One Winner in the Aviation Crisis: Europe’s Railways (Source: Progressive Fix)

Link: One Winner in the Aviation Crisis: Europe's Railways | Progressive Fix

One Winner in the Aviation Crisis: Europe’s Railways
April 20, 2010
Mark Reutter


PPI Fellow Mark Reutter is the former editor of Railroad History and author of Making Steel: Sparrows Point and the Rise and Ruin of American Industrial Might (2005, rev. ed.).

by Mark Reutter

The media’s blanket coverage of the travel chaos gripping Europe has overlooked just one thing — fast and frequent trains have gotten hundreds of thousands of travelers to their destinations safely and on time while airplanes sat on the tarmac.

In fact, if there’s any winner in the crisis that began when a cloud of ash from an Icelandic volcano drifted over the continent, it’s Europe’s railways. They have operated with few disruptions at the same time air flight was grounded by authorities over safety concerns.

Since trains handle a large portion of commercial traffic between many cities, the average European has not been hurt by the “transportation tsunami” breathlessly described by CNN and other media outlets.

Travelers most affected by the air ban have been international flyers, such as British tourists coming back from Easter vacations in the Mediterranean and passengers on transatlantic flights, who couldn’t land in northern Europe, Scandinavia or the British Isles.

Since last Thursday, high-speed Eurostar trains have been the only direct link between London and the rest of the world. Running through the English “chunnel,” Eurostar has added trains to its daily roster of 32 trains to and from Paris and 18 trains to and from Brussels.

An estimated 50,000 passengers took the trains between Thursday and Sunday, a 30-percent jump from normal bookings. Eurostar’s website says trains are sold out through the end of this week, but that special service will be added to accommodate still-stranded air passengers.

Elsewhere in Europe, trains have been packed. A EuroCity train from Italy to France was so crowded over the weekend that people could barely squeeze through the doors. A Swiss Federal Railways spokesman said trains have been reconfigured with twice as many cars as normal to handle the increased patronage.

Although airports across Europe are preparing to resume limited flights today along “safe air corridors,” it will take days, if not a full week, before normal operations are reestablished, according to aviation officials.

Much will depend on the status of the Eyjafjallajökull volcano. It continues to spew out thick clouds of ash, whose microscopic shards of rock, glass and sand can stop jet engines by melting and congealing in turbines.

The volcano’s unexpected activity — leading to the biggest flight ban in aviation history — is a stark reminder of the vulnerability of air travel and the necessity of having solid transportation alternatives in a crisis.

Villaraigosa Presses Obama to Speed Up Funding for Local Transit Projects (Source: LAist)

Villaraigosa Presses Obama to Speed Up Funding for Local Transit Projects - LAist

Villaraigosa Presses Obama to Speed Up Funding for Local Transit Projects


Just minutes ago President Obama boarded his flight to depart Los Angeles after his brief visit to take part in a fundraiser dinner for the DNC and Senator Barbara Boxer's re-election campaign. On the tarmac were City Council President Eric Garcetti and Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, the latter of which took one last opportunity to ask the President to speed up funding for Los Angeles' 30/10 transit project, which would bring

So did Obama bite? "He didn't say no," Villaraigosa laughed with reporters, explaining that the President gave him a hug and told him: "The one thing about you is that you're indefatigable and won't take no for an answer."

Villaraigosa admitted that Obama didn't give him the money, but clarified that it wasn't straight up dollars he was seeking for Los Angeles, but rather federal backing to make the project happen more quickly. "What we're asking for is a guarantee or a loan subsidy of some sort," explained Villaraigosa. This 30/10 plan is composed of "12 projects scheduled to be completed in 30 years accelerated to 10 years. The Plan doesn't ask for free money, it asks for a long-term loan to be paid back with guaranteed funds from Measure R, the voter-approved sales tax hike."

[Caption]

MTA holding hearings on Green Line extension into South Bay (Source: The Daily Breeze)

MTA holding hearings on Green Line extension into South Bay - The Daily Breeze

MTA holding hearings on Green Line extension into South Bay
From news services
Posted: 04/20/2010 06:15:29 PM PDT


TORRANCE - Metro will hold public hearings in the South Bay next week on proposals to extend the Green Line light-rail tracks south into Torrance.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority wants public comments on its tentative plans to extend the passenger train service south from its terminus at Marine Avenue near the San Diego (405) Freeway, at the north end of Redondo Beach.

Although an exact route has not been chosen, planners are eyeing an abandoned railroad track alignment formerly used by Santa Fe freight trains for the new rail service, according to Metro. Green Line trains would run southeast, parallel to the 405, and then south to the Torrance Transit bus hub on Crenshaw Boulevard.

The existing Green Line tracks start at Redondo Beach and go north to Imperial Highway, and then run east to Norwalk via the median of the Glenn Anderson (105) Freeway.

The extension to Torrance may be complemented by a light-rail route planned to connect the Green Line near LAX to Inglewood and the Crenshaw District, allowing north-south rail service from Torrance to the new Expo Line, which is scheduled to start running between Culver City and downtown Los Angeles within 18 months.

Next week's meetings are "scoping sessions" to determine what issues should be evaluated as the proposed Torrance extension is evaluated. Hearings will be held:

-- in Torrance, at 6 p.m. Monday, in the Nakano Theater, 3330 Civic Center Drive;
Advertisement

-- in Redondo Beach, at 6 p.m. April 28, at the North Redondo Senior Center, 2308 Rockefeller Lane;

-- in Lawndale, at 10 a.m. May 1, at City Hall, 14717 Burin Ave.; and

-- in El Segundo, at 6 p.m. May 5, at the Automobile Driving Museum, 610 Lairport Street.

Further information is available at www.metro.net/southbayextension.

The Big Bang and Incremental Improvement (Source:California High Speed Rail Blog)

California High Speed Rail Blog » The Big Bang and Incremental Improvement

The Big Bang and Incremental Improvement

Apr 20th, 2010 | Posted by Robert Cruickshank

Last Saturday RailPAC held what was a fantastic event at MTA headquarters in Los Angeles, bringing together rail advocates from across the state and even the nation to speak about the future of passenger rail in California, with an emphasis on high speed rail.

I was only able to attend the morning session, but found it to be extremely valuable, both for the presentations as well as the opportunity to reconnect with old friends and meet new ones. The discussion was wide-ranging and while there may not have been agreement on everything, there was clearly a shared desire to seize the opportunities voters gave us in 2008 to make a dramatic change in passenger rail in California.

I’ll make some brief comments on different items discussed at the meeting, but I wanted to open with a framework offered by Amtrak VP of Policy and Development Stephen Gardner in his presentation – that there are different approaches to HSR in the US, one he termed “the big bang” (European/Asian style 150mph or higher trains) and “incremental improvements” (small scale improvements that can add up over time).

Gardner argues that the US needs both, and I fully agree. However, I also strongly believe California HSR must embrace “the big bang” – and in fact that Californians have already done so by their votes for Prop 1A, Measure R (LA County), Measure B (Santa Clara County) and elsewhere in 2008.

