SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[CyberEric]

Originally Posted by fflint

Concerning Muni's mechanical problems with Breda cars, Wikipedia notes in its article on the Boston MBTA Green Line that they've also had a lot of mechanical problems back East:



So while I'm not giving Muni a pass on maintenance, we're not the only ones having problems with Breda light rail cars.

Thanks that's good to know.

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

In San Francisco, All-Door Boarding Catches On


Read More: http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2011/08/01/in-san-francisco-all-door-boarding-catches-on/

Thanks for the story! I am not totally sure that I understand what is changing here. Anyone with a Clipper card can board at any door. Will this change allow people paying with cash to board at all doors?

[ltsmotorsport]

So I was looking in Hayes Valley for a friends apartment on Google Maps and noticed some odd empty, diagonal lots and lot lines that start around Octavia and Linden. The lots run in a SW to NE direction. They almost look like an old right of way, maybe from the old freeway?

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.776503,-122.423974&spn=0.000892,0.001534&t=h&z=20

[gtbassett]

Originally Posted by ltsmotorsport

So I was looking in Hayes Valley for a friends apartment on Google Maps and noticed some odd empty, diagonal lots and lot lines that start around Octavia and Linden. The lots run in a SW to NE direction. They almost look like an old right of way, maybe from the old freeway?

http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ll=37.776503,-122.423974&spn=0.000892,0.001534&t=h&z=20

Indeed, that was the Hayes Freeway that was torn down after the 1989 Loma Prieta Earthquake. It significantly improved the neighborhood in the past 20 years. Yay San Francisco's anti-freeway crusade!

[ltsmotorsport]

Yeah, much better without a freeway through there. So I assume the city must own those lots, or maybe Caltrans? Seems like prime real estate to me.

And how far did the old freeway cut north? It almost looks like it went all the way to Golden Gate Ave.

[Gordo]

This is a little old (some of these parcels have now been developed), but here are the parcels that were created by tearing down the freeway:


Source: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2006/10/rfps_for_housing_along_octavia_boulevard.html

Most of the parcels have been sold already, but the city still owns several. There were some that were set to be sold last year, but the bids came in lower than expected and the city decided to keep them for now (I believe the two monsters, O and P, were a part of that batch). Several parcels do have live permits and could see activity fairly soon though. For example, here's the plan for parcel I: http://www.socketsite.com/archives/2011/07/401_grove_street_the_revised_design_and_renderings.html

[peanut gallery]

^One of O or P was going to be developed with multiple architects designing many different buildings to make it look more organic like the rest of the area. Does anyone know if that is still the plan? I certainly hope so.

[San Frangelino]

My apologies if these videos have already been posted.

From:http://www.vta.org/bart/

BART Milpitas/Berryessa Stations Conceptual Video
• Video Link

From:http://www.bart.gov/news/articles/2011/news20110805.aspx

New BART Train Fleet
• Video Link

[CyberEric]

Cool stuff, thank you.

[202_Cyclist]

State approves more than $200 million for South Bay transit and road projects

By Gary Richards
San Jose Mercury
08/10/2011

"The California Transportation Commission approved more than $200 million for three South Bay road projects plus the BART-to-San Jose extension Wednesday, which means work could soon be under way.

The commission earmarked $40 million for the 10-mile BART line from Fremont to the Berryessa area of San Jose, $71.6 million to add carpool lanes on Interstate 880 between Milpitas and San Jose, $84.9 million for merging lanes on Highway 101 from Palo Alto to Mountain View and $10 million to rebuild Kato Road in Fremont along the path the BART extension would take..."

http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_18655960?nclick_check=1

[CyberEric]

This seems like good news. Thanks for posting.

[fflint]

Transit ridership surges throughout the Bay Area

By Gary Richards
08/12/2011 06:44:13 AM PDT
http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county/ci_18663245

In a remarkable turnaround for transit agencies that have repeatedly slashed services, raised fares and lost state and federal funding, transit ridership is steadily rising throughout the Bay Area. Caltrain ridership was up almost 12 percent and BART almost 8 percent in weekday use in June compared with the same month a year ago. The Valley Transportation Authority saw an increase of more than 7 percent and the ACE commuter train of more than 14 percent, while SamTrans ridership was up 0.4 percent.

