2030 San Diego RTP: Integration Code for Freeways

I really like integration when it means not discriminating against people.

It sounds nice and sensible. However, this nice word has been repurposed to nefarious purposes.

LTRs probably know that racist VC DBs have taken the phrase “integration” to mean “playing in high speed traffic on a bicycle.” Thus, they seek to give a dangerous and foolish activity to be equivalent to civil rights.

Now, the RTP is taking the same word as code to build more freeways:

“Integrating Transit and Roadways”

This phrase is used all over the RTP.

When I think of integrated public transportation, I see myself walking a block and not getting out of the Underground until I wind up in the middle of Balboa Park.

Since this entire document looks like it was written someone personality disorder. They want Smart Growth, but they build to encourage sprawl. They want more cycling, but they build to discourage it. And now they say they want “public transportation” but they steal the money for freeway motoring projects. Overall, I recommend that the authors be put in a mental hospital. 🙂

In the RTP, our friend “integration” means freeway projects:

“Competitive transit service must be able to operate in congestion-free lanes. The Plan includes an extensive network of Managed/HOV lanes on the highway system designed to accommodate transit services as well as carpools, vanpools, and fee-paying patrons (similar to I-15 FasTrakTM where fees fund transit services in the I-15 corridor). On arterials, the
Plan includes funding for transit priority treatments, and regional funding to help complete regionally significant arterials. The Plan also includes major transit capital projects, such as transitways, double tracking, direct access ramps, and grade separations, and provides operational funding for the expanded regional transit system.”

Here’s some more doublespeak:

“Systems Management helps get the most efficiency out of our existing system, makes travel services more
reliable, convenient, and safe, and reduces traffic delays caused by accidents and incidents.”

Haha, more efficient? Motoring is the least efficient way to get around in terms of cost and least efficient in terms of space and least efficient in terms of dollars per mile. So it’s a little insane to spend billions on more motoring and to claim efficiency. I just don’t get it.

Also, reducing traffic delays will increase accidents not reduce them. You can’t have it both ways. High speed motoring is responsible for the lion’s share of transportation deaths. To make things safer, you want to increase congestion and reduce the travel speed of single occupancy vehicles. Also, faster cars burn more petrol. Finally, safe and reliable seeming transportation encourages people to live, work, and play in areas which are further away which increases exposure time to motoring which increases risk, encourages more petrol usage which is less efficient, and it encourages more motoring which equals more congestion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: