L.A. Metro Area Transit: What's Next? [Archive] - Page 16

dragonsky

07-06-2008, 04:54 AM

Metrolink growth strains station parking capacity
A ridership surge has already jammed lots, and the Orange County line's planned expansion will soon make it even harder to find a spot.
By David Reyes, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
July 5, 2008

Until recently, Blaine Bridenball's morning involved a well-practiced routine: Get up, eat and drive to the Metrolink station in Buena Park by 7:15 for his commute to Los Angeles.

Then gas prices skyrocketed, and Bridenball found that the parking lot at the new train station was filling to capacity earlier and earlier.

"With each month it seems you add another five minutes," he said. "Now, the lot is full by 6:50 a.m."

This week, Bridenball joined hundreds of transit riders who have been boarding a shuttle bus at a nearby park for a two-mile ride to the train station -- a stopgap solution to a growing problem.

A surge in Metrolink ridership and plans to sharply increase the number of trains running on weekdays are forcing transportation planners to speed up projects to add parking at Orange County's train stations.

Until recently, 300 parking spaces were required at newly built stations.

"We believed that would be sufficient for many years," said Darrell Johnson, Orange County Transportation Authority commuter rail manager.

"The new standard we're now demanding is 500 spaces."

That standard will be used when the county's 12th Metrolink station, in Placentia, is built in three years.

Meantime, by 2010 officials hope to have trains running every 30 minutes from 5 a.m. to midnight on weekdays between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel.

Seven locomotives and 59 passenger cars are on order, new track has been laid, and additional parking must be either finished or near completion when the expanded service begins, officials say.

Until that happens, cities have been scrambling to set up shuttle services from Metrolink stations to residential areas, major employers, resort areas and shopping malls.

Nowhere is the increased demand for parking more evident than in Buena Park.

Its station opened 10 months ago, and unexpectedly high ridership has already forced OCTA and the city to spend $220,000 on shuttle services for a year.

Plans for more parking are in the works.

"This shuttle is a good idea," said Felix Mendez, 30, of Garden Grove. "The station is closer to my home, but with the parking problem I would have to take the train at Fullerton, and that's in the opposite direction of where I need to go."

In Laguna Niguel, OCTA just acquired two acres where the California Department of Transportation plans to close a maintenance yard in two years. Taking its place will be 150 parking spaces.

In Fullerton, the county's busiest station, the lots fill up fast. The city and OCTA are working to build a 1,000-space parking garage at the site of a former citrus packing company nearby.

Down the line in Tustin, OCTA is about to move forward on a planned parking garage with 825 spaces.

In Irvine, valets were hired to wedge cars into its Metrolink lot. The practice ended when customers decided it was cheaper to park their own cars.

Now, OCTA and the city are spending $27 million for a four-story, 1,500-space parking structure that is to open by September.

"With the anticipated upgrade in train service by OCTA in two years, this new facility will meet the increased demand," said Louie Gonzalez, an Irvine city spokesman.

But immediately, the Irvine project will make the daily commute a bit easier for people like Andrew Silber, 37, of Rancho Bernardo,

About a year ago, he paid $2,500 for "a beater" -- a car he keeps parked at the packed Irvine station.

He drives it a few miles back and forth to his office, where he is a partner in a video game company.

"I did it to avoid 2 1/2 hours on the freeway," he said. "When I'm on the train, I can get work done, rest, and catch up on things. There's less stress."

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2008-07/40688679.gif

Tanster

07-06-2008, 03:42 PM

Wow! Some positive coming from high Gas prices. Hopefully these high Gas prices will bring people close to the city and OFF their cars. Tho if more people even new a subway existed. I bet more people would ride. I think this is perfect time for MTA to advertise. they should be putting up billboards everywhere.

DowntownCharlieBrown

07-07-2008, 08:45 PM

I read that article about the parking problems around the Metrolink stations and was elated. It is exactly the kind of problems I want to see. The next logical step would be to start better connecting the Metrolink stations with its surrounding cities. Instead of a Metrolink user thinking "how do I park my car at the station" they should be thinking "how do i get to the station without using my car".

Vangelist

07-08-2008, 01:50 AM

"how do i get to the station without using my car".
And on that note:

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/07/more-on-bike-pa.html

« New database for city of Los Angeles billboards | Main | Forty one road deaths over holiday weekend in California »

More on bike parking at Metro Rail stations
I had the chance to speak last Thursday with Lynne Goldsmith, the bike planning manager for Metro. I wanted to talk to her about the fact that bike parking is woefully short at some rail stations and ask what can be done about it.

I've written several times that perhaps more can be done to accommodate more bikes on trains. Maybe a car dedicated just to bikes would work? Or more bike racks? The photo at right shows a fence subbing as a bike rack at the Memorial Park station on the Gold Line. Financially adept readers may note that the Gold Line cost $859 million, an amount that apparently didn't include bike racks for all the stations.

As for the idea of squeezing more bikes onto trains, Goldsmith said that Metro has looked into the idea of installing bike hooks inside its rail cars but has concluded it wouldn't work. Some other light rail systems have tried it and Metro doesn't see proof it's a good fit.

Among the problems: Bikes can be heavy and hard to lift, it's hard to hold the bike steady on a moving train and riders were getting bonked in the head with the bikes.

As for adding extra rail cars to trains to accommodate more bikes, Goldsmith said that the rail operations side of Metro has told her that some lines are either maxed out on cars or there simply are not enough cars available. I'm a little skeptical on this one: I ride the Gold Line to Pasadena and have never seen the Gold Line storage facility -- next to the L.A. River -- depleted of all cars.

Nonetheless, Goldsmith said that it has been Metro's policy since 2006 to heavily promote the use of bikes to get to and from stations. And she said that all Metro buses have been outfitted with bike racks (Bottleneckers -- do you agree?).

"We're trying to encourage bikes and mass transit, but what wasn't happening in 2006 was the energy situation that is occurring now," Goldsmith said. "Our bicycle racks and lockers are full -- we've gone from 50% occupancy on bike lockers to 77% and all of our trains and buses are full. So, everybody is trying to deal with this issue that occurred all of a sudden."

She pointed to several things that Metro is working on:

1. Creating bike parking stations at several regional locations. There's already one in downtown Long Beach and the agency would like to have similar stations -- where an attendant watches over the bikes -- in Pasadena, Santa Monica and Burbank.

2. Trying to expand the use of bike lockers and bike racks. Goldsmith said that some people won't use bike racks out of the well-founded fear their bikes will be stolen and she said her office is trying to launch an effort to teach people how to better lock their bikes. A bike rack costs $100, compared to $2,000 for a bike locker, Goldsmith said.

3. Promoting the use of folding bikes -- something I posted about recently. Goldsmith said that she believes they are the most realistic option in terms of taking more bikes on trains. "Folding bikes are the way to go if a person wants total flexibility through every hour of the day," she said, adding that Metro is trying to find a group it can partner with to promote the bikes.

One other interesting tidbit: Goldsmith said the Metro budget for bikes has not been reliable until this year, when $100,000 has been set aside for bike improvements. It looks like that amount will hold steady over the next four years. The Metro budget for fiscal year 2008-09 was $3.4 billion.

--Steve Hymon

Photo: Steve Hymon / Los Angeles Times

July 07, 2008 in Cycling | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/816965/30972976

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More on bike parking at Metro Rail stations:

Comments
Regarding bike racks on trains: Some transit agencies have "tried it"? Portland's MAX has "tried it" for years and they are DOUBLING the number of bike racks on their new 4th generation trains.

Just more excuses from METRO for poor service.

Posted by: RAY S | July 07, 2008 at 04:00 PM
One of the most significant things we can do to encourage cycling and mass transit is to simply treat those who use the system with respect by providing sufficient accommodations.

Anything less than routine accommodation and complete access sends a message that cyclists and mass transit passengers are 2nd class citizens traveling in a 3rd world conditions.

When those who get out of the single occupant vehicle and walk, ride and take mass transit are treated like 1st class citizens, we'll be on our way to success!

Posted by: SoapBoxLA | July 07, 2008 at 03:22 PM

sopas ej

07-08-2008, 05:13 AM

From the Los Angeles Times:

Gas prices nudge Southern California drivers onto mass transit -- slowly

The car habit dies hard, but observers notice train parking lots filling faster and more professionals packing seats for the ride to and from work.
By Joe Mozingo, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

July 8, 2008

She thought about it for four years. She wanted to try it, but kept balking at the last minute.

"I was scared," says Francine Choi, a Los Angeles county employee who lives in Long Beach. "I was worried I'd get mugged." And then a couple months ago, filling her BMW at a Chevron near work, she gasped when she saw the total pass $60. Then and there, she summoned the courage to do it at last.

Choi rode the Metro Blue Line to work the next day.

"Now I take naps on the way home" says Choi, 45, extolling the light rail line between downtown L.A. and Long Beach and the $150 or so she saves by riding it every month.

With gas prices shooting into orbit, mass transit ridership is trending upward -- barely.

Car culture has stubborn roots in Southern California. The vast majority of Southern Californians are holding tenaciously to the privacy and convenience of their own cars, over the crush of humanity on the region's trains and buses.

But longtime riders notice more professionals aboard a system that has mostly served low-income workers who didn't have the option to drive.

Now the parking structure at the Willow Street stop in Long Beach is full by 8:30 a.m. -- and spaces used to go empty all day. Some of the riders are not so much new to the system as they are compelled by gas prices to take it more often.

Bryanne Sykes, 50, decided six months ago to take it every day. She parks her Volvo S60 in the spillover parking lot at the Willow station, a good quarter-mile walk to the train.

She scrambles to get a seat on the west side, knowing that the sun beats through the windows on the east side during summer. "You ride and you start strategizing," she says.

Sykes, a student advisor at the Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising, has been riding the train periodically for 10 years. But the extra half hour or so it took her to get to and from work in downtown Los Angeles always put her back in her car. When her children were young, she couldn't spare the time. Now, her youngest is in high school and she doesn't need to race home. As gas prices climbed, her resolve hardened.

She saves about $180 a month in gas, minus the $62 for a monthly Metro pass.

She loves being able to read the paper and doesn't mind having to park farther away, with all the new riders. In fact, she is elated that she lost 10 pounds walking about three miles a day to and from her stations. And the broader spectrum of riders reduces the perception some have that the train is full of gangbangers and homeless people.

"The good thing with gas getting more expensive is, more and more people are riding it," says Sykes.

In the past, when she got back to Long Beach about 9 p.m., the lonely walk to her car, down a dark street between the tracks and a park, was eerie. "I would stay on the phone with my husband as I walked," she said.

"In the last month, it's me and 10 other people with briefcases and computers," she says.

Ridership on Metro buses and trains has risen steadily since January, but has yet to surpass the ridership before a rate increase cut passenger numbers last July. Average weekday boardings on Metro buses were 1.12 million in January, and 1.26 million in May, when the last available statistics were taken. But May 2006 saw 1.31 million average weekday boardings.

Light rail ridership has seen roughly the same trend, albeit on a much smaller scale. The Blue Line has gone from 69,731 average weekday riders in January to 79,291 in May, the Red Line from 124,358 to 141,659, the Gold Line from 19,001 to 23,141.

Passenger levels on Metrolink trains, serving the Antelope Valley and Ventura, Riverside, Orange, and San Bernardino counties, jumped nearly 6% from May to June, and 12% over last year. The 48,046 average weekday boardings in June were the highest ever.

Still, up to 97% of trips in Southern California are in cars, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments. In the Los Angeles Metro area, which includes northern Orange County, there are about 4.3 million lone drivers commuting every week day, and 600,000 carpooling vehicles.

But as the economy sinks and gas prices continue to rise, transit officials expect more refugees, like Steve Sendor, a commercial real estate broker from Venice.

As the real estate business declined, he couldn't justify driving his gas-swilling Jeep Grand Cherokee to work in Century City every day. With no rail options, he had no choice but to hop on the workhorse of L.A.'s mass transit system, the bus.

"It's not as inconvenient as I thought," he said. "It adds about 45 minutes of productive time to my day."

He reads documents and business news. And he saves about $50 a week, he estimates.

Riders' experiences on the buses, of course, vary widely, depending on the route and time of day.

Attorney Susan Seager started taking mass transit from South Pasadena to Century City. She walks to the Gold Line train, takes it Union Station, where she jumps on LADOT Commuter Express to work. "The seats are cushiony and soft," she says "There are no homeless people. There are no screaming children."

But the last Commuter Express leaves Century City at 5:30, and she often has to take a Metro bus down Olympic Boulevard. "It's very bumpy," she said. "Your teeth practically fall out. The other day a woman was hitting her child. We had to get into it, 'Please, don't hit your child.' It's exhausting to ride the Metro bus."

And even on a good day on her beloved train and Commuter Express, the trip takes an hour and 40 minutes -- to go about 20 miles. "What I really hate about the commute is how I don't see my kids," she says.

That minute-to-mile equation is what keeps many people in their cars. Even with traffic jams, the driving is usually faster.

Steve Johnson, 61, waited last week for a train at Union Station after shopping in the Fashion District. He said he would love to take mass transit from his home in Simi Valley to South Gate, where he teaches middle school.

One night in 2005, he planned the trip for the next morning. But when he printed out his itinerary, he realized that his route looked like a circuit board. He'd be taking Metrolink to Union Station, catching the Red Line to the Blue Line, which he'd ride to the Firestone stop, where he would catch a bus to his school.

He would leave his house at 4:45 a.m. and be lucky to get there when school started at 7:30 a.m. He normally left at 6 a.m. and pulled into the school parking lot just after 7.

He decided to put the trip off a day. The train he had considered boarding on that January morning was involved in a massive pileup in Glendale that killed 11 people and injured about 180.

"Somebody up there was trying to tell me something," he said.

Committed to staying in his car, Johnson picks up a car-pooler to cut the cost.

But others find pleasant surprises when they investigate their mass transit options. Richard Covey, a school teacher as well, discovered an express bus from Laguna Hills to South Coast Plaza that delivers him within walking distance of his middle school in Santa Ana.

He started taking it late March -- and kicks himself for not doing it sooner.

The walking invigorates him, and his stress level dropped precipitously. Now he has to set his alarm on his 25-minute ride home so he doesn't sleep right through his stop.

Recently, when he woke up, he looked around at the eight or so other riders.

"I realized that the only ones awake were myself and the bus driver," he said.

joe.mozingo@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-transit8-2008jul08,0,7375677.story?page=1 (Gas prices nudge Southern California drivers onto mass transit -- slowly)

LongBeachUrbanist

07-08-2008, 09:27 PM

I just heard that on NPR that Americans are spending a whopping one billion dollars more, every day, than they did last year on gas. That fact alone should cause us to reconsider how little we spend on mass transit and alternative energy automobiles.

dragonsky

07-09-2008, 01:30 AM

Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Plans for $400 million freeway project push forward
OCTA, Caltrans meeting set for Wednesday to tell residents about west-county project.
By JAIMEE LYNN FLETCHER
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

The Orange County Transportation Authority and Caltrans are looking to bring residents into the loop on a $400 million project expected to ease freeway congestion in west-county cities.

The agencies this month will hold open house meetings to discuss details of the West County Connectors project, which will affect Seal Beach, Rossmoor, Los Alamitos, Garden Grove and Westminster.

The first meeting is Wednesday night at Loyal Barker Elementary School in Garden Grove.

The project will add car-pool lane freeway connectors and improve some on- and off-ramps on the I-405, 22 and I-605 freeways.

Plans are in the final design stages and construction is expected to start in 2010. Work is anticipated to take about three years.

Project specifics:

‧Directly connect the northbound I-405 freeway car-pool lanes with the northbound I-605 car-pool lanes.

‧Revamp the Seal Beach Boulevard bridge crossing over the 405.

‧Reconstruct the 22 and 405 freeway connectors in both directions.

‧Reconstruct the eastbound 22 freeway connector to the northbound 605 freeway.

‧Directly connect the westbound 22 at Valley View Street to the northbound 405.

‧Reconstruct the Valley View Street bridge that crosses the 405 and 22 freeways.

‧Add landscaping and sound walls.

Wright Concept

07-10-2008, 03:11 PM

Valley's Orange Line has appeal
By Sue Doyle, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 07/09/2008 09:54:26 PM PDT

http://i37.tinypic.com/1zf34n8.jpg

NORTH HOLLYWOOD — Soaring gas prices have fueled record-high ridership on the Orange Line, where passengers in June took a record average of 26,596 daily bus trips, officials said Wednesday.
The 63 percent jump since buses first pulled away from the North Hollywood station in October 2005 has prompted Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials to call for more buses to run the 14-mile route and to consider adding express lines.

"We encourage people to save money and stick it to OPEC," said county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a Metro board member, at a news conference.
Metro's board last month adopted a proposal to extend the busway four miles north to the Metrolink station in Chatsworth along Canoga Avenue. However, the agency still must vote on a final environmental impact report in January 2009.

Meanwhile gas prices at the pump Wednesday in Los Angeles averaged $4.57, up nearly 50 percent from a year ago, according to the American Automobile Association's Fuel Gauge Report.
At the same time, motorists' demand for gasoline across the country has dropped 2 percent from the same time last year, according to the federal Energy Information Administration's weekly petroleum status report.

The skyrocketing gas prices are enough to make Peter Bunce, 46, leave his car in his Van Nuys driveway. He now hops on the Orange Line to commute downtown, where he works as a language teacher.
"I can't even back my vehicle out of my driveway for under $5," Bunce joked Wednesday as he waited for the Orange Line.

More popular

http://i37.tinypic.com/14klf13.gif

Breaking all previous records, weekday trips taken by Orange Line riders grew 8 percent from May to June, with 26,596 boardings recorded, according to Metro. The Orange Line had just 16,360 average daily weekday trips in its first month of operation.
Saturdays on the bus line that ends at Warner Center also netted 15,629 boardings in June, a 10 percent jump from May.

The popularity of the $330 million Orange Line has surprised transit officials who initially projected 22,000 weekday riders by 2020.
But that forecast was surpassed 17 months after the bus line took off. By March 2007, weekday ridership reached 23,243, according to Metro.

Orange Line rider Andre Stewart, 67, is saving for a compact car that won't drain his wallet. Meanwhile, the North Hollywood man rides mass transit and sees crowds growing larger for the bus.
"I've noticed more people waiting for the Orange Line," Stewart said. "It's harder to get a seat."

The transit agency is reviewing express lines that could speed up the 38-minute commute across the Valley by 8 percent, said Richard Hunt, general manager for Metro's Valley sector.

Fewer stops?

