The problems with rail in Marin. A rail system has been proposed for Marin and Sonoma counties as part of a solution to our serious current and future transportation woes. Such a system, along with minimal highway 101 improvements, has been voted down once [twice as of March 7]. I believe this is at least in part due to some inherent flaws:
Only single, not dual, rails exist, limiting trains to one direction at a time and round-trip schedules to hours rather than minutes apart.
The current right-of-way ends at Larkspur Landing, requiring travelers bound for San Francisco or Southern Marin to transfer to ferry or bus¾ a slow and inconvenient prospect, especially in comparison to driving directly to one’s destination at any time except during the worst traffic backups. And it takes a lot of busses and ferries to match the potential capacity of rail and significantly relieve highway 101.
Trains would divide Marin via dangerous and congestion-prone grade crossings and/or limited numbers of expensive under/overpasses [see http://www.oli.org/oli/hrfactsterms.html and http://www.fra.dot.gov/o/public/hwytres1.htm].
Trains are big, expensive, and costly to run, even for a minimal system with just a few runs a day.
Each of the above problems can be solved, but only at a prohibitive cost. Even the ineffective minimal system on last year’s ballot would have required decades of added sales taxes to pay for it.
Due to the above points, it is highly unlikely that rail in Marin could ever provide convenient service to anyone except a select set of commuters: those going to and from just the right places and who can adhere to very limited daily schedules.
Marin/Sonoma monorail. I would like to re-introduce the concept of a monorail for Marin and Sonoma counties. A monorail system can address all the rail issues listed above and more. There are so many potential advantages to a Marin-Sonoma overhead monorail system that I believe it is well worth investigating existing and near-term monorail technologies and their economics before limiting solutions to auto, bus, ferry, and rail.
Before continuing, I wish to admit that though I am a technologist and former electric car engineer, I am not a mass transit expert, and have only done a brief internet study of monorail systems. Instead, I am mainly addressing broad strokes that are clear from the basic monorail concept and a few implementations.
Monorail advantages. Below
are a series of specific advantages. Taken together, they add up to something quite
remarkable: the possibility of an affordable, convenient regional public transportation
system that could some day not only relieve the traffic on highway 101, but also on
arteries like Sir Francis Drake Blvd, East Blithesdale, Miller Avenue, and similar
arteries in Northern Marin and Sonoma.
Overhead monorail can be beautiful, futuristic-looking, and fun
to ride¾ with a panoramic view. These factors can
enhance Marin’s beauty, help increase ridership, and even attract tourists. See
appendix for images of existing systems. Because monorail can be overhead without added expense,
objectionable noise, or obscuring light or views:
There is no reason that the single-track-wide Marin right-of-way cannot support dual overhead monorail tracks for full duplex operation.
There are no grade crossings, and no chance of vehicle or pedestrian intrusion. This allows monorail to be much safer as well as faster than heavy or light rail.
Without requiring additional ground-level right-of-way, many stations could even have four rails to support express trains and thereby even greater speed and convenience to help attract commuters, shoppers, and other travelers away from their cars.
The monorail system could eventually be extended from Larkspur Landing to the Golden Gate Bridge by running overhead in the highway 101 median to Sausalito.
A whole monorail system can be much less expensive to build and run than heavy or light rail.
A privately owned 10 mile, 10 station, dual track system between Tokyo and Haneda has carried over a billion passengers since 1964¾ and makes a profit without public subsidies!
Individual trains can be small, light, inexpensive, and automated enough that so many can be put in service as to provide truly convenient scheduling and short headways. Seattle’s original system, only .9 mile long (expansion in progress now) but with 15-minute headways, cost only $3.5 million¾ and the private operator pays the city $75,000/year to operate it! [http://www.seattlemonorail.com]
Monorails have been running safely and efficiently at dozens of locations worldwide. For details, check http://www.monorails.org.
The lack of grade-crossing or pedestrian concerns should greatly increase both safety and the likelihood of eventual full automation, as at the Tampa International Airport, making few-minute headways especially cost-effective.
Stations need be little more than a platform serviced by escalators. Station requirements are simple enough to allow innovative and varied solutions such as stations within buildings, stations combined with multi-level parking lots, etc.
Like rail, monorail would work toward grouping new development within walking distance of stations, though many stations will still need integral parking lots.
The Marin rail right-of-way can be immediately paved for busses, for immediate alleviation of current traffic woes, without preventing or delaying monorail construction. Or they can be used for bicycles and pedestrians, as in another proposal.
An earlier objection to the bus proposal was that it would preclude rail, as the bus system would have to be dismantled before rail construction could begin, causing a major transportation bottleneck until the rail came on-line. With monorail, however, the busses could continue operating while the monorail system is built above, with construction occurring during non-commute hours.
A monorail may be light enough to eventually be extended over the Golden Gate Bridge under the roadway, and into San Francisco over or near Doyle Drive.
Good public transportation between Marin and San Francisco was once avoided at all costs due to fears of overdevelopment. However:
Growth controls in Marin are now firmly established.
Built-in incentives, which could be politically enhanced, would help attractively concentrate any added development in Marin and Sonoma near the monorail stations.
Highway 101 and the Golden Gate Bridge are at or beyond capacity, causing transportation to have become as large a concern for many residents as are growth issues.
Judging from international monorail experience and the lack of ground-level right-of-way requirements, local unidirectional monorail loops¾ connecting to the regional service¾ may be inexpensive and attractive enough to eventually add around major Marin and Sonoma population and retail areas, lessening local dependence on the automobile and reducing air pollution. An example would be a Southern Marin loop through San Rafael, San Anselmo, Mill Valley, and towns in between¾ to relieve bottlenecked Sir Francis Drake Blvd, the Miracle Mile, Miller Ave, Bridgeway, etc. Towns like Santa Rosa, Sonoma, Novato, Tiburon, and Sausalito may be able to support their own tiny loops.
Though it is clearly biased toward monorail, a lot of great information can be found at http://www.monorails.org. Interesting pages at this site include:
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Why.html Why monorail
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/MonoVs.html Rail comparisons
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/enviro.html Environmentally friendly
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/MonoMfr.html Manufacturer list
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/TokyoH.html Tokyo-Haneda monorail
http://www.monorails.org/tMspages/Seattle.html Seattle monorail
http://www.seattletimes.com/news/editorial/html98/carr_101298.html Private funding
http://www.nctransportation.com Manufacturer¾ recently awarded the contract to plan Phase 1 of a 165 mile, 125 mph, system from Denver Metro along interstate highway I-70. QuickTime video clips at http://web.jet.es/trainlin.