A very infomative article on light rail in the city and the difficulties of getting the different lines built.

CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall - Seeking the Light in the Expo Rail Line

Seeking the Light in the Expo Rail Line Print E-mail
Moving LA
By Kenneth S. Alpern

Active ImageDespite the hype, hopes and hoopla about what will happen with the Obama stimulus package and the recently-approved Proposition R, the many projects to come out of these endeavors will not include projects that are unapproved and unexplored by local transportation officials. The newly-promoted and so-called "Expo Line South LA Grade Separation Project" is one such endeavor we should not expect any time soon--if ever.

Only “shovel-ready” (ready-to-go, vetted and needing only funding) projects can occur with the stimulus package—but the only thing “shovel-ready” about this non-existent project is the Bandini being shoveled to South L.A. residents who have been fed a tragic distortion of the truth and who deserve a lot better. I need to emphasize that I personally favor (and have fought for) grade separation and other ways to avoid train/automobile traffic problems whenever possible. On numerous occasions, I have and will come into opposition with other supporters of the Expo Line and mass transit initiatives because I favor the expenditures of safety/operational improvements that others deem unnecessary or cost-ineffective.

However, the claim that only the white/wealthy portions of the county will have their portions of the Expo Line grade-separated is a canard that needs to be quashed. Whether it’s Pasadena, South L.A., Culver City or Santa Monica, we’re going to see regions that are or are not grade-separated based only on traffic studies, and the same LADOT that insisted on elevating the Expo Line at La Brea and La Cienega signed off on at-grade (street level) crossings in other regions of South L.A.

Furthermore, the irrational, divisive and distorting practice of comparing each mile of the Expo Line for grade separation, to say nothing of trying to divide the different geographic and ethnic communities that the line traverses, not only flies in the face of this rail line’s ability to bring these communities together but also ignores the cold, hard facts, numbers and logic that has a singular Metro policy applied to all past and future grade crossings. This policy was put in place after the Pasadena Gold Line experience, and we’ll see it utilized for years to come.

The future Downtown Light Rail Connector that will connect the Expo, Blue, Eastside Gold and Pasadena Gold Lines is likely to be underground, and that’s not exactly a tony and white portion of the City. It’s just so megadense that having it at ground level is an engineering impossibility—especially with so many trains likely to utilize it to get from one part of the county to the other parts. Furthermore, the Eastside Gold Line that will commence service this year goes underground through some lower- and mixed socioeconomic Latino neighborhoods simply because it’s unsafe and imprudent to do otherwise.

It’s important to recognize that light rail (unlike, say, a subway) is meant to blend into the community, without a lot of visual and noise impact beyond that already existing with local automobile traffic; elevated or underground portions are a necessary expenditure when safety and operations indicate such alterations. The Mid-City portion of the Expo Line from Crenshaw to Downtown will largely be a street-running portion of the line similar to what we have on the Blue Line, where cars and light rail trains share the streets.

That portion of the line doesn’t need all the gates and whistles at traffic lights any more than we need them at normal traffic intersections, since the trains will share the traffic with other cars when the light turns green…so any knucklehead who has a problem knowing they should stop when the light turns red, please turn in your driver’s license immediately! We don’t grade-separate traffic lights for north-south and east-west automobile flow, and we don’t need that practice to change just because a 2-car or 3-car train will be part of the mix (just pretend it’s a very long bus, and you’ll get the idea…relax, it’s gonna be OK!)

Should it be impossible to maintain normal light signal sequences, or accommodate long traffic backups, or prevent safety problems, then elevation or underground diversions have and will be utilized for light rail trains such as the Expo Line.

While I don’t deny that there will have to be some accommodations by automobile commuters for a light rail line that—I predict—will enjoy ridership of 70,000-90,000 riders a day like we see on the Blue Line, the LADOT and Metro has and will fight to improve safety and operations and traffic flow when problems exist (such as on north-south West L.A. surface streets that, like the adjacent 405 freeway, has some of the worst traffic in the nation…literally!).

Finally, it needs to be pointed out that safety and speed and operations on the Blue and Pasadena Gold Lines have allowed those to be two of the safest, fastest and busiest light rail lines in the nation. Virtually all of the car vs. train accidents have and will continue to be sustained proof that Darwin was right in selecting out the unfit morons who forget they’ll have a big “ouchie” to their cars, themselves and their passengers if they try to blow by or around a gate and take on a train.

Similarly, there’s not a lot of sympathy that should be dredged up for those who blow through a red light or who drive drunk. I think there’s a lot of us who will have our collective learning curve go up a few notches over the next 2-3 years when light rail reaches the Eastside, the Mid-City and the Westside…but we shouldn’t be afraid of taking on new challenges when we seek for understanding, not hysteria, as to what the benefits and challenges of light rail are to the citizens of Los Angeles.

(Ken Alpern is Co-Chair of the Council District 11 Transportation Advisory Committee and an occasional contributor to CityWatch.) ◘

CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 31
Pub: Apr 17, 2009

California gets earmark money to fund a study for a bus-only lane on Wilshire

Earmark requests by Californians in Congress get increased public scrutiny - Los Angeles Times

Earmark requests by Californians in Congress get increased public scrutiny
The House now requires members to post their requests online. The special spending used to be quietly slipped into legislation.
By Richard Simon
April 16, 2009
Reporting from Washington -- Despite President Obama's pledge to crack down on pork-barrel spending, California House members are not shying away from seeking money for pet projects. In the fiscal 2010 spending bills, they are asking for earmarks big and small -- from $10 million to buy 665 acres in Malibu (for the largest addition to the Santa Monica Mountains National Recreation Area in more than 15 years) to $250,000 for repairs to Hollywood's Walk of Fame.

The special spending used to be slipped into legislation, often at the behest of lobbyists, with little if any public scrutiny.



*
Obama calls for earmark reform, signs earmark-laden spending bill
*
California earmarks - complete list
*
California has enough pork to be in hog heaven

But in the name of ethics and transparency, the House is requiring its members to post the earmarks they are seeking online, as well as the rationale for taxpayers to fund them. The Senate is requiring its members to disclose earmark requests 30 days before Senate committees begin writing bills.

Judging by the long wish lists appearing on lawmakers' websites, it won't be easy for Obama to change Congress' spending habits.

For example, Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) has posted 45 pages' worth of requests, including $500,000 for the city of Highland to buy police equipment and $1 million to improve Cabot's Pueblo Museum in Desert Hot Springs.

"The congressman doesn't make any decisions on which projects to support based on who the lobbyist is," spokesman Jim Specht said. "These projects will all provide important public benefits to his constituents, or bring jobs to the district while providing innovative new technologies to help our nation's troops."

And Rep. Linda T. Sanchez (D-Lakewood), who is seeking $100,000 to install anti-graffiti coating on storefront windows in the Florence-Firestone district, said the project would "encourage more businesses to open in the area."

As well as opening up the earmark process to public scrutiny, the new requirements have produced some insight into lawmakers' views on federal spending.

Several Californians -- including Reps. Henry A. Waxman (D-Beverly Hills), John Campbell (R-Irvine) and Darrell Issa (R-Vista) -- are not seeking earmarks.

"After eight years in office, it's become clear to me that projects are not judged on the merits but on the seniority and power of the requesting member or lobbyist," Issa said in a statement.

Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Atwater) has said he will pursue money for cities in his district but will not seek earmarks for any private companies.

But Reps. Brian P. Bilbray (R-Carlsbad) and Duncan Hunter (R-Alpine) are seeking $26 million to fund the Predator drones that are built by San Diego-based General Atomics. The company's political action committee and its employees were the top campaign contributors to Bilbray and Hunter in the 2007-08 election cycle, providing $17,150 and $20,700, respectively, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign fundraising.

Joe Kasper, a Hunter spokesman, called the unmanned aerial vehicles "critical to our nation's combat mission in Afghanistan." Bilbray spokesman Fritz Chaleff said the congressman has been open about his earmark requests, adding that Bilbray made the request after being told about the drones' importance during a visit to Afghanistan.

In one of the more ambitious requests, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) is seeking $4.2 billion for production of more C-17 cargo planes at Boeing's Long Beach plant. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has targeted the plane in proposed military spending cuts.

A large number of lawmakers are seeking money for "green" projects -- including $500,000 that Rep. Howard P. "Buck" McKeon (R-Santa Clarita) wants for an Alternative Energy Training Institute at College of the Canyons in Valencia and $300,000 sought by Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) to install solar panels on South Pasadena City Hall.

Transportation projects make up a large number of the requests.

Rep. Diane Watson (D-Los Angeles) is seeking $12 million to help fund a bus-only lane on Wilshire Boulevard and $5 million for preliminary engineering for Los Angeles' "Subway to the Sea."

Rep. Grace F. Napolitano (D-Norwalk) is seeking $5 million for preliminary engineering for the widening of the 5 Freeway between the 710 and 605.

And Rep. Ken Calvert (R-Corona) is seeking $30 million to extend Metrolink commuter rail from downtown Riverside to Perris.

The funding requests also reflect personal interests. For example, Rep. Gary G. Miller (R-Diamond Bar), a Civil War history buff, is seeking $10 million to preserve battlefields.

