Please Sir, May We Have Some More Subways? (Source: Curbed LA)

Link: Curbed LA: Please Sir, May We Have Some More Subways?

Please Sir, May We Have Some More Subways?

Thursday, September 24, 2009, by Neal Broverman

 In a statement released today, Metro announced they were officially applying for federal money to help pay for the Wilshire subway extension, as well as the Regional Connector that would link up various light-rail lines and provide transfer-less trips around the County. "The two projects are expected to score highly in the rankings necessary to secure Full Funding Grant Agreements (FFGA) under current federal New Starts requirements," according to the release. Metro is hoping the president helps fund these two easy-to-sell projects, so local Measure R monies can be freed up to pay for less high-profile rail lines like the Gold Line Foothill extension into Montclair. [Metro]

Two rail projects to get federal funding consideration, Gold Line left out (Source: Pasadena Star-News)

Two rail projects to get federal funding consideration, Gold Line left out - Pasadena Star-News

Two rail projects to get federal funding consideration, Gold Line left out
Posted: 09/24/2009 01:23:34 PM PDT

LOS ANGELES - County transit officials approved a request for federal funding for two county rail projects, the Westside's "Subway to the Sea," and a connector project that would link several existing lines.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board voted unanimously to recommend the projects for funding in the federal "New Starts" programs, which funds rail projects all over the country.

At previous meetings, several board members had pushed the idea of including the 24-mile Gold Line Foothill Extension line in the request, but a motion to do that was withdrawn at Thursday's meeting.

The regional connector project would have some benefits for the San Gabriel Valley: it will connect the Gold Line directly to several other lines, making it possible for riders to one day go directly from Pasadena to Long Beach, Santa Monica and Los Angeles International Airport.

MTA officials have said the connector could cut the commute to Long Beach by as much as 21 minutes by eliminating the need for riders to switch rail lines twice.

It also could mean a one-seat trip from Pasadena to Culver City along the Exposition Line, which is slated to eventually extend to there.

The board may consider a motion next month to direct MTA staff to look for other pots of federal money for the Gold Line.

Controversial rail contract approved by MTA board; Italian firm pledges to build plant in downtown L.A. (Source: LA Times)

Link: Controversial rail contract approved by MTA board; Italian firm pledges to build plant in downtown L.A. | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

L.A. NOW

Controversial rail contract approved by MTA board; Italian firm pledges to build plant in downtown L.A.
September 24, 2009 | 3:07 pm

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority board today awarded a contract to the Italian firm AnsaldoBreda for 100 additional light-rail cars, clearing the way for a new rail manufacturing plant that the company has promised to build in downtown Los Angeles.

The decision was a victory for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has made green jobs a centerpiece of his agenda. He said the rail plant would serve as the southern anchor of his proposed clean technology corridor east of downtown.

Board members approved the $300-million deal on an 8-3 vote — with two members absent — after impassioned speeches by union workers who said many of their colleagues were out of work and losing their homes.

Art Leahy, the MTA's chief executive, had recommended against approval of the controversial deal. But at the last moment, AnsaldoBreda circulated an e-mail that provided additional financial guarantees from the firm's parent company, Finmeccanica.

-- Maeve Reston at L.A. City Hall

Wilshire Bus Only Lanes: The Above-Ground Subway to the Sea (Source: LA Subway Blog)

Link: The LA Subway Blog: Wilshire Bus Only Lanes: The Above-Ground Subway to the Sea

Wilshire Bus Only Lanes: The Above-Ground Subway to the Sea
Wednesday, September 23, 2009

The LA City Council voted to move ahead with the EIR for the LA City Wilshire Bus Only Lanes (Streetsblog Reports). This project would improve transit travel times in the Wilshire Corridor. You could think of it as the low cost peak-hour above-ground subway (that runs in mixed traffic through Beverly Hills and Santa Monica).

Paul Koretz from CD 5 has taken a page from David Vahedi's playbook and bowed to Westwood Wilshire Corridor Condo interests (some of which fear change and the realization that they don't live on a two-lane back country road) in expressing skepticism over the project. Paul is a 25-year member of the Sierra Club and surely is aware of the positive environmental implications of improving transit service using natural-gas fueled buses. While localized environmental concerns should be studied in any project, I suspect the Corridor Condo interests will seek to use the CEQA/NEPA process to derail any attempt to change the pastoral nature of their homestead, even if it provides a street buffer that only professionally-trained drivers will have access to. The regional environmental implications of improving transit service will be favorable.

Schedule permitting, Sirinya and I will be at the Westwood meeting.

Here's the latest from Metro:
===
Metro, the City of Los Angeles, and Los Angeles County are considering the feasibility of implementing a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) project on Wilshire Boulevard. This joint effort will be evaluated through the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA).

The EIR/EA, which will be prepared in compliance with State and Federal environmental requirements, will examine the potential for dedicated curbside bus lanes during the morning and evening rush hours along Wilshire Boulevard, from just west of the I-110 freeway to the Santa Monica city line, excluding the City of Beverly Hills.

These same three agencies began evaluating the proposed Wilshire BRT Project in November 2008 as part of preparing an Initial Study/Environmental Assessment (IS/EA). An EIR/EA is now being prepared as a consequence of input received at several community meetings held along the corridor at that time, additional public input, and technical analyses that have been conducted.

Please join us at any of the four (4) scoping meetings to learn more about the Proposed Project and Project Alternatives. These meetings will provide the public the opportunity to comment on the project and any potential effects of the project that should be considered in the Draft EIR/EA. The content presented at these four meetings will be identical, so please make sure to attend at the time and location most convenient for you.

Monday, October 5, 6:00 – 8 pm
Felicia Mahood Senior Center
11338 Santa Monica Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90025

Wednesday, October 7, 6:00 – 8 pm
Wilshire United Methodist Church
4350 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90010

Thursday, October 8, 6:00 – 8 pm
Westwood Presbyterian Church
10822 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90024

Tuesday, October 13, 6:00 – 8 pm
Good Samaritan Hospital, Moseley-Salvatori Conference Center
637 Lucas Ave
Los Angeles, CA 90017

All meeting locations are accessible by public transit. Please go to Metro.net to plan your trip. Parking is also available. Garage parking at Good Samaritan is not validated and costs $8.

For additional information or questions, please visit the Wilshire Bus Rapid Transit EIR/EA website at metro.net/Wilshire.

California to Ask for $4.5 Billion in High Speed Rail Stimulus Funds (Source: LAist)

Link: California to Ask for $4.5 Billion in High Speed Rail Stimulus Funds: LAist: Los Angeles News, Food, Arts & Events

California to Ask for $4.5 Billion in High Speed Rail Stimulus Funds

By Zach Behrens on Sep 23, 2009

hsrgrant.png With the feds yearning to give away $8 billion in Recovery Act money to states for high-speed train development, California officials today prepared to submit an application asking for more than half of that.

"California is a leading contender for this federal funding because our true high-speed rail system is further along than any other project in the country," said California High-Speed Rail Authority Chairman Curt Pringle. "Plus, we can double the value of the federal government’s dollars by matching them with state bond funds approved by California voters last year, we can break ground before the federal government's deadline, and we can show that our early projects can stand alone as important improvements in their own right."

The Authority unanimously approved a grant application asking for $4.5 billion, which includes $2 billion for stations and work on the Anaheim to Los Angeles section.

