Streetsblog Los Angeles

In a somewhat rainy day in Southern California, Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and United States Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood spread a little sunshine on California’s embattled High Speed Rail project with an upbeat press conference at Los Angeles’ Union Station.   There was no mention of the Federal Transit Administration’s Civil Rights Review of the transit agency currently headed by Villaraigosa. The growing opposition against the $100 billion High Speed Rail Project, which includes Republican politicians in California’s legislature and the leadership of the Congressional House of Representatives, was dismissed as a small group of malcontents.

Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa and Secretary Ray LaHood exchange a handshake during yesterday's press event at Los Angeles Union Station. Photo: LA Streetsblog/Flickr

Delivering a “message from President Obama,” LaHood set the tone for a defense of the president’s vision for High Speeed Rail. “”High speed rail is coming to California,” Lahood began. “We will not be dissuaded by the naysayers or those that think that high speed rail is not the next generation of transportation.”

Later, noting that the President’s vision was larger than just a rail plan for California, LaHood talked of the California project as a model for the nation.  ”We believe the high speed rail corridor in California will be the role model for high speed rail in the country.”  Other rail projects won’t capture the country’s imagination as the California project.  For example, the proposed rail project in Illinois would increase rail speed from seventy to one hundred ten miles per hour.  California High Speed Rail will run at speeds up to 200 miles per hour.

Responding to complaints from Steve Gregory, a reporter from the conservative news talk radio station KFI, about the costs and ridership projections, Villaraigosa took the microphone to offer his own defense.  After noting that projections for Los Angeles’ subway and Bus Rapid Transit systems are both well above projections, he pointed both to local benefits of a statewide transit network and to the investments America has historically made in transportation over the decades.

“High Speed Rail in California is the natural extension of the 21st Century transportation system we’re building here.  For me, this is an easy one.  We need to get on this train.  We need to stand for the proposition that California needs to lead the way,” Villaraigosa opened.  ”Imagine if they had asked President Eisenhower to cost out the federal highway system in 2012 dollars.” Read more…

The New York Times yesterday published a series of six opinion pieces debating the merits of the $90 billion High-Speed Rail plan that would connect Los Angeles to San Francisco. Attacks have intensified on the “bullet train” rail project in recent weeks, focused mainly on the projects gigantic $90 billion budget and a recent audit that called funding for the project “shaky.”  Meanwhile, Governor Jerry Brown has stood firm with his support for the project, there is some momentum to provide voters with a chance to repeal the bonding plan to support the project passed on a statewide ballot initiative in 2008.

Against this backdrop, it’s no surprise that four of the six writers at the Times’ website are questioning the value of the project. Streetsblog provides a summary of the six pieces after the jump, but for the full pieces visit “Room for Debate: Does California Need High Speed Rail.”

Read more…

Next Thursday the California High Speed Rail Authority is holding its monthly meeting in the Board Room at the Metro Headquarters Building adjacent to Union Station beginning at 10 a.m. The agenda is now posted online.

March of last year is when the Authority last met in Los Angeles. In the interim there has been a lot of strum and drang by critics yet the project continues plowing forward, most recently releasing a revised/more realistic 2012 draft Business Plan for comment.

Meeting items include “the outcome of the conceptual study of the Grapevine alternative” (#4) and an “update [to] the Board on Station Area Planning Funding Agreements and coordination activities with cities along the Central Valley initial construction segment and future initial operating segment” (#6). Those should result in some interesting Board discussions.

A useful overview of the status of the project was presented at this month’s meeting of the Board of the San Bernardino Associated Governments (item #17, pp.199-219). This includes analysis of the new Business Plan draft prepared by the Legislative Analyst’s Office and state Senate staff.

BTW, since I publicly worried who would succeed Alex Clifford as Metro’s high speed rail point person I’ll take this opportunity to note late March of last year Don Sepulveda was hired as Metro’s Executive Officer for Regional Rail. I’ve been impressed by his grasp of the issues on his plate as exemplified by the presentation he made in November to the annual meeting of the Train Riders’ Association of California.

