SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[northbay]

^ great news. i'm sooooooo tired of clay mitchell constantly shooting down the project. he claims to be 'pro-train' but is in charge of the effort to repeal smart.

a tea bagger masquerading as a 'classical liberal'

[M II A II R II K]

Across the Bay Area, streets are getting a makeover -- with less room for cars


Read More: http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_18561104?source=rss

.....

Across the Bay Area and California, cities are removing or narrowing lanes and redesigning hundreds of streets to add bike lanes, speed up transit and improve pedestrian safety. The car remains king, but the crown is slipping. "There is a strong national and international movement to provide transportation for people and not just cars," said Hans Larsen, director of San Jose's Department of Transportation. "For decades, planning has focused on the efficient movement of cars. The result has been communities that are dependent on cars and are not conducive to walking and biking and transit."

- On Thursday, San Jose will convert sections of Fourth and St. James streets north of downtown from speedy, one-way routes into two-way roads to slow drivers down and make it easier for residents to cross intersections in their neighborhoods. Next month Santa Clara will begin the next phase of removing one lane on busy Pruneridge Avenue to install lanes for bicyclists. Lanes may be removed on El Camino Real from the South Bay to South San Francisco to speed up buses, and Capitol Expressway may lose two lanes for light rail. San Francisco has slowed traffic lights on Valencia Street to match the speed of bicyclists, not cars.

- It's not all smooth sailing, however. "You can't make the streets too narrow; otherwise there would not be room for parking, which is in very short supply in our city," said Don Frascinella, the transportation manager in Hayward. "One of the dangers is that you have to be very careful not to make the lanes on trucks and bus routes too narrow or passing vehicles might conflict."

- Last month when Santa Clara reduced Pruneridge from a four-lane road to one lane each way with a shared center-turn lane, some motorists howled. The change is "completely nuts," says commuter Santo Rao. "Now a slow-moving car can block up the entire road. While China is busy building future infrastructure to dominate the world, here we have harebrained folks doing the opposite, taking us back to one-lane roads."

.....

[CyberEric]

Amen! The story doesn't mention the parklets in SF, which are also fairly "anti-car" since they take away parking.

[fflint]

Utilizing small segments of the city's roadway for something other than cheap public storage for private automobiles isn't "anti-car."

[northbay]

santa rosa has also taken many of its main roads with 4 lanes and narrowed them to 2+turn lane with bicycle lanes: hoen ave and summerfield being some great examples. santa rosa ave leading into downtown is one of the next segments. additional landscaping is also planned.

roads should be for everyone. not just machines with gas-combustion engines.

[fflint]

Bay Area public transit and freeways threatened by big proposed funding cuts
Denis Cuff
Contra Costa Times
8/21/2011
http://www.mercurynews.com/bay-area-news/ci_18726315?source=rss

Bay Area freeways would get bumpier with fewer repairs.

Buses, trains, ferries and paratransit vans would go unreplaced and break down more often, stranding riders.

Hundreds of Bay Area projects to ease road congestion and expand public transit -- like extending BART to San Jose or creating a rapid bus transit system through Oakland and San Leandro -- could be postponed or scrapped if Congress adopts House Republicans' plan to slash federal transportation funding by a third, federal, state and regional officials say.

Things could get even worse if Congressional bickering over budget cuts fails to renew the federal gas tax of 18.4 cents per gallon by its Sept. 30 expiration date.

"I want to sound a wake-up call," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairwoman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, of the sharp funding cuts proposed by Republicans. "It's unacceptable."

Boxer is stumping for her federal transportation reauthorization bill that would preserve existing funding levels for two years.

If the House Republicans prevail with their cuts, California would lose $1.7 billion a year and lose out on 60,000 jobs for projects that wouldn't be built, according to Senate public works committee staffers.
....

[CyberEric]

Some renderings of the Union Square station:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/12/BAPU1L1SUQ.DTL

[peanut gallery]

^I was looking at those yesterday and think it looks just about perfect:


Source: SFGate.

