Light rail a step closer to reality (Source: www.smdp.com)

Link: Light rail a step closer to reality

Light rail a step closer to reality

By Nick Taborek

February 06, 2010

DOWNTOWN — Transportation officials this week signed off on a plan to extend the Expo light rail line to Downtown Santa Monica, approving the project's environmental review and selecting a route for the line's Westside component.

The decision by the Expo Authority's board on Thursday paves the way for construction to begin this year and marks a major milestone in the effort to link Downtown Santa Monica to Downtown Los Angeles by rail. The first phase of the project linking Downtown L.A. to Culver City is under construction, with the extension to Santa Monica scheduled for completion in 2015.

The Santa Monica City Council has supported the project as a way to reduce traffic, cut down on vehicle emissions and encourage transit-oriented development.

The $1.5 billion extension of the line would travel along Colorado Avenue in Santa Monica with the final stop at Fourth Street, where City Hall officials are mulling plans to create a pedestrian plaza.

Opponents of the project have criticized the environmental review process, saying the Expo authority should have more carefully considered building a portion of the line near Century City underground because of safety and traffic concerns.

Bulldog Realtors
advertisement
As approved, much of the line will be built at street level, though bridges will allow the train to bypass some traffic-clogged intersections, including Cloverfield Boulevard and Olympic Boulevard.

Kevin Hughes, president of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Association, said his group and other Westside homeowners' associations that have banded together as Neighbors for Smart Rail could sue over the plan.

But he said one of the group's chief complaints is that the Expo authority hasn't been receptive to discussing homeowners' "community anxieties" over the project before pressing ahead.

"The only time they've ever talked to me about this was to talk to me in a formal way," he said. "I want somebody to come have breakfast with me."

A potential lawsuit, he said, would center on Expo's alleged failure to adequately analyze Westside traffic impacts and to consider making portions of the line into a subway.

The Expo authority has countered that building a tunnel would cost $224 million and isn't necessary.

Darrell Clarke, a prominent supporter of the light rail project and the president of the group Friends 4 Expo, said the Expo board made the right decision to move ahead with the project.

"There's no reason to delay. The thing has been studied to death," Clarke said.

While Santa Monica leaders have consistently backed Expo, the rail project drew criticism last year when the authority disclosed plans to build a rail maintenance yard on Exposition Boulevard near Stewart Street at a site owned by Verizon.

Residents raised concerns that noise from the 24-hour rail yard facility would disrupt the neighborhood.

The site remains slated for use as a maintenance yard, but Councilwoman Gleam Davis said Expo authority officials "are working diligently with Santa Monica to ensure that [the yard] will have minimal, if any, impacts."

Davis voted in favor of Expo plan on Thursday, sitting on the board as an alternate for Mayor Pro Tem Pam O'Connor, who is a permanent member of the Expo Authority board but missed the meeting because she is recovering from surgery.

"This [project is] important for our community and we will do as a community what we need to do to [preserve] the peace and quiet of our residents," Davis said.

Will Antonio’s 30/10 Gambit for LA Transit Work? (Source: CityWatch)

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

Will Antonio’s 30/10 Gambit for LA Transit Work?

SUBWAY TO THE WE-SHALL-SEA
By Yona Freemark (Posted first at thetransportpolitic.com)

The Active ImageMayor of nation’s second-largest city fights to advance city’s transit planning … by twenty years. It’s a job that necessitates a national infrastructure bank that does not yet exist.

Forget that old cliché about Los Angeles. It’s not the old highway-obsessed metropolis it used to be. In fact, as L.A. matures, it’s densifying, shedding its abhorrence towards public transportation. [LINK]

The region already has one of the most ambitious transit expansion plans in the country; a new light rail line to East L.A. opened last year, the Expo light rail line from downtown to Culver City is under construction, and dozens of other routes are in planning throughout Los Angeles County. The passage in November 2008 of Measure R, an additional half-cent sales tax for transit, means that these projects aren’t just conjectural.

But L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, who has always been a strong proponent of new rail and bus lines, isn’t satisfied by the thirty-year timetable that will be required to complete the projects lined up for $13.7 billion in local funding. (Measure R would also fund $27 billion in transit operations, maintenance, and roads projects.)

Current financial assumptions indicate that the Mayor’s highest priority–an extension of the Westside subway (Purple Line) to Westwood–wouldn’t be complete until 2032. A fixed guideway link along I-405 between the San Fernando Valley and UCLA would have to wait until 2038.

For Mr. Villaraigosa, this situation isn’t feasible: he wants his subway as soon as possible, rather than force his city’s inhabitants to spend decades more in congestion. But over ten years, Measure R is only expected to bring in about $3 billion for transit capital projects–enough to build the first phase of the subway, but nothing else.

Because the Metropolitan Transportation Authority represents L.A. County’s ten million inhabitants, not just the city’s four million, prioritizing a line that would provide service to a tiny percentage of the region’s overall geographic area would not be politically feasible.

In October last year, the mayor suggested an alternative: ask the federal government to loan Metro billions of dollars to complete the majority of the county’s transit projects, in the city and out, in ten years, rather then thirty. The transit authority would then pay Washington back for twenty more years as revenues from Measure R trickled in.