For the last 30 years, passenger rail advocates have become expert at doing a lot with very little. Funding has been hard to come by, and advocates learned that in the absence of massive amounts of money (which instead was going to freeways and airports), passenger rail had to be efficient, smart, but also accept certain limitations in order to survive. This approach has had quite a lot of success, especially on the Capitol Corridor but also on the other two Amtrak California routes, where big ridership gains were wrung out of a relatively small amount of money and an unfavorable trackage situation. I don’t mean to disparage the incrementalist approach, because without it we’d have been screwed in the era of Reagan, Gingrich, and Dubya.

That being said, even California’s incremental success has relied on its own Big Bang, which came in 1990. The passage of Propositions 111 and 116 at the June 1990 election provided the funding for Amtrak California services to buy an entirely new fleet of cars that enabled the incremental improvements. This is obviously not the same kind of “Big Bang” that Gardner was talking about – he was referring specifically to high speed rail – but it does indicate that incrementalism is not possible without strong advocacy for big infusions of cash, and that when such infusions become possible, they must be pursued with full force.

Comparing 1990 to 2008 is like comparing a high tide to a tsunami. By 2008, it had become absolutely clear to two key groups of people – the California electorate and the Barack Obama campaign – that what was needed was something more than the relatively slow and sometimes unreliable service burdened by sharing tracks with freight. Big bangs capture the public’s imagination, show that better passenger rail service is both possible and desirable, and can consolidate public and political support for ongoing investments in passenger rail.

The California public in 2008 did not vote for incremental improvements. They voted to transform intercity rail service. Of course, how we get there is an open question.

As the Tea Party movement has arisen and Democrats have grown a bit more hesitant to spend lots of government money, many rail advocates are witnessing the return of the conditions they knew so well over the last 30 years. Growing doubtful about the prospects for more federal money, some advocates are concluding that we may need to scale back our ambitions and use the existing HSR funds for incremental improvements.

Others, like Darrell Clarke, argue for a “mid-course correction” in the HSR planning process, where the CHSRA seeks more accommodation with the existing ROW and more integration with existing service. This appears to be able to meet both the goals of the Big Bang – true HSR service from SF to Anaheim – while also satisfying the incremental approach that may be necessary in the immediate future.

In the presentation we collaboratively produced, Dan Krause of Californians For High Speed Rail laid out CA4HSR’s vision for the LA-Anaheim corridor. Based in part on prior conversations with LA rail advocates, it indicates ways to implement what Darrell Clarke has been describing. Krause laid out some key design principles that need to be foregrounded when considering the LA-Anaheim corridor:

• Design with the assumption of full HSR build out.

• Design each piece of new infrastructure to be scalable – there must be enough capacity to handle future ridership growth.

• Design LA-Anaheim section to be compatible with entire statewide system (to guarantee reliable through-service).

In other words, incremental improvements and track sharing ought to be explored, as long as they serve the long-term Big Bang goals and definitely as long as whatever we spend our money on does not act as a bottleneck to future service.

There is more to the presentation that you should read, but Krause moved to list three priorities for the LA-Anaheim corridor, based on the above principles:

Priority 1: Complete Los Angeles Union Station Approach & Station Modifications – i.e. run-through tracks. Jarard Wright of Transit Coalition also called for this, indicating possible consensus on the value of moving to build this project, which can provide immediate benefits as well as serve the long-term needs of the HSR system.

Priority 2: Complete Key Grade Separations Projects. Importantly, this needs to be done so as to not throttle future levels of HSR service – we do not want to come back in 10 or 20 years and have to tear this out again. Let’s get it right the first time.

Priority 3: Complete HSR Portion of ARTIC Station. The design can be cost-effective – HSR might not need to go in a subway, and parking structures might be able to wait for the time being.

CA4HSR feels these are some starting points – though by no means the only ones – for moving forward on the LA-Anaheim segment.

Still, there were some conceptual differences on display at the meeting. At the end of the “How to Spend the First Billion Dollars” panel (where Dan Krause gave the above presentation), RailPAC president Paul Dyson argued that it did not make sense to build a high speed train that just links LA to Anaheim as a demonstration segment, a first segment, or a proof of concept segment, because that would fail to generate public support.

Ryan Stern, however, gave a very eloquent response to that argument, pointing out that was pretty much what happened with the Metro Red Line – it opened just from Union Station to MacArthur Park in 1993. And what happened? The public clamored for more, and has been clamoring for more ever since.

While there is surely room for sensible short-term investment in the corridor as Dan Krause laid out, he was absolutely right to point out that Californians expect bullet trains, and we need to find ways to deliver. The Big Bang is here. We already are going to have to implement it in stages, but as long as that big picture vision is kept in mind, there is every reason to believe sensible choices can be made about what to do in the near term, and ensure it provides for major increases in passenger rail service in the long term.

What that to me means is it needs to be all hands on deck to secure more and permanent federal funding. We’ll have more on that in the coming days and weeks.

Some other items that were discussed that was noteworthy:

• Tom Stone of DesertXpress gave a very thorough presentation that went into great detail on the plans to link Victorville to Las Vegas. As Brandon pointed out in the Saturday Open Thread, that presentation did not include details on the funding, only that they are in “active discussions” with a range of funders. We will see what happens, but I am excited for this project and think it could give quite a boost to our own HSR project between SF and Anaheim.

• Armin Kick of Siemens emphasized the company’s Sacramento factory, which has been making light rail vehicles since 1984. The factory covers all of North America and even does some exports to South America. Siemens has no plans to build a second factory elsewhere in the country, and is quite happy in Sacramento, defying the claims that California is overregulated and cannot sustain major industry. Siemens has already identified and purchased adjacent land to the existing factory for high speed rail production. There’s been a lot of discussion about China’s proposal to use the former NUMMI plant in Fremont to build trainsets, but Siemens showed that they already meet and exceed Buy America rules, do most of the production in-house, and meet or exceed green building standards. Siemens will be able to make a very compelling case for why it should be the supplier of trainsets for our system.

• Joshua Coran of Talgo came down from Seattle to deliver his presentation on Talgo’s success with the Amtrak Cascades, where they’ve been able to deliver an exceptional on-time performance because they insisted on doing the maintenance on the trains, not just selling them to the State of Washington. Talgo is primarily focused on the emerging HSR corridors elsewhere in the country, but clearly has its eye on California as well.

In the afternoon session, which I had to miss:

• Amtrak’s Stephen Gardner spoke about Amtrak’s HSR success and the need for ongoing investment in existing Amtrak services, particularly replacement of aging rolling stock.

• A panel spoke about the LOSSAN corridor, including Buena Park mayor Art Brown. I’d be especially interested to hear about this panel.

• And finally the Coast Starlight Communities Network presented a list of proposed upgrades to improve service quality and ultimately provide additional runs beyond the daily train serving the line in California.

Again, this was an excellent day of discussion about high speed rail and passenger rail. We are moving into a new era in this country, and while many challenges remain, it does seem that most everyone shares the desire to work together to bring about the vision that Californians endorsed back in November 2008. The Big Bang is here – it’s time to get it built.

