|
|
Published Wednesday, November 17, 1999, in the San Jose Mercury News
Valley commute holds steady as population rises While Silicon Valley commuters stew in the nation's 15th-worst traffic, a national transportation study says aggressive planning has prevented local congestion from getting worse and might keep the area's unprecedented economic boom on track. The Texas Transportation Institute on Tuesday released its annual congestion rankings and offered suggestions on how cities could better manage escalating traffic problems. Many of those ideas, they say, already are in the works in Silicon Valley, including an extensive carpool lane network and efforts to further expand rail service. Not surprisingly, the Los Angeles area topped the congestion chart for the 15th consecutive year. Seattle was in second place, while San Francisco-Oakland -- broken out as a separate statistical region from San Jose -- came in third. But the gap between No. 3 and No. 15 is misleading, observers said. ``People in the Bay Area drive all over the Bay Area. Just because San Jose may be 15th doesn't mean the people in the area aren't experiencing some of the heaviest congestion in the country,'' said Penny Hill, a spokeswoman for Transportation California, a highway advocacy group. The institute's report moved San Jose up from last year's No. 18 ranking. But it's the specific categories within the study, not the overall ranking, that paint a clear picture of valley congestion. Traffic delays in San Jose have stayed just about the same during the 1990s, the study found. In 1992, a 20-minute drive would take 26 minutes in rush hour. Today, the same rush-hour drive takes about a minute less -- hardly noticeable to commuters but worthy of celebration because Silicon Valley has seen significant population growth. That part of the study sends San Jose plummeting to No. 66 out of 68 urban areas studied. ``That's not to say it's not bad, but it used to be a lot worse,'' said Tim Lomax, a co-author of the study. ``The fact that you've stayed level means that other places have gotten worse.'' Or maybe some of the work by transportation leaders is finally starting to show. Good grades for planning James Corless, spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based Surface Transportation Policy Project, praised Silicon Valley leaders for tackling transportation problems head-on while considering housing and land-use issues at the same time. ``I think it's a good sign when you've got your leading business group down there, the Silicon Valley Manufacturing Group, looking at all the transportation options,'' Corless said. ``They're aware that Silicon Valley is dependent on managing congestion and growth and the quality of life that people go down there for. They're looking at this objectively, from the bottom line.'' It's a community effort that brings about improvements, said Carl Guardino, president of the manufacturing group. ``People are screaming for alternatives,'' Guardino said. ``We're so tired of being taxed and wasting time in our cars that we're willing to pay a tax for options to driving.'' In 1996, voters in Santa Clara County passed a dual sales-tax measure that would pay for projects such as a light-rail extension and a rail connection to the Bay Area Rapid Transit District system in Alameda County. Alameda County voters will be asked next year to extend a half-cent sales tax to address transportation issues there. ``I believe transportation is the major issue we have to deal with now,'' said Alameda County Supervisor Scott Haggerty, who sits on several transportation planning committees in the county. ``Transportation has the ability to kill us economically if we do not address it.'' Coming solutions The Tasman West light-rail extension to Mountain View is slated to open next month. And earlier this year, politicians from Alameda and Santa Clara counties began discussions to bring BART trains to downtown San Jose. ``I think when we are able to get BART to San Jose, we will have an impact on the region as a whole,'' Haggerty said. ``Moving people from the urban core to where the jobs are will revitalize the entire region. . . . We have people in Oakland that need to get to work, and they have the jobs for them in Silicon Valley.'' But travel on interstates 880 and 680, two of the worst commutes in the Bay Area, is no easy task for those workers. They don't have time to sit in three hours of traffic, Haggerty said. They don't have the money to pay for three extra hours of day care. And the Bay Area doesn't need the added pollution of more cars burning fuel by idling on the freeway. The Texas institute's report estimated that Silicon Valley commuters stuck in traffic waste 86 million gallons of fuel annually while motorists in San Francisco-Oakland use up 280 million gallons in similar situations. At the Texas institute -- a part of Texas A&M University -- the authors caution that improved public transit is only part of the solution. Other necessary fixes, they say, include ride sharing, better timing of signal lights and wider freeways and roads. ``It's taking what you have in both the transit and roadway systems and making sure you're getting the most out of them,'' Lomax said. More solutions sought Silicon Valley's methods of addressing congestion are noble, he said. But as more people continue to move into the area, dealing with congestion becomes that much harder. ``There's no silver-bullet solution,'' Guardino said. ``We need an arsenal of answers. That's why Santa Clara County has more carpool lanes per road mile than any other county in California. That's why we're developing a rail-transit system, why Eco-pass (public transit pass) is so popular and why we're working for more telecommuting options.'' |