Thursday, June 10, 2010

Oakland Streetcars

The last few years have seen many ideas tossed around for a streetcar line up Broadway in Oakland. I like the idea personally because it would allow me to take the streetcar to Kaiser Hospital if I have Doctor's appointments during the work day and potentially revitalize a corridor with a huge economic upside. I've seen lots of floated ideas but none are as well thought out as Daniel Jacobson's plan. He really did his homework and has a great result. Hopefully some folks in Oakland take a good look at this work.


FDW said...

Nice Plan, but In my mind it should be extended a little ways further to Macarthur BART.

K6-III said...

Main thing I don't see is a site for a maintenance facility. Any plan that doesn't include one is not serious.

Brian Stankievich said...

I believe the plan is that the maintenance yard would be located under the elevated interstate 580.

david vartanoff said...

Good plan to start from. Certainly think a connection to BART either @ Macarthur or Rockridge would be useful. Might be worth thinking about going further up Piedmont to either 40th/41st or Pleasant Valley. With a short tunnel under the crest a major stop at the rebuilt 51st % B'way shopping ctr and access to CCAC could generate ridership.
Bottom line, great basis for further work.

(Reality check, if the full BRT boondoggle sucks up the purported $250 million + inevitable corruption/cost overruns, the far more useful streetcar line will never happen)

Matt Fisher said...

I second david vartanoff's motion, but I support the East Bay BRT project.

Matt Fisher said...

I said I supported BRT in my earlier comment, but then, oh well, I had a revelation today. Maybe the deficiences of BRT in this case are so apparent after all, and I've been writing comments on other blogs, in my name, defending the East Bay BRT project against criticism all because others say it should go on (same applying to the Geary and Van Ness BRT projects, and I've never been to California as of yet, I'm sorry to say). What a sap I turned out to be. :)

I apologize for making these "defensory" (is that even a word?) comments. I will never stoop to such lows again.

Then again, the maintenance yard close to the "Macarthur Maze" would make sense.

david vartanoff said...

@ Matt Fisher and all. First, confession. I love trains/subways/streetcars. So, totally objective?, not always. That said, I support BRT on Van Ness, because as long as Golde Gate Transit buses are in the mix, we might as well plan for rubber tires in reserved lanes.
I REJECT BRT for Geary because I believe if that is what is built, real transit will not happen in the several decades I might see before death. Geary, much like the Frirst/Second Avenue bus line # 15 in NYC has huge volume, great potential for further growth, and vibrant commercial activity along most of the street. S such, both "corridors" need local and express services. Over a century ago NYC demonstrated that subways were superior to streetcars for longer distance/higher speed trips. I believe BRT is appropriate in limited cases, but is often an attempt to cheap out on transit.
PS, Matt come out here for a "site visit" and check out what we have and need.

poncho said...

its a good initial line but i really feel it needs to be a little more, at present it doesnt really serve a whole lot of new teritory, i think the mentioned extension to rockridge, down piedmont avenue and to lakeshore/grand lake is critical. these are great urban neighborhoods that could really benefit a strong quality transit link to downtown and BART.

a line down piedmont ave could redevelop the 41st ave parking lot where the key system used to have a terminal - put the parking underground and dense neighborhood infill on top