SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[Chisouthside]

The SF ferry is my favorite mode of public transportation in the US. Trying to finish a six pack between SF and Vallejo was my favorite part.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by Chisouthside

The SF ferry is my favorite mode of public transportation in the US. Trying to finish a six pack between SF and Vallejo was my favorite part.

That's a hell of a lot easier than trying to chug-a-lug a beer on the SF-Alameda run, haha

[OhioGuy]

The 2 mile SMART Larkspur extension is now open.

SMART Train Larkspur expansion opens, now goes to the Golden Gate Ferry

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by OhioGuy

The 2 mile SMART Larkspur extension is now open.

SMART Train Larkspur expansion opens, now goes to the Golden Gate Ferry

Nearly a billion dollars for a project which doesn't even serve over 5,000 people a day and stops running before 7PM.

Not wanting to hate here but imagine if that money was spent on bus service improvements... This seems like a typical "shiny toy" project giving anti-transit folks ammunition.

[craigs]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

Nearly a billion dollars for a project which doesn't even serve over 5,000 people a day and stops running before 7PM.

Not wanting to hate here but imagine if that money was spent on bus service improvements... This seems like a typical "shiny toy" project giving anti-transit folks ammunition.

It is premature to complain about ridership on a still-incomplete commuter railroad that officially opened its critical extension to the area's main ferry terminal only today. As of today, SMART now provides Marin and Sonoma commuters bound for San Francisco with a direct rail/boat transfer at Larkspur Landing. As for the service hours, the first weekday train heads south from the airport at 4:20 am, and the last northbound weekday train leaves Larkspur Landing at about 8:30 pm, arriving at the airport around 9:45 pm. These are hardly unusual hours for commuter railroads in suburban America.

Since the 101 is the lone freeway serving all of Marin and Sonoma counties, it's quite easy to "imagine if that money was spent on bus service improvements"--more buses stuck in the same old gridlock. SMART and the ferries are the only alternative to gridlock on the 101, and now that the two systems are connected, they should start to see ridership gains.

Larkspur Landing ferry terminal, now served by SMART commuter rail

source

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by craigs

It is premature to complain about ridership on a still-incomplete commuter railroad that officially opened its critical extension to the area's main ferry terminal only today. As of today, SMART now provides Marin and Sonoma commuters bound for San Francisco with a direct rail/boat transfer at Larkspur Landing. As for the service hours, the first weekday train heads south from the airport at 4:20 am, and the last northbound weekday train leaves Larkspur Landing at about 8:30 pm, arriving at the airport around 9:45 pm. These are hardly unusual hours for commuter railroads in suburban America.

Since the 101 is the lone freeway serving all of Marin and Sonoma counties, it's quite easy to "imagine if that money was spent on bus service improvements"--more buses stuck in the same old gridlock. SMART and the ferries are the only alternative to gridlock on the 101, and now that the two systems are connected, they should start to see ridership gains.

Larkspur Landing ferry terminal, now served by SMART commuter rail
source

You are thinking about options for commuting only, but public transit shouldn't only be oriented towards commuting to a major city. In this case, bus service improvements across the two counties might have helped gain more ridership. A busway on the 101 could also be of a huge help for much cheaper if you want direct service to SF (it is an eight-lane highway after all).

All I'm saying is, even if SMART's ridership reaches 10,000 people daily after the Larkspur opening, it's still not enough for a $1 billion investment. You could build three BRTs on critical corridors with that much money.

[Busy Bee]

SMART is sort of exactly what you would imagine Marin and Sonoma would have being two counties that have spent decades opposing anything that would drive growth, in particular connectivity with the rest of the Bay Area with a real heavy rail rapid link. And though it wasn't entirely their fault they backed out of BART 50 years ago since San Mateo started the ball rolling and they didn't want to get caught holding the bag, it's that decision that has sort of passed into lore as a good decision for the counties as they believe it would have exploded "unwanted" growth. So, what they have is an isolated "system" of limited utility and performance suited more for rural Bavaria than a segment of the Bay Area metro with hundreds of thousands of residents, many of whom commute into SF or the East Bay which are served by rapid transit. Short of following through with the original plans of linking Marin over the GGB with BART, I can see an alternative possibility of getting BART to Marin and southern Sonoma in the next few decades over a new Richmond-San Rafael Bridge.

[Nouvellecosse]

It would probably get better ridership if it was a direct rail connection to the city rather than requiring a transfer to a ferry. Any talk of extending it all the way downtown?

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

It would probably get better ridership if it was a direct rail connection to the city rather than requiring a transfer to a ferry. Any talk of extending it all the way downtown?

How? The railroad corridor does not cross the Bay on the Golden Gate Bridge.
The railroad corridor does not even get to the northern approaches of the GGB.

[Nouvellecosse]

Obviously it would require the construction of a tunnel or another bridge.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse

Obviously it would require the construction of a tunnel or another bridge.

Larkspur, the southern terminus for the SMART train, is at least 13 miles north of the Golden Gate Bridge, which is also at least 7 miles west of downtown San Francisco.
Who is going to fund these 20 miles of railroad track? Who is going to fund buying the right-of-way?
Which would be a faster ride, an additional 20 miles averaging 30 mph by train, or riding the ferry 13 or so miles averaging 20 mph? Believe it or not, the ferry would be faster at those average speeds.
Math:
20 / 30 x 60 = 40 minutes
13 / 20 x 60 = 39 minutes

[craigs]

A one-seat ride into downtown San Francisco via SMART would be ideal, but the terrain is just not going to make that practicable. The ferries are a better option, given there's none of the cost of constructing and maintaining rails, bridges, tunnels, etc., and service can be expanded and/or tailored as necessary. And ferry ridership is up in the Bay Area: acording to APTA's newest ridership report, some 21,900 trips are made on Bay Area ferry boats each workday. That is more trips than are made on entire regional light rail systems like Baltimore and Buffalo. It is a real transit option for people in Bay-focused communities.