30/10 Transportation Initiative Would Create Jobs, Cut Emissions In Southern California (Source: http://switchboard.nrdc.org/)

Switchboard, from NRDC :: Damon Nagami's Blog :: 30/10 Transportation Initiative Would Create Jobs, Cut Emissions In Southern California

30/10 Transportation Initiative Would Create Jobs, Cut Emissions In Southern California

Damon Nagami
Staff Attorney, Santa Monica
Blog | About
Posted April 20, 2010 in Curbing Pollution

Los Angeles transportation officials will decide Thursday whether to support the 30/10 Initiative, a bold financing strategy that could benefit the region’s environment, create much-needed jobs, and reduce crippling traffic congestion all in one broad stroke.

In 2008, Los Angeles County voters approved Measure R, a half-cent sales tax increase that will fund critical transportation projects over the next thirty years. But in recent months a coalition of business, labor, and environmental groups – including NRDC – has rallied behind an initiative to speed up construction of twelve of those projects and build them within the next decade.

Under the 30/10 Initiative, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) would use some form of federal help – like a loan guarantee or the use of Build America Bonds – to secure funding up-front. Measure R revenues over the next 30 years would then go toward repaying debt obligations.

This ambitious program would help the region move even faster toward achieving the environmental benefits promised through Measure R. According to Metro staff’s calculations, expanding Metro’s transit system would result in 208 million fewer vehicle miles traveled, reducing harmful emissions from cars and trucks by more than 568,000 pounds.

And the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce is touting a new analysis saying the initiative could create 30,000 jobs by the end of 2012, and 240,000 jobs by 2020.

But first Metro will have to approve the initiative and secure federal backing. NRDC supports the 30/10 Initiative and the significant regional benefits it aims to achieve with respect to air quality and increased regional mobility. You can help to ensure the success of 30/10 by contacting Metro board members and your Congressional representatives and senators.

Green Line extension meetings on tap (Source: The Source )

The Source » Green Line extension meetings on tap

Posted by Steve Hymon on April 20, 2010 - 12:46 pm
Green Line extension meetings on tap

An extension of the Green Line from its current terminus in Redondo Beach to the Torrance Transit Center is currently being studied by Metro. The project is in its draft environmental study phase and a new round of meetings begins soon to give the public a chance to catch up on the relevant issues.

The press release is after the jump — the meetings are between April 26 and May 5.

The draft environmental report is considering whether it’s best to upgrade traffic management systems in the area, extend the light rail line or not build anything (an alternative that the law requires to be studied). When the report is complete, Metro staff will make a recommendation which of the above is best and ultimately the agency’s Board of Directors will select what to do. A Green Line extension would be funded in part by the Measure R sales tax.

The Green Line extension, if built, would certainly help fill out Metro’s rail network. A passenger in Torrance could take the Green Line to the future Crenshaw Line, which will terminate at the Expo Line — meaning a trip originating in Torrance could end in Norwalk (with transfers to Metrolink), the LAX area, the Crenshaw business district or any of the places served by the Expo Line, including USC and Culver City. Metro to Hold Public Scoping Meetings for the South Bay Metro Green Line Extension Project

Metro will hold four public scoping meetings beginning Monday April 26 for the South Bay Metro Green Line Extension project. These scoping meetings are the first step in the environmental process and Metro is seeking public comments and input for extending rail service farther into the South Bay to improve mobility in southwest Los Angeles County.

Metro is currently preparing a Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report (DEIS/DEIR) to identify transit improvements that would provide an alternative to the I-405 corridor by accessing the regional rail network through connections to the Metro Blue Line and the proposed Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor, currently under environmental review.

As part of the Draft EIS/EIR, Metro will assess existing conditions in the study area, further refine the project alternatives, assess their potential impacts and identify possible and reasonable mitigation measures.

Two ‘build’ alternatives are being considered in the DEIS/DEIR. The Light Rail Alterative will evaluate extending the Metro Green Line from its current terminus at the Redondo Beach Station to the proposed Torrance Regional Transit Center (RTC).

The freight track alternative will evaluate operating rail transit vehicles on the Harbor Subdivision right-of-way using upgraded rail tracks from the El Segundo/LAX area to the proposed Torrance RTC. In addition the Draft EIS/EIR will evaluate the No Build and Transportation Systems Management alternatives.

The public is encouraged to attend the public scoping meetings and provide their input. The following is a list of upcoming meetings:

• Monday, April 26, 2010 (6-8 p.m.) Nakano Theater, 3330 Civic Center Drive, Torrance.

• Wednesday, April 28, 2010 (6-8 p.m.) North Redondo Senior Center, Perry Park, 2308 Rockefeller Lane, Redondo Beach.
More…

• Saturday, May 1, 2010 (10 a.m. – 12n) Lawndale City Hall, 14717 Burin Avenue, Lawndale.

• Wednesday, May 5, 2010 (6-8 p.m.) Automobile Driving Museum, 610 Lairport Street, El Segundo.

The study area encompasses approximately 30 square miles and includes the cities of El Segundo, Hawthorne, Inglewood, Lawndale, Los Angeles, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach and Torrance as well as the Del Aire and Lennox areas of unincorporated LA County.
The project is partially funded under Measure R, the half-cent sales tax approved by the voters in November 2008. Under Measure R, the project is provided $272 million in funding for the Metro Green Line Extension to the South Bay Corridor. This project is contained in the constrained element of the 2009 Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP).
For information on the project and the Draft EIS/EIR process the public can call
1-800-266-6883 or visit www.metro.net/southbayextension for additional information.

-- Steve Hymon

Michael Antonovich: Let's make 30/10 work for all of L.A. County (Source: The Signal - Santa Clarita Valley News)

Link: The Signal - Santa Clarita Valley News - Michael Antonovich: Let's make 30/10 work for all of L.A. County

Michael Antonovich: Let's make 30/10 work for all of L.A. County


Michael D. Antonovich
Guest Commentary
Posted: April 19, 2010 3:02 p.m.
UPDATED April 20, 2010 4:55 a.m.

This past month, millions of our county's residents participated in the Census. This crucial form provides equitable federal funds to local government supporting a variety of programs from public safety to education to transportation. These monies are locked into local government, committing them to projects they can or cannot fund until the next Census in 2020.

Likewise, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority is at a pivotal moment that could lock up all of its resources for the next 10 years with the proposed 30/10 transit plan.

The selling point of 30/10 is the acceleration of the construction of 12 Measure R transit projects from 30 years to 10 years. While it sounds great on paper, 30/10 is inherently flawed and neglects large regions of the county.

When Measure R passed last November, it promised voters a healthy mix of transit and road projects. But 30/10 neglects to include any highway projects. This circumvents the mobility promises made to the gateway cities - the San Gabriel, Antelope and Santa Clarita valleys - and the Glendale/Burbank subregion, which have most or all of their Measure R dollars allotted for highway projects.

The county Economic Development Corp. last week released a report stating that 67 percent of the jobs, economic output and earnings generated by Measure R come from highway projects, with the remaining 33 percent from transit projects. Without incorporating highway projects, the 30/10 plan will leave behind 341,500 jobs, $46.3 billion in economic output and $15.1 billion in earnings. We cannot afford to leave the benefits of highways out of 30/10.

