HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 06151996 - 1.78 •
Modern Transit Society `h
of the east bay • ■
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
June 3, 1993
Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors RECEIVE®
651 Pine St., 1 st Floor
Martinez, CA 94553 7
gpNBORS
CLERK
COOpRTA CO.
Dear Members of the Board:
Recently California Assembly Member Barbara Lee has introduced ACR 31, a measure
which would direct the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to study the concept and
feasibility of reestablishing rail transit service on the Bay Bridge. This resolution is essentially a
reintroduction of ACR 107 of 1992, which unanimously passed the Assembly on May 13, 1992,
only to die in the Senate Transportation Commission. We believe the chances for Senate passage
are better this year, especially if we gain significant endorsements.
The proposed rail service, dubbed BayLink by its supporters, has achieved wide publicity
due to the conference put on by the Modern Transit Society last year. Over one million people
viewed some form of TV coverage of the conference, due largely to a good publicity campaign
and a video we made showing live-action footage of Bay Bridge with one traffic lane replaced
by a computer-animated train. What this means is that the Bay Area is primed for the study and
subsequent implementation of service. This work has cut years off of the effort of educating the
populace about the benefits BayLink and other transit improvements can offer. Many local
groups have also endorsed BayLink, including Sierra Club, Urban Habitat, Urban Ecology,
Greenpeace, and Planning and Conservation League.
Despite the excellent work done so far, the next step is still essential: the passage of ACR
31. The endorsement of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors is very important to this
resolution. MTS is proposing three possible users of the Bridge railway: AC Transit operating
light rail, BART operating electrified commuter expresses, and Amtrak or other operator provid-
� �. CA—C .
:>
:.
.:.:..:::..::::::::............. ... .
..::::::::.:::::: ea r:::: vnc�rn�:nl.GR3 »>::» >:F:.........
ing high-speed rail connections. Benefits to Contra Costa County would be tremendous: a major
public works program offering permanent jobs; creation of redevelopment opportunities along
new rail corridors; a substantial diversion of drivers to transit, especially on I-80; and a chance to
win the Bay Area's battle for mobility, clean air, and equity.
Therefore we have taken the liberty of drafting a Resolution in Support of ACR31 for
your consideration. MTS urges that the Board expeditiously vote to approve this or similar
resolution, the effect of which is to endorse Barbara Lee's ACR 31 and direct MTC to study
BayLink. Enclosed please find documents which describe BayLink in detail.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions. Thank you for supporting improved
transportation.
Very truly yours,
�Pvr'cA�
David J. Llewellyn
East Bay MTS Coordinator
- 2 -
i/
Draft Resolution in Support of ACR31
for Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors
WHEREAS, AC Transit has concluded a study of alternative transportation modes for
the East Bay, which has indicated that light rail service is appropriate for some corridors;
and
WHEREAS, AC Transit provides an important transbay bus service, which is expected to
grow; and
WHEREAS, the aforementioned study did not investigate whether tr isbay transit
service could be better supplied by alternative transportation modes, such as light rail;
and
WHEREAS, the San Francisco -- Oakland Bay Bridge and the San Francisco Bay Area
Rapid Transit transbay tube have been operating at full or nearly full capacity for some
time, creating a market for additional transbay transit service; and
WHEREAS, the lack of a standard-gauge rail link across the Bay segments the region's
rail transit system, impeding the development of a truly regional transit network; and
WHEREAS, reestablishing transbay passenger rail services could significantly assist the
Bay Area in attaining mandated clean air, economic development, and mobility goals;
and
WHEREAS, Assembly Member Barbara Lee has introduced Assembly Concurrent
Resolution 31 (ACR 31), which would direct the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission to conduct a study of the feasibility of reestablishing passenger rail service
on the Bay Bridge, in consultation with Contra Costa County and other interested parties;
now, therefore be it
Resolved by the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors:
That the Board supports ACR 31, and transmits a letter indicating such support to the
California Assembly, the California Senate, the Metropolitan Transportation
Commission, the Contra Costa Board of Supervisors, the San Francisco Board of
Supervisors, the city councils of Alameda and Contra Costa County cities, the San
Francisco Municipal Railway, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Board of
Directors, Alameda - Contra Costa Transit District Board of Directors, the Peninsula
Caltrain Joint Powers Board, and other interested parties.
ayLink
..................
... ....... .
................
.............
....... ............
..........:.............
.....................
GeHing .the BaY Area
MlovingAgain
Modern Transit Society of the East Bay
Modern Transit Society mil
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
Introducing the Modern Transit Society
The first chapter of the Modern Transit Society was founded in San Jose in 1980, and was
soon followed by a chapter in Sacramento.Both chapters were instrumental in winning approval and
construction of light-rail systems in their respective cities.Both systems have had immediate positive
effects on their urban environments,livening up what had previously been sleepy downtowns.Night
life and business has grown with the systems.In addition,MTS first suggested the successful Capitol
Corridor trains linking San Jose, Oakland, and Sacramento.
New chapters of the Modern Transit Society are springing up wherever people realize the
difference excellent transit can make to their towns. Chapters in the San Francisco East Bay, San
Francisco,Davis, and Napa have formed in just the last two years, and are actively pursuing local
transit improvement projects. Overall MTS membership is close to seven hundred.
MTS is loosely structured. Our acclaimed color newsletter,Moving People,is published in
Sacramento and includes contributions from all chapters. Each chapter sets its own projects and
priorities, but chapters do cooperate on appropriate projects. Emphasis is on local transportation,
rather thanthe intercity emphasis ofTRAC andNARP.Our overall philosophy is pro-active,actively
designing new services and seeking improvement in existing systems.
While MTS believes that any major urban transit system must include a strong rail backbone
to survive and attractmiddle-class riders,we are not"rail nuts".We are aware of the vital role of buses,
whatever their powerplant technology.Improving bus systems and their rail connections is a major
goal of all chapters.
In the San Francisco Bay Area,the major project is the BayLink plan—a bold proposal to
construct a rail line across the Bay Bridge to be fed by a network of light-rail lines and commuter
expresses fanning throughout the East Bay.This plan has gained significant support,and we expect
shortly to have a resolution before the California Assembly mandating a study of this proposal.We
believe that BayLink will revitalize downtown Oakland,Berkeley and other East Bay cities,reduce
congestion and pollution, and provide sustainable jobs for the communities served.
to J r U
cd P+ OSa O ►,. t
C9 �` PA C3 0
°„ FA 0 O
° G° �o � � �, 30�, .o c°� o
o ai y U o�° U Cs � ra o
� Wo � �r- taG
,.
10-4
00, oci
a .o 0 'U rd G o G ,U�, UGH rd O t�t1
.v C15o o ai
o a Z O o ,, o +^ . �
_ O o p+°� G o O
�y y vc�3 a oo ° ° �Groo'�
+� O +� o -'
O W
O �G S1 0 U �' � bn0;� 0 y G o � U
C3 0 o U H U
* N'd PA
o CPU,
�icd . I
0-0
0)
tZ.5 0 jo 0 0 0
Zo- 0 0 6
'O'o G
- 0 51
t 0 0
0 Vp, 5�- " -r' r, 0 4
•dU��.vy r v C
0 C)
0
0
0 eA
o 'o"o
At
> 0 " 0
0 0
AOA 0
0 0 0) 00 s
0 bD �o W
51 '!,
t*� 0 0
A'
tD W A L
tD 'o
C6 0 4) �
A-4
0 0
rev0 c>
t n & ';�
U,+
0
o -4
-1 0 -A W G G (L) - ':� 'd - .40�
0 I'd o o
'r) Oa 0 fl) ?;:;t 0
IPA tn 0
Ce) . t 0 iA
o
Ch-A 0-A
4 A'
0
%'o
A";e-
o 'o
0 0 'a.)
O -A 0
cr
lod ') A C) 0 A ce)
O' o w o
";*A- )
o bi
-A iA
% 's '�i ss t6t
W
✓IrA r V- Z.11 0)
:>
0
'et
00
CA C4
co a)
.0
C4 cf) 0 AS
.A 'd
1� c)
0 1 0 to
0
tn
o
rA)
too
A 0 'r;!l 0 Vto &
u p
PA A-J' tb 0 0 w. ..0.
-�o d PA 6
ca v
V'A
A.A
G a'
A.A. os rd 0
o' o o Q -� 0
0. 45 r.
x-
t
rJA o rd, tf) & I
A-0 A-0
�D' toll
0
cs tD 0) 0 . 0
voU 4) 00
0 X!;e, C> —0 q 0 bb" , 0 td)
101) 00
'p 0 11 -;� ri 4) s 05 01- to
PA top 0 0) to tn 'i3 tD t-404
�HH
-0 'a) 0 '�s
tord 0 0) AS. I-I
Id ir, bo
�0� moot
Wa
t
%.o 0) q) S� tb"d 4) 4) ci o
ioD . . 0 0
o
0 o 0 tn 0 -0 ts)
0
IPA 0 0 ir- '> E''
0,0 CPS
'tD 0 °U.4-A "*
w 0 - 0 Q 0 >
cj
.
r'j U to *
cd
0
0
CA) p 0 0*?
%
0 ILI)
A
0 c
C4
cls 'd A 0 cr)(m) ce)
ch 0 0
(
ca
00
C4
(D
0 a) 0 0,19 °" a) 4) aa 0
0
C) w �4 4 Q
(D� u 0 w 04
0 .4 , 0 Cd
-le� -.;-6 OV 0)
Q 04 04 C)
4.1 V o
cn fn w s.
0 0
Cd cd +t„+to tFtt 41) bjo 0
OO a) a) 0
Cl Cj 0 04 cd (1) - W
r, 0
-N. �) cd 0 cd 0 —
Uo o 0
>, 0 (1) Q) (1
'd 0 0 x 0
0 U
0 10 V 4� (L
10 Cd
0
cd bO C.) V (D 4C.A) 04 o
-4--J I� ."-- P4 0 1�0
0 0 . 4-a *5 r °° o '
9
0 Z .-, .,
0 14 0 0 0 W
.,q 044 -0w 1 V
'w
0 0
Cd 0 4-J 0
0 0
to
L)
ob U �
0 V 0 0-% OAV 0
C.)
0 0 4c)
02 0 04 41
010 0 4V blD Q) W 0 >0
cd
V I.V 4 0 0
141 E
4cd (�D. cd
013 0 W 0
N cd
cl > 0 cd -0 g
Q)
000
0 '0' 0 C)0 4-J
w
A) 0 'Zl
4U m w -W tj 0 0 04, Q cn Cd
0 Q) to q) Cd a) q) bo v 0 V Cd
4., :i 0 cd 'o -r, -� 24 :�. V-.8 � o a) ,
16.4 0 04
0 E4 >� 134
0 (4) 0) cd 0 C4
0
-0 V A4 0 V
04
0 0 0 4) 04 P4
0 �3 UH
0 4 t44 o td 00 0
,-, Cd 0 0 o hH
--4 Cq V) 'V 10 GC t�,- 00 M C) 1-4 Cq C4) V ht� CO t- 00 M to t- M 0 Cq C')
1-44e' 0 blD -4J (1) 4)7g (1) w 4)4 0) 0) 0 >, W 4)
0 a.r` �O-0.- bo ..0. -Sj CdV-jo td -,d -- "I 'B 4) Q
cd o ('14) -r. 4-o
4-j I�Q blD bO Z
Q .Q 0)
txo Cd 0 U) V
Aj 1.2 4) �s
C13 u
(L) Cd 0 a) a) Cd
0 > cd 0
Cd > 'o
cd
0 C'., a) �o
cn �-4 0 Q >
Q)
bO rn o
aij = a) -1 ej bO ,.a
V > C4-1 W
ca cl 4-j
o 79 11 .1 00 �0. 0 >, ap 2 x A. 'AJb -bo rn
0 4-) . V
4) co 2 0 0
0 -,-4 (1) - E -C'
0 2 e 4
W)
0 Tl 4) �
�+4 �4 C) Q45
0 os en o 04
0 0 0
0 C.)
0 1-4 bJD 0 04 4r4, w 4)
40J— 0 4)
w V�Q C/) 4) 04 0 0 C3 Cd 0 o 45-s"
v 04 > 4) r. 0 P4 C.)
