Streetsblog Los Angeles

When the Mayor and his staff in city hall say that nothing is off the table when it comes to accelerating project development and construction for the transit projects funded by the Measure R sales tax, they aren’t just talking.  While the Mayor promised that there was a “Plan B” if his efforts to change federal law to favor communities that tax themselves to build transit don’t go anywhere in D.C.

Borja Leon. Photo: Mayor's Office

Now, on the eve of announcement of a new federal transportation bill from leadership in the House of Representatives, the Mayor’s office is pursuing three different options to leverage the expected $40 billion in sales tax revenue over the 30 years between 2009 and 2039.  Besides the pursuit of federal dollars, there is also the possibility of asking L.A. County voters to tax themselves again and working with equity firms in China to finance the projects.

Last week, Streetsblog talked to Deputy Mayor for Transportation Borja Leon about the different options being pursued and where the city is in the process.

Plan A: America Fast Forward Née 30/10

Streetsblog will feature ads for the Regional Connector Final EIS/EIR throughout the next 30 days.

“Plan A” is still the 30/10 or America Fast Forward plan to change federal law to reward communities that choose to tax themsleves to expand transit.  If enacted, the Mayor’s proposal would create interest free loan programs that would allow projects to get started earlier and would re-prioritize federal grant programs.  When Republican leadership in the House of Representatives and Democratic leadership in the Senate announced proposals last year, both included major increases in the TIFIA loan program which is a major provision of America Fast Forward.

The Mayor’s Office appears confident that this increase will remain.  ”We have been working with the Federal Government and have a great partnership,” explains Leon.  ”A lot of things have been moving in the last week with America Fast Forward.”

We should find out if the confidence, and Mayor’s lobbying efforts, have paid off this week. Read more…

At tomorrow’s hearing of the City Council Transportation Committee, a last-second motion by Councilman Jose Huizar, who also sits on the Metro Board of Directors, and Councilman Bill Rosendahl seeks to create a mechanism for the City to accept Measure R dollars to better coordinate between the city staff and Metro.

At first glance, the motion creates more questions than it answers, so to that end Streetsblog talked to staff with Councilman Rosendahl’s office, the Mayor’s Office and Metro to get some answers.  Here’s a quick F.A.Q. on the motion.

Why does the Mayor’s Office need Measure R Dollars to better coordinate with Metro?

The City of Los Angeles is the largest partner that Metro has.  Metro staff has quietly complained that working with the city can be a tough process, especially when permitting is involved.  LADWP is somewhat notorious for this, although nobody was willing to go on the record.  Having a central contact person in the Mayor’s office to manage schedules and follow-up with various departments

Where is the money coming from within Measure R?

The money will come from the 1.5% of Measure R that is set aside for “Administrative costs.”  The funding will not come from Measure R’s local return and will not impact the funding of any project.

Why does the City have to pass a motion to accept money from Metro? Read more…

Dana, you left out a key part of her bio. Yoh was also the captain of my (last place finishing) team in the Transit People Transit Race of 2009. - DN

Earlier this week, we posted the responses of Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel member Gary Painter to some questions including several suggested by readers of this blog.  Today, it is Panel member Allison Yoh’s turn.  Yoh is Associate Director of the UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies and also a past member of the Metro Board of Directors. The latter experience resulted in my asking Yoh one extra question I didn’t ask Painter.

And again I wish to express regret at the delay in getting this material ready for posting. As I said earlier, life happens.

 Gabbard: Briefly describe your academic background?

Yoh: I work in urban planning, particularly in public transit. I’ve done research on how transit agencies can increase ridership, the costs of bus rapid transit, transit improvements (operational and capital) needed to increase rider satisfaction, smart card adoption and applications, and different fare structures that could improve the effectiveness, efficiency, and equity of transit services.

Gabbard: To what extent are you a daily train user? Is it you main means of mobility? What other modes do you use (automobile, bicycle)?

Yoh: Transit is one of the modes that I use. It is not my primary mode now, though it had been for over a decade when I first moved to LA in 1999. During that decade, I used transit for a good majority of my trips – to school, work, leisure activities, shopping, and other appointments. Now, I drive or carpool for most trips that are related to getting my child to school, doctor’s appointments, other activities, and for work. I use transit about once every week or two for work and other trips. I also walk. I bicycle/skate/scoot the least.

Gabbard: How long have they been riding transit (i.e. from what age)? Have you experienced outside of Los Angeles, outside of California and outside of North America? Any impressions or thoughts about our system comp[ared to others?

Yoh: I’ve been using transit since I was about 17 years old. I’ve used transit in the Bay Area and in Southern California. Outside of California, I’ve used transit in other large urban areas (New York, Boston, etc.) and also in not-so-large, not-so-urban areas too (Florida). Outside of North America, I’ve used transit in Paris, London (and suburbs), Stockholm (and other areas in Sweden), Beijing, Shanghai, Taipei, Singapore, Kuala Lumpur, and San Juan (Costa Rica).

My impressions/thoughts about our system compared to others? Well, the experiences I’ve had run the gamut. One thing I can say is that LA’s transit system can get you anywhere you need to go. We have great coverage. What we don’t have, however, is good reliability. You can get anywhere, but how long it will take and whether your vehicle is on time is another story. I think LA’s transit system would benefit immensely from having a network of bus-only lanes to pull transit vehicles out of congested general flow lanes. It is something that would require far less in capital costs (compared, for example, with rail), it would improve throughput on our street systems, and it would reduce travel time and wait times.

However, such a system would require a lot of political will and leadership, and support from the local governments that maintain and operate the roads. In other parts of the world, particularly in Europe and Asia, there is a strong public willingness to support transit and to make it a viable mode – in terms of giving it priority and making it a convenient way to travel.

Gabbard: What reaction did you have when asked to serve on the panel? Have you undergone any briefings or been supplied with any materials by the agency prepatory to your service? Have you been given an idea when the panel may be convened and how often it is anticipated it will meet?

Yoh: I am very honored to serve on the panel — there were many well-qualified candidates whom Metro considered. I keep in touch with Metro staff on occasion as questions arise. I’ve been told that the oversight panel will draw on advisory members on an as-needed basis, and perhaps on an individual-by-individual basis when certain questions arise.

Gabbard: What further improvements would you make to the present Metro system, if any?

Yoh: In addition to more bus only lanes as I mentioned above, I would encourage Metro to improve the frequency of their bus services, and particularly the reliability of their bus schedules, since buses provide the most extensive geographic coverage in our region. Rail lines have the advantage of operating in their own rights of way, which helps with reliability and on-time performance, and these service qualities are possible with buses as well if you provide dedicated lanes. If Metro Rail is the “backbone” of the transit system, as I’ve heard some advocates and transit officials proclaim, then Metro Bus and Rapid are really the muscle that supports the backbone. I’d put rail only in corridors with extremely high levels of congestion because rail is so expensive to build.

Metro has recently launched a rather aggressive campaign to provide real-time information (via smart phones, internet, etc.) on bus and rail arrival and travel times. I’d encourage them to continue these programs.

Finally, I’d improve the way that we collect and set transit fares to better reflect the costs of providing services and to improve the equity of how we charge fares. With smart cards, we can begin to really innovate with our fare structures through incentive programs, distance-based, time-of-day-based, and mode-based fares that could really transform the system.

Gabbard: Are you excited at the prospect of undertaking this advisory role to a public entity?

Yoh: Yes!

Gabbard: Has your time serving on the Metro Board effected how you see this appointment? In what way?

Yoh: That’s a good question. On the Metro Board, I voted on very difficult choices. There are many critical improvements needed for LA’s transit system, but these all carry with them price tags and opportunity costs. Now is a particularly hard time for transit across the nation as agencies are expected to maintain service levels at a time when people need affordable travel options and yet, it is exactly at this time when revenues to support operations and maintenance are down. LA is quite unique (and perhaps in a better relative position) because of Measure R. There is no shortage of the ways we can make transit better. The toughest work is political.

All things come to those who wait. In May I solicited input from readers of this blog for questions to ask Measure R Oversight Committee Advisory Panel transit system user members Gary Painter and Allison Yoh. The final set of questions I subsequently e-mailed Painter and Yoh included several that blog readers had suggested. Painter and Yoh sent their responses shortly thereafter. But in the meantime life happened and I had to put the task of doing the final writeup aside until now. My apologies to one and all for the delay.

Professor Gary Painter

Below are the responses of Painter, who as I previously noted is Director of the Graduate Program in Public Policy and Management for the USC School of Policy, Planning and Development. Yoh’s responses will follow tomorrow.

Gabbard: Briefly describe your academic background?

Painter: I was trained as an economist at UC Berkeley, and have been at USC since 1996. I primarily conduct research on housing markets and education policy. My main focus has been on the housing and locational choices of immigrants. I have only conducted one study of immigrant transit mode choice, so my academic expertise on transportation policy issues is limited.

Gabbard: To what extent are you a daily train user? Is it you main means of mobility? What other modes do you use (automobile, bicycle)?

I either take transit or I telecommute. I drive to either the Willow, Norwalk, or Lakewood park and ride, and then take transit in to USC from there.

How long have they been riding transit (i.e. from what age)? Have you experienced outside of Los Angeles, outside of California and outside of North America? Any impressions or thoughts about our system compared to others?

I have riding transit exclusively since 2007. I ride the DC Metro at least 3 times a year, and rode BART daily when living in Northern California. I have also used public transit in Europe. The metro cars and buses are generally not as nice as the other systems. The metro cars appear to be designed for low capacity usage. Read more…

My metaphor of choice to describe transportation funding and policy making is an onion, in which there are a succession of layers representing complexities and multifaceted cross-jurisdictional dimensions. And one cannot be complacent since there are always new aspects to explore and try to fathom.

Passing Measure R was just the beginning. Image:Long Beach Post

For example, in a previous commentary I laid out the history of the Measure R Independent Taxpayers Oversight Committee, which per the ordinance (section 8) is composed of three retired federal judges where the Mayor of Los Angeles, the Los Angeles County Supervisors and the “other cities” of the county each choose one of the three. The Committee is tasked to appoint an advisory panel to assist it, made up of various folks representing various professions or areas of expertise.

My intrigue at all this was that the specified categories for members of the panel included “transit system user”. I was curious how Metro would recruit someone to fill this role. There was even a rumor at one point some folks had me in mind. My thought process was maybe Metro would do outreach via The Source and/or the Metro Monthly take one brochure to recruit interested riders to apply. Read more…

Another massive highway expansion project, brought to you by Measure R

As Streetsblog has been documenting, there has been a heavy cost to Measure R beyond a half cent increase to the county sales tax.

One of those costs that 20% of the collected funds will go towards massive highway expansion projects that will induce even greater car dependence, worsen air quality and promote sprawling development patterns.

Thanks to a recent article in the Santa Clarita Signal, we’ve been given a look at another one of those projects: The planned $500 million six lane widening of the I-5 from the Highway 14 interchange to Parker Road.  Construction could start within the next year.  The project will be completed in three phases and will add two truck-only lanes and a carpool lane in each direction.

Lest anyone wonder about the motivations for the project, Victor Lindenheim, executive director of the Golden State Gateway Coalition, makes it pretty clear.

“This is about adding capacity,” Lindenheim said. “When capacity is needed, in certain situations, it will be a godsend.” Read more…

Senator Boxer offers strong support for a transportation bill that supports 30/10.

On an atypically dreary day for October, Los Angeles County’s elected representatives from every level of government gathered with community members at Leimert Park to celebrate the receipt of a $546 million loan for the Crenshaw Light Rail project.

The news had already broken on Friday. So above all, this was an opportunity for elected officials to congratulate each other, Metro, and civic leaders for securing the low interest TIFIA loan from the US Department of Transportation.

Several speakers, especially LA County Supervisor Mark Ridley Thomas and Congresswoman Maxine Waters, highlighted the economic and environmental benefits that this project will bring to the South Los Angeles.

But for those following the Mayor’s 30/10 plan closely, the biggest news of the day came embedded amidst the promise of thousands of good paying union jobs and the (somewhat dubious) hope for traffic reduction.

Rather, the key points came from three figures at the federal level, whose work will help determine if the Crenshaw LRT loan is a one-off deal or a veritable down payment on a grander 30/10 scheme. Read more…

We don’t often discuss issues effecting the Northern parts of L.A. County.  But as a freeway expansion project moves through the environmental study phases towards construction; it’s worthwhile to check in on one of the few new highway projects in Southern California, the High Desert Corridor project.  With $33 million in Measure R funds to pay for the environmental studies already secured  for the $6 billion highway project, Caltrans is moving forward with a series of public hearings in the North County this month.  A copy of Caltrans’ postcard announcing the meetings is available at the end of the article.

