San Francisco's Brand New 2 BILLION DOLLAR Subway!

San Francisco spent the past 10 years building a brand new subway and extension to the existing MUNI Metro! Its cost is quite high but how much of a return are the people actually getting? Lets go and find out! If you wanna provide support to the channel and get extra content hit the link below!
/ climateandtransit
Video Credits!
HNLTransitFan
43masonic
My Socials!
X
/ climatetransit
Instagram / climateandtransit
Tiktok
/ climateandtransit
Discord
/ discord
Merch
my-store-e11ae...
Citations:
www.sfmta.com/...
www.sfchronicl...
sfist.com/2022...

[@meteorical8036]

I take the central subway almost every day. The busses get super packed, I appreciate the extra space and experience of the subway. The subways been busier lately too.

[@TohaBgood2]

Since this guy posted the video the T Third ridership grew from 12,600 to 17,100. That's a literal 35% growth in two months. So yeah, he's waaaaaaaaay off base here!

[@anthonysnyder1152]

@@TohaBgood2March hit 18k - it’ll cross 20k in a few months, definitely will be a jump when Caltrain goes electric

[@sandasturner9529]

😊

[@anthonysnyder1152]

I don’t particular love all of SF Chronicle’s reporting of the central subway but I particularly love the headline here: “S.F.’s Central Subway isn’t just a transit line. It’s a startling view of a city in flux” If you live here, you know what this means. A city that is known for non-development, and then suddenly built a skyscraper neighborhood in the East Cut, finally brought that energy to transit. We are changing and it’s happening both above and below ground.

[@Dnizzle7]

Not sure if you've taken the 30 stockton bus often, but whenever I get on, and despite its frequency, it's often packed like a sardine can. Despite the problems with the new subway, I do think it's better to have it now and continue to extend the line. We do need the increased capacity in that direction.

[@daveland3183]

Agreed. The 30 Stockton was awful and so was No. 8 Bus which is a long articulated bus that was also packed during commute hours and sometimes off hours.

[@mgescuro]

Couple things: 1) Can’t put bus lanes in Chinatown - one of the densest neighborhoods in the US. 2) Stations are shorter than normal because the Market street stations are meant for BART trains. 3) Muni Metro hasn’t run 4-car trains since they got rid of the Boeing LRVs. 4) Muni Metro won’t run 3-car trains because the catenary can’t handle it for some reason, and surface stops can’t handle 3-car trains. 5) Central Subway cost much more because of the constant delays, exacerbated by the pandemic and SF politics. 6) North Beach station exists, sort of. The tunnel goes there already. But SF politics got in the way and managed to block construction because of street level disruption in North Beach. And then the pandemic hit. 7) The area has been called “SoMa” for well over century. 8) “Moscone” is pronounced “Mos-Co-Nee.”

[@tylerkochman1007]

“Moscone” is pronounced “moss-cone-eee”. There’s an “eee” sound at the end

[@kevansf]

Good thing I scrolled down before posting the same comment! Then SF mayor George Moscone, along with Harvey Milk (see the 2008 film "Milk"), was assassinated by Dan White in 1978. This, incidentally, was how Dianne Feinstein became mayor.

[@RaymondHng]

@@laeihbvaljefhbvalejfhbv _Moscone_ is not English. It's an *Italian* surname. There are no silent "E"s in Italian. It is named after SF Mayor George Moscone.

[@avigdonable]

Tomato tomatoe

[@passatboi]

Came here to say that.

[@ballyhigh11]

@@RaymondHng How do you pronounce Sylvester Stallone's surname?

[@jspihlman]

It seems like a good start. Four stations isn't much, but as you said if they extend it further it will only get more popular the more people it reaches. SF already has a great mix of modes of transit and I think you're always going to run into that issue when adding anything new. Doesn't mean they shouldn't strive for it.

[@ncard00]

Public transportation infrastructure is always worth it, cause it’s a permanent improvement for the public, that stays when politics change. Once people have it, you don’t take it away from them. That’s why most of the tax dollars should go towards public infrastructure, especially public transportation infrastructure like bike lanes and rail lines. Healthcare and military investments don’t fix anything, and are a waste of money, they just treat the symptoms, they don’t fix the core issues.

[@fatviscount6562]

Ridership won’t increase enough to warrant extending the subway. He drew lives over relatively low density extremely wealthy neighborhoods who fight every attempt to build denser hosing. Even the much less wealthy merchants on Geary Street that torpedoed MUNIs top priority of building a very badly needed train there. Geary should have by far the top priority for future MUNI rail.

[@kevansf]

Unfortunately, though, any extension will take another decade plus, even if they decided to start now (which they haven't). I say this because voters (including myself) approved the Central Subway in 2003, and the alignment was finalized in 2008. They ceremoniously "broke ground" in 2010, but didn't start actual work until June 2012. Finally, on November 19, 2022, they had a "soft launch" running only on weekends, with full service starting on January 7, 2023. So from approval to opening: 20 years. I lived in SF when this was being planned and while construction was underway. For a short time, it almost seemed like there could have been an additional station (beyond the Chinatown current terminus) in North Beach (near Washington Square), but, sadly, the NIMBYs put their little feet down. A station in North Beach and one more at Fisherman's Wharf would have been ideal because these are two touristy spots and many visitors to SF arrive by air and (wisely) opt not to rent a car which is only a hassle in the city. That new line would really have come in useful for those visitors as well as all the conventioneers at Moscone Center, not to mention all the retail, restaurant, and hospitality workers who have to get to those tourist areas for their jobs. But that opportunity went up in smoke, and now it will be decades, if ever to see an extension (based on the timeline of the original project, and I doubt things will suddenly become faster and easier to get accomplished in SF). Sigh.

[@sonicboy678]

@@ncard00 I generally agree with the military investments being money sinks, though I should mention that the only reason we even have the Internet is because of one such investment. Throwing health in with the military, on the other hand, is easily debunked.

[@Mike__B]

To be clear it's four stations underground that links up with MANY more above ground stations in some poorer underdeveloped parts of the city (Bayshore), now whether or not that helps a lot I couldn't say, but I will say if you ever need to get to a sporting event whether it's the Giants or the Warriors there's no better way than hoping on the T-line.

