Buffalo News (New) June 5, 2004
With city funding for downtown Buffalo’s Park ‘N Go Shuttle to evaporate as of July 1, efforts are in the works to keep the popular service rolling.
Buffalo Place, which oversees the park and ride service, is in talks with the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority to develop a limited shuttle to link downtown workers with Metro Rail, said Mike Schmand, Buffalo Place executive director.
Buffalo’s budget woes will result in the city ending its annual subsidy of $430,000 for the program, which currently ferries nearly 1,300 participants from parking lots near the HSBC Arena up Main Street to Chippewa Street, weekday mornings and evenings. Shuttle riders pay $15 a month for the service.
Under discussion is an abbreviated shuttle route that would see the NFTA ferry downtown workers from designated parking lots on Perry Street to its Erie Canal Harbor Metro Rail Station, adjacent to Memorial Auditorium. Participants would continue to pay the $15 monthly charge, with Buffalo Place, Erie County and Buffalo Civic Auto Ramps, paying the balance of program costs. “We’d like to have something in place as of July 1,” Schmand said, “but we don’t know. The NFTA is putting together a package that will tell us what the costs will be and we’ll go from there.”
NFTA Executive Director Lawrence Meckler confirmed the authority’s interest in being part of the Park ‘N Go program. “For a number of reasons it would be a good fit with our service goals. It would be a great way to introduce people who aren’t Metro users to Metro Rail and our park and ride options,” Meckler said.
The NFTA would use three, 18-person Metro Link vans to shuttle the parkers to the rail station, with frequent trips between 6:45 and 9:15 a.m. and from 3 to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday. Coach USA is the current shuttle provider, using 10 small buses to run up and down Main Street, along the Metro Rail tracks, to make its stops.
Following release of the city budget, which eliminated funding for the shuttle service, Buffalo Place surveyed participants regarding various options. Alternatives included maintaining current service levels at a cost of $40 a month to users, an option that was not favored because the expense would have approached the monthly cost of parking in a ramp or lot.
Those surveyed preferred the scaled-back service to paying higher fees.
Park ‘N Go shuttle began in 1998 in response to downtown worker interest in a low-cost alternative to ramps and lots. It attracted 400 users in its first year, causing organizers to expand the program to accommodate 1,500 participants. Park ‘N Go enrollment peaks during the winter, leading to full enrollment and a waiting list for slots in the satellite parking lots.
Mayor Anthony M. Masiello said he’s pleased efforts are under way to maintain the service. The mayor said while Buffalo Place has revenue reserves to cover a large portion of the costs of a limited service for the next year, it’s time for businesses and agencies whose workers use the shuttle to help finance it.
“The solution to this is to get as many partners as possible, corporate, government and not-for-profit. This is win-win thing for the employers and the employees, so they should step up,” Masiello said.
The Virginian-Pilot(Norfolk, Va.) June 5, 2004
Two of the three passenger stations for Old Dominion University ‘s controversial maglev train have sat unused for so long that they must be torn down due to safety concerns.
Work on the project resumed this week as contractors began demolishing the stations, which had become structurally unsafe after languishing for a year and a half, supported by wooden scaffolding.
Construction ended abruptly in October 2002 when money ran out and contractors were not paid.
The last of the $14 million budget was spent by American Maglev Technology Inc., the train’s inventor, trying to resolve technical problems with the vehicle, which is supposed to glide along an elevated guideway but instead bumps and vibrates.
Crews this week also resumed building a third station at Webb University Center.
This station, which was further along in its construction than the other two, will not be made available for public use but will have stairs, a handrail and a platform to support the development of the experimental magnetic levitation train.
Tearing down the two stations and finishing construction of the third will take two to three months, said Ron Tola , ODU’s assistant vice president for facilities management. “We’re trying to direct most of the money for research and development of the vehicle,” he said.
S.B. Ballard Construction Co., the original station contractor, is performing the new work. Ballard sued ODU and American Maglev for nonpayment, but the lawsuit has been withdrawn while the parties negotiate the terms of a settlement.
The Webb Center station will cost $93,000 to build and is being funded by a $2 million federal grant that was released in April to jump-start the stalled maglev project. Tola said ODU is paying $42,000 to demolish the other stations.
The Webb Center station will be the starting point for future test runs of the vehicle, if the ride is smoothed out.
Engineers at Lockheed Martin in Orlando, Fla., have begun computer testing of what has come to be known as “The Fix” - new computer controls and sensors that they say should steady the train. ODU engineering professors and graduate students also are involved in the effort.
ODU, American Maglev and Lockheed Martin share a goal of producing a prototype maglev train that can operate smoothly at speeds of up to 40 mph along an 1,100-foot section of the 3,400-foot guideway that traverses the campus.
Additional funding will be needed to finish the stations and allow the train to begin carrying passengers. ODU now hopes to incorporate the Hampton Boulevard station into the design for a new parking garage that could be complete in a year or two , Tola said.
Plans are uncertain for a future west end station, now at Powhatan Avenue. Tola said its exact location hinges on ODU’s development plans in the area, which could include turning the field house into a recreation center and building more student housing and a educational building on the west side of Powhatan.
The International Herald Tribune June 5, 2004
Detailed photographs taken shortly after the partial collapse of a passenger terminal at Roissy-Charles de Gaulle Airport last month appear to offer an alternative to initial theories that cracks in the concrete pillars supporting the structure were to blame for the deadly accident.
Instead of the pillars, a section of the terminal’s curved wall may have been the location at fault.
The photographs, taken by an airline employee within hours of the collapse of a 30-meter, or 100-foot, section of Terminal 2E’s 700-meter-long arched roof, have not been seen publicly. But according to one engineer who has studied them, they could ultimately prove that the damage is sufficiently limited as to rule out demolition of the entire 750 million, or $900 million, structure
“My opinion is that the collapse was a local collapse that had to do with very specific conditions,” said Henry Bardsley, an engineer whose company, RFR, was a design consultant for the glass roof that spans a portion of Terminal 2F nearby and did similar work on the airport’s high-speed rail terminus. Both structures were conceived by Paul Andreu, the former chief architect for Aeroports de Paris, the airport’s state-owned operator. “The building is reparable, and it should be,” Bardsley said.
Bardsley, who is not involved in the investigation of the collapse, based his theory largely on a series of about 40 unpublished and highly detailed photographs that were taken immediately after the accident by a person who had unfettered access to the site. The author of the photographs requested anonymity, but copies of them were shown to the International Herald Tribune.
The latticed roof, made of reinforced concrete, glass and steel, crumpled suddenly on the morning of May 23, burying four victims — all of them travelers — in the rubble and injuring half a dozen others. The Transport Ministry has launched an investigation into the collapse, and a French court is pursuing a criminal inquiry into the case.
The accident at the terminal, which was opened to the public with great fanfare less than a year ago, has been a blow to France, a country that prides itself on grand public engineering projects such as its TGV bullet-train network and the tunnel below Mont Blanc that links France and Italy. The terminal’s elegant design, resembling a glazed tunnel, was also a showpiece of contemporary French architecture.
Uncertainty about what caused the collapse — and whether other airport buildings might be at risk — has also heightened anxiety among travelers as well as airline and ground personnel at Charles de Gaulle, an airport used by about 48 million passengers a year.
French news media reports to date have focused on the fact that small fissures had appeared early in the construction of some of the concrete pillars meant to support the glass and steel vault that encloses the two-story concourse. The cracked pillars were repaired in September 2002, before the roof was placed upon them, and airport engineers said all 170 of the columns were subsequently wrapped in sheets of carbon fiber as a precaution.
Some experts have suggested that if the columns are found to be at fault, the terminal may have to be razed and rebuilt, at considerable expense to French taxpayers.
Aeroports de Paris officials have also said that they are prepared to tear down the building if the investigation determines that there is the “slightest risk” to passenger and employee safety.
But in what he described as “today’s best hypothesis,” Bardsley, who is also on the board of the School of Architecture of Versailles, said that the location of the structure’s initial failure might have been elsewhere: in a section of the terminal’s curved wall. “It appears that there was a bending failure at an insufficiently studied opening in the shell at about mid-height in the flank,” where the curved wall connected with three pedestrian gangways, he said.
Bardsley posited that the building’s arched concrete roof suffered an “asymmetric,” two-stage collapse that began on the north side of the building — an area that was not photographed by the news media on the day of the accident.
Several of the new images depict the building’s deflated blue-gray shell and the three glazed walkways, which appear to have dropped by about one meter from their original placement, which was level with the upper floor of the terminal’s concourse.
Ringlike sections of prefabricated concrete are also visible, and Bardsley identified a number of areas where “radial” steel ribs meant to stiffen the structure along an exterior wall had either twisted or slipped out of their sockets. One image also clearly shows an external steel support boom that is bent by about 90 degrees.
Bardsley posited that the high “load,” or weight, of the walkways, as well as a flaw in the joints that connected the ribs to the concrete shell, caused a “lateral buckling failure” near the walkways. Once the wall of the north side failed, Bardsley said, the force of its collapse could have nudged the south side of the arch off its concrete pillars, sending that edge of the span crashing to the ground.
Jean-Baptiste Acchiardi of the state prosecutor’s office would not say whether investigators were currently favoring a particular explanation for the building’s collapse. “All of the available evidence is being considered by the technical experts,” Acchiardi said this week. “We are waiting for a report of their conclusions, which is not expected for several weeks.”
The office of Jean Berthier, president of the commission appointed by Transport Minister Gilles de Robien to investigate the collapse, did not return phone calls seeking comment.
The new photos of the accident site were taken within three hours of the collapse, before significant sections of the wreckage had been removed by rescue crews, Bardsley said. He said the images would be made available to officials investigating the accident.
Michael Otlet, an Oxford-based structural engineer at Atkins Global, a British consultancy, agreed that the terminal’s collapse probably occurred in two phases. Because the north side of the building had large openings cut into it, where the walkways were introduced, “that area was obviously weaker than anywhere else,” Otlet said.
But he said he still believed that a failure of the supporting pillars could not be ruled out. “There would have been very high forces — both vertical and horizontal — between the edge beams and the column heads.” In an article last week in the New Civil Engineer, a British trade magazine, Otlet and others proposed that the concrete at the top of the pillars had effectively been sheared off at its outer edges by the weight of the vaulted roof.
Bardsley said that he was skeptical of this view and again cited the photographic evidence. One image of the south side of the collapse zone, taken from its eastern edge, reveals at least two pillars that appear largely intact and entirely upright. From this angle, the southern wall of the concrete shell — the side that appeared in most news agency photographs taken the day of the accident — seems to have hit the ground more than a meter away from the pillars. “From these photographs, there is no sign that the columns failed at all,” he said.
Terminal 2E’s concrete superstructure comprises a series of standardized, interlocking pieces. These ringlike sections were cast and assembled at the end of a nearby runway and then trucked into the construction site, where they were integrated to form the long tubular arch. “It is a somewhat industrialized procedure that is common practice in large building sites,” Bardsley said.
But complex buildings often have to adapt prefabricated pieces to accommodate unusual circumstances, such as a juncture with another building or the insertion of a doorway. “It appears that something went wrong with the adaptation of these pieces,” Bardsley said, though he was unsure whether the problem originated with the design or if it was due to errors in the construction process.
Andreu, the architect, told the French daily Le Monde in an interview last week that the “triple passage” that pierced the terminal’s midsection was not envisioned in his original drawings. “But we did not fiddle around with the shell during the course of installing them,” he said. “They were conceived before the effective start of the work. The elements of the shell at this height were calculated precisely. If the error is there, it is not due to negligence or an oversight.”
Andreu was unavailable for comment Friday, said Patricia Casse, a colleague at his Paris firm. The architect, who retired from the airport authority last year, granted several interviews to the French news media last week. He has since been advised by his lawyer, Michele Huet, not to comment further about the case in public.
One of France’s leading construction unions, CGT Construction, pointed last week to “difficulties” encountered during the pouring of pillars in 2002 as a possible factor in the collapse. It also cited pressures to complete work quickly and to save costs wherever possible.
“I don’t think rushing would have been a problem” at that early phase of the construction, Bardsley said. Delays in a multiyear building project tend to be cumulative, he said. “The rushes tend more to take place at the end, for the people laying the carpets, putting in the seats and interior fixtures.”
Bardsley said that the nature of the building’s failure, as he interprets it, “confirms my confidence” in the terminal’s overall design and that the structure’s weaknesses were isolated to a specific situation. The fact that similar creaking and popping sounds were heard on May 24 near the roof in another part of the building with similar construction “suggests that there was something wrong with the way the concrete skin was modified for the doors in these two special cases.”
Aeroports de Paris has installed scaffolds under this second area as a precaution and so that investigators can study it more closely.
Bardsley expressed hope that Terminal 2E would be reopened as soon as basic security in the building was re-established. “What is important is that this part of the building collapsed for reasons that are not impossible to understand,” he said.
Bardsley said that he and his colleagues at RFR were driven by professional curiosity to analyze the collapse. He said he felt that whatever the true cause of the collapse turns out to be, it was important for the engineering and architectural community to study the case and learn from it. “It is important to be reminded that things can go wrong,” he said.
The Straits Times (Singapore) June 5, 2004
IF YOU are driving in a bus lane and spot someone at the side of the road scribbling furiously on his notepad, you have probably just been booked for flouting the bus lane rule.
The Land Transport Authority (LTA) has contracted six traffic wardens from a private company at $34,000 a year to take down the licence plate number, make and colour of vehicles that intrude into bus lanes at peak hours.
The Bus Lane Scheme was introduced in 1974 to help public buses meet their schedules between 7.30am and 9.30am, and 4.30pm and 7pm on weekdays, and between 7.30am and 9.30am, and 11.30am and 2pm on Saturdays. There are now about 113km of bus lanes.
Since May 10, the wardens have been staking out 11 ‘hot spots’ identified by the LTA. These are places where motorists are often observed to be driving in bus lanes. They include stretches along Lorong Chuan and Upper Thomson Road. More than 30 offenders are booked at each of these two areas every morning.
So far, a total of 1,500 motorists have been booked around the island. They will be fined $130 and be given four demerit points. A motorist who has collected 24 points or more within two years will have his driving licence suspended.
Previously, the LTA put its own officers on the roads ‘every few days’ to enforce the Bus Lane Scheme.
Since 1997, the authority has also been using cameras mounted at the front of some buses to catch errant motorists. The bus driver pushes a button near his steering wheel to photograph the vehicles blocking his way. Using both methods, 3,099 offenders were caught last year.
