News | Swindler | Articles

Bergen to start light rail tendering

Railway Gazette International February 2004: City News BERGEN city council’s light rail project office, Bybanekontoret, expects to start prequalification next month for supply of vehicles to operate a projected two-line network in Norway’s second city. Subject to approval of funding by the national parliament, a contract should be awarded at the beginning of 2005. Plans for four of the five sections of the 9�8km initial route were approved by the city council on September 29, and the fifth on October 13. Line 1 will run south from Starvhusgaten in the city centre to Nesttun. Construction is expected to begin in 2005, for opening by the end of 2007. A significant portion of the funding will be provided by enlarging the city’s road toll zone as approved in December 2002. In addition there will be contributions from the national, county and city governments. The initial line will require 12 bidirectional low-floor LRVs to carry 26 000 passengers a day. Services would run every 10min off peak, and at 5min headways in the peaks. Bybanekontoret hopes to complete a 40km network by 2014. Line 1 would be continued southwest for another 10�7km to R�dal and the city’s airport at Flesland, requiring a further nine LRVs. Line 2 would start with a central section linking Sandviken and the city centre with Oasen in Fyllingsdalen. This would later be extended north to �sane and west to Loddefjord and Storevatnet.

Brussels car order

Railway Gazette International February 2004: City News ON DECEMBER 12 the board of Brussels public transport operator STIB selected CAF as general contractor for the supply of 15 six-car metro trainsets, at a cost of €121�6m. The contract was due to be signed in January, after the regional government had approved the funding, and will include options for maintenance and supply of additional units. STIB’s current management contract with the region provides for the addition of 9 200 seating and standing places to the metro fleet, to relieve congestion on Line 2 and provide capacity for future extensions. Deliveries are scheduled to be completed by July 2006. The ‘Boa’ trains will be 94m long and 2 700mm wide, with space for 726 passsengers, offering a total of 10 890 places. They will have wide gangways between cars to improve passenger flows, but will be designed as two half-sets that can be separated for maintenance. Eight of the 12 bogies will be motored. CAF has been left to select its own electrical supplier for the traction equipment, subject to STIB approval. Alstom, Elin or Siemens are seen as likely partners. AnsaldoBreda and Bombardier were the main competitors bidding against CAF for the car order.

Nanjing grows

Railway Gazette International February 2004: City News CONSTRUCTION of metro Line 2 in the Chinese city of Nanjing began on December 28, at the site of Xiangxinyu station. The 21�6km line is due to open in 2009, at a cost of 9bn yuan. Running from Xishang Bridge to Maqun via Jiangdongmen, Suiximen and Mingu-gong, it will have 16 stations (MR 03 p42). December saw the completion of tracklaying on the southern section of Nanjing Line 1, between Xiaohang and the future Line 2 interchange at Xinjiekou. Tracklaying on the remaining section will be finished by June. Revenue service on the whole route, including the western extension to Hexi, is due to start in September 2005, when the city will host China’s 10th National Games. The city government has also started planning for a 10km extension of Line 1 from Andemen to Jiangning.

City News

Railway Gazette International March 2004: February 7 saw the conclusion of the public enquiry for an 11�2km light rail line in Ile-de-France, linking Villejuif, Rungis, Orly Airport and Athis Mons to the south of Paris. Included in the regional plan for 2000-06, the line would have 18 stations serving a corridor where over 300 000 people are employed. Traffic is estimated at around 36 000 passengers a day. RATP expects to start work on the project in 2006 and open the line in 2009. Construction costs are estimated at €229m, excluding the planned fleet of 19 LRVs. Ile-de-France would fund 42�5% and the national government 25�5%, Val-de-Marne council 15% and RATP 17%. On December 15 RATP began revenue operation on its 2�9km extension of route T1 from Bobigny to Noisy-le-Sec, adding five stations and an interchange with RER Line E at the new terminus.

Hanoi plans elevated suburban

Railway Gazette International March 2004 DEVELOPMENT of a high-capacity cross-city suburban railway in Hanoi could be completed by 2010, DSVN confirmed in February, following approval of pre-feasibility studies by the Vietnamese government. Prime Minister Phan Van Khai also indicated that the government would fund between 50% and 60% of the estimated 9200bn dong cost. The Ministry of Transport plans to seek international loans and joint venture funding. According to DSVN Director-General Nguyen Huu Bang, a 25km section of the existing north-south main line between Ngoc Hoi and Yen Vien, which now runs at street level through the heart of the city, would be rebuilt on an elevated alignment and converted to mixed gauge double track. The Long Bien bridge over the Red River would be rebuilt, and a new bridge will cross the Dong River. Hanoi station would be reconstructed as a bus-rail interchange, topped by a 15 to 21 storey office complex. A frequent standard-gauge suburban service operating at up to 80km/h will complement the existing metre-gauge main line operations. Suburban services would initially be worked by diesel multiple-units but electrification is envisaged at a later date. Trains would run at 5min intervals at peak times, each carrying up to 450 passengers. Subject to detailed planning and tendering later this year, work is expected to get underway in 2005 with the northern section from Hanoi to Gia Lam and Ngoc Hoi completed by 2009.

Le Mans to join French tram club

Railway Gazette International March 2004 MARCH 15 is the closing date for tenders to built a 15km light rail network in the French city of Le Mans, at an estimated cost of €290m. Alstom, Siemens, Bombardier and Stadler have already prequalified, and a group led by Semaly and Thales has been selected as project managers. Public enquiries for the Declaration of Public Utility are due to be concluded at the end of April, and advanced works could begin as early as June. Project Manager Christian Coulombier from the local authority’s light rail project office expects full construction to get underway in January 2005, with the first section of line opening in early 2007. The main line will run from the university district in the northwest via a private hospital complex, the city centre and the main SNCF station, which is to be remodelled as a multimodal interchange for bus, LRT and TER services at a cost of €45m. It would then continue south to Glonni�res, Guetteloup and Antar�s, adjacent to the race track. There will also be short branch to serve the eastern suburb of Sablons.

Minatomirai line inaugurated

Railway Gazette International March 2004: City News FEBRUARY 1 saw the start of revenue services on the 4�1km Minatomirai metro line in Yokohama, following a ceremony on January 29. Linking Yokohama station to Motomachi-Chukagai, the line has four intermediate stations. It is worked by a new fleet of Y500 series eight-car EMUs. Through services are operated in conjunction with Tokyu Railway’s Tokyo line, whose services have been diverted at Higashi-Hakuraku to join the metro tunnel and ceased to run over JR tracks between Yokohama and Sakuragicho with effect from January 30. Trains run every 7min 30sec off-peak and at 3 min intervals during the peak hours. As well as all-stations local services, there are Express and Commuter Express trains which omit the stop at Shin-takashima, and Limited Express services which call only at Minatomirai. Journey time between Yokohama and Motomachi-Chukagai is 8 min for a local train and 7 min for the expresses. Through trains from Shibuya station in Tokyo to Motomachi-Chukagai will take 35min.

Singapore’s transportation vision: The country’s long-term transportation plan includes its first fully-automated heavy rail line.

Mass Transit February/March 2004 The country’s long-term plans include its first fully automated heavy rail line to handle rapid population growth and development. Singapore is a small island nation near Malaysia, only 650 square kilometers. Though many areas are heavily urbanized, trees and parks abound, and there are still open plots of land dotting the country that have yet to be developed. Urban planning is a big issue for this small country, necessitating strong dedication to efficient transportation. Currently the government invests roughly US$1.1 billion a year in transportation, making sure infrastructure exists when — or even before — an area begins to grow. This careful planning has ensured both the beauty and efficiency of a country that could easily be an urban nightmare without that effort. The role of the LTA The Land Transport Authority plays a significant role in maintaining the face of the city. It was established by the government in 1995 to manage all land transportation issues and immediately established a long-term smart growth philosophy. The LTA awards transportation construction contracts and pays for the infrastructure, then outsources bus and rail services to various operators. It provides commuters with a number of transportation choices and connects them for easy transfers and quicker commutes. The agency also works with urban planners, transit agencies and the Master Planning Committee to establish a land use plan for the island, design the projects and then fund them. The demand for transportation The economy of Singapore began to take off about a decade ago. The population has also seen a rapid increase and the number of daily commuter trips has grown accordingly. In 1981, there were only 2.7 million daily trips in the country; by 1999 that number had increased to 7 million, and the LTA expects that by 2010 it will be at 10 million. Hence, the agency is working to move more people from car travel to public transportation. Says T.C. Chew, senior director for Projects and Engineering at the LTA, “Our vehicle population is 700,000 — a combination of both bus, cars and other heavy vehicles — and we have about 3,000 km of roads. However, our car increase is quite gentle compared to Bangkok and other places, even L.A. We’re always looking for a balance, and I think it would be wrong to say there isn’t a demand (for automobiles). “So how do you balance the two? If we didn’t introduce a vehicle quota system in Singapore, where we allowed the vehicle population to grow at 3 percent a year max, we would have now seen over a million vehicles on the road. Can you imagine putting another 300,000 vehicles on the road? What would that do to the Singapore road system? It would be horrendous. Fortunately, in Singapore, because it is an island state, we can convince the people that we need to do that in order to create a comfortable environment for people to live in. Otherwise the quality of the air and the lifestyle would just be terrible. But you can’t change peoples’ minds in one swift go.” A new generation in rail Eleven percent of the land in Singapore is already dedicated to roadways, and Chew and the rest of the LTA recognize how expanding those can limit the country’s growth. “Twelve percent is the basic limit we want to get,” he says, “because this is equivalent to 12 percent of the land for public housing that we have. So the bottom line is the roads can’t expand much farther. Rail is the way to go for us, as far as we’re concerned, for public transport. “As a result of this process, we have a written master plan of what we want to do in the future in an immediate five year program and also a long-term projection of what we see in year X as the population increases and the land develops. We have developed a comprehensive rail network which will expand in the year X — which is some time beyond 2030 — to some 500 kilometers of railway.” Singapore’s landmark North East Line (NEL), a US$2.6 billion, 20 kilometer underground system, opened in June 2003 as the world’s first fully automatic heavy-rail commuter train. As part of a US$323million contract with the LTA, ALSTOM delivered 25 six-car Metropolis trains, implemented its Urbalis 300 solution for signalling and automatic train control, and provided full system integration. The government of Singapore paid for the infrastructure costs, as it does with all transportation projects, and operation of the line was contracted out to private operator SBS Transit. SBS Transit already operates taxi and bus service in the city, though managing the NEL is the agency’s first experience with rail. Profits are made solely through farebox recovery — both rail and bus fares are similar to any American rate. “The LTA owns the system and they own the assets, and depending on the financial performance of the rail business, SBS Transit will have the option to buy the assets after a number of years of operation,” explains Steven Lane, CEO of Rail Business, for SBS Transit. “We are the operator and maintainer. What we have to do is plot the replacement of the assets as they wear out, for 30 years.” Sixteen stations have been built along the NEL, though the Buangkok station is being put off because of a lack of development in its immediate area. Construction of additional housing flats will begin this year. “There’s nothing within 400 meters of this station,” says Lane, “but if you come back in 10 years time, all these areas will be very heavily developed.” The LTA is also taking a closer look at the long-term benefits of multimodal stations which would incorporate bus stations, residential developments and retail space. “We’re still learning,” admits Chew. “Certain countries are already building subways with buildings that incorporate every transit mode. It’s just that we are beginning to feel that there is a need for us to do it, and just really creating the opportunity. To get state funding is not simple, so we are trying to showcase an example of what can be done for the benefit of future generations to have that integration. “And because of integration, because of ease of transfer, you create opportunity for encouragement of use of public transport. It’s very important. It is crucial for business, for nature, for families and for tourism.” Automated rail While the NEL may currently be lacking in nearby development, it is a marvel of technology. The line, including the stations, is fully automatic: It can carry 40,000 people per hour in each direction without anyone manually operating the trains or opening the doors at the station, making it the largest in the world in terms of passenger capacity. Automation allows the trains to operate at a 90-second headway, though currently the trains arrive at each station every three minutes. While there are only 25 trains in operation now, automation will allow for more than 40 on the line in the future. Still, Chew dismisses automation itself as a means of carrying more people per hour. “People get the misunderstanding that by going for communication-based train control or moving block system, it would increase capacity, but I’m saying no. In a manual driven system, in a nonmoving block signaling system, you can still provide the capacity that you want.” Instead, Chew identifies what he feels are the three greatest benefits to being automated: safety, service and availability. “In terms of the operation on the main line, we did a very careful evaluation which asked ‘What causes accidents?’ Most accidents are caused by asking human beings to do repetitive tasks, so if you get them to do day in and day out the same thing, just press the button and stop the train, they become bored. And when they become bored, perhaps they make bad judgments. Technology allows us to take the repetitive tasks away from human beings by programming it in. “The next thing is that putting a human being in a driver’s cab to drive a train back and forth is a waste of the availability of resources. “The third benefit that I see is that when you are dependent on a driver to drive your system, when there is a demand or when the driver is not available, you can delay service. We are able to launch a service without having to be dependent on the driver because everything’s handled in the operations control center.” Automated system design “The biggest challenge for us, when we say fully automated system, this is totally, fully automated. And that’s why the effort to put this thing together was a big, big task,” Chew continues. A task which involved considering that for every possible problem the solution would have to be solved remotely. The system was then designed accordingly. Should a train miss its mark at the station doors, it is designed with a feature called the JOG function which will move the train forward or backward up to 30 centimeters to adjust. If a train stops in between stations because of an automatic running failure and no operator is on board to drive the train manually, a feature called the Creep Mode will automatically move the train at 10 kilometers per hour to the next station where an operator will be waiting to take control of the train. Despite any nervousness SBS may have had, the NEL’s inauguration went fairly smoothly. Says Lane, “We had three significant failures in the first four days, and we were just lucky they happened at the right time and in the right place, so that the overall public impact was minimal. The first 10 days we had a system availability of 99.65 percent, above our target of 95 percent. Overall, the public thought the system was wonderful.” The long-term view “It is still questionable whether (automation) is the right thing to do,” says Chew, “but so far it is telling us that it is working fine, and the performance so far is a good indication. And in the long run, we are going to see if it is worthwhile investing that kind of money to achieve it. “That is why there is an urban development program in place until 2015. And that is why one of the features of the transport strategy in Singapore is that the investment and the infrastructure and the facilities and such is designed to provide services for a generation or more. It hasn’t been done just to provide services for the existing urban development.”

