SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News

[ardecila]

Originally Posted by northbay

thanks colemonkee!

as for ebart, let me get this straight. a person traveling east on bart has to wait at the pittsburg/bay point station, then travel to a second pittsburg station some hundreds of feet away where they transfer? i honestly dont know the area but was it really impossible to bring ebart to the existing pittsburg station, rather then having a transfer station completely isolated in the middle of a freeway a hop, skip and jump away? what about someone traveling west to the current pittsburg station from antoich. would they have to transfer to conventional bart for the few hundred feet or so, or would the bart completely skip the current station?

anybody? i'm so confused at this setup.

You're correct. The transfer platform will be in addition to the existing Pittsburg/Bay Point station. Passengers won't be able to exit the system at the transfer platform, only change trains.

This is a cost saving measure, I think. The median of SR-4 is used as a train storage area by BART. Bringing the DMUs to the existing Pittsburg station would eliminate virtually all of BART's train storage tracks. The alternative is to widen the highway to allow for a wider median, but that would increase the cost dramatically.

It's obviously not ideal. I'm guessing that the long-term goal is to move the transfer point further west to the existing station, which is why the transfer platform is being built pretty bare-bones.

[Busy Bee]

In reality how much more would it have cost to just run catenary this distance and operate clean EMU's instead of diesels?

[dimondpark]

Bay Area loses out on high-speed rail

And we have the obstructionists and NIMBYs in Menlo Park, Palo Alto and environs to thank, in good part, for blowing it

As reported on SFGate by AP, the first segment of line between San Francisco and Anaheim will be built "in the middle of Central Valley farmlands, far away from either urban center."

...

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...#ixzz14QCGHi6m

They should have went with the Altamont Route considering the population growth projections for the Bay Area and its neighbors.

[northbay]

^ the cahsr board didn't have much choice as the federal government specified that all of the 4 something billion its so far given cali has to go the the central valley segment(s). it was either start in the central valley or forfeit all federal money
(for more info: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/46985)

as for the ebart setup, thanks ardecila for the clarification. seems rather ridiculous though

[Busy Bee]

Originally Posted by dimondpark

They should have went with the Altamont Route considering the population growth projections for the Bay Area and its neighbors.

That hardly makes a difference since this is a High Speed Train not a rapid transit/commuter rail line that serves local bedroom communities with many stops.

[fflint]

BART wasn't the only transit agency to carry massive numbers of riders Wednesday--check out the stats!

Muni: 900,000
BART: 522,200
Caltrain: 65,000
Golden Gate Ferry: 12,800

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAJC1G7FI0.DTL

[gtbassett]

Riding Muni that day was a nightmare, and I didn't even go to the parade!

[northbay]

here's some bad news in my part of the bay:

SMART votes to start train, delay Cloverdale, Larkspur legs


KENT PORTER/The Press Democrat
Matt Stevens of the SMART public outreach holds a times-up placard for David Schonbrunn of San Rafael during a public question period at a SMART special meeting in Santa Rosa on Saturday.

By BOB NORBERG
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT

Published: Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 3:31 p.m.
Last Modified: Saturday, November 6, 2010 at 5:48 p.m.

Sonoma-Marin Area Rail District directors, facing a $350 million funding gap, chose Saturday to build an initial line from Railroad Square in Santa Rosa to the Marin Civic Center, with extensions delayed to Cloverdale and Larkspur.

“What we did today was put the SMART train on the tracks for 2014,” said Debora Fudge, SMART chairwoman. “The train is now a reality.”

But it also is significantly less than the 70-mile line promised voters in 2008, when a quarter-cent sales tax hike to help pay for the commute train and accompanying bicycle path was approved by a large margin. Completion of the entire line could take another two to four years.

Directors at the special board meeting said it was important to get a train going, despite the economic downturn that has sliced into tax revenue and bond funding.

“No one saw the tsunami that headed our way and I am saddened we can't do the whole magilla, but we have to get something going,” said Charles McGlashan, a SMART director from Marin County.

The decision was made after a six-hour workshop Saturday that compared the latest cost estimates to build the line to the projections of sales tax revenues and other funds to pay for it. It passed with 10 votes in favor, one no vote and one abstention.

