Passenger Trains > BART headed for SJ......again!

BART funding is a sign of hope

FEDS MAY BE MORE GENEROUS THANKS TO STATE SUPPORT
Mercury News Editorial

You can't quite hear the horn yet, but BART just got a little closer to downtown San Jose.

When the line from Fremont to the Santa Clara Caltrain station was proposed in 2000, Gov. Gray Davis promised a fair share of the financing. Then the dot-coms crashed, and with them state revenue. BART funding was frozen more solid than your bougainvillea after January's frost.

Last week, it thawed, due in part to voter passage of the transportation bond and gas sales-tax measure in November. Last Thursday, the California Transportation Commission approved $364 million for design work on the 16-mile extension, following 18 months of meetings with the Valley Transportation Authority, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group and others. The design is expected to cost $649 million over the next 10 years, and $409 million has now been allocated.

The state's commitment will help as VTA continues to fight for federal funding for BART. The project has not fared well in competition for federal money, but the fact that the state remains committed under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger will help. It clearly is a priority for California, as it should be.

The $4.7 billion project seemed within reach in 2000, when voters passed a sales-tax measure to pay for much of it. But the same crash that shrank state revenue reduced the amount from the local Measure A. Now a new measure will be needed if VTA is to build and operate BART as well as complete other transportation improvements promised in 2000, including better bus service.

Last year's attempt at a new local tax fell short, but BART's popularity remains strong. Once the line is running, nobody will question the wisdom of having built it.

Here come the stampede of anti-BART rants.

The East Bay is populating rapidly. Without high-capacity mass transit like BART, that development will not be steered in a thoughtful manner, but will further choke the area's highways with single-occupancy auto traffic originating in the vast swaths of sprawling subdivisions. BART has the opportunity to shape new, truly integrated communities. This area needs places where pedestrians can safely and viably walk to the park, the post office, school, or the grocery store. There will be new employment opportunities closer to where people actually live. For those who must commute, BART will provide the easiest, most accessible solution. Other modes such as the Capitols and ACE are essential, but do not provide the scale necessary to support future boom.

Yes, the design has flaws. There must be more intermediate stations to support denser, more widespread transit-oriented development. The line should terminate at SJ Diridon, not Santa Clara, unless it will actually go to SJC and not force a transfer to a people mover (at least at SFO you have the option of walking).

There also needs to be very stringent oversight of the engineering and construction, so that there's no question the tax dollars are being spent effectively.

I hope this thread doesn't devolve into hypotheticals about how BART shouldn't be wide-gauge or shouldn't have been based on experimental technology to begin with. That would be beating a dead horse.

The bottom line is, California's population will double in the next thirty years, and the innovative Bay Area will continue to bear much of the brunt. Development is coming one way or the other. BART to SJC represents a fork in the road: The true question is one of vision. Do we want vibrant, green communities that make the economy work efficiently and that we can be proud of? Or do we want even more mindless sprawl which will ultimately make today's Bay Bridge commute look like a cakewalk?

pacificparlour Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here come the stampede of anti-BART rants.
>
> BART has the opportunity to shape new, truly integrated
> communities. This area needs places where
> pedestrians can safely and viably walk to the
> park, the post office, school, or the grocery
> store.

I'm Stephen Colbert and tonight's W0RD is BART

Now, normally when a multibillion 10-year project is proposed, that will dig up streets for years to come, most people would do a cost analysis -- not ME! I FEEL the worthiness of this pet project. And this is a good project (for Bechtel).

Ok, sure, some environmentalists think there are more cost effective solutions. But what do they know? Who are you going to trust more...people who actually ride transit, or a bunch of politicians looking for pork? You tell me.

Yes, some European off-the-shelf train could solve transportation in this corridor at a cost 10x less than BART. But its European! We need good honest made-in America crap - for the good of the country, for the good of Bechtel, for the good of the contractors.

And that's tonight's word.

[wow, this stuff practically writes itself]

$649,000,000 will pay for the engineering work done to date (lots of planning and many engineers working out of a building in San Jose), but its a drop in the bucket compared to what the REAL $$$$$ will be if/when they start construction. Last time I did the math, BART comes in at about $100,000,000 ->A MILE<-.

And that's based on current 2006 numbers - the total cost of BART to San Jose, when completed (?) will pobably be double that.


Ye Gods.

BART should have gone to San Jose years ago. People like BART and the proof is they ride it by the thousands daily. Current rail service would never have the frequency or convenience of BART between Oakland and San Jose without a complete rebuild of the system. On top of that, UP track and stations thereon are not as convenient to access when compared to BART. So stop whining and build it.

Clearly there are people who likely opposed linking Oakland and The City when BART was built. Now, nobody in their right mind could imagine not having BART's transbay service. It'll be the same case with San Jose.

