Timeline of Bay Area Rapid Transit

From Timelines
Revision as of 09:20, 13 June 2017 by Vipul (talk | contribs)
Jump to: navigation, search

This is a timeline of Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), a mass rapid transit system serving the San Francisco Bay Area.

Big picture

Period Key developments
Before 1945 The idea of the Transbay Tube has been floated, and there has been some discussion of improving Bay Area transit options, but no concrete steps.
1945–1957 A series of statutes, commissions/working groups, and reports paves the way for the concept of and initial funding for a publicly funded, grade-separated, mass rapid transit system.
1957–1964 The initial years of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BARTD) involve a successful public relations campaign to secure large-scale funding and a full-fledged system plan. BARTD also successfully weathers the first lawsuit against it.
1964–1972 This is the period between the beginning of BART construction and the opening of the first BART line for passenger use. The period involves the construction of the Transbay Tube, Berkeley Hills Tunnel, Oakland Wye, Market Street subway, and the rest of the initial BART system.
1972–1976 The initial batch of BART stations opens up. The last station to open up in this batch is Embarcadero, one of only two infill stations in the BART system, and also the most heavily used BART station. The period is marked by considerable criticism of BART for its poor safety procedures and below-expectations ridership.

Full timeline

Year Month and date Event type Details Associated parts of BART (stations or parts of track)
1872 Emperor Norton envisages a bridge and an underwater tube connecting San Francisco with the East Bay.[1] The bridge declarations are made in the Pacific Appeal on January 6 and March 23,[2][3] and the underwater tube declaration is made in the Pacific Appeal on June 15.[4] The bridge would be realized as the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge, and the underwater tube would be realized as the Transbay Tube, a part of BART. Transbay Tube
1936 November 12 Highway transportation The San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge opens for traffic, three years after construction began on July 8, 1933.[5] Transbay Tube
1945 Organization The San Francisco Bay Region Council is created by California's State Reconstruction and Re-Employment Commission.[6] Although funded by the state in its first year, the council incorporates as a private nonprofit organization, and changes its name to the Bay Area Council. Initial supporters of the now private BAC include Bank of America, American Trust Company, Standard Oil of California, Pacific Gas & Electric, U.S. Steel, and Bechtel Corporation. In subsequent years, BAC would be influential in pushing for transportation changes in the San Francisco Bay Area, including enhancements to the bridges as well as the ceration of BART.
1946 Acquisition The Key System Transit Company, a private operator of electric trollies in the Bay Area, is acquired by National City Lines, a company representing automobile and bus interests, that wishes to eliminate electric trollies from the streets.[7] The removal of a key alternative provider of mass transit would pave the way for mass transit solutions such as BART.
1947 Report A joint review board by the United States Army and Navy concludes that an additional link is needed between San Francisco and Oakland to reduce congestion on the Bay Bridge. The proposed link is an underwater tube to carry high-speed electric trains.[8][9] Transbay Tube
1949 Legislation The California state legislature passes the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Rapid Transit District Act.[10] According to the Act, a specially created district would be needed to operate effectively in the context of multiple Bay Area governmental units. The Act provides that the district shall include the city and county of San Francisco and the cities of Alameda, Albany, Berkeley, Emeryville, Hayward, Oakland, Piedmont, and San Leandro, and may include all or any part of Marin, Sonoma, Napa, Solano, Contra Costa, Alameda, San Mateo, and Santa Clara Counties and any city situated therein. In total, over seventy county, city and county, and city governments are potentially involved.[10]
1950 March Report The Oakland City Planning Commission submits a preliminary report to the mayors and managers of the cities in the East Bay, with an analysis of and suggested improvements to the Key System local bus service. The report emphasizes the need for a publicly owned rapid transit system on grade-separated rights of way.[10]
1951 April Report The Senate Interim Committee on the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Rapid Transit Problems issues a report emphasizing the need for a rapid transit system of the kind envisioned by the Rapid Transit Act of 1949, and favors a publicly owned system over a privately owned one.[10]
1951 Legislation The California State Legislature passes a new statute, adding a Section 39 to the Rapid Transit Act of 1949.[10] It creates a 26-member San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, comprised of representatives from each of the nine counties which touch the Bay. The Commission's charge is to study the Bay Area's long range transportation needs in the context of environmental problems and then recommend the best solution.[10][8][9] Both the joint Army/Navy report[9] and the efforts of BAC are credited for the legislature's decision.[11]
1953 January Report A report prepared by the Rapid Transit Commission with the help of the consulting firm Deleuw, Cather & Co. is submitted to the California state legislature. The report is based on plans, data, and information from all the nine counties potentially covered by the Rapid Transit Act. The report argues that highways alone will not solve the transportation problems of the Bay Area, and pushes for mass rapid transit that has a low elapsed time from start to destination, and that can integrate well with other modes of transport.[10] The Senate Interim Committee endorses this report, and draws particular attention to four major interurban operators serving the Bay Area: Pacific Greyhound Lines, Key System Transit Lines, Southern Pacific Company, and Peerless Stages System.[10]