"Our application is very competitive--the only true high-speed system in the country capable of travel up to 220-miles an hour," said Cathleen Galgiani, who represents a Central Valley district and was the author of Prop 1a, last year's bond measure. "It will bring badly needed jobs and economic activity to the state immediately."

California's high speed rail project would link the Los Angeles and San Francisco metros within a few hours ride. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger is expected to formally submit the application by next week's deadline.

Got $625 Billion? List of 21 Transit Projects for Region Unveiled (Source: LAist)

Link: Got $625 Billion? List of 21 Transit Projects for Region Unveiled - LAist

Got $625 Billion? List of 21 Transit Projects for Region Unveiled


Photo by sirimiri via LAist Feautred Photos on Flickr

The Mobility 21 transportation summit (.pdf) is wrapping up for the day, but earlier a list was released, featuring 21 "Critical Transportation Projects 'In My Backyard' to Improve Mobility throughout Southern California." The same-named six-county coalition included sexy public transit projects like subway to Westwood and high speed rail between San Diego and San Francisco, but also other important projects such as Positive Train Control for safety and added freeway lanes.

None of the named projects--the group says the 21 listed are only examples of some, not all that they are advocating for within the $625 billion plan--include pedestrian or bicycle modes of transit. The list of 21 projects highlighted today is below:

Rail Safety
Positive Train Control (PTC)

Positive Train Control (PTC) is a predictive collision avoidance technology designed to stop a train before an accident occurs. PTC will help save lives by preventing train-to-train collisions, speeding and over-speed derailments, incursions into work zones along the tracks and movement of a train through a switch left in the wrong position.

Reducing Congestion
Interstate-10 Freeway Corridor
One of the most heavily-used trade routes in the nation, the I-10 corridor is also one of the most congested. Among the enhancements planned: I-10 carpool lanes in the San Gabriel Valley, new overpasses at Date Palm Drive, Indian Avenue and Jefferson Street in the Coachella Valley, Citrus and Cherry Avenue Interchanges in San Bernardino, and addition of a west-bound lane from Yucaipa to Redlands.

Interstate-405 Freeway
Several key projects are planned on this corridor including adding up to two lanes in each direction on I-405 from SR-73 to I-605 in Orange County. A carpool lane northbound on the I-405 between the 110 and the 101 also is planned. The goal is to reduce congestion on one of Southern California’s most heavily traveled freeways and improve a vital north/south link between Orange County and Los Angeles.

State Route-91 Freeway
Increases capacity, optimizes operations and implements innovative traffic management strategies between Riverside and Orange County, and adds carpool lanes through Downtown Riverside between Auto Center Drive and the 60/91/215 Interchange.
State Route-101/State Route-23 Interchange Improvements Widens ramps and adds auxiliary lanes to relieve congestion at Ventura County’s busiest interchange, SR-101 and SR-23 in Thousand Oaks.

Interstate-215 Corridor
Planned improvements to this heavily-traveled Inland Empire corridor include adding a general purpose lane in each direction on I-215 in Murrieta and fixing the worst bottleneck in San Bernardino County, the Devore Interchange, where the I-15 and I-215 meet. Complementing the highway improvements will be the Perris Valley Line extension of Metrolink services in Riverside County.

I-5 Carpool Lanes in South Los Angeles County
Adds carpool lanes south from I-605 to the Orange County line and north from SR-134 to SR-170.

Moving Goods Faster
The Alameda Corridor East
Series of railroad grade separations located along Southern California’s main freight rail lines in the San Gabriel Valley, North Orange County, Riverside County and San Bernardino County that will improve motorist and pedestrian safety, reduce congestion and improve air quality.

The Gerald Desmond Bridge
Replaces “The Bridge to Everywhere,” a critical but deteriorating bridge structure that handles 15 percent of U.S. waterborne cargo moving through the San Pedro Bay ports, improving the safety and efficiency of cargo and commuter traffic.

Interstate-710 Freeway South
Upgrades the freeway and improves truck and traffic flow between the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and the SR-60 freeway, easing highway and air-quality stresses caused by goods movement in Southern California.

I-5 Capacity Enhancements through the Santa Clarita Valley to the Kern County Line
Adds a carpool lane and a dedicated truck lane in both directions on the I-5 freeway north of SR-14 in the Santa Clarita Valley, thus helping to alleviate crowding and improve motorist safety in this truck-loaded corridor.

State Route 905
Completes the six-lane SR 905 project connecting interstate routes such as Interstate 805, Interstate 5, and the South Bay Expressway (SR 125 South) to the Otay Mesa Port of Entry (POE), the only commercial vehicle crossing between San Diego and Tijuana.

Creating the Transit System of the 21st Century
San Diego to Northern California high-speed train
First phase of the California High-Speed Rail Authority’s 800-mile system could be a high-speed line between Anaheim and Union Station in Downtown Los Angeles.

Moving More People
Anaheim Regional Transportation Intermodal Center (ARTIC)
A planned gateway transportation center in Anaheim where people will seamlessly move between transit services - including future high-speed rail - to reach destinations in Southern California and beyond.

Westside subway extension to Westwood
Extends Metro Rail to the highly congested Westside of Los Angeles. Expansion is expected to serve Century City and Westwood/UCLA.

Gold Line Foothill Light Rail Extension (San Gabriel Valley)
Extends the Metro Gold Line eastbound from its current terminus in Pasadena.

Crenshaw Transit Corridor
Offers a north/south connection between Los Angeles, Inglewood, Hawthorne and El Segundo, thus relieving the over-burdened 405 corridor between Los Angeles, the South Bay and Orange County.

sbX Rapid Bus Transit Center
Connects both transit and rail at a central station in downtown San Bernardino, where many residents and college students rely on public transportation. Will become a connecting point where Metrolink, Redlands Light Rail, Omnitrans Bus and sbX Rapid Bus services will all meet and offer connections.

Regional Connector
Links four light-rail lines and provides seamless connections through downtown Los Angeles, while improving transfer times between light-rail, subway and Metrolink.
Exposition Boulevard Light-Rail to Santa Monica Extends the Exposition Rail Line, currently under construction to Culver City, and offers transit paralleling the taxed
I-10 Freeway.

Mid-Coast Corridor Transit Project
Eleven-mile project extending light rail transit service from the Old Town Transit Center in downtown San Diego to the University City community serving major activity centers such as the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), University Towne Centre
(UTC), Old Town and downtown San Diego.

How to Sound Like an Expert on All Things Gold Line Foothill Extension (Source: I Will Ride Blog)

Link: How to Sound Like an Expert on All Things Gold Line Foothill Extension « I Will Ride Blog

How to Sound Like an Expert on All Things Gold Line Foothill Extension
Posted by Albert

Instead of commemorating the recent launch of our Facebook fan page (and it’s safe to assume that if you’re reading this and you’re on Facebook, you’re either already a fan or will be one soon – all paths lead to you being a fan), it’s probably better to use today’s blog post to explain the various ways you can be the Foothill Extension’s biggest fan (minus yours truly).