Feedback from commuters and bus operators on buses not being able to move smoothly along their lanes during peak hours prompted the stepped-up enforcement, said LTA investigations manager Chong Pang Boon.
He said some of the cameras are not working well because of wear and tear. So they are being phased out. ‘We did a study and found that deploying wardens is one third the cost of using bus cameras. And it’s been more effective,’ he said.
Singapore’s biggest bus operator SBS Transit said that the presence of the traffic wardens is good news for its bus drivers and commuters. ‘Many motorists have been flouting the bus lane rule and this has made it difficult for our buses to keep to their schedules,’ said ComfortDelGro spokesman Tammy Tan.
The Daily Yomiuri (Tokyo June 5, 2004
Commuters who are sick of overcrowded trains soon may be able to find some relief, or at least entertainment, simply by looking out the window. On one section of a Tokyo subway line, the normally blank underground view has been replaced by a new kind of moving picture advertisement appearing on the tunnel walls.
The “moving picture tunnel ad” made its Japan debut on the Tokyo Metro’s Ginza Line on Thursday. Passengers aboard a train from Tameike Sanno Station to Akasaka-Mitsuke Station can enjoy a 15-second moving picture ad for Nensho-kei Aminoshiki, a soft drink produced by Suntory Ltd. People can view the images from the right-hand side of the train as it heads in the direction of Shibuya Station.
On Wednesday, crowds of newspaper reporters and TV crews flocked to the media preview of what is called “moving picture tunnel advertising.” Dubbed Submedia, and developed by U.S.-based Submedia, the technology was developed based on a 19th-century British toy called a zoetrope, according to Submedia Japan KK. Similar to a flip book, the zoetrope shows viewers a moving picture by displaying a succession of slightly varied still images at a constant speed.
To show moving advertisements on subway windows, special displays containing still images are placed at a regular intervals on the wall of the subway tunnel. In this way, 15 seconds of moving images appear in the windows of passing subway trains.
In the age of high technology, this primitive device has been transformed into a new advertising medium, the firm said. Though it may sound a bit complicated, the concept is quite simple. While a film moves in a movie theater, the audience does not. With Submedia, the audience moves while the film does not.
Shortly after a train leaves Tameike Sanno Station for Akasaka-Mitsuke Station, a blue line appears on the walls of the subway tunnel. Stay alert — the motion picture ad will start when this line ends. In a few seconds, ad images seem to pop up on the subway windows, though they are actually “screened” on the walls of the tunnel outside.
Advertisements are already scheduled until mid-July. This tunnel ad, which covers only a 200-meter-long section of the 183.2-kilometer Tokyo subway system, may be the start of a new advertising age.
Submedia has already been introduced in the United States and Hong Kong. The technology was first introduced between Dunwoody and Sandy Springs stations on the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority subway line in the United States in September 2001.
Among Submedia advertisers in the United States are such leading firms as American Express, Calvin Klein, General Motors and Walt Disney. Submedia Japan hopes to expand the product to other subway lines in Tokyo and other major cities in the country, Naruhiro Tsukikawa of Submedia Japan said.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania June 6, 2004
And now, a public service message from your neighbors, the Port Authority of Allegheny County:
Last week, against the advice of our lawyers, mothers, riders, psychics and brothers-in-law, we had the audacity to change something in Western Pennsylvania.
In an attempt to minimize the rioting and mass bewilderment that may well ensue, we would like to emphasize that we’re not really creating something new! We’re bringing back something you may remember fondly from the past.
No, not flammable, easily derailed 1930s-era streetcars. The Overbrook rail line. This will affect commuters who ride from Library to avoid spending hundreds of dollars weekly to gas up your SUV.
We offer this simple guide to help you understand the adjustments to light rail service and spend as little time as possible puzzling over which trolley not to get on or, worse, chewing us out on the phone. Keep in mind that for the first few weeks, riders may experience some delays. The entire line was due in 1998, for example. Thank you for your patience.
At midnight Tuesday, the last 42L car left Downtown for Library via Beechview. If the 42S left South Hills Village at 12:29, traveling at 22 mph, at what speed must the final 42L travel in order for the trains to meet at Dormont Junction?
Extra credit: Who’s asleep in the back?
On reaching the end of the line, the last 42L was decommissioned and stripped of its insignia amid solemnities including a 21-drunk salute. We encourage you to begin reminiscing about the good ol’ 42L in preparation for Rick Sebak’s upcoming nostalgic documentary.
From today onward, Library will be served by the new 47L Library via Overbrook line. This is the original routing along a new line with new stations that are actually more than a block apart, and no more of this dawdling through Beechview.
We’ve already changed the schedule once and may change it every couple of weeks, just because it’s a new line and nobody can say “I’ve been taking this trolley at the same time for the past 83 years!” to make us feel guilty. Passengers are advised to allow extra time. Just go to your stop and stand there until the trolley comes. There will be one eventually, and you can put your waiting time to good use by eyeing up any shady characters and their bags as potential security risks.
Today, we offer you free rides on the new 47L. And special inaugural celebrations at each of the new stations! Bring the whole family for treats, memorabilia and appearances by all your favorite public-transit characters: Murray Mumbler, Cellma Yakk, Screamy the Kid, Mr. Spooky and the $#@&* Holler Crew.
There will be a snowball-bombing contest with prizes for accuracy and distance, a cross-lot park-n-ride dash and a beat-the-train competition for drivers at several grade crossings.
Commemorative coins will be flattened on the tracks.
The first 1,500 riders boarding the 47L at the new stations will be entered to win a trip for two to New York City via Amtrak, which is a lot like the T except it sometimes goes faster and has even worse financial problems.
Facts you should know:
- 47L passengers going to new stations from Boggs to Killarney and low-level stops must ride in the first car of two-car trains. Others can ride in the second car, but keep in mind there’s no beverage-cart service back there. - Today is the only freebie day. We are not hauling your seersucker butt to work for nothing, mister. - And the 47L is the only route with free rides. We are not taking your half-exposed butt to South Hills Village for nothing, missy. - Oh, but we’re going to change the schedule on the 42S too, starting today. - We are not, repeat not, raising the fares. It’s out of the question. Nearly impossible. Unlikely. Well, we’ll let you know.
Look, don’t panic. You’ll get used to it. Tell you what: We’ll slip you a free transfer at Washington Junction if you got on the wrong line and want to continue on the other one.
It took longer than we expected, but we are pleased to reopen the new and improved Overbrook line. We suppose somebody will want the Drake back now. Don’t get carried away.
The Virginian-Pilot(Norfolk, Va June 6, 2004
It’s difficult to imagine what it’s going to take for Old Dominion University to scrap its ill-starred maglev train project and get on with the business of educating young people.
- Huge cost overruns haven’t done it. - Blown deadlines, measured in years, haven’t done it. - Lawsuits haven’t done it. - The reality that the train doesn’t work, and probably won’t work, hasn’t done it. - Dire warnings from experts in the field haven’t done it. - Cost projections that proved to be clownish haven’t done it. - The bailout of a key partner, Dominion Virginia Power, hasn’t done it. - The reduction of its driving force - American Maglev Technologies - to a wheezing one-man operation that now sells magnetism as a balm for urinary incontinence hasn’t done it.
And, now, the dismaying proposition of having to tear down half-built commuter platforms and rebuild them from scratch doesn’t seem to be doing it. We learned of this latest development in a report in yesterday’s paper.
When is enough, enough?
Apparently, not yet. I’m getting tired of flogging this dead horse. When I last wrote about it, back in October, an ODU executive assured me that I’d be invited to a test-run of the maglev train in March. I responded by offering to lie down on the tracks and let the train run over me if that invitation arrived in the mail. I never heard from him again.
Here’s an update: I’m still moving. Their train isn’t.
Last week, my intrepid colleagues Bill Burke and Debbie Messina published an in-depth look at the progress - or lack thereof - of the maglev project. Officials interviewed for that report apparently declined to mention, just a week ago, that the half-built platforms would have to be torn down and rebuilt.
Lost in the intricate engineering explanations of what it will take to move the train at a snail-like 40 mph across 1,100 feet of campus track is the underlying reason why this project was undertaken: to prove that American Maglev’s unique technology can propel a train for great distances - from here to Richmond, and on to Washington, as they claim - at high speed and low cost.
Proponents who point gleefully to a maglev train that’s running from the airport in Shanghai, China, are blurring the argument. That project enjoyed a $1.2 billion government subsidy and employs different engineering than the American Maglev design.
With that, fares had to be slashed because ridership was running at a fraction of projections. The 440-seat train was carrying just 73 passengers per trip, on average. Commuters found that two people sharing a cab could beat the ticket cost of the maglev train.
And here’s an update from Shanghai that nobody’s mentioning: Within a mere couple of months the track has begun to sink in several places. That should be especially unnerving for engineers on the ODU project, who are trying to get their train to work within a tolerance of about the width of a fingernail across a flat, carefully engineered line of just 1,100 feet, at a modest 40 mph.
What will happen to those minute engineering tolerances once a track is expanded over hill and dale, over hundreds of miles, with cars running at bullet-train speed? With a track that’s certain to sink or warp or bend due to the immutable laws of nature?
Backers of this project sometimes speak as if its critics are SUV-loving Luddites, and that maglev technology is the only mass-transit solution to clogged highways. It isn’t. It just happens to be among the most expensive and finicky.
Given enough time, and enough money, perhaps the project will prove exactly that. Then ODU can declare victory and get on with better uses of its resources.
Sacramento Bee June 6, 2004
How did we end up with all this urban sprawl? Herein, as they say, hangs a tale. And a way out.
In the 1920s, Sacramento was a quaint, sleepy town, its streets lined with elm trees and Victorian and craftsman houses. Children could buy penny candy at the corner grocery store, and neighborhoods were economically diverse with small apartment buildings and single-family homes on the same block.
Few people owned cars. The average families spent less than approximately 12 percent of their gross income on transportation because they relied upon trolleys, which someone else owned and maintained, to get them to their jobs, shopping or the downtown theaters on Saturday afternoons. The trolleys were profitable private enterprises, because the neighborhoods were compact, with enough people living within a short walk of each stop.
People obtained home mortgages from a local savings and loan, and were typically limited to borrowing 30 percent to 50 percent of the home’s cost. But in the 1930s, the Roosevelt Administration instituted the Federal Housing Administration’s Mortgage Insurance Program, under which home buyers could borrow up to 90 percent of the cost of a home. This program, however, came with strings attached. Unfortunately, a lender was not allowed to make a loan on a home that was in a minority neighborhood (surprisingly, this was in the regulations until the late 1960s). In addition, the minimum property standards generally precluded lending on homes in older neighborhoods.
FHA insurance proved to be the beginning of the largest social engineering undertaking in history. By the time the GIs were returning from World War II, FHA-insured home mortgages were the only game in town. Because of intense leverage, new families, with little or no money, could purchase homes for the first time. By the 1950s, because of the restrictions imposed by the FHA, far-away suburbs were in essence the only option for new families in America who wished to own homes.
In the 1950s, President Eisenhower’s administration started building a network of highways - similar to the autobahns of Germany - to facilitate the movement of troops and tanks in the event of an invasion. No one expected that it would become a multi-trillion-dollar government subsidy contributing to the creation of low-density, single-use-zoned American suburbs. The easier it was to travel long distances quickly, the easier it was to live farther from the city centers. The trolley systems did not have a chance with all the government subsidies going into the auto infrastructure and low-density suburbs.
The 1972 Clean Water Act provided hundreds of billions of dollars in federal subsidies for sewage conveyance around American cities, making it even less expensive to build in a suburban location. The methods for financing new infrastructure by local government eliminated any hope that central cities could compete on equal footing with the deeply subsidized suburbs.
Now everything’s coming home to roost.
American suburbs have the largest number of roads, sewers, water and gas lines per capita on the planet. It costs the government hundreds of dollars more per year per household to maintain this infrastructure than if densities were modestly higher. There are literally thousands of acres of land sitting empty in our region with all the infrastructure going unused. It is like a business buying a new piece of equipment and never using it. What firm would do that? It would raise the cost of doing business as it raises the cost of government and housing.
Police, fire, garbage, school buses and other public services are also substantially more expensive when communities are spread out too far. This all costs us, the taxpayers, money and reduces the amount of funding that can go into libraries, schools, parks and other public services that enhance the quality of our lives.
But this is only the tip of the ‘berg. Forty years ago, the average American family spent 11 percent to 12 percent of its gross income on transportation. Remember the compact communities where people could use trolleys to take care of most things and did not have to own automobiles? Today, the average American family spends more than double that percentage of its income on transportation. The average American family owns 1.7 cars, which cost approximately $7,000 dollars a year to own, maintain, insure and fuel.
We tend to focus on affordable housing, but the fact is that housing as a percentage of income has remained relatively stable in America (less so in Sacramento), whereas transportation as a percentage of household income has grown dramatically.
And then, there is a whole array of other factors that costs us more dollars and quality of life.
Thirty years ago, 50 percent of American children walked to school. Now, it is 10 percent. If you live in Arden Arcade, you are 82 percent more likely to be involved in an accident that involves injury than if you live in the central city of Sacramento.
A group at Rutgers University has connected sprawl with obesity. If you live in an urban center, you, on average, weigh six pounds less than someone who lives in the suburbs. The medical community has become increasingly aware of the connection between preventable illness, injury, death and auto-dependency and urban sprawl. Two major preventative health journals recently devoted entire issues to the topic. One senior administrator at the Center for Disease Control has said there are many death certificates that describe the cause of death as lung disease, diabetes, heart attack or trauma from automobile accidents, but they should all really say urban sprawl.
To top it off, Shell, Chevron and major oil-producing countries like Saudi Arabia are recognizing that the day and age of cheap oil will soon be over. When this happens, the average family will be left with few choices and an increasingly expensive lifestyle that will require them to work harder, commute longer and spend less time with their children.
What cautious or discreet person would continue to head down this road? Ironically, elected officials who call themselves conservative - which Webster’s Dictionary defines as “a cautious or discreet peson” - are the same ones who have never seen a real estate development deal they don’t like. Not to say that liberals don’t take the fat-cat land-speculation money and run with it as well.
If you are a voter in Sacramento County, you get it. When asked in a poll last December by J. Moore Methods to choose between expanding existing freeways or adopting growth management policies, 65 percent of the 800 respondents chose growth management and only 26 percent chose expanding freeways. (The margin of error was reported as plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.)
Measure A is the half-percent sales tax that Sacramento County residents pay to support transportation operations and capital infrastructure. It is due to expire in 2009, and Sacramento city and county elected officials on the Sacramento Transportation Authority Board (STA) are currently debating the content of a renewal initiative to be on the ballot this November.
