HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: geo@shilah.Eng.Sun.COM (George Atkins)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Getting to the 'Stick
Date: 12 Jan 1993 18:26:30 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: world
Reply-To: geo@shilah.Eng.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: shilah


I've walked to Candlesitck from Caltrain about five times.  It's okay.  Takes
about 15-20 minutes.  The neighborhood is cool, a little residential, a little
industrial.  You get across the expressway via a street underpass (I never 
knew the name of it, but it's straightforward.) Once you get across 101, getting
to Candlestick is obvious.  One problem, though, is that I don't believe they
schedule any special trains, so you have to work with the existing Caltrain
schedule.  This could be more of a hassle leaving, but taking the bus from
Candlestick I found to be easy.  The muni bus drivers usually don't even check
to see if you have a transfer (muni express buses to the game charge roundtrip
when you first get on.  I don't know if SamTrans does the same.)  The quicker
you get to the buses after the game the less of a hassle it is.



Xref: sparky ba.transportation:3040 la.general:1142
From: ostubble@agsm.ucla.edu (Otha Stubblefield III)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,la.general
Subject: Re: I hate "Rapid" Transit District (RTD)
Keywords: rapid RTD transport
Date: 6 Jan 93 19:07:32 GMT
Distribution: ca

rlm@surfcty.com (Robert McMillin) writes:

[a deletion occurred...]

>unto itself!  However, it was not the LACTC's intention to attract more
>well-to-do riders; rather, they chose to continue seeing their mission
>as providing last-ditch transportation for the ultra-poor.  In so doing,
>they moved the route several blocks south to Pico Blvd., passing through
>poor neighborhoods -- and practically guaranteeing that nobody working
>in the financial towers dotting Wilshire will ever use this line.

WRONG.  While there were some business objections to the construction 
that would have to take place, the MAJOR reason for the diversion was
the methane gas pockets that were discovered in the Fairfax area which
caused a surprise explosion and fire a couple of years back.
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: Sources (was Re: Cars as "something better")
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 18:48:58 GMT

In article <770026@hpcc01.corp.hp.com>, dsherman@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Daniel P. Sherman) writes:
|> Try riding train 90 from SF for a few Fridays and Saturdays in a row.
|> You might not smile so much on that train.

Why?  I've never ridden that train, so I can only guess: too many
drunk/rowdy folks?  Or what?  The few times I've seen a "problem
drunks" on the train, they've been kicked off.  Perhaps conductors
on train 90 cut people more slack since it's the last train and runs
after midnight when it's cold and dark and probably hard to find an
alternate ride.

I assume since you said you live in San Bruno that you were just 
riding #90 for 18 minutes to there...

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
From: mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 8 Jan 93 04:46:15 GMT
Reply-To: dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
Distribution: ba
Organization: DOS Bears

In article <1993Jan8.005104.4278@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>In article <jyc.726446059@Leland>, jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>|> lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro) writes:
>|> >Let Caltrain terminate at the shared BART/Caltrain San Bruno station,
>|> >and make everyone transfer to BART. 
>|> 
>|> This is an absolutely atrocious idea. 
>
>This is the same reaction that I've heard from many people
>that use CalTrain to get to/from San Francisco.  I've heard
>many people say they'd stop riding if they had to take the
>Colma and Daly City detour near the ocean just to get into
>San Francisco.  Another oft-cited point on the subject, is
>that not only will their commute be longer distance-wise,
>but it will take longer and add more station stops.  

It is Jon's contention (or, at least, that's how I read him)
that travel time for commuters in the North of Market Financial
District would be shorter if you include the travel time from
4th & Townsend.

>                                                     This
>is especially true for those who regularly ride one of the
>many CalTrain express trains.

Data relative to Adrian's comment:  there are 11 trains that
arrive in SF before 9:00am, 6 of them could be called expresses.
Of those 6, one makes only one stop after San Bruno, another
makes two stops, and the other four make no stops after San
Bruno (in fact, they don't even stop in San Bruno.)  The expresses
save about four or five minutes compared to the regular runs (from 
San Bruno to SF.)

