L.A. MTA to review Eastside Corridor options with the public (Source: www.progressiverailroading.com) Today, a new term possibly appearing for the first time: Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project

L.A. MTA to review Eastside Corridor options with the public

L.A. MTA to review Eastside Corridor options with the public

Later this month, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) will hold four community scoping meetings to review two alternatives for the Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 project.

The agency is considering plans to build a light-rail line or improve bus services along the corridor. LACMTA also is weighing a no-build alternative.

The scoping meetings are the first step in preparing a draft environmental impact statement/report. During the meetings, agency officials will review the proposed project and obtain input on the alternatives, as well as the evaluation process used to identify and mitigate environmental impacts.

Since 2007, LACMTA has analyzed alternatives and prepared supplemental technical studies to identify feasible routes to extend the Metro Gold Line Eastside Corridor to cities farther east of L.A.
Comments

Roundup of articles on high-speed rail. 2 articles on Korean high-speed rail. 1 article on the lastest Bullet train. The last article deals with the question of whether high-speed rail dollars are being spent well.

Article 1

Link: Arirang | Korea for the World, The World for Korea - Arirang.co.kr

Korea, California Sign MOU for US High-Speed Railway Project

Amid heightening global competition to participate in America's eight billion US dollar high-speed rail project the Korean government signed a memorandum of understanding with the California state government on Thursday promising continuous cooperation in construction efforts.
The signing took place in the state capital, Sacramento, between Korea's Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs Vice Minister Choi Jang-hyun and California High-Speed Rail Authority board member Quentin Kopp.

The MOU, which is California's fifth including those with China, Germany, Japan and Italy, will allow information sharing between the two governments regarding the state's passenger rail service which was granted 2.2-5 billion dollars in investment from the Obama administration's mass transit program.
The Californian project is anticipated to link San Francisco and Los Angeles in as little as two and a half hours.
Backed by Korea's high technology in the field since the construction of its own high-speed railway, Korea Train eXpress, or KTX, in 2004, the Korean government says it will put utmost efforts in winning the construction deal in the Golden State and prove its competitiveness by providing quality maintenance services.
The California High-Speed Rail Authority responded to such comments by saying that the US is aware of Korea's outstanding economic success and hopes that the railway project will further strengthen ties between the two countries.
Jang Sou-ie, Arirang News.

FEB 12, 2010

Article 2

Link: The Chosun Ilbo (English Edition): Daily News from Korea - Korea's 1st Homemade Bullet Train on Track in March

Korea's 1st Homemade Bullet Train on Track in March

Korea Railroad on Thursday said it will put the KTX-II, the first bullet train produced with local technology, into service between Seoul and Busan and between Yongsan and Gwangju/Mokpo four times a day starting March 2.

The KTX-II, produced by Hyundai Rotem, can run up to 350 km per hour, the same top speed as the current KTX model made by France's Alstom. But seats on the KTX-II trains have 5 cm more leg room than the KTX and can rotate 360 degrees. They are also furnished with mobile TV receivers and wireless Internet access.

The train's design is inspired by the shape of cherry salmon, an indigenous fish species, KORAIL said.
The KTX-II train is revealed to the press on Thursday. The KTX-II train is revealed to the press on Thursday.

Article 3

Link: Japan's bullet trains: Coming soon to a station near you - News & Advice, Travel - The Independent

Japan's bullet trains: Coming soon to a station near you

Relax News

Friday, 12 February 2010



East Japan Railway has unveiled a new state-of-the-art bullet train that may be the model for other super-express trains around the world.

Photo courtesy of East Japan Railway Co.




Japan has rolled out the latest version of its state-of-the-art bullet trains at the same time as developers go looking for new markets for the technology.

East Japan Railway unveiled its eye-catching new E6 series shinkansen this week. The sleek, seven-car train will go into operation on the Akita Shinkansen Line in northern Japan in the spring of 2013, company officials said, operating at speeds of up to 320 kph.

The new train has caught the imagination thanks to its 13-meter long nose, which is a full 7 meters longer than the nose on the present E3 Komachi generation of super express trains and is designed to reduce drag and noise.

The design of the train was overseen by Ken Okuyama, who previously served as a senior designer for Ferrari.

Quite apart from the look of the trains, they are increasingly in demand for their reliability, high levels of comfort and impeccable safety record - no passenger has been killed since the first bullet train went into operation in 1964.

Taiwan has already introduced a high-speed railway system based on shinkansen technology linking Taipei in the extreme north of the country with Kaohsuing in the far south, while discussions between Vietnam and Japan on a route that would link Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh city are reportedly close to completion.

A final decision on that project is expected in May, although the developers of the Japan Railway fleet appear to have fought off competition from France's TGV and the German ICE.

The latest country to express an interest in acquiring Japan's railway know-how is the United States, with President Barack Obama keen to promote a more comprehensive railway system.

Officials representing JR Tokai, a sister firm to JR East that operates in central Japan, have identified the route connecting Tampa, Orlando and Miami as being very promising, as well as a line between Las Vegas and Los Angeles. The company also believes there is potential in the even faster maglev system of magnetically levitated trains operating between Baltimore and Washington DC and from Chattanooga to Atlanta.

Other markets that Japanes firms are exploring include Brazil, while the Japanese-built Javelin trains, which operate between London and Folkestone, in Kent, are also based on shinkansen technology.

Article 4

Link: High-speed rail: Stimulus dollars wisely spent? / The Christian Science Monitor - CSMonitor.com

High-speed rail: Stimulus dollars wisely spent?

President Obama's $8-billion investment in high-speed rail may be a giant step forward in the country's transportation system, but experts question if it will gain traction among car-loving Americans.

By Mark Clayton / Staff writer / February 11, 2010

President Obama wants to put a multibillion-dollar down payment on a national high-speed rail network. But will Americans leave their bucket seats to ride those rocket rails in sufficient numbers to justify the investment?

For years, while the United States has focused on its highway and air-transport systems, passenger rail has been an afterthought. Now Mr. Obama has an Eisenhoweresque plan to spend $8 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act to build 13 high-speed rail corridors in 31 states. He also plans to budget an additional $1 billion each year over the next five years. Many say it's a needed "first step."

"Our most congested corridors have to have high-speed rail," says Jack Schenendorf, vice chairman of a blue-ribbon commission that studied America's transportation needs in 2008. "Obviously we can't build an unlimited amount of highway capacity. It's necessary to get people out of their cars and into these high-speed trains."

Who's riding the rails now?

Riders on Amtrak, America's pas- senger rail service, rose steadily from 21.5 million riders in 1999 to peak at 28.7 million in 2008. A weakening economy and lower fuel prices brought the number of riders down to 27.2 million last year, still the second highest in Amtrak's history.

Amtrak's Acela – connecting Boston, New York, and Washington – provides the only existing high-speed rail service in the US. It grew steadily through 2008 to 3.4 million passengers. But last year, ridership dropped below 2007 levels, partially as a result of cooling business travel.

What will $8 billion buy?

The initial investment will pay to build, upgrade, and plan about 7,100 miles of track, including 1,340 miles of new track, 4,724 miles of upgrades to existing track, and planning for 1,032 more.

Building a national network could eventually cost more than $100 billion and take decades, Mr. Schenendorf says. The US High Speed Rail Association, an advocacy group, envisions a 17,000-mile high-speed system to be completed by 2030. But that would require sustained support from Congress and the backing of future presidents.

How fast is 'high-speed'?

Top speeds could reach 220 m.p.h. on the California line that would go through Los Angeles and the San Francisco area, but will be substantially less in the other corridors. None is expected to be as fast as European and Japanese high-speed trains.

What will be the impact?

According to some projections, the $8 billion might be expected to produce about 320,000 jobs and roughly $13 billion in economic benefit.

