AC TRANSIT COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

1625 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94109 (415)474-4500

'"

~ J<

. . - .......

March 1989

AC TRANSIT COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

Capital Element Report

•

s:.(r-~ >~ -r .~

-- ·-v ... --.r.r, _

,;

1625 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94109 (415)474-4500

· - P;(\OI~ . " Rjc~

March 1989



',-}- --~-'_./

"'c;:~--'. "', <-..r:

\,.


CAPITAL ELEMENT REPORT

Prepared for

AC TRANSIT

Prepared by

PARSONS BRINCKERHOFF QUADE & DOUGLAS, INC

March 1989

TABLE OF CONTENTS

~C£HuA~p~T~E~RL-__________ < ______________________________________ ~

2<

3<

4<

5<

FIGURE NO.

lJ1.&B

2A 28

3A

38

4A

48

5A

58

6A

6B

7A

78

SA 88

9A

98

lOA

lOB

l1A

118

12A

128

13A

138

14A

148

INTRODUCTION

TRANS!T CENTER FUNCTiONAL DESIGN CRiTERIA

BASIS OF COST ESTIMATES

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLANS

NEXT STEPS

LIST OF TABULATiONS

DESCRiPTION

TRANSIT CENTER LOCATION MAP

HILL TOP MALL TRANSIT CENTER-ROUTE DECRlPTION -COST ESTIMATE

CONTRA COSTA COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER

RICHMOND BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

EL CERRITO DEL NORTE BART

-ROUTE DESCRIPTION -COST ESTIMATE


STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION -COST ESTIMATE

EL CERRITO PLAZA BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

OAKLAND WEST BART ST.>\ TION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

MONTCLAIR TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION -COST ESTIMATE

SOUTH SHORE CENTER TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

FRUITVALE BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRiPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

COLISEUM BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

EASTMONT MALL TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTiON

-COST ESTIMATE

SAN LEANDRO BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

BAY FAIR BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

2

6

7

52

PAGE

7

11 11

12 12

14 15

16 17

18 19

20 21

22 23

24 25

26 27

28 29

30 31

32 33

34 35

FigURE NO,

15A

158

16A

168

17A

178

l8A

188

19A 19B

201',

20B

21A

218

22A

228

FIGURE tlQ,

11',&8

2A

28

3A

38

4A

48

SA

58

SA

68

71',

78

SA 88

9A

98

LIST OF TABULATIONS

DESCRIPTION

HAYWARD BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -ROUTE DESCRIPTION

-COST ESTIMATE

CHABOT COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER

SOUTH HAYWARD BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

UNION CITY BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

NEWARK TRANSIT CENTER

NEWPARK MALL TRANSIT CENTER

FREMONT BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

IRVINGTON BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

LIST OF FIGURES

DESCRIPTIOtl

TRANSIT CENTER LOCATION MAP

HILL TOP MALL TRANSIT CENTER

CONTRA COSTA COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER

RICHMOND SART 5T A TION TRANSIT CENTER

-ROUTE DESCRIPTiON -COST ESTIMATE


ROUTE DESCRIPTION-COST ESTIMATE





-BUS ROUTE PLAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT



EL CERRITO DEL NORTE BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER -BUS ROUTE PLAN

-CONCEPT LAYOUT

EL CERRITO PLAZA SART ST A nON TRANSIT CENTER -BUS ROUTE PLAN

-CONCEPT LAYOUT

OAKLAND WEST BART 5T A TION TRANSIT CENTER -BUS ROUTE PLAN

-CONCEPT LAYOUT

MONTCLAIR TRANSIT CENTER -BUS ROUTE PLAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT

SOUTH SHORE CENTER TRANSIT CENTER -BUS ROUTE PLAN

-CONCEPT LAYOUT

36 37

38 39

40 41

42 43

44 45

46 47

48 49

50 51

PAGE

8-9

10 11

12 13

14 15

16 17

111 19

20 21

22 23

24 25

fiGURE NO,

10A

lOB

llA

118

12A

12B

13A

138

14A

148

15A

158

l6A

168

17A

178

18A

18B

191', 19B

20A

208

21A

218

22A

22B

liST OF FIGURES

DESCRIPTION

FRUITY ALE BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

COLISEUM SARi STATION TRANSIT CENTER

EASTMONT MALL TRANSIT CENTER

SAN LEANDRO BART STATION

-BUS ROUTE PLAN -CONCEPT PLAN

-sus ROUTE PlAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT

-BUS ROUTE PlAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT

TRANSIT CENTER -SUS ROUTE PLAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT

BAY FAIR BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

HAYWARD BART STATION TRANSITCENTER

CHABOT COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER

SOUTH HAYWARD BART STATION TRANSiT CENTER

UNION CITY BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

NEWARK TRANSIT CENTER

NEWPARK MALL TRANSIT CENTER

FREMONT BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER

IRVINGTON SART STATiON TRANS!T CENTER

-8US FIOUTE PLAN -CONCEPT LAYOUT

-BUS ROUTE PLAN <·CONCEPT LAYOUT







-BUS ROUTE PLAN -CONCEPT LA YOur

26 27

28 29

30 31

32 33

34 35

38 37

38 39

40 41

42 43

44 45

46 47

48 49

50 51



1. INTRODUCTION

This report presents a conceptual development of the various transit centers proposed by AC Transit for implementation as part of the Comprehensive Service Plan (CSP). Thirteen of the proposed centers will be integrated with existing BART stations, eight will be located at colleges, shopping centers and other sites in the AC Transit service area. This report is comprised of five sections. Section 1 - Introduction; Section 2 - Transit Center Functional Design Criteria {used as the basis for developing the transit center concepts}; Section 3 -Basis of Cost Estimates; Section 4 - Transit Center Concept Plans, (briefly describes each transit center in terms of its layout, operation. design concept and outstanding issues. A concept plan is shown for each site with existing infrastructure identified to highlight the proposed improvements): and Section 5 - Next Steps (includes such items as future contract scheduling, environmental clearance, engineering design and transit center design philosophy).

During the development of these conceptual plans, discussions were held with BART and AC Transit staff to elicit their input. Items requiring agreement between these two agencies are noted in the site descriptions.

Because of its conceptual nature, this report does not address the design and engineering issues in detail and is therefore, only the first step in the process of implementing the transit centers. Further inputs and discussions are required with property owners, BART and AC Transit engineering departments and others as part of the final design process.

The information presented is accurate at the time of the design of the transit center. The Comprehensive Service Plan has continued to evolve. Three transit center plans, EI Cerrito Del Norte Plaza and Eastmont Mall, were updated in March 1989 and reflect the CSP route plans of that date, the rest of transit centers were based on the CSP route structure of the Summer of 1988.

1

2

2. TRANSIT CENTER FUNCTIONAL DESIGN CRITERIA

2.1

2.2

2.2.1

Introduction

The purpose of this section is to present the functional design criteria used to develop the transit center concept plans. AC Transit's Facilities Standards Manual and other industry standards were used in developing the plans.

Design Objectives

The principle goal throughout the planning of the <?enters has been to locate and design facilities that facilitate safe and efficient bus operations and passenger connections.

Although each one of the transit centers presented different site and bus routing conditions, the following principles were applied to the conceptual development of ail sites.

Transit Center Patronage

A timed transfer transit center is a place where a bus user transfers efficiently from bus to bus or bus to BART with a short waiting period. The spatial requirements in terms of pedestrian waiting areas and vehicular movements have been designed with this in mind.

2.2.2 Pedestrian Circulation

Pedestrian movements should be segregated from bus and auto movements with crossings permitted only at designated locations. Sketches a-c indicate the circulation characteristics anticipated at the various transit centers:

• • .. .. ped"6Strisn corridor

f:·: ,\' ::J island or sidewalk

c. Bus to Bus Parallel Bay DesIgn

~_ PA/:::;;',"-l~!J)E

l'L'~'l~a/0;0~d/-J 'J' ........................... "~ ..... ' ...... ~ c::±:::r

~ '. "~,t;::,o ',' , u ,e;:::, "'.~ ,\ _. "', ,;. _ 'i1#' . ")!. _ _ ' ~ • J ','. i t ~ ' •• " '"

',_ .,~ •• e, ............ ' •• \.,.,~ ~.~.~.~ ••• ~ •• ~' .• : '" . ' .. ~ .';. - ~ .. "' .. /' ..' ..

c::::::l ~ ) ~c= ~ ____ , _, . ,',", j -, ,-:-, --' ::;,. ===:t..' _":-',' _.'"', > - .l· • , ' \ . ' ',: - -' ~. ,".~ .... "\'

.. ,',"" i I ,-'"

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

2.2.3

2.2.4

b. Bus to Bus to BART ParaHel Bay Design

Location of Off-Street Bays

Wherever practicable, saw tooth bus bays should be grouped closely together to encourage quick and safe transfers between buses. In the case of BART stations, bays should be positioned as close as possible to the main station entrance. Priority should be given to articulated buses.

,d. Accommodating Articulated Buses

l:::' c:;:::, : At::?7/c • ................ j .................. .

BART I :

On-Street Transit Centers

Bus bays should be located to avoid heavily trafficked areas. This may require removal of some parking. Under these circumstances special attention should be paid to safe passenger transfers.

)

2.2.5

2.2.6

•••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • • l Ai/TO PARKJ,V~ L5 c::::J -

§~ __ ~~~~_~ ____ ~====:~ ___ 1~7======~~:J~~~~.~~ ___ CR_OS __ S_~_~_~_K __ __

••••••••••••••••••••••••••••

Station Control/Security

No supervisory personnel will be permanently assigned to any of the transit centers. Station surveillance will be by existing police patrol or BART security services. Visibility will be maintained in all areas of the transit center to ensure the welfare of bus and BART transferees.

..................... ~~~~

Traffic Flow Direction

All traffic, whether bus only or bus and auto, should preferably be one-direction. There should be no mixing of bus and park-ride or kiss-ride traffic in the vicinity of bus drop-off and pick-up zones. The nature of the timed transfer concept requires unencumbered arrival and departure of buses in order to maintain schedules. In some cases, current provisions for kiss-ride and park-ride at BART stations will require relocating to satisfy this objective.

3

4

2.2.7

2.2.8

KISS-RIDe

c··

'----', >

Minimize Impacts Upon BART Parking

BART wishes to retain as much of the existing parking as possible because it provides revenue to the system as well as encourages ridership. The concept plans have recognized this and have been developed with BART staff providing input to the designs. Agreement however, is required between AC Transit and BART to determine the compensation for the park~ ing reductions.

Minimize Impacts Upon Joint Development Potential

BART staff have identified certain areas around the stations as potential.joint development sites. The transit centers have been planned to retain as much of these areas as possible noting that the bus operations wiH be on the ground level with future development taking place above.

~ ( 12 " .. " r.r ._" __ ,-El_~ I c::J

~--=-<?~,,--; "-.-.' ~---,-.---~,--:, ,~---c..:::J = I c::J =

\" ~ I ~ " c::J I c::J ~--==-- \1;

BART ENTRY

FUTl1~ BUILDING COWI"1NS i..IlLL HAVE TO 8E POS/IIONEl)' ON THE BUS iSLANDS

2.2.9

2.2.10

AC Transit and Industry Standards

AC Transit and industry established standards have been used in the various layouts. For ease of bus operation and space economy, sawtooth-berths have been used wherever possible.

Platform Layout

A simplified design of prototypical bus platform would include the following components: (Section 3 - Basis for Cost Estimates, gives a detailed breakdown of the cost categories used in designing the centers.)

CROSSVc;,.

"...'" /

2.2.11 Bus Shelter Design - Adaptation to Sites

Passengers waiting for buses require attractive surroundings and adequate protection from winter weather conditions. The conceptual designs incorporate this need and propose a modular system of bus shelters which wi!! allow varying lengths and positioning of weather protection to suit particular site conditions.

/ 5

3. BASIS OF COST ESTIMATES

6

The capital cost of each transit center, excluding property acquisition, upgrading of local access roads, environmental documentation and AC Transit administration costs, was based upon a base shelter design and enhanced shelter design. The base design allows for a "no-frills" facility -standard transit industry shelters and simple planter landscaping, but with a high quality pedestrian platform finish. The enhanced design assumes that the quality finish platform wi!! remain, with the option to retrofit at a later stage a custom-designed modular shelter system and upgraded landscaping to include trees where appropriate. Following are the general cost categories included in this report.

• Capital Costs

Demolition - curbs, sidewalks, pavement areas, landscaping

• Site Construction - curb & gutter aprons, islands, landscaping, drainage utilities, lighting, striping

• Furnishings - basic and enhanced quality shelters, toilets, trash receptacles, clocks, information panels and bus bay signs

• Contractors overhead and profit

• Contingency

• Engineering and construction administration

.. The cost estimates are based on 1988 construction costs.

