El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard (Source: Th Daily Breeze)

El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard - The Daily Breeze

El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard

By Andrea Woodhouse

Posted: 11/15/2009 06:02:19 AM PST

El Segundo city officials are seething over a county pitch to build a train maintenance facility in town as part of an estimated $1.7 billion proposed light rail project.

And leaders of tiny El Segundo, a scrappy town if there ever was one, have all but promised to sue should the Metropolitan Transportation Authority proceed with plans for a rail yard near the corner of Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard.

"I am confident that I'll have full support of my colleagues should litigation be necessary," Mayor Kelly McDowell said.

The facility - envisioned for about 15 acres of a former industrial site now designated as the second phase of megashopping center Plaza El Segundo - is an element of a large-scale mass transit project designed to ease freeway congestion in the Crenshaw Corridor and improve access to Los Angeles International Airport.

Following an MTA planning committee hearing this week, the agency's board of directors is set next month to adopt the plan, giving staff the go-ahead to begin hashing out the project's details before final certification of its environmental analysis in about a year, said Roderick Diaz, the project manager.

Among those details is the maintenance yard's location, which he emphasized has not been finalized.

"The big thing is there is no firm decision being made at this point," Diaz said. "It may require us to have the flexibility to look at another site. Nonetheless, as it is
Advertisement
necessary, we can't proceed forward with the project without (a maintenance facility)."

MTA staffers have recommended the El Segundo maintenance yard location rather than another spot also previously considered near Florence and Manchester avenues that would have displaced the Westchester Playhouse.

But El Segundo officials have argued the proposed site in town is inconsistent with surrounding commercial use, and could have significant environmental impacts, such as noise and air pollution.

"We've got two power plants, a giant sewage treatment plant, and we're next door to an airport," McDowell said. "It's time for government agencies and others to stop dumping these awful uses into the city of El Segundo. We have done our part."

Though the project's draft environmental analysis states that the facility's actual size would be determined later, the stand-alone facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

MTA envisions the facility between two railroad tracks on the northeast corner of Rosecrans and Sepulveda - land currently slated for future commercial development.

Dan Crosser, one of the developers of the property, said owners have remained mostly "passive" about the project since the MTA initially expressed interest in the land about a year ago.

He said it is too early to comment on whether owners would be amenable to the sale - though their agreement may be irrelevant in the long run.

"(MTA) might have to make a finding to condemn the property," Crosser said, adding that he was aware of El Segundo's displeasure with the proposal. "I'm not sure we would have a choice."

The first batch of Plaza El Segundo's 425,000 square feet of retail shops - including Whole Foods, Best Buy, Borders and PetSmart - began opening in late 2006.

Since then, smaller chain retailers such as J. Crew and Banana Republic have filled out the development, and others, including Linens `N' Things, have closed.

As part of the project's second phase, developers hoped luxury, upscale boutiques would grace the 110-acre property south of Plaza El Segundo by 2008 - but Crosser said development is indefinitely delayed until the economy improves.

Still, El Segundo would at least like the possibility of eventual revenue from the site, an impossibility with an MTA maintenance facility, McDowell said.

"I would rather see a slaughterhouse than the rail yard because it brings more benefit to the city," he said. "At least it would pay taxes."

After several rounds of public hearings in recent months, MTA staffers have recommended the board move forward with an eight-milelong light rail option, rather than a less expensive bus line.

With at least seven stations between the Baldwin Hills- Crenshaw area and LAX, the Measure R-funded project is touted as a way to provide relief to the San Diego (405) and Harbor (110) freeways, as well as improve airport access by connecting the Metro Green Line to the south and the Expo line to the north.

Expected to generate up to 7,800 jobs, the project's final design and construction would begin in 2011 and last up to six years, with the system operational in 2018.

County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, whose district includes many of the South Bay's inland communities, called the selection of the light rail plan as a preferred option a "big victory" for residents.

Supervisor Don Knabe, whose district includes El Segundo and is currently first vice chair of the MTA board, has not yet taken a position on the maintenance facility's location, a spokesman said.

"It's too preliminary to get into something like that," David Sommers said. "Don's priority is getting the Crenshaw Line built. This is going to connect to the South Bay, to LAX. This is a critical project."

Sommers added that the supervisor would likely take a position on the yard's location once more project details were finalized.

But El Segundo is preparing now for a fight.

No stranger to taking on bigger dogs, the city spent millions of dollars battling LAX modernization plans, ultimately in late 2005 winning more than $70 million to insulate homes against airport noise.

"El Segundo is not afraid of environmental litigation, and anyone doubting that can take a look at our record concerning the airport," McDowell said. "This is the reason that there is no blinking at the City Council level about opposing MTA and this project."

McDowell also hoped to garner support from neighboring Manhattan Beach, which he believes would also be affected by a maintenance yard immediately north of its Rosecrans border.

But neither Manhattan's mayor nor its city manager knew much about the light rail project. And it appeared unlikely that the city would fight to protect El Segundo's commercial development options, considering that Manhattan Beach sued over Plaza El Segundo in the first place.

Though the suit won Manhattan about $3 million in street improvements, a general air of displeasure over the large shopping center sitting just a block away from Manhattan Beach's mall lingers.

"Originally, they were going to steal our retail," City Manager Geoff Dolan said. "That's probably why they are upset."

Coming up?

Here's a look at some of the proposed facility's other features:

A storage yard that can accommodate 60 light rail vehicles, with an adjacent 50,000-square-foot office building with 200 parking spaces.

A maintenance area for five light-rail vehicles, as well as a 5,000-square-foot maintenance building for daily servicing, repairs and other support needs.

A 5,000-square-foot paint and body shop with sheet metal, welding and paint storage area.

As a second floor to part of the maintenance building, a 15,000-square-foot operations center would house rail operations, maintenance and training. This element would have its own 100-space parking facility.

A 4,000-square-foot rail vehicle-cleaning platform, and a 7,500-square-foot car-wash building.

Andrea.woodhouse@dailybreeze.com

High Speed Rail Authority eyeing San Gabriel Valley cities for a station (Source) SGVTribune.com)

Link: High Speed Rail Authority eyeing San Gabriel Valley cities for a station - SGVTribune.com

High Speed Rail Authority eyeing San Gabriel Valley cities for a station
By Amanda Baumfeld, Staff Writer
Posted: 11/26/2009 04:16:16 PM PST

West Covina is the latest city thrown into a pool of San Gabriel Valley candidates being considered as a location for a proposed high-speed rail station.

The City Council recently penned a letter to the California High-Speed Rail Authority supporting the project along the 10 Freeway corridor and asking to be considered for a station at the Westfield mall.

West Covina joins El Monte, Industry and Pomona as potential station locations in the Valley.

"West Covina wants to be part of the conversation," said Councilwoman Shelley Sanderson. "I think anytime you have something like that, people will stop at the mall, have a cup of coffee, get gas - I do think it helps stimulate the economy."

The proposed high-speed train system would encompass more than 800 miles and provide intercity travel to Sacramento, the San Francisco Bay Area, the Central Valley, Los Angeles, the Inland Empire, Orange County, and San Diego.

One local city will be able to reap the benefits of a transportation hub in their backyard, according to Genoveva Arellano, outreach manager of Arellano Associates, a consultant for the authority.

"It's mostly economic benefits, construction jobs and permanent jobs which brings a huge advantage for local cities," Arellano said. "The expectation is when you have a lot of people in one location synergy is going to happen."

Because the train is capable of operating at speeds up to 220 mph there will not be
Advertisement
many stops.

There would only be one station in the San Gabriel Valley. The next closest locations could be Union Station in Los Angeles and possibly the Ontario Airport.

The proposed route is either going to align with the 60 Freeway or the 10 Freeway. Stations in West Covina, El Monte and Pomona are being considered along the 10 Freeway while Industry is being considered along the 60 Freeway, officials said.

"Obviously if you have it in either city it will be beneficial," said Industry Mayor Dave Perez. "A transportation link is very crucial in this area."

Pomona officials agree.

"You'll find the the same benefits across the board," said Mark Gluba, assistant to the city manager. "Positive exposure, increasing visitors to the city and economic development."

The authority expects all the environmental studies to be complete by 2013 and for the rail to begin operation in 2020.

"The majority of times the station area is like airports and it attracts economic development," Arellano said. "It can be a boom for local cities."

amanda.baumfeld@sgvn.com

(626) 962-8811, Ext. 2108

Hip-Hip-Hooray! San Gabriel Valley Comes Together to Celebrate Future (Source: I Wil Ride)

Link: Hip-Hip-Hooray! San Gabriel Valley Comes Together to Celebrate Future « I Will Ride Blog

Hip-Hip-Hooray! San Gabriel Valley Comes Together to Celebrate Future
Posted by Albert



“To look backward for a while is to refresh the eye, to restore it, and to render it the more fit for its prime function of looking forward.”
- Margaret Fairless Barber

Now I may not be familiar with the writings of Margaret Fairless Barber (this might be the first time I’ve ever typed out her name), but if there’s one quote I could find on the internet that could describe the tone at Saturday’s celebration – this would be it.