....Caltrain's bullet trains shave nearly 30 minutes off a trip from San Jose to San Francisco. Some VTA light rail trains skip stations along Highway 87 to cut several minutes off a ride from South San Jose to downtown.

"This gives customers a faster travel option as well as the ability to work or relax while on the train," VTA spokeswoman Brandi Childress said, pointing to a recent survey that found that 16 percent of light-rail riders on the express trains are new and motivated to try transit by the new features.

"Out of those new customers, 69 percent of them are now riding the express (trains) four to five days a week," she said.

[fflint]

A couple points on the Mercury News article: those are statistics for the month of June (year over year), which is traditionally a lighter month for transit use at all agencies due to the end of the academic year; the Capitol Corridor stats are reported on the chart as monthly; daily ridership works out to roughly 6,500 on that inter-urban line.

[CyberEric]

Wow, I didn't realize Muni had so many more average weekday riders than BART.
Thanks for posting, this sounds like good news.

[Illithid Dude]

Originally Posted by CyberEric

Wow, I didn't realize Muni had so many more average weekday riders than BART.
Thanks for posting, this sounds like good news.

Well, Muni also controls the buses, so it makes sense.

[ElDuderino]

Sonoma County airport hopes runway expansion will draw more airlines

By STEVE HART
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Monday, August 15, 2011 at 3:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Monday, August 15, 2011 at 9:32 p.m.

Longer runways could help double the number of flights at Charles M. Schulz-Sonoma County Airport by 2016, county officials said Monday at a meeting on airport expansion.

The Santa Rosa airport is in talks with several carriers about new flights, airport manager Jon Stout said. But new service depends on extending the airport's two runways, which are too short for regional jets.

Longer runways are part of a proposed $84 million airport expansion expected to reach county leaders by the end of the year. It also calls for a new passenger terminal, relocated air traffic control tower, air cargo facility and dozens of smaller projects.

Most of the cost would be paid by the Federal Aviation Administration.

On Monday, the public saw the plans and had a chance to comment at Wells Fargo Center for the Arts. An environmental report on the project is now posted on the airport's website.

While some said they're worried about traffic and noise, others said the airport improvements are needed to boost the local economy.

“It's extremely important for our efforts to create jobs,” said Jonathan Coe, who heads the Santa Rosa Chamber of Commerce. A larger airport and more flights will bring more visitors and attract new companies, he said.

But several neighbors said they're already dealing with traffic problems on rural roads leading to the airport. “Any increased traffic is going to impact it that much more,” said Gary Mumm, who lives on Laughlin Road south of the airport.

Neighbors are afraid of losing their homes to airport expansion, said Beverly Schenck, another Laughlin Road resident.

The airport is in talks with Alaska, Frontier and U.S. Air about additional flights, Stout said Monday. Alaska, the airport's only scheduled carrier, now operates five flights a day to Los Angeles, Seattle, Portland and Las Vegas.

It doesn't need longer runways because it uses turboprop aircraft. But Frontier and U.S. Air use regional jets that require more room to take off and land, Stout said.

Future destinations include Denver, San Diego, Salt Lake City and Orange County. The airport could see 12 flights a day by 2016 if the longer runways are completed in two years, he said.

So far, however, none of the carriers has made a firm commitment to add flights.

Under the expansion plan, the airport's main runway would grow by 885 feet to 6,000 feet. The second runway would be extended to 5,202 feet.

Runway buffer and safety zones also would be expanded.

The current runways don't meet federal safety standards because they end at a common point on the airport's northern approach. That configuration could result in a pilot choosing the wrong runway in bad weather, according to airport officials.

As part of the expansion, the runways would be “decoupled” to meet federal standards.

