Los Angeles MTA [Archive] - SkyscraperCity

saiholmes

February 13th, 2007, 06:07 AM

Calif.’s future may be paved with fees
By Evan Halper, Times Staff Writer
7:53 PM PST, February 12, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-02/27883701.jpg

SACRAMENTO — In California, birthplace of the freeway, where motorists can traverse all but a small fraction of the state without encountering a tollbooth, the free ride may be coming to an end.

There is emerging consensus in the Capitol that the state should follow the path already blazed elsewhere and look to tollways — public and private — to help bankroll new roads.

Local and state transportation agencies are already planning several such projects on busy urban corridors, and some of the world's largest investment firms are lining up with proposals that could leave them in control of some major new roads.

Voters last November approved billions in borrowing for roads, but that was only a start; the money won't meet all the state's transportation needs and never was intended to. Nor would anything short of a major increase in the gas tax — one for which voters appear to have no appetite. That leaves tolls.

"The existing way of paying for these projects is not going to work," said Senate Transportation Committee Chairman Alan Lowenthal (D-Long Beach). "We're used to free roads and everything being free. That is a 1950s model. If we want to move forward, we are going to have to head in a different direction."

Under pressure from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has been pushing for the state to start shifting the cost — and some control — of road building to the private sector, lawmakers last May authorized government agencies to build four demonstration projects in partnership with investment banks, shipping companies and other businesses.

The companies would put up money for the projects, and in return could end up owning a share of them. Or at least be guaranteed some of the revenues they generate.

The Legislature has yet to sign off on what roads would be built under the arrangement, but has stipulated that they must serve the movement of goods. The California Department of Transportation is already suggesting a toll road for trucks that would go from the Port of Long Beach to the Inland Empire, and a toll road for cars and trucks at the Mexican border near San Diego that would have its own border crossing.

State and local transportation planners have joined with the governor's office to lobby lawmakers for authority to broker more deals with private companies.

"This should only be a beginning," Mark Pisano, executive director of the Southern California Assn. of Governments, said of the projects approved in May. At a recent legislative hearing, Pisano told lawmakers that his organization wants to work with private companies to build a controversial 8-mile tunnel that would link the 710 Freeway to Pasadena, a project estimated to cost at least $2 billion.

Federal transportation officials are cheering these planners on.

"This is the next step," said Tyler Duvall, assistant secretary for transportation policy at the U.S. Department of Transportation. He flew to Sacramento from Washington last month to urge legislators to build more toll roads, preferably in partnership with the private sector.

"Every single private investor cites California as the dream place to invest," he said.

Currently, the state has 82 miles of toll roads — the first of which opened in 1993 in southern Orange County — and drivers make about 590,000 trips on them daily. Tolls vary by route and time of day.

A short hop on the 73 Freeway can cost as little as 50 cents. A one-way trip on the 10-mile-long 91 Express Lanes at rush hour can come to $9.25.

The American Automobile Assn. in California, which has more than 6 million members, does not oppose tolls on new roads. But many drivers do.

"The lifestyle we have in this state is the result of our freeways," said Pete Van Nuys, a San Clemente salesman who says he drives up to 60,000 miles a year. "If I have a small business, I should be able to drive and deliver goods and services without having to pay onerous tolls."

Some taxpayer groups say the state should make better use of existing resources.

"We shouldn't have to resort to toll roads," said Jon Coupal, president of the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Assn. "There are a host of studies showing we are simply not using our transportation dollars wisely. Before we dream up new ways to raise revenue, we should get smarter about how we use the money we have."

Democrats have long resisted private toll roads, pointing to problems that have arisen in the state's few experiments with private roadways. California, which once was a pioneer in public-private partnerships, soured on the idea after some high-profile missteps.

Example: In Orange County, to close a deal with a company called California Private Transportation, the state agreed not to make any improvements to public roads within a mile and a half of the company's toll lanes on the 91 Freeway. Congestion in the public lanes grew intolerable, and the state ultimately bought the toll lanes for $207 million.

Meanwhile, a private toll road long ago authorized and finally scheduled to open in San Diego County this summer has been beset by lawsuits and cost overruns. The project's final price tag — $683 million — is 70% higher than planners estimated.

The project initially called for the state to take control of the road after 35 years. Lawmakers last year scaled that back to 45 years so that the private company building it will be able to recoup its money by collecting tolls for an extra decade.

Officials in the governor's office say such setbacks are minor bumps in the road.

"We have learned a lot of lessons" from California's existing toll roads, said Sean Walsh, a senior policy advisor to the governor, "as have the rest of the country and the world."

But, he added, "people who keep going back and looking at them as an example of something that is wrong ignore the fact that it is a model now being used successfully around the world."

Indeed, several states are looking to private companies to take over their roads or build new ones. Indiana has turned over its 157-mile-long turnpike, known in the Midwest as the "Main Street of America," to a consortium of foreign investors. Illinois negotiated a similar deal with its Chicago Skyway. New Jersey and Pennsylvania are exploring similar deals with their famed turnpikes.

Texas, where virtually every major road currently being built will have tolls, is looking to the private sector to construct a 4,000-mile network of car and truck toll lanes that would feed into a port. The project, economists say, would position Texas to compete with California as the entry point for goods shipped from Asia, especially if the 710 Freeway continues to deteriorate.

In all, 21 states have passed laws encouraging public-private road-building partnerships. Many are making the move at the urging of the federal government, which provides financial incentives for involving the private sector.

California's Legislature has stopped short of giving local transportation agencies broad authority to cut deals with private road builders, as other states have. Some planning experts and economists are encouraging them to step things up.

"California is famous for the freeway, and it has been a great thing," said Joel Kotkin, an author of books on demographics and planning. "But it is from a time when the state had a lot of money coming in. We are in a different situation now. You have to start looking at these other options. The alternatives are gridlock or spending the state into bankruptcy."

Others caution that international investment firms are accountable to their shareholders, not the driving public. They say California should seek alternatives that don't give such companies too much control.

Regardless, drivers are eventually likely to be reaching for their wallets more often.

"New construction is going to have to be financed at least in part by tolls," said Lowenthal. "Who will control them is an open question."

Westsidelife

February 13th, 2007, 06:21 AM

Thanks for creating this thread. I was just thinking that we should create a thread dedicated to mass transit. :)

godblessbotox

February 13th, 2007, 06:43 AM

ugh... not toll lanes.

build the trains first, then the tolls to get the rest off the road.
not tolls first, were is everyone going to go? surface streets?

Fern~Fern*

February 13th, 2007, 07:33 AM

That a pricey toll Road..... that's like two eight balls in a paper bag.

Fern~Fern*

February 13th, 2007, 07:42 AM

The Metro Purple Line of the Los Angeles County Metro Rail is a heavy rail metro line in Los Angeles.

It is one of Los Angeles' two subway lines (along with the Red Line), and one of the five Metro Rail lines (three are light rail, largely surface lines). Although they separate in different directions west of downtown Los Angeles, the two subway lines (Purple and Red) were until recently considered two branches of one line, and are still marked this way in most stations, on schedules, and on older rail maps. As of March 2006, the combined Red and Purple lines averaged over 138,000 daily weekday boardings.

The Purple Line has two other official names: the A Line, and Line 802. These are rarely used by residents, but occasionally appear on official documents. The same designations are also applied to the Red Line.

^^ Check it out the Purple Line has other names....

LosAngelesSportsFan

February 13th, 2007, 11:02 AM

Moved original post here.

L.A. rethinks open design of subways
The slow response to a mercury spill prompts talk of adding gates, security and other on-site staff.
By Jean Guccione and Andrew Blankstein, Times Staff Writers
February 11, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-02/27851599.jpg

As Los Angeles transit officials pour millions of dollars into cameras and other high-tech security devices in the wake of 9/11, one major security gap persists: No one is stationed underground to help subway passengers in a crisis.

Unlike most U.S. subways, Los Angeles' works on the honor system. There are no gates to pass through, no turnstiles that open when a fare is paid and no attendants — let alone police officers — stationed on the platforms.

Subway planners designed it that way, hoping the open feel would encourage riders in a place weaned on the automobile but also reduce operating costs.

But now — after Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials were embarrassed by the botched response to a mercury spill that was left on a downtown platform in December for eight hours — the look of Los Angeles' subways might change.

There is growing discussion among MTA board members and other local officials about a major overhaul of how the stations work — adding barriers and possibly gate attendants as well as more security officers. Some officials say the mercury incident proves that the agency's reliance on closed-circuit cameras to show what's going on underground is inadequate.

"If we go to gates, we would have a station attendant there all the time," said Roger Snoble, the agency's chief executive officer, who plans to present a report on the issue in the coming weeks. "They would be there to help keep an eye on things."

Adding security personnel and MTA staff would change the atmosphere of the system as well as boost security. It would also be costly.

An MTA study produced last year found that hiring 500 instation attendants would cost $24 million annually. Installing turnstiles in the subway's 16 stations would cost between $50 million and $150 million. To secure the subway, the report said, three attendants per shift would have to be added at each of the subway's 54 entrances.

Some riders — who are expected to buy tickets though usually they are not checked — say they can go days without ever seeing a sheriff's deputy or any uniformed transit workers on their trains or in stations.

Los Angeles County sheriff's deputies patrol the subway, riding the rail lines among stations. About 100 deputies and uniformed fare inspectors patrol 73 miles of subway and light rail — leaving parts of the system uncovered for long stretches.

Without full-time transit workers on site, passengers in an emergency must find an intercom to contact operators at a distant bunker. That is the only source of communication with the outside world. There are no pay phones in subway stations, and cellphones don't work that far underground. (Other subway systems have paid to have their platforms wired for cellphone use but the MTA has not.)

Since 9/11, the MTA has touted its increased security measures, which focus largely on adding hundreds of closed-circuit television cameras to platforms and trains. Those efforts cost about $80 million a year.

Though security experts have praised the effort, they also say not having personnel in stations leaves vulnerabilities.

Experts say adding transit workers and law enforcement to Los Angeles' subway stations would be a plus — especially as the number of daily riders continues to increase. Ridership stands at nearly 250,000 weekday boardings for the entire rail system.

But they caution that it could give passengers a false sense of safety in the tunnels.

"It adds a level of security without saying that if you add people you will not have an attack," said Anastasia Loukaitou-Sideris, chairwoman of UCLA's urban planning department, who has studied transit terrorism around the globe.

Train bombers in London and Madrid killed hundreds after passing through turnstiles under the watchful eyes of gate agents in those stations, as did the attackers who released poisonous sarin gas in the Tokyo subway.

"Fixed posts at all stations would probably be a good thing," said Sheriff's Cmdr. Dan Finkelstein, who is in charge of transit services. "Any employee in that kiosk is a lot better than we have now."

Washington, D.C., transit workers manning each of the 86 subway stations are responsible for visually inspecting the platforms and watching for suspicious activity.

In New York's subway system, station agents staff information booths around the clock to assist passengers.

In Chicago, the system's 21 subway stations are gated and customer assistants or security guards are present whenever the trains are running.

Security concerns led Dallas officials to assign transit police around the clock to their only underground light-rail station: Cityplace, north of downtown.

Most commuters would welcome the presence of transit workers as they wait for the train, especially at night.

"It would most definitely improve the situation," said Leonel Perez-Roura, 33, of Glendale.

In an emergency, PerezRoura, a paralegal who uses the subway to get from courthouse to courthouse, said he would alert authorities using the emergency intercoms.

"They are supposed to be by the escalator or the fire extinguisher," he said, looking around the Wilshire-Vermont station for one within eyeshot. There were three on the platform: one at each end and one in the center. No signs directed passengers to the intercoms.

Vickie Chatigny, 57, of Llano said she has determined how far up the escalator she must climb to get cellphone reception to contact authorities in a crisis.

"I know in situations you have to rely on yourself," said Chatigny, a supervisor with Los Angeles County Superior Court. "I don't think [transit officials] take security serious."

Such sentiments are fueled in part by the MTA's response in December when a man spilled mercury on the Pershing Square platform. After dumping the hazardous substance, he called the MTA operator on an intercom and reported what he had done. But for reasons that are not clear, no one came to investigate or clean up the spill.

Several train riders touched the substance before a passenger called police eight hours later. Hazardous materials crews eventually removed the mercury.

MTA officials acknowledged that their staff botched the response to the spill — and this has prompted calls for major improvements.

Some have said that, had an attendant or guard been on duty, he might have realized the danger sooner or at least cordoned off the area to prevent riders from touching the mercury.

"It may not be a matter that you can stop people" who commit terrorist acts, said Los Angeles County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, an MTA board member. "But at least you'll have something in place so they realize that they are being seen."

Others are more dubious — especially given the high costs involved.

"What would have been different?" asked county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, an MTA board member. He said he questions the decision to build a barrier-free subway but doesn't know if changing course now is the best use of scarce transit funds.

Loukaitou-Sideris and other experts say training employees to respond effectively in a crisis is more vital to passenger safety than where the workers are located.

"If you are going to have people, it's important to have people who are trained and know how to respond appropriately," said Martin Wachs, a transportation expert at Rand Corp.

Assigning transit and law enforcement personnel to stations would bring Los Angeles more in line with the rest of nation's subway systems.

Westsidelife

February 13th, 2007, 11:23 AM

What are the Harbor and El Monte Transitways? I'm not familiar with those. Please fill me in! :)

phattonez

February 14th, 2007, 01:51 AM

EDIT: No one needs to see the stupid mistake I made here.

saiholmes

February 17th, 2007, 05:50 AM

Bond money rolls in for L.A. roads
By Evan Halper, Times Staff Writer
12:56 PM PST, February 16, 2007

SACRAMENTO -- Relief is coming to drivers on some of Southern California's busiest freeways.

State officials today announced the first set of projects likely to be funded with the bond money voters approved in November and there are some big ones in the Los Angeles area. They include:

• Widening I-5 from the Orange County line to the 605 Freeway.

• A new carpool lane on I-10 between Baldwin Park and West Covina.

• A network of carpool lanes connecting the 22, 405 and 605 freeways in northern Orange County.

Staff members at the California Transportation Commission, a state panel that oversees funding for highways and mass transit, included the projects in their recommendations for how the state should allocate the first $2.8 billion of $19.9 billion in borrowing that voters authorized for transportation.

The borrowing was approved as part of a $37.7-billion public works bonds package championed by the governor.

The commission staff chose the road projects from a list of 149 proposed by the state Department of Transportation and regional transportation agencies. Nearly $3 in spending was proposed for every $1 the commission has to allocate in this first round of projects. The money is designated for congestion relief on busy corridors.

The recommendations will be voted on before the end of the month by the full board, which is composed of nine members appointed by the governor. Construction could begin on some of the projects as early as fall.

The 43 projects recommended by the staff could save motorists statewide some 270,000 hours of sitting in traffic.

Among the projects that did not make the cut in this round were proposals to widen the 91 Freeway and to put more carpool lanes on the 405 and 10 freeways. Officials at the commission suggested that such projects could be approved in another round next year or could be funded through other government transportation programs.

The commission will be involved in the dispersion of some, but not all, of the remaining transportation bond money. Those funds will be designated for specific needs, including congestion relief on local roads, repairs on 400 miles of Highway 99 in Central California, public transportation, goods movement, emissions reduction and transportation safety.

Elsongs

February 17th, 2007, 09:50 AM

The Metro Purple Line of the Los Angeles County Metro Rail is a heavy rail metro line in Los Angeles.

The Purple Line has two other official names: the A Line, and Line 802. These are rarely used by residents, but occasionally appear on official documents. The same designations are also applied to the Red Line.

^^ Check it out the Purple Line has other names....

The numbered rail lines are part of the MTA's operational lingo; the bus lines are numbered in a certain way (all bus line numbers 99 and below go through Downtown; Lines 100-299 are lines that do not go through Downtown; 300-399 lines are limited lines; 400-499 are express lines; 500-699 are reserved for special routes; 700-799 are Rapid Lines.

The 800-series lines are given to the rail lines, which are numbered in order of when they first opened:

801: Metro Blue Line (1990)
802: Metro Red Line (1993)
803: Metro Green Line (1995)
804: Metro Gold Line (2003)

I don't know whether the Purple Line will get its own number (it should), so I'm not sure if that or the Exposition line will be 805.

Only train operators, dispatchers and maintenance crews are concerned with the 800-line numbers.

Fern~Fern*

February 17th, 2007, 10:55 AM

^ Interesting....

Here a quick questions what's the difference between Rapid and Limited buses?

Westsidelife

February 17th, 2007, 11:08 AM

L.A. needs subway extension

Readers comment on editorial questioning a multibillion-dollar investment in the subway extension.
From Daily Breeze Readers

We did not receive any direct responses to this week's Question of the Week: "A federal ban on extending the Red Line subway from downtown L.A. through Santa Monica was lifted last week. Would such a subway line reduce freeway traffic and aid commuters, or would it be another money pit?"

Your opinion that the "subway to the sea" offers little bang for the buck flies in the face of a lot of discussion about Westside traffic. Given the economic activity, jobs, taxes and traffic generated on the Westside, I would not begrudge that area both the subway and the Expo light rail line.

The beneficiaries will include tens of thousands of people working on the Westside but living in far-away communities where housing is more affordable. Many will come from the 50-plus communities connected to the subway by Metrorail. Leveraging all existing transit investments in Los Angeles, the potential benefits of the subway are incalculable.

As a South Bay resident who would love to see some viable transit options, I say stop talking about getting the Green Line to Los Angeles International Airport. The master plan for LAX includes an automated people mover (i.e. train) that connects the LAX terminals with the Green Line at Aviation Boulevard and Imperial Highway. Problem solved, with airport money!

-- ANDREW SHADDOCK

Manhattan Beach

No doubt many will recoil from the cost of building a subway along Wilshire Boulevard, but the reality is that there aren't any better alternatives. Putting rail above ground requires a dedicated right of way and grade separations, or else the railroad will interfere with car traffic. When one adds the cost of grade separations and considers the lower capacity of light rail, the per-trip cost of light rail isn't as inexpensive as one might hope.

Furthermore, before preaching the benefits of bus-only guideways, consider that buses have an even lower capacity than light rail. Within a few years, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority will need to upgrade the Orange Line to rail, or its buses will burst at the seams.

If we move to finish the Wilshire subway, we will be in the position within a decade to complete the backbone of our new transit map: perhaps a Green Line extension to Los Angeles International Airport, and from LAX to the Expo Line and Wilshire subway along Lincoln Boulevard? A Green Line extension to Torrance, Carson and Long Beach?

If Los Angeles does not make needed investments in rail in the near future, gridlocked traffic will continue to eat away at our quality of life and guarantee that each day continues to be a fight against the clock -- and each other's cars.

-- JOSH GLUCK

Los Angeles

saiholmes

February 17th, 2007, 07:04 PM

State freeway upgrades bypass much of L.A.
Interstates 5 and 10 would get some attention, but the $2.8-billion proposal is called 'unacceptable.'
By Evan Halper and Dan Weikel, Times Staff Writers
February 17, 2007

SACRAMENTO — Relief is coming to drivers on some of Southern California's busiest freeways, but not enough, according to local transportation planners who say the region is being shortchanged on its share of bond money voters authorized in November.

State officials on Friday announced the first projects likely to be bankrolled with the funds, part of a public works borrowing package championed by the governor. They include widening a portion of the 5 Freeway in the Los Angeles area, adding a carpool lane to a section of the 10 Freeway and installing a network of carpool lanes connecting the 22, 405 and 605 freeways in northern Orange County.

Left unfunded were several proposals that would have brought more relief to those major roads and to the heavily congested Riverside Freeway and other busy corridors.

Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina, who chairs the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board, called the recommendations "an insult to the people of Los Angeles County" and "unacceptable."

Los Angeles County, where 28% of Californians live and which has the most congested highways in the state, has been recommended for less than 12% of the funds on the project list.

The list was released by staff members at the California Transportation Commission, a state panel that oversees funding for highways and mass transit. It shows their recommendations for allocating the first $2.8 billion of the $19.9 billion in borrowing that voters approved for transportation.

The commission staff chose the projects from 149 proposed by the state Department of Transportation and regional agencies. The agencies proposed to spend nearly three times the amount the commission had to disburse in this first round. The money is designated for congestion relief on busy highway corridors.

The bond money, which doesn't cover all costs, will be supplemented with state, federal and local funds.

The full board, whose nine members are appointed by the governor, will vote on the recommendations at the end of the month. Construction could begin on some of the projects by fall.

The list of projects to be funded may still grow. The bond measure authorizes initial spending of $4.5 billion, or $1.7 billion more than the commission staff is proposing. The staff recommended that the board wait until next year to allocate the rest of the money, when planning for some of the projects that didn't make the first cut will be more complete.

There is no precise timetable for allocating all of the bond money. But local transportation planners will be pushing hard for the board to release more of that money now. They will make their case at a hearing before the full commission in Sacramento on Tuesday. The commission staff assumes that some requests will be granted.

The first cut is "a floor, not a ceiling," said John Barna, executive director of the commission. "I imagine as we discuss this over the next week or so the number will grow."

He acknowledged that the southern part of the state received less funding than it is entitled to under state formulas. He said the commission would rectify that by the time all of the funds were doled out.

But Barna defended the initial list, saying the bond money should not be dispensed according to how many people live in an area but on the projects that will do the most to relieve congestion in an overall region. The staff, he said, chose projects based on "readiness for construction, demonstrable congestion relief and connectivity benefits" and "geographic balance."

The bond money that remains after the $4.5 billion is disbursed will also be earmarked specific purposes, among them congestion relief on local roads; repairs on 400 miles of California 99 in the central part of the state; public transportation, including light rail and buses; goods movement; emissions reduction; and transportation safety.

The 43 projects recommended Friday could save motorists statewide 270,000 hours of sitting in traffic, according to commission documents.

One that did make the cut in Los Angeles — at least partly — is the widening of Interstate 5 from the 605 Freeway to the Orange County line.

The 6.7-mile stretch is one of the oldest and least improved sections of the interstate. The highway creates one of the worst bottlenecks in the state near the Orange County line, where it narrows from 10 lanes to six.

Planners estimate that it will cost $1.15 billion to widen that stretch of the 5 Freeway to 10 lanes, including carpool lanes in each direction. They were hoping to receive $387 million in bond money for the project, but the commission staff recommended less than half that amount.

The commission staff declined to fund a $950-million project to add more than 10 miles of carpool lanes to the northbound 405 Freeway between the 10 and 101 freeways. With more than 300,000 cars a day, it is one of the busiest stretches of the 405. The staff was concerned that the start date for construction in late 2011 was too far off and suggested the board reconsider the project next year.

The project list does include funding for carpool lanes along a 10-mile section of the 5 between the 134 and 170 freeways.

It also includes money for carpool lanes on the 10 Freeway from Puente Avenue in Baldwin Park to Citrus Street in West Covina.

In Orange County, projects that were recommended include a network of carpool lanes that would connect the Garden Grove Freeway to the 405 between Seal Beach Boulevard and Valley View Street and from the 405 to the 605 between Katella Avenue and Seal Beach Boulevard.

The Orange County Transportation Authority will receive money to widen the northbound side of the 57 Freeway from the Riverside Freeway to Lambert Road.

"It is kind of hard for us not to say, 'Thank you,' " said Arthur Leahy, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority, who noted that his county would get more money than much larger Los Angeles County.

But the commission recommended funding for only one of four projects to relieve congestion on the busy Riverside Freeway through northeastern Orange County. Caltrans studies show that commuters using the highway experience some of the worst delays in the state.

In Riverside County, one of seven projects was given the nod: a $62.3-million proposal to add lanes in each direction to Interstate 215 from Interstate 15 to Scott Road.

The county did not get recommendations for $752 million more it had requested for widenings, carpool lanes, interchanges and connectors on interstates 15 and 215 and the Riverside Freeway.

"We are disappointed," said John Standiford, a spokesman for the Riverside County Transportation Commission. "But they have yet to allocate the rest of the money, and there is still the State Transportation Improvement Program."

Standiford said that funding the Interstate 215 project was a "big priority" for the county and would help eliminate congestion caused by merging traffic.

San Bernardino County also got much less than it had hoped: $153 million of $531 million requested.

The money will be used to widen and improve interchanges along Interstate 10 through Fontana, Rialto, Redlands and Yucaipa. New ramps are also planned for the 210 Freeway and Interstate 215.

The commission did not approve funding for widenings and interchange work for Interstate 15 through Victor Valley, one of the fastest growing areas in the Inland Empire and an emerging cargo hub for the region.

"The 15 is a major commuting route and a truck route. But none of the high desert projects received funding," said Cheryl Donahue, a spokeswoman for the San Bernardino Assn. of Governments, a regional planning agency. "We are concerned about that."

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2007-02/27964412.gif

Fern~Fern*

February 17th, 2007, 10:06 PM

I hope some of those funds can be use for a connector from the interchange 170/101/134. When you drive down south on the 170 there's no connector to the 101 west. Which means you have to exit Moorpark drive to Laurel CYN make a left then quick right into the 101. ViceVersa there's no way to connect to the 170 when driving East on the 134/101. Same thing you have to exit on Tujunga drive pass the park then re-enter the FWY going North 170. This was such an inconvenience when I use to live up there...

godblessbotox

February 17th, 2007, 11:16 PM

that was not intentional?
i thought it was part of some far reaching traffic control thingy

Fern~Fern*

February 18th, 2007, 12:39 AM

I never really understood it either so hopefully it can be finally done.