One option is omitting stops and sticking to the most popular ones, such as Reseda, Van Nuys and Sepulveda boulevards.

"The growth of the Orange Line is phenomenal," Hunt said.
Last August, the transit agency introduced a 65-foot bus to the Orange Line, the longest bus in America and one capable of holding 16 more passengers than 60-foot buses.

Metro officials aim to phase in nine more of these behemoths to the bus line but are waiting for legislation to clear allowing the nontraditional-sized buses on the street, Hunt said.

Christopher Rodriguez, 20, of Hollywood said that despite the swarms of people, he'll still ride the Orange Line — even if it means standing in an aisle for his trip's duration.

"There are definitely more people on board," said Rodriguez. "For me, it's convenient. It runs across the whole Valley."

Echo Park

07-11-2008, 07:12 PM

The media coverage on mass transit has been pretty relentless. On the local news or in the LA Times there is at least one story on ridership records or how the metrolink is packed or how mroe people using the metro or people getting bikes, etc. I hope the government on all levels stop campaigning to get gas prices lowered as if it were a problem. High gas prices are great! Unless you are poor. Thats why I hope they keep creeping up to $5/gal when november swings around because high prices means people will vote for the county sales tax increse for mass transit.

StethJeff

07-12-2008, 04:59 AM

"We encourage people to save money and stick it to OPEC."

Of all the people, doesn't it seem a little odd that Zev would be saying this?

LosAngelesBeauty

07-12-2008, 09:46 AM

^ Pandering to poor and fed-up drivers to gain political power...

colemonkee

07-16-2008, 09:08 PM

I drive down the Expo Line route to work every day waiting for it to open, and noticed that they've started digging the tunnel entrance at Figueroa and Exposition. I actually don't mind the traffic delays, because it gives me a closer look at the progress. My bet is that this line will be very popular when it opens.

Westsidelife

07-16-2008, 10:04 PM

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/16/22307111_92af15363d.jpg

Downtowners Rejoice, Hail-a-Taxi Pilot Wins Approval! (http://www.angelenic.com/1007/downtowners-rejoice-hail-a-taxi-pilot-wins-approval/)

By Stephen Friday
July 16, 2008

Downtown will never be the same again.

After winning unanimous approval at today’s City Council meeting, the Hail-a-Taxi initiative — a plan to get enhance the urban experience by encouraging a new cab culture in this city — will soon implement its six-month pilot program here in Downtown.

Residents, business owners and visitors in the heart of Los Angeles will find quick travel over short distances much more friendly as taxi drivers are given the freedom to pick up passengers outside of designated zones, allowing for instant curbside hailing.

City officials are moving to launch the program as early as August 1, 2008.

Official Press Release Issued today by Jan Perry’s Office:

The Los Angeles City Council voted unanimously today to support the “Hail-a-Cab” program. The proposed program would create a six-month pilot program that would allow point-to-point taxi service within Downtown and a portion of Hollywood, giving pedestrians the freedom to hail taxi cabs curbside.

“It’s simple. We are a major metropolitan city and we need to afford our residents the flexibility to access and use every form of transportation option available to them. Hailing a cab is the natural next step in the evolution of downtown,” said Councilwoman Perry who authored the motion and shepherded it through the City’s legislative process. “Now, if a person wants to go from the Biltmore Hotel to the Convention Center or from Union Station to City National Plaza or from a sidewalk on Grand Avenue to the Fashion District, they can just hail a cab.”

The “Hail-a-Cab” idea was spearheaded by Hal Bastian of the Central City Business Improvement District. Over three years ago, Bastian presented his idea to Councilwoman Perry who agreed that downtown Los Angeles needed to start allowing what is common practice in other dense metropolitan areas; simply put, people needed the freedom to hail a taxi cab.

Council President Eric Garcetti, who seconded the motion, thought the program would also be a great fit in Hollywood: “This pilot program is an important step toward strengthening transportation alternatives in Los Angeles. Bringing this pilot to Hollywood builds on the walkable, transit rich infrastructure of our most famous neighborhood.”

The current model for taxi service in downtown and Hollywood makes it very difficult to use a taxi locally. The pilot program allows individuals to use a cab in these two urban centers by hailing it, allowing taxi service to function as a realistic means of transportation locally within these areas. The six-month pilot program will allow taxi drivers the flexibility to actively load and unload passengers in some otherwise restricted areas curbside. Currently, taxi cab drivers that stop at colored curbs and risk heavy fines and tickets from law enforcement officers. Taxis will still be prohibited from stopping at designated bus stops.

“The Hail-a-Cab program is a win-win for Angelenos. It will decrease traffic in two of the most gridlocked areas of our City, while making Los Angeles more accessible and business friendly,” said Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, chair of the City’s Transportation Committee. “With this program and our shuttle and DASH service, we are providing a real transportation alternative in downtown and Hollywood.”

“It is only sensible that people should have the option to hail a cab downtown in one of the densest parts of the city. This makes sense for tourists who are unfamiliar with the city as well as residents who need the occasional convenience of a taxi. We need to do everything we can to help people downtown circulate from place to place. This is a long time coming and I look forward to being able to hail a cab myself very soon,” added Councilmember Jose Huizar who represents a portion of Downtown Los Angeles.

In late December of 2007, Councilwoman Perry introduced a motion, seconded by Council President Eric Garcetti asking the Department of Transportation to create a plan that would allow pedestrians to hail a taxi cab in downtown, one of the densest parts of the city. The program was supported by both the Taxi Cab Commission and the City’s Transportation Committee. While an exact date for the program launch is not set, the “Hail-a-Cab” pilot program could start as early as August 1, 2008.

-Council Unanimously Approves Hail-a-Taxi (http://blogdowntown.com/2008/07/3468-council-unanimously-approves-hailataxi) (blogdowntown)
-Summer Tourism Season Picks Up, but Downtown Still Can’t Hail a Cab (http://www.angelenic.com/786/downtown-los-angeles-hail-a-cab-initiative/)
-Hail-a-Taxi Gets a Go, Downtown to Be Test Subject (http://www.angelenic.com/622/hail-a-taxi-gets-a-go-downtown-to-be-test-subject/)

sopas ej

07-16-2008, 11:44 PM

Metro Rail definitely seems more crowded than ever. I was off from work today and rode the Gold and Red Lines just for shits and giggles. The Gold Line definitely has more riders, and I like that the Red Line FINALLY has those LCD screen signs working with the arrival times of the next train. However it's still half-assed; I noticed it's not in real time, that it's basically just the scheduled arrival time. I noticed a few trains that were off by a few minutes. Oh well, I guess it's better than nothing. Definitely gives you peace of mind knowing when the next train is supposed to come, and maybe it'll decrease those smelly crazy bums that always ask "when's the next train comin'??" Or not, I really feel some of them are illiterate. Bums will often ask me "which side goes to Union Station?" or "is this the North Hollywood train?" It's like, can't you read??

sopas ej

07-17-2008, 12:05 AM

From the L.A. Daily News:

Metro gets $16.1 million for gates

By Sue Doyle, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 07/15/2008 10:20:37 PM PDT

Steps to bolster security on Los Angeles mass transit gained a little muscle Tuesday when Metro received $16.1 million to install 379 gates and surveillance cameras on subways and some light-rail lines.

Expected to save $3.8 million lost each year on people deliberately not paying fares, the gates eventually will detect explosives and chemicals and can adapt to new security technologies.

"We know that the risks to our mass transit systems are real," said Matthew Bettenhausen, director of the state Office of Homeland Security, during a news conference Tuesday outside the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's downtown building. "The difficulty is that our mass transit systems are open."

The city has operated its mass transit on an honor system for 18 years. But by September 2009, a test gate will stand at an undetermined location.

If successful, Metro will install all remaining gates by 2010 at every station of the city's two subways - the Red and Purple lines - and sections of the Blue, Green and Gold light-rail lines.

No gates will be installed on Orange Line buses or at its stations along the 14-mile route from Woodland Hills to North Hollywood.

The MTA estimates that 5 percent of its light-rail riders don't bother paying.

"We're such a vulnerable system in so many ways," said Roger Snoble, Metro's CEO, speaking of terrorism. "The gates help us keep order."

Already, sensors are in place to detect some chemicals, said Dan Finkelstein, Metro transit police chief and a Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department commander.
"There are many parts of the system that are unseen," said Finkelstein, who would not elaborate on what chemicals can be uncovered with the technology.

The gates should also save another $3.8 million by reducing the number of fare inspectors hired to check passengers for tickets. About 50 inspectors now work for the agency. Metro spokesman Marc Littman said Tuesday he did not know how many could lose their jobs.

The money for the gates comes from Proposition 1B, a $20 billion transportation bond state voters approved in 2006.

The money covers Metro's portion of the public-private agreement entered with Cubic Transportation Systems Inc. for gate installation. A 10-year, $46 million lease was approved in February by Metro's board with the San Diego-based company for the gates.

sue.doyle@dailynews.com 818-713-3746

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_9892367

jamesinclair

07-17-2008, 12:10 AM

sopas ej

07-17-2008, 01:05 AM

I was visiting LA this past weekend and drove around USC to take pictures of the olympic stadium.

While I was there I noticed a street under construction, the entire thing was torn apart and only one lane was open. We did a u-turn to get back to the highway and drove over some old train tracks that ran in the median.

Where those tracks ever used for passengers? Why are they being torn up? Is this a road expansion project (median being reduced for added lanes) or is a mass transit improvement planned?

Not sure if long ago, those tracks were ever used for passengers, I had always assumed it was an abandoned freight line. But the project you saw is for a light rail line, the first leg of which is scheduled to open in 2010. Here's a rendering of a station between USC and Exposition Park:

http://www.buildexpo.org/img/Renderings%20for%20Webpage/Trousdale%20Station.JPG
From buildexpo.org

Where were you visiting from, BTW?

JDRCRASH

07-17-2008, 01:34 AM

..... JamesinMontclair? :D

jamesinclair

07-17-2008, 07:47 AM

sopas ej

07-18-2008, 07:05 PM

Is the project on schedule?

What I saw didn't look like light rail construction at all, considering the median was filled with stuff and the old tracks were visible (I'm guessing they wont be reused?)

I guess they're redoing the whole avenue, but two years seems like a tight fit. Good luck on getting it done on time.

I'm currently in Fresno, although I live in Boston. Went to Long Beach and LA for a few days.

As far as I know, this project is on schedule. However, there is a group of people in South Los Angeles who are against some of the at-grade rail crossings, who knows if this will delay the project.

On a more positive note, the Gold Line light rail extension from Union Station to East Los Angeles is actually AHEAD of schedule and on or under budget. It was originally scheduled to open in December of next year, but it's now being projected to open in mid-2009.

jamesinclair

07-18-2008, 09:01 PM

Is there anywhere I can see pictures of progress on the LA lines?
I checked wikipedia, and they have maps and station names, but no progress reports

colemonkee

07-18-2008, 10:57 PM

james, the old tracks are not going to be reused. They have torn up the majority of the tracks along this line and dug about 4 feet down throughout most of the route. The one stretch left to be dug out is that area right in front of USC where you probably pulled your U-turn. That will be dug up as well later on.

But the project is humming along. I drive by it every day and there's visual progress nearly every day.

dragonsky

07-24-2008, 01:26 AM

Toll lanes get nod

The California Transportation Commission just unanimously approved the plan in Los Angeles County to convert the carpool lanes on parts of the 10, 110 and possibly the 210 freeways to toll lanes.

Don't get too excited or outraged. Now it's the Legislature's turn to kick the tires of the proposal. And there's no predicting the ways of Sacramento.

-- Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/07/toll-lanes-get.html

sopas ej

07-24-2008, 11:34 PM

From the Los Angeles Times:

MTA votes to seek sales tax hike to fund L.A. County transit, roads
The board takes a major step toward a series of projects over the next three decades, including the long-awaited subway to the sea. The state Legislature must approve the ballot measure first, though.
By Dan Weikel and Steve Hymon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
3:26 PM PDT, July 24, 2008

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board today voted overwhelmingly to seek a half-cent sales tax increase that could raise between $30 billion and $40 billion for transit and highway projects, including the first link of a long-awaited subway to the sea.

The move by the 13-member board, approving a ballot measure for the Nov. 4 election, is a major step that could lead to construction of several dozen transportation projects in the county over the next three decades.

Before the measure can be placed on the ballot, the Legislature must authorize it -- a decision that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa says he is confident will happen soon. A bill, AB 2321, by Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles) is pending in the Senate.

"This is a historic moment," Feuer told the Metro board before the vote. "We know our residents are calling on us to seize this moment. This is an opportunity that won't come again, not for a generation."

If approved, Measure R would boost Los Angeles County's sales tax rate to 8.75% by imposing an additional half a percent for transportation.

It would be the third such transportation measure passed by voters; the others were also half-cent increases approved in 1980 and 1990, with their revenue earmarked for transit projects and carpool lanes. The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. estimates that the average county resident would pay about $25 a year more due to the new tax.

Metro officials say the measure could raise $30 billion to $40 billion over its 30-year life span, depending on the state of the economy and consumer spending habits. About 65% of the revenue would be used to expand the county's bus and commuter rail systems, while 35% would be earmarked for highways, streets, bikeways and sidewalks.

The county's rail system includes Metrolink, the Red and Purple Line subway system, and the Blue, Green, and Gold light rail lines. Metro also operates one of the largest transit bus systems in the nation.

Thirteen mass transit projects and 16 road projects would split the pot. There would also be about $6 billion to be shared by all the cities in the county for their own projects.

Various elected officials, particularly those representing the San Gabriel Valley, have complained that their regions might not get their fair share of projects from the sales tax, and they want assurances that a Gold Line extension would be funded immediately.

In particular, they want the board to give the Gold Line $80 million now so they can begin seeking more than $300 million in federal money.

Villaraigosa, who chaired the meeting, held a press conference earlier this morning to reiterate his view that the spending plan for expected sales tax revenue fairly spreads money to transportation projects throughout the county.

But, the mayor acknowledged, "there are many who are going to argue they didn't get enough."

County Supervisor and Metro board member Gloria Molina said she could not support the sales tax because the list of projects was thrown together quickly and was not fair to some parts of the county.

"I think we are hurting ourselves in the long run," Molina said.

On the final vote, she abstained, and County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and Duarte City Councilman John Fasana voted no.

Transportation planners say the ballot measure could help relieve some of the nation's worst traffic congestion and provide commuters better transit options.

For more than two decades, the Los Angeles area has consistently ranked No. 1 in the country for its arduous commutes. Today, studies show that the average motorist in the region is delayed 72 hours a year due to traffic congestion -- about double what it was 25 years ago.

If nothing is done, regional planners predict that the delay could grow by up to 80% in the county by 2030, when the population is expected to grow from 10 million to 12 million.

Metro officials say the added sales tax is needed to help overcome decades of under-investment in the region's highways and transit systems.

For years, so little state money has been available that major transportation projects have been delayed and California's vast highway system has steadily fallen into disrepair.

Rising construction costs and a failure to raise state and federal fuel taxes since the mid-1990s have sharply reduced the ability of state and local government to keep pace with the transportation demands of a growing population.

The situation has become particularly acute since 2001. During the last seven years, Govs. Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with state legislators, have repeatedly diverted state transportation money to help balance deficit-plagued budgets.

Roughly $5.8 billion in highway and mass-transit funds were diverted during the state's repeated budget crises and have not yet been repaid.

Further shortages of transportation funds for the state could occur in 2010, when the federal highway trust fund is expected to go into deficit, jeopardizing billions of dollars in projects around the nation.

The county's proposed sales tax increase is similar to other measures that have been adopted by surrounding counties during the last 25 years. They include Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino, which sought the tax revenue to offset declines in state transportation funding.

Orange County's Measure M, which required a two-thirds majority, was placed on the ballot several times in the late 1980s and early 1990s before it was passed by voters. The tax was renewed by voters last year and is expected to generate $12 billion for transportation projects from 2011 through 2041.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

steve.hymon@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-salestax25-2008jul25,0,7015819.story

dragonsky

07-25-2008, 03:54 AM

A lot riding on proposal for L.A. County road and transit sales tax

Gas prices are up, traffic is down and mass transit ridership has gone through the roof.

With those issues on the table, the Metro board meets Thursday and has a big decision on its plate: should voters be asked in November to raise the sales tax in Los Angeles County by a half-cent for the next 30 years to pay for new mass transit and road projects?

Such a tax increase, if approved, is expected to raise $30 billion over the next 30 years and perhaps ignite a building boom for rail and road projects (that's the Gold Line's east L.A. extension in the photo above). But the board and other area politicians and officials have been quarreling over how to spend that money and the fighting, which has largely been along geographic lines, may lead to the sales tax effort falling apart.

If the sales tax is approved by voters, how much money would be raised and how would it be spent?

The sales tax increase would be in effect for 30 years and is expected to raise at least $30 billion, although that number could be higher or lower depending on the spending habits of Los Angeles County.

Thirteen mass transit projects and 16 road projects would split the pot. There would also be about $6 billion set aside that would be returned to each city in the county -- and its unincorporated areas -- for use on transportation improvements as they see fit. This could include everything from pothole repair to bike lanes.

Which mass transit and road projects would get money?

As currently formulated, here's a list of the big winners:

$7.9 billion for county-wide bus operations and expansion
$6 billion to local cities for transportation needs on per capita basis
$4 billion for a Westside subway extension
$1.1 billion for Metrolink operations and expansion
$1 billion for a mass transit project along the 405 freeway in Sepulveda Pass
$971 million for Crenshaw Boulevard light rail or busway
$925 million for completion of the Expo Line light rail to Santa Monica
$735 million for the extension of the Gold Line from Pasadena to Claremont
$906 million for interchange improvements on the 405, 110, 105 and 91 freeways in the South Bay
$780 million for a 710 freeway tunnel under South Pasadena
$590 million for 605 freeway interchange improvements
$590 million for 710 freeway improvements in south L.A. County
$400 million for Alameda Corridor East street crossing separations
$250 million for countywide soundwall expansion

You can find the complete spending list at this link to ordinance on Metro's website. The list is on pages 25 to 27.

That's a lot of projects -- is there enough money to finish them all?

Sepulveda_pass No. And this is an important point. The spending plan that Metro has put together for the sales tax revenue shows the estimated construction costs in 2008 dollars. Even now, most of the projects on the list would still need to get some state, federal and possibly private money to be finished.

It's also important to note that the sales tax revenues do not all show up at once - they would flow into local coffers over the next three decades. So the cost of some projects today could greatly rise by the time they are built and many would not be constructed for years, such as the proposed transit project along the 405 freeway through the Sepulveda Pass (pictured at right). That one isn't slated to be done until, gulp, 2038.