Our county's San Fernando, Antelope and Santa Clarita valleys, under 30/10, would continue to receive the short end of the stick from the city of Los Angeles and the MTA.

The San Fernando Valley, for example, which represents one-fifth of the county's population and 40 percent of the city of Los Angeles, is slated to receive a paltry 13 percent of the city's Measure R dollars and benefit little from the transit plan. The Orange Line Extension, which is under construction, will finish construction and be up and running well before 2020 regardless of 30/10.

In the northern county areas, the Santa Clarita and Antelope valleys will grow from 7 percent to 11 percent of the county's population by 2030, but will only receive 5 percent of Measure R funds and no 30/10 projects.

Furthermore, 30/10, as it is written, includes no firewalls or caps on the projects. Only two of the 12 Measure R transit projects - the Gold Line Extension and Orange Line Extension - have their environmental work done, thus any cost estimates for projects like the Wilshire subway extension are not reliable. If project cost estimates go up because of either poor project management or completed environmental review results, would 30/10 cannibalize itself by taking funds from one project to another or use new federal, state or unclaimed local tax dollars to backfill project budgets?

Specific language is required to ensure each of the transit projects are built within their budgets without comprising funds to be utilized by the MTA to provide its mobility duties.

Lastly, accelerating construction for 30/10 transit projects without identifying new revenue sources to operate is a recipe for disaster.
With transit operation funds from the state drying up and federal assistance negligible, the 30/10 plan will require the MTA board to de-fund bus operations, raise fares or propose a new local sales tax to fund the new rail commitments on an accelerated schedule.

Prior to endorsing the 30/10 plan these issues must be vetted at the MTA, and I look forward to working with the board of directors to ensure the plan is regional, balanced, equitable and supported by the entire county.

Michael D. Antonovich represents District 5, which includes Santa Clarita Valley, on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. His column reflects his own views and not necessarily those of The Signal.

Putting L.A. Transit in the Fast Lane (Source: Los Angeles Business Journal)

Link: Putting L.A. Transit in the Fast Lane | Los Angeles Business Journal

Putting L.A. Transit in the Fast Lane
OP-ED: Villaraigosa-backed 30/10 initiative would lift local economy while speeding transportation projects.

By Mark Ridley-Thomas

Monday, April 19, 2010

Los Angeles County voters agreed in 2008 to raise sales taxes to fund massive upgrades in transportation. The benefit of that ballot initiative – dubbed Measure R – was clear: Construction jobs would multiply and businesses would flourish along new rail lines as well as highways and Los Angeles County would see $40 billion in transportation projects across the region over a 30-year period.

Measure R’s overwhelming passage was a public vote of confidence in transportation investments. Now it’s time to give the public a quicker and more potent return on its investment. We have an opportunity to embrace the 30/10 Infrastructure Sustainability Initiative introduced and championed by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and his team.

The 30/10 proposal is a way to achieve 30 years of transportation improvements in 10 years. Rather than waiting a generation for economic and quality-of-life gains to materialize, 30/10 would allow us to reap benefits in a decade.

By borrowing money to accelerate transportation projects, 30/10 could provide an extra 20 years of reduced car traffic and emissions, while jump-starting the economy in a time of great need.

The federal government would support financing the cost of Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s long-range transportation projects. Projects could be finished in 10 years, while the loans are repaid over 30 years. The financing plan’s risk would be negligible, since the sales tax increase to pay for Measure R has already been approved. In fact, that steady tax stream would ensure loan payments are made on schedule.

The 30/10 proposal is already under discussion in Washington and will come to the full Metro board this week. Under this proposal, Metro will be able to move forward immediately with final approvals, design and construction of long-anticipated projects, generating more than 100,000 jobs.

These projects include the Crenshaw/LAX Transit Corridor, providing service to the corner of Century and Aviation boulevards at Los Angeles International Airport, and the Purple Line train from Union Station to Westwood. Another top priority would be the highly efficient Regional Connector in downtown Los Angeles, which would link currently disconnected rail lines.

Economic boost

These projects, up to 12 in all, would pump hundreds of millions of dollars into the local economy. They would create jobs in the neighborhoods they serve through a carefully targeted local-hiring policy. Even more timely, a local and small business hiring policy would create contracting opportunities and significant economic development stimulus for transit-oriented districts around station sites.

Clearly, there are important issues to be addressed before this initiative ultimately moves forward

• First, the federal government must join us in creating a lending mechanism, with terms, conditions and pricing that meet Metro’s needs. Fortunately, we do not go to the Obama administration empty-handed, after all we have Measure R.

• Second, the program must respect the concept of “regional equity,” which ensures Measure R funds are distributed fairly to all regions in Los Angeles County, from Malibu and the Westside to the San Gabriel Valley, from the South Bay and South Los Angeles to the Antelope and San Fernando valleys.

• Third, Metro needs to examine its budgets and internal controls to ensure that it has the capacity to build these very ambitious and large-scale projects simultaneously, and to operate them successfully when they are completed. Special arrangements must be made with local suppliers of materials and labor organizations to ensure the availability and affordability of construction resources and the training of operating personnel.

• Fourth, careful partnerships must be forged between community groups, environmental leaders, labor organizations, the business community and the public sector, including not just transportation planners, but land-use regulators, work force development teams and community outreach staff. This is some heavy lifting, but it is worth it. Thirty-Ten can be a win-win proposition for all. Not only would it create high-paying jobs, it would elevate the quality of communities by making parks, schools, workplaces –and other modes of transport such as LAX – more accessible.

Cost savings from 30/10 might also enable further transportation improvements, such as the undergrounding of substantial sections of the Crenshaw/LAX Light Rail Corridor, protecting the integrity of the historic communities on its path to LAX. It can also provide a means for extending the currently funded Gold Line-Foothill Extension beyond its anticipated terminus in Azusa, and on to Claremont and the San Bernardino County Line.

Thirty-Ten has attracted national attention and support from California’s congressional leaders as well as prominent transportation committee legislators from other jurisdictions. The simplicity and speed of this program can do more than any other notion under consideration to enhance our mobility, prosperity and sustainability.

The public deserves to have confidence in its investment by seeing real results in real time. It’s time to reassemble the coalition that produced Measure R to deliver 30/10.

Mark Ridley-Thomas represents the Second District on the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors and is a director of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

Sharing tracks could save homes (Source: The Orange County Register)

Link: Bullet train authority to look at sharing tracks | anaheim, line, rail - News - The Orange County Register

Sharing tracks could save homes

By ALEJANDRA MOLINA

THE ORANGE
COUNTY REGISTER

The California High Speed Rail Authority will take another look at sharing rail lines with existing Metrolink and Amtrak services – a move that could save homes in Anaheim and Buena Park.

"We are all trying to figure out how to do this in the best way possible," said Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, chair of the nine-member high-speed rail authority board.

The authority is proposing to build an 800-mile-long rail line that would transport passengers from Anaheim to San Francisco in about three hours. The overall cost is estimated at $42.6 billion and would be funded with private and public money, including federal and state funds and bonds.

