DOCSLIB.ORG

Satisfy Passengers and Build Ridership

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Satisfy Passengers and Build Ridership CALTRAIN 20042023 STRATEGIC PLAN PENINSULA CORRIDOR JOINT POWERS BOARD (CALTRAIN) 1250 SAN CARLOS AVE. S AN CARLO S, CALIF. 94070 800-660-4287 WWW.CALTRAIN.COM JULY 1, 2004 A CKNOWLEDGMENTS Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board 1250 San Carlos Ave., San Carlos, California 94070 2004 BOARD OF DIRECTORS STRATEGIC PLAN John McLemore, Chair Mike Nevin, Vice Chair 2 004| 2 023 Michael Burns José Cisneros Don Gage Jim Hartnett Arthur L. Lloyd Sophie Maxwell Ken Yeager TABLE OF CONTENTS Sue Lempert, Metropolitan Transportation Commission Liason Michael J. Scanlon, Executive Director 1 From the Executive Director George Cameron, Chief Administrative Officer and Acting Chief Financial Officer 2 Introduction Chuck Harvey, Chief Operating Officer 2 The Caltrain Strategic Plan 2004–2023 Rita Haskin, Chief Communications Officer 5 Along the Peninsula Ian McAvoy, Chief Development Officer 7 Caltrain Today 8 Vision & Guiding Principles PROJECT STAFF 8 The Caltrain Vision Larry Stueck, Manager, Planning and Research 9 Guiding Principles April Chan, Manager, Capital Programming and Grants Corinne Goodrich, Manager, Special Projects 20 From Principle to Policy Douglas Kolozsvari, Associate Planner 20 The Scenario Approach 21 Policy Questions HNTB CORPORATION 25 Snapshot of the Continuum 1330 Broadway #1630, Oakland, CA 94612 and Future Improvements Camille Tsao, Senior Transportation Planner NANCY WHELAN CONSULTING 28 The Future Scenarios 201 Mission Street #1450, San Francisco, CA 94105 28 Developing the Scenarios NELSON\NYGAARD CONSULTING ASSOCIATES 47 Evaluating the Scenarios 833 Market Street #900, San Francisco, CA 94103 50 Conclusions WILBUR SMITH ASSOCIATES 201 Mission Street #1450, San Francisco, CA 94105 Art direction, design and production by MIG, Inc., Berkeley, California From the Executive Director Friends of Caltrain: On behalf of the Peninsula Corridor Joint Powers Board, (JPB) we are pleased to present the 20-Year Strategic Plan for Caltrain service. This document is a product of challenging economic times demanding hard choices and difficult decisions. But it also reflects an optimistic vision and a conviction that continued dramatic development and even more significant milestones lie ahead in the Caltrain corridor as we respond to relentless demand by new generations of patrons for faster travel, frequent schedules, improved facilities and more convenient access. In 1992, the Joint Powers Board assumed stewardship of the Caltrain system, which was hard pressed at the time to operate 52 weekday trains over a worn and tired infrastructure. Throughout the industry, they called it a “fixer-upper railroad.” From any perspective, we have done some significant fixing during the last 12 years. We have completed a $300 million infra- structure upgrade including new trackage, rolling stock, signal systems, and—in conjunction with many of the cities we serve—station improvements for comfort, convenience and accessibility. That 52-train schedule has expanded to 86, including 10 Baby Bullet trips linking San Jose Diridon and San Francisco stations in less than an hour. Much of this upgrade effort has taken place during a chilling economic downturn that has imposed unprecedented fiscal challenges on every transportation system. Nevertheless, we have not stopped building; we have not stopped improving; and, as this document will attest, we have not stopped planning for the future. Where do we go from here? This Strategic Plan positions us to proceed as fast, and as far, as market demand and resources will permit. It outlines three distinct growth patterns: Moderate, Enhanced, and Build-Out. The document provides for potential service extensions to the south, north and east; for system electrification; additional trains and more express schedules; and, ultimately, incorporation of High Speed Rail sometime in the next decade. Any long-term planning document must contain the means to deal with contingencies. Caltrain has met that challenge during its developmental years, and we believe the current Strategic Plan includes adequate measures to assure continued success. Michael J. Scanlon Executive Director CALTRAIN STRATEGIC PLAN 2004 | 2023 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction The Caltrain Strategic Plan 2004–2023 The Strategic Plan is a blueprint for the future of Caltrain. It presents a vision and guiding principles that shape broad-level policy decisions as well as specific strategies for service and capital improvements. The Strategic Plan is intended to be a reference for policymakers, Caltrain