Transbay Transit Center, San Francisco

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Transbay Transit Center, San Francisco CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN Transit-Oriented Development Case Studies Prepared for City of Laguna Niguel 27781 La Paz Road Laguna Niguel, California 92677 Prepared by PBS&J 12301 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 430 Los Angeles, California 90025 November 2007 Contents CASE STUDIES Introduction.................................................................................................................................1 CASE STUDY 1 Downtown Arlington Heights, Illinois......................................................................................3 CASE STUDY 2 Del Mar Station, Pasadena.....................................................................................................7 CASE STUDY 3 EmeryStation, Emeryville, CA............................................................................................... 11 CASE STUDY 4 North Hollywood Commercial Core ................................................................................... 17 CASE STUDY 5 Rail Station District, Santa Ana............................................................................................ 21 CASE STUDY 6 Grossmont Transit Station, La Mesa ................................................................................... 25 CASE STUDY 7 Pleasant Hill BART Transit Village ...................................................................................... 29 CASE STUDY 8 Rincon Hill Area Plan, San Francisco .................................................................................. 33 CASE STUDY 9 Transbay Transit Center, San Francisco............................................................................. 39 CASE STUDY 10 Cedros Crossing, Solana Beach........................................................................................... 45 CASE STUDY 11 Jefferson–La Cienega Boulevards Exposition Rail Station Plan.................................... 51 Figures Figure 1 Emeryville Amtrak Station Area........................................................................................................ 14 Figure 2 North Hollywood Redevelopment Commercial Core.................................................................... 18 Figure 3 Pleasant Hill BART Transit Pedestrian/Bicycle Circulation ........................................................... 31 Figure 4 Rincon Hill Streetscape Concept ....................................................................................................... 35 Figure 5 Rincon Hill Land Use Plan................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 6 Transbay Redevelopment Project Area .......................................................................................... 40 Figure 7 Cedros Crossing Site Plan, Reduced Massing Alternative ........................................................... 47 TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN iii CASE STUDIESI Introduction Transit-oriented development refers to the clustering of housing, jobs, shopping, and services in close proximity to rail stations, trolleys, bus stops, or other travel options that provide access to frequent, high-quality transit services. This pattern of development typically involves compact development, a mix of land uses, and amenities like pedestrian-friendly streets, parks or other open spaces, and buildings that are oriented to the street to provide visibility and easy access to pedestrians. This report presents eleven examples of transit- oriented developments throughout California, including one outside of Chicago. The case studies selected for inclusion here are intended to demonstrate the variety of approaches and strategies that may be used to facilitate successful transit-oriented developments that uniquely address the location, resources, and constraints that may be available within a community. The location of the Mission Viejo–Laguna Niguel Station and proposed improvements in Metrolink commuter rail service provide a significant opportunity for transit- oriented development as envisioned in the updated Laguna Niguel Gateway Specific Plan currently being prepared. The case studies include a description of the transit- oriented development location, the mix of land uses, transit mode, and a discussion of the resources and tools, both public and private, used to facilitate its development. The case studies also discuss the status of development within the areas that have been generally characterized as transit- oriented districts, as the boundaries of these areas are fluid and not necessarily delineated within a planning document. The eleven case studies are presented in order of the length of time that both transit and mixed-use development has been built and operational. These range from Arlington Heights in suburban Chicago where transit-oriented development has been successful since the year 2000 when it was initially developed, to the Jefferson–La Cienega TOD in Los Angeles, which is currently in the planning stages in anticipation of TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN 1 the Exposition Light Rail Line service in the year 2010. The key factor in the selection of each of these case studies is that they provide a useful approach, ownership or development pattern, implementation tool, or resource that may be considered by the City for its transit-oriented development plans. Implications for Transit-Oriented Development in Laguna Niguel The “lessons learned” for transit-oriented development in the Laguna Niguel Gateway area that can be taken from the case studies that follow can generally be summarized as the need for the following key factors: 1. Catalytic projects. Catalytic projects are developments that will attract people, activity, and recognition to the area. Catalytic projects in TODs