Re: The SF Bay Area: Ponder on what could be in the next 10 - 20 years...

Brent Jonas wrote:

As a resident of the San Francisco Bay Area, I'm quite satisifed with
the progress that CalTrans and other transportation agencies have made
to the Bay Area transportation system over the past 5 years.
Improvements include the following:

1.)  Widening U.S. 101 in the Coyote Valley (between Morgan Hill and
the south CA 85 interchange) from 4 to 8 lanes, including 2 lanes
reserved for HOV's during rush hours.  This widening project eliminated
one of the worst bottlenecks in the United States, although northbound
congestion still exists for a couple of miles.

2.)  The construction of a direct HOV to HOV ramp between U.S. 101 and
CA 85 in South San Jose.

3.)  New flyover ramps at the CA 85/CA 87 interchange in San Jose.
Drivers now have direct flyover connections for all directions at this
interchange.

4.)  Widening I-880 in North San Jose from 4 to 6 lanes (between U.S.
101 and the Montague Expressway), thus greatly reducing congestion on
another horrible bottleneck.  The overpasses were widened to
accommodate 8 lanes in the future.

5.)  Reconstruction of the I-880/CA 237 interchange in Milpitas.  New
flyover ramps, including a direct HOV to HOV ramp, were constructed,
which have significantly reduced congestion at the interchange.

6.)  Widening I-880 in Milpitas from 6 to 14 (or 13?) lanes, including
HOV lanes.


Nos. 1-6 were all paid for by a local Santa Clara County tax.
Not a dime from Caltrans (except for part of I-880).


7.)  Construction of a southbound HOV lane on I-680, between CA 84 and
CA 262 (Mission Blvd.).

8.)  Widening the Bayfront Expressway (CA 84) in East Palo Alto and
Menlo Park, from 4 to 6 lanes between U.S. 101 and University Avenue.
Also, University Avenue was widened from 2 to 4 lanes at the CA 84
junction.

9.)  Adding merging lanes on U.S. 101 between Menlo Park and the CA 92
interchange in San Mateo.

10.)  Widening the San Mateo Bridge from 4 to 6 lanes, including a
brand new span that parallels the old span.


This one kind of flew in under the radar (with an assist from
the Bay Bridge).


11.)  Widening CA 92 in Hayward between the San Mateo Bridge and I-880,
from 4 to 7 lanes.  This includes an extension of the westbound HOV
lane to about 1/4 a mile before the I-880 interchange.

12.)  Addition of an HOV lane on Eastbound I-80 in Oakland, between the
Bay Bridge toll plaza and the I-80/I-580/I-880 interchange (AKA "The
Maze").  In conjunction with the HOV lane project was the construction
of a direct HOV to HOV lane (at ground level), to allow drivers a
direct connection to the already established eastbound I-80 HOV lane in
Emeryville.

13.)  Construction of new lanes for CA 4 between Martinez and I-80,
thus allowing CA 4 to be widened from a dangerous 2 lane highway into a
4 lane hybrid expressway/freeway.  Westbound traffic travels on the
newly constructed lanes, complete with limited access control.  The old
highway was converted into eastbound travel, which has a reduced speed
limit, fairly tight curves, and at-grade connections to sideroads.
Still, this is significantly safer than the old configurement.

14.)  A new westbound-only bridge over the Carquinez (sp?) on
Interstate 80.

15.)  The construction of a LOOOOOOOONG flyover ramp, linking together
eastbound I-780 and northbound I-680.  This goes hand-in-hand with the
new northbound bridge for I-680.

16.)  Widening I-80 between I-680 and eastbound CA 12 in Fairfield,
from 8 to 10 lanes.  Bad congestion remains for 7 days a week, but
congestion periods have been reduced, and traffic does flow somewhat
faster.

17.)  Improving Caltrain service between San Jose and San Francisco.
Morning and evening "baby-bullet" trains can wizz you from San Jose to
San Francisco, and vice-versa in just 1  hour.  This is certainly
faster than driving 101 during rush hours.  I've used the baby bullet
service for Giants games.  It certainly beats sitting in traffic along
101.  Plus, now I can drink a few beers at the Giants games, and have
the train take me back to Redwood City.


But the train isn't convenient for the five people from Atherton
who use it, and they're all lawyers.  So the world is going to
Hades in a handbasket.


18.)  Construction a new Boulevard in San Francisco, AKA Octavia Blvd.
(sp), and new ramps that link together Octavia Blvd. and the Central
Freeway.  Man, what a difference this has made for Central Freeway
traffic.  The Hayes Valley neighborhood looks significantly better
these days, now that the end of the Central Freeway no longer looms
through their backyard.