A nationwide high-speed rail network could mean 29 million fewer car trips and 500,000 fewer plane flights annually, according to a 2006 study. That would save 6 billion pounds of carbon dioxide emissions, the equivalent of removing a million cars from the road annually.

Can high-speed rail compete with air and auto?

In Europe and Asia, high-speed rail lessens congestion at airports and on highways.

In the US, the main impact is expected to come on 100- to 600-mile routes. For example, a five-hour, 300-mile trip from St. Louis to Chicago could be cut to about three hours and 40 minutes by high-speed rail, potentially reducing the need for short-hop jets and taking thousands of cars off the road, says Ross Capon, president of the National Association of Railroad Passengers, which represents train riders.

Will it be a boondoggle or a boon?

The plan is "a giant step forward in the transformation of our nation's transportation system," says Howard Learner, whose Chicago-based Environmental Law and Policy Center supports high-speed rail.

But others are leery of what they see as a plan that won't lure Americans from their cars and therefore may not pay off.

"To believe this makes economic sense, you'd have to be foolish," says James Moore, director of the transportation and engineering program at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles. "In the US, autos cover shorter trips better and airlines capture longer trips. That doesn't leave room for high-speed rail to compete."

Schenendorf sees a need for high-speed rail in the US, but says that future funding will be the key.

While the Obama initiative is a "positive first step," he says, it's just "a drop in the bucket of what the nation will need to get the kind of high-speed rail network it needs. It will take a lot more money to get these systems built out."

Expo Line, Phase I Expo Authority Finds Compromise, Has a Lot of Work to Do (Source: Curbed LA)

Curbed LA: Expo Authority Finds Compromise, Has a Lot of Work to Do

Expo Line, Phase I
Expo Authority Finds Compromise, Has a Lot of Work to Do

Wednesday, February 10, 2010, by Neal Broverman

As reported, the much-anticipated Expo Line light-rail from downtown to Culver City (and then Santa Monica) is running a bit behind schedule. The Expo Construction Authority is working round the clock to open the line to Crenshaw this year, and to downtown Culver City in 2011 or 2012, but the LAPD shut down 24-hour construction after the locals complained of noise. The two groups recently got together to try to meet in the middle. Samantha Bricker, an Expo spokeswoman, tells us that, "We’ve met several times with the police commission, as well as with the community, and the path forward is that we will be preparing monthly requests to the police commission which outlines all our anticipated work going forward for that month and we will demonstrate what community outreach efforts we’ve made and then they will hopefully give their approval on a monthly basis for that work." Bricker says the construction authority is also working on mitigating noise and justifying the night work to locals. As evident in these photos of the future Phase I terminus stop in downtown Culver City (which will be elevated like a Chicago 'L' station), a lot of work remains. Also evident is that the area around the stop looks like a still from The Road, and is rife for development.

Korea Eyes $45 Bil. Train Deal in US (Source: /www.koreatimes.co.kr) Many other countries are showing increasing interest in getting a piece of the high-speed rail construction.

Korea Eyes $45 Bil. Train Deal in US

Korea Eyes $45 Bil. Train Deal in US


An upgraded KTX high-speed train awaits departure from Seoul Station to Daejeon, Thursday. It offers a better riding experience, according to its operator, KORAIL. Korea is trying to export its high-speed train. / Korea Times

By Do Je-hae
Staff Reporter

Can Korea pull off another surprise in a bid for a global infrastructure project?

Following its winning bid for the $20 billion project for nuclear power plants in the United Arab Emirates, Korea is vying for a $45 billion project to build a bullet train connecting San Francisco and Los Angeles, which is set to begin this year.

By all accounts, the competition will be fiercer.

Second Vice Minister Choi Jang-hyung of the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs visited California this week and signed an MOU with the California High Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) Thursday.

The CHSRA has entered into similar information-sharing pacts with other countries with expertise in high-speed rail projects.

"China, Germany, Japan, Italy have signed the pacts and are competitors in the bid for the California high-speed rail project," the ministry said. "While the MOU does not immediately translate to Korea's acquisition of project, it does mean that the state government will consider an active review of Korea's plans."

In recent years, Korea's railway industry has had a series of overseas export success in the burgeoning high-speed rail markets in China and other parts of Asia as well as Africa. Korea is hoping to repeat its success in California, which recently acquired $2.25 billion in federal stimulus funds for the 1,280 kilometer high-speed rail between San Francisco and Los Angeles. The funds will be used for building its initial segment between San Francisco and Anaheim sometime this year, according to latest U.S. news reports.

Upon completion around 2018, bullets trains running at 350 km per hour will connect San Francisco and Los Angeles in as little as two and a half hours. The system will also link other major cities in the state, including Sacramento, San Jose, Fresno, Bakersfield and San Diego.

Hyundai Rotem is one of the companies that participated in a task force comprised of 17 public and private corporations to research the California project last year. Other participants are POSCO Engineering and Construction, Samsung SDS, GS E&C, SK E&C, Korea Railroad Corp. (Korail), Korea Rail Network Authority and the Korea Trade-Investment Promotion Agency (KOTRA). Officials from these companies visited California and presented Korea's engineering expertise in high-speed rail networks to local authorities in August 2009.

What are the chances that a Korean company secure the California project?

Korea and the state of California already enjoy a history of strong railroad cooperation.

In January, Hyundai Rotem exported 131 multi-level carriages for the Southern California Rail Authority's (SCRRA) Metrolink network in Los Angeles. Hyundai Rotem is the third-largest seller of urban metro passenger cars after Canada's Bombardier and France's Alstom, and currently has a plant in Philadelphia.

A global frontrunner in high-speed rail, Korea is one of a handful of countries in the world - after Japan, France and Germany - that has the capacity to build and operate a 350km/h high-speed train. A bullet train usually runs over 200km/h.

"Currently, Korea accounts for 0.5 percent of the world's rail market share. But prospects for exports are higher than ever, " Choi Yeon-hye, president of the Korea National Railroad College in Gyeonggi Province, said in a recent column. "For the past five years, Korea has demonstrated top skills in high-speed railway operations and maintenance."

Korea has been running a high-speed rail network with KTX trains since 2004. An upgraded version of the Korean-made bullet trains called the KTX II will start operations on March 2.

Korean companies have had much success in the growing Chinese railway market, having been selected to construct railways in Chongqing, Guangzhou and Harbin in recent years. Beating France and Italy, Korea won a bid to build a national railway network in Cameroon in June 2009, marking Korea's first railway operation in Africa.

Additionally, Korea has an edge in price competitiveness compared to consortiums from Japan and France, according to industry experts. Due to the financial burden of the project, price is a crucial factor for local authorities in selecting the consortium that will be tasked with a package of responsibilities from designing and constructing the railways and tunnels to operating signals and carriages.

Germany's Siemens has already set up operations in Sacramento, Calif. for the high-speed rail project.

Siemens' new breakthrough train, the Sapsan, is a candidate for the San Francisco-Los Angeles link. The Sapsan's top speed reached 400 km/h in test runs. They are currently used on the route between Moscow and St. Petersburg.

China is another tough competitor as it's determined to succeed in the railway market. It runs bullet trains that are faster than France's TGV. China will invest 823.5 billion yuan ($120.6 billion) in railways in 2010, including the construction of a high-speed train linking Shanghai and Beijing.

Experts say that how Korea does in Brazil's May 2 auction for contractors to build a $17.4 billion high-speed train link will be a true test of Korea's rail competitiveness. A successful bid there is expected to increase Korea's chances in California and other parts of the U.S.

jhdo@koreatimes.co.kr

US can follow in China's train tracks (Source: China Daily) This is the first time I've ever posted anything on high-speed rail from a Chinese media outlet.

