News | Swindler | Articles

No go in Bordeaux

Railway Gazette International August 2004: News READERS may recall that parts of the tram network in the French city of Bordeaux have a novel surface-contact power supply system known as Innorail, chosen to avoid littering the city centre with overhead wires and masts (RG 2.04 p89). There was trouble even when President Chirac inaugurated the first section of the 43�7km network last December, but the issue shot up the city’s agenda following opening on July 3 of the final section of Line B to Pessac. The Innorail equipment caused more trouble, and matters failed to improve over the next few days; services were interrupted for 10h on July 7. All this was too much for Mayor Alain Juppé, who on July 8 wrote to supplier Alstom demanding at least 95 to 98% reliability by mid-September. The problem centres on the switching boxes set into the track, which have proved to be insufficiently robust and not fully watertight, made worse by inadequate drainage. Philippe Mellier, President of Alstom Transport, promised to have the issue resolved by the end of August. He said teams were working round the clock to replace the boxes, of which there are 980. We understand that they have been replaced at least once already. What happens if Juppé’s threshold is not attained is not clear, but one proposal would see Innorail abandoned for Phase 2. There is even a suggestion that the existing third-rail sections could be rebuilt with unsightly overhead wires. Oh l� l�!

The Las Vegas Monorail: First in its Class; The Latest Addition to Sin City’s Skyline Boasts Plenty of Transportation Firsts and Modern Innovations

Mass Transit September 2004 Through a billow of smoke and confetti, the Robert N. Broadbent Las Vegas Monorail finally made its eagerly awaited debut. The culmination of a decade of planning, partnerships and private-funding, the monorail, which in recent months endured numerous delays, boarded its first load of passengers. The inaugural event on July 14, the day before the public opening, was chock-full of glam and glitter, providing riders the chance to rub elbows with Vegas personalities from singer Gladys Knight and comedians Penn & Teller to costume-clad cast members of casino shows like the Hilton’s Star Trek Borg Invasion and Sahara’s Saturday Night Fever. The next day’s launch went off without a hitch. According to the Las Vegas Monorail Company (LVMC), in its first day of service the monorail moved almost 31,000 people from one end of the strip to the other, bringing in more than $98,000 in revenues. In the first 17 days of service, the LVMC reports that nearly half a million people have passed through the monorail’s fare gates between 8 a.m. and midnight each day, generating about $1.6 million in ticket revenue — a statistic that surely pleased the project’s stakeholders. Monorail investors flipped the project’s $650 million bill, a tax-free bond issue. The LVMC, a non-profit organization, collects advertising and fare revenues but the monorail will run exempt of federal and state taxes. In addition to its initial success, the monorail has drawn attention for boasting a number of firsts. It is the first fully automated, wireless, line— haul monorail and it is the first privately funded urban transportation system. “Other features that set the monorail apart from comparable systems, like airport people movers, lie in the complexity of the system, its ability to reverse its direction on turn-backs, and the sheer volume of people it moves every day,” explains Katherine Nickerson, director of communications for the Total Transit Systems division of Bombardier Transportation. Current operations are just the beginning; with Phase I up and running, subsequent phases are in the works. According to the Regional Transportation Commission (RTC) of Southern Nevada, the second phase, the Downtown Extension, is anticipated to start construction in 2005. It will run an additional 2.3 miles off the existing monorail, providing a seamless operation between the Riviera/Stardust station area and the Fremont Street station in downtown Las Vegas. Revenue service is slated to begin in late 2008. A final extension linking the entire system to the airport is under consideration. The Robert N. Broadbent Monorail isn’t Vegas’ first experience with this mode of transportation. According to LVMC, in 1993, the MGM Grand and Bally’s Hotel announced a joint operation to construct a one-mile-long monorail system to connect the two properties. In 1997, proposals were submitted for expanding the existing system. Eventually, the contract was granted to the Las Vegas Monorail Team made up of Bombardier Transportation, the Granite Construction Company, architectural firm Gensler & Associates, Carter-Burgess and bond underwriters Solomon Smith-Barney. In 2000, the LVMC — owner of the new monorail — was created as a non-profit organization and, soon after, acquired the original system from MGM/Mirage and Park Place Entertainment, the two original corporations that contributed the capital and resources to a large-scale monorail project. Transit System Management, a privately-held, for-profit company was contracted to oversee and manage the design and day-to-day operations of the monorail. Today, passengers travel the line at heights ranging from 20 to 70 feet above the strip and can make it from one end to the other in 15 minutes. The route links seven stations (MGM Grand; Bally’s/Paris; Flamingo/Caesars Palace; Harrah’s/Imperial Palace; the Las Vegas Convention Center; Las Vegas Hilton; and the Sahara), more than 24,000 hotel rooms and about 4.4 million square feet of meeting and convention space. Modern Design, Technology The union of Alcatel’s premium automation technology and Bombardier’s ultra-modern design and advanced rail innovations has glided Sin City into the age of wireless and driverless public transportation. “The project grew out of a vision based on the monorail that ran between Bally’s and the MGM,” says Reg Brockway, project manager for Bombardier Transportation. “Bombardier bid for the contract in 1998 and we started in 2000, after they [the late Robert N. Broadbent, CEO and other key players] spent a decade putting it together.” Bombardier has signed a five-year contract to oversee the operation and maintenance of the monorail with options for an additional five years. It is currently doing advanced engineering and design work for the downtown extension. Working closely and on a tight schedule, Bombardier and Granite Construction used an integrated approach, Brockway explains. “Granite is a very experienced construction company but had never built a monorail with Bombardier before so there were standards we had to establish. To familiarize Granite with the trains, Bombardier developed design and construction interface manuals so the engineers knew exactly what it would need to provide. “Bombardier needed a structure built that would support our trains,” he continues. “So on our end, we need to provide them with specific information — like how much the trains weigh and electrical interface details — so they could do the civil engineering.” Granite hired consultants experienced in beam design and provided those consultants with the exact loading information and requirements in terms of attachments like the placement of various components, such as platform screen doors, the cameras and the P.A. speakers. “After Granite provided the base building and all the concrete beams, we came along and set up the system, electronically,” Brockway explains. Bombardier began its part of the project a long way from the shining lights of the strip. All of the engineering for the system and vehicles was conducted in at the Bombardier plant in Kingston, Ontario. Vehicle manufacturing and initial testing was conducted on a mock beam that was installed at the factory prior to shipping the vehicles down to Vegas. Each car has 10 tires. Two vertical tires per car travel on top of a 26-inch-wide concrete beam. Eight horizontal tires hug the sides of the beam, guiding the train around curves. Meanwhile, rails mounted on the sides of the beam provide electrical power. To ship the train cars, Bombardier had to lower the vehicles off their test beams one car at a time and load them onto steel shipping beams. Thirty— six cars later, the trucks made the four— or five— day journey to Las Vegas. Once in Vegas, a crane lifted the cars while on the shipping beam adjacent to the concrete guide beam for the system. The cars were then rolled off. After the nine trains were positioned on the track, the vehicles were mechanically and electrically linked to the system within a matter of days. “We faced many challenges along the way. One of which was an overall aggressive schedule. Typically for a new system, you would be looking at a 48— to 54-month time frame — the monorail was given 40 months,” Brockway recalls. “Some aspects were difficult and presented us with challenges early on. Things like getting through the permitting process in Clark County, doing utility relocation, some property acquisition — things like that. These items postponed the initial construction activities, but we did work out the issues with Clark County. Their officials and inspectors actively participated on a daily basis by approving drawings and signing permits.” Brockway admits that the amount of effort and the time it took to get it through the process was a little surprising. But many of the things he faced were also typical of other projects. Ultimately, Brockway describes the project as a success story. “We delivered the first car, in mid-February of 2003. Approximately 17 months later, we opened it to the public.” Staffing the System Today, Bombardier has 54 operating and maintenance employees assigned to the system. “In the early stages of testing for Phase I, we went through local markets to hire the 30 to 35 part technicians,” Brockway explains. “They came on as test commissioning personnel so they received a tremendous amount of on-the-job training, aside from a full classroom training program. “When we opened the team was fully prepared and alert with virtually no learning curve involved. If the operating company hires locally in advance, the permanent staff has already been through trouble-shooting and they’ve gained experience all along,” Brockway says. Looking Ahead to Phase II Bombardier has signed a five-year contract to oversee the operation and maintenance of the monorail with options for an additional five years. “Now we’re waiting for the final financing components, something that lies with our customer and the RTC,” Brockway says. Phase II of the monorail is being built under a joint public-private partnership with the RTC at an estimated cost of about $454 million, $20 million of which will be appropriated by federal funds. According to the LVMC, about one-third of this funding will come from bonds similar to those that paid for the existing system. Another third will come from a federal low-interest loan, and the remainder will come from federal grants. Currently, Bombardier is talking with the RTC and the LVMC about advance engineering and design work on the downtown extension so it can eventually start the project a little bit ahead of schedule. “Point blank, we want to perform some early engineering to take care of the municipal engineering of the system once we get the financial go ahead with the project,” Brockway asserts. The 2.3-mile extension will require 20 more cars. Other than that, “the project is exactly the same — the only thing different on the extension is that Bombardier is integrating two fully operational transit systems,” says Nickerson. “Bombardier has a great deal of experience working in an environment where it is adding to operating systems. Once that extension is built, we’ll combine our operations and maintenance efforts as one operation,” she adds. Wireless Train Control One of the monorail’s greatest features — and one that has attracted much of its attention — is its driver-less operation, automation provided by Alcatel’s SelTrac S40 communication-based train control solution using its ‘free space’ radio technology. The monorail integrates open-standards wireless technology for broadband data transmission between trains and trackside equipment. “In any situation where you need to control the operation of things, you need some form of communication,” says Walter Friesen, general manager of Transport Solutions and senior vice president of Alcatel North America. “Many systems operate through cables along the length of the railway. A cable is either installed between the rails or on the side of the walls — but a cable is strung the whole length. In Las Vegas, this communication is facilitated by ‘free space’ radio, that provides the data transmission of commands to and from the trains,” he says. Friesen explains how the importance of redundant communication contributes to the reliability of the system. “The monorail uses full redundancy — a complete duplication of all the elements of the signaling and communications systems, including the radio itself. If something fails, the passengers will never become aware of the fact. The system will simply keep on working,” Friesen asserts. Also, with the reduction of equipment along the track, overall reliability for the system becomes significantly higher. The less equipment it has, the less there is to fail, Friesen says. In addition, with little equipment on the track, repairs and maintenance becomes much easier. The entire system can be repaired without shutting down the operation of the railway, since components are located inside the stations, on-board the trains and at central control. The S40 works by collecting status information, such as train location and speed, from each train on the line. The computer on the wayside uses this information to produce the various new commands it needs to relay to the trains. Again, all this is done through a radio communications link. “To ensure safety and efficient operations, the computers need to collect status information from the track switches to know where physically the trains are. The train reports its information to the central computer. It ensures the trains and track switches are safely secured prior to the train requiring the use of the switch or the track itself,” he explains. The wayside system gathers all this information and uses it to prepare a set of commands for the various trains. Once the wayside computer reconfirms the commands, ensuring everything is understood correctly, it then takes control of the train to move it to its next destination, he says. Friesen notes Alcatel provided all the signaling and communications equipment except for the radio equipment itself which is commercial— grade, IEEE open standard equipment, as opposed to unique custom-built materials. For future upgrades, modifications or repairs, Alcatel’s use of standard communications equiment will make it easier for the client. “If we had used custom parts, the client would have no choice but to work with the original supplier to obtain replacement parts,” Friesen adds. “It’s an open-standard vs. custom-design differentiator. In the next few years, we’ll see terrific changes in this area. By making it possible to upgrade as new technology comes out, we’re making it easy for users to stay modernized in a fashion convenient to them.” “Smart” Fare Collection “In terms of the actual fare collection system, it’s pretty much straight forward,” Mike Nash, general manager of ERG’s North American operations, says. “People buy tickets, go through gates and transactions are required.” The system is based on ERG’s smart card technology, supplying the central computer system that processes all of the systems affairs and reports information to the operator, Nash says. The Las Vegas project uses a combined magnetic and smart card system. Although it was launched using magnetic tickets, ERG included smart card capabilities if the LVMC decides it wants a change. “We’ve integrated our equipment with the equipment of other companies we’ve worked with before. We worked with outside companies to fully integrate their products into the system. It all functions together,” Nash reports. Scheidt & Bachmann’s integrated fare collection system, the FAA-2000, was outfitted with ERG’s MASS (multi-application smart card system) software. The operator uses touch-screen technology, providing the interface between customer and machine. The gates were provided by Automatic System’s bi-directional access control gate, the TGF 820, which provides dissuasive access control in one or both directions to accommodate high flow rates of people based on the reaction speed its set at. The gateways work with ERG’s smart card technology, opening when a magnetic stripe ticket is entered into ERG’s gate card reader. Nash explains that the smart card will provide opportunities to add multiple applications on the cards. “One of the visions for the project is to have a smart card that can be used for the monorail, as well as ticketing for events or a coupon for purchases made elsewhere. There’s a high degree of interest in building on the basic infrastructure,” Nash says. In the next phase, the expectation is that the extension will be adding equipment to the system, Nash says. “What we installed can handle the demand and it won’t grow beyond the limits of the systems we put in. We’re quite prepared to watch it grow in whichever direction Las Vegas wants to go, both in terms expanding the existing system and the addition of new features.” Future of the one-track wonder Bombardier’s Nickerson predicts the system will spark a renewed interest in installing monorails in other cities. “People are realizing the benefits of an integrated transit system within their community,” she says. Brockway adds that a monorail application is based on individual cities and their needs. “A monorail is the perfect solution for a city that’s fully built up and things are tight — tight spaces, tight curves. You don’t want a lot of concrete up in the air at 30 to 60 feet. This system is very light in that regard and very capable of handling tight curves and going into places where other transit modes and products probably wouldn’t fit.” Project Specs: Seven stations Cost: $650 million Length: 4 miles long Train Specs: Nine trains total, four cars each Speed: Reaches 50 mph Trains are 138 feet long Capacity: 224 (standing included)