Metro To Hold Community Meeting for Westside Subway Extension Optional Crenshaw Station March 17(Souce:www.metro.net)

Link: Metro | news | Metro To Hold Community Meeting for Westside Subway Extension Optional Crenshaw Station March 17

Metro To Hold Community Meeting for Westside Subway Extension Optional Crenshaw Station March 17

Wednesday March 03, 2010

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, in collaboration with the City of Los Angeles Planning Department, invites the public to a community meeting on March 17 to discuss the optional Wilshire/Crenshaw station under evaluation for the Westside Subway Extension Project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR) currently underway for the Westside Subway Extension identifies Wilshire/Crenshaw as an optional station.

“There is not community consensus in this area as to whether there should be a Wilshire/Crenshaw Station,” said Project Director David Mieger. “We promised the community that we would give them an opportunity to discuss this question. Their input will be one factor in helping us develop our recommendation.” He noted that the study must continue to evaluate a station at Wilshire/Crenshaw.

The staff recommendation about the Wilshire/Crenshaw station will be part of the overall recommendations at the conclusion of the Draft EIS/EIR process. Following a public review period, a “Locally Preferred Alternative” will be presented to the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board of Directors that will make the final decision.

Members of the public are encouraged to attend the upcoming meeting to learn more about the Westside Subway Extension project. Officials from the City of Los Angeles Planning Department also will be on-hand to discuss land-use planning guidelines for the area.

* The meeting will be held Wednesday, March 17, 2010, 6-8 p.m., at the Wilshire United Methodist Church, 4350 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, CA 90010.

This meeting is served by Metro Lines 20, 210, 710 and 720. Free parking is available. Spanish & Korean translation will be provided.

Metro anticipates releasing the Draft EIS/EIR for public comment in summer 2010. The Board of Directors will decide on the recommendations later this year.

Special ADA accommodations are available to the public for Metro-sponsored meetings. All requests for reasonable accommodations must be made at least three working days (72 hours) in advance of the scheduled meeting date. Please telephone the project information line at 213.922.6934. The TDD line is 800-252-9040.

For additional information, visit the Westside Subway Extension project web site at metro.net/westside. Project information also can be found for “Metro Westside Subway Extension” on Facebook. The project information line is 213-922-6934.

From the Facebook Metro Westside Subway Extension fan page

Link: Facebook | Metro Westside Subway Extension

Welcome to the official Facebook home of Metro’s Westside Subway Extension! If you live, work, visit, play or simply travel through Los Angeles, then this group is for you. Here you will learn about the planning taking place for the Westside Subway Extension and how it affects you. Comments, questions and posts on our wall will become part of the official public comment record for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) currently in progress.

Although planning has been underway for a while, don’t worry if you’re new to the process. Welcome! We've posted plenty of background information on www.metro.net/westside explaining how we reached this point in planning for the subway. For those of you who have followed the project for a while, we continue to update this site on a regular basis so be on the lookout for new information.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name: Metro Westside Subway Extension
Category: Organizations - Community Organizations
Description: Welcome to the official Facebook home of Metro’s Westside Subway Extension! If you live, work, visit, play or simply travel through Los Angeles, then this group is for you. Here you will learn about the planning taking place for the Westside Subway Extension and how it affects you. Comments, questions and posts on our wall will become part of the official public comment record for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (Draft EIS/EIR) currently in progress.

Although planning has been underway for a while, don’t worry if you’re new to the process. Welcome! We've posted plenty of background information on www.metro.net/westside explaining how we reached this point in planning for the subway. For those of you who have followed the project for a while, we continue to update this site on a regular basis so be on the lookout for new information.

Stay in touch!

Should the Westside subway have a Crenshaw station? (Source: thesource.metro.net)

The Source » Should the Westside subway have a Crenshaw station?

Should the Westside subway have a Crenshaw station?


See original article for map

The team of Metro staffers that are planning the Westside Subway Extension are holding a meeting on March 17 to discuss a significant issue: should the subway have a station at Wilshire and Crenshaw boulevards?

Stations cost about $200 million to build and there’s been a wide-ranging discussion in the Park Mile section of Wilshire Boulevard about the prospect of having the subway stop there. This is the area surrounded by the communities such as Hancock Park, Windsor Square, Windsor Village, Fremont Place, Wilshire Park and others (click on the above Google map to see a larger aerial view of the neighborhood). Some people in the area want a station, others don’t. Because there hasn’t been consensus — and this is an issue dating back to early subway planning days of the 1980s — the meeting is being held to discuss the issue and to allow Metro staff to gauge how residents now feel about it.

The station is being considered as part of the subway extension draft environmental impact study and Metro staff will issue a recommendation whether or not to build it in that document. The decision, however, will ultimately be up to the Metro Board of Directors.

Here are a few facts and ideas that frame the issue:

*The Crenshaw station would be just one-half mile west of the current Wilshire/Western station. That’s pretty close compared to other stations on the Westside Extension, which are being planned to be about a mile apart. However, if the Crenshaw station is not built, there would be a two-mile gap between the Wilshire/Western station and a station at La Brea. That’s pretty far.

*The area around Crenshaw and Wilshire is mostly residential and fairly low density in terms of population when compared to Koreatown to the east and Wilshire Boulevard west of La Brea. Preliminary projections suggest that the number of people using the station would be low compared to other stations, though on par with some existing and planned stations. That raises the question over whether money spent on a Crenshaw station might better be spent on other aspects of the line.

*One of the concerns in the community is that a new station will bring additional development. That is probably correct, though new development may occur over time anyway. The question is how much. Generally speaking, the current zoning regulations in place do allow for some additional development — as is the case in much of Los Angeles — but not all that much compared to more dense areas to the east and west.