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by craigs

A one-seat ride into downtown San Francisco via SMART would be ideal...

A one-seat ride into downtown San Francisco via BART would be ideal. Period. Full stop.

And it could be done by prioritizing and starting the planning for it right now. It may take a couple more decades before the stars align and the pieces fall together along with funding, but it's worth it. If all SF area agencies are acknowledging a second tube is necessary, then a Geary BART line would likely be part of that and if you are going to build Geary BART you might as well send it over the GG to Marin OR alternatively as I stated extend one Richmond terminating line over a new I-580 bridge (bridge will be 80 years old in another 20, and likely will be eventually replaced with a modern structure).

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

SMART is sort of exactly what you would imagine Marin and Sonoma would have being two counties that have spent decades opposing anything that would drive growth, in particular connectivity with the rest of the Bay Area with a real heavy rail rapid link. And though it wasn't entirely their fault they backed out of BART 50 years ago since San Mateo started the ball rolling and they didn't want to get caught holding the bag, it's that decision that has sort of passed into lore as a good decision for the counties as they believe it would have exploded "unwanted" growth. So, what they have is an isolated "system" of limited utility and performance suited more for rural Bavaria than a segment of the Bay Area metro with hundreds of thousands of residents, many of whom commute into SF or the East Bay which are served by rapid transit. Short of following through with the original plans of linking Marin over the GGB with BART, I can see an alternative possibility of getting BART to Marin and southern Sonoma in the next few decades over a new Richmond-San Rafael Bridge.

Marin doesn't have the density to support a BART-like service. That's the problem.

I'm not from San Francisco but when I went to Muir Woods last August, I took the bus along the 101 and I was surprised at how low density cities right across the bay from SF were. Building that link in the 70's might have helped shape these cities but as you said, they refused it back then.

[Busy Bee]

^The problem with that observation is the fact that BART already serves plenty of East Bay communities of similar if not identical levels of density.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

^The problem with that observation is the fact that BART already serves plenty of East Bay communities of similar if not identical levels of density.

Maybe, but when you add the sprawly nature of Marin county cities, it makes it very difficult to implement successful rapid transit compared to, say, Alameda County, where there are tightly packed cities and a normal street grid.

[Busy Bee]

I really have to disagree with you. If BART ever reaches Marin Co it likely would terminate in San Rafael and SMART or whatever they will be calling it then (electrification, grade sep's) will serve points north. I can see maybe 3-4 stations: A large park/ride station around the 101/131 interchange that serves Mill Valley to the west and points south ---> Larkspur (shared station with SMART) ---> Downtown San Rafael ---> and maybe a terminal as far north as Marin Civic Center (shared station with SMART). Depending on demand I could also eventually see an infill station in Marin City/Waldo. Alternatively a I-580 bridge routing would serve DT San Rafael and Marin Civic Center.

And again, the example to prove my point is not Alameda County. We all know Alameda has densities much higher than outer communities that are served by BART. The example I would use is central Contra Costa which I think is pretty comparable to Marin, and either a Golden Gate BART connection or one originating in Richmond that funneled Marin and Sonoma riders to SF and the East Bay would likely see similar ridership.

[SkahHigh]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

And again, the example to prove my point is not Alameda County. We all know Alameda has densities much higher than outer communities that are served by BART. The example I would use is central Contra Costa which I think is pretty comparable to Marin, and either a Golden Gate BART connection or one originating in Richmond that funneled Marin and Sonoma riders to SF and the East Bay would likely see similar ridership.

Oh sorry, I thought you included Alameda when you said East Bay. From what I can see, Contra Costa seems less dense than Alameda but not as sprawly as Marin (assuming you’re talking about Concord/Walnut Creek).

A BART link in Marin doesn’t seem like a great idea from an urban planning/smart transit perspective (relying heavily on park-and-ride) but I guess it gets people off the GGB

I’m sure the money spent on a hypothetical BART link into Marin would be better served elsewhere in the Bay Area, the North Bay being the largest and least populated area.

[Busy Bee]

Thanks Cirrus

[Pedestrian]

Originally Posted by SkahHigh

From what I can see, Contra Costa seems less dense than Alameda but not as sprawly as Marin (assuming you’re talking about Concord/Walnut Creek)..

Thinly populated is not the same as "sprawly". The question of Marin County's suitability for public transit aside, it is anything but "sprawly"; some might say it's the antithesis of "sprawly" since the portions open to development are severely restricted:

In the early 1970s, Marin policy makers began working to protect one of the most precious, and possibly overlooked, parts of the county. The open space of West Marin, according to the Marin County Parks Website, accounts for approximately 249 miles of road and trails, nearly 16,000 acres of lands and many thousands of additional acres, totaling 83 percent of land in Marin.

https://redwoodbark.org/53048/culture/when-environmentalism-meets-affordability/

The developed/built up part of Marin, with the exception of a few small communities, lies along Highway 101. The rest of the county is parkland or agricultural land whose development rights have been sold to preservationist non-profits. It cannot and will not be developed:


http://calag.ucanr.edu/Archive/?article=ca.v056n01p6

So if you are looking at population density as a criterion for the practicability of transit, perhaps you shouldn't look at the whole county but only at the actually developed strip along 101.