• Annual Costs

The operating and maintenance costs assume that AC Transit will have one maintenance supervisor to administer the contracted-out services for the 21 sites. The estimated annual operating and maintenance costs are approximately 4.4 percent of the total capital costs.

-. -. -- --

BASE SHELTER DESIGN

ENHANCED SHELTER DESIGN

4. TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLANS

The 21 transit centers identified by the Comprehensive Service Plan are located on Figure 1. Five transit centers are in Contra Costa County; six are in the cities of Oakland and Alameda; and ten centers are in southern Alameda County. The ten centers to the south are split evenly north and south of Union City, which has its own transit service and provides a natural break in AC transit local service.

Table 1 summarizes key characteristics for the 21 centers. Thirteen of the transit centers are at BART stations, six are at shopping centers and two are at community colleges. At twelve transit centers, the buses will be scheduled to provide for simultaneous transfers between buses (timed transfers). Interim transit center operations are potentially possible at 14 sites, with curbside or on-street operation at eight sites, use of existing BART parking jots for five sites (requires temporary loss of parking), and use of future parking lot at one site.

Transit Center

Existing Bus Bays

Hilltop Mall 2 Contra Costa Col/ege 2 Richmond BART 5 Del Norte BART 5 EI Cerrito Plaza BART 5

Oakland West BART 2 Montclair 2 South Shore Center a Fruitvale BART 4 Coliseum BART 5 Eastmont Mall 2

San Leandro BART 4 Bay Fair BART 5 Hayward BART 7 Chabot College 1 South Hayward BART 2

Union City BART 3 Newark 2 Newpark Mall 4 Fremont BART 12 irvington BART (future) 0

Table 1

TRANSIT CENTER SUMMARY

Future Bus Bays

10 14 10 13 9

6 1 1 4

11 10 8

12 18 17 12 9

16 8 7

19 9

Timed Construction Transfer Priority

IT

TT

IT

IT TT TT IT TT

IT TT

TT TT

1

1

1

1

1

1 1 1 1

1

1 1

(1) Provides painted bus stalls in existing parking areas. (2) On street operation.

Interim Possibility

No No Yes (3) Yes (2) Yes (2)

Yes (2) No Yes (2) Yes (1) Yes (2) No

No Yes (1) Yes (3) No Yes (1)

Yes (1) Yes (2) No Yes (1) Yes (4)

(3) End-to-end bus loading using existing curb space. (4) Use area designated as future BART parking lot.

1

Contra Costa College-""""'7

Hilltop Mall

Richmond BART Station

£1 Cerrito! Del Norte BART Station

£1 Cerrito Plaza BART Station-~ ~®1]l~ ]]3~Ifill®~il 8

Eastmont Mall--

Fruitvale BART Station

Montc/air

Coliseum BART 'Station

San Leandro BART Station

MATCHLINE

Oakland West BART Station "'-Southshore Shopping Center

AlOes TRANSIT .. COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

TRANSIT CENTER LOCATION MAP FIGURE NORTHERN AREA ' 1-A

I

Union City BART Statio

South Hayward BART Station

Hayward BART Station

Bay Fair BART Station

Chabot Col/ege

DUSO, iCAli.PROJECT .26l!S.2615PISllrRwI

Newark

Fremont BART Station

Irvington BART Station

- -,~-

Newpark Mall

A.C. TRANSIT - COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

TRANSIT CENTER LOCATION MAP SOUTHERN AREA

FIGURE

1-8

9

10

OVERVIEW

The CSP plan for the Hilltop Mal! Transit Center will increase the number of bus stalls from the current two stalls to twelve. Four AC routes will use eight of the bus stalls and the other 4 staBs will be for Westcat, Vallejo Transit and BART express buses (see Table 2-A). Figure 2-A shows the bus routing. The buses approach the transit center via the inner roads and exit directly onto the Ring Road (Hilltop Mall Road). Table 2-8 provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPT

The transit center is located between the Shane Drive and Robert Miller Drive intersections with Hilltop Mall Road at the mid point of bus activity (see Figure 2-A) , The transit center utilizes an existing circulation road which minimizes parking take and provides easy pedestrian access to the Mall. The one-way twin bus-island design avoids two-way bus movements on the mall circulation roadways. To minimize potential conflicts between buses, or between buses and automobiles at the transit center exit, a parking aisle entrance to the ring road would be closed and buses restricted in their movements.

ISSUES

• The design will take parking spaces from the City of Richmond owned Hilltop Mall parking lot as currently striped, (Restriping for compact cars could compensate for this.)

• As shown, the in-bound bus movements use the circulation roads fronting the stores. (An alternative of both entering and exiting the transit center from the ring road would require loss of additional parking.

• An interim transit facility does not appear feasible at this location.

72 200

:r.:

@yWESTCAT 160 I \AlB ~.

1691E8

170lwe 170 lEB 1721

Nfl

S8

BA.RT EX

BART EX

V}"LLEJO TRANS.

HILL lEv\' DR~

V r !\ C. y :

69 70

KLOSE vV'{.,

GARRITY WY.

HILL TOP DR

I I ROUTE TERMINUS

o S FOR THRU ROUTE

CENTER

2-A

ROUTE NO.

72L

TRANSIT

f /

MID.

/ STD.

/

/

/

.. SEP.ARA TE BUS BA Y3 FOR Dli=i=ERENT DIRECTiONS

TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TiMED TRANSFER

T\;VO-\!VAY LOC~F

TV/O-Vi.A.V Leier

'2 BUSES LAYOVER

SH.A.RE

SHi\RE

T

1------------------~-()-·-·~-,A-.;_-i--i?-,~--S-,1r--I~-,-~-O-;:-E-::-~-IIO--NS'--&-r-~j-~I-N-rE-~-'A-N-C-E~ ! PER Vt,AR

I BASE DESIGN I $810,000 I $35,000 I ENHANCED DESIGN $;,411)0,000 $61,000 "--- ----,----~-~~~ *1988 Costs T

""\

N - - - -I - -- - - ---..

,,- I~ '. -I ~/~?: ---1- -~:~ 'I-_~ ~--/~:~'-' ,--' f;.'~-~

.~! \------.,

.~ 'L~_. L ___ ~

QUADRANT 4

\ \-

/ j

! ~ -

0 /' ~

/r

/ /

/~,. -- '--t ',,-.-~

,

, . \. . ,

....".~-~---'

, ,,

MACY

~-i'- -------- - - ~ ---

, ~----------------

t

~~=======::;;;;;;:::::=======- -------------- --;<1 ~ - 5J~

-- "=~ ~-::,--=-..:-..:::: r~~,.o../~~,-,_ ~--- ,--~~- - .

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o ?!:I 40' rr=1 ! I

110' I

160' I

<00' I

~ \1

----;r------,1i"""'"'----~----0"""f_ .... ,----',--,~~ .. --------------------

REViSION DATE

A.C. TRANSIT ... COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

HILLTOP MALL TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LA VOUT

~IGURE

2-8

11

I

I i I I I ~ ~

I

I I ~ • I i I I I I

I I

I I I i I I , !

I !

I

OVERVIEW

The transit center at Contra Costa College will be the northern-most of the timed transfer locations in the CSP. Fourteen bus stalls serve ten bus routes (see Table 3-A). The transit center wi!! be located on an existing Contra Costa College parking lot off Campus Drive on the western edge of the campus (see Figure 3-A). Table 3-8 provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPT

The transit center is located as close as possible to the Campus Lane/Rumrill Boulevard/San Pablo Avenue intersection to minimize bus operating costs and travel times, and also to minimize impacts on college roadways. In the concept plan (Figure 3-B), the 14 bus bays are split between five curb faces to make as compact as possible a transfer center within the confines of the existing parking lot. The plan maximizes the use of existing landscaping and minimizes the number of trees that would be removed.

ISSUES

• The transit center will require removal of 136 parking spaces and approximately eight trees. (The net overall landscaped area will remain approximately the same).

.. Since the 14 buses will leave as a group, the exit onto Campus Drive may need some type of traffic control, such as three-way stop signs.

• An interim transit center at this location would not be possible since for a time transfer to work the 14 buses must be in close proximity.

12

70

73

K E v • , . L~ ROUTE TERtv1!NUS o BUS STOP FOR

TRANSIT CENTER

L?OO! fO~

~

()

o r

m o m

ROUTE DESCRIPTION ROUTE PEAK I ROUTE VEHiCLE NO.

COMMENTS I NO. HDWV OPERA TlONS ** SIZE STAllS (1-,;llN.) I

I j

I !

10 30 TERM.!TT MID. :2 I

I 30 ITT MID. 2* TWO-WAY LOOP I 69 ROUTE I I I 70 30 TERM.!TT MID. 2* TWO-WAY LOOP I

I ROUTE

71 30 TERM.!Tr MID. 1

72L 30 ITT ARTIe. 2* 704 I TERM.!TT ARTie. 1

78 30 I ITT MID. 2* !

200 30 TERM.!!T MID. 1

ORINDA 30 TERM.!TT STD. 1 POTENTIAL AC

SERVICE

WESTCAT 120 I STD. 1 30Z --

104

* SEPARATE BUS BAYS f:OR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

** TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSf:ER

CAPIL'\L

TABLE 3-A

OPERA nONS 8; };.1AINTBLANCE

PER YEAR

SA.S!: DESIGN 1-1 ___ ~ ·.:.,.$.:.,.9..:.3..;;;,G:....O:..O_O __ .....,-+-__ .... !_4.,..1;..~ 0_0 .... 0_. ~--~-J ENHANCED DESiGN L $1.870.000, $~~.OOO

-=========~==="=~-=~~====~ *1988 Costs T

CUBO, ICAD,?ROJECT.2515.Z615P151Iccc (rRY31

~. - ----------- --

CON <oi Ocr, c:.ToP SiCo;N Of'. oUS -A0TI'!A i2D 10-"--1' -!-~ Si~NAL

./

12 , ,

/'

/'

./ /

"\, ( ") ( \ \

I I

i I WOMEN'S LOCKER ROOM

I _______ ~ '---; __ ;

) ----'---- -- ----~ r----:i >--------------' ~------- - I r ;-

'--_____ 1 ex'S",," GYMNAS'UMt: •

I; i

GRAPHIC SCALE: o 'l!f 40' t!! ! ! !

REVISION DATE

eo' !

!zo· i

>60' !

~oo' i

----------

. ..--"~

'0 /1

.~ .J \ j '"'---' ("'j ~J

') ." ~

:.:::\ 'J

A.C. TRANSIT .. COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE

CONTRA COSTA COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

PLAN

f:lGURE

3-B

RICHMOND BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The Richmond BART station transit center plan. will enlarge the existing facility from five bus stalls to ten. See table 4-B for a description of the bus stall requirements. The bus stalls are arranged with two stalls on the north side of the station and eight on the south side (see Figure 4-A). Table 4-B provides the conceptual cost esti

mates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The bus bays are consolidated at existing curb space and a bus island on the south side of the station in order to keep the transfer walk distances between buses and BART to a minimum. The plan will require removal of some parking for an island platform. The narrow north-south internal circulation roadway precludes placing a third

bus stall on the island.

ISSUES

• The concept plan will require removal of approximately 39 parking

spaces.

• Interim operation of the transit center may be possible if through buses are allowed to park nose-to-tail without independent arrival

and departures.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

KEY :

c::J ROUTE TERMINUS o BUS STOP FOR THRU ROUTE

TRANSIT CENTER --

w o o 00

• co '<f ....... -'

w ....,< ....... u.

~~ ..... ,z

0< ..... V)

SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE

NORTH SIDE

t(j)

I tO)

71. 73. 74

~ QI]

D£J @ES

@ES

@EB

__ ::::===:=!=:WESTCA T MARTINEZ

~(

MacDONALD AVE.

I ~( I tU'"J

I-1..0 NO SCALE

ROUTE DESCRIPTION ROUTE

PEAK ROUTE VEHICLE NO.

HDWY COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERA nONS *it SIZE STAllS

10 30 TERM.! MID. 2* 68 30 TERM.! SMl. 1

71 30 I MID. 2* OFF PEAK

73 15 I STD. 2* } STAGG'''D HEADWAY

74 30 I STD. - ALONG

78 30 TERM.! MID. 1 MacDONALD

TRAVELER"S SAN RAFAEL SUS

TRANSIT 60 TERM.! ? 1 MAY GO TO DEL NORTE

WESTCAT MARTINEZ 120 TERM.! SMl. 1

30Z --10

it SEPARA TE BUS SAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIREC TlONS

it it TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 4-A

COST ESTIMATE* CAPITAL OPERA TIONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $ 330,000 ~14.000 ENHANCED DESIGN 1----$-4-9-0-• .:..0-0-0~--+-----.::;$"""2-1.:..; 0"';'0-'-0-' -----1

J=IGURE 4-A *1988 Costs TABLE 4-B

, '.

" , , •...

r '" ~ .. "

OUBO: ICAO.PROJECT.zeI5.Z615P151!RICIf (f"RIUl

."