Also when driving on the 170 north where it merges with the 5. Same thing there's no connector to the 5 south into Burbank/Glendale area. Your force to exit one FWY and re-enter another FWY. :ohno:

godblessbotox

February 18th, 2007, 03:05 AM

well... as far as that one, i could imagine that there was never a plan for that. why whould you take the 170 north to take the 5 south? just take burbank or whatever. but yah i guess it would save from some congestion somewere

redspork02

February 19th, 2007, 08:03 PM

MTA discounts fares on bus 18 routes
From Times Staff Reports
February 19, 2007

Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials are discounting fares on 18 bus routes this week to encourage ridership. The weeklong promotion, which runs through Saturday, reduces fares to 50 cents from $1.25.

The idea was introduced by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and affects routes serving more than 50 destinations throughout Los Angeles County, including job centers, hospitals, schools and museums.

The bus lines included in the reduced-fare promotion are 102, 265, 275 and 577X in the Gateway Cities area; 550, 127, 202, 209 and 305 in the South Bay; 154, 168, 233 and 761 in the San Fernando Valley; and 177, 201, 258, 214 and 220 in West Los Angeles.

redspork02

February 19th, 2007, 08:03 PM

Local Officials to Lobby State for More Transportation Funding
LOS ANGELES, February 19, 2007 - Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will hand out flyers on a busy Los Angeles thoroughfare Monday to ask commuters to urge state officials to provide the Southland with its "fair share" of traffic relief funding, according to the Mayor's Office.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also on abc7.com:

Daily Newsletter | Breaking News Alerts | Eyewitness News team Bios

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He will also head to Sacramento with other local officials to lobby for more transportation funds.
On Friday, state officials announced the first $2.8 billion in transportation projects recommended for funding under a $37.7 billion public works bond package backed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and approved by the voters in November.

The recommended projects include widening the Golden State (5) Freeway between the 605 Freeway and the Orange County line; a carpool lane for the 10 Freeway; and carpool lanes to connect the 22, 405 and 605 freeways in northern Orange County.

But several other proposals were passed over -- projects that some say would have brought more relief to the 5 and 10 freeways, as well as to the 91 Freeway and other increasingly congested corridors.

Local officials complained that Los Angeles County was being shortchanged because the county has 28 percent of the state's population and some of the most congested roads in the country, but less than 12 percent of the funds are being recommended for the area.

Villaraigosa's office said California transportation officials recommended cutting $1 billion worth of freeway projects sought for Los Angeles County, including funding for a northbound carpool lane on the 405.

Los Angeles county Supervisor Gloria Molina, who chairs the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board, called the recommendations "an insult to the people of Los Angeles County" and "unacceptable," according to the Los Angeles Times.

The 43 projects on the list -- boiled down from 149 proposals -- were put together by the state Transportation Commission, a nine-member panel that oversees funding for highways and mass transit.

The commission, which is appointed by the governor, is set to finalize the projects by the end of the month, and construction could start as early as this fall.

The bond money will be augmented with state, federal and local funds.

John Barna, executive director of the commission, acknowledged that Southern California got less funding than it is entitled to under state formulas, but said the commission would balance spending by the time the entire bond issue was spent.

Orange County fared a little better than its northern neighbor.

"It is kind of hard for us not to say 'thank you,'" said Arthur Leahy, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority.

Still, the Riverside Freeway, which stays clogged with commuters driving to and from jobs in the Inland Empire, was not a first-round pick.

In Riverside County, a $62.3-million proposal to add lanes in each direction to Interstate 215 from Interstate 15 to Scott Road did make the list.

Monday afternoon, Villaraigosa, Rep. Howard Berman, D-Los Angeles, state and local officials will hold a news conference at the Federal Building in Westwood to urge state transportation officials to "restore funding for traffic relief projects promised to L.A. commuters," according to the Mayor's Office.

Following the news conference, Villaraigosa will distribute flyers to motorists along Wilshire Boulevard, urging them to call and e-mail state officials to demand Los Angeles's "fair share" of traffic relief funding.

Villaraigosa and a delegation of local leaders will be in Sacramento Tuesday to lobby state officials for more traffic relief funds for Los Angeles. The mayor will also testify before the state Transportation Commission.

redspork02

February 19th, 2007, 08:04 PM

Los Angeles Area Metro Developments and Discussion.

LA Metro, MTA now:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/MetroMapNow.gif

LA Metro, MTA in 3 years:

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/MetroMap5years.gif

The Dream (By Damien Goodman)

http://i13.photobucket.com/albums/a278/Imyurdada/final-1080.gif

Metrolink

LA Metro Stats:

anyone have a metrolink map, and LA MTA stats? current stations, milage, etc. i remember seeing it recently. also, stats on the two new lines.

Officials Deal With Falling Concrete at L.A. Train Station
LOS ANGELES, February 19, 2007 - A flaw in the construction of the Metro Gold Line's elevated station in Chinatown is causing small chunks of concrete to dislodge and fall onto the sidewalk below, it was reported Monday.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Also on abc7.com:

Daily Newsletter | Breaking News Alerts | Eyewitness News team Bios

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one has been hit by the debris in the 18 months since it was first noticed, but officials acknowledge there is a potential danger to pedestrians.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently agreed to make the repairs, although it's unclear when that might be done.

"Until we know what the cause is, we can't really come up with a fix," said Rick Thorpe, the MTA's chief capital management officer.

Nets have been hung under the elevated track from Union Station to Chinatown to catch the falling rubble pending repairs. Thorpe is sure however that the track is safe to ride.

The problem seems to lie in the joints between concrete slabs, where there is an allowance for movement in the case of an earthquake.

Transit officials estimate the repairs could cost as little as $50,000, a small fraction of the railway's $450 million price tag.

In August 2005, two years after the Gold Line opened, transit workers noticed fallen concrete, after spotting a child holding chunks of it in her hands, according to internal MTA documents obtained by the Los Angeles Times.

The concrete had fallen more than 16 feet from the bridge, shattering on the sidewalk below.

The MTA temporarily rerouted Gold Line trains onto a single track, causing minor service disruptions to as many as 18,000 passengers on an average workday.

The concrete right of way was built by Modern Continental Co., the Massachusetts company that was the contractor for Boston's Big Dig highway tunnel. A motorist was killed in that tunnel last year when her car was crushed by falling concrete ceiling panels.

Thorpe has hired an independent engineer to investigate. One question is whether the structure was built according to specification.

klamedia

February 19th, 2007, 09:50 PM

The only real solution will have to be a county proposal and subsequent bond or however you pay for these things.......cannot count on the state.

saiholmes

February 22nd, 2007, 08:04 AM

Mayor wants 405 project in fast lane
In a drive to get state transportation officials to fund a long-delayed freeway-widening plan, Villaraigosa asks motorists to speak out.
By Andrew Blankstein and Charles Proctor, Times Staff Writers
February 20, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/thumbnails/mapimage/2007-02/28005823.gif

Los Angeles political leaders on Monday vowed an all-out campaign over the next week to persuade state officials to fund a long-sought widening of the 405 Freeway over the Sepulveda Pass, saying the traffic-clogged Westside is in desperate need of relief.

The project, which would add a carpool lane on the northbound 405 between the 10 and 101 freeways, was left off the list of freeway improvements announced last week by the California Transportation Commission.

Although commission staff recommended a similar expansion project on Interstate 5 between the 605 Freeway and the Orange County line, Los Angeles officials were at a loss to explain why the funded projects didn't include creating the lane on the 405 — especially after years of planning and delays.

The lobbying campaign kicked off Monday afternoon at the Federal Building on Wilshire Boulevard in Westwood with Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa darting through traffic — on foot.

The mayor twice waded out into cars stopped at the Gayley Avenue intersection to hand out yellow and orange fliers with the phone number and e-mail address of the state Transportation Commission.

"Hey there, how are you?" Villaraigosa asked as he appeared at the driver's side window of a black SUV, surrounded by a gaggle of cameras. He handed the startled couple inside a flier. "Contact the CTC."

The mayor had less luck with the driver of a black Ford Mustang. In spite of the mayor's pleas, the woman refused to roll down her window. More than 300,000 cars cram through the Sepulveda Pass daily. And long before — and often long after — the traditional morning and evening commutes, an unending line of taillights snakes across the Santa Monica Mountains from the Westside to the San Fernando Valley.

"There is hardly a time, except in the overnight hours, when the 405 is not jampacked," Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky said. "There is no question, on the merits, that this project is the most deserving in this county, and it's got to rank in the top two or three highway projects in the state."

John Barna, executive director of the commission, could not be reached for comment Monday.

But last week, he defended the commission staff's choices, saying the bond money should not be dispensed according to how many people live in an area but on the projects that will do the most to relieve congestion in an overall region. The staff, he said, chose projects based on "readiness for construction, demonstrable congestion relief and connectivity benefits" and "geographic balance."

The recommendations were for the first $2.8 billion of the $19.9 billion in borrowing that voters approved for transportation. The 405 project — at a cost of nearly $1 billion — could make the cut in the future.

Commission staff recommended nearly four dozen projects across the state for the first round. Big local projects include adding a carpool lane to a section of the 10 Freeway in the San Gabriel Valley and installing a network of carpool lanes connecting the 22, 405 and 605 freeways in northern Orange County.

The 405 carpool lane project would fill the "missing link," by creating continuous carpool lanes from Orange County to the northern end of the Valley, local transportation officials and political leaders said.

Backers say that if funding appropriations for the project are delayed, the state could miss out on $130 million in federal transportation matching funds.

Villaraigosa, along with city, county, state and federal officials, said at a news conference in Westwood that under the commission's proposal, Los Angeles residents weren't receiving their fair share of the funds and hinted that voters would remember that when additional transportation bonds came up on the ballot.

"If they can't fulfill their promise, it's going to be a long, long time before voters in Los Angeles County will commit themselves to any more dollars," Supervisor Gloria Molina, chairwoman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said as traffic buzzed in the background.

For commuters, the widened 405 can not come soon enough.

Michael Backes, 52, of Glassell Park knows the nightmarish commute over the Sepulveda Pass well. He did it for 10 years from his home in Sherman Oaks to his job in Brentwood before, fed up with sitting in traffic for up to an hour, he moved to a home near Dodger Stadium.

Backes recalled taking winding side streets to get around the 405 in the evening. He even tried driving up a dusty dirt road at the Franklin Canyon Reservoir. "It wasn't so bad," he remembered as he munched on his lunch at a Whole Foods on Gayley Avenue, "if you didn't mind looking like you got out of a rally car event at the end."

(INFOBOX BELOW)

Q & A

Why are officials pushing so hard for widening the 405 Freeway north between the 10 and the 101 freeways when there are so many transportation needs across the region?

This stretch of the 405 has long been one of the most congested in the region, and the widening to allow for carpool lanes was long planned. The 101-405 interchange is generally considered to be the busiest freeway crossing in the nation.

People keep saying traffic in the Westside is particularly bad. How bad is it?

It's difficult to compare one region to another when it comes to the worst traffic. But there are several indicators to suggest Westside traffic is more brutal than most. Population on the Westside has jumped 23% since 1990, compared with a 6% increase for Los Angeles as a whole. Job growth has exploded too, especially along the 405 corridor, in Century City as well as Santa Monica. Only about 30% of those workers live on the Westside, according to a Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority study. That leaves more than 300,000 people a day commuting to the area.

Has traffic been increasing?

Traffic on the 405 at Culver Boulevard increased to 268,126 vehicles a day in 2005, up from 246,273 a day in 2000, according to the Southern California Assn. of Governments. MTA research shows that during the evening rush on Wilshire Boulevard near the 405 Freeway, it can take as long as 19 minutes to drive just one mile.

Isn't there already work being done on the 405?

Yes. Besides improvements to the 101-405 interchange, carpool lanes are being built south of the 10 Freeway. Officials want continuous carpool lanes on the 405 from Irvine to the northern tip of the San Fernando Valley.

Source: Times reports

godblessbotox

February 22nd, 2007, 09:09 AM

how much would it cost to slap some elevated rail down the middle of that thing?

Elsongs

February 22nd, 2007, 11:13 AM

The concrete right of way was built by Modern Continental Co., the Massachusetts company that was the contractor for Boston's Big Dig highway tunnel. A motorist was killed in that tunnel last year when her car was crushed by falling concrete ceiling panels.

O...M...G...

Elsongs

February 22nd, 2007, 11:14 AM

how much would it cost to slap some elevated rail down the middle of that thing?

A lot. But as long as Modern Continental Co. of Boston doesn't get the contract, it'll be fine.

phattonez

February 22nd, 2007, 03:58 PM

klamedia

February 22nd, 2007, 08:22 PM

I don't understand your question.

Elsongs

February 22nd, 2007, 09:07 PM

That second map just showed me something interesting that I never took note of before. Shouldn't the Expo Line increase ridership on the Harbor Transitway drastically? There would no longer be a need for a street running section. Just one more step for converting that thing to heavy rail.

The Exposition line does not directly transfer with the Harbor Transitway. While it looks like it does on the map, they run closely parallel but do not share any stations. Assuming they build the USC station (it's currently an "Optional Station" in the plans), then the 37th St. Harbor Transitway station would be located about two blocks east of the USC stop.

The Exposition line is not designed to run as heavy rail as the non-Exposition portions run on Flower Street.

phattonez

February 23rd, 2007, 01:18 AM

One of the reasons for low ridership on the Harbor Transitway is that it does not go all the way into downtown. If the buses were to go to an Expo Line station, then passengers could take the transitway and then use light rail to get to downtown.

I know that Expo is not heavy rail, but if the section to the east became heavily used enough, it would warrant the conversion.

saiholmes

February 23rd, 2007, 06:46 AM

Hit-and-run on L.A. highway projects jeopardizes voter confidence
February 22, 2007

Sacramento — Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa kept chanting three numbers like a mantra Tuesday as he lobbied the Capitol for more highway bond money.

Every few seconds, it seemed, the mayor would remind anyone listening that L.A. County houses 28% of the state's population, endures 33% of its traffic congestion, but is being earmarked a measly 12% of the initial $2.8 billion being distributed from the $19.9-billion transportation bond approved in November by California voters.

Actually, it's worse than that for L.A. Only $4.5 billion total is available from this particular bond account, designed for "corridor mobility improvement" — like adding a carpool lane on the northbound 405 between the 10 and 101 freeways.

The 405, with 300,000 daily commuters, is the nation's most congested freeway, Villaraigosa says. But that carpool project didn't make the Sacramento bureaucrats' initial cut.

The mayor's numbers are significant, but I also have some others that should be persuasive for anyone with an ounce of political sense:

• L.A. County cast 24% of the total statewide yes votes for the transportation bond, Proposition 1B.

• L.A. was particularly supportive, with 65.5% voting for the measure. It passed statewide with 61.4% of the vote.

• Lawmakers representing L.A. County occupy 33% of the Assembly seats and sit at 35% of the Senate desks.

• Two of the three most powerful politicians in state government live in L.A.: Democratic Assembly Speaker Fabian Nuñez and Republican Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. The third man — Democratic Senate leader Don Perata of Oakland — also is upset with the proposed initial bond disbursements because they shortchange the Bay Area.

So all this points to a political reality instinctively understood by everyone except, apparently, some officials at the California Transportation Commission. The reality is that L.A. and big urban areas have clout because it's the way the system is set up. One person, one vote, and all that.

When something doesn't go L.A.'s way, it flexes its muscle. That doesn't win friends and may even stir up old hatreds. But occasionally it's OK to be a bully, especially when someone's holding back your rightful share of bond money.

The transportation commission staff Friday recommended against initially funding the 405 carpool lane and other L.A. freeway projects, including widening Interstate 5 from the 605 to the Orange County line.

You couldn't blame voters if they felt victimized by a bait and switch scam.

They were all but promised 405 congestion relief in TV and radio ads last fall. Schwarzenegger, Villaraigosa and Nuñez cited the Sepulveda Pass as a prime example of a bottleneck that could be loosened by the bond. In L.A., the 405 was a poster freeway for the bond campaign.

The MTA was pushing hard for the carpool lane, a necessity to get transportation commission project approval.

When it didn't show on the commission staff's list of recommended projects, officials offered lame reasoning. Mainly, they expressed "confusion" over when the project would be ready to build. They wanted only projects ready by 2009 and thought the 405 couldn't start until 2011.

They didn't do their homework. This project had been fast-tracked by the governor and Legislature. Construction could start in 2009. Indeed, if it isn't begun by then, the project could lose $130 million in federal funding. L.A.'s bond money request is for $730 million.

" 'Confusion.' That's what bugs me," says new Assemblyman Mike Feuer (D-Los Angeles), chairman of the budget subcommittee on transportation. "Pick up the phone. 'Hello, MTA, when is the project scheduled to start?' How long does that take?"

But the commission comment that got my attention was from Executive Director John Barna, who told reporters last week that "we've avoided falling into the trap of fair share based on population." The goals were "geographic balance," he said, along with construction readiness, "demonstrable congestion relief and connectivity benefits."

I don't profess to know what most of that means. But I do know he fell right into a political pressure cooker juiced by population.

Bay Area politicians also are perturbed. The commission staff recommended less than half the bond money that Caltrans had urged.

Their cause celebre is a recommended $175 million outlay to build a Highway 101 bypass around tiny Willits in Mendocino County. Willits (population 5,100 at last count) is roughly 140 miles north of San Francisco.

Schwarzenegger, Perata and Nuñez have sent letters to the commission — filled with gubernatorial appointees — asking that its staff be ordered back to the drawing board. It doesn't have much time. Proposition 1B requires the commission to authorize the initial projects by March 1.

One can sympathize somewhat with the staffers. They've received $11.3 billion worth of funding requests for a $4.5-billion pot. But the Willits bypass?

The urban political powers will probably win this fight. They hold the best cards. The bond money ultimately must be appropriated by the Legislature and Nuñez is threatening to block it.

The speaker also is talking about proposing a $5-billion supplemental bond. But good luck talking L.A. or Bay Area voters into borrowing more until they see whether 1B was a rip-off.

"The will of the voters has to be respected," says David Ackerman, a veteran highway construction lobbyist. "If you break faith with the voters, it will be like JetBlue. Here, the voters are the customers."

In fact, this is a lesson that applies to all those $37 billion in Legislature-generated public works bonds passed by voters in November.

There cannot be a complete disconnect between campaign promises and a politically tone-deaf bureaucracy. Or the next significant number will be zero: the number of statewide bonds approved in the future.

saiholmes

February 25th, 2007, 06:11 PM

Funds demanded for 10/605 interchange
By Fred Ortega Staff Writer

BALDWIN PARK - The morning traffic along the San Bernardino (10) Freeway on Friday was not quite as heavy as on most days. But the frustration expressed by the state and local officials gathered on a bridge overlooking the freeway was directed at a different type of gridlock: the legislative kind.

The politicians were protesting last week's decision by state officials against funding a $70.5 million upgrade to the 10 and San Gabriel River (605) freeway interchange. The proposed upgrade would create a flyover transition from the southbound 605 to the eastbound 10.

The project was among several in Los Angeles County turned down by staffers with the California Transportation Commission, the state agency tasked with disbursing $2.8 billion in freeway improvement projects from the $20 billion approved by voters last November.

State Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, accused the Metropolitan Transportation Authority of not doing enough to promote the interchange project. She pointed to a legislative alert issued by the MTA over the weekend that argued for funding of a $730 million car-pool lane project on the San Diego (405) Freeway, but did not mention the 10/605 interchange.

"We are outraged our own transportation authority removed this interchange from their priority list," said Romero, the Senate majority leader. She added that the omission of the 10/605 interchange from the MTA memo was a sign of what she called a "great divide" between the politically powerful Westside of Los Angeles and eastern county areas including the San Gabriel Valley.

"We are asking for an end to this great divide," Romero said. "We are not B-list players with B-list needs."

L.A. County Supervisor Gloria Molina, who chairs the MTA Board, said the agency is fighting equally hard for both the 10/605 interchange and the 405 carpool lane.

"We need both," said Molina. "While \ is no more important than any other region of the state, we are as important."

Assemblyman Ed Hernandez, chairman of the San Gabriel Valley Legislative Caucus, said an upgrade to the 10/605 interchange is imperative.

"The amount of traffic coming through here is expected to increase by 30 percent in coming years and this interchange already has accident rates

27 percent higher than the state average," Hernandez said.

Duarte Councilman John Fasana, who sits on the MTA board, said the authority had reduced the amount of money it was seeking for other projects rejected by the CTC staff in order to increase the chances of funding for all of the county's projects.

He added that the board is also lobbying members of the CTC directly.

"\ Esteban Torres is working really hard for all of these projects," said Fasana.

Torres, who is from West Covina, is the only representative from the San Gabriel Valley on the CTC. His last day on the commission will be Feb. 28, the day final recommendations are due. With his departure there will only be one other L.A. County representative on the commission, former Glendale Mayor Larry Zarian.

The steadily increasing traffic, he added, is expected to lead Caltrans to give the junction an "F" rating, meaning a complete breakdown in mobility, within the next few years.

Assemblyman Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar, said that as a region, L.A. County voted to support the transportation bonds at a rate 3 percent higher than the rest of the state.

"It is only fair that the voters in this region see relief in their own neighborhoods," said Huff.

With 28 percent of the state's population, L.A. County is only slated to receive 12 percent of the statewide freeway funding, said West Covina Mayor Mike Touhey.

"It is taxation without representation, and it is about time for us here in the San Gabriel Valley to have ourselves an good old-fashioned tea party," he said.

godblessbotox

February 25th, 2007, 08:29 PM

^^is it just me or was that percentage quoted differently in another article?

phattonez

February 26th, 2007, 01:43 AM

I'm glad that Gloria Molina is sticking up for us. At any time of the day, the 10 around that interchange is heavily congested. We need that interchange improved and we need those carpool lanes. We can't just forget about the other important side of LA.

solongfullerton

February 26th, 2007, 02:44 AM

^^^ At any given time, EVERY freeway is congested at EVERY interchange. These self righteous attitudes are hurting everyone and it makes us all look selfish. I read an article in the Times recently about how the county is just SOOOOO big that it makes it nearly impossible govern well. There are 5 county supervisors that average 2 million constituants. Not only that, a supervisor hasn't been voted out of in something like 20 years. The supervisors keep running campaigns based on the status quo and its working. It doesn't make sense. It seems that the consensus is that things are getting worse, but nothing is changing when you have the same douche bags doing the same shit they always do. I know this has mentioned here many times, mostly regarding transit, but it really can be applied towards everything in the county, WE NEED A FUCKING MASTERPLAN. We need a masterplan for transit, we need a master plan for money coming from the state and feds, we need a masterplan for affordable housing, we need a masterplan for environmental studies and related items, we need a masterplan for everything!!!!! I know there is no way to make everyone happy, but we need a mayor, supervisors, Counth chief, and city council members with enough cajones to put their greedy, pork following personal agendas aside for the sake of the city, county, and region as a whole.

godblessbotox

February 26th, 2007, 03:15 AM

there are already master plans for transit and freeways, take a few moments and reconnect with the mta website

solongfullerton

February 26th, 2007, 03:31 AM

Some masterplan, huh? I don't think a good masterplan would allow for all this bitching. I understand the complaining for LA's fair share of the state infrastructure bond money, but this regional bickering just makes us look bad. If a solid masterplan was in place, everyone would already know where the money was going before it is even allocated and when their turn was coming to get a piece of the pie. Trying to cut in line is selfish and accomplishes nothing.

LosAngelesSportsFan

February 26th, 2007, 03:34 AM

timquinn

February 26th, 2007, 12:07 PM

Los Angeles County would be the ninth largest STATE in the country in population. In size it would rank 48th.

phattonez

February 26th, 2007, 03:38 PM

klamedia

February 26th, 2007, 06:19 PM

What "solong" is saying is that improving freeways or even constructing rail piece by piece won't work here. The place is growing too fast and needs a real masterplan regards transit of all kinds, both private and public. And it's not as though their are not "masterplans" in place, they just don't seem to have any real teeth to get the job done. Fixing an interchange here and placing a carpool lane there won't do when we all know we need the Purple Line, the 405 line, the Green Line to LAX and up Lincoln, the Crenshaw Line, the Downtown Connector, the Silver Line and the Red Line extended out to East LA all yesterday. Everywhere I look development continues and I don't mean the obvious and popular ones like LA Live and Grand Cenrtral. Drive around the city, almost every vacant lot already has one of those fences up with that green tarp attached. And really most importantly I see lots and lots of baby strollers and pregnant women in and around my neighborhood, coupled with international migration to the area, you just have to ask yourself...whose in charge? I really do hope that the next mayor after Villaraigosa will be Garcetti.
Basically LA needs to break away from the rest of the county. This needing to work with 88 other cities just can't work anymore.

godblessbotox

February 26th, 2007, 06:37 PM

aqua line k... dont forget the aqua line

phattonez

February 27th, 2007, 03:15 AM

But until that happens, we need to make sure that every area gets what it needs. We do what we need for the short term, but we also need to look at the long term, like solong said. Let's make that, but until that happens, let's fix the problems as they come up.

saiholmes

February 27th, 2007, 05:12 AM

State officials expand road funds, relent on 405 Freeway widening
By Dan Weikel and Jeffrey L. Rabin, Times Staff Writer
3:16 PM PST, February 26, 2007

Relenting to the protests of angry commuters, state officials today significantly increased the amount of bond money they plan to allocate this year for road projects, most notably the widening of the 405 Freeway though Westwood and the Sepulveda Pass.

