Principal Engineer…or Sadist?
Paul Medved on his new Warm Springs station:
“It’s a beautiful station. A lot of great architecture has gone into it, a lot of great thinking. The track way is at grade. It’s a central platform station,” he said.
Medved described how the concourse will be above the platform where riders will be able to buy tickets. He said access to the concourse will be from a pedestrian overpass.
So let me get this straight…the tracks are at-grade and the passengers arrive to the station at the ground level. The northbound tracks are literally steps away, but it is a “beautiful” thing to make them travel needlessly up one level to the concourse, just to go back down again to the platform.
The station also includes some really beautiful parking. 34 acres of parking, to be exact:
Medved reports the station is “on schedule” to open in 2015. This must be some new definition of “on schedule” as the station was actually supposed to open by the end of 2014.
I’m confused. Since BART is a third-rail electrified system, and the tracks at Warm Springs are at ground level, how else are people supposed to get to the center platform except by going either over or under the tracks?
The station didn’t have to be designed around a center platform. At the very least, using outside platforms, then passengers going northbound could have had direct access to the platform.
Even better: slightly elevate the tracks with the station entrance below (at ground level).
I guess then my question would be who decided the station was going to be center platform, the architect or BART? I would assume (but I could be wrong) that it was BARTs decision. In that case, I don’t see why you would excoriate the architect’s design, given the constraints he was working under. He was probably told, “here’s the location, here’s how the tracks are going to be laid out, and we want a center platform station. Bring us a design”. And he did. You could, with reason, blame BART for the decisions they made but I don’t think you should blame Mr. Medved. From the drawings you included I would say he did a fairly nice job within the constraints he had to work under.
If this were a space-constrained situation (such as an underground station) then the architect might be might be justified in using a center platform — but that isn’t the case here.
The Center platform isn’t the problem in my mind – escalators make the stairs a non issue and the station is unlikely to have crowding problems and the flexibility of center platforms is nice.
The issue in my mind is the pointless skybridge to the middle of the parking lot that everyone is forced to use. Not only does it pointlessly extend the walk for most users, it also can’t be cheap.
But again, you’re making the assumption that the architect made the decision that it would be a center platform station. I would think it was much more likely that BART made the decision that this was going to be a center platform station, not the architect. You need to remember that this is going to be a terminal station for a number of years until the line south into San Jose is built and for operational purposes most terminal stations tend to be center platform stations.
It will only be a terminal station for 3 years, at most.
BART seems to prefer center island platforms – I believe due to fewer stairs, escalators, and elevators. Off the top of my head the only side platform station I’ve seen is West Oakland. There are several hybrid stations like Daly City, Colma, and Millbrae that are triple-tracked and have both types of platform. Then there is (are ?) the Oakland transfer station(s ?) which has (have ?) a single track level.
Our host has a point, though. The tracks should have been bermed with underpasses for at least pedestrians and bikes. That would have put the concourse at ground level and the platform above.
A similar sort of problem exists in Millbrae / Burlingame where the BART tail tracks cut an industrial area off from the El Camino Real corridor. This forces pedestrians to horseshoe from Trousdale Dr. up to Millbrae Ave, over the tracks via the overpass, and then back south to their destination. A pedestrian / bike bridge near Trousdale and California is something that got left out of the Millbrae Stn.’s plans.
P.S. Trousdale Drive, Burlingame, CA
Key points are : Hwy. 82 (aka ECR); California Dr. (next to tracks); Millbrae Caltrain (aka Millbrae BART Stn.); Rollins Rd. (industrial corridor)
@Drunk
In your original post you seemed to be complaining about making everyone go up and then go down again. That’s what I was responding to. But even if it was a side platform station passengers would still have to go up and over the tracks to reach the other platform so, as you say, with escalators and such it shouldn’t be a problem.
As far as raising the tracks to enable a ‘ground level’ entrance, in looking at the drawings on the project overview site if you ever wanted to allow access to the station from the other side of the railroad tracks you would either need to go down another level or build an overpass since grade constraints for freight trains wouldn’t allow you to raise the freight tracks as well. So it looks like the ‘up and over’ design is better for possible future needs.
The length of the skybridge does seem excessive. In looking at the drawing it looks like it won’t really increase the walk time for passengers (except for a few bus transferees) but I agree the extra cost make it unnecessary.
And yes, 34 acres of parking does not seem to be the best use of the land next to a transit station but, unfortunately, it is typical BART suburban station design.
Yes, it will only be a terminal station for 3-4 years but when this extension was originally designed the funding for the San Jose extension had not yet been approved so at the time there was no telling how long it was going to be a terminal station.
And no, I am not a BART employee. I did grow up in the Bay Area (which is why I continue to follow developments there) but I now live in the Midwest.
Steve: a couple points…
1. The San Jose extension was never in doubt because the Warm Springs funding was contingent on the Santa Clara portion. But your comment raises an interesting point as when the Warm Springs station design work occurred. The retro 1970′s architecture suggests BART may have dusted off an old design, back when Warm Springs would have been a terminus.
2. Yes, the south platform still has the up/down — some stairs are unavoidable in a grade-separated station. But for a round-trip, the total number of level changes should be no more than two. This station has four.
3. West-side access — agreed. Even better: move the station around the corner to Grimmer, where the tracks are already grade-separated.
OK, so it would be useful to have an overpass if you were to continue the overpass over the freight tracks….
….SO WHY DIDN’T THEY DO THAT?!?
Pedestrian overpasses aren’t THAT expensive. I have no idea whether this overpass is actually high enough to clear doublestack freights, but I’m guessing it isn’t, and that an attempt to go over the freight tracks would require yet ANOTHER level.
@Ted
Off the top of my head I can think of the following side platform stations:
West Oakland
El Cerrito Del Norte
El Cerrito Plaza
San Leandro
Hayward
South Hayward
Union City
Walnut Creek
Pleasant Hill
I may have missed one or two but considering how many BART stations are either underground or in freeway medians it’s not surprising there aren’t more of them.
Thanks for the info. It’s been thirty (30) years since I reverse commuted to my workplace via either the WC or P.Hill stations. The other stations in your list I’ve only seen, at most, once or twice and a long time ago. I need to add the Dublin / Pleasanton stations to my bag.
I don’t undersand why those bus transfer facilities nested deep inside the station continue to get built. Every bus line that doesn’t terminate at the station will take 4-5 minutes to circulate through the bus loop, wait at signals, and navigate the parking lot. For bus passengers destined to the station, that’s great, but for those who are just riding the bus, their travel time has now increased all for a scenic tour of the BART parking lot.
Also, they could’ve designed this station like the existing Fremont one– it has a center platform, elevated over a ticketing area. Means you only have to scale one incline to access the station.
Warm Springs / South Fremont Stn. site
Per BART’s FAQ page ( http://www.bart.gov/about/projects/wsx/faq.aspx ) the WS / SF station is near Grimmer and Warm Springs Blvds. It’s actually South Grimmer per the Google map. The tail tracks will extend southwards towards the Warm Springs Ct. area (per the “Tail Track …” section on http://www.bart.gov/about/projects/wsx/). This area is just off-map at the bottom.
The images in the post seem to be from an eastern or northeastern viewpoint looking West (entrance) or Southwest (site overview). My earlier post evinced a concern about access to the area behind the station. The Google map shows that So. Grimmer is trenched with bike lanes and a sidewalk.