Thread

1. dcrazy · 1790136398 · focus · HN ↗

   Meanwhile, the 47 Muni bus that connects the Van Ness transit corridor to Caltrain has been “suspended” since 2020, and the extension of Caltrain to the transit center is still unfunded.

   I appreciate solutions that meet us where we are, but it’s depressing that we don’t seem to actually have the will to make a sustainable, integrated mass transit plan.

   1. tristanj · 1790137381 · focus · HN ↗

      The reason there's not more public transit is because the economics are terrible. Looking at the financials:

        Cost per passenger trip:
          BART: $1.07B operating expenses / 59.5M trips = $16.92
          SF Muni: $1.13B / 160M trips = $7.06
          Caltrain: $225M / 9.1M trips = $24.73
      
        Passenger Fare collected per trip:
          BART: $259M / 59.5M trips = $4.35
          SF Muni: $111M / 160M trips = $0.69
          Caltrain: $58.7M / 9.1M trips = $6.45
      
        Subsidy per trip:
          BART: $12.57
          SF Muni: $6.37
          Caltrain: $18.27
      
        Cost per passenger mile:
          BART: $1.07B / 892.5M passenger miles = $1.20/mile
          SF Muni: $1.13B / 312M = $3.62/mile
          Caltrain: $225M / 177.5M = $1.27/mile
      
        Subsidy per passenger mile:
          BART: $1.07B / 892.5M passenger miles = $0.84/mile
          SF Muni: $1.13B / 312M = $3.26/mile
          Caltrain: $225M / 177.5M = $0.94/mile
      

      Every single ride requires a $6 to $18 subsidy, paid for by tax dollars.

      For comparison, federal spending for the interstate highway system is about 2-3 cents per passenger mile.

      1. skew-aberration · 1790139234 · focus · HN ↗

         Yes, but public transit does create value - the question is who captures it.

         BART likely created huge profits for people who owned land in the areas it services - house prices and rents would have increased substantially. Public investment, private profits. Subsidies in the form of low-cost fares like this are just further welfare for the landowners.

         Interestingly, about a third of BART's cost was acquiring land - if/when that same land is cleared and sold on market, the project would have operated at an enormous profit. Certainly, BART's current assets would far exceed 'total fares collected'.

         1. wallst07 · 1790163972 · focus · HN ↗

            >BART likely created huge profits for people who owned land in the areas it services

            Unless you try to build housing.

            <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reason.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;02&#x2F;21&#x2F;san-francisco-man-has-spent-4-years-1-mi&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;reason.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;02&#x2F;21&#x2F;san-francisco-man-has-spent-4-...

            1. zie · 1790197036 · focus · HN ↗

               Looks like the address is 2918 mission, still no apartment complex there according to web maps, though the laundromat building is demolished it seems. So perhaps by 2034, a good 20 years since the start of the project.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.