Eurotunnel Plans Again To Restructure Its Finances

International railway journal, March 2004 THIS year marks the 10th anniversary of the opening of the Channel Tunnel linking Britain to France. Despite Eurotunnel and Eurostar becoming leaders in the markets in which they operate, the original traffic forecasts have never been met, and all Channel Tunnel rail users continue to make a loss. Although Eurotunnel has reduced its debt by £1.2 billion since its financial restructuring in 1998, it still faces a crippling level of debt at £6.4 billion. Eurotunnel ended 2003 with a net loss of £34 million before an asset impairment charge of £1.33 billion. Operating revenue fell by 5% in 2003 to £556 million and operating profit was down by 18% at £170 million. The financial framework and operating conditions for the Channel Tunnel were flawed from the outset. Britain’s Thatcher government was determined that not one penny of public money should be used to construct the tunnel. The French government agreed to this, and the project went ahead with private funding. The cost of the project soared during construction to reach £10 illion, but Eurotunnel managed to keep its financial backers on board. Although the traffic forecasts were wildly optimistic, British Rail and French National Railways, which would operate the through passenger (Eurostar) and freight services, were forced to agree to pay for 50% of the Channel Tunnel’s capacity until November 2006. In effect this was a subsidy to Eurotunnel. There was an assumption that the Channel Tunnel would put the cross-Channel ferry operators out of business, which it has not. The through railfreight services have performed very badly through poor marketing, lack of management attention, and, more recently, 14 months of disruption by asylum seekers. Traffic increased last year by 22% to 1.78 million tonnes, but this is a tiny share of freight traffic moving between Britain and continental Europe. Although the Channel Tunnel is simply a long railway tunnel, albeit with numerous safety features, the two governments imposed onerous safety and security measures. As a result, Eurostar is the only passenger train allowed to use the tunnel. Eurostar is the only train service in the world with airline-style check-in procedures, which severely restricts where it can operate. Eurotunnel plans three measures to try to stimulate Channel Tunnel rail traffic and revenue. It wants to cut the access charges paid by Eurostar and railfreight operators. However, to fund this Eurotunnel wants to achieve another radical restructuring of its balance sheet. “We have made proposals to the UK and French governments and our industry partners which seek to stimulate growth in rail passenger and railfreight volumes, improve our profitability, and get our financing on to a sensible and sustainable basis once and for all,” said Mr Richard Shirrefs, Eurotunnel’s chief executive. One solution currently under discussion, is for London & Continental Railways (LCR), which is building the Channel Tunnel Rail Link (CTRL) to London St Pancras, to hand over the completed first section of the line to Eurotunnel. In return, LCR would become a major shareholder in Eurotunnel. This sounds more like a poisoned chalice. However, this might be more palatable if LCR was allowed to build the Crossrail line through central London. The British government is impressed by LCR’s ability to complete the first stage of CTRL on time and within budget. However, don’t expect a quick decision as Eurotunnel believes these negotiations will last the rest of this year. In the meantime, Eurotunnel is working on two projects to develop railfreight. It will open in mid-2005 an intermodal railfreight terminal in Folkestone. This will enable freight trains with a Continental loading gauge to enter Britain for the first time. Eurotunnel has become the first company to be granted an operating licence by the French Ministry of Transport. Eurotunnel will operate five trains a week starting next year on a corridor linking Milan, Basle, Metz, Folkestone, and the British Midlands. This could increase to 30 trains a week in each direction by 2008.

Light rail to close for work south of Camden Yards

The Baltimore Sun February 28, 2004 Beginning today, the state will shut down the light rail line south of Camden Yards for construction work, severing the city’s rail link with Baltimore-Washington International Airport and forcing some Orioles and Ravens fans to find different routes to the stadiums. The shutdown will allow the Maryland Transit Administration to add a second track to portions of the line that have a single track.

EDITORIAL; Pg. A12

The Maryland Gazette February 28, 2004 If you want to know how out-of-touch many of our legislators and bureaucrats have become, look at two projects (Maglev and the light rail) and one Senate Bill (SB288, the “assault gun” bill). The only operating Maglev system in the world, in China, has convinced the Chinese that further Maglev systems are impractical, uneconomical and unnecessary. They have abandoned all plans for further development or construction of Maglev systems. Does the state of Maryland take this evidence and cease planning to build the incredibly expensive, economically impractical, highly intrusive Maglev line between Baltimore and Washington? Nope. We go right on, planning to spend hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money. The double-tracking project on the light rail system shows the same sort of “spend it now” attitude that caused the original flaws in the system. The Maryland Department of Transportation tells us on one hand that light rail “trains” (they aren’t trains, just big trolley cars) are often delayed where there are single track areas and stations, and that the system must be double-tracked to alleviate the delay problem. On the other hand, MDOT tells us that light rail usage is so low they are going to reduce the headway between “trains” from 17 minutes to 30 minutes except for rush hours and ballgames. The delays are there simply because the drivers do not stick to their schedules. When the system first went into service, the drivers tried for a time to be precise, and delays were virtually non-existent. Now they have become increasingly sloppy in their habits, arriving at passing tracks and station early or late, causing often multi-minute delays. Finally the assault weapon bill (SB288) currently before the Maryland legislature is a great example of panicky politicians trying to ban something that they don’t understand. Often quoted as justification for SB288 is the phrase “1 in 5.” This is supposed to mean that 1 in 5 police officers killed in the line of duty is killed by an assault weapon. The phrase is so inaccurate that police chiefs from around the country have repeatedly contradicted it. Most police officers who die from gunshot wounds are killed with cheap handguns, not expensive “assault weapons.” The rampage of the so-called “Washington snipers” is also used as justification for banning “assault weapons.” The more likely scenario is that the crooks bought the gun that they used because they thought it looked neat, not for any of its so-called “assault weapon” characteristics. The shooters used none of the so-called “assault weapon” characteristics in their criminal rampage. One of the weapons specifically banned in SB288 is the Springfield Armory M1A. This rifle is an exact copy of the military M14, one of the finest and most accurate long-range rifles ever produced. To a crook it would be absolutely useless. It is large, heavy, clumsy in close quarters (where most stickups and shootings occur) and it costs nearly $2,000. Its primary use is in super accurate shooting competitions (with targets out to 1,000 yards), not holding up the local convenience store. SB288 is a blatant attempt to do an end run around the Second Amendment rights of Maryland citizens. It does nothing to control illegal possession of cheap, lethal firearms. All it does is deny honest citizens the right to own legal rifles and shotguns.

More than 160 years after it opened, a new history of the pioneering London and Birmingham Railway finds it is busier than ever