[@isaacng123456789]

3:40. Muni doesn't run train longer than 2 trains (4 cars), which they already do on the T/central subway. The length of the underground stations is not the only limiting factor; every stop along the T/third ave corridor cannot accommodate trains longer than 2 trains too. 4:28 And you've missed the very important context that the City promised the Chinatown community that it will build the Central Subway to make up for tearing down the Embarcadero Freeway. The City would have looked incredibly bad if they had not fulfill its promise to the Chinese community. Also, the 30/45 does have dedicated lane for most of the way from south of Market to Chinatown. For North bound: entire 3rd Ave has bus lane from south of Market to Market st.. It is impossible to make bus lane for the 30/45 on Kearny from Market to Sutter because the bus needs to go from right most lane to left most lane to turn left in two short blocks. There is bus lane on Sutter between Kearny and Stockton. For South bound: entire Stockton St after the tunnel exit till Market st has bus lane. There is bus lane on 4th Ave from Market until Folsom when more right turn lanes are needed for cars to turn onto the highway. It is pretty much impossible to add more bus lane without major rerouting of either highway entrances or reroute the 30/45 to not go through the heart of south of market. Transit Signal Priority might work great on most stroads in US, it is very impractical in city centers like SF with high traffic of vehicles and pedestrians. The light can't suddenly turn red on pedestrians while people are crossing because a bus is coming. And if the light turn green for the bus every time a bus comes by, it will decrease the throughput of major intersections, which in this case, will cause major traffic backups on 3rd/4th ave, the Bay Bridge, and the i80. I agree with you in the most part that the Central Subway is a pretty big waste of money at its current state, and the solution is to extend it further. But there is just so many factually wrong things said in the video that yells lack of research on the topic.

[@TohaBgood2]

Plus, the Central Subway can actually accommodate three-car trains. It's the surface sections of the T that can't. This creator is simply wrong. He should have done his research.

[@joeylantis22]

Wow what an incredible comment! How do you know so much about this? Long time resident (or secret SF city planner!). Ha-ha!

[@bonk2122]

3+ car trains are still in the testing phase and probably won't ever enter service unless it is extremely important and needed urgently

[@stevevaccaro1645]

Actually the platforms on 3rd St can accommodate 3 or 4 car trains.

[@dancingwiththestars3778]

​@@stevevaccaro1645Muni Metro Can Accommodate 4 or 5 Car Trains LRT in the Subway Also Central Subway Line In the Future with Study and Construction of The Extended Accommodate Longer Platforms to 5 Car Trains 🏗️🚧

[@devinrugaard2657]

I like the Central Subway. It's not the best use of funds as of now, but I like it overall. It's pretty convenient to get to Chinatown and Union Square. The station is literally underneath Union Square. Also convenient to get from hotels and the downtown area to the Chase Center for events. Although it's new and shiny clean, they are really big stations with a lot of walking. It goes right by Metreon which is convenient if you don't want to walk from Union Square area across Market to 4th and Brannan. Unfortunately the depth and walking makes it sometimes take more time than just walking surface streets or the bus. I think the extensions will make it more usable for people because using the F Line and the 30 Stockton is not enough to get from Market to Fisherman's Wharf, especially when there's hoardes of tourists everywhere.

[@Cyrus992]

Chicago needs to expand especially the circle line

[@mysterioanonymous3206]

The by far best transportation for small to medium sized cities are street cars/trams/light rail. No stairs, cheaper to build, much faster to build, high frequency, much greater capacity than busses, separate lanes meaning good traffic flow, you're in and out quick, fresh air, big windows, less noise and vibration, stops can be built anywhere you could fit a bus stop... The user experience and cost is amazing. 10/10 can recommend. It's vastly superior to anything else.

[@jayfielding1333]

To be fair, $2b for a three-station extension to a subway in a major, high-cost US city sounds like really, really good value.

[@climateandtransit]

I mean it’s not really a subway it’s more like underground light rail

[@TohaBgood2]

@@climateandtransit Nope. Muni uses bona-fide Siemens light metro trains that are level-boarding full-capacity metro trains. If this were done with low-floor trams then you could maybe make an argument here, but it's not. The S200 is based on a tram-train design with its European brethren being allowed on mainline rail track in mixed rail traffic. They have more in common with commuter rail than with a tram.

[@qjtvaddict]

LA purple line extension is good not this and San Jose is WORSE

[@qjtvaddict]

@@TohaBgood2you right

[@TysonIke]

As good as the 30 is, an underground subway line is definitely needed. Some oof the hills are too steep and some roads are too narrow for only bus service. Even if transit lanes were added i doubt they could handle the amount of people needed in the future. Also as much as i love busses i do admit that on a very narrow street walkability and business access need to be the priorities. In the future i think they should focus on adding frequency with the extensions also.

[@jfungsf882]

There's one important piece of context you left out in this video and that was the teardown of the Embarcadero Freeway. The *demolition of the Embarcadero Freeway* is what really got the wheels rolling for this project. Chinatown was fiercely influential in getting this project done because that neighborhood felt like it was owed something given that Chinatown lost an "important" transportation connection also that neighborhood opposed demolition of the Embarcadero Freeway, (but in my opinion they're wrong to oppose it). The Central Subway was exactly that replacement though that's not to say the other reasons were wrong because they were true as well, but the teardown of the Embarcadero Freeway was the main catalyst to this. The Chinatown Station includes Rose Pak's name because she fought hard to insure the Central Subway happened as a result although including her name in it was really controversial.

[@alexanderbolosan3061]

As a sf resident and a stadium employee at chase center and oracle park wait until baseball season begins

[@Mike__B]

I've used the central subway a number of times, and I absolutely love it, the fact I can hop on a MUNI train basically anywhere in the city and it links up with the T line at the Powell station, after a small walk, absolutely excellent way to get into Chinatown, or to go to the 4th street station to hop on Caltrain (if needed) or watch a baseball/basketball game, or vice versa. I prefer the undergrounding much better than buses because buses still need to drive in traffic and are stuck with traffic issues everywhere except the 2 mile length of Van Ness where they built a true bus only lane. Now whether or not it's worth the money, I honestly don't know I'm not paid as a bean counter for Muni so not going to worry myself over that, but I do find it's very useful to me as a resident. As for the station length I feel that is being way overblown. There may not be enough room for 4 train cars, but there is room for 3 train cars, but here's the thing, Muni LRVs don't ever run more than 2 train cars because the trains also go on city streets and there are no lines that are true subway-only routes, so it's really a non-issue. Now multiple 2 car trains you might ask? Perhaps, but I can't see that as a problem since currently the T-line is the only train to use that track way compared to the others, and if Muni ever does expand further north and run multiple additional lines, the issue will be maybe a minute delay for one train to leave the station. I will say for other underground platforms in the city it absolutely sucks to come down the escalator and see the train you need way the hell down near the tunnel exit and you need to turn into Usain Bolt in order to catch it before it leaves, i.e. you're not going to catch it, and I've been on a number of trains that were partially in the tunnel when arriving due to another train at the platform even though there was plenty of space, so I think it is largely a separation/safety issue so the extra platform length really doesn't matter.