This past Saturday, dozens of elected officials, hundreds of San Gabriel Valley residents, along with Metro CEO Art Leahy and Board Chair Ara Najarian came out to the historic Santa Fe train depot in Monrovia to celebrate last month’s hard-fought victory and to witness the unveiling of the first of six station signs at the future Foothill Extension stop – all the while looking forward to a brighter future for the region. There was food, coloring book tables for the kids, and a kiddie train that, for a brief moment, was being driven by Congressman David Dreier with Authority CEO Habib Balian and a few elected officials as passengers (more on that later).

Elected Officials Remind Crowd of Past, Look Forward to Future

While the event was a joyous occasion to celebrate the prospect of thousands of new jobs, economic benefits, a cleaner environment, and more transit alternatives for the folks of the San Gabriel Valley, it also marked a time for our lawmakers to reflect on the difficult and hard-fought path that brought us to this point.

Monrovia Mayor Mary Ann Lutz, while thanking every Foothill Extension supporter from top to bottom, took a quote from former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher in saying, “You may have to fight a battle more than once to win it.” If you’ve been a supporter these past few years, that’s a pretty good way to sum it up. Assemblymember Anthony Portantino stated that the incredible levels of support from all levels (from residents all the way up to our federal delegation) was an indicator of just how important the Foothill Extension was to the region. Not to take anything away from other transit projects, but very few other projects can claim they’ve had this level of support for years – even from their federal delegation.

Speaking of federal delegations, Metro Board Chair Ara Najarian – with the infamous Congressional letter still in mind – reminded the crowd (besides that Metro CEO Art Leahy was in the crowd wearing a USC cap and that he was a Gold Line fan at heart) just how fortunate we were to have the likes of Congress members Judy Chu, Adam Schiff, Grace Napolitano, and David Dreier fighting endlessly for the San Gabriel Valley. Despite a few heated debates going on these days in the House of Representatives, they took the time when it mattered most to make a strong stand for the region. Bravo.

However, according to Congresswoman Judy Chu, it doesn’t end there. During her speech, she shared with the crowd that she dreams of the line going all the way to Ontario Airport. Not only do our residents share that dream as well, but so does former Glendale mayor and current California Transportation Commissioner Larry Zarian – who stressed that he was a fan of the line going to Ontario and that our economy depends on a healthy transit line that connects people to work.

Highlighting the speech portion of the ceremony was Congressman David Dreier, who reminded the crowd that we all share responsibility for our region’s environment – and that the Foothill Extension was solving a county-wide regional issue because, while it DSC_4735 (2)can bring people to work in Downtown Los Angeles, it also brings people who want to be in the San Gabriel Valley to the San Gabriel Valley. Then he proceeded to dare any elected official to ride the kid train while he drives it. As you can see on the left, a few took him up on his dare.

Where We Go From Here

There’s five more station signs we haven’t seen yet for the cities of Arcadia, Duarte, Irwindale, and Azusa (two). And then we head towards the groundbreaking in the early summer of 2010 – which also happens to be the FIRST groundbreaking of any Measure R rail project. Neat.

Round up of Articles on Rail Maintenance Yard Location

Round up of Articles on Rail Maintenance Yard Location
Article 1

The Argonaut: Santa Monica

Santa Monica City Council endorses hybrid proposal for light rail maintenance yard location

BY GARY WALKER
(Created: Wednesday, November 18, 2009 4:12 PM PST)

Despite objections from residents who believe that their neighborhood is not the best place for a light rail maintenance facility, the Santa Monica City Council has voted to back a site recommended by the Mid-Cities Exposition Light Rail Construction Authority.

The council also pledged to look into claims made by Stewart Park neighborhood residents that levels of methane gas near the proposed location were higher than previously reported and to urge the construction authority to do so as well.

The Mid-Cities Exposition Light Rail Line, commonly known as the Expo Line, will have three stations in Santa Monica — 26th Street and Olympic Boulevard, near Bergamot Station, 17th Street and Colorado Avenue and at Fourth Street and Colorado.

Kate Vernez, assistant to the city manager for governmental relations, said that city staff members had investigated the methane claims at the proposed location, which is the city-owned Verizon telephone maintenance facility on Exposition Boulevard and a portion of a parking lot used by Santa Monica College (SMC).

“The environmental concerns have been addressed and were found not to be a hazard,” Vernez told the council.

Vernez gave the council and the public an update from an August meeting when the hybrid alternative was offered by Metro authorities instead of only the Verizon site, the original proposal. At the meeting, the council voted to consider the so-called hybrid location of the existing Verizon facility and the SMC parking lot, but a number of residents of the Pico and Stewart Park neighborhoods complained that their neighborhoods were being targeted for a facility that could bring noise and environmental complications.

Vernez mentioned that the new planned location had been redesigned to eliminate “wheel squeal” from the train and a car wash and cleaning platform would be relocated north of the Verizon property. A 110-foot sound barrier is also proposed to reduce noise from the train and the light rail yard.

“In addition,” Vernez added, “Metro has eliminated the paint and body shop, restricted access to Stewart Street, proposed adding directional lighting to reduce glare and installed landscaping to soften the building facade.”

Mayor Ken Genser, as Vernez did at the beginning of the meeting, reminded the audience that the final authority on where the rail yard will be placed lies with Metro. He also commented on what he sees as the transportation authority’s sense of urgency to determine where the maintenance yard should be built.

“It seems like Expo is moving ahead no matter what our position on CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) is,” said the mayor, referring to questions regarding environmental review at the suggested location. “Expo seems to be operating on the basis of ‘we’ll work with you as long as you don’t oppose us or what you’re doing does not slow us down.’

“That seems to be their (modus operandi,)” Genser asserted.

Samantha Bricker, the chief operating officer of the construction authority, said that her agency has been working diligently with Santa Monica officials as well as residents in the neighborhoods that will be affected. Bricker also said it was important to have a site selected so that any necessary environmental work can begin prior to submitting all necessary documents to Expo’s board of directors in January for its approval.

“We have reviewed the hybrid site regarding any environmental issues, and our team did not find anything that would be cause for concern,” Bricker said, echoing Vernez’s earlier statements. “Our final draft is a CEQA document that will give environmental clearance for both the Verizon site and the hybrid site.”

Residents who addressed the council represented a mixture of supporters of the hybrid site and those who remained concerned that Expo has not given sufficient mitigation regarding noise, traffic and potential environmental hazards. Some Stewart Park homeowners have also taken issue with the alignment of the rail station that will stop at nearby Bergamot Station, which will be at grade, or ground level, instead of an elevated track.

Sarah Devine, a Stewart Park resident who lives on Delaware Avenue, took exception with the site’s location, which she pointed out was close to an educational institution, private school New Roads School, on nearby Olympic Boulevard.

“How or why is this (site) so different from the other sites that were not selected because they were close to a school?” she asked.

Darrell Clarke, a former Santa Monica planning commissioner who is also a light rail proponent, commended the city’s staff and Metro officials for crafting a proposal that he feels will satisfy both parties.

“I hear about the impact of the (10) freeway all the time, said Clarke, who lives south of the Verizon facility and is a co-chair for the light rail advocacy group Friends 4 Expo. “A maintenance facility is not the same thing.

“I look forward to the completion of this excellent project,” he concluded.

Councilwoman Gleam Davis stated that it was important to separate safety and the potential impact on neighborhoods.

“There are a number of communities in the country that operate at-grade systems that operate very safely,” Davis noted. “I have seen nothing that leads me to believe that this will be a problem.

“Rail, as a method of transportation, is a safe method.”

Genser also mentioned that the selection of the hybrid site was predicated on approval of a land exchange with SMC officials.

Bricker said that Expo had been in contact with the college and city leaders about the land swap and did not anticipate any problems.

“It’s my understanding that the city and the college are both willing,” she said. “Everyone has been very cooperative and we’re very optimistic that we will be able to work with all parties.”

SMC officials did not return phone calls for comment.

Davis also discussed the environmental concerns that some members of the audience brought before the council.

“City reports show that the ambient levels (of methane gas) are safe,” the councilwoman said.

The Expo Line will begin in downtown Los Angeles and is set to arrive in Culver City in its first stage of construction next year. It is scheduled to arrive in Santa Monica in 2016.

Article 2

Curbed LA: Wheel Squeal Considered, Santa Monica Votes for Hybrid Yard

Wheel Squeal Considered, Santa Monica Votes for Hybrid Yard
Thursday, November 19, 2009, by Dakota

2009_08_expo.jpg Whenever the second phase of the Expo Line opens, there'll be three stops in Santa Monica: 26th Street and Olympic Boulevard, 17th Street and Colorado Avenue and, Fourth Street and Colorado. A light rail maintenance yard also needs to go up as part of the line, and today's The Argonaut reports that the Santa Monica City Council voted to back a recommendation to use a Verizon facility on Exposition Boulevard and part of a Santa Monica College parking lot for the site of the maintenance yard. Metro has the final say on the placement of the facility, but the proposed location has roiled some neighbors. Concessions have been made: A city official tells the paper that the "new planned location had been redesigned to eliminate 'wheel squeal' from the train and a car wash and cleaning platform would be relocated north of the Verizon property. A 110-foot sound barrier is also proposed to reduce noise from the train and the light rail yard." Meanwhile, there's also talk of methane gas. According to members of the Stewart Park neighborhood residents, "levels of methane gas near the proposed location were higher than previously reported," whic

El Monte Taking Transit Village Into Its Own Hands (Source: Curbed LA)

Link: Curbed LA: El Monte Taking Transit Village Into Its Own Hands

El Monte Taking Transit Village Into Its Own Hands

Monday, November 16, 2009, by Adrian Glick Kudler


[Rendering via Compass Blueprint Case Study]

A couple of felony charges can really derail a development, but the city of El Monte has made lemonade out of the arrests of two execs for the developer of their Transit Village mixed-use project. The city is taking the development back from the Titan Group and overseeing it themselves with their redevelopment agency, reports the San Gabriel Valley Tribune. (Two executives were originally arrested on forgery, fraud, embezzlement, grand theft, and burglary charges in June, but those have been withdrawn while the DA investigates a related incident that could yield more charges.) The city says they'll partner with a developer each for housing, office space, and retail.

