Today’s Headlines

  • No New BART Station for Howard Terminal Ball Park (SFChron)
  • SMART to Expand Service (MarinIJ)
  • SF’s Litter and Trash Woes (NBCBayArea)
  • Under the Streets of SF (SFGate)
  • The Lights of Salesforce (Curbed)
  • Youths Arrested in Ashby BART Attack (SFBay)
  • Bay Area Council Spins Poll on Uber and Lyft (SFChron)
  • Hailishly Cold Commutes on our Streets (Curbed, Berkeleyside, SFGate)
  • More on Planned Mid-Market Whole Foods (Hoodline)
  • Cyclist Killed in Concord (EastBayTimes)
  • Commentary: Support for Transportation Taxes (MarinIJ)
  • Commentary: Transit Investment and Housing (SFChron)

Get state headlines at Streetsblog CA, national headlines at Streetsblog USA

  • ellen teapot

    It’s clear that Grace Crunican is only interested in cutting service to keep the books balanced. A new station at Howard Terminal could be paired with new tracks along the West Oakland El to increase capacity and reliability without building a new Transbay Tube. Unfortunately that requires vision and forethought the GM lacks.

  • mx

    Crunican’s argument would seem to preclude BART ever building an infill station or another branch, and suggests that her agency is so slow that takes at least a decade longer to complete a rail project than a stadium. Ignoring the specific site here, that’s a really worrying position for anybody who wants to see BART do more than forever creep its way deeper into the suburbs and exurbs of the Bay Area.

    I suggest she consult the rest of the world, which routinely finds ways to expand its transit systems within the core service area without complete chaos.

  • Crunican is full of bull. BART has looked at running a feeder line between West Oakland and Fruitvale through JLS area many times in the past, especially when the major Oak/9th development surfaced. For a modest sum, that the A’s can help finance, build an elevated line between Fruitvale and West Oakland to serve both JLB and Howard Terminal. To connect with existing BART, west and east bound tracks can be split between Embarcadero and 5th along both Filbert and Chestnut. This would only require one flyover (flyunder) track going westbound. It’s an industrial area that can support an elevated structure.

  • You mean the 3rd world/emerging markets? China is years ahead of the U.S. in infrastructure. In other countries projects are not only completed on time, but on or under budget.
    But, we got sprawl inducing BART extensions coming soon. Meanwhile, 80/880 remain a gridlock levels most days of the week.

  • david vartanoff

    actually doubling the tracks between west Oakland and downtown does nothing to create capacity in the Transbay Tube. That said Crunican is indeed not focused on rider convenience IMHO.

  • ellen teapot

    The new capacity wouldn’t be in the Transbay Tube; it’d be in Oakland. Disabled trains on the el wouldn’t cause the entire system to fail; you could just route around them.