Become a fan on Facebook (click here)


Follow our tweets on Twitter @iwillride (click here)


Watch us on YouTube (click here)


Subscribe to our blog entries via your RSS reader (Google Reader, NewsGator, etc) or via e-mail


By combining the use of all these tools, you’ll be able to:

* Read and share our latest blog entries
* See pictures and videos of our latest efforts to get the Foothill Extension up and running to Azusa in 2013 and Montclair in 2017
* RSVP to our rallies and our meet-ups at Metro Board meetings
* Sound like an expert on all things Foothill Extension and impress people with your knowledge of trendy topics like congestion relief, transit-oriented development, pollution reduction, and clean transit alternatives

Council Approves Moving Forward With Wilshire Bus Lanes (Source: Streetsblog Los Angeles)

Link: Streetsblog Los Angeles » Council Approves Moving Forward With Wilshire Bus Lanes

Council Approves Moving Forward With Wilshire Bus Lanes

by Joe Linton on September 22, 2009
Bus lane free. Photo: LA Wad/Flickr

The city of Los Angeles' Wilshire Boulevard Bus-Only Lane project took another step forward at this morning's full city council hearing. The project would implement peak-hour bus-only lanes from Pico Union to Santa Monica. It's calculated to speed bus times by about 25%. More information at Metro's project website.

Last week, despite John McCain's best efforts, the U.S. Senate appropriated $13.5M in FY2010 funding for the Wilshire project, bringing the project's total federal funding to $23.3M.

The City Council's Transportation Committee recently approved a motion that clears the way for the city to move forward with a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. After Transportation approves it, the bus lane motion goes before the full city council.

At today's council meeting, nobody showed up to speak in opposition to the Wilshire project. At the very start of the meeting, the motion actually initially passed quickly via consent calendar. Just when a half-dozen Bus Riders Union advocates were getting ready to leave, Councilmember Rosendahl moved for the motion to be reconsidered, so that the Department of Transportation (LADOT) and project proponents could speak. A couple hours later, LADOT and bus riders spoke on behalf of the project. Councilmember Koretz again expressed skepticism; Councilmember LaBonge again expressed ideas for other alignments. The full council unanimously approved the motion.

LADOT will soon be hosting a series of public hearings to get input on the EIR. Hearings are expected to begin in October.

Expo Light Rail Is On Schedule (Source: Santa Monica Mirror)

Santa Monica Mirror

Expo Light Rail Is On Schedule

Hannah Heineman, Mirror Staff Writer

Many in Santa Monica have been anticipating the opening of the Expo Light Rail Phase 2 in 2015 with great enthusiasm. Others have been concerned about the placement of Expo maintenance facility at the Verizon site in the Pico neighborhood which is right next to a residential neighborhood.

At the September 15 Friends 4 Expo general meeting one of Expo’s consultants, Stephen Polechronis, announced that a number of people from the Pico neighborhood had visited the maintenance facility that serves Metro’s light rail Green Line. This facility was visited because it is similar in size and contains the same type of operations that the maintenance facility being proposed for the Pico neighborhood would have. He also mentioned that after the Green Line facility was in operation both a condo development and a hotel were built right near it.

Polechronis stated that the main activities that will be done at the Santa Monica maintenance facility would be storage of light rail cars during mid-day and overnight, cleaning and inspection of the rail cars, and light repairs. Cars will be sent to another location for heavy repairs.

The Expo consultant also stressed that the project was proceeding on schedule. The project is currently in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) phase. The FEIR is expected to be completed in December of 2009 and the Metro Board is expected to certify it on January 7, 2010. The project’s design-build contract will be awarded in February or March of 2010 and construction will begin also in 2010.

Most of the funding for the light rail project will come from local sales taxes which were mandated when Measure R was approved by voters in November of 2008. Polechronis emphasized that the light rail project was a “top priority” for the projects being funded by Measure R over the next 30 years.

There was also discussion of delays in the opening of Phase 1 of the project. These delays according to Expo officials will not affect Phase 2 from moving forward.

Expo will hold another meeting on October 14 at 6 p.m. in the Santa Monica Civic Auditorium. At this meeting Expo will give a recap of the DEIR (Draft Environmental Impact Report), a summary of the public input of the DEIR, and what has changed since the DEIR was released. They will also discuss the key areas of community concern such as traffic, noise and vibration. Also part of the discussion will be an explanation by Expo of their thinking and decision-making processes. There will also be another field trip available to those who are interested in visiting the Green Line maintenance facility.

Polechronis noted that the light rail won’t improve traffic on the Westside due to projected growth “but it will carry a lot of people and therefore free up roads for drivers.”

Another Reason Why The Downtown Street Car Will Be a Success! (Source:

LA Cowboy: Another Reason Why The Downtown Street Car Will Be a Success!

Sunday, September 20, 2009

Another Reason Why The Downtown Street Car Will Be a Success!
This Sunday's New York Times evaluates the economic impact of Phoenix's new light rail system which is based upon the same economic development model as the system being built in Downtown Los Angeles.

Their rail line connects Phoenix's different downtown districts in the way ours will link South Park's Staples Arena, Grammy Museum, LA Live and Convention Center to the almost twenty theaters in the extended Broadway theater district - and to Historic Downtown's Gallery Row, Fashion Walk and bars and restaurants before it finally connects with Bunker Hill's Music Center, MOCA, Disney Hall and Grand Avenue Project and Park.

And to the surprise of many in Phoenix, their new light rail has created a local economic boom while the rest of the city continues in a serious economic decline. The good news for LA is that riders in Phoenix are flocking to a system that has a lot fewer attractions along it than we have and it does so in a Downtown with far less density, considerably fewer tourists, a fraction of the residents and comparatively fewer potential riders of ever kind compared to Downtown LA.

Phoenix also does not have our growing concentration of high rise offices and high rise residential buildings all along their line that will attract far more rush hour commuters to LA's system - nor does it have a connection to a growing regional rail sysem.

The Phoenix light rail design is also a little less user friendly than LA's streetcar model which allows you step right from the curb into the car. The far shorter construction method of our model also means local businesses will not have to suffer through an extended construction period as they did in Phoenix (and have done in past traditional light rail projects in LA) - to reap all the economic benefits.

And the success of the Phoenix system increasingly makes it even more certain Councilman Jose Huizar's decision to champion this project will be one of the few economic development projects in Los Angeles in years to create substantial numbers of jobs awhile also raising tax revenues, benefiting both the residents and tax payers of Los Angeles.

And at a time too many economic development projects in LA - and particularly in Downtown - are still largely designed to provide high paying jobs for politically connected consultants and contractors, hopefully the success of this project - and the hoped for success of the overall Bringing Back Broadway Project - will demonstrate that with the right leadership, our city can accomplish the types of genuine economic development projects every city but LA seems to be able to regularly initiate and complete.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/20/us/20rail.html?hpw

Metro Is Drilling On Wilshire Boulevard For The Westside Subway Extension (Source: Santa Monica Mirror)

Link: Santa Monica Mirror

Metro Is Drilling On Wilshire Boulevard For The Westside Subway Extension
Hannah Heineman, Mirror Staff Writer
Metro has begun the process of preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) and part of the process includes exploratory drilling in Santa Monica to assess the conditions below ground.

The exploratory drilling will help Metro determine what engineering strategies will need to be used to construct the subway’s underground tunnels and stations. This will be done by analyzing soil samples. Metro’s Manager of Community Relations, Jody Litvak, explained to the Mirror that Metro has been drilling at 70 locations throughout the Westside and Santa Monica is one of the last locations to be drilled in.

Wilshire Boulevard at 25th Street, 16th Street, and 5th Street were the three locations where drilling has been occurring this week. The locations were chosen based approximately on where Metro is expecting to place the stations for the subway. Right now, stations are projected to be placed at Wishire Boulevard and 26th Street, 16th Street, and 4th Street. Some parking lane and traffic disruption has been caused by the work. Litvak mentioned that so far Metro “hasn’t found anything unexpected” in the drilling that it has completed.