Link: US can follow in China's train tracks

US can follow in China's train tracks
By David Kan Ting (China Daily)
Updated: 2010-02-11 07:55


US can follow in China's train tracks

A century ago, Henry Ford put America on wheels. Now, United States President Barack Obama wants to put the country on rails - high-speed rails, to be precise - to change the way Americans travel, and live.

Ford's dream of making affordable automobiles for every working American revolutionized the transport system in the US. It fueled America's rise as an industrial superpower and transformed it an auto empire.

But times change. The American dream today is caught in the nightmarish labyrinth of traffic gridlock, air pollution, soaring gas prices and global warming, to name just a few problems. The rapid depletion of fossil fuel resources and the melting of polar ice sheets have made the search for green energy a daunting challenge for world leaders.

In his first State of the Union address, on Jan 27, Obama vowed to make all-out efforts to develop clean energy. The "nation that leads the clean energy economy will lead the global economy, and America must be that nation," he said.

The next day, US Vice-President Joe Biden traveled to Tampa, Florida, to make a milestone announcement: Washington will provide a federal grant of $8 billion to start the country's high-speed rail network project in 31 states, including a 135-km line from Tampa to Orlando, the site of Disneyworld. "There is no reason why other countries can build high-speed rail lines and we cannot," he said. "Right here in Tampa, we are building the future."

It looks like an auspicious step toward realizing Obama's "Yes, we can" campaign dream. Obama's "Change" and "Yes, we can" caught the fancy of Americans, who were wary of two expensive wars that was sapping the country's power and wealth and costing it many lives. But putting the US on rails is a task easier said than done.

First, Americans have a love affair with cars for historical and geographical reasons. Cars have been part of the American way of life since Ford put them on the Model T. Unlike Japan or Germany, the US is too big a country for trains to provide people the mobility and convenience they need. Traveling by train has never been popular except for a very few Americans, including Joe Biden who loves to commute between Delaware and Washington by Amtrak.

Second, the US has the world's best interstate freeway network, built in the 1950s during Eisenhower's presidency. It was arguably the world's largest public works project. The 75,000-km road network links the country's 48 contiguous states like arteries in the human body, making faraway places nearly as accessible as a next door neighbor.

But this is the era of high-speed trains - in China and in the US. Ford did not know what air pollution, climate change or prohibitive gas price was. Even when I was a student in the US, gas used to cost a quarter a gallon. To fill up a gas-guzzling tank you needed less than $5. Now, it costs at least 15 times more. If you travel by car you consume more energy and generate more greenhouse gases that aggravate climate change.

Obama stated the obvious when he said the "nation that leads in clean energy economy will lead the global economy". High-speed trains use clean energy. China, no doubt, is at the forefront of high-speed rail development and other green energy sectors such as wind and solar power.

Though the $8-billion federal grant for high-speed rails may seem like a drop in a bucket, it is a significant first step. In fact, it is the first installment for a gargantuan undertaking, which if successful, will change the US. "Change", by the way, is the hallmark of the Obama presidency. He has been trying to change the US in many ways - healthcare, Wall Street and dependence on oil.

But to put the US on high-speed rails will need great political will, consensus at the highest political level and a lot of money. China's high-speed rails will cost $300 billion from 2005 to 2020 but it enjoys the support of the government and people.

It is here, for a change, that the US can learn a thing or two from China. First is efficiency. China is a late bloomer. It began its high-speed rail development project less than a decade ago, that is, more than three decades after Japan operated its Bullet Train between Tokyo and Osaka.

But today, China has the highest high-speed rail mileage. It has the fastest train in the world, too - the Guangzhou-Wuhan train that began running from December. The average speed of the train on the 968-km route is 312 kmph. In comparison, France's TGV averages 272 kmph, and Japan's Bullet Train, 185 kmph.

The US can also learn from China's "green leap forward", a term coined by multi-Pulitzer Prize winning columnist Thomas Friedman. High-speed rail is a part of that leap. And the fact has not been lost on Obama, and the fact that he has said "China is not playing for second place" proves that.

In his State of the Union address, Obama asserted: "I don't accept a future where the jobs and industries of tomorrow take root beyond our borders."

This, obviously, belies his angst after seeing that such jobs and industries have already taken root in China. But it's better late than never. Obama's initiative to set in motion America's high-speed rail network marks an important milestone in the development of the country's green economy.

But don't expect bullet trains to whistle through America's expansive plains any time soon. The first line, either from Tampa to Orlando or from Los Angeles to San Francisco, may not be completed before a decade. The problems are multiple and include funding.

California is nearly broke, the federal government is heavily in debt and high-speed rail is by no means cheap. Obama's blueprint could cost taxpayers $500 billion, according to the Cato Institute, a liberal think tank based in Washington. And that would be difficult to come by.

The author is a Chinese-born journalist residing in North America

(China Daily 02/11/2010 page9)

Our View: Keeping Gold Line extension on track (Source: Pasadena Star News)

List: Our View: Keeping Gold Line extension on track - Pasadena Star-News

Our View: Keeping Gold Line extension on track
Posted: 02/10/2010 04:48:35 PM PST

THE question is worth asking: What was the key factor in moving the local Gold Line Construction Authority into agreement last month with the Los Angeles-weighted Metro board?

Some say it was the new study released by the highly respected Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., which estimates the first phase of the light-rail extension - from Sierra Madre Villa in East Pasadena to Citrus College in Glendora - would create 7,000 new jobs and infuse $1 billion into the region's stagnant economy.

Those kind of numbers will melt away the most ardent parochial squabbles.

Or was it new leadership?

Last spring, Metro said goodbye to longtime chief Roger Snoble and replaced him with Art Leahy. CEO Leahy has been more amenable to using the one-half-cent sales tax funds from Measure R for building the first phase of the extension than was Snoble. Another new leader, Art Najarian, a Glendale councilman, who took over as chairman of the MTA board, gave credit to Leahy. We give kudos to both Leahy and Najarian for recognizing that commuters from the Inland Empire and the San Gabriel Valley need alternatives to driving the 210 Freeway.

But those are not the only reasons. There's one more.

That involves an unprecedented show of bipartisanship from the California congressional delegation in support of federal funding for this extension and two others, the lengthening of Gold Line Eastside out of East L.A. to South El Monte or Whittier, and a Crenshaw rail line. A letter signed in October 2009 by 14 Democrats and Republicans from the South Bay to Pasadena and from San Dimas to San Bernardino applied the right amount of political heat to the Metro board members. (While no federal funds arrived, these same pols are working on getting some for the final leg to Ontario.)

Throw in higher gasoline prices and President Obama's desire to improve rail travel in the United States (see the $2 billion he gave to California for a high-speed rail) and the pieces began falling into place.

We think it may have been all these factors combined, which proves that it takes many people pushing on many pressure points in order for our local region to receive its fair share of transit funding.

Already the political pressure has resulted in a commitment from MTA to the Gold Line Construction Authority for the full $851 million for the first part of the extension.

Like the initial Gold Line from Pasadena to downtown L.A., this one should be breaking ground on time - in June. We're pleased to hear contracts are being let for the construction of the bridge that will take the light-rail from Pasadena to the Arcadia station on the other side of the 210 Freeway. Residents will notice work there first. Also, the Construction Authority is moving ahead with finding potential contractors to design-build the tracks, stations, crossings, utilities and maintenance and operations. That will be awarded in September.

This is extremely good news for the San Gabriel Valley. First, for the new jobs the construction phase will create. Secondly, when the extension is completed in 2013, commuters will have a fast, safe way to get to and from work and students at Azusa Pacific University and Citrus College to get to and from school.

It's a track record of cooperation that will result in transit solutions.

