SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA: Transit/Transportation News - Page 31

mt_climber13 · #**601** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 4:36 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ltsmotorsport

Why does the peninsula still have stations for HSR? Wouldn't their service improvements through Caltrain be enough for them?

No kidding.
Redwood City?
Mountain View?

Can we build a stop at my friend's house in San Mateo?
There's a liquor store that I like to pick up lottery tickets in South San Francisco, can we have a stop there too?

mt_climber13 · #**602** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 4:37 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fflint

The San Jose Mercury News article on Caltrain electrification provides a Bay Area CAHSR map with potential stations, and notes that with electrification, "six Caltrains would run each hour." That's for each direction, meaning passengers would never wait longer than ten minutes during hours of operation.

Very nice. I made the mistake of taking CalTrain one time from South San Francisco to my home in SF. It took me 3 hours to get home. It's a 15 minute drive.

fflint · #**603** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 4:44 AM**

I'm not lobbying for any Penninsula station, let's make that clear.

Redwood City is probably a possible station because it is the San Mateo County seat. Palo Alto is about halfway up the corridor, has Stanford, and IMO the most lively and consistently pedestrianized downtown on the Penninsula. I have no idea why Mountain View would be a possible HSR station--I mean, its a very busy Caltrain station and has TOD, but I don't think it's any more urban or lively or transit-oriented than downtown San Mateo. Anyway, Burlingame has SFO so that one makes sense.

Gordo · #**604** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 5:10 AM**

Unless something has changed, the plan is this:

1. SFO airport station
2. One other station, of which the possibilities are Palo Alto, Redwood City, or Mountain View.

Palo Alto is the clear best choice, but also ground zero for the anti-HSR movement.

Gordo · #**605** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 5:12 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wakamesalad

Very nice. I made the mistake of taking CalTrain one time from South San Francisco to my home in SF. It took me 3 hours to get home. It's a 15 minute drive.

How did this happen? I can honestly say that I've never ridden Caltrain where it wasn't on schedule, give or take five minutes (and I've ridden hundreds of times). Was there some kind of wreck or something?

mt_climber13 · #**606** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 5:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gordo

How did this happen? I can honestly say that I've never ridden Caltrain where it wasn't on schedule, give or take five minutes (and I've ridden hundreds of times). Was there some kind of wreck or something?

Well, I missed the train by a few minutes. So I had to wait for about an hour for the next train to come. It took about 20 minutes until I departed the train in SF. Then I had to board 2 MUNI buses, the 30 Stockton and the 1 California. By the time I got home 3 hours had passed. That's MUNI for ya.

I didn't verify any type of schedule before going to the station, but I think that public transit works best if you just show up at whatever moment and a train/ bus arrives in 5- 10 minutes, at the latest. People shouldn't have to coordinate their schedules around catching a once an hour train.

peanut gallery · #**607** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 7:07 AM**

SFO certainly makes sense. For one thing, there's already infrastructure and service in place for people arriving from a distance with nothing but luggage. As for the other three options, Palo Alto has to be the place to stop for the reasons fflint mentioned. Plus, I think it would be a fairly popular destination. The others will be well served by CalTrain -- which I am incredibly excited about.

M II A II R II K · #**608** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 1:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by fflint

The Penninsula rail corridor may or may not eventually offer BART's long hours and frequent night/weekend service, but for much of the weekday, passengers will be able to just show up on the platform and board a train in a very manageable, short span of time. The combined CAHSR/Caltrain corridor may even beat out BART's service frequency on the outer lines, at least for much of the day.

They could run the double decker trains every hour off peak and provide express service and run an ALRT along it every hour for local service and even add more stations along the route once it's electrified.

Plus every 10 minutes the double deckers would probably be more than half empty which is a waste of running a big train like that.

fflint · #**609** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 8:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

Plus every 10 minutes the double deckers would probably be more than half empty which is a waste of running a big train like that.

Why do you think trains will be half-empty once the system is electrified in 2019? Caltrain ridership has grown tremendously as the trains rolled faster and more often. Average daily ridership increased from 27,191 in 2002 to 41,442 in 2012 due to the introduction and expansion of Baby Bullet and express service. Why would you assume even faster trains running even more often would fail to grow ridership in a similar fashion?

M II A II R II K · #**610** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 9:32 PM**

For commuter rail, double deckers only seem to be full during rush hour.

fflint · #**611** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 9:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

For commuter rail, double deckers only seem to be full during rush hour.

You base a prediction about future ridership on this? Really?

Gordo · #**612** Posted **Mar 30, 2012, 10:46 PM**

Lol Mark

Caltrain already functions much differently than most "commuter rail," and with the frequencies increasing it will basically be a metro-type service.

I think the night-time service is kind of a chicken/egg thing - as soon as frequencies are increased during the day, more people will begin to ride and depend on Caltrain, which will increase calls for night service, etc.

I would be absolutely shocked to see Caltrain go to every ten minute service during most of the day and not add some night service somewhere along the lines of what BART has.

M II A II R II K · #**613** Posted **Apr 3, 2012, 4:18 PM**

After 100 Years, Muni Has Gotten Slower

March 31, 2012

By ZUSHA ELINSON

Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/us...s-of-1912.html

Quote:

.....

In 1920, the F-Stockton streetcar carried passengers from the Financial District at Market and Stockton Streets all the way to the Marina at Chestnut and Scott Streets in a zippy 17 minutes. Today a very similar trip on the 30-Stockton, the successor to the F-Stockton, takes a half-hour if the stars are properly aligned.