1953 November 4 Legislation The California state legislature passes another statute, appropriating $400,000 to enable the Rapid Transit Commission to make preliminary studies for the development of a coordinated master plan. The statute provides that the amount appropriated by the state is to be spent only if the nine counties appropriate an additional $350,000. This condition is fulfilled on November 4.[10]
1953 November 12 Report Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald (PBHM) are commissioned for the study for which $750,000 was appropriated on November 4.[10][12]
1955 Report The Senate Interim Committee on the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Rapid Transit Problems issues a report saying that the general transit situation in the Bay Area has deterioriated. Based on counts of the number of people who commute to work, it concludes that the Bay Area is a single economic unit and is in urgent need of a mass transit system.[10]
1955 Legislation The California state legislature extends the lifetime of the Rapid Transit Commission (that was created in 1951 and scheduled to end in 1955) to 1957, and allowing any unallocated portion of the previously appropriated $750,000 to be used for publicity of the Bay Area's transit problems.[10]
1956 January Report Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald (PBHM) present a report, Regional Rapid Transit (RRT) to the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, that was commissioned in November 1953. This report is the first planning document for BART and would be the starting point for further reports.[10][12]
1957 Highway transportation A number of citizens' groups protest freeway construction in San Francisco starting around this time, beginning with the Embarcadero Freeway. This leads to increased interest in mass rapid transit as an alternative.[13]
1957 March (legislation), June 4 (creation of the District) Legislation Based on the findings of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit Commission, the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BARTD) is formed by the California state legislature, comprising the counties of Alameda, Contra Costa, Marin, San Francisco, and San Mateo. Santa Clara county is not included.[8][9] The draft bill had been the subject of public hearings in November 1956, been revised and introduced in January 1957, had another public hearing on February 20, and finally passes when the legislature reconvenes in March.[10]
1957 November 14 Meeting The first meeting of the Board of Directors of the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District occurs.[10]
1957 December 16 Report The final report of the Rapid Transit Commission is submitted to the California state legislature.[10]
1958 Team Billy Raymond Stokes (stylized B. R. Stokes), a former Oakland Tribune newsman, joins the Bay Area Rapid Transit District as its first employee, with the title of Director of information.[14][10] Stokes starts a carefully orchestrated publicity campaign, with the goal of convincing voters to vote favorably for upcoming BART bond measures.[10]
1958 Team John Pierce, a former executive of the Western Oil and Gas Association (WOGA) becomes the first General Manager of BART.[14][15]
1959 May 14 Work contracts BART retains the services of the joint engineering venture composed of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald, Tudor Engineering, and the Bechtel Corporation to develop a regional plan.[16][17]
1959 Financing plan A bill is passed in the California state legislature providing for financing of what would later become the Transbay Tube through surplus toll revenues from the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge.[10]
1961 System plan A final plan is sent to the boards of supervisors of the five counties. The system would have three endpoints in the East Bay: Concord, Richmond, and Fremont; one in the Northwest at Novato, and one in the South Bay at Palo Alto.[8]
1962 April County coordination San Mateo County opts out of BART, citing high costs, existing service provided by Southern Pacific commuter trains, and concerns over shoppers going to San Francisco, hurting local businesses. The withdrawal of San Mateo County leads to Daly City (just at the border between the counties) as the southwest terminus.[8]
1962 May County coordination Following the withdrawal of San Mateo County, Marin County also withdraws, citing engineering objections and the potential for not getting enough votes. This leads to cancellation of the plans for a northwest terminus and the Geary Subway section of the system.[8]
1962 May Report The Composite Report (CR) is produced by the consortium of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall and Macdonald, Tudor Engineering hired by BARTD in 1959.[17]
1962 November County coordination The remaining three counties (Alameda, Contra Costa, and San Francisco) agree to the modified BART plan with a $792 million bond measure, with terminuses at Richmond, Concord, Fremont, and Daly City.[8] The measure, known as Proposition A on the three-county ballot, is able to pass due to two changes engineered by Alan K. Browne of the Bank of America: (a) getting the state legislature to reduce the needed BART vote from 66.67% (the default) to 60%, and (b) allowing for the requirement of crossing the vote threshold to be applied to all votes together, rather than county-by-county. Without both these changes, the measure would not have passed.[18] Supporters of the measure organize a campaign committee called Citizens for Rapid Transit, whose top members are San Francisco bankers.[18] In contrast, there is no organized opposition. Opponents include the Civil League of Improvement and Associations that opposes the taxes needed, the Central Council of Civic Clubs and the San Francisco Labor Council that have more specific objections, and some automobile and older railroad companies, though these companies do not spend resources on opposing the bond measure.