Las Vegas Monorail shut down…Safety crisis investigated; Produced by the Light Rail Now! Publication Team

Light Rail Now! NewsLog 8 October 2004 The Las Vegas monorail launched on 1 July has experienced a spate of problems serious enough to shut down the entire operation twice within a week. Ironically, while these problems have stemmed from relatively simple vehicle malfunctions, weaknesses in the design of the Las Vegas system appear to have raised critical safety concerns, prompting a more prolonged system shutdown. The first incident occurred on Wednesday, 1 September, when a trainset dropped a 60-lb guidewheel onto a parking lot below fortunately, without hitting anyone or causing damage. However, managers closed down the system to investigate the problem. This came at a time of surging market demand from a mammoth trade convention, and extended through the busy Labor Day holiday. After returning to operation briefly on Tuesday, 7 September, the monorail experienced yet another incidence of dropping a piece of hardware, resulting in a more serious shutdown. A large driveshaft washer apparently detached and struck the guideway’s high— voltage power conduit on its way down, causing arcing and taking a small chunk out of the beamway. This latest shutdown, following on the heels of an inspection after the first incident (loss of a guidewheel), apparently is stirring a considerably greater level of alarm, and may be more prolonged. Some of the main consequences of this latest incident include: — The current status is now being described as an “indefinite shutdown”. — The planned 2.3-mile extension is now considered “in jeopardy” and the project has been put “on hold” as officials and planners evaluate whether the technology is reliable enough for the extension project to proceed. — A major bond rating company is now evaluating whether to downgrade the status of the Las Vegas monorail bonds (now at a relatively low BBB-) to an even lower level. The incidents which have prompted these developments appear to corroborate many of the weaknesses of automated monorail technology which articles in Light Rail Now! have discussed such as the absence of a drip pan beneath the beamways which could prevent debris, lubricants, air-conditioning condensate, etc. from falling to the surface below. Currently, a disaster-investigation firm, Exponent, has been hired to investigate the system’s problems and recommend solutions. The firm has investigated other major disasters such as the grounding of the Exxon Valdez, the walkway collapse at the Kansas City Hyatt, and the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

Sugar House trolley? Support is growing

Deseret Morning News (Salt Lake City) October 9, 2004 SUGAR HOUSE — At some point in time, Doug White hoped people would stop viewing him as a “nut” and see him as a visionary, or perhaps simply an inspired entrepreneur. After two years, the ambitious 39-year-old may have reached that point. White, who works the graveyard shift as a truck driver, is trying to resurrect a long-dead concept and deliver it to the people of Sugar House. He wants to create a nonprofit transit company to build and operate a natural gas-powered trolley service between 1100 East and the existing Utah Transit Authority light-rail corridor. And that’s just the beginning. White envisions an extension to Westminster College and spurs going north and south on State Street and 700 East. And then there’s his hope for a lengthy Draper-to-Lehi trolley line. It may sound a little far-fetched, especially considering UTA and other public transit agencies are heavily subsidized by tax dollars. But at least two state legislators have caught the vision and signed on to lead the trolley steering committee. And a University of Utah class of civil engineering students has agreed to do the preliminary design work as a senior project. White knows his history — and not just about vintage trolley cars. He knows some of the best ideas have been put forth by forward-thinking individuals who were perceived as eccentric, or worse. “I’ve given up on this about a thousand times and come back to it a thousand and one times,” said White, an Ogden native and former Sugar House resident who now conjures up visions of the trolley car’s Utah rebirth from his Rose Park home — and from inside the cab of his UPS truck. “Once I had some important people in the community that liked the idea, it’s changed a lot of attitudes. Before that, they kind of looked at me like some lone dreamer. Now I’m a dreamer with friends.” Among those friends are state Sen. Gene Davis, D-Salt Lake, the Senate’s minority assistant whip, and state Rep. Ty McCartney, D-Salt Lake. White has anointed them as the chairman and co-chairman, respectively, of his Sugar House trolley organizing committee. And White’s Web site, www.sugarhousetrolley.org, also lists an endorsement from Spence Kinard, assistant director of the Utah Travel Council. “I think with the private sector and private donations helping with this project, we could feasibly see the Sugar House line happen,” McCartney said. “He would have to abide by transportation standards, and as long as he did that, I don’t see any opposition from UTA to have him run his line. That’s one less project they’ve got to fund and deal with.” White has scheduled a public meeting to further discuss his proposal. The meeting is set for 2 p.m. today near 1000 East and Sugarmont Drive (2225 South), across the street from Fairmont Park and the existing Sugar House rail corridor. The involvement of the engineering students is a big step in the right direction, but White knows his idea has a long way to go before it can be seriously considered. “I’ll be honest, I have not yet received one official permission at all, so we’re taking this one step at a time,” he said. “It would be real nice to have seed funding if anybody or any corporation or any organization would like to help out. That would be to help get the engineering pushed along quicker and make presentations to the governments.” White is seeking about $100,000 to get the process kick-started. He estimates it would cost between $4 million and $6 million to build the line, but adds that figure is much less than the $40 million he says it would cost UTA to build a light-rail transit line in the area. “The financial side of this thing actually has just been recently started,” White said. “For the last two years, I’ve been focusing mostly on the political and consensus-building.” The Sugar House Community Council has unanimously endorsed the trolley idea, he said. The Wasatch Front Regional Council, which plans future transportation projects for Salt Lake County, has included a possible TRAX light-rail extension to Sugar House in its first phase of priorities on its 2030 plan. But that doesn’t mean UTA definitely will build a TRAX extension into Sugar House. “I’m not sure if it will actually have the ridership that some of the other (proposed) lines may have,” UTA spokesman Justin Jones said. Jones said UTA certainly would consider a request from White to use the Sugar House corridor, which UTA owns, for the nonprofit trolley service. “We haven’t seen a proposal, but as soon as we do we’d be happy to work with him,” Jones said. White said he already has made arrangements to acquire two trolley cars for use on the line.

Records set in September for boardings, ridership

Houston Chronicle October 10, 2004 MetroRail ridership set new records in September, the transit authority reported last week. Average weekday boardings on the Main Street line, which opened Jan. 1, were 32,292 last month, according to Metropolitan Transit Authority data. That’s the first time the average count has topped 30,000. Daily ridership has steadily climbed since the 12,102 recorded in January, thanks mostly to changes made to connect bus routes with the trains. Total ridership for September was 817,020, also a record high, Metro reported. The light rail carried its second-highest passenger load Sept. 2, when the Houston Texans played the Tampa Bay Buccaneers in a preseason game at Reliant Stadium. That day’s count of 42,488 boardings was excluded from the average daily tabulations because the special event could skew the numbers, according to Metro.

Light rail crash title likely to be retained by Houston; New Orleans has more collisions but fewer injuries

Houston Chronicle Oct. 10, 2004 NEW ORLEANS — I, like many other Houstonians, thought our city could boast of a new title: “Light Rail Crash Capital of the Country.” But then I hopped on a streetcar here in the Big Easy. Within a few minutes, I watched a woman chatting on her cell phone start to make a left turn on Canal just as the trolley was nearing the intersection. Suddenly she saw the danger and slammed on the brakes. My first streetcar trip had one other close call, a sport-utility vehicle hauling a trailer that made a U-turn right in front of us. “Yipes,” I thought. “This looks worse than Houston.” In the first three quarters of this year, there have been 56 collisions between our sparkling new MetroRail trains and cars or pedestrians that have resulted in an injury or at least $1,000 in property damage. That’s what the state of Texas defines as a “serious crash.” We’re easily on pace to top the 61 serious crashes the trolleys in San Francisco experienced in 2001, the last year for which comprehensive national data are available from the Federal Transit Administration. But wait — our neighbor to the east failed to report its safety data that year, and the numbers are missing from the National Transit Database. The New Orleans Regional Transit Authority opened the third line in April along Canal, the city’s main boulevard that divides downtown from the French Quarter. The tracks run along the center of the street, just as they do on Main in Houston. “We get all these people turning left in front of the streetcars,” said Rosalind Cook, RTA spokeswoman. “It’s a constant struggle to try to make people aware that they have to be cognizant that there is a streetcar there.” Numbers game Cook estimates there have been 50 to 55 collisions so far this year on the 6 1/2 -mile Canal line. She can’t be sure, however, because the RTA’s record keeping is a mess. She was able to tell me the total count, including the St. Charles and Riverfront lines, for the first three quarters of 2004 is 160. There are lots of ways to examine this data, however. Gerald Robichaux, the RTA’s deputy general manager for operations, points out the figure his agency came up with represents “any type of fender-bender. … If someone just made a slight turn in front of us and touched us, we still report it as an accident.” I asked if he could break the data down to serious crashes. He said that level of detail hasn’t been compiled yet. The RTA officials told me the vast majority of streetcar collisions are minor. “We have not had that many incidents that have resulted in transporting people to the hospital,” Cook said, recalling one pedestrian who was struck and two automobiles whose occupants suffered major injuries. Ah, so maybe we are the tops if you measure rail wrecks by level of human trauma. Ambulances have been needed to transport the injured from 23 MetroRail crashes through Sept. 30, sending a total of 40 people to Houston hospitals. Doing the math Any good statistician would remind us not just to look at the raw totals. Let’s not forget our Main line is only 7 1/2 miles long while New Orleans has three lines with 21 miles of track. When using apples and oranges, all RTA crashes versus serious MetroRail crashes, the two systems come out virtually equal: 7.6 crashes per track mile in the Big Easy; 7.5 per track mile for the Bayou City. Once you reduce the RTA numbers to serious crashes only, whatever figure that might be, in the end it’s clear no one can steal our new claim to fame: Light Rail Crash Capital of the Country.

