Slideshow Loading
previous next
  • MICHAEL ALLEN JONES / mjones@sacbee.com

    A BART train stops at Coliseum Station, where the Oakland Airport Connector would run to the airport. BART hopes to have a winning bidder by year's end. But some on the City Council want to pull the plug on the project the city endorsed in 2001.

  • MICHAEL ALLEN JONES / mjones@sacbee.com

    BART is eager to get started on the Oakland Airport Connector, whose projected costs have increased from $132 million in 2000 to a half-billion dollars now. Critics say a modest proposal has morphed into a runaway train, and they say a high-tech bus service would be a better bargain.

Capitol and California
Comments (0) | | Print

20 years later, opponents still battling the Oakland Airport Connector

Published: Sunday, Sep. 6, 2009 - 12:00 am | Page 4A
Last Modified: Sunday, Sep. 6, 2009 - 10:34 am

OAKLAND – When the Bay Area Rapid Transit District's Oakland Airport Connector project was first conceived 20-plus years ago, the idea was to build a gleaming, elevated tramway that would whisk air travelers from BART's Coliseum Station to the Oakland Airport's main terminal in mere minutes.

No fuss, no muss – and the family car stays in the garage.

In 2000, when interest in the project began to pick up steam, the estimated $132 million price tag for the 3.2-mile people-mover didn't seem all that bad.

That was then.

Nine years later, critics of the OAC (Oakland Airport Connector) say what once was a modest proposal has morphed into a massive runaway train of a project that BART officials admit would cost the district an estimated half-billion dollars and maybe more.

Those critics, led in large part by an Oakland-based public transit advocacy organization called TransForm, say not only has the OAC's overall price rocketed out of control, but few if any of the original project benefits promised by BART remain in the current design specifications.

TransForm's John Knox White says, for instance, that the OAC was supposed to have a top speed of 45 mph. Now it's about 27 mph. He added that over the years, its projected ridership and job-creation numbers have steadily declined.

Knox White said that what was once a system designed to "seamlessly" whisk an air traveler from the Coliseum Station to the airport terminal lobby is now a micro transit system that would take passengers only as far as the western end of the airport's hourly and short-term parking lot.

BART passengers, he says, would have to carry bags downstairs and across a busy intersection to enter the airport terminal.

He notes that the OAC's fares, once quite reasonable at $4 for a round-trip ticket in 2000, would now cost passengers $12.

"BART's attitude is, 'This is the project. We're going to build it no matter what the cost. We are done talking about it,' " Knox White said during a recent interview.

Indeed, a clear majority of the transit district's nine board members recently named four sets of "prequalified" corporations or corporate partnerships to be invited to submit bids on the project. BART officials say they hope to name the winning bidder by the end of the year.

But even as the connector – which would run along an elevated gateway down busy Hegenberger Road – appears to be on the verge of getting a final green light, some dissatisfied members of the Oakland City Council say they hope to derail the project in favor of a much cheaper bus alternative that TransForm is promoting.

Nancy Nadel, chairwoman of the Oakland City Council's public works committee, said she and members of her committee believe the OAC must be stopped.

Council colleague Rebecca Kaplan agreed, calling the OAC one of the greatest boondoggles she's encountered.

"We have to convince them that this proposal is out of control and represents an extremely poor use of public funds. I believe they will bankrupt themselves if they proceed," Kaplan said.

Whether the city continues its participation in the OAC project may depend on what happens at a Sept. 15 meeting of the Oakland council's public works committee.

Kaplan said that, depending on what they hear, the committee may vote to recommend that the full council withdraw the city's support, reversing its initial endorsement of the project in 2001.

"(The council) endorsed the project when it was going to cost $132 million and when it had two stops planned. … Now we're looking at a project costing almost 10 times that amount and which has no intermediate stops," she said.

Both councilwomen say they prefer TransForm's alternative proposal, dubbed "RapidBART."

That proposal features a high-tech bus system that would run up and down Hegenberger in specially marked lanes with a series of prioritized green lights to avoid stops. TransForm officials estimate their proposal would cost the transit district between $45 million and $60 million.


hide comments

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.


Sacramento Bee Job listing powered by Careerbuilder.com

Quick Job Search

View All Top Jobs
Buy
Used Cars
Dealer and private-party ads
Make:

Model:

Price Range:
to
Search within:
miles of ZIP

Advanced Search | 1982 & Older

SacBee Marketplace

Featured Categories

Legal Worship Education Health View all
Powered by Planet Discover