staff, and members of the public that guides them toward a common vision for Caltrain. Above all, it is meant to be an agent for change. The Caltrain Strategic Plan includes the following elements: (1) The Vision & Guiding Principles, which present a vision for Caltrain and outline principles for guiding policy decisions; (2) A summary of the Service Plan, which details the service characteristics, Information from the Service, Capital Improvement, and Finance plans is presented policies, and budget requirements for Caltrain over the next 20 years; through four future scenarios: the Status Quo, Moderate Growth, Enhanced, and (3) A summary of the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), which identifies Build-Out Scenarios. The scenarios are described in detail in the Future Scenarios policy and prioritizes capital improvements over the next 20 years; and chapter (page 28). The service characteristics, operations and capital costs, and (4) A summary of the Finance Plan, which discusses funding strategies member agency contributions reflected in each of the scenarios are based upon for Caltrain. the Draft Short-Range Transit Plan, Capital Improvement Plan, and Finance Plan as STRATEGIC PLAN COMPONENTS of June 1, 2004. The information in the Strategic Plan provides a general under- standing of the costs and benefits of each scenario and provides a basis for com- Vision & Guiding Principles paring the scenarios. Adoption of the Strategic Plan does not commit the member agencies to the funding requirements, service levels, or capital priorities presented in this document but is an agreement on the principles and policies which will Strategic Capital guide the development of the Short-Range Transit Plan, Service Plan, Capital Service Plan Plan Improvement Plan Improvement Plan, and Finance Plan. These plans are being finalized and will be adopted separately from the Strategic Plan in the Fall/Winter of 2004. Any updated information related to JPB actions subsequent to the adoption of Finance the Strategic Plan will be included as these supporting plans are finalized. Any Plan revisions to the Strategic Plan after adoption will be included in an addendum or in the next Strategic Plan update, anticipated by 2010. 2 CALTRAIN STRATEGIC PLAN 2004 | 2023 CALTRAIN STRATEGIC PLAN 2004 | 2023 3 80 INTRODUCTION Petaluma Vallejo 680 101 San Rafael 4 Concord All of the scenarios are based on rea- Peninsula Corridor has been served by sonable assumptions of revenue avail- rail since 1863, and this corridor is 1 Berkeley 24 Walnut Creek ability—based on past experience and where Caltrain operates rail service 80 San Pablo estimates of future events—and opti- today, connecting cities from Gilroy Bay mize federal and state funds. Where to San Jose to San Francisco. Its Oakland estimated revenue meets or exceeds 34 stations and 77 route-miles of SAN FRANCISCO 22ND ST capital program costs, the capital pro- track served about 28,000 passengers Alameda 880 San Francisco San Leandro 580 grams are considered to be fully fund- per weekday in 2003 and over seven PAUL AVE Oakland BAYSHORE 101 Intl. Airport ed. Underlying the financial analysis is million passengers annually. The the assumption that the local funds Caltrain rail system is a vital transit link 280 580 84 Pacifica San Livermore required to match the maximum avail- for communities on the Peninsula and SOUTH SF Francisco Hayward Bay able federal revenues will be provided is a fundamental component of the San SAN BRUNO San Francisco Intl. Airport 680 MILLBRAE by Caltrain’s member agencies. These Francisco Bay Area transportation system. BROADWAY 92 BURLINGAME local matching funds are subject to SAN MATEO The Bay Area has been one of the HAYWARD PARK Fremont BAY MEADOWS annual approval by the three member HILLSDALE fastest growing regions of the country BELMONT 84 agencies. If local matching funds are SAN CARLOS Redwood in terms of jobs and population, con- REDWOOD CITY City not allocated and alternative local ATHERTON stantly challenging its transportation Half Moon Bay MENLO PARK sources are not identified, Caltrain PALO ALTO system to meet travel demands. During STANFORD would not be able to use all of the CALIFORNIA AVE 101 the tech boom, job and population SAN ANTONIO federal funds included in the financial 237 growth far exceeded previous estimates, Pacific MOUNTAIN VIEW plans and other sources will be required Ocean and the highway system proved ill Mountain SUNNYVALE View LAWRENCE San Jose to meet any shortfalls. SANTA CLARA Intl. Airport equipped to handle the dramatic 1 COLLEGE PARK increase in automobile trips. Traffic SAN JOSE DIRIDON TAMIEN Along the Peninsula congestion reached its peak, resulting 85 CAPITOL The San Francisco Peninsula, home in poor air quality, long commutes, and San Jose BLOSSOM HILL to San Francisco, San Mateo, and frustrated drivers. Many commuters Santa Clara counties, is bordered found taking transit to be a favorable 101 by the Santa Cruz Mountains to the alternative and Caltrain ridership