According to Metro documents, the Draft EIS/EIR purpose is to study the potential effects of the Westside Subway Extension “during construction and once it is operating, and also to evaluate measures to avoid, minimize and mitigate any adverse impacts.” This process will include the refinement of project alternatives, define Wilshire Boulevard segments, future segments, specify station details, “examine the cost effectiveness of various segments, and evaluate the timing and funding of a future project.” The study will also look at the entire Santa Monica alignment with and without a West Hollywood component.

Litvak stated that the Draft EIS/EIR should be released for public input in the summer of 2010. The Metro Board will then adopt the draft and the Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The LPA will define the project that will be examined in the Final EIS/EIR process and the project that will be funded by federal matching funds. Another year will be needed after that to complete the EIS/EIR.

The next round of community meetings for the project will be scheduled in early to mid October. Theses meetings will be tailored to the location where they are held so that the community can give input on the planning and urban design around the stations. They will also include updates on the project.

Further information on the Westside Subway Extension can be found at metro.net/Westside or on Facebook at “Metro Westside Subway Extension.”

Maglev Back In the Ring in Speedy Train Battle (Source: Curbed LA)

Link: Curbed LA: Maglev Back In the Ring in Speedy Train Battle

Maglev Back In the Ring in Speedy Train Battle

Thursday, September 17, 2009, by Dakota

Hold up, Desert Xpress! Via the Las Vegas Sun: "The competition between two proposed high-speed trains running from Las Vegas to Southern California ignited anew today after federal authorities announced $45 million for the maglev project that had lost key political support earlier this year. Gov. Jim Gibbons backs the magnetic levitation rail project that critics say relies on a technology that is unproven in this country and too costly. He announced the federal planning funds." Meanwhile, you'll remember that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid dropped his support for the proposed Anaheim-Las Vegas maglev train, throwing it to the Victorville to Las Vegas DesertXpress train. More: "This project will put Nevadans to work and will help bring our transportation infrastructure into the 21st century,” Gibbons told the newspaper. This should also help quiet those people who seemed as though they might sue over the dropped maglev funds.

Establishing Objective, Realistic Assessment Tools for Planning an Effective High-Speed Rail Network (Source: The Transport Politic)

The Transport Politic » Establishing Objective, Realistic Assessment Tools for Planning an Effective High-Speed Rail Network

Establishing Objective, Realistic Assessment Tools for Planning an Effective High-Speed Rail Network

September 17, 2009

America 2050 High-Speed Rail Phasing Plan

» America 2050’s report produces a long-term, phased rail system proposal.

Over the past six months, there’s been much talk of high-speed rail development in the United States, most of it revolving around how the federal government will choose to award the $8 billion included in the stimulus for the program. The discussion has been frustrating, because it has skirted around the incredibly important issue of which corridors are right for fast trains with under-researched over-the-top plans or out-of-date, politically-motivated proposals; meanwhile, the term high-speed rail is thrown around with gumption whenever any train improvement project, no matter how fast, is mentioned.

As far as I know, perhaps with the exception of the high-speed rail investment scheme I produced in February, there has been no serious attempt to evaluate the nation’s rail corridors using an objective, repeatable standard. Fortunately, America 2050 has done just that in a new study released today. It is a quality product that outlines a future American rail network whose shape and proposed phased implementation are the result of a considered study of the country’s cities and metropolitan areas. It is a report whose methods and conclusions should be examined by the Department of Transportation before it releases its National Rail Plan and begins awarding stimulus funds later this fall.

The report’s authors, Yoav Hagler and Petra Todorovich, evaluated more than 27,000 corridors — that is, every pair of cities with respective populations of more than 50,000 and distanced between 100 and 500 miles apart. The rating system, based on six criteria — city size, distance between cities, transit connections, per capita GDP, traffic congestion, and location in a megaregion — isn’t perfect (I’ll return to it later in this post), but at least it attempts to use relevant information to prioritize corridors. This is far more than can be said for virtually every other organization that has discussed high-speed rail development.

The highlights of the study are summarized in the map at the top of this page. After considering the 27,000 corridors, America 2050 notes that the corridors with the highest ridership potential would be in the Northeast (from Washington to Boston, with a spur through Springfield), in the Midwest (radiating from Chicago to Minneapolis, St. Louis, and Detroit), and in California (from Los Angeles to San Francisco and Sacramento). The report advocates their construction first, and I largely agree with the choice of corridors: they’re the most heavily and densely populated areas in the U.S.

In general, the second phase is equally reasonable — proposed are lines between Vancouver and Portland; Los Angeles and San Diego, Phoenix, and Las Vegas; Dallas and Houston; Toledo and Cleveland; Washington and Atlanta; Tampa and Miami; and New York and Albany. All of these lines are currently under consideration by state authorities, and they’re worthy of investment after those suggested in the first phase. Most of the third phase lines deserve to be the last under consideration, though I would suggest that Ohio’s big cities and Pittsburgh get the short shrift here.

The overall reasonableness of route selection presented, however, is what’s important: namely, this study presents an objective manner by which to compare different corridors and it reaches a number of conclusions. We should expect the federal government to present something similar in the National Rail Plan next month.

That said, there are some fundamental problems with the equation used by the report to evaluate city pairs. Most troublesome, it considers 250 miles an “ideal” distance — rating such corridors 2.5 times more valuable than 100 mile routes — and does not consider at all any city pairs less than 100 miles apart. Today, the Philadelphia-New York corridor is the top-ridership route on Amtrak’s Regional and second-highest ridership route on Acela — and yet, because the cities are just under 100 miles apart, travel between them is not considered in the study. This doesn’t diminish the top ranking of the Washington-Boston corridor, but it puts the study’s fundamentals into question.

Was the Florida line delayed to the proposed second phase because travel between Tampa and Orlando wasn’t considered? Was the route between Hampton Roads and Richmond — a potentially high-ridership route — eliminated because travel between those cities was ruled out? Do the study’s authors really think that there would be more traffic between Hartford and Philadelphia than between Hartford and New York, because the latter route is shorter?

Meanwhile, the insistence on rating local transit connections in the equation seems, as I’ve expressed before, superfluous, and it’s unclear to me how congestion on local highways — another criterion — has anything much to do with intercity rail travel.

Nonetheless, these objections are somewhat besides the point, because America 2050’s report isn’t the final U.S. high-speed rail route network. The assessment tools by which the report methodically appraises potential rail corridors are exactly the kind of system the federal government should be using when deciding how to allocate grants. It remains to be seen whether the DOT will make such a commitment to a similar level of objective evaluation.

Image above: America 2050 high-speed rail network phasing map, from America 2050

L.A. waits for its opening(s) (Source: MetroRiderLA)

Link: L.A. waits for its opening(s) | MetroRiderLA

L.A. waits for its opening(s)
Contributed by Wad on September 16th, 2009 at 2:50 am

Portland opens new Green Line

Portland’s TriMet added its new Green Line to its light rail network. It opened Saturday.
Photo by Adron B. Hall / Transit Sleuth

It was never easier being green that this weekend. Two cities opened two new light rail lines — both of them happen to be their respective systems’ Green Lines — on the same day. Portland and Dallas both opened extensions this past weekend. And earlier in the summer, Seattle opened the first leg of its Link light rail line.

