Comments on: keeping up with the Jeanses http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/ Getting around the Bay Area with Denis Cuff and the Queen of the Road Mon, 01 Mar 2010 19:51:27 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Inside Bay Area > The Capricious Commuter > for whom the road tolls http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-275 Inside Bay Area > The Capricious Commuter > for whom the road tolls Wed, 01 Nov 2006 23:04:23 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-275 [...] But back to the idea of privatization: Frequent�CC commenter�Bruce De Benedictis, in questioning my paraphrasing of California High Speed Rail’s claims of profitability and economy, asks�why no private transportation provider has stepped up to make this $30 billion project happen. [...] [...] But back to the idea of privatization: Frequent�CC commenter�Bruce De Benedictis, in questioning my paraphrasing of California High Speed Rail’s claims of profitability and economy, asks�why no private transportation provider has stepped up to make this $30 billion project happen. [...]

]]> By: transit-dependent http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-274 transit-dependent Fri, 13 Oct 2006 21:03:24 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-274 I saw your conclusion, about California not being terribly dense, as a poor excuse for our meandering record on transit issues. Los Angeles is by far the most densely populated metropolitan area in the country (much denser than New York, since the NYC suburbs are so spread-out), and the Bay Area core is large and dense enough to support several successful mass-transit systems, particularly CalTrain and AC Transit. The distance between here and LA is certainly daunting, but the tremendous air traffic between the areas indicates that high-speed rail would be successful. If we could combine high-speed rail to LA with proposed transit improvements to San Jose (ie, instead of BART, have the train go from Oakland to San Jose to LA, skipping SF but saving billions by not doing a BART extension), we'd be getting somewhere. But instead everyone is focused on the wasteful and unnecessary BART line, and San Francisco seems to think that station should be there, instead of the more densely populated East Bay. I saw your conclusion, about California not being terribly dense, as a poor excuse for our meandering record on transit issues. Los Angeles is by far the most densely populated metropolitan area in the country (much denser than New York, since the NYC suburbs are so spread-out), and the Bay Area core is large and dense enough to support several successful mass-transit systems, particularly CalTrain and AC Transit.

The distance between here and LA is certainly daunting, but the tremendous air traffic between the areas indicates that high-speed rail would be successful. If we could combine high-speed rail to LA with proposed transit improvements to San Jose (ie, instead of BART, have the train go from Oakland to San Jose to LA, skipping SF but saving billions by not doing a BART extension), we’d be getting somewhere. But instead everyone is focused on the wasteful and unnecessary BART line, and San Francisco seems to think that station should be there, instead of the more densely populated East Bay.

]]> By: Capricious Commuter http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-273 Capricious Commuter Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:28:02 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-273 Ok, ok. You inspired me. While AC Transit assures me that they hadn't won anything as of Thursday afternoon, I kept my ear to the ground and wrote about BART winning the AdWheel award for its iPod trip planner. Does AC Transit have an iPod trip planner? I wrote about AC Transit winning the bus maintenance rodeo this spring. I even took pictures of the bus driver who won the customer service competition. You didn't see that in the other papers, did you? Ok, ok. You inspired me. While AC Transit assures me that they hadn’t won anything as of Thursday afternoon, I kept my ear to the ground and wrote about BART winning the AdWheel award for its iPod trip planner. Does AC Transit have an iPod trip planner? I wrote about AC Transit winning the bus maintenance rodeo this spring. I even took pictures of the bus driver who won the customer service competition. You didn’t see that in the other papers, did you?

]]> By: Bruce De Benedictis http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-272 Bruce De Benedictis Fri, 13 Oct 2006 05:57:13 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-272 I think you meant $30 billion, not million. That is the sort of mistake the proponents want people to make. Unfortunately, I think that estimate low, too. Still, if you put $30 billion in the bank at 5% interest, it would pay you $1.5 billion a year. That would be enough to provide free service on BART, the Muni, AC Transit and several other transit systems in perpetuity. Would high-speed rail serve that many riders? Not a chance! What I do not understand about this push for high-speed rail is that it requires a huge leap from what we have now. Presently there are three surface mass-transit routes from here to Los Angeles: 1. The Coast Starlight, a very slow direct train that runs once a day. 2. The San Joaquins and other Amtrak service, which is combination bus and rail service which runs infrequently during the day, twice a day from Sacramento and three times from the East Bay. It is much faster than the Coast Daylight. It requires a transfer to a bus from Bakersfield to Los Angeles, or something like that. 3. Greyhound, which is the fastest and cheapest, but more cramped, and there is no food service on the bus. So why not start with a rail connection from Bakersfield to Los Angeles? Just that portion would be a much more useful and practical project. It still is not likely to be cheaper than driving. Current fares are about $55 on the train. That will buy you about 20 gallons of gas, which is enough to get you to Los Angeles, unless you have a real gas hog. If you take another passenger, it is no contest; driving is cheaper. I know someone will claim that you need to include insurance and depreciation, but you need to pay that even if you leave your car in an Amtrak parking lot. I should mention that although VTA and Caltrain were presumably hosts of the APTA convention, the other transit agencies were no doubt participating. I think you meant $30 billion, not million. That is the sort of mistake the proponents want people to make. Unfortunately, I think that estimate low, too. Still, if you put $30 billion in the bank at 5% interest, it would pay you $1.5 billion a year. That would be enough to provide free service on BART, the Muni, AC Transit and several other transit systems in perpetuity. Would high-speed rail serve that many riders? Not a chance!

