L.A. Streetcar Announces Fundraiser and Video Campaign (Source: blogdowntown.com)

_{Link: blogdowntown.com/2010/05/5346-la-streetcar-announces-fundraiser-and-video}

L.A. Streetcar Announces Fundraiser and Video Campaign

By ERIC RICHARDSON 
Published: Friday, May 14, 2010, at 10:59AM

Eric Richardson [Flickr]

A streetcar travels through Portland's Pearl District.

DOWNTOWN LOS ANGELES — The Downtown streetcar may not be scheduled to make its first runs until 2014, but L.A. Streetcar, Inc. is looking to make a big push in 2010 with a fundraiser and a promotional video.

The September 30 fundraiser will be hosted by Councilman Jose Huizar, philanthropist Eli Broad, shopping mall developer Rick Caruso and AEG CEO Tim Leiweke.

"We know that a fundraiser isn't going to build the streetcar, but it does allow us to do critical near-term things," explains Dennis Allen, L.A. Streetcar, Inc.'s Executive Director.

He credits Huizar for getting the together the group of heavy hitters to host the event. "He reached out to them, but they understand the significance of what it means for Downtown."

Some of the money raised from the event will go toward increasing the project's visibility with the Downtown public and property owners.

An ad campaign using kiosk space donated by CBS Decaux went live at the end of March, and Allen says the result has been a big uptick in hits to the project's website and new fans on Facebook.

To continue that outreach effort, the project is looking for those who are interested in going on camera to share their thoughts about what a streetcar could do for Downtown.

The promotional video will combine local sentiment with footage of systems in cities such as Portland and Seattle. Allen says that understanding the impact of those systems really requires seeing them in action, and he hopes the video can simulate that. "We asked, how can we bottle that experience and bring it down here?"

Also included will be 3-D renderings of what a streetcar might look like on the streets of Downtown.

Those interested in being interviewed can sign up on the streetcar project's website. Filming will take place on Saturday, May 29.

"Save the Date" information for the September fundraiser can also be found online.

The proposed first phase of the streetcar is intended to connect Bunker Hill and L.A. Live via the Broadway corridor. It is currently estimated to cost around $100 million to complete. Approximately $10 million of that has been raised so far, though the project could get a big boost at the end of June if itreceives a $25 million grant from the federal government.

California High-Speed Rail Authority Seeks New Federal Funds (SOURCE California High-Speed Rail Authority)

_{Link: www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/california-high-speed-rail-authority-seeks-new-federal-funds-94277504.html}

California High-Speed Rail Authority Seeks New Federal Funds

 

 

Local Leaders Support $16.6 Million Bid for Planning

SACRAMENTO, Calif., May 19 /PRNewswire/ -- With strong support from local officials, the California High-Speed Rail Authority has submitted three planning grant applications that could provide as much as $16.6 million in additional federal funding for the state's high-speed train project.

The funds would pay for service development plans that would help keep the preparation of draft environmental documents and preliminary engineering documents on schedule in the Los Angeles to San Diego and Merced to Sacramento sections of the high-speed rail project and on the Altamont Corridor Rail Project. In addition, the Authority is also supporting the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in its effort to apply for rail plan grants.

"California's high-speed train project is the biggest public infrastructure project in the nation," said Authority Chairman Curt Pringle. "We're already leading the pack in federal funding for high-speed rail, and we're committed to fighting to bring every federal dollar possible to California. These new applications show we're continuing to work hard to win additional support and keep high-speed rail on track."

The applications will go to the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA), which has $115 million available for planning and construction funds for high-speed intercity passenger rail under the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act approved in 2008. Up to $50 million will be awarded in this round of funding.

The cities of Sacramento, Riverside, San Bernardino, Pomona, Ontario, El Monte, West Covina and Murrieta all expressed support for the Authority's effort to garner federal funds to improve transportation alternatives in their regions, provide much-needed jobs and many other benefits.

"The high-speed train's economic development and environmental benefits are significant and we want to bring it toSacramento as soon as possible," said Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson. "I am strongly supportive of the High-Speed Rail Authority's current effort to secure additional federal funding that will help us move the project forward more quickly."

In addition, the effort has the support of the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission, which operates the Altamont Commuter Express and is the Authority's partner in the Altamont Corridor Rail Project.

"The Rail Commission strongly supports the Authority's request for federal high-speed and regional rail planning grant funds, and has pledged matching funds in the current MOU. We look forward to supporting your efforts at the federal level in any way we can," wrote Stacey Mortensen, Executive Director of the San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission.

Also supporting the Authority's application for funding are Southern California Association of Governments, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Riverside County Transportation Commission, San Diego County Regional Airport Authority and the San Diego Association of Governments, who are working together as the Southern California High-Speed Rail Inland Corridor Group.

"The City of Riverside is supportive of California's efforts to provide a state-of-the-art passenger rail system to Southern California, specifically to Riverside via the Los Angeles to San Diego corridor," wrote Riverside Mayor Ronald O. Loveridge. "By 2030, more than 22 million will reside along this corridor, with the Inland Empire in particular anticipated to be one of the fastest growing areas of the nation in the coming decades."

"The City of Ontario wishes to express support for the state's pending PRIIA planning grant application for our high-speed train section," wrote Paul S. Leon, Mayor of Ontario, in a letter to the Authority. "Working cooperatively for a number of years with the Authority, we are supportive of the state's efforts to provide a state-of-the-art passenger rail system to Southern California, and specifically, to Ontario via Inland Empire Corridor. High-speed trains will operate along our 160-mile alignment…and connect the state's largest and second largest cities…"

"We see service in this corridor (Los Angeles to San Diego, via Inland Empire Corridor) as an important transportation component to increase mobility, provide intermodal connections including air-rail, decrease congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, and serve as a catalyst for smart-growth development at stations," wrote Pomona Mayor Elliott Rothman, in a letter of support. "…These and related regional corridor connections… will provide a vital link for all of Southern California to our region which includes major workforce, industrial, and commercial resources…"

"Our city has continuously supported California's efforts to provide a state-of-the-art passenger rail system that would benefit the most populous state in the nation," Murrieta Mayor Kelly Bennett wrote. "….we wholeheartedly support your grant application that would allow the Authority to make further progress with the design of the Los Angeles to San Diego section."

Earlier this year, California received approval of $2.37 billion in federal funding, including $2.25 billion for planning and construction of the initial phase of the high-speed rail project, which will run 520 miles between Los Angeles and San Francisco, via the Central Valley.

The applications submitted this week would cover service development plans to be completed within the next two years on later-stage portions of the project, which would complete the 800-mile network across the state and also incorporate the Altamont Rail Corridor Project. The PRIIA funds are expected to be awarded later this summer.

Waxman seeks to have Westside Subway Extension project evaluated by feds all at once

Click to see larger image. Page 2 is after the jump.

If you’re interested in the Westside Subway Extension project, this letter from Rep. Henry Waxman is well worth reading. It’s short but addresses a CRITICAL topic — how the Federal Transit Administration evaluates the project to determine if it’s eligible for federal funding.

In Waxman’s view, the entire Subway Extension needs to be evaluated now — something that could eventually speed construction of the line.

First, some background.

Metro is in the midst of trying to secure federal New Starts funding for the Westside Subway Extension and Downtown Regional Connector projects. New Starts is the fed’s program that helps local areas build big transit projects and the New Starts money is needed to compliment the Measure R sales tax money going to both the subway and the connector.

Click above to see larger image.

As plans stand right now under the long-range planadopted last year by the Board of Directors of Metro, the Westside Subway Extension would be completed in three phases — to Fairfax in 2019, Century City in 2026 and Westwood in 2036.

Why so long? Because the subway is a multibillion dollar project and the $4.2 billion of Measure R sales tax money dedicated to the subway project does not flow into local coffers all at once. It takes years to accumulate and must also be shared with other Measure R project

Attentive readers will recall that the Board of Directors are trying to speed construction of many of the Measure R projects through something called the 30/10 Initiative. First proposed by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the 30/10 plan seeks to secure other  types of federal money — loans, bonds, etc. — to speed up the 12 Measure R transit projects.

Under 30/10, for example, the subway would reach Westwood in 2017, not 2036. BIG DIFFERENCE!!!

That’s one reason Metro and Waxman want the entire project evaluated by the feds now — if the entire project is going to be built at once and not in phases, that work has to be done sooner rather than later.

The other reason to evaluate the whole enchilada/subway at once is that the project, not surprisingly, fares better in several metrics the FTA uses to rate projects. Ridership is one of them and, of course, ridership from the current subway terminus at Wilshire/Western to Westwood is going to be higher than just the first phase between Wilshire/Western and Fairfax.

It remains to be seen how the FTA responds, but I guarantee you The Source is watching closely. In related subway news, Waxman’s letter comes on the heels of a $10-million request by California Senator Dianne Feinstein for $10 million in funding in next year’s budget for planning of the subway and regional connector projects.

-- Steve Hymon

In California’s 36th District, Transportation Emerges as a Major Issue (Source: http://la.streetsblog.org)

In California’s 36th District, Transportation Emerges as a Major Issue

by Damien Newton on May 18, 2010

Harman meets labor.

"I'm on the team!...I'm right here on the Love Train with sisters and brothers in organized labor, the environmental movement and the business community to make this happen right now!" exclaimed incumbent Congresswoman Jane Harman at a rally yesterday for the 30/10 initiative at the Green Line Station near LAX.  (Watch her full speech, Streetscasted here.)  The 30/10 initiative would use federal loans and grants to leverage the half cent sales tax passed by L.A. County voters for transit projects to complete a thirty year program in 10.

Winograd at the Bikerowave. Photo: Bikeside

"I endorse the Cyclists' Bill of Rights.  The first tenet is that cyclists should be able to travel safely and free of fear.  We need voices in Washington that are committed to this vision.  And I am committed to this vision."  Challenger Marcy Winograd asserted at the Bikerowave on Venice Boulevard on April 7, just before being endorsed by Bikeside. (Watch her full statement, from Scoop L.A.'s You Tube page.)  The Cyclists' Bill of Rights is an expression of the twelve right that all cyclists deserve that was put together by the Bike Writers Collective.

In a way, the two statements and venues are symbolic of the campaigns and candidates vying for the Democratic nomination for Congress in the 36th Congressional District which includes much of the Westside and South Bay.  The well-heeled Harman, one of the richest members of Congress, is supported by much of the establishment, including the organized labor groups that surrounded her yesterday as well as most politicians and even the Sierra Club's Political Action Committee.  Winograd is running to Harman's left, with support from smaller, but community based organizations such as Bikeside, and the Progressive Democrats for America; and seems to be at home surrounded by riders and people at work.

But the two candidates' positions also reflect a new political reality for candidates in Southern California.  Los Angeles now has an organized community dedicated to green transportation or Livable Streets causes.  It's now smart politics to embrace transit and bike riding in the "Car Capital of America."  Both Harman and Winograd are embracing two key programs in the Livable Streets platform in Los Angeles: accelerating transit expansion and securing cyclist rights.

30/10 and the Campaign 

But to be fair, each candidate has a history of "walking the walk" on these issues.  While yesterday's 30/10 sometimes felt more like a Jane Harman rally, speakers representing labor as well as Denny Zane and Mayor Villaraigosa all made pitches to support Harman's campaign; the Mayor has been including her in speeches as the first Member of Congress to support 30/10 for months.  Senator Boxer, also up for re-election, may have grabbed the headlines on 30/10 because she's more in a position to make some of the changes needed to see the proposal move forward; but the Mayor claims that it's Harman who first said that Congress could make this happen for Los Angeles.

For Harman, the issue seems to be as much about jobs as it is a transportation vision for Los Angeles.  Given the high unemployment rate for the city and especially the labor movement, Harman's positioning of 30/10 as a jobs creation program makes sense, but Measure R and 30/10 are about a lot more than just getting people back to work.  It's about changing the DNA of L.A.'s transportation network and how Angelenos think of our city and county.

Harman has been a supporter of expanding transit, fighting hard for funds to study extending the Green Line and to build the Torrance Transit Center.  She's been a member of the "Green Line Coalition" dedicated to having the transit line connect directly to LAX and her earmark requests show a lean towards transit projects, with a minority of road projects, for both the transportation funding bill (SAFETEA-LU) and this year's appropriations.

But Winograd is hardly silent on transit expansion or Measure R.  For Winograd, 30/10 is about both the transportation vision and the ability to remake the economy from "a permanent war economy" to a "green economy."  Winograd writes,

Certainly, California pays its fair share of taxes, with virtually half of our tax money subsidizing perpetual war policies championed by my opponent, Jane Harman. For every million dollars she voted to invest in the Iraq invasion or the Afghanistan occupation, we could have doubled the number of jobs had we invested the same money in mass transit.

In Congress, I will fight for federal dollars, low-interest bonds, to construct 30/10 transit projects that will help us get where we really need to go - sustainability. We need light rail, affordable buses, and safe bike lanes to get us out of our cars and into a new frame of mind.

For a full copy of her statement to Streetsblog, click here. 

Bicycling

Meanwhile, Winograd has the enthusiastic support of the only bicycle group that's made an endorsement thus far, Bikeside.  Here again, we see a candidate who truly believes in cycling as a mode choice.  Her enthusiastic embrace of the Cyclists Bill of Rights isn't just posturing, Winograd's campaign seems to invite her supporters to a bike ride every week.  Whether it's part of 350 Day, a tour of Venice's urban gardens, or a trip to the Bikerowave, it seems that the Winograd campaign can't wait to get people to join the candidate on a ride.  Not that embracing cycling on the Westside doesn't make political sense.  Six months ago, there were no cycling groups with the ability to actively support a candidate without risking their non-profit status.  Today, there are two groups and cyclists are ready to "bike the vote" in L.A. like never before.