.' .' .~ .

/

REVISION

. I

I .. . I I

DATE

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o zri 40' t! I ! I

eo' :

120' I

160' I . /

/


RICHMOND BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

~IGURE

4-8

EL CERRITO DEL NORTE BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

With the CSP transit center plan. the number of bus bays at the EI Cerrito Del Norte BART Station will increase from an existing 5 stalls to 13. The bus schedules for six AC transit lines would be coordinated to allow for simultaneous (timed) transfers (see Table 5-A). In addition. Vallejo Transit and two BART express routes would serve the station (see Figure 5-A). The concept plan assumes modification of the present one-way traffic operation on Cutting Boulevard with two-way traffic operation east of the station. Table . .

5-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept plan (see Figure 5B) maintains the existing one-way clockwise traffic flow around the BART station island. The plan develops a compact transit center at the south end of the BART station to minimize walk distances for transferring bus patrons. Nine of the thirteen bus bays are located in a special bus-only area to minimize interference with automobiles. Due to the one-way street pattern all but two bus stalls are on the west side of the station in order to minimize around-the-block bus movements. Shelters are included only for the new single-sided bus island since the other passengers can wait under the BART station platform. The city-owned bike path on the old Santa Fe Railroad right-of-way is maintained.

Kiss-and-ride parking will be allowed on a new island with easy access from Hill Street and a direct walk connection to the BART station entrance.

ISSUES

• Kiss-and-ride traffic would be moved away from the west side center island to an island location.

• AC and BART need City of EI Cerrito's approval for converting a section of Cutting Boulevard to two-way traffic.

'. Interim operations of the timed-transfer transit center may be possible by stopping buses at curb locations along neighboring streets. Such an interim facility would cause longer dwell times for the buses. because of the longer walk distances between buses.

• The concept plan will require removal of approximately 36 parking spaces.

16

BUS ROUTE PLAN ~ AllEJC: TRANSIT, , ~ 68

SAN RAFAEL \~\ ~/~ BART EX J \

BART EX Q \ \

TO FRWY. N.

IT] [§J

o (10

K E

@ QD

QIJEB

I VAlLEJO I I SAN RAFAEL I

y :

\\ '-lQ' \ \ CO\... \ \ ~G ~\\~

c~ ",

71 75

ROUTE TERMINUS

72L

CJ o BUS STOP FOR THRU ROUTE

TRANSIT CENTER

75

NO SCALE



COMMENTS NO.

HDWY OPERATIONS -- SIZE STALLS

(MIN.)

7 15 ITT MID. 2*

68 30 TERM.!TT SML. 1

71 30 TERM.!TT MID. 1

72L 10 ITT ARTie. 2*

73 15 TERM.!TT STD. 1 r LOOP ROUTE -

75 30 TERM.!TT SMl. 2* TERM. AT EITHER l DEL NORTE OR

BART EX E.C. PLAZA

30 TERM.! 1 J

BART EX 30 TERM.! 1 Q

VALLEJO 15 TERM.! 1

TRANSIT

SAN 60 TERM.! 1

RAFAEL --13

- SEPARATE BUS BAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

** TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 5-A

COST ESTIMATE * CAPITAL OPERA TlONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN ~ __ ..-.:$:....:5:....:0:....:0:.!':..::0:..::0:..::O __ -+ ___ -:$_2_2",:,'_0_0_0 __ --I ENHANCED DESIGN $610,000 $26.000

F=IGURE 5-A *1988 Costs TABLE 5-8

OUBD.lo.o. PROJECT. :615. 261 SP I 511 D£LN

..,: 1111 :

I ' 0 i'

i 'II 0

I! r I 10 , I <>

DU80. ICAO,PRQ,JECT.2615.26'5P'5,IOE~N (fRlol5)

REVISION DATE

-,· .•. cr, ..•. " "


EL CERRITO DEL NORTE BART ST A TION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

FIGURE

5-8

EL CERRITO BART

PLAZA ST A TION

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

18

OVERVIEW

With the CSP transit center plan the El Cerrito Plaza BART Station will increase the number of bus bays from an existing five bays to nine. The five of the seven AC bus routes that serve the station are major East Bay core routes with short headways, and four of these routes terminate at the station (see Table 6-A). Figure 6-A displays the proposed bus routings. The short headways indicate that timed transfers are not needed. Table 6-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout (see Figure 6-B) places nine bus stalls around the BART station island. Since only 9 bus stalls can fit around the island, the two 30-minute-headway routes, 10 and 75, share stalls. The one-way clockwise circulation pattern requires a minimum of 25 feet of roadway and widening the entrance of the east roadway to accommodate bus 'U' turns.

Drop-oft's and taxis will have approximately 200 feet of curb space along the island adjacent to the station entrance area.

ISSUES

• The concept plan requires removal of kiss-and-riders from the central platform.

• Interim operation of the transit center is possible if buses stop along Fairmont Avenue as well as around the BART station island.

10

o .J (Xl <1 0-

Z <1 (f)

72l

KEY :

BUS ROUTE PLAN

o ROUTE TERMINUS

o BUS STOP FOR THRU ROUTE

TRANSIT CENTER

J=IGURE

~

15 88

NO SCALE

6-A


PEAK ROUTE

HDWY VEHICLE NO.

NO. OPERA TlONS ** SIZE STAllS COMMENTS

(MIN.)

10 30 / MID. 2* 15 10 TERM.! STD. 1 40 10 TERM.! STD. 1 ( TWO STAllS NEED.

72 10 TERM.! STD. 2-< TO ACCOMM. SHORT-HEADWAY

72L 10 / ARTIe. 2* .... ROUTE TERMINAL

75 30 / SML. -* SHARE ROUTE 10 STAllS

88 10 TERM.! STD. 1 --

<)

.- SEPARATE BUS BAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

n TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 6-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $210,000 $9,000

ENHANCED DESIGN : $210,000 $9,000

*1988 Costs TABLE 6-B

DU80,ICAD.PROJ£CT.26IS.25IS1'lsIIELI:a

0

0 0 ®

0

I I

. DU80, ICAO.PROJECT.Z615.26151'151IELCER (rRlol6I

-------- ----_. - -

0 (;)

REVISION DATE

w ::> z w ~ ..J < a: ... z w (,)

. ...------------

-~

--~ --;;;.----

-----0 \ ....---- - .. O\~.

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o ';!j .r;t I! I j ! i

eo' i

A.C. TRANSIT - COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN ----I

EL CERRITO PLAZA BART ST AllON ~IGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 6-8 10

OAKLAND WEST BART ST A TION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

QVERVIEW

The Oakland West BART station transit center will be a focal point for three and possibly four bus routes (see Table 7-A). The existing two bus bays will be expanded to six bays. Figure 7-A describes the bus routing. Table 7-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout is to utilize existing curb space. Eastbound buses will stop along the existing curb of West 7th Street, and westbound buses will stop along the existing west station island curb. Shelters will be provided for the patrons waiting at the 7th Street bus stops. Other patrons could wait under the BART station platform.

ISSUES

• Buses exiting on Chester Street going westbound on 7th Street may need assistance crossing the intersection. For example, a new traffic signal could be installed.

• Interim operation of the transit center is possible with on-street bus bays.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

L r

=~=-=-== _J - ==~~ OAKLAND WEST BART1--- - '---··1----

, ~'P".,..."l~""l"~;T''''·1It ..)

; ·,~,;:;:::.:,';:I:~,~j

I- -~""~~ l-(/) I (/)

a:: J I (/)

w (/)

I- W (/) r

@ a::

w WB®@)

a.. :r: >-u u

KEY :

D ROUTE TERMINUS


NO SCALE

ROUTE NO.

13

64

88

PEAK HDWY (MIN.)

15

15

12

ROUTE ROUTE

OPERATIONS

/

/

/

DESCRIPTION VEHICLE NO.

** SIZE STALLS

MID. 2* STD. 2* STD. 2*

--6

* SEPARATE BUS SAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS


COMMENTS

TABLE 7-A

COST ESTIMATE* CAPITAL OPERA TlONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN ~---":"'=="::":::---+----=-::":"'::"':"'::"------l ENHANCED DESIGN

$120.000

I $5.000

I $140.000 $6,000

FIGURE 7-A *1988 Costs TABLE 7-B

20 oUBO.ICAD.PROJECT.2615.2SISPI5111lAlCW

0000: !CAD,PROJ£CT.2515,2515PI5110AKW (fRWTl

l _______ J l~ __ ~./ l~_ N

~ f'Oic!'·mAL NE.W rP-AFF'IC SG,NAL

~ I I I I

I

,....: w w a: ~ co

a: w ~ co W :I: (,)

7TH

5TH

GRAPHIC SCALE:

0 2d 4<1 10' I I I I I I I

REVISION

STREj:T

~ ------

STREET

) I ,

r /--~----

IZO' M 200' I I I


OAKLAND WEST BART STATION FIGURE

DIITE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 7-8

MONTCLAIR TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The transit center in the Montclair District will provide timed transfers between nine bus lines. Four of the nine CSP bus routes will be served by vans, three routes by small 30-foot buses and two by standard sized 40-foot buses (see Table 8-A). After meeting with the Montclair Merchants Association, and, at their recommendation, the buses have been rerouted to avoid the congested block of Mountain Boulevard between LaSalle Avenue and Medau Place (see Figure 8-A). Table 8-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

The proposed timed transfers will occur along curb faces near the intersection of Medau Place and Moraga Avenue.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

For a timed transfer to function properly and to aid passengers, the buses must have fixed stop locations. Fixed stop locations mean that buses must be able to arrive and depart independently.

The concept layout shown in Figure 8-B places as many buses as possible along the west side of Moraga Avenue. The buses stop along the curbs, because the limited right-of-way precludes, the saw tooth bus bay design used at most other transit centers. In order to provide room for bus stops on opposite sides of Moraga Avenue, traffic has been reduced from two lanes to one lane northbound. . Southbound traffic retains the existing two lanes to allow for left turns. The east sidewalk will be reduced to twelve feet at the bus stop locations. The west side sidewalk will be widened to eight feet to allow a minimal width bus platform.

Only transit lines with vans would use the bus stops along Medau Place to minimize potential conflict with the truck loading door for Lucky's and not to block the wine shop driveway. The sidewalk loading areas are deemed too narrow for shelters. Benches would be provided instead. The enhanced plan assumes that additional rightof-way can be obtained from Caltrans along the west side of Moraga Avenue.

ISSUES

• The Concept Plan requires approval with the City of Oakland to change sidewalk widths and to close one northbound traffic lane.

• A traffic count study is required to determine the adequacy of three-lane operation along Moraga Avenue.

• The Concept Plan will require removal of eight metered parking spaces from the east side of Moraga Avenue and nine on the west side.

r,-:;-,TO LE..J ROCKRIDGE

[EJ

~ , ~ , >-

1 , <l: OTI j ~

i @SB

1 w

! LLI

a:: LL

3. 4

, z

i LLI

i a:: a::

<l:

~

K E y :

BUS ROUTE PLAN 3. 4. 5.

37 15. 16. 17. 60 37. 59. 60

LUCKY

!=REIGHT DOOR >--+-~

LA SALLE AVE.

5. 15. 16 37. 60

I MONTCLAIR DISTRICT

c=J o

ROUTE TERMINUS

BUS STOP FOR THRU ROUTE

TRANSIT CENTER

3.4. 5. ~ 16. 17. 59

NO SCALE

J=IGURE 8-A

• AC Transit needs to discuss with Caltrans the possibility of encroaching on the Warren Freeway right-of-way. Two feet additional right-of-way would allow for construction of shelters along the west side of Moraga Avenue. Five additional feet of right-of-way would allow for standard shelters on the east side of Moraga Avenue.

• Interim transit center operation is not possible at this location, because of the need to widen the west sidewalk along Moraga Avenue.



HDWY COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERA nONS ** SIZE STALLS

3 30 TERM.!TT VAN 1

4 30 TERM.!TT VAN 1

5 30 TERM.!TT VAN 1

15 10 TERM.!TT STD. 1

16 30 TERM.!TT SMl. 1

17 30 TERM.!TT SMl. 1

37X 30 ITT STD. 2* S9 30 TERM.!TT SMl. 1

60 30 ITT VAN 2* --

11

• SEPARATE BUS SAYS FOR DI!=FERENT DIRECTIONS

•• TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANS!=ER

TABLE 8-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $200,0'0'0' $9,0'0'0' ENHANCED DESIGN 1----$-3-S-0-',-O'-0-o-----;-----S-1S-.-0-O'-0';-, ------I


oueo, ICAD.PROJECT .2615. 2S15P I 5 I jWONT

DUBD.ICAO.PROJECT.2615.26ISPISIIWONl' (fRW81

----TI--------__ ~I

! !

/

!

.. , .I '0

J)

lj - __

/MOUNTAIN

PAID PARKING LOT

I I I I I

l~ kl

-4 I

PARKING ~

1

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

l

,

I - • '-V. . .

