 |
 |
Crews begin work Tuesday on the first phase of construction of the SMART rail line. The work began at the railroad crossing at W. Third Street in Santa Rosa. Photo courtesy of SMART.
Work on the SMART rail line officially got under way this morning at W. Third Street and the railroad tracks, just south of Railroad Square in Santa Rosa. Farhad Mansourian, SMART’s general manager, says crews began doing survey work at about 9:30 a.m.
Later today, crews also will be doing work down in the Novato area, where SMART’s new sign “There is a train coming to town” will be erected facing the northbound lanes of Highway 101 just south of the airport.
The work began less than 24 hours after the SMART board voted unanimously to approve a $103.3 million contract for the first phase of construction, which involves building and/or upgrading tracks, bridges, station platforms and grade crossings. The contract does not involve the bridge at Haystack Landing in Petaluma which will be a phase of its own.
The contract was awarded to Alameda-based Stacy and Witbeck Inc. and Herzog Contracting Corp. As reported last week, the bid came in so far under estimates that SMART was able to add back in the North Santa Rosa station at Guerneville Road, the Novato station at Atherton Avenue and some much-needed work at Novato Creek Bridge.
In an editorial Saturday, we noted, “For now, board members are taking the right approach in forging ahead with construction rather than awaiting the outcome of the repeal effort. Doing otherwise would be giving this ill-considered effort more credibility than it deserves.”
What do you think?
- Paul Gullixson
Subscribe by Email
Follow us on Twitter
For those of you who are opposed to this project, go back to college and take a coarse in Economics & Transportation Logistics, at least for those of you who went to college. This project is good. Those surveyors are just the beginning. Lots of workers will be hired and this project will be completed. You may throw up your arms and yell, scream do what ever to try to prevent this project from happening but it isn’t going to happen. I know you’ll miss your whole $0.24 a year, big whoop. Since when did supporting our government, yes I said “our” government, not the politicians government, become such a bad thing, especially when it comes to projects like this that actually benefit you! Here’s one fact for you, dispute this if you will but its true (do the math if you can), 1 gallon of diesel fuel can haul 1 ton of materials 400 miles, that’s why trains are so efficient. And for those of you who are so blindly ignorant of any truths, go ahead, sit in the traffic on Hwy 101, you’ll be doing us all a favor.
@GAJ
Why is the BART comparison not valid in this discussion? When BART opened it’s first phase it only operated from Concord to North Concord, Second Phase was Oakland to Freemont(two “trains to nowhere” opponents at the time called them). The point is that BART had phased opening just like the SMART train, and BART did eventually fund and open all their segments.
In addition, just like SMART, opponents of BART had the exact same positions and sound-bytes as opponents of the SMART train. How do those BART opponents look when compared with the incredible success of the system?
Just think if they had promised the GG Bridge, and only built 1/2 of it with no walkway.
That is apples to apples.
Comparing SMART to BART is like comparing a biplane to a 747.
@Graeme Wellington
Truth is, there is nowhere, no one document, where all transportation funding is laid out. So it would be impossible to make the claims you make because the information that you would need to substantiate those claims would only come after months or years of research. And if you had in fact done that research for your rant of a post, why didn’t you cite your sources?
Making comparisons in transportation budgeting is tough, because its never an either/or. It’s always about finding collaborative solutions to pay for everything. It’s not that people who want the train don’t want highways to exist. You need to realize that public transit works together with highways to move people around.
You make it sound that because the SMART train is not the fix to all of our problems then we should be against it. Truth is, there is never anything, especially in public policy, that is a cure-all. There is always some good and bad, some honesty and some graft, that’s the story of life! Transportation planning isn’t about deciding that one thing is good and one thing is bad, it’s about pulling on all the levers to achieve the correct balance. We should not spend all our transit money on this train, but we should spend the amount we are right now because we need a balanced solution to our 101 corridor problem. The train and the highway is a balanced solution, the the highway without the train is a recipe for horrible congestion.
Not for nothing, but how does BART fit into your view on train transit? BART is an unqualified success. In the cities where they have a train nobody is like, “Boy, we really spent too much money on this train…”. Nobody says that, in fact cities are clamoring for BART extensions and passing sales taxes to do so(see Warm Springs, San Jose, Livermore, Dublin, East Contra Costa county)!
Watching these people scramble to hurry up & shove as much as they can down our throats before we can shut them down would be humorous if it weren’t so disgusting.
But it is a futile effort.
WE WILL shut down this despicable farce just as we will with Obamacare no matter HOW far along they get.
@Double R – please point out any factual error and any correction – backed up by facts of course. Simple ridicule proves nothing.
Wow! So many SMART haters on here… I’m surprised.
When looking objectively at this project I’m for it. After examining the actual facts instead of listening to fear-mongers like Graeme Wellington(there are so many factual inaccuracies in that post it’s staggering) people should be for SMART too. People who are against this train are like the people in Kansas who vote Republican even though it’s not in their economic interest to do so. What’s wrong with you guys? Millions of people will be added to our population in 10-20 years. If not a train, what is your solution for moving all those people? Should we expand 101 to a 16 lane behemoth? Hey old geezers, Please stop standing in the way of progress…
To those who want to stand in the way of this project: Get off the tracks because the train is a comin’!
Has Farhad Mansourian really done a great job? Really? 1000 jobs by the end of the year. Well, 3 guys surveying the track. 997 to go. Waste is waste. This project has corruption written all over it. Gov’t hiring people for the sake of jobs with no work, was supposed to be illegal. From the strong arm tactics from SMART, should we expect more?
Yep.
Insanity.
Exposure is the best thing for it.
WIDE EXPOSURE.
