PDA

View Full Version : Editorial: High-density, High-rise, & Transit-oriented Developments


Rob
09-29-2006, 11:49 AM
I believe that the so-called, "Transit Oriented Developments," that former Councilwoman and Mayor Sue Lempert has often raved about, are little more than fictional poppycock invented by developers as public relation illusions, baiting gullible folks into supporting their wealth-making ventures.

Take for instance Fiesta Gardens; don't many of us live within a mile of the Bus and Train? Do we prefer them to the convenience of our automobiles? Don't our neighbors and/or ourselves even drive our kids to school a short distance away? How about those of us who shop at the Concar Drive stores? We live close by, right? Do even a decent percentage of Fiesta Gardeners walk or bicycle there? Additionally, of those few of us who do, are we able to carry much? Do people who own automobiles honestly prefer waiting around at all let alone in all types of weather for a scheduled Bus or Train?

The observed fact I have witnessed all my life is this: In the USA, most people who own cars will use them most of the time even when traveling close distances.

So much for Mrs. Lempert's "Transit Oriented Development" theory.

So, what is all this building really about? Just who are the ones trying to convince us that San Mateo needs to become some lifeboat for the world where it must stuff and pile in countless thousands of more people and turn it into high-density sardine cans like San Francisco? During a recent day's rush hour, it took me 25 minutes to drive from just Fiesta Gardens to the El Camino Real byway of Delaware Street and 25th Avenue (not a lack of an underpass problem, only a couple trains flew by and were non-factors). How much longer would you imagine it might take with thousands of more folks amassed within the railroad corridor? Just who are these people trying to sell us upon the idea that their new high-density developments would be simply wonderful for San Mateo?

If you still do not have a clue, it is highly recommended that you look at the campaign contributors of the San Mateo City Council, and then you might begin to "get it." http://www.savebaymeadows.org/followthemoney.php

What can we do about it? For one, how about taking at least as much time considering who is running for local office as we would for those campaigning at the State or Federal levels. The chances our votes would make a difference in local elections are astronomically higher than in State or Federal ones and in a much more direct way.

We only need witness what has taken place with “Friends of Bay Meadows” petitioning for the Track’s fate to be placed on the city ballot and decided by a vote of all San Mateans. I’ll bet there were just thousands and thousands of residents who thought and still believe that this was and is the fairest way to address it (all the polls I read highly favored keeping the Track) but most folks must have had the attitude that someone else would sign this petition for them. Because of this and currently, “Friends of Bay Meadows” is in the State Court of Appeals trying to get less than 100 rejected petition signatures reversed otherwise there will be no city vote, the developers will have had their ways with us yet again, and be free to begin their enormous Phase II construction project that is scheduled to last nearly 20 years.

What else can we do? Moreover and most importantly, we require real choices; non-conflict of interest candidates need to run for city office. We need people who are in no way supported by or obliged to developers, real estate companies, land owners, architects, bankers, contractors, construction companies, their unions, etc. “Friends of Bay Meadows" seems to be working on this, http://www.smdailyjournal.com/articl...w.php?id=64833 however, without each of us helping, at least in some little way, that group probably cannot save San Mateo by itself.

Roscoe_Beedle
10-12-2006, 08:58 PM
I think Rob is absolutely correct in his estimation of this "Transit-Oriented Community" crud. We've all seen them, the empty buses, the cars and garages populating the last transit oriented development-Baywoods 1.

Old school social engineers such as Sue Lempert are dinosaurs of the past irrepairably tied to a bleief system which says you must have public transporation over everything else. Even when these systems do little more than burden tax bases and run virtually empty.

Here's a solution: Build roads. And increase existing roads. Just look at the San Mateo Bridge today after it was widen several years ago. A true joy to drive in comparison to the bottle neck it was before. .

The #1 thing that has changed in this area is telecommunting. That is, people who work at least a good part of the week from their own home. Sue Lempert will one day maybe discover that you can work from your home with a computer. Maybe not everyone, but enough people do this and this in itself alleviates traffic. I work at home now two days out of a five day work week. That means, without Government investment, I have cut my need to drive by almost 50%. And this has not cost one dime in public money.

We have enough of the trains, BART, buses.

These politicians we employ simply have no clue. They subscribe to a mantra of public transit that borders on the religious. Yet not one of them, not Sue Lempert, Jerry Hill or the rest of them ride these same buses, trains, or BART.