Latest Post

Parking rates begin to stabilize as the SFpark program approaches two-year milestone

Parking rates begin to stabilize as the SFpark program approaches two-year milestone

It has been nearly two years since San Francisco first launched the SFpark program to study how a parking crunch could be alleviated without increasing the supply of parking spaces. In that time, SFpark has attracted the attention of transportation professionals and geeks in the Bay Area and beyond, who are following along with interest … Continue reading »

Short Updates

  • Is the Oakland Airport Connector "too costly to stop," as Matier & Ross wrote at the Chronicle?  BART director Robert Raburn, who was elected in part on an anti-OAC campaign in the very same district hosting the OAC, at least made an inquiry and tried to do something to stop it -- but then immediately retreated upon discovering $95 million had already been spent, and that an estimated $30-150 million more would have to be spent to pay off contractors if the project were halted.  Director Keller opined that "[i]t would be a huge waste of public funds to stop at this point."  But by any worthwhile metric, the OAC will provide effectively no benefit over a less extravagant alternative bus project that could have been built for a fraction of the price.  So the dilemma should perhaps be framed thus: Do we cut our losses, having spent $125-245 million with nothing tangible to show for it -- or do we go ahead, plunder the full $484 million and deliver the project, but still have very little to show for it?  And the answer is unequivocally ... the latter!  Why stop short when you can go for the gold? The actual balance sheet is worse, of course, as the $484 million figure does not include operating costs.  Despite charging $6 fares to pay off a $100 million federal loan, an additional subsidy -- on the order of $9.85 per ride, compared to $1.95 for a bus rapid transit project -- would be required given current passenger traffic levels at the airport.  In short, public dollars are being "invested" in a way that pointlessly maximizes future costs. The fact that $95 million has already been consumed, while certainly interesting given how little there is to show for it, is immaterial when evaluating whether that additional ongoing cost is a worthwhile one to bear.  (Comments)
  • I usually follow websites and blogs through RSS and Twitter rather than Facebook, and so never really thought to create a Facebook page for this blog.  But friends have since persuaded me that it would be worthwhile to set up Facebook as well, in order to better reach readers who use Facebook but not those other tools.  So there is now finally a Facebook page for Transbay Blog.  If you're inclined to follow this site via Facebook, the page is located here, and a link has also been added to the top of the sidebar.  Thanks for reading! (Comments)

Subscribe

RSS Feed Facebook Twitter Flickr

Photos

Church Street Painted Transit Lane

Church Street Painted Transit Lane

More Photos

Archives by Month

Archives by Topic

Archives of all blog posts, organized by topics and themes. Click here for more.

Links

Links to some of our favorite urbanist and transit blogs, websites, advocacy groups, news sources, and government agencies. Click here for more.


If you are interested in California water issues, you may want to check out my other blog on that topic.

Copyright © 2007-2013 Transbay Blog.
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 45 other followers