~ --

BLVD.

@ AVENUE

t~TA~K~E~4P~A=RK~IN~Q=ST~AL~LS~------~ I" 37 ~,. 'ARiITNQ---

_',- ~f--------

,

~ -vJ

86

- -. - - - ""'-____________ ~'!....K.!.!!..!.... _ _=:::~--___ =-, ... [·_~.....,,] __ r:·_~":.::-l.....I..I~_~ ___ ..L.'~I_"_I"' __ ... I __ .-E]L]"'_1 ==...... ___ N~..,.~!5..!.N..! _ _...., ,-----

I

" . 0 \9

_\

MOL

-,~--

• TAKI! I '- NI!W CROSSWALK I 'flO \, ( '" PARKINQ STALLS V'/'

______________ -__ . _________ .. _ '_ ,.- ·.---...,..-~~-_--_·-_--·===-'I!-.~-~-R-E-N-~-R-EE-W-A-Y ___ . --.- ~ -' t ~ [-u~ - -~--- •

GRAPHIC SCALE;

o aJ 40' SO' il I ! I i I

120' !

160' I


REVISION DATE

MONTCLAIR TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

FIGURE

8-B

I I i

SOUTH SHORE CENTER TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The CSP focuses five routes at the South Shore Center. The transit center would not have timed transfers. Unlike other transit centers, the passenger waiting area and the bus layover location would be kept separate. The plan routes all buses to pass the existing bus stops on the eastside circulation driveway of the shopping center (see Figure 9-A). 8uses would layover along the southwest corner of the shopping center along Park Street (see Table 9-A for the layover bus stall needs). Table 9-8 provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The four bus layover stalls would be placed in new bus duckouts off Park Street and the southwest driveway (see Concept Layout, Figure 9-8). The driveway pavement may need to be reconstructed to support the buses. The concept does not remove any parking.

ISSUES

• The concept plan will require approval by the South Shore Center and the City of Alameda to construct the curb cuts.

• Interim operation requires finding a location for the terminating buses to layover.

24

BUS ROUTE PLAN

KEY :

c=J ROUTE TERMINUS


- EXISTING BUS STOP

~'O b.b

~'O ~'!>

46 53

r

NO SCALE

BUS ROUTE DESCRIPTION ROUTE


NO. HDWY

OPERATIONS ** SIZE ST ALLS (MIN.)

12 15 TERM.! MID.

46 20 TERM.! MID. 1

53 20 TERM.! MID. 1

54 10 TERM.! MID.

63 15 / MID.

4

NOTE: SHARE 4 EXISTING BUS STOPS INSIDE SOUTH SHORE CENTER WHICH ALL BUSES SERVE BOTH INBOUND AND OUTBOUND.

* SEPARATE BUS BAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS


COMMENTS

LA YOVER STALLS

TABLE 9-A

COST ESTIMATE* CAPITAL OPERA TIONS & MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $250,000 S11 .. 000 ENHANCED DESIGN 1----$-2~6-0..:.., O-O-0---+----=$:...:1-.:.!1,~O:..::O:.::O:....---

FIGURE 9-A *1988 Costs TABLE 9-8

oU80llo.o.PROJECT.26IS.:S15P'51 SSIfI

.! .. ~

\

\ \

\ Ul ;> -0:: o

\

\

Ul Z -..J Ul a: o 'J: (f)

\ \

\ \

OU80: ICAO,PRO..lECT.Z615.2615P151ISStfl If_l

\ \

\.

"---

/ . \

i \ \' 1< \) •• 1 I, \ ~

! i j

:~---\ ----~~

PARK

• I 10' (T'(R)

I I SIDEW.ALX.

STREET

""I . _. _

I :

i I I

L ! r i

!(~ENTER i !

L I

( .. --.. --.----_ •••• ______ 4

.... -.----~ t?=.::::~==:::-:::;-~ BUS STO P

0~--

~--

0-&-

~nnnn~ BUS STOP

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o Zi.d 80' 'zo' '~o' zo;;.')' !!! Ii! !: ! --------------------------------------------/


SOUTH SHORE CENTER !=IGURE

REVISION, DATE TRAN~T CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 9-8

\

FRUITVALE BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

QVERVIEW

In the CSP, the transit center at Fruitvale BART station will expand from an existing four bus bays to eleven bus bays. Table 10-A describes the bus stall needs for the nine routes that serve the transit center. Figure 10-A shows the bus routings. Routes 82 and 82L will remain on East 14th Street and not enter the station. Six of the routes will use the west side of the station.

BART and AC Transit have applied for UMT A Section 9 funds to construct the transit center and a parking facility which can replace any parking loss due to new bus bays. Table 10-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CQNCEPTS

The transit center design consolidates bus bays at the north end of the station to minimize transfer walk distances (see Figure 1 a-B) . Since the Fruitvale transit center will not have timed transfers. the routes departing in the same general direction will be clustered to give the patron the opportunity to take the first bus that comes. All buses destined to the City of Alameda will be clustered on the west side of the transit center (see Figure lO-A for bus routings). Kissand-ride parking stalls remain essentially unchanged.

ISSUES

• The two-stall island on the west side of the station will require removal of 27 existing parking spaces. A proposed joint BART-AC project will replace the lost parking spaces with a proposed parking structure.

• Interim operation of the Fruitvale transit centers would be possible if bus stalls are painted on the existing parking area.

26

BUS ROUTE PLAN

51. 51L 54 FRUITVALE AVE.

54

~ @.

I-..J [ill ••• (/)

0 : IT!J** .. 0:: 0

'" z @" <t

w -l (8. Z <t

@ (/)

l(/)

I lN

W

46 53

64. 82. 82L

.1-(/)

I '1-

<;t

46. 53

34TH AVE.

'-____ ~~~-----+~----.. 54 54

I r KEY

....

.. *.

ROUTE


TRANSIT CENTER

TO ALAMEDA FROM ALAMEDA TO/FROM ALAMEDA

35TH AVE

NOTE: 82 &.. 82L STAY ON E. 14TH ST.

I=IGURE

NO SCALE

10-A



HDWY COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERATIONS .. .. SIZE STALLS

44 15 TERM'/ MID. 1

46 20 / MID. 2*

51 10 TERM'/ STD. 1

51L 10 TERM'/ ARTIC. 1

HEADWAYS

53 20 / MID. - STAGGERED WITH RT46

54 10 / MID. 2* TO/FROM ALAMEDA

64 15 TERM'/ STD. 1

79 15 / MID. 2*

82 10 / STD. - } STAV ON

82L 10 / ARTIC. - E. 14TH ST.

87 15 TERM'/ SML. 1 --

11

.

.. SEPARATE BUS SAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

.... TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 10-A

COST ESTIMA TE* CAPITAL OPERA TIONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN r ___ .;...$3_8_0..;...0_Q.:...o ___ +-_____ $_17.....;._00_0 ___ --i

ENHANCED DESIGN $410,000 $18.000

*1988 Costs TABLE 10-8

Duoo,loD.?ROJECr.2615.2515?151IfRTY

" ~------------------------

REVISION DATE

ouao: ICAO.PROJECT.26,S.Z615PISI!FRTV (FRIoIIO)

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o ?d .d Iii i i (

eo' !

,ZO' I


zoo' j

FRUITVALE BART 5T ATION J=IGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 10-B

OAKLAND COLISEUM BART ST A TION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

In the CSP the transit center at the Coliseum BART station will expand from an existing five to ten bus bays. Table 11-A describes the bus stall needs for eight bus routes that service the transit center. One bus route, the 41, has wheel chair access and must remain on the San Leandro Street side of the BART station (see Figure 11-A) . All the other routes will stop along Snell Street and take advantage of the pedestrian undercrossing.

Buses serving the Coliseum transit center will not be scheduled for timed transfer.

Table 11-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout shown in Figure 11-B utilizes the existing curb space along Snell Street, thus additional roadway construction will not be needed. The taxis, and kiss-and-riders that currently use the west curb of Snell Street would move to the half-circle driveway just east of Snell Street.

ISSUES

• The concept plan changes taxi stand locations.

• Interim operation of the transit center would be at the same general location along Snell Street.

BUS ROUTE PLAN 46 T J

:~ ,,\~ 69TH[ ~VE. -

~ V l!

~~-'U j I..L.~: PEDESTRIAN OVERCROSSING TO COLISEUM e. ARENA (j) I- Q..

-.====~~ __ ~ __ ~~J Z '. .. I I a:: 0

~VE. >~ --.. 41 -

I I < ~ ~-~- ' ~ . - - - - - - - - - - - PEDESTRIAN

~ @ S9 - - -: ~ - - - - - - -, UNDERCROSSING

~ f56\S9 :: '-~: .:]' r~ '::!:::J I :,! 4 ,4 ..... . Q N9

41 ~--f-_~" t .. J.

WHEELCHAIR ACCESS

8@S9;:-....,t::t-'-"':-/' I .~;]'~ ~

: :: HEGENBERGER RD. :: I I Ii::

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I

18. 4''::- Os ~"""'----:----s---"Q7~5TH AVE.

4 .. :: ji KEY: 46. 56, 83

D o ,. L I'

ROUTE TERMINUS

BUS STOP FOR THRU

TRANSIT CENTER

ROUTE 4P NO SCALE

~IGURE ll-A

ROUTE DESCRIPTION ROUTE VEHICLE NO. ROUTE

NO.

PEAK HDWY (MIN.) OPERATIONS ** SIZE STALLS

COMMENTS

18

41

46

56

79

83

87

98

30

10

20 15

15 15

15

30

TERM.!

/

/

/

TERM.!

/

TERM.!

TERM.!

MID.

STD.

MID.

MID.

MID.

MID.

SMl.

MID.

1

2*

2*

2* 1

-1

1 --

10

WHEELCHAIR ACCESS

SHARE WITH

46 &. 56



TABLE ll-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN ~ ______ ..;.$_1_7_0':....0_0_0 ____ --+I ____ ...::.$_7.:...;O_O_0 ___ ---I1 ENHANCED DESIGN $520,000 $23,000


oueo.jCAD.PROJECT. 2615. 2&ISP 151 I ca.

. ... . .... ' ~ ., '''';'' '.... . .().. I ~ ..~.,-, :, . i : i'- --I - .,:::'- • " - - J.e. '<'. --- -'<;J;, .' .' ;)1 '

;=t 11 :: 2: Ii; )_l.: 'I:~' , ~ . . .==~: ,- ~. In-~ =: i,': II" .\ .... ~ .. i~! . , .

!: ~ i " Ii" i I ---r I ",_: ': l -~: ",' ~ I!::: _ _.-j i I ~/""='--;. il r--. ' . ~ I ~ ,I l I I~ . TC -~: ~ --,- \C'\, -, I I: . .IP/ ~'-.:s. I,',' ;:,,~ '.', I i I .... ' It; '<'. - ! I J-' t , , ; - - , \'!,.L ~ - I I I t;-: 00 -....

, _ I • -... II '<'.. . " ( ~ -.1 -" \., \ ~ /'-I, ' I Ii. : I ~ ~, " f , ..i' I(.. ,- - , ", l' "" --I ' IJ ,"" .. Ii :! ~~::..: I· i: I: ~ ~:, I '. ' . ~( I ~;-:-: J.. \(\ 7>- =1..., I ~ . II ~

i i $ o~ I,' ; !, r--.. ~I' I . : .: ~. ,- ,- : ( I ~ ,,,' ~ '-\::i 1'1 --- , I I I ' 1/' -..,.,: : j ; " " ,-0 . ,~' ; ~ , , ' 1 I ~,- - ; T ' ~ ~ . ' ; I , , I S I Ii Ii ~~ I I ,.-j~. I ~! 1 i ..... : I , ',;-~ i; I ~: ' ~ ~ =: I! Iii' V) iii ,; I I, 'I I) - ~ , ~ I . _C I <I;:) I '~ - - I'''': .-.. , '" '- ,i I' - I ,; <r) !I : ;~ ~' I I ,T~ i ~!: ' \t'! I '~' = 0-- ~1 i ~. l : '" . =1 ~I' 1- I I \ I I I' i ' : i I .t cB' I ' 1/' i ' II: i ~i 'I :~" : ~'--; ~, ! '/! " " -: I lIm:,: I\! ~" ~ I I';! fj I I : I ; I I I ....... I " - -' - '!~i' , -'-.~ . -, I I , ........ / ........ , ' II ' I~ \ /' I I i : ~!; I I"" i I ! ~ i 'i - t-- i(.." l . -, 1 ; '~'. i i 'r;:,: ,'(J I Cl '

!I 1';':,1 ~J III I ,L ,,> ,; ~:, i )~~I i li~ i \:! i ~i;.~( II: ;~ ; ;~~( h' ~'I : j Ili~\!j45:.J -~/~1:lt! -~ !/Z5 1 I" 80' oJ \ ;.

