Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Only be 20? Yeah, if this was the 50's maybe. Here's what would happen. First, if the report comes back that (I'll call this the Geary-Alameda line) is feasible, then what will happen is, BART will put forth a planned route with stops. This will take a few months, maybe a half year. Then, BART puts forth the plan and will certainly vote for it.
Then, the storm follows.
SFMTA will say "But we're building a BRT so its not necessary". They'll push back against it.
Muni driver unions will argue that you're disemploying the 38 line drivers by replacing it with a separate transit agency. Geary business owners will whine and say BART will destroy their business, they even got hysterical when SFMTA announced painting the street for the BRT. So imagine subway drilling and rerouting of Geary Blvd.
NIMBYs will argue "gentrification", because transit villages will inevitably come.
It's going through wealthy neighborhoods as well so lobbyist will argue: "Train to nowhere, who wants to commute to the beach!"
So on and so forth. The only ones to save this project are the actual residences of Richmond and the Western neighborhoods that BART plans to run through to connect to Daly City.
Copy and paste all of this for Alameda.
After all this nonsense is finished, they'll start building the tunnel with the newly approved temporary sales tax. Tones of news will come about--similar to the bridge--in regards to the way its being built, if its cheap, or whatever.
This all sounds like 30-40 years, from now. And depending on what Congress is in charge, they'll probably start cutting lines/stops. Hopefully, Bay Area residents will stick behind this. Its a lot harder than providing Silicon Valley extensions to suburban sprawl, but it can be done.
But these are ignorant arguments. BART stations tend to cause business to boom, Rockridge being an example.
Bus drivers won't be disemployed, because those bus lines will still be needed. BART (or an underground highly limited MUNI line) would only make 3 or 4 stops along Geary. So the neighborhood service would still be needed. The point of high speed transit is to connect big distances and move people faster, not create an alternative milk run.
But these are ignorant arguments. BART stations tend to cause business to boom, Rockridge being an example.
Bus drivers won't be disemployed, because those bus lines will still be needed. BART (or an underground highly limited MUNI line) would only make 3 or 4 stops along Geary. So the neighborhood service would still be needed. The point of high speed transit is to connect big distances and move people faster, not create an alternative milk run.
Of course these are ignorant arguments, but the rhetoric is real. Do you think more Geary business want new competition? No. They're going to be against this, especially if a few houses get displaced for stairways. Especially if for entire years there will be drilling and havoc on Geary Blvd.
How many people take the 38 Geary? A lot. But where are they going? Most, take it to Divisadero and Fillmore. Afterwards, its just Avenues. The frequency of the current 38 bus will decrease massively, only for those taking it along a certain stop. Gone will be people taking it to Divisadero, gone will be people taking it to Sunset Blvd. and the Avenues. If this gets greenlighted, in a few decades Nextbus will say, during rush hour: 38 Geary in 6 minutes, and 28 minutes. Rather than the usual: 1min/2min. And you can say goodbye to the 38L. It'll just be the normal system.
There was fuss over the job security of the AirBART drivers once the tram got put in place, imagine the concern for Muni drivers once Muni's cluster**** of a system is cleasened with a more popular, more functional transit system. SFMTA already has a inferiority complex, don't put it past them.
Geary businesses are part of the reason we don't have a Muni Metro line in the first place. The only ones who beg for rail service are usually lower-income, which is why the T exists. Middle class needs the system but often don't pay enough attention. The opposers are the loudest.
Of course these are ignorant arguments, but the rhetoric is real. Do you think more Geary business want new competition? No. They're going to be against this, especially if a few houses get displaced for stairways. Especially if for entire years there will be drilling and havoc on Geary Blvd.
How many people take the 38 Geary? A lot. But where are they going? Most, take it to Divisadero and Fillmore. Afterwards, its just Avenues. The frequency of the current 38 bus will decrease massively, only for those taking it along a certain stop. Gone will be people taking it to Divisadero, gone will be people taking it to Sunset Blvd. and the Avenues. If this gets greenlighted, in a few decades Nextbus will say, during rush hour: 38 Geary in 6 minutes, and 28 minutes. Rather than the usual: 1min/2min. And you can say goodbye to the 38L. It'll just be the normal system.
