Comments on: JLS West: The New Guy in the Scrum

By: Jeffrey

Jeffrey — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:51:13 +0000

Hey, that is awesome information!

By: Ferry failing, nobody notices – FutureOakland

Ferry failing, nobody notices – FutureOakland — Thu, 17 Dec 2009 21:02:27 +0000

[...] destination. Two of the announced sites were West of Jack London Square, including a site called Jack London North that has stirred significant interest (and is the most popular plan in a poll at Oakland Local). But it poses some serious transportation [...]

By: doctorK

doctorK — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 05:14:41 +0000

I would love to see PNC Park along the water front. Or in downtown SJ, for that matter. PNC Park is in fact the nicest ballpark I’ve seen – too bad the current tenants aren’t worthy of it.

By: gojohn10

gojohn10 — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 02:25:37 +0000

No doubt. I was at the City Council meeting when it was announced the Warm Springs project was being switched from the alternative to the preferred plan…lots of angry people.

By: Ezra

Ezra — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:55:21 +0000

When I lived in Alameda, I remember wishing that there was some BART connector on the island. I know there would be a lot of NIMBYs, but I’d love to see a small line (I was thinking something like tram lines in Europe that sometimes go below ground, sometimes run through city streets, and sometimes have dedicated throughways) that went from Oakland City Center through JLS, on to Alameda with stops on Webster and Park, cross over to Bay Farm Island and meet up with the airport, then head back over to BART (maybe the San Leandro station). Of course this would also be really expensive… but it would kill 3 birds with one stone… er line.

By: Marine Layer

Marine Layer — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:50:31 +0000

It’s been a while since I’ve read the JLS Feasibility study. It’s important to note that the cost was in 2004 dollars. It’s reasonable to add 10-15% at this point because of inflation, materials costs, etc. Any new transportation project would take too long to develop to get the benefit of today’s lower labor costs.

Funny, I had forgotten that the study dismissed a BART station option at Market & 5th because of the track grade and limited space. Even if it were built, the 2004 cost would’ve been $250-300 million. Ouch.

A free downtown-JLS bus shuttle is starting up soon.

By: Jeffrey

Jeffrey — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:33:36 +0000

Yeah GoA’s, I don’t think that adding street cars or BART are really something that should be considered as a part of the stadium construction. MLB or the A’s wouldn’t be paying for any of this stuff. Which is why I said above if it were considered a part of the project the “Cost” would be much worse than it was worth.

As I understand it right now (this is from speaking with a few people who claim to be inside), MLB has given Oakland the directive that they need to acquire any land for the stadium, lease it to the team on favorable terms, clear any governmental hurdles and pay for associated infrastructure. Funding construction is up to the league (which means the A’s), though I imagine that may change.

They are good ideas on their own is all I am saying. It’s up to Oakland to make those things happen and, on the surface, I would say they should be doing it ballpark or no.

By: GoA's

GoA's — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:14:51 +0000

Jeffrey–this is great stuff but at some point all of these “adders” make the site way too expensive and complex–like the idea of dreaming outside the box but also need to keep it in perspective—otherwise it will be just that–dreaming. Finding the money to buy the land, relocate tenants, do the EIR is probably more than Oakland could swing right now…and remember that there is a huge assumption here that the owners are willing to build the yard out of their own pocket—may not be the case in Oakland—so there could be some additional financial requirements.

By: thisplanetsux

thisplanetsux — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 23:14:51 +0000

Heh, actually, I went out looking for infill cost data and ran across a slick analysis of seemingly every possible transit project for JLS by a team of Oakland, BART, AC Transit folks. And they seem to like the streetcar idea best of all.

http://www.bart.gov/docs/planning/JLSFeasibility1.pdf
http://www.bart.gov/docs/planning/JLSFeasibility2.pdf

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:55:57 +0000

The study undertaken by BART several years ago determined that an infill BART station would be all but impossible. Due to the odd grade and curving alignment as BART exists the downtown tunnel, a new alignment would probably have to be constructed.

The study did however recommend a streetcar system as a long term solution. The route would travel along Broadway from the intersection of Grand Avenue in the north to Uptown – Downtown – Old Oakland – Chinatown – Jack London Square in the south followed by a quick run down 2nd street to the Amtrak station.

Based on similar projects in Portland and Seattle, expect the route to be about $30 – 40 million per mile including design, construction, rolling stock, signals, maintenance facility, etc. That would put a 1.5 mile route from Grand Avenue to Jack London Square at about $45-60 million.

Granted that $45-60 million is a lot of money, it is certainly a lot less than any BART project or a standard light rail project (LRT about 3x the cost). Many cities have used a mixture of funding sources to get their streetcar lines moving. Seattle for instance funded their first line with $25.7 M from local improvement districts, $15 M from the federal government, $3 M from the state, and 8.5 from the sale of excess city property.

Portland’s initial line used a mix of state and local funds, local improvement districts, and parking revenues/bonds. Plus, their newest extension is receiving $75 M from the federal government.

It would certainly take some effort to get the streetcar project moving, but at $45-60 million, it is nowhere near the cost of the Oakland Airport Connector, the Central Subway, BART to San Jose, or BART to Livermore. At a fraction of the cost, the streetcar system would provide tremendous benefits to all of Downtown and especially a new Jack London Square ballpark.

[PDF] http://www.bart.gov/docs/planning/JLSFeasibility2.pdf