In addition to completed upgrades, work has started, or continues on
the following projects:

1.)  Reconstructing the U.S. 101/North CA 85 interchange in Mountain
View.  Included will be a direct HOV to HOV flyover ramp.  When it's
all said and done, there will be 5 new ramps, and as many as 14 lanes
at this interchange.

Another VTA project. 

2.)  I-205 widening in Tracy.  This actually won't start for a few
months down the road.


I'm astonished that it took that idiot Pombo to get this
through, and it *still* needed local assistance.


3.)  Widening I-880 in Fremont (between Dixon Landing Rd. and Mission
Blvd, or CA 262,)from 6 to 10 lanes, including 2 lanes reserved for
HOV's during rush hours.  The I-880/CA 262 interchange is also being
reconstructed with new ramps.

4.)  2 new tunnels along Highway 1 at Devil's Slide.

5.)  A new Bay Bridge (hold your breath, as work progresses).

6.)  Reconstructing Interstate 80 in San Francisco, between the Bay
Bridge, and the Central Freeway (U.S. 101).  Of course, this is in
conjunction with the Bay Bridge project.

7.)  A new expressway alignment for CA 4 through Brentwood and Oakley.



What could be done to improve transportation in the Bay Area?

My proposals:

1.)  A long term solution for U.S. 101 along the Peninsula, and Silicon
Valley.  After seeing what Orange County did with I-5 in the 1990's and
early 2000's, I'm hoping something similar will be done for 101.  The
ROW already exists for 14 lanes in some stretches (the interchanges
would have to be reconstructed), while ROW will have to be purchased in
other stretches.  I think the Peninsula and the South Bay should
seriously consider a 14 lane U.S. 101, for current and future traffic
growth.  It will be VERY expensive (lets say at least 2 billion
dollars), but lets face it; this is THE critical transportation
lineline between San Francisco and San Jose.

2.)  Reconstructing I-880 in the East Bay.  This could prove to be even
more expensive than U.S. 101.  With traffic counts topping out at over
280,000 vehicles a day (almost 310,000 during the peak of the dot-com
boom), a serious proposal needs to be looked at overhauling the East
Bay's critical link between Oakland and Silicon Valley.  Perhaps 14
lanes, including HOV lanes, and direct HOV connectors at CA 84, CA 92,
and I-238 should be looked at.  To push a 14 lane freeway through
Oakland would require tons of community involvement.  Perhaps a much
wider and safer freeway through Oakland (it doesn't even have shoulders
in many spots) could be more than just a freeway project, but a
reinvestment in neighborhoods that lie along I-880.  Perhaps the
construction of new parks, new housing developments, job-creation,
community centers, and a lot of other neighborhood revitalization could
be realized, along with a reconstructed I-880.  As of right now, some
of the most dangerous neighborhoods in the country lie along I-880, and
it's such an eye-sore.


You say this just after the last reconstruction project is being
completed.  This is it for a looong time.


3.)  A new bore at the Caldacott Tunnel.  This WIll happen sooner or
later, but it's time to eliminate the backups that plague CA 24
commuters on a daily basis.

4.)  Reconstructing the I-880/CA 92 interchange (see #2).  This thing
goes back to the 1950's.

This was one that Arnold cut just a couple of months ago. 

5.)  Widening I-238 to 8 lanes.  One of the most chronically congested
freeways in the United States.

6.)  A long term solution for Interstate 580 through the Tri-Valley and
over the Altamont Pass.  A 12 to 14 lane build-out needs to be
seriously explored.  There's just way too much traffic today.  #7 and
#8 covers mass transit that should be considered for long term
transportation needs over the Altamont.

7.)  Significantly improving the ACE-transit rail line between the
Central Valley and Silicon Valley.

8.)  Bringing BART out to the Central Valley, with links to Tracy,
Stockton, and Modesto.  Yes, this would be MUCHO $$$$ to construct.

A serious ACE upgrade would handle the demand for 6 and 8. 

9.)  A new bridge over the bay.  I-380, perhaps?  Are we, as a major
metro region, expecting the Bay Bridge and San Mateo Bridge to
accommodate future travel between the 2 sides?  Hell, the new Bay
Bridge will still have the same 10 lanes as the current bridge carries,
and it's damn congested for every day of the week.  Keep the design
simple.  I've heard reports that a new bridge would cost 8 billion
dollars.  Why?  Was it going to be the grand-daddy of all bridges?
Would it have a launch-pad for rockets going into outer space?  Sure, I
could see a billion dollars or two, but EIGHT billion?  What for?
Perhaps a misc.transport.road-member engineer could explain this one to
me.