Director Madeline Kellner, a Novato city councilwoman, voted against the proposal, saying the line would be too short to capture significant ridership.

“It doesn't make sense, it is only half a train,” Kellner said.

Director Judy Arnold of San Rafael abstained, saying she wanted the final vote postponed until the board's meeting Wednesday in San Rafael, where Marin residents could get a chance to voice their opinions.

A contingent of Cloverdale residents at the meeting wore “No Taxation without Transportation” placards.

“We are fearful that if you do an initial phase and leave Cloverdale out, we will stay out,” said Elissa Morrash of the Cloverdale of Chamber of Commerce. “People will hear that and not like it....We deserve better.”

Supporters, however, said there was no other choice.

“We have an ambitious plan and we have no choice but to split it up,” said Jim Eddie, a SMART director from Mendocino County. “You can bite off more than you can chew, but you can chew more if you take smaller bites.”

The cost to build a line from Cloverdale to Larkspur is now estimated to cost $695 million, an increase of 18 percent because of unexpected costs, such as having to replace the bridges over the Petaluma River and over the Russian River in Healdsburg.

Because of the decline in sales tax revenues and a weak bond market, however, SMART only has $350 million for construction, which is 25 less than expected.

John Lackey, SMART's capital projects director, said the agency has identified enough savings to bridge the gap between what the first phase of construction would cost, $395 million, and the $350 million that is available.

Under the plan, SMART staff will seek bids on construction of the train stations, a Santa Rosa maintenance facility and all the operational systems needed to run trains from the Civic Center and Railroad Square as the end stations.

It would serve an estimated 57 percent of the ridership along 40 miles.

...

FOR FULL ARTICLE: http://www.pressdemocrat.com/article...1349?p=1&tc=pg

[Busy Bee]

MAybe they'd save some cash if they'd gone with standard off the shelf rolling stock instead of reinventing the wheel with one of a kind FRA compliant trains.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

MAybe they'd save some cash if they'd gone with standard off the shelf rolling stock instead of reinventing the wheel with one of a kind FRA compliant trains.

locomotives would be too big for San Rafael station since it would have to fit within a city block, and non compliant would create complications with plans to reintroduce freight service. smart is already having a hard time negotiating with the north coast rail authority over their planned use of smart's rails for their freight trains.

[electricron]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

MAybe they'd save some cash if they'd gone with standard off the shelf rolling stock instead of reinventing the wheel with one of a kind FRA compliant trains.

Maybe you should look at locomotive and railcar bids nationally before suggesting SMART is spending too much on DMUs. Since you didn't, here it is....

9 married pairs DMU (18 railcars for SMART) = $57 Million total = $3.2 million per railcar
Source = http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BATN/message/46853

19 MP36-3C locomotives for VRE = $77 million total = $4 million per locomotive
VRE has just recently ordered a 20th locomotive at the same price.
Source = http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...080306678.html

22 Bombardier Bi-Level railcars for Montreal = $44 million total = $2 Million per railcar.
Source = http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Bombar.....-a0107945214

Let's assume each train has a minimum of 2 passenger cars in it's consist.
Locomotive + railcars = $2M + $2M + $4M = $8 Million
DMU married pairs = $3.2M + $3.2M = $6.4 Million

Looks like to me that the DMU route SMART chose is $1.6 Million cheaper per train. Considering they're planning on buying 9 trains, a total of $14.4 Million cheaper.

Add the consideration that eventually SMART may want to increase the trains capacity to three railcars, another $3.2 Million DMU can be added, each DMU train would now cost $9.4 Million. Likewise, adding another railcar to a traditional train, it would now cost $10 Million each. Therefore, there would still be a savings of $0.6 Million per train.
Locomotive + railcars = $2M + $2M + $2M + $4M = $10 Million
DMU triple set = $3.2M + $3.2M+ $3.2M = $9.6 Million

As for operating costs, most would suggest it's around 4 DMUs (two married pairs) where fuel consumption breaks even with a traditional locomotive and 4 passenger cars. At 2 DMUs, the DMUs should be much cheaper to operate.

So, I wouldn't state offhand that SMART has chosen more expensive trains, in fact, I would argue just the opposite..............