At this point, the majority of the STA Board either still buys into the myth that new road construction can reduce traffic congestion or continues to be enamored by big glitzy real estate deals. The STA Board is proposing to give Regional Transit substantially less money than it needs, while at the same time funding construction of new roads through farmland - subsidizing land speculators with taxpayers’ dough. They refuse to include any policy that would control the resulting sprawl.
This is a long-term deal. It has taken us 50 years to dig ourselves into this hole, and it will take us that long to dig ourselves back out. For those of us that are middle-aged or older, this is for our grandchildren, not for us.
The growth that the Sacramento region has experienced is a wonderful resource and can be used to fix our problems or exacerbate them. With billions of dollars of infrastructure sitting alongside thousands of acres of empty land, the growth should be focused into existing areas that are vacant or in need of revitalization.
Our hope is that our children can someday live in safe, compact neighborhoods where they will once again experience the joy and independence of walking, running and biking with friends to school and playing all the games they play along the way. Our hope is that they can grow up in places where they can get to know the clerk in a neighborhood store and learn in those little ways, un-aided by parents, how to become responsible citizens.
Our hope is, as we become elderly, that there are places we can reach on our own - no automobiles, thank you - and where we can engage fully in our community and avoid the isolation that is the fate of so many as a result of 50 years of sprawl.
The Commercial Appeal (Memphis, TN) June 7, 2004
The Memphis Area Transit Authority will reduce its bus operations 2.6 percent by making nine route changes starting Sunday.
Part of the reduction is to avoid duplication with the new, 2-mile Madison Avenue trolley line, MATA president William Hudson said. The changes will save $600,000 by cutting out 11,000 hours of bus operations, he said. “The bottom line, you may reduce some areas, you may add some in other areas, but you are taking from the bus side and adding some to the trolley side,” he said.
Route 2 will no longer operate on Madison between Bellevue and Third because of the new Madison trolley line. Route 2 buses will move to Adams and Jefferson streets. Bus frequency will change from every 36 minutes to every 50 minutes.
Miami Herald June 7, 2004
When Miami-Dade voters overwhelmingly approved a half-cent sales tax increase in 2002 to pay for $17 billion in mass-transit improvements, one of the keys to victory was the creation of a citizens watchdog panel.
The 15-member Citizens Independent Transportation Trust was supposed to act as the public’s eyes and ears, assuring that politicians and county administrators kept their promises to use tax dollars to expand Metrobus, Metrorail and other transit projects over the next 30 years.
Today, several panel members say the trust has fallen short of the mark: They still don’t have an auditor to watch the money trail. Members and commissioners are in a turf battle over autonomy, leaving the CITT, as some members put it, ``relatively toothless.’’
‘’The system is broken,’’ said Mike Abrams, a former state legislator and CITT member. ``I don’t think this has been a satisfying experience for us or the County Commission. We know it. They know it. Something has to be done.’’
Political consultant Ric Katz, one of the architects of the 2002 sales-tax campaign for Mayor Alex Penelas, acknowledged that the oversight component that helped persuade voters to pass the tax ``has sort of run amok.’’
‘’It’s extremely discouraging for people like me who worked pro bono on the campaign, but it’s even more of a problem for the public who voted for the half-cent tax,’’ Katz said. ``Those folks who aren’t involved in day-to- day stuff are prone to the conclusion that they were misled. I don’t think they were misled. But the actual mechanical implementation of the overall CITT has broken down.’’
County Commission Chairwoman Barbara Carey-Shuler agreed, noting that she and her colleagues have to contend with a serious perception issue now or run the risk of losing support for the tax in its infancy: ``If I were part of the general public, I’d be thinking the same thing.’’
Unlike a penny-tax plan that was crushed at the polls in 1999, the initiative voters ratified on Nov. 5, 2002, was a detailed proposal developed at dozens of public meetings. Critics say that even after the victory, it took months for then-County Manager Steve Shiver and former Transit Director Danny Alvarez to get the CITT up and running.
The tax proceeds started rolling in on Jan. 1, 2003. Administrators were already moving to double the existing bus fleet to 1,335 and leveraging billions of sales tax dollars to obtain matching state and federal funds for up to 90 miles of new rail lines.
A LATE START
But commissioners didn’t appoint a quorum of CITT volunteers until May 2003. An inevitable learning curve followed. A full complement wasn’t on board until early this year. A full-time executive director wasn’t hired until January. Hilda M. Fernandez spent just five months running the CITT; she was promoted to a new county job late last month.
Personality clashes — especially between the CITT’s first chairman, John Cosgrove, and Commissioner Dennis Moss, chairman of the Transportation Committee — exacerbated already simmering problems.
Several commissioners privately stewed as Cosgrove repeatedly hinted at public forums that the CITT was protecting taxpayers from powerful interests at County Hall. Cosgrove resigned last week, after the inspector general accused him of unregistered lobbying for a vendor while he was also sitting on a key bid-selection committee. ‘This has unfairly turned into a `good guy/bad guy’ thing,’’ County Manager George Burgess said.
HARDLY AUTONOMOUS
Penelas and his backers didn’t do commissioners any favors when they used words like ‘’independent’’ and ‘’trust’’ to help sell voters on the panel. Anyone envisioning a powerful, seemingly autonomous group like the Public Health Trust was sold a bill of goods, said Luis Morse, a CITT member and former state legislator. ‘’We’re neither independent nor a trust,’’ Morse said. ``People compare us to the [Public Health Trust]. They are autonomous. We are not.’’
Morse fumes that the CITT has become ‘’just another advisory board, a rubber stamp.’’ The panel struggled to get commissioners to sign off on an independent auditor. The CITT can reject contracts or amendments to the transit-tax plan, but nine of 13 commission votes can override the panel. But out of dozens of CITT votes, only one has been overridden — on a bid-proposal technicality.
To clear the air, Carey-Shuler said she plans a summit with CITT leaders, key commissioners, Burgess and Carlos Bonzon, the assistant county manager overseeing all surface transportation projects. No date has been set.
Burgess welcomes the meeting: “Everybody on both sides genuinely wants to do what’s best for this community. Moving forward, I think clearing up the roles of the CITT and the commission should go a long way toward repairing the interpersonal conflicts that have occurred. It’s doable.’’
KLAS-TV Las Vegas Jun. 7, 2004
Last week a Seattle monorail caught fire. Nobody was seriously hurt, but it does raise the question: Is our monorail ready for an emergency like that?
Eyewitness News talked with monorail officials today and they say the answer is “yes.” Officials tell us the Las Vegas monorail is state of the art and can’t be compared to Seattle’s, which was built in the 1960’s.
Right now, the monorail is undergoing a reliability test and cannot open until it meets a 98-percent average for 30 days. But monorail workers say — as far as emergency preparations go — everything’s in place.
Here’s one reason the Las Vegas monorail is better prepared for a fire emergency: An emergency platform allows passengers a way to get out of the train — if it needs to be stopped. “You would hit that emergency release and would be able to open and egress via the windows or doors onto the platform. Seattle’s monorail system doesn’t have this, explained Todd Walker.
The Las Vegas monorail also has four fire extinguishers on board each train and an emergency phone. Todd Walker added, “The people that are on board the train have the ability to interact directly, and in real time, with the people operating the system.”
Staff inside the control center will actually know if there’s a problem on board, before the passengers because of an automatic detection system. The system allows workers to decide on the best plan for safety, for example — stop the monorail or have it run to the next terminal.
Safety is a priority because the new monorail plans to carry 19.5 million people a year, which in the end will help ease the transportation woes of a growing community. “Ya know, 55,000 passengers a day, that takes off about 4 1/2 million automobiles off the road each year,” said Todd Walker.
Fire crews and police have also had extensive training on emergency response. Again, there is no specific date for an opening. But officials do say it will be sometime this summer.
Sacramento Business Journal June 8, 2004
The Environmental Council of Sacramento says it will oppose a transportation funding plan for a renewed half-cent sales tax assembled by the Sacramento Transportation Authority, which the authority wants to put on the Sacramento County ballot in November.
The STA board administers the current Measure A half-cent transportation sales tax, which currently extends to 2009. To ensure future transportation funding, it wants voters to approve a $4.7 billion, 30-year renewal of the tax, with a newly devised disbursal formula for the funds. It also includes a new development fee to generate an estimate $488 million.
ECOS president Andy Sawyer said the current plan funds regional roads and added freeway lanes which contribute to urban sprawl, and that if such funding isn’t dropped from the proposal, an urban development boundary should be added in as a way to curb sprawl development. “We’ll ask them to step back and take the time to fix this,” Sawyer said. “I think this will be defeated at the polls unless they do.” If it stays the same, he added, “It looks like we’re going to oppose it.”
Developers say the boundary isn’t needed because they will follow “smart growth” guidelines in regional planning efforts, such as mixed-use development around light-rail stations and urban infill development.
Fifteen percent of developer fees proposed would go toward a “smart growth incentive program,” for promotion of transit-oriented development, and at least $5 million for planning, development and acquisition of Cosumnes River Permanent Open Space Preserve or any other environmental mitigation need to offset project impacts. It also would allocate 10 percent of the development fees toward open space acquisition.
On Thursday, the STA board will vote to approve or reject the following funding allocation percentages of the half-cent sales tax:
38 percent for local road maintenance; 38.25 percent for transit; 4.5 percent for senior and disabled transit; 12 percent for freeway car-pool lanes; 5 percent for street landscaping, pedestrian and bicycle projects; 1.5 percent for air quality programs; 1 percent for program administration.
The Thursday vote will include the new development fee proposal, whose other major components are road maintenance, 35 percent; transit, 20 percent; and freeway car-pool lanes, 20 percent.
Should the STA approve the formula, said STA executive director Brian Williams, the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors will then be asked to approve it, as well as the cities within the county. If those approvals come through, it will then be filed for inclusion on the November ballot, he said.
The Houston Chronicle June 8, 2004
Expansion of Houston’s light rail line, along with other systems nationwide, could be delayed if Congress fails to complete action this year on a politically charged transportation funding bill, rail system operators warned Monday.
Authorization for federal assistance in highway and mass-transit programs expired Sept. 30, the end of the last fiscal year. Lawmakers have temporarily extended funding at previous levels through June 30 as they struggle to complete work on a six-year package to increase aid to states and localities.
The House and Senate have passed their versions of the bill known as the Transportation Equity Act. This week they begin the process of reconciling the differences in a conference committee. But with a dispute over the proper funding level between the two bodies, a veto threat from President Bush - who has said either version represents too much spending - and the upcoming election, America’s transit agencies are fearing they could be left behind.
Also, some observers are afraid the bill will die during the election season if not passed before Congress’ summer recess, which begins late next month.
MetroRail’s expansion depends on the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County’s ability to obtain federal matching grants. The four MetroRail extensions planned to open by 2012 are among hundreds of similar projects on the drawing board nationwide.
John Sedlak, a Metro vice president, said it’s impossible to speculate what impact all this might have on the authority’s plans to break ground in 2006 on the extension to Northline Mall. “We’re trying to follow every step we need to follow with the federal process to get our projects submitted,” Sedlak said. “We just don’t know what’s going to happen.”
Regardless of the action on Capitol Hill, Metro is preparing to submit its next two rail extensions in August for Federal Transit Administration consideration. The FTA evaluates applications during the fall and will recommend in January which projects should be eligible for federal appropriations later in 2005.
William Millar, president of the American Public Transportation Association, whose members are gathered here this week for their annual Rail Transit Conference, said, “The question is: Will any money be there to implement those projects? Without a bill, it means that the transit systems and local officials won’t know what funding levels will be, won’t be able to effectively compete for new projects that are necessary for the expansion of existing systems. And gridlock is just going to get worse and worse.”
Transit providers are left with a great deal of uncertainty as they plan for the next fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, Millar said in a roundtable with transportation reporters. Inaction by Congress could also result in “higher fares, further service cuts, more layoffs and more delays in replacing old vehicles, old facilities,” he added. “The list goes on and on.”
The unresolved bill has numerous businesses that contract to design and build transit lines or supply their equipment anxious. “The impact on our industry and our jobs is incredible,” David Turney of Dallas, president and CEO of RTI Inc., told hundreds of rail officials and corporate executives at a funding seminar Monday morning. “It’s time for the administration to understand what this is about: It’s about jobs.”
House and Senate conferees are scheduled to hold their first meeting Wednesday. The panel of 73 members has seven Texas representatives, including House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Sugar Land.
DeLay’s presence indicates the importance of the highway and transit bill, which many members want to deliver by Election Day to appease constituents’ aggravation over the increasing traffic congestion that plagues many metropolitan areas. They’re also keen on touting its presumed positive impact on the economy.
“Clearly this bill is critical, not just for Texas’ transportation needs, but also for any effort to create more jobs for our country,” said DeLay spokesman Jonathan Grella. “We are eager to help bring the parties together to get a product to the president’s desk. The stakes are high and the challenges are tremendous.”
KING-TV Seattle June 8, 2004
SEATTLE - Officials from Seattle, King County and Sound Transit held a ceremonial ground-breaking Tuesday on the light rail line in Seattle, in the Rainier Valley.
“It would have been less expensive to build light rail 30 years ago, but I’m here to tell you, it’s less expensive than it will be 30 years from today. It’s time to quit talking and start digging,” said Sound Transit Chairman John Ladenburg
The 4.3-mile Rainier Valley alignment will include many community enhancements, including new sidewalks, landscaping, street crossings, and underground installation of utility lines.
Construction will take three or four years. The 14-mile light rail transit line from Seattle to Tukwila is scheduled to open in 2009.
BusinessWorld June 8, 2004,
The government has failed to pay Japanese creditor, Sumitomo Corp., P242.32 million in maintenance fees it committed to turn over to the company as part of its restructuring agreement.
The amount, which was due on June 2, already has a notice of cash allocation from the Department of Budget and Management dated May 28. However, the Department of Transportation and Communications (DoTC) has yet to remit the amount to its contractor.
The lapse resulted in the downgrade of Metro Rail Transit (MRT) 3’s asset-backed securities to PRS A rating from PRS Aa rating.
Local ratings agency Philippine Rating Services Corp. (PhilRatings) said the DoTC’s failure to remit demonstrates the government’s inability to meet payment deadlines. “The delays in payment demonstrates the current difficulty that DoTC has in making payment on due dates agreed upon. The DoTC, again, is unable to comply with timetables it has committed itself to,” said PhilRatings, in its latest review.
A PRS A rating means the securities have favorable investment attributes and are considered “as upper-medium grade obligations.”
