By Doug Porter
An editorial in the Union-Tribune waxes poetic about the virtues of building a mass transit system for the white people in San Diego– a network of “skyway” gondolas.
Saying it’s “one idea that does not get the attention it deserves,” the UT goes on to predict Ron Roberts, now chairing both the Board of Supervisors and SANDAG (and vice chair of the Metropolitan Transit System board), will use his perch to seek funding for the concept.
The editorial writers for the Union-Tribune might want to try becoming bus riders (I suggest the #7 Route during rush hour) before they go all in on this idea. And I realize they probably have no clue as to what an insult this project might be considered to the (mostly) people of color in San Diego who have very real transportation problems.
Roberts gained approval for $75,000 grant from the supes slush fund in 2014 for a study on the logistics of building an aerial gondola and how much the project might cost. The concept is now embedded in SANDAG’s wish list of transit options. All it needs is funding.
Sensitive Integration
From the San Diego Business Journal:
A proposed aerial tram linking downtown San Diego with Balboa Park would cost between $65 million and $75 million to construct, according to a consultants’ report issued by San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
Consultants at Parsons Brinckerhoff said the small footprint of stations and support towers for a tramway that would operate up to 85 feet above ground level, on a two-mile corridor along Sixth Avenue, would allow major infrastructure to be “integrated sensitively” into the existing corridor environment.
Support towers could be placed within the existing public street right-of-way with minimal or no loss of on-street parking, the report said. Consultants estimated potential ridership between 3,000 and 4,000 daily, averaging 751,000 to 1.1 million annually, including local commuters and tourists.
Here’s the closing pitch from the UT editorial:
We expect Roberts will outline his skyway hopes and plans when he delivers the annual State of the County address the night of Feb. 25.
A SANDAG study last year documented the realistic possibilities of elevated gondola lines, not just as a touristy attraction but, in tandem with buses, light-rail and other transit, as a means of daily commuting. The skyways would be far cheaper – between $65 million and $75 million for the two-mile line to downtown – and easier to build. And they could add to the unique character of San Diego. We hope skyway skeptics will do their homework.
I guess you can count me as one of the skyway skeptics. It is undeniably a bold vision. It’s even (kind of) a cool idea… …until you look at the miserable history of transit projects in San Diego.
Exact Change Only: A History of #Fail
There are transportation advocates in San Diego who have long memories about SANDAG; the failed promise of a special ballot measure on open space acquisition in exchange for support on the transnet authorization in 2004, the lengthy delays in implementation of the CenterLine bus rapid transit project along the Interstate 15 corridor in the Mid-City area, and the Rapid Transit bus line (215) along El Cajon Boulevard that’s not really all that rapid.
When it comes to operational implementation at the level of MTS (Bus/Trolley) one need look no further than the arcane fare collection system. It’s easy to use only if you can send your chauffeur out to obtain the necessary materials.
Having eliminated en route day pass sales over concerns about abuse, it’s been necessary for a couple of years now to either have exact change for each bus ride or find a supermarket location (within specified hours and with a helpful register clerk) to buy a pass.
It doesn’t have to be this way. Other cities–I was amazed at Portland’s system on a visit last year–have made it easy to ride. Local MTS officials have been saying they’d get around to a fix, but don’t hold your breath. Especially since the company that sells easy access technology to other transit systems is in…wait for it…San Diego.
As I said about the gondola idea, all a modern fare collection system needs is funding. Maybe the supes can fund another study there.
From University City to the Shore
An article in the Los Angeles Times suggested that some sky tram routes might replace proposed light rail routes.
In case you’re wondering about my references to the concept being a “white line,” consider the potential routes mentioned in the SANDAG vision:
One line would connect Balboa Park to the waterfront convention center with possible stops along the way.
The second would go from Pacific Beach to Sorrento Mesa. Gallegos said the steep grades would require expensive tunnels and bridges to run a trolley inland, so skyways might be cheaper.
The third route would extend from University Town Center — home to a new Blue Line stop — to the Coaster, with stops along the way. This would link the two systems and give train riders new options, Gallegos said.
Notice anything about these routes and the communities they would serve?
Assorted Shortcomings
Colombia Tram
Then there are the limitations. There’s the reality that sky trams don’t make sense over long distances. They’re slow and the size of the cars makes them unsuitable for handling crowds of commuters. And wait until the NIMBY’s of San Diego find out they can be noisy and consider the privacy issues when a gondola car is traveling above homes.