In the article, King quotes architect Robin Chiang: "Business wanted us to be invisible, and the Arts Commission wanted us to be a monument." This might be one of those very few times where that kind of compromise actually made for a better design. It obviously shouldn't be invisible. But in this location, low-key and fitting into the rest of Union Square is a better choice than standout architecture, IMO.

[M II A II R II K]

S.F. taking small steps to unclog Market Street


Read More: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/09/14/BAN81L482I.DTL

Market Street has been a favorite target for city officials to try to limit private automobiles. For years, there were discussions about an outright ban, but that gave way to business concerns. Now the latest effort is to move cars off the major boulevard one small step at a time. Over the years, the city has put in transit-only lanes on a stretch of Market Street to make it easier for buses to navigate traffic and installed bike lanes. One of the boldest moves to tame drivers was made in 2009, which forced-right turns for private cars traveling eastbound at two Mid-Market intersections. And on Tuesday, Mayor Ed Lee and Board of Supervisors President David Chiu, both of whom are running for mayor in the November election, say added efforts to divert cars from Market Street are warranted, yet neither proposed specific plans.

- "A viable vision for the future of Market Street is of a world-class avenue drawing its success from the huge number of people it attracts through transit and taxis, and on foot and bicycle, and no private automobiles other than delivery vehicles," said Chiu, who proposed legislation Tuesday urging transportation officials to move forward with more trial programs. Lee, who appeared before the Board of Supervisors for his monthly Question Time session, said there's already been proven success with the forced turns at Sixth and 10th streets, citing data that show Muni travel time through the area has decreased 3 percent since the restrictions. "I would be supportive of additional trials," Lee said.

- So for now, city transportation officials are contemplating another tactic to tackle the problem at New Montgomery: deploying a parking control officer at the heavily used intersection to help orchestrate the flow of pedestrians and vehicles. The Municipal Transportation Agency also will install a green right-turn arrow signal for eastbound Market Street, which will alternate when cars and pedestrians have the right-of-way. San Francisco transportation chief Ed Reiskin said Tuesday there's "an eagerness to move forward" with more experiments to make Market Street more in sync with the city's Transit First policy, which favors transit, biking and walking over the private automobile. Market Street, which is used by more than 20 Muni lines, with about 125,000 boardings a day, is the spine of San Francisco's transit system, and has become an increasingly popular route for cyclists.

.....

[202_Cyclist]

Central Subway once-in-a-generation chance, backers say

San Francisco Chronicle
9/20/2011

"Is the Central Subway a boondoggle? Not so much, according to transit officials and other key backers.

Two of the major recent arguments against it – that the price has spiked and the city will be on the hook for cost overruns – are actually intertwined, said John Funghi, Municipal Transportation Agency’s project manager on the subway.

The reason the cost jumped from about $1.3 billion in April 2009 to almost $1.6 billion today is almost entirely due to the inclusion of a roughly $250 million reserve for potential cost overruns that federal transportation officials requested, Funghi said. Comparisons to the $647 million price tag from 2003 are flawed because earlier route options hadn’t been fully designed and may have been more expensive than the current alignment, he added..."

http://blog.sfgate.com/cityinsider/2011/...once-in-a-generation-chance-backers-say/

[northbay]

SMART gets $34.6 million transit funding
By BOB NORBERG
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
Published: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 at 1:19 p.m.
Last Modified: Wednesday, September 28, 2011 at 1:19 p.m.

...

The Metropolitan Transportation Commission in a unanimous vote approved $23.1 million in toll bridge funds and $11.5 million in state funds for SMART.

SMART in its latest financing plan is estimating that building an initial 37-mile line from downtown Santa Rosa to downtown San Rafael will cost $380 million.

However, SMART also estimates there are cost-cutting measures in freight operations and in station design and construction that will save $20.5 million.

....

