One of the essential elements needed early in any large infrastructure project is a valid alternative analysis to determine which of several approaches has the best chance of achieving community goals at a reasonable cost. Despite the fact that this need is set forth in both the NEPA and the CEQA Acts, Bay Area agencies often either ignore the requirement or tip the scales to favor a “preferred” pet project. In some cases, eager promoters are left free to rush blindly ahead with the advancement of a favored scheme without bothering to consider either its public value or its cost.

The results of this careless practice are dire. Here are some Bay Area examples:

Read more here:

HSR Pacheco Alternative: The HSR Altamont Route Alternative was favored by the now defunct High Speed Rail Commission. However, once the new CAHSRA Authority took over, MTC and South Bay interests eventually torpedoed the Altamont Alternative by routing it westward across a rebuilt Dumbarton Bridge to Redwood City and then backtracking in the southeast direction to San Jose. This detour added 12 minutes in travel time to reach San Jose and significantly increased the cost of the alternative; enough to make Altamont look less desirable than the favored Pacheco Alternative. Routing the Altamont trains incoming from the Tri-Valley along the existing tracks already used by ACE and the Amtrak-operated Capitol Corridor trains on the east side of the Bay would have been both less expensive and of  far more valuable to the region. This bit of short-sighted, self-serving trickery is a classic example of how parochial politics can pervert sound engineering.

Development of the Northwestern Pacific Right of Way: Originally Marin and Sonoma counties had a choice between a bus alternative and a rail alternative. The bus alternative would have provided fast inter-city bus service that by-passed the infamous Marin Narrows highway bottleneck and directly linked Santa Rosa via intermediate stops to San Francisco. Since it was not possible to extend a rail service south of Larkspur the selected rail alternative ends on a Larkspur hill nearly half a mile away from the connecting Larkspur Ferries.

The Loooong walk to the train

Was the bus alternative ever seriously considered? Yes, until the zealous rail-advocating Marin County planners got hold of the project. After that no further thought was given to buses. The result is a very low ridership and very costly SMART service operating between Santa Rosa and an isolated hill in Larkspur.

 BART’s Oakland Airport Connector: The favored elevated rail alternative was pursued with virtually no thought given to alternatives. Because of ego and petty local politics, the much cheaper, faster and more useful surface bus alternative was given no consideration whatsoever.

SF Muni’s Central Subway: The only alternative considered other than the “No-Build” was a bizarre zig zag alternative, set up for easy rejection. Despite public objections the sponsors refused to include or even consider three, more promising options, any one of which would have been better than today’s sad Central Subway result.

The Doyle Drive Seismic Upgrade Project: Once the small but ambitious San Francisco County Transportation Authority (SFCTA) got control of the project, Caltrain’s original plan to limit the work to needed seismic upgrading, was soon discarded. What started out as a $420 million seismic upgrade blossomed in SFCTA’s fanciful landscape planning approach which resulted in a five-fold increase in the price of the project and required the removal of over 300 trees from the Presidio of San Francisco, all without adding any transportation benefits.

Bay Bridge East Span Seismic Upgrade: The superstructure (above water portion) of the existing Cantilever Span had been carefully maintained by Caltrans over the years and was therefore in excellent condition, and therefore in need of only moderate bolstering.

The concrete foundation piles however had deteriorated and needed to be entirely replaced. The cost estimate for restoring the existing structure including new foundations came in at under $2 billion. However, the opportunity to upgrade an existing bridge without disrupting traffic (as the Golden Gate Bridge District had successfully done) was dismissed by MTC, whose director headed the Bridge Oversight Committee. This move was backed by the Mayor Oakland who wanted an icon, the Mayor of San Francisco who had property interests on Yerba Buena Island, and Caltrans for reasons unknown. The result was a fancy super-expensive new East Span that ended up costing almost $7 billion, without providing any significant transportation benefits.

VTA’s 6-Mile Phase II BART Subway Extension through Downtown San Jose: To appease a small but noisy group of businesses located at the 875-foot long Downtown Subway Station who were demanding that there be no street disruption in front of their establishments during construction, the VTA abandoned its original plan to construct two 20-foot diameter subway tunnels in favor of one humongous 54-foot diameter tunnel so that everything including the subway stations would fit inside. Partly because of this strange decision, the cost of the project went from $4.7 billion in 2014 to $5.2 billion in early 2020 to $6.9 billion in late 2020 to $9.3 billion in 2022 to $12.2 Billion in late 2023 and the width of the center-loading platform dropped from 28-feet to an unsafe 20-feet. Another example of a sound engineering proposal torpedoed for strictly political reasons.

The Tri-Valley San Joaquin Valley Regional Rail Authority’s Valley Link Line: Thirteen minor engineering choices were included in the EIR, all incorrectly defined as “alternatives”. None came even close to being legitimate alternatives as defined in State and federal environmental guidelines. Despite wide public support, two actual alternatives of real promise were never seriously considered. The selected Valley Link rail alternative, projected to attract only a limited number of riders, will have no discernible effect on badly congested I-580 freeway. Another example of ego and petty politics prevailing over sound engineering.

As these examples show, too many major Bay Area infrastructure projects have bypassed or perverted the Alternative comparison process. Too often, sound decision-making has taken a back seat to political interference, the demands of special interests and greenhorn planning; and the results have been dismal. Large infrastructure projects are supposed to be designed and built to high professional standards. It’s time the sponsoring local and regional agencies got back to complying with well thought out State and federal guidelines.