing last time. I dont live in Sonoma or Marin, but I do go there somewhat frequently sometimes as an alternative to I-80 to San Fran, and sometimes while driving up the North Coast. Those times of sitting in traffic on 101 make me wish we had this already, even if it doesnt connect to SF. I also hope this passes.

while the train itself doesnt connect directly to the city, it will connect to the ferry terminal, where one can transfer. ive mentioned it b4, but i always thought that a BART extension from richmond to san rafael via the richmond bridge (which has an unused 'breakdown' lane available) would greatly help connectivity, allowing direct transfers from SMART to BART. or, a cheaper alternative would be to extend a leg of SMART to richmond, also allowing direct transfers between systems.

Originally Posted by CHapp

From northbay's Pressdemocrat article:

"The Sierra Club's Sonoma and Marin groups took no position on SMART. "

Hmmm ... bizarre ... I wonder why? They're gung ho on the San Leandro/Oakland/Berkely BRT system and silent on the SMART? I thought they were totally in favor of getting cars off the roads?

i believe their argument is that a) it doesnt take enough cars off the road (it will, the numbers arent high, but gas has more than doubled since they came up with the ridership figures). b) it wont help the environment that much (again, it will take thousands and thousands of cars off the road. yes, the trains are diesel, but they are still cleaner than cars and also use a new technology called 'clean diesel' or technically called 'ultra-low sulphur diesel'. electrification down the road has not been ruled out, but remember, most of the electricity nowadays is produced via fossil fuels). c) its expensive ($450 mil for 70 miles is a bargain! thats a little over 6 million a mile, compared to BART, which averages 100 million a mile. even comparable systems across the country were much more expensive. as the article points out, the row is already owned, cutting a huge expense out of the equation).

i usually dont name call, but voting no on this is just plain stupid.

oh, as for the noise:

the line will be serving freight soon so ur gonna have noise either way - and these trains are much much quieter than freight.
dont forget cars noise pollute too! or is that ok cuz the freeway already roars super loud?

[J_Taylor]

One thing I wish they would do for the smart train, and the track is allready there for it. I would like them to have a station at Sears Point Raceway.
The traffic for the big events like NASCAR and the Big Drag events are silly. If they can caputre even a small percent of that, they would be made in the shade

[northbay]

Originally Posted by J_Taylor

One thing I wish they would do for the smart train, and the track is allready there for it. I would like them to have a station at Sears Point Raceway.
The traffic for the big events like NASCAR and the Big Drag events are silly. If they can caputre even a small percent of that, they would be made in the shade

a leg to sears point would be sick i agree, i didnt know that there were tracks parallel to the 37. however, it would be impossible since all SMART stations have to be within city limits. i think they want to concentrate growth this way in 'established' and 'official' centers. this also eliminated the possibility of a station at sonoma county airport - tho i heard shuttles would run to the nearest train station.

[CHapp]

Originally Posted by northbay420

i believe their argument is that a) it doesnt take enough cars off the road (it will, the numbers arent high, but gas has more than doubled since they came up with the ridership figures). b) it wont help the environment that much (again, it will take thousands and thousands of cars off the road. yes, the trains are diesel, but they are still cleaner than cars and also use a new technology called 'clean diesel' or technically called 'ultra-low sulphur diesel'. electrification down the road has not been ruled out, but remember, most of the electricity nowadays is produced via fossil fuels). c) its expensive ($450 mil for 70 miles is a bargain! thats a little over 6 million a mile, compared to BART, which averages 100 million a mile. even comparable systems across the country were much more expensive. as the article points out, the row is already owned, cutting a huge expense out of the equation).

Ah. In other words "the Sierra Club" is quite selective and by no means consistent in its endorsement of transit projects. Perhaps it's up to the local Chapters? Perhaps it has to do with #### of memberships in the various Counties?

As you can tell, I have my theories. And let me assure you, northbay: if I could I surely would vote in favor of SMART!

[Reminiscence]

Originally Posted by northbay420

while the train itself doesnt connect directly to the city, it will connect to the ferry terminal, where one can transfer. ive mentioned it b4, but i always thought that a BART extension from richmond to san rafael via the richmond bridge (which has an unused 'breakdown' lane available) would greatly help connectivity, allowing direct transfers from SMART to BART. or, a cheaper alternative would be to extend a leg of SMART to richmond, also allowing direct transfers between systems.

Connecting Marin to Richmond with BART is something I've always thought of too, what with the Golden Gate being too challenging and expensive in terms of geography and the Market St Subway/Transbay Tube getting ever so crowded. 450 million sure sounds like a bargain compared to other projects being proposed, but I just hope people see it this way as well.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Reminiscence

Connecting Marin to Richmond with BART is something I've always thought of too, what with the Golden Gate being too challenging and expensive in terms of geography and the Market St Subway/Transbay Tube getting ever so crowded.

we can go true bay area style and form a new authority to run a streetcar between the san rafael smart station and richmond bart. who cares if we have another agency, another few transfers and additional fares?


if smart is enacted, it would become the fourth commuter train in the bay area - each one is run by a different agency (smart of course, caltrain, ace, amtrak capital corridor).

[OhioGuy]

Is there going to be some type of coordination between SMART and the ferry operators so that when a train arrives, riders will be able to transfer to the ferry and get into San Fran relatively quickly? Is it at all likely that ferries will be able to operate frequently enough to ensure that every arriving train will have a ferry ready to depart for San Fran? I also wonder about any type of fare integration between SMART & the ferries to encourage commuters to use them?