--
Mike Lipsie                            584 Castro #614, San Francisco, CA 94114
dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
mikel%dosbears.uucp@ingres.com    Running rn (for DOS) with UUPC/Extended 1.11k
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: Re: getting from SJ to east bay
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 20:31:56 GMT

In article <1993Jan12.160503.6039@projtech.com> sanjiv@projtech.com (Sanjiv Gossain) writes:
>Can anyone tell me what is the best way to get
>from the San Jose area to the East Bay (around Oakland/berkeley)
>on public transportation. This would be a one off trip.

>Any help/advice appreciated.

	Easy. The Santa Clara Transit 180 bus runs from downtown San
Jose to the Fremont BART station, and one takes BART the rest of the
way. Inside of Oakland and Berkeley, there are plenty of local buses
run by AC Transit.

	I mean by "downtown San Jose" the Civic Center, St. James
Park, and the CalTrain/Amtrak (former SP) station. I hope that you
won't be having too much trouble finding any of those landmarks.
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 5 Jan 93 22:30:28 GMT
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

In article <2935343922.0.p00004@psilink.com> "Michael Smith" <p00004@psilink.com> writes:
>>DATE:   5 Jan 93 16:50:10 GMT
>>FROM:   Wilson Heydt <whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM>
>[....]
>>Nice dodge.  The question isn't "How can we increase private vehicle
>>occupancy?", but rather "Are *all* those trains full?"  If the answer
>>to that later question is "No", then capacities that assume they are
>>are highly misleading.  No one has argued that with the *vehicle*
>>capacity of a freeway lane.  Heck...  Many of us are willing to have
>>the rough computations assumme 1.000 people per car.  The bias creeps
>>in when you count passengers on the train *as*if*every*train*were*full*
>>rather than on average occupancy.
>
>But aren't we talking here about comparisons of *capacity*? The capacity 
>of a railroad depends on seats per train times trains per hour. The 
>railroad can sell a ticket for every seat. The analogy to seats per car 
>is false, since the turnpike authority (or whoever) can't force drivers 
>to fill up empty seats with users who arrive for service sans car. -- Or 
>rather, I suppose it theoretically *could*, but surely nobody is 
>suggesting this?

The railroad can't *force* people to take the train (and fill up
seats), either.  (Can't you just see RR Authority rounding up folks on
the street.... "But, Officer, I don't *want* to go to San
Francisco..")

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
From: viviana@igor.tamri.com (Vivian Aldridge)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: How is your commute from Half Moon Bay to SF?
Date: 11 Jan 93 17:59:48 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: TOSHIBA America MRI, South San Francisco, CA

Hi,
I am considering a move to Half Moon Bay, but
first I would like to find what it is like to
commute from that area.

Does anyone commute from the Half Moon Bay Area
(Montara especially) to San Francisco? How
long does it take you?
Are there van pools available? Where do they
begin and end?

What route has worked best for you? I know one can take
highway 92, but there looks like there is another
route available exiting at Pacifica.

Thank-you for sharing your experiences with me.
Please email to me directly at

viviana@tamri.com

Thanks!
Vivian

-- 
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
                                                        ____
Vivian	Aldridge                       o__    Bay Area	\  / 
viviana@tamri.com	       	      _.>/ _  Commuter   \/
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: joshua@homespace.mtview.ca.us (Joshua Levy)
Subject: Re: Cars as "something better"
Keywords: auto subsidies
Organization: Expert Support Inc., Mountain View, CA
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 05:09:20 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.181504.18678@ntmtv> adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt) writes:
>The information in this posting was supplied to me by:
>
>John Holtzclaw
>PhD Urban Sociologist * Engineering Physicist * Regional Planner
>1508 Taylor St., San Francisco, CA 94133
>(415) 928-8332, FAX (415) 776-0350
>
>
>America's Autos On Welfare: A Summary of Studies

Unfortunately, I'm leaving on a weeks vacation, so I will not be able to
write a full reply to this posting.  I'm saving it, however, and will
reply when I get back.  Basically, I've seen these numbers and they
can not be used to prove anything, or even argue very strongly.

None of the studies quoted were published in a peer reviewed journal of
any type.  None of them were pulished in any scientific journal at all.
Indeed, most were self published or published by anti-car organizations.
They represent propoganda, not information.

