City Hall Diary
At the General Plan Task Force meeting last week, we discussed transportation and how future VTA projects will guide San Jose’s land use. The VTA budget for new projects is funded out of the voter-approved half-cent sales tax. The tax provides partial funding for BART, light rail extension, bus rapid transit improvements, some road paving, trails and bike lanes.
The big-ticket item is BART. The low estimate to bring BART to San Jose is $5 billion, but some say the amount is closer to $10 billion. Whether you are a BART cheerleader or a skeptic, one thing both sides agree on: BART is a huge investment. It is fair to say that BART will at least have a $1 billion overrun and that the $200 million that is budgeted for trails and bike lanes alone will not close the gap on the BART shortfall.
Trails and bike lanes are two of the most important transportation options available to us. They are the smallest items in terms of funding on the “to do” list at $200 million, versus $5 billion plus for BART. I have had many different forums in my district where residents are constantly asking me about trails and bike lanes. These residents ask how they can help with grant writing, private/public partnerships, etc.
I ask myself: Why not spend the money on trails and bike lanes first since the money needed is much less than any other transportation options like BART? In addition, the talent that can be gained by working with volunteers and the community would be an asset for the VTA, city and county in our goals for trails and bike lanes.
One caveat with trail land is that for the city and county to get its best value, we must purchase land now because land appreciates in value. Trails can be expensive at around $1million a mile. However, in comparison, BART is around $500 million a mile, with an estimated completion of no sooner then 2017.
Another form of transportation discussed was the bus rapid transit lines. In addition to special preference at traffic signals, these buses travel major routes and have fewer stops. However, I would encourage that ALL the buses are equipped with real time GPS information. For example, the bus stop would have a display that would communicate to waiting passengers how many minutes till the next bus arrives. The GPS system has already been successful in Europe and many US cities today. Instead of passengers having to guess what time a bus will arrive by looking down the street from the gutter, they would simply look at the display. This would bring a higher level of consumer satisfaction and increase the number of bus riders.
I think it is prudent to pick off the lower hanging fruit for transportation projects while keeping an eye on the big picture.
What do you think?
Thanks Councilperson Oliveiro for reopening the transit priority discussion. As a businessperson, I am always baffled by how the public transit discussion always throws cost numbers around , but never seems to give a success metric number to help us understand how much is too much and how much is a good deal. For example, BART supporters always say BART is a good idea in the abstract, but never say how much would be TOO MUCH. It would be helpful if somebody could provide at least this forum with a Cost/Ride # or Cost/Usage # for these different expense items (trails, bus, light rail, BART) so we can compare apples with apples.
Given the 1M vs 5M cost/mile of bike trails v. BART building, how can anyone not agree with the councilperson that we start with trails first?
thanks
Debate questions:
Lets explore some facts that I don`t believe made it out on press reports that should have:
The annual cost for VTA to become a member of BART $50 million per year forever.
The estimated operating cost for BART from San Jose to the East Bay that VTA has to underwrite until profitable, $48 million per year.
The Estimated cost to Finance the Bond to build BART at $4.9 billion (questionable) annual payments “principle and interest $50 billion per year.
The total of these three costs are $148 million dollars per year, better known as cash flow out of VTA .
The BIG QUESTION: ” can VTA underwrite the $148 million per year plus, continue to underwrite their current operating losses at VTA for Light Rail, buses, road repairs etc.
Can VTA fund this cost and build BART to the East bay @ $4.9 billion or $10 billion all with an additional 1/8 cent sales tax increase in addition to the 1/2 % sales tax increase they got in 2000.
All we keep on hearing is the doubtful cost to build BART. Why doesn`t the press talk about the $148 million dollar annual expenditure to maintain BART, plus current costs.
I think that the most vocal advocates of BART are the one’s who would profit most from it’s construction; developers, public employee unions, and contractors.
I don’t believe that there is a widespread groundswell of public demand for this budget busting boondoggle. The City has a way of basing its’ important decision on the testimony of “experts”. But too often these “experts” have a vested interest and in no way represent the public taxpaying resident of San Jose.
San Jose City Government seems to exist solely for the benefit of San Jose City Government and not for the people.
Mr. Oliverio is the first City Council member in a long time who seems to understand his role as a representative of the people. The SPECIAL interests already have plenty of representation in City Hall. The City Council exists to represent the PUBLIC interest.
The relatively inexpensive construction of a network of bikepaths would be a (without a special parcel tax) refreshing instance of the City actually doing something for its’ residents.
PO:
BART is a big mistake and will cost this City dearly for years to come if it is built. Please look at the numbers long and hard before committing this gross amount of money for such a little benefit. At $10 billion, assuming a population of 1 million, that is $10,000 per man, woman and child in San Jose. That is just to build, not to run or maintain. With expected overruns (this is government after all), it will be even more. How many people will use BART every day? Again, projections are always higher than they turn out to be. It just does not work fiscally, ever with a basic analysis like this. How does it look based on the “real numbers” submitted by the experts. We need real information and real analysis from an unbiased, non-government source.
We could probably get VTA rail from Alum Rock and White to De Anza college for that much.
Coucilmember Oliverio,
You are right on here. As a long time advocate of parks, trails and recreation here in San Jose, it is certainly time the City expand it’s visioning to see that trails, and infrastructure improvements, as well as parks are an economic essential and will make us a great city. The public has gone on record stating this a their priority and I am happy to hear that you’ve heard it.