But it's one thing to be a politician who happens to ride a bike and to be a politician who supports cycling legislatively.  Winograd has pledged to make the Cycling Bill of Rights a guiding principle of her transportation policy in Washington, D.C.  She's gone so far as to promise federal support for community bike co-ops, similar to the Bicycle Kitchen, Bike Oven, Bikerowave, and Valley Bikery,.

In her decades in Congress, Harman doesn't have the record to match Winograd's rhetoric; although the Congresswoman is one of the 182 members of the Congressional Bike Caucus.  When looking for a signature "bike vote," I was only able to find support for the "fringe benefit" for bicycle commuters which created a small, monthly tax write-off for people who choose to commute via bicycle.  A search for the word "bicycle" on her website reveals, well, nothing.

Conclusion

As Measure R and 30/10 move forward, more and more politicians are going to be talking transit in the coming years.  Whether support for local transit projects leads to a solid vote for a "green transportation policy" out of Southern California remains to be seen.  Already in the 36th District, we're seeing a race to champion transportation that's both green and clean in the race for the Democratic Congressional Nomination.

A peek inside the Hollywood & Vine TOD courtesy of the Urban Land Institute (Source: http://thesource.metro.net)

Link: http://thesource.metro.net/2010/05/17/a-peek-inside-the-hollywood-vine-tod-courtesy-of-the-urban-land-institute/

A peek inside the Hollywood & Vine TOD courtesy of the Urban Land Institute

A brand new view: looking towards the Hollywood Hills from a residential unit at the W.

On May 5th the Urban Land Institute (ULI) of Los Angeles hosted a tour and case study of the recently completed Hollywood & Vine Transit Oriented Development (TOD) project. Put on by the Young Leaders Group, the self-proclaimed “younger, hipper” faction of ULI (so hip, in fact, that some of the organizers actually took the train), the event brought together a wide group of  real estate professionals, developers, architects and students all eager to learn how such a large and unique project came to be.

There to explain the process were some of the people instrumental in making the $600 million joint development project a reality: Jeff Cohen and Scott Rynders of Gatehouse Capital; Scott Morrison, Ed Kirk and Tim O’Brien of Legacy Partners; Bill Roschen, LA Planning Commissioner and Principal of Roschen Van Cleve Architects. A true joint development, Gatehouse Capital and Legacy Partners shared development roles on the Metro owned parcel –  with Gatehouse developing the W Hotel and Residences and Legacy responsible for the 1600 Vine Apartments.

The speakers talked about the complexities of bringing such a massive project to life – massive meaning 305 hotel rooms, 143 condos, 375 apartments and ground floor retail space, all of it spanning over 2 million square feet and built over the course of 30 months.

The parcel was originally split between six owners: Metro (light blue), Clark Trust (pink), HJT (dark blue), Shilling Trust (purple), KITRO (yellow) and the Taft Building (brown).

Architect and Planning Commissioner Bill Roschen said, “The complexity is unbelievable. The project is complex in policy, in design and in financing.”

Many of the challenges came from the joint development nature of the project which required the cooperation from disparate entities including the City of L.A., the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA/LA), Metro, and the two development teams.

As Tim O’Brien, Senior Managing Director of Legacy Partners, put it, “This is probably the most monumental public/private partnership venture in the nation.”

The speakers emphasized that despite the complexities involved, the project simply would not have been possible without the joint participation of all the entities.

Also emphasized was the project’s role in the revival of Hollywood and, on a larger scale, the urban renewal of Los Angeles. Roschen noted that the world is changing – people want a return to urbansim – and this project represents that change. It’s mixed use, transit oriented and has an affordable housing component, all relatively new features to L.A. developments. But he also cautioned that it’s a change that L.A. is going to have to grow into.

In fact, this sentiment was echoed throughout the panel. Scott Morrison, V.P. of Operations at Legacy Partners, conceded that many of the residents at 1600 Vine – whose demographics tend toward the young and single – only discover the development’s proximity to Metro after they move in.

A view of the redesigned Red Line portal from a residential unit at the W.

Livable Streets advocate Stephen Box was in attendance and expressed concern that, despite the overall positive vibe from the panel and attendees, the development does not live up to its transit oriented moniker. Box’s issues include a lack of good signage leading residents and guests to and from the Metro station, a lack of decent bicycle facilities and an overemphasis on parking and car culture in general. Case in point: in addition to the subway, the W Hotel also sits above two and a half levels of parking and offers a luxury branded car concierge to residents and guests.