You have not provied enought information to see if these papers have
repeated the basic mistakes made by similar studies.  Here are three
example mistakes.  Which of the listed studies took them into account?

1. Most anti-car studies ignore fees payed to the DMV.  After covering
   operating costs, the DMV "kicks back" money to cities, counties, and
   the state's general fund.

2. Most anti-car studies assume that all gas tax moneys go to roads.  In
   California, this is not true.  A significant proportion goes into the
   state general fund.

3. Most anti-car studies assume that all tolls go to roads.  In CA, this
   is not true.  The tolls collected on the Golden Gate bridge, for example,
   mostly go to running a bus and boat transit service.  The bridge itself
   is long since payed for.

Joshua Levy  (joshua@homespace.mtview.ca.us or joshua@veritas.com)
From: lau@sunset.ai.sri.com (Stephen Lau)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Muni Token Silliness
Date: 11 Jan 93 20:37:55 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: SRI International, Menlo Park, CA


Here is a true story about those new Muni Tokens. For those
of you who don't know about them, they're Muni's new way to 
reduce the cost of a Muni ride. A roll of 10 tokens sells for
$9.00, that's a .10 discount for each ride and they're good 
indefinitely.

I live in the City and infrequently ride Muni. I don't ride
often enough to cover the costs of a Fast Pass but I do ride
it enough so that I would like to get a discount. The new tokens
sounded like a great idea when they were announced.

I called up MUNI and asked them where they're sold. Well, it turns
out that they're only sold in VERY few places. The reasoning behind
this one is that the retailers who sell the tokens don't make a 
profit off of them. In comparison, a retailer makes .25 for every
Fast Pass or 1/2 month pass sold.

Well, I wander down to the closest token seller and the guy tells
me that they're sold out of 10 pack rolls but has loose tokens for
sale for $1.00 a piece. (?) Of course I say no thanks, since this
is the normal fare for Muni and wander off to the next retailer.
Guess what, same reply, but he was willing to part with the loose
ones for only .95 a piece. So it seems like the retailers have decided
to cash in on the token sales. They get their rolls from Muni, bust
them apart and sell them for around $1.00 a piece, a .10 profit per token,
$1.00 per roll! That's more then the Fast Pass profits! 

Does Muni know about this? Yup, they're allowed to do this if they
have loose ones around. But who's to stop them from busting each new
roll open?

No wonder tokens sales have been relatively flat.

Steve

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Lau                 lau@ai.sri.com| "In my occupation, there ain't no
SRI International                         |  vacation, cause I'm a professional
333 Ravenswood Ave., Menlo Park, CA. 94025|  fool."
(415) 859-2925              (415) 326-6200|               - Michael White
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: adrian@ntmtv.UUCP (Adrian Brandt)
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Organization: Northern Telecom Inc, Mountain View, CA
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 19:13:11 GMT

In article <u2h5oeg@sgi.sgi.com>, jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
|> one billion per mile of freeway [vs.] 10 to 15 million per mile of light rail
|> just doesn't wash.  1 billion per mile is at the upper end of freeway costs,
|> while 10 - 15 million is at the low end of light rail costs.  Typical costs
|> are about the same, at least in Santa Clara county.

I don't buy it.  There are too many apples and organges type of factors
when comparing 85 with Guadalupe Light Rail costs.  Here's the comparison
you need to make for the sake of this argument:

Select a new alignment across the Santa Clara valley.  Compare the cost
of builing a light (or even heavy) rail line along that alignment versus
a 4 to 8 lane freeway.  Clearly the civil engineering, property for
right of way, demolition, home/business relocation compensation costs,
etc. would be much greater for a freeway along most any randomly selected
alignment.

With highway 85 there are a lot of complicating factors that prevent
(or at best, make very difficult) a fair apples-to-apples comparison
of highway to rail cost.  The planning and right of way considerations
for 85 have been in the works for a long long time (20 years or more?).  
Dollars spent and effort and planning for 85 are spread over a long
period of time and are not easyily to acurately map into present-day
dollars to do the same thing from scratch.