Report Supports High-Speed Rail Plan (Source: KRCA)

Link: Report Supports High-Speed Rail Plan - Sacramento News Story - KCRA Sacramento

Report Supports High-Speed Rail Plan
2 California Lawmakers Back Federal Report

POSTED: 12:18 pm PST February 9, 2010

SACRAMENTO, Calif. --
Jorge Velasquez/KCRA

A new report out Tuesday supports a plan that would bring high-speed rail to the Bay Area and Los Angeles.

That plan also makes Sacramento one of the last major cities in California to be added to the line.

Assemblywoman Cathleen Galgiani, D-Livingston, along with Assemblywoman Fiona Ma, D-San Francisco, threw their support Tuesday behind a federal report that looks at high-speed rail service across the country.

The report agrees with previous studies that show high-speed rail should be built first in areas where it would be used the most, and that stations should be located close to other public transportation.

President Barack Obama has pledged billions of dollars in federal money for California's high-speed rail plans.

Reported by: Sharokina Shams

AAR Reports Traffic Remains Down in January 2010

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE   For more information contact: Holly Arthur, 202-639-2344 harthur@aar.org   AAR Reports Traffic Remains Down in January 2010 Rail Time Indicators Report Now Includes Seasonally Adjusted Data   WASHINGTON, D.C. - Feb. 10, 2010 - The Association of American Railroads (AAR) today reported U.S. carloads for the month of January 2010 were down 0.7 percent at 1,056,684 carloads, compared with the same month last year, and down 17.7 percent compared with 2008. The Rail Time Indicators report, available at www.aar.org, comprises monthly rail traffic data framed with other key economic indicators to show how freight rail is tied to the broader U.S. economy.   Last month's intermodal traffic, which includes movement of truck trailers and shipping containers, was up slightly at 2.5 percent to 803,275 units compared with January 2009, but down 11.2 percent compared with the same month in 2008.   Thirteen of the 19 commodity categories tracked by AAR saw year-over-year gains from January 2009, with nonmetallic minerals seeing the highest gain, up 65.9 percent.  The motor vehicles and parts category also saw a significant monthly boost, up 65.7 percent compared with January last year.  However all commodity categories, with the exception of grain mill products, were down in January when compared with the same month in 2008.   For the first time, AAR also is providing seasonally adjusted U.S. rail traffic in the Rail Time Indicators report, using January 1988 - December 2009 as the basis for the seasonal adjustment. Seasonally adjusted carloads in January were up 2.6 percent from December 2009, and were the highest of any month in the past 11 months.   "Seasonal adjustment is designed to improve month-to-month comparisons and eliminate seasonal components that can mask underlying trends," said AAR Senior Vice President John Gray. "While our seasonal adjustment process is subject to further refinement, we're confident that seasonally adjusted rail traffic figures will be a useful complement to our other data and will help further illustrate the importance of railroads to the broader economy."   Due to inclement weather in the Washington D.C. area, we will not have a video summary of the monthly report. Please check back next month for an updated video along with the Rail Time Indicators report.

Building High Speed Rail Isn't a Bolshevik Plot (Source: www.huffingtonpost.com)

Joel Epstein: Building High Speed Rail Isn't a Bolshevik Plot

Building High Speed Rail Isn't a Bolshevik Plot


Let's face it, since in a Mouse That Roared sort of way making war and securing the peace hasn't been this country's strong suit since WW II, Big Government's strength is to be found elsewhere.

If you drive on the Interstate, benefit from the Voting Rights Act of 1964 or live free of polio, smallpox, and other communicable diseases, go ahead and thank the government. Likewise, if you enjoy living in a country that still has one of the world's highest standards of living and (as my brother-in-law likes to remind me) lets me write stuff like this without fear of going to jail, that's because Big Government still works well in more ways than the left and right often care to acknowledge.

In particular, jobs and infrastructure and government go hand in hand. And since creating jobs and building infrastructure is Big Government doing what it does best, for those who would argue otherwise, just cut it out. Hyperbole aside, building high speed rail isn't a "Bolshevik plot" and fast trains won't destroy the America we all love and defend.

That's why like Barack I'm returning to my albeit small base with this piece on infrastructure, jobs and fast trains. Next to President Obama's frontal assault at last week's State of the Union on the Supreme Court for its boneheaded decision in Citizens United (gotta love the irony in the name of that case) the news I'm crowing about is Big Government's decision to start funding the California High Speed Rail project. At least in some circles here in the once Golden State, the $2.5 billion dollar investment is helping President Hope regain the populist mantle. The project planned initially between Anaheim and San Francisco is projected to take 10 years to build at a cost of $42 billion. That's no small sum, but let's compare the return on investment with Goldman or AIG's share of the bailout. If anything is truly too big to fail my money's on the 520 miles of infrastructure that will need to be built between southern and northern California versus the still black box of Wall Street.

With unemployment in California holding steady at 12.4 percent, and gridlock on the I5 freeway between San Diego and Sacramento as miserable as ever, what better way to demonstrate to this politically divided nation that government governs best when it stimulates the economy with infrastructure investment and jobs programs that put Americans back to work.

To the handful of conservatives reading this, I hope you will read on as I try to demonstrate that government investment in high speed rail can be all things to all people. That's our tax dollars at work and that's just one of the important functions that government is here for.

What if instead of looking at the overdue California rail project and other long neglected infrastructure projects as a Big Government handout, you saw it as the juicy bone it is to California business as well as labor, environmentalists, and civic boosters. In other words, how about casting aside for a moment the intellectual dishonesty and acknowledging that infrastructure investment in high speed rail is among the best public private partnership investments of tax payer money we could all ask for. Just take a look at the private contractors lined up to complete the work. You can bet that the principals of most of these Chamber of Commerce dues paying companies hail from the country's toniest country clubs and best private schools or public districts rather than from Compton, South LA and Boyle Heights. And while some of them may say they want Scott Brown to be the country's next president, privately they know who's their sugar daddy. They know what the California High Speed Rail project and other likes it mean for the state and the region. So what's keeping you from joining the Berkeley Lalaland Axis and loving O as much as the Subaru driving same sex family with the Obamanos bumper sticker just in front of you?

Go on, take a toke and breathe in the good vibrations that come with belonging to a movement of inclusion and community rather than divisiveness and No.

Blue and white collar Americans going back to work isn't a bad thing, even if it is happening on President Obama's watch. What's more, riding as a passenger on the train instead of driving will mean traveling with comforts like wireless, so you will be able to pass the trip earbuds firmly in place working on your iPad or learning Spanish listening to a podcast on your Google Nexus phone as you speed through California's Central Valley. And while you're riding comfortably rather than feeling your blood pressure rise on the freeway, take a look out the window at the pretty blooms on the almond, citrus and pistachio trees that line the west side of the Valley. Those agricultural miracles were made possible by another massive public works project that brought water south from the Sacramento Delta hundreds of miles away.

All this sure sounds preferable to me than five hours of turning around to shush the kids as the pea soup fog envelopes the freeway between Bakersfield and Tracy. The train will finally give Californians, and the hundreds of thousands of tourists who will take it instead of driving or flying, a relatively comfortable experience that thousands of easterners, including Vice President Biden, have long known as commuters on Amtrak's only profitable route.

Gone for those who choose the train will be the painful ride on the 5 as you try to get around the SUV- or Ford F150-driving cell phone-glued to-his ear driver clogging the passing lane through Lost Hills. And as for the safety of the trip, it's worth noting that even with the train engineer texting while driving, the auto-piloted train ride will still be safer than driving a recalled Toyota Tundra with a sticky gas pedal. If I were a bitter tree hugger I'd say it serves Toyota right for building the gas guzzling truck in the first place.

What still troubles me though is the failure of the heads of the Fortune 100 firms that will benefit from projects like this to stand at the President's side when the entertainers on Fox News start whining about tax and spend Big Government. The silence is deafening and inexcusable. Opportunities for government, labor, environmentalists and the corporate generals to come together are so rare these days that business should be clambering for the place of honor next to O.