Birmingham Post February 28, 2004 An executive with French State Railways predicted a few years ago that railways would be the transport of the 21st century — if only they could survive the 20th. It’s a point of view which seems to be reinforced by some striking figures quoted in a new history of the Coventry-Birmingham section of the former London & Birmingham Railway. When New Street Station was rebuilt in 1967, there were about 250 train movements in the station area each day: now the number is 1,350. Then there were 15 fast trains a day to London Euston: now there are 34. It sounds like a success story, yet increased traffic is bringing its own problems. Crazily, Birmingham’s increased popularity as a visitor attraction following the opening of the Bullring is such that a dangerously overcrowded New Street may have to close at peak times. In addition, Virgin’s only rivals on the New Street-Euston route are being squeezed off the track because of limited capacity between Birmingham and Rugby. Silverlink County services, which offer travellers the choice of lower fares for a slightly longer journey time, will no longer venture north of Northampton from autumn 2004. Yet the need for four-tracking between Birmingham and Coventry was identified by the London and North Western Railway before the WW1. Its successor, the London, Midland and Scottish Railway, actually bought some of the land needed for the purpose in the 1930s, but this time WW2 put paid to the idea. For most of the time since then railways have been in retreat in the face of the remorseless growth of road traffic. Only in the last few years has it become apparent that their future might be something other than managed decline. Yet a botched privatisation and political paralysis make it difficult to have confidence that Britain will achieve a second Railway Age such as we have witnessed in France and several other countries. The railway historian John Boynton, who is in the process of documenting the entire West Midlands rail network in a series of exemplary histories, has now turned his attention to the London and Birmingham Railway in another meticulously researched and readable book. Perhaps because of its association with the motor industry, Birmingham’s credentials as a major railway centre have tended to be underplayed. Yet it has been ingeniously suggested that it was the world’s first ‘Inter-City city’ (strictly speaking, town), having become connected almost simultaneously to London and Liverpool when the London and Birmingham Railway opened in 1838, a year after the Grand Junction. The fact that travellers between London and the north-west had to change trains at Curzon Street probably helps account for the fact that it could also boast the world’s first refreshment room. The historic importance of the surviving Curzon Street building, soon to become home to the Royal College of Organists, is well known. Sadly, the rest of the original terminus succumbed to demolition as relatively recently as 1965. There is a depressing photograph in the book of demolition in progress, and unfortunately this is not the only dispiriting photograph. There are many glimpses of EA Cowper’s magnificent, but now lost, iron and glass roof over New Street Station — the largest structure of its kind in the world when it opened in 1854, and absolutely at the cutting edge of Victorian technology. The author regards it as at least on a par with renowned examples at York and Paddington and probably the greatest single structure built in the city during the 19th century. If the structure had not been damaged by wartime bombing — it was dismantled immediately after the war — might we have lost it anyway? Possibly, given the Philistinism which reigned unchallenged in the city during the 1960s. Certainly looking at these photographs you recognise that the original roof must have announced clearly to visitors that they had arrived in a great, self-confident city — not at all the message their counterparts receive on arriving at today’s dingy underground station. There is a fascinating snippet about how the trustees of King Edward’s School (which was then where the Odeon New Street is today) blocked access via the adjoining Peck Street when New Street Station was being built. Perhaps this offers a clue for some future radical rebuild of the station, which could actually place the station on New Street for the first time in its life. I thought I knew my Birmingham railway history pretty well, but there are many other surprises here — starting with the fact that a quite different London-Birmingham route was surveyed as early as 1822 which would have bypassed Coventry, but put places like Southam and Temple Balsall on the main line. How rapid the development of railway technology was. The primitive little Bury locomotives with which the London and Birmingham Railway opened were cute but severely underpowered, so that as many as seven are known to have been used on a single train. No wonder travelling between London and Birmingham took eight hours. Yet the second generation of express engines, the so-called ‘Bloomers’ introduced in the 1850s, already began to resemble some locomotives which would survive into the British Railways era. Francis Webb, who became locomotive superintendent of the then LNWR in 1871, had a vision of an electrified, 100mph line, which was finally achieved in 1967. Interestingly, Dr Beeching opposed electrification. At the turn of the century, gingered up by competition from a reinvigorated Great Western Railway with its rival route from Snow Hill to Paddington, the LNWR began to focus on speed as a marketing tool. With a succession of new express locomotives — the ‘Precursors’, ‘Experiments’ and ‘George Vs’ — it established two hours, the equal of today’s Silverlink services, as the high-speed norm. An interesting innovation aimed at the West Midlands business community was introduced in 1910, when a morning train ran direct from New Street to Broad Street in the heart of London’s business district, returning at the end of the working day. Secretaries were provided who would type letters at no additional charge. The First World War put an end to this enterprise, as it did to so much else. As well as the main line, the book also covers the history of several related secondary routes, including Nuneaton-Coventry-Leamington and the now defunct Leamington-Rugby line. The single track Coventry-Leamington route took on a new lease of life when Cross-Country trains to and from the south coast began using it to so that they could call at Birmingham International. But the intermediate station at Kenilworth is long gone and replacing it, seemingly like every other capital project in the West Midlands, is a low priority for the Strategic Rail Authority. Nuneaton-Coventry has made a remarkable comeback with the reintroduction of passenger services which continue beyond Nuneaton to Leicester and Nottingham. But, like the Silverlink services, these are also about to fall victim to success. Because of increased traffic on the Trent Valley Line, which these trains cross at Nuneaton, a grade-separated junction is needed there. Needless to say, the Strategic Rail Authority is not going to pay for it. This has helped promote the idea, currently subject to a feasibility study, of converting the Coventry-Nuneaton line to light rail. Inspired by some innovative recent German schemes, including one at Karlsruhe, this would mean trams running on-street in Coventry, Bedworth and Nuneaton while sharing parts of the existing line with freight trains. John Boynton declares himself fiercely opposed to this proposed tramstitution (I’ve just invented this ugly word as a variant on ‘bustitution’, the notorious practice of replacing rail services with buses). Personally, I have an open mind, since presumably it works in Karlsruhe. But it’s certainly difficult not to suspect that the real appeal of trams for the Strategic Rail Authority is that they would save it the inconvenience of actually having to have a strategy for rail. The book brings us up to date with a glimpse of Virgin’s Pendolino trains which are now gradually taking over Birmingham-Euston services. The journey from Edward Bury’s little puffers to these streamlined, tilting 140mph trains is quite an epic. I recently had my first trip on a Pendolino and despite having to stand from New Street to International (the 21st century railway, oddly, has more trains but fewer seats) was impressed by how smooth, quiet and generally hi-tech it was. But oh dear, John Boynton doesn’t care for the Pendolino, which has restricted views from some seats and no view at all from a few. It just shows how trains are increasingly coming to resemble aircraft. Today they are designed, it seems, for the laptop and personal stereo user rather than the romantic window-gazer of old.

Houstonians don’t have to resort to road rage

HoustonChronicle February 29, 2004 TRAFFIC in America’s urban centers has increased 40 percent since 1999, according to a study released last week by the American Highway Users Alliance. And the study reports that Houston ranks right up there with Los Angeles as having some of the nation’s worst bottlenecks. The alliance is lobbying Congress to include major highway expansion systems in its six-year $318-billion highway-mass transit bill, due to be enacted in March. Such improvements would seem welcome, considering that in 2001, America lost $65 billion in lost wages and wasted fuel because of traffic problems. The lost wages were the result of 5.7 billion person hours in traffic delays. Surprisingly little research has been conducted on the effects of commuting. For the past five years, I have conducted research on the psychological effects of commuting, primarily looking at driver stress. This research has led me to believe that spending hundreds of millions of dollars on additional lanes for interstates and new highways is not the most cost-effective answer to commuter traffic problems. New highways often make it harder for vehicles to move on and off the interstate and ultimately increase driver stress. Houston has the 13th longest average commute in the United States at 29 minutes, and Houston’s commuters spend 53 additional hours each year on the road, thanks to gridlock. Commuting to and from work is a frustrating and stressful part of the day for growing numbers of people across the United States and especially in a city like Houston. Having lived in Houston myself, I know that traffic delays impact many commuters in terms of their work, sleep quality, leisure time and health. There are many low-cost steps Houston can take to alleviate traffic congestion. Most of these steps are known, but few are followed vigorously. Government, business and individuals should embrace flextime more fully, expand the city’s light rail system, add carpool lanes, and institute benefits for companies and corporations with vanpools. Houstonians who have flextime at work have lower driver stress. Flextime benefits everyone because it helps stretch out the morning and evening rush hour, thereby relieving some of the traffic congestion. Using light rail systems and vanpools makes commutes more predictable, which again reduces individual stress and relieves traffic congestion. If each Houstonian decided to do something about their individual commuting habits, the city’s traffic problems could be solved overnight. Consider that nine out of 10 residents commute to and from work alone in their cars. The time they spend commuting has tripled over the past two decades. And despite local, state and federal efforts, traffic just keeps getting worse. So rather than swearing at that person who cut you off on the exit ramp, do something about your situation. Talk to your employer about flextime. Start a carpool with your neighbor or co-worker. Ask your company about establishing vanpools. For some, a viable option might actually be moving to a different area of Houston so that your commute goes against traffic.

SILVER LINE ADDS BUS STOPS FOR MANOR RESIDENTS

February 29, 2004 The Boston Globe By the end of next month, the MBTA’s Silver Line will have two new bus stops in front of Washington Manor (1701 Washington St. in the South End) — bus stops that were not part of the original public hearing process or Silver Line plans; bus stops that cost a little more than $800,000 to put up; and bus stops that — in some ways — conflict with the concept of bus rapid transit, which is meant to have the same trip times as light rail, at lower costs. The stations are being built largely to meet the demands of the elderly and disabled residents of Washington Manor, who never had anyone speak for them and apparently never spoke up for themselves in 77 public hearings and several more informal meetings held before the Silver Line’s construction, according to T officials. Apparently residents had assumed that their old local bus stop would remain. MBTA planners had never planned to keep the stop, believing that a bus stop there would never generate enough riders. There’s a stop a block away. But after a few phone calls to local state representatives, city councilors, and the mayor’s office, the residents of Washington Manor got a station stop. The new stations are expected to average 366 boardings a day and 495 drop-offs. That’s low. The average distance between Silver Line stations is 320 yards. The distance between the new Washington Manor and Massachusetts Avenue is 155 yards. Between Worcester Square and Newton Street, in the opposite direction, is 280 yards. In other words, the station is a tad misplaced on a bus line that’s geared to be efficient. MBTA General Manager Michael H. Mulhern said the new stops would have a marginal impact on trip times and that the stops will not set a bad precedent for the bus rapid transit line, which will succeed or fail based on how efficiently it gets riders to and from downtown. Mulhern also said he had not been politically pressured to put up the stops. “Several elected officials and the mayor’s office said they wished they had paid closer attention to the process,” Mulhern said. “At that point I was forced to revisit the issue.” In the end, he said, “I quickly concluded that they had some legitimate issues.” Residents of the building are largely dependent on transit, he said, and have difficulties with the short walk to the nearby Mass. Ave. stop. “Although a straight review of the numbers did not justify a station at Worcester Square, I was convinced that it was the right thing to do,” he said. “Certainly we have folks that question the investment,” he added. “But the results are clear, and we have doubled ridership on the corridor. It’s a great service and people are letting us know that with their feet.” Mark Potter, the Washington Manor Tenants Association treasurer, said the communication problem wasn’t with the tenants; it was with the T. “We woke up one morning, and the bus stop was gone,” Potter said, referring to the Route 49 stop that had sat in front of Washington Manor. Despite the public meetings and other notices, Potter said no one in the building had been contacted about the Silver Line’s impact on their transit needs. Potter, who said he is 100 percent disabled with emphysema, a stroke, and two heart attacks, said construction of the Silver Line “hit us like a ton of bricks.” Residents made calls to T officials and said they had been ignored. But after contacting several local politicians, Potter said the group was given a meeting before the MBTA Advisory Board. After a lot of hemming and hawing, “they agreed to go ahead and do it,” Potter said, “but it was a long fight.” Orange Crush II Prepare ye, Orange Line riders, for the worst — especially if you ride the line after 9 p.m. The MBTA announced last week that it is moving forward with the full replacement of the line’s signal system. This will mean possibly slowed-down service late at night and busing from Sullivan to Oak Grove for a whopping eight months. Yes, eight months. It all begins on Sunday, March 28 and will require a single track operating between Haymarket and Sullivan stations as well as the bus shuttles from Sullivan to Oak Grove. The shuttles (and signal work) will take place Sunday through Thursday nights starting at 9 p.m. and ending when the system shuts down, around 12:30 a.m. to 1 a.m. Train rides home from night games at Fenway are going to be no fun. This effort should begin months after the end of track work on the line that had riders fuming and arriving late to work. For those who care, the signal replacement project will upgrade a 25-year-old system with something state of the art. It’s a four-year project that will include new switch machines, train stop devices, track circuits, signal rooms, and cabling throughout the project. The new system will be compatible with the existing signal system on the southern end of the Orange Line. It is also expected to improve reliability and capacity all along the system, while “allowing for increased operational flexibility,” according to a press release. The bottom line, according to T officials, is that the busing is expected to add 10 to 15 minutes to the commute. The single track, at that hour of the night (after 9 p.m. Sundays through Thursdays), is expected to have a minimal impact on travel time — “three minutes at the most,” according to T spokesman Joe Pesaturo.