The staff of the California Transportation Commission recommended today that $4.5 billion in bond funds be spent this year on dozens of projects statewide instead of the $2.8 billion initially proposed. The initial rejection of so many projects by the commission staff generated complaints from drivers and politicians, who both noted that voters had just approved a bond measure that will eventually fund $18 billion for various transportation projects.

The protests were the loudest in Los Angeles County, where 28% of Californians live but where only about 12% of the transit dollars in the initial proposal went. Most of the increase in funding will go for carpool lanes on the 405, a project that failed to make a list of 43 highway and road projects deemed eligible for funding from Prop. 1B, the transportation bond measure that voters approved in November.

The carpool lanes for the northbound 405 -- one of the nation's most congested freeways -- would run 10.2 miles from Interstate 10 to U.S. 101. State officials are recommending $730 million in state bond funds for the project.

More funding was also recommended today for Riverside, San Bernardino and San Diego counties. Those increases ranged from $17 million for San Bernardino to $134 million for Riverside. Those counties had also said they were shortchanged.

saiholmes

February 27th, 2007, 05:13 AM

LAX plans to accommodate jumbo planes
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
2:10 PM PST, February 26, 2007

Responding to a trend in which airlines are taking international flights to newer airports, Los Angeles city officials said today that they will build new parking spots to accommodate larger aircraft at the Tom Bradley International Terminal at LAX.

At a news conference heralding the groundbreaking of a $732-million renovation at the 22-year-old terminal, officials vowed to uphold the airport's status as the No. 1 gateway to the Pacific Rim.

"Our friends in Northern California are stealing some customers away from us," said Councilwoman Janice Hahn. "We remain committed to being a leader in international travel."

Even so, airlines have expressed concern that the renovation is too little, too late. Renovation of the Bradley terminal won't be complete for three years and will not enlarge the building, industry watchers note.

Meanwhile, San Francisco officials have been aggressively promoting their international terminals to carriers in hopes of luring away business travelers, who currently connect on flights at LAX to the Bay Area.

Next month, Qantas Airlines will transfer eight of its weekly flights from Sydney, Australia, to San Francisco. Its other 42 weekly flights from Sydney and elsewhere to LAX will continue.

redspork02

February 27th, 2007, 09:11 PM

$723.5-Million LAX Tom Bradley International Terminal Renovation Begins; Largest Individual Project in Los Angeles City History$140-Million Baggage Screening System Will Eliminate Lines, Reduce Terminal Congestion; Other Upgrades Will Improve Overall Customer Service, Convenience

LOS ANGELES, CA -- (MARKET WIRE) -- February 26, 2007 -- Los Angeles Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa was joined today by airport and airline officials in a ceremony to break ground on a long-awaited major renovation of the Tom Bradley International Terminal (TBIT) at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). The $723.5-million project calls for major interior renovations, installation of an in-line checked-baggage security system, and a second boarding gate for new large aircraft.

Considered the largest individual project in Los Angeles City's history, the significant changes are expected to help LAX retain its competitiveness as the premier West Coast international gateway, especially to the Asia-Pacific Region. Because the construction work will be performed while the terminal is fully operational, the project is also considered one of the most complex among U.S. airports. This is the first major upgrade to LAX terminals since 1984, when the one-million-square-foot Tom Bradley International Terminal was originally built, along with the double-deck roadway and concourses that connected airline ticketing counters to aircraft parking satellites.

"The Tom Bradley International Terminal at Los Angeles International Airport is the first and last impression 10 million annual travelers have of Los Angeles," said Mayor Villaraigosa. "This project will improve the travelers' experience as they pass through LAX, while enhancing passenger safety by reducing congestion in the airline check-in lobbies and on the curbside. The upgrades will improve customer service so travelers' first and last impressions of our great city will be positive ones that will make them want to return."

"Los Angeles International Airport is the gateway to our City," said Los Angeles City Councilmember Bill Rosendahl, whose 11th District includes LAX. "It is important that we provide a safer, greener, more modern and efficient airport for our traveling public. These renovations do just that."

Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners President Alan Rothenberg said, "Los Angeles International Terminal is the U.S. West Coast's premier international gateway -- especially to Asia-Pacific, the fastest growing commercial aviation region in the world. We greatly appreciate the Mayor's support to LAWA in reaching today's milestone. Major renovations to the Tom Bradley International Terminal will greatly improve passenger comfort, convenience and safety and will help LAX retain its global competitiveness."

Samson Mengistu, Los Angeles World Airports acting executive director, said, "Passenger-friendly terminals and conveniences, airplane-friendly taxiways and gates are all 'must-haves' as airports around the globe compete for the economic vitality that world-class airports create. Our Vision Initiatives seek to modernize LAX to ensure it retains its vital role as the cornerstone of Southern California's air transportation system."
Frank Clark, executive director of the LAXTEC Corp. consortium of 30+ airlines operating in the Tom Bradley International Terminal, said, "The international airlines serving Los Angeles are extremely pleased with the start of the much anticipated renovation program, which will enhance our customer travel experience for visitors from around the world by upgrading the appearance of the facility, modernizing important building systems, enhancing security, and providing a terminal that will be 'user friendly.'"

The project, which is scheduled for completion in March 2010, will add approximately 45,000 square feet of space in the terminal to house a $140-million, in-line baggage security screening facility. Passengers will check in with their airlines, receive their boarding passes and check their luggage with the airlines, where it will be conveyed to security screening and then to flights. The oversized explosive detection machines currently in terminal lobbies will be replaced with newer generation machines with higher efficiency and through-put and moved to this behind-the-scenes facility. This will reduce congestion in the ticketing lobbies and eliminate passengers waiting with checked luggage while it undergoes security screening.

In addition to enhancing security and efficiency, the renovation will make the terminal more comfortable and convenient with interior improvements that include upgrades to the Lower/Arrivals Level lobby and concourses for inbound international passengers, restrooms, accessibility measures for passengers with disabilities, new elevators and escalators, new paging and clearer signage, better temperature control and ventilation, fire and life safety systems, and electrical system.

Renovations to the passenger boarding lounge and outside ramp area at Gate 123 on the north end of the terminal concourse will create a second gate to accommodate the new generation of jets such as the Airbus 380 and Boeing 747-800. Gate 101 on the south end of the terminal concourse was renovated last June to accommodate the new jets in advance of test flights.

With new amenities and furnishings, four new "mega" airline lounges will replace 16 individual lounges and expand the terminal's overall lounge space to 47,000 square feet -- an increase of 72 percent over current space. Three of the new lounges will serve airline alliances, and the fourth is for customers of airlines not affiliated with an alliance.

Along with a much more contemporary look, the terminal will also incorporate modern technology such as dynamic video monitors that automatically update flight status and information technology components that support the upgrades and promote better passenger flow.

The project is the first at LAX to incorporate Leadership in Energy and Environmental (LEED) standards developed by the U.S. Green Building Council. The terminal's new heating/ventilation/air conditioning and more efficient electrical and lighting systems will reduce energy consumption, while new plumbing systems will increase water conservation. Over 75 percent of the construction and demolition waste will be recycled or salvaged, and the design features various local and sustainable building materials and finishes.

This is in keeping with a sustainable "green" building policy adopted by the Los Angeles Board of Airport Commissioners in January that commits Los Angeles World Airports (LAWA) to incorporate LEED standards in all future construction projects at LAX and LAWA's other three Southern California airports (LA/Ontario International, LA/Palmdale Regional and Van Nuys). LEED standards promote a whole-building approach to sustainability by recognizing performance in human and environmental health, including sustainable site development, water savings, energy efficiency, materials selection and indoor environmental quality.

The 38-month project is expected to be completed by March 2010. The overall Tom Bradley International Terminal Renovation Program cost is $723.5 million. Actual cost for the construction work that begins today is $503.5 million with a $72.1 million contingency (total $575.6 million). The airport has already expended $147.9 million on architectural and engineering designs; purchase of new passenger loading bridges; and construction of the first boarding gate for next-generation jets, lounges and terminal operations offices. The project is being funded by a combination of sources, including passenger facility charges, airline reimbursements and airport revenues. The U.S. Transportation Security Administration has already agreed to a Letter of Intent for partial reimbursement for the in-line baggage security screening system. No monies from the City's general funds will be used.

The more than 30 airlines at the Tom Bradley International Terminal served over nine million international travelers in 2006, or 53 percent of LAX's overall 16.9 million international passenger volume. Total passenger volume at LAX last year was 61,041,066.

Construction is being performed by Clark/McCarthy Joint Venture, which is comprised of Clark Construction Group based in Bethesda, MD, and McCarthy Building Companies of St. Louis, MO. Both are long-established construction firms that have performed major public works projects at other U.S. airports, including most recently at Seattle-Tacoma International Airport.

:banana: :)

redspork02

February 27th, 2007, 09:12 PM

IM a little dissapointed, it dosent talk about hte Green line, BUMMER!!!!
but i did find this:

Proposal to extend subway to Los Angeles airport

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Printable Version Email This Article
(02-25) 13:09 PST Los Angeles (AP) --

A new government agency would be responsible for extending the subway to the Los Angeles International Airport under a bill introduced in the state Legislature.

The light-rail Metro Green Line currently stops about a mile away from LAX, where passengers have to board a free shuttle to the airport terminal.

The bill introduced last week by Assemblyman Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, would create a new agency to oversee the planning, funding and construction of a subway extension into LAX.

"We should be doing anything we can to encourage people to get out of their cars," Lieu said.

Lieu is a member of the Green Line Coalition, a group of elected officials who is lobbying to expand the light-rail line to the airport.

Under the bill, the agency's board of directors would be appointed by the Legislature. The agency would also be responsible for securing local, state and federal funding for the project.

If the bill is passed by the Legislature, the new agency likely won't operate until 2009, Lieu said.

___

Information from: Daily Breeze,

saiholmes

February 28th, 2007, 08:10 PM

Wednesday, February 28, 2007
O.C. wants more road funds
County officials demand a share of state transportation bond money they'd consider adequate.
ELLYN PAK and BRIAN JOSEPH

Orange County's top transit official said the region deserves a bigger slice of the state bond pie – and his agency is going to fight for it as long as possible.

Art Leahy, chief executive of the Orange County Transportation Authority, said the agency especially wants more money to ease conditions on the Riverside (91) Freeway from the Costa Mesa (55) Freeway to Gypsum Canyon Road, a stretch with a frequent nightmare commute.

"We have great projects, and they ought to be funded," Leahy said.

State transportation officials decide today how to spend $4.5 billion in bond money voters approved in November. Orange County's share is $361.5 million, an amount unchanged when the state added $1.7 billion to its original allocation amount of $2.8 billion Monday.

The decision gave four other Southern California counties nearly $1 billion, with Los Angeles County receiving $789 million more.

"What we're saying in Orange County is, 'All right, then, if there's more dollars available, then look at funding some of our 91 projects,' " said Assemblyman Jose Solorio, D-Santa Ana. "I mean, why should Los Angeles get all of the money?"

"I know I'm ready to fight," Solorio added. "I know other members of the Orange County delegation are ready to fight. … I want to make sure that under our watch we can protect our money."

Orange County officials said they will ask the commission to use $150 million from a different account – held for statewide traffic monitoring and traffic counts – for freeway improvements instead. It would only be fair to fund projects that benefit the whole region, they said.

California Transportation Commission Chairwoman Marian Bergeson said Orange County had a good track record of finishing projects on time and within budget. She said she was "reasonably certain" the county would get the money staff members recommended but couldn't predict the outcome of today's discussion.

Los Angeles officials lobbied fiercely for their extra money, getting Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and legislative leaders to battle for them. And they're not done pushing, officials say.

Rick Jager, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said officials including Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa will lobby today for more funding for their projects.

"Overall, we have the heaviest congestion here in Los Angeles County," Jager said. "We're going to press on and hopefully persuade the commissioners to fund the projects that we submitted."

John Barna, the commission's executive director, said Monday that Los Angeles' plan to add car-pool lanes on the San Diego (I-405) Freeway deserved $730 million in funding.

"I don't know if political pressure had a whole lot to do in what we wanted to invest in L.A. County," Barna said.

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/02/27roadfunds_sem.gif

kidA

February 28th, 2007, 09:58 PM

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/02/26golocal_info.gif

n idea to build a transit line stretching from Disneyland to Huntington Beach could gain some momentum today.

Officials from five cities in north and west Orange County are hoping to score up to $250,000 in grant money from the Orange County Transportation Authority to study the possibility of a transit service connecting the tourist destinations, possibly along an existing railroad corridor.

"It's a difficult, long commute going from Huntington Beach to Anaheim, weaving through the cities," said David Webb, Surf City's deputy public works director. "The need for this is really strong. There's obviously a strong commuter connection, and the route connects two major tourism destinations."

But news of the idea has inflamed residents living near the railroad corridor in Huntington Beach. About 25 people plan to attend an OCTA board meeting today to protest, resident Shari Noriega said.

"It's extremely frustrating because we have vested interest in our city and ? we're not being given any information about this," said Noriega, who is worried about the project's effect on property values.

The proposal is among those submitted by 18 cities vying for a share of grant money from OCTA's Go Local program. Each of Orange County's 34 cities was eligible for $100,000 grants, offered to encourage cities to think of ways to link to Metrolink lines.

The best plans will qualify for cash to fund further study. In all, $30 million is set aside.

"The goal of this program is to get people to think outside the box," OCTA spokeswoman Andrea West said. "The cities are the experts, so we're looking for them to tell us what they think would be the best."

Huntington Beach will head the project to evaluate possible transit lines stretching from the sand to Disneyland through Garden Grove, Stanton, Westminster and Anaheim.

The study will include evaluating the possibility of a transit line along 18 miles of Union Pacific Railroad tracks from the Metrolink station in Anaheim to the intersection of Ellis Avenue and Gothard Street in Huntington Beach. It will evaluate ways to move people to the beach and into the Disneyland Resort area and also will review other possible transportation routes.

The type of transportation ? such as light rail, monorail or bus ? also has not been determined. The study could take up to a year and a half to complete, Webb said.

ORIGINAL ARTICLE:
http://www.ocregister.com/ocregister/news/local/article_1590989.php

EDIT: whoops...just saw this in the OC topic.

saiholmes

March 1st, 2007, 03:08 AM

Congestion relief projects first to receive bond funds
Jeffrey L. Rabin, Times Staff Writer
12:45 PM PST, February 28, 2007

The California Transportation Commission today approved $4.5 billion in bond funds for highway projects after stripping rural areas of long-sought road improvements in favor of the state's highly congested urban areas.

After weeks of extraordinarily intense lobbying, the commission voted unanimously to approve the first round of spending for congestion relief projects. The infusion of funds — the largest in decades — came from a massive $19.9 billion transportation bond approved by the state's voters in November.

Before a standing-room-only crowd at Irvine's City Hall, the commission quickly voted to divert $177 million from a project in Mendocino County to Sacramento and the San Francisco Bay Area and $29 million from Imperial County to other Southern California projects. It was a raw display of the political clout of the state's highly populated urban areas.

The final package includes $1.2 billion for Los Angeles County, including construction of a carpool lane on the northbound San Diego Freeway from the Westside to the San Fernando Valley. The $730 million carpool lane devoured almost one-sixth of all the money allocated statewide.

Also included was initial funding for a carpool lane on Interstate 5 from the Orange County line to the Interstate 605 interchange in Downey.

At the urging of Los Angeles County officials, the commission agreed to add another $73 million for construction of a carpool lane on Interstate 5 in the San Fernando Valley, between state Routes 134 and 170.

After a last-minute pitch from representatives of Orange and Riverside counties, the commission also agreed to partially fund additional lanes for the 91 Freeway from state Route 55 to Gypsum Canyon Road.

LA-dude

March 2nd, 2007, 03:24 AM

Also included was initial funding for a carpool lane on Interstate 5 from the Orange County line to the Interstate 605 interchange in Downey.

yay!:banana:

saiholmes

March 2nd, 2007, 04:48 AM

$4.5 billion for freeways is divvied up
The list of upgrades approved by state transportation planners includes $2.7 billion for the Southland, but relief is still years away.
By Dan Weikel and Jeffrey L. Rabin, Times Staff Writers
March 1, 2007

State officials Wednesday approved the largest infusion of state money for road improvements in decades, but for many commuters across California, the promised traffic relief might not arrive for years.

The $4.5 billion in assistance approved by the California Transportation Commission eventually will ease the plight of motorists on the Southland's most congested roads, including the San Diego Freeway, Interstate 5, and the notorious Riverside Freeway.

But it will take years before interchanges are fixed, carpool lanes are built and freeways widened. Many projects, particularly the most expensive ones, won't be completed until 2012 or later.

Just as significant, the state money, which represents the first installment of a $19.9-billion transportation bond measure overwhelmingly approved by voters in November, covers only a fraction of today's need.

The commission staff estimates that California requires up to $140 billion in highway and mass transit improvements to keep the state moving.

According to Caltrans, the percentage of highways in the state deemed congested rose from 32 to 43 from 1992 to 2002. Caltrans defines congestion as rush-hour traffic that moves at 35 mph or less.

At about the same time, the state's population grew by 21% while the number of miles in the highway system rose by only 3%.

Though the state's transportation needs are substantial, Wednesday's action marked a turning point after years of neglect and worsening traffic congestion, particularly in Southern California and the San Francisco Bay Area.

"This is a significant first step," said Marian Bergeson, a former Orange County legislator and chairwoman of the nine-member Transportation Commission. "We haven't been funding projects for years. Now, we can get the ball rolling again."

During the state budget crisis, billions of dollars were shifted from transportation programs to cover deficits in the general fund, forcing the commission to withdraw financial support for road projects.

Bergeson and other transportation officials said the bond money will allow Caltrans and county transportation agencies to combine the assistance with county sales tax revenue and federal matching funds.

"There's still a big need out there," said Roger Snoble, chief executive of Los Angeles County's Metropolitan Transportation Authority. "This is a great start. It is going to take a lot more to solve all the problems."

Arthur T. Leahy, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority, said he could not recall the last time he saw such a surge in state money for pending projects. Orange County received $383 million in assistance.

"This is the first big deal in six years," Leahy said. "We are now putting money back into transportation, rather than taking it out."

The commission divided up the assistance before a standing-room-only crowd in the Irvine City Council chamber. About $1.8 billion was earmarked for projects in Northern California and $2.7 billion for Southern California.

"This is only a down payment to get us where we should have been years ago. Now we are spending money to bring ourselves current," said Commissioner Larry Zarian, a former Glendale mayor and MTA board chairman.

"We promised [commuters] that we are going to relieve congestion, and that is what's going to happen," Zarian added. "Is it going to be 100%? The answer is no."

In Los Angeles County alone, the state will spend $1.2 billion in bond money on three major projects.

Two of the projects are planned on Interstate 5, one through the San Fernando Valley and the other from the 605 Freeway interchange in Downey to the Orange County line, which is one of the oldest and least improved sections of the highway.

The third project involves adding a 10-mile carpool lane on the San Diego Freeway from the Santa Monica Freeway to the Ventura Freeway. It received $730 million in state assistance, the largest single allocation.

Commissioner Esteban Torres, a former longtime congressman from the Eastside of Los Angeles, said the message to solo drivers was simple: "At some point you're going to have to double up to minimize the load on the freeway."

After a last-minute pitch from representatives of Orange and Riverside counties, the commission agreed to partially fund additional lanes on each side of the Riverside Freeway from the Costa Mesa Freeway to Gypsum Canyon Road.

The Riverside Freeway, the main commuter link between Riverside and Orange counties, produces the longest delays for motorists of any highway in the state.

The $95-million widening, which has been highly rated by Caltrans for reducing delay, will receive $22 million in state assistance out of $48 million requested.

Though Los Angeles and Orange counties received additional funding, there were many more losers than winners. Commissioners approved funding for slightly more than a third of the 149 projects considered during the six-week evaluation process.

In Southern California, improvements to the obsolete Interstate 10-605 Freeway interchange in the San Gabriel Valley were rejected, as were three interchange widenings on Interstate 10 through the Fontana area in San Bernardino County. The widenings are needed to accommodate carpool lanes.

"We are quite disappointed that the I-10 interchanges were dropped from funding. They are key to the timely widening of the freeway," said San Bernardino County Supervisor Dennis Hansberger.

Commissioners also sacrificed several key projects in rural areas to provide more funding for projects in major cities.

Over the vehement objections of officials from the state's North Coast, the commission voted to divert $177 million from Mendocino County to other projects in Sacramento and the Bay Area.

It was a raw display of the political clout of the state's highly populated urban areas.

As the day unfolded, other less-populated counties would suffer a similar fate: San Luis Obispo County watched in vain as $58 million to widen a bridge on Highway 101 across the Santa Maria River evaporated. A recommendation that Imperial County get $29 million to build a freeway bypass in Brawley was rejected.

"The urban centers," Torres said, "have a greater need."

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2007-02/28168203.gif

saiholmes

March 2nd, 2007, 05:34 AM

Airbus to land new plane at LAX, JFK
By Jennifer Oldham, Times Staff Writer
March 1, 2007

Officials announced that airplane maker Airbus has changed its mind and will bring the first U.S. test flight of the world's largest plane to Los Angeles and New York on the same day this month.

In a carefully negotiated deal, the company agreed to land the double-deck behemoth at Los Angeles International Airport around 9 a.m. March 19 — at about the same time another aircraft will touch down at John F. Kennedy International Airport.

"Being part of the A380's inaugural visit to the U.S. is a clear indication that Los Angeles is a leading international gateway and that our airport is a world-class facility," Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said in a statement Tuesday night. "The A380 is at the leading edge of the future of aviation, and Los Angeles is proud to be part of this historic moment."

The about-face came after the city's airport agency and Qantas Airways sent strongly worded letters to Airbus executives in Toulouse, France, demanding that they reconsider a recent decision to take the first U.S. test flight of the Airbus A380 to New York and then on to Chicago's O'Hare International Airport.

Los Angeles airport officials said Airbus had promised them it would bring the 555-seat plane here first if they spent $9 million last summer on a parking spot for the aircraft at the Tom Bradley International Terminal. The agency plans to spend about $121 million readying LAX to handle the plane, which has a wingspan stretching nearly the length of a football field and is as high as an eight-story building.

"Clearly, progressive international gateways like Los Angeles see the tremendous value of having A380 service, and they want to demonstrate to the airlines that they will be prepared to welcome A380 flights when the airlines place this aircraft into service," Allan McArtor, chairman of Airbus North America, said in a statement.

Qantas Airways, which hopes to make the first commercial A380 flight into LAX next year, will have a crew aboard the March 19 flight.

L.A. officials have less than three weeks to plan an event to welcome the aircraft, which they think will draw more than 100,000 spectators.

LAX is expected to have more operations involving the A380 than any other U.S. airport.

klamedia

March 2nd, 2007, 09:55 PM

Only HOV Lanes will be added in LA.

saiholmes

March 6th, 2007, 04:54 AM

Homes may be razed to widen 405
High-priced houses and businesses could be torn down to make way for a carpool lane in the Sepulveda Pass.
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 5, 2007

With state funds now in hand, transportation officials are dusting off plans to widen the San Diego Freeway through the Sepulveda Pass, a $950-million project that could level homes and businesses in some of the region's most affluent neighborhoods.

The most controversial option among the proposals would have the California Department of Transportation tearing down dozens of houses and a Lutheran church in Brentwood. A second, more palatable proposal calls for razing fewer homes, mostly as the freeway is widened through the San Fernando Valley.

Homeowners and local officials are urging Caltrans to take as few properties as needed to fill the 10-mile gap in the highoccupancy-vehicle lane. A decision is expected to be made this summer.

"We know there has to be an HOV lane," said Milton Miller, chairman of the transportation committee of the Bel-Air Assn. "We are not opposing it."

But, he added: "We want it done with the least amount of disruption and taking of property."

After years of delay, the project was fast-tracked last week when the California Transportation Commission, under intense political pressure, dedicated $730 million for construction. It was the largest single allocation of the new bond revenue.

But the money came only after Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and other officials demanded a fair share of the nearly $20-billion bond issue approved by voters in November.

Los Angeles voters, they argued, believed a portion of the bond money would go toward widening one of the nation's most congested traffic corridors: the 405 Freeway between the Westside and the northern San Fernando Valley.

Caltrans officials declined to provide specifics about the potentially affected properties, saying they were still unsure how much private property would be needed. But those who have been briefed on the five proposals under review shared some of the details. Community meetings are slated for later this month.

"No one likes to give up property," said Doug Failing, who heads Caltrans' Los Angeles-area district. "We recognize it's an inconvenience but it has to happen … for the greater public good."

At worst, 30 multimilliondollar homes, including several housing multiple families, would be razed to widen less than a mile of the southbound freeway to meet federal highway standards. Eleven-foot-wide lanes would be expanded to 12 feet.

Under that proposal, residential and other properties on Church Lane, a short street on the freeway's west side, would be razed — including Village Church of Westwood Lutheran.

Caltrans officials also are considering whether their plans would require demolishing a couple of two-story office buildings near the freeway, including one leased by Verizon.