:1 . 'I. I ~,--~; : ~! I ~! I' " : II ~1 '=:- ':~: I ;: i :~ : ! ~'=;d~li~A1~ci'\: 1'\ \ I I ·1 I: ~ I j~ -- --- -- . , 'f=±" c ~, : J 1 I ...J...l L ..L i L _ ~ t "\ I --.l ~ t J . t ~u ' -, Co! , ! Ie' c' f- ' r

, I. _. L -" I):) <c::=::::;; ~ <~. c::::::::::=;; -~- <:::==:=:;::> - '___7- ~ - - ......--~ - >.; 1·' , r- I ~ _ _ _ ~. " -', \ . .< II . I - 'r-' I

, , , "",' ~ r' - .. . - . . "" 4-- =. I '" I, .:.. <'-0 , , .- -0l ----- t; -r I ~! ' II 'L. 'I' . .3:1.. ') A ":~, --- -'~I-:-=------'----------------' --@-tI>;-.----~ Ii, II AC'C;cS3:S RQ ~' : 'I ~ ~ ."'T ,rc ~ ~ • - .r;:~ c=::::-- c:=::::::, c==:--, c:===J c:=: ....., \9 - --~ - - -- - - -- -- -rr

, I I I ..... i z} ~ -r Ie I I ~ ii! 1''' : fc':r '1 , T I ~r let. I I, k S6)\ !

I I "':j i ',' I I - - I ~! I ' I "<:;1' i ~'I , "', I ' ~'I ,&1 ~ n\ " \' \. \ .-'1 i I I

I !~ ~i ~,~ i=J ,,~ Ii ~i· i )~i! 'I !1·~;---b~ll~1 ~\!~i _t!=J ttl'! .--If \' ' -#'r :1 '. -:1 . lc:t==,,! /1 I 1/' '<\~ ~-'< c f .fl -~,~I i -l~:~_l~\ =F--- --I~! "!~l --1 \ ~ l [ , ~~\ L \ \ I I jI ! . 'I I - i I ' ~ 1- I J ~! ~ 11 ~ I -If-- ~ I I Ill!.: --L- !: I ,~I ~I .- \ I \' i \. \ \ \ ; ; ,! " ~ i I '<'.', '. ~i ,- 'II '.-:.1 ~~ :, r J i C" I I~!: 1 I! -I-~! !~" I • ~ =:J ~I rn'\1: \ \' ' :

Ii I;/,§ I~( ~ -~ ,I ! ~i~i=J i ',1,_ /~It~ ti' -~L I ~i: ~ IT( j ~ll~~! ~(! ~'~i( 1-tj±~~!~~.. ;I:~;! 'liD \~: \ Ii \ ct 'i\ III Ii ll.;~~i I I I~I __ : _ i!i- J I r~~I-t ~~i \l\~\ \ I:, ~I j .. ~I .l ~:~::~: 1- -~:~f'----t-': ; II'~II I, ~ \ \ \ \.u . II! 'I !,!= ... i 1 I ,;:!-' '''.'--1 I'~~i-+>~"' .. :, 0\ 11 : ~I~:: I"T , ~,~; 1 !",: ' ~:,,:-t-, ,i i l' I \ \ \ ~ \ I

'

I : '- "\! I 'I"'\! =Pur ! _ I I J ~~1-' : ,"'-Z.,"-~! I ~\ \ D 1--..1 ___ 1._ l~, I I~I I ( '~i I 1(\' ---r-- -,~! I .J \ ; \ Q . " I :L-I'r)i"'" I "j: " I/'~'§f§ I \,.' I~ l~' II 1/ ,1(!"==-=1=- ~: " PiJ Lu .! i I:f- i~! I ) __ l. I=t- _: i 'I 'ti: i ~~~. \ ..l~-L~j~.i lcl:,J."':JC::-; I j -1'1 ' I ~ .: i ,f \ \ ' \ CO I;

Ii .,' '',!,j I r: :-'<'.: ,-' %1:1 ru:~., . . ~ ~ +-1- ! II \' \ <. \ ,: Ii ,r- I~; I _!! I ~;:- ). ~i : \"':\:,,-..-.(\ ---~/-" 129-., --.-_ " I, \ " ' lu \ i: " 'Ir-' "'~. , " I '\.'\" " ' A • I \ I r--. \ I ' [i : ,i "': .L i : : f j,;::;::;: _'. *,"~ ,tT·1'1 ' / :' \ \ \ ~ \ I

Ii I i 1=r="~~I __ ; _ .' I' . I' " ,', -, :' ,;" 6'~;:-~ - - -- - _d~~:'J-..!:p~~,~ -- - _. - ..-- ,/.'~ \ \ \ :r:. \ ! :,', ""i-- : J'C~:::rl"'ll~--L :- Ii 1 i~ '~i~!: .::lt1)~- i ~~___ :--::-~~15~-i<IPE. $ IAXI. r • .,/ ~,: ~~CD!'-,:J'i C'~ . \. i: ,

':.'.'!', ~-' : -- II ij: ~'ll -:--- ~/ ~ ~-.:~: 7L 1'7:'-',. -- - '::o.::/.'o ,.: r'~-:~:; /N/C) \ - - ------=.-==V! ---c- .J . I I C . ~ - F =~ r --- - /1 , ~ _ _ A ~ :,c.: ,\' L .----.- ~: , ;;----1', ~ ~ -:;,-----e--------- A-0 ~ \ \ \ I \S=-- --~>__0"'j/'" ;-r\. ';' i -- 7 .A .e> .!...d .~: ----.~- i.,. 'h_~ ___ ._ ~ t -~

::/ > , I ! ... ----1 I -, -~_ ''10;: 1: 5J', I 91:(. • ;5': L 11/:,. -Pe::'~s/r/cn I ' ,: r- -,...-- .-. - , .. - --- .'- . ~,. .. _"'--._... ' \ \

£ L L (jr:duposs ,~~ IP' 5 T R E,~S T ;..-.----- ~-.~ ~a/l7f ;;"-;';$ ;~ik';"- -.-.-. : \ \ __ -, ... --"1' ~1- .- "1 1----", C;] .... --- -:::;:: ".'. -- .. s:J =, ..... -~-.~--.-

. --, J I i -[_' __ J ___ ._. ., -~~~~~(p~~~~~~~~~~;;~~~~~~-~-~' ~~[=~:~~::::::-:.-: .. -t=---~-----..::'2-.l-' ~.-:.--::"ci--:-~::':l.t7 0 • A 4 r--__ ...: ... ~r:o~======::::=~==-----= \.',

"-- 0 ' ~',!.::;.f(/( ! .. 5PQp - ---... --------.---

.-~-, -L--_!. \:",) = ~= =-=3~~;;;;;;~=·==;;~rr==:::J'i==~. _-.-J'~;-_--~=======----=---- -----:-,:~.:-::C,-,---,-_ ~= ~-~s~-; ~.:;:;:. ==========:=:c====== =--_~,-~----,- ~~; P/« -../ -0 0'----; f !

':=':=-=-_~:~' ~~~;-~~~;;;;;;-;-::;. ~==:=:===============_ _ ~~~~_~.:-::l~==~==~=========~=o~~=-====1L~C===-=-=-=-=-~~O~==- ° 0 b-_ _ y-~'~~~~-'~~:~----C~'---:~~N ~ __ a .. -~~~~'-~'~~,~~=~~~~~~~~o~~~~_~-_·~2~~ IE-~'---::: ._._ ------.- 0., ,- ..., I ' C;: . " 1,..1 "" i .- ' ___ S-=::§:=====o===== -,. __ -=-= ________ -_-_ .

_ . l... :...,. i....! .... _ - ~ C'''--- _ - GRAPHIC SCALE:

c -=

0 .=-.

-- c::J 10

REVISION DATE

DUBO, ICAD.PROJECT.26'S.~I5P'5'lcOl.. <FRaU!'

o 2d .d Ii! !!

10' I

,zo' I

'60' !


OAKLAND COLISEUM BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

FIGURE

11-6

EASTMONT MALL TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The Eastmont Mall transit center is located on property owned by Eastmont Mall on the north side of Foothill Boulevard at 69th Avenue. The CSP transit center will consolidate bus stops that are currently scattered around Eastmont Mall area. Table 12-A describes the bus stall requirements. Although buses will not be scheduled for timed transfers, the bus island design will allow for future timed, transfers. Table 12-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

With the transit center, the number of buses that currently must use 68th Avenue would be reduced (see Figure 12-A).

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept design for the transit center utilizes an island with six stalls, plus two bus stalls along Foothill Boulevard (see Figure 12B).

The design utilizes its corner location on 69th Avenue to minimize bus turning movements. The stalls are also located to minimize transferring walk distances by placing stalls adjacent to each other for those buses serving a common route segment.

A new intersection on Foothill with a traffic signal allows buses to cross arterial traffic streams, and also provides a safe way for pedestrians to cross Foothill Boulevard. The intersection located at the current Eastmont Mall parking lot entrance, provides the closest walk distance between the Mall and the transit center. In order to minimize potential disruption of the traffic stream the new traffic signal is located midway between the existing Foothill Boulevard traffic signals at 68th and 73rd Avenues. To further minimize impacts the new signal would be demand activated by buses or pedestrians.

To mitigate visual and noise impacts on the adjacent residences and nursery school, a sound wall with landscaping would be constructed along the north and east property lines.

ISSUES

• AC Transit needs approval from the City of Oakland for the median break and new traffic signal on Foothill Boulevard.

• Southbound buses would access the site via the existing Foothill Boulevard and 69th Avenue unsignalized intersection. Buses waiting to turn left into the transit center may create queues of vehicles on Foothill. A detailed traffic analysis of the impact of buses on traffic operations and visa versa needs to be conducted in the preliminary engineering phase.

K E

D o

BUS ROUTE PLAN

0

FOOTHILL BLVD.

ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

40L 41

OD [ill @NS

eNS

e NB

8 NS

158X

NO SCALE

J=IGURE 12-A

• Since the median break is at an existing right-in/right-out entrance to the Eastmont Mall parking lot, it may be desirable to move the Eastmont Mall lot entrance so drivers are not tempted to turn left into the mall, or turn left out of the mall lot.

• Interim operation would remain the same with bus stops distributed along MacArthur, Foothill Boulevards and 73rd Avenue.



HDWY COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERA TlONS ** SIZE STALLS

14 15 TERM.! SMl. 1 19 30 TERM.! VAN 1

40 10 TERM.! STD. 1

40L 10 ARTIC. 2* 41 10 TERM.! STD. 1

57 10 / STD.

58X 15 / STD. EXPRESSES (X's)

IN PEAK 2* DIRECTIONS 157L 15 / ARTIC. ONLY

158X 15 / STD.

8

it SEPARATE BUS BAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS

.... TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 12-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $810,000 $35.000 ENHANCED DESIGN 1----$-1-, 0-2-0"':',-0-0-0---t---$-4-4-. 0-0-0-----1


Oueo.fCAO. PROJECT. 2e 15. 26 I51' 151 I EAST

"

FOOTHILL

74'

v -I'

DUBO: ICAD.PRO.JECr.2&IS.251?IsIIEASr (FRM121

--

• w ~ X .... 0) CD

/ / ~.. / /

~

/ /

N~RY S0100L I

BOULEVARD

== -= --------- -- - - -- ------ __ ___ _ if _ _ _ _ GRAPHIC SCALE:

.... - - - - -, /' - ' 1"40~d'fll If I 4f' ~' IT" if' ~'

~ ) // r-l r " / / / J ,/ // / I,' ..... / / /

/ ) ~</ /~ ~ / / /

/ / / / / / /

" / / / v / / /

" 'J//

--------~

J,C. PENNY


EASTMONT MALL FIGURE REVISION DATE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 12-8

31

SAN LEANDRO ST A liON

BART


32

OVERVIEW

The CSP proposal for the San Leandro BART station would increase the number of bus stalls from four to twelve. The bus stall requirements are shown in Table 13-A. To accommodate the additional bus bays, the inner bus-only roadway would be extended from West Juana Avenue to Parrott Street. In addition, three southbound buses would use bus duckouts along San Leandro Boulevard (see Figure 13-A). Buses at the transit center will be scheduled for timed transfers. Table 13-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The Concept Layout, see Figure 13-B, realigns the bus-only roadway to minimize the parking impacts. To egress properly a new bus-activated traffic signal will be needed at the Parrott Street and San Leandro Boulevard intersection. The three articulated bus stalls are placed closest to the BART entrance.

ISSUES

• The concept plan removes approximately 33 parking spaces. AC Jransit needs to discuss this reduction with BART.

• AC needs City of San Leandro approval for the new traffic signal at Parrott Street and San Leandro Boulevard.

• Interim operation of a 12-bus transit center is not possible at this site because of the need to maintain close proximity between the bus stalls for the timed transfers to function.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

61. 81

61. 81 84. 95

a:: ci U

u.. U <:t a.. z 0 Z ::::>

KEY:

DAVIS ST.

