8 ms·

This system seems quite stupid. Surely the expenditure could be better invested in public transit. Not only is public transit orders of magnitude more effective

This system seems quite stupid. Surely the expenditure could be better invested in public transit. Not only is public transit orders of magnitude more effective in terms of people moved per hour, it's also much more equitable.

gridspy 5y ago
Perhaps it reflects the transport choices of the lawmakers. They spend more time frustrated on the 101 than they spend attempting to use a bus or train.
- mrsuprawsm 5y ago
  That could well be the case, and I would personally argue that that is a good part of the problem. For example, in Europe, it's quite normal for lawmakers to cycle or take public transport to the office. Obviously, some/most of it is performative to present a public image of the politician as a "man of the people", but it does expose them to the problems of the lay person as opposed to sitting in a chauffeured car. Needless to say, our public transport systems (and cycling) are much more sane, affordable, and efficient options here. They are by no means perfect, but they are a damn good way to get around in most cities. It doesn't mean you can't or don't drive, but often driving is massively slower or less convenient (especially inside the urban core), so you jump on the metro/train/tram or bicycle to get where you need to be.
scarby2 5y ago
I'm not sure about the 101 project in SF but we have exactly this in southern california and believe it or not it's been great. They integrated the HOV lanes into a Bus Rapid Transit system and use demand pricing to ensure that the lanes almost always stay moving. AFAIK the project expenditure is covered by people who want to get there faster. In this case the city/Metro gets to deploy more public transit without having to pay for it, and without having to charge riders more money. There are plans for expansion of the system as it's been very popular.
qbasic_forever 5y ago
The public doesn't want to fund mass transit with higher taxes, etc. so we get these toll systems. Up in Seattle there are similar mixed toll and high occupancy vehicle lanes that were built to help fund expansion of light rail systems, bridges, etc.
- mrsuprawsm 5y ago
  I think it's important to emphasis that this is only the American public. Many other countries _do_ prefer to fund public transport with general taxation. And things are much saner as a result: high quality public transport and bike lanes, without arcane rules around transponders and specific highway lanes.
  - Melatonic 5y ago
    I mostly agree but don't some european countries have the equivalent of toll roads? I could have sworn Germany had some. This route along the 101 does actually have decent public transit by american standards - Caltrain is pretty awesome
    - llampx 5y ago
      Germany actually is one of the few countries in Europe that has a truly free Autobahn network. Most countries around it have tolls on highways.
    - mrsuprawsm 5y ago
      I'm only familiar with Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany - there are basically zero toll roads here. The occasional bridge or tunnel is tolled, but they are very much the exception as opposed to the rule.
    - kelnos 5y ago
      > decent public transit by american standards That's not saying much; our standards are incredibly low. > Caltrain is pretty awesome Caltrain is awesome if you are one of the rare few who live within walking distance of a station and your destination is within walking distance of a station, or if only one of those two things is true, but your local Caltrain station has a parking lot that you can afford, or there's actually good bus service to get you the last mile. Unfortunately, those conditions are not true for many, many people. On top of that, Caltrain is ridiculously slow, and doesn't run anywhere near frequently enough, even during rush hour.
unreal37 5y ago
Even if this system cost $20 million to set up, how much public transit does that buy you? 100 feet of subway track? 20 buses? 1 mile of streetcar track? Transit is way more expensive than any cameras.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  100 feet of subway track? I wish I could get those rates. NYC's latest Second Avenue Subway budget is $6.3 billion for 1.5 miles, or, about $800,000 a foot. You can get 25 feet of subway track. California's not quite that bad, but, it's close to that bad. The Downtown Extension for Caltrain is $3 billion for a mile. SF's Central Subway is $923 million a mile. So sure, you can get about 114 feet of subway, but it'll be the short little LRVs and not like BART or anything nice-ish.
  - m463 5y ago
    makes me think The Boring Company might do well lowering the cost of tunnels...
    - fennecfoxen 5y ago
      I'm told that, besides general competence issues and political-football games about who gets to builds the subway (contractors, ewwwwww) ... a lot of it comes from deep stations with onerous fire-safety guidelines that require massive mezzanines. These stations are mined out through narrow shafts instead of doing cut-and-cover, adding expense and inviting delays. See e.g. https://twitter.com/2AvSagas/status/1064907564230557696 https://twitter.com/2AvSagas/status/1064907564230557696 But it's mostly the fact that the leadership doesn't care, doesn't have to care, and is actively incentivized not to care.
- geraldwhen 5y ago
  None of your numbers are correct. Buses will be more than a million per bus, plus the cost of hiring drivers. You would be lucky to get 10 buses.
Melatonic 5y ago
These systems are designed to be making money which then (theoretically) should go back into transport infrastructure. I agree we need more public transit - but keep in mind (generally) along this exact same route Caltrain provides some very good and very clean service already. I would really love to see that service extended all the way around the bay.
cbhl 5y ago
When I went to the planning meeting for the San Mateo 101 Express Lanes project in Redwood City, these lanes _were_ seen as an investment in mass transit. The tech shuttles will use these Express Lanes instead of sitting in mixed traffic, taking load off of the Caltrain (which, pre-pandemic, was at capacity during rush hour and needs electrification and grade separation work to run more frequent trains). Also, constituents in bay area dislike public-transit-only investments (see San Mateo's historical rejection of the BART proposal).