Miller, whose group opposes such widespread demolition, compared the potential devastation from that plan, known as Caltrans' Alternative 3, with what might be caused by "a nuclear attack" south of Mulholland Drive.

"Alternative 3 would be horrendous and destructive of the neighborhood and not accomplish anything," he said, noting that the southbound carpool lane was added just a few years ago.

At that time, Caltrans received a federal exemption to reduce the lanes to 11 feet wide to make room for the sixth lane dedicated to carpoolers. Back then, residents also opposed taking so many homes for the freeway expansion, so Caltrans sought the exemption.

"Why should you widen it?" asked attorney Jason D. Kogan, who leads the transportation committee of the Brentwood Glen Assn., whose members would be most affected by the addition of the extra foot to each of the six lanes.

The primary advantage would be that Caltrans could raise the speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph. But many commuters doubt they would ever be able to travel that corridor at such speeds.

More significantly, the plans recommend building a northbound carpool lane and improving several freeway ramps, including those at Sunset and Wilshire boulevards. Currently, commuters who rideshare get the advantage of a carpool lane in just one direction, heading south.

Transportation officials expect that adding the northbound carpool lane would encourage more solo drivers to double up on their daily commutes. Caltrans estimates that carpool lanes save motorists about a minute per mile traveled.

Once completed, as early as 2012, carpool lanes would be uninterrupted on the 405 Freeway north from Irvine to the San Fernando Valley.

To reduce the number of private properties that may have to be taken, Caltrans officials may close freeway ramps at Montana Avenue in Westwood, Moraga Drive in Bel-Air Estates and Valley Vista Boulevard in Sherman Oaks. Homeowners would prefer to keep the Montana ramp open but are willing to compromise to save homes.

"We are not going to go to the mat on Montana," Kogan said. "The more important thing is preventing the widening of the freeway going south."

Other options include building an elevated carpool lane over the existing freeway or building an elevated carpool lane with space to later add a light-rail commuter train on the bridge.

There also is the standard no-build option — which elected officials and homeowners say is no option at all.

Richard Close, president of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn., said the new carpool lane was essential to relieve freeway congestion in a region that was "strangling with traffic."

"Our goal is to make sure there is a minimal impact in Sherman Oaks," he said. "However, this is a major transportation problem in Sherman Oaks that affects all residents of Sherman Oaks, the San Fernando Valley as well as the Westside.

"We are not going to be NIMBYs on this," he added.

Elected officials, including Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, have pledged to protect as many properties as possible while adding the lane.

Caltrans should select whichever option affects the fewest residents, he said. "It's very difficult [to demolish a property] if there is a reasonable alternative to taking someone's home."

Community meetings are set for March 20 at Westwood Recreation Center, 1350 Sepulveda Blvd., Los Angeles; and March 21 at Valley Beth Shalom Synagogue, 15739 Ventura Blvd., Encino. Both will be from 5 to 8 p.m.

Fern~Fern*

March 6th, 2007, 05:08 AM

YES.... Carpool lanes to the rescue!!!!

klamedia

March 6th, 2007, 08:28 AM

With state funds now in hand, transportation officials are dusting off plans to widen the San Diego Freeway through the Sepulveda Pass, a $950-million project that could level homes and businesses in some of the region's most affluent neighborhoods.

Homeowners and local officials are urging Caltrans to take as few properties as needed to fill the 10-mile gap in the highoccupancy-vehicle lane. A decision is expected to be made this summer.

"We know there has to be an HOV lane," said Milton Miller, chairman of the transportation committee of the Bel-Air Assn. "We are not opposing it."
"No one likes to give up property," said Doug Failing, who heads Caltrans' Los Angeles-area district. "We recognize it's an inconvenience but it has to happen … for the greater public good."

At worst, 30 multimilliondollar homes, including several housing multiple families, would be razed to widen less than a mile of the southbound freeway to meet federal highway standards. Eleven-foot-wide lanes would be expanded to 12 feet.

There also is the standard no-build option — which elected officials and homeowners say is no option at all.

Synagogue, 15739 Ventura Blvd., Encino. Both will be from 5 to 8 p.m.

What outcry their would be if a subway had to take 30 homes and some businesses for the greater good!
$950 million could fund an entire light rail line not just one measly in one direction car pool lane.
And you think their is no bias really a conspiracy against rail? Those same homeowners in Bel Air of all places would be out with torches and pitchforks in hand if their was talk of a subway coming through their neighborhood. Why? Because good mass transit levels the playing field baby!
When the transit dollars finally come through from this bond, the day after they better be out on Wilshire at Western with shovel and hoe in hand!

kidA

March 6th, 2007, 09:25 AM

I took a bus from Sepulveda/Ventura to the Universal City red line station [boy was it full], got off at Hollywood/Vine, walked to Amoeba, took the 2 to La Brea/Sunset, got off on Venice and took the 333 to my home in Mar Vista.

I love riding public transportation.

klamedia

March 6th, 2007, 06:47 PM

Eventhough convaluted, wouldn't it had just been easier taking the Red, Blue and Green to Aviation. Then taking either the SM rapid or big blue up Lincoln?

godblessbotox

March 6th, 2007, 09:37 PM

day passes are the shit

klamedia

March 7th, 2007, 04:58 AM

At just $3.00......They're really are going to have to raise the fares, that's insane!

phattonez

March 7th, 2007, 04:59 AM

Even at $4.00 it's a great deal, and it would increase revenue greatly.

klamedia

March 7th, 2007, 05:01 AM

Agreed.

saiholmes

March 7th, 2007, 05:29 AM

Those bonds are statewide.

godblessbotox

March 7th, 2007, 07:18 AM

nah... keep it at 3 and enforce tickets on the metro better

Fern~Fern*

March 7th, 2007, 09:34 AM

phattonez

March 7th, 2007, 03:50 PM

nah... keep it at 3 and enforce tickets on the metro better

But that also costs more money . . .

godblessbotox

March 7th, 2007, 05:50 PM

nah, just get some machines/gates like every other transportation group. and you dont have to pay a wage, just initial cost

klamedia

March 7th, 2007, 09:36 PM

Wha??

godblessbotox

March 7th, 2007, 09:42 PM

...whats missing in our fine metro system?

gates and counters at metro stops. its just free flowing and mostly free transit, minus the one day out of the week that there are metro fair enforceres.

if there looking to raise revinue, first thing they should do it seal off the entrences. adding ticket boxes and fences, or plexy glass or anything
http://mikecarano.com/New%20York%20Subway.jpg

CITYofDREAMS

March 7th, 2007, 11:36 PM

day passes are the shit

then buy montly.

Fern~Fern*

March 8th, 2007, 01:05 AM

...whats missing in our fine metro system?

http://mikecarano.com/New%20York%20Subway.jpg

^ A Handicap entrance*

godblessbotox

March 8th, 2007, 01:25 AM

then buy montly.

...not day passes ARE shit.

i said they are THE shit

klamedia

March 9th, 2007, 10:03 PM

^ A Handicap entrance*

Over to the right. I'm not so sure we need all of that. Besides a ticket booth person at every station costs even more money.

godblessbotox

March 10th, 2007, 02:02 AM

just keep the machines. its better then nothing at all

saiholmes

March 10th, 2007, 04:37 AM

Project aims to ease traffic in USC area
Electronic message signs warn motorists of congestion related to games, other events and accidents.
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 9, 2007

The five new changeable message signs around Exposition Park should remind Robert Nubine to take a different route to work when USC's football team is playing at the Coliseum.

The signs, part of an $11-million area traffic relief project, are designed to alert motorists immediately to auto accidents, street detours and major events that might worsen commutes.

"It's a foreshadowing kind of thing," said Nubine, 19, a supervisor at a nearby Starbucks. The signs will let him know to go another way or at least call his boss to say he'll be late.

Even when the signs aren't illuminated, motorists still could notice better traffic flow around the USC campus and adjacent museum complex, an area that city officials concede has lagged behind other sections of Los Angeles in traffic enhancements.

As part of a larger traffic relief project, eight more surveillance cameras have been installed and 176 traffic lights synchronized within the 5.3-mile area. The upgrade is estimated to increase travel speeds up to a third, for example, from 15 mph to 20 mph, while reducing travel times by a quarter.

On Thursday, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa switched on the message board above Vermont Avenue near Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. It read: "Expo Park In Sync!"

"This light-sync project, together with the construction of the Exposition [light-rail] Line, will fundamentally transform the way traffic flows in South Los Angeles," Villaraigosa said at a news conference, as he was surrounded by workers from the city's Department of Transportation.

Similar improvements, including light synchronization and changeable signs, are slated for streets in Mid-Wilshire and around Los Angeles International Airport later this year.

To synchronize all of its 4,300 traffic signals, Los Angeles still needs $130 million, an amount that Villaraigosa and others think they can get from the nearly $20-billion state transportation bond approved by voters in November.

Councilwoman Wendy Greuel, chairwoman of the city's Transportation Committee, called the street timing improvements "one small piece in the much larger puzzle required to get traffic moving in Los Angeles."

She and other city officials are pushing for smaller upgrades, such as installing more left turn signals, in an effort to ease congestion on city streets.

One of the most visible new signs will warn motorists exiting the southbound Harbor Freeway on Hill Street of the traffic conditions for ballgames, concerts and other special events.

Similar signs are at Vermont Avenue and Jefferson Boulevard; Vermont and Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard; Hoover Street and Martin Luther King; and Figueroa and 30th streets.

Over the last decade, Los Angeles has installed about 20 changeable message signs in major traffic corridors, beginning with surface streets along the Santa Monica Freeway. They also can be found around Staples Center, on Sunset Boulevard in Hollywood and near the Coliseum.

The signs will be illuminated only when problems exist so as not to distract motorists or diminish their significance.

"If there is a message all the time, when you really need motorists to pay attention, they will ignore the message," said Verej Janoyan, a city senior transportation engineer.

Martha Cristerna could have used real-time traffic messages as she drove a bus full of Malibu students to Exposition Park on Thursday morning. They were more than an hour late.

"We need to get the information right then and there," she said, describing the traffic jams she regularly encounters on Vermont Avenue while driving students to the museums.

Cristerna, who lives in Northridge, didn't bat an eye at the $11-million price tag for the project: "It's definitely worth it."

klamedia

March 12th, 2007, 08:31 AM

Metro rail(Green Line)now has commercial advertisement on it's cars. I only saw one long ad and it was for the 'Mc Donald's Angus Burger'.

phattonez

March 12th, 2007, 03:14 PM

Whatever brings in revenue for new rail construction . . .

Elsongs

March 12th, 2007, 10:41 PM

Whatever brings in revenue for new rail construction . . .

Construction money is not funded by ad revenue or farebox revenue. It's strictly either from one of the following sources:

- A portion of L.A. County Sales Tax revenue
- State Transportation Funds
- State Bond Money
- Federal Transportation Funds

Ad revenue and farebox revenue (which includes sales from passes) go to operations and maintenance. Construction (capital) funds and operational funds are two totally separate things.

phattonez

March 13th, 2007, 02:03 AM

So they're going for this instead of raising rates? . . . I'd rather pay the extra money.

saiholmes

March 13th, 2007, 04:36 AM

Planners work to forestall congestion on I-15
Riverside and San Diego counties take steps to prevent the bottlenecks that growth and a disparity between jobs and housing will cause.
By Dan Weikel, Times Staff Writer
March 12, 2007

Coursing through rugged hills and bedroom communities, Interstate 15 from southwestern Riverside County to northern San Diego County isn't a hard road to travel — at least not yet.

At the county line, the traffic flow is 135,000 vehicles a day, anemic for a major Southern California highway. Unless there is an accident or road construction, the highway is usually free-flowing.

But anxiety grows in both counties about the future of the 44-mile stretch from Lake Elsinore to Escondido. Commuters who shuttle between the cheaper housing in Riverside County and the more abundant job base in San Diego are beginning to report familiar signs — bottlenecks, worsening rush hours, workers leaving early to beat the stampede.

Indeed, regional planners say that by 2030 the corridor could become as bad as the Riverside Freeway, the infamous commuter route that causes more delays than any freeway in the state.

"The potential is certainly there for another 91," said Kevin Viera, a program manager for the Western Riverside Council of Governments. "We are starting to plan now and consider all the options. Hopefully, it won't get bad before we can do something about it."

The warning signs are everywhere. Northern San Diego County and southwestern Riverside County are some of the fastest-growing areas of the state.

Projections are that the area's population will almost double to 1.5 million people by 2030. The number of jobs is expected to double as well, to more than 500,000.

Already, congestion is beginning to snarl traffic through the Temecula area during the evening rush hour, and the number of vehicles is approaching more than 200,000 on some parts of the freeway, more than half the traffic load that squeezes through Orange County's El Toro Y each day.

Planners said they became alarmed about I-15 in 2001 when the number of workers commuting from Riverside County to San Diego County had doubled to about 30,000 in five years.

The surge resulted from a migration of people from northern San Diego County who bought relatively inexpensive housing in Temecula, Murrieta and Moreno Valley in Riverside County but kept their jobs in San Diego County.

"With all the cheap land in southwest Riverside County and all the homes being built, this thing caught everyone off guard," said Escondido City Councilman Ed Gallo, who is a member of the regional planning effort.

The trend has produced a jobs and housing imbalance between Riverside County with its lower-cost homes and northern San Diego County, which is job-rich.

Planners say that many communities in southwestern Riverside County will have less than one job for every household in the years head, while northern San Diego County cities will have 1.6 jobs per household.

This kind of uneven development pattern has plagued commuters throughout Southern California for decades. The most extreme example is shown by the Riverside Freeway, the main corridor between Riverside and Orange counties.

Every workday, almost 285,000 motorists, the vast majority from Riverside County, use the highway to reach jobs in Orange County. They clog the westbound lanes during the morning rush hour and the eastbound lanes in the evening, jamming the road up to 12 hours a day.

To avoid the mess, some commuters pay up to $9.25 for a one-way trip on the 10 miles of toll lanes that run down the middle of the freeway. And even those slow at times.

Caltrans studies show that one eight-mile stretch of the Riverside Freeway through Corona produces more total delay for motorists than any other state highway — the equivalent of 17,202 lost hours per day, or about two years.

In contrast, Interstate 15, which has six to eight lanes between Lake Elsinore and Escondido, is often a wide-open expanse of concrete where freeway speeds are easily maintained.

Lately, the road during the morning rush hour is a straight shot from Lake Elsinore to Escondido, where traffic can slow to a crawl just south of California 78 because of continuing road construction. Motorists say, however, that the evening commute back to Riverside County can get tedious.

Caltrans predicts that the I-15 corridor will exceed its capacity of 175,000 motorists a day between 2015 and 2030. The highway is eventually expected to have more than 250,000 motorists a day, almost as many as the Riverside Freeway now has.

Commuters agree with predictions that the highway could become like its northern neighbor.

"I believe it," said Timothy J. Davis, a surveyor from Moreno Valley who commutes to the San Diego offices of Nolte Associates Inc. three days a week. "I try to get out of San Diego before 3 p.m. After that, it gets bad. The crunch seems to get worse every day."

But Davis does not consider the traffic overwhelming yet. "If [planners] get proactive," he said, "they can probably contain the situation."

Planners hope to do just that with a preemptive strike. They have formed the I-15 Interregional Partnership to assess the traffic situation and find solutions to prevent congestion.

The coalition includes transportation agencies and regional planning organizations such as the Southern California Assn. of Governments, the San Diego Assn. of Governments and the Western Riverside Council of Governments.

They are studying an area that includes parts of Interstate 15, Interstate 215, California 74 and 79 in Riverside County as well as California 76 and 78 in San Diego County. It extends from Lake Elsinore to Escondido.

"We are trying to think way ahead," said Jane Clough-Riquelme, a regional planner for the San Diego Assn. of Governments. "We are looking at the broader region and the connections between people living and working in different areas."

Already, planners have developed a $3.85-billion dollar wish list of projects for the corridor. They include bypasses, major widenings of I-15 and I-215, reversible lanes, bus rapid transit systems and financial incentives to encourage commuters to carpool or form van pools.

Riverside and San Diego county officials hope to use state money and new transportation sales taxes to help pay for transportation improvements.

But there is more than just adding pavement. Planners on both sides of the county line are considering strategies to reduce the jobs and housing imbalance and keep people off I-15.

In Escondido, less expensive high-density housing is already being built along the route of the new Sprinter light rail line that runs to the coast.

Officials hope the developments will attract residents and keep San Diego area workers from moving to Riverside County.

"There are opportunities to provide people different alternatives and different choices," said Susan Baldwin, a regional planner at the San Diego Assn. of Governments.

"Transportation costs are rising. People will want to live closer to work."

In Riverside County's Moreno Valley, city officials hope to build the region's job base with a variety of retail and commercial projects, including a major distribution and corporate center near March Air Reserve Base. Planners say one project could create as many as 15,000 jobs.

But Ron Roberts, a Temecula city councilman and member of the Riverside County Transportation Commission, said building the job base in his city was more complicated than it sounded.

"It's hard to attract employers." Roberts said. "We don't have an airport. We can attract small firms, but not the larger companies. We don't have enough land for warehousing, and we'd like the cleaner businesses."

Roberts is concerned too that San Diego County is not yet on the same page as Riverside County in the planning process. He said Riverside County officials had placed a higher priority than San Diego County on widening I-15 from eight lanes to at least 12.

Gallo said San Diego County planners had been concentrating on developing a bus rapid transit system for Interstate 15 and had not ruled out widening the highway to prevent a bottleneck at the county line.

But Moreno Valley Mayor Charles White, a co-chairman of the planning partnership, said he was optimistic that both counties would resolve their differences.

"There are so many brains working on this," White said, "we should be able to come up with something."

saiholmes

March 13th, 2007, 04:37 AM

Monday, March 12, 2007
Transit line not flying for La Palma
La Palma officials say a proposed system that would get passengers from O.C. to the Antelope Valley in an hour will produce excessive noise in residential areas.
By SERENA MARIA DANIELS

LA PALMA – Imagine commuting from Irvine to the Antelope Valley in an hour.

The ride would be as smooth and quiet as an airliner and hover inches above a magnetic track at 90 mph, sailing along on tracks that go over freeways.

The magnetic-levitation train, or maglev, is in use in Shanghai, China, and deploys vehicles resembling traditional train cars.

The maglev concept has caught the interest of several Los Angeles County cities and one Orange County city. The municipalities' leaders have formed a group in hopes of creating a 108-mile route.

"Transportation is a growing problem in the region," said Albert Perdon, executive director of the Orangeline Development Authority, the organization pushing to build stations for the line as early as 2013.

But La Palma is on the other side.

Here, City Council members have resolved to vote against mass transit proposals along the now-dormant Pacific Electric rail line that runs just inside the city's borders. They fear such development would produce excessive noise in residential neighborhoods.

Last week, the council unanimously adopted a resolution against the proposal. But members Christine Barnes and Henry Charoen pointed out that increased transportation needs should be taken into consideration.

"People think their town is a little island, but we all need to be connected and find solutions," said Barnes, who serves on the Southern California Association of Governments board that oversees regional transportation issues in six Southern California counties.

Mayor Mark Waldman and Councilman Ralph Rodriguez live near the proposed route; the old railroad tracks have been pulled out in at least some spots.

Both agreed that the negative consequences – increased noise and the construction of an intrusive rail line through residential neighborhoods – outweigh having a regional maglev line run through La Palma.

"I do not believe it will benefit the city," Waldman said.

The Orange County Transportation Authority owns the old Pacific Electric route inside the county but so far has no active plans for the property.

Other county cities have taken interest in maglev lines.

Two years ago, Anaheim officials secured some federal funding to someday build a different maglev line running to Las Vegas, with a stop at the Ontario International Airport.

Another proposed maglev line would connect Ontario to Los Angeles.

So far, Los Alamitos is the lone Orange County city that is a member of the group promoting the Irvine-to-Palmdale line that would go through La Palma.

Los Alamitos Councilman Troy Edgar serves as the authority's vice chairman. He will talk later this month to potential investors in New York. He is hoping for more cities to embrace the project.

"Our biggest reason for being a part of this is … to provide leadership, to be part of the solution," Edgar said.

Maglev's biggest foe so far isn't La Palma— it is a relatively empty wallet.

The authority has raised $1.5 million of the projected $19 billion needed. Its leadership intends to get mostly private and some public funding.

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/03/12norangeline_em.gif

godblessbotox

March 13th, 2007, 06:29 AM

1.5 mill, out of 19 billion. i say this is a ways off. does it even work yet?

how would this compare to the plans to put a high speed rail up the west coast?

Fern~Fern*

March 13th, 2007, 06:31 AM

Metro rail(Green Line)now has commercial advertisement on it's cars. I only saw one long ad and it was for the 'Mc Donald's Angus Burger'.

...oh How tacky!!!

:ohno:

phattonez

March 13th, 2007, 06:41 AM

1.5 mill, out of 19 billion. i say this is a ways off. does it even work yet?

how would this compare to the plans to put a high speed rail up the west coast?

From what I can tell on this map, it doesn't look like it would serve as many areas, although Maglev is supposed to be faster and quieter.

godblessbotox

March 13th, 2007, 07:56 AM

so um... then what is this gona do that metrolink does not?

Buildingfrenzy

March 13th, 2007, 08:06 AM

...oh How tacky!!!

:ohno:

I think this is something we probably will be seeing allot. Las Vegas monorail started doing this advertising as well. It seems to be working. See- Las Vegas monorail via wikipedia.

Buildingfrenzy

March 13th, 2007, 08:07 AM

so um... then what is this gona do that metrolink does not?

It's just going to go FASTERRRRRR!!!!:cheers:

Fern~Fern*

March 14th, 2007, 03:14 AM

I think this is something we probably will be seeing allot. Las Vegas monorail started doing this advertising as well. It seems to be working. See- Las Vegas monorail via wikipedia.

VEGAS.... MONORAIL has wraparound advertisement. Which is totally cool!!!

Saiholmes: When was the last time you actually posted non articles...?

godblessbotox

March 14th, 2007, 05:49 AM

^^ha!

klamedia

March 14th, 2007, 06:24 AM

The MTA needs the money, so let them advertise.

godblessbotox

March 14th, 2007, 07:26 AM

wait... who said they should not?

klamedia

March 14th, 2007, 06:19 PM

"Ferney".......

godblessbotox

March 14th, 2007, 07:32 PM

DAMN YOU!!!:bleep:

Fern~Fern*

March 15th, 2007, 04:19 AM

"Ferney".......

WHAT!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said such thing.... :ohno:

phattonez

March 15th, 2007, 04:36 AM

Ferney was one of the few to wholeheartedly support it.

Buildingfrenzy

March 15th, 2007, 04:49 AM

http://www.laist.com/archives/2007/03/14/called_out_for_transit_apathy.php

March 14, 2007
Called Out for Transit Apathy
It's hard to find people as passionate about LA's underrated downtown as some of the folks at LAist, but we have to admit the readers of Los Angeles Downtown News might give us a run for our money in the downtown passion department. In particular a reader by the name of Frederick, who had a "glass half empty" response to the downtown BID's recently published (and very self-congratulating) 2006 Demographic Study of New Downtown Residents and called out his fellow downtowners for bringing a suburban ethos to the center city.

Impossible to dismiss as a rant, the reader made some pretty awesome points about the surprising statistic that 61.4% of downtown residents "very rarely or never" use public transportation, despite having it (quite literally) at their front door:

"Angelenos are stereotyped as being very image conscious, and typically I write that off, but I have to wonder what exactly about the "urban setting" Downtowners prefer to the suburbs (beyond the brick in place of the stucco) if they fail to take advantage of the real resources our urban setting offers. Much of Downtown is a work-in-progress; soon we will have a supermarket; soon we will have a restaurant row; soon we will have L.A. Live; soon we will have the Grand Avenue project; soon we will see ground floor retail. Essentially, soon we will have the things that other parts of the city already offer, albeit in a more "suburban" setting.

The one thing Downtown does have to offer right now that no other part of the city can claim, and the one thing that truly makes it an urban setting as opposed to a suburb with tall buildings, is its undisputed place as the transit hub of Los Angeles. No other place in L.A. can claim to have three Metro Rail lines, all Metrolink commuter lines, 53 local bus routes, 17 limited stop routes, three Rapid routes, 50 express routes, and six DASH routes. If there was ever a place in Los Angeles where a car-free lifestyle could be embraced, Downtown is it.

Posted by Kemp Powers in Downtown | Link |

phattonez

March 15th, 2007, 04:51 AM

61.4% rarely or never use it, but that means 38.6% do use it, and it seems to me that the percentage of people who use it is increasing. This stat should actually be good news.

CarsonCaliBrotha

March 15th, 2007, 09:58 AM

Metro rail(Green Line)now has commercial advertisement on it's cars. I only saw one long ad and it was for the 'Mc Donald's Angus Burger'.

Finally. I always was surprised at how everyone says MTA is going broke and yet all I see are adds saying "Travel smart: Take Metro" in every train. Advertising isn't bad, its realistic. I mean, even if instead of going to the Del Amo Station I have to go to the "Chillis-Del Amo Station" then I'll be fine.

saiholmes

March 17th, 2007, 08:45 PM

Cheviot Hills residents differ on light rail
Homeowners group has blocked efforts to use an adjacent right of way, but some say the Expo Line would be a boon.
By Jeffrey L. Rabin and Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writers
March 17, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2007-03/28461126.gifhttp://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28463866.jpg

For years, a homeowners association in Cheviot Hills has been able to derail plans to put modern-day streetcars on an old railroad line that skirts the upscale Westside neighborhood.