“Factor giving security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present which suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in the future,” PhilRatings said. The previous rating of PRS Aa meant the securities enjoy relatively high margins of protection, with the smallest degree of investment risk.
The Standard & Poor’s affiliate has been closely monitoring the rating of MRT 3 securities following the earlier request of Metro Railway Transit Corp. (MRTC), the consortium operating the light rail system (MRT 3) along EDSA, to upgrade its ratings for the company’s asset-backed securities to PRS Aaa from PRS Aa.
The government in April committed to pay the $21.5 million in maintenance fees owed to Sumitomo. The commitment was contained in a restructuring agreement it entered with Sumitomo and MRTC.
Based on the deal, Sumitomo, the company that ensures the Metro Rail Transit runs efficiently, will be paid in tranches between May and August.
The first installment of P485 million was due on May 3 but the government was delayed in its payment. The second installment, which was supposed to be paid last Wednesday, was likewise delayed.
The maintenance fees were due in full last Dec. 17 but the government sought a 90-day grace period. On April 15, the DoTC acknowledged its “obligation to pay about $21.5 million in overdue base maintenance fees.”
Payment of about $10 million in escalation fees and value-added taxes likewise remains the subject of further negotiations. It is expected to be settled by July.
MRTC, under the restructuring contract, is also required to obtain as soon as possible “all consents and waivers required from the lenders under the financing documents” to prevent default
As of May 14, Bank of New York said MRTC has a total of $11.6 million available in its collection, reserve, and liquidity accounts. “This amount can cover coupon payments on the notes [Tranche 1] due in August 2004, February 2005, August 2005 and a portion of the payment due in February 2006,” PhilRatings said.
The MRT consortium expects to raise between P3 billion to P5 billion from the secondary offering of asset-backed notes. The bonds will have several maturities ranging from four years to 23 years and are expected to generate yields of 10.5% to 13% per annum.
New Straits Times [Malaysia] June 8, 2004
The RM400 million monorail project in Putrajaya has been shelved for the time being.
Federal Territories Minister Tan Sri Mohd Isa Abdul Samad said the system, initially scheduled for completion by the end of the year, had to be stalled as the Federal Government had not approved funding. The monorail system was supposed to link several important landmarks like the Putrajaya Convention Centre, Putrajaya Mosque and the Government Administrative Complex.
MTRANS Holdings Sdn Bhd, which won the concession to develop the system, had initially estimated the development cost to be RM100 million per kilometre.
Mohd Isa said his ministry would conduct a detailed study on the nine- kilometre system and may push for funding for the project to be included in next year’s budget.
On another matter, he said the ministry was drafting a plan to limit access to Precincts Two, Three and Four. These are the areas where government offices and commercial centres are located. The move, he said, was necessary to prevent traffic congestion in the “heart” of the administrative centre.
“We are planning to allow only 30 per cent of vehicles to enter the areas,” he said adding the proposed plan would only be implemented once an integrated transportation system was in place. The public transport system in Putrajaya had to be improved, he said, noting that more ministries, including the Education and Health Ministries, would be located at the administrative capital soon.
Meanwhile, Putrajaya Corporation president Tan Sri Azizan Zainul Abidin said that parking charges to be introduced soon would be reasonable. “We will take all factors, including what the people want, into consideration before deciding on a rate,” he said.
The Daily Yomiuri (Tokyo June 8, 2004
Last year, Central Japan Railway Co. (JR Tokai) launched a campaign to promote its Nozomi Shinkansen bullet train using the English slogan “Ambitious Japan.” Unfortunately, the phrase does not sound natural in English, according to a recent contest that has chosen it as one of six winners of the “Bikkuri (Surprising) English” awards.
Launched jointly this year by the English Speaking Union of Japan and eigoTown.com, the “Surprising English” awards are designed to spotlight English used in Japan that is “amusing, unnecessary, embarrassing, exceptionally creative or just downright wrong.” The organizers selected the winner out of entries submitted by the public.
“Ambitious Japan” won the Obnoxious English Award. The awards were announced late last month.
Other winners included “High Touch Town Roppongi,” which was given the Nonsense Award. The slogan can be seen attached to the overpass at Roppongi Crossing in Tokyo. Roppongi is one of the most popular entertainment districts for foreigners living in and around the capital.
The Hilariously Funny Award went to a notice found at the entrance of a department store in Kanagawa Prefecture, which read, “When a visitor has injustice, I will notify the police irrespective of quantity.” This phrase was apparently made using a word-by-word translation from the original Japanese sentence.
The You Should Know Better Award went to the slogan “Our city is fruity,” printed on fans distributed during the Hanagasa Festival in Yamagata several years ago. The phrase apparently was intended to promote one of the city’s local specialities — fruit.
As one example of funny English used by public organizations, the For Japanese Only! Award went to “Twilight On,” which the Metropolitan Police Department has come up with. The MPD’s “Twilight On” encourages drivers to turn on their headlights before it gets dark to help reduce traffic accidents.
The Brilliant English Award went to “Walkman,” the name Sony Corp. uses for its portable music players.
“English has accepted words from around the world for many years,” said Russell Willis, chief executive officer of eigoTown.com and one of the judges for the contest. “Whilst many of the examples above would never have been accepted, ‘Walkman’ has made it into the dictionary. Sony should be congratulated on creating such a creative brand and word that has been accepted the world over,” he added in a press release.
Taunton Gazette June 9, 2004
BOSTON — Six months after he asked the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority to include Route 24 in its study of monorails into Boston, state Rep. David L. Flynn has found a possible funding source for his idea.
Flynn has succeeded in amending the omnibus 2005 state transportation bond bill to include authorization to study the feasibility of a monorail link to Fall River and New Bedford.
The monorail might be “a better, more modern” alternative to a planned $770 million commuter rail extension from Stoughton to the Southcoast, the Bridgewater Democrat said.
If rail proponents remain inflexible on the proposed route through the Hockomock Swamp, Flynn said of a Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority plan to extend commuter train through Easton and Raynham, “then a monorail might offer a more environmentally friendly and safer alternative.”
The projected cost of the commuter rail extension has soared since it was estimated at $225 million in the mid-1990s. It could tip the $1 billion mark if and when funding is approved, he said. “We don’t want a fiscal replay of the Big Dig,” he said.
The $2 billion state transit bond plan includes $425 million for the Stoughton rail extension, but Flynn calls that ‘Monopoly money.’ “The funds simply aren’t there and they won’t be for years. State mass transit priorities are aimed at other directions,” he said.
Flynn’s amendment states that prior to beginning any rail service to the Southcoast, the MBTA will conduct an engineering and economic feasibility study on constructing a monorail line from Stoughton through Easton, Raynham and Taunton and submit a recommendation by Dec. 31.
Flynn first floated the monorail idea last year to mixed reaction.
Sen. Marc Pacheco, D-Taunton, recalled a similar monorail concept in the early 1990s was considered economically unfeasible because of problems with bridge layouts.
Raynham Selectman Donald McKinnon was concerned a monorail study could divert attention from long-awaited funding to widen Route 24, south of Interstate-495.
Flynn, the Dean of the House for his earliest service, represents Bridgewater, Raynham and Precinct 6 in Easton.
Los Angeles Times June 9, 2004
The controversial CenterLine project cleared a major hurdle Tuesday night when a government oversight committee concluded that $340 million in local sales tax revenue can be used to fund the light-rail system.
Members of the Measure M Citizens Oversight Committee decided on a 8-0 vote, with one abstention, that the billion-dollar CenterLine project met the requirements of Measure M, a 1990 ballot measure that established a 0.5% sales tax to raise money for local transportation projects until 2011.
The Orange County Transportation Authority has been counting on Measure M funds to cover $200 million of construction and $140 million to fund operation of the line. Some Measure M funds have already been spent on the project. The authority also is seeking state and federal assistance.
“This is a very important finding for CenterLine,” said Arthur T. Leahy, OCTA’s chief executive officer, who had once shelved the project two years ago because of a lack of political support. “The committee members understood the issue and concluded we were in full compliance with Measure M.”
Had the committee found against CenterLine, OCTA would have been forced to seek funding elsewhere for the project or cancel it entirely.
For almost three months, the Measure M Citizens Oversight Committee has been grappling with the wording of the initiative and its criteria for funding projects.
Passed by voters after three attempts, Measure M has raised about $3 billion to $4 billion so far for local transportation projects. It provides guidelines for a variety of highway, street, rail and transit improvements undertaken by the OCTA and local cities.
The initiative also created the oversight committee of nine members nominated by the Orange County Grand Jury Assn., a nonprofit organization of former grand jurors, and then selected by OCTA. Committee members review projects funded by the sales tax to ensure they conform to Measure M’s requirements.
Committee members said Tuesday that CenterLine met the measure’s definition of high-tech advanced rail and was an appropriate extension of service from the county’s main rail line, which runs from San Diego to Los Angeles — the so-called LOSSAN corridor.
The project also met the initiative’s criteria calling for the development of a high-capacity urban rail system in Orange County. “Measure M is specific and written appropriately at the time” it was passed, said committee member Derek McGregor. “I’d like to see this project move forward.”
County auditor-controller David Sundstrom, the committee chairman, abstained from voting, saying he thought the CenterLine project was not clearly defined in Measure M. He proposed asking the OCTA board of directors to amend Measure M to add CenterLine to its language, but his idea got no support from committee members.
The committee began looking into CenterLine after light-rail opponents complained at the panel’s Feb. 10 meeting that the proposal was inconsistent with project descriptions in Measure M.
As now envisioned, the nine-mile street car system would run from John Wayne Airport to the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center. The line, which is in the engineering phase, would pass through the South Coast Plaza area and north on Bristol Street.
OCTA has long contended that the project met Measure M’s requirements to develop existing rights-of-way and create an urban rail system in Orange County. Just as significant, OCTA officials said the oversight committee had ruled repeatedly that Measure M funds already used for the project had been spent properly. So far, CenterLine has received about $25 million in sales tax revenue.
But at the committee’s April meeting, the discussion focused on opponents’ claims that CenterLine’s receipt of $340 million in Measure M funds would run counter to the intent of the initiative’s rail component. Committee members pondered whether a line serving Santa Ana and Costa Mesa would benefit the county and the north-south rail corridor, a priority of Measure M.
The initiative requirements state that “the primary improvements will be along the LOSSAN rail corridor and designed to provide frequent train service between north and south Orange County.”
About $257 million in Measure M funds helped establish the Metrolink commuter rail service along the rail corridor in Orange County. OCTA officials say they are planning to spend at least $300 million to more than double Metrolink service by 2030, which would be improving the primary line.
Los Angeles Times June 9, 2004
In a direct response to the March train bombings in Spain that killed 191 people, transit authorities here will begin random searches of passenger bags on subways and commuter railways.
The nation’s first comprehensive policy of inspecting packages on public transit will start next month, Police Chief Joseph Carter of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority said Tuesday. “Explosives are mainly what we are looking for,” said Carter, whose agency is known in this region as “the T.”
Carter said the searches would be random — perhaps administered on a numerical basis. “Let’s say hypothetically that it would be every seventh person,” he said. “If you were 90 [years old] or you were 9, and you had a bag and you were that seventh person, that bag would be inspected.”
But Carol Rose, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts, said she questioned how random the inspections really would be. “Random means no discretion,” Rose said Tuesday. “More likely, it will become the basis for stopping people who are wearing clothes you don’t like, who look like they are homeless or who have some other look that the authorities don’t like. It becomes a basis for violating people’s civil liberties.”
Rose said her larger concern was that the search policy “is not going to make us any safer. It is going to take away liberty without adding security. If this search policy is truly random, then the statistical possibility of catching a terrorist when you are blanketing an entire metropolitan area is very, very minimal.”
About 1 million passengers ride Boston-area subways and commuter trains each day.
The inspections are set to begin shortly before thousands of visitors descend on Boston for the July 26-29 Democratic National Convention. Regional commuters already are alarmed because many key roads will be closed while the convention is in session at the Fleet Center, an auditorium that faces onto one of the area’s busiest arteries.
Carter said inspections would be stepped up during the convention. He said the number of bomb-sniffing dogs deployed would be increased from four to six. He also said packages may be barred from trains and subways during the convention.
Carter said the new measures “obviously” result from the March 11 bombings in Madrid. “We have been doing a number of things since 9/11, but 3/11 underscores for all of us how vulnerable public transportation, and particularly our rail systems, are to terrorism,” he said.
Carter added: “At the T, we are not going to sit back and wait for an incident. We are doing everything we can to prevent an incident from occurring.” Carter said 5,000 transit employees would be trained in “device recognition” and what to do if explosives were found.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania June 9, 2004
Tasty treats might have been a bigger attraction than the sparkling new stations and free rides as Port Authority showed off the rebuilt Overbrook light-rail line Sunday.
Crowds lined up for goodies that were handed out at each station during the afternoon celebration as hundreds of riders checked out the 5.2-mile T line, which reopened last week after an 11-year hiatus. “This is the O’Henry stop,” quipped rider Ted Lutter, of Bon Air, referring to one of the reconstituted stations on the line.
Other stops were unofficially designated by riders as the Twizzler Stop, the Cookie Stop and the Pretzel Stop, where Port Authority employees and volunteers were distributing those specific treats. “This is like Halloween and trick-or-treat for the kids,” said Robert Barnes, of Bethel Park, who brought his young nephew, Jason, along for the outing.
But those weren’t the only reasons people far and near took advantage of the free rides and visited each stop. Some came to critique. “Who picked that color?” said Pam Waigand, of Castle Shannon, pointing to the plum-colored trash cans and benches contrasting with the blue hues the Killarney Avenue station was painted. “They should have painted it red, white and blue.”
She lives nearby with her son, Matthew, 7, and husband, Dave. They all were looking forward to becoming regular riders. “He told about it at show-and-tell in school,” she said of her son.
Riders James Gianturco and Sandy Bishop, of Overbrook, ready to board at the McNeilly stop, were disappointed that the Glenbury stop of the old line had been eliminated. “I would have ridden it every day. Now, after today, it’s never,” Bishop said.
But others beamed and spoke with enthusiasm, such as Rob Rohe, of Brentwood, while boarding at the Memorial Hall stop. “It’s just great. They put enough money in to do a good job. It’s good they eliminated some stops. I remember when the line was bad and signals would go out all the time,” Rohe said.
“People love the line. They’ll be back,” said Wyona Rompala, a volunteer at one stop. She arrived at 11 a.m., and by 1:30 p.m. had given out 10 boxes of pretzels.