Subsidy may only fuel transit issues

Pittsburgh Tribune Review October 10, 2004 Any idea raised in the Legislature is suspect, of course. This is the outfit that has its own pay and benefits on automatic pilot. Increases just happen. It also doltishly invited legalized gambling into the state, for a windfall of losers’ taxes which has to bleed the rest of the state’s economy. And now some members of the lege (as columnist Molly Ivins would call it if in her belovedly corrupt Texas) would raise the gasoline tax. To build and repair roads, as usual, but also to subsidize public transit. A Pittsburgh radio guy the other day was outraged by that. Buses — buses! — would be given new life on city streets. But buses make traffic jams, he said. There should be no buses; he would abolish them. Why should his gasoline money feed the behemoths of the avenues? Well, a bus is indeed big and bulky. But at rush hour it packs 50 or more riders. They are not in cars. They do not need parking. So the bus effectively saves space in traffic. The same with commuter trains, subways and carpools. Without them, urban downtowns would be more jammed. Or else fewer workers and customers would come in, with many negative ripple effects. So there’s a clear public interest in public transportation. But how to pay for it? Maybe somebody can think of more, but the fare box and the tax collection look like the whole range of possibilities. (The state lottery, which provides “free” rides to seniors, is a tax on players.) Virtually all public transportation everywhere feeds on some open or hidden subsidy, even the speedy trains of Japan and Europe. Yet public good derives from keeping them rolling. They reduce airport and road congestion. They give mobility to lower-income people. Pennsylvania ought to have more trains in its mix. Two or three Amtrak relics rumbling past every 24 hours (and no night-train to drop business travelers in New York at morning!) — disgraceful. The paradox deepens when a service is needed — but can’t tolerate a price increase. Port Authority Transit of Allegheny County warns that without more state subsidization, fares simply have to seesaw up and round-trips down. Thousands inevitably would lose rides to work or school on nights and weekends. That should be intolerable, both for them and the business community. Therefore, a gasoline tax increase? Well, not so fast. We already pay $2 a gallon at the pump, but a 7-cent increase isn’t negligible. It raises costs and displaces other spending for anyone using a car, cab, truck or plow. And this also has to be asked: How much of the fix that the Port Authority is in — and its even worse-off Philadelphia counterpart, SEPTA — is merely another way of stating the high wage and benefit costs of their unionized work forces? So a state subsidy to keep fares down and service up, yes. But a casual pass-through of unsustainable personnel costs to the paying public, no. The city couldn’t do it. US Airways couldn’t do it. Mass transportation can’t do it.

A streetcar step-up; Bigger area included in Peachtree proposal

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution October 11, 2004 The proposed Peachtree streetcar isn’t just a Peachtree streetcar anymore. A study of the prospects for running streetcars along Peachtree Street from downtown to Buckhead recommends a significant expansion of the project to include a downtown loop and northward expansion that would add more than six miles to its route. The consultants hired by the privately organized Atlanta Streetcar Inc. to examine possible Peachtree routes, costs, revenue and ridership for the proposed line will present their recommendations to the project’s board of directors at noon today. The study recommends the addition of a 3.5-mile loop around downtown that would ferry riders as far east as the Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial and as far west as the Georgia Dome. The loop also would serve Atlanta’s new aquarium, now under construction. Mike Williams of Making Projects Work, project manager for the team that conducted the study, said it turned up compelling data that showed a need for a system to move people short distances around downtowne. “The bang for the buck is almost off the charts,” Williams said. The downtown loop would account for more than a quarter of the streetcar’s total ridership, according to estimates in the study. Aquarium benefactor and Home Depot founder Bernie Marcus said downtown’s growing traffic from conferences, tourism, sports, concerts and business activity demands more efficient ways of moving people among a variety of activity centers at the same time. Thousands of cars carrying just one or two people converging at once can quickly gridlock downtown streets and intersections. “When the Falcons play, I don’t want an empty aquarium,” said Marcus, who is on the streetcar’s advisory board While Marcus said the proposed streetcar will help the city attract visitors, Williams said the system will also help boost MARTA’s patronage by as many as 2,000 riders a day. Shows optimism Former MARTA Board Chairman Bill Moseley said he is encouraged by the number of private citizens putting time and energy into creating new transportation options for intown Atlanta. “People need to get behind this type of thing,” said Moseley, who is not part of the streetcar board but has been a longtime advocate of mass transit. “It shows that people are interested in transit, that people are interested in connectivity.” Yet unaddressed is the question of where Atlanta Streetcar will get the estimated $244 million needed to build the line and the additional $80 million needed to purchase the streetcars themselves, not to mention the ongoing operational costs. Atlanta City Councilwoman Debi Starnes, who represents much of downtown Atlanta on the council, said she still is not convinced that the cost of building a streetcar line will be rewarded with the kind of billion-dollar development that Portland, Ore., saw with its new line. “But I’m in the minority,” Starnes said. “It’s a very expensive investment, and I hope it turns out OK.” Project manager Williams said the study’s findings will suggest a variety of ways to finance and support the streetcar’s operation, but he declined to reveal any of those proposals before today’s board meeting. Despite her lingering skepticism about the streetcar’s cost, Starnes favors the proposal to loop it through the Auburn Avenue area if it is built. Questions remain Other Auburn Avenue civic leaders are warming up to the streetcar, too, though some still have questions about its particulars and effect. “We don’t know the type of equipment they plan to use or how it would connect with the current mass transit system,” said Rhonda Brown, president of Wheat Street Charitable Foundation, a large landowner in the Auburn Avenue area. But Brown and others are intrigued by the streetcar’s potential to support and encourage the long-awaited development now poised to rejuvenate the historic Auburn corridor. Chuck Lewis, chief operating officer of Citizens Trust Bank and chairman of the Sweet Auburn Business and Improvement Association, said the streetcar is a little like an earlier proposal for horse-drawn carriages considered by the Auburn business interests. “The streetcar project as I understand it will link the King Center and Centennial [Olympic] Park, and we think that needs to happen,” Lewis said. “It would make it easier for people to move door-to-door without having to walk, and that’s something we need in Atlanta.” The Rundown on a Downtown Streetcar

..................Peachtree......Downtown......Total
..................Corridor.......Loop

Construction......$207 M.........$37 M.........$244 M
Streetcars........$ 60 M.........$20 M.........$ 80 M

Mileage...........10.7...........3.5...........14.2
Stops.............44.............TBD...........44+

Trips per day (excludes trips shared by corridor and loop)
..................18,000.........6,000.........21,000

Added MARTA trips per day
...................1,500...........500..........2,000

Highway Funding to Fall Short

Kiplinger Business Forecasts October 11, 2004 State governments, public works contractors and their suppliers will be disappointed by the six-year highway spending bill likely to emerge from Congress next spring. The legislation will earmark around $285 billion for major road, bridge, tunnel, rail and mass transit projects, up about 30% from the previous six years but well shy of the $375 billion that Congress originally targeted. This means that a lot of items on states’ infrastructure wish lists won’t make it off the drawing board. Big projects in danger of getting scratched include: — New interstate highways from Kansas City, Mo., to New Orleans; from the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas, to Denver; and from the Canadian border at Laurier, Wash., to Reno, Nev. — A Second Avenue subway in New York City. — A high-speed passenger rail line linking Los Angeles and San Francisco. — A vast expansion of bus service in about a dozen cities, including Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Hartford, Conn., and Phoenix. — Inland rail and highway links from the ports of New Jersey and Los Angeles, and new bridges to service the ports of New Orleans and Charleston, S.C. Meanwhile, funding for projects that reduce highway traffic congestion building intermodal connections from ports and rail yards to roads, reconfiguring freeway entrance ramps, upgrading feeder road traffic signals, etc. will probably hold steady at $8 billion for the coming six years. States had hoped for an increase to about $13 billion. Likewise, funding for productivity-enhancing truck information systems will be frozen in the new bill at $180 million instead of the near doubling that lawmakers originally considered. States also may be thwarted in attempts to fund new road and mass transit projects with federally backed bonds. Leaders of both political parties in Congress are souring on federal backing of financial instruments. Many lawmakers don’t think the federal government should guarantee debt issued by other entities. There was broad bipartisan support in Congress early last year for a $375-billion highway bill, but growing concern about the federal budget deficit prompted the White House and some fiscal conservatives on Capitol Hill to push for a smaller amount. The Senate proposed a $318-billion package, but that would have required a politically unpopular hike in the federal tax on gasoline. That leaves a $285-billion bill, currently in the House, that can be funded by existing taxes and by improved tax collection, notably on the federal gas tax. Congress is determined to pass a new highway bill before May 31, 2005, when the extension of the previous bill expires. Although a smaller bill may please politicians worried about the budget, it creates a new political hurdle. The prospect of less overall funding is most worrisome for states, such as California, Florida and New Jersey, that get less money back in highway funding than they contribute to the federal highway pot from gas taxes. Members of Congress from these states are pushing to raise the minimum return on highway funding on gas taxes from the current 90.5 cents on each dollar. Odds are that Congress will agree to increase the minimum return to about 93 cents on the dollar. But this will force lawmakers to cut spending on a variety of smaller transportation programs, such as construction of bicycle paths and development of so-called intelligent passenger vehicles. Transportation professionals warn that the likely level of highway funding won’t be enough even to maintain current infrastructure, let alone expand it. Says John Ficker, president and CEO of the National Industrial Transportation League: “Staying in place with our road, bridge, tunnel and port infrastructure is not enough, considering that commerce will grow by 25% and more over the next decade or so.” The result will be more road congestion, more delays and more pressure on manufacturers and retailers to offset higher transportation costs.

CEBU RAPID BUS TRANSIT FEASIBILITY TO BE STUDIED BY WORLD BANK

Asia Pulse October 11, 2004 The Cebu City Government will formally ask the World Bank (WB) to start conducting a feasibility study on the use of the Rapid Bus Transit (RBT) to replace public utility jeepeneys (PUJ) here in Cebu. Cebu City Mayor Tomas Osmena said the RBT system is the “most interesting solution to our kind of problem. This is the way to solve the traffic and congestion problems in Cebu, we will send them a letter to study how to put up the system here,” Osmena added. Last Wednesday, WB executives from Washingtom DC conducted a presentation on the RBT system to local officials, led by Osmena and Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia. The WB has already implemented a shift to the RBT system in Latin American cities, like Curitiba, Brazil, which Cebu City is trying to emulate. According to City Planning Officer Nigel Paul Villarete, WB is willing to render their study services for free. “They will conduct a study on the over-all viability and acceptability if we can adopt culturally and socially,” Villarete added. Osmena said that out of the study, the city government may be able to identify a pilot route where the RBT bus would first be experimentally deployed. “If the Cebuanos see what it’s like, they will demand to replicate the system on other routes also,” he said on the city’s strategy. Under the system, buses and not PUJs will be the basic mode of transportation on main thoroughfares in the city as well as its neighboring cities and municipalities. Villarete said last Wednesday that if negotiations go well, buses could be seen, at least in Cebu City, by 2006, although a complete integrated system which would cover major routes might take several more years. He also added that the WB may not need to spend much on the study, since there have already been many feasibility studies on the proposed Carcar-to— Danao Light Railway Transit (LRT). “Practically, we already have 80 percent of the data with us,” Villarete said. He added that there were studies on the LRT in 1992, 1997 and 2002 which can be used by WB in their new study on the bus system. The buses adopted by Curitiba City as well as other WB-sponsored cities are the “bi-articulate” type, essentially a very long bus with two joints along its length to facilitate turns. Each bus resembling a small train, they will ply designated routes and can only pick up and drop off passengers at designated platforms. Each bi-articulate bus can accommodate around 270 passengers or an equivalent load of around 20 medium-sized jeepneys. There is no way to enter or disembark from the elevated bus except through the platforms. Fares are collected inside the platforms before embarking. During Wednesday’s presentation, World Bank RBT Consultant Alan Cannel said that local governments should start “designing short-term and think long-term.” But Cannel admits Metro Cebu would need changes in its present infrastructure and only a few streets can accomodate the length and width of the buses. Cannel was joined by WB Delegation Team Leader Rakhi Basu and WB Manila Representative Chris Pablo.

The demise of a London tradition

The International Herald Tribune October 11, 2004 Way back in the 1950s, a song by Michael Flanders and Donald Swann, a British comedy duo, evoked the joys and travails of riding what their composition called a “big six-wheeler, scarlet-painted, London Transport, diesel-engined, 97-horsepower omnibus.” How little the city changes. A half-century later, some of that same blend of pique and pride is being evoked by the looming disappearance of London’s oldest type of bus, the Routemaster — a “transport of delight,” as the song’s title puts it, distinguished by its open rear platform and its team of driver and ticket-dispensing conductor. The double-decker bus is a postcard symbol of London. Bright red, prone to capricious scheduling, usually packed and generally Darwinian in the demands it makes of its passengers, the double-decker has retained pretty much the same place in the national soul as Flanders and Swann assigned to it: quirky, annoying, beloved, necessary and somehow worth the fare. “If tickets cost a pound apiece, why should you make a fuss?” the song proclaimed at a time when fares were counted in pennies. Now they really do cost a pound each — about $1.80 — for most undiscounted rides, and prices are about to rise by an amount undisclosed so far. The Routemaster, though, has proved to be a victim of its own durability, stubbornly outlasting its projected 17 years’ service to find itself condemned like many an old-timer in these times of downsizing as too old, too accident-prone and too expensive. At a time when Transport for London, the publicly financed body responsible for the city’s buses and other mass transit, is seeking to cut costs and modernize safety and accessibility, the 72-seat Routemaster has been singled out for replacement by other buses — the so-called bendy-bus, a long, articulated 129-seat single-decker (two of which burst into flames shortly after their inaugural runs last year) and more modern 88-seat double-deckers. The newer buses are operated by the driver alone (riders are expected to buy their tickets in advance on the honor system), and have closing doors and low access platforms for wheelchairs, baby strollers and people who find it difficult to clamber onto the airy rear deck of the Routemaster. Of the 2,876 Routemasters ever built — the first in the 1950s and the last in 1968 — around 250 still ply London bus routes, such as those that run along Regent Street in the city center. Their decline, though, has coincided with a vast expansion in the number of bus passengers, particularly since Mayor Ken Livingstone embarked on a campaign two years ago to reduce the number of cars in central London by imposing a $9 congestion charge on private motorists. As Routemasters have been withdrawn, around 1,000 new buses have been introduced, bringing London’s fleet to 8,500, according to Graham Goodwin, a spokesman for Transport for London. Travel by bus, in fact, has returned to levels unseen since the late 1960s, when there were far fewer cars on the city’s streets, with bus travel increasing as a proportion of overall commuting into London. Bus riders, Goodwin said, now account for about 6 million paid journeys a day, twice as many as use the subway system known as the Tube and 1.8 million more than four years ago. But it is not cheap to run. Public subsidies for buses consume millions of pounds a year, and the Routemasters are blamed for inflating some of those costs, Transport for London says, since they require two to operate and up to 15 percent more in maintenance expenses. By the end of 2005, Routemasters will have been removed from all 700 of London’s commuter routes, with a handful remaining on a tourist run linking historic sites, Goodwin of Transport for London said. But in a city where the hankering for heritage sometimes outweighs the quest for modernity, the Routemaster’s demise is not going unchallenged. Both The London Evening Standard and LBC radio station have begun campaigns to complain that the city is risking its identity by trading one of its emblems for vehicles that look similar to those of other European cities. “Can you imagine what the citizens of San Francisco would do if their mayor suggested scrapping the cable cars, or how Venetians would react if it was proposed to do away with the gondolas?” asked Nick Ferrari, an LBC Radio program host. To make the point one morning in early September, Ferrari arrived outside Mayor Livingstone’s North London home in a rented Routemaster and offered the mayor a ride to work. Livingstone declined, saying he usually took the subway.

Bridges won’t fill the gap; Agency is expected to lose only one position compared with more than 2,000 trims proposed for subways and buses to close $436M deficit

Newsday (New York) October 12, 2004 The MTA is proposing to cut thousands of jobs on subways and buses but eliminate only a single position at its bridges and tunnels, according to the agency’s documents. More than 2,100 NYC Transit positions are recommended for elimination, translating into increased waits for buses, trains staffed with only one employee, and token booths closed around the city, according to the proposals. By contrast, only a single secretarial position is slated to be cut at MTA Bridges and Tunnels, which operates nine tolled crossings. There are no immediate plans for delayed painting or maintenance. MTA officials predict a loss of more than 11 million subway and bus riders should MTA’s board approve the recommendations in December. More than 2 billion people rode subways, buses and paratransit vehicles last year. There is no expected decrease in vehicles crossing bridges and tunnels. MTA spokesman Tom Kelly said the difference in cuts reflects the fact that Bridges and Tunnels has seen the number of employees steadily dwindle as E-ZPass replaced toll collectors in the past decade. According to MTA figures, those cuts were gradual — 210 positions over an 11-year period. The current cuts could happen as early as Jan. 1. Kelly also said any more cuts to Bridges and Tunnels would likely jeopardize safety. Most employees work in indispensable positions such as security, engineering, maintenance and toll collection, he said. “They are the lifeline of the bridges and tunnels,” he said. William Anderson, associate director of the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the MTA, said the authority may have spared Bridges and Tunnels because the agency was the only one to make money. The MTA’s mass transit systems all operate at deficits, due to high costs. They are subsidized by tolls. Kelly said that was not the reason Bridges and Tunnels was being spared the cuts. The cuts — expected by attrition, not layoffs — are seen as a way to combat a $436-million deficit, the result of growing debt service and pension costs amid decreased state aid. The deficit could also trigger increases in the price of Metro Cards and express bus service, as well as increased E-ZPass fees. Jim Tripp, general counsel for Environmental Defense, a Manhattan-based nonprofit, predicted the drop in subway ridership would lead to more people on clogged roads. He suggested instituting higher rates during rush hour as one way to stem the traffic, while at the same time raising more money.

MBTA WEIGHS BLUE LINE EXTENSION; FINAL PLAN WOULD COMPETE FOR FUNDING

The Boston Globe October 12, 2004 Next stop, Lynn” would be part of the lexicon of Blue Line conductors under an MBTA proposal to extend the subway branch from its terminus at Wonderland to Central Square in the North Shore city. Under another of several options being considered, the subway line would continue even farther, to Swampscott and Salem. Another less expensive alternative would be to build a commuter rail station at Wonderland, the dog racing track near Revere Beach, with a pedestrian connector or people-mover to take riders the quarter-mile to the Blue Line station. The commuter rail tracks and the subway tracks are separated by busy roads and parking lots. Despite criticism that the cash-strapped T cannot afford to embark on major new projects, the MBTA board on Thursday approved $322,000 to bolster a study that will be critical in the application for federal funds on the project, which could cost up to $843 million. T planners are collecting ridership figures and studying environmental impact reports and aim to present a comprehensive plan for the Federal Transit Administration to review. “We’re looking at the different options and showing the feds what benefit we’ll get with the different investments,” said Dennis DiZoglio, assistant general manager for planning and real estate at the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. MBTA planners say the study on the Blue Line extension should be completed by next spring or summer, followed by a determination of how the chosen best alternative would fare in a nationwide competition for federal transit funds. Actual construction is probably 10 to 12 years away. The idea of extending the Blue Line has been debated for decades, but uncertainty about funding has kept the project largely in the shadows. The T is famously short on money to take on expansion projects, having just moved forward with the $491 million restoration of the Greenbush branch of the Old Colony commuter rail line through the South Shore. The Blue Line project also is in stiff competition with other projects, including the proposed extension of the Green Line through Somerville to West Medford; the restoration of the Arborway trolley in Jamaica Plain; a Red-Blue line connector in downtown Boston; the expansion of commuter rail to Fall River and New Bedford, and the Urban Ring, a proposed circumferential transit route around Boston. US Representative Michael E. Capuano, Democrat of Somerville, said it would be difficult to secure federal funding for the Blue Line project as well as another major project, like the Green Line extension, at the same time. The T would have to show that it can maintain both its current and expanded system and that sufficient state funding usually 50 percent of the cost of transit projects was in the pipeline. Capuano called the Blue Line proposal “a great project” and said “it should be one of the priorities, but it’s impossible to talk about it in a vacuum.” He has called on Governor Mitt Romney’s administration to assemble all proposed transit projects, create a priority to-do list, and figure out how to pay for them. “There’s no discussion of which projects, among all 10 or 15 of them, have the most merit,” Capuano said. Administration officials say they are working on a plan to priori tize the estimated $6 billion in proposed transit projects but are still investigating new ways to finance them, including drawing revenue from development near train stations. DiZoglio said the T was able to move ahead on the Blue Line after US Representative John F. Tierney, Democrat of Salem, secured federal funding for planning studies. Going further will depend on the availability of both federal and state funds, he said, but MBTA General Manager Michael Mulhern and state Secretary of Transportation Daniel Grabauskas have both spoken favorably about the project in recent months, giving it a sense of momentum. “It’s chugging along,” said Lynn Mayor Edward J. “Chip” Clancy Jr., who views the arrival of rapid transit as the key to revitalization efforts for the economically troubled city. “This is alive and well. It’s well documented there’s a pressing need for rapid transit. Lynn, and the North Shore, has waited a long time for this.” There are significant engineering and environmental challenges. Continuing the subway tracks due north from Wonderland, on an old narrow-gauge railroad trackbed, would bring the Blue Line through the Point of Pines neighborhood in Revere. The alternative is to build subway tracks alongside the existing Newburyport-Rockport commuter rail tracks, but that would require construction of expensive trestles to get through the environmentally sensitive Rumney Marsh area. Revere Mayor Thomas G. Ambrosino said he is more supportive of building a commuter rail station at Wonderland, which would allow commuters to park elsewhere and make an easy transfer to the Blue Line to get into Boston. The addition of a commuter rail station, which Revere currently lacks, would also enhance city and state plans for housing and mixed-use development on the parking lots at Wonderland, Ambrosino said. A new commuter station would require major street and sidewalk improvements to allow riders to transfer easily to the Blue Line. The T is considering a people-mover tram or possibly a moving sidewalk, but the most direct route is through the dogtrack’s parking lot and across Route 1A.