Helen,
I`m with you and Oliverio 100% on the trails and parks. Barry Swenson promised a Park and trails at Tamien Station, he promised Smart Growth Towers too, but is renaging on the park ant trails. There is no retail on the ground floor nor office space in the tower. Barry Swenson Co. promises one thing and does as he pleases.
Helen and Pierluigi, BART is another subject, it has to do with VTA, is controlled by insiders. The only control we have is to say yes or no on sales tax increases.
Correction on #3, sorry.
The Estimated cost to finance principle and interest payments is $50 million per year ( not $50 billion per year). Excuse the error.
Gotta love the VTA and their recent campaign, “The NEW VTA.” What a slick campaign…The new VTA means less service (especially for the poor), but we should be excited to pay the same for less!
I agree with those calling for more info and an honest accounting. (Didn’t they already cut out two BART stations…one at SJSU?)
I really don’t think that BART is coming anytime soon. And, what about cheaper alternatives? What about bringing it just to N San Jose?
Pete Campbell
I agree that the BART project costs too much for the benefits it gives. And Richard Zappelli is correct that those opposed to BART don’t get a fair hearing in the press, despite a recent Scott Herhold column. Let’s get Bay Rail Alliance and Eugene Bradley’s group to the table.
Thank you.
Hugh
Trails and bike paths can be completed way quicker than BART to SJ, and will get used a whole lot more. This is a no-brainer (no offense intended, Pier).
Much as the current VTA trolley system leaves to be desired (like a transit mall bypass), the idea that we could build a lot more trolley lines for less than it would cost to bring BART here is something to consider—if it can be done wisely. SF has BART service but the bulk of public transit riders are on the Muni trolleys or buses. We already have CalTrain and the trolley connects with it at Cahill Station and Tamien. I would much rather have our regional transit connection remain CalTrain to SF (as it has been for over 100 years) than BART to the likes of Oakland, or even worse, Richmond, or even worse Baypointe. Why make it any easier for the thugs to get to downtown SJ than it already is?
880 is one of the biggest bottlenecks in they Bay, and assuming San Jose takes its share of the 50% growth expected in California, it going to become a necessity. The price of the project is going to keep rising, wouldn’t it be smartest to get the ball rolling as soon as possible?
BART as it exists now is a huge boondoggle. It is not and can never be RAPID transit, since each train stops at each station…much like our ridiculous light rail trolleys in SJ.
Regional transit, rapid or otherwise, can never work in a horizontally-developed, low-density environment like most places in California. When will the transpo-flacks ever realize this? Ooops, they can’t, ‘cuz then they’d have to get real jobs.
#9 Richard…. WRONG . . . Principle and interest on $6.1 Billion over 30 years with interest at 5% is $327 Million per year. (check the math on this)
This would put the P&I on $5 Billion closer to $270 Mil / yr.
Then add the BART membership fee of $50mil/yr and operating loss and a little cost over-run and you are easily at $1/2 Billion /yr.
Anyone wanta guess what that will take in sales tax hikes?
Anyone wanta take a guess at what that will do to all other VTA people moving projects?
VTA might then be in the land sales and high rise development business; but other than BART VTA will not have the money to be in the people-moving business. (My guess)
Policy is one thing…
Reality is another.
Build a good network of bike trails and I won’t be needing BART, personally.
And #5—‘Unbiased non-Government source’ is a funny little phrase. You’d prefer a ‘Shareholder-owned unbiased source’ perhaps?
Trails and bike lanes are two of the most important transportation options available to us.
Wrong.
They are both important from a quality of life perspective, and I agree they should be done before BART. However, from a transportation perspective they are next to zero in regard to the number of people using them for actual transportation needs. The only thing used even less for actual transportation purposes is general aviation.
Trails, bike lanes, and general aviation are overwhelmingly used for recreational purposes, and should be evaluated in that context.
Again, I will support trails and bike lanes before BART.
I’m againsr BART to SJ. But are bikepaths a viable alternative?
Mr. Schwerin points out: “At $10 billion, assuming a population of 1 million, that is $10,000 per man, woman and child in San Jose.” Wouldn’t that get every man, woman and child in SJ an Outreach vehicle to wherever they wanted to go?
#6—and how many riders/day would that be from Alum Rock to De Anza?
RZ: your math is no better than your spelling.
Ooooops…
The subject of BART, VTA, costs, tax increases and choices has raised its head… time to shut this down and move on.
#3 Richard
Correct me if I’m wrong here…
1) BART San Jose to Fremont project could run $6.1 Billion by conservative estimates.
2) Over 30 years and at 5% interest, payback would be $327 Million per year.
3) Add $50 Million per year just for BART membership fees starting with ground breaking.
4) Add to that the $48 Million per year operating deficit.
5) This BART project thing could cost VTA, SCC and we in San Jose…. $425 Million per year?
6) And given any cost overruns, delays or inflation in construction costs, VTA and the County could be facing an annual obligation of $500,000,000 per year.
7) Given the current Fed, State, County, VTA and San Jose deficits; will we be able to afford this?
We need affordable, viable and cost-efficient solutions to our county-wide transportation needs.
Is BART-to-Fremont that solution?
#14 JMO.