The board of directors voted to examine sharing tracks Thursday after the chiefs of the Orange County Transportation Authority and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation submitted a letter requesting the agency reconsider the option in the Anaheim to Los Angeles segment of the project.

"We would like to make these services more coordinated and integrated," wrote Metro's Arthur Leahy and OCTA's Will Kempton.

"We believe that this shared use alternative will significantly reduce the impacts upon the ... corridor communities between Los Angeles and Anaheim... as it would not require viaducts, aerial structures and trenches," the March 23 letter said.

Richard Katz, a Los Angeles transportation official who is on the high-speed rail board, said the shared-use option could save up to $2 billion. It would also save hundreds of homes along the Anaheim to Los Angeles route, officials said.

The shared-use option was previously considered and discarded. Officials began looking at tunneling or building at the existing level and creating grade separations – to separate the rail line from car traffic.

Under that option, the line would run on dedicated tracks parallel to the existing Metrolink line.

A dedicated-track option would require taking over some homes and properties to expand the existing rail line to accommodate the high-speed train and Metrolink on separate tracks.

"It's kind of exciting to put this alternative back in," Pringle said.

Officials also said interest in the shared-track alternative resurfaced following the award of $2.25 billion in federal stimulus funds for the high-speed train project.

Over the last few months, Pringle said, the Federal Railroad Administration has been more open to considering shared use.

The agency will continue looking into a dedicated-track option as it develops a draft environmental impact report for the Los Angeles-to-Anaheim section of rail line.

If the shared-use option were to be adopted, Pringle said, fewer or no major property purchases would be required.

For Buena Park, the shared alternative would mean not having to choose between sacrificing their two-year-old Metrolink station or 40 condominiums, said Mayor Art Brown.

"The shared use alternative makes the most sense," Brown said.

The first segment of the line would be constructed between Anaheim and Los Angeles, taking passengers from near Angel Stadium to L.A.'s Union Station in 20 minutes. The cost of that segment: $4.8 billion.

Top operating speed on the high-speed line will be 220 mph – mostly in the Central Valley, where it's straight and flat. In urban areas, the trains will travel at speeds of 110-125 mph.

The Associated Press and Register staff writer Eric Carpenter contributed to this report.

Contact the writer: 714-704-3795 or amolina@ocregister.com

Construction workers rally in support of transit project plan in Los Angeles County

Link: Construction workers rally in support of transit project plan in Los Angeles County - LA Daily News

Construction workers rally in support of transit project plan in Los Angeles County
By Rick Orlov, Staff Writer
Updated: 04/14/2010 08:38:20 PM PDT

Wearing hard hats and carrying picket signs, nearly 1,000 construction workers demonstrated Wednesday in support of a plan asking the federal government to expedite funding for transit projects in Los Angeles County.

The rally was led by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, with county Supervisors Mark Ridley-Thomas and Zev Yaroslavsky, who urged workers to lobby Congress to approve the so-called 30/10 program.

Local officials hope to get an advance of $40 billion – the amount expected to be raised by the Measure R half-cent per dollar sales tax. The advance would allow the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to build the projects in 10 years, but repay the money over a 30-year period.

"A year and a half ago, you joined with us to approve Measure R," Villaraigosa said. "Now it is time to pressure the federal government to guarantee that we can create the jobs now."

Yaroslavksy said the 30/10 program would have wide-ranging benefits. "This nation cannot begin to recover until California goes back to work, and California cannot begin to recover until Los Angeles goes back to work," Yaroslavsky said. "It all begins here."

The trades' unions are scheduled to be in Washington, D.C., next week where similar rallies are expected to be held.

The MTA board is scheduled to take a formal position on the measure later this month, although several board members have already come out in favor of the plan.

Villaraigosa also has
Advertisement
made several lobbying trips to Washington, D.C., and has won backing for the plan from Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer.

Bullet train officials agree to take second look at sharing L.A.-Anaheim tracks

Bullet train officials agree to take second look at sharing L.A.-Anaheim tracks | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

Bullet train officials agree to take second look at sharing L.A.-Anaheim tracks
April 8, 2010 | 4:03 pm
A high-speed rail configuration that backers say could save up to $2 billion and greatly reduce demolition of homes and business across the heart of Southern California was revived Thursday by project officials.

In the 6-1 voted at a meeting in San Jose, the California High-Speed Rail Authority agreed to revisit a plan, discarded in 2008, to share existing rail where feasible with commuter and freight services operating along a 34-mile route between Anaheim and downtown’s Union Station.

The action came in response to local officials’ concerns that hundreds of private properties would have to be condemned in Anaheim, Buena Park and other cities to accommodate the separate, exclusive tracks being envisioned for high-speed trains. Both alternatives will now be examined.

“It’s a very good sign,” said Richard Katz, a high-speed rail board member who also is a director of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

“It means we have an opportunity to make a change ... that is much more neighborhood-friendly, that is cheaper and that will improve rail services between L.A. and Anaheim.”

Opposing the move was board member Quentin Kopp, a former state lawmaker and longtime Bay area transportation leader. Kopp questioned the potential costs of changing course in design at this stage, agency officials said.
With a recent infusion of $2.25 billion in federal stimulus money, officials are racing to break ground by a 2012 deadline.

Previous reviews concluded that the existing Los Angeles-Orange County rail corridor could not accommodate Metrolink, Amtrak and freight service, as well as high-speed trains expected to run every few minutes.

Bullet train board Chairman Curt Pringle, who also is the mayor of Anaheim, supported reexamining the shared track option. He noted that federal officials who regulate and help finance high-speed rail projects have become more open to such track sharing arrangements in recent months, said Jeff Barker, the agency’s deputy executive director.

Project planners and Los Angeles and Orange County transportation officials will begin reviewing the design alternatives immediately. Among the issues likely to be examined are whether bullet trains can operate safely and how they can avoid delays on mixed-use track. A final recommendation could come in several months, Katz said.

The L.A.-to-Anaheim leg of the bullet train is projected to cost about $4.5 billion if separate tracks are laid. It is likely to be the first section constructed of a 500-mile initial phase extending to the Bay Area and carrying a price tag of nearly $45 billion.

-- Rich Connell

LA to start studying north-south transit connections in the San Fernando Valley

Link: LA to start studying north-south transit connections in the San Fernando Valley « Be A Green Commuter Home

LA to start studying north-south transit connections in the San Fernando Valley

April 12th, 2010 by Sirinya Tritipeskul


It’s always good to hear that LA is making good on its promises.

On Friday, LAist reported that the Los Angeles City Council approved a directive to begin studying options for improving north-south transit options in the San Fernando Valley. These options include a busway on Van Nuys Boulevard and extending rail service from the North Hollywood Red Line station to the Northeast Valley.

According to the Long Range Transportation Plan, this project is slated for completion by the year 2018.

There will be scoping and public outreach, so I look forward to asking how this might lower travel time for our Valley commuters. I’m also looking forward to stressing the importance of improving travel times and connections to the Westside from the Valley.

Even though an I-405 Sepulveda Pass rapid transit way is not slated to open until the late 2030s under the Long Range Transportation Plan, it does need a little bit of love.

Ken Alpern of CityWatchLA reminded me of this this need today (The Elusive 405 Corridor Rail Line, CityWatch, Vol 8 Issue 28 Pub: Apr 9, 2010), as he noted there isn’t presently a grassroots advocacy group to shepherd such a project.

Effort under way to repeal high-speed rail bond measure (Source: San Jose Mercury News)

Link: Effort under way to repeal high-speed rail bond measure - San Jose Mercury News

Effort under way to repeal high-speed rail bond measure

By Mike Rosenberg
San Mateo County Times
Posted: 04/14/2010 06:15:16 PM PDT
Updated: 04/14/2010 11:09:34 PM PDT

Officials in five cities will consider whether to throw their weight behind an effort to ask California voters to repeal the bond measure that launched the high-speed rail project.

Such an endeavor would be difficult and time-consuming, and local officials and residents should instead strive to make sure the project is done right, rather than not at all, said Menlo Park Mayor Rich Cline, who heads the group that will consider the idea.

Cline agreed to place the item on the agenda for the Friday meeting of the Peninsula Cities Consortium, which also includes the mayors of Burlingame, Belmont and Palo Alto, and an Atherton councilman. The cities formed the consortium one year ago to unify their high-speed-rail concerns.

Cline said he has noticed a small increase in the number of local residents who want to try to repeal Proposition 1A, the $9.95 billion high-speed-train bond approved in November 2008 with 52.7 percent of the vote. He received a letter from Menlo Park resident Morris Brown asking for the consortium to discuss whether to form a subcommittee that would consider trying to change or repeal Proposition 1A.

"There's more people whispering about it," Cline said. "There's a growing group of people who feel they're not alone in their concern."

But he noted that in the year since the consortium was formed, none of the city leaders on the panel have asked the group to consider repealing Proposition 1A. Personally, although he is willing to allow his colleagues on the consortium to discuss the idea, Cline does not see the value in trying to nullify the bond.

"We have to continue to look at how to form this thing when it comes rather than look at ways to undermine it," said Cline, who was an opponent of Proposition 1A. "That's always been my position; I am respectful of elections."

It would be an uphill battle for a Proposition 1A appeal to reach the ballot.

It is too late to gather signatures for the measure to make the November election, and even an overwhelming Peninsula movement would require significant aid from across the state to gather enough signatures to make the next election, in 2012. Backers of a measure that would overturn a prior approved measure currently must get nearly 700,000 registered voters to sign their petition to make the ballot.

Brown, though, said he has been getting many e-mails since he broached the idea.

"We feel there's a lot of people upset with the way the project is going along," said Brown, who figured a signature-gathering campaign would cost $1 million. "I don't know how you start something like this. The idea is to at least take a look at it and see how much grass-roots support you could get for it. But it is daunting, to say the least."

It appears unlikely that the Legislature, which put Proposition 1A on the ballot, would ask residents to revote on a measure they already approved.

There is a bill in the Assembly, however, that, if approved, would essentially strip the high-speed train project of its Proposition 1A funding. AB 2121, by Assemblywoman Diane Harkey, R-San Juan Capistrano, is scheduled for its first hearing in the committee on transportation Monday.

Contact Mike Rosenberg at 650-348-4324.

Planner Calls For ‘Fight’ Against High-Speed Rail Sharing Track With Freight

Streetsblog Capitol Hill » Planner Calls For ‘Fight’ Against High-Speed Rail Sharing Track With Freight

Planner Calls For ‘Fight’ Against High-Speed Rail Sharing Track With Freight

by Elana Schor on April 12, 2010

As federal and local officials plot out the future of U.S. high-speed rail, a prominent speaker at this week's American Planning Association conference is urging fellow urban planners to "fight" the prospect of high-speed rail sharing roadbed with freight lines -- a significant dilemma for Amtrak, which must split an estimated 70 percent of its track with freight.

371487850_3908ba93fb_thumb_461x500.jpgAmtrak's Acela can feasibly top 100 miles per hour, but is often relegated to lower speeds by the need to share roadbed. (Photo: Flickr/pgengler)
Leslie Pollock, a principal at the Chicago-based firm Camiros, today outlined his high-speed rail presentation from the conference for reporters, focusing on two issues that he depicted as major obstacles to a successful domestic high-speed rail network.

Pollock noted that two of the three bullet train plans receiving the bulk of early federal funding -- California's and Florida's -- would build dedicated new track for high-speed service, while the midwest initiative would attempt to share track with freight companies.

"As soon as you begin to" rely on track where freight and passenger rail coexist, Pollock said, "you begin to slow down travel and start to create inefficiencies. Indeed, one of the problems underlying Amtrak for many years has been it that it has to operate at the pleasure of freight lines on its road bed."

The limiting effect of shared track on new high-speed service was felt most acutely in the northeast corridor between Washington and Boston, where Amtrak has acknowledged that trains are forced to share an "overcrowded, and often overwhelmed, track."

The northeastern area got just 1.4 percent of the first round of Obama administration high-speed grants, a move that prompted blowback from some Republicans but ultimately was acknowledged to be a consequence of local planning deficiencies and aging track.

The shared-tracking approach, according to Pollock, is a "challenge" that "you have to fight" -- and he outlined another problem facing high-speed rail planners: "Frankly, you have to fight political demand for stops, because everybody wants a station."

The location of stops along Florida's planned line has drawn particular criticism in recent days. A recent New York Times report identified weak links in the state rail system's connections with local Tampa and Orlando transit, as well as its failure to include the Tampa airport as a stop.

Despite his warning of the risk inherent in splitting track between passenger and freight rail, Pollock did highlight the value of an improved rail network in the northeast, one of the few areas in the nation where train travel times are competitive or more attractive than those for air trips.

The planner closed by emphasizing the importance of a long view in gauging the success of U.S. high-speed rail. "These things take time" to be integrated into the culture of travel, Pollock said, warning that five or ten years would be too short of a period to truly expect bullet trains to remake American infrastructure.

Bring Your Shovels to the Groundbreaking – It’s Official (Source: I Will Ride Blog)

LinkK: Bring Your Shovels to the Groundbreaking – It’s Official « I Will Ride Blog

Bring Your Shovels to the Groundbreaking – It’s Official
Posted by Albert

The Citrus College owl and Bob Davis knew this day was coming.

UPDATE: CHANGE IN GROUNDBREAKING DATE – to better accommodate the schedules of many San Gabriel Valley residents, the Authority has moved the groundbreaking to June 26, 2010 (previously on June 19). So save this date. Remember it. Leave post-it notes everywhere, as far as the eye can see. Write it on both palms on your hands. If you’re that forgetful, maybe key it onto the side of your car.

It’s going to be that big.

In what has been the biggest day for the San Gabriel Valley since the Long Range Transportation Plan was approved last October, the Metro Board of Directors unanimously voted yesterday to approve the funding and master cooperative agreements that would officially allow the Authority to move forward with the groundbreaking and construction of the Gold Line Foothill Extension this June. The effort to officially become the first Measure R light rail project to break ground may have seemed like an eternity for some folks, but the Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority had been working with Metro staff through countless meetings in the past three months to hammer out these agreements. Great job to both sides.

The funding agreement sets in stone (or paper) the transfer of nearly $700 million from Metro (via Measure R tax revenue) to the Authority over a 10 year period towards the construction of Phase 2A (Pasadena to Azusa), and provides for an additional $110 million to be used in later years for Phase 2B (Azusa to Montclair). The master cooperative agreement basically sets the oversight rules between Metro and the Authority – since it is Metro that will be running the line after the Authority completes construction.

While there was a little bit of a tug of war between the two bodies to find the right level of review and approval over every aspect of the design and construction of the Extension, both sides were able to come to an agreement in the end that satisfied the needs of both agencies. Another significant aspect of this agreement is that, in addition to being applied to the Foothill Extension, it will serve as a framework for similar agreements in future transit projects throughout Los Angeles County.

Enough of this dry jibberish. What does this really mean?

The timely approval of these two agreements means that the Authority’s construction schedule… will be on schedule. There are currently six teams vying to win the design-build contract to begin construction of the Iconic Freeway Structure this summer, and four more teams turned in Statements of Qualifications earlier this week, looking to be pre-qualified to design, build and finance the Phase 2A Alignment work.

This also means that:

* thousands of construction workers (one of the worse hit job sectors) will be put back to work
* almost $1 billion in economic benefits will come to the region as a result of the construction
* thousands of non-construction jobs will be created as a result of the Extension
* in 2014, the cities of Arcadia, Monrovia, Duarte, Irwindale, and Azusa will be connected via light-rail to Metro’s rapidly-expanding transit network
* more San Gabriel Valley residents will be able to skip the 210 gridlock to and from work
* more San Gabriel Valley residents will have some extra change in their pockets
* and more! (if you can think of something, you’re probably right)

See you on June 19 June 26!

Metro to Host Community Meetings on Regional Connector Project (Source: LA Watts times)

Link: COMMUNITY MEETINGS

April 08, 2010

Metro to Host Community Meetings on Regional Connector Project

(Metro) — Community meetings on the Regional Connector Light Rail Transit project will take place throughout April. The meetings will consist of an open house, as well as a presentation highlighting the features of the new build alternative. There is no need to attend multiple meetings, as identical information will be presented at each.

The meetings will take place on the following dates and locations:

• April 9, noon to 1:30 p.m., at Los Angeles Central Public Library, 630 W. 5th St., Los Angeles. This meeting was tentatively scheduled to be broadcast live from www.metro. net/regionalconnector.

• April 13, 6:30 to 8 p.m., Lake Avenue Church, 393 N. Lake Ave., Pasadena.

• April 14, 2 to 3:30 p.m., and 6:30 to 8 p.m., Japanese American National Museum, 369 E. 1st St., Los Angeles.

• April 17, 11 a.m. to 1:30 p.m., Los Angeles Theatre Center, 514 S. Spring St., Los Angeles.

Information: www.metro.net/regionalconnector, regionalconnector@metro.net.

High-speed rail authority narrows Merced-to-Fresno route choices (Source: The Modesto Bee)

Link: The Modesto Bee | High-speed rail authority narrows Merced-to-Fresno route choices

Posted on Fri, Apr. 09, 2010
High-speed rail authority narrows Merced-to-Fresno route choices
By Jonah Owen Lamb
jlamb@mercedsun-star.com

last updated: April 08, 2010 11:19:08 PM

The California High-Speed Rail Authority has winnowed the possible route its bullet train may take from Merced to Fresno.

It cut the number of routes it will continue to study to two, according to a route analysis released Thursday.

Although the decision gives local governments an idea of where the train may run, it pits several Merced County governments — as well as farm interests in the area — against Madera County's two largest cities.

The report narrowed the possible routes through Merced and Madera counties that the authority will continue to study. Those two routes are A1, which would run to the east of Highway 99 south of Merced along the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway; and A2, which would run south near Highway 99 along the Union Pacific line.

The Greater Merced High-Speed Rail Committee's co-chairman, Lee Boese, said he's happy that its preferred route (A2) was kept as an option, the other alternative wasn't to his liking. "We are not happy with A1," said Boese.

Environmentally sensitive

Route A1, argued Boese, would be devastating for farmers and would take much longer to build, since it goes through more ecologically sensitive areas.

The cities of Madera and Chowchilla were watching the authority's decisions closely, since one of the routes would bypass both cities.

Madera City Manager David Tooley said the City Council hasn't taken an official position on either route, but that A2 would hurt the city the most.

"A2 would have the greatest impact to the city of Madera," he said.

A1 would have the least impact on Madera and Chowchilla, since it would bypass both cities, he added.

Although the impact of A2 would be massive to both cities and raise mitigation costs, said Tooley, there are other elements to consider. If either city wants the heavy maintenance yard, the A2 route is almost a must, he said.

"Certainly, there's a balancing act for us," he added.

The analysis tentatively removed several alternative routes, including A3, known as the Western Madera route; and A4, a hybrid between Union Pacific track alignment and Burlington Northern Santa Fe track.

No station at Castle, Amtrak site

The analysis also set aside two station sites in Merced: Castle Commerce Center and the Merced Amtrak station. Besides those changes, the analysis left just two routes crossing the valley north of the San Luis Reservoir.

Paul Barker, deputy director of the authority, said that though it has decided to focus on two routes in the Merced area, none of the paths will be official until the environmental impact report is completed in 2011. "For the layman, we are kind of dropping those (other routes) and not studying them any further," he said.

Whatever sections are further along in their environmental work will most likely be where the authority decides to start building, he said. That's because the federal government gave the authority $2.5 billion, which it has promised to match, and construction must start by 2011 or the agency will lose that funding.

The High-Speed Rail Authority's state governing board was formed in 1996. In November 2008, voters passed a $9 billion bond, setting in motion the building of a 220-mile-long high-speed train line from San Francisco to Los Angeles.

The Elusive 405 Corridor Rail Line (Source: CityWatch)

Link: CityWatch - An insider look at City Hall

The Elusive 405 Corridor Rail Line
Beyond Measure R
By Ken Alpern


Whenever I’ve raised the idea of the Expo Line, the Green Line to LAX, the Wilshire Subway, the Orange Line being a light rail line instead of a busway, or anything other than a mass transit effort, my feedback has always included someone commenting on the need to connect the San Fernando Valley with the Westside via a rail alternative to the 405 freeway. Interestingly enough, pretty much EVERY rail line has had its organized supporters…except the 405 Corridor Rail Line!

Why this is, I do not know—it is one of those many observations that aren’t accompanied by explanations. I see it but I don’t get it. I’ve not seen Valley and Westside grassroots organizations, websites or other efforts sprout up to support what most folks consider to be a no-brainer.

The closest thing anyone’s done to suggest a transit alternative to the 405 freeway (one of the worst traffic bottlenecks in the nation, if not the world) is when Supervisor Yaroslavsky proposed a Busway to be established utilizing the HOV/carpool lanes being finalized in the middle of the Westside portion of the 405 freeway.

