LivermoreBART.org

Comment from Linda Jeffery Sailors
Time: January 7, 2007, 6:38 pm

The $100 million a mile cost for BART is probably accurate, but the actual figures will not be known until BART funds the two studies that are needed to start the process. Those studies are “The Environmental Study” and “The Preliminary Engineering”. In doing these studies (for an estimated cost of $12 million), the monies that have already been expended could be deducted from the total amount of money needed i.e. the cost of the station sites, CalTrans right of way, the cars that were ordered for us when Dublin/Pleasanton was build, our space on the train control computer, etc. The costs escalate every year, but the Livermore extension should be calculated in a different way than SF to the airport or Fremont/Warm Springs or any other extension.. We will have an over crossing that will need to be raised, but no tunnels or underground facilities like Fremont/Warm Springs. Engineers have stated, in the past, that Livermore BART is the cheapest extension BART could make. It is only 12 miles long and no major obstacles.
Linda Jeffery Sailors

Comment from Dawn P. Argula
Time: January 8, 2007, 11:06 pm

For many years Supervisor Haggerty has been an ardent advocate of this extension. While some effort has occurred on this extension over the past twenty or so years, the most recent included two studies evaluating possible alternatives to extend BART to Livermore. The studies were conducted by consultants with oversight by BART staff. In a study completed July 2002, consultants estimated costs for BART in the median to Greenville Road with two stations in Livermore (Isabel & Greenville – total distance about 10 miles) at $760 million in 2001 dollars. In a phase 2 study completed June 2003, the estimated cost was $896 million in 2003 dollars. The earlier study described various project elements and related costs that included – required studies (environmental, etc.); construction; vehicles; right-of way; project implementation; and contingencies – that would be required to build this extension to BART’s specifications. The costs also do not account for operation of the extension. BART should be able to give you a more detailed breakdown of the estimates. The studies also identified projected ridership numbers for the extension. By BART standards, ridership is a key factor in determining the cost-effectiveness of investments in its system (this is also a requirement for federal transportation dollars). The study results indicated that the extension would not meet this criteria. Supervisor Haggerty was rather skeptical of the low ridership numbers, and yes the cost estimates do seem astronomical. Nevertheless, he continues his efforts to assure that the Tri-Valley will be in a position to take advantage of future opportunities to build an acceptable transit alternative, preferably BART, from the existing Dublin/Pleasanton BART station to Livermore. I hope that this background is helpful. Please let me know if this office can be of further assistance.

Dawn P. Argula, Deputy Chief of Staff
Office of Scott Haggerty
First District Alameda County Supervisor

Comment from Paolo Giusto
Time: September 7, 2007, 1:35 pm

Can anybody explain (because I don’t see the rationale behind it) why no BART station is built in Livermore, while instead a new BART station is built in Dublin, very close to the existing one?

Thanks
Paolo

Comment from Eric
Time: September 29, 2007, 11:42 am

Paolo,

I could think of many other places I’d rather see a BART infill station than at West Dublin/Pleasanton, but comparing the new Dublin station to a Livermore station is comparing apples and oranges. In the former case, you are only building a station. In the latter case, you are also building a new station, and then miles and miles of additional track. The two are not even remotely equivalent propositions.

Comment from Sean MacRae
Time: July 12, 2008, 11:41 am

The new BART station in West Dublin is a terrific waste of time and energy. I think the addition was made to bring business to the Stoneridge Mall, so Pleasanton can have BART to thank for the increased revenue, however, most likely increased crime will follow. The funds really should have been used to extend the train to Livermore, then Tracy, to help alleviate the 580 West catastrophe everybody has to deal with daily!

Comment from Lin
Time: July 31, 2008, 2:51 pm

The best wat to get rich(er) is to build road first!!!!
This is the experiences from many other countries, such as China.

Lin

Comment from chris
Time: November 23, 2008, 8:59 am

We moved from Union City to Livermore in 2008 to get away from the crime. There is an unbelievable increase in crime within a several mile circle around a BART station. Folks come down from Oakland looking for trouble and crimes of opportunity. We saw this often in Union City. We have no interest in BART coming to Livermore, and are more than happy to drive to Dublin to hop on BARt to SF.

Comment from Martin Isenburg
Time: December 3, 2009, 2:57 pm

The city of Livermore is holding three workshops to gather public input on the possible alignments and station combination for the BART extension. The first one was well attended and it seemed as if the audience’s opinion more or less converged on having two stations: One in downtown Livermore to serve the residents, to vitalize local businesses, and to spark sustainable transit-oriented development but with strict parking regulations to keep car commuter traffic out of downtown. The other one as far east as possible with ample amounts of parking to serve commuters from Mountain House, Tracy and beyond and ease congestion on I-580.

A pure I-580 alignment is something that i – and all urban planners and city officials i talked to – strongly dislike because it would mean to repeat the mistakes of (auto-centric) planning in the past. a BART station in downtown Livermore presents a unique opportunity to create a wonderful walkable community around downtown setting a textbook example for sustainable transit oriented planning in America. i already love what city has done during the redevelopment efforts of the past few years that have converted downtown from a four-lane freeway to a welcoming and cute destination. but it is still a downtown on life-support. there is no sustainable traffic throughout the day to support the kind of business you expect to find in a healthy downtown: produce stalls, a delicatessen, a small grocery store, a bakery, a cheese store, or a butcher. well done a downtown BART station could turn Livermore into a poster child for sustainable urban growth that promotes local business, healthy lifestyle, and walkable communities.

Comment from Xiaotian Shi
Time: January 12, 2010, 2:13 pm

I will feel very shameful to have to use 10 millions to build just 1 mile Bart trackway. This is not even an high-speed railway!

Think about it, China as a overall such poor country, they just used 4-year to have completed 600-mile high-speed railway (214 miles per hour).

I don’t understand that United States as one of the most developed countries with enormous engineering resources and technologies can’t compete with poor countries like China in constructions.

It just does not make any sense to me.

Comment from vamsee
Time: January 23, 2010, 8:01 pm

Xiaotian,

Thanks for your comment but your are missing something important.
In a democratic country things sometimes just take longer because everyone has a chance to voice their opinion and influence the final outcome. There is the issue of priorities and other things like environmental and safety considerations and labor costs.

Comment from iggy
Time: March 19, 2010, 2:20 am

Constuction in US is extremly ovepriced. Even in Mexico they build highways like crazy, and in \fifth\ economy in the world (read CA) to improve highway would cost zillions of dollars. I’m completely not getting this part. It’s mexican concrete, it is mexican labor, were does the money go? The only guess prices are comming from \democratic\ local and state govermments who need to feel up pockets of their friends in construction business. I’m also guessing that that is the reason in 8 times differnce in estimates from \officials\ that are in offices and former \officials\.

And let’s do not compare CA and Mexico and China with their \corrupted\ and even undemocratic goverments. Let’s compare CA to Texas the same country but when I been Dallas few month ago CA feels realy backward. Can any body explain why democracy in CA affects road construction in different way it does in Texas?