"It doesn't appear that the light of day has abated many lawmakers' appetites for earmarks," said Steve Ellis of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense, "but at least now, their constituents can evaluate the requests and hold their elected officials accountable."

richard.simon@latimes.com

California's high-speed rail project part of Obama administration's new vision for transportation in country

Obama Touts High Speed Rail | Political Hotsheet - CBS News

April 16, 2009 10:54 AM
Obama Touts High Speed Rail
Posted by Brent Lang | Comments 44


(AP Photo/Gerald Herbert)
President Obama today unveiled his plans to grow the U.S.'s network of high speed rail lines and improve train travel. Mr. Obama said that by investing $8 billion in stimulus funding to expand high speed rail lines, America will create jobs and reduce pollution.

Mr. Obama labeled the plans a "new foundation for our lasting prosperity."

Employing a common rhetorical device, the president listed possible objections to his plans raised by unnamed critics. Among the charges he said people were making were that the cost was prohibitive, that the current economic crisis should be his top concern, and that Americans' fondness for cars makes improving train travel something of a non-issue. To refute these claims, he cited the success of high speed rail lines in countries such as China, Japan, France, and Spain.

"This is not some fanciful, pie-in-the-sky vision of the future. It's happening now. The problem is, it's happening elsewhere," Mr. Obama said.

The administration's plan is two-fold. It identifies 10 new corridors (listed below) for high-speed rail lines and enhances existing lines in a way that will improve speed and efficiency. In addition to the funding from the stimulus plan, the president said he is seeking $5 billion through the federal budget to help improve rail lines.

Mr. Obama said that this funding would enable trains to go from 70 to 100 mph along some lines and would reduce congestion on streets and airports that amounted to some $80 billion in lost productivity.

"This plan lets American travelers know that they are not doomed to a future of long lines at the airports or jammed cars on the highways,” Mr. Obama said.

In Mr. Obama's calculus, train travel will resemble something akin to a utopian transportation experience.

"Imagine boarding a train in the center of a city -- no racing to an airport and across a terminal, no delays, no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes," said Mr. Obama in describing his vision for high speed rail travel. "Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 miles an hour, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination."

Mr. Obama also cited the examples of two of his predecessors to justify the importance of a massive infrastructural investment: presidents Lincoln and Eisenhower. He noted that Lincoln's stewardship of the Union Pacific Railroad and Eisenhower's creation of the Interstate both contributed to America's long term growth.

If he wanted support for his plan, he didn't need to look far. Vice President Joe Biden, one of the country's most prominent cheerleaders for train travel, was standing by the president's side throughout his remarks. Biden, of course, achieved some fame for his daily train commutes from Washington to his Wilmington, Del. home during his more than three decades in the U.S. Senate.

Because of his frequent train travel, some have labeled Biden "Amtrak Joe." Today, Mr. Obama called him "America's number one rail fan."

Here are the 10 corridors the administration is identifying as having potential for high speed train projects:


* California Corridor (Bay Area, Sacramento, Los Angeles, San Diego)


* Pacific Northwest Corridor (Eugene, Portland, Tacoma, Seattle, Vancouver, BC)


* South Central Corridor (Tulsa, Oklahoma City, Dallas/Fort Worth, Austin, San Antonio, Little Rock)


* Gulf Coast Corridor (Houston, New Orleans, Mobile, Birmingham, Atlanta)


* Chicago Hub Network (Chicago, Milwaukee, Twin Cities, St. Louis, Kansas City, Detroit, Toledo, Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, Indianapolis, Louisville,)


* Florida Corridor (Orlando, Tampa, Miami)


* Southeast Corridor (Washington, Richmond, Raleigh, Charlotte, Atlanta, Macon, Columbia, Savannah, Jacksonville)


* Keystone Corridor (Philadelphia, Harrisburg, Pittsburgh)


* Empire Corridor (New York City, Albany, Buffalo)


* Northern New England Corridor (Boston, Montreal, Portland, Springfield, New Haven, Albany)



And here are the full remarks by the president and vice president, as released by the White House:


THE VICE PRESIDENT: Thank you. (Applause.) I promise these comments will be shorter than the ride -- (laughter) -- a ride, Mr. President, I've taken about a thousand times with Rob Andrews and Frank Lautenberg and others in the Northeast Corridor. But what gem we've had in the Northeast Corridor. It's time it gets extended throughout the country and improved.

Mr. Secretary, thank you. You know, we often refer to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, as I've been going around the country -- shorthand I call it the Recovery Act, Mr. President, for short. But today, we're here to talk about the other part of the effort, the reinvestment -- the reinvestment part of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the commitment to building our nation's future.

And you see while the vast majority of what we're doing in the Recovery Act is about short-term job creation -- as it should be, and is our top priority -- we also set aside some funds to build America's long-term economic future, which you all understand very well, assembled in this room.

And we're making a down payment today, a down payment on the economy for tomorrow, the economy that's going to drive us in the 21st century in a way that the other -- the highway system drove us in the mid-20th century. And I'm happy to be here. I'm more happy than you can imagine -- (laughter) -- to talk about a commitment that, with the President's leadership, we're making to achieve the goal through the development of high-speed rail projects that will extend eventually all across this nation. And most of you know that not only means an awful lot to me, but I know a lot of you personally in this audience over the years, I know it means equally as much to you.

With high-speed rail system, we're going to be able to pull people off the road, lowering our dependence on foreign oil, lowering the bill for our gas in our gas tanks. We're going to loosen the congestion that also has great impact on productivity, I might add, the people sitting at stop lights right now in overcrowded streets and cities. We're also going to deal with the suffocation that's taking place in our major metropolitan areas as a consequence of that congestion. And we're going to significantly lessen the damage to our planet. This is a giant environmental down payment.

All in all, we're going to make travel in this country leaner and a whole lot cleaner. And as we look to the future, we're going to ensure that we can travel through the system that is sound, secure and able to handle full-speed-ahead progress for this new economy.

You know, as it's been mentioned often, I'm not sure it's good or bad, but my father referred to my many commutes -- it exceeded over 7,900, they tell me -- he said one day before he died -- he said, you know, honey -- he said, "That is the definition of a misspent adulthood, sitting on a train." (Laughter.)

But I've -- I have, like many in this room, devoted most of my career to doing what I can to support America's rail systems. So I'm really proud to be part of an administration led by a man who has real vision; real vision about how to not only transform this country generally, but transform our transportation system in a fundamental way. It's about time we took those railways and made them the national treasures they should be. They're the best way to reconnect and connect communities to each other to move us all forward in the 21st century.

And many people deserve credit for this: the great congressional leaders who've been introduced today, many of you -- if I started going through the audience, the people I've known who have been working in the vineyards in this, we'd be here all day, Mr. President. But there are so many critical aspects of this, so many supporters in state capitals among the cities, among the governors.

But on behalf of those of us who've been waiting for this day for decades, Mr. President, I want to pay particular thanks to three people. And the first is Secretary LaHood for his leadership and vision. He jumped right into this job and he didn't miss a step, didn't miss a beat, and was ready to go from day one. And this is very uncharacteristic of me, Mr. President, but I want to thank Rahm Emanuel. (Laughter.) Not only as smart as a devil, not only as a former congressman, I believe, Mr. President, it was Rahm's tenacious, tenacious persistence that led to getting this high-speed rail funding in the Recovery Act. It was at your direction, but I'm not sure it would have been able to have been done without Rahm. And third, to the man who in this area is, as so many others, has turned the years of talk in Washington into a season of action, President Barack Obama.

Ladies and gentlemen, join me in welcoming the man who's making this possible. And this will be one of the many parts of a great legacy he's going to leave -- President Barack Obama. (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. That is a wonderful reception, and I want to, in addition to Ray LaHood and Joe Biden, Rahm Emanuel, all of who have worked on this extensively, I also want to acknowledge Jim Oberstar and Rob Andrews, two of our finest members of Congress, both people who understand that investing in our infrastructure, investing in our transportation system pays enormous dividends over the long term. So I'm grateful to them. (Applause.)

You know, I've been speaking a lot lately about what we're doing to break free of our economic crisis so to put people back to work and move this nation from recession to recovery. And one area in which we can make investments with impact both immediate and lasting is in America's infrastructure.

And that's why the Recovery and Reinvestment Plan we passed not two months ago included the most sweeping investment in our infrastructure since President Eisenhower built the Interstate Highway System in the 1950s. And these efforts will save money by untangling gridlock, and saving lives by improving our roads, and save or create 150,000 jobs, mostly in the private sector, by the end of next year. Already, it's put Americans back to work. And so far, we're ahead of schedule, we're under budget, and adhering to the highest standards of transparency and accountability.

But if we want to move from recovery to prosperity, then we have to do a little bit more. We also have to build a new foundation for our future growth. Today, our aging system of highways and byways, air routes and rail lines is hindering that growth. Our highways are clogged with traffic, costing us $80 billion a year in lost productivity and wasted fuel. Our airports are choked with increased loads. Some of you flew down here and you know what that was about. We're at the mercy of fluctuating gas prices all too often; we pump too many greenhouse gases into the air.

What we need, then, is a smart transportation system equal to the needs of the 21st century. A system that reduces travel times and increases mobility. A system that reduces congestion and boosts productivity. A system that reduces destructive emissions and creates jobs.

What we're talking about is a vision for high-speed rail in America. Imagine boarding a train in the center of a city. No racing to an airport and across a terminal, no delays, no sitting on the tarmac, no lost luggage, no taking off your shoes. (Laughter.) Imagine whisking through towns at speeds over 100 miles an hour, walking only a few steps to public transportation, and ending up just blocks from your destination. Imagine what a great project that would be to rebuild America.

