Blog Post < Previous | Next >
MarinCounty
Alto Tunnel Reopening Plan: Connectivity At A Price
Those weighing the option of an Alto Tunnel reopening need to wrap their head around this figure: “up to 1,850,000 annual users.”
That’s the projection buried on page 126 of the 2010 “Mill Valley to Corte Madera Bicycle and Pedestrian Corridor Study,” commissioned by Marin County supervisors, project partisans.
Does that old railroad tunnel reuse estimate sound preposterous?
Think again.
The idea is to forge a link in the planned “bicycle-pedestrian greenway” from Cloverdale to Sausalito. County planners know that an unobstructed 85–mile-long bicycle path would prove irresistible, not only to enthusiasts across the Golden Gate Bridge but to the entire Bay Area recreational cycling community as well.
Putting projected path use in perspective, it’s 57 percent more than 1,049,400 — the entire Muir Woods visitor total for 2014.
Can anyone argue seriously that cyclists in such numbers would not have huge impacts on the infrastructure of Southern Marin’s small cities and towns — namely Sausalito, Mill Valley, Corte Madera and Larkspur? Overpasses and underpasses likely will be needed at critical road crossing points. And life in targeted sections of quiet suburbs would be forever changed.
Then there’s the estimated $60 million needed to shore the partially collapsed tunnel.
Many of these “greenway” construction problems could be solved by simply widening the existing bicycle track around the base of Horse Hill at a fraction of the cost. Further widening of the Camino Alto roadway between Corte Madera and Mill V alley is another low cost option.
Connectivity is a good thing, to be sure. But shouldn’t we have a robust discussion about the merits of all three studied alternatives---Alto Tunnel, Horse Hill and Camino Alto---before anointing Alto Tunnel the winner via a timpani roll from the Kyoto Drummers?
Cycling advocate Howard Ortman of San Anselmo does neighbors no favor when he suggests (in the IJ Readers’ Forum, Nov. 22), “I hope they stop wasting money on studies and get digging.”
The Marin County planning document in fact states:
“Each of the three routes was studied equally, and although they are compared based on selected evaluation criteria in section 3 of the Study, there is no intent to select a preferred alternative. It may ultimately be appropriate to improve two or even all three of the routes. The information in this Study is provided as part of the basis for future discussion and decision-making.” (Executive Summary, 1-3, Page 10).
Evaluate the plan for yourself at:
http://www.marinbike.org/Campaigns/Infrastructure/AltoTunnel/MVCM-Study.pdf
----Peter Hensel, Corte Madera