So when does L.A. get to join in on the party? For the Gold Line extension to East L.A., we don’t know. The construction is complete, but the line south of Union Station must first go through “stress tests,” then six weeks of simulated revenue service without passengers. We are already in September, and the chances are dwindling that the Gold Line extension may still open by the end of the year.

That’s not even the bad news. The bad news is for Expo Line riders. The line, already 50 weeks behind schedule, now will not open until 2011, the Los Angeles Times reports. Only part of it was because of the grade-crossing controversy near Foshay Middle School and Dorsey High. The other problems stem from sewer repair at La Brea Avenue and bridge work near National Boulevard and Ballona Creek.

It’ll be a long while before we could report on light rail parties like the ones in Portland and Dallas. Here’s selected blog coverage from Portland’s Green Line opening festivities:

Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line (Source: LA Daily News)

Link: Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line - LA Daily News

Construction lags on LA-Culver City Expo Line
Daily News Wire Services
Updated: 09/15/2009 08:38:00 AM PDT

Though the Expo Line light-rail system from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City is about half finished, construction problems have pushed back completion of the project by another six weeks to almost a year, it was reported Tuesday.

Expo officials said they had planned to open the 8.6-mile line in 2010, but parts of the route would not be completed until the latter part of 2011, the Los Angeles Times reported.

Earlier this year, the estimated delay was 44 weeks, a figure that has been revised to 50 weeks in a September report to the Expo Line Construction Authority board.

Officials attribute the additional six weeks of delay to the late completion of a bridge at National Boulevard, which set back construction of a bridge at Ballona Creek, The Times reported.

Expo Chief Executive Richard Thorpe said there also have been complications involving sewer lines where the route crosses Jefferson Boulevard and La Brea Avenue, according to The Times.

The bulk of the delay has been attributed to the addition of a third aerial station that eliminated the need for an interim station and a controversy over pedestrian safety at Dorsey High School and the Foshay Learning Center. The California Public Utilities Commission eventually required improvements to a pedestrian tunnel at Foshay and a pedestrian bridge at Dorsey.

The $862 million line between downtown and Culver City broke ground in 2006. It will run from the 7th Street Metro Center to USC where it will turn onto Exposition Boulevard and proceed to Venice Boulevard and Robertson Avenue in Culver City.

Las Vegas-Anaheim maglev train proposal to finally receive federal funds (Source: LA Times)

Las Vegas-Anaheim maglev train proposal to finally receive federal funds -- latimes.com

Las Vegas-Anaheim maglev train proposal to finally receive federal funds
The project will get $45 million that was approved several years ago to pay for final planning and environmental analysis.
By Dan Weikel

September 17, 2009

A long-standing proposal to build a high-speed maglev train from Las Vegas to Anaheim will finally receive $45 million in federal funds that were approved several years ago to pay for the project's final planning and environmental analysis, the Nevada governor's office announced Wednesday.

Gov. Jim Gibbons said the Federal Railroad Administration will administer the money that was earmarked by Congress for the first phase of the system, which would extend from Las Vegas to Primm on the Nevada-California state line. The train, which has been in the planning stages for almost three decades, would run 270 miles to Anaheim and cost at least $12 billion to build.

Maglev technology relies on electricity and magnetic force to lift trains and propel them down a guideway at up to 300 mph. The only commercial maglev train is in China.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

High-speed rail competition heats up with new funding (Source: Las Vegas Sun)

Link: High-speed rail competition heats up with new funding - Las Vegas Sun

High-speed rail competition heats up with new funding

Associated Press File

Plans for a maglev train like the one in Japan would give travelers between Las Vegas and Southern California another alternative to Interstate 15. The plan is competing with DesertXpress, which is further along in the planning process.

By Lisa Mascaro

Wednesday, Sept. 16, 2009 | 5:35 p.m.

WASHINGTON - The competition between two proposed high-speed trains running from Las Vegas to Southern California ignited anew today after federal authorities announced $45 million for the maglev project that had lost key political support earlier this year.

Gov. Jim Gibbons backs the magnetic levitation rail project that critics say relies on a technology that is unproven in this country and too costly. He announced the federal planning funds.

The long-envisioned maglev train between Las Vegas and Anaheim suffered a setback this year when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced he was pulling his support. Reid now prefers the proposed DesertXpress train -- a much cheaper alternative.

DesertXpress is backed by Nevada political guru SigRogich, a Reid supporter, and is much further along in the planning process with hopes of breaking ground on construction next year. But it too has shortcomings: Critics are skeptical of the route between Las Vegas and the California high-desert city of Victorville, some 80 miles from Los Angeles.

DesertXpress says it is a private venture that would only rely on federal government loans -- though experts say few private train lines are profitable.

Maglev would rely more heavily on federal funds, and is seeking part of the $8 billion for high-speed rail Reid helped to secure in the econmic recovery act.

Nevada's Republican Sen. John Ensign has long preferred DesertXpress.

With Gibbons behind maglev the split among Nevada's top elected officials could further complicate either project's prospects.

Nevertheless the governor welcomed the federal funds. “This project will put Nevadans to work and will help bring our transportation infrastructure into the 21st century,” Gibbons said.

Crenshaw Transit Corridor (Source: Metro.net)

Link: Link: Crenshaw Transit Corridor Study - Crenshaw Transit Corridor DEIS/DEIR

Crenshaw Transit Corridor
Open Houses/Public Hearings

Make your voices heard and comment on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR)



Shape the future of transit in the Crenshaw Corridor. An environmental document that explores transit improvements including Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Light Rail Transit (LRT) is now available for your review and input. (This document is formally known as a Draft Environmental Impact Statement / Report or DEIS/DEIR.)

Learn more about the project and share your comments with us at one of the following Open House / Public Hearings:

Wednesday, September 30, 2009
6-8 pm
Wilshire United Methodist Church
4350 Wilshire Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90010
Metro lines 20, 720, 210, 710

Thursday, October 1, 2009
6-8 pm
West Angeles Church – Crystal Room
3045 Crenshaw Bl
Los Angeles, CA 90016
Metro lines 38, 210, 710

Saturday, October 3, 2009
10 am – noon
Inglewood High School – Cafeteria
231 S. Grevillea Av
Inglewood, CA 90301
Metro lines 40, 111, 115, 212, 740

Tuesday, October 6, 2009
6 - 8 pm
Transfiguration Church Hall
2515 W. Martin Luther King Jr Bl,
Los Angeles, CA 90008
Metro lines 40, 42



Public Comment Forum
You may submit your comments verbally (2 minutes per speaker) or in writing

The deadline for comments on the DEIS/DEIR is Monday, October 26, 2009, 5PM. Comments can be made at the public hearings or submitted to: Roderick Diaz, Project Manager, Metro, One Gateway Plaza, 99-22-3, Los Angeles CA 90012 or diazroderick@metro.net.

For more information, please explore more of the project website at www.metro.net/crenshaw or call the Project Hotline at 213.922.2736.

Firms get look at Gold Line possibilities (Source: Pasadena Star-News)

Link: Firms get look at Gold Line possibilities - Pasadena Star-News

Firms get look at Gold Line possibilities
By Ryan Carter, Staff Writer
Posted: 09/15/2009 08:36:39 PM PDT

MONROVIA - About 150 small business owners filled a room at the Doubletree Hotel Monrovia Tuesday to learn about how they could get a piece of a possible $735 million pie.