~ 0::: « CJ:l

0 0::: Cl Z « w ...J

Z « <f.)

; , i , ,

;

PARROiT ST. I j

; j

! i

o o

ROUTE TERMINUS

' .. ". ::" 1 , ~ - .". ..' ..

BUS STOP J:OR THRU ROUTE

TRANSIT CENTER

55 55 84 95

l __ 81

W. JUANA AVE.

55. 61 82. 82L

---... - 124L

NO SCALE

I=IGURE 13-A



HDWY COMMENTS NO.

(MIN) OPERATIONS ** SIZE STALLS

55 30 ITT MID. 2* 61 30 ITT STD. 2* 81 30 ITT STD. 2* 82 10 TERM.!TT STD. 1

82L 10 ITT ARTIC. 2* 84 30 TERM.!TT MID. 1

95 30 TERM.!TT MID. 1

124L 15 TERM.!TT ARTIe. 1 --

12

* SEPARATE BUS SAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS


TABLE 13-A

COST ESTIMATE* CAPITAL OPERA nONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $580,000 $25.000 ENHANCED DESIGN 1-----=$-8-10-.-'-9-00----+---..:.$-3-5.:....0-0-0-----1


DU80: ICAD.PRO.J£CT.2615.:5ISP1511SAN.

I :

].~"_~ : 1 i ! i ! ! ! : i F\ ,\~l .. :" -------;--~' -==I

- - ----------, !

; ~1!. • I '

: ' Li.~ i., I : i i : i I I ! i ; iii ! i I LL LI i j L ~ I J .: ~ I I : L!

, hi : hi

I

I I : ;- ~

I r-- ' ! i ; -, :·t: ., ' ;~ f I : 'L 'j , ' ir. Ie:

fr--m111111111 ijCty Q10'j~

• I 1.

SAN LEANDRO BLVD

•.. i !' I II ~ .. i' : I ,: li\

: : i 1: ! ! ! Ii.' 'I II II Ii. I] I,. , ! i 'v: 1" Ll : ! I

i.HI i , r ' , ,h!: . '.:

I RI[ i .hl I ! R'I -~:

I ! I :

iG , .n

I,: . ,

w > < < z < :J. .,

~

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \

~'-- - -- - - - --.-:. - -;- - - --=-- - - - -+--

,-, ' , , .... _-'

. t • 1 • ; ; ~ : '. t \ l~ :i\\i:\\:\i:'\::~i I \ I l " ! 'A', ., -:-Tr~ ;; 1 vJ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ; ; ! \ ; " \ : \ '

'o.:~

NF::-W TAAf?i0 61C1NAL.

v

,..: til

....

I 0

I a: a: < ... ,

, , ' ' , : ' , . : : : i ! ' ! n I ' \ \ \ 1 ~_JI~\~\L' l,\ 1\ ~L~\~l:::b:~~~::\=\::' ~ i , I:: f' : ! r" ;: 1 ., ,"'. "I .. i i ; I ii' 'I '. iii Iii: : ("(\I ,: ' i 1\\ : : ' :. ',I ~.l.L···· , ~---

_f '-======~~~~~~~=======_~~~' = .. =_==_== __ =_=_~-~_~ __ =_=.~=_==~.=-~:=~~!~!I.~:.~,=.=._;= .. =.~!~i==~'~'~I~'~' ~,~l~! ~I~I= "~'='~' ~'~!~i~'~'~i ~i~t ;:~ !f~ ":' I ~~--- ~ ._ ... ____ . ___ ,.___ ____ _ _ __ ___ __ L '~LL_: _,I : ~=--' -.-!--~~.-...-.- ....----------

:

-'-___ ------l

-~

\ J \.~---\".( ~r(. t '-":~. ~-~---.------- -----

OUBo,ICAO.PROJECT.2615.Z615PISIISNl. (rRWI31

I.4ARTINEZ ST.

REVISION DATE

GRAPHIC SCALE:

12fi .~' o 2!J' .0' I! j Iii

A.C. TRANSIT - COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN SAN LEANDRO BART STATION

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

~IGURE

13-8

33

BAY FAIR BART ST A TIOH TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The existing four bus stalls at the Bay Fair BART Station serve ten AC routes and two BART express bus routes. Buses stop along the curb in front of the station and share the curb with kiss-and riders and taxis. In order to discourage through traffic from using the underpass between the east and west parking lots, BART has instituted several sections of one-way street operation, including in front of the station. The CSP plan calls for a bus only area with 18 bus stalls serving 14 routes (see Table 14-A). The bus routing will remain the same (see Table 14-A). Table 14-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The Bay Fair BART Station will be enlarged when it becomes the junction for the BART Dublin/Pleasanton Extension (DPX). The Bay Fair Transit Center Concept Plan provides input into the DPX design process which will begin this year. The concept plan for the transit center gives the general location, and dimensions, for the transit center bus stalls and circulation pattern. For the near term until DPX is in operation, the transit center will serve the two BART express sources. After the projected DPX startup in 1990's, the transit center will need 16 stalls for timed transfer operation. BART and AC have jointly submitted to UMT A for funding of the transit center and additional parking. The parking loss of approximately 200 stalls will be replaced by the construction of a parking garage on the west side of the station.

ISSUES

• The east parking lot is an area under consideration for joint development.

• The concept plan may require modification pending final design of the DPX station enlargement.

• The kiss-and-ride location requires further discussion between AC and BART.

• During construction, the BART station interim operation would be possible on an existing parking lot. This would require temporary loss of approximately 200 cars, and may require repaving the parking lot after the bus bays return to their final location.

34

BUS ROUTE PLAN 61

80

81

40 ____ 55

------------------------------------------~- 57 84 WB~--e---~;:~------~~~;;~----~~~ 91

95 sa 97

~ [ill @]

o ~ €9 e [ill @]

@ [ill IBART ULI

I BART upJ

KEY:

ROUTE TERMINUS

J 1:1


TRANSIT CENTER

82L

95 wa UL

UP

84 EB

93

NO SCALE



COMMENTS NO.

HDWY OPERATIONS ** SIZE STALLS

(MIN.)

40 10 TERM'/TT STD. 2 NEED 2

LA YOVER STALLS

55 30 TERM./TT MID. 1

57 10 TERM./TT STD. 1




82L 10 ITT ARTIe 2*

84 30 ITT MID. 2*



95 30 ITT MID. 2*

97 30 TERM'/TT STD. 1

BART UL <10 TERM'/TT STD. 1

BART UP <10 TERM./TT STD. 1 --

18



TABLE 14-A

COST ESTIMATE * CAPITAL OPERA TIONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN $1,260,000 $55,000

ENHANCED DESIGN $1,530,000 $66,000

I=JGURE 14-A *1988 Costs TABLE 14-B

--~=========~============~

REVISION DATE

DUBO: ICAO.PROJECT.2615.261~'51IBAYfAIR (rRWI.)

GRAPHIC SCALE=-

o 'Kf 40' j It! !

80' I


BAY FAIR BART STATION f=IGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 14-B

HAYWARD BART ST A TION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN -

OVERVIEW

The Hayward BART station is the site of the on-going AC transit timed transfer demonstration project. In May 1988. all the AC Transit routes serving the station were re-scheduled to arrive and depart simultaneously to allow no-wait transfers between the buses. The demonstration project has proved the feasibility of the timed transfer concept at one of the busiest BART -to-bus and bus-to-bus transfer locations in the AC Transit district. With the CSP bus route restructuring. the benefits of timed transfer would be extended elsewhere.

The CSP proposal for the Hayward BART station transit center is to consolidate all the bus bays in a bus-only area to reduce conflicts between automobiles and buses. and also to minimize transfer walk distances (see Figure 15-B on the facing page). Table 15-A describes the bus stall needs and Figure 15-A shows the bus routing pattern. Buses to and from the south on Grand Street are routed along D Street to take advantage of the underpass under the Union

Pacific Railroad.

BART has joint development and parking expansion plans for Hayward station. In conjunction with the City of Hayward Redevelopment area to the east and south of the station site. BART plans a joint development commercial structure on the existing east side parking lot and facing Atherton Street. The bus transit facility then would be under the joint development structure in the general area of the concept plan. The parking taken by the commercial development would be replaced by a parking structure on the parking lot on the west side of the Union Pacific railroad tracks.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The current layout provides a bus-only area and thus avoids the current problem of kiss and riders, and taxis utilizing the bus curb loading area in front of the station. The concept layout moves the kiss and riders to the North Lot, which is just as close to the BART station entrances as the east curb. The North Lot would have a new opening onto B Street.

The 17 bus stalls are distributed along the curb face in front of the BART station and over two island platform. The design takes approximately 160 parking spaces, which would be replaced by the proposed parking structure on the west side of the station.

ISSUES

• Due to the joint development proposal, BART will not maintain the east-west driveway to Atherton Street for the long run. In that event, all buses coming from the south may be routed via Grand and B Streets and not D and Atherton Streets, to avoid left turns.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

, i

J l i i , ! ! ! ~ 96l

, - -i i ! B ST. , " 80. 82. 8A-:'

,-_____ "90 92 95 U a

:'\ - / ... i ; i a::

"' w ® 0 0-

0:: U

/" INTERIM J BUS ROUTING

INBOUND BUS ROUTING

0 @ a;)

-LL U <:(

IF JOINT DEVELOPMENT

@ ,...: "

[ill I- ~ (/)

a ~ z Ii <:(

@ a:: <.!)

[ill ~ ~ 190EI

[EJ

{v( 77. 80. 86. 90.

92. QQ. 90E (SAMTRANS)

0...

Z 0 -Z =>

K E

D o

77. 80. 86. 90. 92. 9Q. 90E

---,_ 86. 90. Q2. 99

" i i i , I ! , I

Y . . ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

J=IGURE

• The new entrance to the North (kiss and ride) parking lot is close to the Union Pacific grade crossing. AC and BART will need City of Hayward approval for this curb cut.

• Maintaining a bus-only area would be eaSier-if automobiles c;ould be banned from the Montgomery Street entrance off B Street.

• The concept layout removes approximately 160 parking spaces which could be replaced by the proposed west side parking structure.

• The interim operation of the transit facility is already in place.

o ST.

NO SCALE

15-A


NO.

77

80

82

84

86

90

92

95

96

99

PEAK HDWY (MIN)

30

30

10

30

15

30

15

30

30

30

BAR~ EX FREQ.

SamTrans 90E

60

ROUTE VEHICLE NO. COMMENTS

OPERA TlONS ** SIZE ST ALLS

/TT MID.

/TT STD.

/TT ARTIC.

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM./TT STD.

TERM'/TT MID.

/TT STD.

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM'/TT STD.

TERM'/? STD.

TERM'/? STD.

( WILL DISCONTINUE

1.) WHEN DUBLIN BART I EXTENSION liS IN OPERATION

17


** TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TR"NSFER

TABLE 15-A


PER YEAR

$1,010,000

I $44,000

I $1,280,000 $56,000 -BASE DESIGN I ENH"NCED DESIGN 1------..:.....----+-----=-.:..:..:..:..:..:----1


-3-6-------------,.-..+==<-------------------------------:::':'~=~=:-:' DU8O.ICAO.PM.J(CT.2el~.2ol~ISI j .... rw

1---- - ..

I .

~C'I

1 \

i \

! \ i \ i \ 't

\ ,

. \ ~ \

I \ ~ ~ ! \

I \ I \

I \ ! \

~"-.

\ \ i /

i i I

! \ • i ,~ !

\J'

DUIO.ICAD.I'!!OJECT. 2815. 26' 51' 1511 HAYW (rAM 15'

h1 ;;£~i ---.. -- ----

. \ '."

\ \ \ \ \

NEW ENTRY IEXIT

110' I

120' I

N Q)

\ \

160' 1


HA YW ARD BART STATION FIGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LA YOUT 15-8

37

CHABOT COLLEGE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The CSP includes a transit center at Chabot College. The transit center would increase the amount of transit service to the college and the effective transit range, since more students· would be within a 3D-minute transit ride to the campus. In addition, buses serving the transit center would be scheduled to arrive and depart simultaneously, thus improving transferring between buses. Table 16-A describes the bus stall needs. The proposed center would be on college property west of Hesperian Boulevard and south of the main entrance. Southbound buses would use a duck-out along Hesperian Boulevard, and northbound buses would enter via the existing parking entrance, stop along the eastside of the bus island and exit at the existing college front circle road. Figure 16-A describes the bus routing pattern. Table 16-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

AC Transit is committed to providing an attractive transit center that will fit into the campus environment. The general layout, structures and landscaping of the transit facility will not only minimize the impact of the transit center on the college campus, but will enhance the use of the little utilized area of the campus adjacent to Hesperian Boulevard. The rendering Figure 16-C shows how the transit center would appear from the college side

The location of the proposed transit center contains a large number of trees, some 3D years old. The concept layout utilizes a large, clear area between several groves of trees to minimize tree removal. Figure 16-B shows, in approximate location, the existing trees that

would be saved, the trees that would be removed and new planting. Several of the trees along Hesperian are breaking up the sidewalk and may need to be removed according to the grounds keeper. The concept plan will replant trees as needed to preserve the tree lined appearance along Hesperian.