Mayor unveils £10bn scheme for capital’s transport

The Guardian (London) — Final Edition October 12, 2004 Ken Livingstone will unveil a £10bn five-year plan today to improve London’s ailing transport system. The plan takes advantage for the first time of the permission London’s mayor has received from the Treasury to fund big projects by borrowing funds on the capital markets. Mr Livingstone will outline a programme which includes improvements to the reliability and capacity of London Underground, further measures to curb traffic gridlock in targeted suburbs, and the much mooted extension of the congestion charge into west London. The plan will turn London into a “low emission zone” by 2007, barring entry to vehicles that fail to meet environmental requirements. New tube trains will be air cooled, meeting criticisms that conditions in the summer can even put them in breach of regulations for the transportation of livestock. There will be improvements to the Docklands Light Railway, to aid regeneration, and to increase London’s chances of securing the 2012 Olympics. CrossRail, the proposed east-west underground line, is not part of the package, but talks with the government are continuing. The details are expected to be approved by the Transport for London (TfL) board on October 27. But the mayor is already facing criticism over the amount he will have to raise to service his borrowing. Opponents say many projects on his wishlist may not come to fruition. Critics are also highlighting the absence of schemes previously thought to be mayoral priorities. The West London tram project and Cross Rover Tram project will only proceed “once additional funding has been secured”. Plans to widen the North Circular Road also appear to have been downgraded. Mr Livingstone said: “This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reverse decades of underinvestment. It marks an end to stop-start funding for London’s transport. The programme will deliver the real improvements in the services and capacity needed to keep London on the move. “Over the next four years we will be extending the kind of improvements we have already made to London’s bus services to the tube.” He said five years was a realistic period to achieve improvements. “Whether you walk, cycle or travel by bus or tube, over the next five years your journey should become safer, more reliable and more comfortable, and London will be a world leader for environmentally friendly and accessible public transport,” he said. The government’s decision to allow Mr Livingstone to borrow, first revealed in the Guardian, says much about New Labour’s warmer relationship with the mayor, and also reveals something about the government’s own position. Having allowed Mr Livingstone to be re-elected as the Labour candidate, it cannot allow him to fail. After his successful first term, there is also a desire to loosen the reins on London’s devolved government. There are also electoral considerations. London’s Labour MPs and particularly those in marginal seats would be reluctant to fight a general election next year as representatives of a party that had failed to address the decline in London’s infrastructure. There are national implications too. Many of the growth targets set by the Treasury cannot be met unless the London economy functions effectively. The mayor will borrow £3bn, and a further £4bn will result from the public-private partnership and private finance initiative contracts on the tube — a funding method Mr Livingstone opposed in principle but is obliged to accept. The remaining £3bn for capital investment will be funded by government grant and “revenue surpluses”, although the latter will rely on TfL being able to achieve them. Last year its budget was heavily skewed by the cost of Mr Livingstone’s bus expansion. But Lynne Featherstone, the Liberal Democrat chair of the London’s assembly’s transport committee, said the mayor would have to limit himself to schemes such as the East London line extension, improvements on the Docklands Light Railway, and bus schemes around Stratford, east London. London’s five-year plan:

Thames Gateway Bridge to link Greenwich and Newham
Air-cooled tube trains
East London line extension to Dalston, Croydon and Crystal Palace
Completion of ‘showpiece’ Wembley Park station
Extending Metropolitan line to Watford Junction
Completion of switch to low-floor buses with CCTV by 2006
Introduction of low-emission zone by 2007
New pedestrian crossings and street lighting
New security measures for overground trains and stations
Enhanced cycle network
Initiatives to encourage more walking
Possible extension of congestion charge westwards
Energy-saving and noise reduction on London Underground

Monorail opponents seek release of reports

SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER October 13, 2004 Opponents of Seattle’s new monorail system went to court yesterday to try to obtain release of monorail contract information, part of which the monorail project said it may release if given time. A complaint for “wrongful delay and withholding of public records” was filed in King County Superior Court by attorneys for Yes on (Initiative)-83, formerly known as the Monorail Recall Committee. The suit asked the court to order release of some records within three days. Court papers said initiative backers requested records of the proposal submitted Aug. 16 by Cascadia Monorail Co. to complete design, build and operate the $1.6 billion system for up to seven years.The complaint accused the agency of trying “to keep information from Seattle voters until after the Nov. 2 … election” when the initiative will be decided. The monorail agency’s legal affairs director, Ross Macfarlane, disputed the opponents’ claims. He said the agency has already invited opponents to read some documents but they haven’t accepted the invitation.

WORK IS UNDER WAY AT NEW MAGLEV FACILITY

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette (Pennsylvania October 13, 2004 The banks of the Youghiogheny River in McKeesport are ringing with the clang of steel hitting steel again as craftsmen work the metal at Maglev Inc.’s new facility in RIDC Park. Local and national officials are optimistic that the research facility, housed in a building in the old National Tube steel mill complex, some day could be Grand Central Station for the production of large steel superstructures on which Maglev trains will ride. The McKeesport site is a U.S. Navy-sponsored research facility where engineers and tradesmen are working to develop a process where the 22-foot long steel beams on which high-speed Maglev trains ride can be mass produced by large robotic arms. Employees now have the facility’s first computer-controlled robotic arm operational. This “arm” is the first in what researchers hope one day will be line of 42 robotic arms. Researchers are using laser-radar measuring to help in the fabrication of the steel beams. The computer database in which these measurements are stored eventually will control the facility. The plan for the facility is to perfect the fabrication of the beams so they can be produced rapidly on a line of 42 robotic arms. A small miscalculation in weld distortion will ruin the plan, Ken Flessas, director of technology said. “You can’t afford to re-fit beams,” he said. Once proven, the technology could be used in the construction industry as well as the naval industry and lots of others , said Brad Shaw, senior welding engineer for the Maglev facility. “The Navy’s goal is to put the technology to use,” he said. “The idea is to make the fabrication of steel structures more competitive.” The long-term success of the 22,000-square-foot facility, which its engineers hope will be the prototype for a later million square-foot facility, is partly contingent upon implementation of the federally sponsored magnetic levitation demonstration project. The project could be awarded to Pittsburgh, but its funding became stalled after 911. But legislation is being re-drafted to include the demonstration project in a new federal transportation bill, said Dan Disk, director of engineering for Maglev Inc. The Navy has funded the Pittsburgh project since 1999, providing a total of $12 million. The Navy is interested in the project because the research could be useful in creating better ships. Flessas said those at the facility aim to create a new technology that will automate the fabrication of large and small steel structures. “In the steel fabrication industry you now have job shops, where they produce things one or two at a time. And in the automobile industry you have mass production,” he explained. “We need to bring those two together.” Caterpillar and John Deere are working on similar technology but on a much smaller scale, Shaw said. But even if the federal government doesn’t fund Maglev, and regardless of whether the Navy decides to use it, the process could be a prototype used in a number of industries. McKeesport administrator Dennis Pittman said the company’s development is a win for the city. “Maglev does two things for us,” he said. “It brings state-of-the-art technology back to the Mon Valley, allowing us to transition from basic steel to specialty steel. It will also bring more jobs, and a way to retain young people — two critical things that we need for survival.”

NJ Transit unveils broad rail plan; Direct-to-N.Y.C. a key goal of ambitious project

The Record (Bergen County, NJ October 13, 2004 NJ Transit has drawn up plans to link Bergen and Passaic train riders to Manhattan — without a transfer — through a new rail tunnel under the Hudson River. “This means a one-seat ride for Bergen County customers to midtown Manhattan for the first time ever,” NJ Transit Executive Director George Warrington said Tuesday. “The power of this cannot be overstated.” Money to fund the plan, which could exceed $6 billion in costs, would come largely from the federal government. If funding is in place, the rail lines could be up and running by 2009 and the new tunnel under the Hudson ready for service by 2014, Warrington told the Bergen County Transportation Summit. The tunnel project alone, dubbed “Access to the Region’s Core” or ARC, is expected to cost $4 billion to $5 billion. Design work and environmental impact studies are already under way. The plan to bring trains directly to Manhattan from North Jersey builds on an idea to link Bergen, Passaic and Hudson counties to Xanadu, a $1.3 billion entertainment, retail and office complex set to be built in the Meadowlands. It also depends on taking the $1 billion needed to bring the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail from Ridgefield to Tenafly and redistributing it to other projects that would create a cohesive mass transit system for the first time. The light-rail system would still be built — and even extend out to Hawthorne in Passaic County — but it would be up to $800 million cheaper because of a new technology. Riders of the current Bergen, Main and Pascack Valley lines would have a connection to Xanadu through a proposed Meadowlands Rail Link. Those riding these new rails would reach Xanadu through a transfer at a Tonnelle Avenue station in North Bergen. From there, riders could also continue directly to Manhattan or transfer onto the light rail to head south through Bayonne. Al Cafiero, chief emeritus of the Bergen County Transit Committee, wasn’t sold on the idea. “I think there are a lot of problems,” he said. “First, the time frame. And then I’m afraid what they are going to do is just build the light rail diesel to Tonnelle Avenue and then just forget about the rest.” The key funding move to get the plan rolling would be to scrap the Bergen County portion of the light-rail system — essentially an electric trolley — and replace it with a self-powered diesel train, a relatively new technology, that would provide similar service. The “diesel multiple unit,” or DMU, would run from Ridgefield to Tenafly on Bergen County’s Northern Branch, a freight line. It would also stretch from Hackensack to Hawthorne on a freight line operated by the New York, Susquehanna & Western Railway. The DMU is a new type of train that does not need to be pulled by a locomotive. Instead, small diesel engines mounted near the wheels power the passenger car, which can pull two additional cars. The DMU is rated to run on freight lines, meaning it can withstand a collision with a bigger train. The advantage it offers over an electric trolley is mainly economic. DMUs do not require electrical substations, new tracks, overhead electrical wires, or raised station platforms. The cars have better fuel economy than a typical diesel, burning about 1 gallon of fuel for every two to three miles they travel. A typical diesel locomotive drinks 5 gallons of fuel each mile, officials have said. “The DMU allows us to achieve getting rail service to the eastern part of Bergen County in a much quicker time frame than the electrified system,” said state Sen. Paul Sarlo, D-Wood-Ridge. “By doing it this way, we are taking years off the time frame and we are saving an unbelievable amount of dollars.” The components of the plan include: — A new rail tunnel under the Hudson River to Penn Station in New York, connecting Newark Penn Station and North Jersey to Manhattan directly. — A loop at Secaucus Junction that would allow riders on the Bergen, Main and Pascack Valley lines to reach Manhattan without changing to another train at the transfer station. — A 1.5-mile spur from the Pascack Valley Line in East Rutherford to a new station in the Meadowlands. The Pascack line runs from Montvale through Hackensack to Hoboken. This $150 million spur is expected to be completed in 2007 and has been funded by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. — A one-mile link from the new Meadowlands station to the Bergen County Line. The Bergen line runs from Mahwah through Fair Lawn to Hoboken. The project has been estimated at $244 million. — A continuation of the Meadowlands link from the Bergen to the Main Line. The Main Line runs from Mahwah through Paterson to Hoboken. The cost is estimated at more than $100 million. — An extension of the Bergen-Hudson Light Rail from Tonnelle Avenue in North Bergen to a park-and-ride in Secaucus. Eventually, a rail bridge will be built across the Hackensack River, providing a direct train connection from Hudson County to Xanadu. — Using DMUs to connect Hackensack with Hawthorne and Ridgefield to Tenafly. The total DMU program in Bergen and Passaic counties is expected to cost $100 million to $200 million. Rep. Steve Rothman, D-Fair Lawn, said he will work to get funding for the project through his seat on the House appropriations transportation subcommittee. “We are committed to going ahead with the very ambitious process,” he said. “I have already begun my effort to secure federal funding.” Jon Orcutt of the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, an advocacy group that monitors transit issues, said the success of the project will come down to one thing. “It’s all going to depend on funding,” he said. “I think politically, it’s a smart move by Transit to sort of harness Bergen County into supporting the ARC project. All these lines become more viable once they connect to the city than a simple suburb-to-suburb connection that won’t attract as many riders.” Jeffrey Zupan, senior transportation fellow at the Regional Plan Association, agreed. “I think it’s very ingenious,” he said of the proposal. “The problem with the light rail line … is that it didn’t get people into New York City. This proposal gives both: a relatively low impact service in terms of negative impact on the community and at the same time it provides direct service into Manhattan.”