The pie is the Foothill Gold Line Extension project - a proposed rail line that would extend the light rail system from Pasadena to Montclair.

In January, the Metro Gold Line Construction Authority Board will issue a request for proposals from local companies vying for a contract to design and build a bridge over the Foothill (210) Freeway as part of the 24-mile project. And in June of next year, the agency will begin accepting bids for a builder of the rest of the project - aligning rail tracks along the system to Azusa, crossings, stations and maintenance facilities.

Tuesday's event was the first of its kind to bring together smaller firms interested in subcontracting with whatever large business gets the main design/build contract. Those contracts will be awarded in May and November of next year.

Transit officials wanted feedback - and they got it - from a host of small construction and engineering firms. One business representative, who declined to give her name, was concerned about the time it takes for transit agencies to pay for services contracted for.

"How do you ensure (as a small business) that you really get paid?" she asked officials, including Habib F. Balian, CEO of the Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Authority, the agency tasked with
Advertisement
overseeing the design and construction.

Long delays with transit agencies in the past have jeopardized her business, she said.

"This is really hard for us small businesses," she said. "We can't take the hit that a multi-billion dollar business can."

Authority officials assured her that in this case, payment would come much sooner, given obligations of the design/builder to pay subcontractors.

That pay would ultimately come from voter-approved Measure R funds, which targeted 35 percent of the new half-cent sales tax to planning for L.A. County rail lines.

Bouncing off of the success of the 13.7-mile line from Los Angeles to east Pasadena, which was completed in 2003, construction authority officials are pushing for Metro's go-ahead of two more phases - from Pasadena to Azusa, and from Azusa to Montclair.

Among the selling points is the potential for $40 billion in economic benefits from jobs to transit-oriented developments, according to authority officials.

But funding - or the lack of it - has held up the project, which officials say is shovel-ready to begin in June.

Metro could approve a long-range transportation plan, which could include allocating at least $735 million to build the 24-mile line by 2017.

But even as Balian pushes for money now, officials told small business on Tuesday that the authority is creating a public-private partnership with hopes of speeding up construction ahead of funding.

While the project got no federal stimulus funding, it's go-ahead could end up being a huge stimulus for the area, Balian said. And that's what firms are waiting to tap into, he said.

"There's about 150 or so businesses who want Measure R transportation dollars being spent for transportation....This project is ready," he said.

Another workshop will begin at 8 a.m. Sept. 29 at Doubletree Hotel Monrovia, 924 W. Huntington Drive. For more information, go to www.foothillextension.org or call (626) 471-9050.

ryan.carter@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, ext. 2720

Cost Concerns Could Shorten L.A.’s Crenshaw Corridor… Or Turn Planners to Rapid Buses (Source: The Transport Politic)

Link: The Transport Politic » Cost Concerns Could Shorten L.A.’s Crenshaw Corridor… Or Turn Planners to Rapid Buses

Cost Concerns Could Shorten L.A.’s Crenshaw Corridor… Or Turn Planners to Rapid Buses

September 16, 2009

Proposed Crenshaw Corridor Light Rail Alignment Map»
DEIS reports that making it as far north as Wilshire Boulevard would be too expensive for light rail.

Los Angeles has released its Draft Environmental Impact Study (DEIS) for the Crenshaw/Prairie rapid transit corridor in preparation for Metro’s selection of a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) later this year, with completion aimed for 2018. The DEIS demonstrates the dramatic cost benefits of choosing bus rapid transit, rather than light rail, because of lower construction costs and higher projected ridership. Yet those conclusions are based on a misleading difference between the two mode choices — the former would extend to Wilshire Boulevard, while the latter would stop at Exposition, three miles south — a consequence of the limited funds available for transit expansion.

A line running north-south roughly along Crenshaw Boulevard has been studied for years, as it would form a second north-south backbone for the Los Angeles transit system. The passage of Measure R in November 2008 put the project on the front burner, and the selection of a transportation mode for the travel corridor will allow Metro to enter engineering and soon after apply for federal New Starts funding.

The two projects advanced to the DEIS stage and to be considered by Metro when it selects the LPA are an 8.5-mile light rail line extending from the Green Line Aviation Station to the future Expo Line Crenshaw stop, and a bus rapid transit corridor following the same route but continuing further north to Wilshire Boulevard, where it would run east for several blocks to the existing terminus of the Purple Line at Wilshire and Western. Unlike the bus option, the light rail line would act as an extension of the Green Line, allowing commuters to travel without a transfer from as far south as Redondo Beach; it would also allow some Green Line trains to extend north one station to a new LAX Airport stop that would be connected to a people mover linked to terminals.

Considering only the segment shared between the Expo and Green Lines, the light rail option would attract 18% more riders than the bus; it would also be about 25% faster. But Metro can’t afford to extend light rail north of Exposition, because it only has budgeted about $1.5 billion in tax revenue for the project, and the three mile extension to Wilshire, which must be entirely tunneled because of the limited space available on roadways, would add one billion dollars to the cost. On the other hand, the rapid bus line, primarily using reserved lanes, would cost only $550 million to connect Wilshire with the Green Line — and the full corridor would attract some 17,000 daily riders compared to only 13,000 on the shortened light rail line. That’s because Wilshire is the economic hub of the city; it’s hard to imagine justifying a new north-south line that doesn’t come into contact with it.

The high cost of the light rail project can be summarized by this vertical profile of the proposed line — huge sections of the route would have to be placed underground or elevated above the street, and that costs a bundle of bucks.

Crenshaw Corridor Vertical Profile

Metro estimates that the light rail option would garner a “lower than medium” federal cost-effectiveness rating, because, to be blunt, it’s too expensive for a line serving neighborhoods that aren’t that dense. Can Los Angeles afford to build this project without a contribution from Washington? Should it build a project relying fully on local funds?

Ironically, a full-corridor light rail line, running up La Brea from Exposition and reaching Wilshire Boulevard, would attract far more riders and receive a medium-high federal cost-benefit rating, making it a strong competitor for national funds. The corridor’s importance would expand exponentially when the Purple Line is extended down Wilshire, as planned. Yet Los Angeles does not have the resources, at least in the medium-term, to make the longer light rail line a reality. The DEIS suggests that Metro should make preparations for an eventual completion of the line — but that will be in decades.

If the goal of the project is to improve the mobility of people living in southwest Los Angeles and Inglewood, the light rail line as proposed would do little to decrease transit times to downtown, since the Green and Blue lines already provide that service. Meanwhile, the Expo Line connection doesn’t provide access to the heart of the west side, which explains low ridership estimates — only an extension up to Wilshire would ramp up performance.

We’ll take it as a given that Los Angeles does not have the money to do a full light rail build-out along Crenshaw. As a result, it seems clear that a bus rapid transit line running along the whole corridor would provide the maximum number of benefits over the short and medium term, and that Metro has little choice to select that option. On the other hand, as ridership grows, a BRT project would have significant problems coping with additional capacity, as experienced by the Orange Line in San Fernando Valley. The bus would also lack interoperability with the Expo and Green Lines, one of the primary advantages of picking light rail, since it would allow through-running onto existing routes. Does it make since to build a bus line, only to have to replace it with a rail corridor in 20 years? I’m not sure.