You are 100% correct. I have spent lots of time in major cities in America and mass transit is only used where high density housing is prevelant. New York, Chicago and Boston are the most notable. It would not be viable to install in this area because of your stated reasons.
Pierluigi,
I`m a strong believer of “Smart Growth” and I`m opposed to urban sprawl.
I believe in open government and I`m opposed to “censors”. Censors that use their power as a organized group and, that use the power of the force to stop or remove those that disagree with them.
This group of organized censors here in our city and county prevent the truth on major issues like BART from getting out. These people believe that ” you agree with us or you are our enemy”, or you agree with me or you are the enemy!
Open Government at the City and County levels allow open debate with those that agree with them and those that may have a differant opinion.
The truth on BART needs to come out and can only come out without opponents of the organized force being censored.
This “organized force” know who they are, many of the cities voters know who they are, they are the same individuals we hear from in the press all the time, they all lean in the same direction.
The last 1/2 Sales Tax increase on the ballot failed because of a lack of faith or trust in what the proponents of BART from San Jose to the East Bay were telling us. Because of their continued efforts to block both sides of the argument any future sales tax increases will most likely fail also.
We need to have an open debate by the leaders of those for and opposed to BART.
It would be nice if we had experinced transp[ortation experts involved in the debate. The “organized force” should not be the ones that pick the transportation experts for the debate.
We keep on hearing from the same “old” people all the time. In the debate this force should be represented too, but we need to hear from the other side too. We need to be careful when we pick the moderator too. We need a neutral moderator.
We are talking about a transportation project that will cost way up in the “Billions of Dollars”. Because of this it is important that we have a fair and open debate.
A good question or subject for debate might be : “CAN VTA AFFORD TO DO BOTH”, CAN VTA CONTINUE TO UNDERWRITE VTA`S CURRENT OPERATING LOSSES AND AT THE SAME TIME UNDERWRITE THE ANNUAL OPERATING LOSSES OF BART TO THE EAST BAY”?
This debate should take place before we go onto the next question?
“Next Question” VTA has other questions too, like how are they going to fix our roads, purchase Hybrid buses, fix our gridlokk problems on all the other freeways and major interchanges in Santa Clara County.But first the debate.
Don`t forget the BART to the East Bay from San Jose is planned to operate on “one” track, making a lot of stops. This is not “Rapid Transit”, three tracks are needed to be Rapid Transit. BART has xtra large parking lots, where would we build them in Santa Clara and San Jose?
BART is broke, Who is going to hire the new BART south bay Police Chief and special BART police officers, San Jose or Warm Springs. San Jose is broke and Warm Springs doesn`t have that kind of money to hire enough poilce officers for the new extension.
BART backers, endorcers don`t think about these extra details needed for BART. Most of the insiders live outside of San Jose in Los Gatos, Los Altos Hills, Aptos and Palm Springs. They want nothing to do with this mess they created in San Jose.
As long as I’m thinking about VTA, it’s wasteful ways, and it’s underworked, overpayed employees I’ll point out the fact that at VTA’s Cerone facility off Zanker Rd. there is what appears to be an RV park.
I’m guessing that VTA allows employees to park and live in their motorhomes there.
My only questions are;
1) Do they pay any rent?
and
2) If not, can I park a motorhome there too?
If this perq is not explicitly written into their contracts then I see no reason why bus drivers should have any more claim to that publicly owned land than I do.
After all, I happen to be an actual taxpaying resident of the City.Presumably, the employees who live in this RV Park are non-residents and only live there when they happen to be in town working.
I’ve been a cheerleader for BART during this past decade (especially because the first SJ station would be very close to me) but considering the fiscal mess our county is now in, this is a pipe dream we may just have to abandon for the time being. I think Mark has a point as well. Most of those East Bay cities with BART stations aren’t desirable places to visit anyways.
I’m against the sales tax because that kind of increase mainly hurts low income residents. I’m much rather support something where the wealthy are paying more.
#32, #33
Your constant grammatical and spelling errors are making me wonder about the accuracy of your financial data. In other words, you are starting to do more damage than good in regard to opposing BART.
#20
re 2) $6.1 billion financed at 5% over 30 year is actually $393 million per yr. (not $327mil)
Trails and bike paths first.
What is the cost per mile of the light rail? Would it be cheaper to extend the light rail to Fremont?
There is already ACE heavy rail service from San Jose to Fremont. Why not just put a link from the Fremont rail station to Bart? That’s a very short distance.
The biggest problem to the user is that there are all these systems—ACE, Caltrain, Muni, Bart, VTA, AC transit, and none of them really work with each other.
Look at London, England. The city center is dense but the burbs are not much denser than here and they go a long way out. They have heavy rail, light rail, the underground and buses all integrated together and you can use all of them with a single pass.
Plus the underground goes right into the airport.
The Santa Clara Caltrain station is literally two blocks from San Jose airport but it’s on the wrong side. Light rail is on the right side but it doesn’t go in.
If you just linked together what we have now we’d get there faster and cheaper.
David,
I`m using their numbers. You have to go on line to find them, but they are available. I`m not a investigative reporter, but their numbers , when you add them up sound scary enough to me.
You noticed I used the construction cost of $4.9 billion, even when the MTA report set estimated cost at $6.1 Billion in 2006. They chose to hang on to their old number of $4.9 billion from 2002 even though they knew they were incorrect and did not contain finance costs.
