Comments on: BART Advances Extension to Livermore, Despite Lack of Immediate Funding

By: Henry

Henry — Sun, 20 Feb 2011 01:45:51 +0000

Honestly, do things still need to be built in the BART standard? Everything about the system screams expensive: custom built trains, nonstandard track gauge, serving far flung small cities with $3B extensions. Does everything need to be about freaking BART?

Which also brings up another point – how will BART get money for the new trains needed to maintain frequency on this extension? Even if you didn’t consider the fact that BART trains are custom built, getting enough trains for an 11 mile extension is an expensive task.

By: Jo

Jo — Sat, 25 Sep 2010 15:20:32 +0000

Livermore city council is seeking on the strength(?) of only the initial EIR to make the VASCO station at Livermore a priority with ABAG. Why?

BART obviously needs to correct its infrastructure at Geary, etc.

The promised super ACE has the option of meeting with BART at Dublin.

BART to Livermore has not completed the necessary steps,why should it be funded first?

By: Dave

Dave — Sun, 11 Jul 2010 01:58:03 +0000

Couldn’t BART implement a Dual Gauge track or a “Third rail” (Not The Power Surce) inside the Current BART broad gauge to allow standard Gauge railcars with the option of Catenary power source addition? So that before BART orders it’s new cars they can be standard gauge then later removing the Broad Gauge track. This will eneble outside EMU’s to enter the BART tracks and serve the BART system and points outside and beyond without transfers and at a lower cost then the current BART pricetag?

By: Joseph E

Joseph E — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 07:12:49 +0000

Yes. Even cheaper, buy light-weight DMUs and run them every 30 minutes all day. You could pick vehicles with 90 or 110 mph top speeds, to make the trip even faster than BART, despite the transfer.

By: Wad

Wad — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 05:00:42 +0000

BART would, but it’s the connecting transit systems that drop the ball. There’s a huge imbalance between the 15-20 minute BART service and the 60 minutes or worse connections of the various outlying systems.

Of course, the reason why bus service sucks in the first place is because of BART.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 01:01:35 +0000

Wad, if BART served this edge city employment well, you’d see Dublin/Pleasanton produce large volumes of reverse commuters.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:59:06 +0000

BART provides a transit backbone in those areas where transit ridership is bound to be low. In any area, you’d want to start with a good local rail system and then build commuter rail to connect to it. BART doesn’t do it; in San Francisco it doesn’t complement Muni but competes with it, and in Oakland its lines are not laid out well enough to provide dense urban service.

The only time you’d ever want to build commuter rail first is if it can be done cheaply, on existing track. BART by definition can’t do that; it provides the service levels of commuter rail for the cost of a full subway.

By: GRL

GRL — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 22:31:20 +0000

Wouldn’t it be cheaper to electrify and increase the trips per day of the Altamont Commuter Express, which covers most of the route?

By: Wad

Wad — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 21:42:37 +0000

The Bay Area has a slew of edge city employment in the Pass area.

Livermore has the Lawrence Livermore Lab and several industrial employers. Dublin/Pleasanton provides an express bus connection to the huge Bishop Ranch office colony in San Ramon; that’s the world headquarters of Chevron, for one.

Then you have the more established industrial centers of the East Bay, and it wouldn’t be unrealistic to assume that some of those Stockton riders have jobs in San Francisco.

As for Golden Gate, the last I remember there were about 3 or 4 different Santa Rosa services besides the line-haul 80. I’ve taken the commute bus (80 takes about 3 hours one way) at 6 and 7 a.m. The seats would fill up at Santa Rosa Transit Mall, and standees get on at Petaluma. I think the seated capacity of the MCIs is about 54.

Those buses may become obsolete when SMART opens. Even with a transfer to the ferry, that may still be a faster commute since it’ll get passengers quicker to the Financial District.

By: Andy K

Andy K — Thu, 08 Jul 2010 18:37:21 +0000

“The real problem is a lack of better “express” i.e. commuter rail and local rail i.e. streetcars/light rail.”

The cause of this problem is arguably BART itself – BART sucks up most of the available funding for the Bay Area. Case in point, Warmsprings got the $ originally allocated for Dunbarton Rail. BART is extremely “popular” with voters/the public – many of whom don’t want anything else, despite the fact that most of them never take transit.