Some looked on the event as an opportunity for a family excursion, like Rick King, of Overbrook, who brought his wife, Maria, his father and three children. His dad, William King, a retiree who worked for a steamfitters union, won’t be a future rider. “It doesn’t go to the South Park golf course,” Rick King said.
But Katie King, 14, wants to use the line to get to South Hills Village. “That’s the only thing she cares about,” her father said. His younger children, Billy and Mattie, were taking one of their first T rides. “I hit a grand slam Friday,” Billy told other passengers and anyone who wanted to know. “He did,” his mother said of her son’s achievement for the Carrick Athletic Association.
Donna Dugan, of West Mifflin, and Robyn Marsden, of Australia, a former Pittsburgh resident, wanted to take one more ride on the Overbrook line. “We traveled on the line before they pulled it down,” Matsden said.
They had their hands full with Donna’s son, Mike, 3, who ran all over the Denise station exploring. “He likes this stuff because he plays with Thomas the Train all the time,” his mother said.
Robinson retirees Rudolph and Fran Johnson were looking forward to seeing each stop and getting their tickets punched for an opportunity to win a trip to New York.
Bryant Schude, one of several Pennsylvania Trolley Museum volunteers, was posted as a conductor at the Willow station and shared bits of history with those who boarded.
The Willow station was the original location for a stop on the Pittsburgh and Castle Shannon railroad in the 1870s, a line serving passengers and a coal company. It was modified for trolleys in 1909, Schmude said.
He believed the day’s celebration and ceremony with city council members was historically appropriate. “There was a time when there was a lot of ceremonial stuff whenever a railway or trolley line opened,” he said.
Schmude is known as “Mr. Conductor” at the trolley museum for birthday parties arranged there for children. By coincidence, he encountered a couple that day who had scheduled a museum party by phone for their 4-year-old son, who seemed really excited about riding the T. “That would have been me at that age,” Schmude said.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Wisconsin June 9, 2004
A new alderman is steering light rail back onto the track of public debate.
Ald. Robert Bauman, a longtime public transit advocate, has proposed a $120 million light rail line — he calls it “European-style tram technology” — on a route that would connect the Menomonee Valley to the lakefront, linking Miller Park, Potawatomi Bingo Casino, the planned Harley-Davidson Inc. motorcycle museum, the Midwest Airlines Center and O’Donnell Park.
Bauman wants the Milwaukee Connector study of downtown transit to pick that five-mile line, instead of the study’s current favorite: a $300 million, 14.5-mile guided electric bus system linking the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, the near north side and the Third Ward to downtown, the lakefront, the casino and the ballpark.
His idea is receiving polite consideration from Mayor Tom Barrett and from the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce but solid opposition from County Executive Scott Walker, who has never backed either light rail or guided buses.
Because Bauman represents downtown and has been involved in litigation to demand consideration of rail transit plans, “we don’t want to ignore him completely,” explained Pete Beitzel, vice president of the commerce association and chairman of the connector study’s steering committee.
But Bauman’s concept still faces an uphill battle as it competes with the electric bus plan for $91.5 million in federal transportation money. Barrett said Bauman’s idea “deserves to be part of the mix,” but the mayor added that the key test for either plan will be whether it can attract local or state funding and public support.
Bauman argues that by operating largely along a newly extended Canal St., his route would stimulate Menomonee Valley development and link the valley to downtown. He wants to coordinate planning for the route with rebuilding Canal St., establishing a new valley industrial park and building the Harley museum.
The alderman also says this route would focus on the connector’s original purpose of linking downtown and nearby attractions for tourists and conventioneers.
Walker says he wants no part of any new transit system that might require additional county property tax dollars to build or operate, and he adds, “I’m certainly not going to support a new tax for that.” Bauman said he would seek private financing to avoid spending property tax dollars.
Better alternative
Beitzel questions the ridership and operating cost of Bauman’s route. By contrast, Beitzel said the guided bus route would help residents reach jobs — a key point in the litigation Bauman previously pressed — and could be operated for about the same cost as the regular Milwaukee County Transit System buses it would replace on Wisconsin Ave.
Nonetheless, Beitzel said, he has asked HNTB Corp., the connector project’s engineering firm, to review Bauman’s plan to ensure that the connector committee “didn’t miss something” when it ruled out light rail in 2002. Bauman had been involved in the connector study but became disillusioned with it when guided buses replaced light rail as the leading option.
Both light rail and guided bus lines use electric vehicles, often powered by overhead wires, that run either in reserved lanes of streets or on separate rights of way. Both line up precisely with platforms for quick loading and unloading of passengers, with the buses guided by a single rail, by lasers or by magnets.
One major difference between the technologies is that guided buses can occasionally leave their routes to steer around obstacles. Bauman says guided buses, used mainly in France, are a less-established technology than light rail, the modern descendant of streetcar lines. Beitzel notes that guided bus lines are less expensive per mile than light rail systems.
Because Walker also opposes guided buses, developer Gary Grunau raised $400,000 in private money to cover the local share of the $3 million environmental study now under way on the connector system, with federal funds picking up the rest. Beitzel said that study should be done by the end of the year and should provide detailed cost and ridership estimates.
Light rail lines operate in hundreds of cities around the world, including about 20 U.S. cities.
Environment and Energy Daily June 9, 2004
The House-Senate conference on the transportation reauthorization bill begins this afternoon, with conferees expected to move forward on several noncontroversial issues and discuss the prospects for another continuation of current law, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).
Conferees will likely present opening statements and stick to policy areas where the House- and Senate-passed highway measures mimic each other, sources said yesterday. Controversial provisions dealing with environmental laws like the National Environmental Policy Act and the Clean Air Act are unlikely to be discussed today.
Highway lobbyists and environmental groups last week prepared to make their push for certain policy changes dealing with altering the environmental review process for highway construction. But sources on both sides said they have seen little willingness from staffers to begin work on such controversial issues as Republican leaders work towards a funding agreement.
Lawmakers will also consider the next TEA-21 continuation today, as the third extension of the 1998 law expires at the end of this month and will cut off funding for transportation projects.
Democrats are pushing for a one-month extension, giving members until the August recess to finish the highway conference. “I would like [the extension] to be for one month, but others want it for longer,” Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), who is a conferee, said yesterday. “We’re talking about it tomorrow.”
Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.), another conferee, said he would prefer a longer extension. “I’d like to see as long as possible,” said McCain, noting that he would support a continuation running past the November elections.
“The Dems want to keep their feet to the fire,” said one highway lobbyist, of the push for a one-month extension. Transportation observers say if Republicans cannot finish the highway conference by the end of July, they will likely put off the bill until after November. House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and other GOP leaders do not want to force President Bush — whose administration has threatened to veto both chambers’ highway bills — into a showdown over transportation spending as the election season heats up.
But pressure on the administration is building from the business community, whose leaders sent a letter to Bush last week in support of the Senate’s larger, $318 billion bill, which exceeds the White House’s $256 billion proposal and the House’s $284 billion package.
“The $318 billion investment level would create over 2 million American job opportunities and help address the growing deterioration of the nation’s highway, bridge and transit infrastructure facilities,” wrote the chief executive officers of Siemens Transportation Systems, Bechtel Infrastructure Corporation, Caterpillar Inc. and 208 other major companies. “Our 307,000 employees strongly urge your support in addressing the nation’s surface transportation needs and believe now is the time to approve a six-year authorization at a minimum of $318 billion,” the CEOs said.
USA TODAY June 9, 2004
Subway and commuter train passengers in Boston will be randomly stopped starting in July to have their bags searched and identifications checked in a first-in-the-nation program to protect trains from terrorism.
Officials said the new policy was prompted by the March 11 train bombings in Madrid that killed 191 commuters. It is expected to be in place before the Democratic National Convention in Boston July 26-29.
The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority said it is developing ‘’a program that strikes a proper balance between individual rights and the (system’s) obligation to ensure its customers’ safety.’’
But the American Civil Liberties Union says the searches may be unconstitutional. The group is reminding passengers that they have the right to refuse ID checks. Carol Rose, director of the state ACLU, said the searches could target people based on appearance. She called it ‘’pretend security.’’
The federal government took over airline security after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Since then, it has spent more than $12 billion on upgrades at airports and on planes. But little has been done until now to secure other modes of transportation.
Some bus passengers will see security upgrades this summer. Greyhound will increase the use of metal detectors and luggage searches. It also will begin installing shields to protect drivers in their 2,400 buses, as well as communications systems to connect drivers to 911 operators.
Although it would be impossible to secure the nation’s vast rail system, Amtrak is encouraging passengers to report suspicious activity or unattended bags. Police with bomb-sniffing dogs increased patrols.
Experiments are underway to see if rail security can be tightened further. In May, passengers at a Maryland station had to pass through an explosives-detection machine. In Washington, D.C., the government is screening checked bags on five trains a day; passengers will be screened in July.
NOTE: USA Today of 2004/06/09, posted above, reports that “the American Civil Liberties Union says the searches may be unconstitutional. The group is reminding passengers that they have the right to refuse ID checks.” Perhaps, but then they will be excluded from the transit system, as the following article reports:. “Commuters who refuse to be searched will be prohibited from riding the rails.”
As most transit professionals know, it is difficult enough to persuade motorists to leave their cars and take public transit. How much more difficult will it be to persuade them to forsake the privacy, security, and convenience of their private motor vehicles to be randomly subjected to the arbitrary delays and intrusions of mandatory searches in addition to the other attributes of public transport?. The balance between ensuring appropriate, reasonable, and truly effective “security” measures, and maintaining a transit environment that is attractive to the public, seems to be an issue of increasing challenge to the public transport industry.
Cybercast News Service June 9, 2004
The Bush Administration has had some very legitimate reasons for spending money. They include the build-up in defense after more than a decade of wind-down following the end of the Cold War; the war in Iraq (even though many of us had reservations about getting involved there); the expansion of Medicare (I was very much opposed to the particular version which passed the Congress but the President had promised this in the 2000 campaign so he felt honor-bound to follow through); homeland security (hopefully we will remain secure as the result of this new focus of government); and the war on terror (the Administration contends that Iraq is a part of that but there are other aspects including Afghanistan).
The Bush Administration also had lots of reasons not to spend money: it expanded government as if it were the Great Society Administration; no thought was given to eliminating agencies; hardly any department or agency had to do with less; and limited government was almost a forgotten concept.
Conservatives began to talk about this. The Heritage Foundation and the CATO Institute did many impressive studies. Members of the Republican Study Committee (the caucus of House conservatives) worked to raise that issue in the Congress. A dozen or more conservative columnists ranging from George Will to Cal Thomas to Paul Craig Roberts to Wes Pruden wrote about the spending issue. Longtime activist Donald Devine convened meetings of conservatives who still cared about limited government to see what might be done. He couldn’t accommodate all who wanted to attend.
The net result is that the one group of conservatives and Republicans the President is losing are those focused on economics, especially the libertarians. The Administration has now suddenly become very concerned about spending. Not concerned enough to veto a bill yet, mind you. But in their replies to media inquiries and in their private discussions with Members of Congress suddenly the Administration, which is the only one in modern times to have come this far without vetoing a single piece of legislation, is talking the fiscally conservative line.
That is all well and good and if they really mean it, it will be good for the country. The problem is that now in their zeal for fiscal conservatism they are prepared to scuttle one of the most successful government programs of all time.
TEA 21 was a six-year extension to the original ISTEA (aka ice tea), which was the highway/mass transit authorization bill. When ISTEA was passed it was controversial. There was transit money from the highway trust fund.. That raised the hackles of some in Congress. But that program worked so well that when TEA 21 came along it sailed through the Congress with strong bipartisan support.
Now it is time for a renewal of that program. The Administration is trying to lowball the Congress and seems to be serious about a veto if the Senate and House Conferees can’t agree on something close to the White House number. If they can’t then Speaker Dennis Hastert has said he will not bring the measure to the floor.
If that happens, the bill is dead for this Congress. That will mean that TEA 21 will be extended for a few months more but both Congress and the Administration will not be able to initiate major long-term highway or transit projects.
I agree with one of the true heroes of the conservative cause in this country, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, when he contends that the only two items authorized in our beloved Constitution as being appropriate to the Federal Government are defense and infrastructure. Everything else, if you honestly believe in what the Founding Fathers had in mind, should be handled at the state or local level.
We no longer have post roads as mentioned in the Constitution, but their successors are the excellent highway system we have in America. And while mass transit was unknown at the time the Constitution was ratified, an excellent case can be made for the proposition that mass transit is an excellent substitute for roads, carrying people to and from destinations for which they otherwise would have to use their automobiles.
Here in Washington, our 103-mile METRORAIL (or subway) system carries 700,000 passengers per day and that number often goes up another 100,000 during the peak tourist season. Our two commuter railroads, MARC (Maryland Area Rail Commuter) and VRE (Virginia Railway Express) together carry upwards of 40,000 people in and out of Washington each day. That is equivalent to the population of a small city.
What METRO carries equals one of our larger cities in the USA. The METRO bus system carries another half million people, although many of them transfer to the subway. There are six regional bus systems that also feed METRORAIL as well as carrying local passengers. Washington streets and highways are at the saturation point as it is. Imagine if all of these transit riders were dumped on the highways. It would take days to get home.
The Administration has picked the wrong measure with which to be fiscally responsible. As Senator Inhofe has reminded us, this bill does not add to the deficit. In fact, it can be considered a jobs bill. I understand that. public works jobs, funded by government, are not the same as private sector jobs. Certainly the latter is preferable.
Still, with unemployment higher than desirable, it would not hurt if some of these highway and transit projects could at last get underway. The ratio is 80% highways to 20% for transit. Highway projects are funded with 80-90% federal funds. Transit projects, especially rail projects, are lucky to get 50%. The Bush folks are not pro-transit.
Another problem, which should perhaps be discussed in greater detail in a subsequent commentary, is that the Bush ‘43 Administration is THE most anti-rail Administration in the history of federal involvement in mass transit, which goes back to 1963. They openly push so-called bus rapid transit on cities that would rather have rail.
Bus rapid transit is a fraud. First the public doesn’t care to ride buses, no matter how plush they are. Second, each bus must have a driver whereas light rail trains can easily handle four articulated cars with a single motorman. That means that one operator does the work of seven to eight bus drivers. Labor is the major part of the cost of any transit system so the idea that so-called bus rapid transit will cut costs in the long run is absurd.
Now fuel costs are rising. Continental Airlines testified before Congress that the increase in fuel costs means a difference of over $700 million to Continental for this fiscal year. It is the difference between solvency and continued bankruptcy for that airline. Well, buses use fuel as well, whereas most rail cars are powered by electricity. Nuclear, natural gas or coal-driven power plants provide the electricity. It is far less expensive than diesel fuel.
