 As freeways become more congested,
local streets leading to the ramps are similarly jammed. Our planners answer
to traffic congestion has been, "Send us more money to expand the freeway
and local road network."
This is the same argument that prevailed
in Los Angeles; though the city is two-thirds paved, congestion is worse
than ever!
There has never been a road that
had less traffic on it after it was constructed than was present before
it was built. Similarly, adding additional lanes to a freeway never reduced
the number of vehicles. In fact, adding a new lane to any road results in
ever increasing traffic because people can now commute further; until the
road again becomes too congested. In fact, if we built all the projects
they want, they still forecast severe congestion!
In San Diego and Los Angeles, only
2 percent of commuters use public transit. Why is it that 17 percent of
Chicagoans use public transit, 20 percent in San Francisco, and 47 percent
in New York City, but San Diego and LA can only scrape up 2 percent? According
to SANDAG and transit district spokesmen, "It is not our fault because
we won't leave our cars!" Is this a valid argument?
In LA, the Santa Clarita line of
their Metrolink system carried about 900 passengers a day between the San
Fernando Valley and Downtown. Following an earthquake that demolished the
freeways, passenger usage jumped to 36,000 per day; due to the fact that
it took more time to drive using local streets than taking the Metrolink.
As the freeways were reconstructed, revenue dropped to near pre-quake levels.
This proves that people will leave their cars when there is a service available
that takes less time. Our RTP shows that SANDAG envisions that it will always
take us two to three times as long to use public transit than to drive.
This is called planning?
Why do other cities have better transit
usage? Their primary commuter systems are above or below ground level (elevated
or subway) and have effective feeder systems to bring passengers to and
from the main System. These trains are not impeded by, and do not impede,
ground traffic. Is San Diego so different from other cities that an elevated
system would not be effective? No!
In spite of their predictions of
massive regional congestion, SANDAG and our two transit districts have rejected
the use of any elevated system!
There is some light beginning to
shine in the transit tunnel. Recognizing the failure of their Metrolink
system to attract commuters, SCAG (Southern California Association of Governments),
which includes LA, Riverside, Orange, Ventura and San Bernardino Counties,
has designated a MAGLEV (Magnetic Levitated) train as their primary transit
system of the future. MAGLEV is elevated, silent, non-polluting, and fast.
It is the perfect system for urban and interurban service here in San Diego.
If we can redirect the mindset of
our transportation official from roads and ground level trains and trolleys
to rapid transit, San Diego may yet emerge as a economic powerhouse of the
21st Century that retains our quality of life.  | 
hy are the Audubon Society and its local
chapters concerned about population growth, urban congestion and transportation
planning in Southern California? Because these elements affect our quality
of life, and the responsible government agencies have done such an abysmal
job in trying to cope with their impacts.