Now, all of you know this is not some fanciful, pie-in-the-sky vision of the future. It is now. It is happening right now. It's been happening for decades. The problem is it's been happening elsewhere, not here.

In France, high-speed rail has pulled regions from isolation, ignited growth, remade quiet towns into thriving tourist destinations. In Spain, a high-speed line between Madrid and Seville is so successful that more people travel between those cities by rail than by car and airplane combined. China, where service began just two years ago, may have more miles of high-speed rail service than any other country just five years from now. And Japan, the nation that unveiled the first high-speed rail system, is already at work building the next: a line that will connect Tokyo with Osaka at speeds of over 300 miles per hour. So it's being done; it's just not being done here.

There's no reason why we can't do this. This is America. There's no reason why the future of travel should lie somewhere else beyond our borders. Building a new system of high-speed rail in America will be faster, cheaper and easier than building more freeways or adding to an already overburdened aviation system –- and everybody stands to benefit.

And that's why today, with the help of Secretary LaHood and Vice President Biden, America's number one rail fan, I've been told -- (laughter) -- I'm announcing my administration's efforts to transform travel in America with an historic investment in high-speed rail.

And our strategy has two parts: improving our existing rail lines to make current train service faster -- so Rob can, you know, shave a few hours over the course of a week -- but also identifying potential corridors for the creation of world-class high-speed rail. To make this happen, we've already dedicated $8 billion of Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds to this initiative, and I've requested another $5 billion over the next five years.

The Department of Transportation expects to begin awarding funds to ready projects before the end of this summer, well ahead of schedule. And like all funding decisions under the Recovery Act, money will be distributed based on merit -- not on politics, not as favors, not for any other consideration --purely on merit.

Now, this plan is realistic. And the first round of funding will focus on projects that can create jobs and benefits in the near term. We're not talking about starting from scratch, we're talking about using existing infrastructure to increase speeds on some routes from 70 miles an hour to over 100 miles per hour -- so you're taking existing rail lines, you're upgrading them. And many corridors merit even faster service, but this is the first step that is quickly achievable, and it will create jobs improving tracks, crossings, signal systems.

The next step is investing in high-speed rail that unleashes the economic potential of all our regions by shrinking distances within our regions. There are at least 10 major corridors in the United States of 100 to 600 miles in length with the potential for successful high-speed rail systems. And these areas have explored its potential impact on their long-term growth and competitiveness, and they've already presented sound plans. I want to be clear: No decision about where to allocate funds has yet been made, and any region can step up, present a plan and be considered.

The high-speed rail corridors we've identified so far would connect areas like the cities of the Pacific Northwest; southern and central Florida; the Gulf Coast to the Southeast to our nation's capital; the breadth of Pennsylvania and New York to the cities of New England; and something close to my heart, a central hub network that draws the cities of our industrial heartland closer to Chicago and one another.

Or California, where voters have already chosen to move forward with their own high-speed rail system, a system of new stations and 220 mile-per-hour trains that links big cities to inland towns; that alleviates crippling congestion on highways and at airports; and that makes travel from San Francisco to Los Angeles possible in two and a half hours.

And by making investments across the country, we'll lay a new foundation for our economic competitiveness and contribute to smart urban and rural growth. We'll create highly-skilled construction and operating jobs that can't be outsourced, and generate demand for technology that gives a new generation of innovators and entrepreneurs the opportunity to step up and lead the way in the 21st century. We'll move to cleaner energy and a cleaner environment, we'll reduce our need for foreign oil by millions of barrels a year, and eliminate more than 6 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions annually –- equal to removing 1 million cars from our roads.

Now, I know that this vision has its critics. There are those who say high-speed rail is a fantasy -- but its success around the world says otherwise. I know Americans love their cars, and nobody is talking about replacing the automobile and our highways as critical parts of our transportation system. We are upgrading those in the Recovery Package, as well. But this is something that can be done, has been done, and can provide us enormous benefits.

Now, there are those who argue that if an investment doesn't directly benefit the people of their district, then it shouldn't be made. Jim, you know some of those arguments. (Laughter.) But if we followed that rationale, we'd have no infrastructure at all.

There are those who say, well, this investment is too small. But this is just a first step. We know that this is going to be a long-term project. But us getting started now, us moving the process forward and getting people to imagine what's possible, and putting resources behind it so that people can start seeing examples of this around the country, that's going to spur all kinds of activity.

Now finally, there are those who say at a time of crisis, we shouldn't be pursuing such a strategy; we've got too many other things to do. But our history teaches us a different lesson.

As Secretary LaHood just mentioned, President Lincoln was committed to a nation connected from East to West, even at the same time he was trying to hold North and South together. He was in the middle of a Civil War. While fighting raged on one side of the continent, tens of thousands of Americans from all walks of life came together on the other. Dreamers and risk-takers willing to invest in America. College-educated engineers and supervisors who learned leadership in war. American workers and immigrants from all over the world. Confederates and Yankees joined on the same side.

And eventually, those two sets of tracks met. And with one final blow of a hammer, backed by years of hard work and decades of dreams, the way was laid for a nationwide economy. A telegraph operator sent out a simple message to a waiting nation. It just said, "DONE." (Laughter.) A newspaper proclaimed: "We are the youngest of peoples. But we are teaching the world to march forward."

In retrospect, America's march forward seems inevitable. But time and again, it's only made possible by generations that are willing to work and sacrifice and invest in plans to make tomorrow better than today. That's the vision we can't afford to lose sight of. That's the challenge that's fallen to this generation. And with this strategy for America's transportation future, and our efforts across all fronts to lay a new foundation for our lasting prosperity, that is the challenge we will meet.

"Make no little plans." That's what Daniel Burnham said in Chicago. I believe that about America: Make no little plans. So let's get to work. Thank you, everybody. (Applause.)

How Metro (MTA) is funded

Beacon Media News

Paying the Fare on Metro is Costly

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, now known as "Metro" is a humongous agency that the public entrusts to bring us modern, clean and swift public transportation, plus maintenance of our highways and other assorted transportation related jobs for the 10.4 million people who reside in the county’s 1,433 square mile area. Metro borrows funds from the private sector, but the really big money comes from program fees and taxes paid by county residents—sort of like an unending equity line of credit.

The primary sources of countywide transportation funds are local sales taxes, a portion of the 18-cents per gallon state gasoline tax, a portion of the 18.4-cents per gallon federal gasoline tax and the California sales tax on motor vehicle fuel. Voter-enacted initiative, Proposition A and Proposition C are local sales taxes that flow directly to Metro and other agencies linked to their programs and assorted state and federal transportation-related taxes. Metro estimates total revenues available from 2005 to 2009 at around $22 billion, with 54% coming from us locally, 29% from the state (our tax dollars at work) and 17% from federal sources (gosh, that ’s us, too).

Locally, we provide ¼-cent from the state 7.25% statewide retail sales tax collected in L.A. County. Those funds (enacted through Proposition 42 in 2002) are due to be distributed this year to such programs as Public Transportation Account (20%) and the State Transportation Improvement Program (40%) and 40% to local streets and roads. Federal programs set up in 2005 authorized, but not necessarily appropriated, $241 billion nationally to be distributed between 2005 and 2009 in an 80:20 ratio of highway to transit funding.
Early this week President Obama announced $787-billion economic stimulus plan that now has Caltrans salivating over an anticipated $625 million with Los Angeles County to receive $125 million for a rehab project on the Golden State Freeway from Hollywood Way to San Fernando Rd., and to repave a short stretch on the Long Beach Freeway between Florence and Slauson.

Metro has budgeted $3.4 billion for fiscal year 2009 with $2.2 billion from various sales tax receipts, $748 million from federal, state and local grants, $350 million from passenger fares and $120 million from "other" sources.
It will spend the money on $600 million for highway projects to include construction of carpool lanes, sound walls on freeways plus street-widening, traffic signal coordination, grade separations at railroad crossings, bikeways, ride-sharing initiatives, shuttles and more. This budget is $268 million, or 8.5% higher than last year due to increased subsidies to the 88 cities in the county and unincorporated areas and additional funding of paratransit services, Metrolink Commuter rail, and municipal bus operators. Metro funds 16 municipal bus operators including, locally, Arcadia Transit (Dial-A-Ride) and Foothill Transit. More funding is in store for Metro as Measure R, passed this last November, allows for a ½-cent increase in the current 9.25% sales tax, to 9.75%, laregly to fund the "Subway to the Sea" rail line from Downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica. Measure R received a majority vote even though it was strongly opposed by cities in the San Gabriel Valley which registered complaints that all the sales tax money contributed by our cities might not benefit residents here, such as with the contruction of the Gold Line Foothill Extension connecting the Sierra Madre Villa terminus with Arcadia, Monrovia, and, eventually, Ontario Airport. Now with increases in sales tax at historic levels, who would blame our city officials if they were inclined to say, "I told you so!"