What the Administration is doing by foisting this fraud on local communities is shameful. Some locations, which have spent millions planning for light rail, such as Louisville, have dropped the project, saying that they can’t get through the approval process set up by the Administration.
Only five fixed guideway projects made it through the Administration approval process this year. One of projects to be funded is the extension of the Las Vegas monorail. The monorail should have begun service in January. First, a motor fell off of one of the cars and came crashing down to the street. By the grace of God no one was hurt. Now the software controlling the unmanned cars appears to have problems, so testing continues day and night. No one knows when service will begin on the original part of the line, so funding the extension seems premature.
The ONLY light rail project to win approval is a six-mile east side extension of the Gold Line, the Los Angeles light rail line from Union Station to Pasadena. Congressman Ernest Istook (R-OK), no fan of light rail, nearly killed the project. His useful questions got it modified so that it is almost certain to be built now…but for a few days the project was nearly dead. Some critics contend that when Istook takes such a dogmatic stand against light rail (he won’t even consider funding a line in his own district of Oklahoma City) he is doing the bidding of the Administration. Others insist that he just wants to see the taxpayer’s dollar spent well.
Either way, what the Administration doesn’t manage to kill by its unusual method of calculating potential passengers, Istook is eager to take on. Istook is also a bus rapid transit advocate, which is why his connection to the Administration is suspect.
Fortunately, Congress has a say in which projects get funded. While the bills passed by both Houses of Congress had far too many earmarks, some of those earmarks are useful in overriding the anti-rail prejudice of the Administration.
One Senator from a large industrial state told me he asked White House Chief of Staff Andy Card why the Administration had picked, of all things, the highway/transit bill to threaten a veto. Card replied that the Administration feared what the Heritage Foundation and the editorial page of the Wall Street Journal would say if they let a bill, with a larger authorized amount, through.
The Senator, a loyal Republican, replied, “What? The Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal people are going to vote for Kerry?” They are not, but as Eric Licht, the President of Coalitions for America, suggested, it is likely that their polling shows them in trouble with economic conservatives, and that is driving the decision to lowball the Congress.
If the extension of TEA-21 has to wait until the next Congress to finish, it will be most unfortunate for the nation, and ironically, for the Administration. There could be a lot of ribbon cutting for highway and transit projects between now and November if the bill could get passed near term. Lots of people will be put to work. I know the jobs picture is looking up, but as Bill Clinton proved it helps to have very low unemployment.
I give Senator Inhofe much credit for moving ahead. It was he who took the initiative to name conferees in the Senate. If the Senate and House conferees can only agree on moving this forward, even if a two-year program has to be passed and then the remainder worked on in the next Congress to make up for the other four years, it would be worth the fight.
If the Administration, for the past three and a half years, didn’t ever meet a spending program it didn’t embrace, then I’d be right there with them on the highway/transit bill. If everyone was going to be asked to sacrifice, perhaps because of the war, then projects Sen. Inhofe and I think are worthwhile should be among those to be cut. But every big spending program, regardless of merit, was signed on the dotted line.
In that case, I stand with Sen. Inhofe. His position (and mine) is that Congress should pass the higher number and if the President should veto it, Congress should attempt to override the veto. That makes sense to me but Speaker Hastert says he is not going to give the media a chance to drive a wedge between the Administration and majority House Republicans, who would then be accused of being profligate spenders.
Who knows? Perhaps at the last moment sanity will prevail. Perhaps we will get a bill we all can live with. Ooops! I almost forgot. This is an election year.
Los Angeles Times June 9, 2004
Rail Line Funding Is OKd
The controversial CenterLine project cleared a major hurdle Tuesday night when a government oversight committee concluded that $340 million in local sales tax revenue can be used to fund the light-rail system.
Members of the Measure M Citizens Oversight Committee decided on a 8-0 vote, with one abstention, that the billion-dollar CenterLine project met the requirements of Measure M, a 1990 ballot measure that established a 0.5% sales tax to raise money for local transportation projects until 2011.
The Orange County Transportation Authority has been counting on Measure M funds to cover $200 million of construction and $140 million to fund operation of the line. Some Measure M funds have already been spent on the project. The authority also is seeking state and federal assistance.
“This is a very important finding for CenterLine,” said Arthur T. Leahy, OCTA’s chief executive officer, who had once shelved the project two years ago because of a lack of political support. “The committee members understood the issue and concluded we were in full compliance with Measure M.” Had the committee found against CenterLine, OCTA would have been forced to seek funding elsewhere for the project or cancel it entirely.
For almost three months, the Measure M Citizens Oversight Committee has been grappling with the wording of the initiative and its criteria for funding projects. Passed by voters after three attempts, Measure M has raised about $3 billion to $4 billion so far for local transportation projects. It provides guidelines for a variety of highway, street, rail and transit improvements undertaken by the OCTA and local cities.
The initiative also created the oversight committee of nine members nominated by the Orange County Grand Jury Assn., a nonprofit organization of former grand jurors, and then selected by OCTA. Committee members review projects funded by the sales tax to ensure they conform to Measure M’s requirements.
Committee members said Tuesday that CenterLine met the measure’s definition of high-tech advanced rail and was an appropriate extension of service from the county’s main rail line, which runs from San Diego to Los Angeles — the so-called LOSSAN corridor.
The project also met the initiative’s criteria calling for the development of a high-capacity urban rail system in Orange County. “Measure M is specific and written appropriately at the time” it was passed, said committee member Derek McGregor. “I’d like to see this project move forward.”
County auditor-controller David Sundstrom, the committee chairman, abstained from voting, saying he thought the CenterLine project was not clearly defined in Measure M. He proposed asking the OCTA board of directors to amend Measure M to add CenterLine to its language, but his idea got no support from committee members.
The committee began looking into CenterLine after light-rail opponents complained at the panel’s Feb. 10 meeting that the proposal was inconsistent with project descriptions in Measure M.
As now envisioned, the nine-mile street car system would run from John Wayne Airport to the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center. The line, which is in the engineering phase, would pass through the South Coast Plaza area and north on Bristol Street.
OCTA has long contended that the project met Measure M’s requirements to develop existing rights-of-way and create an urban rail system in Orange County.
Just as significant, OCTA officials said the oversight committee had ruled repeatedly that Measure M funds already used for the project had been spent properly.
So far, CenterLine has received about $25 million in sales tax revenue.
But at the committee’s April meeting, the discussion focused on opponents’ claims that CenterLine’s receipt of $340 million in Measure M funds would run counter to the intent of the initiative’s rail component.
Committee members pondered whether a line serving Santa Ana and Costa Mesa would benefit the county and the north-south rail corridor, a priority of Measure M.
The initiative requirements state that “the primary improvements will be along the LOSSAN rail corridor and designed to provide frequent train service between north and south Orange County.”
About $257 million in Measure M funds helped establish the Metrolink commuter rail service along the rail corridor in Orange County. OCTA officials say they are planning to spend at least $300 million to more than double Metrolink service by 2030, which would be improving the primary line.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution June 9, 2004
Suburbanites have always gotten bashed for not riding mass transit.
Now suburbanites trying to escape Atlanta’s maddening rush hour traffic are being bashed because their buses have the audacity to run along Peachtree Street.
For years, I’ve followed the activities of PEDS, or Pedestrians Educating Drivers on Safety, the increasingly influential pedestrian advocacy group. On Monday, they were out on Peachtree, carrying picket signs, some of them reading, “Peachtree is for Pedestrians.”
Well, excuse me for pointing this out, but Peachtree is also for traffic. Four lanes of it, in fact.
And until Peachtree is transformed into a grand pedestrian boulevard and completely closed to traffic, the scores of MARTA buses, coaches operated by Gwinnett and Cobb transit, and the new Xpress buses quietly launched this week by the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority have every right to drive along it and let off their patrons.
Usually, PEDS and its founder, Sally Flocks, have been on target, providing a helpful public conscience prod to drivers who need reminding that once they get onto city streets, the freeway mentality should be left behind.
And yes, bus drivers should be made aware that pedestrians and bikers share the streets and that crosswalks belong to walkers. But a distasteful whiff of class warfare, urbanite vs. suburbanite, entered into Monday’s protest. “Suburban bus drivers routinely bully past pedestrians waiting at unsignalized crosswalks,” said the PEDS press release. And MARTA bus drivers don’t?
As a downtown denizen for more than 15 years, I speak from experience about the perils of trying to cross the street. I’ve nearly been run over several times by buses. Every single time, the insignia on the side was “MARTA.”
On Monday, Atlanta police were out in force ready to nab marauding suburban bus drivers mowing down pedestrians. Instead, they wrote a few tickets to the usual suspects, those in four-wheeled vehicles.
Lt. Frank Zunno, commanding the detail, said he hadn’t been aware of any problems with any buses buzzing pedestrians. “The buses have been really good,” he said.
But Flocks insists there is a difference in how MARTA buses are driven vs. their suburban counterparts. “MARTA buses are used to being in a city, and they tend to be a lot more respectful,” she said. Suburban buses are driven differently. “Their reaction is, hard on the horn, get out of the way, I’m coming,” said Flocks.
The protest was timed to coincide with the first day of service of GRTA’s express buses from Rockdale, Clayton and Henry counties. The startup was designed to be almost invisible to “work out the kinks,” said GRTA director Steve Stancil.
Stancil said the GRTA drivers had been well-trained and were talked to about sharing the road with walkers and bikers. “We reiterated that we would not tolerate any aggression,” he said. Can’t we all just share the road?
The West Australian (Perth) June 9, 2004
FOR many Perth residents, the city’s rattling green and yellow trams are remembered with a fond and sentimental sense of days gone by.
Younger residents lament not having had the chance to experience the trams that these days remain only as an integral part of Melbourne’s public transport system.
But when Perth’s trams passed into history and the last service pulled out of Inglewood on July 19, 1958, not all West Australians were mourning their passing.
The West Australian reported that the end of the tram service would be marked more by rejoicing than sadness. The “box-like” trams were described as a helpless transport medium that took “a greedy share of city and suburban roads”. The service was considered outdated and unable to hold its own against the speed and flexibility of the fuel-powered bus service.
WA’s first tram services began in Hay Street on September 28, 1899, and were operated by a British company, Perth Electric Tramways Ltd. By 1905 trams replaced buses to Victoria Park and the service was extended to Fremantle.
More suburban services, including to Inglewood, Subiaco, Leederville, Nedlands, Mt Lawley, Maylands, Osborne Park, Mt Hawthorn, Como, Claremont, Wembley and South Perth, were introduced over the years to meet the growing population’s demand for public transport for work and recreational needs.
Trams also operated in Kalgoorlie from 1902 to 1952 and for a short time in the Goldfields town of Leonora. By the time the system came under State government control in 1913, Perth’s tram tracks had expanded to a total of about 37km but it was in critical need of maintenance.
Trolley buses were introduced in 1933 to boost the service, which had experienced a drop in patronage - and therefore reduced maintenance - during the Depression.
World War II posed more challenges for the city’s tramways, with an ageing system under heavy use facing stiff competition from cheaper and more flexible bus services.
Trams later became seen as an impediment to the growing dominance of cars on Perth’s roads and were blamed for causing congestion and traffic jams. Suburban services began to be scaled back from 1948 and disappeared over a decade, with the final Inglewood service replaced with a trolley bus in 1958.
Though the end of Perth’s trams may have brought a sense of relief, the service played a major role in the public transport system and development of the city’s suburbs that cannot be forgotten as the State embarks on its next major public transport project - the building of the Mandurah railway.
TRAINS News Wire June 10, 2004
Ridership on the nation’s capital’s rapid-transit system Metrorail reached 850,636 trips June 9, the highest ridership day in Metrorail’s 28-year history, on a day that people flocked to the District of Columbia to pay their respects to former President Ronald Reagan. Wednesday’s ridership bested the previous record by 49,379, when 811,257 people took a trip on Metrorail on January 20, 1993, the day that Bill Clinton was inaugurated as President.
Typical weekday spring ridership usually sees anywhere between 670,000 to 690,000 customers taking trips on Metrorail. Two other days this month have also seen unusually high ridership. Earlier this week, on Tuesday, June 8, ridership was 717,196; it was 718,359 on Thursday, June 3.
Times-Picayune (New Orleans June 10, 2004
Living downtown is great. Who can complain about having the New Orleans Jazz and Heritage Festival, Louis Armstrong Park, Mardi Gras Under the Bridge and a host of other attractions right in their own back yard? And, now, some residents couldn’t be happier with a new addition to our neck of the woods: The Canal streetcar is again rumbling through the heart of downtown.
The new streetcars take thousands of locals and tourists to work and play as they travel a 5?-mile route from the French Market, along Canal Street through the Central Business District and into the Mid-City area. The line ends at City Park Avenue and the historic city cemeteries.
“I love the trolley,” said Chicago resident Davis James, in town for the Memorial Day weekend. “Locals should be happy to have this connection in the city. I’m no local but this trolley is indeed a good connection.”
And, what a connection! A spur line along North Carrollton Avenue connects Canal Street to City Park at Beauregard Circle, where riders can enjoy the splendor of nature, a storybook village and a variety of activities. The final stop is the New Orleans Museum of Art, where visitors can see one of the finest art museums in the country as well as the breathtaking Sydney and Walda Bestoff Sculpture Garden.
But, if that isn’t enough to persuade you to take a ride on the little red streetcar, only blocks away from its final stop is the historic Fair Grounds, with its horse races and, of course, Jazzfest.
“I’ve lived in Mid-City for six years,” said Lisa Daniels Smullen. “Every year, we cab it over to the Fair Grounds or walk our way from Canal and Jeff Davis Parkway. This year, we boarded the new streetcar. It made attending Jazzfest more convenient and fun. It was an adventure before our adventure. It was a ride on the wild side.”
The new line includes a fleet of 24 brand-new red streetcars, built in New Orleans by a special Regional Transit Authority team, including blacksmiths, carpenters, electricians, and mechanics. The streetcars closely resemble the Perley Thomas models used on the St. Charles Avenue line and the city’s first streetcar lines. “My nanny took me on the trolley,” said Maxxi Lynn Bryant, 4. “I like it.”
A ride on the wild side costs $1.25 each way. You can buy a one-day pass for $5 or a three-day pass for $12. By the way, the new Canal streetcar has something else that differs from the St. Charles streetcar: air conditioning.
Sacramento Bee June 10, 2004
Friday morning’s opening of three stations on Folsom Boulevard through Rancho Cordova marks light rail’s deepest foray into suburbia.