[@1sfgmen]

Muni T line need to extend to Fishermen Wharf

[@johnshollenberger2337]

Although it may have small ridership now, this subway is going to expand and serve many in the years ahead. It's not a mistake that this has been built. I love it. When I come to SF in the future, I want to ride this subway. "Good Job SF".

[@philrabe910]

You can skip the "SOMA" type abbreviations, but Moscone was a former mayor, and it is pronounced "mos-co-nee".

[@UnReal31337]

The Central Subway only exists because the 480 collapsed during the 1989 quake everyone saw live during the World Series. That was an important connection for the cities Chinese constituents to get from the southeast side of the city into Chinatown. Most of the people that live along the T don't really feel like the line serves there needs and isn't much of a freeway replacement. Because it was more of a political promise to Rose Pak (her name is on the Chinatown station and an adjacent hospital) who owned all of the Chinese votes in SF, there was never really a comprehensive plan on what this subway would ultimately look like.

[@RaymondHng]

California State Route 480 did not collapse during the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake. It significantly damaged the structure, causing it to be closed to traffic. The earthquake collapsed the double-deck Cypress Street Viaduct of Interstate 880 in West Oakland.

[@tylerkochman1007]

You don’t seem to know that this was built not due to transit needs, but more to resolve political backlash in Chinatown that came with the demolition of the Embarcadero highway embankment that neighborhood businesses and leaders wanted to retain

[@climateandtransit]

That still doesn’t make it a smart choice to spend 2 billion on light rail

[@jfungsf882]

@@climateandtransit It doesn't, but that very important piece of context should have been included especially if you're going to do a video on this and the history that led up to the Central Subway happening.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@jfungsf882That is a fair comment.

[@mrAhollandjr]

There are a few problems anytime you discuss building or expanding transit, especially rail, in the United States 1. Initial costs are always going to be high. Generally speaking, most cities are already built up so there's little available land to develop for transit without having to pay significant costs for land acquisition or excavation. Which usually leads to number 2 2 Lawsuits. Opponents of any and all transit expansion olay this cars early and often to drive up the costs of the project so high that they hope to discourage building by drying up resources. They also know that even delaying the projects will drive up costs. Time us if the essence Which leads to number 2 3. Government mandated studies. These alone can take up to two ir three years to complete 4. Funding. These projects always require federal government funding and they usually require some sort of state and local funding match Again, time allows the costs of these projects to balloon People don't realize these things when they start complaining about how much over budget these costs are Therefore sometimes compromise has to be made. Unfortunately in San Francisco Subway case, building short platforms was a way to cut costs imagine if there was no opposition to the plan. Perhaps the money saved from litigation could have paid for longer platforms. Maybe this sounds simplistic, but time is money

[@WestTown97]

i often ride bart into the city from oakland. i love the central subway. it makes getting to chinatown & north beach a lot easier (with the transfer at powell st). when i go home, i just walk downhill back to montgomery st station to save time & money

[@owenreese2216]

I mean I'll never really complain about new subways but the funds would probably be much better spent on a rail line down geary. Of course that'd be a much longer distance so it's not a fair comparison.

[@ggrohwin]

Love that you captured one of the ubiquitous George Kittle Zenni ads. George Kittle is to BART what Anh Phoong is to buses.

[@Chris-ig9gz]

I have taken the central subway multiple times. Its ease of access from the Bart is a great transfer point to go both north and south. Think education is the problem. A good example is that google maps won't show the new T line on it. A lot of people use that or Transit to know which to take.

[@daveland3183]

I had to chuckle a bit when the narrator of this video said "threats of lawsuits." There was a lawsuit filed to halt construction. Lawsuits do in fact have a tendency to increase the cost of construction for any infrastructure project. Also, the geologic conditions in that area of the city caused problems with construction costs. Is this project worth it. Answer is yes because it moves residents off the crowded streets. Residents of Chinatown and some parts of North Beach can use this line to transfer to BART at the Powell Street station and transfer to CALTRAIN at 4th and Brannan or 4th and King stations. Sports fans riding BART can transfer to the T Line at Powell Station and ride to CALTRAIN Station at 4th and King and walk to Oracle Park to watch a Giants game or continue on the T Line and exit at the Chase Center stop to watch the Warriors Play.

[@melovetorun]

Your pronunciation of Moscone 🤧

[@kabulykos]

Like it's one thing to mispronounce the name of transit stop. But it's quite another thing to mispronounce the name of transit stop that's also the name of the city's biggest convention center when both are named after a mayor who was assassinated while in office.

[@txlogs]

I have SO many photos of the early construction in Chinatown, pretty crazy to see it come complete

[@Facepalmsareus]

I’m curious, why wouldn’t they just double the frequency instead of doubling the train length? Seems like they could get three birds with one stone (don’t have to expand the stations, get better frequency, and can handle the expected increase in ridership)

[@TohaBgood2]

This guy doesn't know what he's talking about. The Central Subway can support three-car trains. And they're installing new CBTC system wide to give them sub-minute frequencies. This means that total capacity on this line could be increased by up to 15 times! SF won't grow into this capacity for at least another 100 years. This appears to be a satire channel.

[@AL5520]

​@@TohaBgood2First of all "this guy" believes that 4 cars will be needed, not three. You can disagree with him but for what he believes is necessary they will need to extend the platforms. As for frequency, CBTC cannot increase frequency in the current structure as most of the line is st street level which means it cannot run sutomatically and maximum frequency is not even close to "sub-minute". This means that the frequency of the short underground section is limited to the max frequency of the street running section. The only way to increase frequency in the underground section is to add a second line that will run only in the underground section thus increasing the frequency. This requires facilities tomprovide more train directly to this section and more space at the stations on both ends of this section to allow the train of this line to stop and turn around without interfering the trains entering from the surface section, like 4 tracks with two island platforms at each end station of the unerground station.