THE BIG ITEM is they failed to tell us they signed a GUARENTEE for BART people in the event they got behind in their payments BART could attach VTA`s bank account- bringing all VTA services to a halt. They never disclosed this important item, nor did the press disclose the important item, “THE GUARENTEE”.
Are you surprised, I`m not. Just think about the “endorcers of BART to the East Bay”, why didn`t they disclose all the facts to the voters?
I think the VTA plan from the beginning was to not disclose all the facts. They just wanted to get enough money to start the project and then go to the voters and say…wow, we ran out of money…we need a bail out…MORE TAXES fro the TAX PAYERS.
Nice bunch of guys.
I’m amused that the pro-BART folks didn’t come out in droves for this one.
PLO is right on the money here. There are a ton of projects that can be done now, with the money we have. BRT lines and trails have got to be two of the cheapest forms of alternative transportation out there. It makes very good sense to do them now.
To answer David D. # 20’s question of “can we afford this?”, the answer is clearly no. The federal government gave the project a “not recommended” rating precisely because the VTA could not demonstrate that it had funds to build and operate BART. (Among other reasons. There are also issues with questionable ridership projections and a high cost per new rider.)
Alot of comments have been made about the big dollars…so here’s a perspective on a smaller scale, that of a rider.
In my experience as a former commuter, BART is just awful. I used to commute to/from SJ to SF and can attest that BART was dirty, expensive and slow. (Full disclosure: I still take BART to Raider games, but at least Raider fans provide a great source of amusement along the way)
BART was dirty because it appeared no one cleaned the cars. Litter was everywhere. There were stains in the seats, and some seats you didn’t want to sit in, period. Some cars smelled. The air conditioning/heating was not consisitent in each car.
It was expensive – it didn’t offer a very good monthly pass program, and the regular rider price continued to rise in order to accommodate the low ridership/escalating costs. (The result of poor projections!)
It was SLOOOOW—BART has to stop at every stop, so it took ~45 minutes to get from Millbrae station to Civic Center station, vs. the ~ 15 minutes it took on Caltrain; Millbrae to 4th/Townsend. I switched after a while, to Caltrain permenantly. Had a much better experience too.
I would like to see benchmarking studies done, best practices/lessons learned results analyzed, and all of it disclosed so we know what we may be getting into.
My .02.
Councilmember Oliverio:
I strongly suggest you visit and read these web sites that monitor VTA, in particular the proposed BART extension:
http://vtawatch.blogspot.com/
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/ (the group I run)
This will give you many of the hidden facts about VTA that you do not – and likely will not – get from fellow councilmembers.
I also suggest you (and others) read two stories from the November 5, 1997 issue of the San Francisco Bay Guardian. One story deals with the backroom deals and cost overruns created the original BART district and initial line in the East Bay:
http://tinyurl.com/yvarhl
One story describes how local and regional priorities toward BART slowly destroy the Bay Area’s bus system:
http://tinyurl.com/2gt7nu
You will quickly find that the same slow destruction of VTA’s bus system is what is truly happening with the proposed BART extension.
Pete:
The VTA watchdog/advocacy group I run (with some input from Hugh H.!) found that some of the New* VTA is not what is advertised. See:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/bus/restructuring2008.html
for the dirt on why VTA’s ad campaign should have an * to it.
#20 David:
To calculate the payments, did you use the add-on method or the deduction method of compound interest payments?
Based on what you said in point 5 you made, and based on county tax revenue estimates from the State Board of Equalization
http://www.boe.ca.gov/legdiv/sutleg/pdf/sb0264-1dw.pdf
VTA and the county would need the equivalent of a 1.50% to 1.75% sales tax increase.
VTA would have to get a waiver from the state to exceed the 2% limit in district taxes that can be legally charged. Remember: you already pay 3 forms of sales taxes to VTA…
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/ffa/taxme.html
which total 1.25% of the current 8.25% sales tax you pay in the county.
VTA and the SVLG would have to run the equivalent of 12 to 15 sales tax campaigns to make this work. Would the entire county be willing to have up to 10% in sales taxes just to support a single corridor, all-local-stops rail extension? Would YOU be willing to live, work, and/or shop in such a county with a high sales tax?
Thanks, Blue Fox.
Look at the numbers. Go on line and connect the dots. The big damage will come if VTA builds BART.
#34 Blue Fox (great name)
re: the constant grammatical and spelling errors
You have a point. I suffer from the same thing but worse at times. It’s all about proof reading over and over. When the fingers, in this case maybe only two, are trying to keep up with the mind that is reading and researching, it’s hard to do both.
In his case, as is with most bright caring people, judge by the intent and content. Maybe when the writer’s strike is over and he can afford an admin, it will be an easier read.
I have proofed this 17 times and I approve this message.
#34 and #36
David and the “Blue Fox”.
You know one of my best friends use to watch me type ! As he stood over my shoulder and watched me type, he used to say:” Richard, I`ve always liked to watch the handi cap work, they are fun to watch”. Thats me !
Please excuse me people, I`ve learned to watch myself and laugh too.
Pierluigi Oliverio writes “I think it is prudent to pick off the lower hanging fruit for transportation projects while keeping an eye on the big picture.”
It’s a pity that your colleagues on the City Council don’t see it this way. That recent op-ed by Reed and Liccardo shows that they’re still drinking SLVG Kool-Aid.