Brennan wants metro to link air, city and rail

Sunday Times (London) February 29, 2004 A FINAL proposed route has been drawn for Dublin’s planned metro system. The light rail trains are expected to travel from Dublin airport, through O’Connell Street, the capital’s main thoroughfare, to Connolly station before finishing at St Stephen’s Green. According to department sources, Seamus Brennan, the transport minister, has decided the metro trains should travel at ground level from the airport to Ballymun. The tracks will then be elevated through Ballymun, which is undergoing a huge regeneration, to Dublin City University (DCU) in Glasnevin. From there, the trains will go underground to the Mater hospital in Phibsboro. The metro will then cut across to O’Connell Street to a stop near the Gresham hotel and from there to Connolly station on Amiens Street. It will go under the River Liffey, passing through Pearse Street Dart station, on its way to St Stephen’s Green. The Railway Procurement Agency (RPA) had drawn up two options, but the minister has asked for elements of both to be incorporated. The first RPA route, estimated to cost E1.7billion at current construction costs, ran from the Mater hospital directly to Connolly station before going on to St Stephen’s Green. It did not stop at O’Connell Street. The second, a cheaper alternative costing E1.2billion, ran from the Mater hospital to O’Connell Street and then on to St Stephen’s Green, stopping at D’Olier Street near TCD in the city centre. It did not link with Connolly station. This proposal included a travelator, a moving walkway, designed to transfer people from a D’Olier Street stop to Tara Street Dart station. If commuters wanted to go to Connolly Station they would have to get a Dart from Tara Street. The minister wanted, however, to link the metro with Connolly station, a mainline rail and Dart stop and a larger facility than Tara Street. He was opposed to the idea of an underground travelator, due to safety concerns. Brennan also believed it was an impractical option for travellers with luggage going to and from the airport. Brennan is now expected to ask the RPA to finalise the cost of the proposed new route and intends to bring his plan to cabinet within weeks. Ger Hannon, a spokesman for the RPA, said it was awaiting final instructions from the minister. He confirmed the route, as redrawn, was possible to complete. “The plan that linked to Connolly station did not go through O’Connell Street. It took a more direct route from the Mater hospital. Going through O’Connell Street from the Mater to Connolly station is something we could do though. It would involve extra cost. It is not ideal as it includes a significant change in direction, but it is achievable, especially as the stop is not at the bottom of O’Connell Street,” he said. Brennan is understood to be confident that his plan will be approved by cabinet colleagues. The Department of Finance is understood to believe that building a metro system for Dublin would not prove value for money. A report carried out by Goodbody Economic Consultants on behalf of the finance department said the project was too expensive. The minister, however, is to propose that the system be built as part of a public-private partnership (PPP). There is a belief that the state could hire a company to design and build the metro and not begin paying for it until the day it opens, possibly as early as 2009. Effectively the state would then lease the system from the company for a period of about 25 years. The initial line to the airport will form the basis of an extended underground system. If the minister’s plan gets the go-ahead, Connolly station will increase in importance as a transport link. It will be a stop for the Luas, Dublin’s new tram system, and is close to Busarus, the city’s inter-city bus terminal.

HOBSON’S CHOICE ON RAIL LINE

Hartford Courant (Connecticut) March 1, 2004 Thomas Hobson, a 16th- and 17th-century English stablekeeper, required customers to take the horse closest to the door, thus giving us the term “Hobson’s choice,” meaning no choice. Move ahead to Connecticut in the 21st century and a different form of transportation, and we face a Hobson’s choice. The state must upgrade the equipment and maintenance facilities on the Metro-North Commuter Railroad’s New Haven line. It cannot allow breakdowns and delays to force commuters onto I-95 and the Merritt Parkway, because there is no room on the freeways. There is no choice. This has been a winter of discontent for rail commuters. Cold weather and aging equipment have combined to cause constant delays, cancellations and crowded trains. On one recent day, 141 of the 350 electric-powered cars on the Metro-North line were out of service. The situation is exacerbated by the fact that the line has only 18 repair bays, so the cars can’t be fixed quickly. The state Department of Transportation and passengers are paying the price for deferred maintenance and equipment purchases. The DOT bought 242 cars in the early 1970s, but has bought only 100 since — 50 in the 1980s and 50 more in the early 1990s. The 30-year-old cars are near the end of the line. But instead of replacing them, the state plans to rehabilitate the old cars over seven years at a cost of $150 million. This can be done at a rate of three cars per month, and thus far 19 have been upgraded. Meanwhile, the General Assembly has approved the purchase of up to 20 cars after 2006, though officials are trying to hasten the process. There’s also a program to upgrade the ancient catenary wires, some more than 90 years old, that provide AC power on the line east of New Rochelle, N.Y. The state is spending money on the line, but not enough. The New Haven line needs new cars and new maintenance facilities. The cars cost $3.5 to $4 million each. It may take $600 million or more to bring the line into the 21st century. Gov. John G. Rowland’s response is to raise the fares. He proposes a 5.5 percent increase, following a 15 percent increase last year. That’s likely to send more people to their cars. State leaders must find the political courage to raise the money while keeping the fares competitive. There may be no alternative to raising the gas tax. But that is the point. If you’ve been in I-95 or Merritt Parkway traffic on any weekday, you know that, as in Mr. Hobson’s stable, there is no other option.

COUNCIL HIRES FIRM TO STUDY METROLINK FEASIBILITY/ ISSUE IS WHICH OF TWO ROUTES WOULD BE USED; MONEY IS KEY TO EXTENSION

St. Louis Post-Dispatch (Missouri) March 1, 2004 A San Francisco-based consulting firm has been selected to help study the feasibility of extending MetroLink into Madison County. One of the key factors that will be examined by the firm, URS Corp., is which route would be followed. Two probable routes exist. Both would hook into the existing MetroLink rail line just east of the Emerson Park station in East St. Louis, then go north into the Tri-Cities area — Granite City, Madison and Venice. One possible route would go north along the Illinois Route 3 corridor up to Alton and then to Godfrey. A second possible route would go east out of the Tri-Cities, then north along the Illinois Route 159 corridor into Collinsville, Edwardsville and also Southern Illinois University Edwardsville. Justin Carney, the project manager for the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council, said he believed the idea of a train in Madison County should appeal to car commuters who get caught in the traffic jam at the Poplar Street Bridge each morning. The coordinating council is overseeing the study. “Think about it,” he said. “Paying $75 a month to park (in downtown St. Louis) and trying to get over the bridges.” However, extending light rail into Madison County would take years and cost hundreds of millions of dollars. The feasibility study, costing $175,000, will be paid by Madison County Transit. And even if the feasibility study indicates that a particular route might work, and if voters back the idea, the project would still have to get in line for federal and state funding. The project’s overall costs, officials have said, would probably be about $500 million. And that’s for one of the two routes, not both. Carney said a series of focus groups and open houses would be held to involve the public in the study. In November 1997, Madison County voters rejected a sales tax increase to support such an extension, despite an earlier telephone poll that had indicated the measure would pass easily. Alan Dunstan, the current County Board chairman, has championed the idea of such a study. Dunstan, who was a member of the County Board at the time that board members rejected the tax increase, has said the problem was that no specific alignment was presented to voters. St. Clair County voters approved a tax in 1992 to extend MetroLink as far east as Southwestern Illinois College. The Shiloh-Scott Air Force Base station, on Illinois Route 158 south of Interstate 64, was the most recent station to open. There are now a total of 11 MetroLink stations in St. Clair County, from the East Riverfront station out to Shiloh-Scott.

Highway bill momentum marginalizes veto threats

Concrete Products March 1, 2004 A Feb. 25 call from nearly 400 Transportation Construction Coalition TCC members for Congress to accept a six-year highway and transit funding bill of no less than $318 billion capped three weeks of rhetoric, lobbying and decisive, bipartisan measures in Washington, D.C. The TCC conducted a Feb. 24-25 fly-in so that members could impress upon their Congress persons the need to substantially increase surface transportation funding in legislation succeeding the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. Although the bill expired Sept. 30, its funding levels were maintained by a five-month extension ending Feb. 29 . The $318 billion target reflects the funding level of SAFETEA, a six-year TEA-21 reauthorization package the Senate passed on Feb. 12, leading up to a one-week Congressional recess beginning on President’s Day Feb. 16 . Passed by a 76-21 vote, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act includes funding for highways at a level of $255 billion, $56.5 billion for transit programs and additional monies for other highway-related programs. TEMPORARY REPRIEVE The excitement in Washington didn’t end with the TCC fly-in. On February 26, the House approved a second funding extension for highway and transit programs. The legislation, which maintains funding through late April at an annualized level of about $33 billion, is consistent with a 2004 budget resolution Congress and the White House reached in early February. The following day, the Senate approved a similar extension bill, now clear for President Bush’s signature. Senators John McCain R-AZ and Joe Lieberman D-CT had blocked passage of the extension because they want to include language extending the expiration date of the independent commission investigating the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. However, Congressional leaders reached an agreement late on February 27 that allows for an extension of the 9-11 Commission. Coincidentally, McCain and Lieberman also were cosponsors of the Climate Stewardship Act, a measure that was defeated by the Senate last summer and had potentially negative implications for the cement industry, thanks to proposed production caps. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Don Young R-Alaska had previously observed that a second extension would give him and his Senate colleagues additional time to complete a multi-year surface transportation bill. On the heels of the SAFETEA passage, the House would likely weigh the Senate bill provisions against Rep. Young’s more ambitious $375 billion six-year plan detailed in Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users TEA-LU . While the Senate’s $318 billion proposal was cited as a baseline in the Feb. 25 call to Congress, the TCC remained firmly behind TEA-LU, debate on which is expected to proceed in early March. Congress’ strong support for a TEA-21 reauthorization package exceeding $300 billion contrasts with a hard line that the White House has held since releasing a reauthorization plan in mid-2003 calling for a six-year, $256 billion package. The Bush Administration’s position on keeping a reauthorization package within funding levels tied to existing user fee collections was underscored in a Feb. 3 letter from Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta and Treasury Secretary John Snow to congressional leadership. In that letter, they assured Capitol Hill that senior administration advisers would recommend President Bush veto any reauthorization plan contingent on increased gas taxes or non-Highway Trust Fund dollar allocation — funding mechanisms central to the House and Senate reauthorization plans, respectively. The three-quarters majority vote on SAFETEA in the Senate, coupled with wide co-sponsorship of TEA-LU in the House, foreshadows the potential for an override of any White House veto. BEYOND SAFETEA FUNDING Amid the back and forth on funding of surface transportation programs, the U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved several measures, including its Views and Estimates on the Fiscal Year 2005 budget. “There are going to be some in Congress who believe that we should reduce all federal spending to balance the budget,” says Don Young R-AK , Chairman of the Committee. “Those people simply do not understand that the users of our highways and airports pay for the care of those facilities. This is a system that pays its own way. Transportation infrastructure keeps our economy alive and well.” The Committee will submit its FY 2005 Views and Estimates to the Budget Committee. Highlights include the following recommendations: Highway, transit, highway safety, and motor-carrier safety programs are to be funded at the levels set forth in H.R. 3550, the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users TEA-LU . Aviation programs are to be funded at the levels authorized by the recently enacted Vision 100 — Century of Aviation Reauthorization Act. In particular, the Committee opposes the Administration’s proposed cut in the Federal Aviation Administration’s Facilities & Equipment program. Civil works programs of the Corps of Engineers are to be funded at $7.5 billion in FY 2005, substantially more than the $4.215 billion proposed by the Administration. Clean Water State Revolving Funds are to be funded at no less than $3 billion for FY 2005, the level set forth in H.R. 1560, the Water Quality Financing Act of 2003, as approved by the Water Resources and Development Subcommittee last year.