-- 

Adrian Brandt (415) 940-2379
UUCP: ...!ames!ntmtv!adrian
ARPA: ntmtv!adrian@ames.arc.nasa.gov
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,rec.railroad
From: jbvb@vax.ftp.com  (James B. VanBokkelen)
Subject: Re: Grade Separations (was Re: CalTrain scheduling musings)
Nntp-Software: PC/TCP NNTP
Keywords: grade separation
Reply-To: jbvb@ftp.com
Organization: FTP Software, Inc., Wakefield, MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 1993 16:12:31

In article <16B4D99EB.M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org> M00209@MBVM.Mitre.Org writes:

    I think you're slightly mistaken about the station.  The old Haverhill
    Depot about which I could tell you many stories, some pretty gross, was
    certainly not built in the "20s".  I do not know exactly when the grade
    was raised, but I think that was also earlier.  My guess on raising the
    grade, without looking it up, would be between 1905 and 1910.

My belief that the grade separation dates from the '20s is based on
the bridge.  It shows no signs of significant stregthening, and it
was capable of carrying R1 4-8-2s, which implies that it was built
when engines that large loomed on the horizon (the S1 2-10-2s were
post-WW1, and the T-1 2-8-4s were delivered in 1927 or so, if I
recall correctly).  Bridges that were built just prior to WW1 were in
general rated for P3 4-6-2s and K8 2-8-0s.

I never saw the station - I just commuted from Haverhill for 4 years
and looked at what I could still see.  I could easily accept the
station being older than the grade separation.

James B. VanBokkelen		2 High St., North Andover, MA  01845
FTP Software Inc.		voice: (508) 685-4000  fax: (508) 794-4488

Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (Alert)
Date: 7 Jan 93 17:43:29 GMT
Reply-To: whheydt@PacBell.COM (Wilson Heydt)
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA

In article <1993Jan7.151239.23692@pbhye.PacBell.COM> mjvande@PacBell.COM (Mike Vandeman) writes:
>>|> I've seen freeways run at or near capacity a lot more often than I've
>>|> seen (or read) of rail lines doing the same...
> 
>Nonsense. The full capacity of a freeway is being full of FULL vehicles. That
>means full trucks & buses (no cars -- too wasteful). That NEVER happens.

First time I've ever seen that as the definition.  Does this mean that
a full rial line is one in which there is no room to add another train
to the system and all the seats and standing room are full?

Mike, I hate to break this to you, but there is no universal hatred of
cars.  I know *you* hate 'em--but that's a minority opinion, and an
extrememly small minority at that.

	--Hal
-- 
Hal Heydt                    |    
Analyst, Pacific*Bell        |            You!
510-823-5447                 |    Out of the Gene Pool!
whheydt@pbhya.PacBell.COM    |
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
From: lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich)
Subject: CalTrain Article
Organization: LLNL
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 20:31:49 GMT


	In the railfan magazine _Rail Classics_ (Jan/Feb 1993), there
is an article on Big Ding-Ding, er, CowTrain, er, CalTrain that some
of you folx might be interested in. I found entertaining the
description of the upper-level seats; from the lower level, they look
like seats mounted in the luggage racks.

	Some of you Peninsula Rail 2000 people might take exception to
some of the characterization of the system, so you are hereby invited
to flame away. The stations were described as "much less sophisticated
affair than their BART cousins", and the proposed CalTrain tunnel to
Market St. was described as "appear[ing] to be prohibitively
expensive".
-- 
/Loren Petrich, the Master Blaster
/lip@s1.gov
Xref: sparky ba.transportation:3052 la.general:1157 oc.general:144
From: jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation,la.general,oc.general
Subject: Re: I hate "Rapid" Transit District (RTD)
Keywords: rapid RTD transport
Date: 7 Jan 93 04:43:12 GMT
Distribution: ca
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In article <1993Jan7.020450.29757@gordian.com>, mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas) writes:
> In article <ui6o5ak@sgi.sgi.com>, jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
> > Well, Mr. Bzzt, I think you just made both my points very well.  Taking
> > the subway to Logan requires a transfer to a shuttle bus.  Assuming
> > it doesn't get derailed (heh heh), SF will have a shuttle car that
> > takes you from an external airport Caltrain/BART station into the
> > terminals.  It sounds like LAX is planning something similar.
> 
>   A shuttle which runs continuously and takes you to the T station
> all of about a mile away. Neither Daly City or Manhatten Beach share
> those properties. You practically have to get on the Freeway fer
> criss sake. 