I’m disappointed with Reed, who campaigned against the waste of the Ron Gonzales, rightly pointing out how much money was wasted in building the “Taj Gonzales” on East Santa Clara Street. Reed can’t make the connection that BART-to-SJ represents another Taj
Gonzales
I’ll be voting “no” on the 2008 sales tax increase.
HUGH
#29 Tina
Your $0.02,
worth Billions
Tina#29
The High Street station for BART is in a neighborhood you wouldn`t want to walk in during daylight hours. People have been shot during daylight hours in the area near High Street inbetween I-880 and San Leandro Blvd. It is an area heavy with drug dealers and all types of crime. This is true of most of the BART east bay Cities.
Most of the warehousing on the east bay along the BART route have high fences and two armed security officers at their entry gates. There are several warehouses in the area over 1 million square feet in size that store expensive imported items and imported liquor from the “Port of Oakland”. The crime extends from the City of Richmond south beyond Hayward. BART is the new vehicle of choice for criminals to escape on.
Cars average 141 brake ins per month in BART parking lots on the east bay.The Mayor of Oakland in his “State of the City” speach “2008” was on TV requesting 100 new police officers. BART apecial Police Chief is requesting 60 additional Police officers for the BART poplice. He wants to add half of the new poilce officers to be a bicycle unit to ride through the BART parking lots during the day. The remaining police officers he wants to be undercover plain clothes to catch drug dealers, muggers and( terrorists), to ride the BART cars and work in the BART underground stations.
#15 David,
We need to focus on “three annual costs” before we build BART to the East Bay. If we don`t “we” will most likely bankrupt VTA as we know it today.
(1) The cost to become a member of BART, $50 million per year.
(2) Estimated operating cost to operate BART from San Jose to the East Bay per year $48 million per year. ($48 million figure supplied by VTA).
(3) The annual payments to pay the principle and interest on the construction loan.The old figure supplied eight years ago was $50 million per year, but this figure didn`t include interest. The cost has skyrocked since this number was established ($4.9 billion). Your number might be closer to the truth, (see # 15)
Adding up these three figures up totals $148 million a year. But #3 needs to be updated and #2 needs to be endorced today (2008) by VTA officials, they need to be held accountable.
The Big Question is,” can VTA underwrite this loss figure to operate BART/Santa Clara County and still underwrite the continuing losses at VTA for buses and Light Rail ?
Can VTA do both ? This is a very serious question.
If the answer is no and we move forward with BART, then VTA will go bankrupt.
#38 item 2)…
Update: … (and this comes from the same sources that have been understated and slow to disclose)
Current estimated BART-to-Fremont operationg costs would be $85 Million per year.
(old number was $48mil/yr)
Richard Zappelli,
Keep posting! I love reading your comments. I have a horrible time with spelling too, and difficulty with punctuation. Try typing out what you want to say on Word, and use your spell checker. Most programs also have a grammar, and punctuation corrector. Cut and paste your finished thoughts onto the blog. I still make mistakes, but it helps me tremendously.
#42 The number you quote on BAREC is incorrect. They are not putting 600 units on 17 acres. They are putting 165 Affordable Senior Housing units and 110 market rates units which equals 275 units not 600. Source: Santa Clara Weekly.
Also I have never seen 20 story buildings in San Jose even in Downtown. 20 story towers outside of Downtown exageration. More like 8 stories like the building at Bird and San Carlos.
As someone who works up the peninsula and recently moved to a condo by a transit station so I can take the train north to work 2-3 days a week vs. 5 days a week driving. Good for me, good for the other drivers on the freeway and good for the environment.
Can’t make the meeting since I will still be at work.
Richard Zappelli wrote:
“The VTA people and it`s [sic] endorcers [sic] say they can cover this annual $435 million expence with another “1/8” cent sales tax increase. Do you think the Mercury News and the SVLG group will tell us the “1/8” sales tax increase will cover every thing?”
Besides that, don’t you think that Santa Clara County’s regressive sales tax is high enough at 8.25%? Look here to see how much of that currently goes to VTA:
http://www.vtaridersunion.org/ffa/taxme.html
Let VTA live within their means. If the BART project is too expensive to build and operate with the existing cash flow, then scale the project down to something more affordable.
#43 Ryan,
I agree with you and your remarks on Cal Train. I used the CalTrain Express train week days from San Jose to San Francisco and back. Express to San Francisco during commute hours, “45 min. Can`t be done in a car. CalTrain is not only fast but it`s clean, the CalTrain Station(Diridon) parking lot in San Jose is safe compared to BART parking lots where BART parking lots average 140 brake-ins per day (S.F. Chronicle).
With CalTrain you save money on Gas and wear and tear on your car. San Francisco parking is expensive.
Regarding news print when it comes to facts, don`t hold your breath. The Mercury News has been telling us for eight years that the cost to build BART to the East Bay is $4.9 billion, not true. They have never disclosed any of the annual cost figures to operate BART, which are enough to sink VTA. Consider too that VTA current operations are operating at a loss for Light Rail and Bus Service. VTA can`t do both.
VTA promiced us in writting on our balot`s for Measure A and B in 2000 specific items that they haven`t delivered on.
Tamien Station, we were promised things by the same developer that wants to build San Carlos @ Sunol Street VTA property that never came true.