0 oV .0 04 0 '41 4 9 -.- •-1� o
0, 0 6bC4. 4-1 0 o ,d 08
a1 aSb b 0 0 14. Zj 0 1
0 cd cd 4-j cd (1) o
04 0 0
0 1-4
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 bb 0'bf
0 w bo 0 V(L) V 00,0cu
(4) 'El o o
--4 42 04= -Z -r'"�a " Q Cd .5 0
1-4 1.4 0 t: 04. 0 o co Cd -W 0 rn cd
C) C.) g C: � blD- %4;4 �4 > 1.4-4 04
W)4-A Cd o Q) (1) 6 .9�2 M, -1 m > ow Cd
a) P4 0 0404 V
0 C.) a) 164 Q)V rn 10 cd
Cd .. 0 V C-) 0
0 ' En
$_4 Cd 4) 9V 04V V -60 o CS
bO W) cd L*.., :3 0 04 Q) 0 0
�: 0 C.1;4
0 0 cd bO� 0 Cd oo 0
U0 0-0 0 > 03 U
Zi Cd C-) (n ." , 4) 0 U U bID6 OU . 130 0 "-04
41
-0 cd id 0 — (1) bO bO
(L) Cd V V cq o V cq. k
CA
0 P4 0 0gCd ,I c)7 0 0 0 >0 0 t44
0 r.
P4 co C.) U 0 Q 4.0 0 1-0.4 0 Q cd 0 9 44)
U -4 cq co v m (D r- w m o -, N m 10 (D 1� x m 0 0 cq M V 10 (0 r- M
r-4 -4 x•4 ' 4 Cq N C11 m C13 C4) C43
Modern Transit Society Hal
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
BayLink: an affordable rail system
for the bay area
Summary
BayLink is a proposed rapid-transit rail system linking the East Bay and Sacramento with San
Francisco and Peninsula,via a rail line on the Bay Bridge.This line could easily carry 40,000 people
per hour peak,the equivalent of twenty freeway lanes.Three basic systems would use this line: an
East Bay light rail network,a commuter express running on existing rail right of way,and an intercity
high speed service from Los Angeles.
Each of the three proposed services would terminate in the Transbay Terminal in San
Francisco.It would also be possible,once Peninsula rail service is extended to Transbay,to operate
through service from Sacramento to the Peninsula and S.F. Airport.
Costs for the entire system are low:about$700 million for a 40-mile electrified rail network
(not including high speed service),light-rail fleet,Transbay rehabilitation,Bay Bridge Rail Facility,
Eastshore rail electrification, and stations —all for about what the Cypress 1.5 mile replacement
would cost!
By providing adequate Transbay and Peninsula service for the first time, BayLink will
alleviate the need to build a"Second Crossing Bridge" and widen I-80 any time soon.
Ridership will be high, far higher per dollar and in absolute terms than any of the BART
extension plans now underway. This is due to the close-in nature of the service areas,high density
of service,excellent BART,bus and Amtrak connectivity,and rapid speeds allowed by modern low-
floor rail vehicles.Areas targeted for service are those for which transit is not now time-competitive
with the private automobile.By providing time-competitive transit,large mode shift is guaranteed,
particularly for S.F.and Peninsula-bound trips.Thus BayLink will substantially and rapidly reduce
traffic on the critical inner-Bay freeways to a degree unachievable by any other current transit
expansion proposal.
BayLink's moderate cost, quick implementation time, and high utility will help convince
voters that.transit can work,that it must be funded with future rail bonds and other measures, and
that the steps being taken to achieve clean air are worth the effort and are in capable hands.
- 1 -
dost...._ fi
eR�
Routes
New
E
•
Ba Ex LRT
New AC
Tran. . .
Light R-aiii
t
Others
Existing
BART Lines
Existin
Amtrap
Locall AC
LRT Routes
r
m � �
�� � . - �,n • -n�q�a f1-�_a��.
.1
i}:.....;:i::;:i v'•...................
.....i:;fii i:i?i::::i:::::::::?•:t?:::}'; ii: .:::::::..iii: '`%;:��`���''?�v::i?::::••i :::':.:ii i�•::•ii:i:
..IM IY! ::•:!.•: l 11Ifi:::'Y.TMY,M.' :ii:}:::i::iii :'iiii: is i%:i`:?:::i::y:i::i::::::i::i::.........:::::v::i:i::::::ii:
::.::.:.::::::: ::::::::.::::::::::::::::::.::::::::.: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: b .l�.... ::.::::::::::::::::::.;'::::::::::::::::::::<:.;:::
Perk&Ride
How to
Give Rail \
Transit A - \
Dominant
Share of
Transbay M CWdtO DO N
Trips
krn Urkie�s
W \ EI Cerrito
I
np EI
BART LU
New Aron ny \
Where Tra \ \
Becomes r \� we
Competitive No. '
E_zistla Areas-s_ \ \
Where Transit°==:s;_= W. a Berkeley
I�npetd,y Timis r: N
five
N.Erneryvil
Int
Terminal \\\\ \\r
Yerba -
W Oakland.::::;::::
tak
ll ��
Trar<:ba�r Adding 40 miles of Light Rail mutes,including an
Express BART Bayshore Line,would make transit
time-competitive to S.F.even during middays.
Map 2. Areas In which BayLink will be time-competitive
- 3 -
::{:>'�'iii:}:::::y:::::(:is}}!}}}!!}}<;> ii:::Ri:i:::;:;i:'i'riiii riiii......;':'+.;:;'{"; :[i;:;••:}•{Yy:}^?{::::{:}:{{{{{({:}}':::i::i;ji: is•.',.,.,
ii;:;
.. :::•:i:::i:i�:v:i 5'i:::::::iA'...
iiiiiiiiiiiii:.iiiii: :ii::•:iii::isi::isif::%:::i::i:ii:i:::iiiii4i::{:i fvS>.{i: :: i ;
The Problem—Jammed Freeways,Uncompetitive Transit
In much of the inner East Bay,transit is not time competitive with the private automobile—
even for trips into San Francisco.The Bay Bridge is choked with cars entering San Francisco from
close-in regions.BART has not attracted these drivers because of its circuitous routing,long station
spacings,and sharp speed-cutting turns. BART is highly competitive for trips over 15 miles or so,
but cannot offer the speeds or frequency required for shorter trips. To reduce congestion and
pollution,transit must offer times comparable to driving for more trips.Clearly people are disgusted
with traffic jams,but just as clearly few highway capacity improvements are feasible. We need a
transit system targeted on inner area trips: those now made on our most crowded freeways and yet
those easiest to attract to transit.We can neither wait for systems which may take 20 or more years
to implement,nor can we afford systems which cost a hundred million per mile.
Introducing BayLink
BayLink is an affordable transit system time-competitive with the automobile,for inner East
Bay circulation and travel to San Francisco. BayLink will help the Bay Area attain mandated air-
quality,traffic-reduction,and economic-growth goals.The system will relieve traffic pressure on the
Bay Bridge by including a 70mph rail line across the Bridge itself,capable of carrying as many riders
as the remaining four lanes of traffic—even given optimistic ride-sharing assumptions. This Bay
Bridge Rail Facility will almost double the Bridge's people carrying capacity,while reducing traffic
and pollution. The line is a joint-use facility, spreading costs over multiple agencies and riders.
BayLink uses only proven technology; it is not a research project. BayLink focuses on high cost-
effectiveness, quick implementation time, and offering an effective travel alternative to the most
people per dollar spent.
Components
BayLink consists of three main components: a new light rail system fanning throughout the
inner East Bay; a Bay Express line running on existing rail right-of-way; and a Bay Bridge Rail
Facility(BBRF)used by both services.A future component is a California High Speed Rail service
from San Francisco to Los Angeles via the BBRF.Other services can be added freely,as long as they
conform to the physical requirements of the Bridge facility.All components use"AAR"or standard
track,capable of carrying rail vehicles offered bythe widest variety ofmanufacturers.This adherence
to accepted standards reduces cost and speeds implementation.
- 4 -
-------------------------
:.::::...:...................................................................:::::.;:.;:.;:.>:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.;:.::<.>:<.:;:.;:.::.:.;.>;; :::.;;;:.;:.;:.;:.;;;;:.;:::::::::.>:...........::.::.::.::....
Users
Each of the above components serves a different group of users.The light rail system serves
close in commuters and general travelers. Its high speeds from Oakland, Berkeley, El Cerrito,
Albany, Emeryville, and San Leandro will promote extensive mode-shift from automobiles.
The Bay Expresses serve longer-distance trips with higher speeds.This service is basically
similar in station spacing and ridership characteristics to BART's service. Express users will
primarily arrive at stations by automobile,although good bus connections should also be provided.
This service will help reduce the crush parking loads currently being experienced at North Bay BART
stations.Its high speed and direct connections into San Francisco,time competitive with the car,will
alleviate congestion on and pressure to widen I-80.
Future high-speed rail serves intrastate travelers,as well as interstate travelers from Amtrak
trains feeding Los Angeles.Providing better connections throughout the Bay Area,particularly into
San Francisco and Oakland, will reduce the need for our airports to expand.
Operators
BayLink itself is not an operator,but more a marketing concept of a unified service offered
by multiple co-operators.The Bay Bridge Rail Facility is the prime joint-use component.We suggest
that Caltrans should operate and maintain the BBRF,since Caltrans operates and maintains the Bay
Bridge itself.
AC Transit would operate and maintain the light rail system up to the connection to the Bay
Bridge.BART would operate the Bay Express on tracks owned by Southern Pacific.Caltrans would
own and build the connectors needed to the BBRF. We do not see any near-term need to acquire
trackage from SP.Planned schedules allow easy intermixing of SP's current freight movements with
Bay Express passenger service.
Equipment
An astonishing variety of rail vehicles are commercially available today, to meet every
conceivable need.All such equipment is surprisingly lightweight and can easily be carried by the Bay
Bridge;even 180 mph French TGV trains are much lighter than the streetcars which ran on the Bay
Bridge up to 1959!
- 5 -
' L:•:ii:::ysi{':{{•}ji::}::::y:isi }'i{:::}:{:}}}}:••:: .: :::}?':::�}: i:::.:::iii:::'•':::::::i::ii::i:::i:::::::::iiiiii�v::}:i'i':L:::i:::!:::::i::<::?{::::};i•i vv—v—.r;:
ti::::•::iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ii ilii:iii:
:•:::•r::i:i:»>:::'::i::i::i::iii::i::i:i:::i::i::i::ii::i::i:
is :iiiii:i•iiiiiiiii::::::::}ii :is.....:......
.....................