Why so many projects?

Politics. A sales tax increase needs two-thirds support by voters to pass and many local officials believe the only way to achieve that is to spread the benefits around. L.A. County covers 4,084 square miles and has more than 10 million people -- making it the most populated county in the nation. And it has big-time transportation needs.

That's the reason that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, at a recent Metro Board meeting, said that the county needs $100 billion in transportation needs, although he would be very happy to have the $30 billion or more from the sales tax.

Is the sales tax definitely going to make the fall ballot?

No. If the Metro Board votes to go forward with the proposal Thursday -- and it appears the seven votes are there to do so -- the state Legislature still must approve a bill, AB 2321, that would allow the county to take the tax to voters.

Various elected officials, particularly those representing the San Gabriel Valley, have complained that the region would not get its fair share of projects from the sales tax and they want assurances the Gold Line would get sales tax money immediately, saying the project is ready to begin construction. Metro recently upped the funding for the Gold Line in the sales tax plan to $735 million, but not enough to win support from some Valley officials.

In particular, Gold Line advocates want the Metro Board to vote for a motion by board members John Fasana and county Supervisor Mike Antonovich to give the Gold Line $80 million in funding now. On Thursday, five members of Congress from the Valley dispatched a letter to Metro board members insisting on the $80 million.

The money, Gold Line advocates say, would make the project eligible to seek federal funding, although it remains far from certain that Congress would be willing to allocate more than $300 million for the project. Typically, Congress pays for half or less of new rail projects.

Fasana said Wednesday that he can't support the sales tax plan as written because it leaves too many questions unanswered. "I've got some concerns about equity," Fasana told me today. "My [other] issue is that some of these projects will get built and some won't."

One of his concerns is where the money goes if a project such as, for example, the 710 tunnel falls through. Does it go to the subway? The Gold Line? Is it spread around the county in a fair way?

Fasana also said that he could support the sales tax, but needs to see amendments on Thursday to the sales tax plan that the Gold Line would get money in a timely fashion.

What are the supporters saying?

“I’m not surprised by the parochialism –- to a large extent people are elected to deliver for their district,” said Richard Katz, the former assembly member and Metro board member. “I get that part, but I don’t think people fully comprehend what benefits their district.”

His point: because many people commute such great distances in the county, projects have an impact upon their immediate area –- a commuter in Claremont, for example, could take Metrolink to the subway a Beverly Hills job. Katz also said that significant sums of money have been shifted to San Gabriel Valley projects and added, "I think everyone needs to take a step back and see what they risk if this thing falls apart."

Roger Snoble, Metro's CEO, has argued that the sales tax is the best chance for Los Angeles County to get billions of dollars in funding. "Without it" -- the money -- "it's extremely bleak," Snoble told the California Transportation Commission on Wednesday. "And we won't be adding much capacity to the system."

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/07/todays-meeting.html#more

JDRCRASH

07-25-2008, 05:06 AM

MTA votes to seek sales tax hike to fund L.A. County transit, roads
:banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

The board takes a major step toward a series of projects over the next three decades, including the long-awaited subway to the sea. The state Legislature must approve the ballot measure first, though.

By Dan Weikel and Steve Hymon, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
3:26 PM PDT, July 24, 2008

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board today voted overwhelmingly to seek a half-cent sales tax increase that could raise between $30 billion and $40 billion for transit and highway projects, including the first link of a long-awaited subway to the sea.

The move by the 13-member board, approving a ballot measure for the Nov. 4 election, is a major step that could lead to construction of several dozen transportation projects in the county over the next three decades.

Before the measure can be placed on the ballot, the Legislature must authorize it -- a decision that Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa says he is confident will happen soon. A bill, AB 2321, by Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles) is pending in the Senate.

"This is a historic moment," Feuer told the Metro board before the vote. "We know our residents are calling on us to seize this moment. This is an opportunity that won't come again, not for a generation."

If approved, Measure R would boost Los Angeles County's sales tax rate to 8.75% by imposing an additional half a percent for transportation.

It would be the third such transportation measure passed by voters; the others were also half-cent increases approved in 1980 and 1990, with their revenue earmarked for transit projects and carpool lanes. The Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. estimates that the average county resident would pay about $25 a year more due to the new tax.

Metro officials say the measure could raise $30 billion to $40 billion over its 30-year life span, depending on the state of the economy and consumer spending habits. About 65% of the revenue would be used to expand the county's bus and commuter rail systems, while 35% would be earmarked for highways, streets, bikeways and sidewalks.

The county's rail system includes Metrolink, the Red and Purple Line subway system, and the Blue, Green, and Gold light rail lines. Metro also operates one of the largest transit bus systems in the nation.

Thirteen mass transit projects and 16 road projects would split the pot. There would also be about $6 billion to be shared by all the cities in the county for their own projects.

Various elected officials, particularly those representing the San Gabriel Valley, have complained that their regions might not get their fair share of projects from the sales tax, and they want assurances that a Gold Line extension would be funded immediately.

In particular, they want the board to give the Gold Line $80 million now so they can begin seeking more than $300 million in federal money.

Villaraigosa, who chaired the meeting, held a press conference earlier this morning to reiterate his view that the spending plan for expected sales tax revenue fairly spreads money to transportation projects throughout the county.

But, the mayor acknowledged, "there are many who are going to argue they didn't get enough."

County Supervisor and Metro board member Gloria Molina said she could not support the sales tax because the list of projects was thrown together quickly and was not fair to some parts of the county.

"I think we are hurting ourselves in the long run," Molina said.

On the final vote, she abstained, and County Supervisor Mike Antonovich and Duarte City Councilman John Fasana voted no.

Transportation planners say the ballot measure could help relieve some of the nation's worst traffic congestion and provide commuters better transit options.

For more than two decades, the Los Angeles area has consistently ranked No. 1 in the country for its arduous commutes. Today, studies show that the average motorist in the region is delayed 72 hours a year due to traffic congestion -- about double what it was 25 years ago.

If nothing is done, regional planners predict that the delay could grow by up to 80% in the county by 2030, when the population is expected to grow from 10 million to 12 million.

Metro officials say the added sales tax is needed to help overcome decades of under-investment in the region's highways and transit systems.

For years, so little state money has been available that major transportation projects have been delayed and California's vast highway system has steadily fallen into disrepair.

Rising construction costs and a failure to raise state and federal fuel taxes since the mid-1990s have sharply reduced the ability of state and local government to keep pace with the transportation demands of a growing population.

The situation has become particularly acute since 2001. During the last seven years, Govs. Gray Davis and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with state legislators, have repeatedly diverted state transportation money to help balance deficit-plagued budgets.

Roughly $5.8 billion in highway and mass-transit funds were diverted during the state's repeated budget crises and have not yet been repaid.

Further shortages of transportation funds for the state could occur in 2010, when the federal highway trust fund is expected to go into deficit, jeopardizing billions of dollars in projects around the nation.

The county's proposed sales tax increase is similar to other measures that have been adopted by surrounding counties during the last 25 years. They include Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino, which sought the tax revenue to offset declines in state transportation funding.

Orange County's Measure M, which required a two-thirds majority, was placed on the ballot several times in the late 1980s and early 1990s before it was passed by voters. The tax was renewed by voters last year and is expected to generate $12 billion for transportation projects from 2011 through 2041.

dan.weikel@latimes.com

steve.hymon@latimes.com

LongBeachUrbanist

07-25-2008, 03:45 PM

I heard about Molina's objection on NPR this morning. She is still *very* bitter about the fact that Boyle Heights got light rail, instead of the originally-planned Red Line Eastside Extension.

LosAngelesBeauty

07-25-2008, 07:28 PM

LA County politicians never think regionally. Even if it means shooting down this tax increase to fund transit that would improve the lives of their own constituents.

They're incredibly provincial.

dragonsky

07-26-2008, 03:09 AM

Dodger Stadium shuttle begins tonight

Trolley2 Mass transit returns to Dodger Stadium this evening when city of Los Angeles DASH buses start running a new route between Union Station and the ballpark.

The flier, at right, shows the route -- it's basically from Union Station straight up Cesar Chavez and Sunset to Elysian Park. The buses run from 90 minutes before the game until one hour after -- for those who like to stay until the bitter end. The ride is free.

We wrote about this last month. The Dodgers wouldn't help pay for the service, saying that mass transit isn't their responsibility, rather it's a civic function. The team did promise to help publicize the bus, which it appears to be doing -- although I wonder if that trolley at the right can afford to eat at the stadium.

The Dodgers are also intent on developing some of the land around the stadium. That could mean to a loss of some parking or an increase in the number of people going up the hill, which perhaps is the reason that the team wants to get people on the bus.

Either way, it's intriguing that the team is embracing something that could cost it parking revenue. With parking at $15 a pop and the high price of gas, now seems the time to strike.

A prominent elected official once suggested to me that I bear a distinct resemblance to a rain cloud, and in that spirit I would like to suggest that another bus be added that picks fans up at some downtown eateries and bars. The last time I was at the stadium I whipped out a $20 bill to pay for two watery beers and discovered it wasn't enough; next time I'm eating and drinking before the game.

-- Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/07/dodger-stadium.html

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/images/2008/07/25/trolley2.jpg

dragonsky

07-26-2008, 11:30 PM

Fans wait on deck for mayor, then enjoy Dodger Stadium shuttle's return
Amid high gas prices and the $15 stadium parking fee, the lift from Union Station goes over well on its first night, with 500 to 600 taking advantage of the free ride to Chavez Ravine and back.
By David Wharton, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
3:25 PM PDT, July 26, 2008

Let us count the reasons for the crowd of Dodger fans that gathered outside Union Station on a warm summer evening.

Gas prices approaching $5 a gallon. The $15 it costs to park at the stadium.

"Every single game I'm paying," season-ticket holder Rudy Montoya said. "It adds up pretty big."

Big enough to lure Montoya and an estimated 500 to 600 others downtown Friday for the debut of a new - and free - shuttle that will circulate between the train station and Chavez Ravine for every home game.

By most accounts, the inaugural "Dodger Trolley" was a success.

The majority of riders were ferried up the hill, a trip of 10 or so minutes, and unloaded outside the stadium well before the first pitch. All but a small group landed back at Union Station within an hour of the final out.

"You get tired of driving," said Dick Martin, who took light rail from Pasadena. "I think I'd do this again."

Not that all went smoothly. Not on the first try.

Team executives started the evening by parking a blue-festooned minibus in Union Station's main entrance where it might attract attention and make for a dramatic television shot. Soon, an official-looking woman was telling them to move because they were blocking traffic.

After several minutes of testy discussion, the celebration was allowed to stay put.

Then Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa arrived to shake hands and take the maiden voyage. But most of the minibus was reserved for politicians and other officials, with only a few fans welcomed aboard.

The rest were ushered around the corner to larger, plain-looking buses.

"We'll be following this shuttle in our shuttle," a bus company employee announced cheerily to a momentarily puzzled crowd.

That first run accommodated the initial rush. Thereafter, fans arrived sporadically and waited only a short time.

Many had paid $5 to take rail and bus service from their homes, while others parked at nearby lots that charged $6 or less. It wasn't just the money -- they wanted to avoid traffic.

"Driving up the hill," said Miguel Reyes of Manhattan Beach, referring to congested surface streets leading into Dodger Stadium. "It's like 20 to 30 minutes."

Which is exactly the point team and local officials hope to drive home.

A city bus line that ran to Dodger Stadium was discontinued in 1994 because of budget constraints and declining ridership. In 2004, Friday night shuttles from Union Station attracted only 400 passengers a game.

This time, the city is spending $70,000 in surplus transportation funds to reacquaint fans with public transportation.

"With the high gas prices, this is a great time to get people to try," City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel said.

The "Dodger Trolley" recalls "Trolley Dodgers" -- one of several names, including the Superbas and Bridegrooms, the team went by in its Brooklyn years.

The shuttles begin 90 minutes before each game and run continuously until an hour afterward. They make two stops along Sunset Boulevard, at Figueroa Street and Marion Avenue.

Ben Fournier and his buddies, who came north from Lakewood, said they enjoyed riding into the stadium with other fans. And waiting half an hour for the return trip did not seem so bad, not with cars idling all around them, inching toward the exits.

"Look at the parking lot," Fournier said. "This is much better than trying to drive out of here."

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2008-07/41254564.jpg

LosAngelesBeauty

07-27-2008, 10:58 AM

^ Wonderful news glad to hear it was a success. Also glad to see Union Station gaining more usage from a diverse mix of demographics as new destinations continue to be added.

I am hoping that Megabus will eventually make its way back with a stronger marketing plan. Also, I'm absolutely certain that Greyhound bus needs to relocate its LA terminal from 7th/Alameda to Union Station. I'm still flabbergasted that Greyhound is located where it is - in the middle of nowhere for a newly arrived out-of-towner.

Kingofthehill

07-28-2008, 02:42 AM

Do you think that the East LA extension will spark gentrification over there?

sopas ej

07-28-2008, 05:02 PM

Do you think that the East LA extension will spark gentrification over there?

I somehow don't see the Gold Line extension sparking gentrification in East LA, at least not on the same scale as say, Echo Park. East LA does not have charming neighborhoods or the distinctive old architecture that Echo Park has, which seem to be the draw for people of better means to invest in an older, run-down area. You've never heard of upper-income young people buying up homes in East LA like you have upper-income young people buying into Echo Park, and Echo Park doesn't even have a rail line. I know that the East LA Civic Center has recently been upgraded, but that's because of LA County government investment in its own property; they would have upgraded anyway, regardless of a rail line.

LongBeachUrbanist

07-28-2008, 05:15 PM

I think Boyle Heights, Belvedere and East Los Angeles stand to become far more attractive to homebuyers than before. I wouldn't say it will gentrify, but I would say the pool of potential homebuyers will increase, as will property values.

The new rail line is definitely part of it. However, there are other improvements as well. For instance, First Street is seeing a number of improvements, from the new high school near Mission, to the new LAPD station, to the scheduled landscape improvements of the First Street plan. Also, there are rumblings of a renewed effort to incorporate ELA into a city. With its newly-revitalized civic center area, this could raise the status of the Eastside considerably.

Westsidelife

07-31-2008, 02:01 AM

Officials Celebrate Taxi Program Initiation Tomorrow (http://www.angelenic.com/2051/officials-celebrate-taxi-program-initiation-tomorrow/)

By Stephen Friday
July 30, 2008

A formal launch of the Hail-a-Taxi program is scheduled tomorrow morning at 10:00am on the sidewalk in front of Walt Disney Concert Hall.

Under the program, taxi drivers are afforded flexibility to actively load and unload passengers in some otherwise restricted areas curbside (like colored curbs), allowing for point-to-point taxi service for pedestrians.

Councilwomen Perry and Greuel will join officials from the Department of Transportation to kick off the six-month pilot run — set for Downtown and a portion Hollywood — by hailing a taxi from the event to City Hall.

I wonder how long they’ll be waiting for one to drive by…

When & Where:
Sidewalk in front of Walt Disney Concert Hall
2nd & Grand
Thursday, July 31
10:00am

-Downtowners Rejoice, Hail-a-Taxi Pilot Wins Approval! (http://www.angelenic.com/1007/downtowners-rejoice-hail-a-taxi-pilot-wins-approval/)
-Hail-a-Taxi Gets a Go, Downtown to Be Test Subject (http://www.angelenic.com/622/hail-a-taxi-gets-a-go-downtown-to-be-test-subject/)

dragonsky

08-02-2008, 02:54 AM

Sales tax bill stumbling to the finish line

The state bill, AB 2321, that would allow a half-cent sales tax increase to go to voters in November faces a hearing in front of the Senate's Appropriations Committee on Monday. From what I'm hearing today, all is not well with the bill.

Attentive readers will recall that the Metro Board last month already passed its own ordinance to put the sales tax initiative to voters. But this is a three-headed legislative monster and the Legislature, Metro board and Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors must all agree that the sales tax hike should land in the lap of voters. The Supervisors vote on Tuesday -- they'll likely follow the will of the larger Metro board -- and then the county and Metro have until Thursday to submit the initiative to the county registrar to get it on the Nov. 4 ballot.

Of course, it's all for naught if the Legislature doesn't go along. And whether AB 2321 is heard in committee Monday remains to be seen. It could be put in the so-called "suspended" file that would delay a hearing until Thursday. Why? Seems some senators on the appropriations committee still aren't happy with the project list contained in the state bill.

I can't say for sure who is or isn't happy because hardly anyone is calling me back. Senator Jenny Oropeza (D-Long Beach) didn't respond to a request for an interview Friday. Senator Gil Cedillo's (D-Los Angeles) office didn't return a call. The Metro board last month upped money for projects in both Oropeza's and Cedillo's districts to try to placate them. Cedillo, in fact, saw more than $700 million committed to the 710 tunnel project he has long sought -- here's a link to his bill, SB 1350, concerning how the project should be built/

A legislative deputy in the office of Senator Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) said that the office was still analyzing the bill. Vincent Harris, the chief-of-staff for Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas (D-Los Angeles), called and said that while his boss hadn't made a decision on how to vote Monday, he is sympathetic to the sales tax and is well aware that it would fund three projects of benefit to the 26th district -- the subway extension, Expo Line and either a light rail or busway along Crenshaw Boulevard.

Lynda Glehill, a spokesperson for Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata (D-Oakland), said Friday afternoon no decision had been made whether to suspend the hearing of 2321 on Monday. I also checked in with the appropriations committee staff and they said 2321 was still on the Monday schedule.

If you're interested in this sales tax, here's what you should be watching: If the Legislature seriously alters AB 2321 so that it conflicts with the Metro board sales tax ordinance, there could potentially be two different laws on the books that have two different spending plans for sales tax revenues (assuming it passes muster with voters in November).

Voters would be left in the dark how their money would be spent and a lawsuit that would invalidate the election would be likely. And, remember, after Thursday the Metro Board can't alter their ordinance.