The plan for the VTA San Carlos Street property calls for four towers at differant heights, the tallest 20 floors. This along with other developments along Lincoln Avenue, San Carlos and Auzrais Streets are going to cause serious traffic problems in the area.
BAREC developers can do anything they want and are not tied to anything the news papers say or the balot says.
#39
Thanks for the update David.
Is the new $6.1 billion dollar estimate introduced to us ( January 29th) in the Mercury News Opinion Section is still good ? A study from USC on building BART from San Jose to the East Bay put the cost at $8.5 Billion.
In the third quarter of 2007 Barry Witt at the Mercury News was still telling us the cost was $4.9 Billion.
Barry was unwilling to discuss the three annual costs for Santa Clara County to operate BART to the East Bay,” the membership fee $50 million per year, the operating cost $85 million per year, and the annual payment for the Bond including principle and interest which now hast to be over $300 million per year”. The total cost to VTA per year would be over $ 435 million per year once the system activates.
The VTA people and it`s endorcers say they can cover this annual $435 million expence with another “1/8” cent sales tax increase. Do you think the Mercury News and the SVLG group will tell us the “1/8” sales tax increase will cover every thing?
Johnmichael, hoe about our road repairs from Measure A & B. Do you believe VTA will be able to factor them into the new 1/8 cent sales tax increase ?
Kathleen,
I thought I was the only handicapped person on SJI. You too?
Tonite at the County Building at 6pm in the VTA room there will be a open meeting for residents to discuss their concerns about VTA selling their property on the corner of San Carlos St. @ Sunol Street to Barry Swenson Co so Barry can build four 20 story condo buildings on that site. Any concerns they ask us ? Like they really care about all the grid lock. George Mrcus of Summerhill got the go on 600 new condo`s on BAREC on Winchester near I-280. New high rises going up on the corner of Meridian @ San Carlos Blvd. All these new developments close to I-280.
VTA says,” NOT TO WORRY” we are going to solve the traffic problems on Interstate 280 with BART from San Jose to the East Bay.
Kathleen,I have no intention of moving to San Leandro or Hayward just to make the BART program successful. Another problem is it will take residents living in Santa Clara one hour to get to downtown San Jose on I-280 to get to the downtown SJ BART station. Another problem, when they get downtown SJ where will they park their car. Has BART planned one of their huge parking lots downtown?
Don`t worry,VTA isn`t worried.
#41 you said <<The VTA people and it`s endorcers say they can cover this annual $435 million expense with another “1/8” cent sales tax increase.>>
The VTA FY 2007 Adopted Budget, pg 10, line 11 shows the 1/2cent Sales Tax provided $150mil.
That would peg revenues from a 1/8cent sales tax at $37.5mil.
If VTA is strained for operating funds, and it’s long range capital improvement plan (without BART) is $2 to $3 Billion under funded, will there be any language in the 1/8cent tax measure binding VTA to apply this new tax only to funding ongoing operations and prohibit any portion of it from being spent on SVRT or BART?
Ralph-
VTA already has two half cent taxes. The first is 100% for operations. The second is currently about 18% for operations. Nothing I know of keeps them from increasing that percentage.
So the short answer is that you don’t need a new tax if you want to increase spending on buses.
Nor can a new tax effectively be restricted to be only buses. If you did, the VTA can easily reduce the amount from either of the other half cent taxes.
#47 Greg
So you’re saying just give VTA the money and they will decide what to spend it on.
I’ve lived in san jose for over 30 years, this debate about BART has come and gone every single year without any resolution. Why? Each set of buffoons we have had in office has this grand idea of San Jose being more than just a bedroom community; they have shuddered and scoffed at the idea that people might leave san jose to work elsewhere and in turn take their business to another city.guess what? because of this short sighted mentality we have congestion and the biggest joke of a light rail system, that only creates more traffic jams with its preferential signal light treatment, adding on average 5 additional minutes per stop and puts the traffic flow out of sync with our light system.
yes, BART will cost a ton, but consider it the tax we’ve been forced to pay for not moving forward when the rest of the bay area had the vision to do so decades ago. San jose is nothing more than a wanna be town too busy smelling the garlic fries emanating from its own anus.
#43 Ryan,
I attended the VTA Board of Directors meeting last nite (February 7th) at the County building. I pickrd up a copy of the “Presentation to the VTA Board of Directors, from VTA management. The report called for “four 19-20 story towers” to be constructed on the VTA property at San Carlos Street @ Sunol Street. The report went on to say,“800 units”. It also said 100% Land Sale @ $18.5 billion. Exclusive Negotiations began 4/2/07. Selection of Architect 6/2007. Working to finalize DDA. Finalize DDA (winter 2008). Complete conceptual design (3/08).
Big Problem: no community outreach meetings have been held.
Protests came from reps. from Willow Glen Neighborhood Association, Shasta-Hanchet Neighborhood Association, Buens Vista Neighborhood Association.
An on record request was made to the Chair Person to begin the “Sunshine Process at VTA, “open government” reporting.Also a ten day notice to all residents of all meetings comming up, any documents relating to those meetings, “on line”. Provide public notice of “all VTA meetings, on line. Everything on VTA website on Google Standard Easy to find data. Make it easy for all documents to be downloaded by residents on home computers.
In otherwords an ethical standard of behavior.Provide information for ethical choices.