are generally supported by public investments of land or other financial resources as well as public investment in the infrastructure that is needed to support the new mix of uses and the increased development intensity. These investments may include amenities such as wider sidewalks, public open spaces, streetscape enhancements, and resized infrastructure to name a few. 2. A mix of land uses. Mixed-use development is characteristic of most successful TOD and includes development of housing, shopping, services, and employment within ¼ to ½ mile walking distance of the transit options available. The mix of land uses may be within a single development— vertical mixed use, a mix of uses in independent structures spread throughout the TOD district or a combination of both. Land uses that should be considered include retail, services, entertainment and leisure, housing, and office and other professional operations that provide employment. It should be noted that the land use mix can, and often does, include industrial development as a component of a successful TOD. Jefferson-La Cienega and Santa Ana are good examples of TOD developments that have a substantial component of industrial and business park activities within the transit-oriented district. 3. Appropriate scale of development. The scale of development must achieve a critical mass to ensure a successful TOD. Small scale developments, even if they are mixed-use, will not transform an area into a transit-oriented district. Appropriate scale is dependent on the location of the development and, of course, its community context. Critically, the scale must be large enough to accommodate a rich mixture of land uses to complement and support the available transit and attract visitors, residents, and shoppers to the area. 4. Density. While density is related to scale, more importantly, it is a tool to ensure that the level of development intensity will be economically feasible to construct without substantial public subsidies. Market analysis dictates the level of density for specific areas based upon land costs and other factors, but successful TODs will have substantially higher densities than surrounding adjacent development. Several of the case studies benefited from having a single developer who consolidated properties for the catalytic projects. An appropriately high density to support the desired development as well as regular transit service is a key feature of successful transit- oriented development. These lessons must be carefully considered in the development of the Laguna Niguel Gateway Specific Plan to assure that the City’s vision for the development of this area as a vibrant and successful transit- oriented development can be achieved. TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT CASE STUDIES 2 CITY OF LAGUNA NIGUEL GATEWAY SPECIFIC PLAN CASE1 STUDY 1 Downtown Arlington Heights, Illinois 1. Project Description Downtown is located near the geographic center of the Village of Arlington Heights, Illinois, which has a population of approximately 80,000 and a geographic area of over 10,000 acres. Arlington Heights is approximately 25 miles northwest of Chicago and, excluding the downtown, is a largely single-family suburban community with auto-oriented retail and services. The Downtown, approximately 65 acres in size, is located along the Union Pacific Northwest Corridor, a major commuter line from Chicago. Institutional uses, including Village municipal service buildings, are located east and north of Downtown. A new commuter station was built in Downtown in 2000, following which a new Downtown Master Plan was adopted in 2006, transitioning the Downtown into a pedestrian
Recommended publications
  • THIS STAFF REPORT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO.: 8 for the MEETING OF: April 19, 2007 TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY BRIEF DESCRIPT
    THIS STAFF REPORT COVERS CALENDAR ITEM NO.: 8 FOR THE MEETING OF: April 19, 2007 TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY BRIEF DESCRIPTION: This staff report provides the status of a planning feasibility study for a future pedestrian connection tunnel between the Transbay Transit Center and the BART/MUNI Metro stations on Market Street. SUMMARY: The TJPA is conducting a study of the feasibility and estimated construction cost for a new pedestrian connection tunnel along one of the following four alternative alignments. • Beale Street (Alternative 1) • Fremont Street (Alternative 2) • First Street (Alternative 3) • Ecker Place (Alternative 4) Estimated construction costs vary for each alignment, with the Beale Street and Ecker Place alignments expected to cost less than the Fremont Street or First Street alignments due to the shorter total length of the tunnel structures. There is currently no funding identified for inclusion of the pedestrian connection tunnel in Phase 1 of the Transbay Transit Center Program. Consequently, it remains a “design option” that would be implemented during the Caltrain Downtown Extension project in Phase 2 of the Transbay Transit Center Program, as originally envisioned in the Final Environmental Impact Statement/ Environmental Impact Report (FEIS/EIR). If adequate funding is secured, construction of the pedestrian connection tunnel appears technically feasible along any of the four alignments studied. A study report with input from City and regional stakeholders is planned for consideration by the TJPA Board at its May 2007 meeting. REPORT: FEIS/EIR Consideration of a Pedestrian Connection Tunnel The Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) that was adopted during the preparation of the FEIS/EIR included a “design option” for a pedestrian connection tunnel below Fremont Street between the train mezzanine level of the new Transit Center and the mezzanine level of the existing BART/MUNI Metro Embarcadero Station, as part of the Caltrain Downtown Extension Project.