[@TohaBgood2]

@@AL5520 The frequency increase would only apply to the Shuttle service that they want to run on the subway section and to Caltrain. That's a very tiny street section that is already in the process of getting the necessary signal priority. And no, it is actually perfectly possible to run at under 1 minute frequencies. There are bus systems that do that even without a dedicated right of way! Dude, you're just making stuff up. Read about transit if you're interested. But stop spouting this made up youtube transit influencer nonsense.

[@brucemastorovich4478]

@@TohaBgood2yep. Also, just adding length to the system and new stations adds to total weekday ridership (most rides are not end to end). 13000 daily is tiny and has plenty of to grow. Limiting ourselves strictly to his platform length logic, we’d need 20+ car sets to get to the 100k+ daily riders seen on lines in other cities. That’s just silly. The system is nowhere near capacity and has a lot of room to grow with the stations as is. He mentioned that existing bus routes are competing for ridership, so it seems like he’s aware the system is not at capacity.

[@fatviscount6562]

1 I don’t know if he knows that MUNI jargon “2 car” actually mesh’s 2 PAIRS of cars. 2 Why argue about whether the T can run 60-second frequencies? Even 3-cars every 5 minutes would clear a Union Square rally in reasonable time, let alone daily peak traffic.

[@stevevaccaro1645]

I've used the T dozens of times since it opened. A really nice addition to SF's transit infrastructure. "The cost ballooned to nearly $2billion" - that is about what it costs to build an underground line in a densely packed area these days. NYC's 2nd Ave subway cost about the same per mile. This line will seem like a bargain in 20-30 years and beyond. BART faced the same criticism in the 60's and 70's, and started out with low ridership and lawsuits that delayed it's opening, but today, the initial cost of $1.8billion 1960s/70s dollars for 75miles of track, stations, train sets and infrastructure can never be duplicated. With 10-15 min headways reduced to 2-3 minute headways (if needed) the 2 or 3 car trains can quadruple the capacity. The crushloads on the 30 (on narrow/congested Stockton St) is one reason why this line was built. The depth of 2 of the stations (Market St/Union Sq and Chinatown)is really is no big deal. To get underneath the 3 level Powell St Station (which the T bisects and the Union Sq station is connected to) requires near 100 ft deep platforms for the T. Every day around 400K passengers use Muni - that is just under half it's population - investing in transit in SF long term has always been a good deal. No it is not perfect. But for those of us who don't have cars it has become a quick and fairly reliable way to get around town.

[@JStack]

You can have staggered entry if the ATO has it coded. For example, the programmed stop for first set of cars, move them forward, align the next two using the programmed stop antennas. It’s a bandaid solution, as the ridership for this goes up and up the more I take it. I’d imagine by 2026 it’d be the norm to require 4 cars

[@tomtaber1102]

Moscone is pronounced "moskony".

[@celebrityrog]

The simple answer is NO. Chinatown didn’t need a station or rail it needs to utilize what it has with buses.

[@denysivanov3364]

Marina needs subway from downtown. Buses suck. Over time line will develop. Whole city should be connected with comfortable underground transit.

[@AdamFaruqi]

This line only runs with 10 minute headways iirc. There's a lot more capacity to be squeezed out of this line before you have to expand the stations and platforms, although you're 100% right that not doing so from the get go was short sighted, as most transit development in this country seems to be these days...

[@bonk2122]

I think there may be some sources that misguided you, in the sf metro system, 1 car = 1 unit. For example {[][][][][][]||||[][][][][][]} is a car { and } = cab [] = passenger seats and standing space |||||| bendy thing/connection point. (sorry for the bad representation cuz keyboard) Second of all, the sf metro system's longest trains only uses 2 car trains,(ones in the central subway) there have been testing with 3 car but they are not in service. All the different "Cars" are referring to my point of 1car = 1 unit

[@caleblaw2331]

Don't worry about the need to run larger 3-4-car trains just yet. Let's focus on getting phase 2 to North Beach done. Adding one stop to North Beach will not generate that much ridership and the current 2-car setup will be just fine. If we need more capacity, why not just increase the frequencies?

[@celdur4635]

I think super deep stations for Subways are a HUGE Achilles heel.

[@jobanthind9106]

Can you also bring Toronto , Montreal and Vancouver in the video of Tier city list. Would love to see a video on these cities with comparison to American cities.

[@matthewgoodsell480]

I'm a londoner, and compared to our new Elisabeth Line, frankly this looks awful. Two billion dollars for just two miles of track, and as far as I can see the stations don't even have platform screens or lifts/elevators.

[@lioneljones6484]

Extending the stations to fit 4 cars might prove to be impossible, if the station box isn't big enough, that was a really dumb way to save on costs,

[@TohaBgood2]

This guys is simply wrong. He didn't do his research. The Central Subway stations can accommodate three-car trains. It's the surface sections of the T that can only do two-car trains due to the length of the blocks.

[@Urbanhandyman]

It's a "just okay" system that doesn't go anywhere at the current moment. Hopefully there will be three to four stations added to the existing north end of the line within the next twenty-five years. Then it will become competent.

[@TohaBgood2]

Dude what are you talking about? This line goes from the most transit-dependent neighborhood and one of the densest in the city, to the largest shopping/entertainment area, largest office area, largest conference center, both major sports arenas, and the largest new area with 10 miles of new housing and office development on the waterfront. Seriously, don't you people ever look at a map before commenting?

[@Urbanhandyman]

@@TohaBgood2 At the risk of bursting your anger bubble, the video and my comments are about the new construction that consists of three underground stations and one surface station. For all the cost overruns and years of delays, the finally completed extension of Muni's T Line into downtown San Francisco is worthy of being rated "just okay" at best.

[@theoubliette]

The 30 and 45 bus, I don’t know if the 45 still goes through Stockton it’s been awhile but those buses have always been soooo crowded, especially with the Asian community coming from Bay View/Candlestick area. The new line sort of solves that problem. I kinda take whatever is convenient for me. Bus or subway.