But now, those residents' long opposition to mass transit in their backyard is encountering resistance from neighbors fed up with worsening congestion that has slowed traffic to a crawl.

The debate arises as transportation planners are starting to examine the environmental effects of possible routes for the second phase of the Metro Expo Line. The first phase, now under construction, goes from downtown L.A. to Culver City. The second phase is supposed to go to Santa Monica. The most direct way there is using the former Southern Pacific right of way that borders Cheviot Hills — and that is causing controversy.

Some Westside residents spoke openly of the need to use that corridor at a meeting Thursday night in Cheviot Hills that attracted 325 people.

"It's the shortest, fastest route," said attorney Jonathan Weiss, a member of a newly formed group, Light Rail for Cheviot. "People are afraid for the schools. They are afraid of their property values."

The mere mention of running trains on tracks that carried streetcars to the beach half a century ago arouses intense opposition from the homeowners association.

The group is lobbying hard to make sure the tracks stay south of the Santa Monica Freeway. It wants the trains to travel along Venice and Sepulveda boulevards before returning to the Exposition right of way near the interchange of the Santa Monica and San Diego freeways.

The association's leaders argue that ridership would be higher if the rail line avoided their single-family neighborhood and followed a denser corridor lined with apartment buildings and strip malls.

"Do you think the people who live in Cheviot Hills are going to take this bloody train?" asked Benjamin Cate, a former association president. "No, they are going to get in their cars.

"The people who are going to use this are the people who work in the hotels in Santa Monica, and they are going to come from the Hispanic areas nearer downtown. Now they take the bus."

Emotions ran high outside the meeting, where advocates from both sides set up card tables to sign up new members.

Darrell Clarke, a founding member of the group Friends 4 Expo Transit, took the brunt of the criticism, although his group has not endorsed either route.

A few feet away, another group, Neighbors for Smart Transit, provided those attending the meeting with a "statement of concern." The group, established by a coalition of four Westside homeowners associations, including Cheviot Hills, listed nine reasons for opposing use of the existing right of way, including noise, danger to pedestrians, traffic jams at rail crossings, and loss of property values.

On a separate flier, the group offered more than two dozen questions to ask transit officials about ridership, population density, traffic impacts and costs associated with each of the proposed routes.

The group also recommended that the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, the agency established to build the rail project, consider a third route: along Venice Boulevard to Lincoln Boulevard in Venice rather than going to Santa Monica.

They also want planners to determine how much could be raised if the right of way across Westside neighborhoods were sold and the land developed with single-family homes. They suggest that the money raised could be used to pay for the alternate routes.

After the environmental impact study is completed next year, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board will decide where the tracks will go.

Seven years ago, at the behest of the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Assn., the MTA board voted against using the publicly owned right of way. Instead, it chose to study only the Venice-Sepulveda route.

Cate was president of the association at the time. He said in 2000 that residents were concerned about safety, noise, pollution, and negative impacts on schools and traffic patterns.

Today, attorney Kevin Hughes, the current president of the homeowners association, is more diplomatic.

"We support mass transit. We support rail," he said. "It's just a matter of two things: which route makes the most sense for Phase Two, and building it right."

Peter Paterno, a prominent entertainment attorney, disagrees with his homeowners association. Its opposition to use of the right of way irked him so much, he said he felt compelled to weigh in at the public meeting.

In a letter to the construction authority, Paterno wrote, "In case nobody's noticed, traffic in West Los Angeles is horrible and getting worse. Why wouldn't we support a rail line that's convenient to our neighborhood and makes it easy to get downtown?

"Let's not let the bleating of a few benighted Luddites blow it for the rest of us," he said.

Melissa Kenady, who lives a block and a half from the old railroad tracks in Rancho Park, described herself as a "big supporter of public transit."

But she wants to see the light-rail line on Venice and Sepulveda boulevards.

"I think our community is a great neighborhood," Kenady said, "and those are few and far between in Los Angeles."

She said the Exposition right of way doesn't serve the population that needs mass transit.

Christopher and Michelle La Farg take the opposite side. They would love to hop on a train near their Rancho Park home to get to work in downtown Los Angeles.

"It seems to make the most sense because the right of way is there already," said Christopher La Farg, who works for the Los Angeles Housing Authority. "Why not just utilize that asset?"

godblessbotox

March 18th, 2007, 02:48 AM

what a bunch of ass holes...

"The people who are going to use this are the people who work in the hotels in Santa Monica, and they are going to come from the Hispanic areas nearer downtown. Now they take the bus."

these people should be tagged like peter-asses. give them that little ankle band so that they can never use the metro when we are in full swing. let them rot in there cars

ArchiTennis

March 18th, 2007, 02:54 AM

soup or man

March 18th, 2007, 04:24 AM

Some Expo Line stuff..

Expo Line Trains
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2002%20-%20Expo%20LRT%20Vehicle.jpg

Flower Street looking south
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2004%20-%20Existing%20Flower%20Street%20looking%20south.jpg

Flower Street looking south future
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2005%20-%20Vision%20for%20Flower%20Street%20looking%20south.jpg

Flower Street looking north
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2006%20-%20Existing%20Flower%20Street%20looking%20north.jpg

Flower Street looking north future
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2007%20-%20Vision%20for%20Flower%20Street%20looking%20north.jpg

Exposition Blvd looking west
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2008%20-%20Existing%20Exposition%20Boulevard%20looking%20west.jpg

Exposition Blvd looking west future
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2009%20-%20Vision%20for%20Exposition%20Boulevard%20looking%20west.jpg

Exposition Blvd looking east
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2010%20-%20Existing%20Exposition%20Boulevard%20looking%20east.jpg

Exposition Blvd looking east future
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2011%20-%20Vision%20for%20Exposition%20Boulevard%20looking%20east.jpg

National Blvd looking west
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2012%20-%20Existing%20National%20Boulevard%20looking%20west.jpg

National Blvd looking west future
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2013%20-%20Existing%20National%20Boulevard%20looking%20west.jpg

Fern~Fern*

March 18th, 2007, 04:35 AM

Westsidelife

March 18th, 2007, 06:26 AM

From Flickr, by waltarrrrr:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/113/302406488_0c2c464825_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/102/302406114_49242f813a_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/116/302405719_522813d9f2_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/103/302405277_45cd8a019d_b.jpg

Westsidelife

March 18th, 2007, 06:28 AM

I guess if they get some wrap around advertising we can actually make it work.

:lol: You're joking, right?

klamedia

March 18th, 2007, 06:39 AM

Gorgeous!!! I can't wait for 2009 and 2010!! I love the new Breda cars, they look subway-y!! CC will be transformed ala Pasadena but so will all of the Exposition Corridor! Those few who are opposing the #1 alternative for Expo have a slim to no chance of winning. The ROW already exists, their is now a vocal proponent group for the #1 alternative that are residences of Cheviot Hills and plus the opposition is tacky:
"The people who are going to use this are the people who work in the hotels in Santa Monica, and they are going to come from the Hispanic areas nearer downtown. Now they take the bus."

That statement will be used against them in the coming months. This is no longer the city of the 50's when HandCOCK Park could say that they don't want 'their neighborhood attacked' by those other people. Too bad, too bad 'Shoveitup' Hills.

djm19

March 18th, 2007, 09:58 AM

[QUOTE=Threehundred;12222699]Some Expo Line stuff..

Expo Line Trains
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2002%20-%20Expo%20LRT%20Vehicle.jpg

^ Are you serious- they look very retro for some reason. I was expecting modern high tech trains instead... I guess if they get some wrap around advertising we can actually make it work. On the other hand the stations rock!

These ARE more modern, high tech trains. These are new Breda cars, and they are more spacious than our current trains and they can be used on ALL of the light rail track, so if we get a downtown connector, a train can go from the blue line to the connector, to the gold line without a hitch. Current trains we have cant do that.

Plus they look more subway-car-ish, which is cool. I dont know if they will paint these cars to a different color. Certainly this grey metal look is perfect for the expo line (as its been portrayed so far)

phattonez

March 18th, 2007, 08:21 PM

I thought that all of the rail cars were supposed to be painted grey now so that:

Local Buses: Orange.
Rapid Buses: Red.
Express Buses: Blue
Metrorail: Grey.

LA-dude

March 18th, 2007, 11:53 PM

ok so i wasnt sure where to put this but whatever....

NEED IDEAS!
I live in Downey pretty close to the Lakewood station Green Line and have been thinking about how the city could best utilize this asset. My friend from school is the daughter of the Mayor and so it wouldn't be too hard for me to have a conversation with him especially since we go to the same church as well. What could the mayor/city council do to fully maximize the Light Rail station in our city? I know not many cities can say they have a link to the MTA system so I just was wondering if you guys had any idea on how to approach this.

Some ideas I have so far:
1) Contact The Olson Company(olsonhomes.com) who specialize in small to medium sized TOD's throughout Southern Ca. Inform them of opportunites for development of underutilized land in Downey that is within walking distance of the Green Line.
2) Get the mayor to join the coalition that Ted Leiu has started in the South Bay(expand Green line to LAX) to also convince the State/MTA/whoever provides the funding, to also expand the Green line east to Norwalk Metrolink(it has already been studied) so this way the city has a link to the OC as well.
3)......not much else lol....this is where I need your guys' input...thx in advance:)

godblessbotox

March 19th, 2007, 01:49 AM

^^ahhh!! lime green text again!

give the mayor a hug for me :)

solongfullerton

March 19th, 2007, 03:17 AM

I didn't get a pic, but I was near the 3rd st. promenade today and I saw one of those articulated busses that are usually only used for route 720 on Wilshire, that was painted in the local bus colors (orange and grey). It was traveling on Wilshire, so I figured it was a route 20 bus. Has anyone else seen this?

Fern~Fern*

March 19th, 2007, 03:34 AM

^ If your referring to the slinky rapid buses, yes I have. I see them on Vermont, Western back to back. Usually full to capacity I must say.

Fern~Fern*

March 19th, 2007, 03:37 AM

These ARE more modern, high tech trains. These are new Breda cars, and they are more spacious than our current trains and they can be used on ALL of the light rail track, so if we get a downtown connector, a train can go from the blue line to the connector, to the gold line without a hitch. Current trains we have cant do that.

Plus they look more subway-car-ish, which is cool. I dont know if they will paint these cars to a different color. Certainly this grey metal look is perfect for the expo line (as its been portrayed so far)

^ I would understand if cost was a major factor. So we could only get what we can afford and whatnot. Hopefully that was the case and if not they should fire the decision maker who signed for those particular trains... :ohno:

solongfullerton

March 19th, 2007, 04:01 AM

so there are multiple lines running Local (orange and grey) "slinky busses"? I guess Vermont and Wilshire would be the best streets to run these extra capactiy busses on. Maybe this is happening on Ventura Blvd too.

soup or man

March 19th, 2007, 04:36 AM

I actually saw one of the accorrdian busses way out here in Riverside. Why I don't know.

Ferney...people don't ride LRT because they're looking for first class comfort. The new trains are nice. They are not nor are expected to be airstreams.

Fern~Fern*

March 19th, 2007, 04:44 AM

All I'm saying is what we paid for those retro's Betra. I'm sure there was something similar with a more modern shell, that's all!!!!

Since we are visual people, a newer shell train would be more attractive. Then those non transit riders would be eager to ride the train. If they see this retro train their going to think we bought second hand trains. Not the attitude we want from Angelinos*

soup or man

March 19th, 2007, 04:52 AM

They're going to ride it anyway regardless of what they look like.

Fern~Fern*

March 19th, 2007, 05:05 AM

The regulars for sure.... but if you want to reach out to everyone else. You might grab another hand full that's about it. And yes people are weird if we see something new and attractive curiosity kicks in. So a newer looking fleet is always positive to grab the 3.5 mil of Angelinos tired of the daily bumper to bumper traffic.

Hope you understand my point of view!

ArchiTennis

March 19th, 2007, 06:19 AM

^^ for once i agree with you...i would think that people that are even considering taking LRT would more than likely take it if it were somewhat futuristic looking.

klamedia

March 19th, 2007, 06:55 AM

I don't agree w/ this at all! These are not "old" looking cars, these are "classic" styled cars. To me they harken back to a by-gone period but still look modern enough to look somewhat futuristic, in other words, timeless.

Fern~Fern*

March 19th, 2007, 07:09 AM

... all I'm saying is if there still under Warranty-can we trade the, for something that atleast resembles a Monorail type of train*

saiholmes

March 20th, 2007, 05:31 AM

Plan for Victorville-to-Vegas train gains steam
Transit officials in California and Nevada like the idea of the project proposed by investors, who say the trip would take less than two hours at 125 mph.
By Jonathan Abrams, Times Staff Writer
March 19, 2007

The idea has been kicked around for years — a high-speed train to zip passengers from SoCal to Sin City and then boomerang them back, bypassing the sea of brake lights flooding the highway to and from Las Vegas.

Originally, even the most farfetched scenarios didn't include Victorville — a desert pit-stop for thousands of gamblers en route to Las Vegas — as the starting point for such turgid dreams.

But with plans for a magnetically levitated bullet train between Anaheim and Nevada still on the drawing board after nearly two decades of research, a private group proposing a Victorville-to-Las Vegas train has been gaining some credibility with transportation officials in California and Las Vegas.

"There's still work to be done," said William A. Mosby, a district deputy director for planning and public transportation with the California Department of Transportation. "But Caltrans thinks it's a very realistic proposal. It doesn't look like it's pie-in-the-sky thinking at all. If any of the projects move forward, I think it will be this one."

And with growing frustration over Interstate 15 congestion, escalating gas prices and airport delays, some see a train as the only way a spontaneous weekend Vegas spree from Southern California will be possible in future years.

The plan, pitched by Thomas Stone of the Las Vegas-based DesertXpress Enterprises, calls for electric-diesel hybrid trains to make the 190-mile trip every 20 minutes. The construction wouldn't use federal or state funding; the hope is that investor funds, which have yet to be raised, will cover the estimated $3-billion cost. The train would top out at 125 mph, making the one-way trip in about 1 hour and 45 minutes.

"Millions of people use Interstate 15 to get to Vegas, and it is getting too congested," said Stone, who has worked as a consultant for transit projects in China and the Las Vegas Monorail — which currently faces dire financial straits. "We will have trains to carry that demand every 20 minutes."

Stone and his group are betting that Los Angeles and Orange County residents would be willing to drive to Victorville — about 80 miles from Los Angeles or Anaheim — to hop on the train.

But the Victorville terminus is seen by others as a major drawback.

"That's one of the concerns of ours," said Kent Cooper, Nevada Department of Transportation's assistant director of planning. "Typically, one of the major congested areas is Victorville to the Los Angeles Basin. So in some points, you're avoiding one of the problem areas that need to be addressed."

Another risk is that early estimates have round-trip tickets costing about $110, a price competitive with pre-booked flights from LAX to Las Vegas. But Stone said that his service, which he hopes would lure about 4 million people annually, would cater to those who plan — or rather don't plan — spur-of-the-moment Vegas trips.

Still, the question remains: Why Victorville?

"Victorville is the closest urbanized area to the population base of Southern California," Stone said. "What we are looking for is a project without public tax dollars. There aren't any available for building this in Los Angeles, so we have to come as close as we can to the population center to make the project successful financially."

The move would also avoid the Cajon Pass, the high mountain access between the San Bernardino and San Gabriel ranges that links the high desert and the Los Angeles Basin. By bypassing the pass, billions of dollars would be saved.

Victorville, which has a population of nearly 100,000 and is quickly becoming the economic hub of the high desert, is on board and seeking to use the project as a coming-of-age-event. And, according to studies performed by Stone, between 5 million and 10 million people are within an hour's drive to Victorville, depending on the time of day.

City officials envision Vegas-bound visitors arriving in a 10,000-vehicle parking lot in Victorville to begin their excursion. Check-in and baggage services would be provided, with all the major hotels represented.

"Victorville has flown under the radar for quite a long time," said Bill Webb, the city's development director. "Most people would think Victorville is just a place people go through on their way to Vegas, but we are the powerhouse of the high desert. We are ready and willing to take on all the responsibilities of being a full-fledged city."

Officials hope to break ground next year and have trains operating by 2012.

"If you've ever seen Interstate 15 on a Friday going north to Las Vegas, it's a parking lot," said Victorville Mayor Terry E. Caldwell. "The volume of traffic is unbearable. We look at the impact this will have, and we are seeing all positive."

But the plan clashes with a long-standing proposal for a project that would propel magnetically levitated trains on a cushion of air at speeds of up to 300 mph between Anaheim and Las Vegas. That train could be running by 2015, if taxpayers and private investors foot the estimated $10-billion cost.

Both proposals are in the environmental impact stage. Afterward, they are expected to tussle for investment money, with only one coming out as the winner.

"If you have the choice of a maglev operating at 300 mph versus a 20th-century-technology train that will go at most 125 mph, which one do you think the consumer will choose?" said Neil Cummings, president of the American Maglev Group.

And to add to the mix, Amtrak, which discontinued its financially troubled Desert Wind service between Los Angeles and Las Vegas in 1997, is considering restoring its services.

But for transportation officials such as Nevada's Cooper, it only matters that one of the projects gets built.

"You would characterize us as a supporter of all of them," he said. "There needs to be an alternate way of transportation. If we keep putting all our eggs in one basket, we are setting us up for disaster."

phattonez

March 20th, 2007, 05:56 AM

I'm really against this. I read this today and this is all I got from it.

1. It only goes to Victorville, so there will still be a lot of traffic.
2. It will be run by the same guys who operate the unsuccessful Las Vegas monorail.
3. The line from Anaheim to Las Vegas is faster and serves a better destination.

Fern~Fern*

March 20th, 2007, 06:05 AM

L.A. Union Station--------> Las Vegas Route would be more successful....

PotatoGuy

March 20th, 2007, 06:08 AM

who goes to Victorville? Laaaaaame

phattonez

March 20th, 2007, 06:08 AM

Hehe, of course it would. But imagine if we had the California high speed rail and then this . . . it's a great dream. There are just way too many benefits to this, plus the fact that SoCal will be the birthplace of America's high speed rail system.

PotatoGuy

March 20th, 2007, 06:20 AM

^^ I agree 100%

redspork02

March 22nd, 2007, 07:10 PM

If im already in Victorville, going to Vegas, ill just keep on driving, if it were in San Berdoo, then Maybe....Union Station then hell yeah!!

saiholmes

March 23rd, 2007, 04:26 AM

South Pasadena tunnel plan may advance
The MTA is expected to OK studies on digging 2 routes under the city to connect the 710 and 210 freeways.
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 22, 2007

In an effort to end a decades-old standoff over freeway expansion, Los Angeles County transportation officials are set to take a small but significant step today toward tunneling under South Pasadena to connect the 710 and 210 freeways.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority board is expected to give the go-ahead for preliminary engineering and technical studies for building an underground freeway.

A vocal group of South Pasadena residents opposes any effort to close a 6.2-mile gap in the 710 Freeway between Alhambra and Pasadena, including this one. But the tunnel idea seems to be taking hold in surrounding cities.

"This community, along with every other community in the San Gabriel Valley, is negatively impacted by air pollution, traffic congestion on local streets and lost family time spent idling on freeways every day of the week," the Monterey Park City Council wrote in a letter urging the MTA board to fund the studies.

City council members from Alhambra, El Monte, Monterey Park, Rosemead, San Gabriel, San Marino and South El Monte want the freeway gap closed — any way possible.

An estimated 100,000 cars a day empty onto Alhambra streets near where the 710 Freeway ends at Valley Boulevard.

The state Department of Transportation has been locked in legal battles with South Pasadena and its residents for decades over the proposed demolition of homes to extend the freeway. A few years ago, Caltrans and the MTA joined to examine the feasibility of building tunnels as a possible alternative.

A preliminary study last year found that building twin 4.5-mile tunnels to connect the freeways was physically, environmentally and financially feasible. The project would cost about $3 billion and take nine to 11 years to complete.

Some MTA board members are pushing the proposal forward. But Los Angeles County Supervisor Gloria Molina, who heads the MTA, expressed concern about dumping millions of dollars into studying a project without a firm board commitment to build it.

"I don't want to spent $13 million on studies if we are going to get politically impotent at the end of the day," Molina told her colleagues during a committee meeting last week.

If there is no political will to extend the freeway, Molina advised MTA board members to consider pulling the plug now and spend the money on projects more likely to be built.

Board members John Fasana and Richard Katz, among others, support the tunnel studies. Completing the 710 Freeway would cut traffic in downtown Los Angeles by 20%, Katz said.

Currently, commuters traveling between Long Beach and the San Fernando Valley must go through downtown L.A. or get off the freeway and travel through San Gabriel Valley neighborhoods.

"For 30 years, the tail has wagged the dog on this thing," said Katz, a board appointee of Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. "It is time to bring relief to the rest of the county."

But La Ca–ada Flintridge officials oppose further study of the tunnel idea. And city officials in South Pasadena and Pasadena are wary of the MTA study process. They fear that further review would prematurely commit the agency to building the tunnels.

La Ca–ada Flintridge city leaders question why the MTA would put any money toward a project that, they say, would "worsen traffic for communities in adjacent areas" and adversely affect communities along the 210 Freeway, including La Crescenta and Glendale.

South Pasadena Mayor Philip Putman called the preliminary feasibility study completed last year inadequate. He wants the MTA to define the project's scope, including proposed routes, so it can be properly assessed.

"This analysis has to be done before we go into the environmental study," Putman said.

MTA board members assured him that the engineering and technical studies would not automatically result in a formal environmental review but that the data collected for them could be used in a future environment impact report.

"We anticipate doing a lot of technical work," said Doug Failing, regional director for the state Department of Transportation, the project's lead agency.

The studies would take at least 18 months to complete.

phattonez

March 23rd, 2007, 05:03 AM

A part of me wants this to reduce traffic, especially since it'll give me a better option for getting to Glendale when I'm downtown (currently I have to take the 110 to the 5 to the 2, and the 110 to the 5 transition is horrible). But then again, compared to the price of this, what's the cost of a rail line that goes to Glendale and Burbank. We need politicians that see that this that the benefit is not worth the price. Maybe if it could be built above ground, but not like this.

godblessbotox

March 23rd, 2007, 05:27 AM

ah just close the damn thing to make the 5 a better place. and yes the roads around alhambra and south pass will be much better off.

i dont see how a rail line from burbank to glendale would solve the problum of everyone using the freeways in this area.

not saying i would not like to see it built. but damn... just get this over with

phattonez

March 23rd, 2007, 05:46 AM

i dont see how a rail line from burbank to glendale would solve the problum of everyone using the freeways in this area.

It wouldn't, it's something that would really help me though. I'm just saying that rail expansion is cheaper and more efficient and should be give a priority higher than freeway expansion.

ArchiTennis

March 23rd, 2007, 05:54 AM

Economic Impact Study Finds Trade Moving Through Ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach and the Alameda Corridor Significantly Impact California’s Economy

More Than $62 Billion in Total Trade Value and 886,000 Jobs in California Connected to Southern California Trade Activity

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--A trade impact study released today by the Alameda Corridor Transportation Authority (ACTA) and the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach (collectively known as the San Pedro Bay Ports) underscores the role the nation’s two largest container ports play as critical economic powerhouses and job generators for both the state and national economies.

The San Pedro Bay ports handle more than 40% of the nation’s total containerized cargo import traffic and 24% of the nation’s total exports. This trade volume equates to $256 billion in total national trade in 2005, with $62.5 billion of that trade in California. In addition, the study conservatively estimates that more than 886,000 jobs in California are directly and indirectly related to international trade activities conducted through the San Pedro Bay Ports. International trade moving through the San Pedro Bay Ports also generated more than $6.7 billion in state and local tax revenue benefits. The taxes are generated from sales, motor vehicle and other local taxes attributed to containerized trade and the movement of goods from the Ports.

"Southern California is America’s Gateway to the global economy and plays a central role in sustaining the nation’s prosperity,” said Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. “As container traffic continues to grow, however, we must invest more in our goods movement infrastructure while addressing the environmental and health impacts of our ever-expanding international trade.”

“The study re-affirms the national significance of the San Pedro Ports. These two ports lead the way not only in cargo volumes but also in implementing forward-thinking environmental mitigation strategies that recognize the severe health impacts on our communities of such monumental commerce,” said Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster.

Southern California has become the primary gateway for trade between the U.S. and the Pacific Rim. The centrally located San Pedro Bay Ports have seen dramatic increases in trade volumes since the last study conducted in 2000. This tremendous growth in trade volume is due to the increase in consumer demand in the region and nationally. A majority of the distribution centers that rely solely on the ports to transport toys, clothing, shoes, computers, TVs, furniture and many other goods across the nation are located in the region.

Californians reap many benefits from the goods coming into the state through America’s ports. In addition to receiving a vast array of raw and manufactured goods in the most timely manner possible, the products arriving on the ships – everything from car parts to shoes to avocados to steel – support nearly 900,000 jobs in the state and make it the focal point for logistics, warehousing and transportation activities.

