Comments on: COMMUNITY COMMENTARY: They want to pave paradise (and widen the freeway)

By: realencinitas

realencinitas — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 16:58:42 +0000

I am sickened by the thought of 40-foot walls that would obscure views of Torrey Pines and the beach. While I am sympathetic to coastal property owners who wish to control the noise that this proposed project would create, our beautiful coastal views are one of the defining characteristics of our region. These views are enjoyed by all drivers and passengers who use I-5.

Also, has anyone considered the health risk to I-5 drivers with all of the carbon monoxide trapped in this 30-mile tunnel? Let’s work towards a solution that will allow us to preserve the unique resources that we have in San Diego! Let’s not compromise on this important quality of life issue!

By: dorndiego

dorndiego — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:32:45 +0000

In the hoary old days, when I was a reporter, any time a local or state agency received proposals for light rail, or multiple commuter lanes or, for that matter, more stringent emissions regulations a small militia of "conservatives" would turn up in meetings yelling about tax dollars being wasted. They’d swell up and berate environmentalists as if they were Damn Communists, and insist that public transport was just a touchy-feely
minority preoccupation
Fact is, these people are simply afraid of bumping elbows with people they don’t know. That, and they have a love for gasoline, mistaking it for a path toward some sort of freedom (from what?). Petroleum, for them, is nearly sacred (hell smells like it, right?) and they hate the idea of sharing. And… they’re losing what they view as a battle.
MTS in San Diego (bus and trolley) says it’s been voted the best transit system in America. I can buy a senior citizen’s ticket and get anywhere I want in it huge San Diego service area for $1.10. How much do cars cost, per day, in gasoline and maintenance and insurance and parking tickets?
All these gas heads would probably prefer sending our kids to Iraq just to cop the oilfields, rather than tax themselves a few coins to ride The Coaster. They’re not conservatives any more than are people who like sending kids to war. They’re just alarmingly, provocatively, disastrously DUMB.

By: PJay77

PJay77 — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 17:30:57 +0000

Quote: "People like their cars, get over it"
The present situation of "people like their cars get over it" is unsustainable. Someone mentioned the reality of the situation: The reality is that 100% use of one’s car is not going to work in the future. That is the reality. You can try to explain it away; suggest we build 30 lane freeways or other fantastical proposals, but the REALITY is that we are going to have to come up with ANOTHER solution OR limit the number of people who can live and work in Southern California.
That my friend, is something that NO ONE is going to be able to "get over."

By: Steve Moyer

Steve Moyer — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:53:26 +0000

While I agree that the no build option is the best proposed option (rather than subsidizing long commutes with more lanes of freeway), I disagree with most of your conclusions. It’s sad that you can see the folly of government wanting to build more freeways but you can’t see that it’s the government involvement that is the problem.
"In the present case, however, the proposed Caltrans project will cost $3 to $4 billion, which is almost certainly more than what such a rail project would cost."
Based on what? Don’t forget you’re entrusting the incompetence of government to execute the rail plan.
"Any project undertaken at this 21st century juncture needs to yield environmental benefits"
Perhaps you mean that we should be aware of the environmental impacts? What if I said any meal eaten in the 21st century should yield "environment benefits", would this be any more reasonable?
"Traditionally, the argument against such rail projects has been that they’re too expensive. This argument has always been shortsighted, as we put saving a few tax dollars above the health of our children, the beauty of our area, and the quality of our lives."
Children have longer life expectancies that ever before.
Are trains more aesthetically pleasing? By how much? By who’s judgement? What about train whistles vs car noise?
Who can judge the quality of life for other people? People have mass transit options (the coaster runs parallel to the 5!) but still choose to drive. People CHOOSE to live in suburbs such as Leucadia and commute to the city rather than living closer to work.

By: SD8

SD8 — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 16:41:45 +0000

Just more NIMBY. Or better yet, lets build a flying car port, if we are talking about ideas based in our own personal wishes, and not reality. Certainly there will be flying cars in 40 years? That’s about as realistic as the suggestions in this article. People like their cars, get over it.

By: common sense

common sense — Fri, 17 Sep 2010 13:53:03 +0000

Your comments reek with logical solutions and wise options.
Plan for massive packed freeways and that is what you get.