Earth berms would be constructed between the transit facility and the closest buildings. The berms will help shelter the buildings from the transit center and the busy street. If needed, precast concrete tree wells will keep the berm from damaging tree trunks and roots. A small retaining wall on the westside of the bus driveway will allow the berms to be increased in height, and also will tunnel pedestrians onto the pathways. Trees will be planted on two of the beams.

The center island transit facility will have shelters with columns and roof designs in keeping with the general campus architecture. Figure 16-0 shows a concept design for the shelters.

38

K E

D

BUS ROUTE PLAN 90. 91. 92. 96. 97. 90E

) U L TURNER CT.

W PARKING ___ ---~ 96

y :

ROUTE

(.!) W ...J ...J o (J

>J--

Z :::> ~ ~ o u J--

o £Xl or( J: (J

PARKING

DEPOT RD.

90

TERMINUS

BUS STOP FOR THRU

TRANSIT CENTER

~ ( 91. 92. 97. 90E

ROUTE

CHABOT CT.

C§ @SB

@SB

@EB

@SB

@SB

CATHY WAY

NO SCALE

J=IGURE 16-A

ISSUES

• The exit onto Hesperian Boulevard currently is not signalized. Since the buses will be pulsed with five buses exiting every half hour, a semi-demand activated signal may be required. AC Transit and Chabot College need to discuss this issue with the City of Hayward.

• Interim operation of a timed transfer transit facility is not possible at or near this location.


PEAK ROUTE VEHICLE

HDWY NO.

COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERATIONS ** SIZE STALLS

90 30 /TT MID. 2* 91 30 /TT MID. 2* 92 30 /TT STD. 2* 96 30 /TT MID. 2* 97 30 /TT STD. 2*

SamTrans 60 / STD? 2* 90E --

12

* SEPARATE BUS BAYS !=OR OI!=!=ERENT DIRECTIONS

** TERM.- ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANS!=ER

TABLE 16-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $8'0,000 $3a.o.oo ENHANCED DESIGN r-----$~1....;..3-2..;..0-'-.• ·O....;.0-0---:-+-----$5~""''1~ • ..;::0;:..00-=------I


OUBo.ICAD.PROJECT.2615.26151'151!CHBT

/

I,

DUBO. ICAD.PROJECT.2fl15.2615P151ICH11T (rRl.tI6!

HESPERIAN

NOTE: TREE LOCATIONS ARE APPROXIMATE

X TREES TO BE REMOVED o NEW TREES TO BE PLANTED

ITIIIl NEW BUS SHELTER

BOULEVARD

, / , ,

" , " .

................

406"'·.

", ~""

-r----

/ /

.1 ... -:

/ I . , /

I / I /

--- -- .. - .. ---R..-J-=r----

GRAPHIC SCALE: ,~--.,.~~-

- ~::::::-.::: ---- -,--~- o 71i. 4ft

'II I I I 10'

I '20'

I '60'

I

A.C. TRANSIT - COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE 'PLAN

CHABOT COLLEGE FIGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 16-8

39

SOUTH BART

HAYWARD ST A liON


OVERVIEW

In the CSP, the South Hayward BART station would expand from its existing two bus stalls to nine. The nine-stall transit center will allow· for timed transfers between seven routes. Table 17-A describes the bus stall requirements. The bus routing at the transit center will remain the same (see Figure 17-A). Table 17-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The Concept Layout places the buses closest to the BART entrance with stalls on the front of the station and on two adjacent bus islands (see Figure 17-B). The Concept Layout provides a bus-only area to reduce interference between buses and automobiles. Kiss and riders would use the third island, and the close parking stalls around the perimeters of the station.

ISSUES

• The additional bus stalls will remove approximately 100 BART parking spaces. The loss of parking requires further discussion between AC Transit and BART.

• The location of the kiss and ride stalls requires further discussion between BART and AC Transit.

• An interim timed-transfer transit facility would be possible at South Hayward BART, only if the parking lots are used for temporary bus bays. The parking lot pavement may need to be reconstructed after the buses move to their permanent terminals.

40

BUS ROUTE PLAN

KEY:

D ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

J l

NO SCALE

!=IGURE 17-A



HDWY COMMENTS NO.


77 30 TERM.lTT MID. 1

80 30 ITT STD. 2* 82L 10 ITT ARTIC. 2* 91 30 TERM.lTT MID. 1

92 30 TERM.lTT STD. 1


99 30 TERM.lTT STD. 1 --

9

* SEPARATE BUS BAYS !=OR DII=!=ERENT DIRECTIONS

** TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSI=ER

TABLE 17-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN ~ ___ • __ 8_0_0-,-.,_o_o_o ___ .t ___ $_3_5_'_O_~_O_,_---i ENHANCED DESIGN ' ••• 900 . $4.0.C)u.\i


oueo. ICAO.PROJECT.2615.26ISPI51ISHAY

-------,,'-:~;\ , Ii (1/

J) /I / II ;/1

/'jl //1 .I I 0 /1

j: II 'C /;1 II - il

/ /;1 -< III ,; 0 1//

./ II ,f) / f ---' / :} I jl _ 1/ 13' II II t--- /,

1/ / ; /1 I

l I _'j' I '/ I ,-

,/ j,

1l/1 ,7 / I /

/7 :' ,.. I I /// J,I Iii

/ ' / -I / I t ! - i

/ / i I

,/If i,/

I / / J

II II

!; //

I

/ / ! /

l---l--. ___ ~

. /--: --.. !-: ----

DU80: !CAO.PROJECT.zeI5.26I5f"5,ISltAl' (fIlW17)

IV /

/ I

/ /

---- -------------------------------------

~-- --------- ----------------------- -----------

L ---- -------------------~-\_~~ -------- -- --------------------

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o 7d 40' II j r I r

110' , ,zo' o

'60' o


SOUTH HA YW ARD BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

J=IGURE 17-8

41

UNION CITY ST A liON

BART


42

OVERVIEW

In the CSP, the Union City BART station transit center will expand its existing three bus stalls to sixteen stalls. The transit center will have. timed transfers for eight AC Transit routes and provide bays for five ' Union City transit routes (see Table 18-A). The bus routing at the transit center will remain the same (see Figure 18-A). Table 18-8 provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout places the buses closest to the BART entrance along the front curb and on three islands (see Figure 18-B). The concept layout provides a bus only area to reduce interference between buses and automobiles. The plan provides a compact bus berth area to minimize bus to bus transfers. Kiss and riders will use the fourth island and the close parking area around the perimeter of the station.

ISSUES

• The additional bus stalls will remove approximate 120 BART parking spaces. The loss of parking requires further discussion between BART, AC Transit and Union City Transit.

• The location of the kiss and rider stalls requires further discussion between BART and AC Transit.

• Interim operation of a timed-transfer transit center would only be possible if parking lots are used for temporary bus bays.

20. 23. 25 26. 27. 49 DUM BARTON BRIDGE UNION CITY TRANSIT AIRPORT

KEY:

BUS ROUTE PLAN

o ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

[22J OD CEJ ~ @ @] [ill ~

NO SCALE



NO. HDWY

OPERA nONS ** SIZE STALLS COMMENTS

(MIN.)



23 30 TERM.lTT SMl. 1

25 30 TERM.lTT SMl. 1

26 30 ITT MID. 2* 27 30 TERM.lTT MID. 1


82l 10 TERM.lTT ARTIe. 1

DUMBARTON

DE 30 TERM.lTT STD. 1 BRIDGE EXPRESS

AIRPORT TERM.I STD. 1

UNION CITY TRANSIT ? 5 --

16



TABLE 18-A

COST ESTIMATE * CAPITAL OPERA liONS & MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN $1,180:000 ~51.000

ENHANCED DESIGN $1,fiO •• OOo. $65.000.

J=IGURE 18-A *1988 Costs TABLE 18-B

DUBO, I CAD. PROJECT. 2615. 261SP 151 I \/CTY

OUBO,ICAD.PRO.lECT.26'5.26'5P'51!UCTY <rIllue)

• > , ' .

n

-- -_._ .. __ .-

UNION

...

"=. ==============~====~ ---j~L_._. ___ .. _._ L-__ -.---- - .. --.~---------.. -.. ---.j------.-------.-.-... ---L -- -l~,-.------~--.~---·.---. !

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o '2d 4ft (I! i I I

U

eo' I

120' I

.so' 200'

~N


UNION CITY BART STATION REVISION DATE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

~IGURE

18-8

43

NEWARK TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

44

OVERVIEW

In the CSP, the Newark BART station transit center calls for an eight bus stall transit center along Newark Boulevard near Cedar Boulevard. Buses serving the transit center will be scheduled to arrive simultaneously to facilitate a timed transfer. Table 19-A describes the bus stall needs.

The preferred location for a transit center is next to the shopping centers which are a major transit destination. Figure 19-A shows how the buses would be routed. Table 19-B provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout, see Figure 19-B, utilizes the existing bus pullouts along Newark Boulevard so that pedestrians can cross the boulevard at the shopping center driveway traffic signal. The additional six bus pullouts would be placed to the east on both sides of Newark Boulevard. It is important, in order for the timed transfer to work effectively, that the bus stalls be as close together as practicable to minimize walking distances. The bus stalls will be recessed off the street, out of the traffic stream, and will be placed to avoid sight distance problems for drivers entering and exiting the shopping centers.

The bus pullouts on the northside of the street will occupy an existing landscaped area. On the south side of Newark, the bus stalls would require removal of a few parking spaces.

ISSUES

• AC Transit needs to discuss the transit facility with the City of Newark, the affected merchants and shopping center developers.

• An interim timed-transfer transit facility may be possible along Newark Boulevard under the Route 84 freeway overcrossing. Such a facility could only be temporary, since as traffic grows in the area, the full width of the roadway will be needed. A transit center at this location would maintain easy connection with the Dumbarton Bridge bus route.

• Walk distances between bus routes could be as much as 600 feet. Other sites for the transit center are difficult to find.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

KEY:

o ROUTe TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

@WB

@NB

@WB

@WB

NO SCALE

I=IGURE 19-A


PEAK ROUTE VEHICLE

HDWY NO.

COMMENTS NO.

(MIN.) OPERATIONS ** SIZE STALLS

25 30 ITT SMl. 2* 27 30 ITT MID. 2* 49 30 ITT MID. 2* 97 15 ITT STD. 2*

8


** TERM. - ROlJ.TE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 19-A

COST ESTIMATE * CAPITAL OPERA TIONS & MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I .• ~_OO., ·$1~GOO· ENHANCED DESIGN f----. ..;:..;;.j..~*;.;;··~~oe.:;..',:.,8;:..'--....,.-f----$;....2.:.:3:..:.,~O,;;.O~o-----l


Duso.lcAO.PROJECT.2eIS.2015P151IL 100

ROSEMCNT S'jO"P:~jCi canES PARKING

NEWARl<

,---,-, .. ~'-'--'"' .. =~.,== .. =~,.-~7c"'-==-=~=~r"===<:~=r---T /r-'-=-~-r-~T-

---- -- .,\;; , .. ' _______________ __ J

E:X15f1NG!

UDO F.:":RE S"O?~"',(; CENTER PARKING

DU8O: ICAD.PROJ[CT.2615.261~151ILIDO (f"RIII91

, GRAPHIC SCALE:

o 'l1:f 4d '" I I I

10' I

BLVD

120' I

"}

iii o ,!I{' >,/ ...J ;". aJ : v

I !

i I

I !


NEWARK TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT

FIGURE 19-8

45

NEWPARK MALL TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

46

OVERVIEW

The Newpark Mall transit center would be located on property owned by Newpark Mall. The seven bus bay facility would serve six AC Transit routes (see Table 20-A). The transit center would not be a timed transfer. so multiple routes could use the same bus stall. The proposed transit center would be in the west quadrant of the shopping center parking lot. located to minimize bus travel on the Ring Road. Figure 20-A shows the proposed bus routing. Table 20-8 provides the conceptual cost estimates.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The Concept Layout fits a center island transit facility into two aisles of parking--except for the bus turn back which encroaches onto a third aisle (see Figure 20-8). 8y staying within the existing parking geometry. the plan minimizes parking impacts and maintains the parking aisle one-way flow pattern

A pedestrian walkway extends to the nearest mall entrance 250 feet away. To allow room for the walkway. the parking stalls for the aisles could be angled 40 degrees rather than the usual 60 degrees.

ISSUES

• The transit center requires approval of the Newpark Mall developer.

• The concept plan requires removal of approximately 100 parking spaces. The spaces may be regained by restriping some spaces for compact automobiles.

• Interim operation of a transit center is not possible at this site without using the mall. Ring Road. or creating major detours of the bus routes.