Load more

Recommended publications
  • SFO to San Francisco in 45 Minutes for Only $6.55!* in 30 Minutes for Only $5.35!*
    Fold in to the middle; outside right Back Panel Front Panel Fold in to the middle; outside left OAK to San Francisco SFO to San Francisco in 45 minutes for only $6.55!* in 30 minutes for only $5.35!* BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) from OAK is fast, easy and BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit) provides one of the world’s inexpensive too! Just take the convenient AirBART shuttle Visitors Guide best airport-to-downtown train services. BART takes you bus from OAK to BART to catch the train to downtown San downtown in 30 minutes for only $5.35 one-way or $10.70 Francisco. The entire trip takes about 45 minutes and costs round trip. It’s the fast, easy, inexpensive way to get to only $6.55 one-way or $13.10 round trip. to BART San Francisco. The AirBART shuttle departs every 15 minutes from the The BART station is located in the SFO International Terminal. 3rd curb across from the terminals. When you get off the It’s only a five minute walk from Terminal Three and a shuttle at the Coliseum BART station, buy a round trip BART 10 minute walk from Terminal One. Both terminals have ticket from the ticket machine. Take the escalator up to the Powell Street-Plaza Entrance connecting walkways to the International Terminal. You can westbound platform and board a San Francisco or Daly City also take the free SFO Airtrain to the BART station. bound train. The BART trip to San Francisco takes about 20 minutes. Terminal 2 (under renovation) Gates 40 - 48 Gates 60 - 67 Terminal 3 Terminal 1 Gates 68 - 90 Gates 20 - 36 P Domestic Want to learn about great deals on concerts, plays, Parking museums and other activities during your visit? Go to www.mybart.org to learn about fantastic special offers for BART customers.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain Business Plan
    Caltrain Business Plan PROJECT UPDATE – SPRING 2019 What Addresses the future potential of the railroad over the next 20-30 years. It will assess the benefits, impacts, and costs of different What is service visions, building the case for investment and a plan for the Caltrain implementation. Business Plan? Why Allows the community and stakeholders to engage in developing a more certain, achievable, financially feasible future for the railroad based on local, regional, and statewide needs. 2 What Will the Business Plan Cover? Technical Tracks Service Business Case Community Interface Organization • Number of trains • Value from • Benefits and impacts to • Organizational structure • Frequency of service investments (past, surrounding communities of Caltrain including • Number of people present, and future) • Corridor management governance and delivery riding the trains • Infrastructure and strategies and approaches • Infrastructure needs operating costs consensus building • Funding mechanisms to to support different • Potential sources of • Equity considerations support future service service levels revenue 3 Where Are We in the Process? Board Adoption Stanford Partnership and Board Adoption of Board Adoption of of Scope Technical Team Contracting 2040 Service Vision Final Business Plan Initial Scoping Technical Approach Part 1: Service Vision Development Part 2: Business Implementation and Stakeholder Refinement, Partnering, Plan Completion Outreach and Contracting We Are Here 4 Electrification is the Foundation for Growth with Plans for
    [Show full text]
  • JPB Board of Directors Meeting of June 4, 2020 Correspondence As Of
    JPB Board of Directors Meeting of June 4, 2020 Correspondence as of May 21, 2020 # Subject 1 Excessive Idling at San Francisco Caltrain Station 2 Diridon Cooperative Agreement 3 Caltrain Sales Tax 4 BATWG Newsletter – May 2020 5 SSF Virtual Town Hall From: Chad Hedstrom <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2020 1:51 AM To: Public Comment <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Excessive Idling at San Francisco Caltrain station Observed the 912 San Bruno and 923 Baby Bullet, as well as the 913 (THREE (3) train engines) fast idling (very loudly) at the Caltrain station at 4th and King. I walked the entire perimeter of the yard, was not able to determine that any work was being done on any of the three engines. Last train to leave the station was 9:37pm on Sunday night, was last observed at 1:45am Monday morning, still idling. As I am writing this at nearly 2am all three trains continue to idle in an empty yard, resonating for blocks in every direction. 