    [Show full text]
  • The Third Crossing
    The Third Crossing A Megaproject in a Megaregion www.thirdcrossing.org Final Report, February 2017 Transportation Planning Studio Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley Acknowledgements The authors would like to acknowledge the Department of City and Regional Planning (DCRP) at the College of Environmental Design (CED) at UC Berkeley, the University of California Transportation Center and Institute of Transportation Studies (ITS), UC Berkeley for support. A special thanks also goes to the helpful feedback from studio instructor Karen Trapenberg Frick and UC Berkeley faculty and researchers including Jesus Barajas and Jason Corburn. We also acknowledge the tremendous support and insights from colleagues at numerous public agencies and non-profit organizations throughout California. A very special thanks goes to David Ory, Michael Reilly, and Fletcher Foti of MTC for their gracious support in running regional travel and land use models, and to Professor Paul Waddell and Sam Blanchard of UrbanSim, Inc. for lending their resources and expertise in land use modeling. We also thank our classmates Joseph Poirier and Lee Reis; as well as David Eifler, Teresa Caldeira, Jennifer Wolch, Robert Cervero, Elizabeth Deakin, Malla Hadley, Leslie Huang and other colleagues at CED; and, Alexandre Bayen, Laura Melendy and Jeanne Marie Acceturo of ITS Berkeley. About Us We are a team of 15 graduate students in City Planning, Transportation Engineering, and Public Health. This project aims to facilitate a conversation about the future of transportation between the East Bay and San Francisco and in the larger Northern California megaregion. We are part of the Department of City and Regional Planning in the UC Berkeley College of Environmental Design, with support from the University of California Transportation Center and The Institute of Transportation Studies at the University of California, Berkeley.
    [Show full text]
  • California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16
    California State Rail Plan 2005-06 to 2015-16 December 2005 California Department of Transportation ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER, Governor SUNNE WRIGHT McPEAK, Secretary Business, Transportation and Housing Agency WILL KEMPTON, Director California Department of Transportation JOSEPH TAVAGLIONE, Chair STATE OF CALIFORNIA ARNOLD SCHWARZENEGGER JEREMIAH F. HALLISEY, Vice Chair GOVERNOR BOB BALGENORTH MARIAN BERGESON JOHN CHALKER JAMES C. GHIELMETTI ALLEN M. LAWRENCE R. K. LINDSEY ESTEBAN E. TORRES SENATOR TOM TORLAKSON, Ex Officio ASSEMBLYMEMBER JENNY OROPEZA, Ex Officio JOHN BARNA, Executive Director CALIFORNIA TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION 1120 N STREET, MS-52 P. 0 . BOX 942873 SACRAMENTO, 94273-0001 FAX(916)653-2134 (916) 654-4245 http://www.catc.ca.gov December 29, 2005 Honorable Alan Lowenthal, Chairman Senate Transportation and Housing Committee State Capitol, Room 2209 Sacramento, CA 95814 Honorable Jenny Oropeza, Chair Assembly Transportation Committee 1020 N Street, Room 112 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear: Senator Lowenthal Assembly Member Oropeza: On behalf of the California Transportation Commission, I am transmitting to the Legislature the 10-year California State Rail Plan for FY 2005-06 through FY 2015-16 by the Department of Transportation (Caltrans) with the Commission's resolution (#G-05-11) giving advice and consent, as required by Section 14036 of the Government Code. The ten-year plan provides Caltrans' vision for intercity rail service. Caltrans'l0-year plan goals are to provide intercity rail as an alternative mode of transportation, promote congestion relief, improve air quality, better fuel efficiency, and improved land use practices. This year's Plan includes: standards for meeting those goals; sets priorities for increased revenues, increased capacity, reduced running times; and cost effectiveness.