As a long-time observer of the California high speed rail project who advocated in favor of the 2008 bond, to me one interesting recent trend is that the original hotbed of support (the Central Valley) of late has become much more skeptical and critical. Some of that is due to the dynamics of large projects — early on excitement holds sway whereas when construction begins to approach folks begin to confront the downside impacts of such ventures, causing a backlash. And frankly, until recently, I think it can be fairly said the Authority’s outreach and handling of politically sensitive aspects has been less than stellar.

Click on the report go visit the CAHSR website.

I am well aware a lot of folks are having serious sticker shock about this project. But the improved business plan seems to be attacked for merely doing what critics have long asked for — provide realistic estimates of costs, ridership and the likely timing of private investment. Plus many cities are reeling from the technology’s attributes resulting in many towns being impacted without the benefit of having a station.

All that said, I am not big on second guessing the authority unlike many other rail activists. Having the first segment in the Central Valley seems a reasonable approach, especially since it is a condition of the federal funding they have been awarded. And after many convulsions this latest news of a preferred route seems to auger the project getting back on track with support from those to be most effected.

I am not unaware this is just one step in a lengthy process. And that there are many more obstacles ahead. But I think those predicting loudly of late the bullet train is on life support are being premature.

It’s no surprise that CALPIRG is a strong supporter of High Speed Rail for California.  While the rest of L.A. County was holding their breath on the L.A. County transit tax ballot proposition known as Measure R in 2008, CALPIRG was more concerned with a state bonding proposition that would set aside billions for the California High Speed Rail Project.

The students from yesterday's CALPIRG event also love a fast train. Photo: Anne Ohliger/CALPIRG

Back then, most people thought of California High Speed Rail as the future of transportation for the state.  High Speed rail was imagined as fast quiet trains zooming through the country-side connecting the major cities and other attractions.  Over the last three years, High Speed Rail has taken a beating in the public, with accusations of incompetence and corruption hurled at the project’s Board of Directors.  Nationally, the idea of fast moving trains has become a political hot potatoe because President Obama likes the idea which means that Republicans have to hate it.

For example, these are two headlines that didn’t make the morning headlines roundup: With Little Hope for Near-Term Federal Support, California High Speed Rail Struggles, and Congress Is Broken and CHSR Pays the Price.

But yesterday at Union Station, on the same day that U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer announced a “mark-up” of legislation to renew the federal transportation funding package, a group of CALPIRG’s students rallied to remind voters, and the Senator, that High Speed Rail is a winning proposition for California regardless of what’s going on with the politicians and appointed members of the state CAHSR Board.

“As students, we know that our broken, outdated, and oil dependent transportation system needs to change,” said Josh Joiner, CALPIRG Students Campaign Leader.  ”With California’s population expected to hit 50 million by 2035, we can’t afford to just keep building more congested highways and airport runways that will cost us more money and keep us stuck in traffic, stuck on security lines at the airport, and ever more dependent on oil. Our transportation system alone consumes more oil than any country in the world besides China.” Read more…

This map was created in 2009. It's sad that there are less lines being discussed now instead of more. Image;Green Options

One of the three complaints I hear most often about L.A. Streetsblog’s coverage is that we “don’t cover High Speed Rail” enough. Truth be told, there’s so many issues and projects happening locally that I haven’t had time to really dive into the issue, look at all the complexities impacting California’s project, and have anything really new to say outside of what is in the newspapers, radio, etc…

However, I’ve been enjoying a series on Infrastructurist about High Speed Rail that’s featuring printed works before and against High Speed Rail from different parts of the country and world.  If you’re not interested in what Zev has to say, and are interested in High Speed Rail, check out their compilations.

There are four parts to the series:

• Part 1: Megan McArdle v Europe
• Part 2: Richard White in the New York Times v at Steven Harrod CNN
• Part 3:  Zhao Jian at USA Today v Michael Scott Moore at Miller-McCune 
• Part 4: Philip Longman at Washington Monthly v The Economist’s Gulliver Blog

Thanks to Florida Gov. Rick Scott’s head-smacker of a decision to refuse billions in federal high-speed rail funds, other parts of the country are getting a windfall. Even with $400 million of Florida’s money vanishing in the name of deficit reduction, the remaining $2 billion will go a long way in improving rail service in key areas around the country.