Among public transportation funding, Proposition A programs receive ½-cent from County sales tax. About 75% of Proposition C’s ½-cent sales tax money is used to benefit public transportation for such items as security, operation and maintenance of Metrolink, park-n-ride lots and others. The Transportation Development Act receives ¼-cent from the statewide retail sales tax and is parceled out to Metro’s municipal bus line partners. The Red Line receives property tax assessments levied on commercial properties within ½ mile of certain stations along its route. Fare revenues are direct contributions to the Metro budget and used in the operation of the various lines. Metro also receives $4 of the annual $6 vehicle registration surcharge made by the South Coast Air Quality Management District which is designated for any project that reduces motor vehicle pollution, i.e., public transportation. The Public

Transportation Account derives revenue (along with State Transportation Improvement Program) from sales and use taxes on diesel fuel and gasoline: 4¾% sales tax on diesel fuel; 4¾% sales tax on 9-cents of the state excise tax on gasoline. State Transit Assistance aids Metro in accomplishing its goals in short-range transit and transportation improvements, among other things. The Surface Transportation Program gives about 10% of its funds to Metro to strengthen the cultural, aesthetic and environmental aspects to enhance the interface of transportation systems.

Section 5309 funding is a federal share program on an 80-20% basis that funds purchases of buses, maintenance, terminals, computers, garage equipment, bus rebuilds, passenger shelters, rolling stock and other items needed for maintenance and repair of rail systems. A new section of Section 5309 is preserved for large, new, heavy rail, light rail and bus rapid transit systems. Section 5339 is a federal share program earmarked (yes, earmarked) for San Gabriel Valley Gold Line Foothill Extension corridor study. Section 5307 and 5311 allocates funds to L.A.-Long Beach-Santa Ana Metro rail operations. It must be noted that many of these programs share highway funding programs and that there are dozens more designed only for highway, bridge, and associated projects.

Somewhat startlingly, in spite of the length of the list of revenue sources and the new American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 stimulus package, outgoing Chief Executive Officer Roger Snoble wrote, "We are seriously short on funding." Snoble retired this year. On April 6 by Arthur T. Leahy assumed the duties as CEO of Metro.

A review of our local bus and rail lines does not show the public overly enthused about using these services in increasing numbers. The Metro website provides average weekday boarding figures for Metro bus lines and its Gold, Green, Red, Blue and Orange rail lines for the period February 2007 through February 2009. Information was taken from the current posting and figures that were previously available in the same format with average weekday boardings from May, 2006 to May, 2008. In almost all instances, ridership from May of 2006 to February, 2009 are flat showing no growth. Peak ridership occurred mostly in June and July of 2008, when gas prices were at record highs, and the low point in most cases was December of 2008, according to the data
Average weekday boardings for Metro bus lines were highest in May, 2006 and March, 2007 with about 1.3 million boardings. Lowest reported was December, 2007at about 1.1 riders. The February, 2009 count is 1,150,190, systemwide.

Metro records show that the Gold, Green, Red, and Blue rail lines all reached their highest ridership in June and July of 2008. The Orange line peaked in September, 2008. The Gold line, other than the two peak months of around 24,000, remained between 18,000 and its February, 2009 boarding figure of 22,271. The Green line has risen from a low of about 34,000 to a peak of some 43,000 but has been declining since October 2008 to its average weekday boarding of 34,766 in February, 2009. The Red line, as a transfer point to other lines, accounted for half of all average weekday boarding figures at 141,815 in February, 2009. Although the Red line peaked like all the others in June and July of 2008 to nearly 160,000 riders and a low figure of around 120,000 in August of 2006, it has remained flat since September 2008 through February, 2009. The Blue Line had 74,271 boardings in the month of February, 2009 and while it peaked in July, 2008 to some 84,000 boardings it, too, has remained stable in the 75,000 range. The Orange Line likewise has remained stalled, ending February, 2009 with 21,633 boardings — just about where it has been for the entire three year period.
With fare prices averaging $1.12 per boarding (fare revenues in 2008 were $341,100,000 and ridership 380,073,888) and the boarding cost at $2.44, citizens subsidize all riders and pay a wide assortment of taxes on the building and maintenance of the Metro system. It is a low-cost system for riders only.

By Bill Peters
Posted by Beacon Media on Apr 16th, 2009 and filed under News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

Streetsblog Questionaire for CD5 City Council Candidates

Streetsblog » Help Edit the Streetsblog Questionaire for CD5 City Council Candidates

Help Edit the Streetsblog Questionaire for CD5 City Council Candidates

by Damien Newton on April 14, 2009

4_14_09_vahedi.jpg4_14_09_koretz_jewish_journal.jpgPhoto of Vahedi from Campaign. Photo of Koretz via Jewish Journal
By the time the runoff election for City Attorney and 5th District City Council are held next month, Paul Koretz and David Vahedi may be the most well vetted City Council candidates, when it comes to transportation, in the history of L.A. politics.

The Bottleneck Blog asked all six of the original candidates their views on the Expo Line and development in more general terms. Biking in LA asked all the candidates about bike issues. Vahedi responded. Koretz didn't. We also know how they both feel about the city's Pico-Olympic plan: they hate it. On top of that, the Bruins for Traffic Relief are hosting a forum next week focusing solely on transportation issues for the candidates.

That being said, here at Streetsblog we're going to do our part to get you the information you need before election day. Below are my draft questions for the candidates, feel free to comment:

1. We know that you are opposed to the city's Pico-Olympic plan for traffic relief because of parking concerns. What would you like to see the city do to improve east-west mobility in the short and long term?

2. The city ran into a public relations firestorm after it raised the cost of on-street parking after little public notice and without building any public support. What role do you see parking reform taking in providing a long-term solution to the city's transportation policy and funding?

3. DASH Service is in for drastic cuts and fare hikes in the coming years. What, if anything, do you think the city should do to avert these cuts?

4. This year is shaping up to be a particularly deadly one for pedestrians in Los Angeles. What can the City Council do to reduce or eliminate pedestrian crashes and fatalities?

5. If you could waive a magic wand and change one thing about transportation in and around the City of Los Angeles, what would it be?

Because we're so late in the election cycle, I'm hoping to turn around the questionaire and get it to the campaigns by Thursday evening so get your comments in quickly.

Incidently, there has been no word back yet from either of the City Attorney Candidates.

CALL FOR ENTRIES

CALL FOR ENTRIES

Final Deadline – May 8, 2009

13th LA Shorts Fest July 23-30, 2009 the largest short film festival in the world. Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences accredited. In past years, 33 participants have earned Academy Award nominations including 11 Oscar winning short films! The festival annually attracts more than 10,000 moviegoers, filmmakers and entertainment professionals looking for the hottest new talent. We have honored some of Hollywood’s legends of the past: Charles Chaplin, Harold Lloyd, and Robert Wise; along with actors Martin Landau, James Woods, Gary Oldman and directors Tim Burton, Bryan Singer, Jan de Bont, Paul Haggis and Shane Black. 
Submit Online www.LAshortsFest.com 

High-Speed Rail Authority's Frequently Asked Questions

http://www.cahighspeedrail.ca.gov/faqs/stimulus.htm

Questions & Answers
California's Economic Stimulus

Will the high-speed train system create new jobs and boost our economy?

Yes. The statewide high-speed train project will require us to draw upon and expand California’s skilled workforce, creating nearly 160,000 construction-related jobs to plan, design and build the system. An additional 450,000 permanent jobs are expected to be created by 2035 as a result of the economic growth the train system will bring to California. High speed trains will further boost California’s economy by:

* Improving the movement of people, goods and services throughout the state;
* Generating more than $1 billion in annual revenue surplus;
* Reducing travel times for train riders;
* Reducing delays to air and auto travelers as freeways and airports are relieved of congestion;
* Reducing air pollution and related health care costs;
* Reducing auto accident fatalities and injuries and related health care costs.

How much does our broken transportation system cost our economy?

California has three of the top five most congested urban areas in the United States. Right now, congestion costs approximately $20 billion per year in wasted fuel and lost time.

What would be the cost of expanding our highways and airports to meet future intercity demands instead of building the high-speed train system?

To serve the same number of travelers as the high-speed train system, California would have to build nearly 3,000 lane-miles of freeway plus five airport runways and 90 departure gates by 2020 – costing more than twice the high-speed train system and having much greater environmental impacts. What’s more, the proposed high-speed train system will provide lower passenger costs than for travel by automobile or air for the same city-to-city markets.

California High-Speed Rail Authority Latest News

California High-Speed Rail

The Official Site of California's Proposed
High-Speed Train System

By linking all major cities in California with a state-of-the-art new transportation choice, high-speed trains will move people and products across our state like never before.
What's new?
What's New?

March 31, 2009
View the letter from California’s Congressional delegation to US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood outlining suggested criteria for projects seeking funding from the $8 billion in federal stimulus package that has been allocated to high-speed train and other rail projects around the country.

March 31, 2009
The April 2, 2009 CHSRA Board Meeting is cancelled. See this cancellation notice.

March 17, 2009
View the San Jose to Merced Notice of Intent and the Merced to Bakersfield Notice of Intent, both just published in the Federal Register. These and other important documents are available in the library.

March 9, 2009
Download and view the Statewide Project Overview PowerPoint 2009 Presentation. (116 MB ZIP file - includes simulations) To download this presentation as a pdf click here. The pdf includes animations that play when clicked.

Siemens, a candidate manufacturer for high-speed rail in California

Siemens onboard for high-speed trains in China : News : Business - ZDNet Asia

Siemens onboard for high-speed trains in China
By Erik Palm, CNET News.com
Monday, March 23, 2009 11:23 AM

The Obama administration isn't the only one looking to high-speed rail lines.

German train producer Siemens has inked a US$1 billion contract to build 100 new high-speed trains for China, the company announced last week.