    [Show full text]
  • Transbay Temporary Terminal : Project Fact Sheet
    Transbay Temporary Terminal PROJECT FACT SHEET Temporary Terminal The Transbay Joint Powers Authority (TJPA) continues to make exciting progress toward building the Transbay Transit Center, the “Grand Central of the West.” Groundbreak- ing commenced in December 2008 for the Temporary Terminal that will serve bus pas- sengers while the new Transit Center is un der construction. ➤ SPEAR STREET ➤ ➤ ➤ ➤ HOWARD STREET MAIN STREET ➤ Temporary Temporary Terminal Rendering + Terminal Site ➤ BEALE STREET ➤ ➤ Sign-up for Notices ➤ The TJPA is committed to mitigating traffic impacts during ➤ FOLSOM STREET the course of construction. However, traffic disruptions are FREMONT STREET expected throughout the course of the project. ➤ In order to stay informed on our progress, upcoming community meetings and potential street closures, please ➤ ➤ sign up to receive email alerts and to join our project mailing list at www.temporaryterminal.org Map of Project Area + PROJECT TIMELINE December 2008 Summer 2010 Fall 2010 Late Fall 2010 2012 2017 2018 Temporary Terminal Temporary Terminal construction completed. Demolition SamTrans Construction Construction Construction Groundbreaking. of East Loop and Golden of the of the of the Caltrain Greyhound, AC Transit, MUNI and WestCAT (Phase II of Gate Transit Caltrain Transbay Downtown Lynx operations move to the Temporary Temporary move to the Downtown Transit Rail Extension Terminal. Terminal) Temporary Rail Center to be to be Begin demolition of Transbay Terminal; completed. Terminal. Extension to completed. completed. construction of new Transit Center begins. begin. Temporary Terminal to close. For more information, please visit: www.temporaryterminal.org 06.10 PROJECT FACT SHEET Frequently Asked Questions Transbay Transit Center Rendering + WHAT IS THE TEMPORARY TERMINAL? The Temporary Terminal is the temporary replacement bus facility that will serve bus passengers while the new, multi-modal Transbay Transit Center is under construction.