1. Why are these trains idling more than 60 minutes before departure? 2. Why are these trains not using Wayside power? 3. If wayside power is not available, when will wayside power be restored to San Francisco Station? I would ask that trains continue to use wayside power! Several thousand people are directly impacted by the noise. Caltrain has committed to using wayside power when at the station to reduce idling. Now more than ever citizens of San Francisco are staying at home and having to endure excessive idling not just at night, but during the day as well.
    [Show full text]
  • Calmod Local Policy Maker Group (LPMG) Agenda
    CalMod Local Policy Maker Group (LPMG) Thursday, September 25, 2014 6:00 PM – 7:30 PM SamTrans Offices ‐ Bacciocco Auditorium 2nd Floor 1250 San Carlos Ave., San Carlos Agenda 1. JPB Staff Report 2. Information/Discussion a. EMU Procurement – (Attachment A) b. CBOSS PTC Program Update – (Attachment B) 3. Public Comments 4. LMPG Member Comments/Requests 5. Next Meeting E‐Update: October 23, 2014 In‐person: November 20, 2014 at 6:00pm Memorandum Date: September 25, 2014 To: CalMod Local Policy Maker Group (LPMG) From: Marian Lee, CalMod Executive Officer Re: Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) Procurement Process _________________________________________________ At the August JPB meeting, CalMod staff provided an update on the Electric Multiple Unit (EMU) procurement process and shared information learned from the Request for Information (RFI) meetings, which were completed in June. The LPMG will receive a similar presentation, which is attached. The RFI is a critical step in the procurement process and provides up-to-date information about the EMU industry. With this information, staff can begin to more clearly understand the availability of “off-the-shelf” EMUs that can be best utilized for electrified Caltrain service. There are two phases of public outreach related to the design of the EMUs. The first phase, which kicked-off at the August Board meeting, involves soliciting input on key structural and capacity elements such as bathrooms, seats and standees, and bike capacity. Public feedback during the Phase I outreach will be coupled with technical analysis to inform staff recommendations to the Board for the EMU Request for Proposal, scheduled to be released in early 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • Altamont Corridor Vision Universal Infrastructure, Universal Corridor Altamontaltamont Corridor Corridor Vision: Vision Universal Infrastructure, Universal Corridor
    Altamont Corridor Vision Universal Infrastructure, Universal Corridor AltamontAltamont Corridor Corridor Vision: Vision Universal Infrastructure, Universal Corridor What is the Altamont Corridor Vision? The Altamont Corridor that connects the San Joaquin Valley to the Bay Area is one of the most heavily traveled, most congested, and fastest growing corridors in the Northern California megaregion. The Bay Area Council estimates that congestion will increase an additional 75% between 2016 and 2040. To achieve state and regional environmental and economic development goals, a robust alternative is needed to provide a sustainable / reliable travel choice and greater connectivity. The Altamont Corridor Vision is a long-term vision to establish a universal rail corridor connecting the San Joaquin Valley and the Tri-Valley to San Jose, Oakland, San Francisco and the Peninsula. This Vision complements other similar investments being planned for Caltrain, which is in the process of electrifying its corridor and rolling stock; Capitol Corridor, which is moving its operations to the Coast Subdivision as it improves its service frequency and separates freight from passenger service; a new Transbay Crossing, which would allow for passenger trains to flow from Oakland to San Francisco; the Dumbarton Rail Crossing, which is being studied to be brought back into service; and Valley Rail, which will connect Merced and Sacramento. The Vision also complements and connects with High- Speed Rail (HSR), and would enable a one-seat ride from the initial operating segment in the San Joaquin Valley throughout the Northern California Megaregion. One-Hour One-Seat One Shared Travel Time Ride Corridor Shared facilities, Oakland, Stockton, Express service, integrated Peninsula, Modesto modern rolling ticketing, San Jose stock timed connections • The limited stop (two intermediate stops) travel time between Stockton and San Jose is estimated to be 60 minutes.