The Southwest Region, which in the study encompasses California, Arizona, Colorado, Nevada and Utah, saw the highest volume of containerized trade in the U.S., handling more than $82 billion of the $256 billion of the trade generated nationally in 2005.

The 20-mile long Alameda Corridor is the first link in the national rail system leading out of the San Pedro Bay Ports, transporting goods to the transcontinental rail system near downtown Los Angeles that will be moved to destinations across the United States. With more than 60% of the cargo arriving at the San Pedro Bay Ports ultimately destined for markets outside of Southern California, the Alameda Corridor has seen 106% growth in cargo movement over the last four years. This means a variety of importers and exporters across the country depend on this corridor of national significance. In 2006, the Alameda Corridor carried 19,924 trains, an average of 55 trains per day. :gasp: This represents a 15% increase over the number of trains which used the Corridor in 2005. In addition, nearly five million TEUs were transported via the Corridor in 2006, a 32% increase from the 3.75 million TEUs moved on the Corridor in 2005. On an average day, the Alameda Corridor carries 14,000 TEUs, more than twice the entire daily volume of cargo that is handled by the Port of Oakland.

The Port of Los Angeles, a non-taxpayer-supported department of the City of Los Angeles, and the Port of Long Beach, a non-taxpayer supported department of the City of Long Beach, are the top two container seaports in America. Together, the ports occupy about 7,400 acres of land, 7,900 acres of water and 78 miles of waterfront in Southern California. With about 60 (combined) terminals serving container, automobile, break bulk, liquid bulk and dry bulk customers, the ports facilitate the flow of goods that sustain the entire nation. In addition to leading the nation in international cargo trade, the San Pedro Bay Ports are dedicated to leading the world in progressive and aggressive environmental programs. In November 2006, at a first-ever joint meeting of the two Harbor Commission Boards, the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan was adopted. This landmark plan, the first in maritime history, outlines a strategy for reducing air emissions at both ports by roughly 50 percent over a five year period.

Buildingfrenzy

March 23rd, 2007, 06:41 AM

Do you know what would be great?
I know! How about we DON'T build this tunnel and build the freeway through those rich peoples homes on principle!!! Heck we have been at this now for almost half a century and thrown so much money at this, why stop now. If they can bulldoze poor Julio, and Shane-qua out of a home, hell I want to see some rich people move too. I would rather us spend billions fighting in court over this than to see them win. I say we wait this shit out. :banana: Listen Rich people suck, This thing they are doing is UN-AMERICAN. This serves a bigger common good. :bash:

phattonez

March 23rd, 2007, 06:59 AM

Silver Lake was able to stop a freeway. My dad lived there and he was recently immigrated from Cuba. He had no money. Caltrans did not build it because the community did not want it. All people have power if they come together, it does not matter if they have money or not (although money does really help).

godblessbotox

March 23rd, 2007, 07:20 AM

..silver lake isnt exactly the ghetto

phattonez

March 23rd, 2007, 07:28 AM

In the 1970's . . . it definately isn't Bel Air either.

CarsonCaliBrotha

March 23rd, 2007, 07:49 AM

..silver lake isnt exactly the ghetto
Its Hipster Central nowadays. Well its one of many out here.

Elsongs

March 23rd, 2007, 11:49 AM

CarsonCaliBrotha

March 23rd, 2007, 03:06 PM

MTA fare hikes: Bound to happen sooner or later

Bus and commuter train fares would go up significantly under hikes proposed Thursday by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

To deal with a projected $1-billion budget deficit, transit officials are proposing a fare increase effective July 1, and a second increase Jan. 1, 2009.

The regular cash fare for bus and rail lines would remain $1.25 until 2009, when it would increase to $2. Day passes would increase from $3 to $5 in July, and to $8 by 2009. The semi-monthly pass would be eliminated, and monthly passes, currently $52, would increase to $75 in July and $120 by January 2009.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/los_angeles_metro/la-me-briefs23.3mar23,1,152033.story?track=rss

godblessbotox

March 23rd, 2007, 05:53 PM

eek... guess it wont be cheaper to ride metro after all...

phattonez

March 24th, 2007, 12:26 AM

It probably will. Gas will be up a lot by then, unless of course we're all driving electric cars by then.

godblessbotox

March 24th, 2007, 12:54 AM

nah, i dont have 1ook for a new tesla

Elsongs

March 24th, 2007, 04:26 AM

The regular cash fare for bus and rail lines would remain $1.25 until 2009, when it would increase to $2. Day passes would increase from $3 to $5 in July, and to $8 by 2009. The semi-monthly pass would be eliminated, and monthly passes, currently $52, would increase to $75 in July and $120 by January 2009.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/los_angeles_metro/la-me-briefs23.3mar23,1,152033.story?track=rss

$120?!?!? That's ridiculous. No one can afford a Metro pass then. I mean, that's a more-than 100% increase in less than two years?!?!? I don't understand it.

ArchiTennis

March 24th, 2007, 04:31 AM

$120?!?!? That's ridiculous. No one can afford a Metro pass then. I mean, that's a more-than 100% increase in less than two years?!?!? I don't understand it.

eh...who needs metro when u can take your car.

kidA

March 24th, 2007, 06:19 AM

I do because I don't drive.

godblessbotox

March 24th, 2007, 07:21 AM

^^dont or cant?

CarsonCaliBrotha

March 24th, 2007, 10:10 AM

eh...who needs metro when u can take your car.

Because gas will be about $6-7 by then most likely?

I agree that $120 isn't exactly a fair price. $78 sounds reasonable, they should keep it that way.

kidA

March 24th, 2007, 10:43 AM

^^dont or cant?

Both. I don't know how to drive.

Fern~Fern*

March 24th, 2007, 07:10 PM

^^ Are you on some kind of medication?

future_trance011

March 24th, 2007, 09:11 PM

$120?!?!? That's ridiculous. No one can afford a Metro pass then. I mean, that's a more-than 100% increase in less than two years?!?!? I don't understand it.

^^
Just when the MTA was gaining more ridership and fans? Geezus!! I wonder who works in the marketing department for the MTA. It's bad enough the MTA doesn't promote itself enough on television commercials or print ads, but this fare increase is counter-productive. Instead of gaining fans, they will be pushing away people who would've abandoned their cars and probably given PT a chance.

future_trance011

March 24th, 2007, 09:22 PM

[QUOTE=Threehundred;12222699]Some Expo Line stuff..

Expo Line Trains
http://www.buildexpo.org/images/Expo%20Image%2002%20-%20Expo%20LRT%20Vehicle.jpg

^ Are you serious- they look very retro for some reason. I was expecting modern high tech trains instead... I guess if they get some wrap around advertising we can actually make it work. On the other hand the stations rock!

^^
I love the new Breda cars! They are modern and high tech trains but the grey color has got to go!! I think the color is what's giving Ferney that retro feeling. Haha!!!.. Maybe if they were painted in a brighter color, I can see the Breda car attracting many new fans to rail transit.

Fern~Fern*

March 24th, 2007, 09:31 PM

^ Yeah something on it is better than gray. I can see them with some flashy wrap around advertisement. I'll bet there's companies out there who would pay top dollar to advertise in L.A. Then the metro bus ticket would not cost $120, that's insane!!!!

klamedia

March 24th, 2007, 10:20 PM

saiholmes

March 24th, 2007, 11:12 PM

MTA fare hike plan is opposed by riders
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 24, 2007

Five months after a federal consent decree expired, Los Angeles County transit officials Friday unveiled a plan that would raise bus and rail fares to cover an expected $100-million deficit.

The proposal, which would push the price of a regular monthly pass as high as $120, has drawn fire from bus rider advocates. They want fares reduced instead.

"There is no middle ground," said Manuel Criollo, a spokesman for the Bus Riders Union, which sued the transit agency the last time it tried to increase fares, in 1994. "Our people cannot afford another cent."

But Roger Snoble, chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said the increase is necessary and, in fact, overdue. "We don't have enough money to pay for what we operate," he said, advocating that passengers pay more of the agency's operating costs. Without an increase, he predicted the deficit could grow to $1.8 billion over the next decade.

Snoble proposed increasing the standard $1.25 cash fare to $2, beginning Jan. 1, 2009.

Day passes, which now cost $3, would increase to $5 in July and to $8 by 2009. Monthly passes, now $52, would cost $75 in July and $120 by January 2009.

A public hearing must be held before the MTA's 13-member board approves any rate hike. A date has not yet been set.

Passengers, on average, pay 58 cents per ride, an MTA calculation based on the larger number of riders who use monthly and other discounted passes. Snoble estimates that next year it will cost $2.50 per ride to operate the buses and trains.

In recent months, ridership has increased, gently boosting revenue, he said. The MTA also is preparing to cut $10 million in services as part of its semiannual service adjustment.

Last year, the transit agency balanced its operating budget by cutting administrative costs and increasing revenue by selling more advertising on buses and in subway stations.

Fares have increased little, if any, since 1994, when the Bus Riders Union sued the MTA to improve bus service. In fact, monthly passes for students in kindergarten through 12th grade are $2 lower today than in 1982, when they cost $22.

Under the federal court order, the agency was limited in how much more it could charge riders. The MTA did not raise fares during that 10-year period. The decree expired in October.

Instead of raising rates, the Bus Riders Union wants transit officials to lower fares to 50 cents to attract more riders. The group also wants $42 monthly passes.

kidA

March 25th, 2007, 12:05 AM

WTF. Yeah make it 50 cents so EVERYONE will ride, but the buses will be packed and uncormfortable. Probably firty and unnsanitary. I'm all for raising rates.

klamedia

March 25th, 2007, 02:05 AM

They have not raised fares in 10 years. Raising fares at this point is a necessity.

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 02:07 AM

How does that compare to the rate of inflation?

kidA

March 25th, 2007, 02:41 AM

:ohno: They have not raised fares in 10 years. Raising fares at this point is a necessity.

And they even lowered the fare 10 cents after the boycott!

Fern~Fern*

March 25th, 2007, 03:12 AM

That's not insane! These are proposals btw. Metro needs to charge more for their fares and push commercial advertising, $1.25 and $3 a day are way too cheap. $5 a day is a fair price and $78 a month is about right. Go look up other Metro fares around the country and you'll see that we had it really easy all of these years.......

^Yeah but were not the rest of the Country there. Here in L.A. we do things differently if you have not noticed. So let's keep it @ Three bucks for a day pass and $1.25 for bus service. We are trying to attract more riders not scare them away, right?

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 07:16 AM

^^Yes, but we can't exactly operate on a billion dollar defecit.

Fern~Fern*

March 25th, 2007, 07:18 AM

A billion dollar deficit.... where are you getting those numbers from?

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 07:27 AM

This is just from memory. I had heard that the MTA had stated that they would be running on this large of a defecit if nothing was done.

Fern~Fern*

March 25th, 2007, 07:31 AM

...figures!

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 07:33 AM

Who knows, maybe it was $1 million, I have really bad short-term memory. But I do know that they don't have enough money to operate at the current rate.

Fern~Fern*

March 25th, 2007, 07:38 AM

Wrap around advertisement should alleviate some of the shortage in funds. Besides what happened to all the previous bond money. I knew I should of voted NO for anymore un~neccessary bonds.

CarsonCaliBrotha

March 25th, 2007, 05:21 PM

I say $78 is a fair increase (no pun intended). They should make one way fares $1.75 and Day Passes $5 is fair. If you guys ever went to NY, fares are like what, $2 for every ride? And theres no day pass there.

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 06:38 PM

I'd like to know about the half cent sales tax that goes to the MTA for constuction. Is that automatically adjusted for inflation or has it remained constant?

klamedia

March 25th, 2007, 06:59 PM

MTA fare hike plan is opposed by ridersBy Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
March 24, 2007

Five months after a federal consent decree expired, Los Angeles County transit officials Friday unveiled a plan that would raise bus and rail fares to cover an expected $100-million deficit.
The proposal, which would push the price of a regular monthly pass as high as $120, has drawn fire from bus rider advocates. They want fares reduced instead.

"There is no middle ground," said Manuel Criollo, a spokesman for the Bus Riders Union, which sued the transit agency the last time it tried to increase fares, in 1994. "Our people cannot afford another cent."

But Roger Snoble, chief executive of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, said the increase is necessary and, in fact, overdue. "We don't have enough money to pay for what we operate," he said, advocating that passengers pay more of the agency's operating costs. Without an increase, he predicted the deficit could grow to $1.8 billion over the next decade.

Snoble proposed increasing the standard $1.25 cash fare to $2, beginning Jan. 1, 2009.

Day passes, which now cost $3, would increase to $5 in July and to $8 by 2009. Monthly passes, now $52, would cost $75 in July and $120 by January 2009.

A public hearing must be held before the MTA's 13-member board approves any rate hike. A date has not yet been set.

Passengers, on average, pay 58 cents per ride, an MTA calculation based on the larger number of riders who use monthly and other discounted passes. Snoble estimates that next year it will cost $2.50 per ride to operate the buses and trains.

In recent months, ridership has increased, gently boosting revenue, he said. The MTA also is preparing to cut $10 million in services as part of its semiannual service adjustment.
Last year, the transit agency balanced its operating budget by cutting administrative costs and increasing revenue by selling more advertising on buses and in subway stations.

Fares have increased little, if any, since 1994, when the Bus Riders Union sued the MTA to improve bus service. In fact, monthly passes for students in kindergarten through 12th grade are $2 lower today than in 1982, when they cost $22.

Under the federal court order, the agency was limited in how much more it could charge riders. The MTA did not raise fares during that 10-year period. The decree expired in October.
Instead of raising rates, the Bus Riders Union wants transit officials to lower fares to 50 cents to attract more riders. The group also wants $42 monthly passes.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jean.guccione@latimes.com

CITYofDREAMS

March 25th, 2007, 07:04 PM

^^ and the funny thing is that really ends up in Silver Lake.

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 08:00 PM

There you go Ferney, $100 million. I was kind of close.

Fern~Fern*

March 25th, 2007, 08:07 PM

..oh save it!

phattonez

March 25th, 2007, 08:09 PM

Haha.

saiholmes

March 28th, 2007, 04:14 AM

O.C. tollway faces many stops before green light
Eight state and federal agencies must weigh in before work can be planned. The project could even be scrapped.
By Dan Weikel, Times Staff Writer
March 26, 2007

During the next three years, the government agency planning a tollway through San Onofre State Beach must clear a thicket of regulatory hurdles before construction can begin.

The Irvine-based Transportation Corridor Agencies needs approvals from at least eight state and federal agencies to build the Foothill South toll road, a 16-mile highway that would cross the northern half of the popular coastal park.

Last month, TCA board members postponed the start of construction for the tollway from 2008 to early 2011 because of the complexity of the permit process.

"The schedule change has brought reality to the situation, but it is disappointing. We need to start construction today," said county Supervisor Bill Campbell, a TCA board member.

Tollway officials must secure permits from the California Coastal Commission, state Department of Fish and Game, Army Corps of Engineers, state water quality regulators, the state Office of Historic Preservation, Federal Highway Administration and the Navy because San Onofre State Beach is on land leased from the Camp Pendleton Marine Corps Base.

Also of importance is a biological opinion that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is preparing. If it finds that the project puts endangered species in jeopardy, it could threaten the proposal.

But the most difficult hurdle to get over might be the state Coastal Commission, which regulates development along the state's vast coastline. Its staff already has expressed serious reservations about the Foothill South.

Deborah Lee, the commission's deputy director, testified at a November 2005 hearing in San Clemente that the proposal violates state law and that commissioners would likely deny a development permit.

Mark Delaplaine, a Coastal Commission staff member analyzing the highway project, says the road threatens campgrounds, watersheds and endangered species, such as the Pacific pocket mouse.

"We have been on the record pretty strongly about the toll road," Delaplaine said.

"It's hard for me to see how they are going to get past the campground and pocket mouse issues. But maybe there are things the TCA can do. I need to remain open-minded."

TCA board members said it was premature for commission staff to comment on the project when they had yet to receive the permit application.

"I'm disappointed that they are going in with the preconceived notion of failure," said Mission Viejo City Councilman Lance MacLean, TCA board vice chairman. "Clearly we want to make this the most environmentally sensitive project we can. The process we have to go through will make the highway better."

The Foothill South would run from Oso Parkway in Rancho Santa Margarita to Interstate 5 at Basilone Road, south of San Clemente. The cost estimate is $875 million.

Supporters say the tollway is needed to accommodate the region's population growth and to reduce traffic on I-5, which is projected to increase 60% by 2025.

The Foothill South will complete the TCA's network of turnpikes, which includes the Eastern, the Foothill and the San Joaquin Hills.

Opponents counter that the six-lane highway would irreparably harm San Onofre, a popular park that contains endangered species, unspoiled watersheds, archeological sites, pleasant campgrounds and world-renowned surf spots.

"It's a bad idea," said Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-Santa Barbara), who unsuccessfully sought legislation last year to stop the tollway.

"I suspect when it gets to the commission, I will look for ways to express my opposition, including testifying."

To help meet federal requirements and to secure permits from the Coastal Commission, the TCA authorized $1.15 million this month to hire legal and planning consultants. Tollway officials hope to submit the application within a year.

Once it is received, the commission's staff will scrutinize the project to determine if it complies with the California Coastal Act and make recommendations to the commission, which must decide whether to grant a development permit.

The process can take years for major projects. There are often lengthy public hearings and discussions between agencies before final requirements are set for a development.

From his initial review of the project, Delaplaine says one key issue is the San Mateo Campground, which was given to the state by Southern California Edison in exchange for the loss of a bluff-top campground to make way for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in the early 1970s.

The campground's 162 sites, amphitheater and bathroom facilities would be 400 feet from the tollway.

"The campground is rare and unusual with links to surfing and other recreation," Delaplaine said.

"There is no place like it between Gaviota [near Santa Barbara] and the Mexican border. The highway will ruin the experience."

Delaplaine said the TCA's plan to build a freeway ramp over the San Mateo Creek marine estuary is inconsistent with the state Coastal Act, which prohibits the sinking of concrete pilings into wetlands.

He also said the tollway would further jeopardize the endangered Pacific pocket mouse, which is on the verge of extinction.

Macie Cleary Milan, the TCA's deputy director of environmental planning, said the agency would lessen the effects on the park with sound walls, landscaping, filters for highway runoff, and precautions to avoid habitats for endangered species. The public, she added, would still be able to enjoy the San Mateo Campground.

But TCA officials say they are worried about the time it will take to go through the approval process. The agency's financial staff estimates that inflation will add $3 million to the cost of the project for every month of delay after the original 2008 start date for construction.

"The longer the wait, the worse the congestion will get on I-5. Pollution will get worse. The waste of time will get worse, and costs will grow," said supervisor and TCA board member Chris Norby.

Norby is also concerned that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has remained neutral on the tollway, which the state parks commission has opposed. "I would like him to come down here and say, 'Let's build it.' His support would help."

Norby and other TCA officials said they were guardedly optimistic about the Coastal Commission.

But if the permit is denied, the tollway agency can appeal to the U.S. Department of Commerce because the park is on federal land.

Such a move might add more uncertainty to the project if a Democrat wins the presidency in the 2008 election. A new secretary of commerce might not look as favorably on the tollway as his or her Republican predecessor. It is something Foothill South opponents are hoping for.

"That is not where we want to be with the Bush administration" in power, said Mark Massara, director of coastal programs for the Sierra Club.

But Jim Thor, a Rancho Santa Margarita councilman and TCA board chairman, said it was hard to guess what would happen if a Democrat is the next president.

Though generally more supportive of environmental protection than Republicans, Democrats might support the tollway because labor unions want the jobs it would create, Thor said.

"Their positions could flip-flop," Thor said. "This is a great project. They need to come down here and walk the area to see the proposal for what it is."

Fern~Fern*

March 28th, 2007, 04:20 AM

....Everyone Boycott these unnecessary Toll Roads!!!! They need to be converted into FWY's at once!!!!

godblessbotox

March 28th, 2007, 07:23 AM

will do!

solongfullerton

March 29th, 2007, 03:32 AM

....Everyone Boycott these unnecessary Toll Roads!!!! They need to be converted into FWY's at once!!!!

Whats is matter to you Ferney? How often are you in the east OC? i guarantee that the opening of those toll lanes would not affect your commute on the westside or in the valley.

saiholmes

March 29th, 2007, 04:24 AM

Leaders in D.C. to pitch L.A.'s wish list
More than 200 regional officials and executives accompany the mayor to lobby for additional federal funding for the region's security, transit.
By Duke Helfand, Times Staff Writer
March 28, 2007

WASHINGTON — More than 200 of the Los Angeles region's top civic and business officials — some of them adversaries back home — kicked off a two-day lobbying blitz in the nation's capital Tuesday to secure more federal money for transportation, education, anti-gang programs and other priorities.

Members of the delegation — led by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce — delivered a unified message to members of Congress: The Los Angeles area powers much of the nation's economy and therefore deserves to reap its fair share of federal dollars.

"Southern California's challenges are America's challenges," Villaraigosa said at a midday news conference next to the Capitol, where he was joined by four members of the City Council, Police Chief William J. Bratton, School Board President Marlene Canter, Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom and others. "It's time to recognize that this is an engine not just for the region or the state but the nation and the world," Villaraigosa added.

The Los Angeles officials — who fanned out to meet with several high-ranking members of Congress, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) — said they didn't expect to come home with dollars in hand but worked to press the region's needs on lawmakers who are distracted by the war in Iraq and other matters.

"Sometimes you get immediate gratification. Other times it's laying the foundation for votes that will take place in a few months," Councilwoman Wendy Greuel said. "We're doing a little bit of both."

During their trip, the officials are focusing much of their attention on what they believe is the need for greater federal investment in transportation and security for the region. They came armed Tuesday with facts and figures about Southern California's contribution to the national economy, noting that 43% of the nation's imported cargo comes through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

The officials also brought along a breakdown, by congressional district, of the value that goods coming through the two Southern California ports add to a region's economy. For example, imported goods traveling through the local port complex contributed $2.2 million in economic activity to Minnesota's 5th Congressional District in 2005, the report said.

The Los Angeles officials called on federal lawmakers to authorize money for rail and transit projects that can speed cargo on roads and railways near the ports. And they urged the lawmakers to support legislation that would allocate money for port and rail security based on risk rather than on population.

Gang violence was another important subject Tuesday.

Villaraigosa, Bratton, Councilwoman Janice Hahn and Chamber of Commerce Chairman David W. Fleming urged lawmakers in one meeting to ensure that Congress passes gang legislation and that Los Angeles receives a significant portion of the money. The delegation also recommended that legislation target not only law enforcement activities but also prevention programs, job training and other efforts to keep young people from joining gangs.

Waters and Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village) were among those who listened to the hometown pitch. Reps. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) also attended the session.

"We have a million things competing for our time, and this helps focus us," Berman said afterward.

In a separate meeting with Kennedy, Villaraigosa and Canter, who have sparred over the mayor's bid to exert authority over the schools, discussed the pending reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind education law. They asked for greater flexibility for local schools and also for the federal government to pay the full cost of reforms. Los Angeles schools Supt. David L. Brewer and Monica Garcia, a school board member, also attended the meeting.

The delegates started Tuesday with a breakfast talk from Sen. Dianne Feinstein. She told the delegation that she supports efforts to pay for more gang prevention programs, as well as transit projects such as the extension of the Gold Line on the Eastside and the Exposition light-rail line on the Westside.

After the talk, the delegates divided into teams covering education, energy and the environment, international trade, small business and goods movement. They fanned out to meet with members of Congress.

Wherever they went on Capitol Hill, the L.A. visitors followed a simple rule: Stay on message.

"We are the ATM machine for the United States, and we're coming here to get refilled," Fleming told the gathering at the breakfast meeting with Feinstein. "We need some of those federal dollars back that we have been putting out year after year after year."

saiholmes

March 29th, 2007, 04:44 AM

March 29, 2007
L.A. SUBCULTURE
Save gas. Avoid traffic. See art. And you're not riding the Metro because ... ?

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668169.jpg

By Chris Lee, Times Staff Writer

TRAVELING by subway in Los Angeles involves a kind of magical thinking. To get the most out of the city's Metro Rail system, you need an open mind but also blind optimism.

It's not simply that Angeleno life has been literally mapped out around cars and that commuting by subway in these parts is viewed as an alternative lifestyle decision even more radical than driving a Prius. It's that to travel beneath a city regularly wracked by earthquakes — even in an era when gas prices have soared above $3 a gallon — demands considerable faith that the Big One isn't going to hit.

Then there's the art.

Since 1989, the Metropolitan Transit Authority has earmarked one-half of 1% of all rail construction costs toward the creation of original, site-specific artwork. So now, from Pasadena to the South Bay, Watts to North Hollywood, the MTA displays a trove of museum-worthy modern art pieces and installations at its Metro Rail stops.

In the daily hustle and flow of millions of straphangers, however, much of it remains hidden in plain sight. Which is a shame, because as public arts initiatives go, Metro Rail's is world class. Put another way, the transit system — as opposed to the places the trains take you — has evolved into a cultural destination in and of itself.

"Most of the folks who take our tours have never been in our system before," says MTA public art officer Jeffrey Mohr. "After that they're surprised that there's art work in there. And from there, they can't believe the scope of it."

Much MTA-sanctioned artwork reflects the Southland's ethnic diversity; stylized images of Mexican American pachucos, Gold Rush-era Chinese laborers and black civil rights demonstrators are linked via underground (and aboveground) railroad. Moreover, the art often provides a meta-narrative commentary about aboveground goings-on.