    [Show full text]
  • Samtrans Service Plan Final Recommendations
    SamTrans Service Plan Final Recommendations May 2013 Table of Contents Executive Summary ......................................................................................................i Introduction ..................................................................................................................1 Plan Background ..........................................................................................................3 Plan Framework ...........................................................................................................6 Service Plan Development .......................................................................................10 SamTrans Service Plan ..............................................................................................21 Next Steps ...................................................................................................................31 Appendix A: SamTrans Service Plan Route Recommendations ...........................................A-33 Appendix B: SamTrans Service Plan Route Maps ................................................................... B-38 Appendix C: Outreach Summaries ............................................................................................C-91 2 | SAMTRANS SERVICE PLAN - MAY 2013 Acknowledgments Board of Directors 2013 Project Team Carole Groom, Chair April Chan, Executive Officer, Planning & Jeff Gee, Vice Chair Development Jerry Deal Chuck Harvey, Deputy CEO Rose Guilbault Douglas Kim, Director, Planning Shirley Harris
    [Show full text]
  • Frequently Asked Questions Updated February 26, 2021 Alta Way
    Frequently Asked Questions Updated February 26, 2021 Alta Way Grading Permit The Marin County Community Development Agency’s Planning Division (CDA) is a regulatory agency responsible for implementing State and local land use laws through the entitlement process. While the CDA is not the permitting authority for a Grading Permit, we prepared this informational document to provide responses to questions that we have received about the Alta Way Grading Permit application. 1. Why is the project not considered a “Subdivision”? Response: The Marin County Development Code defines a subdivision, in part, as follows: “The division, by any subdivider, of any unit or portion of land shown on the latest equalized Marin County Assessment Role as a unit or contiguous units…”. The project applicant is not proposing to create additional, new lots. The proposal will provide access to a number of existing lots that were created by a prior subdivision map (Map of Garden Valley Park Subdivision 1, filed for record on October 9, 1919 in Volume 5 of Maps at page 4 in the Office of the Recorder, Marin County Records). The applicant proposes to “merge” or combine 8 of the existing lots into 4 lots. As a “merger” involves the combination of existing units of land rather than a division of a unit or units of land, a merger is not considered a subdivision under the County Code and the State Subdivision Map Act. Therefore, the provisions for subdivisions do not apply to the proposed project. The applicant has applied to the CDA to merge the lots described above.
    [Show full text]
  • Transbay Transit Center
    Transbay Transit Center TRANSBAY JOINT POWERS AUTHORITY FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS Transbay Transit Center Why do we need the Transbay Transit Center? It is time for public infrastructure to meet the needs of the 21st century. The project will centralize a fractured regional transportation network—making transit connections be- tween all points in the Bay Area fast and convenient. The new Transit Center will make public transit a convenient option as it is in other world-class cities, allowing people to travel and commute without the need for a car, thereby decreasing congestion and pollution. The Transit Center will provide a downtown hub in the heart of a new transit- friendly neighborhood with new homes, parks and shops, providing access to public transit literally at the foot of people’s doors. When will I be able to use the Transit Center? The Transit Center building will be completed in 2017 and will be a bustling transit and retail center for those who live, work and visit the heart of downtown San Francisco. When will I be able to take Caltrain into the new Transit Center? The construction of the underground rail extension for the Caltrain rail line and future High Speed Rail is planned to begin in 2012. It is estimated to be completed and operational, along with the Transit Center’s underground rail station, in 2018 or sooner if funding becomes What is the Transbay Transit available. Center Project? How many people will use it? When the rail component is complete, it is estimated that The Transbay Transit Center Project is a visionary more than 20 million people will use the Transit Center transportation and housing project that will transform annually.
    [Show full text]
  • Transbay Transit Center
    Transbay Transit Center Building the First Modern Multi-Modal Transportation Station in the United States The Transbay Transit Center Project will centralize the region’s transportation network by making transit connections between all points in the Bay Area fast and convenient for more than 100,000 passengers per day. The Project will replace the current bus terminal with a new multi-modal transportation center—the “Grand Central Station of the West”— and house eleven transit systems under one roof. The new Transit Center will make public transit a convenient option as it is in other world-class cities and return San Francisco to a culture of mass transit. As the northern terminus for high speed rail in California and the first modern high speed rail station to be constructed in the United States, the $4.2 billion project will create a modern regional transit hub and: • Stimulate the economy by creating more than • Serve as the San Francisco terminus for California 125,000 jobs High Speed Rail Service which will reduce California CO2 emissions by 1.4 percent statewide • Generate more than $87 billion in Gross Regional Product and $52 billion in personal income • Serve up to 45 million passengers per year through 2030 • Use cutting edge designs and technologies to • Create a demand in transit use through intermodal achieve LEED certification connections for eight Bay Area counties and • Feature a fully accessible city park and utilize Southern California natural light to conserve water and energy • Reduce carbon dioxide emissions by more than 36,000 tons each year from the Caltrain commuter rail extension alone The Transbay Project is the Largest Transit Project Under Construction in the Western United States www.transbaycenter.org 1.11 Transbay Transit Center TRANSBAY TRANSIT CENTER The Transbay Transit Center in downtown San Francisco will transform transportation in California and stimulate the economy.