    [Show full text]
  • Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan JUNE 2015 Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan (FY 2016 – FY 2025)
    ten-year bus fleet management plan JUNE 2015 Ten-Year Bus Fleet Management Plan (FY 2016 – FY 2025) TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 3 1.0 TRANSIT OPERATIONS ............................................................................................................... 6 1.1 TRANSIT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................... 6 1.2 DESCRIPTION OF SERVICE TYPES ........................................................................................... 7 1.3 BUS SERVICE TYPE & LINE IDENTIFICATION......................................................................... 14 1.4 PROGRAMMED TRANSIT PROJECTS..................................................................................... 16 1.5 TRANSIT ACCESS PASS (TAP)................................................................................................ 31 1.6 ADVANCED TRANSPORTATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (ATMS)........................................ 31 2.0 VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY ............................................................................................................ 33 2.1 GENERAL FLEET STATISTICS ................................................................................................. 33 2.2 SPARE RATIO ........................................................................................................................ 35 2.3 CONTINGENCY FLEET ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • SBC Executivesummfac
    CAPITOL CORRIDOR SOUTH BAY CONNECT AUGUST 2020 Purpose Study Area and Project Elements South Bay Connect proposes to relocate the Capitol Corridor passenger rail service between the Oakland N Coliseum and Newark from the Union Pacific Railroad (UP) Niles Subdivision to the Coast Subdivision for a faster, more direct route. It will also create new transbay connections for passengers between the East Bay and Peninsula by connecting to bus and shuttle services at the Ardenwood Station. The project is not proposing an increase in Capitol Corridor service frequency or changes to UP’s freight service, but does not preclude service growth in the future. The relocation will facilitate the separation of passenger and freight rail, resulting in improved rail operations, efficiency, and reliability while minimizing rail congestion within the corridor. Proposed New Station and Railroad Potential Station Area Proposed Capitol Corridor (CC) Service Potential Station Considered and Eliminated Existing CC Service Existing Station CC Service to be Discontinued Station where CC Service Study Area to be Discontinued UP Improvement Area BART Station Benefits Reduce passenger rail travel time between Oakland and San Jose and throughout the larger megaregion to increase ridership on transit, ease congestion on the Bay Area’s stressed roadways, and decrease auto commutes. Diversify and enhance network integration by reducing duplicative capital investments and dif- ferentiating Capitol Corridor’s intercity rail service from commuter rail and other transit services, including BART’s extension to San Jose. Support economic vitality by permitting enhanced rail movement and the preservation of freight rail capacity in the Northern California market through the reduction of existing conflicts between freight rail operations and passenger rail service.