[@shubdotclub]

45/8/30 still go down Stockton and are still super packed

[@hkraytai]

The bus is free for a lot of people so there’s that. Harder to get a free ride on a train.

[@ballyhigh11]

@@hkraytai Isn't fare evasion huge on Muni rail services and BART? Ain't that hard to get a free ride on a train in SF!

[@hkraytai]

@@ballyhigh11 From what I have seen living here around 30% of bus riders don’t pay. That number is considerably less with BART I guess not everyone can jump over. I don’t ride MUNI rail so I guess it’s also sort of honor system.

[@j134679]

@@ballyhigh11 they're testing New York like fare gates that are like full body sized steel sliding doors so it'd be impossible to jump or crawl

[@vinyldreamsus]

Man am I tired of social commentary about SF from people who don’t even know how to pronounce Moscone. Frankly it ruins your credibility, as if you’ve never even been here.

[@climateandtransit]

Maybe that’s better! Because Moscone felt that infamous cult leader Jim Jones was a great choice to be the chairmen of the housing board in the city!

[@hkraytai]

It’s obvious the narrator and/or the channel isn’t local. Excellent research though.

[@isaacng123456789]

@@hkraytai No it is not. This video screams lack of research on the most fundamental facts, like Muni doesn't run 4-train trains, and "the bus lane that the city should've spent the money on" already exist.

[@hkraytai]

@@isaacng123456789 Yeah I was concentrating on the 30 and 45 busses going down Stockton. He got those right.

[@davidjackson7281]

@@climateandtransitMaybe Dan White was right.

[@xii-warzone-xiiwz9996]

Takes more time getting from the train underground to the street in Chinatown than the train ride lol

[@philiphamner9809]

I love that you cite your sources, taking a read now! Hope that we can see continued muni expansion. Great vid.

[@geoffreykail9129]

Don't run four car trains just run two two car trains close in the schedule. Cheaper than station upgrades. SF has the best transit on the West coast.

[@kabulykos]

This will very likely be untrue in 4 years, when Los Angeles finishes preparations for the 2028 Olympics.

[@GKP999]

I am in vacation in Singapore at the moment. San Francisco should learn from Singapore's public transportation system.

[@stevenroshni1228]

Building a two car metro is contraproductive Would running 30-36 of these per hour meet the demand?

[@marcnawo3533]

everyone says SOMA; no one says anything else. Also, Mosconeeee. And a very strange (and incorrect) use of the present perfect, not to mention it COSTED.

[@DanielSchramm]

Two car trains... WHAT?!

[@xicanosfxicanosf4433]

Can we finally get BART to the beach?

[@davidjackson7281]

Which beach? l see surfboards on BART all of the time.

[@no40]

This subway project was and still is a huge waste of money. Money that truly could have been spent elsewhere such as the repaving the horrible roads or reconstruction of the traffic systems in the city.

[@WaripoloW]

Subway? Is just a tram xD

[@RaymondHng]

It is light rail (streetcar/tram) transport that runs underground. It is not a heavy rail rapid transit system.

[@aadd74]

You mentioned 2 car length, how long is each car? What is the platform length in metres/feet?

[@climateandtransit]

They operate the Siemens S200 which are 75ft or 23m long

[@TohaBgood2]

The Central Subway can actually accommodate three-car trains. You can even see in his own video that there's space for one more half-car at each end of the stations. This guy just doesn't know what he's talking about.

[@ronnyrueda5926]

​@@TohaBgood2can the surface stations accommodate 3 car trains?

[@TohaBgood2]

@@ronnyrueda5926 No, the street sections has blocks that are too short for three-car trains. That's why the three-car trains will only run on the Subway to Caltrain section as a shuttle. They've already piloted the shuttle service during game days and events at Chase Center.

[@sdstreiker]

Mos-KO-NEE

[@OwlGreene]

If you love the 30 so much, you take the 30 while rverybody else takes the escalator down to the faster train which doesn't stop at red lights. In the meantime, they can make announcements/sugnage to tell anybody who wants to get off in the first two cars to only choose those those cars. Let C Darwin figure out the rest (via endless red lights)

[@ronaldmitchell9499]

once outside the stations the T line is slower than molasse rolling down the Swiss alps in February that why the # 15 line was brought back.

[@Society2day]

No more wasting time going down and around embarcadero,🎉 .the walk to connect to bart at powell😢.

[@michaelbettinger3486]

I didn't like how deep the stations are. If I had to use it, I would probably choose surface transit instead.

[@petern6808]

Total waste of $$$$$. I have ridden it and it’s not a lot of bang for the bucks

[@davidjackson7281]

Should have tunnelled 5 years ago to the transit center instead.

[@LuisMendoza-pp9qi]

People shoud go to JAIL over this...😡

[@teams3345]

San Fran will never be what is used to be. No such word as costed! It is cost.

[@gary9080]

We paid for all day bus trips only to find out there are many systems that don’t reciprocate. That’s what I remember about San Fran.

[@nickfielding5685]

he hasn't look at cost of highway

[@rcud1]

A very expensive project for a small gain.

[@jordanjohnson9866]

Nah. Not getting any project done here is like pulling teeth and more. /

[@jordan80673]

I find it interesting that you generalize North America has bad transit but good projects through cities in this video. But Mexico has been probably the best country recently for transit and new projects

[@szayelThe8thespada]

I don't know where's the point of tunnelling and avoiding traffic to improve frequency and speed, if you make the subway station with smaller platforms to save cost. Upgrading underground stations builded with large platforms is a more expensive 😅.

[@RaymondHng]

5:00 Dedicated bus lanes cannot be added on Stockton Street in Chinatown. The street is not wide enough and it cannot be widen. It is simply too congested.

[@j134679]

make it bus only

[@omar_rasidagic]

In the 90’s, Muni identified 4 corridors that they wanted improvement on: Geary, Van Ness/Mission, and Stockton/Colombus. These were all supposed to be subways, but ofc, cost was too much and most were downgraded to BRT at best. While the Van Ness/Mission corridor should definitely be a subway, the BRT they built is incredibly useful, almost as good as a subway. However, this could only be done because Van Ness itself is essentially a stroad. There are still two whole lanes open on each side for car traffic, even with two bus lanes and platforms. Same with Geary. Stockton on the other hand is wayyyy too narrow. Plus, even with three frequent bus routes, they are all at over capacity. Investing in those routes wouldn’t work, because the street is simply too small, and buses are way too full. While it’s true that Rose Pak strong armed city hall into building it, the subway was-and is- definitely needed. However, it’s too short, limiting its capacity and usefulness. If they were to at least extend it to Stockton/Columbus it would 100% justify the cost, let alone Fisherman’s Wharf, let alone the Marina. This isn’t a sunken cost fallacy- this is just plain common sense from what I’ve observed as a daily rider on those lines.