There was fuss over the job security of the AirBART drivers once the tram got put in place, imagine the concern for Muni drivers once Muni's cluster**** of a system is cleasened with a more popular, more functional transit system. SFMTA already has a inferiority complex, don't put it past them.
Geary businesses are part of the reason we don't have a Muni Metro line in the first place. The only ones who beg for rail service are usually lower-income, which is why the T exists. Middle class needs the system but often don't pay enough attention. The opposers are the loudest.
I'm not sure it's all that predictable. I'm not sure what you mean about most of the ridership to Divisadero and the Avenues would be gone. Why? People still live there, they'd need to get from their homes to a station to ride BART downtown to work, or whatever. They'd take a local bus to the beach on weekends, instead of riding more expensive BART, where they'd have to walk several blocks to get to a station.
I'm not sure it's all that predictable. I'm not sure what you mean about most of the ridership to Divisadero and the Avenues would be gone. Why? People still live there, they'd need to get from their homes to a station to ride BART downtown to work, or whatever. They'd take a local bus to the beach on weekends, instead of riding more expensive BART, where they'd have to walk several blocks to get to a station.
IDK, I'll have to think about this one.
Yeah, but BART would just be impersonating the 38 Geary, not an addition to it. Unless you're rather lazy, you can walk to the next station, even downhill since the train is fast anyways. The bus can't shortcut it. There's going to be more than a couple of stations, it's a densely populated urban area, not a suburb. The only people taking a bus would be those in the Sunset who take the 28 or 29 bus to the BART system in order to get to downtown faster, since the N and L are slower. (Actually nevermind, in the study, BART is analyzing a line through the Sunset to Daly City, so lol nevermind! Win:Geary-SOMA, Win:Geary-Sunset-Daly City, Win: Transbay Tube/Alameda.) That's another tick-off for the SFMTA. If you live along the line, you won't need the bus. The stations ought to be close. If they're not (and say there's only 5 stations) then maybe. But there will be a lot of fare evaders, for sure.
Plus it's not expensive. The only time BART is ever expensive is if you take it out to the suburbs and use the transbay tube. Whenever you take BART from one side to another in the same sub-region, it's rather cheap.My friends near Glenn Park and Daly City take it all the time rather than the 24 bus and J-Church, and it costs less.
One way trip from Balboa Park to Embarcadero is only $1.80. Lucky jerks. It's only more expensive than Muni once you take it from Colma, which then surges it to $3.50 hilariously. This plan is so good, that even though BART is analyzing it finally, officially, it's so good you know someone is going to mess this up.
Yeah, but BART would just be impersonating the 38 Geary, not an addition to it. Unless you're rather lazy, you can walk to the next station, even downhill since the train is fast anyways. The bus can't shortcut it. There's going to be more than a couple of stations, it's a densely populated urban area, not a suburb. The only people taking a bus would be those in the Sunset who take the 28 or 29 bus to the BART system in order to get to downtown faster, since the N and L are slower. (Actually nevermind, in the study, BART is analyzing a line through the Sunset to Daly City, so lol nevermind! Win:Geary-SOMA, Win:Geary-Sunset-Daly City, Win: Transbay Tube/Alameda.) That's another tick-off for the SFMTA. If you live along the line, you won't need the bus. The stations ought to be close. If they're not (and say there's only 5 stations) then maybe. But there will be a lot of fare evaders, for sure.
Plus it's not expensive. The only time BART is ever expensive is if you take it out to the suburbs and use the transbay tube. Whenever you take BART from one side to another in the same sub-region, it's rather cheap.My friends near Glenn Park and Daly City take it all the time rather than the 24 bus and J-Church, and it costs less.
One way trip from Balboa Park to Embarcadero is only $1.80. Lucky jerks. It's only more expensive than Muni once you take it from Colma, which then surges it to $3.50 hilariously. This plan is so good, that even though BART is analyzing it finally, officially, it's so good you know someone is going to mess this up.
See, that's where I say it depends on how you devise the system and view the transit aggregate in the area as a whole. If you keep the 38 buses (local, at least, if not the "L"), then you can have a BART (or lightrail) line whose purpose is to move people from downtown to the beach, not to serve local ridership. So you have maybe 1 stop near Powell Bart station, 1 at around Japantown and maybe 1 in-between, 1 at the beginning of the Avenues, 1 at around 25th, and then the last one near the beach.