Monorail debut postponed again; Transit system opening now set for next month

LAS VEGAS SUN March 2, 2004 The opening of the Las Vegas Monorail appears to be headed for yet another postponement. The futuristic transit option is supposed to open no later than the end of this month. But the Clark County building division, which has responsibility for ensuring that the system and its eight stations are safe for the public, was still testing aspects of the system Monday. Following “scenario testing,” or testing to see how the system operates in extreme situations such as a disaster, the system needs to run continuously through a 30- day demonstration test, Clark County Building Official Ron Lynn said Monday. “Scenario testing has been 99 percent completed,” he said. Lynn said that the testing delays did not appear to be due to any fundamental problem and that the 30-day test run could begin sometime this week. If successful, that would allow the monorail to open early next month. The Las Vegas Monorail Co., the nonprofit company that owns the system, has not been able to meet several of the opening dates it had set for the system. In August 2003, the opening was to be Jan. 20. But in December, the company said it wouldn’t begin taking paying passengers until March 1. As recently as Feb. 20 representatives for the system said they planned to open the monorail by March 31. Todd Walker, Las Vegas Monorail Co. said the company’s contract with Bombardier Transportation, the Canadian-based company building the system, and Bombardier’s partner, California-based Granite Construction, called for construction completion by the first quarter. The construction contractors potentially faces penalties because of the construction delays, but Walker said he does not know how large they would be. The contract between Las Vegas Monorail Co. and Bombardier is private and confidential, he said. Terry Murphy, a Las Vegas Monorail Co. board member, said her company and the contractors will meet this morning, and the delay in opening the system is likely to be a primary topic of the conversation. “For a $650 million project that is scheduled to open in the first quarter of ‘04, we’re not quite late yet, and if we are a little bit late, that is not surprising for a project of this size,” Murphy said. “When it does open we’re going to make sure that it is fully operational and safe. We have to make sure the testing is done properly.” Among those that hope the system will begin operating soon are representatives of the National Association of Broadcasters convention, the largest scheduled this year. The NAB convention could bring 130,000 people to Las Vegas April 17-22, according to the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. An NAB spokesman said it will be a disappointment but not a calamity if the monorail isn’t open by the time the convention begins. “We had plans in place in case the monorail didn’t open to have just as many buses ready to go to aid in the transport of the crowds,” NAB spokesman Dennis Wharton said. “We had hoped that it would be open, but we’ll be OK either way.” Rob Powers, Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority spokesman, said his agency has always let potential convention visitors know that the monorail might not be ready for service. “We didn’t have any firm date that we have told our customers,” Powers said. “This is a very complicated system and they need to make absolutely sure that everything is up and running perfectly when it opens. We’re certainly not rushing it.” Walker said his company cannot announce a firm starting date for the system’s operation in part because the testing of the monorail is up to the company building it. Walker said they receive periodic updates from Bombardier Transportation on construction, and should get an update today. “It would be premature to put an exact date on the opening of the system without all the necessary information,” Walker said. “We recognize the importance of this system to the resort community and overall community, and no one wants the system open more than we do, but we want it done right.” Lynn, with Clark County, said a handful of relatively minor problems have cropped up in the last month. On Feb. 18, high winds tore sheet metal roofing panels from a structure and hit the monorail line, shorting out the electrical system. A day earlier, mechanical problems surfaced on one of the “decks” where the monorail train starts and ends its 4-mile journey along the Strip. The monorail company reported in early January that a drive shaft fell off cars being tested on the track, but said at the time that no one was hurt and that the accident did not affect the opening date. Lynn said the monorail can operate, “but not in a public manner.” He said a problem with communications gear surfaced during the scenario tests, which involve ensuring that the public can clearly hear warnings and move freely out of stations in an emergency. While the communications problem was corrected, the tests need to be re-run. “That is the bottleneck at this point,” he said. “The corrected gear now has to be tested in the scenario.” We have to make sure the testing is done properly.”

Controller berates transit agency for inept accounting

The San Francisco Chronicle MARCH 2, 2004 The staff of a San Francisco agency responsible for annually administering tens of millions of dollars in transportation improvement funds has been rebuked by the city controller as the most financially incompetent he has seen in his 13 years in office. “We would not allow a small nonprofit the city does business with to have the lack of financial understanding your staff has,” Controller Ed Harrington told the finance committee of the San Francisco County Transportation Authority last week. “It is the worst organization I have ever audited in my entire life.” The blistering remarks about the staff of the Transportation Authority came as Harrington is finishing up a financial audit of the agency. His comments were made last Tuesday as the Transportation Authority’s finance committee discussed whether the agency should take on the first significant debt in its 14-year history by selling up to $200 million in commercial paper to help fund the Municipal Railway’s Third Street Light Rail Project. The full board of the Transportation Authority — a group composed of the same members as the San Francisco Board of Supervisors — will consider the borrowing at a special meeting this morning. “They could not do bank reconciliations,” Harrington said of the agency’s 17-member staff. “You can delegate whatever you’d like to them, but … I am telling you that they are not competent from a financial perspective.” Harrington was out of town and unavailable for comment Monday. A spokesman from his office said a draft of the audit will not be ready for another week or so. The Transportation Authority was created in 1989 by the voters’ passage of Proposition B, which authorized a new half-cent sales tax to fund transportation projects. In November, voters renewed the tax by passing Proposition K. One of the projects the sales tax funds is the Third Street Light Rail. Jose Luis Moscovich, the executive director of the Transportation Authority, said issuing the commercial paper was necessary to allow Muni to continue building the Third Street Light Rail line. Technically, the Transportation Authority is independent of city government, and until now it had not been audited by the city controller. This year, Harrington invoked his right under state law to examine the books of a governmental agency located within his jurisdiction, Moscovich said. San Francisco Supervisor Fiona Ma, who is chairwoman of the Transportation Authority’s finance committee, said her understanding was that no criminal wrongdoing had been uncovered by the controller. “I don’t think there’s any fraud or anybody is stealing money,” she said. “I think there are a lack of procedures and controls.” Moscovich said the agency was addressing concerns that the controller had brought up to him in November. “We are in the middle of selecting a new director of finance,” Moscovich said. “As far as I’m concerned, we’ve already dealt with this head-on two months ago.” Board of Supervisors President Matt Gonzalez, who with Ma sits on the agency’s finance committee, defended the Transportation Authority staff at the Tuesday meeting with Harrington. “My own experience is this authority is the best-run operation in the city, bar none,” he said.

Higher parking fees may bankroll light rail; Motorists who bring cars downtown would pay more at meters for longer hours under Portland’s new plan

The Oregonian 2 March 2004 Downtown motorists probably will pay higher fees at parking meters and city garages to help pay for adding light rail to the Portland transit mall. A tentative financing plan calls for $15 million in bonds to be repaid from parking fees as part of a construction budget estimated at $149 million to $160 million. Brant Williams, director of the Portland Office of Transportation, said the city hopes to boost annual downtown parking meter revenue from $9 million to $10.8 million, an increase of approximately 20 percent. Williams said $1.3 million of the increase would go toward retirement of construction bonds. The remaining $500,000 would go to an association charged with maintaining and managing public activities on the revamped transit mall. Williams said options for increasing downtown parking revenue include raising hourly meter and garage fees, extending hours of metered parking on evenings and weekends, and adding meter fees for loading zones. However, the city has yet to suggest a detailed parking proposal. The added revenue would come from meters in the downtown and from six city-owned downtown parking garages. “We’ve got a lot of work ahead of us to consider what the package should be,” Williams said. “We want to meet with a lot of downtown stakeholders and listen to their ideas and concerns.” More than $1 an hour A conceptual design study suggests raising long-term meter rates from 60 cents per hour to $1, and short-term rates from $1 per hour to $1.10. Existing parking rates have been in effect since the 1997-98 fiscal year. Increases would have to be approved by the City Council. The same report also suggests extending the hours of metered parking downtown, which now end at 6 p.m., to 8 p.m. Extending the evening hours could raise problems with the city’s solar-powered parking meter ticket dispensing machines. Some motorists have complained that they cannot read the machines’ digital displays in dim light. “We have heard about that problem,” Williams said. He said the city is trying to place dispensers in areas where evening light is available. Where necessary, he said the city would consider separate lights for the dispensers. Grants from the Federal Transit Administration are expected to pay for 60 percent of the light-rail work. Adding tracks to the transit mall is part of a $495 million project that also would build a new line between Gateway and Clackamas Town Center in Southeast Portland. Financing still in flux Overall, a tentative financing plan circulated by TriMet shows $23.6 million in local matching money must still be found to meet the $495 million total. The same finance plan shows a $4 million shortage for the transit mall portion of the project. “We have now until the middle of August to come up with a firm financing plan,” said Neil McFarlane, TriMet’s capital facilities director. “That’s the challenge.” McFarlane said mid-August is the deadline for the federal grant application. He said federal officials insist on firm plans for raising local matching money for new transit projects, as well as evidence that local governments can afford to operate the transit improvement for at least 20 years. According to the tentative plan, Portland’s financial share of the transit mall work includes $10 million in tax-increment urban renewal money, $15 million from parking revenue, $15 million from a local improvement district composed of nearby property owners, $5 million from Portland State University and $5 million towards utility relocation costs from public utilities. The City Council agreed last year that it wanted to see light rail added to the transit mall as part of the Interstate 205 project. The tracks would extend from Union Station to PSU on Fifth and Sixth avenues. Lefties and righties Designers have submitted plans for adding the tracks. The more expensive plan, at $160 million, would have buses and trains board from the right-hand side of transit vehicles in the direction they are headed. A less costly plan, at $149 million, would have train passengers board from the left-hand side of the street and bus passengers on the right-hand side. The less expensive version would require less tinkering with existing transit mall sidewalks. The more expensive plan would allow a single lane for auto traffic the length of the mall. The cheaper version would allow only limited auto access, similar to the present configuration. If completed on schedule in 2009, trains from the Interstate MAX line, which opens May 1, and from the Interstate 205 corridor would use the transit mall alignment. Blue Line and Red Line trains would continue using the cross-mall tracks on Southwest Morrison and Yamhill Streets as they travel east and west through downtown.

METRO-NORTH MAY GET NEW RAIL CARS; PROPOSAL INVOLVES $60 MILLION FOR FLEET

Hartford Courant (Connecticut) March 2, 2004 About 2,000 more seats could become available on Metro-North’s crowded New Haven Line within the next few years under a financing plan announced Monday at the state Capitol. The proposal entails selling $25 million in state bonds, then blending the proceeds with $35 million already set aside by the Transportation Strategy Board to replace equipment on the busy commuter rail line. Gov. John G. Rowland and House Speaker Moira K. Lyons, D-Stamford, announced the proposal Monday, calling it the first step in a long-term plan to refurbish the entire Metro-North fleet. Passengers have complained for years about crowded conditions and shabby, 1970s-era rail cars on Metro-North’s New Haven Line. However, the problem worsened this winter, when almost one-third of the 343 cars were disabled on several days because of age-related problems exacerbated by cold weather. The Transportation Strategy Board urged Rowland and legislators this winter to find a way to expedite the equipment purchase, saying the problems were choking Fairfield County’s commuting options. “The events of this winter have clearly demonstrated the need to accelerate the purchase of this equipment,” Rowland said Monday. The plan presented by Rowland and Lyons avoids increasing the state’s gas tax, currently 25 cents per gallon. Some frustrated commuter groups in Fairfield County and other officials — including U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays, R-4th District — recently suggested increasing the gas tax in a last-ditch effort to hasten the rail line improvements. But Rowland and many legislators balk at the idea of raising the gas tax, both because of its effect on the state’s economy and the political firestorm that it surely would ignite. The new funding plan is expected to be presented to the General Assembly during the current session for a vote. If approved, it would use the $35 million from the Transportation Strategy Board account, plus $25 million in proceeds from selling State Transportation Obligation (STO) bonds. “Transportation is an issue that impacts the entire state of Connecticut,” Lyons said in a written statement. “Marrying the TSB account with bonding in this case will allow us to address other pressing transportation needs throughout the state.” The legislation authorizing the $25 million bond sale also would direct state transportation officials to order the new rail cars and locomotives right away, getting them on the rails within 18 to 24 months after the order is placed. The problems on Metro-North’s commuter line have become a frequent topic of conversation at the Capitol, including during a session Monday before the General Assembly’s transportation committee. The governor’s proposal to increase rail fares by 5.5 percent has angered many rail passengers, especially coming at the same time that service worsened, said Jim Cameron, vice chairman of the Metro-North/Shore Line East Rail Commuter Council. “Commuters are angry. They’re being overcharged, getting lousy service and starting to abandon the trains and take back to the roads, worsening an already horrible situation on our highways,” he said. The new purchase plan, while welcome, is just a start to the long process of catching up with the New Haven Line’s needs, Cameron said. State officials have said that in addition to accelerating the purchase of new rail cars and locomotives, they will look into buying secondhand equipment from other regions if it is compatible with Metro-North’s equipment. Rowland also has directed the state Office of Policy and Management to draw up a plan within 60 days on how Connecticut can replace the entire 300-car fleet over the next several years. About 110,000 commuters use Metro-North’s New Haven Line each day. A large portion of the fleet is more than 30 years old, despite being designed for a 20-year life span.