DOWNTOWN RAIL LINE ON TRACK; PLANNERS, CONSULTANTS CHUG ALONG WITH SCHEME TO FIT O-TRAIN INTO CITY’S BUSY CORE

The Ottawa Sun October 13, 2004 IT’S GOING to be a tight squeeze. City planners and consultants are trying to find a way to fit the massive expansion of the O-Train into Ottawa’s busy downtown core — wedging rail lines into existing streetscapes while still leaving room for cars, buses and pedestrians. As part of the study to find the best route and best trains for the downtown leg of the O-Train, the city has started consulting and explaining its ideas to downtown groups. So far, the city is proposing that the train enter downtown from Lebreton Flats and travel on one or two of five streets — Laurier, Queen, Slater, Sparks or Wellington. From there the train would cross the canal over the Mackenzie or Laurier bridges and swoop down onto Rideau St. and possibly into the market. Pushing the train through downtown is considered to be the most costly and difficult stage of the $600-million expansion. The expansion is also causing concern among some Rideau St. businesses who are wondering why the city plans to continue to run buses beside trains. Biz Group Upset “How much can you clog up one street?” said Peggy Ducharme, executive director of the Rideau St. Business Improvement Association. “Our position is that Rideau St. has already been through a couple of experiments with mass transit.” Ducharme said the association was in favour of a light rail project that would eliminate buses, but leave access to cars. She said the city needs to take buses out of an increasingly clogged downtown core. “This is where everything is going to grind to a halt,” she said. But Peter Steacy, a program manager for transportation environmental assessments with the city, said the O-Train would alleviate growth pressures by providing more service for transit users and not replace bus service. “The future network is really a balance of the bus network and the rail network,” he said. To illustrate how streets could look, the city has released maps and drawings as part of the continuing consultation helping determine the final route of the train. David Jeanes of Transport 2000, an advocacy group for transit, said the city is moving too slowly and is dragging out the current environmental assessment. “The city isn’t really getting its act together and isn’t fast-tracking the development,” said Jeanes. “Our view is that the (route from) Rideau Centre to Lebreton Flats is something that you should be able to build over the next three to four years.” At this rate the downtown line won’t be completed until 2010, he said.

Bombardier Awarded $22 Million BiLevel Cars Order From Mid-Region Council of Governments in Albuquerque, New Mexico

Canadian Corporate Newswire October 13, 2004 Bombardier Transportation announced today that it received a firm order from the Mid-Region Council of Governments and the New Mexico Department of Transportation for the supply of 10 Bombardier BiLevel commuter rail vehicles, 6 cab cars and 4 coaches. Valued at approximately US$22 million, the contract calls for the design, manufacture and delivery of the new commuter vehicles. The new cars will be used to provide service between Belen and Bernalillo, New Mexico. “The BiLevel vehicle developed in North America has become one of our flagship products because of its undisputed economical performance and shortest delivery schedule in the industry”, said William Spurr, President of Bombardier Transportation, North America. “This vehicle is a popular choice for today’s commuter rail industry because it is one of the largest-capacity cars in the world designed for maximum commuter passenger comfort”, added Spurr. The first Bombardier BiLevel vehicle went into service in 1978. Since then, Bombardier has produced more than 740 BiLevel cars, which are currently operated by ten different public transit authorities in North America, enhancing its features over time. The vehicles will be built at Bombardier’s Thunder Bay, Ontario, manufacturing facility. Production will begin in the coming months and first deliveries are expected in the summer of 2005. In North America, Bombardier Transportation is the leader in high-speed rail, commuter rail, automated rapid transit and automated guideway transit systems. It also maintains two of the largest multi-level commuter fleets in Canada and the United States.

Alcatel and Tube Lines Demonstrate Successful Automatic Train Operation on London Underground Line

Canada NewsWire October 13, 2004 Alcatel today announced that it has completed first stage testing and a successful demonstration of its transmission-based automatic train control system it is supplying to Tube Lines, the company responsible for upgrading and maintaining track, trains, signaling and stations on London Underground’s Jubilee Line and Northern Line. Equipped trains performed for a select guest list of local politicians and stakeholders by shuttling at varying speeds up to 50km/h on a dedicated test track at Highgate, North London. Tube Lines has a 30 year private-public partnership (PPP) with London Underground and as part of this arrangement is managing a 1 billion pounds investment program to upgrade the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly lines — one of the largest upgrades of an existing metro system anywhere in the world. Each of the lines will have a new signaling system and Alcatel’s SelTrac(R), proven in use around the world for two decades, has been chosen for the Jubilee and Northern Lines. The Alcatel contract, which was announced in October 2003, is valued at Euro 450 million and lasts for seven and a half years. Alcatel’s signaling system will be implemented completely by 2009 on the Jubilee Line and by 2011 on the Northern Line when the new systems are to go into full revenue service. New equipment on both lines, comprising 63 trains, 27 stations on 37km of Jubilee Line and 106 trains, 50 stations on 58km of Northern Line, will be installed and commissioned in sections before the old signalling system is disabled, minimizing disruption in passenger service. Commenting on the successful test, Tube Lines Chief Executive, Terry Morgan said “Effective, modern signaling systems make a huge difference to passengers’ journeys by improving services and reliability, which is why it’s our priority to install the best signals on our lines. When the new system is installed, more trains will be able to run each hour and passengers will reach their destinations more quickly. We chose Alcatel’s system because it is tried and tested on light railways around the world, although none present such a challenging environment as the London Underground. By reaching this milestone in our rigorous testing, we’re a step closer to introducing a robust, reliable signaling system on the Northern and Jubilee Lines.” In a further comment, Mark Halinaty, General Manager of Alcatel’s transport automation activities in the UK, said, “Today we have seen implemented, albeit in a test scenario, prototype automatic train operation and protection. This completes our initial system design phase of the project. We’re on schedule and now we can move ahead with physical design followed by section-by-section installation, testing and commissioning of our train control system.� SelTrac technology gives our customer, Tube Lines, the ability to improve customer throughput safely and reliably using an existing infrastructure.” About Tube Lines: Tube Lines is responsible for the maintenance and upgrade of the infrastructure on the Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly Lines. London Underground is responsible for operating the Underground, for employing drivers and station staff, for ticketing and fares, and for the Tube’s safety regime. The Tube Lines consortium consists of Amey, Bechtel and Jarvis.

Transit asks for tax help

San Francisco Chronicle October 14, 2004 The Bay Area’s congested transportation network, and the stressed— out commuters who use it, could get some relief if voters in five counties pass sales tax measures on Nov. 2. Voters in Marin, Solano and Sonoma counties are being asked to increase their sales taxes to help pay for transportation improvements. The so-called transportation sales tax would be the first in these counties and would pay for everything from filling potholes to completing highway projects to adding transit service. In Contra Costa and San Mateo counties, voters are being asked to extend existing half-cent transportation sales taxes to pay for a new set of improvements. And in parts of Alameda and western Contra Costa counties, AC Transit is seeking approval to double the current $2 parcel tax for 10 years. All of the measures require approval by a two-thirds majority to win. With state and federal money for transportation increasingly scarce, transportation officials say such local tax measures are the surest way to fund improvements in economically trying times. “As state and federal budgets continue to ignore local transportation needs, the half-cent sales tax allows us to keep projects moving and be ready when the state and federal government are in better shape and can contribute more dollars,’’ said Scott Haggerty, a Metropolitan Transportation Commission member. Such self-help measures have become common throughout California. Five of the nine Bay Area counties — Alameda, Contra Costa, San Francisco, San Mateo and Santa Clara — have them, as do 16 of California’s 58 counties. In addition to providing more money for roads and public transportation, the taxes also make it easier for counties to attract state and federal funds. Advocates say the measures provide a way for residents to help ensure that the transportation improvements they want get funded. Opponents say the measures, if they pass, will force people who don’t necessarily use — or want — the improvements to pay for them. Contra Costa County’s Measure J would extend its existing half-cent sales tax, set to expire in 2009, for 25 years. It would raise an estimated $2 billion to pay for projects including a new fourth bore for the Caldecott Tunnel, an eastern Contra Costa rail extension to BART, the widening of Highway 4 in eastern Contra Costa, carpool and transit improvements on Interstate 680, road maintenance, and transit for seniors and the disabled. In San Mateo County, Measure A would extend for 25 years a half-cent transportation sales tax that is to expire in 2008. The $1.5 billion spending plan would steer 30 percent of its funds to transit; 27.5 percent to highways; 22.5 percent to cities to use as they choose for road maintenance, shuttles, traffic operations and bicycle and pedestrian programs; 15 percent to grade separations (projects that eliminate railroad crossings); 3 percent to bicycle and pedestrian projects; and 1 percent to other congestion relief efforts, including ride-sharing programs and ramp metering. Solano County voters will be asked, for the second time in two years, to approve a half-cent sales tax. An initial effort in November 2002 gained 60 percent of the vote, falling short of the two-thirds majority required. Measure A would raise $1.4 billion over 30 years for improvements to the Interstate 80/680/Highway 12 interchange and to I-80, I-680 and I-780; to increase the capacity and safety of Highway 12; for street and road maintenance; for transportation safety projects; for transit for seniors and the disabled; and for commuter rail, ferry and bus service. Marin County’s Measure A proposes a first-ever half-cent sales tax that would generate $322 million over 20 years. Sonoma’s Measure M would institute a quarter-cent sales tax projected to raise $465 million over 20 years. AC Transit’s Measure BB will appear on the ballot in Alameda County, except for Fremont and Newark, and in western Contra Costa County. The parcel tax measure would raise $140 million to help support the district, which has been forced to cut service and raise fares.

TUNNEL VISION — $5B PROJECT WOULD LINK CITY TO 3 N.J. LINES

The New York Post October 14, 2004 A proposed rail tunnel linking New Jersey to Manhattan would give passengers a no-transfer ride into Penn Station by 2014, officials said yesterday. The project would be part of a larger effort to expand the region’s commuter rail system. The Hudson River tunnel project — dubbed “Access to the Region’s Core” — is expected to cost as much as $5 billion and is part of a “larger blueprint” that would create a cohesive regional mass transit system. Riders who currently take the Bergen, Main and Pascack lines would get a direct ride into the city with the help of a loop at the Secaucus Junction without having to change trains to get into the city. “People who work in the city do not want to transfer,” said Rich Roberts, NJ Transit’s chief planner. “They don’t want to get out of their seats. They want a one-seat ride.” Roberts said the two-track tunnel project, which is being coordinated by New Jersey Transit and the Port Authority, would reduce traffic and make it easier for people to get around New Jersey and into the city. “This is a great project that takes pressure off buses and reduces traffic on the roads coming in and out of Manhattan,” he said. The new tunnel would also make it easier to connect to Xanadu — a 104-acre site at the Meadowlands that will house a sports and entertainment complex slated to open in 2007 — to Manhattan. Riders could take the proposed Hudson-Bergen Light Rail extension from the Meadowlands and transfer at the Tonnelle Avenue Station in North Bergen, then take trains to Penn Station. “This would link New Jersey’s premier sports complex with Penn Station and Times Square,” Roberts said. The plan is part of a larger mass transit effort in New Jersey that includes a 1 1/2-mile connection to link the Pascack Valley Line in East Rutherford to a new Meadowlands station in 2007. The project includes a 1 1/2-mile connector between the Pascack Valley Line in East Rutherford to a new Meadowlands Station. The $150 million spur, which will be funded by the Port Authority, would connect riders in northern New Jersey to Xanadu by 2007. The plan also calls for using two freight lines for passenger service by running self-powered diesel trains along the tracks, which stretch north in one direction to Tenafly and northwest in the other direction to Hawthorne. Another $200 million project would allow trains to run without the help of a locomotive because a series of small engines would be affixed to the wheels of passenger cars. Roberts said NJ Transit will lobby the feds to help pay for the projects. “We’re looking at a variety of sources,” he said. “Federal funds have always been part of our capital program.” Track to the Future NJ Transit is spearheading a regional transit project that will make getting in and out of New Jersey easier than ever. Highlights include: — A new Hudson River rail tunnel, giving New Jersey riders a direct ride into the city — A 1 1/2-mile connector from the Pascack Valley Line in East Rutherford to a new Meadowlands station — A loop at Secaucus Junction that would let riders on the Bergen, Main and Pascack Valley lines reach the city directly without having to transfer to another train — A link between the Hudson-Bergen Light Rail system and the Xanadu sports and entertainment complex — The use of “diesel multiple-unit” trains — cars that do not need to be pulled by a locomotive — on two freight lines in North Jersey to connect Hackensack to Hawthorne and Tenafly