About 60 acres are covered in the city's El Monte Transit Village Specific Plan, which they passed in September 2007. It allows for up to 1,850 residences, a theater and entertainment complex, a conference center, a hotel with about 200 rooms, about 491,000 square feet of retail, about 500,000 square feet of office space, 12 acres of parks, and river improvements. The centerpiece will be the bus depot--MTA will start a total renovation of the station early next year. Only problem? Financing, natch. The total price tag is about $1 billion. Deputy City Attorney Dave Gondek is optimistic, though. He told the Tribune, "We'll have families moving in within four to five years."

Expo and Crenshaw Lines: Under Whose Authority? (Source: CityWatch)

CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall - Expo and Crenshaw Lines: Under Whose Authority?

Expo and Crenshaw Lines: Under Whose Authority?
Moving LA
By Ken Alpern

It appears that there is a growing emphasis to construct transportation projects right the first time, so I am thrilled that the efforts of Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas to create a first-rate Crenshaw Light Rail Line are paying off.

The Metro Crenshaw Corridor Project, under the leadership of Roderick Diaz, Dave Monks and others, are recommending this transit line be a light rail and not a busway, and are still working out details that will (for a higher cost, of course) create a safer, quicker and more rider-friendly line that could revitalize the Crenshaw Corridor and Inglewood as major economic centers for decades to come. I have been a fan of this Crenshaw project for years, despite its opponents, and I look forward to the network it creates between the Green, Expo and Wilshire Lines once it becomes a reality.

Currently, it is planned to link only the Expo and Green Lines to each other and LAX via Century/Aviation, but the political support for ultimately linking it to the Wilshire Corridor (likely at Wilshire and La Brea, or thereabouts) is rising so fast that the appropriate map for this future key north-south line is as follows:
Active Image
The currently-planned northern terminus of Exposition/Crenshaw is undergoing increasing scrutiny (as it really should) for an underground alignment because north of Crenshaw the street becomes so narrow that any future light rail extension to Wilshire requires a subway.

In fact, the whole darn length of the line under Crenshaw from Exposition to the Harbor Subdivision Right of Way is on its way to being a subway, as both Supervisor Ridley-Thomas and Mid-City LA Councilmember Bernard Parks are pursuing the undergrounding of the line to minimize traffic concerns, increase speed and safety of the line and—most of all—ensure smooth operations and high ridership.

Furthermore, the portion of the line that goes through Westchester is likely to be grade-separated at Manchester, as it should, since Westchester residents have boldly pursued the light rail option but with an elevated station south of Manchester to avoid traffic problems and/or residential street closures.

I am not one of those wedded to at-grade (street-level) rail or grade-separated (elevated or subway) rail, and am neither wedded to the car-is-king philosophy nor the screw-the-car-commuters-because-they’re-sinners philosophy…and I suspect most taxpayers aren’t, either. Inappropriate spending is just that—inappropriate—but a betterment is also just that—a betterment!

To be fair, it remains to be determined whether the extra costs for the grade-separating betterments will be borne at the expense of other projects, but as our political paradigms change (in particular, from building infrastructure on the megacheap to doing things right the first time despite—within reason—the extra cost), it becomes necessary to compare the Expo and Crenshaw Corridor planning processes.

You see, both Ridley-Thomas and Parks, who are championing the subway portion of the Crenshaw Corridor Light Rail Line, are also on the Exposition Line Construction Authority Board, which is on its way to slamming through a purely at-grade line across some of the busiest streets in the Westside.

I refuse to oppose Ridley-Thomas’ and Parks’ desire to pursue the subway option at Crenshaw … but I do have to wonder about the can of worms being ripped open regarding the Expo Line.

Unlike the Crenshaw Corridor team, operating directly under the Metro Authority, and which is offering betterments to achieve more local support for that line, the Expo Line is being built under its own Authority that is operating under an entirely different paradigm.

Those working for the Expo Line Construction Authority, created by Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky and others during a now-bygone era where transportation funding was always given short shrift and even shorter budgeting, are operating under much tighter fiscal constraints and receive much harsher evaluations from the political and media powers that be when things go over budget.

With the recently-opened Eastside Light Rail Line and the future Expo Line, the pressure to keep things at-grade (and cheaper!) was and is enormous, but with the Crenshaw Corridor the extra costs appear to be received by most parties as: “SO WHAT? AND? THE PROBLEM WITH A BETTER LINE FOR EXTRA MONEY IS WHAT?”

Similarly, the Hobson’s choice for the Expo Line crossing at megacongested Sepulveda Blvd., with either an at-grade crossing with local street widening for $13 million, or an elevated rail crossing for $28 million paid for by the local Casden Developer landowners but with a political go-ahead for a regionally-opposed 8-10 story project, might likely be received as:

“ARE YOU FREAKIN’ KIDDING ME? WHY CAN’T METRO PAY FOR THAT $15 MILLION BETTERMENT AT SEPULVEDA FOR A PROJECT THAT’LL BE AROUND FOR A HUNDRED YEARS?”

I again need to point out that the Expo Line Construction Authority, created by Supervisor Yaroslavsky during a pre-Measure R era, (and after the countywide anti-subway initiative Yaroslavsky sponsored passed overwhelmingly because of cost overruns during the 1980’s/90’s), is merely doing its job: build the Expo Line on time and for as low a cost as possible.

I suspect that Yaroslavsky will (wisely) oppose the extra frills of the Crenshaw Line while he’s fighting to get the Expo Line built without expensive frills, and that he will come into conflict with Ridley-Thomas who (also wisely) recognizes a worthy-but-more-expensive betterment when he sees one.

I just hope that Yaroslavsky, who once was a City Councilmember of the West L.A. region through which the Expo Line will run, and who steadfastly prevented the Expo Line from being built through that region for decades, didn’t create the Expo Line Authority with an engineering and legal staff to line things up, build up the political and legal crescendo to create an unstoppable momentum, and…
KABOOM! An at-grade Expo Line is slammed through West L.A., with car traffic, decreased Expo Line ridership, and/or planning challenges that will plague the region for decades.

I want to go on record as not blaming the Authority staff (again, they’re just doing their jobs), but instead blaming the City of L.A. for not planning for the Expo Line and offering the Authority guidance in its planning.

I also remind City Councilmembers Rosendahl and Koretz, who are for some inexplicable reason are not going to be on the Expo Line Construction Authority Board any time soon, that they are the ones that local residents will look to for leadership and guidance and that they do chair the L.A. City Transportation Committee.

I know that the two Westside City Councilmembers are likely annoyed at being off the Expo Line Authority Board, but the “blame it on Zev” paradigm will have a limited half-life as the Expo Line Westside Phase EIR becomes finalized.

We need first-rate leadership to create a first-rate Expo Line. Whether its Westsiders or Mid-City residents, the taxpaying commuters who voted in Measure R deserve no less.

(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.)

El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard (Source: ContraCostaTimes.com)

El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard - ContraCostaTimes.com

El Segundo ready to fight proposed MTA rail yard
By Andrea Woodhouse
Posted: 11/15/2009 06:02:19 AM PST
Updated: 11/16/2009 11:03:24 AM PST

El Segundo city officials are seething over a county pitch to build a train maintenance facility in town as part of an estimated $1.7 billion proposed light rail project.

And leaders of tiny El Segundo, a scrappy town if there ever was one, have all but promised to sue should the Metropolitan Transportation Authority proceed with plans for a rail yard near the corner of Rosecrans Avenue and Sepulveda Boulevard.

"I am confident that I'll have full support of my colleagues should litigation be necessary," Mayor Kelly McDowell said.

The facility - envisioned for about 15 acres of a former industrial site now designated as the second phase of megashopping center Plaza El Segundo - is an element of a large-scale mass transit project designed to ease freeway congestion in the Crenshaw Corridor and improve access to Los Angeles International Airport.

Following an MTA planning committee hearing this week, the agency's board of directors is set next month to adopt the plan, giving staff the go-ahead to begin hashing out the project's details before final certification of its environmental analysis in about a year, said Roderick Diaz, the project manager.

Among those details is the maintenance yard's location, which he emphasized has not been finalized.

"The big thing is there is no firm decision being made at this point," Diaz said. "It may require us to have the flexibility to look at another site. Nonetheless, as it is
Advertisement
necessary, we can't proceed forward with the project without (a maintenance facility)."

MTA staffers have recommended the El Segundo maintenance yard location rather than another spot also previously considered near Florence and Manchester avenues that would have displaced the Westchester Playhouse.

But El Segundo officials have argued the proposed site in town is inconsistent with surrounding commercial use, and could have significant environmental impacts, such as noise and air pollution.

"We've got two power plants, a giant sewage treatment plant, and we're next door to an airport," McDowell said. "It's time for government agencies and others to stop dumping these awful uses into the city of El Segundo. We have done our part."