The airport's long-range plan calls for 21 flights a day by 2030. The number of passengers boarding commercial flights would grow from about 88,000 a year to nearly 300,000.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/201...runway-expansion-will-draw-more-airlines

[CyberEric]

I am surprised we are having any discussion about the protests yesterday.

Was anyone's info leaked by Anonymous? I am all for the protests, but leaking personal info is not cool and misguided in my opinion.

[M II A II R II K]

San Francisco's teetering on a transportation crisis that could lead to crushing traffic and overcrowded transit for the fast-growing city. The biggest issue at stake? The Bay Bridge needs a makeover, and quick. Advocates more automation and another Tube, and not another bridge for more cars.

Video Link

[CyberEric]

Nicely made video, wow. I agree with most of that.
Thanks for posting.

[peanut gallery]

Originally Posted by fflint

Since I'm feeling a little left out ( ) here are the numbers for Golden Gate Transit:

Golden Gate Transit Bus
Avg/WD Riders
Jun 10 - 21,394
Jun 11 - 21,560
% Chg - 0.8%

Golden Gate Ferry
Avg/WD Riders
Jun 10 - 7,003
Jun 11 - 7,618
% Chg - 8.8%

[ElDuderino]

SMART approves $171 milllion bond sale despite delays

By SAM SCOTT
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 3:00 a.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 at 9:52 p.m.

The first SMART commuter train probably won't make the 37-mile trip between Santa Rosa and San Rafael until at least 2015, a journey far shorter and later than originally planned.

But Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit appears to be gathering momentum despite the delay and despite continuing criticism the train is a boondoggle in the making.

On Wednesday, SMART's board of director's unanimously approved a $400 million financial plan that should allow the district to receive $23 million in funding from the Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission in September.

That money in turn sets the stage for SMART to go to the financial market in October to sell up to $171 million in bonds approved by Marin and Sonoma county voters in 2008.

Together, the revenue puts SMART in a position to start moving more quickly, said Valerie Brown, chairwoman of the SMART board and a Sonoma County Supervisor.

“Today was pretty momentous,” she said.

SMART had been set to get similar funding from the MTC in July, but the commission held off in light of questions about new cost and revenue estimates developed this summer by rail agency staff.

SMART originally was planned to open in 2014 with service from Larkspur to Cloverdale, a distance of 70 miles. But declining sales tax revenues and a weak bond financing market prompted the agency to announce it would open the line in stages, starting with the 37-mile stretch from San Rafael to Santa Rosa.

That first phase is now expected to cost $360 million, an increase of $25 million.

Such tinkerings to the cost and scope of the project have ignited opposition to the train system. Detractors showed up in force Wednesday to raise concerns about what they see as a wasteful, ill-conceived rail pan.

The board's support is based on overly rosy numbers, incomplete accounting and false election promises, they said.

“We've being forced to ask these questions because they just keep going forward,” said John Parnell, founder of Repeal SMART. The group is trying to qualify a ballot initiative that would repeal the quarter-percent sales tax increase approved by voters in the two counties to fund the commute rail.

Opponents, however, appeared outnumbered Wednesday by supporters who celebrated SMART's promise of an environmental alternative to Highway 101 that would provide hundreds of jobs to the area and prepare the North Bay for life beyond cars.

“It is a bargain and it is a necessity,” said Shirlee Zane, SMART board member and Sonoma County Supervisor, who was echoing the day's proponents.

However, fans of the train will have to wait for the system to start rolling, said Farhad Mansourian, SMART's interim executive director.

He repeated Wednesday that a gauntlet of government review agencies need to approve environmentally sensitive wetlands construction, which could mean up to a two-year delay in operation.

Brown said the board was forming an ad hoc committee to explore using shuttles to fill in the gaps of the train line until the full Larkspur-Cloverdale route can be finished.

The board later convened in closed session to discuss hiring a new general manager.

The district has been negotiating a contract with the board's top choice, who has not been identified. Brown said the board would continue the discussion Monday at a meeting in Santa Rosa, which would largely be behind closed doors.

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/201...es-171-milllion-bond-sale-despite-delays