Comments on: Bay Area Transit Agencies Eye Federal Oversight Proposal with Caution http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/16/bay-area-transit-agencies-eye-federal-oversight-proposal-with-caution/ Covering San Francisco's livable streets movement Sat, 11 Feb 2012 18:38:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: david vartanoff http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/16/bay-area-transit-agencies-eye-federal-oversight-proposal-with-caution/comment-page-1/#comment-56261 david vartanoff Tue, 17 Nov 2009 17:43:08 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=86361#comment-56261 While fear of current FRA crashworthiness regs spreading to 'isolated' transit systems is legit, the WMATA refusal to allow inspectors/monitors from the commission supposedly authorised to oversee safety to do their work needs to be addressed. CA's PUC may not make perfect decisions, but BART can't tell them to go away. While fear of current FRA crashworthiness regs spreading to ‘isolated’ transit systems is legit, the WMATA refusal to allow inspectors/monitors from the commission supposedly authorised to oversee safety to do their work needs to be addressed. CA’s PUC may not make perfect decisions, but BART can’t tell them to go away.

]]> By: Drunk Engineer http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/16/bay-area-transit-agencies-eye-federal-oversight-proposal-with-caution/comment-page-1/#comment-56201 Drunk Engineer Tue, 17 Nov 2009 05:12:36 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=86361#comment-56201 "Meh, I don't see this as being a problem as long as it isn't an unfunded mandate." But of course it would be a huge colossal unfunded mandate. Just read the article. It states the agencies which fail to meet the new Federal "safety" rules would lose out on funding. That would totally screw over the older established systems like NY, which still rely heavily on older (but otherwise safe) equipment, track, and stations. Even worse, they are proposing to follow the FRA operating model, which for decades has prevented Amtrak, Caltrain, and other operators from utilizing modern (i.e. foreign) trainsets because they are "unsafe". Mark my words. If this plan goes through, it will make the Obama legacy 100x worse than anything Bush ever inflicted on public transit. “Meh, I don’t see this as being a problem as long as it isn’t an unfunded mandate.”

But of course it would be a huge colossal unfunded mandate. Just read the article. It states the agencies which fail to meet the new Federal “safety” rules would lose out on funding. That would totally screw over the older established systems like NY, which still rely heavily on older (but otherwise safe) equipment, track, and stations.

Even worse, they are proposing to follow the FRA operating model, which for decades has prevented Amtrak, Caltrain, and other operators from utilizing modern (i.e. foreign) trainsets because they are “unsafe”.

Mark my words. If this plan goes through, it will make the Obama legacy 100x worse than anything Bush ever inflicted on public transit.

]]> By: Daniel Jacobson http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/16/bay-area-transit-agencies-eye-federal-oversight-proposal-with-caution/comment-page-1/#comment-56191 Daniel Jacobson Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:50:46 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=86361#comment-56191 The CPUC is by no means a perfect oversight organization--it accounts for a lot of wasteful spending, specifically in light rail projects. The CPUC regulates that new rail projects (streetcars, light rail, etc.) cannot run in mixed traffic and must have their own separated ROW, thereby driving up costs and slowing down the engineering process if an agency wants to go through the complicated waiver process. Meanwhile, virtually every other state allows light rail and streetcars to run in mixed traffic without millions of over-engineering (see: Portland, Denver, Houston, etc.). Hopefully we can adopt the new federal standards and cut the red tape and money-wasting regulations. The CPUC is by no means a perfect oversight organization–it accounts for a lot of wasteful spending, specifically in light rail projects. The CPUC regulates that new rail projects (streetcars, light rail, etc.) cannot run in mixed traffic and must have their own separated ROW, thereby driving up costs and slowing down the engineering process if an agency wants to go through the complicated waiver process. Meanwhile, virtually every other state allows light rail and streetcars to run in mixed traffic without millions of over-engineering (see: Portland, Denver, Houston, etc.). Hopefully we can adopt the new federal standards and cut the red tape and money-wasting regulations.

]]> By: Ben http://sf.streetsblog.org/2009/11/16/bay-area-transit-agencies-eye-federal-oversight-proposal-with-caution/comment-page-1/#comment-56181 Ben Tue, 17 Nov 2009 02:35:10 +0000 http://sf.streetsblog.org/?p=86361#comment-56181 Meh, I don't see this as being a problem as long as it isn't an unfunded mandate. Meh, I don’t see this as being a problem as long as it isn’t an unfunded mandate.

]]>