Sacramento Regional Transit commuter trains will roll out of the new terminus at Sunrise Boulevard - making additional pickups at new stations at Zinfandel Drive and at Olson Drive, as well as existing stations - on a 32-minute ride into downtown.
Wednesday afternoon, workers hurriedly were spreading concrete for sidewalks, planting trees, lighting fixtures, and assembling artwork as trains pulled through stations on final training runs.
RT officials say they think the 2.8-mile, $89 million project, although modest, represents more than just a rail-line extension.
With its reach to Sunrise Boulevard, the light-rail service connects with some of the more affluent and car-oriented communities in the county.
“This is a brave new world for RT, and a tremendous opportunity,” said Roger Niello, an RT board member and county supervisor who represents the area. If the transit system can start pulling longtime drivers out of cars and onto trains, Niello said, “it bodes well for the long-term success of the lines we will be installing.”
RT officials would like to extend light rail to El Dorado, Placer and Yolo counties, as well as to the airport and Elk Grove.
The current challenge, transit officials say, will be in persuading first-timers to try the line, and in making the experience good enough, compared with driving a car, that they will want to continue. Niello said residents of the Sunrise area have shown a lot of interest in light rail. “The question is,” he said, “are they excited because they hope others will ride so Highway 50 will be less crowded for their car, or do they want to ride?”
Niello, a car dealer, says RT must market its product. Because there are few RT users in the area, “we need to identify our potential customers, and ask them: ‘What do we need to do to attract you to our product?’ “
The Sunrise Boulevard extension is the first phase of a bigger expansion. By April, RT officials say they expect to push the line out seven more miles into historic downtown Folsom.
They also plan to build a spur in downtown Sacramento, running from the nexus point at Seventh and K streets a few blocks north to the Amtrak station.
Officials estimate the Folsom and Amtrak extensions will add 6,100 passengers daily to the light-rail system by 2005.
RT spokeswoman Christina Ragsdale said this light-rail line will advertise itself. It runs parallel to Folsom Boulevard and Highway 50, giving motorists a good chance to see if the trains truly go faster than cars. “We’re getting to the point where commuters may see any alternative as a good thing,” Ragsdale said. “We think there is pent-up demand.”
RT officials hope to run speedier, limited-stop trains during commute hours late next year, shortening the ride from Folsom to the Amtrak station downtown from 45 to 37 minutes, and from Sunrise Boulevard from 32 to 25 minutes.
A ride on light rail costs $1.50. That ticket can be used for a bus transfer. An all-day ticket costs $3.50. The Sunrise station has a 500-space park-and-ride lot. Officials said they believe the lot will be full most mornings.
In addition, RT will start a feeder-bus service Sunday along Sunrise Boulevard from Roseville to the light-rail station. County road officials say they will watch to see what effect the Sunrise station will have on the congested streets there. Officials say the Sunrise, Folsom and Highway 50-ramp area has become one of their biggest congestion headaches, and it should get worse as housing expands to the south.
RT officials built a $3 million overcrossing at the site, so trains will not block traffic on Sunrise. County transportation officials and RT are designing a similar overpass for light rail at Watt Avenue to relieve traffic backups there.
Business Wire June 10, 2004
Today BART’s Board of Directors voted to strengthen the Bay Area’s regional rail system to withstand future powerful earthquakes by putting a general obligation property tax bond measure on the November 2004 ballot in Alameda, Contra Costa and San Francisco counties.
Should voters approve the measure by a two-thirds margin, BART would use the $980 million in bond revenues to strengthen its Transbay Tube, stations and elevated tracks.
The estimated average yearly tax rate would be approximately $7 per $100,000 of assessed value over the life of the bonds. BART Directors called the $980 million bond a “truly wise investment” saying that the yearly cost to the average property taxpayer would be minimal but the benefits of passing the measure would be immense.
“When you boil it down, the average property owner will pay less for this bond than they do to fill up their vehicle with gas, or buy a ticket to a Bay Area theme park, or even take their family out to the movies,” said BART Director Lynette Sweet. “Meanwhile, the bond revenues would prevent massive gridlock, save lives and save taxpayers tens of billions of dollars in BART rebuilding costs should a major earthquake rock the Bay Area.”
According to the U.S. Geological Survey, there’s a 62% chance of at least one magnitude 6.7 earthquake striking the Bay Area by 2032. “The ground motions and associated ground deformation from a major earthquake will be stronger than anything this region as ever felt since 1906, and that is what causes the damage,” said USGS Geologist David Schuartz.
In the 1960’s and 1970’s engineers designed and constructed BART well beyond the earthquake standards of the time but earthquake science has improved dramatically since then. BART’s 2002 Earthquake Safety Program study found that a powerful quake could likely cause many BART structures to fail, risking passenger safety, unless strengthened to today’s seismic standards.
Cost to Rebuild BART
BART’s 2002 Earthquake Safety Program study, which two panels of independent, world-renowned geologists and engineers reviewed, found a massive quake would likely shut down BART for two and a half years or longer and cost taxpayers upwards of $15 billion to rebuild the system if isn’t strengthened for an earthquake.
The Effects of a BART Shutdown on Traffic, Economy
— An April 2004 U.C. Berkeley study found that the evening rush hour commute from Oakland, thru the Caldecott Tunnel and into Concord would take at least five times as long if an earthquake knocked out BART service. — BART carries 310,000 weekday commuters. A BART shutdown could add 310,000 trips to Bay Area roadways, many of which would likely be closed after a major quake. — A BART shutdown could gridlock transbay commutes. BART carries 150,000 transbay commute trips, and during peak commute hours carries the passenger equivalent of a deck full of Bay Bridge traffic. — The 2002 Earthquake Safety Program study estimates there would be a $3.4 billion loss in worker productivity for employees who would otherwise be at their jobs if they weren’t stuck in traffic. This figure does not calculate the estimated tens of billions of dollars in economic loss to Bay Area businesses.
Cost of Bond Measure
The estimated average yearly tax rate would be approximately $7 per $100,000 of assessed value over the life of the bonds. Assessed values are often lower than market value. For example, if the assessed value of a Bay Area home is $400,000, then the property owner would pay on average, over the life of the bonds, approximately $28 per year in taxes. “That’s the cheapest insurance policy on earth,” said BART Director Dan Richard. “Especially when you consider it will ensure traffic doesn’t come to a standstill after a massive earthquake and that taxpayers won’t have to rebuild BART, which is valued at an estimated $15 billion.”
Bond Measure Pays a Portion of Total Funding
The $980 million bond measure is designed to pay a portion of BART’s $1.3 billion Earthquake Safety Program. The remaining funds will come from a combination of state and federal dollars as well as passenger revenues.
Burlington County Times June 10, 2004
TRENTON, N.J. - The plan to build the River Line never included buying land or paying interest on the millions borrowed for the rail system, but no laws were broken in the deal, the attorney general’s office said Thursday. Those two factors helped push the Trenton-to-Camden rail line’s final cost to over $1 billion.
State investigators interviewed 10 people and used a grand jury to subpoena hundreds of documents, but ultimately found no criminal wrongdoing.
The investigation centered on questions about the cost overruns, said Chuck Davis, a spokesman for Attorney General Peter C. Harvey. “That’s what we looked at. We looked at whether there were cost overruns and whether change orders were a problem,” Davis said.
The original $604 million contract with the Bechtel Corporation did not factor in $268 million in interest and other fees, the investigation found. Bechtel’s contract also failed to include $84 million to buy land for rail stations and parking lots. Another $40 million needed for NJ Transit to collect fares was also missing from the original estimate.
But investigators concluded they were not true cost overruns, and did not violate any state law regulating public contracts, Davis said.
The project, which was developed and approved during the administration of former Gov. Christie Whitman, not only far exceeded its cost estimate but opened nearly two years late.
The planning and construction of the 34-mile line was marked by doubts on both counts as well as about 18 months worth of delays, including some caused when a new 900-ton bridge fell into the Rancocas Creek in 2001.
In 2002, with construction well under way, a legislative committee held hearings on why the line was even built.
Originally, two law firms with expertise in fraud detection - Fischbein, Badillo, Wagner and Harding of New York, and Chatham-based Arsenault and Fassett - were hired to conduct the investigation. But Harvey cut that short, saying the investigation was better handled by the state itself.
Assemblyman Jack Connors, D-Camden, who held hearings in 2002 to look into whether there was political wrongdoing in the creation of the light-rail line, said Thursday’s announcement might not ease everyone’s mind. “The question is, did the depth of the investigation go far enough?” Connors said. “I don’t know the answer to that.”
Burlington County Freeholder Vince Farias was one of the biggest supporters of the light-rail, which has most of its route in his county. “I was pretty confident there wasn’t anything going on anywhere,” Farias said. “But I was glad the attorney general made that as an independent observation.”
Gov. James E. McGreevey is disturbed by the overall cost of the project, but remains committed to seeing the rail line succeed, spokesman Micah Rasmussen said. “The bottom line is we are here today. We have a system that is up and running and people are using it,” Rasmussen said. “The decision should never have been made to spend a billion dollars of scarce transportation dollars.”
South Florida Sun-Sentinel June 11, 2004
FORT LAUDERDALE — In a boardroom 300 feet over downtown Fort Lauderdale, Broward County’s first light-rail project emerged Thursday: a pair of downtown loops on a free, modern, fun-looking vehicle.
After more than two years of talk, reports, congressional lobbying and consultant contracts, the Downtown Development Authority’s plan to pull drivers off the roads has finally gelled.
The quasi-governmental DDA, a taxing authority, hopes to slip into place by 2007 a public transit option that would free downtown of the congestion redevelopment will bring. “One of the things we can say to the public is we are doing something … about this potential gridlock,” said County Commissioner John Rodstrom, a guest at the DDA meeting. The county has agreed to operate the light- rail system, said Rodstrom and County Administrator Roger Desjarlais.
The rail project is expected to fit into the wider maze of transit that one day will allow drivers to become riders, with public transportation from Sunrise to downtown Fort Lauderdale to the airport and seaport and elsewhere. “This would relieve people of having to drive anywhere,” said Florida Department of Transportation Mobility Manager Jeff Weidner, who said the state would consider helping pay for the downtown people-mover.
At the same meeting in the AutoNation tower, the developer-led DDA voted to push for thousands more residential units in the ballooning downtown, arguing that more people are needed to bring their vision to life.
The DDA agreed Thursday to spend up to $25,000 writing a land-use plan amendment for the city of Fort Lauderdale, which can’t afford to write the research-intensive document to allow another 13,000 to 18,000 residential units downtown. It then would need city, county and state approval.
Though high-density growth has been controversial in Fort Lauderdale, the city’s recently approved Downtown Master Plan envisions the population of the urban core more than tripling. The approximately one dozen high-rises and scores of smaller redevelopment projects under construction downtown now and in the past several years brought only 5,100 new units.
Downtown leaders see the rail project as the missing amenity that must accompany heavy residential growth, which in turn, is key to the “Live, Work & Play” city center they advertise.
The light-rail system would stop every eight minutes to pick up passengers along Las Olas Boulevard and Southwest Second Street downtown — a $12 million loop from the Performing Arts Center/Himmarshee entertainment district to Las Olas Boulevard at Federal Highway. The project would break ground in 2006 and open in 2007.
A second phase would loop Andrews Avenue and Third Avenue, from Sistrunk Boulevard down to Southeast Ninth Street. It would be complete in 2009 or 2010.
The rail cars would run on tracks laid in the roadway, but vehicles still could travel in the lanes. The rail cars haven’t been selected, but DDA Executive Director Chris Wren said the board wants something modern, fun and unique.
To test the route, a rubber-tire trolley will begin, possibly as soon as next month, offering an evening and possibly a lunch loop, including on-board entertainment.
Both rail loops are expected to cost a total of $38 million. Of that, the federal government would pay half, and the state and the DDA would each pay a quarter. The DDA will request construction funding in 2006 but for now is working to qualify as a federal “New Starts” project, eligible to apply for money every year.
“We believe, particularly in talking to our congressional offices, everyone is extremely behind this project, from the federal government, the state, the county, the city, the DDA, the [Regional Transportation Authority,]” Wren said. “We think we’re going to get our money.” Like most public transit, the rail system would operate at a loss. The county is expected to spend $1.5 million a year operating it.
The DDA board is made up of downtown businessmen, most of them developers with a financial stake in the success of the downtown. With the city of Fort Lauderdale paralyzed in a budget crisis, DDA filled the void, agreeing to pay for the planning and engineering studies; hiring consultants and lobbyists; even traveling to Washington, D.C., two weeks ago to firm up the deal.
“Because the city is going through leadership change and there’s a vacuum,” said Wren, a former top city planning manager, “DDA is percolating up to take care of that. We’re brothers and sisters anyway.”
Houston Chronicle June 11, 2004
Speakers criticized a draft transportation plan for the Houston area Thursday as too unbalanced, with too many street and road projects and not enough mass transit and trails for bikers and pedestrians.
Also, the 2025 Regional Transportation Plan focuses on moving future vehicles but fails to consider some consequences — such as increased air pollution and flooding — of too many automobiles and too much paving, said several speakers at the City Council’s Transportation, Infrastructure and Aviation Committee meeting.
“We don’t know what these (proposed projects) will mean for neighborhoods, and neighborhoods have not had an opportunity to evaluate them,” said Robin Holzer of the recently organized Citizens Transportation Coalition.
The group’s members include opponents of the Katy Freeway and Spur 527 rebuilding projects. “The plan was always to build a lot more roads all over the place,” said John Wilson of the Galveston-Houston Association for Smog Prevention. He asked that all new road projects that have not received public scrutiny be deleted.
Alan Clark, chief transportation planner for the Houston-Galveston Area Council, which drew up the plan, did not respond to that suggestion. He said the plan includes eight proposed commuter rail lines, plus Metro’s voter-approved light rail expansion and vastly increased bus service.
Clark acknowledged that future population growth — an expected 3 million in the next two decades — also will require a lot more concrete. Most of the roadways, he said, would be built in suburban areas as residential development spreads outward through the eight-county area. In the city of Houston, the plan calls for splitting transportation dollars almost equally between new street capacity and mass transit.
Council members limited themselves to questions and did not criticize the plan, but several have expressed dismay about such items as the proposed conversion of segments of South Main, Kirby, Gessner and other thoroughfares into “smart streets.”
These are envisioned as almost-freeways with computerized signals, grade-separated intersections and added lanes, enabling traffic to zip along.
Federal law requires renewing the regional transportation every three years, and projects must generally be included in the plan to qualify for federal funding.
