SANDAG's New Year's resolutions
By: GEORGE CRISSMAN - Commentary: | ∞
It's almost time for board members of our regional planning agency, the San Diego Association of Governments, to attend their annual get-together in Borrego Springs. The La Casa del Zorro was specifically chosen for its isolation, which will apparently enhance discussion on the scheduled topics of habitat preservation, water quality, climate change and beach sand replenishment (as stated in the board agenda for Dec. 21, item No. 11 ).
But there are additional issues requiring attention, such as:
1. Remedial training for SANDAG's professional staff.
Staffers appeared confused when responding to public comment about the Regional Transportation Plan. For example, comment No. 199 suggested upgrading I-15's existing managed lanes from "carpools & tolls" to "regular lanes" to reclaim wasted capacity and provide congestion relief. SANDAG's response was a lofty non-sequitur: "The first completed Managed Lanes project is not open yet on I-15."
When the failure of Bus Rapid Transit (buses operating in I-15's managed lanes) was revealed in comment 196, staffers said the discontinued routes "were not BRT services" because they "did not have the benefit of Direct Access Ramps." This conflicts with the definition used by SANDAG's Transportation Committee! In the Oct. 5 meeting, Bus Rapid Transit was described as "a form of rapid transit operated wholly or partly on exclusive bus lanes, guideways, or managed lanes."
More chaotic responses from SANDAG staffers were documented in my previous Community Forum article "Reject the transportation plan" (Nov 20). While some staffers are probably well trained and competent, improvement is clearly needed.
2. Implement a customer service orientation.
One of mass transit's success stories was bus route 89, which handled more than 100 daily boardings between Sorrento Valley and Del Mar Heights. It was discontinued by the Metropolitan Transit System because 70 or so of those passengers were transferring from the Coaster, which means they weren't paying a fare as they boarded.
There were impassioned pleas from the public during the Transportation Committee meeting to maintain the route so they could get to work. However, the negative impact of the decision on those passengers was not discussed. The decision-making process requires a customer service focus or the transit system will continue to eject passengers.
3. Emphasize cost-effective solutions.
As a steward of the taxpayer's money, SANDAG must provide the greatest benefit at the lowest cost. For example, consider the need to reduce traffic congestion on Highway 78. The $477 million Sprinter will remove up to 1,100 cars from the road at a cost of $433,000 per vehicle. Adding two regular lanes for a billion dollars would add capacity for 48,000 cars per day at a cost of only $21,000 per car. Obviously, adding freeway lanes is more cost-effective than a train -- by a factor of 20-to-1!
Adopting these measures would help transform SANDAG into an effective regional planning agency. Board members are encouraged to tackle these issues during the retreat and report their findings when they return.
-- George Crissman lives in Vista.
More Stories
Advertisement
Jack wrote on Jan 3, 2008 6:51 AM:I don't know jack, but I am dead tired of all this destructive criticism. If you don't have something positive to say, do us all a favor and be quiet.
The Roadie wrote on Jan 3, 2008 8:10 AM:Jack - don't you know that the essence of America is the free and open dialog of diverse ideas? You should just stop reading the Editorial section.
George, as always, is spot on in shining a light on SANDAG's misalignment with their constituents.
Their staff has drunk the Koolaid of "carpooling and transit will solve all the world's problems", and seems to live in fear of being sued by the state for doing what the people want - more standard lanes. Let them support what the voters want (and were promised), and then Moonbeam Brown can sue the public for voting the "wrong" way.
I can't wait to get some hard data on the increased wait times on the north/south feeder routes after the Sprinter interferes with free traffic flow. Then it will be easy to do the math, calculate what energy and human time is wasted in Sprinter-induced north/south traffic jams, and conclude that the Sprinter is essentially punishing the north/south commuter in preference to the few east/west riders who can use it. From just the test runs, I estimate that 4 times an hour, a hundred autos, trucks, and buses will each be delayed by three minutes. That's 12 minutes out of every hour, or 20% of capacity, will be stolen by the Sprinter while neighborhoods near the feeder routes get to breathe the idling fumes.
George wrote on Jan 3, 2008 9:49 AM:Well golly, Jack, in what way would staff training, a customer-service focus, and cost-effective solutions be destructive? Please elaborate!
Alf wrote on Jan 3, 2008 12:24 PM:George, where does it end? Have you driven to Disneylsnd recently? There is a section of I-5 that is over 16 lanes wide. Regarding your Point 2 - The agreements between two methods of transport; Coaster to MTS or MTS to Coaster are the result of stupid negotiations. Stupidity is adding lanes ad infinitum when there is a finite source of fuel and therefore an end-point at which the option of individual cars will and must give way to mass transit, I'm talking long-term here. What of the long-term investment in land and concrete when, way down the line, the freeways become either useless or obsolete? Proper mass transit, well thought out will eventually supplant most individual cars, what then? Points to ponder. Regards, Alf.