Much, much, much more next week.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/sales-tax-bill.html

dragonsky

08-02-2008, 05:06 AM

FlyAway Shuttle Adds Early Morning Service

News Brief

Responding to a 30% year-to-date increase in passenger demand, the LAX FlyAway bus service at Union Station has increased its early morning frequency. Between January and June, 191,509 passengers used the service, which costs $4 each way. Los Angeles World Airports, the city department that oversees airport operations, attributes the added demand in part to an increase in train and light rail ridership. The new weekday schedule has in turn been tailored to coincide with train and light rail timetables. It also creates a shorter wait between departures, LAWA spokesman Tom Winfrey said. The FlyAway operates from Union Station's Patsaouras Transit Plaza Bus Stop 9, on the east side of Union Station. The new early morning departure times from Union Station on Monday through Friday are: 5, 5:30, 5:50, 6:30, 6:45, 7:10, 7:30, 7:50, 8:10, 8:30, 8:50, 9:10 and 9:30 a.m. From 10 a.m.-1 a.m., buses depart every 30 minutes on the hour and half-hour. Service is every hour on the hour between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. Weekend departures remain every 30 minutes on the hour and half hour from 5 a.m.-1 a.m. and every hour on the hour between 1 a.m. and 5 a.m. For more information, visit lawa.org/flyaway.

http://www.downtownnews.com/articles/2008/08/04/news/news_briefs/at04.txt

Echo Park

08-05-2008, 09:33 PM

LAsam

08-05-2008, 11:33 PM

Well, I guess we have our answer to the original question of "What's next for LA transit." Surprise! It's NOTHING! Did anyone really expect otherwise with our current political leadership and NIMBY population? Edluva, where are you? We need a good verbal kick in the crotch.

sopas ej

08-06-2008, 12:26 AM

From the LA Times:

L.A. County Board of Supervisors rejects sales tax
Board votes 3 to 2 to keep the tax aimed at transit improvements off the November ballot.
By Garrett Therolf, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
12:58 PM PDT, August 5, 2008

In a surprise move, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors denied a request today to place a half-cent sales tax on the November ballot to pay for up to $40 billion of road and mass transit improvements, including the so-called subway to the sea.

The board's two Republicans, Mike Antonovich and Don Knabe, joined Democrat Gloria Molina to deny the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's request to place the measure on the ballot.

Los Angeles County Registrar Recorder Dean Logan said the MTA must now pay up to $10 million for a special second ballot on election day or ask a court to force the measure onto the existing Nov. 4 ballot.

The Republicans said they were opposed to new taxes. Molina said she was voting in opposition to "back room deals" by Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky that she said would steer too much of the tax's proceeds to his Westside district and too little to her Eastside district.

garrett.therolf@latimes.com

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tax6-2008aug06,0,3404233.story

Westsidelife

08-06-2008, 01:28 AM

Update: Subway to Sea Still Could Go Up for November Vote (http://la.curbed.com/archives/2008/08/updated_subway_to_sea_still_headed_for_november_vote.php#more)

By Dakota
August 5, 2008

First, an aide to one of the County Supervisors tells LA Observed (http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2008/08/molina_kills_transit_tax.php) the LA Times "played the story wrong" regarding the board's failure today to back that proposed sales tax to fund (http://la.curbed.com/archives/2008/08/subway_dreams_smashed_county_board_kills_transit_tax.php) the Subway to Sea. For those just catching up, it was reported today that the board voted not to back a sales tax that would help fund numerous transit projects, including the planned Subway to the Sea. But the aide tells LAObserved: "Voters WILL still vote on the sales tax issue. It will just be a separate ballot that voters will get during the same election." "This was all clearly explained at the meeting today." The headline and story on the home page (http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tax6-2008aug06,0,3404233.story) of the Los Angeles Times remains, but another reporter, Steve Hymon, has updated his blog post (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/sales-tax-hits.html) to add this paragraph: "The supervisors’ failure to muster a simple majority to place the proposal on the Nov. 4 ballot does not kill the measure, but makes it more complicated and more costly. If the Legislature gives its blessing — a bill to authorize the measure goes before a key committee Thursday — county election officials would create a separate “conditional” ballot that general election voters would also consider." The office of dissenting Supervisor Gloria Molina backed that up, telling Curbed that the decision to have a second ballot is currently being hammered out. (The Daily News' story is out (http://www.dailynews.com/breakingnews/ci_10106481): "Still, the 3-2 vote won't stop it from going before voters Nov. 4 - but now the county will have to spend up to $3 million to print it on a separate ballot."

Molina's press deputy, Roxane Marquez added: "The Board did not approve of [the sales tax] being on the same ballot [as the one with the other initiatives]... The Board of Supervisors is not going to rubber stamp a decision because they feel they don't have a choice." Marquez said Molina did not approve of how the ballot initiative was put together, calling it "backroom dealings." When asked if this was political bickering, she said that "one person's bickering is another person's negotiating."

dragonsky

08-06-2008, 02:26 AM

The Mayor responds to today's sales tax vote

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa just released this letter he's sending to the County Board of Supervisors, who earlier today refused to put the half-cent sales tax for transit and road projects on the November ballot:

Honorable Supervisors:

I am writing to urge you to reconsider your vote today regarding the countywide
half cent transportation sales tax approved for the November 4, 2008 ballot by
the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) Board of
Directors last month. Specifically, I am urging that you place the MTA measure
on a consolidated ballot on November 4, 2008.

There is simply no legitimate basis for failing to consolidate the November ballot.
No matter how you cut it, the taxpayers and voters will be the ultimate losers if
the Board refuses to place the MTA measure on the general election ballot.

Either the taxpayers will be stuck with costly legal bills resulting from the MTA's
litigation against the County on this matter, or the taxpayers will be on the hook
for an additional $3 million required to run a confusing dual-ballot election in
November - which would create a logistical nightmare certain to disenfranchise
untold thousands of County voters.

I think we all agree that our long-term transportation needs require significant
public investment in mass transit alternatives. The MTA sales tax measure is a
down payment toward the many transit and highway improvements this County
needs to support our economy, our environment, the needs of the transit
dependent and an overall high quality of life for the people we represent.

The people of Los Angeles County should have the right to decide for
themselves whether they want to invest in their future. And the most transparent
and cost-effective way to do that is through a consolidated November 4, 2008
ballot.

I am optimistic that you will reconsider your vote and consolidate the MTA
measure with November's general election ballot.

Sincerely,

ANTONIO R. VILLARAIGOSA
Mayor

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/the-mayor-respo.html

DowntownCharlieBrown

08-06-2008, 06:35 PM

:brickwall: :brickwall: :brickwall: :brickwall: :brickwall:
Just when it seemed there was enough momentum to push this thing through and most of gov't was on the side of progress....:hell: :hell: :hell: :hell: :hell:

I really let the 3 of them have it in an email and told them how short sighted they are:gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah:

dragonsky

08-07-2008, 01:38 AM

Judgment day for sales tax bill tomorrow

Thursday is the big day: The state Senate's Appropriations Committee will decide to move AB 2321 to the full Senate floor or they'll keep it in the suspense file and kill it.

For those who like their transportation news in English, here is what that means: The fate of the state bill that would authorize local officials in Los Angeles County to place a half-cent sales tax increase on the Nov. 4 ballot will be decided in the Appropriations Committee.

The sales tax, proponents say, would raise $30- to $40-billion in revenues over the next three decades and provide funding for an extension of the subway, the Expo Line to Santa Monica, the Gold Line to Azusa and perhaps beyond, local monies for cities to improve their roads and transit, as well as many other projects.

But it hasn't been an easy road to get the sales tax on the ballot. Attentive readers may recall that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority Board in late July approved an ordinance that would put the sales tax hike before voters. But in order for that ordinance to take effect, the state Legislature must approve 2321 the companion bill.

Of course, there have already been noteworthy developments. Namely, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday refused to muster the support to put the sales tax on the regular ballot. The MTA has said it will sue to force that to happen.

All that doesn't matter if the state bill dies. A hearing Monday was delayed until tomorrow because, in part, two members of the committee -- Senators Gil Cedillo and Jenny Oropeza -- are still unhappy with the bill. Cedillo (shown in the photo with former state Sen. Rico Oller) wants the bill to include language that guarantees a 710 tunnel project would get funds and Oropeza wants the same for improvements to the Green Line, namely extending it to the airport.

OropezaThe sponsor of AB 2321, Assemblyman Mike Feuer, told me this afternoon that "I'm very optimistic that the Senate Appropriations Committee will pass this bill along to the [Senate] floor and very soon the governor will have the opp to sign the bill."

On that point, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday said that he would not sign any more bills until the Legislature solves its impasse over the budget deficit. That's one potential complication.

Now, back to Cedillo's and Oropeza's issues with the state bill. Here's the problem: the state bill lists 17 projects or other items that must be included in the MTA's ordinance. The MTA's ordinance, in section 16.2, also lists those projects and says they must be included in the state bill.

The problem? It's too late to change the MTA ordinance, which must be submitted to the county registrar by Friday. So it's a time issue. The MTA board isn't scheduled to meet again until September. It's not clear if the board could together by Friday, if necessary, and whether they have authority to change the ordinance at that point anyway.

Oropeza declined an interview request through spokesman Ray Sotero. "They are still working on it," Sotero said, in reference to the bill. "There are many things she likes about the bill. She has to wait to see a final version."

I'm still waiting to hear back from Cedillo. If I do, I'll update this post later. Either way, we'll be covering the meeting here at the Bottleneck Blog tomorrow. You can also watch a webcast of the Appropriations Committee on the California Channel website.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/judgment-day-fo.html

Codex Borgia

08-07-2008, 05:09 PM

Hi there I haven't posted in a long time...but lurk quite often as an Interested & Invested Citizen of the LA Area. I have much interest in seeing Los Angeles invest in it's Transportation infrastructure. While I have mixed feelings about the manner in which Antonio Villaraigosa the LA City Council and MTA are going about their push for expanding our Rail Network. I can understand the financially conservative County Board of Supervisors zealous refusal to support the Tax Measure...however that being said I believe that they are fools for going about this the way they did.....Should have better been left on the ballot to allow the Citizens of LA County to make up their minds...
Read on...
Originally Published at
http://railriders.la/2008/08/06/gop-supes-protest-wastes-tax-dollars/

Republican County Supervisors Mike Antonovich and Don Knabe tried making a statement against higher taxes by voting against placing a half-cent sales tax for transit on the November ballot (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/sales-tax-hits.html). But their action may have back-fired, costing taxpayers even more. According to a letter from Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, they may have unintentionally diverted millions of dollars (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/the-mayor-respo.html) away from traffic and transit programs.There is simply no legitimate basis for failing to consolidate the November ballot. No matter how you cut it, the taxpayers and voters will be the ultimate losers if the Board refuses to place the MTA measure on the general election ballot.
Either the taxpayers will be stuck with costly legal bills resulting from the MTA’s litigation against the County on this matter, or the taxpayers will be on the hook for an additional $3 million required to run a confusing dual-ballot election in November - which would create a logistical nightmare certain to disenfranchise untold thousands of County voters.
If Knabe and Antonovich were really out to fight for taxpayers, they would let the sales tax go on a consolidated ballot, then campaign against it. Forcing a separate election is simply an example of government waste at its worst.

Vangelist

08-07-2008, 10:36 PM

It's going to be on the same, consolidated ballot: Knabe isn't such a knabe after all -

MORE BREAKING NEWS: Knabe to change vote on sales tax
A press release from L.A. County Supervisor Don Knabe just popped up in my email basket. It's a keeper and it's below.

What this means is that if the sales tax increase goes to the ballot, it will be on the general ballot. But it's not sure thing it will be on the ballot because a state bill that is needed to authorize such an election is stuck in the State Senate while members haggle over what projects are included in the bill.

Nonetheless, this is a remarkable turn of events. According to the release, Knabe changed his mind after learning that having the sales tax on a separate ballot would cost the county an additional $10.3 million. Officials at the Supervisors' meeting on Tuesday, if my notes are correct, estimated the cost to be $2- to $3-million more.

Update, 2:22 p.m:

"The mayor thanks Supervisor Knabe for doing the right thing," said Matt Szabo, a spokesman for Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, in an email. "Regardless of the supervisor's position on the measure, he understands that playing games with the election process would only cost the taxpayers and burden the voters."

Here's the full text of the release:

KNABE TO CHANGE VOTE ON TRANSIT SALES TAX ISSUE

Los Angeles, August 7, 2008 – Los Angeles County Supervisor Don Knabe has announced that at the next meeting of the Board of Supervisors, he will enter a motion to reconsider the Board’s previous vote on the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s (MTA) sales tax measure. Supervisor Knabe has also decided that at the time of the reconsideration he will change his vote from ‘no’ to ‘yes.’

Supervisor Knabe’s planned reconsideration and intention to change his vote effectively means that the MTA sales tax measure now has the three votes it needs to pass the Board of Supervisors and go before the voters as part of the consolidated November 2008 Presidential Election ballot, and not as a totally separate election.

This morning, the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk informed the Board of Supervisors that the costs of a concurrent election, with the MTA sales tax appearing as a totally separate ballot in the November election, would cost taxpayers an additional $10.3 million. If the MTA measure were included as part of the main ballot, the cost would be $7.2 million, instead of the $17.5 million estimated for a separate ballot.

Additionally, the MTA measure would have to be setup as a completely separate election that would be conducted on the same day as the November 4, 2008 general election. Polling places would require additional staffing and voters would get separate ballots, sample ballots and voter guides for both elections.

“I remain absolutely opposed to the MTA sales tax measure and I plan to spend my time and effort campaigning against it,” said Supervisor Knabe. “The plan is not equitable for all County residents and this is the wrong time to burden people with even higher taxes.”

“Although I am against the sales tax plan, I cannot in good conscience burden County residents with over $10 million in higher election costs. The taxpayers will have to pay for these costs, and that is something I will not allow to happen. Additionally, the separate ballots, voter guides, and other resources needed to conduct a separate election on the same day as the Presidential Election could cause unnecessary confusion and challenges for voters. This upcoming election is the most important in many years, and voters deserve better than a potential disaster at their polling place.”

--Steve Hymon

dragonsky

08-08-2008, 02:45 AM

Breaking news: No vote today on sales tax bill

I just received a phone call from state Senate President Don Perata's office: AB 2321, the bill that would authorize an election for a half-cent sales tax increase for road and transit projects, will not be voted on today in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

"It's not like it's dead, it's just a matter of we're not doing it today to work out a few more issues with the bill," said Lynda Gledhill, a Perata spokeswoman. "There are questions about the list of projects in the bill."

She said the bill would likely be heard next week. It has to pass and be signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger before the legislative season is over. If not, there's no half-cent sales tax election on Nov. 4.

The delay, as we've reported previously, involves concerns by Sens. Gil Cedillo and Jenny Oropeza, both of whom sit on the Appropriations Committee. Neither has returned my calls, but sources say they are trying to ensure there is money and legislative language to make sure the 710 tunnel and a Green Line extension to LAX get built.

More later. There may be a brief discussion of the bill in the Appropriations Committee, which you can watch online at the California Channel.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/breaking-news-n.html

dragonsky

08-09-2008, 06:58 AM

Oropeza says she's prepared to try to kill sales tax bill if not amended

State Sen. Jenny Oropeza put it in no uncertain terms when I spoke to her late this Friday afternoon: she is prepared to kill the bill that would allow a half-cent sales tax increase to go on the November ballot in Los Angeles County to pay for road and transit projects.

「I said in order for the bill to pass the Senate, it is going to have to contain the Green Line extension,」 Oropeza, (D-Long Beach), told me. 「They」 — Los Angeles County transportation officials — 「understood that. They are playing a game of chicken and blaming the Legislature. I am praying to God they do the right thing. I don't want to see this thing go down either.」

I asked her if she was prepared to try to kill the bill — and any chance of a vote in November. Oropeza firmly answered: 「Yes I am.」

There have been plenty of legislative maneuvering in recent weeks as Los Angeles County transportation officials and politicians have scrambled to get the sales tax proposal on the fall ballot, when a huge turnout is expected because of the presidential election.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board last month approved an ordinance calling for the election. That ordinance details how the expected $30- to $40-billion in sales tax revenues would be spent.

Oropeza wants to be sure the work includes extending the Green Line to Los Angeles International Airport. The light rail line, which runs down the middle of the 105 freeway, opened in the mid-1990s and has long been an potent symbol of poor local transportation planning because it skirts the southern end of LAX, but doesn't actually go near the terminals.

Oropeza said the MTA's proposed ballot language makes it sound like the connection will be built. But she believes that neither the MTA proposal nor the current state bill, AB 2321, provide enough guarantees.
She wants to insert new language in both documents. MTA officials, however, are hesitant to reopen what has already proven to be a can of worms and could invite a legal challenge if somehow the state bill and ordinance don't match.

「I have been trying to find out from someone why they object to having this particular project in the bill and no one has given me an answer,」 Oropeza said. 「Now they are claiming it is too late because of the timing with the ballot to effectuate a change in the ordinance.

「We have a documentation to show that's not true,」 she added. 「We know it's not impossible. Yes, they would have to convene another meeting, but they could do it if they wanted to.」

Oropeza has sway in the process. The bill is stuck in the Senate Appropriations Committee, where she is one of four senators from Los Angeles County. While two of the others — Sens. Sheila Kuehl and Mark Ridley-Thomas — are likely to support the sales tax because of the benefits to their districts, both Oropeza and Sen. Gil Cedillo have raised doubts . So it will come down to who the rest of the committee will side with.

Now, as Oropeza said, the bill has become one big game of chicken. And she certainly sounded Friday as if blinking was not an option — even if it means that the sales tax effort dies.

「The transportation wheels have moved way too slowly in the county of Los Angeles and a lot of it has to do with these politics,」 Oropeza said. 「The losers are the people. I'm not personally responsible for that. I wish I could fix it. It's extremely frustrating. I have this incredibly important project. It just disappoints me very much.」

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/oropeza-says-sh.html

DowntownCharlieBrown

08-11-2008, 11:42 PM

Gawddam transit isalattawerk

From Curbed:
http://la.curbed.com/archives/2008/08/breaking_expo_line_must_go_over_or_under_but_not_through.php

Big news from the Expo Line meeting this morning. Damien Goodmon shoots out another email that offers some surprising news:

At the [Public Utilities Commission] Hearing today on the Expo Line crossings by Dorsey HS and Foshay Learning Center, the assigned Judge Kenneth Koss issued the following statement as part of his ruling: "With the submission of Expo's information it appears that a grade separation at Farmdale is in fact practicable." This means that the street-level application with the holding pen IS OFF THE TABLE! The only options are:

a) underpass
b) overpass
c) street closure with a pedestrian bridge.

This a MAJOR VICTORY for the Dorsey High School family - for the future children of Dorsey HS. It validates all of your hard work."