*There is also the matter of the Crenshaw Line light rail project, which will have one terminus at Crenshaw and the Expo Line — about three miles south of Crenshaw and Wilshire. There are no current plans to extend the Crenshaw Line to the north and the Crenshaw Corridor Northern Segment Feasibility Study indicated that it would probably be better to bring that line up to Wilshire west of Crenshaw, possibly at La Brea, Fairfax or San Vicente.

*Another question sure to be batted around: if a station is not built now, will residents regret that in 10 or 20 years? You can’t really go back and add a station to a line already in operation without shutting it down. And that’s hard to imagine happening.

What do you think? Let us know your opinion by emailing us at thesource@metro.net. Or, to make your views an official part of the study, send them to WestsideExtension@metro.net or on the new Westside Subway Extension page on Facebook.

The press release about the March 17 meeting is below.

METRO TO HOLD COMMUNITY MEETING FOR WESTSIDE SUBWAY EXTENSION OPTIONAL CRENSHAW STATION

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, in collaboration with the City of Los Angeles Planning Department, invites the public to a community meeting on March 17 to discuss the optional Wilshire/Crenshaw station under evaluation for the Westside Subway Extension Project. The Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (DEIS/DEIR) currently underway for the Westside Subway Extension identifies Wilshire/Crenshaw as an optional station.

“There is not community consensus in this area as to whether there should be a Wilshire/Crenshaw Station,” said Project Director David Mieger. “We promised the community that we would give them an opportunity to discuss this question. Their input will be one factor in helping us develop our recommendation.” He noted that the study must continue to evaluate a station at Wilshire/Crenshaw.

The staff recommendation about the Wilshire/Crenshaw station will be part of the overall recommendations at the conclusion of the Draft EIS/EIR process. Following a public review period, a “Locally Preferred Alternative” will be presented to the Metro Board of Directors who will make the ultimate decision.

Members of the public are encouraged to attend the upcoming meeting to learn more about the Westside Subway Extension project. Officials from the City of Los Angeles Planning Department will also be on-hand to discuss land use planning guidelines for the area.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

6-8 p.m.

Wilshire United Methodist Church

4350 Wilshire Boulevard

Los Angeles, CA 90010

This meeting is served by Metro Line 20, 210, 710 and 720. Free parking is available. Spanish & Korean translation will be provided.

Metro anticipates releasing the Draft EIS/EIR for public comment in summer 2010. The Metro Board of Directors will decide on the recommendations later this year.

Special ADA accommodations are available to the public for Metro-sponsored meetings. All requests for reasonable accommodations must be made at least three working days (72 hours) in advance of the scheduled meeting date. Please telephone the project information line at 213.922.6934. The TDD line is 800-252-9040.

For additional information, visit the Westside Subway Extension project web site at metro.net/westside. Project information can also be found for “Metro Westside Subway Extension” on Facebook. The project information line is 213-922-6934.


-- Steve Hymon

Debates over High Speed Rail Likely to Intensify Locally (Source: LAist)

Debates over High Speed Rail Likely to Intensify Locally - LAist

Debates over High Speed Rail Likely to Intensify Locally


Local controversy over high speed rail has been more commonplace in the Bay Area, but some believe that as plans progress in Southern California for the L.A. to Anaheim segment, among others, we'll be hearing more about it.

Case in point, a recent LA Times article about HSR controversies has ruffled feathers for bloggers, creating its own meta-controversy of sorts. In one rebuttle, Robert Cruickshank at the CAHSR Blog titled a post "LA Times Reports on HSR Controversy, Not HSR Facts." Opinions on the Times and Cruickshank's writing aside, this is just the beginning of the local debate here in Southern California.

"Expect to see more of these kinds of debates," noted Damien Newton at Streetsblog LA. "As more government and private money flows in to High Speed Rail planning and construction; there's going to be more scrutiny and more controversy." And with that, bring it on.
user-pic
By Zach Behrens in News on March 3, 2010 9:03 AM

Why NYC's New Dedicated Crosstown Bus Lane Owes a Debt to Bogota, Colombia (Source: www.fastcompany.com)

Why NYC's New Dedicated Crosstown Bus Lane Owes a Debt to Bogota, Colombia | Design & Innovation | Fast Company

Why NYC's New Dedicated Crosstown Bus Lane Owes a Debt to Bogota, Colombia

(Like LA's orange line, other cities are adopting the idea of having fully dedicated express-lane for buses)

BY Cliff KuangTue Mar 2, 2010
How one brilliant idea has traveled from Bogota, Colombia all the way to New York City.

Bus

Urban planners, rejoice! Today, the New York City Department of Transit announced a radical new plan for improving the city's bus lines: A fully dedicated express-lane for buses, running crosstown on 34th Street. It's expected to improve bus speeds by 35%, on a route where buses are stationary a whopping 40% of the time. And it marks another huge, bold idea from Janette Sadik-Khan, the DOT commissioner who's overseen a slew of projects, ranging from the new sidewalk saffolding to a pedestrianized Times Square.

Bus Station

That's a coup for harried New Yorkers, but there's a bigger story here, and one other outsize urban visionary: The New York proposal marks a huge coup for an idea that began in Curitiba, Brazil; and then was co-opted in Bogota, Colombia; and it's now been spread around the world by Enrique Peñalosa, the former mayor of Bogota who's become a globe-trotting evangelist for better urban planning.