[@Mike__B]

Yeah I was flabbergasted at the cost of the Van Ness corridor, while yeah it was way cheaper than the central freeway all they essentially did was turn the center most lane on each side into a bus only lane (a real one), and pour some concrete for new medians and platforms. While I"m sure that's not the "only" thing they did, it really doesn't feel like 360 million worth of changes that they made, they essentially took a 3 lane street in both directions (with parking) and turned it into... a 3 lane street in both directions (with parking) with red "paint" in one of the lanes. Not to dismiss how useful it is, at least for 2 miles or so of Van Ness, but all that usefulness largely does disappear once buses turn onto Lombard.

[@wesleylin3175]

The mess was with the sewer line in the middle. They first built the center median bus lanes almost finishing it in 2018/2019 then tore it out to move the sewer lines and then re installed the bus lanes basically building it twice.

[@Mike__B]

@@wesleylin3175 Typical San Francisco planning, I remember quite a while back PG&E replaced all the gas lines (after the San Bruno fiasco) and then when they repaved the whole street sidewalk to sidewalk, it was butter smooth... then a month or so later San Francisco decided it should redo water lines and trenched up the street and then instead of redoing the street to make it smooth again just patched up where they dug and of course it's garbage.

[@vimmentors6747]

None of these lines are over capacity anymore. First, with flight from the city there are not many fare paying riders. Second, literally every woman I know who lives or works there ride shares or drives because they feel legitimately unsafe. When ride shares are robotaxis fare paying ridership will plummet. Time to take all of the Muni infrastructure and make it for cars.

[@DemPilafian]

Rose Pak did strong arm City Hall, but she was right! Chinatown was getting shafted (partly from politics and partly from bad luck of the layout of the streets).

[@mrxman581]

I don't see a problem with the cost. It's actually about what the Regional Connector cost in Los Angeles. However, the Regional Connector resulted in actually improving the system through consolidation of 3 lines into 2 lines. That resulted in less transfers amd quicker speeds and frequencies. So it was definitely worth it.

[@fatviscount6562]

You missed two of the biggest purposes of the Central Subway: to connect CalTrain riders Downtown and to connect Dog Patch to downtown. I’ve seen first hand the T Line turns San Francisco’s semi-derelict eastern shore to vibrant high density development, with a building boom still in progress. The Central Subway shortens each of those trips dramatically by not having to round the Embarcadero and wait 5+ minutes for signals at 4th+King intersection. The elders of Chinatown prefer one steps up to the buses instead of a hundred steps down to the subway, and I don’t blame them. North Beach does not have enough housing now nor in the future to increase ridership. The ultra wealthy on Nob and Russian Hills aren’t people who ride public transit. The future rise in Subway ridership will come from south, not north, of Downtown. There’s another reason this Subway is worth it. Now that it’s in place, if it can run with decent frequency of 6-10 minutes, then for the foreseeable future it can preempt having to build the (for nie) $6 billion rail extension. CalTrain passengers can get use it to get to Downtown directly, and HSR won’t get to San Francisco before 2038-2040. The prime contractor is Tutor Perini, capitalized by Richard Blum. Mrs Blum was well known in San Francisco.

[@RaymondHng]

It's not just the elderly in Chinatown. It's people with low English proficiency who find that taking a subway system is too confusing and are afraid of getting lost without being able to get assistance from someone who speaks their language.

[@davidjackson7281]

The HSR extension estimate is now up to $8.2 Billion. Hopefully the skids are greased so Tutor Perini gets the contract. No apparent political conflict of interest now. Rose Pak weaponized racist guilt feelings against the white establishment to successfully play the race card.

[@denysivanov3364]

@@RaymondHng common, chinese people are not dumb. Anybody can use subway.

[@RaymondHng]

@@denysivanov3364 You have not worked with Chinese people with low English proficiency, especially elderly ones.

[@MrDude826]

The Richmond needs a metro line and so does Marin County.

[@Cyrus992]

Marin County does have SMART. Folks then can take the ferry to SF

[@Panetierre_]

Marin County hates transit so much lol It's a miracle SMART passed, but imagine if the train actually took you to the ferry terminal. Or imagine if they said yes to BART all those years ago. Maybe some day "north bay" won't feel so far off and disconnected...

[@MrDude826]

@@Cyrus992 Ehhh... Ferry doesn't run until late at night.

[@Cyrus992]

@@MrDude826 okay

[@Cyrus992]

@@Panetierre_ ok

[@TheWolfHowling]

Maybe the issue of the current underground stations being built for shorter trainset could be mitigated by Muni moved away from separated cars, at least on the Central Subway, & beginning to use longer, fully walk-through trains, similar to the DLR in London with its new rolling stock, where the new trains are roughly the same length as 3 of the old units coupled together. Therefore, longer trains could serve the existing stations using Selective Door Operation, that would require passengers in the end segment to move forward to alight. Hypothetically, two longer walk-through trains could be run together, with only the doors on the adjoining segments opening for even more capacity but that could cause problems with passengers trying to board/alight through two end doors, possibly a third central, on a single segment.

[@TohaBgood2]

The existing stations in the Central Subway were designed to accommodate three-car trains. This guy simply doesn't know what he's talking about. He saw some other transit youtuber crap all over the Central Subway and wanted to join in on the fun. Very poorly sourced video with a bunch of nonsense information.

[@alfonsoromario3078]

Public Transport in USA sucks. Cities of Europe, Asia or Latin America have better transporte (more modern)

[@californiahummus]

There would have been far more demand if they pushed this line all the way to North Beach and the Marina. The SOMA area already has rail service to downtown and a bus to Chinatown is 10 minutes from Market Street.

[@arxligion]

The tunnel already exists to north beach, which should make it easier to build a station there

[@arxligion]

Also, for them to do 4 car trains it would require a turnaround yard before surfacing as they only use 2-car on street running portions

[@Mike__B]

@@arxligion Yup, and none of the lines are only underground so they will always be 2-car trains, it's not like they'll only run a line for North Beach, it'll simply be one more stop on the T.