Another guest in attendance, architect Stan Klemanowicz, noted that while the transit element may not be perfectly integrated, future development will create a transit destination out of Hollywood & Vine.

If destination and density are the most vital elements in transit oriented design then Klemanowicz may be right – Roschen noted that Hollywood is becoming a regional center where density is encouraged and the entire panel agreed that the Hollywood & Vine project is a landmark venture that will spur further redevelopment efforts in the area.

Here are some more photographs of the development:

The residential lobby of the W.

Guests on the rooftop of the W, dwarfed by an Iron Man 2 supergraphic advertisemnt.

To the left: the Red Line portal and plaza. To the right: the W Hotel outdoor lounge.

A studio apartment at 1600 Vine Apartments.

Looking down Vine Street from the 1600 Vine Apartments.

Sunset view from the 1600 Vine Apartments outdoor terrace.

The redesigned Red Line plaza features, of all things, public restroom facilities.

Bike facilities, on the other hand, are in short supply.

• 
 
• 
 
• 
 
• 
 
• 
 
• 
 
• 
 
• 

-- Fred Camino

Streetscast: Villaraigosa speaks at 30/10 Press Event

Here, the Mayor speak at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bak4pyF3tbI

Will Real Estate Developers Build Our Mass Transit? (Source: http://www.infrastructurist.com)

Link: 

Will Real Estate Developers Build Our Mass Transit?

Posted on Monday May 17th by Melissa Lafsky | 1,015

Over at the Atlantic, they’re running a series called “The Future of the City.” It includes some lighthearted testimonials on U.S. metropolitan staples likeChicago,  Portland, and Minneapolis, but there are also worthwhile features on topics like the urban neighborhoods’ partial immunity from the Great Recession.

In his piece “Here Comes the Neighborhood,” writer Christopher Leinberger brings up a point that’s infrequently mentioned, but definitely important in the discussion of the long slow death of suburbs and the urban renaissance: “Two-thirds of all households today consist of singles, childless couples, or empty-nesters, and that proportion will rise over the next 20 years. All of these groups tend to prefer walkable urban housing.” He also offers an interesting solution to the “who will fund much-needed public transit?” debate that’s plaguing growing urban areas:

This problem has a solution, one that could be borrowed from U.S. history, and that might help our economy get up more quickly off its knees: What if developers and property owners build the transportation infrastructure themselves?

In the early 20th century, every town of more than 5,000 people was served by streetcars, even though real household income was one-third what it is today. By 1920, metropolitan Los Angeles had the longest street-railway network in the world. Atlanta’s rail system was accessible to nearly all residents. Until 1950, our grandparents and great-grandparents did not need a car to get around, since they could rely upon various forms of rail transit. A hundred years ago, the average household spent only 5 percent of its income on transportation.

How did the country afford that extensive rail system? Real-estate developers, sometimes aided by electric utilities, not only built the systems but paid rent to the cities for the rights-of-way.

Looking back at history, it’s somewhat remarkable how drastically attitudes about private funding of public transit have shifted. According to Leinberger:

When [Senator Francis Newlands from Nevada] Newlands got into the rail-transit business, he wasn’t drawn by the profit potential of streetcars. He was a real-estate developer, and he owned 1,700 acres between Dupont Circle and suburban Chevy Chase in Maryland, land served by his streetcar line. The Rock Creek Railway did not make any money, but it was essential to attracting buyers to Newlands’s housing developments. In essence, Newlands subsidized the railway with the profits from his land development. He and other developers of the time understood that transportation drives development—and that development has to subsidize transportation.

After the Second World War, federally funded highways slowly supplanted this system, creating a windfall for a new batch of developers. One Polish-refugee-turned-real-estate-developer, Nathan Shapell, who owned a large tract of land outside Los Angeles, was approached in the 1960s by the California highway department about the possibility of building a freeway through his property. Shapell was delighted at the prospect—and immediately offered as much land as needed, for free. He also offered to pay for an interchange to get customers to his land.

Needless to say, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to revert modern attitudes fast enough to see recession-worn real estate developers rushing to build new commuter train lines and streetcars. But the idea has merit, particularly when you consider that residents, not developers, may be the ones driving the change. Right now, most states already have laws that permit local voters to create “special-assessment districts,” allowing property owners to vote in a payment for infrastructure upgrades by charging themselves, either in the form of temporarily higher property taxes or onetime fees. Still, these increases are totally voluntary, and depend entirely on the collective views of the taxpayers — which means the key is making sure that homeowners understand the principle behind the increase: that better public transit in a neighborhood means higher property values. Until then, it’s just a nice idea.