Though the project's draft environmental analysis states that the facility's actual size would be determined later, the stand-alone facility would operate 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

MTA envisions the facility between two railroad tracks on the northeast corner of Rosecrans and Sepulveda - land currently slated for future commercial development.

Dan Crosser, one of the developers of the property, said owners have remained mostly "passive" about the project since the MTA initially expressed interest in the land about a year ago.

He said it is too early to comment on whether owners would be amenable to the sale - though their agreement may be irrelevant in the long run.

"(MTA) might have to make a finding to condemn the property," Crosser said, adding that he was aware of El Segundo's displeasure with the proposal. "I'm not sure we would have a choice."

The first batch of Plaza El Segundo's 425,000 square feet of retail shops - including Whole Foods, Best Buy, Borders and PetSmart - began opening in late 2006.

Since then, smaller chain retailers such as J. Crew and Banana Republic have filled out the development, and others, including Linens `N' Things, have closed.

As part of the project's second phase, developers hoped luxury, upscale boutiques would grace the 110-acre property south of Plaza El Segundo by 2008 - but Crosser said development is indefinitely delayed until the economy improves.

Still, El Segundo would at least like the possibility of eventual revenue from the site, an impossibility with an MTA maintenance facility, McDowell said.

"I would rather see a slaughterhouse than the rail yard because it brings more benefit to the city," he said. "At least it would pay taxes."

After several rounds of public hearings in recent months, MTA staffers have recommended the board move forward with an eight-milelong light rail option, rather than a less expensive bus line.

With at least seven stations between the Baldwin Hills- Crenshaw area and LAX, the Measure R-funded project is touted as a way to provide relief to the San Diego (405) and Harbor (110) freeways, as well as improve airport access by connecting the Metro Green Line to the south and the Expo line to the north.

Expected to generate up to 7,800 jobs, the project's final design and construction would begin in 2011 and last up to six years, with the system operational in 2018.

County Supervisor Mark Ridley-Thomas, whose district includes many of the South Bay's inland communities, called the selection of the light rail plan as a preferred option a "big victory" for residents.

Supervisor Don Knabe, whose district includes El Segundo and is currently first vice chair of the MTA board, has not yet taken a position on the maintenance facility's location, a spokesman said.

"It's too preliminary to get into something like that," David Sommers said. "Don's priority is getting the Crenshaw Line built. This is going to connect to the South Bay, to LAX. This is a critical project."

Sommers added that the supervisor would likely take a position on the yard's location once more project details were finalized.

But El Segundo is preparing now for a fight.

No stranger to taking on bigger dogs, the city spent millions of dollars battling LAX modernization plans, ultimately in late 2005 winning more than $70 million to insulate homes against airport noise.

"El Segundo is not afraid of environmental litigation, and anyone doubting that can take a look at our record concerning the airport," McDowell said. "This is the reason that there is no blinking at the City Council level about opposing MTA and this project."

McDowell also hoped to garner support from neighboring Manhattan Beach, which he believes would also be affected by a maintenance yard immediately north of its Rosecrans border.

But neither Manhattan's mayor nor its city manager knew much about the light rail project. And it appeared unlikely that the city would fight to protect El Segundo's commercial development options, considering that Manhattan Beach sued over Plaza El Segundo in the first place.

Though the suit won Manhattan about $3 million in street improvements, a general air of displeasure over the large shopping center sitting just a block away from Manhattan Beach's mall lingers.

"Originally, they were going to steal our retail," City Manager Geoff Dolan said. "That's probably why they are upset."

Coming up?

Here's a look at some of the proposed facility's other features:

A storage yard that can accommodate 60 light rail vehicles, with an adjacent 50,000-square-foot office building with 200 parking spaces.

A maintenance area for five light-rail vehicles, as well as a 5,000-square-foot maintenance building for daily servicing, repairs and other support needs.

A 5,000-square-foot paint and body shop with sheet metal, welding and paint storage area.

As a second floor to part of the maintenance building, a 15,000-square-foot operations center would house rail operations, maintenance and training. This element would have its own 100-space parking facility.

A 4,000-square-foot rail vehicle-cleaning platform, and a 7,500-square-foot car-wash building.

Andrea.woodhouse@dailybreeze.com

The future of public transportation takes off (Source:The Daily Aztec)

Link:The Daily Aztec - The future of public transportation takes off

The future of public transportation takes off

By Susan Healy, Contributor

Published: Tuesday, November 17, 2009



The new California High-Speed Rail will run from San Diego to Sacramento at rapid speeds to help cut time lengthy travel times. The high-speed train will also pass through many major cities to connect the entire state.

Californians passed a proposition last year that approved funding for the high-speed rail. It will provide quick and easy accessibility from the north of the state down southward. A forum was recently held in Point Loma to discuss the impact it will have on the area considering its close proximity to the airport.

Last year, California residents voted in favor of Proposition 1A, which provides funding for a high-speed rail train from San Diego to San Francisco and Sacramento. Today, government officials such as Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger are collaborating with California citizens to provide the state with the most efficient and sustainable method of transportation.


With a total of 36.8 million residents last year, California’s population has increased 8 percent within the past nine years, according to the California Census Bureau. It is also estimated that San Diego alone will add one million people to its population by 2040.


This growth helps the state by bringing in more revenue through taxes and new businesses, but a problem arises because its infrastructure was simply not built for this amount of people. Sitting in traffic has become part of the everyday routine for many Californians. Three of the top five most congested areas in the nation are in California, according to the California High-Speed Rail Authority.


While California grows at a rapid speed, a worldwide movement toward sustainability or “going green” has emerged. Experts speculate that Earth’s natural oil supply will reach its usage capacity within the next few years, if it has not already been exhausted as some scientists believe.


The environmental impact of carbon dioxide emissions is no longer a hot topic solely for scientists. Average citizens have become concerned about the diminishing health of the environment. Education regarding the protection of Earth’s resources has infiltrated mediums across the spectrum, from mainstream television, to college professors to political activists such as Al Gore.


Just as people are aware of the need to sustain the planet, California faces an unemployment rate of 12 percent. This rate is even greater than the national unemployment rate. State school budget cuts are only one of several indicators that the Golden State is not in “golden” condition.


Perhaps the issues of overpopulation, environmental concerns and economic troubles convinced the majority of citizens to vote in favor of a high-speed train in California. The rail may be an optimal solution to help improve the state’s troubling condition.


California’s High-Speed Rail will run from San Diego to Sacramento / San Francisco, moving at more than 200 miles per hour. Voters approved a rail, which will provide a convenient, safe and affordable alternative to driving. The route includes major state cities, such as Anaheim, Ontario, Irvine, Bakersfield, San Francisco, San Jose and many more.
The nearly 600-mile trip from San Diego to Sacramento will cost riders approximately $70, take approximately four hours, and save nearly 500 pounds of CO2 gas emissions. This is a dream come true for the large number of San Diego State students who call Northern California home and need to travel there for the holidays.


Last Thursday evening, the Design Innovation Institute held a forum at Point Loma Nazarene University to educate San Diegans about the high-speed rail. Board members informed the audience of the crucial need for energy, rejuvenation and sustainability. Different speakers detailed how the rail will benefit California and how this type of innovation is the future of transportation.


“Finding a solution to gas will not solve the problem. Cars will remain the same size and so traffic jams are not minimized,” board member and urbanist Rich Flierl said. He, along with the rest of the Design Innovation Institute, believes intelligently designed public transportation, such as high-speed rails, is the answer to saving the future because it will minimize the environmental impact as well as the problems of traffic congestion.


“If we want things to change, we must look at our inputs. We must sort these inputs by toxicity and then design choices to eliminate these toxicities,” board member and professor of strategy and sustainability Harry Watkins said.


“How would nature design a city? Interconnected.”


Watkins compared city designs of the Spanish colonists who set the first formations of California to the visions of the Design Innovation Institute. What both the old and new plans have in common were communities that were well-linked. The California high-speed rail will provide the state with a network that allows people, goods and services to be more efficiently connected.


The forum was held in Point Loma, a neighborhood that would be greatly affected by the high-speed rail as it is close to the San Diego International Airport. The airport is limited on room as the city’s population has boomed. The high-speed rail would directly minimize air traffic in and out of the airport and potentially decrease airfare rates because of decreased demand.


While the rail will cost` approximately $45 billion, it would cost the state more than double this amount to fix the congestion problems will worsen with continuing population growth. It is also estimated that the rail will raise more than $1 billion annually throughout the state.

Traffic jams currently cost the state $20 billion a year because of wasted fuel and lost time according to the California High-Speed Rail Authority. The CHSRA also projects that 160,000 construction jobs and 450,000 permanent jobs will be added to the economy.
High-speed rails have already been implemented around the world. Germany, known for its advanced engineering, Italy and Japan, are proud operators of fast, environmentally-friendly and efficient public transportation systems. In Italy, transportation by train is a part of everyday life, and benefits not only the country but the environment as a whole.

Truth Getting Lost in the Measure R Feeding Frenzy (Source:CityWatch )

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall - Truth Getting Lost in the Measure R Feeding Frenzy

Truth Getting Lost in the Measure R Feeding Frenzy
Box Soap
By Stephen Box

Active ImageThe Measure R feeding frenzy has just begun and LA's Department of Transportation has already created a cloud of confusion as it sets out to convince the City Council that when distributing $181.2 million in Local Return funds, the 10% Bike/Ped allocation amounts to $10.8 million. (Shouldn't it be $18.1 million?) The LADOT continues by referring to the Administrative Cost of $3.5 million as 2% (fair enough) and the Local Match set-aside of $73.4 million as 3% (not even close!) This bit of financial alchemy demonstrates the LADOT's knack for telling the truth, only the truth but not the whole truth.

At issue is the distribution of the Measure R Local Return funds which amount to 15% of the $30-40 billion that the Metro will collect over the next 30 years as a result of the half-percent sales tax increase that was approved by voters last year.

Relying on the Metro's revenue estimates, the City of Los Angeles anticipates collecting $181.2 million in Local Return funds over the next five years and is poised to approve a plan at Wednesday's Transportation Committee meeting that will lay down a budget for the funds that have been accruing since this past July.

During the contentious process that preceded the approval of Measure R, the 15% Local Return was conceived in response to the objections of the communities and constituent groups. They argued that Measure R would cost them money but yield them no specific returns.

By design, the 15% Local Return funds would empower locals with funds to support the projects that were not specifically included in the Measure R budget and long range transportation plan.

When the Measure R Ordinance was presented to the voters, Local Return projects were defined as "major street resurfacing, rehabilitation and reconstruction; pothole repair; left turn signals; bikeways; pedestrian improvement; streetscapes; signal synchronization; and transit" and it was to be distributed on a per capita basis.

Demonstrating a bookkeeping style that must be the envy of Hollywood Studios and Three Card Monte dealers alike, the LADOT and its Interdepartmental Committee (IDC) partners are proposing a budget that calculates on gross revenues when necessary to diminish (admin costs just 2% of gross,) on net proceeds in order to enhance (bike/ped funds are fully 10% of net,) and on unrelated figures in an effort to distract (3% local match is based on another budget!)

Most disturbing is that the IDC proposes to start the process of budgeting for the anticipated Local Return revenue by funneling 40.5% ($73.4 million) back to the Metro to satisfy LA's "3% local match contribution" to the Measure R "mega transit/rail projects" which include the Crenshaw Transit Corridor, Canoga Transit Line, and the Subway to the Sea Projects. (this is where "3%" actually amounts to 40.5%)

There are three significant problems with this the LADOT and IDC proposed budget:

First, the immediate and local transportation needs of LA communities should not have to compete with the "mega" projects of the region. The Local Return funding was established to prevent the project vs. project drama that is divisive to the community. The Local Return funds must be spent on Local Return projects, not siphoned off for "mega" match obligations.

Second, playing fast and loose with the percentages leaves naive bike/ped advocates lined up with their porridge bowls, thinking that when the LADOT promises 10%, it means 10%. It doesn't. It means 6%.

The only way to fix this is to take the $3.5 million in Administrative Costs and the $3.8 million in Council Office Discretionary Funds, and add them to the current $10.8 million bike/ped allocation. This totals $18.1 million, which amounts to 10% of the anticipated Local Return of $181.2 million over the next 5 years.

Third, this whole process demonstrates the real need for a Transportation Vision that commits Los Angeles to a robust and comprehensive transportation system, one based on equality and a commitment to creating real transportation choices for everybody. At the federal and the state level, the simple standard is to accommodate people of all modes all the time.

Yet in Los Angeles, cyclists compete with street furniture for funding, pedestrians compete with transit passengers, motorists compete with each other, council districts compete with their constituents, and city departments simply grab their budgets and hide.

The people of Los Angeles need to demand a real Transportation Vision, the LADOT needs to step away from the cash-box, and the bike/ped advocates need to count their change before they leave the window.

(Stephen Box is a transportation advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.netThis email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it )

CityWatch
Vol 7 Issue 94
Pub: Nov 17, 2009

Tuesday's Round of Articles on the Goldline Eastside Extension

Article 1

Link: Metro's new Gold Line now in business - 11/16/09 - Los Angeles-Southern California-LA Breaking News, Weather, Traffic, Sports - abc7.com

Metro's new Gold Line now in business
Monday, November 16, 2009

By Melissa MacBride

LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- The commute gets easier for thousands of people in L.A. County, as Metro's new Gold Line extension is now in business.

The new six-mile route is expected to carry some 13,000 commuters every day. The extension runs from Atlantic boulevard in East Los Angeles to Union Station in downtown L.A., where it now connects to the rest of the line all the way to Pasadena.

"This is the most transit-dependent community in L.A. County. It will give them access to jobs, schools, medical care and other opportunities. There's going to be development here, there's going to be housing and business opportunities," said MTA spokesperson Marc Littman.

For $1.25, the train will take you from East L.A. to downtown L.A. in about 17 minutes. The eastside extension of the Gold Line will run every 8 minutes during the morning commute, then every 12 minutes during the day.

Article 2

Link: Los Angeles Gold Line Eastside Extension off to impressive start and to be part of something bigger

Los Angeles Gold Line Eastside Extension off to impressive start and to be part of something bigger
November 16, 11:06 AMFresno Green Transportation ExaminerAlan Kandel
n., Nov. 15th, 50,000-plus people enjoyed a free ride on the Los Angeles Gold Line Eastside Extension light rail transit system, as reported in the Los Angeles Wave in the story “50,000 take a free ride on the Gold Line, no major problems reported,” first published Nov. 15th and updated today. And on top of this, no major glitches were reported either. The line is expected to transport 13,000 people daily.

Construction of the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension began in 2004. Six miles in length and costing $898 million, “the extension runs between Union Station and East Los Angeles, with stops at eight new stations, two of them underground,” information in the article revealed, bringing the total track mileage to 79; all since 1989. Stations holding community celebrations were: “East L.A. Civic Center, Mariachi Plaza in Boyle Heights, Little Tokyo/Arts District and Union Station.” Connection to the original Gold Line is at L.A. Union Station. The 1.7 subsurface miles are through Boyle Heights. The remaining 4.3 miles are at or above ground.

“Officials are selecting a possible route for a light rail link from the Gold Line on downtown's east side to the Blue Line stub on Figueroa Street on downtown's west side,” information in the article stressed. “This would allow through Blue Line trains from Long Beach to Pasadena, or from East L.A. to Culver City via the new Expo Line, which is scheduled for completion in two years.” However, a funding source or construction timetable for this link has not yet been established.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa was quoted in the article saying that “‘…this not the end of the ride … Thanks to the passage of Measure R, there will be local funding for half a dozen new rail projects in the next decade, which will give Angelenos even greater transit access to jobs and other opportunities throughout the county.’”

Article 3

Low ridership tarnishes Gold Line extension's luster - latimes.com

latimes.com
Low ridership tarnishes Gold Line extension's luster
Only 13,000 riders daily are expected to use the new extension, which began its normal operations Monday, by the end of its first year.

By Ari B. Bloomekatz

November 17, 2009

Behind the hoopla and celebration of the Gold Line Eastside extension opening this week, there are some sobering numbers.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority projects that the extension between Union Station and East L.A. will serve 13,000 riders each day by the end of the first year -- a paltry number compared to other sections of L.A. County's rail system.

The Eastside link expands a Gold Line that has struggled to attract riders since it opened in 2003.

The original section of the Gold Line, from Union Station to Pasadena, serves an average of 21,322 riders each weekday, far below original estimates of 38,000 daily boardings.

Even when the new Eastside riders are added, MTA projections suggest that the Gold Line will remain at the bottom of the ridership rankings.

Moving the Gold Line farther east will clearly draw new riders. But some of the problems that have long hampered the Gold Line remain: The trains are slow, and there are limits on where passengers can go when transferring to another rail line or a bus.

"The biggest problem with the Pasadena Gold Line, which will be shared by the Eastside line, is that it really doesn't go anywhere that people want to go," said transit consultant Tom Rubin. "It serves Union Station, but it doesn't serve downtown; as a result it's just not a very fast way of getting people to their ultimate destinations."

The Gold Line covers territory once served by a bustling streetcar network in Los Angeles through the early 1960s.

But today, only a fraction of those lines used by the Pacific Electric Red Cars and L.A. Railway Yellow Cars remain.

As a result, getting around on rail remains a big challenge.

For example, the new Eastside extension goes through the heart of Boyle Heights.

But instead of pushing west into the heart of downtown L.A., the line veers sharply to the north just outside downtown, going through Little Tokyo to Union Station. Riders who want to get into downtown then need to transfer onto the Red Line subway and go west and then south again -- or take a bus.

Bart Reed, executive director of the regional nonprofit group the Transit Coalition, said it's important to see L.A.'s rail system as a work in progress. Further improvements could significantly improve ridership.

The MTA is seeking federal funding for the so-called "regional connector," a rail line that would run directly through downtown L.A.

This line would allow riders on the Eastside Gold Line to switch trains as the Gold Line turns north, making for a much more convenient trip into downtown.

Reed also believes that the Gold Line could pick up more riders simply because people would favor rail over bus service.

Today, the MTA has two star lines that rise well above the rest: The Red Line, which runs underground from Union Station to North Hollywood, and the Blue Line, which runs above ground from downtown L.A. to Long Beach.

The Red Line (combined with the much smaller parallel Purple Line) has an average of 141,302 riders each weekday, according to MTA's statistics for October.

The Blue Line averages 74,311 riders.

The Norwalk-to-Redondo Beach Green Line averages 36,453 commuters. The Green Line was supposed to connect to Los Angeles International Airport, but the MTA stopped it just outside the airport, a decision that many blame for the relatively low ridership numbers on that line. There is now a plan to extend the line into LAX.

It is much too early to tell how the Gold Line Eastside extension will fare.

Its public opening Sunday drew about 75,000 riders, many of whom waited in hourlong lines to try the new rail line for free.

The lines were much shorter Monday as paying customers boarded.

Marc Littman, an MTA spokesman, said Gold Line ridership would probably increase significantly in the coming years if development occurs around some of the line's stations and if the pattern of the Eastside opening follows that of the Blue Line's opening nearly two decades ago.

"The Metro Blue Line ridership has quadrupled since 1990 to become one of the busiest light rail lines in the country," Littman said. "We will continue marketing the new extension so the ridership will steadily build."

Reed agreed that the Gold Line's ridership could improve, noting that the Eastside has many residents who can't afford cars and who rely on mass transit to get around.

"There's new habits to be built, but quite frankly that particular route, it was the old corridor for one of the heaviest used streetcars in the system," Reed said. "It'll maybe take a year or two."

ari.bloomekatz@latimes.com

Another Roundup on the Red Line/Purple Line/ Subway to the Sea

Link: Which is the best way west for L.A.'s subway? - latimes.com

Article 1

Which is the best way west for L.A.'s subway?
Wilshire or West Hollywood? As a subway extension draws closer to reality, the debate over the route intensifies.

By Ari B. Bloomekatz

November 15, 2009

Building a subway through the Westside has been the Holy Grail of transportation planners for decades, and many feel they are closer to tunneling than ever before.

Backers envision subway cars packed with shoppers balancing Prada and Barneys bags after Beverly Hills shopping excursions and surfers with their boards tucked under their arms heading for the morning waves, as well as workers.

But now, as Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa has pushed to fast-track the long-delayed Westside subway extension, there is debate about whether the route for the roughly $5-billion project gets the most bang for the buck.

It's a familiar problem in Los Angeles, a city developed for the automobile whose sprawl makes it difficult for rail lines to cover enough ground to make commuting simple.

The first leg of the Westside extension would spur west from the existing Purple Line along Wilshire Boulevard from Western Avenue to Fairfax Avenue. Wilshire is L.A.'s legendary roadway, lined with office towers, shops and restaurants. The route would go through the Miracle Mile shopping district and stop at the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, which has lobbied heavily for the line.

From there, future phases would take the Purple Line through Beverly Hills, Century City and Westwood.

That route, however, bypasses some key Westside shopping and business areas in Hollywood and West Hollywood, including Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, the Beverly Center and the Pacific Design Center.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is considering an extension route that would cover those areas, but it probably would not be built until after the Wilshire link is done.

The mayor wants the entire Purple Line extension to Westwood completed in the next 10 years, a tall order for a project that has been discussed for nearly four decades and still needs funding.

Current plans have the subway reaching Westwood by 2036, using a mix of revenue from an L.A. County transportation sales tax and federal funding that the MTA is seeking but has not yet received.

"We really determined that Wilshire would have to come first. You're trying to hook up the Purple Line with Beverly Hills, Century City and Westwood, where the big ridership would be," said David Mieger, MTA's project manager for the subway.

"The heaviest-used bus lines, the heaviest-congestion corridors, are north and south of Wilshire Boulevard."

The MTA unveiled the West Hollywood extension to great enthusiasm from community groups. The leg would run as an extension from the Red Line in Hollywood through parts of Hollywood and West Hollywood and would connect with the proposed extension of the Purple Line near the intersection of Wilshire and La Cienega boulevards. The Purple Line would then go west along Wilshire to Westwood.

The Purple Line extension to Westwood would generate an estimated 49,000 daily boardings at the new stations and a total of 76,000 new daily boardings throughout the system, according to early studies from the MTA that are being updated. Ridership would increase by 17,900 at new stations if the West Hollywood link is built, according to MTA numbers.

That compares to an average of 78,955 weekday riders on the Long Beach-to-downtown L.A. Blue Line, 149,597 on the downtown-to-North Hollywood Red Line, 38,619 on the Norwalk-to-Redondo Beach Green Line and 22,476 on the downtown-to-Pasadena Gold Line, according to the most current ridership counts from the MTA.

The dilemma is a familiar one for transportation planners, who have struggled to build light-rail routes to capture the most riders possible.

This is difficult because Los Angeles is so spread out and designed for the car, not rail lines.

L.A. has far fewer rail lines than New York, Chicago and other large cities, so passengers often must transfer to buses to complete their trips.

Con Howe, the former director of planning for the city of Los Angeles and now managing director of the CityView Los Angeles Fund, pointed to one example: the MTA's decision not to build the Green Line into Los Angeles International Airport, meaning that people who want to take public transportation to the airport have to take a shuttle to the passenger terminal.

"Unlike New York City, you're never going to have 100 years of subway construction in the city," he said.

Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, chairwoman of UCLA's Department of Urban Planning, said the West Hollywood alignment is important because the idea of transit is to go to "where you have major concentrations of jobs and people."

"There is a trade-off: It would cost considerably more money. It's all about how much money is available," she said.

Loukaitou-Sideris said that Angelenos are not tapped into a pedestrian culture and that most people are reluctant to walk more than a quarter-mile to a destination.

If that holds true, many who would take the Wilshire subway would need transit to places such as Cedars-Sinai, the Beverly Center and the Westside Pavilion.

Some commuters said they were excited about the Wilshire extension but added that a route through West Hollywood made more sense to them.

Last week, Sharon Richards stepped off the subway at the end of the line and made her way to the Metro Rapid bus that runs along Wilshire Boulevard -- the fourth part of her roughly two-hour commute to work in West Hollywood.

"Oooooh, it's gonna be packed," she said as the 720 Rapid approached. "Feel like a sardine."

Richards, 61, has been commuting from Upland to her job as a manager at Cedars-Sinai for more than two decades.

She wakes before dawn, drives to a park-and-ride and catches a bus in Montclair just after 5 a.m., arrives at Union Station where she takes the Purple Line to its last stop, takes the Wilshire bus to La Cienega Boulevard and then hoofs for it the last stretch, a little more than half a mile, to her desk.

"I'm late," Richards muttered as she rushed off the 720.

She said a direct stop near the Beverly Center and Cedars-Sinai would help her and other employees commute.

Jeanne Flores, senior vice president in charge of human resources at Cedars-Sinai, said that fewer than 10% of the 11,000 employees at the medical center use public transportation to get to work.

"The public transportation systems just are not adequate to support our location and the hours that people work," Flores said. "People resign because they just can't do the commute anymore."

Supporters of the Wilshire corridor say it is the simplest and most logical route to take and would be heavily used. They don't deny that a route through West Hollywood would be beneficial, but they note the huge population, cultural and employment centers along the Wilshire route and say that places like Cedars-Sinai and the Beverly Center will be close to future stops along that alignment.

"There's absolutely no question that it should go straight out Wilshire," said Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge, whose district is included in the first phase of the subway.

"At the same time, the concept of coming off the Hollywood line is absolutely necessary as well, because that is the de facto Beverly Hills freeway."

LaBonge is referring to the ill-fated freeway that the California Department of Transportation wanted to build along Santa Monica Boulevard from north of downtown to West Los Angeles.

Residents strongly opposed the freeway, and the plan was eventually killed. But that decision is considered one factor in the Westside's notoriously congested traffic.

The Beverly Hills freeway could have run through West Hollywood, where the Mayor Pro Tem, John Heilman, now strongly supports a subway.

Heilman said the West Hollywood route make sense because it would provide a rail alternative for north-south commuters who live in the Valley but work on the Westside.

"No one disputes that Wilshire needs to be served, but a lot of the traffic that is going westbound is coming over from the Valley" and through West Hollywood, he said.

The MTA's directors will make a final decision on the Westside subway alignment next year.

Officials said it's possible that the West Hollywood route could be built after the Purple Line gets to Westwood -- if it ever gets that far. But then, it would probably compete for money with a plan to build the Purple Line extension through Santa Monica.

ari.bloomekatz@latimes.com

Article 2

Link: WeHoNews.com:

WeHo Subway To The Sea: All Aboard!… In 2047?

Thursday, November 12, 2009 – Op-ed by Steve Martin, West Hollywood

West Hollywood, California (November 12, 2009) – For the record, I would love the subway to come through West Hollywood. I am one of the few people in WeHo who actually use the subway.

Steve Martin is a West Hollywood attorney and former-city council member. WeHo News - West Hollywood’s ONLY Newspaper, ONLY ONLINE.

The proposed stations at San Vicente and Santa Monica and at Cedars Sinai would just be blocks from my house. That has to be good for property values. The only problem is that I would be way past the age of retirement by the time the subway gets here. That is unless I’m still working when I’m ninety.

Unfortunately, despite a lot of civic boosterism by City Council and Staff, the prospect for a WeHo subway in our lifetimes is pretty dim.

On November 3, there was well attended community outreach meeting regarding the Westside Metro extension at the Pacific Design Center.

As presented by the Metro consultants, the proposal for a West Hollywood extension from Hollywood Highland down Santa Monica Boulevard to Wilshire is still on the table.

