With Los Angeles as Inspiration, San Diego Enviros Call for 50/10 Plan

Environmentalists from San Diego are echoing the rhetoric of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa in the battle to expand the local transit network and reduce funding for highway expansion.

Transit, as it would exist in San Diego under SANDAG's hybrid option.  For links to maps for all the potential plans,##http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?projectid=368&fuseaction=projects.detail##click here.##
Transit, as it would exist in San Diego under SANDAG's hybrid option. For links to maps for all the potential plans,##http://www.sandag.org/index.asp?projectid=368&fuseaction=projects.detail##click here.##

Enter the newly branded, “50-10” plan.  Los Angeles’ 30/10 advocates can eat their hearts out.

Brought to you by the Save our Forest and Ranchlands (SOFAR) and the Cleveland National Forest Foundation (CNFF), “50-10” is an attempt to influence the “2050 Regional Transportation Plan” being proposed by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). Advocates are calling on the agency to build all of its planned transit projects for the next fifty years in the next ten and to leave the highway projects for another day. Even if the agency falls short of the ten year goal, it would hold off on any highway expansion projects until the local transit network is completely built out.

“The foundation of the 50-10 plan includes the development of a preferred regional land use plan – a smart growth land use plan – and the development of a transportation mobility network that support the needs of this smart growth plan,” said Duncan McFetridge of SOFAR in a press release.

Currently, SANDAG staff is proposing a long range plan that actually includes more funding for transit investments ($24 billion) than highway investments ($21 billion). This plan is a combination of the three major options that were considered by the SANDAG Board of Directors and would have transit and highway projects built concurrently. While SOFAR and CNFF concede this is a step in the right direction, they also argue that planning such a large investment in highways as the region is trying to grow its transit mode share is somewhat incoherent.

While SOFAR and CNFF may be borrowing Villaraigosa’s rhetoric, there are many differences between 30/10 in Los Angeles and 50-10 in San Diego.

It's hard to imagine labor embracing 50-10 as they did 30/10.  Villaraigosa, pictured here with Congress Woman Jane Harman, addresses 30/10 at a labor rally last May.  Photo: ##http://www.flickr.com/photos/29300710@N08/##L.A. Streetsblog/Flickr##
It's hard to imagine labor embracing 50-10 as they did 30/10. Villaraigosa, pictured here with Congress Woman Jane Harman, addresses 30/10 at a labor rally last May. Photo: ##http://www.flickr.com/photos/29300710@N08/##L.A. Streetsblog/Flickr##

The first difference is that 30/10 is an attempt to leverage a recently passed sales tax to build rail and rapid bus projects more quickly with help from the federal government. It doesn’t attempt to pit rail against highway projects. One of the benefits of not de-emphasizing highway projects is that 30/10 has much broader backing including the Metro Board of Directors, the local Senate and House Delegations to Washington, and most organized labor organizations. Indeed, one of the major selling points of 30/10 is that nearly nobody opposes it.

Which leads us to a similarity. Both 30/10 and 50-10 are proposed plans that would mark a major change in governmental policy. 30/10 may have near-unanimous support in Los Angeles, but to become reality it would need the federal government to change the way it funds transportation and the creation of an Infrastructure Bank. 50/10 is a proposed change to a proposed Long Range Plan for the San Diego region.

Another difference has to do with the scope of what is being proposed. 50-10 is an attempt to change the entire regional plan, not just the transportation plan, for San Diego. As such, it calls for more mixed-use development, density, and investing in the urban core first. 30/10 calls for building transit as quickly as funds become available. While staff at L.A. Metro (aka LACMTA) and local politicians such as Villaraigosa call the Downtown Regional Connector the linchpin of the transit expansion plan, that project is still in environmental review.

The first two projects in Greater Los Angeles to begin construction and receive funds from the 2008 sales tax are in the more suburban San Fernando and San Gabriel Valleys. The 50-10 proposal would focus more on the urban core, whereas the 30/10 plan is more spread out throughout the region, basing the timeline not on geography but on when construction can start.

But at this point, each of these plans, 30/10 and 50-10 are still just proposals. Both San Diego’s advocates and Los Angeles’ politicians deserve credit for envisioning a better way for both cities, but more will have to embrace those visions before they become reality.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

CA Voters Reject Measures With Lots of Highway Money and a Dash of Transit

|
On Tuesday night, voters approved major transit improvement plans in Los Angeles, the Bay Area, Atlanta, Indianapolis, Raleigh, and Seattle. There were other types of transportation measures on local ballots — they focused on highway expansion and lumped in transit funding as a secondary consideration. TransitCenter reports that in California, highway-centric packages didn’t have the same appeal as transit-focused ballot measures: Consider California. While […]

San Diego Planners Envision a Future With More Driving

|
When it comes to forward-looking transportation and planning policy, California is out in front of other states, with legislation that requires regional agencies to incorporate carbon reduction goals into their transportation plans. But not all regions are up to the challenge. San Diego seems to be having a hard time mustering the political will to adapt, as […]

How San Diego Planners Spun the Press to Sell Highway Expansions

|
How far will transportation agencies go to spin public perception of their highway expansion plans? San Diego’s KPBS has produced a brilliant case study in this video and the accompanying report — a deep dive into the media operation mounted by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) to defend its slate of highway expansion projects. In late 2011, SANDAG passed […]

How NIMBYism Stifles San Diego’s Sustainability Goals

|
Earlier this month, the California environmental group Next 10 released a study ranking the walkability of nearly 500 rail stations in the Golden State’s major cities. Not surprisingly, San Diego’s transit stations rated at or near the bottom. Andrew Keatts at Voice of San Diego says the culprit isn’t bad planning. And it’s not the lack of a market […]

San Diego Chooses Between Two Bicycle Boosters For Mayor

|
The election is less than a week away. Americans have a choice between a) a president who has overseen notable transportation and land use innovations but failed to provide leadership when the national transportation bill could have been reformed, and b) a former governor who enacted a progressive, pro-smart-growth agenda but who has renounced those […]

Five Factors That Will Determine Whether TIFIA Benefits Transit

|
Phineas Baxandall is a senior analyst at the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. Last week, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood touted his department’s $545.9 million TIFIA loan to construct Los Angeles’ 8.5-mile light rail transit line along the Crenshaw corridor as “just one example of how DOT’s TIFIA credit assistance program extends the value of America’s transportation dollar.” But will […]