Leading local progressive group says No to BART-to-SJ extension
Image by Wikimedia Commons
The South Bay Progressive Alliance joins transit experts and fiscal watchdogs from all across the political spectrum in urging VTA to redirect funding for the misbegotten downtown SJ add-on toward more relevant, green, and cost-effective alternatives. From the SBPA website, below.
The South Bay Progressive Alliance (SBPA) urges redirecting funds from the BART Extension Phase II project to other transit solutions that offer a much better return on investment. The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) plans to spend an estimated $12 billion to construct a massive BART underground tunnel system with four stations to connect East San Jose (Berryessa BART) with Diridon Station (Caltrain) in Downtown San Jose.
The 6-mile extension, which will bring BART through downtown San Jose and into Santa Clara, costs roughly $2B/mile. The earlier 10-mile extension from Fremont to Berryessa (Phase 1) only cost $2.3B in total, or $0.23B/mile. Tunneling underground in mud, sand, and water (instead of rock) accounts for most of the 10-fold cost increase.
Using technology developed in the 1960's, BART's commuter rail system relies upon big stations along a few corridors in the sprawling Bay Area. Recently, the system has experienced a worsening of 4 mutually-reinforcing problems: low ridership, low fare box recovery, financial difficulties, and security issues.
Now is a good time to consider alternatives to the BART-Caltrain Connection like buses, light rail, or Automated Transit Networks (ATN).
The project is now expected to cost $12.7 billion and be completed in 2037, well past the date that dramatic reductions in CO2 emissions are required. This past Summer, we learned that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) agreed to commit nearly $5.1 billion to the project - leaving only a 5.5% funding gap of $700M. Then, the election happened!
Because the new administration’s Project 2025 calls for transit projects to meet “sound economic standards and a rigorous cost-benefit analysis”, it seems unlikely that the BART project will get the expected $5B from FTA. Without that funding, the project is likely to be delayed another 4, 8, or 12 years until a more favorable administration is elected.
Trips on the 6-mile 4-station extension from the Berryessa station to the Santa Clara Caltrain station will take as long as riding from the Coliseum Station to the Oakland/19th Street station (also 6 miles and 4 stations), or 13 minutes according to the BART schedule. Thus, the average speed = 27.7 mph [6 miles / (13 mins./60 mins/hr)].
BART Disadvantages
Besides high cost, the BART extension also suffers from 3 major shortcomings:
BART is slow. The average speed of BART trains between Berryessa and Santa Clara is just 27.7 mph. Add in minutes awaiting a train, riding long escalators from 75 feet underground, and walking 600 feet to Diridon Station, results in the average speed slowing to that of an electric bike. *
BART’s low ridership. While commuter rail like BART is capable of moving 50,000 people per hour, the projected ridership is 50,000 riders per day. Even if all 50,000 passengers were carried during just 5 hours of the day, technology to move 10,000 people per hour is adequate. Both LRT (Light Rail Transit) and BRT (Bus Rapid Transit) can easily handle that volume, as can 2 PRT (Personal Rapid Transit) lines.
BART’s huge carbon footprint. The steel, cement, and other materials used to construct BART require lots of energy to manufacture and deliver. Most of that energy generates lots of CO2 emissions. That is called "embedded carbon", and BART's 50-foot-wide tunnels and stations require huge amounts of it. Reports show that 20 years of electricity generation is required before overcoming the carbon embedded in building a nuclear power plant. A similar figure can be expected from the BART Extension, especially with low ridership. At a time when we need to dramatically and quickly reduce carbon emissions, the BART Extension does neither.
Alternatives
Instead of extending BART technology for $12B ($2000M/mile), quicker to implement and far less costly options—like buses, light rail, or Automated Transit Networks (ATN)—could achieve similar goals for less than $2 billion. Local funding could pay for it without the need for federal funding or time-delaying reviews.
Read the whole thing here.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.