    [Show full text]
  • Clipper® Executive Board Meeting Agenda
    Metropolitan Transportation Commission 101 Eighth Street, Meeting Agenda Joseph P. Bort MetroCenter Clipper® Executive Board Oakland, CA Committee Members: Denis Mulligan, Chair Edward D. Reiskin, Vice Chair Grace Crunican, Nuria Fernandez, Jim Hartnett, Steve Heminger, Michael Hursh, Rick Ramacier, Nina Rannells Monday, March 28, 2016 4:00 PM Meeting Location: San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District 300 Lakeside Drive, 23rd Floor Oakland, CA General Manager’s Conference Room This meeting will be recorded. Copies of recordings may be requested at the Metropolitan Transportation Commissioner (MTC) at nominal charge, or recordings may be listened to at MTC offices by appointment. To access meeting location, please take the elevators to the 23rd floor lobby area, where the agenda will be posted with entry access instructions. Upon entry you will be escorted to the meeting location. 1. Roll Call / Confirm Quorum Quorum: A quorum of this committee shall be a majority of its regular voting members (5). 2. Consent Calendar 2a. 15-1353 Minutes of February 22, 2016 meeting Action: Board Approval Attachments: 2a_CEB Minutes_Feb 2016 Clipper® Executive Board March 28, 2016 2b. 15-1354 Clipper® Program Contract Actions i. Contract Change Order - Replacement of Clipper® Handheld Card Readers: Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. ($1,000,000) ii. Contract Change Order - Implement New BART Product for San Francisco State University Institutional Program: Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. ($200,000) iii. Contract - Clipper® Customer Communications Program: Swirl, Inc. d/b/a Sidecar ($325,000) iv. Contract Change Order - Statement on Standards for Attestation Engagement No. 16 (SSAE 16) Report: Cubic Transportation Systems, Inc. ($200,000) Action: Board Approval Attachments: 2b_Clipper Contract Actions - Mar 2016 2c.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain JPB Member Nevin Would Scuttle Caltrain BART Extension
    Peninsula Rail 2000 www.rail2000.org No. 99–2 September 1999 Caltrain JPB Member Nevin Would Scuttle Caltrain On a recent “Peninsula This Week” cable potential of bringing that line, that right of be used to position it for future use by BART. TV program in San Mateo County hosted by way, to its fullest potential during my time.” “Electrification has nothing to do with Bob Marks and SF Chronicle “Peninsula In- Since 1983, Peninsula Rail 2000 has ad- speed ... or efficiency of the line. The only rea- sider” columnist Mark Simon, San Mateo vocated for upgrading Caltrain to a first-class son for electrification, in my opinion, would County Supervisor Mike Nevin suggested that rapid transit line, including the conversion be, if in fact, Caltrain at some time or another, Caltrain’s right-of-way (ROW) should be used from diesel to electric power. PR2000 has main- went to downtown San Francisco ... the only for a BART extension. tained that this would permit service, fre- real gain is about 5 minutes savings in time “Our right of way, our jewel, the El Camino quency and capacity better than BART for less and speed to get from San Jose to San Fran- Real, the Caltrain/SP right of way is the an- than $1 billion for the approximately 50-mile cisco,” stated Nevin. swer—I believe—[from] a cost perspective. length of Caltrain. In contrast, the eight-mile CalTrain advocates maintain that electri- [You’re] asking about the buy-in to BART...we BART extension from Colma to Millbrae is fication in conjunction with other improve- own the right of way.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 3: Environmental Setting and Consequences
    CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES CHAPTER 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND CONSEQUENCES This chapter presents information on the environmental setting in the project area as well as the environmental consequences of the No-Electrification and Electrification Program Alternatives. Environmental issue categories are organized in alphabetical order, consistent with the CEQA checklist presented in Appendix A. The project study area encompasses the geographic area potentially most affected by the project. For most issues involving physical effects this is the project “footprint,” or the area that would be disturbed for or replaced by the new project facilities. This area focuses on the Caltrain corridor from the San Francisco Fourth and King Station in the City and County of San Francisco to the Gilroy Station in downtown Gilroy in Santa Clara County and also includes the various locations proposed for traction power facilities and power connections. Air quality effects may be felt over a wider area. 3.1 AESTHETICS 3.1.1 VISUAL OR AESTHETIC SETTING The visual or aesthetic environment in the Caltrain corridor is described to establish the baseline against which to compare changes resulting from construction of project facilities and the demolition or alteration of existing structures. This discussion focuses on representative locations along the railroad corridor, including existing stations (both modern and historic), tunnel portals, railroad overpasses, locations of the proposed traction power facilities and other areas where the Electrification Program would physically change above-ground features, affecting the visual appearance of the area and views enjoyed by area residents and users. For purposes of this analysis, sensitive visual receptors are defined as corridor residents and business occupants, recreational users of parks and preserved natural areas, and students of schools in the vicinity of the proposed project.