As for the charge of waste and extravagance that Fox & Friends will inevitably throw at the speeding train, I can't even remember the last time the blue color union workers who will be laying the track outside of Wasco in the Central Valley invited me to their second homes in Malibu and Edgartown. I'll have to recheck my mail.

This train of dreams matters because it puts Californians back to work while helping the US make up for decades of lost time in the move to more efficient and clean means of getting around. With the public hurt by budget-induced transit cuts statewide and expected further delays in completion of LA's Expo Line, here's a rare bit of good transportation, economic and jobs news with a real multiplier effect.

So here's what I am asking of O'Reilly, Rush and Beck, just this once, overcome your distaste and say it. "Thank you Mr. President and Congress for momentarily bridging the political divide that often separates the unions, the Chamber of Commerce, and communities as different from one another as Los Angeles, Bakersfield, Fresno, and San Jose." There, that wasn't so bad.

TOHOKU SHINKANSEN (Bullet train) 東北新幹線
I used to live in Japan and rode high-speed rail there. I can attest to its efficiency and convenience.

US PIRG: How About High Speed Rail for Every Major City (Source: Streetblog Los Angeles)

Link: Streetsblog Los Angeles » US PIRG: How About High Speed Rail for Every Major City

US PIRG: How About High Speed Rail for Every Major City

by Elana Schor on February 9, 2010

Now that the Obama administration has awarded $8 billion in high-speed rail grants to more than two dozen states, with $2.5 billion more coming soon, why not keep thinking big when it comes to bullet-train expansion?

That's the ethos of a new report released today by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) calling for a New Deal-like public works juggernaut that would eventually connect all major cities located within 100 and 500 miles of each other. For a look at how such a system would remake the American rail map, check out the image above.

"The first step in building the network is to set a national goal with an ambitious time frame, just like we did for the Interstate Highway System or getting to the moon," U.S. PIRG senior analyst Phineas Baxandall wrote in a blog post unveiling the report. "We can link all our major cities by 2050, if we set our minds to it."

Given the political wrangling over the deficit that continues to paralyze Washington, however, it's worth asking how an ambitious rail program would be funded. The U.S. PIRG answers that question in several ways: First, the group calls for a dedicated revenue stream for inter-city passenger rail in the next long-term transportation bill, with local investments matched by the federal government in the same 80:20 ratio that highway plans receive.

"By financing transportation projects equitably," the report's authors write, "states will be able to make rational transportation decisions based on the needs of their residents, rather than on the chances of securing a lucrative federal match."

Secondly, the U.S. PIRG aims to put government support for Amtrak -- often derided by conservatives for its reliance on federal subsidies that also benefit road projects -- in perspective. When evaluated as a share of U.S. GDP, government investment of passenger rail looks stunningly low compared with other industrialized nations. The imbalance is visible in the chart below:




From the U.S. PIRG report:

To begin to dig out of that hole, the federal government should invest steadily increasing levels of funding in passenger rail. We probably cannot hope to match the $300 billion China will be investing in its high-speed rail system between now and 2020, but we should endeavor to match the level of investment provided by other industrialized nations, as a share of GDP, in their rail networks.

The group does not address the lingering debate over whether all planned U.S. inter-city rail projects can truly be called "high-speed" given that many would achieve maximum speeds little better than 110 miles per hour. Still, its vision of finishing the job begun by the White House this year is likely to fire up rail advocates and give helpful new tools to local planners.

I'll Have a BRT With the Sepulveda Pass (Source: www.huffingtonpost.com)

Link: Joel Epstein: I'll Have a BRT With the Sepulveda Pass

Posted: February 8, 2010 01:14 PM

I'll Have a BRT With the Sepulveda Pass


Imagine my delight earlier this week when a membership card arrived from the AARP with my name on it. Now a reduced fare Metro pass for seniors, that would have been something but I guess it wasn't in the cards.

Though I'm still licking my wounds from the AARP incident, my memory, happily, remains pretty good. Even at my advanced age I can still recall my grandfather's voice from the 1960s as if it were yesterday as he described the drive to our house from his apartment in the old country. He spoke a classic Brownsville Brooklynese, unsoftened by a law school education, prosperity and years away from the old neighborhood with the pushcarts near New Lots and Alabama Avenues. Arriving at our home, after making the drive from my grandparents', the first words out of his mouth were invariably, "The traffic was moider." It wasn't until I was older and had learned to drive that I realized the old man took a sort of perverse pleasure in regaling us with tales of his triumph over all of the lousy drivers out there.

Remembering him and that gravelly voice on a rainy LA weekend morning, I settled in at my kitchen table with the morning paper and a hot mug of tea. With prodigious amounts of rain pouring down it was a Snuggie, green jacket or famous blue raincoat sort of day, good for reading the paper and singing along to the lugubrious prose of Leonard Cohen, that icon of my youth and the bane of my pitch perfect wife's existence. She's out of the house this morning, so I'm living large. And if I take off my glasses and ignore the palm trees out my window I can pretend it's April and I'm in an old prewar Manhattan apartment with a storm noisily thrashing the fire escape outside and the radiators hissing away.

It's just those pesky op eds. The piece that's got me all hot and bothered this morning is Patt Morrison's Q & A with Michael Barbour in the Los Angeles Times.

Now at first blush as Barbour's an engineer who builds bridges and roads - infrastructure - for Metro his profile is just the sort of thing I could really sink my teeth into. The "I" word is usually like an aphrodisiac for me, but today it's just not doing it.

Don't get me wrong; Mike Barbour looks and sounds like a nice guy. In fact I like his candor in the piece about the time he spent in Iraq in 2003 working with the Iraqi Ministry of Construction. "...When you get to Iraq, you're dealing with the sheik and his tribe. I think the U.S. was somewhat arrogant - a lot of us in the West are, but we actually [had] good relationships with them." Refreshingly no bull, I'd say.

Along with the interview the LA Times ran a nice photo of the smiling builder holding a large Interstate 405 sign. It sure looks swell and even though the photo's in black and white I can clearly picture the red, white, and blue logo burned into my brain through countless trips on Big Government's ("Tax and Spend" is the Tea Party's moniker) interstate highway system. I hope when he retires Metro gives Barbour the conversation piece sign in lieu of a boring gold watch for his years of loyal service to the agency.

Well now that we've got straight that I'm not slamming Mike Barbour personally, let's get to what's bothering me.

You see Barbour's just getting started on construction of the last 10 miles of HOV lane on the northbound 405 through the Sepulveda Pass. For the uninitiated this will complete a carpool lane from the San Fernando Valley to the O.C. - Orange County, not the TV show.

Frankly, with the Skirball having cornered the market on concrete for its new parking garage, I'm surprised Metro was able to find enough of the stuff for the big project. Must be the slowdown in high-end apartment construction in Beijing has freed some up now that the Olympics have come and gone.

The Sepulveda Pass project is years overdue and will help reduce commute times on one of America's most congested freeways. And when I'm not riding the bus, biking, or walking I too am often enough on that freeway crawling along in my Scion xA, pinched between a Tarzana-bound Toyota Sequoia and a Palmdale-bound Lincoln Navigator.

Well every time I go over that damn Pass there's something missing for me. And that something is a light rail line running up the center divide of the freeway connecting the Valley's Orange Line Busway with the to-be-built Purple (Wilshire) and Expo lines, or even, perchance to dream, LAX. And if rail's truly not economically feasible, then I'll settle for one of those dedicated bus lines that have been demonstrating so much success for years now in Mexico City, Bogota and Curitiba, Brazil.