.Fi. M, :::::i::iii:Miiii::i:::<:5::.....: i:iiiiii::iii::
.>:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.�:. ::::.�:::::::.;'.i:.i::.;:.::;;iii::.;:.i:;.>;:;:.;:;b�[. .i:.�::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::::::::::::::. _-
Line Route Length Bart, Bay Exp Transfer
North El Cerrito BART to SF via San Pablo, 12.5 Eastshore Terminal
Macarthur. El Cerrito BART
Northeast Albany Hill to SF via Solano,Shattuck, 15.0 Eastshore Terminal
Bancroft,Telegraph,Ashby,Adeline. Ashby and Berkeley BART
East Broadway to SF via Macarthur. 10.5 Eastshore Terminal
Macarthur BART
Southeast Piedmont to SF via Grand. 11.5 19th St BART
South Alameda County Offices(Hayward)to SF 18.0 12th St BART
via Winton,Mission,E. 14th St,Grand. Hayward BART
Table 1. Baylink Light Rail Routes & Connections
The light rail system features conventional light rail vehicles(LRVs)such as that used in San
Diego. LRVs can be coupled and uncoupled quickly so that multiple routes can merge at the Bay
Bridge.Unlike the heavy,noisy,slow streetcars which originally used the Bridge,today's LRVs are
smooth, quiet, and easily capable of 70mph. Low floors speed loading and aid passengers in
wheelchairs. Barrierless fare collection would further speed loading; this scheme also improves
safety by letting the train operator concentrate on driving the train.
The Bay Expresses use either electric locomotive pulled bilevels or self-propelled electric
multiple units(EMUS).Consists of six to ten cars can carry between 600 and 1000 riders and unload
in minutes.
Modern electric rail vehicles can all be specified as dual-voltage,allowing easy mixing and
fleet-pooling with different systems, such as Peninsula rail service, Muni, and Capitol (once
electrified).
Routes
Routes were chosen to maximize use of existing facilities. New facilities are sited on
commercial streets, to minimize neighborhood impact and maximize transit-induced business
growth. Light rail routes follow the most heavily used bus routes in AC Transit's system,because
these routes have proven ridership and invariably run on commercial streets.Experience with other
- 6 -
I • •
:::::>:....:....:i::i::>::::i::i::i::i::;::i::::::i::i::i::i::is:i::i::i:::::::::::::::2:i:::'
:::::::::::: ::::::: :: 2: s�'::::::...................
::':....::: :. .:: ::::<::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.........;:;3:;: ......... ..........................
:..... :. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: . : I l7 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ::;:
......................
..... ... .....................
..
...
..
transit systems shows that bus to rail conversion inevitably boosts ridership. These routes were
chosen so as to maximize vehicle loadings per mile,justifying the all-new construction required.
The BayLink rail routes are shown in Map 1 and detailed in Table 1.
Two local connector light rail services would run from the Eastshore Terminal to West
Oakland BART,and from San Pablo&MacArthur to meet the East line at Grand.These local East
Bay routes could also provide through service north and south by using the same tracks as the transbay
routes.
The Bay Express route begins at Pinole, with stops in North Richmond near Broadway,
Richmond BART/Amtrak,West El Cerrito near Central,Albany Hill near Golden Gate Fields,North
Emeryville near Ashby, the Eastshore Terminal, and into San Francisco via the Bridge. Bay
Expresses run on existing freight rail right-of-way,on the same alignment as the existing Capitol
service...the difference being that Bay Express trains run into San Francisco,whereas the Capitols
provide through service from San Jose to Sacramento. These services would be electrified, in a
manner compatible with the light rail system, so that both can share the Bridge rail facility.
Eastshore Terminal
This new station near Beach and I-580 is the East Bay equivalent of the Transbay Terminal
in San Francisco.The Bay Express and three light rail routes(North,Northeast,and East)converge
here for the run into the city.Amtrak service(Coast Starlight,San Joaquin,and California Zephyr)
could also be consolidated at the Eastshore Terminal.This would be a good place for a high density
commercial area surrounded by high density housing.
Transbay Terminal
All transbay routes, both light rail and Bay Expresses, would terminate in the current
Transbay Terminal in San Francisco. This facility was built as a three-track rail terminal, and we
propose restoring it as such.This underutilized terminal should be rehabilitated.A 1-block pedestrian
tunnel to Market St.with airport-type moving walkways would facilitate interchange with Muni and
BART.
Several Peninsula rail extension alternatives involve running into Transbay Terminal.Much
of the rail infrastructure and station modifications required for BayLink would also be required for
Peninsula rail,providing a cost sharing and saving opportunity.
- 7 -
:::: ::::::::::::: ::::...Y.. ..........::::::.::::::::::::::::::.:::.:lam. :Ian ::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::: .._
:::: :::: :::::::::::::. ::::::::::::::::::::::......................................: .::::::::::::::::::::::::::._: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..................
Line Destinations
North El Cerrito Shopping Ctr,Vista School;Cornell School;Middle School;Albany City
Hall;W. Berk Senior Center,W.Campus Swim Center;Employment Devel. Dept.;
San Pablo Park;Golden Gate Rec Center.
Northeast Golden Gate Fields;Middle School;Solano and Shattuck shopping districts;UC Berk;
Telegraph shopping district;Alta Bates Hosp.;DMV.
East Mosswood Park;Kaiser Permanente;N.Oakland Cultural Arts Center;Calif.College
of Arts and Crafts;Claremont Country Club.
Southeast Oakland Army Base;Multi-Service Center,Greyhound Bus Terminal;Lake Merritt;
Piedmont City Hall.
South Downtown Oakland;Laney College;Franklin&Garfield Rec Centers; San Antonio
Park;Oakland Hosp.;Fruitvale Center College;Fremont Pool;Rainbow Rec Center,
E.Oakland Youth Develop.Center, San Leandro City Hall;Alameda County Office
Bldg&Hall of Justice.
Table 2. Popular Destinations served by Light Rail Routes
Connections
BayLink would greatly improve transit connectivity throughout the East Bay. The Capitol
trains currently lack a direct rail connection into San Francisco,except by a circuitous BART route
from Richmond. Capitol riders could ride directly to the Eastshore Terminal, which is less than 1
mile from the Bay Bridge,about six minutes from S.F.Three separate light rail lines run to S.F.via
the Terminal,so transfer time would be minimal(about 1 - 1.5 minutes peak).Amtrak service could
also be consolidated at the Eastshore Terminal.The existing Amtrak terminal at 16th and Wood has
been condemned due to earthquake damage;the planned new terminal in Jack London Square has
traffic-impact problems and little real constituency or support from the Port of Oakland. The
Eastshore Terminal would offer intercity Amtrak passengers the same quick connections to San
Francisco or the Peninsula as to Capitol riders.
Every BayLink line connects with BART. These connections open up more inner East Bay
destinations from BART, drawing suburban BART riders to shop and work here. This "no-car-
needed" accessibility will help inner Bay businesses compete against outer-suburb areas better
equipped with parking.
- 8 -
...... ..............
xx-
::>:::::>
.: »s :.::.::.::.::.::.:::.:::::.:::::.::::.::.::.::.::.::.;:.:;: . ::I: rk:.::.::...................... .....::.::.::.::.::.::.::.::.:::.::.::.::.::.::
Because the light rail routes follow existing popular bus routes,extensive bus connections
already serve these routes.Replacing these bus routes with rail will free buses to improve AC service
elsewhere, particularly connections to BayLink. AC's overall equipment utilization will rise
considerably as buses now mired in Bridge traffic will be replaced by fast LRVs on dedicated right-
of-way.
In San Francisco,the Transbay Terminal offers connections to Muni,SamTrans,BART,and
Golden Gate Transit. Once Peninsula rail service is extended to downtown S.F.,direct connections
to the Peninsula will be available to transbay riders. Since BayLink uses the same kind of industry-
standard track as Peninsula rail service, we could easily provide through service from Eastbay to
Peninsula and Airport.BART's circuitous routing through Daly City would add at least 15 minutes
compared to a through Bayshore corridor service.
Destinations Served
A partial list of popular destinations within about 1/4 mile of each of the light rail lines is
shown in Table 2.
Ridership
Ridership levels are always tricky to predict,but our proposal has an unusual advantage here:
we know how the old Bay Bridge rail route performed. Using much more primitive, slow, and
uncomfortable vehicles compared to those now available, in 1946 electric trains carried over five
hundred thousand passengers per day! Yet with current bumper-to-bumper conditions,with all the
"Transportation Systems Management" improvements Caltrans has invented, the best the Bay
Bridge can do is carry a mere 250,000 per day—with no hope of future capacity improvements.Even
if the rail line carries only 200,000 daily, this will still practically double the Bridge's capacity,while
helping the Bay Area achieve mandated reductions in Vehicle Miles Travelled and in air pollution.
Experience in San Diego and elsewhere has shown that when rail replaces bus,ridership at
least doubles.BayLink should do much better;other systems usually have replaced a slow bus with
a slow LRV, whereas our rail lines will deliver much higher speeds than existing buses.
While some riders will come from BART,there will be no mass defection.BART will operate
the Bay Express system so it will have use of the Bridge as well,to serve areas not now effectively
reached on BART.The transbay tube is itself near capacity.BART extensions now being built will
encourage more long-distance travel. By the time inbound BART trains reach Oakland, most will
- 9 -
XXXXXXX
:{:!};:;i:;::y:;;:••:: •';:i?;:i iii'i;;ii::<i . .....• i......::{::{:::':;{;•i� {::{{.��:t'{'Lii4iiiiii}:L:;iii:::isL:: :}}
iiiiiiiiiiii
{ . � �
..:..:.... ..: .:.•.•:
{rryy Iy�.rryyRRyy ��yy�.++����� w::
]1: :i: f:M11V i Y.� :iiii: :iiiiii"iiiiiiiii:i:':i::::i::::i:....ii::::::i i?'�:L:i:::L:%:::::i::ii i:i?iiiiiii::ii;}::::::i::i::i::::i::::i:: ........ ........:::...............
:.:..b . :Ilr k:::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::::::...
::. :.;:;:;.:;:<.;:::;.;::;.::;.;:;.;:.;:.;:.;::::................ ..
be full with passengers destined for SF and Peninsula.Our system takes"local traveler"pressure off
BART, allowing BART to do what it does best: carry longer-distance commuters at higher ticket
values. Thus the Bridge facility will help BART recover the maximum return on its expensive
transbay tube. Improved connections offered by the light rail system will encourage BART travel
for those not within walking distance of a BART station.
BayLink will have heavy ridership forone simple reason:it provides travel into SanFrancisco
(and eventually Peninsula)time competitive with the car from many densely populated areas. See
Map 2 to view areas from which transit would become car-competitive.
Level of Service
Level of service must be high to encourage mode shift.Drivers must feel that BayLink offers
them a pleasant, speedy alternative,or they'll stay right in their cars. Service on the light rail lines
feeding the Bridge must be no more than'3 minutes headways peak and 10 min offpeak.LRVs can
combine to cross the Bridge if the peak frequency is too high for separate trains.Offpeak trains should
not combine so as to minimize waiting.Evening and all-night service is essential for attracting non-
commute trips, which actually exceed commute trips in number.
Bay Express trains should operate every 10 minutes peak,hourly offpeak initially.Offpeak
service should be increased as soon as practicable to BART type levels(20 min headways).A single
bilevel 8-car commuter train can easily carry 1000 passengers: that's about 800 cars off I-80!
Fares
Fares should be equivalent to BART fares,on both the BART-operated Bay Express and the
light rail system.Users should choose between systems on a service and convenience basis and should
not be artificially influenced by the fare structure.
BayLink should employ barrierless fare collection throughout.In this scheme drivers are not
responsible for collecting fares; there is no attempt to check each person any more than we try to
ensure absolute parking meter compliance.Enforcement is statistical,with fines for noncompliance
set sufficiently high so as to gain revenue equivalent to the current method but at far less cost,vehicle
delay, and driver heartache.
- 10 -
x .:: .: :.::::.::::.::.::.::.:::::::::::::::.:::::::::.::::.::::::::::::.: �t ::
:::::: ms. : irk::::::. :::.::::::::::::::::: ::::: u ........