Damien's silence on the issue of Foshay Learning Center leads us to believe that the light rail line can pass at surface level there. More to come, we're sure...

dragonsky

08-12-2008, 01:20 AM

Sales tax proponents ask Legislature for their support

I just returned from Union Station, where on a roasting pit of a train platform, about a dozen elected officials this morning called for the Legislature to pass a bill that would allow a half-cent sales tax increase in Los Angeles County to be placed on the Nov. 4 ballot.

The increase, if approved, would create a pool of $30- to $40-billion for road and mass transit projects, including $4 billion for a subway extension to the Westside.

Some highlights:

++When I asked the mayor to name names of those holding out in the state Senate, his response was: "I think you know the individuals in the Senate appropriations committee who have spoken their opposition. In our ordinance we have provided more money for the projects that they want. What they said is they want more and we can't do that." We've been reporting for the past week that Sens. Jenny Oropeza and Gil Cedillo are the holdouts and both hold key votes on the Senate's Appropriations Committee, where AB 2321 looks to face judgment day tomorrow.

++"The problem in Sacramento is that there are some who want to engage in the pork barrel politics of asking for even more money than has been distributed for their pet projects," Villaraigosa added later.

++"I think the people are way ahead of their representatives on this issue," said County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky. "I'm not worried about the politicians opposing it."

++Using several maps and visuals, the mayor also said the sales tax revenues would be spent on an equitable basis when factors such as employment density and need are taken into consideration. "On the Westside, there are four times as many jobs than there are homes and people."

++Councilman Bill Rosendahl made a point of saying the Green Line addition is part of the MTA's spending plan for sales tax revenues -- Oropeza wants it in the state bill, too. And, Councilman Richard Alarcon said he now supports putting the sales tax on the ballot. He voted against it last week, saying he had questions since answered about whether busway projects in the N.E. Valley would be adequately funded.

++Two key labor leaders said they were closely watching the the Appropriations Committee vote. "I think this is a real litmus test for them," said Marvin Kropke, chief of the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 11. "If you're wrong, you're going to suffer the consequences," said Richard Slawson, executive secretary of L.A. and Orange Counties Building & Trades Council. By which he meant that unions may not support Cedillo or Oropeza in their next elections.

++Finally, and I thought most interestingly, Councilwoman Wendy Greuel had a line that I bet most people will overlook. "It's not about politics, it's not about personalities," she said.

I'll explore that idea more later.

-- Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/sales-tax-propo.html

dragonsky

08-12-2008, 01:21 AM

Oropeza responds to sales tax press conference

State Senator Jenny Oropeza just finished up her own press conference in Sacramento to discuss tomorrow's vote on AB 2321 in the Appropriations Committee on which she serves. But she phoned me first, and her comments are below.

Oropeza's name didn't come up at this morning's press conference featuring Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, but the mayor and others implied that she's a holdout on the bill -- and Oropeza agrees.

Some highlights of our conversation:

++Oropeza took strong issue to Villaraigosa's assertion that she was asking for more money for the Green Line. "I don't want more. That's intellectually inaccurate," Oropeza said. "I am not asking for anything more than what is in the [MTA's] ordinance. What I want is the protection of state law for the [Green Line to LAX] project."

++She also didn't like the mayor's comment that her opposition involved "pork barrel politics." "It is just shocking to me that they would have the audacity to say it's pork barrel politics," she said. "That kind of rhetoric is disappointing to me."

++I asked her if perhaps some personality differences may come into play -- such as Villaraigosa's failure to endorse her in recent campaigns. "I don't think it has anything to do with that," Oropeza said. "He hasn't supported me in the Senate race or Congressional race. But it's really not about that. We've tried to put that behind us and are working together on a number of things. I hope that's not what it's about."

++I asked her the same question I asked the other day: If the sales tax doesn't go through, the Green Line project doesn't have any funding (the sales tax would provide $200 million if the MTA spending plan is to be believed) if the sales tax doesn't go to voters. And, I suggested, it may even make it harder to get funding if politicians turn against it because of a 'no' vote from her against the sales tax. "One thing I learned is that if you do not hold the line when you're right and it's good for the people, then in the end the people will get screwed," Oropeza said. "I feel the duty to do the right thing."

++I asked her if she had the votes. Oropeza said she didn't know. I also asked her if she had the vote of her colleague, Sen. Gil Cedillo, who has raised concerns about the bill behind-the-scenes (he hasn't been returning my calls). Oropeza said that she spoke to Cedillo today. "I know he has concerns. I'm not super clear what his concerns," she said.

++Finally, she said that if gets the Green Line project inserted into the state bill, the MTA Board has until Aug. 13 -- that's Wednesday -- to change its ordinance.

However, it should be noted that the Los Angeles County Counsel Raymond Fortner, in a memo dated Aug. 7 to County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, wrote that the MTA does have until Aug. 13 to change its ordinance, but -- and it's a big 'but' -- can only change the ordinance at a regularly scheduled board meeting.

The MTA Board doesn't meet again until the end of September. So, that would appear to be too late. In other words, Oropeza and public officials in the county are at odds and the end result, as of this afternoon, looks to be that she'll vote against the sales tax plan tomorrow.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/orepeza-respond.html

dragonsky

08-13-2008, 01:48 AM

Supes put sales tax on regular ballot but ...

Just minutes ago, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors voted 3 to 2 to put a sales tax hike initiative to raise money for mass transit and road projects on the Nov. 4 regular ballot. However, the board also voted 3 to 2 to officially oppose the sales tax increase.

Confused? Hey, it's local politics.

First, the ballot issue: The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board last month voted to put a half-cent sales tax increase on the November ballot. But the county supervisors -- three of whom say the sales tax wouldn't spread money evenly in the county -- refused last week to put the initiative on the regular ballot. Instead, the sales tax would go on a supplemental ballot.

After learning that a supplemental ballot would cost the county an additional $10 million, Supervisor Don Knabe said he would change his vote, even though he continued to oppose the sales tax hike. Today, Knabe followed through with that promise and was joined by Supervisors Yvonne Brathwaite Burke and Zev Yaroslavsky to put the sales tax on the regular ballot.

Knabe was one of a trio of supervisors -- including Mike Antonovich and Gloria Molina -- who voted to take an official position against the sales tax hike. It's a symbolic move, but one that could resonate during a fall campaign. It means that three of the most powerful politicians in the county will probably be campaigning against the sales tax.

Here's the key excerpt from the motion calling for opposition:

"Unfortunately, this ordinance was not crafted with countywide consensus nor does it provide an acceptable standard of long-term equity for all regions of Los Angeles County which will be paying this new sales tax."

Of course, all this could be for naught.

The state Legislature still must approve a companion bill that would allow the sales tax to go to the voters. The bill is stuck in the Senate's Appropriations Committee, which is now scheduled to vote on it on Thursday. If the committee kills the bill, there will be no sales tax measure on the ballot come November.

-- Garrett Therolf and Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/supes-put-sales.html

dragonsky

08-14-2008, 03:16 AM

BREAKING NEWS: Amended sales tax bill clears Senate committee

With almost no prior warning, the state Senate's Appropriations Committee quickly convened this afternoon and approved AB 2321, the state bill that would allow a proposal for a half-cent sales tax increase in Los Angeles County to be placed on the Nov. 4 ballot.

UPDATE: The vote was 14 to 0, with one absence. Among the supporters were state Sen. Jenny Oropeza and state Sen. Gil Cedillo, both of whom had issues with the bill before it was updated.

I just got off the phone with Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles), the sponsor of the bill. He said the amendments included so-called "intent language" that clarified that some of the sales tax revenues should be spent on several projects, including a Green Line Extension to LAX, fixes at traffic hotspots along the 605 freeway, the Gold Line extension and 710 Freeway improvements.

However, the intent language does not change the list of projects in either the state bill or the MTA's sales tax ordinance. Those two lists must match or the sales tax initiative could have been invalidated, according to MTA officials and Los Angeles County attorneys.

"I want to convey to your readers it's a good day because the logjam has been broken here," Feuer said. "I think it's smooth sailing to the ballot and it's up to all of us who support this to gain the support of two thirds of the voters."

The other amendment to the bill -- and in my view, the one that you should note -- requires that the MTA give the state Legislature one year's prior notice if the MTA board decides to change the spending plan for expected sales tax revenues. In other words, if the MTA board wants to take money from one project and give it to another, they have to let the Legislature know way ahead of time so anyone who wants to cry foul can do so.

The state bill still must pass the full Senate, then go back to the Assembly for approval. Then it must be signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has said he won't sign any more bills until the state budget deficit is solved. Schwarzenegger has said that he supports this bill -- but it remains to be seen if he makes an exception if the budget problems can't be solved.

SECOND UPDATE, 4 p.m.: I just spoke with Sen. Oropeza. I would describe her mood as ebullient.

She said that her staff and MTA staff had "hunkered down" over the past two days to figure out a way to amend the bill that would satisfy everyone's interests. She needed to see language that the Green Line extension was a project that would get built if the sales tax was passed, while the MTA, she said, didn't want to have to change the county's ordinance.

When I suggested to her that the language about the Green Line was basically "intent language" -- that is, without the force of law -- Oropeza respectfully disagreed. "This codifies the fact that this project is expected to be constructed," she said. "We thought that was very important."

The other amendment, she said, should help all interested parties because it requires the MTA to give the Legislature one year's notice if they intend to transfer money between projects. That has been the big concern of many public officials all along -- that the sales tax was basically a guise to bring in billions of dollars that the MTA board would one day use on the subway on the Westside.

"It's a safeguard against raiding certain projects to fund other projects," Oropeza said. "This was all about getting some assurances in the law for the people who may vote for this in good faith. It goes along the lines of this issue of transparency -- of having decisions made out in the open and not in a closed door meeting with two days notice. It's good government."

Finally, I asked her if she'll campaign for the sales tax. Oropeza said that no one has asked her yet -- but she's more than willing to help.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/breaking-news-a.html

dragonsky

08-15-2008, 03:25 AM

SoPas reverses stance on 710 Freeway extension bill
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 08/05/2008 11:07:03 PM PDT

By Dan Abendschein

Staff Writer

SOUTH PASADENA - After years fighting a proposed freeway extension, South Pasadena City Council members have reversed course, voting to support a state bill that authorizes the MTA to seek private financing for a 4.5-mile tunnel extension for the 710 Freeway.

Only last month, the council voted to oppose SB 1350, calling it "troublesome" and "poor public policy" in a letter to the state Legislature. The city has, for decades, fought against an above-ground extension of the freeway through South Pasadena.

City leaders changed their minds when the bill's sponsor, Sen. Gil Cedillo, D-Los Angeles, proposed new language that would recommend that the above-ground route be eliminated from consideration. The amendments also recommend that hundreds of state-owned homes along the route be sold.

The fact that the bill has a lot of support in the Legislature and is likely to pass was a major factor in the council's decision, said Councilman Mike Ten.

"It's to Sen. Cedillo's credit that he came back with some amendments that we could support," said Ten. "It's better to be on the winning side than the losing side."

At a special meeting Monday night, South Pasadena City Council members voted 4-1 to reverse their stance against the bill. Although the city's June letter denounced Cedillo's bill, it also voiced the city's desire to work with the senator to improve his legislation.

Mayor Philip Putnam said that his vote was about getting the best deal for South Pasadena, not supporting the project. In fact, in a closed-session item at Monday's meeting, the City Council met with their attorneys to talk about possible legal action against the tunnel project.

Most local legislators are advocates of the project, but Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-Pasadena, is one of the main lawmakers in opposition.

Councilman Richard Schneider, who was the lone vote against the measure, said he believed the language was not strong enough and does not guarantee that an above-ground option will never again be pursued.

He added that supporting the legislation makes it appear that the city supports the tunnel project.

"I don't think that the council members who voted for this do support the tunnel project," said Schneider. "I think the idea is that the bill is going to pass anyway so that we should try to get something out of it. And I don't think that is a good attitude."

Although proposed, amendments to the Cedillo's legislation have also not yet been formally added to the bill, a concern for Schneider. Also, he added, the tunnel project has the potential to add traffic and construction to neighboring cities like Pasadena and La Ca ada Flintridge.

"I don't think it is right for us to abandon our allies in this fight," said Schneider.

For decades, the battle over completing the 710 project has been fought between area cities with competing interests.

Cities near the foothills have opposed the extension because they want to keep traffic levels low on the Foothill (210) Freeway, while cities adjacent to the San Bernardino (10) Freeway, like Alhambra and San Gabriel, favor the extension because they have to cope with increased street traffic because of the unfinished gap in the freeway.

South Pasadena, which was in the path of the proposed above-ground 710 extension route, has always sided with the cities to the north.

Councilman Ten said that the city is not endorsing the tunnel project and still has no position on whether it should be completed.

The project had stalled until April, when a local government organization floated the idea of finding a private company to finance a tunnel under the Pasadena area to complete the 4.5-mile gap.

Echo Park

08-15-2008, 04:50 PM

dragonsky you're killing this board, man.

JDRCRASH

08-16-2008, 08:28 PM

Perhaps.....but at least its a project that is going to go through a community that has nowhere to build out but up. Not to mention that it's going to be a tunnel going beneath development, anyways.

dragonsky

08-20-2008, 01:39 AM

Study finds congestion pricing doesn't hurt the poor

One of the long-held arguments against congestion pricing or toll lanes is that they're not fair to low-income users. The tolls are the same for everybody and low-income earners get hit the hardest, so goes that line of thinking.

In fact, pretty much every politician I spoke to in the San Gabriel Valley has raised that point when talking about the proposal to convert the carpool lane on the 10 and possibly the 210 freeways into toll lanes.

Two local academics have concluded otherwise: tolls are a pretty fair way of raising money to build road capacity. In fact, they say, it's fairer than most other funding schemes.

The study comes from Lisa Schweitzer, an assistant professor of policy, planning and development at USC, and Brian Taylor, a professor of urban planning who heads up UCLA's Transportation Studies center. Taylor, in particular, has long been a vocal advocate of congestion pricing. The study has been published online in Transportation, an academic journal.

Their study is based on the toll lanes on the 91 freeway in Orange County. The two authors found that medium- and high-income earners tend to use the lanes the most -- and therefore are the ones paying for the debt service on the lanes.

They also looked at a scenario in which sales taxes collected from across the OC would be used to pay for the toll lanes. In that case, they concluded, low-income earners would be paying millions of dollars in taxes for something they don't use. Here's the key passage from their paper:

"Using sales taxes to fund roadways creates substantial savings to drivers by shifting some of the costs of driving from drivers to consumers at large, and in the process disproportionately favors the more affluent at the expense of the impoverished."

I spoke to Schweitzer earlier today and she made it clear that she doesn't buy the congestion pricing-hurts-the-poor scenario. In her view, congestion pricing is a way to ration a resource often in short supply -- space on the road. She likes it because those who use it pay for it and that puts a direct cost on driving, instead of indirect costs such as at-large sales taxes.

"I think the equity issue is a magic bullet," she said. "Food prices go up, housing prices have gone up since Jesus was a carpenter, but no one" -- politicians, that is -- "ever brings that up."

I'm guessing some readers do not agree with the ivory tower on this one. Please direct your thoughts to the comment board.

-- Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/congestion-pr-1.html

dragonsky

08-21-2008, 06:13 AM

Wednesday, August 20, 2008
91 Freeway toll roads could roll into Riverside County
If the governor signs a bill, Riverside would be allowed to build toll lanes east of the Orange County line to the I-15.
By ELLYN PAK
THE ORANGE COUNTY REGISTER

The governor will soon consider a proposal to extend toll lanes into Riverside County – a plan that could help unclog traffic on one of Southern California's most traffic-choked freeways.

If approved by Gov. Schwarzenegger, the Riverside County Transportation Commission could forge ahead with plans to add two toll lanes and a regular lane in each direction on the 91 from the Orange County line to Pierce Street, just a few miles past the I-15.

The 17-mile stretch would be an extension of the Express Lanes – a 10-mile tollway that runs from the 55 Freeway in Orange to the Riverside County line.

On Tuesday, the Senate approved a bill – sponsored by Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana and Assemblyman Todd Spitzer, R-Orange – that would allow the addition toll lanes and the construction to be funded by tolls. The approval put the bill on the governor's desk for consideration.

The project "was attractive to us, because the 91 eastbound traffic backs up into Orange County," said Art Leahy, CEO of the Orange County Transportation Authority, the public agency that owns the Express Lanes.

If signed by the governor, the bill would also allow the OCTA to use toll revenues to construct a direct-connector from the Express Lanes to the 241 Toll Road.

Riverside transportation officials, who are reviewing potential environmental impacts, hope to have the new lanes open by 2015, said John Standiford, spokesman for the Riverside commission.

The OCTA's Leahy said the two counties would seek to make the transition between the two toll road segments seamless for commuters.

The pricing structure on the Riverside sections would be similar to those on the Express Lanes, which charge drivers up to $10 a trip based on how congested the freeway is. The Riverside price range has not been determined.

The RCTC would be in charge of constructing and financing the lanes. Standiford said the agency plans to fund the project by issuing bonds and using revenue generated from the new toll lanes to pay them off.

Construction of the toll lanes is just one part of a $1 billion-plus plan to improve trouble spots on Riverside County freeways. Much of the money to fund those other projects would come from Measure A funds, Riverside's half-cent transportation sales tax.

More than 14 million trips are taken annually on the 91.

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/Graphics/2008/08/91expresslanesCOLOR.gif

dragonsky

08-26-2008, 03:42 AM

L.A. streetcar update

Los Angeles officials are saying that construction of the downtown streetcar they want to build here could begin as early as two years from now, reports Anna Scott in the Downtown News today. Interest has ramped up as part of the initiative by Councilman Jose Huizar to revive Broadway in downtown L.A.

Two years? That would mean the streetcar would hurdle over other L.A. projects that have spent years or decades in the planning stages. People mover at LAX, green line to LAX, L.A. River revitalization, brining back the NFL, putting a park on top of the 101 Freeway in downtown, extending the subway -- all a lot of talk to this point.

There is a little glitch with the streetcar effort: They don't have a single dime of funding yet for a project expected to cost north of $70 million. But streetcar proponents earlier this month formed a nonprofit organization to build the line, same as was done in Portland -- where the streetcar ignited the ongoing national trend to bring them back. Blogdowntown has also been diligently covering.

Something to keep in mind: About $19.4-million of the cost of the construction of Portland's $103-million streetcar was paid through new property taxes targeting those who live closest to the train, according to Portland officials.

A few minutes ago I phoned Huizar's office to see if he wants to install a local assessment district to help build the streetcar. I got a recorded message. Scott, in the Downtown News, reports that the nonprofit will be seeking donations.