One option that does not seem to have been fully considered is starting at Wilshire and then building as far south as possible within the financial constraints, which might mean to the Harbor Subdivision railroad; a future connection to the Green Line would be planned. This poses some serious equity questions, since it would further reward the wealthy west side and delay improvements for poorer Inglewood; this probably makes this option politically infeasible. On the other hand, it would likely attract more riders and reinforce the city’s center, which, amorphous as it is, runs roughly west from downtown and deserves to have concentrated transit service.

Images above: Proposed Crenshaw Corridor LRT, from Metro

Another delay pushes Expo Line opening to late 2011 (Source: LA Times)

Link: Another delay pushes Expo Line opening to late 2011 -- latimes.com

Another delay pushes Expo Line opening to late 2011
A September report projects a 50-week delay in opening the 8.6-mile light-rail system from downtown L.A. to Culver City. The project is about half finished.
By Dan Weikel

September 15, 2009

Though the Expo Line light-rail system from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City is about half finished, construction problems have pushed back completion of the project by another six weeks to almost a year.

Expo officials said they had planned to open the 8.6-mile line in 2010, but parts of the route would not be completed until the latter part of 2011. Earlier this year, the estimated delay was 44 weeks, a figure that has been revised to 50 weeks in a September report to the Expo Line Construction Authority board.

Officials attribute the additional six weeks of delay to the late completion of a bridge at National Boulevard, which set back construction of a bridge at Ballona Creek. Expo Chief Executive Richard Thorpe said there also have been complications involving sewer lines where the route crosses Jefferson Boulevard and La Brea Avenue.

The bulk of the delay has been attributed to the addition of a third aerial station that eliminated the need for an interim station and a controversy over pedestrian safety at Dorsey High School and the Foshay Learning Center. The California Public Utilities Commission eventually required improvements to a pedestrian tunnel at Foshay and a pedestrian bridge at Dorsey.

Thorpe said further delays have been caused by problems trying to lower power lines at La Brea and La Cienega Boulevard.

Though Expo officials say the project is still within its cost estimates, the September report states that "there are still outstanding issues that could pose a significant risk to the budget."

The $862-million line between downtown and Culver City broke ground in 2006. It will run from the 7th Street Metro Center to USC where it will turn onto Exposition Boulevard and proceed to Venice Boulevard and Robertson Avenue in Culver City.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

Is the Expo Line Making the Grade? Moving LA (Source: CityWatch)

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall - Is the Expo Line Making the Grade?

Is the Expo Line Making the Grade?
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern

It’s no secret that the 10 Freeway between the Westside and Downtown LA is one of the most congested, if not THE most congested, freeways in the nation. It’s also no secret that the major north-south surface streets are some of the most congested streets in the nation as well … due to poor planning and overdensification of the Westside.

Enter the Expo Line, a light rail line that will shadow the 10 Freeway from Downtown to the beach, access the majority of its adjacent pedestrian destinations, and thereby add the commuter capacity of the 10 Freeway corridor by the equivalent of 2-4 extra freeway lanes.






Map reflects Expo Board's 4/2/09 preferred alignment (from the Friends4Expo Transit website at http://www.friends4expo.org/ )

Although it’s always foolish to proclaim that mass transit initiatives such as the Expo Line or Wilshire Subway will reduce automobile traffic (only planning for decreased density can do that), it’s safe to say that if these initiatives are designed and built correctly that commuters will have more transportation alternatives.

With respect to the Expo Line or any other major initiative, I’ve always felt it vital to approach transportation with a balanced approach that:

1) Doesn’t make one side “eat it” at the expense of the other—it’s neither smart nor moral to make motorists suffer unnecessarily to convenience transit users, or vice versa. Whether it’s the old car vs. rail, rail vs. bus, car vs. pedestrian/bicyclist arguments, transportation options are as mutually exclusive of each other as is food to water.

2) Recognizes that the best answer to a problem often lies with the lesser of all evils—so when there are neither good nor easy options, the answer is often unpleasant (even downright lousy) yet the best available alternative.

The first, Mid-City phase of the Expo Line is on its way to being built from Downtown to Culver City over the next two years--despite engineering, contractor and legal challenges. The second, Westside phase of the Expo Line will be designed and built over the next 5-6 years, and arguably the greatest conundrum that Expo Line and community planners will confront will be that of grade separations in West Los Angeles.

In short, “at-grade” crossings of rail with surface streets are the equivalent of traffic signals (in fact, an at-grade crossing IS somewhat of a traffic signal with respect to its traffic-slowing aspects).

“Grade-separated” means either shutting down a street to allow the rail to cross unimpeded (such as at Farmdale Ave. near Dorsey High School), digging a trench (such as the Jefferson undercrossing by USC) or elevating the rail (such as at La Brea, La Cienega or Venice Blvds.).

The five most disputed grade separations in West L.A. are (from west to east) at Centinela, Barrington, Sepulveda, Westwood and Overland., and the controversies swirling about their potential grade separation can be tied into three major groupings: Traffic, Neighborhood Preservation and Land Use.

1) Traffic:

This issue is, and will always be, to many commuters the end-all and be-all of the whole grade crossing debate and is the sole subject for part one of this and numerous other future CityWatch articles.

A grade-separated train means a faster and accident-free arrangement for the trains, and smoother traffic for the cars—a win-win for all parties involved, right?

Unfortunately, it’s not that simple because the visual, sound and financial impacts of grade-separation aren’t always that benign. While I will normally favor spending extra for first-rate transportation projects (I despise it when we “cheap out” on transportation projects), our reality must be premised on the limited availability of transportation dollars.

Well, the recently-announced scorecard from the Expo Authority goes like this: The Expo Line will be signed off by the LADOT to be elevated/grade-separated at Centinela, at ground-level (at-grade) at Barrington, either a cheaper at-grade/ground-level or more costly elevated/grade-separated configuration at Sepulveda, at ground-level/at-grade at Westwood and at-grade/ground level at Overland.

I need to caution Westsiders that are new to light rail of two caveats:

1) Considering that the Expo Line is NOT already trenched at Palms Park (that “trench” through the park is actually dug through a hill at the same level as where it intersects Overland), and that the trench needed to connect the Green Line past the LAX runways might require up to $385 million, it is almost a certainty that there will be NO trenching of the rail line under Overland for a $100 million or more price tag.

The Expo Line is a light rail, not a subway (and I need to emphasize I’ve pushed for such an Overland trench for more years than probably anyone reading this), and any trench needed to get below the storm drain by Overland is much deeper and more costly than most folks realize.

2) Any grade separations will therefore likely be elevated rail bridges—which are not cute little bridges raised on skinny telephone poles. They’re imposing freeway off ramp-like structures necessary to handle earthquakes, and I recommend anyone go to the elevated Aviation/Imperial Green Line station to really get a grip as to what that means for single-family home neighborhoods like Rancho Park or Cheviot Hills.

Furthermore, the ability to reduce noise when a rail crossing is at-grade is much greater than elevated rail—depress/cover the tracks a bit with a dirt berm and you’ve got the majority of the sound reduced…yet the gates, lights and quacking train horns (even if they are less than the booming horns of old) have their own impacts.

Perhaps another way to look at this paradigm is to mentally replace the words “at-grade” with “stoplight”, and “elevated rail bridge” with “freeway off ramp”.

It’s my prediction that the powers that be will find the extra money for the Sepulveda Blvd. elevated rail crossing, that both Barrington and Westwood will remain at-grade, but it’s a thorny and impossible-to-answer conundrum at Overland…and it’s gonna be a legal battle for years to come.