Amtrak's overhead wires will get an overhaul on the Northeast Corridor, thanks to federal funding just announced by the USDOT. Photo: NAMTI

House Transportation Committee Chair John Mica (R-FL) will be happy to see that the biggest winner is the Northeast Corridor, which he considers to be the country’s best chance for successful high-speed rail. (He’s not the only one that thinks so, either.) The NEC is getting $795 million to increase speeds from 135 to 160 mph on critical segments, with more than half of that going to Amtrak to upgrade the signaling, tracks, and overhead wires to allow trains to run faster.

It’s a good test for Amtrak, which has been criticized by top political leaders recently as a “Soviet-style” rail service that isn’t competent to run an efficient, 21st century system. “It will show whether they’re capable of pulling off the next-gen vision proposal that they’ve put forward, which we’re very excited about, but it’s an extremely ambitious project,” said Petra Todorovich of America 2050. “We’ll be watching.”

Maryland, New York, and Rhode Island also get help with their sections of the Northeast Corridor. Todorovich says the grant to the NEC is “overdue” and she’s pleased with the recognition that the greatest need for rail improvement is concentrated in this corridor.

Detroit gets some good news with the announcement of a $404 million grant for 110-mph service to Chicago. For a depressed city like Detroit, connectivity to the region’s biggest economy can only be a good thing.

The “Buy American” lobby has reason to be happy, too, given the $336 million investment in U.S. manufacturing of locomotives and rail cars for California and the Midwest. And California got another $300 million to extend the current 110-mile segment another 20 miles through the Central Valley.

Read more…

Just when we thought transportation had gotten off relatively easy in the shutdown-aversion budget deal:

House Appropriations Chair Hal Rogers (R-KY). Image: Mindfully

The House Appropriations Committee has released details [PDF] on the budget agreement between the two houses, including more information on the agreed-to $38.5 billion in cuts. Where we’d heard before that high-speed rail was getting a $1.5 billion haircut, down to the $1 billion for 2011 that President Obama had originally requested, it turns out now that that last billion dollars is being cut too. And to add insult to injury, they’re also zeroing out $400 million of rejected Florida rail funds (technically cutting funding from 2010), bringing the grand total of HSR cuts to $2.9 billion.

This is a big blow to one of the president’s signature projects, with which he was planning on “winning the future.” It further clouds the outlook for his $53 billion proposal for high-speed rail over the next six years, starting in 2012. These budget cuts, of course, are for FY2011, before the $53 billion was to start, but please believe the Republicans aren’t looking for a massive increase in rail money for next year either.

TIGER, which had appeared to be safe, is getting $72 million cut from its $600 million budget, and the Appropriations Committee eliminated all funding for “planning, preparation or design” of projects eligible for TIGER funding. For now, the Partnership for Sustainable Communities appears to be safe.

Meanwhile, New Starts transit funding, already slated for $280 million in cuts, is now getting $502 million cut from its $2 billion budget, with another $128 million coming out of Amtrak grants for capital improvements and debt service. They’ve also cut $3.1 billion in highway contract authority that had not been obligated, as opposed to the $2.5 billion cut announced Friday night.

Vincent Kartheiser, who plays Pete Campbell on the hit series “Mad Men”, and Rich Sommer, who plays Harry Crane, have teamed up with U.S. PIRG to make a video about high-speed rail. In it, Campbell suggests an ad campaign for trains, which Crane finds ridiculous — trains make so much sense; why would you need to sell them? It ends with a call to action.

U.S. PIRG developed the video with FunnyOrDie.com, where people can basically post anything they think is funny and viewers vote on whether or not it’s funny enough. The high-speed rail video is “a way to reach new audiences and build excitement for high-speed rail projects around the country,” according to Phineas Baxandall at U.S. PIRG.

Meanwhile, the Regional Plan Association yesterday released a less funny but still worthwhile video called “Why Build High-Speed Rail in the Northeast,” making the argument that projected population growth makes rail investment an imperative.

Vincent Kartheiser, who plays Pete Campbell on the hit series “Mad Men”, and Rich Sommer, who plays Harry Crane, have teamed up with U.S. PIRG to make a video about high-speed rail. In it, Campbell suggests an ad campaign for trains, which Crane finds ridiculous — trains make so much sense; why would you need to sell them?

Why Build High-Speed Rail in the Northeast? from Regional Plan Association on Vimeo.