To wit: Daniel Martinez's "For Your Intellectual Entertainment," a sculpture at the Green Line's El Segundo/Nash station, features a 30-foot-tall wire-mesh hand rising between the tracks, poised to launch a massive "paper airplane" made out of metal — a metaphorical nod to defense and aerospace plants located nearby.

The only thing left to do is ride the rails. For a $3 all-day fare, art appreciators can have an enriching cultural experience that is at once totally L.A. and totally unique in a city where public life and public transportation have never been particularly cherished.

A glimpse of what awaits you.

CIVIC CENTER

They float silently, swayed by gusts of wind from passing trains near the ceiling of this Red Line station — six life-size fiberglass figures that constitute Jonathan Borofsky's installation sculpture "I Dreamed I Could Fly." Arms and legs splayed outward in cowabunga posture, the statues — all of them male, barefoot and clad in jeans and T-shirts — were inspired by the artist's recurring dreams of flight.

They also recall suicide jumpers, however, creating a somewhat jarring juxtaposition viewed alongside the subway.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668171.jpg

7TH STREET / METRO

Descending by escalator from the Hope Street entrance, a ceramic triptych calls attention to the passenger's allegorical journey underground. Titled "Heaven to Earth," by Roberto Gil de Montes, it transposes figurative images that are, by turns, heavenly, earthly and womb-like: a morning glory vine wrapped around a cane, a bird silhouetted by sunset, a lush garden.

Deeper down, a set of seven light boxes created by artist Sam Erenberg line the wall on the westbound platform. Each box features someone holding or contemplating a book — hence the piece's title, "The Complete Works of Roland Barthes." Again, the meta-narrative thing comes into play: It's part of an ongoing temporary installation series in which artist commissions reconsider subway commuters' cherished pastime. No, not the iPod — reading.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668176.jpg

CHINATOWN

Both Chavez Ravine and Chung King Road's pagoda roofs and fluttering paper lanterns are clearly visible from the open-air 33-foot-high platform of the Gold Line's Chinatown station. But then, the red, gold and green station is no slouch in the pagoda department, boasting its own curving pagoda-style roof on the passenger platform — a tribute to the Chinese workers who helped build America's railroads in the 1800s.

At the station, artist Chusien Chang created four benches meant to reflect the changing face of Chinatown's community. But the station's must-see holding is the artist's granite "I Ching" dial. Sixteen feet in diameter, the piece (titled "The Wheels of Change") contains a magnetic compass radiating 64 hexagrams, detailing what the "I Ching" (a 3,000-year-old Chinese philosophical text) puts forth as the 64 states of the human condition.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668159.jpg

HOLLYWOOD / VINE

An altogether more lighthearted, mash-up take on local culture prevails here on the Red Line (Hollywood / Vine boasts the most elaborate installations and highest concentration of art).

Above ground, an elevator entrance resembling a movie theater facade has a marquee that reads, in part, "Gas prices too high? Travel smart … take Metro." And surrounding the subway entrance, concrete bus shelters have been designed to recall various Hollywood cultural touchstones: a brown derby in honor of the yesteryear Tinseltown watering hole of the same name, a stretch lowrider limo and yet another Chinese pagoda — this time in honor of the landmark Grauman's Chinese Theatre nearby on Hollywood Boulevard.

Inside the station, the pachuco-centric work of artist Gilbert "Magu" Lujan evokes a vision of the city that simultaneously celebrates immigrant culture and Hollywood glamour. Hundreds of movie projector reels cover the vaulted ceiling. And 240 hand-painted ceramic tiles line the walls leading from the street to the platform, depicting fedora-wearing Latino characters driving '40s Chevys, eating at a "Comida Chicana" restaurant and wearing sunglasses at night while contemplating the Hollywood sign. Lujan also designed five platform benches resembling lowriders. Perhaps not coincidentally, each has been heavily tagged with graffiti.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668185.jpg

ROSA PARKS/

WILMINGTON/

IMPERIAL STATION

Cropping up throughout two levels of the station where the Blue and Green lines intersect, artist Joesam.'s large-scale installation piece "Hide-N-Seek" functions more like a figural game than a work of art. More than two dozen large-scale technicolor metal cutouts of African American schoolchildren crop up near the top of freeway supporting columns and on the train platform itself. Some of the figures seem to shy away from view, others bound outward in ecstatic action poses. A kind of massive community self-portrait, the piece was created over three years with the help of 1,000 youngsters from the Watts/Willowbrook Boys & Girls Club.

The station's namesake, meanwhile, is honored with an artwork titled "Pathways to Freedom" by Michael Massenburg and Robin Strayhorn that comprises five intricately decorated bus benches — an appropriate tribute for an anti-segregation pioneer who refused to relinquish her seat.

Viewed from afar, they are just a place to sit. Up close, the point becomes clear. The benches' hand-set fragments of concrete and ceramic tile are intermingled with black and white images and headlines taken from the civil rights struggle: "Segregation Hurts Children" and "Negro Owned & Operated: We Shall Overcome" among them.

UNION STATION

The connecting point for the Gold and Red lines is what a military strategist might call a "target rich environment." There are installations galore in addition to the terminal's textbook-worthy Art Deco architecture.

"Atrain" by Bill Bell provides a sensory assault for Metro Rail passengers taking the down escalator. A conceptual piece featuring 12 vertical light-sticks capable of producing an array of colors and patterns, escalator riders are inevitably taken aback by the piece's sound component: a blast of locomotive engine noise.

Nearby is "City of Dreams / River of History," by May Sun, Richard Wyatt and Paul Diez, a bench and fountain fashioned out of bottles, rocks and other detritus excavated during the station's construction.

And in the airy, blond stone lobby, beneath the East Portal's semicircular glass atrium, hangs Richard Wyatt's "Los Angeles City of Dreams" — a humongous mural that comprises portraits of a multi-generational, multicultural cross-section of proud Angelenos.

In a larger sense, the painting is emblematic of the MTA's thinking on its public art offerings. "The artwork can take on different layers," said Jorge Pardo, art and design manager for Metro Creative Services. "We don't just place a painting here and a mural there. It's about having the wherewithal to have a metaphor. We see it as a level of care for our customer. It's about identity."

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668172.jpg

Art tours by rail

The Metropolitan Transit Authority offers docent-led art tours on the first Saturday and Sunday of each month, hitting five or six showcase stations inside two hours. This weekend, tours depart from the Hollywood / Highland station at 10 a.m.

Info: metro.net/about_us/metroart/ma_docent.htmTopOfPage.

Private tours for groups of 15 and more can be arranged by contacting Jeffrey Mohr at (213) 922-2738; or by e-mail, MOHRJ@metro.net.

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-03/28668179.jpg

Fern~Fern*

March 29th, 2007, 06:22 AM

Whats is matter to you Ferney? How often are you in the east OC? i guarantee that the opening of those toll lanes would not affect your commute on the westside or in the valley.

^ Maybe it doesn't have a major impact with my commute. What about if they realize it's a money making scheme and decide to convert all FWY's into Toll Roads. Then it is going to impact me directly and the rest of the car addict Angelinos....

phattonez

March 29th, 2007, 03:52 PM

^^Imagine how well maintained our roads would be.

godblessbotox

March 29th, 2007, 07:24 PM

what the hell happened to union station and universal stations? they both have multiple massive advertisements. all the same covering just about every available inch.

soup or man

March 29th, 2007, 08:18 PM

^ Speaking of which, that Angus burger from McDonalds better be mana from heaven because 7th/Metro station is plastered ALL OVER with ads for that thing. And I don't even like McDonalds.

klamedia

March 29th, 2007, 11:29 PM

^ Maybe it doesn't have a major impact with my commute. What about if they realize it's a money making scheme and decide to convert all FWY's into Toll Roads. Then it is going to impact me directly and the rest of the car addict Angelinos....One way to break the addiction!

godblessbotox

March 30th, 2007, 02:16 AM

what you mean like chopping of a junkies arms?

redspork02

March 30th, 2007, 04:49 AM

Leaders in D.C. to pitch L.A.'s wish list
More than 200 regional officials and executives accompany the mayor to lobby for additional federal funding for the region's security, transit.
By Duke Helfand, Times Staff Writer
March 28, 2007

WASHINGTON — More than 200 of the Los Angeles region's top civic and business officials — some of them adversaries back home — kicked off a two-day lobbying blitz in the nation's capital Tuesday to secure more federal money for transportation, education, anti-gang programs and other priorities.

Members of the delegation — led by Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and the Los Angeles Area Chamber of Commerce — delivered a unified message to members of Congress: The Los Angeles area powers much of the nation's economy and therefore deserves to reap its fair share of federal dollars.

"Southern California's challenges are America's challenges," Villaraigosa said at a midday news conference next to the Capitol, where he was joined by four members of the City Council, Police Chief William J. Bratton, School Board President Marlene Canter, Santa Monica Mayor Richard Bloom and others. "It's time to recognize that this is an engine not just for the region or the state but the nation and the world," Villaraigosa added.

The Los Angeles officials — who fanned out to meet with several high-ranking members of Congress, including Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles) and Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) — said they didn't expect to come home with dollars in hand but worked to press the region's needs on lawmakers who are distracted by the war in Iraq and other matters.

"Sometimes you get immediate gratification. Other times it's laying the foundation for votes that will take place in a few months," Councilwoman Wendy Greuel said. "We're doing a little bit of both."

During their trip, the officials are focusing much of their attention on what they believe is the need for greater federal investment in transportation and security for the region. They came armed Tuesday with facts and figures about Southern California's contribution to the national economy, noting that 43% of the nation's imported cargo comes through the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
The officials also brought along a breakdown, by congressional district, of the value that goods coming through the two Southern California ports add to a region's economy. For example, imported goods traveling through the local port complex contributed $2.2 million in economic activity to Minnesota's 5th Congressional District in 2005, the report said.

The Los Angeles officials called on federal lawmakers to authorize money for rail and transit projects that can speed cargo on roads and railways near the ports. And they urged the lawmakers to support legislation that would allocate money for port and rail security based on risk rather than on population.
Gang violence was another important subject Tuesday.

Villaraigosa, Bratton, Councilwoman Janice Hahn and Chamber of Commerce Chairman David W. Fleming urged lawmakers in one meeting to ensure that Congress passes gang legislation and that Los Angeles receives a significant portion of the money. The delegation also recommended that legislation target not only law enforcement activities but also prevention programs, job training and other efforts to keep young people from joining gangs.

Waters and Rep. Howard L. Berman (D-Valley Village) were among those who listened to the hometown pitch. Reps. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) and Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) also attended the session.

"We have a million things competing for our time, and this helps focus us," Berman said afterward.

In a separate meeting with Kennedy, Villaraigosa and Canter, who have sparred over the mayor's bid to exert authority over the schools, discussed the pending reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind education law. They asked for greater flexibility for local schools and also for the federal government to pay the full cost of reforms. Los Angeles schools Supt. David L. Brewer and Monica Garcia, a school board member, also attended the meeting.

The delegates started Tuesday with a breakfast talk from Sen. Dianne Feinstein. She told the delegation that she supports efforts to pay for more gang prevention programs, as well as transit projects such as the extension of the Gold Line on the Eastside and the Exposition light-rail line on the Westside.
After the talk, the delegates divided into teams covering education, energy and the environment, international trade, small business and goods movement. They fanned out to meet with members of Congress.

Wherever they went on Capitol Hill, the L.A. visitors followed a simple rule: Stay on message.

"We are the ATM machine for the United States, and we're coming here to get refilled," Fleming told the gathering at the breakfast meeting with Feinstein. "We need some of those federal dollars back that we have been putting out year after year after year."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
duke.helfand@latimes.com

godblessbotox

March 30th, 2007, 08:29 AM

hey look at that! foothill transit has got itself some dildo buses too!
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/156/439482368_50b8bd0200_o.jpg

soup or man

March 30th, 2007, 10:21 PM

^ Those things are taking over the planet. At least they're cool looking, quiet, and comfortable.

LAsam

March 31st, 2007, 01:32 AM

^ Is that the Silver Streak?

soup or man

March 31st, 2007, 02:48 AM

^ Yup.

godblessbotox

March 31st, 2007, 04:31 AM

^ Those things are taking over the planet. At least they're cool looking, quiet, and comfortable.

i must admit i was getting a bit envious seeing them stoping by and opening up those limo tint doors to revile the nice comfy looking seats and clean insides.

...then i got on my rickety old 487 metro

klamedia

March 31st, 2007, 10:51 AM

They also have wireless internet service.......I guess it would have to be wireless.

godblessbotox

March 31st, 2007, 07:12 PM

ah but just imagine if it wasn't! a nice shiny new bus with a clean interior.

and CAT5 cables hanging for every inch!

Fern~Fern*

April 1st, 2007, 01:23 AM

^ Is that the Silver Streak?

^ What's that?

phattonez

April 1st, 2007, 01:26 AM

Foothill Transit's version of Metro Rapid.

Fern~Fern*

April 1st, 2007, 03:39 AM

I don't like the livery on those buses. Plain looking and boring....

phattonez

April 1st, 2007, 05:51 AM

Lol, the logo for Silver Streak reminds me of some lame 80's or early 90's movie.

future_trance011

April 3rd, 2007, 12:42 AM

I've seen a lot of those "dildo" busses on the 10 Freeway lately. For some reason they just aren't as polished looking as the MTA Rapid busses. Yes, I have to agree it has soemthing to do with the cheesy looking, dated logo the Foothill Transit uses.

Fern~Fern*

April 3rd, 2007, 05:17 AM

... speaking of the Foot Hill Bus Service, someone told me that when RTD broke and merge with MTA Foot Hill buses took over the SGV so the new MTA would not have access, is that true?

Elsongs

April 3rd, 2007, 06:01 AM

... speaking of the Foot Hill Bus Service, someone told me that when RTD broke and merge with MTA Foot Hill buses took over the SGV so the new MTA would not have access, is that true?

Not true at all. The RTD used to serve most of those lines Foothill serve, but decided to cut them. Foothill Transit was formed so another agency can serve that area so the RTD/MTA doesn't have to.

Back in the day, the RTD used to go as far as San Bernardino. Imagine THAT bus ride!!!

Fern~Fern*

April 3rd, 2007, 06:20 AM

So if the MTA would of blocked The Foot Hill bus from taking over the SGV and beyond. MTA would of been cashing in the $funds$. I wonder why they decided to terminate the routes?

Elsongs

April 3rd, 2007, 07:11 AM

So if the MTA would of blocked The Foot Hill bus from taking over the SGV and beyond. MTA would of been cashing in the $funds$. I wonder why they decided to terminate the routes?

No you still don't get it.
1. It costs a lot of money to run a transit system.
2. The RTD (back then)'s heaviest lines are obviously more of a higher priority than the suburban lines.
3. They cut the SGV lines off so they can concentrate their budget more on Los Angeles (including Westside and the Valley).
4. People still needed transit service in the SGV
5. Foothill Transit was created to be the transit service for the SGV.

Foothill runs their buses differently than RTD/MTA does. The bus drivers for the MTA work for the MTA. But the bus drivers for Foothill work for another company that's being contracted by Foothill to operate the buses. They are paid less than MTA drivers, so that's how Foothill can run a transit system for less money.

In addition to running a transit system, the MTA receives and distributes all transportation funds in Los Angeles county. So part of their job is to also give the smaller transit agencies some funds. In a way, Foothill, Santa Monica Big Blue Bus, Torrance Transit, etc are all part of the MTA. They just have their own budgets and administer their own routes.

phattonez

April 3rd, 2007, 07:43 AM

^^But there are Metro buses that run in Pomona . . . ?

Fern~Fern*

April 3rd, 2007, 08:20 AM

^^ No your wrong Pomona/Montclair would be service by Foothill...

Fern~Fern*

April 3rd, 2007, 08:24 AM

[QUOTE=Elsongs;12477107
Foothill runs their buses differently than RTD/MTA does. The bus drivers for the MTA work for the MTA. But the bus drivers for Foothill work for another company that's being contracted by Foothill to operate the buses. They are paid less than MTA drivers, so that's how Foothill can run a transit system for less money.

In addition to running a transit system, the MTA receives and distributes all transportation funds in Los Angeles county. So part of their job is to also give the smaller transit agencies some funds. In a way, Foothill, Santa Monica Big Blue Bus, Torrance Transit, etc are all part of the MTA. They just have their own budgets and administer their own routes.[/QUOTE]

^^ Yeah your right, so much confusion so thank God for the bus riders union who know how to deal with this.

Lastly, I could of swore I never really heard of the Foothill Bus Srvs till not sooo long ago. Was it because they never travel to L.A. city or had a different livery?

saiholmes

April 3rd, 2007, 08:52 AM

OCTA to push for carpool rule change
The agency wants the successful program — allowing drivers to go in and out of the lanes at will — extended countywide.
By David Reyes, Times Staff Writer
8:45 PM PDT, April 2, 2007

An experimental program that allows motorists to pull in and out of carpool lanes as they wish has been such a success that the practice should be allowed on all Orange County freeways, a transportation committee recommended Monday.

Motorists carrying at least one passenger have been permitted to enter and exit carpool lanes without restriction since late last year on a renovated stretch of the Garden Grove Freeway in a first-of-its-kind demonstration project in Southern California.

The idea is to expand that program to other freeways, said Carolyn Cavecche, Orange County Transportation Authority chairwoman. She was part of a planning committee that recommended the conversion Monday. OCTA's full board will consider the recommendation Monday. The California Department of Transportation must also sign off on the idea.

As chairwoman, Cavecche has given a high priority this year to improvements to the 22 Freeway, now in the final stages of a $550-million renovation, and changes governing carpool lanes.

"I want you to know that I'm very, very serious about this," Cavecche told Caltrans and OCTA officials who appeared before the committee.

In many ways, the action demonstrates the growing strength of local transportation agencies such as OCTA and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority to shape decisions to fit transit needs in their jurisdictions.

Initially, Caltrans balked at the plan of adding a lane to the 22 Freeway that carpoolers could enter and exit at will. Typically, drivers can pull into or out of the lanes only at stretches marked by broken lines.

The agency changed its mind after it was criticized by the OCTA board for dragging its feet on innovative ideas. Supporters say drivers should be able to move freely in and out of carpool lanes so they can carefully move over in traffic to make their exits. Critics, however, say that it could cause more accidents when slow drivers move into a fast-moving carpool lane.

The open carpool lanes are already in use in the Bay Area and Sacramento.

At board meetings, Caltrans officials said they would allow the proposed conversion by calling it a demonstration project, and only if OCTA added cameras and paid for monitoring and any increased police enforcement.

In February, OCTA board members were told that the local Caltrans district would be given greater authority by its Sacramento office over the county's 244-mile carpool system. But the agency was sluggish returning to the board with its recommendations, the board said.

"I share the frustration with Orange County motorists that this was supposed to have a quicker start," Cavecche said.

The agency has been considering highway safety issues such as carpool lane ramps, approaches and carpool transitions at both county borders, James Pinheiro, Caltrans deputy district director, told the committee.

"We want to avoid setting up different options for motorists that might be confusing," he said. "We don't want people merging into each other."

So far, there have not been major problems with the new carpool lane on the 22 Freeway, the California Highway Patrol said.

But carpool lane users don't have a lot of room to maneuver in case of emergency, said Officer Stacy Willits of the CHP's Westminster office.

"You have the wall on one side and cars on the other," she said. "When things go bad in the carpool lane, they go bad fast."

Under Monday's recommendation, OCTA and Caltrans would begin implementing the first carpool conversions for the San Diego, Riverside and Orange freeways. More complex conversions for other freeways will come later, Pinheiro said.

Both agencies still need to find funding and schedule the projects. In addition, the proposed conversions must be approved by federal environment and highway agencies and the state air quality district.

phattonez

April 3rd, 2007, 04:27 PM

^^ No your wrong Pomona/Montclair would be service by Foothill...

Then why are Metro buses running out there?

godblessbotox

April 3rd, 2007, 07:17 PM

anyone have a map of the mta zones?

i keep having to pay zone change fair and i want to cheat it

ArchiTennis

April 3rd, 2007, 07:24 PM

End of Line for Public Input Brings Light Rail Controversy

By Olin Ericksen
Staff`Writer

April 2 – Facing a deadline for public comment Monday, West Los Angeles homeowners have been working to reroute a light rail line slated to end in Santa Monica, where City officials have pumped $35 million in the hopes their beachside city will be the final stop.

Council members registered their strong disapproval last month for a route proposed by some Cheviot Hills residents :banana: at a packed meeting March 15 that would follow Venice Boulevard and skip Santa Monica altogether,:nuts: despite years of planning and lobbying by City officials.

Of the three paths being considered by the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority, the agency established to link a light rail line from Downtown Los Angeles to the beach by 2015, the other two would end in Santa Monica.

"I think it's important we have the most direct route to Santa Monica and that we would oppose any realignment that would take this outside Santa Monica to take it to a different destination," said Council member Pam O'Connor, the first vice chair of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.

The comments March 20 came nearly two years after newly elected Los Angeles City Council member Bill Rosendahl suggested that there may have been a political tussle brewing over where the light rail should end.

While Rosendahl, who represents the 11th District on LA’s Westside, later assured Santa Monica officials that he backed making their city the end of the line, local officials are facing opposition from some Cheviot Hills homeowners, who must meet a Monday deadline to submit written comments.

Homeowners fear that using the former Southern Pacific right of way that borders Cheviot Hills – the most direct route for the proposed line – will make traffic worse, bring crime and graffiti, endanger schools and lead to declining property values.

To counter, the proposal, City officials are making it clear where they stand.

"City staff will. . . note that an alternative that does not serve Santa Monica will be completely unacceptable," :banana: read the City staff report.

Just what route will be chosen for the second and final leg of the light rail line from Downtown Los Angeles, which is estimated to cost $800 million, could be finalized in the next few months. The first leg to Culver City is currently under construction.

In addition to opposing the proposal that bypasses Santa Monica, council members at the March 20 meeting supported the most direct path into their city, following an existing right-of-way along Exposition Boulevard.

The other proposed route to Santa Monica would add approximately one mile of track along Sepulveda Boulevard and Venice Boulevard, before linking back up at Exposition Boulevard near the 405 Freeway and coming into Santa Monica.

Some residents in the Cheviot Hills Homeowners Association have pushed hard and publicly for the longer route -- expected to span 7.8 miles -- to have the rail bypass their neighborhood. Other Cheviot Hills residents have expressed support for the shorter 6.9- mile route.

In addition to making recommendations on the path, Council members last month adopted a Planning Commission proposal that asks Construction Authorities to consider adding a third Santa Monica station near Santa Monica College on 17th Street on the public right of way, running parallel to Olympic Boulevard

The station would serve “Santa Monica College to the south, UCLA hospital to the north, a lot of businesses, and a lot of high-density apartments that are in that Mid-city area that would be in close range," Planning Commissioner Daryl Clarke told the council.

Currently, four possible Santa Monica sites are being considered for the project, according to maps unveiled at a March 6 public meeting.

However, transit officials have said fewer stops would keep ridership high and the line a success.

Currently two stations are likely under consideration -- Bergamot Station and a site on Colorado and Fourth Street, the proposed light rail terminus, where the City recently purchased a building from Sears for $35 million.

spoonman11

April 4th, 2007, 12:58 AM

The carpool story just sounds like another way to screw non-carpoolers to me. If there was really a push to make traffic flow better, Orange County would allow all motorists to use the existing carpool freeway-to-freeway connectors. Having two sets of freeway-to-freeway connectors would make a world of difference in traffic flow at interchanges. Fast moving traffic could use the one on the left, slow traffic and trucks could use the one on the right. Nobody would have to get over more than two lanes.

redspork02

April 4th, 2007, 03:40 PM

ACtually, The Idea of ending the Expo in Venice isnt such a bad idea, That way we all have a direct route to that District. ---The Purple line, HAS TO end in Santa Monica That is a given! Then Connect all the Seaside cities with an extended Green Line

phattonez

April 4th, 2007, 03:59 PM

^^Expo should go to Santa Monica, but that should be a possiblity for a spur.

klamedia

April 4th, 2007, 07:20 PM

Or just a future Venice Line. Besides Rosendahl's Green Line up Lincoln would serve Venice.

LAsam

April 4th, 2007, 09:41 PM

Or just a future Venice Line. Besides Rosendahl's Green Line up Lincoln would serve Venice.

Ding ding ding! You hit the nail on the head :)

saiholmes

April 5th, 2007, 04:09 AM

Wednesday, April 4, 2007
California lawmaker aboard as French train sets speed record
Two O.C. Assembly members were meeting with transportation minister while colleague took ride.
The Associated Press

SACRAMENTO – A California lawmaker got a firsthand look Tuesday at the potential of high-speed rail as a double-decker train raced through the French countryside at a record 356 mph.

Assemblywoman Fiona Ma said she was the only American on board when a train operated by the French high-speed rail system surpassed the previous mark for conventional rail of 320.2 mph, which was set in 1990 by another French train. A magnetically levitated Japanese train holds the ultimate speed record of 361 mph.

Ma said the approximately 15 minute-ride was "pretty amazing."

"It felt like we were ready to take off on the runway in a plane," the San Francisco Democrat said in a telephone interview. "That steady acceleration ... feeling and force."