Unfortunately, a really nasty and distracting canard has been the much-ballyhooed Environmental Justice/Legal Precedent nonsense that’s been thrown out there by a few agenda-driven folks who have proclaimed that the situation between Expo-adjacent Dorsey High School and Expo-adjacent Overland Ave. Elementary School is exactly the same and requires identical treatment.

This sad and contrived paradigm ignores the facts that:

1) Dorsey High School is, well, a high school, and Overland is an elementary school (and don’t get me started on racist proclamations I’ve heard that black and brown Dorsey High School students can’t figure out how to avoid moving trains), but there are even elementary schools throughout the nation already adjacent to rail lines

2) Dorsey High School actually has a greater pedestrian problem than Overland because its front entrance borders right on the tracks, while almost every Overland Ave. Elementary School student accesses that school via adjacent residential streets such as Ashby since traffic-heavy Overland is an intimidating way for both children and adults to approach that school

3) Dorsey-adjacent Farmdale is a dinky little street that’s more akin to quiet Military Ave., while Overland is a much wider and busier street than Farmdale ever will be (in fact, it’s rather similar to Venice or other streets that will be grade-separated)…it’s always been about the traffic!

4) There are virtually no precedents in the first phase of the line to widening Mid-City streets (as proposed for Sepulveda, Westwood and Overland) in order to have each lane carry fewer cars and thereby fall below the Metro grade-separation threshold, so it’s a real tough debate as to whether this can pass legal muster with the local and state powers that be

5) The Exposition Right of Way is much, much, MUCH wider at Overland and provides considerably greater opportunities for grade-separation than the narrow land strip by Dorsey

I hope that each street and school the Expo Line passes will be evaluated appropriately and with fairness…and not sink into a twisted and perverted Environmental Justice battle that is a violation of the very intent of Environmental Justice—which is to treat all neighborhoods equitably and to compare identical situations only when, in fact, the layout of the land is identical, and which between Overland and Farmdale streets it is most certainly NOT.

The second part of this article (which is, I’m afraid, a necessarily long one) will address what might even be greater issues to contend with as the grade separation controversy builds—that include Neighborhood Preservation and Land Use—and will address the following questions (which don’t always have easy or consensus-building answers):

1) What’s best for Overland Ave. Elementary Schools students and for local residents: do safety/traffic issues always favor grade-separation, or does the greater noise/visual impact of what would be the equivalent of a freeway overpass adjacent to Overland Ave. Elementary School necessitate a quieter at-grade crossing as the lesser of two evils?

(I again caution anyone reading this that it’s neither smart nor moral to make any group of commuters or residents “eat it” at the expense of any other groups, and the legal and time-delays blowbacks could hurt the timeframe or even existence of the line if appropriate financial, legal and engineering mitigations aren’t sufficiently pursued)

2) Is it financially, legally or physically possible to depress Overland Ave. (with perhaps a very slight rail bridge) in order to keep car and rail traffic safe and swift without the greater noise/visual/financial impacts of the elevated or trenched rail alternatives next to the school?

3) Why the heck are we building a proposed parking structure and directing car traffic to the wide Right of Way next to the Exposition/Westwood station in a single-family neighborhood instead of focusing car traffic to the nearby, freeway-adjacent Exposition/Sepulveda station that is a much better parking alternative…especially when we have big parking structures along Westwood at Westside Pavilion Mall?

4) Why is the Authority abandoning the principles of the Expo Greenway and Expo Bikeway on the Right of Way between Sepulveda and Overland by paving over so much of that land for the aforementioned parking structure (instead of the park/bikeway design that most Expo friends and foes alike favor), thereby choosing about the worst land-use options possible?

5) How can the single-family housing tracts adjacent to the Expo Line be preserved with the existing and adjacent layout of the Expo Line by creating both a “regional station” with lots of parking at Sepulveda and a “neighborhood station” at Westwood that is limited to bus, car drop-off, bicycle and pedestrian access?

6) Finally, might Overland Ave. Elementary students and neighbors someday see an accessible park on the Right of Way that will make the Expo Line the best thing ever to come to the region (see below)?

http://www.expogreenway.org/





(Ken Alpern is a Boardmember of the Mar Vista Community Council (MVCC) and is both co-chair of the MVCC Transportation/Infrastructure Committee and past co-chair of the MVCC Planning Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely that of Mr. Alpern.

Council Moves Forward with EIR for Wilshire Boulevard (Source: Streetsblog Los Angeles)

Link: Streetsblog Los Angeles » Council Moves Forward with EIR for Wilshire Boulevard

Council Moves Forward with EIR for Wilshire Boulevard

by Joe Linton on September 10, 2009

Bus lane free. Photo: LA Wad/Flickr

Yesterday's full Los Angeles City Council meeting ran extraordinarily late due to a potential lawsuit between the Controller and the City Attorney. The council's Transportation Committee meeting, previewed last week here and here, was scheduled for 2:00 P.M. but didn't begin until after 4:30 P.M. By then, most of the Department of Transportation (LADOT) staff had left. Remaining were a little more than half of the initial 30+ yellow-t-shirt clad Bus Riders Union members, a half-dozen Comstock Hills homeowners, and a couple of bicyclists.

Committee Chair Bill Rosendahl apologized profusely for the delay, and, with fellow committee members Alarcón, Koretz and LaBonge in attendance, immediately launched into the most contentious agenda item: the LADOT's recommendation that the city move forward with full environmental review of the federally-funded peak hour bus-only lanes on Wilshire Boulevard.

Paul Koretz is the newly elected Council Member representing the city's 5th district, which includes the Comstock Hills, aka the "condo canyon," stretch of Wilshire between Beverly Hills and UCLA. The bulk of the opposition to the bus-only lane project has come from this area. Among the committee, Koretz was the most openly skeptical of the project - asking a number of questions, including if the project is a "disaster" could it be removed? LADOT staff responded that they "didn't want to go there" and reassured Koretz that their calculations showed a very modest impact on traffic. DOT stated that estimates show a 3-5 minute delay for cars driving the entire corridor, with a corresponding 24% reduction in the time it takes for a bus to go the same length. Koretz ultimately moved the motion to fund the environmental study at Rosendahl's suggestion.

Council Member LaBonge questioned whether the route could go to other high-volume destination centers like Century City; LADOT countered that Wilshire itself is a destination-rich corridor, indeed "the number one bus line in the United States."

Four Bus Riders Union speakers testified in support of the project and the important precedent it will set. Speakers representing the Green L.A. Transportation Working Group and the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition also spoke in favor. Homeowners expressed their displeasure at the planned bus lanes which they stated would be "dangerous" for residents getting into and out of driveways, and negatively impact trash trucks, mail delivery, ambulances, and fire engines.

Rosendahl diplomatically thanked speakers for raising important issues and suggested that the full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) process would be where all these benefits and costs can get full public airing. The committee unanimously approved the motion for the project EIR to proceed, including directing LADOT to report back in 90 days. The motion (08-2595-S1) will now be scheduled for a vote of the full city council.

Running very late, the committee then spent less than three minutes approving LADOT's proposed contract for ShelterCLEAN to maintain the Orange Line Bike Path (09-2120) and continued the rest of the agenda to future meetings.

(Editor's Note: Linton is Chair of the Green L.A. Transportation Working Group and is an unabashed supporter of the Wilshire Bus-Only Lanes project.)