I spent the weekend in San Francisco, where the city is running historic streetcars -- something Jason Burns is pushing over at Metblog Los Angeles. They're neat to look at, but I can tell you based on a short ride along the Embarcadero between the Ferry Building and Fisherman's Wharf, the streetcars are also overrun with tourists.

Two lessons I think L.A. can learn: If you put a streetcar in all the touristy places, it will be overrun by tourists. And if you assume tourists are going to know how to put $1.50 in the fare box or not stand in front of the train or not block doorways, then you have assumed wrong.

-- Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/streetcar.html

dragonsky

08-26-2008, 03:44 AM

Mass transit sales tax faces more hurdles

Readers who have checked their calendars today may have noticed it's August 25. That's just six days before Aug. 31, the deadline for the Legislature to pass most bills for the 2008 legislative season.

One bill not yet passed is AB 2321, sponsored by Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles). That's the piece of state legislation that would allow Los Angeles County officials to ask voters in November to consider a one-half cent sales tax increase to pay for $30- to $40-billion in mass transit projects and road improvements.

Here's the skinny on what needs to happen:

HURDLE NUMBER ONE: The full Senate needs to vote on AB 2321, which then must be re-approved by the full Assembly. This must happen by 11:59 p.m. Sunday. Proponents of the bill say they've got the votes and the Senate could vote as early as Tuesday.

HURDLE NUMBER TWO: Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger must sign the bill into law within 30 days of receiving it from the Legislature. This is a big obstacle. Why?

"The governor has said he'll veto anything unrelated to the budget," said spokesperson Rachel Cameron today.

Bills in California can automatically become law without the governor's signature if he fails to sign or veto a bill within 30 days. But Cameron said that her boss has yet to let that happen since taking office in 2003.

In other words, if legislators want Schwarzenegger to start signing their bills, they better find a way to close the $15-billion-plus budget gap.

HURDLE NUMBER THREE: By the way, Schwarzenegger has not taken an official position on AB 2321, Cameron said. "Generally speaking, he doesn't take an official position until it reaches his desk in final form," she asdded.

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, at a news conference on Aug. 11, said he had spoken with Schwarzenegger about the sales tax the prior evening and that Schwarzenegger supported it. There's no reason to think that's not true, but nothing's final until ink hits paper.

HURDLE NUMBER FOUR: Schwarzenegger has proposed solving the budget impasse by temporarily raising sales taxes on Californians by as much as a penny. That would bring the sales tax to 9.25% in Los Angeles County and likely make it extremely challenging to persuade voters to tax themselves another half-penny.

But it's hard to say if the sales tax will happen or it's just a threat. Republicans in the Assembly have said they won't raise taxes -- and there are enough Republicans to block such an effort -- and many Democrats aren't wild about the idea.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/sales-tax-updat.html

JDRCRASH

08-26-2008, 05:03 PM

What? Only 6, no, make that 5 days till the deadline? **checks calander**
Ohh....whadya know? Interesting.....
......
............
................
:gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah: :gaah:
WHAT ARE THOSE PEOPLE IN SACRAMENTO DOING???!!! HURRY UP AND PASS THE BUDGET ALREADY!!!

dragonsky

08-27-2008, 02:34 AM

Gold Line Foothill Extension video

In a push to extend the Gold Line light rail from Pasadena deeper into the San Gabriel Valley, several members of Congress had a video made promoting the project. They titled it -- seriously -- a "Special Congressional Report."

The video comes from Rep. David Dreier, Rep. Grace Napolitano, Rep. Adam Schiff and Rep. Hilda Solis.

The show features the four of them sitting around in a circle being asked questions by a moderator named Jo Maney. Here is her first hardball question, addressed to Dreier:

"Can you tell us a little bit about the Gold Line Foothill Extension and how it will help reduce traffic congestion and save energy?"

Maney then goes on to forget to tell viewers a crucial detail: she happens to work for the guy she's interviewing. Maney is Dreier's press secretary.

As for the rest of the 25-minute video, there's nothing earth-shaking. All four members of Congress reiterate their support for the project. Dreier, in a meeting with the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin's editorial board, also urges readers to plead with the MTA board to provide seed money in funding so the project can seek federal funding from Congress.

High-resolution video: http://dreier.house.gov/video/transportation-high.wmv

Low-resolution video: http://dreier.house.gov/video/trans-low.wmv

I have a call into Dreier's office to see if he will support the half-cent sales tax increase if it makes it to the November ballot. The Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority is not supporting it, still angry over the MTA board's refusal earlier this summer to provide the $80 million in seed money for the Gold Line project.

--Steve Hymon

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/08/gold-line-footh.html

dragonsky

08-28-2008, 03:53 AM

Universal gridlock disaster?
By Connie Llanos, Staff Writer
Article Last Updated: 08/27/2008 05:08:15 PM PDT

A massive $800 million proposed development in Universal City that would include a new home for NBC studios would add at least 14,000 car trips per day to the already clogged southeast San Fernando Valley, according to a long-awaited environmental study released Monday.

The traffic projections for the plan released late last year - one that would create 1.5 million square feet of new commercial, office and residential space to Lankershim Boulevard - drew immediate concern from politicians and neighborhood activists who said the area is already too congested.

"What has been proposed is too intense," said Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge. "This is not a New York City block. This is an odd-shaped parcel in the San Fernando Valley. ...

"It's a dream to think that you can fit so much onto one little banana-sized lot."

As currently proposed, the project would be developed in two phases over the next seven years.

Phase I would be completed by late 2011 and include a 24-story office tower, NBC's five-story production site and 1,900 parking spaces, including 800 spaces for the Metro station.

Phase II, completed in 2015, would include either a 24-story office tower or a 34-story hotel and residential project with 300 hotel rooms, 400 residential units and no more than 11,000 square feet of retail. It would include almost 1,800 parking spaces.

But an official with developer Thomas Enterprises said residents

should focus on the benefits the project would bring to the area.

"This is an investment in the Valley that will anchor it further as an entertainment center and will create and retain much-needed jobs," said Ayahlushim Hammond, senior vice president of Thomas Properties.

Thomas Properties currently estimates that the project could bring more than 5,000 new jobs to the area and $8 million in annual tax revenues.

Hammond also said that despite community perception, the NBC development is less dense than other transit-oriented projects.

He cited the new development at the Hollywood and Vine station of the Red Line subway, which has 1.16 million square feet of commercial and residential development on a 4.6-acre lot.

Traffic improvements

In neighboring North Hollywood, Lowe Enterprises has proposed 2 million square feet of new commercial and residential development on the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's 16.5-acre lot.

And at the Universal project, Thomas Properties has proposed about $30 million in traffic improvements that include a 101 Freeway on-ramp and off-ramp to directly feed traffic for the new development and divert it from Lankershim Boulevard.

Hammond said public transit will also be promoted for employees of the development and incentives will include the use of flex cars and guaranteed rides home.

"This encourages people to live the way we need to in the future," Hammond said. "This is smart growth, green growth and transit-oriented development at its height."

According to the environmental impact report released Monday, use of public transportation could reduce the traffic count at the site by about 2,000 trips.

The NBC studios development is half of the NBC/Universal Vision Plan, which in 25 years will bring $3 billion of new construction to the area - as well as a large-scale increase in traffic.

NBC Universal argues that the project will be a long-term investment by the entertainment giant in this region of the San Fernando Valley.

"NBC Universal's West Coast News Center represents a significant investment in the future of Los Angeles, creating an entertainment and transit hub and a new center for production jobs and employment growth," said NBC Universal spokeswoman Cindy Gardner.

More jobs for area

Los Angeles Deputy Mayor Bud Ovrom reiterated the support by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa's office for a project that he said solves more issues than it creates.

Ovrom said the project's location makes it prime real estate for transit-oriented development and, perhaps more importantly, grows the city's entertainment sector.

"The truth is we are in an almost life-and-death struggle to preserve and grow our entertainment jobs in Los Angeles and particularly in the Valley," Ovrom said.

"We can always have less traffic - we just won't have any jobs."

Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who has said he would try to work with the developer to downsize the project, said the traffic the project will produce is "unmitigatable."

According to the city's traffic study of the project, heavy traffic will continue to plague at least eight intersections in the area, despite all traffic mitigations.

"You can't compare this project to other transit-oriented developments," Yaroslavsky said.

"You have much more auto dependency here than you have on Wilshire and Vermont, and you have a lot more people using public transit there."

Yaroslavsky said the only way to ensure that this project is successful is by downsizing it.

"I am not opposed to a responsible development on either the MTA or the studio lot, but this is not responsible," Yaroslavsky said.

Valley Industry and Commerce Association President Brendan Huffman said his group supports the concept of the project, especially putting so many jobs near public transit.

"The pros include jobs and tax revenue for the city and strengthening the Valley's base for the entertainment industry," Huffman said.

But he said VICA members also want to look at the environmental impact report and evaluate the pros and cons before taking a formal position because potential traffic is a concern.

For many residents, the cumulative impact of this project is also a major issue.

"What they are proposing is a 1970s project, not a 21st-century project," said Richard Bogy, vice chairman of the NBC/Universal Community Working Group.

"This is like another Century City where they want to pack as much as they can without respect for the effect on the community or traffic."

Staff Writer Kerry Cavanaugh contributed to this report.

http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_10302318

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site200/2008/0826/20080826_121129_nbc-studios.gif

DowntownCharlieBrown

08-28-2008, 06:49 AM

So I understand the Governor signed the bill today that will allow us to vote on the High Speed Rail proposition because he didn't want the hard work of those that put it forth to be wasted. Haven't heard about the 1/2 cent increase for LA transportation bill being signed yet. Has anyone else heard anything. That was a lot of work by a lot of people. $#!*, I wrote the 3 supervisors, and would like to think it had some affect on Knabe changing his mind. Arnold don't waste our hard work. ;)

LosAngelesBeauty

08-28-2008, 06:57 AM

This is absolutely the right direction to take for the Universal City Project. You need to add mixed-use density to subway stations to increase the chances of more people using the subway. Look at Hollywood/Highland and how many people actually get on and off at that station. The more residential units, office space, and entertainment options, the more chance people will find the location relevant to their lives - whether it be for live, work, and/or play. To dilute the project because Valleyites are not savvy enough to take transit is short-sighted and doesn't prepare for the future.

In addition, EIR traffic forecasts never include the peak oil scenario in their assessment where gas prices would be so incredibly high by 2015 (7 years from now and 200 BILLION barrels of oil later). The report assumes that people will just keep on driving as the earth rotates around and around taking in little regard for the actual fact of supply of oil not keeping up with demand.

By the time, it would be very wise for more and more neighborhoods to be connected by rail and powered by solar energy.

Smarten up Zev and La Bonge! Don't just say whatever your constituents want you to say. LEAD the people for once.

JDRCRASH

08-28-2008, 04:38 PM

LABeauty, you see the link I added to my signature? This is exactly what it is for. Contact Yaroslavsky and slam him for trying to de-rail this project.

JDRCRASH

08-31-2008, 08:01 PM

Sales tax bill approved by state Senate

BREAKING NEWS: The California State Senate voted 24 to 13 a few minutes ago to approve AB 2321, needed to put a half-cent sales tax increase proposal on the November ballot in Los Angeles County. If approved, proponents say the tax would raise $30 billion to $40 billion in revenue for mass transit and road projects over the next three decades.

(Update, 7:43 p.m.: another yea vote came later, bringing the vote total to 25 to 13).

The Assembly must re-approve the bill by Sunday, then it must be signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger within 30 days. Officials with the MTA are saying the Assembly will vote this afternoon.

Schwarzenegger has threatened to veto all bills that come to his desk until the Legislature can agree on a state budget. The Senate today voted against a budget plan that included a temporary sales tax hike.

If the Legislature and Schwarzenegger ultimately decide to fix the $15-billion deficit by imposing a sales tax, it remains unclear if local officials in Los Angeles County will still pursue the half-cent transportation tax increase. Los Angeles County's sales tax rate of 8.25% is already one of the highest in the state.

The sales tax increase proposal is known as Measure R. It has already been submitted to the county registrar to be on the Nov. 4 ballot, but the state bill must be signed by Schwarzenegger for there to be an election.

--Steve Hymon

JDRCRASH

09-02-2008, 07:37 PM

Sales tax vote on the November ballot

by Neel Sodha on September 2, 2008

This weekend the state Senate and the California Assembly passed the AB 2321 sales tax measure after holding hearings. Unless Governor Schwarzenegger vetoes the bill in the next 30 days, the measure will appear on our November 4th ballot as Measure R - Traffic Relief, Rail Extensions, Reduce Foreign Oil. UPDATE: Metro has created a flashy new site for information on the measure.

The 1/2-percent sales tax increase is expected to bring in $30 - $40 billion over 30 years. LA County will see the largest investment of public transportation never before seen if this bill passes.

Attachment A is attached to this measure to note the distribution of funds with the Measure’s passage.

Here’s a summary of the most heavy-hitting transit projects funded by the measure:

- $200M for the Green Line extension to LAX
- $272M for the Green Line extension to the South Bay
- $1B for the I-405 Corridor transit project
- $780M for the I-710 Tunnel gap closure
- $1.3B for the Eastside Gold Line extension
- $925M for the Expo Line
- $1.2B for the Crenshaw Corridor
- $182M for the Orange Line extension to Chatsworth Metrolink station
- $735M for the Foothill extension
- $160M for the Downtown Connector
- $4.1B for the Purple Line extension
- $70M for Metrolink improvements
- $400M for Alameda Corridor East grade seperations

After months of struggle within the City Council and the MTA board, finally, the citizens of Los Angeles will be given the chance to vote on Measure R.

The San Gabriel Valley politicians Mike Antonovich and Gloria Molina are still disgruntled with the perceived “lack of equity” for their district. Please provide them any comments you feel necessary to communicate the necessity of this sales tax measure.

-Measure R (Metro)

Gloria Molina, 1st district
856 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
molina@bos.lacounty.gov

Mike Antonovich, 5th district
869 Kenneth Hahn Hall of Administration
500 West Temple Street
Los Angeles, CA 90012
FifthDistrict@lacbos.org

Vangelist

09-03-2008, 09:44 AM

Woo - looks like the Red Line extension is still likely!

MTA picks subway route(s!) for further study

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/2008/09/in-a-long-antic.html#more

In a surprising and ambitious move, local transportation officials said Tuesday that they would recommend further study of two subway lines to the Westside, with one train going down Wilshire Boulevard and the other shorter leg partially following Santa Monica before diving south to meet the Wilshire line.

That's what the map above shows. The dark green areas indicate sections of the route where the MTA needs to do further study.

While the whole effort is still largely hypothetical -- the subway has no funding, nor has it been formally approved -- it shows how officials with the Metropolitan Transportation Authority are gearing up should any money be secured for a project with a potential $9-billion price tag.

It was just a decade ago, amid several spending and construction boondoggles on the existing subway, that voters in Los Angeles County banned the MTA from using sales tax money for subway tunneling. That ban remains in effect, but complaints over Westside traffic have continued to pile up, fueling efforts to continue the subway.

"We know there are some people internally [at the MTA] who have said 'this is always where [the subway] was going to end up," said Jody Litvak, a spokesperson for the Metro Westside Extension study. "But now there's some validation for what we've thought. We thought people would say they want a Wilshire line or we want a Santa Monica [Boulevard] line. We were surprised they wanted both."

The Wilshire line would get first priority for funding because it has higher ridership estimates, said David Mieger, the project manager for the Westside study. But the other line is being considered because it would make the entire system more versatile by stopping near major job centers and attractions such as the Warner Hollywood studios and Pacific Design Center in West Hollywood and the Beverly Center and Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles.

It would also chop significant time off the trip to the Westside from the San Fernando Valley, according to MTA estimates -- shown above on this page from the latest study. Mieger said a train trip from North Hollywood to Westwood could potentially drop from 61 minutes according to today's MTA schedules to 28 minutes if both lines were built.

One major job center and attraction that would remain more than a half-mile from either line would be the Grove and CBS Studios, both located along Fairfax Avenue.

Officials with the MTA have been studying the best way to expand mass transit on the Westside for the past year and have slowly been narrowing the options. In public meetings set to begin tomorrow night (the meeting times are posted below and at the MTA's website), agency officials will say they're now down to their final four choices: don't build anything, try to improve road and bus capacity or build one or two subway lines.

In a briefings with The Times and other media on Tuesday, agency officials said that the subway has the greatest potential to move the most people quickly. While trying to push the project forward, they are also urging caution and saying that these are only draft recommendations and that anything could change.

"At this point, all we're doing is recommending what should go forward for a full environmental impact report and environmental impact study," said Litvak.

Still, Litvak and other MTA officials say their choices has significance. From this point forward, the focus of big and expensive studies will be on the Wilshire, Santa Monica and La Cienega corridors -- giving them momentum should the subway project actually happen.

It will be up to the 13-member MTA Board to decide to launch those studies. Litvak said that the goal is for the Board to consider the matter later in the fall. The environmental studies, which would also include engineering work, would take at least three years. Under the best case scenario, Litvak and Mieger said construction could begin by 2013.

There is, however, one huge obstacle to that taking place: The Wilshire line alone is estimated to cost $6.1 billion and the combined lines would require $9 billion in 2008 dollars. So far, there is not one cent of funding that has been set aside for any kind of subway project.

The MTA and many public officials, including Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, have been pushing to place a half-cent sales tax increase proposal on the November ballot to help pay for mass transit and road improvements. The proposal, called Measure R, has secured a place on the ballot in Los Angeles County, but Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger still needs to sign a state bill by Sept. 30 authorizing the election. The Governor has said he won't sign any bills until the Legislature adopts a workable budget.

A budget that includes a sales tax hike for state residents, as Schwarzenegger has proposed, may make it politically difficult to ask residents to raise their taxes even more. His press office has declined to comment on the sales tax bill, but the governor made an exception last week and signed a bill that clarifies how $9.95 billion would be spent if voters approve the high-speed rail project on the Nov. 4 ballot.

County Supervisor Mike Antonovich's transportation deputy criticized the proposal and said it could consume too much transit money if the sales tax passes.

"This is why the supervisor will continue to make the case to the San Fernando Valley that their money [from the sales tax] that they think they're getting can be diverted back into the subway," said Michael Cano, the transportation deputy.

As for the subway, the precise location of all the stations would need to be worked out in the next round of studies, said MTA officials. A station on the Wilshire line may be added at Crenshaw Boulevard and one station on Santa Monica Boulevard could be at either La Cienega or San Vicente.