- In 1920, the B line, replaced by the busy 38-Geary in 1956, departed from the spot where the ferry building stands today and zoomed out to near Ocean Beach in 35 minutes. The fare was a nickel. Today a similar $2 trip on the 38-Geary takes 54 minutes, while the 38 Limited, which makes fewer stops, takes 43 minutes. Many of the early Muni lines were faster because of “less competition for street space — there was no surface traffic, and the streetcars would fly through,” said Rick Laubscher, president of Market Street Railway, a nonprofit group dedicated to preserving Muni’s history.

- Building the Market Street subway in 1980 was supposed to speed the streetcars that traveled on crowded Market Street before heading off to the foggy outer limits of the city. But even lines that now use the tunnel, like the N-Judah and the L-Taraval, have not become faster over the past century. The popular N-Judah, born in 1928 with the opening of the Sunset Tunnel, made it from the ferries to Ocean Beach in 33.5 minutes more than 80 years ago. Today the same trip is scheduled at 38 minutes. The L-Taraval, which runs underground for 5.5 miles from the Embarcadero station before emerging at the West Portal station, now takes 36 minutes to take passengers out to the zoo, the same as it did in 1939. Riders of the K-Ingleside and the J-Church, at least, have reason to rejoice. Both lines have sped up three minutes since 1920, although the J-Church is still chugging along at its 1939 rate.

.....

fflint · #**614** Posted **Apr 3, 2012, 10:05 PM**

^Here is the most critical part of that article: today, private automobiles (and all the traffic-control they engender) choke the city streets and slow down street-running public transit.

Quote:

Originally Posted by the article

“Streetcars ruled the road, and there wasn’t much getting in the way — no car traffic — and we didn’t have all the traffic lights and stop signs,” said Peter Straus, a retired Muni service planner. “Back then it was basically ‘load and go,’ ” he added, “and there was nothing to slow them down.”
....
Many of the early Muni lines were faster because of “less competition for street space — there was no surface traffic, and the streetcars would fly through,” said Rick Laubscher, president of Market Street Railway, a nonprofit group dedicated to preserving Muni’s history.
....
Commuters pining for the quick old days of Muni may soon get some relief. Officials at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency are preparing a plan to speed several routes, including the 30, the J and the N.

This is scheduled to be done by removing stop signs, programming traffic signals so they stay green for buses, creating additional bus-only traffic lanes and removing some bus stops. The plan is known as the Transit Effectiveness Project.

M II A II R II K · #**615** Posted **Apr 3, 2012, 10:43 PM**

If those streets aren't wide enough to separate them from traffic then those routes should be buried, and run in the middle of a wide street but with full priority. Although of course finding the money for it is another story.

CyberEric · #**616** Posted **Apr 5, 2012, 4:26 AM**

Exactly!
I can't wait til Muni gets signal priority, way way overdue.

northbay · #**617** Posted **Apr 6, 2012, 9:02 PM**

Quote:

South City ferry finally sails in, will charge $7

By: Will Reisman | 04/05/12 8:53 AM
SF Examiner Staff Writer

mike koozmin/The s.f. examiner

Ferry service between South San Francisco and the East Bay is set to begin this summer after years of delays, and passengers can get information on how much the ride will cost.

The Water Emergency Transportation Authority, which operates the ferry, has proposed one-way fares of $7. Seniors, youths and the disabled will pay $3.50 fares, and children under 5 ride free. The trip clocks in at 35 minutes.

Nina Rannells, executive director of the water authority, said the fare proposal was reached after receiving feedback from more than 200 potential riders. She also said it was comparable to other Bay-crossing transit systems — the fare for a similar trip via BART, including a shuttle and parking fees, can cost up to $6.40, and ferry service from Oakland to San Francisco is $6.25.

Today, the authority’s board of directors will vote on the proposal. If approved, the fare system will be in place for the scheduled opening of service June 4.

Rannells said the authority projects anywhere from 200 to 300 daily passengers in the first year, although she conceded those estimates could vary...

Originally projected to open in 2005, the ferry service has been consistently beset by funding problems.

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/tran...-will-charge-7

CyberEric · #**618** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 12:45 AM**

Oh that sounds like great news! They should have trips up to the City as well.

fflint · #**619** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 9:00 PM**

Bullet train won't make it to Anaheim in latest high-speed rail plan
Los Angeles Times
April 6, 2012

The California bullet train project has dropped a link to Anaheim from its current $68-billion plan, officials confirmed Friday, marking a significant departure for the Bay Area-to-Southern California high-speed rail system that state voters approved in 2008.

Under revised plans, the first phase of the line would have its southern terminus near downtown Los Angeles rather than in Orange County.

Bullet train passengers would have to transfer to slower Metrolink or Amtrak trains in Los Angeles to reach Anaheim, Orange County’s largest city. Until now, officials had vowed that under the first phase, the bullet trains would whisk riders about 40 miles southeast of downtown to the Disneyland area.
....
Electrifying and improving the Los Angeles to Orange County route would cost $6 billion and save only 10 minutes of travel time, said rail authority Chairman Dan Richard.

“Why would we do that, pay $600 million per minute?” he said in an interview.

Richard said the savings to be achieved by dropping an Anaheim link from the initial construction plans made financial sense.
....

ardecila · #**620** Posted **Apr 7, 2012, 11:05 PM**

This isn't a Bay Area story really... but it only seems fair if Oakland and Sacramento won't get direct connections in the first phase either.

Does it really matter if OC get screwed over? Did they ever even support HSR in the first place?

Hopefully, CAHSR can work with Metrolink to make cross-platform transfers with the Orange County Line.