Getting to Work: Nearly One-Third of Nation’s Public Transportation Commuters Live In New York City, Says Census Bureau

U.S. Newswire March 2, 2004 Of the approximately 6.4 million people nationwide who usually travel to work using public transportation, nearly one-third live in New York City, according to a new analysis of American Community Survey data released today by the U.S. Census Bureau. New York is the only city where the majority of workers — 55 percent, or 1.9 million people — commute from home to work via public transportation. That is by far the highest percentage among the nation’s largest cities (Table 1). Among other large cities (250,000 population or more) the highest public transportation rates are in Washington, D.C. (37 percent), Boston and San Francisco (31 percent each), Chicago and Philadelphia (27 percent each), Newark, N.J. (26 percent), and Baltimore (25 percent). Only 1-in-8 workers (12 percent) in Los Angeles, the nation’s second largest city, use public transportation, and in Houston, the nation’s fourth largest city, only 6 percent of workers use public transportation. Overall, only 5 percent of the nation’s 128.6 million workers use public transportation to get to work. (See Table 2.) Referring to the analysis, Census Bureau Director Louis Kincannon said, “Transportation planners can use the new American Community Survey to track trends in commuting patterns. Having updated information every year instead of every 10 years will allow them to make more informed decisions about transportation resources and options.” Driven by New York City’s dominance, New York state led all states in the percentage of its public transportation commuters. Statewide, 27 percent of New York workers used public transportation. Other states above the national average were: New Jersey (10 percent), Maryland (9 percent), Massachusetts (9 percent), Illinois (9 percent) and Hawaii (6 percent). (See Table 2.) Of the 231 counties for which data are available, four New York City boroughs / Manhattan (New York County) (61 percent), Bronx (60 percent), Brooklyn (Kings County) (58 percent) and Queens (51 percent) / had the highest percentages of public transportation commuters by far. Other counties in the New York metropolitan area with high public transportation rates were Richmond County (Staten Island) (33 percent) and Hudson County, N.J. (31 percent). Counties in other areas with high rates of public transportation use include San Francisco County, Calif. (31 percent) and Suffolk County, Mass. (30 percent). (See Table 3.) Other survey highlights (see Table 4): — Nationwide, 77 percent of workers drove alone to work, 10 percent carpooled and 2 percent walked. — Bus transportation accounted for 55 percent of public transportation use nationally; subway or elevated rail use ranked second at 29 percent. The American Community Survey annually provides communities with socio-economic data previously available once every 10 years. The survey will be conducted monthly in every county in the nation beginning in July 2004, eliminating the need for the long form in the 2010 Census. The findings are based on responses from a sample of households interviewed in 2002. As with all surveys, the estimates and rankings may vary from the actual values because of sampling or nonsampling variations. The statistical statements have undergone testing, and comparisons are significant at the 90 percent confidence level.

THE £ 40M GAMBLE

Yorkshire Evening Post March 2, 2004 Leeds Supertram, which the city is desperately trying to save, has so far cost taxpayers £ 40m. The scheme now faces an uncertain future amid fears the Government will not fund the cost of £ 800m- £ 1,000m — almost double the expected sum. The bulk of the cash has been spent on buying land. Work on building the three lines, which will cover a total of 28km, has now been delayed by ministers. Transport Secretary Alistair Darling has asked the city to see if savings can be made, leading to widespread concerns that the plug will be pulled on Supertram in Leeds. Defended Metro — West Yorkshire’s Passenger Transport Executive which is heading the project — defended the sums so far invested. A Metro spokesman said: The £ 40m that has been invested in Supertram is in line with the pre-bidding period for other similar projects such as Manchester’s Metrolink. As soon as all statutory powers and formal written approval for Supertram were received from the Government in 2001, the process of buying land began. This avoids costly and lengthy delays. A successful consortium would expect to be able to begin work as soon as possible after being awarded a contract. It was therefore important to purchase complicated plots of land, such as at Stourton for the tram depot, as soon as possible. Because land increases in value, purchases were carried out as swiftly as possible to help reduce overall costs. All the land purchased would now realise more than its cost if sold. But Coun Andrew Carter, Leeds City Council’s Tory group leader, said: (This merely underlines the predicament that Metro and the city council are in and graphically highlights the shambles the Government has created. Estimates Land values can rise but those values in south Leeds without Supertram could prove to be a different matter. Original estimates for the project were about £ 500m, with the Government expected to contribute about £ 355m, but tenders for the work proved to be much higher. Metro and the council want the Government to increase its contribution. Leeds’s private and public sectors are now united in a campaign to persuade ministers to press ahead with Supertram, arguing that the scheme will bring benefits — including jobs and investment — which far outweigh the cost. Coun Keith Wakefield, council leader, said: The fact that we have already committed £ 40m shows how determined we are to make it happen. As demonstrated by the all-party support at the council meeting on Wednesday and the lobby by local business leaders, people from across the city are determined in their campaign to get the Government to back Supertram.

Sketch: Railing at the anoraks

The Guardian (London March 2, 2004 I rarely go to the Commons public accounts committee, which is a mistake, because it seems to be lots of fun. Yesterday, for instance, they were investigating why there are so few new trains on our railways, and why the new trains that exist are presently “mothballed”, which means they are sitting in sidings, covered in graffiti, going nowhere. Also the famous tilting trains are yet to do any tilting. There was a huge, heaving crowd outside the committee room. It was like Waterloo when there’s a quarter inch of snow, or a fallen leaf has to be rescued from the line. These people were anoraks, without the anoraks. They sat gazing fixedly ahead, now and again making a note in their little books. “Aha,” you could see them saying, “that was question number 96702. I last saw that at Preston!” Finally, we were admitted to the room, and there was a massive surge forward. This is one of the old-style “slam door” committee rooms. As the crowd pressed in, the copper on the door asked the clerk “Standing allowed?” If they had to ask that on a commuter train, nobody would get home. The witnesses, six of them, sat buttock to buttock, at a table which would comfortably fit four. So they must have felt very comfortable. Then the chairman, Tory MP Edward Leigh, got going. Gosh, he was rude. He couldn’t stay silent for a minute. Nobody got to finish a sentence. So Richard Bowker, who has the misfortune to be chief executive of the Strategic Rail Authority was going on about Mark I rolling stock, but before he could say what he was trying to say, Mr Leigh chipped in: “Why has the SRA not been equipped with the tools to do the job? Is that right or not?” “Er. . .” said Mr Bowker, but that was all he could say. At times, witnesses were reduced to total silence. There seemed no point interrupting questions merely to provide answers. I wondered what it would be like if Mr Leigh got into a guard’s compartment. “Ladies and gentlemen, this is the 0930 hours King’s Cross to Edinburgh, calling at Stevenage, Peterbo. . .” “Did you say Swanage? Why on earth is this train going to Swanage? I think we need an explanation from you, now!” “. . .will call at Stevenage, Peterborough, and. . .” “Frankly, I have no idea why you would want to stop the train at Peterborough. It beggars belief that you should have planned for this train to travel there when it could be going to Leeds, a bigger city with a much wider range of attractions!” “Peterborough, Doncaster, Newcastle. . .” “Am I hearing you correctly? Are you seriously telling me that you are not calling at Durham, one of our finest and most historic cities. . .” And so on. The witnesses began to twitch. No wonder. It turns out there are several hundred new trains sitting idle because nobody was aware that they needed more power, and it will be a long time before the extra juice is available. One witness said it would have helped to have “joined-up thinking”. Or “thinking”, as we used to call it. Timothy Walker, of the Health and Safety Executive, began to stutter, poor fellow. But it didn’t matter, because Mr Leigh shut him up anyway. “I didn’t understand a single word of that answer. But others may do.” Suddenly the bell rang for a division and the MPs had to go and vote. “We will be back in eight minutes or, if there are two divisions, 23 minutes,” Mr Leigh announced, and swept out. It was the equivalent of signalling problems at Crewe. As on a train, everyone sat silent, rolling their eyes, but saying nothing at all.

WTC PATH station reclaims its spot at the top; World Trade Centre; Port Authority Trans-Hudson

Real Estate Weekly March 3, 2004 Two months after opening, the Port Authority’s World Trade Center PATH Station is setting ridership records far Faster than expected. In the clearest sign yet of Lower Manhattan’s continuing recovery from the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, the temporary World Trade Center Station already has achieved an important milestone, reclaiming its position as the busiest station in the PATH (Port Authority Trans-Hudson) system on weekdays — two years ahead of the Port Authority’s original projection. The World Trade Center Station also has averaged more than 30,000 weekday PATH riders since January 15 — and topped 30,000 riders seven times between January 20 and 30. The busiest day occurred on January 29, when more than 36,000 riders boarded PATH at the World Trade Center Station. Before the Port Authority restored PATH service to the World Trade Center site on November 23, 2003, the bistate agency expected the temporary station to initially average 18,000 weekday riders; to range between 20,000 and 30,000 weekday riders within the first year; and to average 24,000 weekday commuters after a year of service. The Port Authority also expected the World Trade Center Station to become the PATH system’s busiest weekday station by 2006. The station already has exceeded each goal. New York Gov. George E. Pataki said, “The rapid return of PATH riders to the World Trade Center Station clearly shows that Lower Manhattan is recovering from the devastation of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks even faster than we had hoped.” The $ 2 billion World Trade Center Transportation Hub will feature a Permanent PATH Terminal that eventually will serve more than 80,000 daily PATH riders, and seamless pedestrian connections to the World Financial Center and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s proposed Fulton Street Transit Center. Lower Manhattan residents, commuters and visitors will enjoy far taster access to ferry service along the Hudson River, and to 14 Lower Manhattan subway lines — the 1/9, 2/3, 4/5, N/ R, A/C/E and J/M/Z. By 2020, these connections are expected to accommodate 250,000 daily commuters and visitors. The Transportation Hub also is being designed to accommodate potential future rail service to John F. Kennedy International Airport, Newark Liberty International Airport and Long Island destinations. The permanent PATH Terminal is expected to begin serving passengers by the end of 2006. All elements of the World Trade Center Transportation Hub are scheduled for completion by 2009. The temporary station — the final piece of the Port Authority’s $ 566 million program to restore PATII service as quickly as possible from New Jersey to Lower Manhattan — is the first public space to open within the World Trade Center site since the terrorist attacks.

French rail system ‘hostage to unions’ Network once the envy of the British is badly maintained, says new book. Philip Delves Broughton in Paris reports

THE DAILY TELEGRAPH(LONDON) March 3, 2004 THE French railway system, long the envy of British travellers, is badly maintained, deeply in the red and a hostage to self-interested trade unions, says a book to be published tomorrow in Paris. SNCF: La Machine Infernale, written by three investigative journalists paints a sorry picture of what many tourists consider the most obvious triumph of the French public sector. French railways, the authors argue, survive only because of pounds 7 billion annual taxpayer subsidies and politicians terrified of confronting a deeply rotten system. Their main thesis is that France’s railways are now moving at two speeds. First there is the TGV network, which carried its billionth passenger last year. These high-speed trains are the only profitable arm of SNCF. Politicians jostle to have new lines laid to their towns and regions. In December, with the forthcoming regional elections in mind, Jean-Pierre Raffarin, the prime minister, promised six new TGV lines. But behind the glittering facade of the TGV is the rest of the train network, notably the Transilien, which serves the Ile de France, carrying commuters in and out of Paris. About 2.2 million passengers use this service daily, two thirds of all those who use the railways. Unlike the lavishly funded TGV network, the Transilien suffers from ageing tracks, faulty signalling and vandalism. Official SNCF figures state that 90.5 percent of Transilien trains operate within five minutes of their schedule. A consumer magazine, Que Choisir, said recently that only 56 percent were on time. The capital’s main newspaper, Le Parisien, frequently rants about the suburban service, its tardiness and assaults on passengers. Eurostar, the authors claim, is now similarly recognised by SNCF as a disaster. One of the company’s executives is quoted as saying : “Eurostar was a huge mistake. “But closing it would wipe out the shareholders of Eurotunnel, would be absurd in terms of jobs and chucking out 27 tracks built at a cost of pounds 34 million each.” The last time a government tried to reform trains was in 1995. In response, the unionised workers’ imprisoned SNCF bureaucrats in their offices for days without even access to lavatories. When the government caved in, the hostage-takers were not disciplined for fear of another strike. The authors estimate the government’s contribution to SNCF, via subsidies and pension contributions for its 180,000 employees, at roughly pounds 125 per citizen. Philippe Essig, head of SNCF during the 1980s, is quoted as saying: “The politicians have never told the French, ‘The TGV is a very nice toy, but it’s expensive’. “So the French think that it’s their right, like baguettes and the minimum wage.” One of the reasons given by the authors for the failure of the French press to report on SNCF’s troubles is that each year the company gives more than 300 discount cards for journalists and their families to use on private trips. Civil servants were also reluctant to find fault with SNCF as 50,000 of them travelled on reduced fares. In 1997, the government tried to help SNCF by hiving off its pounds 16.7 billion accumulated debt into a separate state company, the Reseau Ferre de France, which would look after rail infrastructure. But burdened with interest payments, the RFF can afford to maintain only half of all France’s railways, letting the rest go to ruin. The 35-hour week has also caused havoc. An SNCF executive said: “Many trains leave late simply because there is no one to drive them.” There is also the problem of many workers taking holidays in the summer when the trains are at their busiest.