[peanut gallery]

During the week, ferries leave approximately every half hour, so there shouldn't be much of a wait no matter what the train does schedule-wise. On weekends, this would be more of a concern. I hope that SMART will integrate TransLink from the get-go, which would take care of fare integration.

[northbay]

the larkspur ferry is already very busy - the parking lot is full nearly every day, they are (going) to build a parking garage to accommodate the cars. they are also buying another ferry because they have to turn away people. encouraging people to use it is not part of the problem. getting people to the ferry without them having to drive will solve at least the first problem.

translink? whats that?

jk, the devil is in the details. hopefully, they include it. though i heard something that the mtc dropped the contract with the company providing it.

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by northbay420

though i heard something that the mtc dropped the contract with the company providing it.

I hope not as it would set us back. I'm not wedded to TransLink per se, just something that works across systems.

Originally Posted by northbay420

they are also buying another ferry because they have to turn away people. encouraging people to use it is not part of the problem.

Just to add to northbay's comment, there's one particular ferry in the morning where this happens daily, the 8:20. But they bring out one of the older spalding (mono-hull) ferries to make a special run for everyone who couldn't get on the 8:20. This also happens occasionally northbound in the afternoon during summer when the Giants end at just the right time. A lot of people will come over to the ferry building rather than take the ferry at PacBell. I have no idea why.

The new ferry GGTD wants to buy will replace the Del Norte with a larger high speed ferry (larger than the Mendocino from what I've heard). So when they have to bring out another ferry -- for the situation above, when the other high speed ferries are undergoing maintenance, the 5:20 run in the evening -- they can use a high-speed ferry instead of the slower mono-hull ferries. Plus, it will be cleaner than the Del Norte and much, much cleaner than the spaldings. More fuel efficient too.

[northbay]

^ thanks for the clarification pg.


anyone remember jchurch?

(the guy responsible for sfcityscape.com, and once a regular sf forumer, o yeeea)

he came out with a nice map of the proposed smart system:
http://sfcityscape.com/maps/SMART.html

[northbay]

good news! (im not counting chickens too early i hope)

This time around, SMART gains passage
North Bay's diesel train service headed for victory

By GUY KOVNER
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Tuesday, November 4, 2008 at 3:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Tuesday, November 4, 2008 at 11:42 p.m.

A sales tax for the proposed Sonoma-Marin commuter train was headed for approval early today, apparently reversing its defeat at the polls two years ago.

Diesel-powered trains will be rolling along the 70-mile line from Cloverdale to Larkspur in five years if the results hold up, said Cynthia Murray of Petaluma, co-chairwoman of North Bay Transportation Alliance, the Yes on Q campaign organization.

“We’re thinking we won it,” Murray said, adding that the residents of both counties “decided they wanted to invest in our transportation future.”

The tax held a winning margin, 69 percent to 31 percent, in both counties with more than about 98 percent of the votes counted in Sonoma and all of the Marin precincts counted.

Measure Q, the quarter-cent sales tax for the Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit project, known as SMART, needed two-thirds of the combined two-county vote to be approved.

Mike Arnold of Novato, an anti-tax leader, called Murray to concede defeat late Tuesday.

“I congratulated her on a hard-fought battle,” Arnold said, acknowledging that the sales tax appeared to win approval in the midst of a recession, a condition that would typically blunt the chances of a new tax.

“We think that’s largely a function of the higher turnout,” said Arnold, a leader of North Bay Citizens for Effective Transportation.

The tax would help pay for the train by raising an estimated $890 million over 20 years.

The train would cost $450 million, with an additional $90 million bicycle/pedestrian pathway connecting the 14 rail stations.

Advocates said the train would establish an alternative to driving on congested Highway 101; critics said it was too little bang for the buck.

“I think it’s just the way to go,” said Jay Fuselier of Santa Rosa, who voted for Measure Q. Fuselier said he wants “to get away from burning gasoline and oil.”

Fuselier said he also voted for Proposition 1, the proposed high-speed train from San Francisco to Los Angeles, saying it would be a treat to connect to it from SMART via the Larkspur ferry.

“It opens up possibilities,” he said. “Let’s go down to L.A. for the weekend.”

“I think it’s a great idea,” said Dennis Hegwood of Santa Rosa, who voted for the tax two years ago and on Tuesday.

Andrew Bullene of Santa Rosa said he voted for the train tax enthusiastically, but worried that Marin voters would again defeat the train, “shattering our hopes and dreams, just like they did in the 1950s with BART.”

In 2006, 70 percent of Sonoma voters said “yes” to the rail tax, but it fell short with only 57.5 percent approval in Marin. This time, Sonoma voters gave it 73 percent approval; Marin 63 percent.

SMART says the trains will take 5,300 car trips off the freeway and eliminate 124,000 pounds of greenhouse gas emissions per day.

The opposition contends SMART won’t have much impact on freeway congestion or global warming.

Critics say the train will be growth-inducing, but supporters say it will spur the local economy of the North Bay.

[peanut gallery]

Yes, I think we have it this time. And HSR too! I'm a little surprised at both. Other than one particular prop passing, it was a great night.

[Gordo]

Yes indeed. If not for that one particular prop, it would have been a cleansweep for everything that I cared about.