A bridge back east might cost a billion, but something here has
to have the best engineering possible.  We came really close to
losing much more than that 100 foot section of the eastern span,
16 years ago (on Tuesday!)


10.)  Bringing BART into Silicon Valley.  Cross your fingers on this
one.


As one who originally supported this, I'm doing everything that
I can to ensure that only the half of the project that we can
afford will be built.  It's now supposed to cost more than $5
billion, and all state and federal assistance has vanished.  So
we build it down to the Milpitas/San Jose border, have a nice
intermodal station at the light rail, it's close to the mall
and two freeways, and will cost about $2 billion, which we can
afford.


11.)  Constructing a new freeway between San Jose and the Central
Valley.  There's tons of debate on whether or not this would devastate
the environment over the mountains between San Jose and the valley.
I'd propose a ban on ALL development along the freeway, and preserving
just about EVERYTHING over the mountains.  In other words, not one damn
house would be constructed throughout those mountains.  We really need
another link for Bay Area to L.A. (and vice-versa) drivers.  We cannot
expect I-580 and CA 152 to continue handling the load.


If they have to do this, then make it a super rail line.  Don't
bother with another road.


12.)  Widening I-680 over the Sunol Grade to 12 lanes.  This is
certainly doable.

Never happen. It took forever to get it up to eight. 

13.)  Widening I-80 through Fairfield and Vacaville.

14.)  Construction of a new expressway or freeway along CA 152, between
101 and CA 156.  This HAS to be one of the most congested 2 lane
highways in the entire country.  This project will get done sometime in
the next 20 years.  A definite in the next 5 years will be a new
interchange at CA 152/CA 156.

15.)  Looking at extending I-238 down to I-680.  I think this was
originally proposed as the "Mission Freeway".  There really should be
another freeway link between Oakland and Silicon Valley.  I-880 is
overtaxed as it is.  This will probably never get built.  Personally, I
don't view the neighborhoods running alongside the proposed freeway as
anything special; some of them are rather run down.

16.)  Improving traffic signals along 19th Avenue (Highway 1), and
along U.S. 101 (Van ness Ave. and Lombard Street) in San Francisco.
Lets face it.  Highway 1 is not going to be put underground, and nobody
(including I) will accept a freeway being plowed through San Francisco.
 19th Ave. had traffic signals re-timed a few years back, but it could
still be improved, especially between I-280 and San Francisco State
University.  Traffic signals along Van Ness Blvd., on the other hand,
are not coordinated.  It's frustrating to have to stop at every other
light.  If I could somehow average 15 MPH along Van Ness Blvd., I would
be satisfied (the current timing of the lights probably results in an
average travel speed of under 10 MPH).

17.)  Providing a direct link between I-880 and CA 87 in San Jose.  Oh
yeah, I almost forgot to mention that a new freeway was constructed for
CA 87 through Central San Jose, and opened to traffic earlier this
year.


Gray Davis (I really miss him) had the money budgeted.  That
*** Arnold took it away.  Arnold is the worst governor for
transportation ever.  Jerry Brown was a godsend compared to him.


18.)  Reconstructing CA 84 between I-580 and I-680.  Perhaps this
should be improved to a 4 lane expressway?

Where do you run it through Livermore? 

19.)  Widening U.S. 101 through the Sonoma Narrows (between Novato and
Petaluma) to 6 or 8 lanes.

20.)  Reconstructing U.S. 101 through San Rafael.  Perhaps 8 or 10
lanes.  This will probably happen within the next 5 years, but I'm not
sure.


This would be possible if we weren't spending trillions on
invasions of countries that had nothing to do with Al Qieda.


21.)  Alright, this one somewhat contradicts what I mentioned in #16.
Provide a direct freeway link between I-280 and I-80.  I-280 currently
ends just 1/4 a mile before I-80.  There's nothing really special
between the 2 freeways.  Why not finish the missing link, instead of
having to force drivers to sit at 3 VERY congested intersections.  U.S.
101 in San Francisco would certainly benefit.


Another multi billion dollar project that would have millions
of people fighting every inch.


22.)  Widening Vasco Road between Brentwood and I-580.  A very
dangerous and busy highway.  If not a freeway, then perhaps a 50 MPH
expressway would do.


They did widen it, and the local morons who don't believe in
speed limits (like a huge number in this NG) instantly turned
it into the new blood alley.  We should make the idiots here
go walk the length of Vasco.
.

Loading