Passenger Trains > SMART loses out on federal grant for Larkspur extension

SMART loses out on federal grant for Larkspur extension

BY MATT BROWN
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT
September 10, 2014

> The Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit authority is unlikely to receive a
> $20 million federal grant that the agency was counting on to extend
> the commuter line to Larkspur, a blow which could significantly delay
> construction on one of the key segments of the $660 million rail
> project.
>
> The news surfaced this week as other winners of the highly
> competitive Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery,
> or TIGER, grants were announced by members of Congress in at least
> two dozen states. SMART was not mentioned among the grant winners,
> whose congressional representatives were told of the awards Tuesday
> by U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx.
>
> A senior Senate staff member familiar with the list of grant winners
> said the SMART project was not among the recipients. The source spoke
> on condition of anonymity to discuss an unofficial announcement.
>
> The Department of Transportation is expected to officially announce
> the winners next week, said Howard Hill, transportation analyst in
> the department’s Office of Infrastructure, Finance and Innovation...

Full story:

SMART loses out on federal grant for Larkspur extension

Personally if I were commuting from Santa Rosa to SF I'd prefer to board at bus at the SMART San Rafael downtown station and being driven to the front door of the ferry terminal rather than having to walk from the station across Sir Francis Drake and then walk across or more likely around the entire ferry parking lot.

It rains here in winter. You'll be wet by the time you on the ferry for sure.

Personally if I were commuting between Santa Rosa and San Francisco, I would prefer
the current one-seat express bus service operated by Golden Gate Transit. The express
buses operate Santa Rosa-San Francisco with only one or two stops in between, and those
are at freeway-convenient park-and-ride lots.

Well I meant if I were commuting on SMART. If I were commuting from Santa Rosa to San Francisco and could just choose any option I'd choose helicopter probably or probably telecommuting.

OK, I don't get it, without all the details, just logically, how does 20 million sink a 660 million dollar project.

Bob

robj Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> OK, I don't get it, without all the details, just
> logically, how does 20 million sink a 660 million
> dollar project.


It does not sink the whole project but it removes direct (via shoe leather) connectivity between the trains and the Golden Gate Ferry to San Francisco.

SMART looks like it is going to be primarily Sonoma-Marin local transit. A three-seat commute is virtually unmarketable when a one-seat ride is available.

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SMART looks like it is going to be primarily
> Sonoma-Marin local transit.

Is it worth $660M just to do that?

Reminds me of another project going on in California that is a hundred times worse in regards to the boondoggle potential.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Reminds me of another project going on in
> California that is a hundred times worse in
> regards to the boondoggle potential.


Typical govt extortion technique these days for major projects: Build the less important segments first (like the bike trails or the part with the lowest projected ridership) and then cry about how we have to give them more money because obviously the most critical link needs to be completed.

99% of the ridership will be local commuters, not interstate travelers, so let the locals and CA fund the remainder, not the rest of the country.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/14 08:31 by darkcloud.

> robj Wrote:
>
> > OK, I don't get it, without all the details,
> just
> > logically, how does 20 million sink a 660
> million
> > dollar project.
>

It does not sink the whole project but it requires a 3-5 minute bus leg for connection between train and ferry, which actually will be more direct than connecting via shoe leather.

SMART looks the same as it always has--going to serve a combination of intra-district commuters as well as commuters to San Francisco. A three or four-seat commute to SF will still be worth it to many many commuters sick of sitting in 101 traffic. There is virtually no difference between a bus ride from downtown San Rafael to ferry and a walk from the future Larkspur station to the ferry as long as the bus meets the trains at the station.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/14 10:18 by sliderslider.

Which is a testament to the failed planning process in CA, which bends too far to the whims of whacko's, NIMBY's, and local micro-political interests. So instead of a very feasible plan for a station right next to the ferry, Larkspur succeeded in forcing the future ferry station to be a 1900' walk away from the actual ferry. And unlike Denver, the walk isn't in any way sheltered or enclosed and requires crossing 2 roads. It wasn't shot down because of cost, but because Larkspur didn't want the alleged horror of an elevated train crossing two wide open parking lots. More about snobbish urban myths than actual noise or reductions in retail property value/appeal.

Stupid.

And yes, numerous studies throughout the years, both in the US and around the world, have consistently shown that each added transfer kills off a significant percent of potential ridership.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/11/14 11:25 by darkcloud.

darkcloud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Which is a testament to the failed planning
> process in CA, which bends too far to the whims of
> whacko's, NIMBY's, and local micro-political
> interests. So instead of a very feasible plan for
> a station right next to the ferry, Larkspur
> succeeded in forcing the future ferry station to
> be a 1900' walk away from the actual ferry. And
> unlike Denver, the walk isn't in any way sheltered
> or enclosed and requires crossing 2 roads. It
> wasn't shot down because of cost, but because
> Larkspur didn't want the alleged horror of an
> elevated train crossing two wide open parking
> lots. More about snobbish urban myths than actual
> noise or reductions in retail property
> value/appeal.
>
> Stupid.
>
> And yes, numerous studies throughout the years,
> both in the US and around the world, have
> consistently shown that each added transfer kills
> off a significant percent of potential ridership.



Was an elevated portion to the ferry in the works? That would have been ideal obviously it's a shame that isn't happening. You know it rains here in the winter. Who wants to walk through the rain to the ferry at 730am? It doesn't make sense.

Who cares? This is properly something for Marin and Sonoma counties to pay for. Not a federal issue. The little railroad will not serve anyone but those folks.

stash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Who cares? This is properly something for Marin
> and Sonoma counties to pay for. Not a federal
> issue. The little railroad will not serve anyone
> but those folks.

Then apply that same philosophy to all the roads that get built locally with lots of Federal dollars.

Let the Golden Gate Bridge pay for it. They run the bus and ferry lines anyway. Then they could raise tolls to $25 or more. Keep the poor folk out of Marin. Perhaps charge bikers who get a free pass now.


coach Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> stash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Who cares? This is properly something for Marin
> > and Sonoma counties to pay for. Not a federal
> > issue. The little railroad will not serve
> anyone
> > but those folks.
>
> Then apply that same philosophy to all the roads
> that get built locally with lots of Federal
> dollars.