BART originally wasn't designed to have all the stops it does in the East Bay. It wasn't supposed to stop at Orinda AND Lafayette AND Walnut Creek. It was designed to reach maximum speed to move people from out there to the inner Bay and SF, and it couldn't reach those max speeds if it had to puddle-jump. But huge fights broke out about who should get a station, so speed got compromised. The vision for a downtown-to-beach BART could come closer to the original purpose of the system--high speed people-moving, on a route that's already served by short-haul busses. Think about it; people who are coming from Fremont or Walnut Creek to go to the beach aren't going to want to sit through a dozen stops in SF.
Last edited by Ruth4Truth; 12-03-2014 at 08:00 PM..
The vision for a downtown-to-beach BART could come closer to the original purpose of the system--high speed people-moving, on a route that's already served by short-haul busses.
That makes sense. But the distance between stations (if its paralleling the Mission BART line) shouldn't be that huge. I'm just saying that it will take a dent out of 38 ridership. A huge dent. BART will basically replace the 38 L, and the normal 38 will just be used for short distances. The 38 wont go away, but it'll have the ridership I suppose of like the 29 bus, or some bus that's moderately popular, say 30 Stockton pass Chinatown. It for sure won't be those extra long buses downtown and overflowing. More like a 1/15th of it.
That makes sense. But the distance between stations (if its paralleling the Mission BART line) shouldn't be that huge. I'm just saying that it will take a dent out of 38 ridership. A huge dent. BART will basically replace the 38 L, and the normal 38 will just be used for short distances. The 38 wont go away, but it'll have the ridership I suppose of like the 29 bus, or some bus that's moderately popular, say 30 Stockton pass Chinatown. It for sure won't be those extra long buses downtown and overflowing. More like a 1/15th of it.
And that's a good thing, because ALL the 38's, including the "L"s, are overcrowded. BART would reduce the overcrowding.
Interesting graphic. I didn't know a Geary leg was part of the original plan. Too many stops on it, though. That's the problem with introducing a system like BART; it ends up like the SoCal portion of the HSR; every community wants in, so the project gets bogged down and speed gets slowed down to try to keep everyone happy.
And that's a good thing, because ALL the 38's, including the "L"s, are overcrowded. BART would reduce the overcrowding.
Interesting graphic. I didn't know a Geary leg was part of the original plan. Too many stops on it, though. That's the problem with introducing a system like BART; it ends up like the SoCal portion of the HSR; every community wants in, so the project gets bogged down and speed gets slowed down to try to keep everyone happy.
I understand the concern, but to me it's much different. San Francisco is too small. The stations to me are pretty good because it will just be in metro mode. We can't expect BART to go 80 mph like it does in the Transbay tube through dense neighborhoods. While it's in San Francisco, I think it's fine to treat it more like a Subway and less like a commuter rail.
The opposite of the HSR is what BART currently is, where people are begging for infill stations. These trains with that distance of stops should run about 30-40MPH, a lot faster than Muni could ever dream of, usually only going 10mph or less. And if anything, knowing the density of this area, it sounds harder to convince people to take the station rather than keep it; or it's like the Muni bus fiasco, where there's a stop on every block and once SFMTA tried to cut back on stops, everyone protected their own.
it's only 7 stops anyways. 6 if you take out Union Square, which is not a needed stop since Muni is already going there.
I understand the concern, but to me it's much different. San Francisco is too small. The stations to me are pretty good because it will just be in metro mode. We can't expect BART to go 80 mph like it does in the Transbay tube through dense neighborhoods. While it's in San Francisco, I think it's fine to treat it more like a Subway and less like a commuter rail.
The opposite of the HSR is what BART currently is, where people are begging for infill stations. These trains with that distance of stops should run about 30-40MPH, a lot faster than Muni could ever dream of, usually only going 10mph or less. And if anything, knowing the density of this area, it sounds harder to convince people to take the station rather than keep it; or it's like the Muni bus fiasco, where there's a stop on every block and once SFMTA tried to cut back on stops, everyone protected their own.
it's only 7 stops anyways. 6 if you take out Union Square, which is not a needed stop since Muni is already going there.
What an F-ing train wreck! So, it's hopeless.
*throws up hands and stomps off*
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