    [Show full text]
  • MPO Partners Meeting SACOG - MTC - SJCOG Thursday, October 6 – Noon to 2 P.M
    MPO Partners Meeting SACOG - MTC - SJCOG Thursday, October 6 – Noon to 2 p.m. Sacramento Area Council of Governments 1415 L Street, Suite 300, Sacramento, CA 95814 AGENDA 1. Welcome & Introductions 2. Target Setting - Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Reduction Scenarios (Andy Chesley, Steve Heminger & Mike McKeever) 3. Passenger Rail Planning Coordination (Matthew Carpenter, SACOG) 4. Mega-Region Goods Movement Plan (Ken Kirkey or Matt Maloney, MTC) 5. Economic Development Partnerships (Rebecca Sloan, SACOG) 6. Next Steps Agenda Item 3 Mega-Region Rail Highspeed Rail: Collaborations • Phase 1 (Blue) & Phase 2 • State & Federal Funding (Gold) Programs California’s rail ownership • Changing Relationship with • Inter-city Amtrak driven by PRIIA systems (Red) Section 209 • Network Integration Planning • 2018 State Rail Plan • High Speed Rail Commute Travel in the Megaregion Non-Commute Travel in the Megaregion Northern California Intercity Rail Ridership Trends • Altamont Corridor Express (ACE) • Amtrak Capitol Corridor • Amtrak San Joaquins Capitol Corridor Service Integration is: Planning for Future Mobility Needs Now Vision Plan Key Concepts . 1-hour travel time between Sacramento and Oakland . Clockface frequency with 90 daily trains between Sacramento and San Jose . Minimize freight and passenger railroad interference . Increase railroad safety (grade separations, signal technology) Initial Vision Plan Ridership Estimates 2040 Baseline 2040 Vision with 2015 Service (2015 Service Levels) Growth* 1,402,300 2,267,200 6,112,567 % increase above 2015 service 62% 336% *Average ridership growth for several alignment alternatives considered in the Vision Plan Update (2014). Capitol Corridor: Big Challenges – Crucial Opportunities CCJPA Vision Plan: Key Focus Areas Sacramento - Auburn . Roseville 3rd Track Project will expand current capacity to operate up to 10 roundtrip trains in this segment .
    [Show full text]
  • 5901 Christie Avenue | Emeryville, California
    5901 Christie Avenue | Emeryville, California FOR LEASE HOME HIGHLIGHTS FLOOR PLANS LOCATION Charlie Sweeney 555 12th Street, Suite 1400 +1 510 267 6021 Oakland, CA 94607 [email protected] main +1 510 465 8000 LIC #01987199 fax +1 510 465 1350 cushmanwakefield.com Cushman & Wakefield Copyright 2015. No warranty or representation, express or implied, is made to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained herein, and same is submitted subject to errors, omissions, change of price, rental or other conditions, withdrawal without notice, and to any special listing conditions imposed by the property owner(s). As applicable, we make no representation as to the condition of the property (or properties) in question. 5901 Christie Avenue Emeryville, CA HOME HIGHLIGHTS FLOOR PLANS LOCATION Property Highlights • Panoramic Bay Views • Mixture of Creative Office Space and Traditional Office Space • HVAC • Recent Interior and Exterior Improvements Amenities • Free on site parking • Freight and passenger elevators • Excellent Emeryville location, adjacent to the Public Market and walking distance to many restaurants, health & fitness facility and retail amenities • Immediate access to I-80/I-580 for convenient access to San Francisco, downtown Oakland and the East Bay thoroughfare • Property Management on-site • 24-7 Building Security and Tenant Access Available Suites Suite 208 | ±2,261 SF | $3.00 - $3.25 FSG 5901 Christie Avenue Emeryville, CA HOME HIGHLIGHTS FLOOR PLANS LOCATION 2nd Floor Plan Suite 208 | ±2,261 SF Highlights • 6 Private Offices • Large Conference Room • Kitchen Charlie Sweeney 555 12th Street, Suite 1400 +1 510 267 6021 Oakland, CA 94607 [email protected] main +1 510 465 8000 LIC #01987199 fax +1 510 465 1350 cushmanwakefield.com Cushman & Wakefield Copyright 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • VTA Daily News Coverage for Monday, July 22, 2019