Transit nerds like Friends4Expo Co-Chair Darrell Clarke and Transit Coalition Executive Director Bart Reed and I have debated this issue for years, and as the Expo and Crenshaw Light Rail Lines convert from science fiction into the world of reality, and as the Wilshire Subway looks like something that will be built within our lifetimes, the role of this line, and how it can be routed, is a topic for debate that is increasingly relevant.

The following two maps, created by Darrell Clarke, enjoy a lot of interest and support among other transportation enthusiasts, and were made about a year ago before it was determined that the Crenshaw/LAX Line was indeed going to be a light rail. The first map shows a Crenshaw Blvd. and Lincoln Blvd. light rail line complex that both enjoy connectivity to the Expo and Green Lines, with LAX connectivity to boot. The 405 Corridor rail line is also a light rail that closely follows the 405 freeway to connect the Orange Line with the Wilshire and Expo Lines.

Note that the map, created by a Santa Monica resident and veteran of that city’s Planning Commission, does not have the Wilshire Subway to the Sea going entirely to the ocean. Very few transit advocates and planners have supported such a full extension westwards, because the 405/Wilshire Blvd. traffic jam begins in earnest at approximately Wilshire/Bundy, and it is doubtful that Santa Monica wants the Wilshire Blvd. corridor to be megadensified as far west as Lincoln Blvd. (which would normally accompany a subway).

Hence the argument that myself and others have pursued to have the Subway stop at approximately Wilshire/Bundy, and forego any expensive and unnecessary construction if the Expo Line makes it to the ocean (which it pretty much will). An interesting option would be for the Subway to proceed from Wilshire/Bundy to link with the Expo Line at Olympic/Bundy station, but it is also uncertain as to whether West Los Angeles wants that much densification there, either (it already has its hands full with the Bundy Village megadevelopment).

Regardless, when the Wilshire Subway finally reaches Westwood, the focus among grassroots and political leaders and thinkers will likely NOT be getting it as far west as the beach, but rather how to connect or extend it to the San Fernando Valley:



The second map has both outdated as well as rather likely features of what a 405 Corridor rail line would look like, but the thinking behind it follows a different paradigm than a rail routed along the 405 freeway. Rather it is a speedier (like 10 minutes or so!) and more direct subway route between the Valley and the Westside with only two stops between the Orange and Wilshire Subways (UCLA campus and Ventura Blvd.).

In this map, Lincoln and Crenshaw Blvds. have heavy rail subways that will likely NOT happen (Crenshaw Blvd. will be a light rail line, regardless of whether it’s above or below ground, or ground level), although any Crenshaw Corridor rail line extension north of the Expo Line will be underground to connect with the Wilshire Subway and, perhaps, the Red Line at Hollywood/Highland.

The details as to whether there would be one or two rail lines to connect the Red Line with the Purple and Crenshaw

Lines is a subject I’ve addressed in previous articles, and is somewhat off-topic for the issue of the 405 Corridor rail line. It is an issue, however, that will affect construction of the Wilshire/Purple Line and be a topic for future generations to confront. What we must confront now, however, is the question of whether a Valley-Westside rail line need closely track the 405 freeway:



My own personal epiphany on this topic came several years ago when I realized that successful rail lines either supplemented or replaced freeways that serve as major commercial corridors. The Expo and Gold (Pasadena, Eastside and Foothill) Lines track the 10, 710, 60 and 210 freeways, respectively, and the Wilshire Subway actually replaces the original freeway once planned in the 1940’s/50’s for where Wilshire Blvd. now is.

With the understanding that the Wilshire Blvd. corridor is so megadense as to need a subway/heavy rail line, I came to the conclusion that the Sepulveda/405 freeway corridor is just as megadense and would ALSO need a subway—perhaps one that directly connected to the Purple/Wilshire Line, because up to 150,000 riders/day or more would use if built right.

Considering that the uphill grade and narrowness of the Sepulveda Pass made a surface/elevated light rail difficult at best, and that such a light rail would reach full capacity rather quickly, and that there weren’t many good potential stops between Wilshire Blvd. and the Orange Line, I still believe that a straight shot with a 10 minute subway ride of 100 mph (like the Red Line does under the Cahuenga Pass) and with stops at the Orange Line, Ventura Blvd./Sherman Oaks, UCLA and Wilshire/Westwood would be remarkably attractive to many 405 commuters accessing one side or the other of the Sepulveda Pass.

I still await the formation of a grassroots group to promote and advocate for this 405 Corridor line (or Valley-Westside line), but I expect such a group won’t form until the Expo Line is completed, the 405 HOV/carpool lane project is completed, and the Wilshire Subway is on its way to Century City and points west.

Still, it is my strong prediction that the really BIG transportation improvement sought by Westsiders and Valley residents after the east-west rail lines are completed will be this elusive, probably wildly popular, but as of yet nonchampioned 405 Corridor Rail Line.

(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/Land Use Management Committee. He is co-chair of the CD11 Transportation Advisory Committee and also chairs the nonprofit Transit Coalition, and can be reached at Alpern@MarVista.org.This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it The views expressed in this article are solely those of Mr. Alpern.) -cw

Local Transportation Projects Could Create 500,000 Jobs & $68.8 Billion, Study Finds (Source: LAist)

Link: Local Transportation Projects Could Create 500,000 Jobs & $68.8 Billion, Study Finds - LAist

Local Transportation Projects Could Create 500,000 Jobs & $68.8 Billion, Study Finds



The one thing saving Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa from two black eyes right now is his 30/10 Plan, which would build 30 years of planned public transportation infrastructure--that's 12 projects, mostly rail--in 10 years. The money is already guaranteed thanks to the voter approved Measure R, a half-cent sales tax. Problem is, the anticipated $30 to $40 billion will come in over the next 30 years. Villaraigosa's solution is to ask congress for a loan upfront with a guarantee to pay it back. So far, it's garnering praise and today it's getting another boost.

A study released today concluded that all projects under Measure R, not just those under 30/10, could create over 500,000 part-time and full-time jobs with total earnings of $22.4 billion. That's an annual average of 16,900 jobs with $746 million in annual earnings.

The Construction Impact of Metro’s Measure R Transportation Projects (.pdf) by the non-profit Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC) says most of the jobs would come from highway and freeway projects. 341,500, or 11,380 jobs a year, would be created to build new corridors, lanes, grade separations and sound wall barriers. The total regional economic output is projected at $46.3 billion.

Public transit projects, such as light rail, subway and bus rapid transit could create 5,530 jobs, earning of $244 million annually and generating $22.5 billion in total output for the regional economy.

Combined, road and public transit could generate up to $68.8 billion in economic output in the five-county Southern California region while creating more than 500,000 jobs over the 30-year period. An added bonus is the $9.3 billion in tax revenues that could occur.

Gregory Freeman, LAEDC's Vice President of Consulting and Policy and author of the study, points out that "the most important economic benefit of Measure R spending is the long-term improvement to the County’s transportation system... Our study shows that the massive investment in transportation infrastructure projects will also create business activity and hundreds of thousands of jobs during construction.”

By Zach Behrens in News on April 8, 2010 7:30 AM

Coverage resumes tomorrow: 4/8/20101