There are cities where sky trams an effect means of transit. The system in mountainous Medellín, Colombia has been heralded as a social and cultural success because it opened up a connection with the poorest neighborhoods.
But nobody’s claiming it actually reduced traffic, which is supposed to be a regional goal– a fact SANDAG’s planners seem to have have a hard time grasping.
From Urbanland:
Detractors say gondolas are still most effective as tourist attractions, not commuter vehicles. London’s gondola line over the Thames, built for the 2012 Summer Olympics, attracts more than 1.5 million passengers a year, but a very small percentage are commuters. Guardian newspaper columnist Owen Hatherley mocked the “Air Line” as “theme park whimsy.”
Gondolas are “useful only in a narrow range of cases,” says Jarrett Walker, a Portland-based public transit consultant and author of the book Human Transit. “You need sufficient volume of people traveling between just two points, with a significant barrier to solving the problem on the surface, such as topography or a land barrier like a water body.”
But Walker says there are “certainly situations” where gondolas are the most cost-effective transit option. In particular, gondolas can provide an alternative when there is a short-distance gap to be addressed and a constant demand, “because gondolas have fixed moderate capacity and can’t do huge peak crushes,” he says.
I’m not saying we can’t or shouldn’t do an aerial transport system in San Diego. I am saying such an idea needs to get in line –behind the region’s more pressing transportation issues…
Short Sighted Thinking About Tall Buildings
Some of the good citizens of University Heights/North Park (where I live) are in a tizzy over a city decision to put a modified version of a Density Bonus Plan back into the Land Use Element of the North Park Community Plan Update.
From the UH 2050 blog:
The Density Bonus Plan for North Park would allow developers to “request approval of the increased density on a specific property through a Process 4 Planned Development Permit” for the Bus Transit Corridor along Park and El Cajon Boulevards, and the residential area between Lincoln and Howard Avenues, as shown below. The proposed Density Bonus allows for the density to be increased up 73 dwelling units per acre for the area bounded in blue, and for to 145 dwelling units per acre for the area bounded in black.
This is a bad thing?
If San Diego is to have any chance of meeting its climate change mitigation goals existing neighborhoods like North Park need to be zoned to accommodate a LOT more people. The El Cajon Boulevard corridor has the nearly all associated infrastructure in place to deal with increased density.
If not along El Cajon Boulevard, then where? We can’t continue building suburbs. Maybe a poorer neighborhood?
I’ll take this rant one step further and say the city should ease parking requirements for these new developments. Then maybe we’d get enough political critical mass to make better public transportation a priority.
Bwa-ha-ha-ha…. Are the Raiders Coming to San Diego?
The Rams and the Chargers are meeting to see if they can work out a deal to share a stadium in Inglewood.
From NBC7:
The two sides wrapped up their first session on Monday afternoon. Soon after the conclusion Chargers Special Counsel Mark Fabiani released the following:
JOINT STATEMENT FROM THE RAMS AND CHARGERS
January 18, 2016
We have concluded our first meeting. We mutually have agreed not to publicly discuss details of this or any future meeting.
The Union-Tribune/10 News commissioned a poll by SurveyUSA looking at the future prospects for football in San Diego.
While those polled were mostly (50%) opposed to spending public money on a new stadium, they were adamant about not wanting an attempt to bring the Oakland Raiders to town. Only 18% thought the Raiders coming to town was a good idea, with 34% saying they’d consider some other team and 45% saying screw it, let’s go to the beach.
The Los Angeles Daily News considered what the Men in Black coming to town might mean:
If they go to Inglewood, the Raiders are sitting there in the waiting room. A Raiders move to San Diego might trigger the next major earthquake, thanks to the rumblings in the graves of former owner Gene Klein and former coach Don Coryell.
The Raiders were the skunk in the Chargers’ basement, the Dutch Elm disease in their front yard. They won a game on the Holy Roller play. They came to San Diego in 1980 and jolted the Chargers out of the AFC Championship, when Dan Fouts and Kellen Winslow were at their peak.
During the 1982 Raiders/NFL trial, over the issue of relocation to Los Angeles, Klein testified against Davis and got so exercised on the stand that he suffered a heart attack.
Another Chargers coach, Harland Svare, was so convinced that Davis had bugged his locker room that he began screaming, “Damn you, Al Davis, I know you’re in there!” as his bemused players looked at each other.