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/201...=SMART-gets-34-6-million-transit-funding

[CyberEric]

I thought this article in the Chronicle was interesting:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/05/BU7O1LCPJI.DTL&tsp=1

[San Frangelino]

i hope this hasn't already been posted somewhere, but I found some very interesting maps on this website http://wilshirevermont.com/

From:http://wilshirevermont.com/2010/10/01/a-true-rapid-transit-plan-for-san-francisco/


From:http://wilshirevermont.com/2010/05/18/new-urban-metro-lines-for-the-bay-areas-dense-core/


From:http://wilshirevermont.com/2010/12/20/barts-future-washington-metro-style/

[CyberEric]

Wow, that's pretty cool, thanks for posting. I would love to see even some of that happen. Mainly the North-South stuff, and the Geary line.

[drifting sun]

Wow, BART is getting ambitious, did they recently report something like a $20 million surplus? I like the idea of a north/south BART line that runs between Inner and Outer Sunset, and then swings over to the financial district. What potential impact in the eyes of the public does this put upon the already maligned central subway MUNI is building? Would the City benefit from MUNI halting any future plans and let BART build and maintain any subway lines on the peninsula from here on out? Why does the first map show the stretch of N-Judah between Van Ness and 19th/Judah as "proposed" and not existing?

Edit: I see, they are proposing to bury that whole length?

[electricron]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

Wow, BART is getting ambitious, did they recently report something like a $20 million surplus? Would the City benefit from MUNI halting any future plans and let BART build and maintain any subway lines on the peninsula from here on out?

No! They wouldn't because there is no guarantee BART would actually build the lines MUNI wants to build. BART is a Regional transit agency, not a Municipal one.
How would San Francisco feel about their BART taxes going to support a streetcar line less than 2 miles in length in Richmond or Oakland? They wouldn't. Just turning the situation around we arrive at the truth.
BART should continue to be a Regional transit agency while Muni should continue as a Municipal one. Let Oakland and Richmond fund their own Municipal buses and trams.

[drifting sun]

We aren't talking about streetcar lines. BART is all about heavy rail, but just because it is a regional system, does not mean it can't be useful to commuters on the peninsula in the areas that it passes through. I have ridden both MUNI and BART multiple times, BART had far superior service where it went (despite nasty car interiors). Maybe MUNI should stick with street level transit (buses and street car/light rail) to fill in the gaps between BART's heavy rail lines. Let BART do what it has proven to be better at, I say.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by drifting sun

Maybe MUNI should stick with street level transit (buses and street car/light rail) to fill in the gaps between BART's heavy rail lines. Let BART do what it has proven to be better at, I say.

Why? Don't MUNI's existing streetcar lines run in subways in part already? One of the advantages of light rail transit is that it is flexible, it can operate at grade in streets, and above and below grade. Restricting MUNI to light rail lines that only run at grade is taking all the flexibility they need away to design, build, and operate efficient light rail lines.

[drifting sun]

Because the at-grade portions of the MUNI lines are a big part of what hinders the underground sections, and the whole thing, from operating efficiently and reliably. I like where MUNI goes, the N-Judah is a useful line, as is its parallel sister line, but these need to be buried for a longer length to avoid the intersection snarls at street level that back stuff up all the way to Van Ness, sometimes. I was told that due to an overriding state requirement that is preferential to automobiles, intersection preemption by the light rail (something that I think would have solved a lot of the problems) is not going to happen. I was thinking if BART ever wanted to build a couple more heavy rail subway lines through the peninsula, let them. As to your claims of the inherent flexibility of a hybrid buried/surface light rail route, I have seen it work out fine in other cities, but it doesn't seem to in S.F. After decades of MUNI fumbling with these chronic issues with no real solution, maybe it is time for a bigger change.

[fflint]

Just so everyone is on the same page, those maps above are not from BART or Muni--they are fantasy maps, and good ones, but they're *not* proposals or plans.