1962 November 29 Work contracts BART signs a new contract with the successors to the firms it had contracted with to come up with a design for the system. The new contract is for overall system planning through research and development, design, and management of construction. The contract is with the engineering joint venture firm composed of Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Quade, and Douglas (the successor to Parsons, Brinckerhoff, Hall, and MacDonald), Tudor and Bechtel. In short, the joint venture to which the work is contracted is called PBTB.[19][20]
1962/1963 Lawsuit Robert L. Osborne, an Oakland city councilman and East Bay manufacturer, files a lawsuit against BARTD arguing that fixed rail is obsolete, that BART stations would be too far apart to encourage riders, that better and more efficient transit systems were rejected by BARTD, that the ultimate cost would exceed the $792 million approved, that BARTD's contract with PBTB is open-ended and illegal and based on nepotism, and that an illegal, close working relationship exists between the Citizens for Rapid Transit Committee and BART public officials.[10] The court first eliminates some of the allegations, then after hearing the plaintiff's case at trial the court rules against the plaintiff.[10] Many of these allegations would later prove true.[21][10]
1963 Team B. R. Stokes, who was BART's first employee serving as BART's Director of Information, becomes the General Manager of BART.[14]
1964 June 19 Construction BART construction is officially inaugurated by President Lyndon Johnson, presiding over the ground-breaking ceremony for a 4.4-mile test track between Concord and Walnut Creek.[20][10] Concord, Walnut Creek
1965 Construction Construction on the Transbay Tube begins. Transbay Tube
1965 June 27 Rolling stock The first BART train car is unveiled.[22]
1966 October Construction, Referendum Since 1965, the government of the city of Berkeley had been pressing BART to construct the Berkeley portion of the BART underground (instead of elevated), and said it is willing to pay the additional construction costs. The city government is concerned that an elevated track would reduce connectivity between the black population of South Berkeley and the rest of the city, and reduce prices in the area. Due to disputes between Berkeley city engineers and BART engineers about the magnitude of additional costs, competitive bidding is opened up both for underground and elevated construction, and the city of Berkeley decides, after seeing the difference between the bids, to pay extra for underground construction. A referendum is held in October 1966, where the residents of Berkeley overwhelmingly vote in favor of underground construction and the corresponding tax increase (with 83% in favor, compared to the 75% that city officials were hoping for).[10] Ashby, Berkeley, North Berkeley (stations in Berkeley)
1967 July 25 Construction Construction for BART tracks along the Market Street Subway in San Francisco commences. The construction is carried out using cut-and-cover.[22] Market Street Subway; stations include downtown San Francisco stations of Embarcadero, Montgomery, Powell Street, and Civic Center
1967 Report In response to criticism by the California Society of Professional Engineers (CSPE), the National Society of Professional Engineers (NSPE) Board of Ethical Review reviews the case. The Opinions are published as Case No. 66-1 in Vol. 2, 1967. The Opinion concludes that it is not appropriate to issue criticism of the fee arrangements in the manner that CSPE did.[23]
1967 Work contracts The contract for the operation of BART's Automated Train Control (ATC) system is won by Westinghouse for $26 million.[19]
1969 April 3 Construction The final section of the Transbay Tube is laid out (it has not yet been fitted for use by trains).[24] Transbay Tube
1969 September 1 Controversy At the Contra Costa County meeting to nominate candidates for the BART Board, Roy Andersen, the candidate of the Diablo Chapter of the CSPE delivers a speech critical of the BART/PBTB relationship.[25]
1969 November 9 Preview A section of the Transbay Tube is opened for pedestrian traffic, prior to being fitted out for train use.[26] Transbay Tube
1972 February and March Controversy Three engineers working for BART, Max Blankenzee, Robert Bruder, and Holger Hjortsvang, had identified safety problems with the Automated Train Control (ATC). They contact Daniel Helix, a member of the BART board of directors, who raises the matter with the board, and goes public with the issues on Febrary 7-9. On February 24 or 25, at a public meeting of BART, the issues are raised. The board votes ten to two in support of BART management.[19] On March 3, BART, having determined the identities of the three whistleblowing engineers, gives them the option of resigning or being fired. After they refuse to resign, they are all fired.