Curitiba's bus system was one of the first and is regarded as a model Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system. The frequently arriving buses are considered reliable, and the generally well-designed stations are placed at convenient locations resulting in high ridership. Curitiba and other successful examples of BRT also benefit from subway system features like dedicated routes free of too many traffic signals and fare collection prior to boarding. If you've never ridden Metro's Orange Line (you should!) you'd be surprised to learn that LA already has a pretty successful example of BRT up and running, and expanding! There's even a late model articulated bus, the Metro Rapid 761, that runs from the Busway (in a convoluted way down Van Nuys Blvd and west along Ventura) to the 405 and on to the West Side. That's a good start, but the route leave something to be desired and challenges even the most patient of Metro riders. The answer is a dedicated rail or bus line that runs back and forth over the Pass unencumbered by the thousands of commuters and others who make the trip daily in largely single occupant vehicles.

According to Wikipedia which I regard after Jon Stewart and The Daily Show as America's best source of news and information, in Bogota passengers enter the TransMilenio BRT through elevated stations in the center of a main avenue, or "troncal" via a bridge over the street. The center lanes of the street are then dedicated to bus traffic.

Which brings me back to Mike Barbour in conversation with Pat Morrison. Even the beautiful view of the Verdugo Mountains on a clear day after a heavy winter rain isn't enough to salve the pain and disappointment I feel every time I reach Mulholland Drive, the crest of the pass, as I crawl along the 405 heading north.

Now I'm sure the plans are there somewhere at Metro's busy office but I've heard nary a peep lately out of them about connecting the Valley and the West Side via the Pass. [For a less Pollyanna view of BRT, skeptics and others may want to read, Curitiba's "Bus Rapid Transit" - How Applicable to Los Angeles and Other U.S. Cities? This thin critique from Light Rail Now, a website whose title gives away its perspective on mass transit, basically says the bus is OK but light rail is better.]

According to Metro, in addition to the 10-mile HOV lane extension the Pass construction project will replace the Skirball Center, Sunset Blvd and Mulholland Drive bridges; realign a couple of dozen off ramps, widen underpasses and build 18 miles of sound barriers and retaining walls making LA look even more like the border between San Diego and Tijuana. Admittedly the sound barriers will help those who didn't go deaf during construction enjoy their older and old age without the roar of traffic going by.

My concern is that with all that money and time going into planning and construction you can bet Metro and the taxpayer won't be too excited about tearing up the pavement to build BRT lanes and stations along a rejiggered 405. Alas, another missed mass transit opportunity for Los Angeles. Or maybe we can get involved and change fate. Please email me if you're up to the challenge.

In his old age my grandfather, who by then had developed an aversion to funerals that only rivaled his love of beating the traffic, was known to have had the following exchange with his sister-in-law upon the death of his brother.

Ruth: "Louis, I'm sorry to tell you your brother just died."

Grandpa: "I can't come to the funeral, I'm sicker than he is."

About mass transit in LA, like my grandfather, I just hope I'm not too old or sick to ride the BRT or light rail over the Sepulveda Pass when it's finally built. It's time we all got on that bus

405 North Sepulveda pass

2 articles on the Expo Line

Article 1

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

EXPOsing the Westside to Mass Transit…Finally! Print E-mail
MovingLA
By Ken Alpern

WActive Imageell, the Westside, to say nothing of the greater City and County of Los Angeles, now has a political and moral imperative to truly address how mass transit will interact with the many far flung neighborhoods through which the Expo Line and other passenger rail lines will someday traverse. After last Thursday’s long and interesting session on the Exposition Line Construction Authority, where much public testimony was aired and considerable political maneuvering occurred, when push came to shove the Authority Board voted 6-0 (not 7-0, because Mark Ridley-Thomas did not vote) to approve the Expo Line

Yes, Virginia, the Expo Line will actually make it to West L.A., Santa Monica and the beach, and the long effort by the grassroots Friends4Expo Transit (www.friends4expo.org) to create a light rail that parallels (and effectively offers an alternative/addition to the capacity of) the I-10 freeway.

While some will cringe and recoil, and others will gloat and smirk, I think the right approach is for the Expo Authority, the Westside/Mid-City political cadre, and grassroots entities to be more civil than ever and to confront the logical…while fighting the emotional.

This light rail line is meant to benefit the neighborhoods through which it traverses, be it Rancho Park, Santa Monica, Palms, Culver City, Crenshaw, USC, etc. It is also going to create unavoidable impacts, and the impacts must be weighed against the benefits. At two locations—USC and Dorsey High School, there have been failed political and legal efforts to create a mega-expensive subway portion of the Expo Line as a way to mitigate for a light rail line that (by its very nature) is meant to normally run at ground level and to fit into neighborhoods in ways that subways and freeways never can.

So it is therefore not out of cruelty but a desire to save money, time and grief for Westsiders concerned about the Expo Line’s impacts when I remind these Westsiders about the unsuccessful underground-Expo-Line ventures at USC and Dorsey High School. It’s not just “you can’t fight City Hall” because you can—but the legality and practicality of asking for a $250 million or more tunnel under Overland and Westwood Blvds. has to be seen as risky.

But I do encourage those who raise concerns—as I have and will continue to do—to make their case wherever possible, preferably through compromise but, if the shoe fits, in court. It’s your right, it’s your taxpayer and private dollars at stake, and it’s a benefit of living in a free society…but please realize:

1) There is extraordinary local, state and federal support (even though the feds aren’t paying for it, they’ve got to approve it) for the Expo Line, and the I-10 freeway ain’t getting any less easy to drive in either direction.

2) An “evaluation of all possible alternatives” includes rail bridges as well as subways (a bridge costs $30-40 million, unlike subway portions that are hundreds of millions of dollars), so if you don’t want a visually intrusive rail bridge next to Overland Avenue Elementary School or in the middle of Rancho Park you might understand why the Expo Authority came to the conclusion that an at-grade option—despite its inherent problems—was the least of all evils

3) An at-grade crossing, with gates and all, effectively means an extra traffic signal on Overland and Westwood every five minutes or so (less frequently when it’s not peak hour operations), one that (as with all signals) takes about 30-60 seconds or so; I don’t deny hating to be stuck at a red light, but it’s not the end of the world

So…what’s next, as the line goes from the EIR phase to the Preliminary Engineering phase?

Well, there are certain items that the EIR left open for exploration and evaluation, and there are certain City efforts that are even more important than the Authority’s—it bears repeating, but most of the problems that Westsiders had and will have with the Expo Line lie in the failure of L.A. City Planning, and absolutely NOT with the Expo Authority.

1) Sepulveda should be grade-separated with a rail bridge, and paid for either by Metro or by the City of L.A., and NOT by the adjacent Casden developers who would more likely be granted a variance to create a megaproject entirely out of character with that neighborhood, if not region. BOTH the at-grade and rail bridge options have been approved by the LADOT, unlike Westwood and Overland which were approved at-grade, and BOTH can and should be evaluated during Preliminary Engineering

2) There should be more parking at the Sepulveda station, and virtually none at the Westwood station, with the Sepulveda station being a “regional” station accommodating Westside, South Bay and San Fernando Valley commuter access to the line (it’ll probably be the closest thing to a Metrolink station the Westside will ever have)

3) A Regional Transportation Center accommodating rail, bus, bicycle, car and all other transportation options, belongs at or adjacent to the Sepulveda station (pursuant to the above point)

4) Serious planning and transportation issues need to be revisited at Westwood, with lanes narrowed, bicycle lanes or sharrows established, sidewalks redone and as many trees preserved as possible to retain the residential character of that neighborhood. The Exposition/Westwood station should be a “neighborhood station” with only bus, bicycle and pedestrian access.