Jim wrote on Jan 3, 2008 2:25 PM:George, you are spot on again. SANDAG staffed by ideologically PC diehards and they are leading the politicians with a hook in their noses. Wake up politicos and make SANDAG responsive to common sense and the public will. You were elected, not the SANDAG staff.
Derek wrote on Jan 3, 2008 2:38 PM:Once the Sprinter is up and running, how will the cost of adding train cars to increase capacity compare with widening the 78?
Walt wrote on Jan 3, 2008 2:40 PM:Adding to the points about Sprinter costs and lack of congestion relief; Full Sprinters in one hour one direction carry about 520 riders. About on third are truly new transit riders. Assuming all come from SR-78, that's about 150 cars at the usual peak hour 1.15 per car. Thus $477 million buys 150 cars/peak hour from the freeway for zilch reduction of 4,500 or so that would be using it. Then $477 million amortized 50 years means taxpayer capital cost is about $71,500 per day. That's w/o operating expenses. Taking the projected 1,100 per day from the freeway is $65 per car per day. Taxi anyone? Or even if 11,600 boardings/day are reached, $6 per boarding again before any operating costs.Fare $2. Who makes up the difference? SANDAG resolution; Do the math before committing the $$$$'s. Alf; SANDAG has been trying your approach for 20 years using most of transit capital funds. Only 2% of travelers are using. Can you suggest what is not proper about it's approach? Yes we need to do better than autos and roads. But the future lies not in century-ole monster buses and trolleys, but in small lightweight vehicles, automated on electrified guideways saving both energy and land, and preserving personal transport like autos do now. Unfortunately beginnings for this are in foreign countries, and USA effort is moribund.
Reardon wrote on Jan 3, 2008 3:39 PM:Mass transit is a religion to some – and demonstrated inefficiencies be damned. When there are no busses to see how bad they are, they pump for busses. Then when it is obvious that you can toss live hand grenades on busses without life being threatened, they pump for rails. (“Don’t look at what we said, and what actually is, look over here at our better idea.”) When rail cost goes from $60 million to $460 million, they pump the ridership. When the ridership is less than sterling, they say we must increase the efficiency by forcing the drivers to use rail. It is always the next idea, but please don’t look at how good our last idea was! Meanwhile King Tut’s search for immortality cost HUGE treasure and thousands of lives. You can get immortality by buying a rail ticket – it is highly subsidized, and the federal portion of the subsidy is borrowed, never to be repaid. Your immortality is secured by buying a rail ticket!
Bored wrote on Jan 3, 2008 9:30 PM:George is a "usual suspect" who always criticizes SANDAG and NCTD.
That's OK, but George knows full well that SANDAG put the retreat out to bid and the Anzo Borrego place was the best deal for us taxpayer's!
But George is a cranky activist who would never divulge something like that.
Sadly, that fact puts all of George's opinions and spouted "facts" in doubt...
George wrote on Jan 3, 2008 10:25 PM:Hi, Bored! Of course I know that SANDAG put the retreat out to bid. I also read item 11 of the Board's agenda for December 21st where it says the Borrego Springs location was chosen for its "isolation". If you'd like to see for yourself, you can click on the first link in the article (above) or find it at SANDAGs website. To make it easy, you'll find it on page 9 of 209 pages of the agenda.
George wrote on Jan 4, 2008 9:36 AM:Hi, Derek! It may not be possible to add capacity to the Sprinter without improving the infrastructure since most of the system is single-tracked. But let's assume the Sprinter is wildly successful and NCTD spends another $50 million to buy twelve more trainsets. This would remove another 1,100 cars from the road at a cost of $45,000 each, which is still more than the per-vehicle cost of adding freeway lanes. But with trains running every 15 minutes instead of every 30 minutes, you'll need to double-up more of the track to ensure safe and reliable operation. Any attempt at "smart growth" (adding capacity without adding to the infrastructure) will cause more problems than it cures. Realistically speaking, adding more Sprinter trains will be another half-billion dollar proposal.
First name only. Comments including last names, contact addresses, e-mail addresses or phone numbers will be deleted. Attempts to misrepresent your identity or impersonate any person will not be approved. All comments are screened before they appear online, so please keep them brief. Comments reflect the views of those commenting and not necessarily those of the North County Times or its staff writers. Click here to view additional comment policies.
Today's Stories
Advertisement