Oakland Airport Connector
I was just listening to KPFA on a short segment on the Oakland Airport Connector... you can read about it here, here, and here for starters. Funny that this blogger wouldn't post my comment. Even Don Perata is against the OAC.

Anyway, I'll post my comments here, because even though it doesn't affect the Jack London District directly, it does have relevance.

First, I love it when BART spokespeople say that they can add stops later. Really? That worked out so well for our neighborhood, didn't it? Oh, wait, that's right. It didn't. Have they ever added a station to the middle of an existing line? Maybe they have and I just am not aware.

I also love it when they talk about how this connector will go to the airport, but gloss over the fact that it won't be a direct line like the SFO connector. Just like now where you have to leave the platform and go downstairs and take the AirBART (which I'll just say I've always found an ironic name for something that in my opinion should be called OAKBusBart), you'll also have to change platforms to take the proposed OAC. When the voters approved this originally it was sold as being a direct line connection just like SFO.

Let's see... there's more.

The alternate proposal that most transit activists are for is called BRT. Bus Rapid Transit. It's where a bus has a dedicated lane. It won't get stuck in traffic because it has it's own lane. Are there chances for failure? Yes. Have you ever been stuck or delayed by BART? Yeah, me too.

BRT would cost significantly less than the proposed people mover to implement, plus as an added bonus would take significantly less time to implement.

The proposed OAC fares are being touted as $6 EACH WAY. Isn't AirBart (Bus) only $3? At some point the cost is less to take a taxi, especially from our neighborhood. You're not gaining any significant time in transit reduction, especially not enough to cover the significant price increase. Keep in mind you'll still have to change platforms at the Collisium, which they never seem to mention.

What I really don't get is why BART employees are for this. Yes, the voters voted for the connection years ago, but things have dramatically changed financially since then. It's also been found that their cost estimates were underestimated. They've also overestimated the riders that would be using this service - just as they did with BART to SFO. If they go through with this, at some point they'll have to layoff emps. Hmmm, but if they used the stimulus money for extending service hours, they'd need more emps, right? Long term jobs vs short term construction jobs - which are usually people that live outside the area.

That said, do I think SFO BART was a bad idea? Not necessarily. I have used it many times. If financial conditions were different today; if we had pot loads of money to spare; if the existing BART system didn't need significant improvement (add service hours instead!); and if the proposed OAC were a direct connection to the airport just like at SFO, then yeah, I think I'd be for it. Okay, even deleting the pot loads of money, I'd still only be for it if it were a direct connection.

Just like BART is representing the BRT option as "replacing a bus with a bus", the proposed people mover isn't replacing a bus with BART. They're replacing it with another transit system. A VERY expensive transit system.
Posted 6/19/2009