Bogota

During his tenure as Mayor, Peñalosa installed the TransMilenio system in Bogota (pictured above, via GOOD), which has a slew of innovations, in addition to dedicated express bus-lanes: First, to increase the robustness of the network, smaller "feeder" buses trundle through outlying areas, bringing them to centralized stations--much like the hub-and-spoke system for airlines, or train systems across the world. The buses themselves are designed to minimize waits: The fare is collected beforehand, and the floor of the bus is low slung, so that passengers can board more quickly. Real-time systems let riders know exactly when the next bus arrives--a key component in encouraging ridership. (For our previous coverage of TransMilenio, click here.)

For Peñalosa, the system solved the problem of cheap, scalable mass transit: Bogota is choked with traffic, but Bogota simply couldn't afford a new subway system. So they had to adopt an innovative alternative. And they found that model in the buses of Curitaba, Brazil (pictured below).

Curitaba

The idea turns out to have been a tremendous success, both in Colombia and Los Angeles, where a version of the TransMilenio, the Orange Line, began operating in 2005. Since then, traffic along its route during the morning rush hour is moving 14% faster, and the rush hour itself begins 11 minutes later.


With lots of American cities finding themselves with the same problems as Bogota, you can bet we've only begun to see the influence of the Transmilenio, and Peñalosa.

LACMTA adds underground alternative to Regional Connector study (Source: /www.progressiverailroading.com)

LACMTA adds underground alternative to Regional Connector study

LACMTA adds underground alternative to Regional Connector study

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s (LACMTA) board recently approved the addition of a new underground light-rail alternative beneath Little Tokyo to the Regional Connector Transit Corridor study that’s under environmental review. The Regional Connector would complete a nearly two-mile transit gap between the Metro Gold, Blue and future Expo lines through downtown Los Angeles.

During scoping and working group meetings, Little Tokyo community members opposed a grade crossing at First and Alameda Streets that they believed would disrupt street activity in the historic area. Projected to cost between $200 million and $300 million, the new alternative proposes two variations of an underground crossing at the intersection to keep trains grade separated and the addition of an underground station. Portals would be built on both streets to enable trains to surface and connect with the existing Metro Gold Line.

A project team that’s preparing a draft environmental impact study/report now will conduct technical studies to determine the alternative’s costs, impacts and benefits. LACMTA plans to present the board a locally preferred alternative for final environmental review later this year.

If funding is obtained through a combination of local, state and federal sources, the project could break ground in 2014 and be completed in 2018 or 2019.

Heated debate over high-speed train station in Burbank (Source: www.examiner.com)

Heated debate over high-speed train station in Burbank

Heated debate over high-speed train station in Burbank
February 28, 4:02 AMBurbank Community ExaminerJodi Tack

Include other special offers from Examiner.com
Terms of Use

Areas considered for construction of a high-speed rail station in Burbank.
Top: Railway near Alameda Avenue, viewed from Linden Avenue
Bottom: Site near Burbank Blvd., viewed from Magnolia Blvd.

See also: California moving forward with high-speed train plans


In an often tense Burbank community meeting on Wednesday, February 24th, project managers from the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) presented their plan for a high-speed rail station to a room full of citizens who questioned the logic behind this behemoth of a transportation project. With Burbank Principal Transportation Planner David Kriske presiding and Vice Mayor Anja Reinke watching from the back of the room, CHSRA Project Manager Dan Tempelis outlined his agency’s proposed 800-mile rail system and its route through the local area, from Downtown Los Angeles to Palmdale.

When the system is completed, CHSRA projects that there will be 20-22 trains traveling the Los Angeles to Palmdale corridor every hour during peak hours (10-11 trains in each direction). Not all will stop in Burbank, as express trains are planned to travel nonstop between Union Station and San Francisco, with local and regional trains offering service to Burbank and smaller communities. The trains are expected to travel up to 160 miles per hour (mph) through the city, accelerating to their optimal speed of 220 mph by the time they reach the north San Fernando Valley.

The high-speed trains would share the existing rail corridor with Metrolink, Amtrak and freight operations, but extensive construction and infrastructure redesign would still be needed throughout the city. An electrically-powered steel wheel on steel rail design, the high-speed train would need dedicated tracks parallel to the ones used by Metrolink and other carriers. The existing tracks would need to be shifted west and the corridor would need to be widened by 10-15 feet to accommodate this side-by-side positioning. As many feared, Tempelis confirmed that the state could seize private property by eminent domain to facilitate this expansion.

Due to the speed at which the new train operates, it requires a completely sealed corridor, inaccessible to pedestrians and other vehicles. Significant infrastructure redesign would be needed to allow the train to run beneath roadways in trenches or tunnels, above them on elevated tracks, or at grade level alongside roadways that are closed off from the tracks. CHSRA plans to use all three options at various points along the railway, each of which carries its own set of concerns for Burbank residents.

A below-grade corridor in Burbank would take the form of trenches. This design has residents worried about safety -- preventing children, animals and others from falling in, accidentally or otherwise -- and unsightly walls that may become targets of vandalism and graffiti.

With elevated tracks, nearby residents worry about noise and vibrations, but project engineers assert that there is actually less disturbance with high-speed trains as compared to traditional trains, due to the lightweight construction and smooth rails of the former.