:: :.::::::::::::::::: ::::::::::......:::::::.:::::::::::::::..:::::::::
Financing BayLink Element Cost
The BayLink forty-mile system is de- Build 30 miles of double track 600
signed to cost approximately what replacing Electrify 10 miles existing track 10
Cypress would,about$700M.Financing possi-
bilities are future state rail bonds,federal grants, Acquire 30 LRVs 30
bridge tolls, land-use improvement fees. Acquire 30 EMU vehicles 30
Alameda and Contra Costa Counties have $98 Misc.connections,track improve. 30
million from Proposition 116 available. Fed-
Rehabilitate Transbay Terminal 2
eral funding policy will favor transit as never
before, but the lion's share of federal dollars Construct Eastshore Terminal 3
will go to communities with early and effective Total Cost 705
transit proposals.BayLink,by concentrating on
serving high-density close-in commercial areas Table 3. Cost Estimates, x$1 Million
and commuters, proven low-cost technology,
and use of existing facilities will easily prove its cost-effectiveness—even against tough federal
standards.
Estimated costs are in Table 3.
Time Frame
Soon Caltrans must repair and rebuild the approach structures on each side of the Bay Bridge.
This is the ideal time for construction of the Bridge rail facility.During this time,the Bridge will no
longer be the bottleneck to transbay traffic,due to construction delays at each end.The line itself need
only take about 15 months to construct.Light rail lines on surface streets could take up to four years
to build. The Bay Express service utilizes existing freight rail right of way, but connectors to the
Bridge facility would need to be built, and the trackage electrified. Electrifying this trackage is
already planned as part of the eventual Capitol service.
Assuming two years of studies and engineering analysis,three years of environmental review
and public hearings,and four years of construction,the complete BayLink system could be running
in nine years,by 2001.This time frame is well within the window of voter understanding.The other
regional transit programs assume little mileage to be in place before 2020;most of that will cut traffic
and pollution to a much less extent than BayLink.A thirty-year time frame is just too long to interest
most voters,who would like to ride the systems for which they're paying and not merely be building
them for their children.
- 11 -
link
Future Extensions—Second Tier
The BayLink system as proposed was scaled to cost approximately what Cypress replacement
would,about$700 million.This figure was chosen for comparison purposes only.Additional lines
or extensions can be built with greater resources;many others would have equal ridership and traffic-
cutting potential.
University Ave- S.F. Express(Like FX bus).
580 - Macarthur Corridor south of Downtown Oakland, perhaps to San Jose. Currently a
major AC Transit commute corridor.
Extend Bay Express service south of Oakland to San Jose using existing tracks(like Capitol),
running into San Francisco via Bay Bridge.This extension would serve Fremont BART,then use
the joint Southern Pacific—Union Pacific right of way to San Jose.This could provide"every train,
all day"painless connections for BART passengers, substituting for the proposed$2 billion Santa
Clara BART extension at a fraction of the cost.
A branch from the South line (E14th St) to Oakland Airport along Hegenberger would
directly serve BART Coliseum Station,providing the long-awaited direct rail connection between
the two. Such a light-rail line could be built for about 20% what a BART extension would cost.
Extend Bay Express line along S.P.to Martinez,and eventually to Stockton.When Caltrans
constructs a new bridge for I-80 across the Sacramento River as planned, the existing narrow
Carquinez Bridge would become available fortransit.This bridge could provide Bay Express or light
rail service,or both, from Vallejo to San Francisco via the Bayshore S.P. corridor.This important
line would provide direct transfer to BART at Richmond, Amtrak at Crockett and Richmond. In
Vallejo,existing S.P.tracks run as far south as Redwood St.It would be possible to use these tracks,
once the connection to BayLink is made,to provide service to Fairfield to the northeast and Sonoma
to the northwest.
- 12 -
irk:.;:.:;:.:::.::.:<.:::.::::.::.::.::<... >:.>:.:::.::.::.::.:::.::
Appendix A: Light Rail Construction Costs
Light rail construction costs differ widely from city to city and project to project. Some cities,such
as San Diego,have been able to utilize existing rail right-0f--way to reduce cost.Careful engineering,
adherence to accepted standards and a watchful citizenry are all critical factors. The table below
summarizes some American cities' experiences with light rail construction.
City System Length Project Type Year Cost Cost/
Open Mile
Cleveland Shaker Rapid 21.1 Reconstruct 1981 150 7.1
Newark City Subway 6.8 Reconstruct 1985 20 2.9
Portland MAX 24.3 New Start 1986 213 8.8
Sacramento RT Metro 29.4 New Start 1987 176 6.0
San Diego South Bay Phase 1 25.6 New Start 1981 86 3.4
San Diego East Line-Euclid 7.2 Extension 1986 34 4.7
San Diego East Line-El Cajon 18.5 Extension 1989 101 5.5
San Diego Bayside 2.1 Extension 1990 40 19.0
San Jose Guadalupe 32.7 New Start 1991 500 15.3
Buffalo Metro Rail 10.3 New Start 1985 530 51.5
Ft Worth Tandy Subway 1.6 Reconstruct 1978 1 0.6
San Francisco Muni Metro 33.3 Reconstruct 1981 330 9.9
Table 4. Typical American Light Rail Construction Costs, x$1 Million
source:Transportation Research Board,"Light Rail Transit",Special Report 221
- 13 -
.................
...............
:»<« s €€ »»:<»>> ''''' `> `':::°
:.:b . :l :::::::::::::::::::;:.�
............
.................
...............
.................
:>::»::>::>::>....:::_:::>:<:» >.. <:>:<:::><:::::>::>::> ............ ........................... ::::::::::.:::::::::::
.................
Appendix B: Transit and Urban Revitalization
Recently built urban rail systems have induced economic growth along their routes,adding jobs and
revitalizing these fortunate cities.In addition,capturing some of the revenue created could provide
funds for further transit construction. While rail transit is by no means sufficient to turn around a
decaying city,transit can play a vital role as one tool in the battle to improve urban economy and
liveability.The list below mentions some American cities' experience with transit-induced devel-
opment.
San Diego Trolley Important influence on suburban development near stations is
reported;several transit center and j oint development proj ects
are noted; a$120 million, 800,000 sq-ft mixed-use develop-
ment is planned for downtown with an integral light-rail
Buffalo Metro Rail Light-rail has been directly associated with downtown revital-
ization;over$200 million in private downtown construction
was committed during the first year of construction;adjacent
downtown office space is expected to increase by one-third;
over$100 million in private development has occurred near
one station alone;an extensive Theater District reconstruction
boom is associated with the new light-rail line.
Portland MAX $214 million in adjacent private development was compted
upon opening of the line;an aditional$300 million is planned
or under construction.
Pittsburgh's light-rail The system has helped generate $1.5 billion in downtown
construction;local developers are exploring the feasibility of
commercial and office complexes at suburban stations.
- 14 -
.......;:.::.C . :I ink
Appendix B, continued
Sacramento's light-rail RT Transit cites a list of developers who have invested in
facilities to improve connection of their developments with
light-rail stations.Illustrative major impacts include a 465,000
sq-ft state office development with 3,000 employees and
nearly 1 million sq-ft in adjacent office and real-estate devel-
opment.
- 15 -
Modern Transit Society
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543 :.; , S
The start of an Idea
whose time has come. . .
- 1 -
if thep- _W1-_ .
M . Oa and Tribune. P.O. Box phone number. SerKeiev
da County?
heir choice
my, task of
to reflect
!y shouldn't IN MY OPINION
! redistrict-
v appointed
strict, how- BG.qv Bridge rail e is the ticket,
tainly pres- J Consider the high- Whereas increased congestion is negatively
! challenge. way transportation im- perceived in most neighborhoods. the proposed
person who provements currently Galleria is one place where it should be sought.A
ging racial- being proposed on ei- transit center at the Galleria could give it the
verall lead- x they side of the Bay
additional stream of potential shoppers it needs.
wing demo- Bridge: Cypress Struc- While many users of a Bay Bridge rail line will
i public re- tore replacement, Em- reach the transit center by public transit, it is
barcadero Freeway also a good alternative location to already cong-
corridor improvements, ested neighborhoods for new commuter parking.
Emeryville maze re- With a rail system connecting the San Fran-
construction, I-80 im-
cisco Transbay Terminal, the Bay Bridge and a
provements, 1-880 im- transit center at the Galleria site, AC Transit
provements and a sec- buses would no longer need to cross the bay.
and bay crossing. These Instead, the transit center would function as a
Mort" projects represent our transfer station between Eastbay buses and the
current government re- Bay Bridge rail line.
fa Jenson sponse to an unprece- This line, with its spectacular views over the
dented opportunity to bay, could either be part of a greater Eastbay
reshape the core of the Bay Area transportation light rail system similar to the Key System,or it
not need to system at a time when many existing systems could be made part of BART:
are criticized-as inadequate and inappropriate. Light Rail Alternative: A new Eastbay light
ok to the so- The policy of replacing and building new au- rail system would include lines extending out
their loans. It tomobile lanes needs to be reevaluated.A recent from the Galleria site down the major arteries of
them to deal poll showed that 80 percent of Bay Area resi- the'Eastbay including San Pablo, East 14th
lPs, mortgagedents interviewed favored mass transit improve- Street and Telegraph.
tarket funds. BART Alternative: Making the Bay Bridge
anks for their :rents,over highway improvements. To be sure, line part of BART would require building a'new
want to take the reason for the proposed auto-oriented im- 19th Street "West" BART station within the site
provements has much to do with rebuilding what of the proposed Galleria retail center connected
iking fiasco is was already functioning before the earthquake. to the existing 19th Street station by a pedestrian
But why rebuild it exactly as it was when the
much of the needs and desires of the area have clearly walkway. An additional short length of aerial
secretary and changed? track would connect this new station to the exist-
damage came ing Richmond-Concord line tracks just north of
,ynch. the na- Now that both ends of the bridge need to be West Grand Avenue where BART currently
replaced, instead of rebuilding every lane or comes out from underground to occupy the medi-
up the cash. even increasing automobile lanes. let-us reacti- an of Highway 24.
it Possible for vate a historic Bay Area rail line — the Bay Another new set of BART tracks could be
of their invest- Bridge. built down the middle of the proposed Maritime
-h — into one The Bay Bridge was originally built with rail Avenue replacement for the Cypress Structure
on it.Putting rail back on the bridge by substitut- connectng the Bay Bridge to a new Jack Lon-
;s from selling ing one of the existing automobile lanes on each don Square station. These new BART tracks
In 1973,banks deck may not be technically difficult. Trains could then parallel 1-880 to a point near, Laney
nation's Finan- could be made to enter the San Francisco rans- College where they would slip under the free-
o had plunged bay TerTway overpass beside the Southern Pacific
minal much the same way they used to 40
years ago. tracks to connect to the existing Fremont Line.
banks to deal Either of these alternatives, light rail or
help level the Downtown Oakland could be the key to mak- BART, could be the answer to the question of a
iacea. ing rail over the Bay Bridge work.The site of the second bay crossing now being studied by the
et up an elite proposed Eastbay Galleria retail center beside Metropolitan Transit Commission. If such a sys-
al banks. For. the existing 19th Street BART station is the logi- tem were in place by the time of the reconstruc-
ie model.Jap. cal place for the preeminent Eastbay transit hub. tion of the Emeryville Maze. it could help alie-
conomy. It is a large flexible site located next to an exist- viate the tremendous back-up tr.is will cause. In
p" I
~Mist past that ing BART station with three lines going through addition. the BART altprnati%,e could provide
ill-town bank- it. In addition.it is at the center of many Eastbay more train capacity thrGugh the 1-883 corridor as
'ampaigns. so
bus lines and the focus of the Eastbay*s relatively BART is being expanded to Dublin ana Warm
financial crisis uncongested radial surface street system. Via Springs.