[@arxligion]

@@Mike__B The s shuttle during peak hours runs 4 car and turns at castro

[@Mike__B]

@@arxligion is the S still running? I thought they discontinued it.

[@arxligion]

@@Mike__B according to the site it still runs "Weekdays 7 a.m. - 8:20 p.m. and for special events" also it apparently now goes all the way to west portal instead of turning in the castro

[@transitvideosbayarea]

Ok the N Judah (as well as all other lines except for the J) can only run 2 coupled unit trains, same as the T. Not “4 cars”. The T could have been provisioned for 3 unit trains, however, half the surface stations on the T would also need to be redone as those also only fit 2 unit trains. The Stockton St corridor definitely warrants a subway as the 3 existing frequent bus lines (8, 30, and 45) are all packed as sardines despite ALREADY HAVING bus lanes, however, the main problem aside from the lack of riders due to no North Beach extension yet, is that the reliability of the T is abhorrent due to single point switches, very low speed limits, and no signal priority on the surface portion of the line (which mind you is a total new build and only opened in 2007). Due to the unreliability, and the comparatively low (hypothetical) frequency of every 15 min when the buses keep flowing on Stockton like a river, means that the subway as it stands is unpopular. Going to Market, the 8, 30, and 45 are only very slightly slower but come every few minutes, and going from downtown or Chinatown/ North Beach to the Bayview district on the other end of the T is way faster taking the frequent 8 bus which takes the 101 freeway directly down after downtown rather than slowly inching downwards on the T.

[@richardlamch]

The easiest low cost way is to make Stockton (Chinatown section) transit only. That will speed up the bus lines 8. 30, 45 with minimal cost. But there is no political will since everyone wants on-street parking…

[@climateandtransit]

Exactly! They would’ve saved so much money! (Also I love trolleybuses)

[@TohaBgood2]

@@climateandtransit Dude, what are you even talking about?

[@isaacng123456789]

You just have to go to Chinatown once to know that stores on Stockton in Chinatown do not have a lot of options when it comes to trucks dropping off deliveries.

[@gelinrefira]

2 billion and it still looks like sh*t.

[@superflip1729]

A quick thing to mention. The T Third has a lot of stations that are barely long enough to even hold two car trains. An example, Oakdale and Palou station is only about the size of the trains. I would love 4 car trains as well, but the geography of S.F. doesn’t really help. Instead the T-Third should have more trains on the line at a faster pace as well.

[@TohaBgood2]

The ridership on T Third grew again, to now nearly 19,000 riders. That's over 70% growth since the Central Subway launched last year. How do you explain that? Were you completely wrong on this then?

[@MAtildaMortuaryserver]

First, MOSCONE has a long E on the end, pronounced Moss*Cone*EE and second, I remember when you could jump on and off cable cars and just flip a quarter to the conductor, it was not that long ago as the first time I ever rode the system was in 1975. They were a good cheap way to get around where the remaining lines ran, most since deleted as they redid the cable car system and kept just a couple routes as tourist rides with a lot of rules and a $8.00 ticket purchased from a kiosk making it unusable for local transport. I am surprised the city lawyers do not require you to wear a helmet. But then they nearly got to the point of just scraping the cable cars entirely. That would have been a real shame. As to Bay Area transit the first HUGE error was allowing the 9 Bay Area counties to have veto power over the tracks laid for BART. Marin, the snobby (8th richest county in the USA) county on the north end of the Golden Gate Bridge refused to allow BART to run through their county to Santa Rose which desperately needed real mass transit to The City. It is less than 60 miles but when I was commuting on Hwy 101 down to SF it was 3 hours each way for an average speed of about 19 mph. Marin was afraid that their wealthy enclave status would be ruined by commuters if the trains were allowed to run through to Sonoma County. Of course it was a lot more complicated than that, San Mateo County had refused to be part of BART and with the smaller population to support the system Marin then pulled out as well. Sonoma was also not part of it but only because without Marin track could not get to Sonoma. Napa had no real Need of it back then. And without San Mateo tracks could not get to San Jose. But critically SFO which needed the system the most is 14 miles south of downtown in San Mateo County. I am pretty sure the cab companies strongly opposed the BART tracks to the airport also. Every cab ride to the airport was a license to steal.

[@amazing50000]

Only 2 billion dollars? Here in New York City, The Interborough Express (IBX) is a Light Rail that is going to cost 5 billion dollars, and that is being build on a existing rail right of way between Brooklyn & Queens. Don't even get me started on how much it is going to cost for Phase 2 of the Second Ave Subway in Harlem (Manhattan) , which is only 3 new stops.

[@gtgene]

It was a tough slog building it. Court battles, having to relocate utilities and closing off streets to businesses then tunneling and laying down the tracks along with Covid related delays. I rode it and happy it got done. Maybe Fisherman's Wharf next.

[@noeonoohno4219]

You don't have to like it but it's been called SoMa since before you were born.

[@jamisonwieser]

So about those two-car subway stations... Building the Central Subway stations for two-car trains was not a cost-cutting measure that will need to be changed to expand capacity later. Some important context to this is Central Subway is the second phase of the T-Third Street Light Rail project, a surface/subway line connecting the underserved southeast portion of San Francisco with downtown. Most of the 5-mile-or-so line runs on a surface corridor with room for no more than a two-car train, and even that was a squeeze in places. I was on an advisory committee, so I know about this project. Longer trains in the subway portion - and geology decided where that starts - could not provide direct service to those who live, work, transfer to Caltrain, attend Giants and Warriors games, or anything else people do along the surface portion of the T-Third Street line. With that as a constraint, why would you do anything but design for frequent two-car service? For the existing surface/subway light rail system, frequent two-car surface stops at the perimeter turning into wider-spaced downtown subway stations works relatively well. The T-Third Street was designed to include everything that works and try to fix what didn't. Every station on T-Third Street is fully accessible, with level boarding through every door. It runs in a dedicated corridor with signal priority for nearly its full length (except for several blocks where there just wasn't room). More importantly, it doesn't share the subway with 4 other lines. The Central Subway is designed to comfortably support regular two-car service every 4 minutes, alternating between Sunnydale trains and Mission Bay shuttles. There's some padding to run a few event shuttles less than 3 minutes apart. The limiting factor on frequency is the turnback facilities at Chinatown Station: A scissor crossing before the station and tail tracks long enough to stash an extra train on each side. As the Central Subway extends further, it can have more turnback capabilities: longer tail tracks and a second set of crossover tracks after the final station.