1972 September 11 Service start BART opens service. Initial service is between the stations of MacArthur and Fremont (completely in the East Bay). Iinitial service is on weekdays only, and comprises eight trains, each of which is two or three cars long.[22] MacArthur, 19th Street, 12th Street, Lake Merritt, Fruitvalue, Coliseum, San Leandro, Bay Fair, Hayward, South Hayward, Union City, and Fremont
1972 Controversy Concerned by the controversy surrounding the engineers who raised safety concerns with BART, California's legislative analyst A. Alan Post commissions Bill Wattenburg to review problems with BART. Wattenburg identifies a number of potential flaws with the method BART uses to track trains, and provides suggestions to improve the system, albeit in a combative fashion that generates a lot of publicity (including San Francisco Chronicle coverage) but is not well-received by BART.[27] and brought in electrical engineering Professor Bill Wattenburg of the University of California, Berkeley as a consultant.[28]
1972 October 2 Accident A failure of the Automated Train Control (ATC) system at BART causes an accident at Fremont station called the Fremont flyer, where a train runs off the end of the elevated track and crashes to the ground at the parking lot. Four people are injured.[29][30]
1972 November Report At the request of the California Senate Public Utilities and Corporations Committee, California's legslative analyst A. Alan Post issues a report containing criticisms of BART's Automated Train Control (ATC) system as well as its contracting and operating procedures. Within three weeks, BART issues a 157-page response, agreeing to some of the suggestions (and outlining its intention to implement them) but viewing others as nitpicky, questionable, and misguided.[31][32][29]
1973 January 29 New stations BART opens service from MacArthur to Richmond (in the East Bay). Ashby, Berkeley, North Berkeley, El Cerrito Plaza, El Cerrito Del Norte, and Richmond.
1973 January 31 Report A report is produced by a special blue ribbon panel of experts, namely Drs. Bernard Oliver, Clarence Lovell, and William Brobeck, commissioned by the Senate Public Utilities and Corporations Committee, working closely with BART. The report includes 21 technical recommendations.[31]
1973 May 21 New stations BART opens service from MacArthur to Concord (in the East Bay) completing the East Bay part of its initial plan. Rockridge, Orinda, Lafayette, Walnut Creek, Pleasant Hill, and Concord.
1973 August 10 Preview The first test run of a train under automatic control from West Oakland to Montgomery is performed. The train runs at full speed, taking seven minutes and returning in another six minutes.[33] Transbay Tube, stations of West Oakland, Montgomery
1973 November 5 New stations BART opens its service in San Francisco (not yet connected with the East Bay), from Montgomery to Daly City. Montgomery, Powell Street Station, Civil Center/UN Plaza, 16th Street/Mission, 24th Street/Mission, Glen Park, Balboa Park, and Daly City.
1974 September 16 New stations BART opens its station in West Oakland and begins trans-bay service between its East Bay and San Francisco stations. West Oakland, system-wide
1976 May 27 New stations BART opens its Embarcadero station, its first infill station. This would become BART's busiest station. Embarcadero

References

  1. ↑ "EMPEROR NORTON  :: Bridge Proclamations". The Emperor's Bridge Campaign. Retrieved June 3, 2017. 
