Meeting: City Council

Meeting Time: April 18, 2023 at 1:16pm PDT
The online Comment window has expired

Agenda Item

5.2 23-546 Actions Related to the Pre-Development Agreement for the 10183 - Design-Build-Finance-Operate-Maintain: Diridon Station to Airport Connector Project.

  • Default_avatar
    Hattie Chau over 3 years ago

    Please do not waste tax payer dollars by going with a unproven and untested that will just add to the congestion on our roads. Expand your light rail or build a BRT lane instead.

  • Default_avatar
    Kate Christoperson over 3 years ago

    PRT is not an efficient or effective way to transport many people. SJC to Stevens Creek corridor would be better served by expanded and frequent bus service with dedicated lanes.

  • Default_avatar
    Matthew Garrett over 3 years ago

    A self-driving technology that doesn't yet exist is not the way to connect SJC-Diridon. We should have built a rail line into SJC decades ago, but we didn't, out of lobbying from the taxi industry. Let's not refuse to do it now, due to lobbying from the autonomous vehicle industry.
    Connecting by rail, the same way OAK and SFO are connected to nearby transit lines, is what should be done. Invest in infrastructure now, for the future. It will be cheaper and better in the long term. It always is.

  • Default_avatar
    Sam Tseng over 3 years ago

    The proposal doesn't solve what we should be striving for, which is reduction of vehicular congestion. Connection would be better suited with buses powered by renewables or rails independent from regular traffic.

  • Default_avatar
    Li Chiang over 3 years ago

    This is not a viable long term solution and it doesn't even make sense for the majority of travelers who would utilize SJC. Try increasing bus lines or building light rail line.

  • Default_avatar
    Tevin Hendess over 3 years ago

    Do something like the new Van Ness bus lane in San Fransico. I understand San Jose is the capital of Silicon Valley and we want to innovate, but going with a completely untested plan is not the way to go about things. There are plenty of tried-and-true methods for moving people around. With how integral this connector is for transportation in San Jose for the coming decades, this needs to be done right and we need to do something we know will work.

  • Default_avatar
    Jay B over 3 years ago

    Go with proven solutions

  • Default_avatar
    Jaime Bowes over 3 years ago

    Please go with a proven solution rather than this untested option. Increasing bus service is a far less expensive option.

  • Default_avatar
    Elliott S over 3 years ago

    This proposal is a gimmick. The technology has no proven installations and no guarantees for long-term viability. As with many "high tech" start-up solutions, there is a higher risk from market volatility, and it's likely to be obsolete in a few years as these technologies progress. We would be better off with a proven solution like the SFO Air Train, or increased bus & light rail service using existing routes.

  • Default_avatar
    Gordon Chester over 3 years ago

    While I understand the need to find a SJC to Downtown solution, I support all actions which expand our existing public transportation. I would not want to see time and public dollars wasted on studying this for months to conclude the project not realistic. Considering the London Heathrow's version of these pods, we will see that their shorter route leaves passenger costs more than 3 times as much. We can provide Bus Only lanes and signal priority as the stop gap until light rail can be expanded.

  • Default_avatar
    Emily Smith over 3 years ago

    This is a waste of money. Please just use a bus on existing roads. You could get this started immediately, instead of going with unproven technology and boondoggle that will take years to test and implement.

  • Default_avatar
    A C over 3 years ago

    This seems like a colossal waste of money. Please don’t move forward with this connector solution. What happens when this start up goes belly up and we are stuck with a bunch of vehicles we won’t be able to service. What’s wrong with a bus. A rail system would be better than this solution as well.

  • Default_avatar
    Seth Barberee over 3 years ago

    Please don't invest city funding in something that will add more cars to the road and detract from our public transit. VTA Route 60 already serves the airport and if anything, should be invested in more to increase the frequencies to be more often and all day (24/7). I live along the Stevens Creek Corridor and often use the VTA 23 -> 60 when I go to the airport. It has saved me so much money and headache. Please invest more in VTA and our public transit rather than trying to waste our money.

  • Default_avatar
    Hamza Shaikh over 3 years ago

    Please use a proven technology that can be managed directly by the city. This can be VTA light rail or a Bus Rapid Transit. We have proven, scalable and reliable technology to connect airports to hubs. The current technology proposed is unproven and looks wasteful.

  • Default_avatar
    Calley Wang over 3 years ago

    This unproven people mover proposal will drain the city's finances and fail to move passengers effectively. The City of San Jose already has the tools to provide a great airport transit solution. San Jose's Transit First policy promotes bus lanes and transit signal priority. With these tools and partnerships with VTA, the city can easily offer a fast and convenient shuttle between downtown and SJC with better ADA accessibility and more luggage space to boot!

  • Default_avatar
    Russell Heywood over 3 years ago

    I am a successful silicon valley entrepreneur/engineer with decades of experience, and 20 year SJ resident. Silicon valley is about wildly gambling money on unproven ideas, and almost all of which fail. This is going to be another one of those. The city shouldn't play venture capitalist. Please just solve our fairly ordinary transit problems with proven methods like bus lanes, busways, or a VTA extension. We are silicon valley, we should know better than to be bamboozled by our own snake oil.

  • Default_avatar
    Simon Tan over 3 years ago

    This proposal is a gadgetbahn. I'm all for finding an automated solution that doesn't depend on operator availability, but pick a proven technology please.

  • Default_avatar
    Steven Herrin over 3 years ago

    I urge the council to look up the word "gadgetbahn". Transit solutions like trains or busses have well-understood costs and constraints. A gadgetbahn, such as this proposal, can promise unreasonably effective solutions for unreasonably low costs because it is entirely imaginary and unconstrained by reality and experience. San Jose needs a connection to the airport, and wasting time and money on a fantasy will serve no one and harm the people and businesses that need a real solution.

  • Default_avatar
    Robey Pointer over 3 years ago

    This looks like a total boondoggle. We have a pressing need: mass transit options connecting our world-class airport to our beautiful and growing downtown... and there are obvious existing solutions that are proven to work: BRT and light rail. If we don't trust VTA's ability to connect two of the most important centers of our city, why do we have VTA at all? -Robey, D6

  • Default_avatar
    Kyle Posey over 3 years ago

    Please reject these asinine unproven technology and utilize what we have now, what we know works… use buses or trains. Autonomous driving vehicles have already proven to unreliable and even deadly, Cruz self driving taxi’s in San Fransisco have held up traffic for no reason and Tesla self-driving has caused multi-car pileups and even has caused one Tesla to drive off a cliff! An average bus can take 20-50 people, pods can only take 4, BART can take up to 200 at crush cap, pods can take only 4!