There are a lot of details to question, but to me the real stupidity of this plan is looping around and terminating in Santa Clara. If one is in the Twilight Zone, why not simply extent the line out the I280 or Stevens Creek Corridor to Cupertino? This route fills a real cross valley transit need.

Lost in the SJ extension debate is the larger debate on BART'S ultimate viability and future. Since the era of BART extensions began, the core of the system has continued to decline. If you doubt this, try a visit to Oakland's 12th street/City Center station. This is one of the busiest stations on the system and serves all trains except the Dublin/Pleasanton trains. This station looks like something out of the third world. There seems to be a complete absence of janitorial service. At least half of the station plaza and platform lighting doesn't work. The other half buzzes and flickers from filthy fixtures. Parts of the platform are in near total darkness. Having been raised in Chicago, I've always been amazed that bay area residents permit BART to cease operation every night. Closing the whole system at midnight makes the janitorial/maintenance issue look even more stark--why the he** can't the stations be kept clean and in good repair when they are closed for a minimum of 5 hours EVERY NIGHT?

--BART carries an operating loss that is only increased by extending the system.
--BART extensions are generally based on political maneuvering, not on actual transit need or analysis. BART is one big gravy train for Bechtel, Parsons, and big joint venture contractors that build the extensions. The cost, to put it very mildly, is simply absurd.
--As BART's energy and resources continue to be poured into extensions, the core system will continue to decline, necessitating eventual total renovation (another big pay-day for the engineers and contractors).

IMO, a serious public investigation and re-evaluation of BART's management, day-to-day operation, and future viability is LONG overdue and would be a very good use of money.

Now for how it SHOULD be done:
--Extend BART (at absurd cost) to a new intermodal transfer station at the Great Mall location, where passengers can connect, cross platform, with existing VTA light rail to not one destination (downtown), but THREE: east San Jose, downtown, or Mountain View (where a Caltrain connection is available).
--Build another leg of the wye from the Pleasanton line to the east bay mainline. At present, all trains from Pleasanton turn north and head for San Francisco. At the time the Pleasanton extension was engineered, it couldn't be foreseen that San Jose/Silicon Valley would be an equally important commute destination from eastern points. Complete the wye and establish service from Dublin/Pleasanton direct to Great Mall/Main, where the transfer above could be made.

Once these projects are complete, further extension of the system should be off the table, due to absurd expense and long term viability.

Light rail, in American form or Euro form, is the only way to go for the future. It has the efficiency of high speed running on private ROW, as well as the utility of street running using relatively simple boarding platforms. This makes it perfect for both regional and local service. Bay area regional transit managers should study light rail operations around the world, then form a vision that will include the inevitable need for lines to places like Tracy, Stockton, Manteca, Modesto, etc.

In the mean time, it would be nice if bay area folks demand a little more from this bloated agency in terms of basic upkeep and maintenance.

I do agree with avogel that something is needed along the I-280 corridor through San Jose. This would be a good future line for VTA light rail.

-Robert

I agree with BobTowar. The Federal estimate of the SJ-BART is $6.7B, not the $4.6B that VTA and SVLG is talking about. With the "total" estimate income of the 30-year Measure A at around $4B, SJ-BART threatens to kill all other projects on the list, such as Caltrain electrification and light-rail extensions. An electrified commuter rail along the VTA owned old-WP right of way is a much better option than the SJ-BART. The best option to make BART useful to Santa Clara County residents is for it to extend to the Great Mall transit center, where it could connect to the light rail.

Apparently when someone agrees with you it's reasoned discourse, and when he or she disagrees it's a rant.

Building expensive subways make sense when population and employment densities are high. However the density of Santa Clara County, and even of downtown San Jose itself, is not high. In fact the densities of the Silcon Valley "campuses", surrounded as they are by hundreds of acres of beautifully-landscaped free parking, are singularly low. Because of Santa Clara County's sprawled out nature and auto-saturated culture, running another Eastbay rail service (in addition to ACE and the Capitols) into and under downtown San Jose does not make sense.

Moreover, unless the mogels of Silicon Valley scale way back on their free parking, there is virtually no chance that a BART line would affect the current flow of cars along I's 680 and 880 (or anywhere else for that matter) in any way. Anyone who actually believes that a BART line would ease freeway congestion should provide examples of where this has occured in the past.

"BART has the opportunity to shape new, truly integrated communities"

Really? Where has it done so to date? What is so new and integrated about them?

The entire proposed extension of BART into San Jose/Santa Clara will pass through areas already developed, with little opportunity for shaping anything except a few more high rise offices in downtown San Jose.

BART to San Jose is a vast and expensive exercise of "you've got one, so I want one." Or, keeping up with the Jones.