Meeting Time: June 11, 2024 at 11:30am PDT
Note: The online Request to Speak window has expired.

Agenda Item

6 24-0486 Subject: Link21 Program Update From: Transportation Department Recommendation: Receive An Informational Report Regarding An Update On Link21, A Program Led By San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) And Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority (CCJPA)

   Oppose     Neutral     Support    
1500 of 1500 characters remaining
  • Default_avatar
    Anthony C 3 months ago

    Last night at the Link21 Virtual Public Meeting, presenters characterized the standard gauge technology option as providing less urban metro core service than the BART option. I'm supportive of the standard-gauge technology if it can provide frequent service (20+ trains per hour) in the new tunnel and serve downtown Oakland, but I'm concerned assumptions being made may preclude that. If a standard-gauge tunnel is fed only by trains on the freight-owned mainline, then one dedicated passenger track (for example) may not provide much frequency. It was also concerning that the presenters at last night's meeting said the mainline may not receive electrification, which is important for high-quality, frequent passenger service. Lastly, the intention to send intercity trains to San Francisco with a wye in Oakland seems to ensure that Oakland stations will miss out on half of the service, repeating the mistake of the BART wye. Instead, a grand Oakland transfer station between Capitol Corridor and Link21 would provide full service and avoid frequency delay from the freight corridor. I hope the Committee will ask the Link21 team to confirm a Downtown Oakland station is a priority (such as by utilizing the I-980 corridor), to elaborate on frequency of urban metro core service for the standard gauge option, and to

  • Timbermemttam
    Kent Lewandowski 3 months ago

    While I agree with some recommendations in the Report, primarily to provide BART service in new locations such as Jack London Square and San Antonio, neighborhood, it seems some of the stated goals of the report are in conflict. With limited (shrinking) operational revenue and a projected $385 million deficit by fiscal year 2027, BART would be foolish to embark on an expensive new tunnel project. Instead it should focus on improving its existing service by providing more frequent service and easier access to its stations. More frequent access would be provided by running more trains. Easier access would be provided by constructing new stations in neighborhoods that lack service. Those the underserved San Antonio neighborhood, one of Oakland's most diverse (both racially and economically) as well as the Jack London Square neighborhood. If BART was able to construct an infill station in Dublin, it should be able to do the same in Oakland.