There are other big decisions that would have to be made. The route between Century City and Westwood hasn't been settled upon and could follow the street grid or take a more direct route under residential neighborhoods. Litvak said that may not be a problem.

"Our system today looks like it's under city streets, but we do go under private property at all kinds of depths," she said. "If people could feel or hear the subway, don't you think you would be hearing from them why won't those bozos at Metro do anything about it?"

Mieger said that the subway would serve more riders from outside the Westside than those who live within it because it would be a popular way for people to reach their jobs. Critics of the sales tax proposal -- including three of the five Los Angeles County supervisors -- say tax revenues would not equitably be spent around the county and that too much would end up being sunk into the subway.

There is another potential obstacle. A cost effectiveness measure that takes into account construction cost, ridership and potential time savings for commuters, shows both lines exceed a target considered by the Federal Transit Administration before that agency provides funding. MTA officials hope that they can refine the subway further to bring those costs down.

--Steve Hymon

MTA MEETINGS ON SUBWAY

City of Santa Monica: Wednesday, September 3, 6 – 8 p.m., Santa Monica Public Library, Auditorium, 1st Floor, 601 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa Monica. Served by Metro Lines 4, 20, 33, 333, 720 and Santa Monica Big Blue Bus Lines 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10. Validated vehicle and bike parking is available.

City of West Hollywood: Thursday, September 4, 6 – 8pm, Plummer Park, 7377 Santa Monica Boulevard, West Hollywood. Served by Metro Line 4. Free vehicle and bike parking is available at the location.

City of Beverly Hills: Saturday, September 6, 2 – 4 p.m., Beverly Hills Public Library – Auditorium, 2nd Floor, 444 N Rexford Drive, Beverly Hills. Served by Metro Lines 4, 14, 16, 704. Free 2-hour parking available in the adjacent structure.

Wilshire/Fairfax area: Monday, September 8, 6 – 8 p.m., Los Angeles County Museum of Art West - Terrace Room, 5th Floor, 5905 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles. Served by Metro lines 20, 720, 920, 217, 780. Validated vehicle parking is available in the Museum’s 6th Street underground garage. Enter from 6th and Ogden

Westwood area: Wednesday, September 10, 6 – 8 p.m., Westwood Presbyterian Church, 10822 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles. Served by Metro Lines 20, 720, 920. Free parking available at the location.

Metro has completed three rounds of community meetings — in October 2007, January/February 2008 and May 2008. Based on the analysis and public input received at these meetings, Metro has identified the alternatives to be recommended for further study through an Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement.

These new round of meetings will present to the public the refined set of alternatives that will be recommended for further study and a schedule for future steps.
Content presented at these meetings will be identical, so members of the public can attend at the time and location most convenient for them.

In the fall, Metro will present the Alternatives Analysis Report and its recommendations to its board of directors, which may then authorize a full environmental review.

For additional information or questions, please visit the Westside Extension Transit Corridor Study web site at metro.net/westside or contact the project information line at 213.922.6934.

StethJeff

09-04-2008, 03:25 AM

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottleneck/images/2008/09/02/alternative_11combo_2.jpg

Here's the map that accompanies the above article. Can't really see many details but the basic track alignments are visible.

LosAngelesBeauty

09-05-2008, 07:32 AM

Auto Club supports Measure R

The Automobile Club of Southern California has decided to support Measure R, the proposal to raise the sales tax by a half-cent in Los Angeles County to pay for more mass transit and road projects, according to AAA. It's a big endorsement for the effort because of the club's reach -- it has more than 6 million members -- and obvious interest in car travel.

Steve Finnegan, the club's government affairs manager, said that the club has supported several sales tax measures in different counties. "Transportation issues clearly need additional resources and sales taxes have proven to be a reliable locally controlled source for those priorities," he said.

The spending plan for Measure R devotes about $13.8 billion of expected sales tax revenues to mass transit and about $7.9 billion to highway improvements, plus another $5.9 billion being returned to local cities -- much of which will presumably be spent on street projects. Finnegan said that the Auto Club's support was conditioned on the Metro board guaranteeing that 20% of revenues would go to highways, as well as other oversight provisions.

He also added, "Measure R isn't perfect, but it's needed to keep us moving into the future." As for how much, if any, money the Auto Club may spend on the sales campaign, Finnegan said that has yet to be determined.

Measure R is on the ballot, but the election is not official until Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signs AB 2321, a bill authorizing the election. Schwarzenegger has threatened not to sign most bills until the Legislature has settled the state's $15-billion budget deficit.

-- Steve Hymon

September 03, 2008 in Measure R | Permalink

JDRCRASH

09-05-2008, 04:12 PM

Thanks for posting that. Did not expect it. Huge announcement indeed.

edluva

09-07-2008, 01:27 PM

wow, i tallied up latest ridership for metro rail and we now have 319,581 daily boardings as of july, half of which (159,439) belongs to the red line alone. thanks fuel prices! .

throw in the orange line (26,907) and we get 346,488 daily boardings on local fixed-guideway transit. didn't think it would happen this quickly. these skyrocketing prices are a blessing in disguise, because they're prompting more fundamental changes in local and national politics. :banana:

JDRCRASH

09-08-2008, 03:28 AM

^That is incredible; indeed, it is the bright side of high gas prices and hopefully will be further leverage for MTA officials to gain more support for its long range plans.

dragonsky

09-08-2008, 06:12 AM

Measure R is a half-cent sales tax to fund transportation improvements in Los Angeles County.

The one common denominator for everyone who lives and works in Los Angeles County is traffic frustration. By the year 2030, LA County's population is expected to swell to more than 12 million. And growth in international trade will likely double current truck traffic at our ports.

More people. More cars. More freight. In 20 years traffic on local streets could increase by approximately 30 percent and average freeway speeds could dip below 20 miles per hour.

Today the average person spends an estimated 72 hours a year stuck in traffic. Our air quality and asthma rates are among the worst in the nation. Mobile source emissions are a major contributor to global warming.

The public is seeking alternatives to high gas prices. While more than 600 million boarding passengers annually use public transit in the county, it's likely that more would ride trains or express buses or join a carpool or vanpool if they had more options to do so.

What is Measure R?

Measure R is a half-cent sales tax increase that is expected to provide the local resources to finance new transportation projects and accelerate those already in the pipeline. Over 30 years, it is projected to generate $40 billion for countywide congestion relief projects – and may enable Los Angeles County to qualify for additional state and federal matching funds that could otherwise be awarded outside of the County.

The average cost is $25 a year per person.

According to calculations by the private nonprofit Los Angeles County Economic Development Corporation (LAEDC), Measure R would cost residents an average of $25 per person each year. The American Automobile Association estimates traffic congestion currently costs the Los Angeles-Orange County economy $9.3 billion annually. Another $10.6 billion each year is lost due to roadway collisions, which are a leading cause of congestion. And the national transportation research group TRIP says roads with potholes cost the average Angeleno $778 a year in vehicle wear and tear.

We've made progress.

Los Angeles County has made more progress managing congestion in recent years than any large urban area in the nation, despite the addition of 2.5 million residents and the growth of truck traffic moving goods through our Ports.

What's made the difference? A multi-pronged approach that has brought such improvements as:

* More left turn lanes, carpool lanes and traffic signal synchronization, plus services like the Metro Freeway Service Patrol – clearing 300,000 stranded vehicles annually which save drivers an estimated 57 million hours of delay and more than $1 billion annually, according to the Texas Transportation Institute.

* An expanded transportation network that now carries more than 600 million passengers annually.

* One of the nation's largest clean-air bus fleets -- more than 2,500 vehicles powered by compressed natural gas. Metro's transit operations, coupled with our rideshare efforts, eliminate 76 tons of air pollutants a day in LA County.

Safeguards are provided.

To ensure that money will be spent in LA County for exactly what voters were promised, Measure R calls for an annual independent audit and report to taxpayers, plus ongoing monitoring and review of spending by an independent taxpayer oversight committee.

This site will give you an overview of the dozens of transportation projects and programs Measure R is expected to make possible.

http://metro.net/measurer/

dragonsky

09-09-2008, 01:45 AM

Lawsuits filed to stop tunnel
Two local cities oppose extension that would link 210, 710 freeways
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/04/2008 11:10:58 PM PDT

Two local cities have filed lawsuits to stop a proposed tunnel extension of the 710 Freeway from receiving $780 million in funding.

South Pasadena could have the tunnel dug under it, and La Ca ada Flintridge could see additional traffic from the project. The cities filed the suits against the Metropolitan Transportation Authority this week and claimed an environmental impact study has not been done on the project.

"You can't fund a project before it goes through an environmental review," said South Pasadena Councilman Richard Schneider, a vocal opponent of the 710 extension. "The lawsuit's goal is to knock out the funding for this project."

The 4.5-mile tunnel, which would connect the 710 and 210 freeways, does not have a proposed route. A preliminary feasibility study on the project was completed in 2006, but a follow-up study has not been done.

The project would receive $780 million from a proposed half-cent sales tax measure, if a state bill authorizing the measure is signed into law by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and if the measure is passed by two-thirds of county voters in November.

If either of those things does not happen, the lawsuits would be withdrawn, according to city officials.

Officials from both cities also said they do not oppose the sales tax measure as a whole. The lawsuit is designed only to remove funding from the tunnel project, not to invalidate the sales tax measure, according to legal documents in the case.

A 710 Freeway extension was opposed for decades by both cities when the proposal included building an above-ground road through South Pasadena.

South Pasadena and La Ca ada Flintridge each filed a separate lawsuit against the tunnel plan, but officials from both cities said the cases could be consolidated by a judge.

South Pasadena recently agreed to drop its opposition to SB 1350, state legislation that would have authorized the MTA to pursue a private-public partnership to allow a private company to complete the tunnel and charge tolls to recover its costs.

In exchange, the city received guarantees of legislative language that would give South Pasadena a right to reject an above-ground version of the freeway. The legislation died in committee last month, however, after opposition from environmental groups and some labor unions.

South Pasadena Mayor Philip Putnam said he did not see any contradiction between supporting the legislation and suing MTA over the tunnel proposal.

"They are completely different issues," Putnam said. "SB 1350 was to allow a funding mechanism, but it did not propose to allocate any money to a project that has no route."

He also said the city does not oppose a tunnel project from being carried out, but it does not want to see any funding for the project until it has an established route.

Councilman Mike Ten said the lawsuit probably would not have been filed had SB 1350 passed and the city had been guaranteed there would be no surface freeway. He said the city's concern is the MTA might build a surface route instead of a tunnel.

MTA spokeswoman Helen Ortiz Gilstrap said neither her agency nor Caltrans, the state highway authority, had eliminated the surface freeway plan completely, although she added the agency's preference is to pursue a tunnel option.

She said her agency could not comment on the pending lawsuits.

La Ca ada Flintridge's concerns about the project have to do with possible traffic impacts that could come with the freeway extension, Mayor Stephen Del Guercio said. He said those impacts need to be studied.

"I don't know what the effects will be, but we have suspicions that will be seeing air, noise, and traffic impacts if the project goes through," he said.

La Ca ada Flintridge City Manager Mark Alexander said both cities' cases assert that the MTA violated the California Environmental Quality Act by proposing funding for the project without an environmental review.

"Our lawyers' view is that the CEQA exemptions they are trying to apply are not valid," Alexander said.

In the state Legislature, local representatives have been divided over efforts to push the tunnel project, based on the geography of their districts.

Assemblyman Anthony Portantino, D-La Ca ada Flintridge, a former council member in La Ca ada Flintridge, has been the most vocal critic of the project. He previously voiced many of the arguments made in the lawsuit in the media and at MTA meetings.

He said he had expected the possibility of a lawsuit since July, when MTA put the 710 extension on its list of sales-tax projects.

"It was no surprise," Portantino said. "MTA was so hellbent on this project that good judgement went out the window."

Assemblyman Mike Eng, D-Monterey Park, a project advocate, represents areas that have long advocated completion of the freeway. He said he had not heard about the lawsuit and would need to review it before he could comment.

http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/ci_10385991

dragonsky

09-09-2008, 01:50 AM

Los Angeles County Business Federation (BizFed) Supports Measure R to Ease Gridlock
Saturday - September 06, 2008

LOS ANGELES – With Los Angeles County already mired in traffic gridlock, the Los Angeles County Business Federation's Board of Directors has voted to back Measure R to increase the sales tax a half-cent to fund vitally needed transportation projects.

「Residents and businesses are losing billions of dollars a year because our transportation infrastructure is failing to keep pace with our growing population. Measure R is crucial to retaining and attracting new companies and jobs to the region, and ensuring traffic congestion does not sap our economic vitality and quality of life,」 said BizFed Chairman, David Fleming.

From Santa Clarita to the South Bay, Santa Monica to Claremont, BizFed operates as a grass roots alliance of LA County business organizations. Members consist of large trade groups, Chambers of Commerce both large and small, as well as Business Improvement Districts and businesses with anywhere from one to tens of thousands of employees.

BizFed is encouraging its network of over 93,000 members to also support Measure R on the November 4 ballot, as expectations are Los Angeles County's population will swell to more than 12 million in the next two decades and international trade growth could double truck traffic at the ports.

In a survey of BizFed members earlier this year, fixing the region's transportation issues to reduce commuting time emerged as the top concern.

「This is one of the most pressing issues facing our county,」 said Fleming. 「Fixing traffic congestion takes a regional approach and Measure R is a key in funding projects across the county that will benefit the entire area economy.」

The American Automobile Association estimates traffic congestion currently costs the Los Angeles-Orange County economy $9.3 billion annually. Residents lose another $10.6 billion each year due to roadway collisions, which are a leading cause of congestion. And the national transportation research group TRIP says roads riddled with potholes cost the average Angeleno $778 a year in vehicle wear and tear.

Metro officials cite calculations by the private nonprofit Los Angeles County Economic Development Corp. that Measure R would cost residents an average of $25 per person each year.

To ensure that money will be spent in LA County, Measure R calls for an annual independent audit and report to taxpayers, plus ongoing monitoring and review by an independent taxpayer oversight committee.

「While funding from Measure R will not fix all of the county's traffic problem, or fund all of Metro's long-term projects, doing nothing will just continue to delay all of the much-needed projects,」 said Holly Schroeder CEO of the Building Industry Association and Chair of BizFed's Advocacy Committee. 「Doing nothing just stalls any progress to relieve congestion, even as it continues to worsen.」

http://bizfed.org/alerts

Vangelist

09-09-2008, 07:51 AM

just cutting and pasting from Curbed via Skyscrapercity -

...can there be ANY more doubts about this guy? Seriously?

A nice little story from Curbed LA. It seems that Damien Goodmon has become the BRU personified.

"Curbed stopped by Saturday's Beverly Hills community meeting on the proposed subway to the sea. This raucous update was part of a fourth and final set of meetings (there's another tonight at LACMA and Wednesday in Westwood) before the Westside Extension Study team makes their suggestion to Metro this Fall on what to build. As previously reported, it looks like they definitely want a subway progressing straight down Wilshire, and possibly including a "Pink Line" spur through WeHo. Previously, support for the subway was almost unanimous but that was before "transit activist" Damien Goodmon had his say.

During the public comment section of the meeting, Goodmon--who is waging a legal battle with Metro over the state of rail crossings on the under-construction Expo Line in South LA--railed against Metro for proposing a subway for Wilshire, while South LA and East LA are getting light-rail (actually, the under-construction Gold Line extension into East LA is 1/3 underground). Goodmon loudly said he would fight the subway and called it "DOA." This prompted another speaker to accuse Goodmon of being hypocritical since he claims to love rail but is threatening to kill every new line in the city; Goodmon stood up to defend himself, although only one person is aloud to speak at once. A screaming match ensued and someone yelled for security. Luckily, Jody Litvak, Metro's capable master of ceremonies, kept the peace.

Litvak told the group that the billions needed for the subway could partially come from Measure R, the half-cent transit tax that if put on the ballot and passed by two-thirds of voters could probably get the subway at least to Westwood. Construction could start by 2013 if all goes as planned (Litvak said that before then, Wilshire Boulevard would most likely get bus-only lanes). A representative of assemblyman Mike Feuer, the local politician who pushed for Measure R, said the tax should be on the ballot: Governor Schwarzenegger has indicated he would sign the legislation needed to get it on the ballot. There were a few people who indicated they wouldn't vote for the measure, including someone named Jim Walsh who screamed at the top of his lungs for two minutes straight about how the subway would "be a train from hell." But the detractors were definitely outnumbered by the supporters."
____________

edluva

09-09-2008, 08:22 AM

don't mean to be a smartass, but i saw damien's idiot-fanaticism coming a mile away, way back when he was hailed on this forum as our transit savior. i had a nice "debate" with him about affirmative action, and while i can still respect some aa supporters, the way damien pursued his pro-aa stance had me questioning his reasonability from the get-go. some people just rub me the wrong way - and i have this uncanny ability to pick out the ones like damien, while the world continues to rave about them, right before they "go rotten".

LAsam

09-09-2008, 08:52 PM

Vangelist

09-10-2008, 12:37 AM

Yeah I still don't understand the 180 degree move, unless you asked me to become wholly cynical and say that it was ALL a long-term plan for a "grassroots" rise via identity politics...and that's bizarre. Someone spending so much time to pursue "transit," with his goal only to move himself into office

Using yr fellow minorities as tools of political expediency to count upon is what's racist, not fucking at-grade subways

http://laist.com/2008/09/08/blogger_to_politician.php

Speaking to poor planning and development, an opinion piece from last week in the St. Petersburg Times talks of bloggers moving from idea maker to action taker. "Many of us are angry about the impoverished environment we've inherited... Because of this brutal lack of place and community in our real world, those who Richard Florida calls 'the creative class' have been agitating for positive change by using the Internet to exchange ideas... it's just a question of time before some of these folks enter the local political scene."

One person who comes to mind is Damien Goodmon, who first hit local blog notoriety with his public transportation dream map.

To date, Goodmon, a transit advocate, has fought hard against the Expo Line that will travel 8 miles from downtown to Culver City with a planned second phase continuing to Santa Monica. He's leading the Citizens’ Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line (he uses Blogger to update the website) who seek to fix the deficiencies on the light rail line that has already broken ground. Among the problems, the major theme from the group is safety on the at-grade crossings where they believe the train should run in a trench similar to underground portions of the Metro Blue, Gold and even Expo Lines.

