16
Jul

2010

Oakland Airport Connector Back From The Dead

Post by Steven Dale

This is getting absurd:

In December of 2009, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) announced that the Oakland Airport Connector would be a cable-propelled transit system.

This was a major victory for cable as the bids pitted cable technology provided by Poma and Doppelmayr against standard self-propelled technologies provided by Bombardier and Mitsubishi. That cable came out on top was important and a strong, rational choice.

But then in February of this year, the project was all but killed by a ruling by the FTA. The ruling said that BART was not in compliance with a Title 1V Civil Rights requirement. The project was therefore in limbo.

Late last month, however, reports arise that BART has located alternative funding sources and will proceed with the project. BART staffers are expected to present their new funding plan to the BART board as early as July 22nd.

We’ll make sure to keep you updated the next time this project gets killed and subsequently resurrected. And killed and subsequently resurrected. And killed and subsequently resurrected . . .



Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

Want more? Purchase Cable Car Confidential: The Essential Guide to Cable Cars, Urban Gondolas & Cable Propelled Transit and start learning about the world's fastest growing transportation technologies.

Oakland Airport Connector
3
Comments

Comments

  1. Dave in KY
    July 16, 2010 – 12:27 am
    Sigh. The last thing we need is for the showcase to be also a case of downgrading a good bus service with a less-good rail service, which is what this project is, last time I checked.
  2. Steven Dale
    July 16, 2010 – 1:20 am
    Dave, From what I've heard and read, the bus service to OA was very unreliable. Sure it could take 10 minutes in good traffic, but often it took 30 minutes. Plus waiting. Furthermore, taking the bus when you've got luggage for travel is very unappealing for business and recreational travellers alike. I personally think it's a good system with a few reservations: 1) Why did they eliminate the intermediary station? It looks like it will be added in sometime in the future, but why now? 2) The big issue was with how it would affect poor income residents in the area? Especially given the 6 buck price tag to ride. Why didn't the airport simply say that employees of the airport would be given passes? 3) Why did it cost so much? With cable, system length is not a huge determining factor in cost. The Toronto Pearson Airport link (almost identical in concept) only cost apx $150 for a 1.5 km, 3 station system. Why is the OAC costing $500 for a 5 km long, 3 station system. It just doesn't make sense to me.
  3. Dave in KY
    July 16, 2010 – 1:44 pm
    The AIRBart buses this will replace had several seats ripped out and replaced with luggage racks. From what I remember riding it, it cost $3. Any unreliability of the bus was smoothed out by the fact that BART itself only serviced the station every ~20 minutes, so +- 5 minutes was just not a big deal. Seems like a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" to me. But hey, I don't live there anymore. I live in Kentucky, where there is not a single urban passenger rail installation anywhere in the state.

Leave a comment

You can add images to your comment by clicking here.