)r move. West Grand Avenue. this transit hub is within Morten Jensen is an arrhirect who lives in
Jews Services. easy reach of a new rail line to the Bay Bridge. Oakland.
NUNN
A-10 Monday, May 6, 1991 OAKLAND TRIBUNE
��ofModern Transit Society
N
the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
A well thought-out plan
attent
draws favorable ion. . :
- 2 -
A-16 Suedy.NwnJm24. 1991 *** SAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER
TCluaach proposes r0 miles of At the Ban Francisco and, all
The Bay Area may be sprawl- would share the old Key system
track and overhead wire, with
ing.but the cru:of congestion rs- train ramps and the roomy elevat.
■ mains the Bay Bridge and envi- Psrir-and-ride lots along congested ad boarding area in the TransbayRail line equ all chat Caltrans
million That by AC
Tons.Building a new span to the Terminal now monwolized
south seems to be out of the ques- �Y°h` what Caltrans wants w Tre,rsit's trans-Bay buses, which
tion for now because of the multi- spend wilding the 12&mUe col-Oakland
could be the &A
lapsed segment of the elevated m
billion-dollar cost and environ- ; Nimitz Freeway in West Bay.Ian for menta over the objectimn ofenvironmea.
"Ir you want to solve the mob- am and neighbors ..tb..amam■«T.
lam in this decade,"observed Mod- Many standard-gauge Baht=9
ern Transit Society President cars an the market today are spa-
Richard b tJte tlme m sbM
BayRichard a to doh of Sacramento, arab and upholstered,very sed b-'fou have to ao something t4 in- JohnathsnLkcrelh'n. Eda< 84Y sat from�bane vahir3a.used by
crease the capacity of the Bay_ chief
of the Modern Transit Soci- San P aaciaoo's Muni Mew, w.
, -
Bridge ety,a Tail lobbying group,says the cording to Dan McNamara of the
One obvious problem is per- time to move is now'while Loma California Rag Foundation•
Bridge �� motorists to give up 2G Prieto earthquake relief funds are; Amtrakstandard F-40
percent of the bridge,which now flowing and Caltrans is Tacna- locomotivess are too heavyavy for the
has Svc one-way lanes on each and damaged bridge, but nothing would stop
■ deck. Skeptics say forget n and f eewaya on both sides of the Bay Amtrak or some other operator
even proponents shrink from the Bridge —in inning a French or
trains
hailed �'a �°�- During says, outthe Uans-Bay traffic the-Bays,Lkw_ _it-speed mo el — fromeReno
pied the lower deck from the b�enecwill act be the bridge high-speed models — from Reno
's opening in 1937 until 1959. itself but its approach f rsa s>7— and the Sierra aid—oft too a and rs-
bridge mento and ben Francisco and
�'-y Contra Costa County dvo particularly the elevated junction ��h,down the Peninsula to
F�1C t aiM Wo@d sor Tom Powers,a light-milt would of Interstates 80 and 580,which Sen Jose
rte,said the political Sgy' Caltrans nays must be retrofit with In the near term,passengers on
ki L ���} but worthwhile if tba steel braces if not rebuilt altogeth•
S.F. Wltl] Fag
d do as advertised — er. BART anticipates a surge in , And-Sanmtmks infant S el line well a-
�land-San Jose diesel line as well as
Bay wid I4onal up 1so,000 p°0�e r 1 ridership. 1 the long-haul Coast Starlight,Cali-
as a supplement to BART,which LIYloB track on the bridge will fornia Zephyr and San Joaquin
hanit network noir operates at 170 percent of n- never be easier.Llewellyn"Ys,ad- Valley trains could transfer for San
pity ding peak hours. ding:'It's just beginning to crystal- Francisco at any of several East
By Walt Gibb "Yea,rail will take away a lane, line that we can do this." Bay light-ail stations matead of
OF na rYMMM arws but it will also take away more Engineering and construction of waiting for buses.
A group of mass transit boosters traffic than had occupied That. the rail system would take 15 when ars so many Posgibibties
is trying to whip up support to lane,"said Tolmech, a Caltrans! months,including four months Of with a standard-gauge system,"
bring back trains on the congested employee."It will take a little sour. bridge-kune closures, aoconb- to said Ron Kilcoyne.as AC Transit
San Francisco-Oakland Ray age to make motorists see that" Telmach'a Cahrans employee who plan embarking on formal atud-
Bridge,nearly doubling its people- was fust to propose the Sacramen-
moving capacity while Ylo6 M■there be twerst to-Oaklaad-San Jose Amtrak ser- res to convert bury East Bay bus
only one lane on each deck. Under ideal Conditions,a Lree- ; bice that is scheduled 10 start Dec- Bees rails"Just operating light
The Concept Electric light-rail way lane can move 2,000 vehicles 11 rail between Oakland and San
ears swooshing 70 mph across the per hour.In the same space,trains 1, jAck*r p1edicted the!e would Francisco wouldn't double the ca_
bridge from the Transbsy Termi- at three-minute intervals could be many years of talk and study paty of the bridge, but if this
nal in downtown San Francisco to move 10,000 people per boor — byre any such crud go became pert of.a rrgiomvide rail
a web of street linea in Oakland and awmnmg People choose to tide• forth,gapeCialh'since the Bad'Ar network much the way the Bay
Berkeley and to enress route 'Q'hdt's an enormous tit,'"said ea's 28 transit agencies argue more .Bridge is part of the r' 'ide
on existing Southern Pacific state Sen• Bill L'ockyer, D'Hay- than they cooperate.
Unlike the current BART freeway network,than it has that
freight tacks along Interstate 80 to ward I
Richmond and Pinole.Eventually. Wer called a Bay Bridge light- tracks,which are wider than sten- p�itity.I km the idea.-
the same bridge track could be used Tail system-an etching possilig. ' dard Teti'on a third rail I.
for high-speed service to Sacra. ty"but Quesdonsd whether matey � for propulsion,power,the new Bay
mwto on trains such as the French of its passengers would be former Bridge backs would be apes to any
TGV. ado drivers,as hoped.or primarily transit aged that wishes
to join
the MunL
"It sounds too logical," said defectors from BART,AC Transit -AC test'�'Paras—
Steve Weir,chairman of the Met, buses and car pools. AC Trami4 BART(with a differ-
Steve
Transportation Commis- "V you Pull a lane out of service ant style Veers)or even the Pen-
sion.'"There must be a law against without reducing single-ompant marls min(if it akctri5es,a8
even thinking like that. eelikles,the remaining four lasses Plannedand ascends its track lb
State Sea.Quentin Kopp,)-San would grind to a haft,'he said. miles to the Tunsbay Terminal m
Francisco and chairman of the i The bridge now tarries 240,000 San Francisco).
Senate Transportation Commit- vehicles per day on the two five-
tee,
xa said,"I would certainly like to t��� ltrans�R�be traffic
that by
ermine the idea."
demand for 10 additional Innes,
though the agenWa study did not
not consider the potential of ail.
Cheaper tuts MCT
The transit advocates any tight
rail systems cost$12 million to$18
million per mile to construct. By
comparison, BART will spend
i' more than$100 million per mile to
M get to San Francisco Airport and
$50 ini ion per mile for extensions
in the outer Fast Bay.BART in-
II I tende to inciesse the frequency of
I�I Ij is trans-Bay service but will re-
main constrained by overcrowded
parking lou
To pay for light rail, transit
I IIII'I C boosters and environmentalists
have their eye on the federal earth-
Quake relief funds with which Cal-
trans intends to resurrect the ool-
Ispeed Nimitx segment,where 42
people died in the 19W earthiriake.
Rail proponents hoe teamed with
West Oakland residents to oppose
the freeway reconstruction and
: steer the money to rail.
' , YWeir noted that surface trans-
portation portetion bills approved by both
houses of Congress and now being
melded into one package call for a
o dramatic shift from highway
spending to mass transit.
"The idea of taking on an ambi-
tious transit project right now is far
more credible than it was three or
t four years ago,"he and-
"Regional recd is the only answer
to our transportation and land-use
e..• i `4' r., problems,"said Powers,the Coa-
g tra Coeta County wpervisor."We
"+► ~'~`' =�
can't just have a bunch of uncon-
nected rail programs. Linking
them up is the only way the region
will continue to grow economically
•y��� 'C while offering an acceptable quality
The cost of an altogether new
bridge for ars and trains, which
or�sr,ao Sen.Kapp would like to we built
Scenes Yka slid.—SO Lite with Bay Bridge"—might be Jen corn- I to mike with of the Bay Bridge
mon if a lane in each dweetm u devoted to electric rail,so proponents sometime early in the 21st century.
gti<tJre idea. , is estimated at$2 billion,not in-
of
n-
duding iaterchaagea.Auto tolls on
this "southern crossing" would
have to be in the$10 range,Lock-
yer said,and many officials in San
Mateo and Alameda counties are
opposed on environmental
Modern Transit Society
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
BayLink gains a major supporter..
.
- 3 -
-ig Toesd+r,Ne.w m6i 26, 1991
RANDOLPpN H¢ARST
NMR, / Tallo/
C(
WILLIAM R. H E A R S T I I I P A U L W I L N E R Assistant Managing Editor,FeWurrs
Editor and Publisher
T 1 M P O R T E R Metropolitan Editor
LARRY KRAMER
Executive Editor STEPHEN COOL ForeignINatiorW Editor
PHIL BRONSTEIN JAY JOHNSON E=,iwNewsEditor
Managing Editor,News
Ca L E N N S C H W A R Z Sports Editor
PAMELA BRUNGER SCOTT
Managing Editor,Operations CHRISTINE BARNES Styk Editor
JAM4S A. FINEFROCK SHARON B I B B Night Nmv Editor
Editot o/the Editorial Pages
B o B M c L E O D Photo Editor
.TAMES 9. SEVRENS
General Manager .1 I M W O O D Associate Editor
Back to the future—on rail
ICHARD TOLMACH of the convenient for a few commuters—those
Modern Transit Society in Sac- who live near stations or can drive to them
ramento wants to run a new —but it is of limited use to other patrons.
electrified rapid transit system BART is also extraordinarily expensive to
from the East Bay to San Francisco across extend. The cost of expansion is between
the Bay Bridge. It would take up one lane $50 million and$100 million a mile.
on both bridge decks. Light-rail routes are relatively inexpen-
Don't we already have a trans-Bay train sive—about $17 million a mile. They are
system? It's called BART, remember? simple to build. More people can use light
Don't you have to be crazy to even suggest rail. Such a service wouldn't compete with
taking space away from cars on the Bay BART so much as offer those who find
Bridge? BART inconvenient a chance to ride.
Sweep away the objections: We should A light-rail system across the Bay Bridge
strongly consider building this railroad. . might spur other routes—to Candlestick
Whatever the logistical and logical objec- Park and San Francsico Airport from
tions,whatever the cost,this light-rail sys- downtown, for example. Or,from the ferry
tem could provide answers to serious prob- terminal in Larkspur to Santa Rosa.
lems plaguing Bay Area transit systems. Tolmach's proposal has at least two
BART best illustrates the problems.For qualities that recommend it—convenience
all its halting efforts to provide a modern and inexpensiveness. Light rail is a conve-
system,BART gives a ride only marginally nient and cheaper alternative to megabuck
faster than that offered by the Key System technology. It will serve us well in the
trains eliminated. in the late 1950s. It is future, as it.did in the past.