5) Better traffic planning for north-south access between National and Pico is in order, because the question of whether the Rancho Park portion of Westwood Blvd. needs to retain its residential character needs answering. Sepulveda and Overland are much, MUCH better alternatives to be utilized for 405/10 freeway access, and the widening/restriping of those two streets as part of Expo Line mitigation might offer an opportunity to address longstanding traffic problems

6) Create an adjacent Expo Bikeway and north-south bicycle connections to Sepulveda and Westwood—both the City of Los Angeles and the Expo Authority deserve to be taken to task for punting this issue to each other, and it’s downright embarrassing that the Expo Bikeway question still remains unanswered

7) Make the Expo Right of Way between Sepulveda and Overland a “Palms Park West” that is so green, tree-lined and attractive that the region will wonder why the heck anyone ever opposed the Expo Line to begin with

8) Nail down police/traffic/safety issues now, and not wait for “incidents” to occur—While it’s good to know that Metro, the Sheriff’s Department and the LAPD are enhancing their enforcement of illegal activities of motorists and pedestrians on the Blue and Gold Lines, the Westside (as with all regions) deserve to have this enforcement consistently applied. Equally important is the need to have sheriff’s deputies routinely assigned to Expo Line stations and to trains so that everyone can feel safe and secure on MetroRail

As the rhetoric ends and the reality begins for the Expo Line, it’s paramount for all of us to confront the challenges of Westside mass transit. Change is always scary, but I don’t doubt Westsiders will easily be more than up to the task.

Oh, and a quick P.S.: Meaning no disrespect to either Bernard Parks or Mark Ridley-Thomas, but speaking of ending the rhetoric and beginning the reality, I suspect that any end to an Overland Ave. Expo Line undercrossing also means an end to the complete subway portion of the Crenshaw Corridor Light Rail Line below Crenshaw Blvd. where it fails Metro Grade Crossing Guidelines to do that. On the other hand, the money saved can pay for a northern extension that MUST be a subway to the Wilshire Corridor, so it’s probably more of a gain than a loss (again, after the rhetoric ends).

(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 those of Mr. Alpern.) -cw

Article 2

Link: City Hall to pay for integrating Expo

City Hall to pay for integrating Expo
By NICK TABOREK


February 09, 2010

Editor's note: This story is part of an ongoing series that tracks the city's expenditures appearing on upcoming Santa Monica City Council consent agendas. Consent agenda items are routinely passed by the City Council with little or no discussion from elected officials or the public. However, many of the items have been part of public discussion in the past.

CITY HALL — It's expected to be five years before Expo light rail cars are traveling down Colorado Avenue as part of system linking Santa Monica to downtown Los Angeles.

But City Hall is already starting on plans to reorganize the street around the future rail line.

Tonight, the City Council will be asked to approve $368,000 for preliminary plans to integrate the light rail project into the existing infrastructure.

The funding would pay for a consultant, Cityworks Design, to create a design for Colorado Avenue that is in-line with City Hall's vision of an attractive and user-friendly streetscape.

Under the contract Cityworks Design would be charged with deciding where to put parking lots, how to best accommodate pedestrians and the disabled once the rail line is built, and how to relocate utilities equipment that is displaced by the rail.

City Hall received 22 bids for the contract and interviewed seven firms before deciding to recommend Cityworks for the job.

The proposed contract is part of a nearly $600,000 spending package the council is expected to approve tonight.

The council is also being asked to sign off on a plan to demolish the building located at 1324 5th St. that once served as the interim library but has been vacant since 2005.

The building is in "an extreme state of deterioration and has a toxic interior environment consisting of asbestos, lead, mercury and dangerous levels of molds and fungus," according to a city staff report.

The toxins must be abated before the building contents may be removed and the structure can be demolished, the report said.

City staff recommends awarding the $231,000 contract to knock down the structure and resurface the 7,500 square-foot area as a parking lot to AMPCO Contracting.

The council is also expected to approve a parking arrangement Tuesday night aimed at better accommodating the 25,000 runners who are expected to participate in the Los Angeles Marathon this year. The race, to be held March 21, has been re-routed to conclude at the Santa Monica Pier for the first time.

The proposed resolution on Tuesday's agenda would allow 5,000 cars to park overnight on March 20 in South Beach Lots 4 and 5. The estimated cost of keeping the lots open overnight is expected to be offset by charging $17 for the privilege to park there, a City Hall report said.

nickt@smdp.com

2 articles on planning for rail

Article 1

Why not rail? | Planetizen

Why not rail?
Diana DeRubertis
Sun, 02/07/2010 - 13:03

When faced with the costs and logistics of rail, planners and city officials increasingly seem to favor Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), a trend likely to continue through the current recession. But even with the many persuasive arguments for BRT, the nagging question remains: why not rail?

To be successful, a rapid transit system needs to be comprehensive. Either a city is going to invest in comprehensive BRT (like Brisbane or Bogota), a comprehensive rail network (like Toronto, New York, or European metropolitan rail systems), or a mix of rail and BRT. The halfway approach doesn’t do the job.

The limited experiments with BRT in the United States have so far amounted to “light rail lite”: single corridor bus lines that attempt to mimic light rail. Transportation experts Alan Hoffman and Alasdair Cain argue that significant infrastructure investments — in the form of separated guideways called ‘Quickways’ — are needed before American cities can achieve the ridership and efficiency of the world’s best BRT.

Similarly, light rail ridership suffers because established networks do not yet cover enough ground. In southern California, the Los Angeles Metro and the San Diego Trolley do not reach most residential neighborhoods, tourist destinations or satellite cities, let alone suburban job centers. (The good news is that these systems are expanding, albeit slowly). Rail stops can also be located in disconnected, unwalkable areas.

If a city is serious about mass transit, it will require substantial capital and a fairly bold vision to implement either BRT or rail (light rail or the uber-expensive heavy rail subway). The most persuasive argument for Bus Rapid Transit is that it can be established more quickly and at lower cost. BRT can also use existing automobile infrastructure like wide roads and freeways. Furthermore, because buses are more flexible than fixed rail, they can leave the busway to access out-of-the way housing developments and office parks. In other words, BRT better serves sprawl, which after all is what shapes most American metropolitan areas.

Still, for riders, skepticism about BRT persists. Will it be as sleek and comfortable as a train? Can one read on a bus, even a modern one? Is the experience a vast improvement over a bumpy city bus? Will it be slowed by car traffic? Given the infrastructure required for true BRT, why not simply pursue rail? Elevated busways can look a lot like freeways – how will they affect neighborhoods?

If a modern rail system seems impossible, Toronto presents a good case for investment in higher quality rail, even if that means diverting funds from other modes (i.e., roads and highways). The city opened its first subway in 1954, added two more lines, integrated subways with retained streetcar lines, and more recently supplemented with above-ground light rail. It is not a coincidence that subways were expanded as several freeway projects were canceled.

So, transit riders and planners, for your city would you choose rail, BRT or a combination of both?
Diana DeRubertis is an environmental writer focusing on the urban planning field.

Article 2

What’s the Problem With a National Infrastructure Bank? Capitalism (And Politics) » INFRASTRUCTURIST

What’s the Problem With a National Infrastructure Bank? Capitalism (And Politics)

Posted on Monday February 8th by Melissa Lafsky | 330
The idea of a National Infrastructure Bank has plenty going for it: It could streamline and facilitate necessary projects, secure credit at low rates, and help leverage private funds to create the long-term investment that’s needed to see big projects through to completion.