Condolences to Carl DeMaio
It was a bad day for Carl Demaio. The former City Councilman and his sidekick former San Jose Mayor Chuck Reed announced they were postponing taking their latest public pension ‘reform’ scheme to the voters until 2018. And he got an unexpected promotion. And then it was taken away.
From the Los Angeles Times:
DeMaio, in an interview Monday, said the measures’ backers decided to hold off this year in part because they were awaiting the result of a U.S. Supreme Court case on mandatory union fees. If justices decide to strike down such fees, it could deal a major blow to labor unions.
“If labor unions aren’t able to spend unlimited amounts of money, that certainly heightens the chance of [pension] reform,” DeMaio said.
He also said instability in the stock market could make their proposals more palatable.
“We believe that as the markets begin to show distress, taxpayers will see it’s not fun seeing their 401(k)s go down and then have to turn around and write bailout checks for government pension programs,” DeMaio said.
So now that confirms what the conservatives “free speech” case about union dues before the supreme court is really about. And DeMaio’s rooting for the economy to tank.
I wrote the sub-head “Condolences…” because the Times article originally ran a photo identifying DeMaio as a congressman from San Diego. Now he’s been demoted to being a former congressional candidate.
The Donald Pitches Evangelicals
Donald Trump at Liberty University: “Jesus was good. I prefer guys who don’t get crucified, I wouldn’t have been crucified, but he’s nice.”
— Rex Huppke (@RexHuppke) January 18, 2016
On This Day: 1793 – King Louis XVI was tried by the French Convention, found guilty of treason and sentenced to the guillotine. 1981 – President Reagan signed an agreement with Iran paving the way for the release of 52 Americans held hostage for more than 14 months and for arrangements to unfreeze Iranian assets and to resolve all claims against Iran. 1986 – Bruce Springsteen made an unannounced appearance at a benefit for laid-off 3M workers, Asbury Park, N.J.
Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to “The Starting Line” and get an email every time a new article in this series is posted!
I read the Daily Fishwrap(s) so you don’t have to… Catch “the Starting Line” Monday thru Friday right here at San Diego Free Press (dot) org. Send your hate mail and ideas to DougPorter@SanDiegoFreePress.Org Check us out on Facebook and Twitter.
Doug Porter
Latest posts by Doug Porter (see all)
- Last Call. Last Column. - December 14, 2018
- Which Presidential Candidate Will You Support in 2020? - December 13, 2018
- Mounting the Assault on Big Gay and Other Drivel From SDSU’s Minimum Wage Scrooge - December 12, 2018
Robert’s Aerial Tram-Scam is a flagrant abuse of his power and privilege on the various transit/planning boards cited in the article. Its appearance on the SANDAG project list would be laughable if it weren’t so dishonest in portraying how it would address critical transit needs. It will require substantial public subsidies for a novelty that appeals to tourists and does nothing for encouraging regular transit use.
Damn! I wish there was a large LIKE button for your comment, Anna, and for Jay Powell’s excellent SDFP article about San Diego parks & open space sell-off issues.
I feel ill every time I see articles like this promoting millions and millions of dollars for a novelty (love your choice of word) transportation project when San Diego has such immense needs for improvements in our existing transportation system. I guess the CAC Waterfront Park isn’t enough for Ron Roberts’ legacy?
Get fed and drunk downtown, take the $65 Million Scamway to the Zoo’s Tramway and blow lunch on the bipeds below. Who is served by this gift of Roberts to his own legacy? Roberts is, and the few who’ll play Star Trek tunes in their gondolas. This is not transportation, it’s titilation at the cost of a bus/trolley system that needs improvement.
Yes!
The author’s statement that “If San Diego is to have any chance of meeting its climate change mitigation goals existing neighborhoods like North Park need to be zoned to accommodate a LOT more people” is completely unsubstantiated. North Park will be greener, more comfortable and will more easily meet environmental quality goals without a lot more people. Promoting density increases solely based on the location of bus lines would amount to an overly simplistic, short-sighted approach to urban planning. Growth (and associated traffic and congestion) should be distributed throughout the city by taking a holistic approach that balances and integrates development and [relatively less expensive] transit solutions, thereby improving transit everywhere, not just in core urban areas, and preventing lop-sided growth where the core urban areas become too dense while suburbs remain a transit disaster full of yet more cookie-cutter McMansions.
I’m really sorry this inevitable increase in density will encroach on your lifestyle. North Park has the bones to support it. The NIMBY’s in Linda Vista won’t allow it. (other neighborhoods do and they also need to grow, mostly upwards) The planet is more valuable than easy access to a parking place.