In areas where the train would travel at grade level with existing roadways, residents are concerned about eminent domain issues and permanent street closures affecting traffic congestion. At this time, the only planned permanent closure in Burbank is Arvilla Avenue, north of the airport.

The biggest concern for nearly all Burbank residents, however, is the construction of a new high-speed rail station near Downtown Burbank. The Burbank Metrolink station is one of the busiest in the county, making the city a logical choice for Rail Authority planners. Other stops in the region would include Union Station downtown, and yet-to-be-constructed stations in Sylmar and Palmdale.

High-speed rail stations require 1400-foot platforms with straight tracks. This eliminates the site of the current Burbank Metrolink station as a possibility, due to a curve in the tracks there. The area must also be wide enough to accommodate six parallel tracks: two for Metrolink and other carriers, two for high-speed rail travel, and two for high-speed rail passenger platforms. CHSRA has identified two possible locations for such a station in Burbank:

1. Near Alameda Avenue, west of San Fernando Boulevard. This would be an elevated-track platform that would run above Alameda. The area surrounding the tracks is occupied by warehouses and small production companies, which would all be displaced if the state chooses this location.
2. A vacant lot just west of the 5 Freeway, between Magnolia Boulevard and Burbank Boulevard. A station here would sit below street level, but impacts plans to widen the freeway with carpool lanes through the area.


Regardless of which option is chosen, the Burbank Metrolink station will likely be relocated to the site of the high-speed rail station. Planners must also squeeze 2,000 parking spaces onto the site to accommodate the projected 5,000 riders per day that the Burbank station will service.

Residents are understandably worried about increased traffic and congestion that the station will bring to already-congested areas of the city. They also dread the dirt, noise, and daily disruptions they will face during the years it will take to construct this system.

If the plans are approved, construction could begin in 2014 for train operation to commence in 2020. For a city that’s already fed up with a long-term freeway project on the other side of town, many wonder why they are being asked to stomach another decade of major development, particularly when the project has been heavily criticized for underestimating its cost, overestimating its profitability, and failing to justify its necessity -- issues which Tempelis avoided or ignored during Wednesday’s meeting, much to the frustration of residents in attendance.

The City of Burbank has yet to make any formal recommendation in regard to the California High-Speed Rail Project and is soliciting input from the public. If you would like to make your opinion known, please do so by:

* Attending the City Council meeting on Tuesday, March 2nd, when the high-speed rail project will be discussed.
* Submitting a comment through the City of Burbank website.
* Calling or writing to the City of Burbank Community Development Department, Planning & Transportation Division, Community Services Building, 150 North Third Street, Burbank, CA 91502; (818) 238-5250.

Train fans send off final 500-series Nozomi service from Tokyo

Link: Train fans send off final 500-series Nozomi service from Tokyo - The Mainichi Daily News

Train fans send off final 500-series Nozomi service from Tokyo
Railway fans take photos of a 500-series Nozomi bullet train at Tokyo Station on Sunday, as it leaves for its last run. (Mainichi)
Railway fans take photos of a 500-series Nozomi bullet train at Tokyo Station on Sunday, as it leaves for its last run. (Mainichi)

Some 1,500 railway fans bid farewell to a 500-series Nozomi bullet train at Tokyo Station on Sunday, as the last service departed for Shin-Osaka.

The 500-series trains, popular for their futuristic pointed nose cones, entered service in March 1997 between Shin-Osaka and Hakata. It became the first train to attain a top speed of 300 kilometers per hour in service in the world.

The 500 series also began to travel between Tokyo and Hakata in November 1997, but the trains were retired from Nozomi service on Sunday to be replaced with the new N700 series. The 500 series was put in use for Kodama services between Shin-Osaka and Hakata on Monday.

"I liked it the most among all the shinkansen trains," said a 9-year-old boy from Tokyo's Hachioji, who sent the 500-series Nozomi off with a drawing of the train in his hand at Tokyo Station on Sunday. "I want to say 'thank you' to the train."

A 26-year-old company employee from the Saitama Prefecture city of Shiki was also sorry to say goodbye to the train: "Since I learned about the last run, I only used the 500 series."

(Mainichi Japan) March 1, 2010

Riding the bus changes her view (Source:latimes.com)

Link: Riding the bus changes her view - latimes.com

Riding the bus changes her view

A self-described 'snob' makes the switch to public transit. Though frustrating, it proves enriching in ways she never expected.
On board

Jacquelyn Carr had rarely ridden a bus until last year. "This feels different, this looks different," she says. "When you drive through the streets of L.A., you're not looking around, talking to people." (Liz O. Baylen / Los Angeles Times)

By Ari B. Bloomekatz

February 27, 2010

The first time Jacquelyn Carr decided to take a bus in Los Angeles, she felt as if she were navigating a new world.

As she arrived at the bus stop at Wilshire Boulevard and Barrington Avenue, the 26-year-old wondered if she was on the right side of the street. She could not help but fixate on what her friends would think if they saw her.

She grabbed a seat on the bus and immediately noticed the garish multicolored upholstery of the seats. She couldn't help but wonder what fabric they used.

The ride was a little bumpy and Carr kept to herself, adopting a sort of tunnel vision. She brought a book, "The Alchemist," and when she got to work, she applied a good dose of hand sanitizer.

"I felt like I was too good for the bus," said Carr, recalling her virgin voyage last October with a mixture of embarrassment and marvel. "I think there's a social understanding and a construction around that if you take the bus, you take it because you don't have money. There's a social standard. Obviously I had bought into that."

