GUEST OPINION: Is SMART on the right track?

Any dream of luxurious commuter trains running through Sonoma and Marin counties crumbles in the face of SMART's determination to severely limit railcar size and seating. Even zero-emission technology has been ruled out.

Who will SMART serve? One would think it would serve passengers. One would be wrong.

According to SMART's Vehicle Alternatives Report, passenger satisfaction is trumped by a phantom: The fear that someone seeing a train will scream "It's too big!"

The report charts the sin of "visibility," and concludes, "Bi-level locomotive-hauled trains show strongly, higher than other railroad alternatives, in large measure because of the good riding experience they offer passengers, a thoroughly proven track record and relative ease of procurement. This option appears to lag in cost-effectiveness; and its positive visual impact on potential riders is negated by its probable community impacts."

In other words, passersby outrank passengers. How many businesses do you know that succeed by satisfying everyone except customers?

Repeatedly, SMART asks not "How good is the ride quality?" but "Does it have a sexy look?"

Passengers on Stockton/San Jose ACE commuter trains can expect a seat on every ride, but SMART's vehicle specs imply standees as routine. ACE provides a restroom in every railcar; SMART's two-car trains will have only one. On its longer trains, passengers seeking an empty seat or vacant restroom will find the pass-through blocked where two "aerodynamic-nose" cars are coupled nose-to-nose. (BART wisely abandoned the aerodynamic nose.)

Is this the best SMART can do in upscale Marin and Sonoma counties, where in 1981 riders deserted Golden Gate Transit because new bus seats were not comfortable enough? When did Marin/Sonoma ever signify austerity?

Priorities normally arise from detailed scrutiny. Actually, in 2000-01 the SMART Commission's Vehicle Advisory Committee thoroughly examined alternatives, but SMART rejects the committee's preferred alternative — locomotive-hauled bi-levels.

Bi-level trains are almost twice as efficient as single-level with 70 percent more seating, 15 to 30 percent lower operating costs and lower maintenance costs. Bi-levels have low-floor access, avoiding the enormous costs of SMART's planned high platforms and gauntlet tracks

Single-level diesel railcars were locked in without even an agenda item examining benefits and drawbacks. Of the 25 commuter lines in North America today, 23 use locomotives and 17 use bi-level coaches. The last four startups — Rail Runner Express, FrontRunner, Music City Star, and Northstar — all use locomotives and bi-level coaches. But SMART seems uninterested in what the industry does. Many rail systems lease equipment, but SMART hasn't looked at leasing, which could drastically cut up-front costs.

SMART can say it's breaking new ground, but then it has the burden of providing evidence for operational, economic

and marketing advantages. No such evidence has surfaced.

With startup ridership projections of more than 5,000 daily trips, SMART could be poised to surpass at least two West Coast commuter rail systems, ACE and Coaster, yet SMART prefers railcars with lower seating capacity — 80-seat cars rather than the 136- to 145-seat cars ACE and Coaster chose.

Is SMART betting on failure, ridership shriveling instead of blossoming? Large seating capacity allows more room to grow and to balance bike and wheelchair accommodations with seating. Why not strive to take the most automobiles off the highway?

SMART won't even look at zero-emission rail technology. Their response to the idea is that they need established technology.

How so, when the vehicles they hope some company will develop for them are not even on the drawing board and would be so outr?that most parts would be special-order at elevated costs?

Zero-emission rail technology is a reality today, with a working prototype.

It's a battery-powered 1350-hp electric locomotive, NS999, that can run 24 hours on one charge and could plug into Marin Energy Authority: zero emissions plus clean energy. Going electric eliminates engines, engine noise, fuel, fuel tanks, exhaust, and a host of systems and components that go with diesel technology.

Why would any agency in ecologically conscious Marin and Sonoma refuse to look at something that clean and green? I believe SMART can do better and sincerely hope they will.

Lionel Gambill is a former Santa Rosa resident and rail advocate who is currently living in Beijing.