Modern Transit Society
of the east bay ' , ■■
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
A devastating earthquake creates
a unique opportunity. ..
- 4 -
, StateSAN FRANCISCO EXAMINER
•t:tL7R2ANS fmm A-1 r
State would rebuild
W�Oufd
Bay Bridge `maze' °'w"° M
rye lace Dm -,w�in a
p tetter to the Federd Highway Ad-
replace c&
11t issue is the eomEaena of ln-
VOW
Bay0skl n Es eco .� fe0 at
do
Oakland-Emerryville border jad
�ofth.�B��
The mum^the I-M 4 of
which collapsed in the Oct 17, D•
Bridge low,I-Prieto eerthqurake,d-so handles � to and from
Hbwey 24 and I4M
ke the earthquake only one col- Ee would be bbodsred additionally
maze w ��� y h -
npboo& He said it was possible asgi-
But the date transportation peen would propose amwuebog
_'�_- ap mT bas E W&W a low-probe ane or man elwsed ddans—as
^
�..ahmns doubts Waminaban of the structure — tbey will do during the I4e01Higb-
--[- parts d which an man than 50 way 24 intmehanp reconstruction
1tS seismic safety, rare old — and concluded that at Walout Creek—that world be
rsiofoe I g it with dad hoose to demoBshed when the pwaisoast
asks larger structure survive an even stronger earth. struchnn is oospide.
quake would sed e0 percent man Caltreos spobeaman An Drage
than tearbtg it down and building a said agency 6' wen oo con-
By wok Gibe new model earned about earthquake sed.10
s M esnseri crew Replacement, according to a on the nearby Hayward Faun that
Caltrans now.aye the eiwated peebmiaary estimate, would cost they have recommended net only
mase of fernegs ant of the Beer $MU miman,while a"nba t and replacing the dietriladi n sbuckin
Bride toll pion d oudd be torn rhabOkatim'project would asst but attaehimg ketenes to bold it nF
downandnpiaoed—possl*wkh an estimated$176.2 mfliiom• until the demolition erwn coma.
a kwger strubotrnn—as a Missile CaWsns'PMUM eery cost astl- Tae interim retrofit project
enter meswsn, maws for other nnponod of dam- world cat an ntimated$IOM=11-
Sum tramp Mlm officials aged h-mv in the Bay Ana have boa. Bruce L Cannon. Federal
bow approved the eonomik but pwend to be hr lower then s Htgbmw Adinfoldredon division
have yet to End the nay—an' ad+nd. adininistrstarapproved the tses-
setimated$LW minim , Raber4e odd in his k ser that Wmy;;a in a later to Cal-
8vea a partial closure would. replacement of the dideibutioo tams Director Robert Bed dated
do mdio* camatrlt the mow- dructu n would proceed stens with Oct.16,1980,but not disclosed by
msmt of pea*and goods through' nose meat of the Cypress Street Caltrem matt this week.
the Bey Ana,partimk*&nft segmesd of I480,the Nbed Fre► "Ws generally arm with do
aaamub hours,wben the ens is a wq,which Caltreas hapea to re• jadmostion you pewvidMd.' Can-
mat vehidss, Was by ML Tin now for the eon wrote its the letter,wbich long
Tlerhniodbr raked the Asirlbte- Clpew eplseemeft hn act yet with other documents pertdning
tion stnacvm%lea the hmpot WE been dad" to the atruetran were released
dump to Naethern California Caltrans apokewas Ong Bad 7%nedoy by Cabsne public is-
aerrying just under fWAW vahi-, said the mase npiaosment world faemstion afeiale.'
des a day—and the eighth lerpet: Moly be done in phew and that Dago seld S hemi been deter-
In the United stable. duaimg peek trawl hour.Cehrsae mimed whether a strucnns buEt to
'Bven tbough the diftbudoo would pe_ motoeiste the same modern standards for atrangth and
sauce=wkbetod the eeismie so- mmsbw of lease they have now. traffic own*could At tomo tis
batty d the Iona Pefsta event On Bis he said lease would be ear eating r*bt of way.
Ort 1980),S b belie to be vul- rawer than stsoderd and that trot- In memce related to the
savable to A nn seismic aetivtfy, somthe•icmg wMah M of the
pWdMdady m th.*1d7wWd"*d " _ dauuco e. Caltrans officials said
dames Raba%chid of Colt= any new sauce=should be wider.
Sae C ALTRANS,book pegs Vant"er is built Will require
-- estemsive environmental study.
with shNgoabty of ieiab and anvi-
ros mental sadvtate guarding .
spinet a; mi P-that world Induce
additional amag-pro&dng befts
Regain and wen verbal dosing
d the interchange wouid aawvate
an wady bedtsaf c dbw im
Bina the colloas and removal
of the Cypnse sbuctun an 14MA
northbound delvers have been di-
verted thrausb Oakland on DM
and tbem dumped too the normsi-
ly jammed IABD appos&to the
BW Brw#L
Stats highway Mneamn also
omthdd Int year tbat the noes•
pis$ aeries of merger liuuking the
Beebareadwo Feneway with the
Bay Bride and other feeswtpa in
downtown Sen Ptuen ' must be
torn down red redaeed.
Modern Transit Society
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
One possible source of
funding BayUnk appears. . ■
- 5 -
` rV11AY AREA'S CROWDED ROADWAYS .
,..Bridge Tolls.-That� Rise With Tra ffic
1 than
.Bp JonaHanhart "lhat technique,used successo ages'"sant Randall Pozdena,a for.
. u F"MoNa s la+atrgr, `fully for mare.than 15
�.} .ctup�rk years in, mer state transportation consul-
! Bay Area commuters, tax- ,-"5ingapore,may soon be adopted 'toot now sit ills Fedetal'Reserve
payers and businesses could ''�several European cities. Bank of San Francisco.
save hundreds of millions of ' }-" Michael McGill,executive di-
Several experts say the time -
dollars a year if bridge tolls sim- isl7pe for the Bay Area to make: -rector of the Bay Area Economic
t ply varied with the time of day, the same leap.The Golden Gate Forum, Although he ap-
transportation experts say. Bridge toll went up to$3 on Mon- plauded recent moves to raise
.expedient of day. And state Senator Quentin tails,McGill added that"it would
The 'be even more desirable to have a
± charging higher .tolls during Kopp,.a San Francisco indepen- ..
commute hours and lowering or dent, has won 6enate approval I peaky surcharge."
eliminating them during slow .fora bill to double tolls on the ` These and other economists
periods would speed the flow of day.San Mateo and Dumbarton argue that higher tolls during
::traffic, revitalize public transit 'bridges to S2 Mimes Of maximum traffic would
`..and help clear the region's dirty "Now is the time to think Of ke people think twice about
air,many planners contend. time-of-day pricing on the brid- ! _ Pape Al2 Col:3
From.Pagel other people more.It will promote I A study released last year by
driving alone across a bridge when ;efficiency by making people take . , the Bay Area Economic Forum
they could take some forme pub- jaccount of the social impact of ;' produced even more striking re-
their decisions." sults.A commuter from San Rafael
he transit or wait for the roads to ;
cam, Just how big is that gain in effi- to downtown San Francisco who
ciency?Only a small percentage of ,switched from a ear to a.bus be. '
The Bay Area public has given drivers would have to leave crowd- cause Of higher tolls would see
signs.that it is ready to buy the
Idea. A poll released by the Bay ed roads t0 make a huge improve- . � benefits of ii3,860 each year from i
Area Council in January found _ment in traffic flow. Pozdena cal- reduced vehicle costs and time sav-
that 53 percent of residents sur- .culates that time-0f-day pricing an ed,it found.
veyed were willing a accept r- local bridges would save the re- Among the biggest gainers
additional$2 toll in peak commute -pian as much as$600 million a year would be taxpayers, spared the
hours. in travel time and business costs huge expense of building new
and would attract growth now de- highways and bridges -- like the
The concept behind time-of- terred,b traffic congestion..
day pricing is that commuter-rush y g proposed S3 billion Southern
1 driving — like pollution -- is a Studies Show Savings Crossing Of San Francisco Bay of
making more efficient use Of
social nuisance.Every time drivers . Greig Hexisting a gay Areatrans- ;
existing traffic lanes. "There's no
merge onto ;jammed freeways, portation consultant,recently question that if you priced Proper-
they delay hundreds of people be- ulated the effects of a$3 peak sur- ly, it would cut down everyone's
hind them, from executives on charge on the Bay Bridge--a sum . i perception of how many places the
their way to the office to truckers that would merely equal the cast road system needs to be expan-
-rushing supplies to a production of the toil in 1940,in constant dol- i ded,"said Harvey.
line.In all,such delays cost the Bay lags.-The average commuter, he Inevitably,a few people would
Area about $2 billion each year, found,would come out more than ,
Pozdena-said. $100 ahead each year by avoiding be hurt those who cannot take
"Congestion pricing says you long delays at toil plaza.
pltransit and must sit in fir.But
'can drive any time you want,but . ' that group is a small minority,pro-
you are forced to take account of j ponents say, and they could be
1(the effect of)your actions on oth- compensated by creative use of
;er people,"said Clifford Winston, toll revenues. For example, the
a transportation analyst at the fees collected could replace sales
Brookings Institution. "We will taxes now dedicated to transports-
tion financing.
charge you more when you delay
"
Depending on wbat is done soundingly so, and is bipartisan,"
"`with the revenue, the toll system said Brian Connolly, an aide to .
might be.considerably more stemequi- -'New York Senator'Daniel Moyni-
table,'"Harvey said. ban,the bill's principal sponsor.
Even so,until recently few poli- The Bay Area Economic Fo-
titian have been willing to en- :rum's strong endorsement of time-
rs dorse the concept. Many Ameri-
of-day Pricing last year drew wide
-'cans still think driving is and :support. But the concept is far
ohould rgmain *free" ---^even from becoming a reality,said Law-
rence Dahms, executive director
Lvai=le4fiarge
h they readily accept time-
s for airplanes," of the Metropolitan Transporta-
tion Commission.
lephones, restaurants, movies, - _
'electricity, �seasonal vegetables i "Economists are right about
the theory of congestion pricing,"
and even some transit operations, he said. "But we've lad difficulty ;
including AC Transit buses and the .-achieving public acceptance of
= Metro system in Washington,D.C. that idea. Indeed, we've been do-
-Abroad,the situation is differ- ing just the opposite, giving dis-
ent.In 1976,Singapore began mak- counts to regular commuters."
Ing downtown commuter-rush Experts such as Pozdena, who
drivers buy a daily sticker for have seen numerous tollro
$2.50, a low-tech approach that P �
more than doubled the percentage shot dawn over the years, do not ,
of car pools and bus trips and cut expect legislators to bite anytime
travel costs for the average com- soon.
muter. "chis is a topic like abortion
The Norwegian city of Trond- that people circle without getting
;beim now uses an electronic sys- near. Politicians spend their lives
to get other people to pay for their
tem to vary tolls by time of day: constituents' things. This is just
Cambridge, England, and Edin- the opposite: getting constituents
-burgh,Scotland,are studying pric- to pay for their awn well-being"
.ing schemes'to unsnarl local traf-
fic jams. And similar projects are
now in the planning stage in Am-
sterdam and Paris.
` In the United States, two pri-
:vete toll road projects in Orange
County will use time-of-clay pric-
4ng to speed the flow of cars and
pay for construction. And a U.S.
'Senate highway bill gives states
wide latitude to experiment with
time-of-day pricing on federally fi-
nanced roads.
a'' "The concept has prevailed,re- -
Modern Transit Society .
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
Bay Bridge rail served
us well before o e .