gridspy 5y ago

Perhaps it reflects the transport choices of the lawmakers. They spend more time frustrated on the 101 than they spend attempting to use a bus or train.

mrsuprawsm 5y ago
That could well be the case, and I would personally argue that that is a good part of the problem. For example, in Europe, it's quite normal for lawmakers to cycle or take public transport to the office. Obviously, some/most of it is performative to present a public image of the politician as a "man of the people", but it does expose them to the problems of the lay person as opposed to sitting in a chauffeured car. Needless to say, our public transport systems (and cycling) are much more sane, affordable, and efficient options here. They are by no means perfect, but they are a damn good way to get around in most cities. It doesn't mean you can't or don't drive, but often driving is massively slower or less convenient (especially inside the urban core), so you jump on the metro/train/tram or bicycle to get where you need to be.

scarby2 5y ago

I'm not sure about the 101 project in SF but we have exactly this in southern california and believe it or not it's been great. They integrated the HOV lanes into a Bus Rapid Transit system and use demand pricing to ensure that the lanes almost always stay moving. AFAIK the project expenditure is covered by people who want to get there faster. In this case the city/Metro gets to deploy more public transit without having to pay for it, and without having to charge riders more money. There are plans for expansion of the system as it's been very popular.

qbasic_forever 5y ago

The public doesn't want to fund mass transit with higher taxes, etc. so we get these toll systems. Up in Seattle there are similar mixed toll and high occupancy vehicle lanes that were built to help fund expansion of light rail systems, bridges, etc.

mrsuprawsm 5y ago
I think it's important to emphasis that this is only the American public. Many other countries _do_ prefer to fund public transport with general taxation. And things are much saner as a result: high quality public transport and bike lanes, without arcane rules around transponders and specific highway lanes.
- Melatonic 5y ago
  I mostly agree but don't some european countries have the equivalent of toll roads? I could have sworn Germany had some. This route along the 101 does actually have decent public transit by american standards - Caltrain is pretty awesome
  - llampx 5y ago
    Germany actually is one of the few countries in Europe that has a truly free Autobahn network. Most countries around it have tolls on highways.
  - mrsuprawsm 5y ago
    I'm only familiar with Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany - there are basically zero toll roads here. The occasional bridge or tunnel is tolled, but they are very much the exception as opposed to the rule.
  - kelnos 5y ago
    > decent public transit by american standards That's not saying much; our standards are incredibly low. > Caltrain is pretty awesome Caltrain is awesome if you are one of the rare few who live within walking distance of a station and your destination is within walking distance of a station, or if only one of those two things is true, but your local Caltrain station has a parking lot that you can afford, or there's actually good bus service to get you the last mile. Unfortunately, those conditions are not true for many, many people. On top of that, Caltrain is ridiculously slow, and doesn't run anywhere near frequently enough, even during rush hour.

unreal37 5y ago

Even if this system cost $20 million to set up, how much public transit does that buy you? 100 feet of subway track? 20 buses? 1 mile of streetcar track? Transit is way more expensive than any cameras.

fennecfoxen 5y ago
100 feet of subway track? I wish I could get those rates. NYC's latest Second Avenue Subway budget is $6.3 billion for 1.5 miles, or, about $800,000 a foot. You can get 25 feet of subway track. California's not quite that bad, but, it's close to that bad. The Downtown Extension for Caltrain is $3 billion for a mile. SF's Central Subway is $923 million a mile. So sure, you can get about 114 feet of subway, but it'll be the short little LRVs and not like BART or anything nice-ish.
- m463 5y ago
  makes me think The Boring Company might do well lowering the cost of tunnels...
  - fennecfoxen 5y ago
    I'm told that, besides general competence issues and political-football games about who gets to builds the subway (contractors, ewwwwww) ... a lot of it comes from deep stations with onerous fire-safety guidelines that require massive mezzanines. These stations are mined out through narrow shafts instead of doing cut-and-cover, adding expense and inviting delays. See e.g. https://twitter.com/2AvSagas/status/1064907564230557696 https://twitter.com/2AvSagas/status/1064907564230557696 But it's mostly the fact that the leadership doesn't care, doesn't have to care, and is actively incentivized not to care.
geraldwhen 5y ago
None of your numbers are correct. Buses will be more than a million per bus, plus the cost of hiring drivers. You would be lucky to get 10 buses.

Melatonic 5y ago

These systems are designed to be making money which then (theoretically) should go back into transport infrastructure. I agree we need more public transit - but keep in mind (generally) along this exact same route Caltrain provides some very good and very clean service already. I would really love to see that service extended all the way around the bay.

cbhl 5y ago

When I went to the planning meeting for the San Mateo 101 Express Lanes project in Redwood City, these lanes _were_ seen as an investment in mass transit. The tech shuttles will use these Express Lanes instead of sitting in mixed traffic, taking load off of the Caltrain (which, pre-pandemic, was at capacity during rush hour and needs electrification and grade separation work to run more frequent trains). Also, constituents in bay area dislike public-transit-only investments (see San Mateo's historical rejection of the BART proposal).