Government shines when the “sunshine process is in place”.
Hey Ralphie Boy, why are you concerned about VTA? You live in Bensonhurst with me and dem udder bums.
Ralph,
If you ever get in trouble, remember Ed Norton lives upstairs.
Alice
#50
>>> It also said 100% Land Sale @ $18.5 <<<billion.
Was that billion or million?
#50
Thanks for the update on the meeting. San Jose is stuck in the Beaver Cleaver surburbia mindset…might as well build suburban sprawl all the way to Morgan Hill. I would not have a roof over my head if someone blocked where I live today. I assume you meant $18.5 million and not billion?
Question for Sam Liccardo,
Being a member of the VTA Board and Council person for the District closest to District six,Pierluigi`s Dstrict, I believe you can understan some of the traffic problems both Districts share along the Interstate 280 corridor, highway 87 and U.S.101. All grid locked during commute hours.
I am a believer in Smart Growth and I know why our City has to move in that direction. I am also a strong backer of rapid transit in our City/County. I`d like to see us design and develop a comprehensive transportation system as a solution to our serious traffic congestion problems.
I`d like to see our developers include Green buildings in all our future buildings.
I would like to see our Trail system grow. The Los Gatos Creek trail connecting our two Districts, Downtown San Jose and Willow Glen are in trouble of being compleeted because a developer wants to build row houses on land that was schudled to be used for trail at Coe between Bird and Lincoln Avenues.
My first concerns have to be with the Interstate 208 corridor which has serious grid lock problems during morning and evening commute hours. To view the problem, one has to walk over the Bird Ave. overpass over I-280 and stop midway and look down on the Interstate wher traffic slows at times as slow as 10mph.
When I look to the “VTA Mission statement” and read: VTA is a special district responsible for bus and Light Rail operations, “congestion management, specific highway imporvement projects and county wide transportation planning…involved with transit highways, bikeways and pedestrian facilities”.
I see the value of the Light Rail/bus system along the Vasona corridor and how all the high density development will help Light Rail ridership, help rail commuters that can use that system.
My concern is the effect all this big high density housing are going to effect our main City roadways and Interstate 280 conjestion. If half the new residents ride the light rail and the other half use Bird Ave. Lincoln Ave and Meridian Ave arteries to get on I-280. What will happen when these new residents enter the down ramp to get on the Interstate and they can`t because the Interstate is jamed.
Do the VTA people do traffic studies to determine future traffic conjestion problems and solutions caused by all the new developments along the Interstate.
From San Carlos Blvd. @ Sunol Sts. west to San Carlos and Meridian Ave. South to Parkmor, over to Auzreais, there is a lot of high density housing underconstruction underway. Not just the two developments VTA exec`s showed on the monitors at the VTA meeting on Thursday evening. There the Sobrato development with a project as big as VTA/Barry Swenson`s 800 unit project, the KB homes project, the two new high rises going on the corner of Meridian at San Carlos southwest corner.The Summerhill project on the old Lou`s Village property and the public storage area they plan to develop also.
Cross over the Interstate 280 at Meridian Ave and you come up on the big developments on Southwest Expressway at Fruitdale, more on St. Elizabeth drice at Cursi Drive. Then the big Willow Glen development on Meridian at Foxworthy.
I wish you would take a ride through this area with Pierluigi Oliverio and Ken Yeager and see all this development.
Add to all this all the Downtown San Jose development that will be trying to use I-280 traffic.
Is VTA with their “Mission” and Vision see the problem developing ? Do they have a plan?
Willow Glen residents use Interstate 280 to get to the U.S. 101 which is more traffic for the Interstate.
How about the conjestion at the interchange of I-280/hwy 87, Intersection of Meridian at I-280, the I-880/I-280 interchange, the I-280/Winchester Blvd. intersection ( and now comes BAREC traffic when compleeted)
Sam, how are we going to solve this problem ? Does VTA have a plan?
U.S. Dot is broke, Calif. Dot is broke. Who`s going to help us?
#53 Ralph,#54 Ryan yes 18.5 million.
Ryan, I believe in “Smart Growth” I know why we have to go in that direction. I also am a strong supporter of Rapid Transit. I would like to see San Carlos Street cleaned up at that end. I believe we missed the point of a “Green City” when we built the new City Hall and the Tamien Station Building, the first of 5 high rises at Alma St. @Lelong Sts. The reason we have the Tamien building looking as good as it does is because of pressure from the people from the Willow Glen Neighborhood Association getting involved.
Still at Tamien Station Development the Basrry Swenson Co., promised was a Smart Growth project with a park, trail and retail. He is now renaging on his promices. There is nothing that can be done because the developer and VTA moved to fast without community outreach and the first tower is just over the District Six line and in Cindy Chavez district. Hwy #87 seperates what was the Ken Yeager District and Cindy Chavez district. This is why everyone was at the VTA meeting complaining. They learned their lesson at Tamien Station.
The three district six residents and Ken Yeager were not opposed to the development, they were opposed to the size of the development, 4-20story high rises, 800 units without any concern for the traffic impact to the neighborhood streets and Interstate 280. The “KB homes project, the proposed size of the VTA/Swenson project of 800 units, the Sobratto project with 600 units- just one block away and the two high rises on the corner of San Carlos at Meridian, the Summerhill project on San Carlos near Meridian on the Lou`s Village property and their plan to purchase the public storage project next to the Lou`s Village project will bring a lot of traffic to the area.
