SAN JOSE, Calif. — As it approaches the point of needing to order replacements for its light-rail vehicle fleet, the transit agency serving the San Jose area is considering a more existential question: whether its light rail system even has a future.
The San Jose Spotlight reports that at a recent meeting of the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority board of directors, board members discussed the agency’s issues with high operating costs and low ridership for the light rail system, with San Jose Mayor Sam Liccardo asking “Are we riding the right horse here? … I think we need to ask bigger questions because marginal improvements aren’t going to change this picture at all.”
Data developed by an agency planner shows VTA has the highest operating costs per revenue in the nation, and that light rail costs three times as much as a bus to operate, while most agencies see a ratio closer to two to one, and that the agency has the nation’s highest cost for parts and materials.
At the same time, replacing the entire 81-track-mile, 42.2-route-mile light rail system with bus routes would take 60 years to provide a return on investment because of the initial cost of replacing track with concrete. A better option may be operating more one-car trains and shortening their periods in service which would extend their lifespan, planner Jason Kim said.
At the current rate of use, VTA will face replacing its its fleet of 100 Kinki Sharyo light rail vehicles in three ot seven years.
Some board members noted light-rail ridership could be helped by the Caltrain electrificiation project, which aims to increase commuter-rail frequency, and the extension of BART into San Jose, where it will connect with light rail. The BART extension, however, may not be complete until 2034 [see “News report: FTA says BART extension to San Jose likely to be delayed by years,” Trains News Wire, Feb. 21, 2022].
And other board members said the agency needed to communicate with the cities it serves before making other changes, with board member Glenn Hendricks of Sunnyvale, Calif., noting that city is considering a 20,000-home development near light rail. “I would hate to be in a spot where Sunnyvale’s planning for a lot of housing near light rail and then all of a sudden light rail service is not what we thought it was going to be,” Hendricks said.
Boy the shelf life of those rail cars seems pretty short. Amazing that the old PPC cars lasted forever when maintained.
I would bet that about 85-90 percent of the residents in those 20,000 new homes will choose to commute in their own personal automobiles, jammed highways or not.
Or they’ll just walk to work instead, since most of them will probably work at Google, Microsoft of some other tech campus located in Sunnyvale/Mountain View. What’s really missing is a direct line down the center of CA Hwy 85 which should run from the Ohlone/Chynowith and/or Blossom Hill station all the way to the Mountain View(in the middle of a state highway), then extend the Mountain View line over Hwy 101 and into the Googleplex campus(and all the other tech offices located there). In other words, a line that goes from where people live to where they work.
“Data developed by an agency planner shows VTA has the highest operating costs per revenue in the nation, and that light rail costs three times as much as a bus to operate, while most agencies see a ratio closer to two to one, and that the agency has the nation’s highest cost for parts and materials.” They should look at this first and work on this before just picking up and packing it in. Especially if a 20,000 home development is going in.
Different routes.
MARK — It’s not about the end points. It’s about the points in between. You know from your own former employment that Metra Electric parallels CTA Dan Ryan Trains, Metra UP North and Metra Milwaukee North parallel each other, etc. Manhattan has several parallel north-south subway routes.
Now, back to the story itself. It’s a tale often told —- big capital project, no thought to ongoing maintenance, operation and depreciation.
Why are they wanting to extend BART to San Jose when CalTrain already goes there?
Because there is significant movement of people from the East Bay (Oakland south to Fremont) to San Jose. Caltrain doesn’t serve the East Bay and I-880 is massively jammed with traffic basically all the time.
The problem with San Jose’s light rail is that it doesn’t run often enough, and there is poor coordination with other modes of transport. I used to use it regularly to see clients in Campbell (end of the Green Line) and the trains only come every 20 minutes, slightly less at rush hour. If you miss your train, you’re screwed and then I would miss Caltrain going north.
The other problem with San Jose’s light rail has little to do with it per se. It’s the terrible land use of the South Bay. Offices are generally 2-6 stories and surrounded by parking. There is often little access to transit. The corridor on N 1st St in San Jose (north of downtown) is an exception but it’s still low density.
Apple’s new $5BN campus has NO public transit access. Yes. None. The city of Cupertino allowed Apple to built a giant low rise office building and didn’t require public transit access.
MIKE — Thanks for your post. I’m not familiar with San Jose so I learned much from what you wrote. From the map (enclosed with the article) it looks like a good system on paper. Doesn’t mean its managers know what they are doing.