The current phase one plans apparently call for the Berryessa Station tail tracks to be extended along the Phase II alignment to the location for the Phase II tunnel portal. The plans call for the tail to be removed, to clear the portal area when construction of the Phase II tunnel begins.
The current position appears to be:
- The straight alignment is too short to meet BART operational requirements
- BART operations require the tail tracks for storage of trains
- How long are the two alternatives, straight and curved, and what do BART operations actually require?
- If this is required for operations, how will operations continue for the year or so that the tail tracks will be unusable, after Phase II construction begins?
- What are the approximate costs related to the two options?
- Can the storage requirements be met by adding extra storage tracks parallel to the straight alignment?
- If that would create extra operational costs, to assemble trains before morning operations, how would those costs compare to the cost to build / destroy the tracks on the tunnel alignment?
The following is background information related to my questions.
Three comments to start the discussion.
- The distance between the southern edge of the Berryessa platform and 101 is 3,000 feet. How much space is actually needed, for how many cars?
- Fremont did not have any tail tracks for 20 years.
- BART policy prohibits storing trains at the end of a line overnight.
BART needs increased maintenance capacity as part of its Fleet of the Future program. The Hayward Maintenance Complex (HMC) will ensure that BART’s maintenance and repair capacity is sufficient to support the new railcar fleet for both the current system and system expansions.
Provide construction of two maintenance facilities at Hayward Main Shop and Component Repair Shop including demolition, site work, structural work, foundation work, architectural work, trackwork and special trackwork installation, mechanical work, train control work, electrical and communications work, providing and installing equipment, testing and commissioning work.
TITLE: Hayward Maintenance Complex Maintenance Facilities
DATE OF AWARD: 8/24/15
AWARD AMOUNT: $98,390,000
CONTRACTOR: Clark Construction Group – California LP
The discussion starts around 03:08:45?
Q: “Is Hayward Phase II needed only if we have 100 more rail cars?”
A: “Hayward Phase II is not needed provided Phase II of the San Jose extension is built”
03:09:45 “What happens if the San Jose 2016 Measure does not pass?”
03:10:50 “We do have other options for storage. BART does not store trains at end of line stations overnight. […] We won’t need Hayward Phase II until we get the additional 300 cars.”
03:30:30 “One thing that I like very much is Hayward Maintenance Phase II. $168M is too small a piece of change to not have in the mix!”
The discussion about the tail tracks starts at 1:47:32 into the video.
Carolyn Gonot, the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s chief program officer for the BART extension: “Currently, with Berryessa being the end of line station, which we hadn’t planned for, there is a requirement to actually have tail track and storage track for vehicles, BART vehicles, to be stored so they are not dead-headed from Hayward in the morning, so they’d be located, down in the Berryessa area at the end of the line.
However, at the BART board’s workshop in June, they clearly state that they do not store vehicles at the end of line or on storage tracks.
Is there that much more space available if we follow the right of way?
If you look carefully at this picture, you can easily see that the difference in length between the two tail track alternatives is very minor. However, if more space is needed, there is easily room for an extract track to be added to expand the capacity of the tail track area.