Ma is part of a delegation of a half dozen lawmakers who are in France this week, in part to examine the French high-speed rail system as California considers building a 700-mile system of its own to carry passengers at speeds of more than 200 mph.

Ma said she ended up on the record-setting run after the legislators met Monday with representatives of Alstom, a company that makes trains for the French high-speed rail system, TGV.

She said company officials were "all excited about setting the world speed record" and offered to take a member of the California delegation on the ride. "I kind of chimed up and said it would be great to be on there. ... I jumped at the chance," Ma said.

While she was on the record-setting ride, the other lawmakers -- Assembly Speaker Fabian Nunez, D-Los Angeles, and Assemblymen John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, Joe Coto, D-San Jose, Michael Duvall, R-Yorba Linda, and Bob Huff, R-Diamond Bar -- had a meeting with the French transportation minister, Ma said.

Ma's experience was probably more memorable.

"It's something that is going to go down in my history book," she said. "How many times does one have an opportunity to do that, to be part of history?"

She said the ride made her even more convinced that California needs to develop high-speed rail, which has been in the planning stages for more than 10 years.

A nearly $10 billion bond measure that would help pay for a high-speed rail line between Los Angeles and the San Francisco area will be on California's 2008 November ballot. Plans also call for links to Sacramento and San Diego.

But a vote on the bond measure has been delayed twice already, and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger wants lawmakers to bump it from the 2008 ballot.

Ma said she and other high-speed rail supporters hope to persuade Schwarzenegger to support the 2008 vote and to increase funding in his proposed budget to allow the state's high-speed rail board to do engineering work and begin buying right of way for the bullet trains in the next fiscal year.

"Our highways are congested," Ma said. "We're not going to be able to put more runways at our airports. The only way to move people around efficiently and effectively is a high-speed rail system like we have in Europe."

A spokeswoman for Schwarzenegger, Sabrina Lockhart, said the Republican governor has other priorities for state bonds, including prisons and flood control, but is willing to consider other ways to pay for high-speed rail, such as private financing.

"The governor understands the state has limited ability to borrow money at this time," she said.

As far as boosting his budget proposals for the 2007-08 fiscal year for high-speed rail, Lockhart said the governor was "always willing to work with the Legislature to achieve budget solutions."

Fern~Fern*

April 5th, 2007, 04:43 AM

Then why are Metro buses running out there?

^ They must be charter buses....

phattonez

April 5th, 2007, 06:17 AM

^^They rent out some of their buses? It's strange because this is an area that a charter bus would go in, and I see them there all the time.

Fern~Fern*

April 5th, 2007, 07:19 AM

^ Well of course....

phattonez

April 5th, 2007, 07:48 AM

Whoops, I meant would NOT go in.

Elsongs

April 5th, 2007, 10:23 AM

^^ Yeah your right, so much confusion so thank God for the bus riders union who know how to deal with this.

No, the Bus Riders union is EVIL. E-V-I-L. They do not support better transit, they have a mis-guided political agenda bent on class warfare.

They are also hypocrites to the highest degree, claiming to advocate for working-class, low-income immigrants, when in fact they are duping them, force-feeding their beliefs on them and shamelessly exploiting them.

saiholmes

April 6th, 2007, 04:41 AM

Thursday, April 5, 2007
Rubber hits road on I-5 widening in L.A.
Officials announce that $1.2 billion funding is in place.
By ERIC CARPENTER and SERENA MARIA DANIELS

NORWALK – Help is headed up the road for one of the region's most notorious stretches of freeway.

Transportation officials announced Thursday that full funding – $1.2 billion – has been secured to widen the Santa Ana (I-5) Freeway at the gateway between Orange and Los Angeles counties, from the county line in Buena Park north to the San Gabriel River (605) Freeway.

Construction on the 6.4-mile stretch is to begin in 2009 and will take about seven years to finish.

City, county and state officials gathered Thursday at the side of the 5 freeway in Norwalk to jointly announce the funding and celebrate that the project, finally, is moving forward.

"A lot of people are now living in L.A. and working in Orange County, so (the road improvement) is important for jobs and commerce," said Art Leahy, Orange County Transportation Authority's top administrator.

The stretch of freeway is a major source of headaches for motorists traveling north into Los Angeles, as traffic often jams. The new project will make the freeway five lanes in each direction, up from three.

In Orange County, billions of dollars have been spent to widen the 5 freeway to as many as 12 lanes from Dana Point to its northern border. A $314 million widening project, from the Riverside (91) Freeway to the Los Angeles County line, is underway.

Meanwhile, Los Angeles County has focused much of its transportation funds on light rail and other mass transit.

“It's fantastic that the work we've done in Orange County seems to have finally made L.A. County focus on the problem,” said Art Brown, a Buena Park councilman and member of the OCTA board.

“We've had a traffic bottleneck in our city for more than 15 years and, hopefully, we'll soon see an end to that.”

As of last fall, the $1.2 billion proposal had stalled because it was almost $400 million short. But California voters in November approved a bond measure, Prop. 1B, which contributed $387 million, allowing the project to push ahead.

In a region already packed with roads and housing, the widening project comes at a price for some residents.

In Norwalk – a working-class town incorporated in 1957 about 20 miles southeast of downtown L.A. – 21 homes must be razed to make way for the wider freeway.

Five homes have already been bulldozed. Remaining residents said they must vacate by November. The neighborhood of single-story homes built in the 1950s – the same era the original freeway was built – stands near the parking lot where Thursday's announcement came.

Daniel Rojas, 53, is among the residents who will be displaced, in his case, from the neighborhood he grew up in with 10 siblings near Firestone Boulevard and Dinard Avenue. He said the $435,000 offer for his house is inadequate and fails to account for improvements that have been made over the years.

“I don't want to move,'' said Rojas, 53. “I've lived here my whole life.”

Cities and transportation agencies often use eminent-domain proceedings to seize land for road-widening projects, saying it's for the greater public good.

Motorists who commute into L.A. can expect to see gradual improvement between now and 2016. Orange County is completing the first year of a four-year widening project between the 91 and county line.

In Buena Park, the Western Avenue bridge over the 5 freeway was demolished in November. The Stanton Avenue and Beach Boulevard bridges will come down next, though some lanes will always remain open on Beach as that bridge is slowly dismantled beginning in spring 2008.

Work on the Orange County side is scheduled for completion in 2010.

Officials say that in both counties, they intend to keep open as many freeway lanes as possible during the daytime.

“They can't widen the 5 fast enough,” said Irene Reyes, who commutes between her home in Orange and a car-parts manufacturing plant in Commerce five days a week. “I hate sitting in traffic, but if you travel from Orange County into L.A., you're just used to it.”

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/04/06freeway_gp.gif

Fern~Fern*

April 6th, 2007, 04:51 AM

^^ :drool: :drool: :drool:

godblessbotox

April 6th, 2007, 05:21 AM

ha, oh well

saiholmes

April 7th, 2007, 04:52 AM

Friday, April 6, 2007
High-speed train inches ahead
Segment of a $40 billion, 700-mile route through the county will undergo study.
By ELLYN PAK

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/04/06highspeedtrain1_md.jpg

A state rail agency this week began moving forward on an extensive study for a high-speed train route that would whisk commuters between Anaheim and Los Angeles.

The California High-Speed Rail Authority is leading the charge for the $21 million analysis to examine the Orange County-to-Los Angeles segment of a $40 billion, 700-mile system that would eventually stretch from the Bay Area to San Diego.

"It really goes into the deeper level of environmental analysis," Darrell Johnson, Orange County Transportation Authority's director of transit project delivery, said of the next round of studies that will last about three years.

In addition, the rail authority is looking to study other segments of the system, including one that could connect Los Angeles to Palmdale and another linking the central part of the state to the Bay Area.

Officials envision a system that would move commuters from Anaheim to Los Angeles in 20 minutes. Meetings are being held to gather public input.

Last September, transportation officials in Orange County agreed to contribute $7 million to the study that would include considering right-of-way requirements and noise issues. The rail authority is funding the rest.

The city of Anaheim is already preparing to be a pit stop for the high-speed train and hopes to integrate the service into a full-scale transit hub that would be built by 2010.

The transit hub would bring bus and different rail services together at one location. Anaheim's current Metrolink and Amtrak station would move from Angel Stadium's parking lot the site.

The Orange County-to-Los Angeles leg would cost $1.5 billion and go alongside the Metrolink tracks, said Dan Leavitt, deputy director of the rail authority.

Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, a rail authority board member, said Anaheim is a convenient and central point for commuters who wish to shuttle between different counties.

Officials said the high-speed train service would be financed through state funds – though a plan to place a bond measure onto the 2008 ballot was recently delayed, pushing the tentative schedule back.

"I'd really like to see if there are private-sector options," Pringle said of possible funding sources.

http://www.ocregister.com/newsimages/news/2007/04/06highspeedtrain_info.jpg

godblessbotox

April 7th, 2007, 07:17 AM

whats so damn important about norwalk? there the end of the line for the green line, and now there gona be a major stop on the high speed rail.

am i missing somthing?

LosAngelesSportsFan

April 7th, 2007, 09:38 AM

Metrolink stop?

Elsongs

April 7th, 2007, 11:26 AM

whats so damn important about norwalk? there the end of the line for the green line, and now there gona be a major stop on the high speed rail.

am i missing somthing?

Depending on where the line will go, there's a transfer to Metrolink and/or the Green Line. Plus, Norwalk is the halfway point between Downtown L.A. and Anaheim.

saiholmes

April 7th, 2007, 06:10 PM

A feast for the eyes at subway stations
McDonald's newest ad campaign brings in needed revenue, the transit agency says.
By Jean Guccione, Times Staff Writer
April 7, 2007

The MTA has TVs blasting ads at bus riders. It has ads wrapping around hundreds of buses.

Now, in another attempt to generate cash, the transit agency has allowed McDonald's to transform Metro Rail's biggest subway terminal into a massive ad campaign for the company's new Angus burger.

The 7th Street/Metro Center station in downtown Los Angeles is plastered with huge pictures of the burger — on walls, ceilings, lining the columns.

The ads are jarring some riders, who say the experience makes them want to never eat a burger again. But the MTA argues that the ads bring in much-needed revenue, particularly at a time when it has proposed increasing fares.

So far, the $3-billion-a-year agency has collected $146,000 from the advertising, which began appearing last month.

The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority also has a separate five-year, $77-million contract with CBS Outdoors to place advertising on its buses.

Besides 7th/Metro, the MTA has redecorated three other subway stations.

Commuters using the North Hollywood and Universal stations are bombarded with banners for the new "Shrek the Third" movie. At Union Station, subway riders are greeted with displays on the walls and floors touting an April 14 pay-per-view fight.

Trains along the Green Line, which travels down the center of the 105 Freeway, also are covered with the McDonald's ads.

In addition, the transit agency is trying to sell space on its Gold Line trains and at two more subway stations: at Hollywood Boulevard and Highland Avenue, and at Hollywood and Vine Street.

Ryan White, 26, likes the new ad campaigns.

"It's a good idea. It's making money and it looks better" than the tunnel's plain gray walls, said White, a South Los Angeles handyman who depends on public transit to get to jobs.

He can name each product and the station where its ads are located. When he learned how much money the ads generate, he smiled and said: "I wish I had had the idea."

But others aren't as receptive. "I think it's kind of annoying," said Erica Ibarra, 18, of East Los Angeles. "It doesn't make me crave [a hamburger] at all."

Karla Lopez, 21, believes that the agency should ban fast-food ads. Her 2-year-old son, Matthew, begs her to go to McDonald's each time they walk through the subway station.

She's not opposed to advertising — just to the giant burgers.

"They contradict themselves too much," Lopez said, referring to officials who press parents, in another set of bus advertisements, to make healthful food choices for their kids.

klamedia

April 7th, 2007, 06:38 PM

Bring on the ads! The agency needs the money.

Fern~Fern*

April 7th, 2007, 08:24 PM

Why doesn't the MTA add huge billboards on top of train stations. This should help generate more revenue and possibly more future rail tracks.

LtBk

April 8th, 2007, 07:54 AM

Forgive my ignorance, but why would it 7 years to widen a 6.4 mile stretch of I-5?

godblessbotox

April 8th, 2007, 08:27 AM

too many damn people use it. they cant just shut the whole thing down to work on it.

Buildingfrenzy

April 8th, 2007, 11:16 AM

godblessbotox

April 8th, 2007, 07:55 PM

^^now that is humor!
...maybe i should see shreck when it comes out

Fern~Fern*

April 8th, 2007, 08:49 PM

Ok, this burger is quite possibly the worst thing I have ever tried in my life, and I mean it. I LOVE BURGERS, but this burger taste like prison food in Afghanistan. I wanted to try because in my mind I told myself I would be supporting the M.T.A in some strange way. I thought if I try this stupid burger- I would be validating the fact that the marketing campaign on the L.A metro trains worked, and that they should continue to do more advertising with the m.t.A- THUS LEADING TO THE M.T.A HAVING MORE MONEY. After trying this burger I want to sue the M.T.A for letting them plaster this sick slop of ANGUS Beef burger (yeah right) all over their walls and quite possibly making me sterile in the process. Please stay away from this burger unless you need to grow hairs on yours balls or you need to commit suicide.

^^ Hey think of it this way in your mind you did a good deid. Although the new angus burger sucks ass it's actually contributing to the MTA budget for futher rail. I was on the 105 yesterday heading to the OC and actually saw the ad on the Line "Green". To be honest they killed it, it makes the train look cheap and it like belongs somewhere east of Nevada.

When I first heard of the Advertisement I assume it would be a nice wrap around example: Vegas Monorail. Instead of small side bus ads, what in God's name where they thinking. I am actually ashamed of the final outcome on this bad marketing gimmick. Next time I drive on the 105 and see the train approaching, I would turn my head of shame!!! :ohno:

saiholmes

April 9th, 2007, 12:06 AM

Will we shell out to ease traffic nightmare?
April 8, 2007
By Steve Lopez

The year is 2030, and traffic is moving reasonably well at rush hour on the 710 northbound out of Long Beach and all the way to the San Bernardino Freeway.

Why?

No trucks hogging the road.

They're traveling an adjacent tollway for trucks only, leaving the rest of the highway to cars.

I saw this projection on a computer screen at the downtown Los Angeles office of the Southern California Assn. of Governments. SCAG director Mark Pisano and his staff have been working on ideas like this for years, trying to figure out how to ease congestion and how to sell their solutions to public officials.

Pisano told me he's been reading The Times' Bottleneck Blog with great interest, because it's proof that people are desperate for relief and eager to discuss solutions.

And he's got some.

Take that truck tollway, Pisano said. There's space available to add truck lanes along the 710, the 10 and the 15 all the way to Victorville, a common trucking route that now takes an average of 4 1/2 hours to cover.

If truckers paid $25 to $200 — with higher fees in peak hours — to travel an exclusive tollway, faster speeds would enable them to make two or three daily round trips to Victorville instead of one. The fees would pay for the cost of building the new lanes, and the rest of the highway would be free of congestion caused by trucks.

If you think that's a good idea, wait until you hear this: The traffic headache could be reduced significantly just by doing a better job of clearing accidents.

Hasan Ikhrata, Pisano's director of planning and policy, told me that 50% of congestion is caused by accidents.

"Fifty percent?" I asked, shocked by the number and all the more ticked off about nitwit drivers gabbing on cellphones, applying makeup or shaving while driving.

Ikhrata and Pisano said their research clearly shows that if more crews were in place to clear wreckage — a relatively cheap fix — the impact would be huge.

I checked with the MTA and found that it has 191 tow trucks working L.A. County in conjunction with the CHP and Caltrans, at an annual cost of $27 million. Response time to breakdowns and accidents is 10 to 30 minutes and could be greatly reduced if the fleet of trucks were, say, doubled.

I suspect that neither of these two ideas — truck tollways and more tow trucks — would be tough sells to the public. But the rest of Pisano's ideas are a different story. They all involve ending a sense of entitlement that goes back half a century, to the construction of the nation's interstate highway system.

"You have this culture of, 'By God, you don't have to pay for your roads.' "

Pisano said, "We can show you six ways to Sunday" that a system of toll roads, along with other ideas, could reduce traffic, speed up movement on highways and increase transportation options for everyone, so both high- and low-income people would benefit.

I'd be more skeptical, except that I've now been told the same thing by experts like Martin Wachs at the Rand Corp., Brian Taylor at UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies and Tyler Duvall, assistant secretary in the U.S. Department of Transportation.

Yes, there are political hurdles, Duvall said. It's hard to sell politicians or the public on the idea that the solution involves higher fees.

"But compared to what?" asked Duvall, who has been leading a national movement toward the kind of congestion charging that has relieved traffic in other parts of the world. "We're paying now in a lot of different ways, and paying exorbitantly. We're paying in time…. We're paying in pollution."

Not to mention the healthcare costs associated with pollution and stress, and the cost of lost productivity.

Pisano told me his staff tried coming up with a plan to return traffic flow in Southern California to 1984 levels, but that was ultimately considered impossible, largely because of population growth that continues to make solutions difficult. The more realistic goal, he said, is to go back to the kind of mobility we had in 2000, which would mean a 10% to 15% decrease in current congestion.

So, how to do it?

The long answer can be found by going to http://www.scag.ca.gov and clicking on Destination 2030.

The short answer is that flow meters would regulate entry onto major roadways, and electronic sensors would record charges that rise during rush hour. You might pay, say, a dollar or two to travel from Santa Clarita to Santa Ana on the 5 during off-peak hours and 10 bucks to make the trip during peak travel times.

This would encourage off-peak travel, carpooling, working from home and staggered shifts. The fees raised by congestion charging would in theory fund additional transit options, and if more employers offered transit vouchers instead of free parking, all of this could make for less of a daily migraine than we're all now subjected to. So would smarter residential and commercial growth that's built around transit hubs.

Pisano said his staff has been pitching these solutions to state legislators, but there's a long way to go. He said Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger used to speak like a convert but has lately disappeared on the subject.

"It's going to take the president, the secretary of transportation, the governor and the Legislature working together," said Pisano.

Memo to Gov. Schwarzenegger:

We've got 2,000 Bottleneck Blog postings from readers crying out for help and a little leadership. Ditch the Hummer and get behind the wheel of this thing.

godblessbotox

April 9th, 2007, 12:45 AM

...or a train

redspork02

April 17th, 2007, 05:14 PM

Safety issues could delay Exposition Line
The state Public Utilities Commission raises concerns about vehicle and pedestrian crossings along the Exposition Line in Los Angeles.By Jeffrey L. Rabin, Times Staff Writer
April 17, 2007

http://www.latimes.com/media/photo/2007-04/29106869.jpg
RISK ASSESSMENT: Dorsey High students walk on tracks near the Crenshaw district school. L.A. County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke is concerned about possible danger posed by the Expo Line to students walking or driving across tracks near campus.
(Carlos Chavez / LAT)

Points of contention
http://www.latimes.com/media/graphic/2007-04/29106870.gif

While debate simmers over whether the last segment of the Exposition light-rail line should run through upscale Westside neighborhoods, safety concerns raised by state officials and others threaten to delay the first phase of the $640-million project from downtown Los Angeles to Culver City.
Ground has been broken, contracts have been awarded and construction is getting underway on the nine-mile first phase, which is scheduled for completion in 2010. But the state agency that oversees rail safety in California is concerned that the trains may pose a risk to pedestrians and motorists at several locations.
Until additional safety precautions are incorporated into the project's design, the California Public Utilities Commission and the agency building the line remain at odds over 13 intersections near Los Angeles Trade Tech College, USC and Dorsey High School in the Crenshaw district.

"The commission's jurisdiction … does not include whether to build a transit line. All we are concerned with is the safety of the proposed rail line," said Patrick S. Berdge, the commission attorney.

Several residents along the former railroad right of way are formally protesting the Exposition Metro Line Construction Authority's applications to put rails across 44 intersections along the route. In addition, a USC engineering professor and Los Angeles Unified School district officials have voiced safety concerns.

Builders of the rail line fear the issues raised by the utilities commission staff and others could delay construction for years and add millions of dollars to the project's cost. So they are fighting back, pushing legislation in Sacramento to cut in half the amount of time the commission has to act on the grade-crossing applications.

"We've still got a lot of folks talking about what we should do with this project," said Rick Thorpe, chief executive of the construction authority. "That discussion should have been done a long time ago…. When do you draw the line and say, 'We're done. Let's go build it.' "

Over the last three decades, Thorpe has built light-rail lines in San Diego, Salt Lake City and Los Angeles. "I won't allow any design … that I don't think is absolutely safe to the public," he said.
Others aren't so sure. Najmedin Meshkati, a USC engineering professor, warns that fast-moving trains on the Exposition Line will pose a danger to "sensitive and vulnerable populations such as schoolchildren and elderly pedestrians."

Meshkati and graduate students in engineering at USC and Cal State Long Beach examined safety problems on the Metro Blue Line, which runs 22 miles from downtown Los Angeles to Long Beach.

A total of 87 people have been killed by Blue Line trains since the Metropolitan Transportation Authority opened the heavily traveled light-rail route in 1990. Twenty of those fatalities were ruled to be suicides.

The latest fatality occurred Saturday, when a 24-year-old woman ran across the tracks on Washington Boulevard, south of downtown Los Angeles, and was struck by a train, according to Abdul Zohbi, the MTA's manager of system safety.

Based on accident data, Meshkati and his team found that at-grade rail crossings posed a high risk to pedestrians and motorists. To reduce those risks significantly, Meshkati said, human factors need to play a vital role in the design of rail crossings on the Exposition Line.

Meshkati said the MTA's grade-crossing policy, which guides the agency's decisions about whether to place a rail line over or under a street, needs "a great deal of improvement."

But Zohbi said lessons learned from accidents on the Blue Line were incorporated into the design of the Metro Gold Line, which runs from downtown Los Angeles to Pasadena. The 13-mile rail line has had just one fatality, a suicide, and no serious injuries since operations began in 2003.

Zohbi said engineering improvements, enforcement of traffic laws and education of residents and schoolchildren have made both the Blue and Gold lines safer.

To prevent motorists from driving around gates, the Gold Line was built with gates that cover all traffic lanes on both sides of the tracks. Other gates block pedestrians from crossing the tracks when a train is approaching.

The same methods will be used on the Exposition Line. "We are basically sealing off the intersections entirely," Thorpe said.

But the Public Utilities Commission's rail safety staff remains concerned about the potential risk to drivers and pedestrians where the Exposition Line will pass Los Angeles Trade Tech College, just south of the Santa Monica Freeway.

Eight driveways lead into or out of the campus in four blocks of Flower Street between Washington Boulevard and 23rd Street. The Public Utilities Commission and the Exposition construction authority have been unable to reach agreement about how to design those crossings.

Four pedestrian crossings near USC, where the tracks will run in the median of Exposition Boulevard, are also a concern.

In the Crenshaw district, there is disagreement over what to do about the rail crossing nearest Dorsey High School.

At a recent meeting, County Supervisor Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, chairwoman of the Exposition construction authority, said she was concerned about the potential risk that the trains may pose to students walking or driving across the tracks near the school. "They just seem to go in all directions [and are] not as easily controlled" as younger students, Burke said.

The supervisor urged project officials to consider building elevated tracks near Dorsey High, half a mile east of where they are slated to start. The above-ground section would carry passengers to an elevated station at La Brea Avenue.

Burke suggested that project officials contact local, state and federal representatives in an effort to find additional funds to build the elevated line at Dorsey.

Thorpe said examining the issue is one thing, but building the elevated section is another. In addition to the cost, which could exceed $10 million, such a change may require reopening the environmental impact report on the project. The original environmental study did not evaluate the effects of an elevated line at that location.

Officials at the Los Angeles Unified School District also have raised concerns about the Exposition project, including potential risks to the safety of students, teachers and staff. In a letter to the Public Utilities Commission last fall, environmental assessment coordinator Glenn Striegler said the district opposed the rail project as designed. He demanded that steps be taken to eliminate all rail-pedestrian conflicts on routes to schools in the area.

In addition to Dorsey High School, four other schools sit within 100 feet of the Exposition Line: Foshay Learning Center, Theodore Alexander Jr. Science Center, Adams Middle School and Central L.A. Area Middle School No. 4.

Mark Jolles, a member of a group called Expo Communities United, is protesting the Exposition construction authority's applications to construct at-grade crossings at numerous intersections. "I don't think safety is their primary concern," he said.

Jolles, a schoolteacher, said he was particularly concerned about locations where the trains would pass near schools.

Clint Simmons, who lives near the Exposition right of way, has joined Jolles in protesting the applications for at-grade crossings. "Nobody is against light rail, but do it right," he said.

Determined to get construction underway, the Exposition construction authority and the MTA have sought legislative help.

State Sen. Sheila Kuehl (D-Santa Monica) introduced legislation recently to limit to nine months the amount of time the Public Utilities Commission has to act on the grade-crossing applications.

Kuehl said she hopes the bill will encourage the commission "to be more collaborative" in working with the construction authority.

"We need to get the Expo line because half the time," Kuehl said, the Santa Monica Freeway "is a parking lot."

The second phase of the project is expected to link Culver City with Santa Monica, but the route remains undecided. Homeowner associations in upscale Westside neighborhoods object to using the old Exposition railroad right of way that runs through their area.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
jeff.rabin@latimes.com