Still, the concept isn’t without its problems. And the biggest problem, in fact, is right there in the name: Bank. If it’s a bank, then it needs to generate revenue, and therefore make investments that repay themselves. And of course, not all infrastructure projects worth funding are ones that will be rolling in profits. Ken Orski sums up the issue thusly:

[A]s [a recent]press conference and most NIB proposals have urged, the Bank would fund a broad range of public infrastructure projects, some of which, such as schools, public housing and mass transit facilities do not generate a revenue stream that could be used to repay the bank loans. Hence, the NIB would require periodic federal appropriations to cover grants for non-revenue producing projects. And indeed, in its FY 2011 budget request, the White House proposed to launch the bank with a small $4 billion appropriation. Of that amount, $2.2 billion would be for grants, which prompted one former member of the National Infrastructure Financing Commission to observe, that “institutions that give away money without requiring repayment are properly called ‘foundations’ not ‘banks.’” That could be the reason why the White House renamed the NIB in its FY 2011 budget request as the “National Infrastructure Innovation and Finance Fund” (NIIFF) — a clumsy but more accurate designation.

So basically what we’re talking about is a federal organization that injects large amounts of capital on an as-yet-to-be-determined basis, while still trying to convince investors that their money will be reserved for projects that could turn a profit. As Pa. Gov. Ed Rendell told us in a recent interview, there could be safeguards written into the legislation creating the bank to avoid a Fannie/Freddie repeat, and care could be taken with the type of people appointed to it — I.E. make sure every appointee has substantial experience in infrastructure development, such as state secretaries or former DOT employees. Still, the plan leaves plenty in the air as to how and whether necessary but non-profitable projects will be financed.
DiggSubmit

Then there’s the small matter of political power. As Orski puts it:

What is the likelihood that Congress would be willing to turn the power of decision over large-scale capital projects to a bureaucratic organization lodged in the Executive Branch? Probably not very great. Many lawmakers, including the powerful chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), believe that Congress must not abdicate its authority to decide how public capital should be spent. As one Senate aide remarked to us, one cannot “depoliticize” the project selection process, as NIB advocates would urge, because major public infrastructure investment decisions are inherently and fundamentally political in nature.

In other words, as it does with so many potentially good ideas, can Congress kill the National Infrastructure Bank even before it’s born?

Obama’s Money Trains | Journal of Commerce (Source: Journal of Commerce )

Link: Obama’s Money Trains | Journal of Commerce

Obama’s Money Trains

John D. Boyd | Feb 8, 2010 5:00AM GMT

The Journal of Commerce Magazine - News Story

• Washington
|
• Trade
|
• Rail + Intermodal
|
• Government + Regulation
|
• United States

More than half of high-speed rail grants will go into freight corridors to build up inter-city passenger service

It took nearly a year and a stubbornly high unemployment rate before the Obama administration recast its long-awaited $8 billion in rail system grants as part of a jobs strategy.

But when the White House unveiled its list of winners for high-speed rail funding, to boost passenger train service between cities, it quickly became clear large parts of it would go into the freight rail corridors that also carry Amtrak trains.

For instance, of the 13 funding corridors that traverse parts of 31 states, just two would be true high-speed passenger lanes with “bullet trains” that would need their own walled-off tracks away from freight operations.

The first phase of a high-speed rail lane in Florida, linking Tampa and Orlando, got a $1.25 billion grant. A California multicity project, including a 220-mph Los Angeles-San Francisco electrified train service, was awarded $2.25 billion.

The remaining $4.5 billion will be spread across what is mainly the freight rail network. Although some money will build or modify passenger stations, much more will go into freight-owned corridors to add or boost passenger use. Grant projects include signal and track upgrades, “flyovers” to eliminate road crossings, new sidings for trains to pass each other, and automated “positive train control” systems that Congress has ordered installed by 2016 on rail lines that have passenger service.

All of this originated with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act President Obama signed into law last February. Initially, the Federal Railroad Administration expected to cull the deluge of stimulus applications so Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood could award high-speed rail grants last September or October, but the administration put it off four more months.

Meanwhile, with the nation’s jobless rate still at 10 percent as 2010 began, the president began highlighting job-creation plans and timed the high-speed rail announcement for Jan. 28, the day after his State of the Union address.

In return for grant money, freight railroads say they must adjust their operations around passenger service. In most cases, their trains would move along just fine without those upgrades, they say.
But money is heading their way.

One so-called high-speed rail corridor, awarded $1.13 billion, extends from Chicago to St. Louis, and then across Missouri to Kansas City. The planned top speed in Illinois would be 110 mph, within the limits of Amtrak service on upgraded freight line tracks, while the Missouri investment mainly aims to develop reliable on-time passenger service where it usually falls behind schedule.

In North Carolina, projects between Raleigh and Charlotte will get to top speeds of 90 mph, under a $620 million grant for a corridor that includes Richmond, Va., and Washington, D.C.

The Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency Program, or CREATE, received $133 million to build what it said is a critical flyover that will eliminate a crowded junction between a commuter line and Norfolk Southern Railway tracks used by Amtrak. CREATE said that stretch handles 78 Metra commuter trains a day and 60 freight trains.

Iowa’s Department of Transportation cheered the award of $17 million “to improve infrastructure on the BNSF line that provides current Amtrak service across southern Iowa” and boost on-time performance.

Contact John D. Boyd at jboyd@joc.com.

Students voice support for phase two of Expo line (Source: Daily Trojan)

Link: Students voice support for phase two of Expo line Daily Trojan

Students voice support for phase two of Expo line

By BROOKE MATTHEWS · Daily Trojan

Posted February 4, 2010 (4 days ago) at 11:50 pm in News

On the same night USC students voiced their opinions at an Expo Line Construction Authority Boardmeeting about the benefits of the new light rail, the board voted unanimously to extend the line from Downtown to Santa Monica.

Full steam ahead · Construction on phase one of the Expo line is underway by USC, and construction of phase two is expected to start before the end of the year now that the plan has passed. - Geo Tu| Daily Trojan

Undergraduate Student Government President Holden Slusher and about eight other students went to the meeting to lobby for passage of phase two of the light rail. Phase one, which extends from Downtown to Culver City and runs along USC’s main campus, had already been approved.

Later, after students and other advocates had spoken, the board voted 6-0 to extend the rail the seven miles from Culver City to Colorado Avenue and Fourth Street, in the heart of Santa Monica.

The public meeting lasted several hours, as hundreds of residents and students voiced their support for or concerns about phase two of the Expo line project.

Though Slusher did not get a chance to speak at the hearing, he said it was good that other students went and made their voices heard as he believes this issue is important to students.

“We need a way to get around the city,” Slusher said after the meeting.

Officials hope construction will begin on the Santa Monica portion of the line later this year. Construction on the Downtown to Culver City portion is already underway.

“It’s a really great thing for students,” said Helen Moser, USG director of Campus Affairs. “Santa Monica is a really big draw.”

Representatives for Expo Rail reached out to students at USC and UCLA, asking them to show support for phase two at Thursday’s meeting. Moser helped organize a group of students from USG and other campus organizations to speak about the impact Expo Line would have on students.

“This is obviously a great benefit to the students and the faculty,” said Samantha Bricker, chief operating officer of the Expo Line Construction Authority. “It will connect Downtown to Santa Monica and provide linkages to other transportation centers. It will also bring people into the USC Exposition Park area and provide an alternative to the 10 Freeway.”

Some who attended Thursday’s hearing said they worried that at-grade crossings at busy intersections would be dangerous. Others fretted that the crossings would create traffic jams in already congested areas. Officials are considering raising the line above some intersections, which would cost millions of dollars.

The extension will cost an estimated $1.5 billion, funding officials say they’ve already secured from local and state sources. They hope to have the Culver City to Santa Monica portion running by 2015.

“I think the Expo Line will be really great for ’SC students, and I hope that they do extend it out to Santa Monica,” said Madeline Azevedo, a freshman majoring in business administration. “There is so much to do out there, but without a car, it’s almost impossible to get there.”

Azevedo also said she would be interested in taking the train because of its low environmental impact.

Moser said, “We live in this amazing city, and it’s important that students are able to explore it.”

Whitney Blaine contributed to this report.