H-GAC’s Transportation Policy Council is scheduled to vote on the plan June 25. Then, after it is analyzed for conformity with federal environmental law, it will be submitted to the Federal Highway Administration for approval.
Sacramento Bee June 11, 2004
A major Sacramento County transportation improvements funding measure took a key step this week toward the November ballot, but picked up some unwanted baggage on the way.
Environmentalists say they oppose Measure A, a $5 billion sales tax proposal, because it builds too many roads and doesn’t contain enough growth controls.
As well, Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo warned that the City Council may have problems with the measure because it doesn’t do enough to encourage infill and transit-oriented development.
The measure, as approved Thursday by the Sacramento Transportation Authority, would replace the county’s existing Measure A, a half-cent sales tax for transportation services and projects that expires in 2009. If approved by two-thirds of voters, the new measure would go into effect in 2009 and last 30 years.
Much of its revenue is proposed to go to buses, light rail, road maintenance, road safety and road expansions, including highway car- pool lanes and larger interchanges. Money also would go to services for the elderly and disabled, for pedestrian improvements, and for the American River bike trail. Some funds would be set aside to purchase permanent open space to mitigate some of the growth-inducing effects of new roads.
Sacramento Transportation Authority officials and several STA board members called the measure a good compromise, while acknowledging it doesn’t provide enough money to make anyone happy. STA officials decided not to ask voters for more than a continuation of the existing half-cent level.
Several STA board members implored special-interest groups in the community to support the measure. “I can pick holes in things I don’t like either, but if we don’t pass Measure A, we’re going to be in a world of hurt,” STA board member Illa Collin said.
STA officials now must take the measure’s spending package to the Board of Supervisors and each city council in the county.
To qualify for the ballot, the measure must receive the county supervisors’ support, the city of Sacramento’s support, and the support of at least three other city councils. Regional Transit officials, who complained early about the dollar distribution, have signaled their support. “We go out now to win this election,” RT General Manager Beverly Scott said.
Others, notably environmentalists, are balking. Ann Kohl of the Environmental Council of Sacramento said her group doesn’t support the measure as written.
The measure stipulates that local governments must have an approved habitat conservation process in the Cosumnes River area to receive Measure A money.
The measure also includes a fund that local governments can pull from to help build infill or smart-growth style developments.
However, to environmentalists’ dismay, the measure also provides funds for freeways - which are supported by the business community - and does not establish the permanent county growth-limit line environmentalists requested.
Brian Williams, STA’s executive director, countered the environmentalists’ argument, saying the measure needs elements in it that appeal to voters throughout the county. “Not acknowledging the congested highways would have been a fatal flaw for voters in the suburbs,” Williams said.
Sacramento Mayor Fargo voted as an STA board member Thursday to support the measure but warned she “cannot assure there will be a majority of votes on the Sacramento City Council when this goes before them.”
Sacramento Councilwoman Lauren Hammond echoed Fargo. “The rest of the region refuses to address reasonable measures of growth management,” Hammond said.
Dan Briggs, representing Elk Grove on the STA board, called on Sacramento to accept the measure. “The city of Sacramento has to realize there is more than one city in this region,” he said. He and other STA members say they are interested in trying to pass a supplementary tax measure a few years down the road for more transportation improvements.
M2 PRESSWIRE June 11, 2004
The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) nudged rail to Dulles a step forward by allowing the project to move into preliminary engineering. Preliminary engineering is the second phase of a three-part process in which the projects design, scope and cost are refined before construction can begin.
This corridor has long needed a public transportation solution that will provide local residents with greater convenience and flexibility while reducing congestion, said FTA Administrator Jennifer L. Dorn. Our goal is to provide common sense transit solutions to residents throughout the Northern Virginia area.
This approval does not guarantee that the project will be approved to enter the Final Design phase of project development. The FTA will continue to monitor and evaluate the project throughout the development process as information concerning costs, benefits and impacts is refined. In order to be considered for any future grants, all federal requirements must be met as rail to Dulles continues through the rigorous project development process.
The Dulles Corridor Rail Project Extension to Wiehle Avenue is a joint venture between the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation (VDRPT) and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). The project would operate from the existing West Falls Church station to Wiehle Avenue in Reston for approximately 11.6 miles, with five stations along the route. Through an agreement with VDRPT, WMATA will serve as the Technical Manager of the project to ensure that the project design is compatible with Metrorail requirements.
VDRPT plans to conduct preliminary engineering for the project through a public- private partnership agreement with Dulles Transit Partners, LLC.
The Dulles Corridor Rail Project, like all major capital projects seeking federal funds, is subject to the FTAs rigorous evaluation process, which measures mobility improvements, environmental benefits, cost-effectiveness, operating efficiencies, transit supportive land use and future patterns, as well as a number of optional factors, including the projected economic impact of the project.
The San Diego Union-Tribune June 11, 2004
NATIONAL CITY — The former general manager of National City Transit was sentenced yesterday to six months in a work furlough program after pleading guilty to charges that he stole nearly $30,000 in public funds.
After his attorney asked for leniency, a tearful Alfredo “Freddy” Rios stood before a San Diego Superior Court judge to express his remorse for the series of unauthorized credit card expenses, such as lunches and a 2001 trip to the Little League World Series in Pennsylvania. “I don’t know why it happened . . . It’s a disgrace to my family,” Rios said. “To go from an outstanding citizen to a criminal.”
Rios, who oversaw 45 employees and a $2.2 million bus company budget, was charged Aug. 18, 2003, with grand theft by the county’s District Attorney’s Office after a six-month investigation.
Yesterday, he was sentenced to a work furlough program for 180 days that would allow him to work during the day and spend his nights in jail. Rios also was ordered to repay $27,973 and will be on probation for three years.
Rios’ attorney asked Superior Court Judge Browder A. Willis to allow Rios to perform community service instead of being placed in custody, arguing that the charges amounted to only small lunches over time that were not work-related.
“As the years went on, it just got easier for him to do,” said attorney Marc Carlos. Carlos added that Rios — a former police officer in Texas — had already paid a heavy toll, filing for bankruptcy and going from an $89,000 annual salary to a menial job paying $24,000.
It was an argument that Mayor Nick Inzunza agreed with. “There are other ways that people can pay their debt to society,” Inzunza said. “Freddy Rios made a mistake and certainly paid his debt and will be paying for it the rest of his life. Jail wouldn’t just harm Freddy Rios. It would harm his children and wife, and that is, I believe, a greater crime to society. What we’re looking for is justice, not abuse.”
While Judge Willis said the public accepted Rios’ apology, he said stiff punishment had to follow because Rios was a public official. “You violated the public trust,” Willis said, noting that he was sending a message to other public officials. “This behavior will be punished.”
Problems at National City Transit were discovered last year after city auditors found discrepancies that triggered a broader audit by the San Diego Association of Governments.
A report released in August 2003 revealed as much as $325,000 in missing fares and unauthorized expenses paid with federal Transportation Act funds under Rios’ management.
The city’s bus service is run by a private company based in Fort Worth, Texas, called McDonald Transit. That company administers a mix of public funds earmarked for National City for transit programs.
Auditors pointed out that in November 2001, the city Finance Department stopped its oversight of National City Transit finances. Auditors said the accounting discrepancies and fare box losses began after that administrative change.
Police detectives said they asked city officials why the oversight procedure changed and who authorized it, but never received an answer.
Yesterday, City Manager Chris Zapata — who was appointed to the job this year — acknowledged that more than eight months after Rios was charged, city officials haven’t examined why the change occurred. “I heard an answer that wasn’t satisfactory to me,” he said, “so I need to explore that more in detail. “Where it’s been pointed involves employees that are no longer here. And I don’t have a comfort level with that at this point,” Zapata said.
Zapata said he has met with officials at McDonald Transit to discuss how much the city will be reimbursed. He also said new security measures — such as cameras in fare box counting rooms — have been installed and a new city auditing firm has been hired.
Yet the key question — how internal financial controls were lifted — remains unanswered. “I will continue my diligence,” Zapata said. “That means talking to a number of people, including the departments affected: police, finance, transit and the manager’s office.”
Railway Technology June 11, 2004
When the rail link to the Cologne.Bonn Airport, an integral part of the high-speed line between Cologne and the Rhine/Main area, is inaugurated tomorrow, the region will acquire a new and highly attractive air and rail connection. On behalf of DB Netz AG and DB Station & Service AG, represented by DB Projekt Bau GmbH (all German Rail units),the Transportation Systems Group (TS) of Siemens AG has ensured that the telecommunications systems, overhead lines and electrical equipment as well as the signaling and safety systems for that line were completed on time.
Less than two years after official inauguration of the Cologne.Rhine/Main high speed line . a project in which Siemens also played a major role . ICE 3 intercity express trains from both Frankfurt and Cologne, fast regional trains, and suburban rapid transit trains can now stop directly at Cologne-Bonn Airport. This direct connection to the terminal ensures passengers of a quick transfer between plane and train.
Siemens has supplied extensive installations for the roughly 15-kilometer link that branches off from the main line, many of those vital components being realized within the context of a turnkey project. In the telecommunications area, for example, a digitally capable amplifier and antenna system for the BOS radio system (for authorities and organizations responsible for safety), including a tunnel radio system, was planned and installed by Siemens on a railway line of German Rail (DB AG) for the very first time. The system facilitates communication with and between the different rescue services in an emergency. Siemens also installed the GSM-R-based train radio system, DB AG’s cable-bound railway telephone system, the passenger information system, as well as the fire alarm system for the station and the tunnels.
For the subsystems power supply and electrification equipment, Siemens was responsible for supplying the overhead contact line system including 450 masts, a 53-km-long catenary system (contact wire and messenger wire), 27 kilometers of aluminum cable (for grounding and power supply), and the line voltage testing equipment (for indicating to rescue services whether or not the overhead contact line is live). It also provided the safety equipment and power supply systems for the tunnels (also including 675 lamps and 340 power terminals), the electronic interlocking and the Frankfurter Strasse station as well as the platform lighting for the Frankfurter Strasse and Porz-Wahn stations. Moreover, four switch heating stations will ensure that the switches will also operate perfectly in winter.
Siemens is additionally responsible for significant aspects of the signaling and safety system. The latter basically consists of an electronic interlocking, 50 signals and 8 switches. For this purpose, around 50 kilometers of signal cable have been laid. The shape and size of the tunnels necessitated diverse specially designed signals suitable for suspension from the tunnel walls. The electronic interlocking for the Cologne-Bonn Airport station is located at the northern end of the station. It is operated by the traffic controller in the electronic interlocking control center in Troisdorf. The northern section of the Cologne.Rhine/Main high speed line, from Siegburg to Cologne, is also controlled from that center. Like the electronic interlocking for Cologne-Bonn Airport, this section of the line is part of the scope of supply and services rendered by Siemens TS in Braunschweig.
Meeting the most demanding railway requirements and is one of the most modern stretches of track in Europe today, the airport rail link marks another achievement of Siemens following on from successful completion of the high speed line between Cologne and the Rhine/Main area. This high speed line has been one of the most important projects in Germany’s railway history and has also been completed by Siemens TS as a turnkey project.
The Transportation Systems Group (TS) of Siemens AG is one of the leading international suppliers to the railways industry. As single source supplier and system integrator, the Group combines in its business segments Automation & Power, Rolling Stock, Turnkey Systems and Integrated Services all the expertise necessary to cover the spectrum from signaling and control systems to traction power supplies, as well as rolling stock for mass transit, regional and main line services. Extensive experience in project management and forward-looking service concepts complement our portfolio. In fiscal 2003 (ended September 30) TS generated sales of EUR4.7 billion with a staff of around 17,700 the world over.
Light Rail Transit Association 11 June 2004
The spade cutting ceremony was due to take place on the 9th June for the start of work for the second stage of the extension of tramline 2 to solar City, an recent office park and residential area - based on energy- saving technology. This 2.3km extension is estimated to cost EUR16.5 million and is being financed equally between the city and Land. It is expected to be completed by the end of 2005. The route will run from the present final stop at Hillerstrasse via Bahnhof Ebelsberg to the centre of solar City.
For both stages 1 (Simonystrasse to Hillerstrasse) and 2 of this extension seven Bombardier Cityrunner cars will be required - four are already in use, with the remaining three due to be delivered in the Autumn. A third stage is still being stage planned to run from the solar town centre to the new station at Pichling.
A description of the Linz tramway can be found in the May 2002 edition of Transport & Urban Tramways.
Globe and Mail June 11, 2004
VANCOUVER — The provincial B.C. Liberals have offered to save a pricey proposed rapid transit line that was billed as the showpiece of the 2010 Winter Olympic Games before it was killed by the regional transit authority last month.
The offer, extended by Premier Gordon Campbell himself, means the stop-and-start $1.7-billion transit project is back on track.
Last month, regional transit directors killed the project, called the Richmond-Airport-Vancouver (RAV) line, saying they were worried local taxpayers would be on the hook if it went over budget.
Mr. Campbell said yesterday the province would take responsibility for the project and assume the financial risks. The premier said 19.5-kilometre commuter line is worth it. “People clearly want the RAV line to proceed; there is widespread agreement that it’s the right project for the region and urgently needed,” Mr. Campbell told reporters at Vancouver airport.
The resurrection of the transit line was good news for business and civic leaders, who said Vancouver desperately needs another rapid-transit commuter line.
Darcy Rezac, managing director of the Vancouver Board of Trade, said the province made a wise move and hopes transit directors accept the offer. “This is a win-win offer,” Mr. Rezac said. “We’re lagging behind others.”
The proposed transit line was especially appealing because it had lined up funding from a variety of sources.
Ottawa had committed $450-million, and the province, airport authority and regional transit authority had each promised roughly $300-million each. The balance is to come from the private sector.
Vancouver’s only other rapid transit system, Skytrain, links the city to suburbs in the Fraser Valley. It was built before the Expo ‘86 fair.
Although the rapid-transit line, much of it to be underground, was not an official part of Vancouver’s Olympic plans, the proposal was an attractive enhancement to the bid.
Those against the RAV line argued in favour of a cheaper transit system such as light rail.
Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon said the province is confident that construction costs can be kept in line. “We’ve done extensive due diligence,” Mr. Falcon said, adding that provincial studies have shown “this project can be completed on time and on budget.”
If the regional transit authority accepts the offer and the transit line goes ahead, it would be the most expensive public works project ever undertaken in B.C.’s Lower Mainland.
The proposed line would bring transit service to the airport, located in the fast-growing suburb of Richmond Planners want much of the route to be underground.