These projects total over 3000 new units in a quarter mile radius. The Sobrato project had no problems with the neighborhood organizations because Sobrato Co. did their neighborhood outreach meetings first. There was nothing sneaky about the Sobrato project and they were a known quality builder.
The traffic impact on this area is a major concern, Smart Growth planning and design too were also a concern of the neighborhoods. The sneaky planning became an issue.
Just think if 1/2 of these new residents used the Light Rail, that would have been a good thing. Consider if the other half tried to get on Interstate 280 using Bird ,Lincoln or Meridian Avenues to get on the Interstate in an area where the Interstate is already grid locked during the busy commute hours?
Residents have to live with the traffic problems in an area long after the developer takes his profits and runs. Neighborhood concerns need to be addressed.
Many residents living in high density projects also complain about a lack of good parking facilities near their development. It doesn`t do any good to complain if you don`t get involved from the begining.
Is it time for VTA to begin plans for a comprehensive transportation system County wide ? Is it to late ?
#49 smartmover,
Something to consider. If you were to get on the new BART at Diridon Station and I were to get on the ACE train @ Diridon Station and we both rode to Warm Springs I would arrive before you.
BART, is not rapid transit. The “R” in BART is misleading as it means “Rapid”, nothing could be further from the truth.
BART from San Jose to the East Bay is going to make a lot of stops in between San Jose and the East Bay. Also it is going to be a single track system. To be true “Rapid” transit it would require “3” tracks.
Yesterday i saw a “5” car light rail unit. Five light Rail cars hold 425 passangers, five BART cars hold 325 passengers. “Big Dirrerance.
Express Light Rail to Warm Springs from Milpitas to Warm Springs moving as fast as the Light Rail service does from Santa Teresa Light Rail along 85 to 87 to Curtner would be fast servise to Warm Springs as Light Rail can get up to 65mph. with 425 passangers in 5 cars.
Richard Zappelli wrote:
“Many residents living in high density projects also complain about a lack of good parking facilities near their development. It doesn`t do any good to complain if you don`t get involved from the begining.”
I can understand this. When I was looking for a condo near downtown SJ a few years back, one of the developments I toured was close enough to the Shark Tank that all of the street parking in the neighborhood was permit only. I couldn’t imagine ever having a party for my friends at my place if they couldn’t park. Fortunately I found a place where this would not be much of a problem.
#57 Richard you said… >>Yesterday i saw a “5” car light rail unit. Five light Rail cars hold 425 passangers, five BART cars hold 325 passengers. “Big Dirrerance. <<
30% more passengers at what could be half the cost? delivered in half the time? and scaleable to the Valley’s growing needs on an annual basis?
Sounds good; sounds practical; maybe even like common sense; but it’s not near as sexy as BART and it won’t dress up those huge new ball parks and developments in Alameda County that SVLG and builders are salivating over.
Richard; you have to think of them; they have needs too you know. It’s not always about being practical and using common sense.
Besides, this is way too complex and sophisticated for us voters; we should let those who know tell us how to think.
Grid lock problemd along U.S.101 and Interstate 280 seem serious. With all the new high density housing development along 1o1,280and 87 it seems like we are heading into a very serious problem. This problem could add to traffic problems on city roadways too.
Pierluigi and Sam Liccardo, is there a solution in the works?
Sam, Pierluigi is having town meetings where we can input our concerns. You are our VTA rep for our District and many of us would like to see you get involved in VTA town meetings.
This problem if not addressed could cause a lot of politicians future problems at elections if not addressed.
#57 Richard
and besides, it’s only a fraction of a cent here,
a fraction of a cent there,
hardly enough to count,
and tax money at that.
San Jose can’t open pools for kids to swim in the summer or aford restrooms in some parks, but we can afford $billions for BART?
Oh yes; I forgot, it’s green and reeeely cool.
Alice, where’s my lunch box? I’m late for work.
#24 wrote:” I’m much rather support something where the wealthy are paying more.” So, I guess you’re not wealthy. Always easy to have someone else pay for your benefit, eh?
#26 wrote:“The Santa Clara Caltrain station is literally two blocks from San Jose airport but it’s on the wrong side.” TWO BLOCKS? Not from the terminals, sir. Do you want to walk those “two blocks” schlepping bags and towing the wife and kids?
#28: I don’t know what a BRT line is, sorry. But to consider trails and whatever BRT lines as a viable alternative for someone driving 10+ miles for work is…words fail me, it’s so ridiculous.
I see lots of #s bandied about. Re Construction and operating costs #s supplied by BART or VTA or SVLG—double them. Re ridership numbers, cut them by two-thirds. That will be close to the real picture. I can’t believe any city/county govt. types continue to talk about this boondoggle as if were anywhere near viable…even in good economic times with budget surpluses. And trusting the incompetents @ VTA to make this work—I want want you’re smoking.
Why is this even a debate? Because the pols can get big bucks from the Feds, like that’s something good. BART to SJ will be worse than The Big Dig in Boston from an economic point of view.
#50 wrote:“The report went on to say,“800 units”. It also said 100% Land Sale @ $18.5 billion. ” Uh, that would be Million, with an “M” Richard.
#51—you can’t be from Bensonhoyst, or you woulda said “udda bums”.