The company's Velaro train has a top speed of 218 mph. A typical train will have 16 cars and carry more than 1,000 passengers. With a total length of more than 1,300 feet, the new trains will be the world's longest single high-speed units in use, according to Siemens.

Japan and European countries such as France have had high-speed train systems for decades. But now the race to build such trains seems to have taken off in two of the leading world economies, China and the United States.

In the United States, the Obama administration wants to invest US$1 billion dollars a year over the next five years in high-speed rail. In addition, the stimulus bill (PDF) contained US$8 billion in capital assistance for high-speed rail corridors and intercity passenger rail service.

Among the projects angling for a slice of the stimulus money are California high-speed trains capable of 220 mph and expected to link San Francisco and Los Angeles in as little as two and a half hours. California voters authorized US$9.95 billion for the project last year.

At the same time, China plans to create the world's largest high-speed rail network. The Chinese Ministry of Railways is planning to buy around 1,000 high-speed trains within the next few years. The current order from Siemens includes the first trains to serve the new high-speed line between Bejing and Shanghai.

The train will complete the 825-mile run between Bejing and Shanghai in a mere four hours. The Chinese Ministry of Railways already has 60 trains in the Velaro style in use--among other things for transportation between Tianjin-Beijing during the Olympic games last year.

With a consumption of only 0.33 liters per seat for every 100 kilometers traveled (712 mpg), the Velaro is the most environmentally friendly high-speed train on the market, Siemens claims.

This article was first published as a blog post on CNET News.

Wikipedia Article on Jack Smith

Jack Smith (columnist) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jack Smith (columnist)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article may need to be wikified to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please help by adding relevant internal links, or by improving the article's layout. (November 2007)

Jack Clifford Smith (August 27, 1916-January 9, 1996) was a journalist, author, and newspaper columnist who wrote about Los Angeles during its period of greatest growth and increasing influence. His Los Angeles Times column, which ran for 37 years, chronicled or poked gentle fun at Los Angeles, his family and himself in an urbane, witty style that became a defining voice for the booming city. Throughout his long tenure as a Times columnist, he came to be closely associated with the city, as Herb Caen was to San Francisco or Mike Royko to Chicago. He was the author of 10 books, many of them based on his columns, and won the Los Angeles chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists' Distinguished Journalist award in 1981.
Contents
[hide]

* 1 Early years
* 2 The Black Dahlia
* 3 Jack Smith, columnist
* 4 Awards
* 5 Quotes
* 6 Bibliography
* 7 References

[edit] Early years

Smith was born in Long Beach on Aug. 27, 1916, grew up in Bakersfield and Los Angeles, and spent some time in the Civilian Conservation Corps before joining the merchant marines at age 21. He went into journalism, first for the Bakersfield Californian, then for the Honolulu Advertiser, United Press, the Sacramento Union, the San Diego Journal, the Daily News, Independent and Herald-Express, all in Los Angeles, before joining the Los Angeles Times in June 1953. He remained with the Times until his death.

He got to the Honolulu Advertiser by working his way there on a passenger ship. In World War II, he joined the Marine Corps and was a combat correspondent who took part in the assault on Iwo Jima, going ashore with his rifle but without his typewriter, which had been lost at sea.

At Belmont High School in Los Angeles, Smith served as editor of the student newspaper, the Belmont Sentinel. He said later that was the highest position he ever reached in his career.

[edit] The Black Dahlia

It was as a rewrite man for the Daily News in 1947 that Smith had what he later called "perhaps my finest hour as a newspaperman": his stories on the celebrated Elizabeth Short murder case.

The police beat reporter phoned in the bulletin to Smith, who recounted the moment this way in his book "Jack Smith's L.A.": "Within the minute I had written what may have been the first sentence ever written on the Black Dahlia case. I can't remember it word for word, but my lead went pretty much like this: 'The nude body of a young woman, neatly cut in two at the waist, was found early today on a vacant lot near Crenshaw and Exposition Boulevards.'" His editor added one adjective, making Short "a beautiful young woman."

"Our city editor, of course, no more knew what the unfortunate young woman had looked like than I did," Smith later wrote. "But the lesson was clear. On the Daily News, at least, all young women whose nude bodies were found in two pieces on vacant lots were beautiful. I never forgot it."

Smith also believed that he was the first to name Short "the Black Dahlia" in print. After a Daily News reporter learned that Short had frequented a certain Long Beach pharmacy, Smith phoned and spoke to the pharmacist, who said the kids at the soda fountain called her the Black Dahlia "on account of the way she wore her hair." But Smith acknowledged that Herald-Express reporter Bevo Means had also been credited with getting the name into print first.

[edit] Jack Smith, columnist

At the Times, besides his duties as a rewrite man, in which he would quickly assemble stories based largely on information from reporters who phoned in from the field, Smith began writing humor pieces for the op-ed page. He was awarded his own column in 1958 and continued it until his death.

"He was a hard drinker, prone to three-day binges that not only jeopardized his health but his job. When the Times gave him a column it probably saved his life. It also gave Los Angeles a voice and gave him a voice," wrote Rob Leicester Wagner in Red Ink, White Lies (2000), a history of Los Angeles journalism. Smith's "witty, literate, and urbane" columns observed Los Angeles as the city was making its postwar transition to a metropolitan center on par with New York and Chicago, Wagner wrote.

Rather than write about issues, Smith's columns chronicled small moments. He might write about the birdbath in the backyard of his Mount Washington home, his wariness of cats, a visit to the Getty Museum's garden, the contradictions of the English language or the thoughts that flitted through his mind while driving the freeways. He also defended the city against all slights, although usually with tongue planted firmly in cheek.

A series of "Baja Diary" columns concerned a weekend getaway cabin in Baja California that took years to build. His landlord and partner in the construction was Mr. Gomez. This arrangement was the subject of Smith's book "God and Mr. Gomez" (1974).

At their height of popularity, Smith's columns were distributed to almost 600 newspapers worldwide by the Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News Service. For most of his career he wrote five columns a week, a pace later eased to four per week. In 1992, he went into semi-retirement, writing one column per week. In his later years, his columns often concerned his declining health and the infirmities of age.

Smith had quadruple bypass surgery in 1984 and a heart attack later that year, a second heart attack after prostate surgery in 1994 and a final heart attack in late December 1995. His last column appeared on December 25, 1995. He died on January 9, 1996.

The coverage in the Times of his death compared him to such iconic columnists as Herb Caen in San Francisco, Mike Royko in Chicago and Jimmy Breslin in New York.

His columns "had sly elegance, genteel self-mockery and keen observations of the life he loved in ever-surprising Southern California," then-Times Editor Shelby Coffey III said.

"In many ways, Jack served as the country's first -- and most enduring -- columnist of postwar suburbia," fellow Times columnist Robert A. Jones wrote. "With his minimalist, non-intrusive style, he fit superbly with his era. He functioned almost as a diarist of the time when modern L.A. was being built."

His papers were donated to the Huntington Library in 2005. An exhibit, "Smith on Wry: Jack Smith, Columnist for Our Times" was on view at the Huntington (Feb. 15 - May 12, 2008). It featured original newspaper columns, drafts and galleys of his books, and other materials.

[edit] Awards

Smith won the Greater Los Angeles Press Club's highest honor, the Joseph M. Quinn Memorial Award, in 1991. According to his Los Angeles Times obituary: "He occasionally joked that he had come close to winning a Pulitzer Prize but that 'one can't talk about having won second place in the Pulitzer Prize.'"

[edit] Quotes

"I've heard it said that men first begin to realize their youth is over when policemen begin to look like college boys. That's true, but there's a much more alarming sign, and that's when a man's doctors begin to die."

Describing a book publication party in 1973 for Norman Mailer's "Marilyn": "[Mailer] stood in a slight crouch, feet apart, toes in, like a fighter; a good middleweight, over the hill, but game. His pale-blue eyes seemed alternately to burn and disconnect, as if his circuits were overloaded...They [Mailer and Monroe] had never met in life, and here was now, revealing himself as her last, most passionate, most hopeless lover...They seemed an odd couple: Mailer so open, Marilyn so closed. He should have called their book 'The Naked and the Dead.'"

Defending Los Angeles from Woody Allen's remark that making a right turn on a red light was Los Angeles' only contribution to culture: "What about the drive-in bank, the Frisbee, the doggie bag? What about our Hansel and Gretel cottages, our Assyrian rubber factory, our Beaux-Arts-Byzantine-Italian-Classic-Nebraska Modern City Hall? What about the drive-in church?"

On his Baja house: "When we reached the house, the rain had stopped, but the wind off the ocean was like wild organ music in the roof tiles. We lighted lanterns and I built a fire; that is to say, I put an ersatz log from the supermarket in the grate and put a match to it."

On why his 50th high school reunion was better than his 25th: "[The 25th] catches everyone at midlife crisis. It throws vulnerable people together in a kind of brutal encounter at a moment when they are already abraded by regrets, bewildered by uncertainties, and tormented by resurgent fantasies. Women are anxious about menopause and fading beauty, about empty homes and errant husbands; men look in the mirror and no longer see Charles Boyer or Charles Atlas. Jealousies are sharpened; spouses measure their mates against the ones that got away; infidelity is contemplated if not accomplished, and almost everyone goes home only slightly disenchanted....[But after 50 years] we have banked most of our fires; our passions are subdued; our regrets blurred, our demons exorcised. We are rather surprised to be here at all, and not entirely discontented."