[@davidgarrison8053]

As someone also noted Muni does not run 4-car trains, only 2-car and to see a 1-car train that you needed to catch pull up during rush hour would make you pull your hair out.

[@joeylantis22]

San Francisco upzoning rabbit hole video, next please!

[@climateandtransit]

Please don’t make me talk about SF zoning, I wanna keep my sanity

[@slashmaster2]

Having the shorter platforms to save money was the one thing they did right. You can always extend them if necessary.

[@BaskingInObscurity]

The cable car is expensive to ride casually, but rides are included free with the monthly Muni passes. I always assumed that this line would be extended into the Richmond, but I see that the Chinatown Station is a bit too far north already not so would have to arc back south, which seems un-Muni-like. Still, it surprises me that they built it to only accommodate 2-car trains, as well as that I didn't know that before now. [I wish I could move back, but it's been 22 years now, and I don't see it happening financially.] What about undergrounding the 38/38$ Geary Line, or a 23/28R + California? Was the new tunnel south of market built in such a way that a rail-Y could link it to a Geary Line, with a Union Square station that would be two substations connected Paris Metro style?

[@michaelrmurphy2734]

How deep are the stations? I don't understand why the buses are still running on the surface when a brand new subway is right there underground.

[@denysivanov3364]

buses just suck. I lived in Marina, its fun neighborhood but not clean (easily solvable by washing) and bus only transit was huge pain.

[@shubdotclub]

This line is incredibly useful exactly at this moment in December every year when they decide to shut down Stockton street for a month due to union square holiday things and make all the busses do a long detour around to market 😂😂

[@chrispontani6059]

Big projects opening in 2023? Ummm…East Side Access? But I’ll let that slide… 😜 Why do they insist on building these gigantic cavernous stations, like they’re going to be the next major transfer station? (I’m talking about you, Second Avenue Subway!) Building that giant box for a two car trolley? Thats insane. That can be a fallout shelter for half the city!

[@libertubey2199]

One of the reasons that the cost of the subway ballooned so much because the United States of North America, in general, is far more pro-car and pro-bus than pro-rail, be it heavy rail or light rail/streetcar (trolley). In Philadelphia, the call for the Roosevelt Blvd Subway, which has been on the books for over a century, to be a reality is at an all-time high. But, there are five things keeping it from being a reality: purposely ballooning costs, constant studies to see if the subway is feasible, despite studies being done years ago, and the reluctance of SEPTA, the Philadelphia government and the Pennsylvania government having it constructed. The growth of Philadelphia area transit was stunted once SEPTA took over back in 1968. The one great thing that SEPTA really did was connect the former Reading Railroad Lines and former Penn-Central Railroad Lines with a Center City tunnel, complete with a new station, Market East, now named Jefferson Station.

[@CaptainsChannel58]

LOL no the reasons the costs ballooned beyond the original projections is greed. Nothing less, nothing more. This is America you're talking about.. California.

[@warrengibson7898]

I rode from Caltrain to Union Square recently. I waited several minutes for a train that crawled along the surface part before speeding up in the subway. Adding 2 minutes to emerge from the bowels of the station, my trip was barely faster than walking.

[@wallflower15875]

I take the central subway every time my motorcycle is out of service. Its a great system and very convienient, as I work in Mission Bay and live in Union Square. The busses are far more unreliable as they frequently get caught in traffic around Market, whereas the T goes underground well before.

[@anthonysnyder1152]

One thing to note is that you can increase frequency with the 2-car trains and support over 50k daily riders pretty easily. Plus to redesign them for 4-5 car trains would require ripping out all 17 or so surface stations. The point of light rail is to be less disruptive to the neighborhood it serves. I think more realistically we just need to add 1 or two more routes that leverage the tunnel, like the Market St Subway. Have it branch in the north or south and use these stations as transfer points. We could have a train running through it every 30 seconds. It’s all a fever dream though unless we can unlock funding.

[@TheCloakedTiger]

Sure it’s had its headaches… But I think it’s totally worth it. No more having to walk from BART to Chinatown for lunch!

[@isaacliu896]

The bus lines are packed and the Chinatown streets are packed with pedestrians because the stores are all open air and crowd the sidewalks. So I think the line was justified by capacity concerns. But it is kind of sad to be limited to 2 car trains, and it's really a pain to go down that deep, really wish they hadn't made those design calls or found ways around them. I, for one would be fine if they made the project an automated light metro with like 4-6 cars or something, even if that would mean not as smoothly connecting to the rest of muni light rail. Also a minor annoyance is that they already drilled the tunnels to North Beach and Washington square but didn't put a station there yet for some reason.

[@topsnek4603]

What I really want to see from San Francisco is a BART infill station at 30th and Mission, which is something that's been discussed for decades. BART's station spacing throughout San Francisco is about a mile or less, which is reasonable for a metro line, except for the gap between Glen Park station and 24th and Mission station, which is about 1.57 miles. An infill station at 30th and Mission would fix this and provide a valuable transfer connection with the 24 bus.

[@cobblerwillorange]

I am continuously surprised how every deep dive of this T Line expansion always miss a main point of the project. One of the main points was to link the poorest parts of San Francisco, Bayview/Hunter's Point with Downtown San Francisco and Chinatown. Now, the working class of Bayview have a dedicated light rail accessing the heart of the city. It's wonderful, imo.

[@climateandtransit]

I mean it’s not bad to have more transit it just that 2 billion could have been better spent to link low income areas than just adding a mile and a half of LRT

[@cobblerwillorange]

@@climateandtransit I guess you know more than SFMTA plans since the 1980's to try to get a pipeline to those people. For my part, I remain unconvinced anyone truly understands how badly Bayview needs infrastructure to connect it to the rest of San Francisco proper. Including, I might add, the gentleman in the upper comments who mentioned the Richmond District as needing more transit. The 38, 38L and 38X run 24/7 to jet Richmond District residents straight from their homes to Downtown. They are doing *just* fine, imo.