BUS ROUTE PLAN

PAR K

KEY -:

D ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

23. 25 27. 38, 97

NO SCALE



HDWY COMMENTS NO.


23 30 TERM'/ SMl.

25 30 / SMl. 2*

27 30 / MID. 2* HEADWAYS STAGGERED WI 97

38 30 / STD. USE RT. 27 STALLS

49 30 / MID. USE RT. 25 STALLS

97 30 / STD. USE RT. 27 STALLS

7


**TERM. - ROUTE TERMINAL TT - TIMED TRANSFER

TABLE 20-A


PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN 11-__ $_5_9_0-:,._O_0_o __ ---,.t ___ $-:-2 ...... 6_._0_0_0 __ ---1

ENHANCED DESIGN $ 72(),OOO . $31,000

~IGURE 20-A *1988 Costs TABLE 20-B

Duao. ICAO.PRo.JECT.28Is.26ISPI51INPRK

w o z c a: IZ W ,

e,ANK

........ ....... . ....... . ....... . ....... .

NON-eull.Df«3 AREA

DUBOIICAD.PftOJECT.2615.26ISPI511N'RK (f'RM201

REVISION

GRAPHIC SCALE: o 7d 40' II I I I I

DATE

eo' I

IZO' I

!60' I

200' I


NEWPARK MALL J=IGURE

TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 20-B 47

I=REMONT BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT PLAN

OVERVIEW

The Fremont BART station transit center will expand its existing 12 bus stalls to 19 stalls. The number of stalls includes seven for Santa Clara County Transit Authority (SCCTA) routes (see Table 21-A). All AC Transit routes will be schedule coordinated to allow for timed transfers. The bus routing will follow the same pattern as today, except that 9 of the stalls will serve buses coming from the east along' Walnut Avenue and 10 stalls will serve buses coming from the west on Walnut Avenue. Figure 21-A shows the routing plan. Table 21-B

provides the conceptual cost estimates.

When BART is extended to Warm Springs or further south, then the SCCTA routes will also terminate further south. At that time the SCCTA bus stalls will be freed possibly for new AC bus service, or

returned to parking.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The Fremont BART transit center will operate similarly as today in a bus-only area with curb side stops and island platforms. The compact design allows for efficient bus to bus transfers. The counter clockwise flow requires a larger than normal aisle width in order to

turn onto the east driveway.

ISSUES

• The concept plan removes approximately 100 parking stalls. The loss of spaces requires further discussion between AC and BART.

• Interim operation of the transit center is possible if the BART park

ing lot is painted for bus bays.

48

20. 21. 22 24. 25. 26

27. 3~8. 49

~: KEY:

BUS ROUTE PLAN

G WALNUT AVE.

o o

ROUTE TERMINUS


TRANSIT CENTER

[}§] [ill [EJ [EJ [ill [ill [EJ @] [ill 0

28.30 SCCTA

NO SCALE

f=IGURE 21-A

ROUTE NO.

20

21

22

24

25

26

27

28

30

38

48

49

PEAK HDWY (MIN)

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

30

ROUTE DESCRIPTION ROUTE VEHICLE NO.

OPERA TlONS ** SIZE STALLS

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM./TT STD.

TERM'/TT STD.

TERM'/TT SMl.

TERM'/TT MID.

TERM./TT MID.

TERM./TT STD.

TERM./TT SMl.

TERM./TT STD.

TERM'/TT SMl.

TERM./TT MID.

COMMENTS

STAGGER HEADWA YS WITH ,*27 ON MOWRY AVE.

STAGGER HEADWAYS WITH ,*22 ON PADRE P ASSEO

SANT A CLARA TRANSIT AUTHORITY ROUTES 120/140/141/180

7

19

* SEPARA TE BUS SAYS FOR DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS


TABLE 21-A

COST ESTIMATE * CAPITAL OPERA TlONS &. MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN $1.1&O.00() $5:2,000

ENHANCED DESIGN $1,570,000 $680000


DUBO: I CAD. PRO.J£CT. 2615. 2615P 1511 fllIIT

I

~''; \ I

GRAPHIC SCALE:

o 7d 4tt II I I I I

OU80: ICAIl.I'ftOJECT.ZOI5.2015f'1511f'RIIT (f'IIIIZI,'

\ '

eo' j

IW' I

160' I

-+_-'=~--==-=:;---______________ - ----r--

;r.

.: I ! q« ' .-: .. ,,;,-," ! I !

j'n...".ci I j. .----'>L-.

/; .

A.C. TRANSIT- COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

FREMONT BART STATION TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LA YOUT

I=IGURE 21-8

49

IRVING TON STATION

BART


OVERVIEW

The transit center at the Irvington site is scheduled for operation prior to the construction of the proposed BART Station. The concept includes an interim transit center on largely vacant BART-owned land ... east of Osgood Road on what will eventually be a BART parking lot (see Figure 22-A and 22-B). The site east of Osgood will range from the construction of the BART station to the accompanying railroad relocation. The ultimate bus transit center on the west side of Osgood will be integrated as part of the BART station. Maintaining the interim bus facility may require scheduling the proposed grade change of Osgood Road after the final transit center location is in operation.

The Irvington transit center will serve five routes and require nine stalls to allow for timed transfers (see Table 22-A). The concept plan assumes that the proposed Warm Springs station will be the next terminal station for BART and not Irvington. Figure 22-A describes the interim and future bus routings.

The capital cost estimates of Table 22-B and the concept layout of Figure 22-B are only for the interim plan. The final transit facility will be designed as part of the BART station.

DESIGN CONCEPTS

The concept layout shown in Figure 22-B is for a center island bus platform with an entrance off Osgood near the BART property 'line. As shown, the construction of a transit center will require removal of some trees and a house. During the preliminary engineering for the BART station, when the final grade profile of Osgood Road and the construction phasing is better known, the interim transit facility location, could possibly be moved further north towards the winery to temporarily avoid the house. Th-e interim facility will be a low cost, basic design.

ISSUES

• The interim transit facility may require property purchase on BART owned land.

• Construction phasing is currently under review.

• The proposed plan is for the interim facility.

50

BUS

22. 48

KEY:

D ROUTE TERMINUS

ROUTE PLAN

~

SITE 01= I=UTURE IRVINGTON BART S T A TlON


TRANSIT CENTER NO SCALE

I=IGURE 22-A


PEAK ROUTE VEHICLE

HDWY NO.

NO. OPERA nONS ** SIZE COMMENTS

(MIN.) ST ALLS

22 30 ITT STD. 2* 30 30 TERM.!TT SMl.

47 15 ITT STD. 2* 48 30 ITT SMl. 2* TWO-WAY

LOOP ROUTE

97 15 TERM.!TT STD. 2 9

CONCEPT PLAN ASSUMES THAT WARM SPRINGS. NOT IRVING TON. WILL BECOME THE NEXT BART TERMINAL S T A TlON.

* SEP ARA TE BUS B.A YS FOR DIFFERENT DIREC TIONS


TABLE 22-A

INTERIM PLAN COST ESTIMATE* CAPITAL OPERA nONS & MAINTENANCE

PER YEAR

BASE DESIGN I $930.900 ; $4tt.!)OO' ENHANCED DESIGN 1----$=-1-.-4.-0-• ....;0-0-0-. ---+--~--....::.-6:....:5..:..0::...0.:..0-=-----I

L-_____________ ~ ____ ~~~~ ___ ~

• ONL Y If BART STATION IS NEVER CONSTRUCTED


DUBD.tCAD.PROJECT. 2615.261SP15111RYG

t t -

I , , i

DU80: ICAD.PRO-IECT.2615.26151'151I IRVG (F"RW22J

---.-----------~ / HISTO ',.--- )

,.,.--------------------- - - ~ N~

AREA ATION I / I I I I . / I \

____ - ~ AR-r,C

'" 7 . e ----~--....=i=====""--:"::10~

( "'---------INTERIM TRANSIT CENTER

4

--PE~~~R:E~~N~::====~~~~~==~~~~~~-L~~~~

1/ II

/.....------.... ----I ----, -- --- -="" -------- ) I ---- //~.====~ (~----- ------.,--

I / __ - "'-- PARKING

PARKING ~ -----__________ -----_____.

I / - ____ -----./~~ --- __ , / /' ~----- --- -------- ---\ / / / ---\ --

\ '---- / // / --------"- ,----- / ----------- ----- / / / ------ ----_/

~ ------- / ( r----- ---- / --- . --- ---~ /' \ L p ------- _____ '-- __ --- ___ k I.A If:ORj:-- ___ -- ____ ___ I ______ 'I'l

S P --- --- ---- BART C ---- --- --1 ----. . R . R. T R ----___ F1NA0 ---- ~OURSE ---A C 1<. S " -------~NSIT CEN---"" ---- ___ TER ----::;C/J--- GRAPHIC SCALE:

~ ___ ~~ O~~~' ~40'~=~~'==~IW='~I~·==~l~ __ __ nO) i_L' I I I I I j


IRVINGTON BART STATION (FUTURE) l=IGURE

REVISION DATE TRANSIT CENTER CONCEPT LAYOUT 22-8 51

52

5. NEXT STEPS

AC Transit is embarking upon a new era in terms of the type and quality of transit service that it will offer to its patrons. The Comprehensive Service Plan, and everything implied by it, is a bold attempt by the Agency to restructure and market its operational and economic resources in a cost-effective manner. This report has documented the first step in the overall planning, design, and implementation of the CSP transit centers.

Implementing a capital program for twenty-one transit centers requires considerable forethought. Clearly, not all of the centers can be built at the same time. Some may have to be designed to allow a basic facility to operate for the short term with potential upgrading at some later date as funds become available. Other sites will require lengthy and sensitive negotiations with existing property owners long before any form of center can be operational. Throughout this transitional period the service has to be operated with minimum inconvenience and frustration to the public. To assist AC Transit in reaching its ultimate goal, the study team has identified the following topics and issues which are beyond the scope of this study and which, in our opinion, require further attention in the next coming months:

A. Establish Construction Priorities Based Upon Financial Realities

This process will involve the identification of groups of route changes, coupled with appropriate transit centers that can logically be made in phases over a period of years consistent with the availability of capital and operating funds.

B. Obtain Environmental Clearances

The majority of transit centers are at BART stations for which categorical exemption will suffice.· Others, however, such as the Chabot College and Contra Costa College sites, may need more extensive environmental assessment. AC Transit should determine for each site the extent of environmental analyses required prior to commencing engineering design.

C. Begin Engineering Design

Once construction priorities are established, and environmental issues defined, engineering design and preparation of contract documents for bid purposes could begin. From an efficiency standpoint, groups of transit centers should be designed at the same time and contracts awarded to take advantage of the economies of scale. Once a concept has been firmly established and agreed to, the engineering design costs, including site supervision during construction (but exclusive of

AC Transit administration costs) would typically amount to approximately 15% of the construction cost.

D. Develop a Fully Integrated Transit Center Design Philosophy

In our view, the proposed new transit centers represent an exciting opportunity for AC Transit to offer a more attractive service to its patrons and prospective patrons. We believe that capital improvements related to the transit center program should be integrated as part of a complete package or system with many common elements. A unified approach to the design of the centers is particularly important since the transit centers, when developed, will become hubs of AC Transit operations -- analogous to stations on a rapid transit line. Given the importance of the centers, it is recommended that they may be designed to present a coherent and pleasing overall image to the users of the AC system. To achieve this goal, we propose a systems approach incorporating the following elements:

• Adopt a modular approach to designing the passenger shelters such that a standardized and easily recognizable AC Transit shelter design is adaptable to each of the various transit center demands and site conditions. The modular concept could be applied in a way that utilizes a single design philosophy, conforms to budget limitations, and allows for future expansion consistent with demand.

• Develop a system of standardization that keeps safety, maintainability, good operations, and costs in mind. It should also be noted that a major consideration when selecting a standard deSign is the future availability of parts. The careful. selection of a standardized deSign is therefore a demanding but very important activity. Elements that could be standardized include:

Structures Lighting fixtures Telephone booths Advertising or information panels or kiosks Map cases Hand rails or leaning rails Seating Trash containers, clocks Signing or bus bay identification Paving AC Transit logo panel

• Develop a similarly coordinated approach to all AC Transit System graphics, signing, and application of color schemes. Too often

transit properties think of these design issues in terms of color schemes for buses and graphics for bus stops. With the system being proposed by AC Transit, significant opportunities are presented in how the .. image" will be perceived and understood by the everyday user and, just as importantly, the infrequent user. A coordinated design approach would address as a minimum the following:

Directional signing Use of AC logo Graphic standards for information panels, stops, etc. Application of color to distinguish between elements Integration of AC and BART color/graphic systems.

The above issues and opportunities describe in simple terms a systems approach that we believe is important to the success of the Comprehensive Service Plan.

53

AC TRANSIT COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN

Documents

Transcript of AC TRANSIT COMPREHENSIVE SERVICE PLAN