Who said anything about Daly City?  They're planning a BART and Caltrain
station right across 101 (about a mile from the airport).  According
to another poster, they're planning a green line stop at the airport
transit center, where you can now get a bus.  The poster went on to
say that LAX is planning a rail system that sounds something like what
SFO is planning.  So the end result will be something very similar to
what you have at Logan.

jeremy
From: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 7 Jan 1993 18:48:11 GMT
Organization: lbl
Distribution: ba
Reply-To: b_nbca@icarus.lbl.gov (Bruce Nordman)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 128.3.12.154

lip@s1.gov (Loren I. Petrich) writes:
>> I've learned of a cute nickname for BART:

>> Bay Area Reckless Transit

After last months derailment "Bay Area Wreckless Transit"
would be obsolete!  :)

Bruce Nordman
B_Nordman@lbl.gov





PS: Am I the only person who thinks that "s1.gov" can't possibly
be a legitimate address, particularly from "Organization: LLNL"?
From: mikel@dosbears.UUCP (Mike Lipsie)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 11 Jan 93 03:43:38 GMT
Reply-To: dosbears!mikel@pyramid.com
Organization: DOS Bears

In article <1inhhh$m7t@agate.berkeley.edu> lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro) writes:
>
>Hopefully, the conversion of the 15 Bus to a MUNI Metro line will
>solve this problem [that MUNI & CalTrain poorly serve the stretch of
>SF that CalTrain uses], at least inside the city; the 15 and the Caltrain
>tracks are within three or four blocks of each other, except directly
>around Mission Bay.

Details please.  I am aware that Metro is being extended from the
Embaracdero station to "Potrero Hill" but I thought that that was
only a short distance beyond the 4th & Townsend station.  Are they
planning on replacing the entire 15 as far as Bayshore?
From: lazzaro@boom.CS.Berkeley.EDU (John Lazzaro)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation
Subject: Re: CalTrain Article
Date: 9 Jan 1993 22:04:08 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
NNTP-Posting-Host: boom.cs.berkeley.edu

In article <jyc.726615803@Leland> jyc@leo.Stanford.EDU (Jon Corelis) writes:
>
>In other words, the best argument that
>can be made for the San Bruno option is that it is somewhat less stupid
>than the present situation.  This is a case where the better, if it is
>better, is still the enemy of the good. 

No, you gain something tangible in addition. Here's the logic in math
form:

Number of miles saved on each train by terminating at San Bruno: 11.6 miles
Number of trains on a weekday: 60
Total number of miles saved each day by new termination: 696
Number of extra trains that could be run with this milage: 696/(48.9 - 11.6) = 18.7

That's what you gain by going to an option that is, in the best
argument, "less stupid than the current situation." Kicking SF county
off the JPB is an extra bonus.

  


Newsgroups: ba.transportation,la.general,oc.general
From: mike@gordian.com (Michael A. Thomas)
Subject: Re: I hate "Rapid" Transit District (RTD)
Keywords: rapid RTD transport
Organization: Gordian; Costa Mesa, CA
Distribution: ca
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:04:50 GMT

In article <ui6o5ak@sgi.sgi.com>, jeremy@classic.asd.sgi.com (Jeremy Higdon) writes:
> Well, Mr. Bzzt, I think you just made both my points very well.  Taking
> the subway to Logan requires a transfer to a shuttle bus.  Assuming
> it doesn't get derailed (heh heh), SF will have a shuttle car that
> takes you from an external airport Caltrain/BART station into the
> terminals.  It sounds like LAX is planning something similar.

  A shuttle which runs continuously and takes you to the T station
all of about a mile away. Neither Daly City or Manhatten Beach share
those properties. You practically have to get on the Freeway fer
criss sake. 
-- 

		Michael Thomas	(mike@gordian.com)
	"I don't think Bambi Eyes will get you that flame thrower..."  
		-- Hobbes to Calvin
		USnail: 20361 Irvine Ave Santa Ana Heights, Ca,	92707-5637
		PaBell: (714) 850-0205 (714) 850-0533 (fax)
Newsgroups: ba.transportation