On the Universal Studios tour: "When you're all set for God, it's a letdown to hear some tour guide give the command, 'Part, Red Sea!'"

[edit] Bibliography

Three Coins in the Birdbath (1965)
Smith on Wry or, The Art of Coming Through (1970)
God and Mr. Gomez (1974)
The Big Orange (1976)
Spend All Your Kisses, Mr. Smith (1978)
Jack Smith's L.A. (1980)
How to Win a Pullet Surprise -- The Pleasures and Pitfalls of Our Language (1982)
Cats, Dogs, and Other Strangers at My Door (1984)
Alive in La La Land (1989)
Eternally Yours (1996)

[edit] References

Los Angeles Times obituaries, January 10, 1996
Jack Smith's L.A. (1980)
www.literacyla.org/jack's%20papers.htm
Rob Leicester Wagner, Red Ink, White Lies (2000)

A Walk Remembering a great Angelino

14th "Jack Smith Trail Walk" Set for Sunday, April 19 | Mt. Washington Association - Los Angeles, California  (Next article has an overview of his life)

14th "Jack Smith Trail Walk" Set for Sunday, April 19
Mon, 03/23/2009 - 4:25pm — Eliot Sekuler
Start: 04/19/2009 - 9:00am
End: 04/19/2009 - 12:30pm

The Mount Washington Association's 14th annual Jack Smith Trail Walk will take place on Sunday, April 19 with walkers departing in two groups at 9:00 am and 9:30 am from the Southwest Museum tunnel entrance at 234 Museum Drive.

Participation is free and children, leashed dogs and all other manageable pets are welcome.
Refreshments and water for pets and people will be provided at Mount Washington School.

The trail route, walked at a leisurely pace and taking between two and two and a half hours, will wind through the slopes of Mount Washington, affording walkers dramatic vistas of Mt. San Antonio, Mt. San Gorgonio and Mt. San Jacinto --Southern California’s highest mountain peaks—as well as panoramic views of the San Gabriel and Verdugo ranges. Docents will call attention to the many notable craftsman and contemporary architectural landmarks that dot the area.
Since the inaugural walk in 1996, two new parks (Moon Canyon and Heidelberg Park) have been added to the community and several rest benches have been installed.

Walkers are encouraged to park on Museum drive or Marmion way or, preferably, to take the Gold Line to the Southwest Museum station, just steps away from the start point.

The Mount Washington School PTA will hold a parallel event for students and their families.

LA times takes its turn announcing meetings for the Jimi Hendrix line, the Purple Line.

Metro seeks public input on Westside subway extension | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

Metro seeks public input on Westside subway extension
4:10 PM | April 13, 2009

Starting tonight, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority will hold six public "scoping" meetings on the Westside subway extension project. These meetings begin the environmental review process for the project, which is slated to receive partial funding from Measure R, the half-cent sales tax increase approved by voters last November.

Two “build” alternatives are moving forward for analysis in the draft environmental impact report: A Wilshire subway that extends the Metro Purple Line via Wilshire Boulevard and a Wilshire/West Hollywood subway that incorporates all of the Wilshire subway and also includes a spur from the Metro Red Line in Hollywood via Santa Monica Boulevard. For more information, see the Metro's subway extension website.

Here is the schedule, including an April 22 meeting that Metro has added for the Koreatown/Mid-Wilshire/Wilshire Center area:

Wilshire/Fairfax area, 6 to 8 p.m. tonight, Los Angeles County Museum of Art, West Terrace Room, 5th Floor, 5905 Wilshire Blvd. This area is served by Metro lines 20, 720, 920, 217 and 780. Validated parking is available in the underground structure at 6th Street and Ogden Drive.

West Hollywood, 6 to 8 p.m. Tuesday, Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Blvd. (at Plummer Place), West Hollywood. This area is served by Metro line 4. Free parking for vehicles and bikes is available at the location.

Beverly Hills, 6 to 8 p.m. Thursday, Beverly Hills Public Library, Auditorium, 2nd Floor, 444 N. Rexford Drive. This area is served by Metro lines 4, 14, 16 and 704. Free two-hour parking is available in the adjacent structure.

Westwood area, 6 to 8 p.m. April 20, Westwood Presbyterian Church, 10822 Wilshire Blvd. This area is served by Metro lines 20, 720 and 920. Free parking is available at the location.

Koreatown/Mid-Wilshire/Wilshire Center area, 5 to 7 p.m. April 22, Wilshire United Methodist Church, 4350 Wilshire Blvd. This area is served by Metro lines 20, 210, 710 and 720. Free parking is available at the site.

Santa Monica, 6 to 8 p.m. April 23, Santa Monica Public Library, 601 Santa Monica Blvd. This area is served by Metro lines 4, 20, 33, 333 and 720 and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus lines 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9 and 10. Validated parking for vehicles and bikes is available.

--Martha Groves

Permalink | C

4-13-2009 is the first date for public meetings to discuss options for extending the Purple Line subway to Santa Monica.

http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_12132784

MTA to hold public meetings on Purple Line, the Jimi Hendrix line, subway

Daily News Wire Services

Posted: 04/13/2009 10:19:01 AM PDT

Updated: 04/13/2009 10:19:34 AM PDT

Starting tonight, Metropolitan Transportation Authority staffers will hold a series of public meetings to discuss options for extending the Purple Line subway, the Jimi Hendrix line, to Santa Monica.

Metro officials will host a public input session at 6 p.m. at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, 5905 Wilshire Blvd., in the West Terrace Room on the fifth floor.

The meeting will be the first of six meetings held in April at various locations around the proposed subway corridor.

"Public input is going to be really critical," said Metro spokeswoman Jody Litvack.

Construction on the first leg of the so-called Subway to the Sea could begin around 2012, with the segment open to passengers by the end of that decade, according to Metro.

Attendees at the meetings will be presented with plans to extend the subway along Wilshire Boulevard, with a possible second leg that would connect to the Red Line Hollywood/Highland Station via Santa Monica Boulevard. Metro officials also will discuss the possibility of not extending the subway line at all.

Currently, the Purple Line, the Jimi Hendrix line, runs from downtown Los Angeles to Wilshire Boulevard and Western Avenue.

Metro will use public input to help develop a locally preferred plan that will then be presented to the agency's board of directors for approval.

Funding for the proposed extension -- which could cost between $6.1 billion and $9 billion -- would come in part from the half-cent sales tax increase under Measure R, which was approved by voters last November.

Metro officials said they planned to seek the rest of the money from the federal government, and possibly from private agencies.

The rest of this month's public scoping meetings will be held at the following times and locations:

-- April 14 at 6 p.m. in Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Boulevard, West Hollywood;

-- April 16 at 6 p.m. at Beverly Hills Public Library, 444 N. Rexford Drive, second floor auditorium;

-- April 20 at 6 p.m. at Westwood Presbyterian Church, 10822 Wilshire Blvd.;

-- April 22 at 5 p.m. at Wilshire United Methodist Church, 4350 Wilshire Blvd.;

-- April 23 at 6 p.m. at Santa Monica Public Library, 601 Santa Monica Blvd.

The name on MTA's webpage is "Harbor Subdivision"

Overview

From MTA website: www.mta.net

The Harbor Subdivision is a freight rail corridor, approximately 26 miles in length, that traverses southwest Los Angeles County from Vernon to Wilmington. In the early 1990’s, Metro purchased the portion of the corridor between Redondo Junction and Watson Yard, along with several other rail rights-of-way, to further the development of the region’s rapid transit system.

Metro has initiated an Alternatives Analysis Study (AA) for the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor. The study will examine potential transit service along the Metro-owned Harbor Subdivision. The study’s goals include:

• Improving mobility in southwestern Los Angeles County by introducing high-frequency transit service options
• Enhancing the regional transit network by interconnecting existing and planned rapid transit lines
• Providing an alternative mode of transportation for commuters currently using the congested I-405 and I-110 corridors
• Improving transit accessibility for residents of communities along the corridor
• Encouraging a mode shift to transit, reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions

The AA will evaluate a broad range of alternatives including Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) with dedicated bus lanes, various types of rail technology such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and commuter rail , as well as “no-build” and Transportation Systems Management improvements.

Though alternatives will generally follow the Harbor Subdivision corridor, potential alignment and improvement options outside the immediate Harbor Subdivision right-of-way will also be studied.

In addition, the analysis will examine potential financing mechanisms outside the traditional funding sources commonly used for constructing and operating transit service.

At the conclusion of the AA, Metro staff will recommend a course of action to the Metro Board, including possibly proceeding with an environmental document consistent with both federal and state requirements.

Study Area

The study area will encompass approximately 85 square miles including the jurisdictions of Huntington Park, Vernon, City of Los Angeles, Hawthorne, Inglewood, El Segundo, Lawndale, Torrance, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, Carson, Los Angeles County, and the port areas of Los Angeles and Long Beach. 

South Bay transit corridor also called "Harbor Subdivision corridor." Does it have an official name yet?

Los Angeles MTA to outline alternatives for Harbor Subdivision corridor

http://www.progressiverailroading.com/news/article.asp?id=20165

During the next month, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) will hold five meetings to update the public on an alternatives analysis study being conducted for the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor.

Launched in September 2008, the study examines potential transit service options along a 26-mile freight corridor that runs across southwest Los Angeles County from Vernon to Wilmington. LACMTA purchased a portion of the corridor between Redondo Junction and Watson Yard in the early 1990s. Now, the agency is considering the addition of light-rail or bus rapid transit service along the line.  