New York City subway system marks centennial anniversary

National Public Radio (NPR October 14, 2004 ROBERT SIEGEL: Before the first New York City subway train took its historic ride in 1904, engineers and electricians had to plan the inner workings of the transit system. The infrastructure they designed more than a hundred years ago has since been updated with some new technologies. Overall, though, the system still works pretty much as it was originally planned. Beth Fertig of member station WNYC has the second part of our series on the subway’s centennial. BETH FERTIG: The New York subway was designed at the turn of the century when electric power was in its infancy. Thomas Edison and George Westinghouse were feuding over which form of transmission would become the standard. Subway trains were built to run on a third rail powered by Edison’s direct current technology. But just as they were coming online, Westinghouse had proven that alternating current was more efficient for mass transit. So with miles of track ready to go, the trains needed some way of converting AC to DC. FERTIG: The solution was a machine called a rotary converter, a mechanical rotating device so powerful its vibrations would shudder nearby buildings. This one’s no longer in service, but it’s still standing in a midtown substation. Robert Lobenstein made a recording of it for transit buffs like himself. He’s in charge of power operations for the New York City Transit Authority. Mr. ROBERT LOBENSTEIN (New York City Transit Authority): It’s one of our original rotary converters that went online in 1904. FERTIG: It looks like something out of the film “Metropolis,” a round steel structure about 10 feet high and painted dark green. Mr. LOBENSTEIN: We have some machines at one time that stood 30 to 40 feet tall, and it would tower over the operators. FERTIG: Most of these old machines have been destroyed, but the Transit Authority has kept this substation intact as a piece of history. Upstairs there’s an old-fashioned control panel. It’s made of black marble with a row of meters and knife switches. Mr. LOBENSTEIN: And it brings you back to an era when you were a real power man. You’d stand in front of the switchboards, slam the switches in. You’d have power in your hands. Now we have a little push button: click — and that’s it. FERTIG: The transit system still relies on a network of substations for converting AC power to DC for the third rails, but the modern machines are electronic and much quieter, making just a steady hum. FERTIG: The subway system has gone through many generations of technology in the last century, but the system is so large that most changes are gradual. The last few rotary converters were taken off line in 1999, and there are other kinds of machines tucked away that are still operating just as they’ve been for decades. FERTIG: In a tunnel in Queens, there are two pumps that were built in the 1930s. The subway system is constantly battling water because it’s deep underground. A flash flood can literally stop the trains. This pump room is about the size of a freight elevator. Visitors aren’t allowed in here for security reasons, so maintenance supervisor John Swift(ph) gives a recorded tour. The pumps have long pipes that dip down into the sump room below where the water collects. Mr. JOHN SWIFT: And it acts as a straw and it’ll suck the water out through the pump, and then it’ll push it out into the sewer system in the street. FERTIG: Most of the older pumps have been replaced with newer models that have twice the capacity, but they’re still working. The subway system was built at a time when people expected to make their equipment last. FERTIG: At the northern tip of Manhattan, there’s an overhaul shop which was built in the 1920s. The red brick building is the length of two football fields. This shop handles cars that were manufactured between the 1960s and the 1980s. Jim Davitt(ph) is in charge of the operations. Mr. JIM DAVITT: We can’t get our stuff of the shelf. We can’t call Home Depot or a hardware store and get the kind of things we need. FERTIG: Most of the repairs are made with state-of-the-art equipment, but the building still has its original blacksmith shop, where workers slice small pieces of steel in a tall, black machine called a buffalo. FERTIG: Today the Transit Authority is phasing in sleek, new cars with electronic voice announcement and digital displays. It’s also testing out a new computerized control system for its trains. But Davitt says he still marvels at the things that pass through his shop. Mr. DAVITT: You see some of the old work ethic and combined with new technology, and it’s a synergy that — it’s just unbelievable. FERTIG: With proper maintenance, Davitt says the subway system could easily last another hundred years. For NPR News, I’m Beth Fertig in New York. SIEGEL: And for pictures of parts of the New York City subway riders seldom see, you can visit our Web site at npr.org.

Railcar order gets commuter train rolling

Albuquerque Tribune October 14, 2004 Commuter train service between Belen and Bernalillo took another lurch forward with Gov. Bill Richardson’s announcement of a $23 million order for railcars. Tonight, the Mid-Region Council of Governments and the New Mexico Department of Transportation will hold an open house at the Raymond G. Sanchez Community Center to give potential riders information about a planned North Valley commuter train stop. The council also will gather information about how people want the commuter service to operate when it begins in the fall of 2005. Loretta Tollefson, transportation program manager for the council, said people who attend the open house will learn more about the design of the commuter rail stops and be asked about how what sort of commuter rail service they want. The public input will help in deciding when trains should run, she said. Attendees will also be asked which of two North Valley locations is better for a commuter rail stop. The stop, she said, will be either at the southeast corner of Alameda Boulevard Northwest and Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway tracks or at the northeast corner of El Pueblo Road and the tracks. “There will be visuals of what the platforms will look like and maps of each of the locations,” Tollefson said. “What were really looking for is comments about platform location, ingress and egress,” she said. “And we’re always asking for information about travel patterns that we can use as we develop our service plan.” Bombardier Transportation, a Canadian company, said in a news release Wednesday that it will build 10 bilevel commuter railcars, six cab cars and four coaches for the Belen-to-Bernalillo service. The cars will be built at the company’s manufacturing plant in Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada. “The contract calls for the design, manufacture and delivery of the new commuter vehicles,” Bombardier said. “First deliveries are expected in the summer of 2005.” William Spurr, president of the company, said the bilevel car “is a popular choice for today’s commuter rail industry because it is one of the largest-capacity cars in the world designed for maximum commuter passenger comfort.” The basic Bombardier bilevel car seats 164 people. The council has already had commuter rail open houses about stops planned for Belen, Los Lunas and the South Valley. The South Valley commuter rail stop will be at the northeast corner of Rio Bravo Boulevard and Second Street Southwest. There will also be an open house about a commuter rail stop in Bernalillo, Tollefson said.

Bombardier awarded $22 million BiLevel cars order from Mid-Region Council Of Governments in Albuquerque, New Mexico

M2 Presswire October 14, 2004 Montreal — Bombardier Transportation announced today that it received a firm order from the Mid-Region Council of Governments and the New Mexico Department of Transportation for the supply of 10 Bombardier BiLevel commuter rail vehicles, 6 cab cars and 4 coaches. Valued at approximately US$22 million, the contract calls for the design, manufacture and delivery of the new commuter vehicles. The new cars will be used to provide service between Belen and Bernalillo, New Mexico. The BiLevel vehicle developed in North America has become one of our flagship products because of its undisputed economical performance and shortest delivery schedule in the industry, said William Spurr, President of Bombardier Transportation, North America. This vehicle is a popular choice for todays commuter rail industry because it is one of the largest-capacity cars in the world designed for maximum commuter passenger comfort, added Spurr. The first Bombardier BiLevel vehicle went into service in 1978. Since then, Bombardier has produced more than 740 BiLevel cars, which are currently operated by ten different public transit authorities in North America, enhancing its features over time. The vehicles will be built at Bombardiers Thunder Bay, Ontario, manufacturing facility. Production will begin in the coming months and first deliveries are expected in the summer of 2005.

STATE ORDERS HORNS AT FATAL TRAIN CROSSING; NO DATA FOUND TO OK LONGSTANDING BAN

The Boston Globe October 15, 2004 A state agency ordered MBTA commuter trains yesterday to begin blowing horns when approaching the intersection in Beverly where a 14-year-old boy was killed Wednesday, after state officials could find no documentation authorizing a longstanding ban on train whistles or horns at that site. In a letter sent late yesterday to the T, Brian Cristy, director of the transportation division of the state Department of Telecommunications and Energy, said trains should begin blowing their whistles at the intersection of Hale and West streets “immediately, and until further notice.” Cristy cited a law that allows the department, which oversees transportation safety in the state, to issue the directive and said the request was made in response to the accident. While the action is not unprecedented, the department rarely steps in to lift a ban at a single crossing. Officials of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority said they would immediately comply and said they told engineers to begin blowing their horns during last night’s commute. Tim Shevlin, executive director of the Telecommunications and Energy Department, said communities apply when they want to ban train whistles at road crossings. The bans are issued either by an order from the department or though an act of the Legislature. The Federal Railroad Administration has also been reviewing local whistle bans nationwide, because laws governing the use of whistles at road intersections will switch from state to federal control on Dec. 18. To provide information to the federal agency, the MBTA asked the Department of Telecommunications and Energy more than a year ago to search for documentation authorizing whistle bans at 107 road crossings in the MBTA service area, some of which date back more than 60 years, Shevlin said. “We couldn’t find any documentation or some act of the Legislature for 80 grade crossings,” he said. “We only found documentation on 27 of them.” The railroad crossing at the Hale and West street intersection in Beverly was among those for which no documentation could be found, Shevlin said, and the Federal Railroad Administration is reviewing whistle bans at the 80 crossings that lack documentation to see if they should remain in place. “I think that this incident sort of raises the issue as to whether there is a public safety issue at this intersection,” he said. “And it would be imprudent for us to just stand on the sidelines and do nothing.” Communities will have to re apply to the federal agency to keep their whistle bans, but federal officials say the bans will probably remain in place unless there has been a significant increase in accidents at any crossing. At crossings where there is no ban, locomotive engineers are required to sound a train’s whistle or horn 15 to 20 seconds before arriving, and no more than a quarter-mile away. Even where there is a ban, federal rules allow engineers to sound their horns in case of emergency. David Siljeholm, an eighth-grader from Manchester-by-the-Sea, was biking to school with his mother and younger sister Wednesday when he went around the gates at the Beverly intersection and was struck by the train, authorities said. The accident and the state action yesterday rekindled debate in Beverly over the value of the whistle ban. Mayor William J. Scanlon Jr. said Siljeholm’s death caused him to “pause and think,” but did not change his mind. “As tragic as this is, I’d be for horn blowing if I thought this would help us,” Scanlon said. “But I don’t think it would help us, and I think we have to develop rules that are based on the horn really meaning something.” He said that lifting the whistle ban would result in an average of two horns blowing every minute of every day in Beverly, which has 17 crossings, the most of any community in the state. The whistles would become so commonplace that motorists and pedestrians would ignore them, Scanlon said.

Officials rethink station City: Denton County line may cancel need for DART Frankford stop

THE DALLAS MORNING NEWS October 15, 2004 After years of negotiation and planning for a DART light-rail station at Frankford Road, Carrollton officials are considering asking DART not to build it. Originally intended to open in 2011 as the northernmost light-rail station on the northwest line, nearly 90 percent of its users — commuters who work in Dallas — were expected to come from Denton County communities north of the DART service area. Officials from the city and from the North Central Texas Council of Governments say that when the Denton County Transportation Authority was established to start a commuter rail line between Denton and Carrollton, the need for the Frankford station seemed to shrink dramatically. The goal for opening the proposed Denton County line is 2011 — the same time that DART hopes to start using its northwest light-rail line. If the Denton County plan “is successful, then in an overall regional transportation plan, Frankford doesn’t really need to be there,” Carrollton Mayor Mark Stokes said of the station. “Frankford was an absolute necessity to handle the cars from the north, but if that’s not true anymore, then it’s kind of hard to justify.” Michael Morris, director of the transportation department for the council of governments, said: “We would like to evaluate what is in the best interest of transportation in this corridor. It is premature to say that station will not happen. “We know we have a good answer. The question we’re asking is: Is there actually a better answer? The numbers will have to make this look like a better plan.” Steve Salin, DART assistant vice president for capital planning and development, said the agency hasn’t changed its plan to end the line at Frankford Road. “It does have some question marks on it that depend on those discussions occurring between Carrollton and NCTCOG,” Mr. Salin said. Mr. Morris noted that if the Denton commuter line is built, the Frankford station might become superfluous. Denton County commuters using the DART line to get to work in Dallas would ride the from Lewisville or Denton into a station in Carrollton, then transfer to a DART train, he said. He said it might be more efficient for the Denton County line to end at DART’s Belt Line Road station, because from there Denton County riders would be able to ride the rails in several directions, including south to Dallas; west to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport; or southwest to Irving. Mr. Morris noted that much depends on Denton County transit officials’ conclusions. They’re still studying the alternatives for the county’s $240 million rail line, such as the locations of its stations, and the best Carrollton station at which to transfer passengers. Until officials finish studying the effects of the Denton County rail line on the need for a station at Frankford, the plan for the station will remain intact, Mr. Morris and DART officials said. Charles Emery, chairman of the board of the Denton County Transportation Authority, said the southernmost Denton County station would be at the intersection of the rail line and the State Highway 121 bypass, just north of the T.C. Rice tract and less than a mile north of the intended location of the DART Frankford station. “As it stands right now in our plans, there are three stations in Lewisville,” said Mr. Emery. One would be at Highway 121; the next station to the north would be at Main Street in old town Lewisville. Two more stations will be in Denton, he added. Cesar Molina, Carrollton’s engineering director, said that if DART is able to save the $60 million or more it would have spent on building the Frankford station and the light-rail lines from the planned station at Trinity Mills Road, it might be easier to expand the plans for the Belt Line Road station, which will eventually serve three rail lines.