A year ago, Carr would not have been caught dead on a bus.

She pulled into town from Indiana University in 2006 and quickly got a job at a talent agency. She drove a 2005 Volkswagen Jetta with tinted windows and thought of one day becoming a publicist.

She boasted of never taking a municipal bus -- save for the campus shuttle in college or party buses chartered for a night out with friends.

But her job working in Hollywood publicity went away. Then the lease on the Jetta was up. Her parents, who had been helping cover the $250 monthly payments, told her she would have to foot the bill on her own.

She could have pinched pennies and gotten a cheaper car. Instead, she decided to try the bus.

All Carr had to do was walk about half a mile to a bus stop just south of her apartment in Brentwood and catch the 720 Rapid for a straight shot down Wilshire into Beverly Hills, where she now works at the "yoga-inspired" retailer Lululemon Athletica.

The ride is only 20 minutes, yet there is an additional 22 minutes of walking from her apartment and to her shop. And that's when the buses are running on time and traffic isn't gridlocked.

But that was doable, she thought, as long as the bus was clean.

Over the next few months, she found that adding the bus to her life would be much more complex -- filled with frustrations but also enriching her life in ways she never expected.

Carr represents a relatively small but highly important segment of the MTA's passenger base: people who could commute by car but take the bus instead. Such "discretionary riders" currently make up a little more than a quarter of total ridership.

Transportation officials consider people like Carr central to the agency's future as it builds more rail lines with hopes of easing congestion by getting people out of their cars.

Carr can recite the improbabilities of becoming a bus rider: The commute is longer, less predictable and often more harried. There's standing in crowded buses and waiting when buses deviate from their schedules. Getting around nights and weekends is even harder -- and Carr sometimes relies on friends for trips to dinner or to a party.

Despite all this, Carr says it feels good to take the bus. She's saving money that would have been going to her car: about $450 a month on gas, insurance and car payments, not to mention oil changes and tuneups. She also feels she's helping the environment -- and the bus gives her a front-row seat in a city she missed when she was driving and focused on traffic.

"This feels different, this looks different," said Carr, who has a quick grin, long, brown hair and a penchant for bright-colored clothes and big sunglasses. "When you drive through the streets of L.A., you're not looking around, talking to people."

The first rides were the hardest.

In October, a woman sitting across from Carr began staring at her intensely.

Carr was wearing neon-green, aviator-style sunglasses.

Carr wondered whether the woman thought she smelled funny. She forced a smile. No response. The woman continued to stare before nodding off to sleep.

The encounter left Carr feeling uneasy. She adopted a strategy of shutting everyone else out. She often read, sent messages to friends on her BlackBerry or put on headphones and listened to music.

But slowly she began to let her guard down. It started with smiles, then turned to quick chats about weather and working out.

Carr is naturally gregarious, and she found that chatting with passengers was the best way to ease her anxieties about riding the bus. She started to make eye contact with people and have a little talk -- even if it lasted only a few minutes. She also wrote down some of her experiences in a notebook.

Those notes turned into a blog called Snob on a Bus.

She envisioned the blog as a way to keep friends and family updated on her bus adventures. But it soon became a repository for her thoughts on mass transportation and her dreams about making her commute better.

Early on, she lamented how unlikely it was that any of her car-owning friends would ever join her on the bus.

How fun to ride the bus with friends. I could stare at the bus doors EVERY day and probably never see a friend of mine jump on. How great would that be? Like when you are grocery shopping and run into an old friend and you talk over lettuce.

Her friends wouldn't materialize, but she met some new ones.

One night in November, Carr was riding to meet a group for a run and started talking with an older man named Enrique, who needed help into his seat.

She couldn't decipher his accent but told him his jacket was wonderful and that he was "trendy and hip." He smiled back, telling her that if you have clothes long enough, they always come back into style.

He then asked if she was a movie star. The comment made her day.

"In my car I wouldn't have that with my Lady Gaga on the radio," Carr recalled later.

Another triumph came a few weeks later, when a woman with white hair hidden under a winter cap shouted from the front of a bus, furiously digging through a trash bag.

"Does anyone have change? Hello?! Is anyone listening to me?" the woman said loudly.

Most of the passengers looked at the floor or stared straight ahead -- bracing for one of those uncomfortable moments veteran bus riders come to expect.

But Carr perked up. "I'm listening!" she said, jumping out of her seat and bounding to the front of the bus to meet the woman. Together, they counted out 11 dimes. The extra one "just in case," Carr said.

The woman blessed Carr, explaining that she was returning from a trip to visit her son at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center and needed to get home.

"It's nice to meet you," Carr said. "I'm Jacki."

Finally, in early January she was able to persuade a few friends to join her after a group dinner in Venice followed by some drinking and dancing. Carr chose a restaurant with a bus stop nearby.

They agreed to leave for home at 1:30 a.m. Carr had never taken the bus that late and was not sure what to expect. Stumbling but rushing, the group got to the bus stop just before the coach pulled away.

They piled into the front seats and started talking with the driver. Before long, the bus was echoing with alcohol-fueled hoots and laughter. The driver seemed to take great pleasure in playfully needling the group, at one point calling them "idiots" for being so boisterous. The group called her Patty, even though Carr can't remember whether that was her real name.

The group told "Patty" she deserved an award for best late-night bus driver. And the ride home ended up being the most memorable part of the evening.

