HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Transportation


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1861  
Old Posted Dec 11, 2013, 5:32 PM
northbay's Avatar
northbay northbay is offline
Sonoma Strong
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Cotati - The Hub of Sonoma County
Posts: 1,881
Maybe SMART will go from the Ferry to the Airport!!

Quote:
Funding OK could extend SMART to airport

A commuter rail station could be built near the Charles M. Schulz-Sonoma County Airport if a regional transportation panel allocates the funding today.

A Metropolitan Transportation Commission committee will decide on the $16.7 million request from Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit board.

On Monday, the Sonoma County Transportation Authority allocated $4.3 million for the project, which would extend the commuter rail service four miles north to Airport Boulevard when it opens in two years.

“Our board is interested in the last segment to Airport Boulevard,” said James Cameron, SCTA deputy director.

If the MTC Programming and Allocations Committee recommends funding the project, the full commission would have to vote on it next week, said John Goodwin, MTC spokesman. It is “highly unusual” for the commission to vote against a committee recommendation, he said.

“Once it passes the committee, it's first and goal at the one,” he said.

The MTC approved $11.7 million for the project in January, and its action today would allocate that money plus an additional $5 million. MTC funds come from bridge tolls.

“There are a lot of moving parts to this,” said Carolyn Glendening, SMART spokeswoman. “We're hopeful the committee will approve the request.”

With the funding in place, the SMART board could approve an airport station at its meeting next week, officials said.

A station near the airport would serve Sonoma County travelers, especially once a project to expand the runway to accommodate larger jets is completed next year.

Officials hope that project will attract more commercial airlines with flights to eastern destinations. The airport currently serves Portland, Seattle, Los Angeles and San Diego.

SMART trains are scheduled to run in 2016 between Guerneville Road in Santa Rosa and San Rafael. The rail authority has some of the funding in place to extend the track south to the Larkspur ferry. Eventually, the line is planned to run north to Cloverdale, although the funding for that segment and its timing is uncertain....

http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article/20131210/articles/131219960
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1862  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 4:26 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,150
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eightball View Post
What's effect on Caltrain electrification with the lawsuit possibly effecting the CAHSR funding?
And a more authoritative answer to the question you asked earlier: yesterday's San Mateo Daily Journal reported "Caltrain electrification still on track: Officials say modernization project isn’t affected by high-speed rail lawsuit."
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1863  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 5:25 PM
Eightball's Avatar
Eightball Eightball is offline
life is good
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: all over
Posts: 2,301
Thank you, that's exactly what I was getting at. Glad it's going forward, Caltrain needs more frequencies and lower operating costs asap! Many of those trains are hugely overcrowded.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1864  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 5:30 PM
Busy Bee's Avatar
Busy Bee Busy Bee is offline
Closeted Normie
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: on the artistic spectrum
Posts: 13,244
Anyone have the inside scoop on the final rendering of the new Bart cars? The website shows the prototype image that has been available for over a year. I suspect the mock up that will be coming next year will not look exactly like that rendering.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1865  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 5:59 PM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 415
According to the timeline page, if I'm reading this correctly, the final design won't come until 2014:

http://www.bart.gov/about/projects/cars/delivery-plan

With each mockup we've seen, the design gets more and more conventional, though from all the new features that are included (third door, video announcements, more standing room without much of a reduction in seating, etc.), these new trains can't come soon enough.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1866  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 6:27 PM
dennis1 dennis1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,253
Why don't they build a bridge or use and existing bridge to bring smart to the new Transbay Terminal?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1867  
Old Posted Dec 13, 2013, 7:11 PM
k1052 k1052 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 2,368
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennis1 View Post
Why don't they build a bridge or use and existing bridge to bring smart to the new Transbay Terminal?
Who would want to pony up the billions that would cost for a low intensity service while BART/Muni/Caltrian struggle financially to manage their growing riderships?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1868  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 12:54 AM
fflint's Avatar
fflint fflint is offline
Triptastic Gen X Snoozer
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: San Francisco
Posts: 22,150
Running SMART on a new rail bridge over the Bay and then through a new tunnel into the Transbay Terminal would cost trillions of dollars and take decades to complete, only to move a few thousand people a day. That's why.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1869  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 1:22 AM
dennis1 dennis1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,253
Thanks.


Next Question: Why doesn't Caltrain run SMART? Why seperate agencies?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1870  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 1:46 AM
twinpeaks twinpeaks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennis1 View Post
Thanks.