How many might step forward ?
Lisa Maldonado in other comments is claiming that the train stations will be built by “local construction workers” and claimed that there would be “thousands and thousands” of such jobs.
This is yet another proof that SMART supporters persist in believing in a dream version of SMART, rather than the reality.
The stampede to plan and build rail transit lines in American cities has led and is leading to a series of financial and mobility disasters. They are financial disasters because rail projects spend billions of taxpayers’ dollars and produce little in return. They are mobility disasters because rail transit almost always increases regional congestion and usually reduces transit’s share of commuting and general travel.
Rail transit is not only expensive, it usually costs more to build and often costs more to operate than originally projected. To pay for cost overruns, transit agencies often must boost transit fares or cut transit service outside of rail corridors. Thus, rail transit tends to harm most transit users.
Rail transit also harms most auto drivers. Most regions building rail transit expect to spend half to four fifths of their transportation capital budgets on transit systems that carry 0.5 to 4 percent of passenger travel. This imbalanced funding makes it impossible to remove highway bottlenecks and leads to growing congestion.
Rail’s high cost makes it ineffective at reducing congestion. On average, $13 spent on rail transit is less effective at reducing congestion than $1 spent on freeway improvements. Investments in rail transit are only about half as effective as investments in bus transit.
Rail transit does little to save energy. The average light-rail line consumes more energy per passenger mile than passenger cars. While some commuter and heavy rail transit operations use a little less energy per passenger mile than cars, the energy consumed to construct rail lines can more than make up for this savings.
Nor is rail transit an effective way to clean the air. Even where rail transit has attracted new transit riders out of their cars, rail transit costs roughly $1 million per ton of air pollution eliminated. Many other techniques to clean the air cost less than $10,000 per ton.
Rail transit attracts riders because of its higher frequencies and fewer stops and thus higher speeds than bus transit. Yet buses can also operate more frequently with fewer stops. Rail transit requires years to build and can cost fifty times as much to start as comparable bus transit. As a result, the cost of attracting one auto commuter onto rail transit, relative to bus improvements, averages $10,000 a year or more.
For many, rail transit’s incredible expense is its main attraction. Auto-haters love rail transit because it consumes funds that could otherwise be spent reducing congestion. Politicians love rail transit because the companies that will profit from it are a source of campaign contributions. Transit agencies love rail transit because it boosts their budgets and national prestige. But the public should not be fooled: For everyone else, rail transit is a disaster.
Skippy:
yeah, let’s protest at the work sites.
Whether all of us realize it or not at this time…
In conjunction with OneBayArea this is a land use/containment/oppression plan, NOT a tansportation plan. The transportation part is just the excuse, the vehicle to implement this tyranny.
Like I’ve said, when you stand against this train, you stand up for your freedom.
You will all know this sooner or later, it would be in our interest for us to all know it now.
The protest on the street could be the catalyst for more understanding, engagement and participation.
SMART has left the station. We are now moving down the tracks to create a regional rail and bike trail to relieve the pressure off of Highway 101 and to lay the groundwork for the 21st century economy of the North Bay.
Congratulations to Farhad Mansourian for finally getting the project started. I wish he had been around years ago, instead of letting the opposition get traction by SMART’s protracted inaction.
I have always supported the concept, but have often been dismayed by the lack of political judgment by the SMART staff. There’s a new engineer at the controls, and the train is finally rolling.
Hope all this activity doesn’t interrupt the freight service. What’s up with the North Coast Rail Authority these days?
A few guys standing around does not a train make. But this looks exactly like all other welfare programs. Lots shovel leaning and not much of anything being done.
Will they run out of money before they reach the Cotati Grade? Will SMART fire the project manager for delays caused by cost over runs?
It will be a bumpy rail ride from here on to the last stop for the little training going nowhere.
I disagree wholeheartedly with this piece and especially the last paragraph.
However, as an editorial article…they don’t have to be objective.
We taxpayers should take a page from the Occupy mob.
Wanna get attention and have Big Govt cowards kowtow to your desires?
Occupy the tracks!
Don’t worry; it’s safe.
No trains in sight in either direction.
For a long, long, long time.
About as “ill considered” as growing opposition to the High Speed Rail boondoggle:
“According to a new Field Poll, nearly two-thirds of voters want to re-vote on the project Californians authorized in 2008, and 59 percent of voters say they would reject the measure if such an election were held.
The poll comes after the rail authority revised the project’s estimated cost this fall to almost $100 billion over 20 years, more than twice what was originally thought.”
Read more here: http://blogs.sacbee.com/capitolalertlatest/2011/12/high-speed-rail-blames-uncertain-economy-for-voter-opposition.html#storylink=cpy
They’re measuring the tracks in Santa Rosa. They’re building a sign in Novato. This furious burst of job-creating activity gives a whole new meaning to shovel-ready.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
” Ill considered.” ?????????
The mere fact that the Press Democrat would actually allow such a blatant one sided statement as Paul uttered is a perfect example of why the Press Democrat has struggled financially for 20 years and has now been sold for lack of future promise.
I propose that Paul grants himself far more credibility than HE is worth.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
What happened to objectivity. Isn’t “ill-considered” a loaded statement.
I don’t think it’s an ill considered effort to point out the waste of tax money for a train that can’t get commuters off the road and isn’t being built the full distance everyone voted on.
Is it ill-considered to point out it won’t generate all the jobs being promised or that the level of government subsidy for it goes on in perpetuity some 15 million a year over and above construction costs.
I don’t understand why it’s ill-considered to make the effort to stop a completely valueless $500 million dollar construction project.
I thought the news was supposed to be objective. Has the Press Democrat abandoned its journalistic ethics?