In the White House, who would be better for roads

Copley News Service October 15, 2004 If your commute moves at a turtle’s pace, you might appreciate President Bush’s plan to speed environmental studies so America can build roads faster. On the other hand, you might not care for his plan to spend $119 billion less on roads than his own Transportation Department says is necessary. In that case, you might prefer Sen. John Kerry’s history of shoveling federal money into America’s highways and mass-transit systems. Then again, it might pain you to learn that his party probably will pressure him to raise your gas tax. While the presidential candidates haven’t highlighted it on the campaign trail or in their debates, congested roads are a hot topic in America. And while many voters might not realize it, the man who lands in the White House could have a lot to say about whether America’s traffic problems get better, or worse. “Americans look to their governors, mayors and local officials when they’re frustrated about transportation, but they don’t necessarily look to their president,” said Helen Sramek, a lobbyist for the 47 million-member American Automobile Association. “There’s a very strong role that the national government plays, and there’s a lot of direction that can (come) from the administration.” Conventional wisdom says it is better for businesses to have a Republican in the White House than a Democrat, but that wisdom doesn’t hold when it comes to the business of building the nation’s roads. While Republicans tend to favor the tax changes and regulatory streamlining that can help road-building companies thrive, Democrats have historically been more sympathetic to road funding and the higher taxes sometimes necessary to pay for it. Under Democratic President Bill Clinton, roads won significant increases in funding. But for the coming six years, Bush has proposed far less than the $375 billion that his U.S. Transportation Department says is needed to maintain and slightly improve highways and transit systems. The Bush plan — $256 billion — is just $38 billion more than what the nation spent in the previous six years. In fact, some assert that Bush’s plan amounts to a 10-percent spending cut when one factors in projected inflation rates. Because the president threatens to veto anything that spends more than he wants, Congress has repeatedly put off passing a highway-spending bill, and probably won’t do so until next year. “Where we sometimes have conflicts with the Republican administration is in the area of public investment in infrastructure,” said Steve Hall, governmental affairs director for the American Council of Engineering Companies. “We have to work very stridently to demonstrate the economic benefits and the quality of life benefits that infrastructure investment brings to the country.” The Senate plan, which Kerry supports, would spend $318 billion. The House would spend $275 billion. As an 18-year member of a Senate subcommittee on transportation issues, Kerry has demonstrated a willingness to invest generously in the nation’s roads, said Lauren Diggin, spokeswoman for Construction Industries of Massachusetts, a trade group that monitors Kerry’s record on transportation spending. Moreover, she said, Kerry would likely put more emphasis on building mass-transit systems than Bush. “Kerry… has continually recognized the economic, environmental and public safety benefits that such investments create,” Diggin said. Some in the transportation community are pushing for a higher federal gas tax to pump billions more into America’s road projects. Many congressional Democrats, and even some leading conservatives, support the idea. In 1993, Clinton supported a gas tax increase to help reduce the federal deficit, and Kerry voted for it. “There’s no disputing in Congress the need to increase investment, and at the end of the day, the only way to get to the (necessary) levels is to increase the fuel tax,” said Matthew Jeanneret, vice president of communications for the American Road and Transportation Builders Association. But Bush, who is wary of signing any tax increase so close to an election, opposes the idea. Kerry, who does not support a gas-tax increase now, is certain to get party pressure to raise it again should he land in the White House. Bush’s highway-spending plan includes ideas sympathetic to the road-building industry. His plan would speed environmental reviews of road and transit projects by having state and federal agencies perform their studies concurrently, rather than sequentially. “The goal… is to shorten the approximate nine to 10 years it takes to complete a highway improvement project from start to finish,” Jeanneret said. Kerry isn’t likely to support this idea should he win the White House. “When it comes to land use and the environment, the Kerry administration is going to be more interested in enforcing existing law than the Bush administration,” said Max Sawicky, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, a liberal-leaning think tank. Both the Bush plan and the Kerry-supported Senate plan would remove federal bans on highway tolls, which would allow state and local governments to raise money to pay for roads. Both plans would also lift restrictions on using tax-exempt private-activity bonds for transportation projects. In the end, some say, spending on roads may be determined more by the federal deficit than by who is in the White House. Said Sawicky: “No matter who is president, the trend is that… we could see some contraction in transportation spending.”

Bombardier To Deliver 20 High-Speed Trains To China

Canadian Corporate Newswire October 15, 2004 Bombardier Transportation and its joint venture partners, Power Corporation of Canada and China South Locomotive and Rolling Stock Industry (Group) Corporation have received, through their joint venture Bombardier Sifang Power (Qingdao) Transportation Ltd. (BSP) an order from the Ministry of Railways of China (MOR) for the production and delivery of 20 eight-car high-speed trainsets. The order is valued at approximately $424 million US and Bombardier’s share is approximately $263 million US. Deliveries are scheduled to take place from July 2006 to July 2007. The trains, which can reach a maximum speed of 200 km/h, will be designed by Bombardier in Vasteras, Sweden. Bombardier will manufacture the bogies in Siegen, Germany and will provide part of the propulsion from its site in Vasteras. The carbody production and final assembly will be undertaken in China under BSP’s responsibility. Commenting on the order, Olof Persson, President, Mainline & Metros, Bombardier Transportation, said: “Through its participation in a number of challenging railway projects in China, Bombardier has earned an excellent reputation and has gained a great understanding of the specific needs of the Chinese railway market. I am very pleased that we can now transfer our high speed train knowledge and expertise to the mainline network in China, which we will significantly contribute to modernize and upgrade.” In addition to BSP, Bombardier participates in two other joint ventures in China. The first one, Changchun Bombardier Railway Vehicles Co. Ltd. (CBRC), is dedicated to the production of metro vehicles. The other joint venture, Bombardier-CPC Propulsion Systems Co. Ltd., is involved in the production, marketing and maintenance of propulsion equipment for rail vehicles. Including its joint ventures, Bombardier currently employs 1,400 people in China. In addition to its rail transportation operations, Bombardier is the number one in the Chinese regional aircraft market, with an installed base of 37 aircraft operated by 7 airlines. It is also the first ranked manufacturer of business aircraft to China. Bombardier’s longstanding relationship with China began 50 years ago.

Train drivers learn to deal with leaves on the line

Bristol Evening Post October 15, 2004 Train drivers are being taught how to cope with the threat of ice and leaves on the region’s railway lines. Rail operator First Great Western claims that it is fighting back against the impact of autumn and winter weather. A briefing pack has been sent out to all 750 of the company’s drivers across the South of England and Wales, including drivers in Bristol. The idea of the pack, which contains a DVD of footage of how to drive over ice and leaves, is to supplement their training for bad weather driving. The DVD shows sections of the line which are particularly prone to slippery conditions because of their location. The rail operator claims that when leaves fall on the tracks the weight of passing trains crushes the leaves at up to 30 tonnes per square inch. This can create a non-stick surface leading to reduced friction, increases braking distances and slows acceleration. The same thing occurs when ice forms on the tracks and the new drivers’ packs are designed to help them minimise the impact on punctuality. Large maps showing the entire FGW line network are being put up at depots including Temple Meads and Paddington. Areas where particularly poor driving conditions have been identified in the past will be marked up, along with new areas of concern. Kevin Gale, operations director for FGW, said: “These briefing packs are another weapon in our armoury against the autumn and winter weather. “Our drivers are highly trained, professional and skilled at dealing with inclement weather. But they will be able to put those skills to even better use if they are aware of potential problems before taking to the cab each day. Leaf fall used to be seen as a joke, now it is only seen as a joke by those who are ignorant of its true effect.” He said the company’s 125 high speed trains have also been fitted with an advanced version of a system similar to anti-lock braking in cars, called WSP. Mr Gale said preventing wheels from locking up and sliding would help prevent damage to tracks and trains. Damaged to wheels in the past has led to carriages being taken out of service for repairs, causing inconvenience to passengers. Network Rail is responsible for the upkeep of the track and has taken action to cut back trees next to lines across the region, as well as using high-pressure water jets to clean fallen leaves. Network Rail also uses Sandite, a thick substance, similar in look and texture to wallpaper paste, containing small gritty particles to help adhesion. Shiobhan McCurdy, regional spokeswoman for Network Rail, said: “We will be running additional water jetting and Sandite trains in the Bristol area on six mornings a week for the 10-week period during the autumn and winter. Cutting back work has also ensured that there is no vegetation within five metres of the tracks, which will help to prevent leaf fall on the lines.”

OVERNIGHT, BULLET TRAINS BRIDGED THE CULTURAL GAP

The Asahi Shimbun October 15, 2004 What a long, fast trip it has been. And what a difference it has made to the way we travel. Yes, Shinkansen bullet train services have been with us for 40 years already. Now, the service is taken for granted. But four decades ago, those sleek rides transformed a sleepy yet industrious Japan from a land divided by regional and cultural differences to a nation of speedsters zipping to and fro on one of the globe’s most punctual and reliable high-speed train systems. When bullet trains made their debut on the Tokaido Shinkansen Line connecting Tokyo and Shin-Osaka, they were considered a technological marvel that much of the world wanted to emulate. The Shinkansen was a symbol of a new Japan. Yet, strangely enough, only Taiwan has imported Shinkansen technology. Operations there are scheduled to start next year. For years, too, there wasn’t much difference in price between bullet train runs and domestic air travel. When the 0-series Hikari Shinkansen was launched on Oct. 1, 1964, it was called the “Dream Super Express.” Its snub-nosed, long white trains covered the 515 kilometers between Tokyo and Osaka in just four hours, traveling at speeds of up to 210 kph. The following year, that time was shortened to three hours and 10 minutes. With the 1992 introduction of the 300-series Nozomi, which tears along at a top speed of 270 kph, the travel time was cut to an unheard of 2 hours. There are plenty more runs now, too. Initially, only one Hikari express and one Kodama, which makes more stops, ran each hour. Since autumn 2003, 12 trains run per hour in peak times, including seven super-fast Nozomi trains. That’s a frequency that rivals a subway schedule. It’s a popular ride: A total 130 million passengers now travel on the super-dependable Shinkansen annually. They know they will be on time. In fiscal 2003, the average delay per run on the Tokaido Shinkansen line was a mere 10 seconds-an improvement that makes Shinkansen operators beam with pride. From fiscal 1972 to 1986, the last 15 years of operation by the now-privatized Japanese National Railways (JNR), the average delay was three minutes. The Shinkansen arguably leads the world in prompt service. In comparison, the French TGV cross-country service does not even begin to consider services delayed until trains are 14 minutes late. Indispensable to all Shinkansen drivers is their timetable, which lists the exact times trains must arrive at, depart from or pass by each station-marked down to a level of 15 seconds. Operators must keep a beady eye on the ticking clock, noting to the second when a certain spot is passed and comparing it to their timetable. Minute speed adjustments are made accordingly to ensure prompt arrival at stations. This takes a bit of bra