Next Question: Why doesn't Caltrain run SMART? Why seperate agencies?
we should put all Bay Area transportation under a single agency?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1871  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 1:49 AM
dennis1 dennis1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post
we should put all Bay Area transportation under a single agency?
Would that not help management?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1872  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 2:03 AM
twinpeaks twinpeaks is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 263
Quote:
Originally Posted by dennis1 View Post
Would that not help management?
It will make our transportation system better and more efficient if transportaton planning is done at a regional level. It will help everyone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1873  
Old Posted Dec 14, 2013, 2:27 AM
dennis1 dennis1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post
It will make our transportation system better and more efficient if transportaton planning is done at a regional level. It will help everyone.
Agreed. At least closer cooperation with all the transit agencies and BART.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1874  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2013, 5:49 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,616
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by twinpeaks View Post
It will make our transportation system better and more efficient if transportaton planning is done at a regional level. It will help everyone.
I understand that transportation planning will be more efficient if planned at the regional level, but the regional level doesn't generate revenues. Funding is always generated from local sources. That's why there are so many local transit agencies.

Usually transit projects advocated by regional planners die as soon as they are planned because they have no funding. It's better for the locals to propose, plan, fund, and operate transit if you wish them to actually get built. It's easier for grass roots projects to get the political support and resulting funding needed. Let the regional planners coordinate projects and find out of area matching funds for local projects.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1875  
Old Posted Dec 15, 2013, 9:32 PM
zilfondel zilfondel is offline
Submarine de Nucléar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 4,481
Quote:
Originally Posted by electricron View Post
I understand that transportation planning will be more efficient if planned at the regional level, but the regional level doesn't generate revenues. Funding is always generated from local sources. That's why there are so many local transit agencies.

Usually transit projects advocated by regional planners die as soon as they are planned because they have no funding. It's better for the locals to propose, plan, fund, and operate transit if you wish them to actually get built. It's easier for grass roots projects to get the political support and resulting funding needed. Let the regional planners coordinate projects and find out of area matching funds for local projects.....
??? Seriously?

Counterpoints: BART, Trimet, Metro, MTA, WMATA, RTD, LACMTA.

It may be simpler to avoid the difficult job of creating & managing regional transportation projects, but then noone says that tackling challenging jobs are easy, now do they?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1876  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2013, 8:47 AM
TWAK's Avatar
TWAK TWAK is offline
Resu Deretsiger
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Clearlake, CA Micropolitan Statistical Area
Posts: 17,172
would be tight if all the tracks could merge (impossible?) i think that could work to bring about a regional agency.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1877  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2013, 5:04 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,616
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by zilfondel View Post
??? Seriously?

Counterpoints: BART, Trimet, Metro, MTA, WMATA, RTD, LACMTA.

It may be simpler to avoid the difficult job of creating & managing regional transportation projects, but then noone says that tackling challenging jobs are easy, now do they?
Trimet has been somewhat successful building new lines near Porland, Oregon. But they haven't been successful extending any line, bus or rail, across the Columbia River. So, it doesn't quite meet your standards for a Regional transit agency. MTA runs well in New York, but it too doesn't cross the Hudson into New Jersey. RTD has been unsuccessful at getting rail to Boulder. LACMTA doesn't impact areas outside LA County. Southern California is much larger than LA County. Even BART doesn't cross the Bay north into in Marion County or south into San Mateo County. BART and San Francisco's world famous trolleys and light rail lines are different transit agencies.


One by one your "Regional" transit agencies are NOT as all encompassing as you claim they are. You should really rethink your what you consider a true "Regional" transit system is. All your examples have "Local" transit systems.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1878  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2013, 5:28 PM
CharlesCO's Avatar
CharlesCO CharlesCO is offline
Aspiring Amateur
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Berkeley, CA
Posts: 415
^^^

I think a lot of that is quite dismissive. To digress somewhat, yes, RTD has had problems getting the Northwest Rail Line completed, but that's not at all due to the regional nature of transit planning on the Front Range. The reason why the Northwest rail hasn't been built yet and probably never will is because its cost was projected way too low and right before the cost of a lot of materials and construction shot up. RTD has actually been very creative and successful in getting every other line funded through some rather unique and unusual public/private partnerships. With the Northwest corridor, much of the rail line's ROW is also already duplicated by bus service (which is more or less also being upgraded to BRT in FasTracks) that goes closer to where people actually need to go, so the projected ridership for that line is staggeringly low. It has pissed Boulder taxpayers off, but it was the only corridor that couldn't decide between bus or rail and felt that it needed both, and considering that RTD has pulled miracles getting all the other far more important lines built in a budget crunch, I actually think RTD has done a tremendous job. I don't think their perceived success or failure is due to the fact that it's a regional agency, and it doesn't really matter at this point if that line never gets built.