By now, it was clear the bus had become part of Carr's life.

But it was far from a love affair.

Just to note, there are some pressing things about not having a car and riding the bus that I ponder at times. Like how long it takes me to get somewhere with the leaving the house early to walk the 15 minutes to the bus stop, to wait for the bus, to play stop-and-go down Wilshire. Or, when the bus is late. I mean, I know it happens but it really puts a kink in my schedule. Or, when you just want to listen to the radio and sing at the top of your lungs with the windows rolled down.

Later, she also complained that some of the buses smell like greasy fast food, and admitted she gets tired of wanting to go places on a whim and realizing that's not always easy.

"You start to question how much of your life you are spending walking to the bus stop," Carr said. "I'm trying to be positive."

And she missed the trunk of her Jetta.

She groaned recently because her shoulders were bruised from carrying groceries and wine home from Trader Joe's in her backpack.

There are some days she relies on friends and co-workers to take her to work and yoga classes. But she makes a point of saying she never asks for a ride -- only accepts offers.

She dreams of one day owning a hybrid or fully electric car, but said "it's not something I see happening any time soon."

But despite the aches and inconveniences, Carr still believes in her bus dreams -- meeting new people and perhaps even finding that special someone.

She might be on her way.

"My bag matches your jacket," a young man named Peter told her on the 720.

They talked about how bad the television station is on the bus and where they each came from and went to school. At one point, they both got out of their seats for other people.

Then came Carr's stop.

"Do you ride the bus often?" Peter asked.

"Every day," Carr said, before walking away. "Every day, my friend."

ari.bloomekatz@latimes.com

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

Another downtown subway station? (Source: thesource.metro.net)

The Source » Another downtown subway station?

Posted by Steve Hymon on February 26, 2010 - 8:48 am
Another downtown subway station?

Click here for map
View Extend the subway? in a larger map

I wanted to circle back to the end of Thursday’s meeting of the Metro Board of Directors. Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge was serving on the Board yesterday as a one-day substitute — two of the city of Los Angeles appointees to the Board were absent — and at the end of the meeting LaBonge made a simple verbal motion.

He wanted to know if it would be possible to extend subway service downtown to Sixth Street. LaBonge’s reasoning: although Union Station serves as a terminus for subway service, the tracks continue south from Union Station and rise to street level, ending at Metro’s subway maintenance facility between Santa Fe Avenue and the Los Angeles River.

In LaBonge’s view, the infrastructure is already there and all that’s needed is a platform for passengers. So why not add another mile of subway service to the downtown arts district at minimal cost?

I first met Councilman LaBonge in Jan. 2005, when I was assigned to cover the Council for the L.A. Times. On that very first meeting he mentioned his idea about the subway and it’s something he’s been talking about for a long time to a lot of people. He even has large posterboard maps in his office showing where a station could be. It’s just one of those ideas that hasn’t gained traction at Metro.

I’ve always thought it was an intriguing concept. The obvious question is how much would it cost — nothing is free in the world of mass transit — and whether there’s enough demand in the arts district to justify that cost. The area has certainly seen a steady increase in residential housing and seems poised to continue to blossom, but neighborhood sidewalks aren’t exactly overwhelmed with people.

Still, downtown Los Angeles covers a huge area and rail service is mostly concentrated in the central business district. Bringing other parts of downtown into the rail fold is certainly enticing and for that reason, The Source very much looks forward to posting the Metro staff report on LaBonge’s idea.


-- Steve Hymon

Approval of Light Rail Concerns Neighbors (Source: Corsair)

Link: Corsair - Approval of Light Rail Concerns Neighbors

Approval of Light Rail Concerns Neighbors

By By Daniel Ross

Published: Thursday, February 25, 2010

Updated: Thursday, February 25, 2010
Expo Line

Michael Story

Kim Christiansen, Board Member of Neighbors for Smart Rail (NFSR), speaks on behalf of neighbors concerned by the approval of the rail line being built less than a mile from their homes.

In a packed meeting at the Palms Park Recreational Center on Feb. 20, local residents assembled to discuss an intended legal challenge to the Expo Authority to get a portion of the Expo Light Rail Line built below ground level.

Neighborhoods For Smart Rail, a coalition of homeowner organizations from the Rancho Park and Cheviot Hills areas, arranged the meeting to inform local residents of their intention to take their case to the Los Angeles County Superior Court, using a Final Environmental Impact Report they regard as being fundamentally and fatally flawed, as the basis of their argument.

The FEIR was submitted at an Expo Authority board meeting on Feb. 4, and its approval green-lighted construction to begin on phase 2 of the Expo Line project. Originally scheduled to begin later this year, phase 2 will link Culver City, where phase 1 finishes at Venice and Robertson, with Santa Monica.

However, having spent a number of years pushing to get the portion of the Expo Line between Overland and Sepulveda constructed below-grade (below ground), NFSR believe that the FEIR fails to address a number of fundamental issues which should have formed part of the report, and therefore makes its legality questionable.

“This is the worst EIR I have ever seen,” said Mike Eveloff, President of the Track 7260 Homeowners Association. “The report was supposed to take everything into account before any mitigating measures were made, but they’ve deliberately fudged the baseline to avoid taking [below-grade] into account.”

Other than taking pre-emptive measures to satisfy certain requirements of the report, something Eveloff said is a violation of protocol, he said that the Expo Authority also failed to take into account the effect the rail line would have on traffic at a number of important and heavily congested intersections, and failed to adequately address the effect it would have on emergency services already stretched thin.