As for squeezing the train into a city block, the DMU trains do so far easier as Northbay suggested. Since each railcar or DMU is 85 feet long...
Typical short city block = 300 ft.
3 x 85 ft = 256 ft.
MP36-3C locomotive = 68 ft.
Therefore.....
3 DMU train = 256 ft.
3 railcar + Locomotive = 256 ft + 68 ft = 324 ft.

Wow! A three car traditional train doesn't fit in a city block, so it would block city one or two streets for the length of time the train is at that train station.

[Busy Bee]

Hold your horses for darn sake. What made either of you assume I was talking about powered locomotive - coach consists? I was referring to standard non-FRA compliant European DMU equipment. The desire for freight service on the same ROW with an operating non-FRA DMU vehicle(s) is simple: limit freight operations to overnight hours with no passenger service. There, problem solved, now get the freaking thing built forgodsakes.

[northbay]

Originally Posted by Busy Bee

Hold your horses for darn sake. What made either of you assume I was talking about powered locomotive - coach consists? I was referring to standard non-FRA compliant European DMU equipment. The desire for freight service on the same ROW with an operating non-FRA DMU vehicle(s) is simple: limit freight operations to overnight hours with no passenger service. There, problem solved, now get the freaking thing built forgodsakes.

like i said, the freight rail company isn't even agreeing to the current windows of operation - there's no way they would agree to operating only at night along a very highly populated corridor (blowing their horns in the middle of night is NOT how smart got their sales tax measure to pass). unfortunately, freight only at night is too publicly unpopular and impractical.

smart made the right choice. though yes it will probably add to the timetable to get smart up and running.

[fflint]

Dumbarton Rail back on track, but still faces funding shortage

By Bonnie Eslinger
Daily News Staff Writer
Posted: 11/10/2010 07:41:03 AM PST

San Mateo County officials have revived a plan to restore the Dumbarton rail bridge for commuter train service between the Peninsula and East Bay, saying funding and ridership look promising for the $700 million transportation project....

The newfound support for Dumbarton Rail is due in part to updated ridership projections, which show the line would attract 6,000 to 8,000 daily riders by 2035....

Also, while a 2005 plan envisioned peak hour service from Union City to San Francisco and San Jose in the morning and back again in the evening, Lee said more options are on the table now, including hourly service in both directions....

http://www.contracostatimes.com/cali...nclick_check=1

[CyberEric]

Thanks for making me aware of this in the other thread. The link doesn't seem to work.

So would this be BART, or Caltrain?

[fflint]

Originally Posted by CyberEric

Thanks for making me aware of this in the other thread. The link doesn't seem to work.

So would this be BART, or Caltrain?

It would be commuter rail like Caltrain.

[BrennanW]

Are we sure it would be operated by CalTrain and not another East Bay agency like ACE? Also, on the East Bay, where is the terminus going to be, and how far is total funding shored up, like annual operating costs, rolling stock, infrastructure.

Is there already designated ROW on either end of the bridge? Stations, etc?

What will happen when BART finally gets built under San Jose? Does this become redundant or work in Cooperation like Metra and CTA in Chicago?

Sorry for the myriad of questions. I'm very interested in this kind of forward transit planning.

[manrush]

It would be interesting to see a 3rd rail version of the Alstom X'trapolis used as the new BART trainset.

Some examples of 1676mm gauge X'trapolis trains used in the Valparaiso regional metro.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2583/...bb42370046.jpg


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2801/...623f245861.jpg


http://www.flickr.com/photos/3486874...-55446023@N00/

[Busy Bee]

Not gonna happen. If they were going to spend the extra money for electric propulsion infrastructure they would have just made it a simple extension of BART.

Edit: Wait, nevermind. I thought you were talking about eBART.

[Gordo]

The Dumbarton plan is to be run by Caltrain, at least as far as I know. Some details on the plan here: http://www.bayrailalliance.org/dumbarton_rail

As far as being "redundant" to BART, no. Caltrain is already faster from SJ to SF than BART will be when the SJ leg is completed, so BART to SJ to really for East Bay destinations (sort of...it's mostly an easy way to piss away $6 billion in transit funds...)

Dumbarton rail would just allow southern East Bay folks a faster trip up the peninsula and into SF and could potentially be used to connect services like ACE to the peninsula. It could also be used to route folks south to SJ and other Caltrain stations before SJ.