Good urban development depends on context and has to be done holistically. There is no one-size-fits-all solution and it can’t be done in isolation. The bigger picture city-wide must be taken into account. Saying that density simply must be added, without consideration of specifics, and backing this theory with unsubstantiated environmental claims, makes for little more than idle internet chat. There is more to the equation than “density will magically force cars to go away”. Such a theory would also fail to account for major transformative shifts now underway. Transportation-sector greenhouse gas emissions have actually been going down for the past 10 years, as cars (and bikes) become more efficient, smaller, and move to hybrid, electric and smarter designs – at what are now exponentially increasing rates. The bus system will likely lose half of its currently already low ~4% ridership number to these greener, smarter transportation modes and other ride-sharing and free-market solutions over the next 10 years. Thus our approach needs to be a little more intelligent than “let’s make all the bad cars go away and put more buses and unlimited density everywhere”.
And the 30′ coastal height limit. Ditching that would be a huge win for SD emissions.
David, every — I mean EVERY — group human habitation (city, town, etc.) that has ever been has developed around and along routes of transportation. Remember that U. Hgts. was first born along the trolley line (been to Trolley Barn Park?). Many other neighborhoods were brought to life similarly.
Simplistic? Short-sighted? No; obvious and sensible. Those other areas will also get their share of growth.
Obvious and sensible in this case is already built in to existing zoning, which already allows much higher density near major thoroughfares. What would not be sensible would be to arbitrarily propose greatly increasing that density.
Not arbitrary; just an extension of what has already been done.
The value of the land underneath the skybridge is not adequate to justify this expense.
The border advocate weighs in here–
In 1959 a gondola was in the works going from San Ysidro to Tijuana. It could have decreased congestion, but it was also a cool idea that ended up being scrapped due to freeway building: http://www.sandiegohistory.org/sites/default/files/journal/v61-1/v61-1zaragoza.pdf
In 2014 an Intermodal Transportation Center was studied by SANDAG at the San Ysidro Port of Entry. The idea was to have something much more humane for those who cross the border everyday and allow it to be what it already is: an important shopping/employment destination. At SANDAG transportation meetings, however, it was precisely Ron Roberts who explained that the SY POE was only a transit point and not very much money would be available for such a project.
But now a money for a gondola study in downtown? “Scamway” or “Richway”?
I’m a bit more sympathetic to the idea, but no doubt it’d be primarily a tourist amenity. If the forces of tourist/dt $$ want to pay, though, cool!
You outlined some of the characteristics of where trams make sense. We have some places like that, where there’d also be a contribution to the overall transit network. Namely, connecting Mission Valley to the central mesa and to Clairemont Mesa. Starting the study with those routes would make sense and be a good faith gesture on Roberts’ part. Genuinely hope it’s considered.
https://twitter.com/augmentedballot/status/481302544724271104
I like the gondola idea, but we should name it the “Rondola”. Seriously, there are some places in San Diego where a gondola could solve a difficult connectivity problem. Sorrento Valley Coaster station to UTC would make a lot of sense.
Yep, Sorrento/UC would be a good fit too. Good call.
A trolley line up Park Avenue makes more sense. Have you ever waited in line at the zoo’s Skyfari to get on a gondola? It would be the same with the proposed tramway. A trolley can add more cars at peak times. A tramway can’t. There is plenty of room to run a trolley line up Park Ave like used to be there in the first place. The trolley line could take to the air at congested places like it does in Mission Valley.
Transit on the street level activates the street. That’s why streetcars have had success as more than just transportation systems but also as revitalization catalysts. A sky tram is the opposite. No urban planner or person who is well read in urban planning would support a sky tram.
It’s true that transit at street level contributes to the street. (Express service, less so.) A tram on ECB? No.
But there are some mobility needs where there is no street to activate and where point-to-point leaps are the point, particularly in concert with local transit lines. In SD, for example: connecting MV to the mesas north and south of there or to hop freeway nightmares in Sorrento Valley/UC.
San Diego could also build suspension bridges across the inner canyons running toward downtown. Bike and pedestrian lanes across these canyons would get a LOT of people out of their cars. The bridges could also hook up the communities that now see themselves with separate and different interests when, in fact, they have very similar problems and opportunities. Physically connecting these great neighbourhoods would tend to increase the political power of the neighborhoods over issues the Council and Mayor now find easy to dismiss because of this evolved social separation.