Along with a planned Crenshaw Transit Corridor, the Harbor Subdivision would establish a north-south link connecting downtown L.A. to Los Angeles International Airport and potential South Bay area destinations. 

Future of Santa Monica's development. In the mix, Expo line is assumed to be there.

http://surfsantamonica.com/ssm_site/the_lookout/columns/FrankGruber/FG-2009/04_2009/04_13_09_Capital_Ideas.html

Capital Ideas By Frank Gruber Tomorrow night's meeting of the Santa Monica City Council could be the most important meeting for decades about public investment in our city.  The council members will indicate their priorities for capital expenditures under the redevelopment project the City established after the 1994 earthquake. At present, the Earthquake Recovery Redevelopment Project is throwing off about $60 million per year in tax increment funding -- this money represents the property taxes on the increase in property values in the redevelopment zone, which encompasses about a third of the city.  More than half of this money is available to the City for capital projects.  (Some of the tax increment money cannot be claimed by the City's redevelopment agency and goes back to the government entities that would otherwise get it, and the City must spend 20 percent of the money on affordable housing.)  Based on fairly conservative economic projections, the City's staff and consultants project that there will be enough income to service at least $283 million in debt; while this is not a little money, to put the number in context, it's about as much as each of the most recent bond issues approved by local voters for the School District and Santa Monica College. The kicker is that under the law, the redevelopment agency must incur this debt by mid-2014 (the agency will then have access to the tax increment funds to pay it off until 2042).  The five-year capital plan that the council must adopt this year for the agency will therefore be the ultimate word on the investment of the earthquake redevelopment funds. In the staff report for tomorrow night's meeting, the City's staff outlines the priorities it suggests that the City Council adopt in its role as the redevelopment agency.  In addition to affordable housing, staff is proposing a total of $272.8 million in investments in the Civic Center area (many projects, including projects related to the terminus of the Expo light rail and at Santa Monica High School), downtown (mostly parking), the Pico Neighborhood (a new branch library), mid-city (expansion of Memorial Park and in connection with the Expo stations coming there), at the Pier (to keep it standing), and around the city for various infrastructure improvements. What will probably draw the most attention tomorrow night from the public will be the staff's reaction to plans that the School District has put forward for joint development of recreational and other facilities at Samohi.  These projects potentially total about $230 million -- City staff recommends contributing $46 million of redevelopment funds, plus possibly additional funds for "shared parking."  Supporters of the high school's plan will surely ask for more. While all public money should be spent (or invested) wisely, there is a particular need to spend the earthquake redevelopment funds with an eye towards lasting public benefit.  This is because Santa Monica, a relatively wealthy city, used the earthquake to create the redevelopment zone and thus capture revenues that would otherwise go to the state and the county to pay for education, social services, the justice system, etc. -- expenditures that would benefit a broad spectrum of Californians. The theory behind tax increment funding is that a redevelopment agency's investments in a "blighted" (or in this case, "earthquake-damaged") area will result in an increase in property values, and it's reasonable to capture the increased taxes that result to pay off the bonds issued to pay for the investments.  But in Santa Monica it would be ridiculous to contend that the increase in real estate values over the 15 years since the earthquake had anything to do with any investments the City has made with redevelopment funds. While it's thus hard to justify Santa Monica's capturing these revenues, Santa Monica does have a "moral" advantage over many redevelopment districts when it comes to investing those funds.  That's because Santa Monica plays an important regional role, particularly with respect to recreation, and because Santa Monica itself has a large low-income population that lives mostly in areas -- the Pico Neighborhood and mid-city -- that are underserved with parks and other public facilities. Capital expenditures that support public education also have a wide public benefit; voters in Santa Monica, Los Angeles, and throughout the region have voted time and again over the past two decades to tax themselves to build schools, and it's reasonable to use redevelopment money to supplement those funds. If you review the list of projects that staff recommends, you'll find that nearly all of them fall within the beneficial categories I mention above (although you may disagree on the staff's suggested allocations).  The projects will benefit Santa Monicans, but they also will help Santa Monica welcome visitors who will be arriving on Expo line trains.  They will provide more parkland for a city that needs more parks, a library in Pico, and sports facilities on the Samohi campus that will benefit the public as well as students.  (One editorial comment is that while I hope the City funds the Michigan Avenue promenade and bikeway through the campus that the School District is proposing, I hope the district changes its policies so that it could be open during school hours.) There is one big exception, however, when it comes to the quality of the projects.  Almost 20 percent of the money staff proposes to spend -- $53 million of the $273.8 million -- would be for parking, either building it or acquiring land for it, and that number is in addition to $17 million the City's parking authority would spend. Underground or otherwise structured parking is expensive -- the School District estimated the cost for underground parking at $44,000 per space (although that number may turn out to be less given the economy).  Monthly debt service to amortize $44,000 over 30 years at the 6 percent interest rate that staff estimates the redevelopment agency would have to pay would be $264.  The City charges less than half of that for monthly parking in its downtown structures, and of course it gives away the first two hours of parking downtown. Yes, parking is cheap, but the parking structures the City has built downtown in recent years are nearly empty most of the time.  Now it proposes to build more.  Subsidized parking only encourages more driving, which contributes to the traffic congestion residents complain so much about. While the City is waiting for the results of a parking survey for the Civic Center area, I'm not going to wait for it to say that there is no justification for building any more parking in the Civic Center area except to allow the conversion of surface parking at the high school to an athletic field.  This would provide 490 spaces, about 100 more than currently exist at the school.  (And it should be remembered that the Civic Center structure the City built a few years ago was designed to free up the Civic Auditorium parking lot to be turned into a park.) One cannot, however, simply say that building the 490 spaces would make sense without considering the economics.  While the freed-up land has value, when a parking space costs $264 a month to build, it can't be given away to teachers or to students for nothing or nearly nothing.  If the School District or the City plan to build more parking, they need to explain how the parkers will ultimately pay for it.  Redevelopment money doesn't exist to subsidize parking.

If readers want to write the editor about this column, send your emails to The Lookout at mail@surfsantamonica.com . If readers want to write Frank Gruber, email frank@frankjgruber.net The views expressed in this column are those of Frank Gruber and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Lookout.

2 + 2= 2 possible routes for the Purple Line and 2 years until construction starts.

Two routes for subway to be studied - LA Daily News

Two routes for subway to be studied
By Sue Doyle, Staff Writer
Updated: 04/06/2009 11:36:56 PM PDT

The long-awaited, multi-billion dollar subway link from Mid-Wilshire to the sea inched forward Monday when county transportation officials said they would begin an 18-month environmental study of two proposed routes.

Flush with cash from a 30-year, half-percent sales tax voters approved last year, Metro, the Los Angeles County's transportation agency, announced plans to analyze plans for a 12.5-mile line to run below Wilshire Boulevard. The line is expected to cost $6.1 billion.

Also being studied is a longer line that would start at Hollywood Boulevard and Highland Avenue and run below Santa Monica Boulevard through West Hollywood before linking to the Wilshire Boulevard line - a 17-mile route. That line would cost $9 billion.

Neither plan would be complete before 2034.

The renewed focus on the two plans is possible thanks to last year's voter-approved Measure R, which gives the Westside subway $4.1 billion - enough to start the project but not enough to build it to the ocean.

"Now with Measure R, there is really a substantial amount of funding for this," said Jody Litvak, Metro community relations manager for the Westside extension project. "It's a huge change from where we were several months ago."

The line will be built in segments, as the agency seeks additional money to continue tunneling to the beach.

Beginning next week, the agency will host several public meetings to discuss routes, hear passenger
Advertisement
preferences for station locations and parking and hear concerns about vibrations, noise and air quality during construction.

Under one plan, the line would start at Wilshire Boulevard and Western Avenue, today's terminus for the Purple Line subway. It would continue below Wilshire, zip around Century City and Westwood and end at Fourth Street in Santa Monica.

A second plan includes the Wilshire route, but would start at Hollywood and Highland, a major station for the Red Line subway.

The route would run south on Highland and then head west on Santa Monica Boulevard before turning south on either La Cienega or San Vicente boulevards - to be decided in the environmental impact report.

Either way, the line would connect to Wilshire Boulevard and then head to the ocean.

The environmental report should be completed next spring and be available to the public within months. Metro's board expects to review the study during summer 2010.

If a plan is approved, construction could begin in 21/2 years.

Metro is counting on federal money to pay for half of the cost of the subway construction. To receive federal money, Metro must complete the environmental report.

When the economy rebounds, the agency will seek public-private partnerships and money from Sacramento, said David Mieger, Metro project director.

"Hopefully the state economy won't be in terrible shape forever and it will come back," Mieger said.

sue.doyle@dailynews.com 818-713-3741

An April Update on Stimulus money and the State

State officials pan for gold in D.C. - Los Angeles Times

Doyle McManus:
State officials pan for gold in D.C.
A lobbying effort by Californians for federal stimulus dollars meets with mixed results.
Doyle McManus
April 12, 2009
Last month, a flock of Californians streamed through Washington's halls of power seeking federal money for the state's slumping economy, gridlocked transportation system and troubled schools. To their delight, they found a Democratic administration with a sympathetic ear for the state's problems -- plus a big bag of stimulus funding to spend.

"There's never been so much money in D.C. waiting to be shipped out to the states," marveled lawyer and MTA Director David W. Fleming after a visit to the White House. "It's like a huge trail of breadcrumbs."