The proposal, entitled “Alternate Four” includes subway stations at La Brea and Santa Monica, Fairfax and Santa Monica and San Vicente and Santa Monica. There would be a stop at Cedars/Beverly Center then it would hook up at Wilshire and La Cienega.

Currently there are Measure R funds to pay for an Red line extension from Wilshire and Vermont all the way to Westwood/U.C.L.A. Currently there is no funding for the “Subway to the Sea” touted by Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaragosia.

At the current schedule, the Fairfax/Wilshire station would open in 2019, but the Wilshire extension would bypass West Hollywood and wind up at Century City in 2026 and hit U.C.L.A. somewhere between 2034 and 2036.

While there is virtually no funding on the horizon for the West Hollywood extension, it did not damper that enthusiasm of the Metro presenters. After a general information session, we broke into groups to discuss how the various West Hollywood stations would be configured.

Because of that announcement, however, about a third of the crowd disbursed, foregoing the break out meetings, discouraged by the construction schedule. As a neighbor of mine put it, why should he care where the subway entrances are located when he won’t be around to enjoy it.
As
one neighbor put it, why can’t they build the subway were there was
local support, given that so many Wilshire adjacent groups were
opposing the Wilshire extension. If those folks in Hancock Park don’t
want a subway, WeHo was happy to take it.

If local enthusiasm would miraculously create a
WeHo extension, we would have a subway down Santa Monica tomorrow.
There was a great cross section of West Hollywood residences in
attendance; the usual City insiders or the local business community
were notable in their absence.

But it is not that simple.

Currently
Alternate 1, the Wilshire/Fairfax to U.C.L.A. extension if funded by
Measure R. Alternate 2 would extend the subway under the 405 freeway to
the Veteran’s Administration Hospital. The Metro folks hoped to find
some loose change under the sofa to pay for Alternate 2.

Alternate
3 is the “Subway to the Sea” would extend the line down Wilshire
through Santa Monica to the Pacific. Alternate 4 is the WeHo extension.
The “alternates” are in priority based upon projected use.

If you have been following the controversy in the
Los Angeles Times, Mayor Villaraigosa and Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky
want to get Federal funding for the Santa Monica extension.

They
are opposed by Supervisor Gloria Molina and Congressman Adam Schiff,
who want those Federal funds to extend the Gold Line East.

It seems those insular folks of the eastern part
of the County resent the billions of dollars being spent exclusively on
the Westside. They seem to think their less than fashionable
neighborhoods deserve billions of transportation dollars too.

While
Metro folks seemed to think that funding for the Alternate 4, the WeHo
extension, might occur sometime in the next twenty years, it would take
twenty years of planning, environmental studies and construction before
it would be completed.

Even if funding were found in the next
seven or eight years, the Metro officials said it was unlikely that we
would see a West Hollywood subway before 2045. Or 2050. Or 2055.

I
spoke with the Metro staff during the break with some of my neighbors
about the potential for the WeHo line funding. Metro Staff felt that
the Santa Monica line was had the best chance for any sort of Federal
funding.

Metro
staff pointed out that West Hollywood does not even come close to
meeting the Federal funding criteria based upon cost effectiveness
based upon ridership and construction costs.

When asked if somehow West Hollywood could lobby
to have funding diverted for our extension to be built prior to the
“Subway to the Sea,” Metro staff was emphatic that there was no
possibility of Federal funding for WeHo.

Despite the fact
that West Hollywood currently has a large public transportation
ridership, that actually works against us. The goal of the subway is to
get commuters out of cars, not move bus riders on to an expensive
subway.

The point of the subway is to alleviate gridlock before
Los Angeles becomes uninhabitable. With over thirty percent of West
Hollywood’s adult population being retired or at retirement age, we
don’t currently have the demographics to fit the ridership needs to
meet Federal criteria for funding.

Furthermore we don’t have
the sort of middle class jobs as other areas of the Westside, so we
really are not a credible destination. Getting eastside gays to West
Hollywood hot spots is not a goal of the Metro.

A WeHo subway, while convenient for our residents and visitors, would do little to alleviate regional traffic problems.

If
funding ain’t coming from the Feds, the Metro staff hoped that WeHo
funding might come from a future County bond measure or sales tax
increase earmarked for public transportation, which is not likely in
the next decade.

n top of that, once funding is secured for the
“Subway to the Sea,” it is unlikely that the rest of Los Angeles County
is going to vote for any additional funding for a WeHo extension when
other parts of the County desperately need subway services.

The
west Valley, San Gabriel Valley, Downey and Glendora all want their
“fair share” of any transportation funds that might come from a future
bond measure. The only people who believe funding is imminent are at
WeHo City Hall.

Obviously West Hollywood cannot fund this
extension on its own, but staff keeps insisting that the subway is
coming, but the General Plan Advisory Committee is becoming openly
skeptical and resistive to staff’s insistence that we need more density
to qualify for a subway extension.

But city staff and the
city’s consultant want the Committee to suspend common sense and add
huge heights and densities based upon a phantom transportation system
that will not be seen in our collective life times.

We will not have a West Hollywood subway any time during the life of the new General Plan, which would be about twenty years.

If
in 2031 the planets are aligned for a WeHo extension, we can plan for
it in our next General Plan. Then we can think about major changes in
density. But common sense dictates that we should not approve major
height increases on Santa Monica Boulevard until a subway moves from
the world of fantasy.

The General Plan needs to be based upon the current
realities, not on wishful thinking. While the City Council is anxious
to pander to the developers who want a “Greater West Hollywood,” let’s
not build a West Coast Manhattan until we actually get our subway.

Article 3

Link: Mayor V. Bows To The Westside As He Dedicates Eastside Rail - Los Angeles News - LA Daily

Mayor V. Bows To The Westside As He Dedicates Eastside Rail
By Dennis Romero in City News, community, politics
Sat., Nov. 14 2009 @ 11:09PM

Eastside son Antonio Villaraigosa beamed Saturday as he helped to dedicate the Metro Gold Line extension train that runs from downtown to East Los Angeles. Free rides are being offered Sunday to celebrate the opening and to lure the bus-riding masses. And while a vast majority of county transit users are bus riders, the mayor couldn't pass up a chance to plug his vanity project -- a "subway to the sea" -- in coded language.

Mayor V. stumps for regional rail at the official dedication of the Gold Line extension.​

" ... This is not the end of the ride," he stated. "Thanks to the passage of Measure R, there will be local funding for half a dozen new rail projects in the next decade, which will give Angelenos even greater transit access to jobs and other opportunities throughout the county."

Of course, Mayor V.'s favorite new rail project is a line that would extend from the end-of-the-line subway station at Wilshire Boulevard and Western Avenue to Westwood and eventually Santa Monica. Villaraigosa is pushing for the 30-year project to be fast-tracked to a 10-year timetable. And some say he's favored it at the expense of more-pressing public-transportation needs, particularly bus service.

The Measure R Villaraigosa was referring to was the 2008 law passed by county voters that increases sales tax by a half-cent and will pour $40 billion dollars into MTA coffers in the decades to come. Of course, it's just pocket change when it comes to the mayor's vision of bringing light rail to the Westside. Despite promises that the measure would be a panacea for transit needs and traffic congestion, hundreds of billions of dollars, much of it from the federal government, would be needed to complete Mayor V.'s vision of a rail-gilded region.

The mayor's goal of tunneling below the Westside, including a leg through the methane- and tar-plagued Miracle Mile, and then completing his subway to the sea in 10 years would be nearly unprecedented.

As U.S. Rep. Lucille Roybal-Allard noted at Saturday's dedication, her father, longtime Congressman Edward R. Roybal, had hoped for decades to cut the ribbon on an Eastside line but never lived to see the day. (The leg was officially dedicated in the late congressman's name as the Edward R. Roybal Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension).
Aside from the physical construction, the loopholes, bureaucracy and political maneuvering required to get a multi-billion-dollar project off the ground is daunting.

"As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives for 30 years, he was a staunch supporter of efforts to bring rail to the Eastside and he worked long and hard towards that end," Roybal-Allard said, referring to her father. "It has been my pleasure to continue that fight and today his dream of affordable, clean and efficient transportation is becoming a reality."

It's interesting how the Gold Line Eastside Extension is couched as a battle won for the transit-dependent Eastside -- a tale of government-done-good for hard-working taxpayers. "This caps a 20-year battle to bring rail back to East L.A. -- one of the most transit dependent communities in Los Angeles," said Villaraigosa.

The "subway to the sea," on the other hand, has seen little battle. While Westside Rep. Henry Waxman once opposed the proposed line, he's gotten out of the way, and now there's nothing to stop the Eastside native Villaraigosa's dream of light rail for the transit-needy shoppers of Rodeo Drive.

Sunday Open Thread - From San Diego (Source: California High Speed Rail Blog)

Link: California High Speed Rail Blog: Sunday Open Thread - From San Diego

Sunday, November 15, 2009
Sunday Open Thread - From San Diego

Sorry for the lack of a post yesterday - been busy all day with the California Democratic Party's Executive Board Meeting here in sunny, beautiful San Diego. Some news from the southwestern corner of the nation:

* I had the chance to interview Janice Hahn, LA City Council member and candidate for Lieutenant Governor in 2010. We'll have the video up on a Calitics soon. One thing I asked her about was high speed rail - she's shown strong support for HSR recently, and I asked her if she'd be willing to be a statewide advocate for HSR should she be elected, since we seem to lack such an advocate right now. "Absolutely," she said, and proceeded to make a strong case for why California needs HSR.