But to relate this bay to Back Area transit, I'm always conflicted when this topic comes up. On one hand, it's fun to think of all the great projects that could be built if all the resources of every transit agency were pooled together. On the other, I don't know if it would really benefit people on a local level, which is equally, if not more important. I don't think a one-size-fits-all approach from Brentwood to Gilroy would really work that well, but I could also imagine that greater cooperation between BART, Muni, Caltrain, and ACTransit could produce something great, as well as better coordination between the aforementioned big four and local bus transfers from all the smaller agencies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1879  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2013, 6:44 PM
electricron's Avatar
electricron electricron is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Granbury, Texas
Posts: 3,616
Lightbulb

Quote:
Originally Posted by CharlesCO View Post
^^^

I think a lot of that is quite dismissive. To digress somewhat, yes, RTD has had problems getting the Northwest Rail Line completed, but that's not at all due to the regional nature of transit planning on the Front Range. The reason why the Northwest rail hasn't been built yet and probably never will is because its cost was projected way too low and right before the cost of a lot of materials and construction shot up. RTD has actually been very creative and successful in getting every other line funded through some rather unique and unusual public/private partnerships. With the Northwest corridor, much of the rail line's ROW is also already duplicated by bus service (which is more or less also being upgraded to BRT in FasTracks) that goes closer to where people actually need to go, so the projected ridership for that line is staggeringly low. It has pissed Boulder taxpayers off, but it was the only corridor that couldn't decide between bus or rail and felt that it needed both, and considering that RTD has pulled miracles getting all the other far more important lines built in a budget crunch, I actually think RTD has done a tremendous job. I don't think their perceived success or failure is due to the fact that it's a regional agency, and it doesn't really matter at this point if that line never gets built.

But to relate this bay to Back Area transit, I'm always conflicted when this topic comes up. On one hand, it's fun to think of all the great projects that could be built if all the resources of every transit agency were pooled together. On the other, I don't know if it would really benefit people on a local level, which is equally, if not more important. I don't think a one-size-fits-all approach from Brentwood to Gilroy would really work that well, but I could also imagine that greater cooperation between BART, Muni, Caltrain, and ACTransit could produce something great, as well as better coordination between the aforementioned big four and local bus transfers from all the smaller agencies.
Boulder already had its own bus lines from local city funding. It joined RTD especially for a rail line to Denver. While it is true rail costs skyrocketed in Colorado, it didn't rise as much everywhere else. DART experienced some costs rises, but DART was able to build what it promised with just undertaking a few project cuts. DART cut some stations instead of cutting entire lines. The bus lines to Boulder and Longmont aren't even true BRT lines, they're more akin to Express Bus services seen in Dallas and Houston, sharing of HOV lanes. At least Houston has dedicated flyovers to get the buses out of the HOV lanes to the bus stops, Boulder buses will have to merge over several lanes of traffic like they do in Dallas to reach the stops (park & ride lots). Express bus services is not the same as rapid bus transit. So Boulder isn't even getting true bus rapid transit.

RTD will never be able to promise taxpayers in the future that it can build what it promises to get future referendums for new taxes passed as long as Boulder and Longmont have no rail transit. The over promising will be remembered for a long, long time.

As long as the different transit agencies coordinate their plans, there is no need for an all encompassing "Regional" transit agency. NJT, SEPTA, MARC, VRE, MTA, CDOT, and MBTA all share access to Amtrak's NEC successfully. Sometimes I think those who advocate "Regional" government entities wish to rule local politics from above, instead of locals ruling local politics.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #1880  
Old Posted Dec 17, 2013, 7:52 PM
Gordo's Avatar
Gordo Gordo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Seattle, WA/San Francisco, CA/Jackson Hole, WY
Posts: 4,256
BART does cross into San Mateo County. San Mateo County isn't a part of the BART tax district, so they paid (and continue to pay) a separate fee to BART to build and manage the line.

LACMTA works quite well because LA County is so large (10 million people). The "local" government is the regional government for the most part. It would be similar to the Bay Area merging Marin, SF, Contra Costa, Alameda, and San Mateo Counties. Sure, there would still be folks in the Bay Area not within the central county, but balkanization would be drastically reduced.
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 > Discussion Forums > Transportation
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:04 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.