Airport Passengers Put in Storage

WPVI-TV Philadelphia March 4, 2004 NEW YORK-March 4, 2004 — For the second time this year, passengers on the Kennedy Airport AirTrain were accidentally diverted to a storage yard that contained electric rails, officials said. The Feb. 12 mistake prompted an internal overview of the $1.9 billion, eight-mile long transit system which runs from Howard Beach and Jamaica Queens to the airport, Newsday reported in Thursday editions. The train was riding on the Howard Beach line when it went off course and into an area where unused trains are kept. When the train’s doors opened, the dozen passengers on board were exposed to live electrified rail. Passengers who were expecting to arrive at the airport called for help with the intercom on the train and an employee advised them to stay clear of the doors. After about 15 minutes, the train was back on course. Two employees of Montreal-based Bombardier, the company that operates the AirTrain system, were disciplined after the incident. “This incident is unacceptable and the Port Authority deeply regrets any inconvenience,” said Pasquale DiFulco, a Port Authority spokesman. On Jan. 26, another train filled with travelers was also mistakenly diverted to the same yard.

Firm spent thousands to woo SEPTA leaders; A Korean consortium hired a lobbyist for $10,000 a month while seeking a controversial deal to build train cars.

Philadelphia Inquirer March 04, 2004 The South Korean consortium seeking a quarter-billion-dollar SEPTA railcar deal hired Pennsylvania Republican chairman Alan Novak’s lobbying firm for a five-year, $10,000-a-month contract, according to a document released yesterday by the train-car company. Novak’s role in United Transit Systems’ attempt to win a contract for 104 Regional Rail cars had been disclosed, but not his fee. The Inquirer obtained the information from the consortium. SEPTA declined repeated requests for any federal lobbying disclosure forms filed by the four companies that sought the contract. United Transit’s Japanese competitor, Kawasaki Rail Car Inc., failed to file a disclosure form with SEPTA. Kawasaki acknowledged yesterday that it hired former SEPTA executive Robert G. Bickhart, who now runs his own lobbying firm. This month, a Common Pleas Court judge will hear Kawasaki’s claim that SEPTA “rigged” the bid for United Transit when it changed the contract’s specifications in May. The $236 million award to United Transit is on hold pending the outcome of the suit. Novak’s firm was hired at the $10,000 monthly fee in 2002 to “actively” contact SEPTA board members to “introduce” the South Korean firm, the form states. “This introduction has been educational in nature covering the company’s history… . Initial contact with SEPTA board members began in December 2002 and will continue through 2003,” the form states. Along with Novak, the lobbyists actively working on United Transit’s behalf for that fee were Craig L. Tucker, an employee of Novak’s firm, and Albert Mezzaroba, a Philadelphia Democrat and president of the Convention Center, who is a fishing buddy of Pasquale “Pat” Deon, chairman of the SEPTA board of directors. Citing the ongoing lawsuit, SEPTA spokesman Richard Maloney declined to comment yesterday. Deon and board vice chairman James Schwartzman did not return phone calls seeking comment yesterday. In a statement, United Transit contended that all four bidders for the railcar contract “had to file” the detailed lobby form and that United Transit “may have been the only one to fully comply” with SEPTA’s requirements. United Transit said lobbying disclosure was required because up to 80 percent of the funds would come from the federal government. “This is a federally funded contract and federal requirements flow with the money,” a United Transit statement said. “Now we find out that… other bidders thought these rules… didn’t apply to them.” Kawasaki said it interpreted the requirements differently. It concluded it only had to file a brief statement certifying that it was neither using federal funds for lobbying nor lobbying federal officials. Kawasaki did file that statement with SEPTA. A Kawasaki official yesterday contended that Bickhart, a former aide to U.S. Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.), was a “representative” rather than a “lobbyist.” “Lobbying is if you’re trying to influence,” Kawasaki marketing manager Jitendra Tomar said. “We never did that kind of thing… . You could say he [Bickhart] is our representative… to keep a watch on what these Koreans are doing… to see and give us information on that. I am very clear he is not a lobbyist.” Reached yesterday, Bickhart said he was not a lobbyist for Kawasaki. “I was helping them discern their way around SEPTA and the region, and who might be important people to be in contact with,” Bickhart said. He described his role as a “government affairs” consultant. Tucker and Novak did not return phone calls seeking comment yesterday. Donald Nigro, president of the Delaware Valley Association of Rail Passengers, expressed dismay that lobbyists were needed by any potential contractor. “Why can’t the product… sell itself?” said Nigro, who represents the region’s largest organized group of rail passengers. “I don’t know why they need to be spending $10,000 a month on lobbyists.” Stephan Rosenfeld, a former SEPTA official familiar with large-scale public procurements, said: “None of this should come as a surprise to anyone. It is a high-stakes game.” SEPTA did not disqualify Kawasaki for its failure to file the detailed form. The penalty for not filing the form is a fine of $10,000 to $100,000 and is a civil rather than criminal violation. Disqualification from bidding is not a sanction mentioned in the law. A third competitor, Sumitomo Corp. of America, spent $20,000 to hire the lobbying services of former SEPTA board member and agency executive Robert “Rick” Wooten. Wooten left the SEPTA board in January 2003. Beginning in September, Wooten met with most of SEPTA’s 15 board members to discuss Sumitomo’s merits, company vice president Gino Antoniello said. “We don’t like to call it grease,” Antoniello said of Wooten — a respected transit expert — and his resulting introductions on the company’s behalf to SEPTA decision-makers. “We’re not from Philadelphia,” Antoniello added. “Rick’s services were as a public relations consultant.” Wooten declined to comment for this article. The fourth contender, Bombardier Transit Corp., said it hired no outside lobbyist.

Miami-Miami Beach link put on back burner

Miami Today March 4, 2004 A mass-transit link of downtown Miami and Miami Beach is taking a back seat to other projects as Miami-Dade County sets priorities for spending a half-percent sales surtax. A light-rail trolley, BayLink, that would connect the cities will not be ready until 2022, according to county plans. The county’s transportation planning board approved the link last fall. Instead, the county will focus on Metrorail extensions to Miami International Airport and Florida International University and up 27th Avenue to the Broward County line. All three extensions are to open in 2012. If all goes according to the county’s most recent transit-funding schedule, residents will see a Metrorail tunnel to the Port of Miami before they see a modern trolley rolling across MacArthur Causeway. “The other projects are larger projects, and they are projects, especially the east-west corridor, that as far as relief of congestion are of much greater magnitude,” Metropolitan Planning Organization Director Jose- Luis Mesa said. “Right now, the way the program is moving, the east-west and the north corridors continue to be the first priorities.” Mr. Mesa said the transit project schedule could be changed, depending on availability of federal funds. Plans for the link have been heavily debated for two decades, and the Metropolitan Planning Organization in September approved a basic route and technology mode for the system. The Miami Beach City Commission approved BayLink this year, the first time since 1988 that both cities have backed the concept. The county estimates BayLink would carry almost 5 million riders a year and cost $400 million. Metrorail’s airport extension would carry 1 million riders a year and cost $215 million, the FIU extension would cost $440 million with an unestimated ridership and the port extension would cost $1.8 billion with 8.4 million riders annually, according to a Metropolitan Planning Organization study. The county’s priorities for the projects were laid out recently in an assessment of a half-percent sales tax approved by voters in 2002. The Florida Department of Transportation is not involved in BayLink, said local spokeswoman Aymee Ruiz. Instead, the state is focusing on the Metrorail extensions to the airport and seaport, which fit into the state’s long-range goal of connecting major transportation hubs, she said. Once the Department of Transportation gets involved in BayLink, she said, it could take up to 20 years to have it running. “Average project life could be 20 years from concept to concrete,” Ms. Ruiz said. “Property is so hot that it becomes quite a challenge because we buy property at fair market value.” The county, though, is working to get the Federal Transit Administration to recognize BayLink so planners can begin preliminary engineering, said Wilson Fernandez of the Metropolitan Planning Organization. Another round of meetings will take place as consultants put together details, Mr. Fernandez said. “Now we are focused in on what side of the street the rail is going to be on and where the stations would be located,” he said. “It is getting into more details of the plan.” Carlos Bonzon, county surface transportation manager, said the county will push to win federal funding for BayLink along with other mass-transit projects. “We are trying to advance all of (the corridors) through the process to make sure they have federal funding at some point,” Mr. Bonzon said. Mr. Fernandez said that if funding were immediately available or if the county gave the project a higher priority, BayLink could be running by 2012.

ELECTION 2004; 8 transit projects to start rolling next year; BART retrofit, rail, buses, shuttles good to go

The San Francisco Chronicle MARCH 4, 2004 On July 1, thanks to the passage of Regional Measure 2, tolls on the Bay Area’s seven state-owned bridges will rise to $3, and an estimated $125 million a year will begin pouring into the region’s transportation treasury. Bay Area residents may not have to wait long to see some of those extra toll dollars at work — construction on eight projects on the to-do list are scheduled to start next year, with another 17 to begin in 2006 and 2007. Two of the biggest projects — a landmark Transbay Terminal and Caltrain downtown extension, and a fourth bore for the Caldecott Tunnel — also are expected to get money next year, but it could be many years before they are completed. “This measure is going to be unique in how many projects can be delivered in the first one, two, three years,” said Stuart Cohen, executive director of the Transportation and Land Use Coalition, a collection of environmental and social justice groups that campaigned for Measure 2. “We didn’t choose projects that were a glimmer in a politician’s eye; we chose projects based on their readiness.” At least one project is already under way. Construction of the new Benicia-Martinez Bridge, funded by an earlier toll increase, has begun — and is over budget. Regional Measure 2 is expected to contribute $50 million toward the cost overruns next year. Also under way is BART’s $288 million project to seismically retrofit the Transbay Tube against a major earthquake — which Metropolitan Transportation Commission spokesman Randy Rentschler calls a priority project for the Bay Area. The earthquake work will get $143 million from Measure 2. “This gives us a big boost,” said BART spokesman Linton Johnson. Bay Area buses and light rail are also on track for an infusion of Measure 2 funds next year. — AC Transit plans to spend $65 million on the first phase of a rapid bus line with limited stops and traffic signal priority along Telegraph Avenue in Berkeley and Oakland and International Boulevard in Oakland. — The Port of Oakland and BART plan to start work on an automated shuttle linking Oakland International Airport with the Coliseum Station. Other projects expected to benefit next year from Measure 2 money include: — A direct BART-Muni Metro connection at San Francisco’s Embarcadero Station. — The Muni Metro Third Street light rail extension from King Street to Hunters Point. — Expansion of Muni’s historic F-line streetcars. — BART’s Warm Springs extension. — Safety improvements on Interstate 880 in Oakland. The next two years could bring a burst of transit spending — including new ferries for the Alameda/Oakland/Harbor Bay service as well as a new service from South San Francisco. Regional express buses across the seven state toll bridges also could hit the road with Measure 2 funding. With only $125 million a year in revenue, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the region’s transportation planning and financing agency, will likely sell bonds — a way to borrow money based on the anticipated revenues of the toll increase — to cover costs in the early years of the measure. Rentschler said the commission will set up a process to review and spend money from Measure 2, which includes performance standards and requirements that must be met before checks can be written. “We’re going to want to make sure projects are ready to go,” said Rentschler, “and that the other pieces of their funding are in place.” That will be tougher for some projects than others. The Transbay Terminal, scheduled to receive $150 million, has a price tag of $1.7 billion. But it is also counting on $270 million if San Franciscans renew their transportation sales tax in November, $127 million from a statewide high-speed rail bond that is in jeopardy of being removed from the November ballot and $500 million from selling land around the terminal for development. A fourth bore for the Caldecott Tunnel also could be a distant vision. Measure 2 chipped in $50.5 million toward the $200 million project, which has about $36 million in state funding promised. Regional Measure 2 traffic relief projects With the passage Tuesday of Regional Measure 2, tolls on seven state-owned bridges will rise from $2 to $3. The $125 million in annual revenue from that toll increase will go to fund a wide variety of transportation projects across the region. A partial list of projects, with dates for the start of construction: — Transbay Terminal and downtown Caltrain extension in San Francisco, 2005 — BART Transbay Tube seismic strengthening, 2005 — Commuter rail service over Dumbarton rail bridge, 2006 — I-680/I-80/Highway 12 interchange improvements in Solano County, 2010 — BART extension from Pittsburg/Bay Point Station east to Byron, 2011 — BART extension to Warm Springs, 2005 — AC Transit improved bus service (International Boulevard/Telegraph Avenue corridor), 2005 — I-580 rapid transit corridor improvements in Dublin, Pleasanton and Livermore, 2010 — Caldecott tunnel fourth bore, 2005 — I-80 eastbound carpool extension from Highway 4 to Carquinez Bridge, 2007 — New Benicia bridge (cost overruns), 2005 — Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit District ext. from San Rafael to Larkspur, 2009 — San Francisco Muni Third Street Light Rail, 2005 — BART, Capitol Corridor connector to Oakland Airport, 2005 — Regional express buses for San Mateo, Dumbarton and Bay Bridge corridors, 2006 — Regional express buses in Contra Costa County, San Rafael and Napa, 2006 — Commute ferry service for Alameda/Oakland/Harbor Bay, 2007 — Commute ferry service for Berkeley/Albany, 2009 — Commute ferry service for South San Francisco, 2007