But as federal spending is being parceled out, it's beginning to look as if California won't quite find the whole loaf of bread it hoped for.

Yes, the stimulus package is big: $787 billion. And California is getting big chunks of that money for some of its most painful needs, such as extended unemployment benefits and job training. But that's partly a reflection of the depth of the state's troubles. A portion of the stimulus money is being allocated to states on the basis of need, and at 10.5%, California's unemployment rate is the fifth-highest in the nation, behind Michigan, Oregon and the Carolinas.

In other spending categories, California didn't come out so well. In highway construction, for example, only about 9% of federal money is coming California's way, although the state has about 12% of the population.

"We still don't get our share most of the time," said Bruce Cain, director of the University of California's Washington Center. "It would be worse if we weren't in there fighting."

And because most of the stimulus is earmarked for specific uses, it won't be much use in filling the state's huge budget gap.

Part of the problem lies with Congress, where small states wield far more power than their population numbers justify. Take Wyoming. With the nation's lowest unemployment rate -- 3.9% -- the state really doesn't need much help. But the first wave of state-by-state allocations sends $723 per resident to California and $979 per resident to Wyoming, according to estimates compiled by Federal Funds Information for States, a nonpartisan analysis group.

Believe it or not, California's allocation was a significant victory for Rep. Henry A. Waxman and others in the state's congressional delegation, who made sure that money to help the unemployed would go to states with high unemployment rates, education funding to states with lots of schoolchildren and so on.

As a result, California is on track to get almost 12% of the total stimulus package. This sounds good -- it's about in line with the state's population -- but the state is one of the hardest hit by the recession. And if the stimulus is really aimed at pulling us out of tough times, it should be aimed at the places that need it most.

President Obama has said nice things about California, named some Californians to his Cabinet and visited the state more quickly than his predecessor did -- but he has also made it clear that he's focused on fixing the national economy, not any one region.

"California oftentimes gets hit worse when recessions come, but you also rise up faster when the economy starts to recover," Obama said when he visited Los Angeles on March 19. "So I'm confident California will continue to be on the cutting edge of our economy."

Last month, when all those Californians were visiting Washington, Gary Toebben, president of the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce, put the arm on Larry Summers, Obama's chief economic advisor. If you want to revive the nation's economy, start with its biggest state, Toebben urged.

But Summers turned the point around, saying he hoped Californians would use their renowned creativity to lead the country out of its economic ditch. Translation: No special bailout for California, folks.

L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa tried a less parochial pitch and urged Summers to focus on the cities, where most Americans live. "You fix the problems of New York, Chicago, L.A., Miami, Houston, you've fixed 80% of the problems in the country," the mayor said.

That was a more effective argument. Much of the stimulus package hasn't been allocated yet, and California's hopes of winning a bigger slice may rest largely on the new administration's more urban focus. That isn't surprising in a Democratic presidency; the gulf between urban Democrats and rural Republicans is one of the deepest divisions in American politics, even within the borders of California.

Los Angeles and other cities still face an uphill struggle for federal money, even in the age of Obama. Now that the economy has shown some initial signs of recovery, the administration isn't talking about a second stimulus package anymore. Instead, it's worrying about how it will pay for healthcare reform and a middle-class tax cut. It's not looking like that $6-billion "subway to the sea" is going to be running any time soon.

Villaraigosa acknowledged that he left Washington last month without any major new funding commitments in hand. But he said he was happy just to have a chance to compete for money for mass transit, schools and policing.

"This is like fishing," he told me. "We're throwing out the cast. Now what we need is a little patience." Still, as any fisherman can tell you, he'll need more than patience; he'll need some luck.

doyle.mcmanus@latimes.com

A strong argument for high-speed rail

Cleantech Blog: High-Speed Rail Unlocks Intermodal Potential

Wednesday, April 08, 2009
High-Speed Rail Unlocks Intermodal Potential

By John Addison. Intermodal solutions allow people to effectively navigate major cities such as New York, Washington D.C., Paris, Madrid, and Tokyo. Subway and light-rail are especially effective, but expensive to build. As cities grow, change, and morph, not every potential route can be served with subway and light-rail. Bus rapid transit is a cost effective way to duplicate some of the benefits of light-rail, at a fraction of the capital expenditure. Buses, taxis, car sharing, bicycling, and walking are all parts of the solution. For many, cars are their preferred way to get around, yet if all transportation were cars then cities would be frozen in gridlock.

High-speed rail integrates all these systems together and moves people from city to city at high-speed. When the distance is only a few hundred miles, high-speed rail coupled with city transit beats airplane and car every time.
Now an 800 mile high-speed rail network is being started in California. Because it depends on local and public-private partnership funding, as well as state and federal funding, it will be built in sections. First online are likely to be areas that are currently overwhelmed with passenger vehicles crawling on freeways that should be renamed “slowways.” Likely to be among the first in service are the Orange County – Los Angeles section and the San Jose – San Francisco section.
San Jose provides an example of current transportation problems as well as the future promise of high-speed rail integrated with intermodal solutions. Currently, during rush hour, cars crawl from all directions into San Jose, the self-proclaimed capital of Silicon Valley. Vehicles overload some of the nation’s busiest highways - 680, 880, 101, 280, 87, and 17.

Commuters to and from San Jose have a number of options. Many require multiple transit agencies and added time to reach their destination. Caltrain services cities from San Francisco to San Jose, at times taking only an hour, at other times being less frequent and taking much longer. Several transit agencies have special commuter shuttles including AC Transit and Santa Cruz Metro.

Major San Jose employers promote carpool and van pool commute programs. Shuttle buses run to the nearby airport. Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority’s (VTA) light-rail and buses effectively cover major parts of the city and connect to other systems. A variety of private bus, shuttle, car sharing, taxi, and other services all help. A network of bicycle trails and paths helps some enjoy their commute and stay in shape.

A central hub for VTA, Caltrain, and Amtrak is the Diridon Station in San Jose, named after Rod Diridon who provided leadership for the modern transportation system in the greater area as six-time chairperson of the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors and Transit Board. He has also been chair of the American Public Transit Association; he is the Executive Director of the Mineta Transportation Institute and Chair Emeritus of the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CAHSR).

When I met with Rod Diridon last month he was optimistic about CAHSR breaking ground within two years, and carrying a high volume of riders on at least one segment within ten years. The reasons for success are compelling: high-speed rail is less expensive than freeway expansion, less expensive than airport expansion, secured voter approval during a severe recession, will create up to 400,000 new jobs, integrates all of California’s major transit systems, reduces petroleum use, and helps prevent increased climate change damage. Mr. Diridon feels that support is also strong, because each year of delay could add millions to the ultimate cost of the 800 mile system.

In ten years, the Diridon Station is likely to see high volumes of travelers as high-speed rail shuttles people to and from San Francisco in 30 minutes. The CAHSR system will share the corridor currently in place for Caltrain. The station will allow passengers to board Amtrak and continue on to places like Los Angeles and Sacramento. Eventually, the high-speed rail will continue to those destinations, as all right-of-way and not-in-my-backyard (NIMBY) issues are resolved.

In ten years, increased VTA light-rail traffic will flow through the system as San Jose continues to grow. VTA Transportation Planner Jason Tyree described how light-rail will be supplemented with advanced bus-rapid transit that will rapidly move people with modern features such as level boarding, automated fare handling, signal prioritization, and potentially dedicated lane sections. The 60-foot buses will be hybrid diesel.
People from the East Bay area may connect to the station via an extension to BART. Feeding off BART will be AC Transit’s ultramodern buses including its expanded fleet of hydrogen fuel cell buses.

The Diridon Station ten-years from now could well have zero-emission electric bus shuttles from the nearby airport or even a more advanced people-mover service. Preferred car parking at the station is likely to be for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles. San Jose, home to advanced vehicle and technology companies like Tesla, is committed to an extensive city-wide vehicle charging infrastructure.
Although many electric vehicles are criticized for only having less than 100 mile in range per battery charge, such range is good for several days when combined with effective public transportation systems. Another way to cover the last miles to and from home and work is the good old bicycle. Bicycle boarding will be permitted on high-speed rail and the other public transportation systems.

As cities are connected with high-speed rail, similar multimodal systems will also be connected in San Francisco, Los Angeles, Orange County, San Diego, Sacramento, and other major cities in this state of 40 million people; soon to be 50 million people.
The new high-speed rail and the light-rail transit systems use electricity not petroleum. Electric rail is many times more efficient than diesel engine drive systems. In ten years, by law 33 percent of the electricity will be from renewable sources such as wind, solar, and geothermal. In 20 years, especially with the benefit of California’s new cap-and-trade of greenhouse gases, renewable energy is likely to be less expensive than natural gas and nuclear, with coal already being phased out in California. In other words, the high growth part of California transportation is likely to be zero-emission providing significant relief in emissions and energy security.

Combining improved multimodal transportation with high-speed rail with renewable energy is bringing climate solutions just in time. California’s busy Highway 101, which stretches over 800 miles and which carries millions daily, will find major sections under water if the sea rises only 16 inches.

As leading delegates from 175 nations now meet to discuss climate solutions scientist agree that global warming is accelerating and the artic ice cap is disappearing.
The multimodal transportation that serves millions of Americans is experiencing record use and provides the foundation for a more promising future.

John Addison is the author of the new book – Save Gas, Save the Planet.