  2. ↑ Emperor Norton (January 6, 1872). "Emperor Norton Bridge Proclamation I". Pacific Appeal. Retrieved June 3, 2017. 
  3. ↑ Emperor Norton (March 23, 1872). "Emperor Norton Second Bridge Proclamation". Pacific Appeal. Retrieved June 3, 2017. 
  4. ↑ Emperor Norton. "Emperor Norton Transbay Tube Declaration". Pacific Appeal. 
  5. ↑ "Two Bay Area Bridges". U.S. Department of Transportation. January 18, 2005. Archived from the original on November 1, 2010. Retrieved June 13, 2008. 
  6. ↑ J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 42". 
  7. ↑ J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 45". 
  8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6 "A History of BART: The Concept is Born". BART. Retrieved May 28, 2017. 
  9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 Robert Morris Anderson. "Divided Loyalties: Whistle-blowing at BART (Page 25)". 
  10. ↑ 10.00 10.01 10.02 10.03 10.04 10.05 10.06 10.07 10.08 10.09 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 10.15 10.16 10.17 10.18 10.19 10.20 10.21 10.22 10.23 Griffith, John; Holmes, Dallas (August 1, 1967). "BART and the Victoria Line: A Comparison of New Commuter Transport in California and London". California Law Review. Retrieved June 2, 2017. 
  11. ↑ J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 44". 
  12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 52". 
  13. ↑ J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 48". 
  14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 14.2 Healy, Michael. "BART's first employee, former General Manager B. R. Stokes, passes away". Bay Area Rapid Transit. 
  15. ↑ Bond-Graham, Darwin (October 11, 2013). "Backing BART Against Its Workers". CounterPunch. Retrieved June 3, 2017. 
  16. ↑ "BART, PBTB, and CSPE". Retrieved May 28, 2017. 
  17. ↑ 17.0 17.1 J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 54". 
  18. ↑ 18.0 18.1 J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 59". 
  19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 19.2 Stephen Unger (April 29, 2010). "The BART Case". The Online Ethics Center for engineering and science. Retrieved March 15, 2017. 
  20. ↑ 20.0 20.1 "A History of BART: The Project Begins". BART. Retrieved May 28, 2017. 
  21. ↑ J. Allen Whitt. "Urban Elites and Mass Transportation: The Dialectics of Power, Page 63". 
  22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 22.2 Hartlaub, Peter (May 19, 2011). "The birth of BART: Photos from the 1960s and 70s". SFGate. Retrieved June 13, 2017. 
  23. ↑ "Robert Morris Anderson". 
  24. ↑ "BART Tunnel Completion Moves Near". Lodi News-Sentinel. UPI. 31 March 1969. Retrieved 20 August 2016. 
  25. ↑ Robert Morris Andersen. "Divided Loyalties: Whistle-blowing at BART". 
  26. ↑ "BART Tube Is Opened For Sunday Visitors". Lodi News-Sentinel. UPI. 10 November 1969. Retrieved 20 August 2016. 
  27. ↑ Peter Sheerin (October 1, 1990). "Bill Wattenburg's Background: BART—Bay Area Rapid Transit System". Retrieved March 15, 2017. 
  28. ↑ Dr. W.H. Wattenburg (December 1, 1972). "The BART Train Control Game" (PDF). Retrieved March 15, 2017. 
  29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 "Troubles Beset Transit System in San Francisco Bay Area". December 9, 1972. Retrieved March 15, 2017. 
  30. ↑ Fischer, Eric (October 2, 1972). "Derailed BART train (1972)". Flickr. Retrieved June 3, 2017. 
  31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 Robert Morris Andersen. "Divided Loyalties: Whistle-blowing at BART". , Pages 233 to 235
  32. ↑ Bill Northwood (November 29, 1972). "What is BART, and why are we saying such terrible things about it?". KPFA Pacifica Radio. p. 5 min : 00 sec. Retrieved March 15, 2017. 
  33. ↑ "Bay tube run made by BART". Lodi News-Sentinel. UPI. 11 August 1973. Retrieved 20 August 2016. 
Retrieved from "http://timelines.issarice.com/index.php?title=Timeline_of_Bay_Area_Rapid_Transit&oldid=14695"