3 ms·

You haven't taken into account how much the bay area would have needed to spend on bridges and freeways if BART hadn't been built. https://www.bart.gov/sites/d

You haven't taken into account how much the bay area would have needed to spend on bridges and freeways if BART hadn't been built. https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/BARTfactsheet_June17_0.pdf https://www.bart.gov/sites/default/files/docs/BARTfactsheet_... says (as of 2017) 70k people go through the transbay tube in each direction during peak commute hours. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SFOBB/Sfobbfacts.html http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/esc/tollbridge/SFOBB/Sfobbfacts.htm... isn't dated but says that 270k vehicles cross the Bay Bridge every day. These numbers aren't directly comparable because they're not measuring the same thing, but taking things as pessimistically as possible, let's say those 270k vehicle crossings all happen during the same time period as the BART numbers. If all those commuters crossed the Bay Bridge by themselves in a vehicle (because the overwhelming majority of car commutes are one person per car), that would be (270k + 70k) / 270k or a 26% increase in vehicles, when it's already ludicrously packed every single day. The bridge would need to have been widened by now (or another bridge built entirely, with feeder freeway interchanges on both sides).

rayiner 8y ago
I'm not ignoring it. I'm computing the per-trip capital cost for BART assuming today's inflated construction costs, and asking if the reduced congestion/need for road infrastructure would still justify that investment given today's costs. I don't think you realize how completely bonkers the cost of mass-transit development has gotten. New York is up to $1.5-3.5 billion per mile of subway. The new Bay Bridge, massively over-budget at $6.4 billion, represents just a few miles of subway (BART has almost 30 miles).
masonic 8y ago
70k people go through the transbay tube... 270k vehicles cross the Bay Bridge every day In other words, taking your figures painfully literally, if those vehicles carpooled just one additional passenger each on average, you'd have 4 times the added throughput that BART provides. But this will never happen as long as we give HOV lane access to cars other than those carrying 2+ licensed drivers... for political reasons.

rayiner 8y ago

I'm not ignoring it. I'm computing the per-trip capital cost for BART assuming today's inflated construction costs, and asking if the reduced congestion/need for road infrastructure would still justify that investment given today's costs. I don't think you realize how completely bonkers the cost of mass-transit development has gotten. New York is up to $1.5-3.5 billion per mile of subway. The new Bay Bridge, massively over-budget at $6.4 billion, represents just a few miles of subway (BART has almost 30 miles).

masonic 8y ago

70k people go through the transbay tube... 270k vehicles cross the Bay Bridge every day In other words, taking your figures painfully literally, if those vehicles carpooled just one additional passenger each on average, you'd have 4 times the added throughput that BART provides. But this will never happen as long as we give HOV lane access to cars other than those carrying 2+ licensed drivers... for political reasons.