He's really got some community force behind him, especially this last Friday when 2nd District County Board of Supervisor candidate and current State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas has gave him some credit when referencing his group in a press release:

State Senator Mark Ridley-Thomas today called on Los Angeles City Councilmember Bernard Parks to immediately resign his appointed position on the Board of Directors of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) because he has accepted more than $21,000 in political contributions for his campaign for L.A. County Supervisor for the Second District while serving as an MTA Board member.
[snip]

The Citizens' Campaign to Fix the Expo Rail Line called for a state and county investigation into Mr. Parks' MTA contractor fundraising activities. To date, Mr. Parks has refused to return any of the more than $21,000 in contributions he solicited. Worse yet, he continues to vote on MTA projects of prime interest to his campaign contributors as a sitting member on the MTA Board.

Not everyone agrees with Goodmon, but change doesn't come when no one's rocking the boat. Recently, he's been submitting public records requests to Metro regarding accidents and incidents along the Blue Line. Metro has refused according to documents he has been e-mailing the press.

What's interesting is that a study by the American Public Transportation Association and USA Today found that the Metro Blue Line, which travels 22 miles from Long Beach to downtown, had 61 fatalities between 1990 and 2002. It ranked number one on a list of major U.S. cities who had light rail. San Diego came in at second with 22 fatalities during the same time period with more than double the mileage of light rail tracks. San Francisco with a whopping 73 miles of light rail has only had 8 fatalities.

Whether Goodmon is right or wrong on the Expo Line, he's on to something and he's definitely paved a path to political leadership in the near future

Westsidelife

09-11-2008, 07:20 AM

Metro to Hold Community Meetings to Discuss Transportation Options for the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor (http://www.metro.net/news_info/press/Metro_146.htm)

September 8, 2008

Metro will hold a series of community meetings in late September as part of their Alternative Analysis Study (AA) for the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor. The study will examine potential transit service along the Metro-owned Harbor Subdivision.

The Harbor Subdivision is a freight rail corridor, approximately 26 miles in length that traverses southwest Los Angeles County from Vernon to Wilmington. In the early 1990’s, Metro purchased the portion of the corridor between Redondo Junction and Watson Yard, along with several other rail rights-of-way, to further the development of the region’s rapid transit system.

The AA will evaluate a broad range of alternatives including Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) with dedicated bus lanes, various types of rail technology such as Light Rail Transit (LRT) and commuter rail, as well as “no-build” and Transportation Systems Management improvements. Though alternatives will generally follow the Harbor Subdivision corridor, potential alignment and improvement options outside the immediate Harbor Subdivision right-of-way also will be studied. In addition, the analysis will examine potential financing mechanisms outside the traditional funding sources commonly used for constructing and operating transit service.

The study area will encompass approximately 26 corridor miles including the jurisdictions of Huntington Park, Vernon, City of Los Angeles, Hawthorne, Inglewood, El Segundo, Lawndale, Torrance, Manhattan Beach, Redondo Beach, Carson, Los Angeles County, and the port areas of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Together with the planned Crenshaw Transit Corridor, the Harbor Subdivision would establish a north-south transit link connecting the downtown Los Angeles area to LAX and potential South Bay area destinations.

At the conclusion of the AA, Metro staff will recommend a course of action to the Metro Board, including possibly proceeding with an environmental document consistent with both federal and state requirements.

Harbor Subdivision Study

The study’s goals include improving mobility in southwestern Los Angeles County by introducing reliable, high-frequency transit service options, enhancing the regional transit network by interconnecting existing and planned rapid transit lines, providing an alternative mode of transportation for commuters currently using the congested I-405 and I-110 corridors, improving transit accessibility for residents of underserved communities along the corridor, and encouraging a mode shift to transit, reducing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Public involvement is critical to the success of the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor project. Metro encourages the public to attend at least one of the meetings listed below to learn more about the Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor Study and provide Metro with your feedback and/or suggestions.

Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 6:30-8:30 pm, Torrance Cultural Arts Center, George Nakano Theatre, 3330 Center Dr., Torrance, CA 90503
Wednesday, September 24, 2008, 6:30-8:30 pm, Banning's Landing Community Center, 100 E. Water St., Wilmington, CA 90748
Thursday, September 25, 2008, 6:00-8:00 pm, Westside Park Community Center, 2061 E. Gage Ave., Huntington Park, CA 90255
Tuesday, September 30, 2008, 6:00-8:00 pm, El Segundo Public Library, 111 W. Mariposa Ave., El Segundo, CA 90245.

The Early Scoping comment period will end on October 22, 2008. Comments will be accepted up until that date by sending them to Kathleen McCune, Project Manager, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro), One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop: 99-22-3, Los Angeles, CA 90012. The public also can call (213) 922-4004 and leave a voice message or e-mail comments to HarborSubdivision@metro.net.

StethJeff

09-11-2008, 06:20 PM

:previous: Is there any sort of map showing what kind of route a line in this area would take? Indeed, sounds very interesting . . .

StethJeff

09-11-2008, 08:44 PM

Should L.A. get onboard with San Francisco's commuter benefits ordinance?
Here's a question to ponder: Who is smarter -- legislators in San Francisco or Los Angeles?

Read on ... and perhaps you'll find an answer.

Late last month, San Francisco supervisors passed legislation that requires employers to make mass transit part of an employee's benefits package. It's the kind of legislation that elected officials in the Southland should be poring over -- because they just might learn something.

The new law is called the "commuter benefits ordinance," and it says employers with 20 or more employees must do one of three things:

1. Allow employees to pay for mass transit on a pre-tax basis.
2. Provide employees with transportation to and from work.
3. Pay for employees' transportation to and from work.

You're probably looking at this and saying that Nos. 2 and 3 are pretty unappetizing if you're an employer. And you would be right. No. 2 and No. 3 are costly unless you're a firm like Google, which does provide transportation. But there's a reason that No. 2 and No. 3 are dogs: The idea is to make choice No. 1 more attractive.

The Internal Revenue Code already allows employees to deduct the cost of mass transit on a pre-tax basis. The problem is that not many employers provide this benefit.

Here's how it works:

Let's say you buy a $62 monthly pass from Metro in Los Angeles County. If you deduct the cost of the pass on a pre-tax basis, that's $744 of annual income you don't have to pay taxes on each year.

To put it another way, if you report $50,000 in annual taxable income to the feds, your tax bill would be lowered by $187 a year.

That's the equivalent of a $15.59 discount each month on your Metro pass, bringing its cost from $62 to $46.41. Imagine the savings if you Metrolink to work everyday between L.A. and Anaheim. A monthly pass costs $198.75, or $2,385 annually. In the above scenario, that's a tax savings of $550 over the course of a year -- dropping the cost of the monthly pass from about $200 to about $150.

Not bad.

Los Angeles Councilwoman Wendy Greuel is aware of the San Francisco ordinance and met last week with San Francisco Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi (above), who introduced the law in San Francisco. Will Greuel, who chairs the council's Transportation Committee, introduce similar legislation here?

"We are working on something; once we do have something, you'll be the first to know," said Patty Park, a Greuel spokesperson.

Music to my ears.

This is a law that would seemingly work in any city, although I'm curious to see if business would fight it here. To emphasize the point again, it doesn't take money out of the pockets of business, although it certainly requires some paperwork.

Maybe there are some real flaws here. But in a time of high gas prices, laws like this seemingly deserve, at the least, a heated discussion among lawmakers.

--Steve Hymon, LA Times

LosAngelesBeauty

09-12-2008, 04:13 AM

I was at the meeting in BH the day Damien acted like a complete idiot. I never liked the guy to begin with (I met him on an SSP meet once) and, like edluva, got a bad impression of him from the get-go. He came off extremely smug and unfriendly and seemed to have a thing against gays.

Anyway, if he's using this to get "ahead" politically, I don't think he'll get very far as he would need a lot more than a few "black" votes to win any position.

LosAngelesBeauty

09-12-2008, 04:16 AM

Third Santa Monica stop on Exposition Line light rail project under consideration by Metro

BY GARY WALKER

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro or MTA) is exploring the possibility of adding an additional station to its Mid-Cities Exposition Line Light Rail project in Santa Monica, the last city on the highly anticipated Westside rail line.

"We're looking at this request very favorably," Samantha Bricker, the chief operating officer of the Exposition Construction Authority, which is responsible for building the rail line, told The Argonaut.

The Santa Monica City Council requested an additional station for the light rail line last year due to the immense interest by many of its constituents. The site of the the proposed third line has yet to be decided by the council.

There are currently two stations that would be built on the Expo Line, as it is known — at Bergamot Station near 26th Street and at Fourth Street near the Sears Automotive Center in downtown Santa Monica, which would mark the end of the light rail route.

Possibilities for the third stop include a station in mid-Santa Monica between 14th and 17th Streets or a location near 20th Street.

The construction authority has recommended the former location, due to the fact that a station near 20th would be relatively close to the Bergamot Station site.

"We usually try and space [station stops] about a mile apart when building a light rail line, because otherwise it could impact train speed times," Bricker explained.

City officials also feel that a mid-Santa Monica stop can provide a direct link to bus service for Santa Monica College.

Santa Monica Mayor Herb Katz indicated in a recent interview that the best alternative would be closer to 20th Street, near the campus of Santa Monica College.

"I think that's more reasonable," said Katz, adding that the council was still considering a site closer to Memorial Park near 14th Street.

Kate Vernez, assistant to the Santa Monica city manager, believes that Santa Monica should have a third station.

"I think that it's justified, [because of the potential ridership figures]," said Vernez.

Metro estimates that ridership numbers on the Expo Line could exceed 62,000 passengers a day.

"[The Expo Line] would arguably be one of the busiest light rail lines in the nation," said Bricker.

Katz, who is Santa Monica's alternate on the construction authority board, is encouraged that Metro officials seem to be agreeable to building a third station.

"They've been relatively receptive to it," the mayor said. "But first we've got to make sure that the line is operative, which I'm sure it will be."

The second stage of the Expo Line has been approved as part of Metro's current long-range plan by the Metro board and is slated to be one of the first projects on the drawing board following the completion of the first phase of the line, which will run from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City.

Darryl Clark, a former Santa Monica planning commissioner, is a strong proponent of building a third station along the light rail line.

"I think it's a great idea," said Clark, the founder of Friends 4 Expo, a transportation and light rail advocacy group. "I am a big supporter of having another station that would create a transit village for residents and commuters."

Establishing transit-oriented housing near light rail lines has proven to be very successful in Los Angeles and Pasadena, and other areas as well. Santa Monica officials believe that, at some of the city's stations, these possibilities exist as well, which would create a more dynamic streetscape, functionally and esthetically.

Representatives of the construction authority think that the Santa Monica stops lend themselves to being potential mixed-use development locations.

"At Bergamot Station, there are plans for a joint development that would work with a transit-oriented area," Bricker pointed out. "It's a good example of a station that can serve economic opportunities and can also serve necessary transportation opportunities as well."

Clark feels that a potential station near 20th Street has these same possibilities.

"A station there would put the hospital and the college within walking distance," he said.

Santa Monica City Councilman Kevin McKeown thinks that city leaders should take into account the fact that both options have certain advantages.

"I have heard that some members prefer a location at 14th or 17th Streets, while others prefer a station near 20th Street," McKeown said. The councilman agrees with Katz that having a stop that can incorporate serving the needs of the college can be advantageous to both the light rail line and the city.

"Expo will best benefit both Santa Monica and the region if we can site a light rail station to serve specifically Santa Monica College between 16th and 20th Streets," said McKeown.

Clark feels that the 14th or 17th street site for transit-oriented housing and community amenities is a good location.

"I really like the idea of seeing that kind of development arranged around Memorial Park," said the former Santa Monica planning commissioner.

City officials have created a blueprint for a possible dual use facility in mid-Santa Monica, based on the construction authority's recommendation.

"We have conceptual plans for a somewhat intensified activity center, with transit-oriented park-side housing, at Memorial Park," McKeown confirmed. "That's between 14th and 17th Streets, so at the moment, a station near 17th Street seems most sensible."

Santa Monica City Council, which will consider the location of the third station this fall, will also need to decide if it will travel along Colorado Avenue or Olympic Boulevard.

The configuration of the route of the second stage of the Expo Line will be settled later this fall, said Bricker.

"The Federal Transportation Agency will receive our draft this month," she said.

The two most debated segment configurations are the Venice-Sepulveda Boulevards route and utilizing the MTA-owned former railroad right-of-way along Exposition Boulevard that would run along the Interstate 10 freeway near Cheviot Hills.

Both options would feature a mixture of at-grade, or street-level, crossings, and grade-separated or aerial stations.

The Expo Line to Santa Monica is envisioned to be completed in 2016, although funding has not been secured.

dragonsky

09-12-2008, 02:36 PM

Metrolink Now on Google Transit and Metro is on the way.

Westsidelife

09-13-2008, 06:45 AM

The Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor study is now up and running:

http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/harbor_subdivision/default.htm

StethJeff

09-13-2008, 07:26 AM

The Harbor Subdivision Transit Corridor study is now up and running:

http://www.metro.net/projects_studies/harbor_subdivision/default.htm

With the People Mover, this would create a direct connection between Union Station and LAX. That alone should elevate this line into some sort of priority status.

Man, this is even better than the Expo Line!

Wright Concept

09-16-2008, 06:31 PM

http://www.presstelegram.com/news/ci_10474288
Blue Line deaths on decline since launch
Article Launched: 09/15/2008 10:24:14 PM PDT

LONG BEACH - The Metro Blue Line connecting downtown Long Beach to the Seventh Street/Metro Center Station in Los Angeles has reported 90 fatalities since it was established in July 1990, but none of those fatalities have been on board, authorities said Monday.

The light rail does not share tracks with another train on its route through Long Beach, South Los Angeles, Vernon, Huntington Park, Lynwood, Watts, Compton and Carson. "There are freight trains that run parallel but no tracks cross," .

The main danger lies with vehicles and pedestrians, he said.
Of the 90 fatalities reported, 26 involved vehicles and 64 involved pedestrians, he said, adding that 20 of the pedestrian fatalities were ruled suicides.

Since 1990, the Blue Line has reported a total of 821 accidents, including 652 with vehicles and 169 with pedestrians. Jager said it was a process of "lessons learned" in the early years.

"When the Blue Line was first built, people thought it was long and cumbersome, like a freight train," he said. "They thought they could beat it."
Los Angeles County Metro Rail has since taken more precautions, including using four-way gates to keep motorists from driving around the railroad stops.
Jager said the number of accidents has decreased over the years. One fatality has been reported so far this year. On April 7, a 75-year-old Long Beach woman was killed when she allegedly made an illegal turn in her vehicle and collided with a train in downtown Long Beach.

The Blue Line is the longest in the Metro system. About 86,600 boarding passengers will ride the train on an average weekday.

Los Angeles County Metro Rail is separate from Metrolink, which serves Los Angeles, Ventura, San Bernardino, Riverside, Orange and San Diego counties. said Rick Jager, a Los Angeles County Metro Transportation Authority spokesman - Kelly Puente

Wright Concept

09-16-2008, 06:44 PM

http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_10459911
Battle goes on over fate of Gold Line extension
By Dan Abendschein, Staff Writer
Article Launched: 09/13/2008 11:26:33 PM PDT

San Gabriel Valley representatives and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority are continuing to battle over the fate of the proposed 24-mile Gold Line extension to Claremont. The battle lines were drawn in July, after the MTA board refused to commit $80 million to get the project started on the condition that the federal government (http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_10459911#) contribute $320 million in matching funds.

The arguments on both sides lend themselves to a maddening chicken-and-egg situation: The MTA says it does not want to commit local funds because the federal funds are not guaranteed. Legislators complain they cannot secure funding without more of a local commitment.

The Federal Transit Administration would ultimately make the decision on whether to grant funding. An FTA spokesman said the project is not under consideration until the MTA is willing to commit funds to it.
"The local agency tells us which projects are a priority, and they haven't said that about the Gold Line," said FTA spokesman Paul Griffo. "Mainly, we are looking for a sound financial plan, with a local commitment to funding."

While Congress (http://www.sgvtribune.com/news/ci_10459911#) has passed a resolution urging the FTA to fund the project, Griffo said, the language does not force the agency to fund it, as some local officials have implied in the past. Griffo said that the project would only be taken into consideration for funding if local funds were committed, and the Gold Line would be forced to compete with other projects throughout the country.

The problem, according to some local legislators and officials, is that the MTA simply doesn't like the project. One congressional staff member said that the MTA has been "dead set against the project" since its inception.
Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Pasadena, said that the MTA board has historically disliked the project.
"The MTA board has had members in the past and some in the present who don't support this project," said Schiff. "From the very beginning they have not liked it, and have not wanted to do projects in the San Gabriel Valley in general."

Schiff experienced the reluctance of the board first-hand as a state legislator, when he sponsored a bill that created an independent construction authority to oversee the Gold Line project.
La Verne Mayor Jon Blickenstaff oversees the board of that group, the Foothill Extension Construction Authority. He agreed that his agency has been battling the MTA to get funding for the project for years.
"It's extremely frustrating," said Blickenstaff. "I can't understand the hostility that the majority of the (MTA) board has to this project."

MTA spokesman Marc Littman balked at the idea that the agency is hostile to the project. "If we didn't like the project, why would we include hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for it in the sales tax measure?" asked Littman, referring to Proposition R, a measure on the November ballot that would raise the county sales tax a half-cent to provide an estimated $40 billion in transit funding over 30 years.

MTA officials have argued that Proposition R is the best way to ensure the project is completed. It includes more than $700 million in earmarked funding for the Gold Line. San Gabriel Valley officials have mostly opposed the measure. They argue that the Gold Line should first receive an iron-clad funding commitment that does not depend on a measure that will need two-thirds of the county's voters to pass.

MTA chief Roger Snoble said the problem with signing away a conditional $80 million for the project is not so much that the federal funds might not come through, but that if they did, his agency would not be able to afford to actually allocate the $80 million. "If we commit $80 million into the plan, the Gold Line jumps over other projects that have been there a long time," said Snoble. He added that the MTA has also submitted a plan to the FTA for the completion of the Exposition Line that runs from south of downtown Los Angeles to Santa Monica, and that the federal government would not likely fund both.

"When we compete with ourselves we end up losing everything," said Snoble.
FTA spokesman Griffo declined to comment on whether the agency would fund two projects from the same area. But a 2007 summary of the agency's actions indicated that it had funded multiple projects in Chicago, and multiple projects in San Diego, as well as several within Southern California.
Local officials have also rejected the idea that MTA cannot afford to fund the project.
"We're talking about $16 million a year over five years," said Blickenstaff. "That is a drop in the bucket for MTA."

dan.abendschein@sgvn.com (dan.abendschein@sgvn.com)
(626) 962-8811, Ext. 4451