Comments on: Platform Shortage Could Threaten CAHSR into Transbay Terminal

By: dphillips

dphillips — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 14:06:40 +0000

The solution would seem to be to extend the proposed tailtracks to form a loop, so trains would not need to reverse. A grade separated junction would be required at 2nd/Townsend. Caltrain could simply continue. HSR trains needing servicing could go immediately to the yard, then make return for loading. A 5 minute headway could be maintained on the through tracks.

By: anon

anon — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 20:56:21 +0000

I know it’s even *more* expensive, but instead of adding extra tracks, the train box with six tracks (could probably get away with four, actually) should be extended north into a new Transbay Tube (as long term plans already propose). Trains could be reversed and cleaned on the other side of the Bay, in Oakland. This would obviously have some significant additional advantages.

The site which would need many terminal tracks would then be Oakland; the Transbay Terminal would have all through-running tracks, which increases capacity quite substantially (since trains don’t have to cross in the station throat). The dwell time would be only that needed for passengers to get on and off (with their baggage), and six tracks would then handle a simply enormous number of people.

Oakland has room for a big terminal at much lower cost — though in fact some of the trains should be extended eastward towards Sacramento.

By: Christopher Parker

Christopher Parker — Sat, 14 Mar 2009 01:26:57 +0000

Build 6 tracks now, but do it so it’s easy to expand later.

By: Adirondacker

Adirondacker — Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:01:26 +0000

I’m not convinced that 12 trains an hour isn’t reasonable. 4 tracks for HSR means you have 20 minutes to move the train in and move it out.. well less because that 20 minutes also includes moving it from the tunnel to the platform and from the platform to the tunnel. But in 20 minutes it can be at the platform for … 15? Same amount of time that an Acela running between Boston and Washington is in Penn Station in New York.

By: murphstahoe

murphstahoe — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 18:24:33 +0000

Somehow central Paris survives with train stations that are really out in the corners of the city. I think the trainbox would be nice but we can invest money in a better fashion. The 4th/King station could be improved with not too much money – as far as I am concerned, terminate I-280 at 6th St and use the land currently operating as the 4th St on/offramp, which would also improve the MUNI situation at that intersection and even allow MUNI to pass through the train terminal. Of course this cuts off the Embarcadero from 280 and 280 from the Ballpark, so it won’t happen.

The T-Third out to Bayshore currently doesn’t serve a very important area – lower population and lower income. That could change, but the T-Third is still crazy slow. The Central Subway may never get built and will be a freak show if it does – face it if you have bags and will be taking HSR to LA, most will fade the $10 extra for a cab to the station. Factoring in for inflation that cab is 2x a Caltrain ticket, but it is 1/5th a HSR ticket. The only transit connection that really matters for HSR is BART. Unless the connection is at Montgomery, we might as well leverage the platform at Millbrae.