- 6 -
MISSION ST.
NAJOMA _5T
SAN FRANCISCO
TOWER
HOWARD ST.
Westbound Key System-
S.N.Ry. Trock I
Westbound I.E.Ry.Trock
FOLSO ST
W
r: t— J
cA Q
W
W m
HARRISON
rt�
SAN FRANCISCO
SUB-STATION
Switch No.45
v Pole W-1
t D
Modern Transit Society `
of the east bay m
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
.il
.. .with 135 trains in just one
two-hour period in 1939. ..
- 7 -
•y MMM Mi.0 MM COMM tiCMMy .It 1• ii M
C M ONN C Mv~IO,C,~rC My N C MA ON N C a—U pM,N C M 7 MN C100.�iN
N.N.1 M M 0-4 K Nr u+�i�MNN M p~,M N�+F'1 ►f M fNV.Ni MN M.�•I YI� U M
C .0 1 IlA yyO W M C..CI U,U3 N•••1��pC yC1 ZO WA +y<O M5 pC.ami •COt M y•pO~ C•.Oi 11
J C� 4«7 �N< OF � �741i O O O N My ' O ■ C O O M NAN � v O
ww M M.y.IC M N y Nww M M MJC JC M•dY•r� M M-w WJ .M
.1L JC y y M N M O y y M M?I.IL Y • • b M O U N M JC JC N M M N O
M OONInmdo 4'6
96
• y yii O •-•-I °aaoommmm��<a
«aa00NNNmmV96
W
C •I M m<A SU..1,W u%Df nNO<HANS0.W Ct�t-N so-C YIS W W UD r4
A Y C H GM H f
M CC
• n
G • f.D N N%n%D�f.D�H w N f.O•D M H N.O f.p N w N f.D N N N N f f N H
N OO N O N O O N O NO NN O N CIA O NON O Yf O N O O N 01A 0 Y101I1
■O .+MOw Mf OMf wMf wMf Ow H f Mf Ow MI w H Ow Hf Mf Ow
.7 ••N N.O f�•0 0/V N M t I.O t,O N M I/I.D t`w".no p t Z t 0 t V H V 1.D
�•• O O O O O O w w w w w w w N N N N N N N M M M M M f f f f f f N N N HI
N
MMM Inii 7•.MMM ii CV JC M iiM
DC
•INN Y w /+ �+ Cw W,M ;-0 c •INN O M M.+N C•Ci U •N Y M 4'N^••0 c
O N C NY10w •Ci • C M O CNO U w C M 7 M CNO y C M
%Nf O CNN NO
Z •.'1Nf C,t: ONN MN O+tN f.4 CNN
11 1{
yETa� M M < 55Y Y•.�Mp i • • O M M ~9 •�wC O.0 C•o •CNA1o YII 'peOi17 0 C4
yy
N'U O
O � L'U CCJ' CNC W C wC
O • • O►.
• y N M•y•� M M M .+.-•M M My a JAI id 0
.y M +'I M •w w.Yt.1[JC Jt M M w.a M
~ y N N 00a V dt<19Z o 4S w N N O m0 V d Wa<O O O m m m vd a<O OM.
N
SE w
0
C m0 C A„SI+.t�117 Ci.pf Nfm<=A�SY.W u N-a m<M w=L16 W C.1Nf m<=
.�
u
"Man N to w f�o N M.•1 N f IO�O H N N IO f,O N w N f IO N N N N f f H N f f•O
y
+4
O O I/I O YI O O N O N O YI N O w O N O N O YI O N 0.4 O O HI O N O N O III UI O N
O O■ O w M f O H�►O.•I H f w H f O w M f M f O w M w M O w H f M f O w w H f
Ow NM.p I�OO wNM1�•pO w N•OP O w N M t�CD O w.O •0
t•.
C3,00000 C,0.^1 w w w w w w N N N N N N M H M H H f f f f f f N N N In N N
OI N
C•q
•?DI V M ti.1C M M
hJyCOi A•hOr •Mpa „,t NfaM•;+y'J0w•C iy NmM OMC$MiUO O ww Na�y iyN•yyOiMC iMC yaUt ap<Ca1N1'O.Or aN+iMid< hON
N1
CLn a l a 4j N O a
CNN 042f MN CiNH O .INf MawLNN O+ i N O C 4i
t� MNwMw 1 1 M• YYNwM w N 1 1 •I X F
~ C CC^ yyO CZrO A M W t`
y .. 445
Sp < 0. 5CCC bNyAYONr-3 yy
'4 CC
MOo C 1 1 W O yCN 1 O O I p
wC iC iC HJCm N4.� wMJ{•iMM••9� MM
• t M ty RJC NMY N 0.4.” y
. M OwOw it UM • y yyM M Ca
-4U
0 0 0 w 0 u .1 aamu yG. py CO
C „ M
y a, m •
410 � i e
n D• O 00 N m<S t1•W U YIf N SQ C $. U M I CON m<CDS IV N W Ci f t-M N y
442 m M mG C _ • _ H .. C
f. �
M - �._ - N C
CQ u. u o�iu
1 O •
Wb-V f N UI f f N N N H f fN►YI f f N N 04 H f f.O N VIN E f N w H •'•1 No pC
I G H ..1 7 3
{� 0 W O O YI O I//ON O In N O ON O N O YI NN v1
OO 0 AOONONO
1.q7 O OwMHf Hf Ow Mf wHHf Hf Ow M f wM rMf OMf OwH 1y�ym ��
N.O t`m w N H f`400.N M N•O f` S w M
�-. �•. 00 0 0 0 w w w w w w N NN N M M M H H M f f f f f N N N%n N 1/1 •> 0 d
f •I�N !�O
y M i i M ,IC M i i
y/+ • m1 m1 m1 y`1" MyMON C.1I OCy.iCyNV •NN •M+M+~WyyC1 , ),y y • y1 ♦~1 yw wS
b •C•+.G 1
N4
w�.
V UM, ccc y NM O 0i MwIM ug.1O .NO N O y w C i
M62. :5ONN• N + NCN NM f
M Mw 1 I M YNwM Mw I I M+ Nw M VQ
yiYOJM t. C It i Y• n Oi M U64
wO JC
i � YSCON< YC
JC JC.t { C.t jCm M OyONO11 � O
~ yjd yY 0. yOM JC Mid
OmOV
buaOOmmO�U1 O.aNM mY mOmOmJ. O <a<0y 0y000 i
= +
M •8 • O
i oe•o0 • ■ ~ osw
C m$ Cc MIY11S116 4)i.1N 0--C IN=96SQUNfm<m1111Yl=W WCtf N.Om< w •^4•� •+
h • NNNM�f H N r It N N M so v.0 V.0a mM,.,. r.O 0
. i 11 .. yyUUifa■� .
h ONONONO NN O ON O N ONONN ON O N O N O N O N ON O 'aaICO.F•
• O.•1 lqf Mf ww H wMf Hf ww MrOwHf M f Ow MwM E
�•. 8000./ww NMM Hf 114 0
000wNMMf4N a1 MIfr f I1/11A%aNN , O P m t-44
• N 40 ft N M
♦ m t•
� l
Modern Transit Society Nil
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
BayLink will move a stalled
economy as well as stalled traffic.. .
- g -
EDITORIALS
T h e Rai I Reviva
NOSTALGIA HAS NOTHING to do with it.
Passenger railroads once dismissed as part San ,Vrancisro Chronide
of California's glorious past have become a way
Of looking toward the future. T H E VOICE OF THE WEST
Suddenly, railroads are unable to keep up Richard Tobin Thieriot,Editor and Publisher
with the demand. Amtrak would put many
more trains in operation if it only had the cars. Charles de Young Thieriot,Publisher 1955-77
The Muni Metro is so short of equipment that it George T.Cameron,Publisher 1925-55
still isn't providing service on a $20 million, Founded 1865 by Charles and M.H.de Young
two-mile extension it completed in the Outer .
Mission last spring. .
The Bay Area led the way with the con- BART orders were filled by a French company;
struction of BART,but the boom in rail travel the Sacramento and San Diego cars were built
has spread beyond the region. A 300-mile rail by Germans; and New York's latest subway
transit system is beginning to take shape in Los orders were won by Japanese and French com-
Angeles County, panies.Canadians are also major players in the
San Diego's rail line to Mexico—the so-cal- market.
led Tijuana Trolley—has been a success from In large part, the reason for the foreign
the start.And Sacramento plans to expand its ascendancy was that there hadn't been enough
line that brings suburbanites to downtown demand in the United States in the postwar era
shops and state offices. to keep the domestic passenger business going.
But this is changing. Morrison Knudsen, the
The new Capitol trains, operating three huge construction firm based in Boise,has won
round trips a day on the San Jose-Oakland- major contracts in Chicago, Hawaii and, most
Sacramento route, are doing far better than recently,California.
expected. State officials plan to double the The state Department of Transportation se-
service when enough equipment is available. lected Morrison Knudsen last week to build 88
The new systems are beginning to produce double-deck cars, some to be used on the Cal-
a revival of the highly productive railcar-build- Train Peninsula line.Others in the$155 million
ing industry in the United States — with a order will operate in Southern California and
major share of the jobs and construction to be between Oakland and Bakersfield.
performed in California. The firm is competing against two Japanese
Pullman,Budd and the St.Louis Car Com- firms to build 50 new BART cars at a cost
pany,the old-line builders that had been inter- expected to exceed $100 million — an order
national leaders in the industry, gradually that may swell to five times that size by the
dropped out of the business. The most recent time all of BART's extensions are completed.In
Los Angeles, county officials were forced by
popular opinion to cancel a$122 million order
awarded a Japanese firm whose bid was$5 mil-
lion higher than Morrison Knudsen's.
IT IS ALREADY CLEAR that rail projects
on the drawing boards aren't enough. With
Interstate 80 jammed past the bursting point,
BART must be extended beyond its present
terminus in Richmond—to the Pinole area at
first and eventually to Vallejo.The state has a
long-range plan to build a wider bridge across
Carquinez Strait for westbound I-80, making
the present narrow bridge available for BART
tracks.
Similarly, the new BART line to Dublin
must be extended at least to Livermore.
Rail can't do the entire job. It will also be
necessary to take firm steps to.improve traffic
conditions on streets and highways,particular-
ly in San Francisco.
With San Francisco's freeway network in
parlous condition, city;government must face
up to the need to improve access to the Golden
Gate and Bay bridges—and to make it possible
to get from one to the other without compound-
ing downtown traffic problems.
Rails and highways—they both have im-
portant roles to play.
Modern Transit Society mini
of the east bay
P.O.Box 7728 Berkeley,CA 94707 510-649-9543
ayLink -- the high speed rail
connection between Sacramento,
San Francisco and Los Angeles.
. .
- 9 -
cc
N] r..rJ p LJ
P,
21.
cn
rD go
0 ca
cc 2
"?a..:`=r y; �`�F,+.+� � �,:,, -•tip H
_ ..
1
oav C m C eo m L2 m� °
a ~ �
to E °
ca >, ri
cc (U CCI co
W
tka
-- ..Y .,..n,.,MUZ w ue uune.- project would boost the state econ- continue north to Sacramento.