Used cars bolster TRAX fleet; From California: The 29 rail units cost $500,000 apiece, compared to $2 1/2 million for a new model

Salt Lake Tribune (Utah) March 4, 2004 Not everybody can afford, or wants, a new car. Among those joining the ranks of used buyers: the Utah Transit Authority. The UTA on Wednesday took delivery of one of the first of 29 used light rail cars it purchased in January from the Santa Clara Valley Transit Authority, which serves the San Jose, Calif., metro area. Once refurbished for TRAX and put into service, the cars will add train capacity during peak hours and special events. The purchase more than doubles the size of the UTA’s TRAX fleet. The new TRAX cars date to the mid-1980s. But Mike Allegra, the UTA’s director of rail operations, says they will be barely distinguishable from the current fleet once renovated for TRAX use. The key thing, he adds, is that they come at the bargain price of about $ 500,000 a car — well below the $ 2.5 million cost of a new light rail car. “That’s a $ 64 million savings, so this is huge for us,” Allegra said, including the cost difference between the used and new cars, the parts inventory the UTA inherits and the cost of renovating the 29 cars. The UTA first approached Santa Clara Valley Transit before the 2002 Olympics, when it was seeking loaner cars to handle the crowds using TRAX during the Winter Games. That deal never materialized, and the UTA eventually got its temporary light rail help from Dallas, but Santa Clara told its UTA counterparts to stay in touch. “We knew they had a whole [new] fleet coming in, so we kept it in the back of our minds, and two years ago restarted the discussion,” said Allegra. The deal “was legally complicated because of California’s ‘lease-back’ laws. It had to be signed off on by state attorneys and private investors, but we got it worked out.” The new vehicles will be shipped to the UTA one at a time over the next few months. They will be overhauled and made to conform with the TRAX system. But the beauty of the deal is that — aside from the interior and exterior refurbishing — relatively little will have to be done, according to Allegra. “You can’t just buy these things off the shelf,” he said. “Every [light rail] system is unique, from the tracks, to the stations, to the platforms and canopies. So we’re extremely fortunate that these cars can fit our track.” Because the Santa Clara cars are built by a different manufacturer than the original 23 purchased by the UTA, the transit agency’s current cars and the used cars will run as separate trains. But the overall result will be longer trains, and hence, added rider capacity during rush hours and special events — such as Jazz basketball games, University of Utah football and basketball games and concerts. The first of the Santa Clara cars are slated to enter service this summer, with the entire fleet expected to be up and running by the end of the year, according to UTA spokesman Justin Jones

Panel gives trolley plan green light

Santa Cruz Sentinel March 5, 2004 SANTA CRUZ — The trolley project is back on track. The Santa Cruz County Regional Transportation Commission late Thursday chose to go ahead with an environmental report on the tourist train, planned to run from Capitola to Aptos, with an extension to Seascape. The three-hour-long, standing room-only meeting was punctuated by bits of street theater, including a Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger impersonator. But it was also marked by urgent pleas from neighbors of the rail line who said they didn’t think any environmental report would find a way to offset the blaring of air horns past their homes several times a day. At the end of the meeting, the commission voted down, on a 9-3 vote, a motion to stop pursuing $11 million in state Proposition 116 funds, which would be used to buy the Union Pacific right of way for the tourist train. The vote means the commission will complete the environmental report, which is 90 percent finished, then decide whether to keep going with the project. Drafts of the environmental report and business plan are expected to be done by the end of the month. County Supervisors Jan Beautz and Ellen Pirie and Scotts Valley representative Randy Johnson were in the minority. “Irresponsibility seems to be the word of the night,” Pirie said. “Both sides seem to think the other is being irresponsible. It seems to me people want the rail-trail. Everyone agrees on that. But I don’t agree (using Prop. 116) is the only way to get it.” The rail-trail is another proposal for use of the right of way, which runs from Watsonville to Davenport. The plan calls for a county-spanning bicycle and pedestrian trail that would run along the rail line. The majority of commissioners said they wanted to complete the environmental study and business plan for the proposed tourist train, then decide whether the train is worth pursuing. “It seems premature to shut off the study at this point,” said Supervisor Mark Stone. “I don’t think it’s a responsible decision to walk away now.” The decision was a surprise, as Beautz and Pirie already had spoken out against the project. But the overwhelming public support for the project, demonstrated in part by the roughly 200 people who attended the hearing, may have swayed commissioners. About 35 people spoke against continuing the study and about 45 people spoke in favor of it. Most of the trolley supporters at the meeting said the Proposition 116 money was the only way they could see to buy the line and build a rail-trail. “We’re happy,” said Micah Posner, a member of Friends of the Rail-Trail. “No one had any idea how this was going to go, so I think seeing so many people from so many different walks of life who say they want this made a difference.” In addition to the Proposition 116 funds, the commission has set aside another $10 million for the purchase. Two rail operators, Santa Cruz Big Trees and Roaring Camp Railroad in Felton and Sierra Railroad Company of Davis, have expressed interest in running the trolley without subsidies from the commission.

Scaling back of light rail was legal, state Supreme Court rules

Seattle Times March 5, 2004 The state Supreme Court yesterday lifted one of the last significant legal clouds hanging over Sound Transit’s Seattle light-rail line, ruling the agency didn’t violate state law when it scaled back the project in response to cost overruns. Sane Transit, an opposition coalition, filed a lawsuit two years ago to block the line, arguing it was illegal because it wasn’t the same project that voters approved in 1996. Foes wanted the project halted until another vote could be held. By a 6-3 vote, the Supreme Court upheld a lower-court ruling that voters had given Sound Transit discretion to scale back the project in the event of unforeseen circumstances. The “Sound Move” regional transit plan that King, Snohomish and Pierce county voters approved in 1996 called for a 21-mile light-rail line from Seattle’s University District to SeaTac by 2006. By late 2000, however, the project was $1 billion over budget and three years behind schedule. So, in November 2001, the Sound Transit board downsized the project to a 14-mile line from downtown Seattle to Tukwila, to be finished in 2009. Construction finally began last fall. The Sane Transit lawsuit boiled down to different interpretations of exactly what voters approved in 1996. Sane Transit argued that an eight-page Sound Transit brochure and official voters pamphlets mailed to voters before the election promised the full 21-mile line would be built within 10 years, and made no mention of possible delays or downsizing. But Chief Justice Gerry Alexander, writing for the court majority, said those materials were “extrinsic documents” that were not legally binding. Voters in fact had approved by reference a more detailed board resolution that did allow for changes if money ran short, he wrote, even though they hadn’t been provided that resolution. “An inquiry into the voter’s subjective understanding of what he or she thought he or she was enacting is a task we will not undertake,” Alexander added. Justices Richard Sanders, Charles Johnson and Tom Chambers dissented. Chambers called the majority ruling a blow to the people’s power to legislate directly. It gives proponents of a measure “almost unfettered discretion to (do) whatever they want regardless of what the resolution submitted to the people promises to the people,” he wrote. Light-rail foes said the majority opinion could further erode public trust in government. “Sadly, it appears that the state requires more disclosure and provides more protection to a person buying a used car than to taxpayers footing the bill for a multibillion-dollar project,” the Coalition for Effective Transportation Alternatives (CETA) said in a prepared statement. CETA co-chair Maggie Fimia said the decision could increase voter skepticism about claims governments make in future ballot measures, such as a three-county roads and transit package tentatively scheduled for the November ballot. “Opponents of that will use this (ruling) to kill it,” she predicted. Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg, who also is Sound Transit’s board chairman, labeled that “a silly argument. … Any agency has to have some latitude on how things might turn out.” If Sane Transit had prevailed, Ladenburg said, Sound Transit probably would have sought relief from the Legislature. That probably would have delayed construction one or two years and driven up costs, he said. Ladenburg said the ruling “gets the last legal hurdle out of the way for Sound Transit. … People are going to see light rail finally come to Seattle.” But at least three unresolved lawsuits still could affect the project: - Another anti-rail group, Citizens for Mobility, has filed a federal suit contending Sound Transit and the Federal Transit Administration erred in not requiring an environmental-impact statement on the scaled-back project. The group lost in U.S. District Court last year, but has appealed. - State courts still haven’t decided whether Sound Transit can continue to collect a motor-vehicle excise tax that provides 20 percent of its revenue in light of another state Supreme Court ruling last year. That ruling upheld voter-approved Initiative 776, which attempted to repeal the tax. Sound Transit has assured the federal government it will complete the light-rail line even if it loses the money. But Fimia said that’s not a sure thing. - Kirkland attorney Will Knedlik filed a lawsuit in King County Superior Court against Sound Transit in December seeking, among other things, refunds to voters of motor-vehicle excise taxes paid since Initiative 776 passed, as well as a partial rollback of Sound Transit taxes starting in 2007.

NJ Transit to link Newark stations

Newark Star Ledger. March 05, 2004 A yellow backhoe loader yesterday was perched over a gaping hole on Broad Street at the northern end of downtown Newark, slowing traffic to a crawl. From morning rush-hour until dusk, workers in hard hats climbed in and out of the pit that gives them access to underground gas and electric lines. The work crews have become an around-the-clock presence on northern Broad as New Jersey Transit steps up construction of a one-mile light-rail trolley between the Broad Street and Newark Penn stations. State and city officials believe the rail link will transform the intersection of Broad and Interstate 280, a long-neglected part of downtown, into a hub filled with housing, corporate office space, shops and restaurants. It’s also sparking interest from one of the largest developers in the state. The Gale Co. of Florham Park, for example, confirmed it is in preliminary negotiations to build a mixed-use development on the site of the abandoned Westinghouse factory west of the light-rail tracks and the v