    [Show full text]
  • Metreon San Francisco, California
    Metreon San Francisco, California Project Type: Commercial/Industrial Case No: C030001 Year: 2000 SUMMARY A 350,000-square-foot urban entertainment center on a 2.75-acre site in downtown San Francisco. Developed by Millenium Partners and WDG Ventures, the project is located within the 87-acre Yerba Buena Center. Within the first few months of its opening in June 1999, Metreon attracted some 2.5 million visitors. As many as 40,000 people have visited on peak-period weekends. The four-level project offers amusements, games, shopping, restaurants, a food court, and cinemas—including a 600-seat SONY•IMAX theater, the largest of its type on the West Coast—enlivening the evening activity of the Yerba Buena Gardens neighborhood. FEATURES Urban entertainment center Downtown development Ground lease Interactive entertainment Metreon San Francisco, California Project Type: Retail/Entertainment Volume 30 Number 01 January-March 2000 Case Number: C030001 PROJECT TYPE A 350,000-square-foot urban entertainment center on a 2.75-acre site in downtown San Francisco. Developed by Millenium Partners and WDG Ventures, the project is located within the 87-acre Yerba Buena Center. Within the first few months of its opening in June 1999, Metreon attracted some 2.5 million visitors. As many as 40,000 people have visited on peak-period weekends. The four-level project offers amusements, games, shopping, restaurants, a food court, and cinemas—including a 600-seat SONY•IMAX theater, the largest of its type on the West Coast—enlivening the evening activity of the Yerba Buena Gardens neighborhood. SPECIAL FEATURES Urban entertainment center Downtown development Ground lease Interactive entertainment DEVELOPER Yerba Buena Retail Partners Millenium Partners 1995 Broadway, 3rd Floor New York, New York 10023 212-595-1600 WDG Ventures 107 Stevenson Street 5th Floor San Francisco, California 94105 415-896-2300 ARCHITECT Simon Martin-Vegue Winkelstein Moris 501 Second Street Suite 701 San Francisco, California 94107 415-546-0400 Gary E.
    [Show full text]
  • Caltrain Business Plan
    Caltrain Business Plan JULY 2019 LPMG 6/27/2019 What Addresses the future potential of the railroad over the next 20-30 years. It will assess the benefits, impacts, and costs of different What is service visions, building the case for investment and a plan for the Caltrain implementation. Business Plan? Why Allows the community and stakeholders to engage in developing a more certain, achievable, financially feasible future for the railroad based on local, regional, and statewide needs. 2 What Will the Business Plan Cover? Technical Tracks Service Business Case Community Interface Organization • Number of trains • Value from • Benefits and impacts to • Organizational structure • Frequency of service investments (past, surrounding communities of Caltrain including • Number of people present, and future) • Corridor management governance and delivery riding the trains • Infrastructure and strategies and approaches • Infrastructure needs operating costs consensus building • Funding mechanisms to to support different • Potential sources of • Equity considerations support future service service levels revenue 3 Where Are We in the Process? Board Adoption Stanford Partnership and Board Adoption of Board Adoption of of Scope Technical Team Contracting 2040 Service Vision Final Business Plan Initial Scoping Technical Approach Part 1: Service Vision Development Part 2: Business Implementation and Stakeholder Refinement, Partnering, Plan Completion Outreach and Contracting We Are Here 4 Flexibility and Integration 5 What Service planning work to date has been focused on the development of detailed, Understanding illustrative growth scenarios for the Caltrain corridor. The following analysis generalizes the 2040 these detailed scenarios, emphasizing opportunities for both variation and larger “Growth regional integration within the service Scenarios” as frameworks that have been developed.
    [Show full text]