♦ TRAINS from A-I The process aztually started in omy by creating tho ds of con- He said a direct east-vest c8n-
1989, n the Legislature ap- struction and train�mbly jobs nection between San Franciscc
Bullet trains may prov d high-speed rail de- -for up to 10 years a perma- and Sacramento would enhance
velopment bill by then-state Sen. nently improving trade and tour- any statewide system by creating a
link S.F. and L.A. John Garamendi, D-Walnut ism. Northern loop, Such a link would
Speed Rail Commission hired a Grove. It's now up to Caltrans to It could also reduce demand for -raean spanning San Francisco Bay
consortium involving the French 'build a system or explain why it controversial tax-supported air- — perhaps, he said, by sharing
?Min a Grande Vitesse (TGV) should not. port expansions at both ends of tracks with a proposed light-rail
manufacturer build s 590-mile New direction for Caltrans? `-'.�-locked California. .: -.metwork between Oakland and San
The San Francisco Airports Francisco using one lane on each
system linking Dallas, Houston California Rail Foundation
Commission wants to ca
and San Antonio by 1998.That put President Dan McNamara said he rry?1 per- deck of the Bay Bridge as a supple
Texas in league with Great Britain, believes Caltrans--under new di- - cent more passengers by the year meat to BART.
Spain,Germany,Austria,Switzer- rection by former U.S.Army Carps 2006, which means an extra 329 For now, Amtrak's cross-coun-
land, Canada, Brazil, Australia, of Engineers Maj.Gen.James van flights per day and additional flight try train service and its successful
South Korea and Taiwan as high- Loben Sels--will take the phinge. :paths over heavily populated areas am diesel line connecting the Bay
speed clients of the French. "The freeways are basically including The City.Almost 40 per- Area to Sacramento have stops on-
What about California? done and the leaders of Caltrans cent of planes leaving SFO go ly in the East Bay with bus connec-
The $2.5 million in Wilson's are beginning to see that this is the straight to the the Los Angeles be- .-tions,to San Francisco.
budget would come from a Cal- next great project for them,"acid air, according to airport spokes Supertrain selling points:
trans planning account and would McNamara. man Ron Wilson. ►At distances below 600 miles,
be followed by an equal amount Caltrans officials also know Los Angeles authorities, for travel time is competitive with jets
next year. If the Legislature ap- high-speed rail could be forced on their part, are planning a super because passengers roll into the
proves, Caltrans will spend the them. I - airport in suburban Palmdale that hearts of each city instead of land-
money on an 18-month high-speed State Sen.Quentin Kopp,a San Would be five times the size of Los ing at remote air fields. Jets take
rail study detailed enough to serve Francisco independent and chair- Angeles International. only an hour to cover the 347 miles
as the basis for a multibillion-dol- man of the Senate Transportation .Denis Doute, vice president of •hom SFO to LAX, but there are
lar, mostly private construction Committee, introduced a bill the French national railroad's At- increasing delays on the tarmac,in
contract. Thursday that would create a new lanta-based affiliate, Reil Trans- the passenger terminal and on sur.
"We're very excited about going Intercity Rail Commission as"the Portation Systems Inc.,said Cali- rounding highways. Mass-transit
ahead with the study," said Cal- first giant step toward a much- forma was "perfect" for electric ,connections are more plentiful at
trans' chief planntr, Allan Hen-. needed network of high-speed in high-speed trains such as the downtown train terminals.
drix."We see an awful lot of inter- tercity rail service for the 21st cen- French TGV,the German ICE,the ►Fast train service is cheaper,
est out there in high-speed rail. tury." Italian ETR-500 or the Japanese safer and more comfortable than
Now we have to find out specifical- Hendrix said a high-speed rail Shinkansen• air travel. With electric locomo-
All require exclusive rights of rives at both ends, 10 passenger
way for top-speed operation but g
10 Ilk i ' 3 1 could share commuter tracks at the coaches and a ranch cafe-bar car a the
•' t southern end and the Peninsula middle, each French TGV carries
With 200-mph supertrains and a direct line over the Tehachapi Mountains, southern
trackbetween SJ525 people, slightly more than a
travel time from San Francisco to Los Angeles would be 2 hours,30 s San -Boeing 747,but uses only a third of
minutes nonstop or 2 hours,45 minutes with stops in San Jose,Fresno and San Francisco• - the energy.The French and Japa
and Bakersfield.The trip now takes 9 hours,20 minutes on Amtrak's nese have never had a fatality in
three dais San Joaquin"trains between Oakland and Bakersfield,with
a top speed of 79 mph and bus links to San Francisco in the north and Magnetic experts, prospect high-speed operation.
Los Angeles over the Tehachapis. Most experts, including re- ► Europe's fastest trains travel
Mnusl projected riders searchers at UC-Berkeley, agree 186 mph,serving airports and city
Short-term that the long-awaited magnetic venters beth. On lines under con.
Improvements 6 0,0 0 levitation trains of Germany and struction, including the English
Japan,which float quietly on cosh- Channel tunnel line, they will go
110-mph .3.T Ilton ions of magnetism, need refine- 198 mph. But the limits are pri-
t service inert before le passenger marily to minimize power use. A
125-mph
i I service. TGV went 320 mph outside Paris
service 3.13 mfliitrn •Maglev" supporters such as -in a 1990 test,eclipsing the expert
' BART board member Wilfred Uss- mental German maglev record of
iB5inph a say California should fric-
` service rY Y 1Tn'e 310 mph.
tionless trains a chance.But even if
Don't Amtrak trains already Ply
'
Sacramento 300-mph the technology were ready,maglev the Central Valley?
• service trains cannot share conventional
Stockton . souecE:++w* owCOrntlor StliOt Three diesel-powered"San Joe-
tracks and thus would squire allquips"a day do connect Oakland to
San �, .E. Oaklan new rights of way involving mass ,Bakersfield,going up to 79 mph on
Francisco San Jose condemnations in urban areas. tracks shared by freight trains.
• Fresno .. Doute imagined "off-the-shelf" From Bakersfield to Los Angeles,'
high-speed trains with steel wheels the Tehachapi Mountains inter-
'California i shooting north from San Diego vene and must be crossed by bus.
Corrsdcr and Los Angeles to a fork near The whole trip takes more than
Fresno or Merced, where some nine hours,yet is often sold out.
Bakersfield uld h d f Sana d
: trains wa ea or ose sn "It is amazing to see how the
Tehachapi. San Francisco and .others would present service,although very slow
xMountains
• LDS Angeles.
a.� Potential basic network
...r. possible additional line San Diego
SOURCE:R.X Vivi Srpsn.Mn. EXAMINER GRAPHICS
S
compared to European standards, terprise have met failure so far.
is still pretty popular,"said Doute. The Texas consortium — fea-
"Imagine what it would be like ung GEC Alsthom of Paris and
with 200-mph cruising'speeds and nominally headed by Morrison
direct service to Los Angeles.Any Knudsen Corp.of Boise—will rely
high-speed rail system is as far on farebox revenue to repay con-
-from these standard trains as a struction bonds and foreign bank
new Porsche is from a Ford Model loans totaling$5.8 billion. But the
T." state has played a role, too: It
A profitable venture? Planned the project and agreed not
French forecasts indicate Am- to tax interest earned by bondhold-
trak or some other operator in Cal- ere'
Last year Bechtel Corp.canned
ifornia could make$100 million to its proposal for an all-private Dis-
$250 million a year in profit if state neyland-Las Vegas maglev line.No
-and federal agencies helped plan banks would lend$5 billion to $6
the project and bore some measure billion for an unproven system.
of construction costs. Florida, a consortium plan-
rector
Larry Dahms,executive di- P
rector of the Bay Area's Metropoli- ning to link Miami, Tampa and
tan Transportation Commission, Orlando with Swedish trains,capa-
said he was skeptical about the ble of tilting on curves,failed to win
financial claims and cautioned, bank support despite development
"It's not a slam dunk by any rights along the track right of way.
stretch of the imagination." Rail officials are revising the pro-
Even without a San Franciscopow to include participation by
Bay crossing,he said,obstacles in- state government and they plan,in
clude the Tehachapis and a U.S. any case, to construct a 14-mile
governmental structure that un- demonstration maglev line with
dermines rail profitability by private capital between Epcot Cen-
heavily subsidizing air and auto ter and Orlando airport.
travel. California's Little Hoover Com-
While the French TGV manu- mission, a 13-member body creat-
facturers have formally estimated ed by the Legislature to point out
construction costs in California at deficiencies in state government,
$5 billion to$7 billion,Caltrans has said in a report Jan. 29 that it's
put the figure closer to$14 billion. high time California got some fast
The discrepancy centers on more trains.
than 20 tunnels through the Teha- It made four specific high-speed
chapis that a study committee led rail recommendations:
by Caltrans believed would be nec- ►."The governor and the Legis-
essary, but which TGV marketers lature should enact legislation re.
insisted would not. questing a franchise to build,oper-
The study committee last year ate and finance a high-speed train
recommended nudging the current system to include Sacramento,San
service to 125 mph through electri- Francisco,Fresno,Bakersfield,Los
fication and extending the tracks Angeles and San Diego.
to Los Angeles before eventually ► "The governor and the Legis-
making the leap to supertrains—a lature should place before the vot-
conservative tack that Doute ers a revenue bond proposal to par-
claimed would cost the state more. tially pay for the construction and
Hendrix said the state probably initial operations...
couldn't provide much cash to ► "The Legislature should
build a high-speed network, but adopt a resolution urging Congress
neither should it expect private and the president to allow federal
companies to go it alone,especially airport and highway trust funds to
in the early sages of site selection be used to provide partial financing
and environmental review.
"One reason for the study," he ► "The governor and the Legis-
said, "is to see what role the state lature should enact legislation to
would have to play." establish a consortium that would
American high-speed rail pro- guide development of the high-
posals based solely on private en- speed train system."
1 �
OF
RANDOLPPHH A. HEARST P)Jt1ful 1111 II i
WILLIAM R. H E A R S T III P A U L W I L N E R Assistant Managing Editor,Features
Editor and Publisher 'I M P O R T E R Metropolitan Editor
PHIL BRONSTEIN STEPHEN COOS Fwe4rdNadma Bditor
E,V=titte Editor JAY JOHNSON Em=Um Nene Editor
GLENN SCHWARZ Sports Editor
PAMELA BRUNGER SCOTT CHRISTINE BARNES Style Editor
Managing Editor,Operations
SHARON BIBB NightNeurEduor
JAMES A. FINEFROC$ BOB McLEOD DimcbroJPhoOgroplay
Editor of the Editorial Pages KELLY F R A N[E N Y Art Diroctor
JAMES E. SEVRENS JIM WOOD AmekwFAWP
General Manager A.S.ROSS Associate Eduor
California by train
T'S HIGH time California began act- with rail development."
ing like the world's sixth biggest econ- A proposal by state Sen. Quentin Kopp,
omy and committed itself to fast I-San Francisco,would put the state on the
trains linking its major cities. right track. Kopp's bill would create the
The French,Germans and the Japanese, Intercity Rail Commission,charged solely-
who are much more enlightened than we with promoting and overseeing passenger-
when it comes to public transit, have en- train travel between cities.
joyed high-speed trains for years. For 28 The new nine-member panel would as-
years, the Bullet Train has been taking sume duties that now are divided among
travelers in comfort and safety from Tokyo Caltrans, the state Transportation Com-
to Kyoto in two hours. mission and the state Public Utilities Com-
Why must California train riders spend a mission.
whole day to go from Oakland to Los Ange- "The rail commission will cut through
les when the technology is available to cut red tape and bureaucracy now hampering
the trip to a little more than two hours9 the expansion of passenger rail service in
One answer- is that we have been ill- California," says Kopp, chairman of the
served by myopic, concrete-happy, pro- Senate Transportation Committee.
highway officials dominating the state De- The new transit board is necessary if
partment of Transportation. A scathing California is going to meet the needs of its
report by the watchdog Little Hoover Com- growing population and maintain its quali-
mission makes it clear that the state hasn't ty of life into the next century.The Legisla-
been able "to shift gears and move ahead tore and the governor should get on board.