* Daniel Krause and I took a quick scoping tour of the proposed HSR route in San Diego, from the Santa Fe Depot north to Rose Canyon and University Towne Center. It seemed clear to us that a downtown station would be the best location for an SD station. Downtown San Diego has become a major regional destination, has a lot of density, and is well-served by the existing mass transit (San Diego Trolley). An airport station, which has a lot of local momentum, would be much less effective from the perspective of potential riders and certainly from the perspective of linking HSR to urban densification (which downtown SD has accomplished quite well). We also took a look at Rose Canyon, where CHSRA proposes an at-grade implementation. BNSF still uses this route for freight service, so track-sharing is an issue. Adding new tracks would mean encroachment on Rose Creek, which is what worries locals. Finally, we drove up to University Towne Center mall, which is an awful TOD location and doesn't seem like a good place for an HSR station. A possible alternative to Rose Canyon is possible though via a tunnel under UTC, along Nobel, and then south along I-5.


* Scoping comments for the LA-SD route are due Friday, November 20th. From Dan Krause:

It appears that most folks making comments support a downtown San Diego station. Unfortunately, the political momentum in the San Diego area is to eliminate the downtown station in favor of an airport station. While I think there is merit considering a scenario where there would be both a downtown and airport station, it is absolutely necessary for the downtown station to happen for a successful project segment.

Comments are due for the scoping for the LA-SD section of the project-level eir-eis on Friday November 20th. Please consider sending a note to the following address and let them know a downtown San Diego needs to be preserved.

Mr. Dan Leavitt, Deputy Director
California High Speed Rail Authority
Attn: Los Angeles to San Diego via the Inland Empire Section EIR/EIS
925 L Street, Suite 1425
Sacramento, CA 95814
comments@hsr.ca.gov



Feel free to use this as an open thread for anything HSR-related, whether it involves San Diego or not.

Clear Track for Rail Car Bids (Source: Los Angeles Business Journal )

Link: Los Angeles Business Journal

Clear Track for Rail Car Bids
By FRANCISCO VARA-ORTA - 11/16/2009
Los Angeles Business Journal Staff

The last-minute derailment of a $300 million pact between rail car manufacturer AnsaldoBreda and the county’s transportation agency was greeted as a big loss.

But, in fact, many are cheering the Oct. 30 collapse of the deal, which would have supplied 100 rail cars to Los Angeles County’s growing subway and light-rail network.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Michael Antonovich and other critics said they didn’t trust the Italian company to deliver cars on time, within budget and to specification. Moreover, they disliked relying on a proposed AnsaldoBreda rail car assembly plant to be the anchor of an ambitious clean tech manufacturing center planned for downtown Los Angeles. Now, they can start fresh.

“We knew the emperor had no clothes, but Los Angeles city insiders and special interests attempted to ram through a substandard outfit, creating costly delays in the MTA’s ability to seek a legitimate firm to build rail cars,” said Antonovich, a board member of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

“AnsaldoBreda’s failure is a significant victory for county taxpayers as the MTA is now obligated to secure a cost-effective contract with a reputable company who will build quality rail cars, on budget and on time,” he added.

With less than 12 hours left before the Oct. 30 midnight deadline, AnsaldoBreda walked away from its deal to manufacture the cars after failing to agree to penalties for late delivery. Leaving with it was the company’s promise to build those cars in a $70 million plant with 650 workers in the proposed clean tech redevelopment zone.

However, the MTA is preparing to release a bid for proposals for at least 100 new rail cars within two months. And rail car makers such as Germany’s Siemens and Canada’s Bombardier that already have rail cars and small service operations in Los Angeles have expressed interest.

“Los Angeles is definitely already a great market that’s only going to become more alluring to us with all these projects,” said Talal Zouaoui, a spokesman for Montreal-based Bombardier. “We will review the next request for proposals and wouldn’t rule out anything at this point, including setting up more operations such as a plant if it makes business sense for us.”

The companies have good reason to be interested. Los Angeles County is expected to be a hot market for rail cars thanks to the passage of Measure R, a half-cent sales tax that will pay for its expanding rail network over the next 30 years – and likely additional contracts.

Meanwhile, the city’s Community Redevelopment Agency is looking into inquiries from about 20 companies expressing interest in establishing a plant at the clean tech site, including one major sustainable energy company agency officials declined to name, said Len Betz, the agency’s project manager.

Greg Freeman, author of an economic impact report on AnsaldoBreda’s proposed plant and vice president of economic and policy consulting at the Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp., said officials shouldn’t be devastated.

“Los Angeles still is the nation’s largest manufacturing sector, with a lot of diverse skilled workers capable of bringing another manufacturing company or even another rail manufacturer,” Freeman said. “It’s not like no one wants to come here and this was our only chance.”

Political cost

Still, the collapse of the yearlong deal comes at a political and economic cost for its supporters.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa spent political capital lobbying for the contract with the assistance of labor, which would have been able to organize the plant’s workers. His efforts helped delay a final vote on the deal at least five times this year amid MTA staff concerns over AnsaldoBreda’s performance.

Much was at stake. Freeman’s LAEDC report estimated AnsaldoBreda’s plant would generate $369 million in economic activity annually, including 2,240 full-time jobs in Los Angeles County with annual earnings of $91.1 million.

“It’s a total disappointment,” said Richard Katz, who serves on the MTA board and is a liaison to Villaraigosa’s office. “But it’s really their loss, as we know we are becoming the nation’s leading rail market with half-a-dozen rail projects coming on line in the next decade.”

However, MTA management became disillusioned with AnsaldoBreda, which in 2003 was awarded a $159 million contract to deliver 50 light-rail cars by May 2007. Thus far, more than two years after the deadline, the company has delivered a total of 27, but each is 6,000 pounds more than the MTA weight limit, incompatible with other cars, and cannot run on the Green and Blue lines, said MTA spokesman Marc Littman.

“All rail car manufacturers have problems and experience delays as these cars aren’t products that you just go to a showroom and pull off the shelf because they are custom made,” Littman said. “But we’ve never seen delays like this though.”

As part of that original deal, the MTA had the option of ordering 100 additional rail cars, which the agency now needs to complete various projects. But earlier this year, MTA staff, including former Chief Executive Roger Snoble and successor Art Leahy, recommended putting the order for more cars out to bid.

However, AnsaldoBreda struck back, gradually sweetening the deal by offering to build an energy-efficient green factory at the downtown manufacturing complex, pay unionized workers top wages and have a money-back guarantee in the form of a $300 million performance bond if it failed to deliver up to MTA’s specifications.

That got the support of Villaraigosa, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, the AFL-CIO and environmentalists, with the board bowing to pressure and setting the Oct. 30 deadline. But just hours before the deadline, AnsaldoBreda officials refused to sign the deal. According to a Nov. 3 letter sent by company Chief Executive Salvatore Bianconi to Leahy, the final draft of the agreement included a clause that would require the company to pay “unlimited additional liquidated damages” if it failed to deliver on time, which he said the company was forbidden to agree to under Italian law.

Littman, however, said AnsaldoBreda wanted a 10-month limit on penalties that would be about $5,000 a day per car that is late. Littman said that would come out to a maximum of $13 million to $15 million and undermine the $300 million guarantee.

“So now we are all on to Plan B,” Littman said.

Riding on Plan B

Back in June, the MTA, at Antonovich’s request, unanimously passed a motion to start preparing a new bid for rail cars just in case the AnsaldoBreda deal fell through. Now, that’s scheduled to be released right after Jan. 1.

“We know there is significant interest in going after that contract, but these manufacturers didn’t take it seriously because they thought AnsaldoBreda had it locked up,” said Michael Cano, Antonovich’s transportation deputy. “Now we can try to get a better deal and maybe a better tenant at the clean tech center.”

The 20-acre CleanTech Manufacturing Center, at Santa Fe Avenue and 15th Street, just south of the Santa Monica (10) Freeway, would form the anchor of a planned four-mile-long, 2,236-acre manufacturing corridor running all the way to Alameda Street. AnsaldoBreda was supposed to open up its plant in 2011.

Project manager Betz said that the agency is looking for a major tenant or smaller tenants that meet the same requirements to which AnsaldoBreda agreed. They include producing an environmentally responsible product such as renewable energy, recycling or clean transportation. The plant also would have to be energy efficient and nonpolluting with workers receiving good pay.

Freeman said that the MTA could still demand that the signee of the next rail car contract has to bring jobs to the county, either through opening a plant or service center, or using local suppliers. However, MTA officials believe that could alienate some manufacturers from bidding on the L.A. market.

Moreover, he noted that such a requirement could violate federal law, which prohibits transportation agencies using federal funds from giving special consideration in a competitive bid process to companies offering local incentives, such as job creation. The idea is that federal funds should be used to most efficiently get the best transit deals.

The MTA is expected to decide Dec. 10 what funding sources for the rail pact it will seek at its next meeting. Littman said the issue may ultimately mean the clean tech center and the rail contract are permanently separated.

“While the new rail car contract and manufacturing center have been tied together most of this year under the AnsaldoBreda proposal, the two now are separate matters,” Littman said. “But we’re moving forward and now all parties have more freedom to see what makes the best sense.”
Los Angeles Business Journal, Copyright © 2009, All Rights Reserved.