“The [Metropolitan Transit Authority] said that the rail crossing is just like any other light,” said Eveloff, “but that’s not true. An ambulance can’t go through a rail-crossing when the rails down, and those few extra minutes could be the matter between life and death.”

Health and safety is a major worry for local residents, and among some of their concerns are the proximity of the proposed line to the Overland Elementary School, roughly 70 feet, and the overall safety record of the MTA. According to NFSR, the Blue line recorded its 99th fatality as of last week, and approximately its 860th accident overall.

“The MTA took a number of concerned parents to see their Gold Line and show them a stretch that runs right beside another school, just to allay any fears they might have,” said Terri Tippit, President of the NFSR, “and within two hours of them leaving, there was an accident right in front of the school.”

In response to NFSR’s intention of legal action, Monica Boin, project director of phase 2 for the Expo Construction Authority, said that they had worked in conjunction with the City of LA to decide upon which intersections should be examined and included in the FEIR. She also said that any claims on behalf of the NFSR that the Expo Authority did not examine possible alternatives to an at-grade rail-line were “totally incorrect on their part,” and added that the Expo Authority are not obligated to examine every concern raised by the public.

Regarding the general safety record of the MTA, Boin said that they are doing “everything they possibly can” to improve safety features throughout the whole operation. She also said that while the aforementioned accident was unfortunate, it was “driver error, and not mechanical error” that caused the incident.

One other issue that arose from the Expo Board meeting that ratified the FEIR, was a concern by the NFSR that SMC students were being used as political lobbyists. They said that two bus-loads of students, some of whom they claim had only a limited knowledge of the full ramifications of the line, were taken to the meeting where their presence not only painted a rather skewed picture of public opinion, but prevented many NFSR members from stating publicly their case.

However, Genevieve Bertone, project manager of Sustainability Coordination, and an integral figure in the student representation that day, said that far from using the students as political pawns, they were merely voicing the concerns of a wider group of people.

“We’re not using students for political lobbying, we were allowing stakeholders the opportunity to have an input on a project that directly affects them.

A lot of people from low-income households don’t have access to events like that. I think everybody who’s affected by the light-rail should have the opportunity to have their say.”

The 30-day deadline for a law-suit to be filed will be March 4.

OP-ED: Metro’s Expo Line plan will hurt businesses and neighborhoods in L.A.’s South-Central and Westside. (Source: )Los Angeles Business Journal Online

Los Angeles Business Journal Online - business news and information for Los Angeles California

Heavy Impact of Light Rail

OP-ED: Metro’s Expo Line plan will hurt businesses and neighborhoods in L.A.’s South-Central and Westside.

By MARK RIDLEY-THOMAS

A light-rail line, when built carefully to fit its surroundings, can create a corridor for high-value commercial and residential development.

But a train rumbling through busy intersections in front of shops, homes and schools can also condemn a community to permanent second-class status.

The Expo Line, now being constructed to eventually run from downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica, is already alarming residents and business owners in both South-Central and the Westside.

That’s because the light-rail line’s planning methods call for trains to run at street level through busy intersections, including the neighborhoods surrounding Dorsey High School and the Westside Pavilion shopping mall.

Metro’s Grade Crossing Policy dictates whether a train crosses an intersection at street level, is elevated above the crossing or put underground.

Adopted in 2003, the policy favors car traffic volume in decision-making: Train tracks are slated to be built above or below streets at the intersections that move the most cars, since these are most likely to see traffic snarled by the trains.

Coincidentally, the intersections with the most car traffic – and those set to get grade-separated crossings – tend also to be in more well-off neighborhoods. Those areas tend to have vibrant commercial centers, which in turn generate car traffic.

In the low-income neighborhoods in which apartment dwellers will look straight out their front windows to see speeding trains, and where retail stores already lead a fragile existence, the rail line could become a development death sentence.

Land values can quickly be dragged down by a poorly executed rail line. If trains take up lanes previously used by cars, the area’s traffic-handling ability is reduced. When that happens, developers must downsize any new building projects to fit that lower capacity.

When running trains make it difficult for cars to drive in and out of store parking lots, or to easily make turns, a rail line can be disastrous for retailers.

Should Metro Extend the Red/Purple Lines to Downtown's Arts District? (Source: LAist)

List: Should Metro Extend the Red/Purple Lines to Downtown's Arts District? - LAist

Should Metro Extend the Red/Purple Lines to Downtown's Arts District?


L.A. City Councilmember Tom LaBonge certainly thinks so. At yesterday's Metro Board Meeting, which he is temporarily appointed to, LaBonge entered a verbal motion in an effort to extend rail service on already existing track to 6th Street in the Arts District.

“This is a no-brainer,” he said in a statement. “The track is already there. It would help bring people to the lofts, galleries and restaurants in the Arts District and connect SCI-Arc (Southern California Institute of Architecture) to the rest of the city.”

Specifically, LaBonge's motion drects Metro to report back in 90 days the feasibility, ridership and cost of extending Red and Pruple Line service from its current terminus at Union Station to the Arts District, where a station would be built on 6th Street. The track leads to a maintenance yard.

Currently, a Gold Line station sits at the edge of the Arts District and Little Tokyo at 1st and Alameda.
user-pic
By Zach Behrens in News on February 26, 2010 1:41 PM