    From: VTA Board Secretary <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 22, 2019 3:07 PM To: VTA Board of Directors <[email protected]> Subject: From VTA: July 22, 2019 Media Clips VTA Daily News Coverage for Monday, July 22, 2019 1. Google’s big plans for downtown San Jose — answers for all your questions (Mercury News) 2. Caltrain has an ambitious plan to run BART-like service. Here’s what it will mean for Bay Area traffic (Mercury News) 3. Caltrain maps out big growth and how to pay the $25 billion tab (San Francisco Chronicle) 4. Editorial: Pair big Bay Area transit tax with tough decisions (San Francisco Chronicle) 5. Targeting Bay Area gridlock, groups floating $100 billion tax measure (San Francisco Chronicle) 6. Is this supposed to make us feel better about 101-87 mess? 7. Man On Bike Hit, Injured by VTA Train Friday Morning 8. Bicyclist struck and injured by VTA train in San Jose (KTVU Ch. 2) Google’s big plans for downtown San Jose — answers for all your questions (Mercury News) (Click link above for video report on transit village) In the next decade, Google, BART and a new Diridon Station will transform San Jose There’s been a lot of buzz about Google gobbling up land in San Jose and big plans for an overhaul of the city’s sleepy downtown train station. But when will it all start to happen? When will we see those artist renderings of the tech giant’s gleaming new campus or shovels hitting the ground and cranes crawling across the sky? When will the first BART trains roll into Silicon Valley’s new futuristic station? And what has to happen along the way before any of this gets done? Read on to find out.
    [Show full text]
  • The Future of Downtown San Francisco Expanding Downtown’S Capacity for Transit-Oriented Jobs
    THE FUTURE OF DOWNTOWN SAN FRANCISCO EXPANDING DOWNTOWN’S CAPACITY FOR TRANSIT-ORIENTED JOBS SPUR REPORT Adopted by the SPUR Board of Directors on January 21, 2009 Released March 2009 The primary author of this report were Egon Terplan, Ellen Lou, Anthony Bruzzone, James Rogers, Brian Stokle, Jeff Tumlin and George Williams with assistance from Frank Fudem, Val Menotti, Michael Powell, Libby Seifel, Chi-Hsin Shao, John Sugrue and Jessica Zenk SPUR 654 Mission St., San Francisco, California 94105 www.spur.org SPUR | March 2009 INDEX Introduction ________________________________________________________________________ 3 I. The Problem: Regional job sprawl and the decline of transit-served central business districts _ 6 II. The Solution: The best environmental and economic response for the region is to expand our dynamic, transit-served central business districts _______________________________________ 16 III. The Constraints: We are running out of capacity in downtown San Francisco to accommodate much new employment growth _______________________________________________________ 20 The Zoning Constraint: Downtown San Francisco is running out of zoned space for jobs. 20 The Transportation Constraint: Our regional transportation system — roads and trains — is nearing capacity at key points in our downtown. 29 IV. Recommendations: How to create the downtown of the future __________________________ 39 Land use and zoning recommendations 39 Transportation policy recommendations: Transit, bicycling and roadways 49 Conclusion _______________________________________________________________________ 66 The Future of Downtown San Francisco 2 INTRODUCTION Since 1990, Bay Area residents have been driving nearly 50 million more miles each day. Regionally, transit ridership to work fell from a high of 11.4 percent in 1980 to around 9.4 percent in 2000.
    [Show full text]