What I do not understand about this push for high-speed rail is that it requires a huge leap from what we have now. Presently there are three surface mass-transit routes from here to Los Angeles:
1. The Coast Starlight, a very slow direct train that runs once a day.
2. The San Joaquins and other Amtrak service, which is combination bus and rail service which runs infrequently during the day, twice a day from Sacramento and three times from the East Bay. It is much faster than the Coast Daylight. It requires a transfer to a bus from Bakersfield to Los Angeles, or something like that.
3. Greyhound, which is the fastest and cheapest, but more cramped, and there is no food service on the bus.

So why not start with a rail connection from Bakersfield to Los Angeles? Just that portion would be a much more useful and practical project.

It still is not likely to be cheaper than driving. Current fares are about $55 on the train. That will buy you about 20 gallons of gas, which is enough to get you to Los Angeles, unless you have a real gas hog. If you take another passenger, it is no contest; driving is cheaper. I know someone will claim that you need to include insurance and depreciation, but you need to pay that even if you leave your car in an Amtrak parking lot.

I should mention that although VTA and Caltrain were presumably hosts of the APTA convention, the other transit agencies were no doubt participating.

]]> By: Capricious Commuter http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-271 Capricious Commuter Thu, 12 Oct 2006 17:59:32 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-271 I was writing about the event staged by APTA, at which only VTA and Caltrans were representing California. But you're right, I should acknowledge AC Transit and its standing on the national stage, so to speak. As for high-speed rail, I was only referring to the twice-delayed bond issue of nearly $10 billion. You're right that it would cost much more, something much closer to $30 billion by the High Speed Rail Authority's own estimates. And the claims about it being so cheap are also straight from the authority. No guarantee of of accuracy should be construed here. I, too, wonder why a private company wouldn't jump at the chance to create something so lucrative. Your comment reminds me that it's high time someone asked some of those companies just how risky said investment would be. I was writing about the event staged by APTA, at which only VTA and Caltrans were representing California.

But you’re right, I should acknowledge AC Transit and its standing on the national stage, so to speak.

As for high-speed rail, I was only referring to the twice-delayed bond issue of nearly $10 billion. You’re right that it would cost much more, something much closer to $30 billion by the High Speed Rail Authority’s own estimates.

And the claims about it being so cheap are also straight from the authority. No guarantee of of accuracy should be construed here. I, too, wonder why a private company wouldn’t jump at the chance to create something so lucrative. Your comment reminds me that it’s high time someone asked some of those companies just how risky said investment would be.

]]> By: Bruce De Benedictis http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/comment-page-1/#comment-270 Bruce De Benedictis Thu, 12 Oct 2006 17:29:21 +0000 http://www.ibabuzz.com/transportation/2006/10/10/keeping-up-with-the-jeanses/#comment-270 I do not understand how someone around here could talk about the APTA convention without mentioning AC Transit, which has dominated the awards for bus transit systems for the past decode or so. Also, I hope you realize that it would take considerably more than $10 billion to build a high-speed rail system to Los Angeles. $10 billion would not even build BART today. I think that you should get a projected cost and income breakdown from these backers who claim it would pay for itself, and ask them if it would pay for itself with a fare cheaper than driving, why it cannot be built with private money? I do not understand how someone around here could talk about the APTA convention without mentioning AC Transit, which has dominated the awards for bus transit systems for the past decode or so.

Also, I hope you realize that it would take considerably more than $10 billion to build a high-speed rail system to Los Angeles. $10 billion would not even build BART today. I think that you should get a projected cost and income breakdown from these backers who claim it would pay for itself, and ask them if it would pay for itself with a fare cheaper than driving, why it cannot be built with private money?

]]>