So what is the High Desert Corridor?  Caltrans refers to the project as “multi-modal” because it will help move cars and trucks.  Metro, gives a more honest assesment in the project’s homepage.

The High Desert Corridor (HDC) will accommodate an expected three to six fold increase in tra;c between the Antelope and Victor Valleys…

…The HDC will construct a new 50-mile east-west freeway/expressway and possible truck toll facility between Los Angeles and San Bernardino counties. The east-west segment would be an eight-lane freeway [including a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) lane in each direction] from SR-14 past the Palmdale Airport to 50th St East along an alignment paralleling P-8 in Palmdale; a six-lane freeway/expressway from 50th St East to 240th St East past the planned Southern California Logistics Airport to I-15.

In an era where new freeway projects are greenwashed with claims the project will help clean the air by reducing congestion or reduce the number of cars by encouraging carpooling, it’s both refreshing and horrifying to see a new highway proposed solely because it will create hundreds of new travel lane miles between two sprawled out places on a map. Read more…

Move L.A., the first organization to push for a sales tax to fund transit in 2008 and the group that invented the 30/10 plan, is now asking for your help to get that plan through Congress.  The petition, which you can sign on behalf of yourself or on behalf of an organization, isn't just a lobbying tool; it's perhaps the best summary of the benefits of leveraging the half cent sales tax revenues to build all twelve Measure R transit projects in the next ten years.

Denny Zane, Move L.A.'s founder and executive director, has preached that a big tent would be needed to get the sales tax passed and to get 30/10 through Congress and the White House.  Thus, it's no surprise that this petition lists everything from environmental reasons to job creation as reasons to pass 30/10.  And for good government advocates, it also points out that by paying for projects now, instead of decades from now, L.A. County voters would save $4 billion in the long run.

In other 30/10 news, L.A. Observed writer Bill Boyarsky, who once covered the transportation beat for the L.A. Times, recently penned a column in praise of Measure R:

With city hall news full of minor malfeasance, it is surprising to report that something positive is actually happening. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa’s 30/10 transit plan is moving toward Congressional approval even though progress is about as slow as a Wilshire bus during rush hour.

Locally, it seems just about everyone is in favor of 30/10.  Move L.A. is just giving people an easy way to show it.

From the groundbreaking's pamphlet, which can be found here. h/t I Will Ride

This weekend wasn't just a good one for cyclists.  On Saturday, while I was still sleeping off Critical Mass, groundbreaking occurred for the Gold Line Foothill Extension in the San Gabriel Valley.  The rail line was always a popular project with Valley residents, but until Measure R was passed, a measure opposed by several prominent politicians in the area, funding for the project was not approved.  Now, with cash in hand and shovels in the ground, officials are predicting the extension will open in 2014, before the Expo Line will be completed all the way in to Santa Monica. 

Anyone who wants to know more about the specifics of the project should read this excellent "Q and A" written for The Source by Steve Hymon.

Reports on the ground breaking describe an event that was equal part celebration and pep rally.  The Source quotes Metro Board Chair Ara Najarian proclaiming that, "This whole county is going to change."  Later, Congressman Adam Schiff put in a plug for the a third extension (as in the one after the next one,) promising, "None of us will rest until this line goes to Ontario Airport."

But of course, it's not just transit hungry residents that are the winners.  While it's great that residents of Azusa can take a train to Mariachi Plaza if they want to; the creation and construction of this line will also determine how the San Gabriel Valley will grow.  On Saturday, The Times wrote an article all about the T.O.D. plans for line, including details of an ambitious project already on the "drawing board" in Azusa:

Monrovia's proposed Station Square project would rise next to the future site of its Gold Line station, just south of the 210 Freeway. Monrovia has already invested $30 million into the project and is negotiating public-private partnerships with multiple commercial real estate developers, Monrovia Mayor Mary Ann Lutz said...

...The project's first phase will include approximately 700 apartment units, 450,000 square feet of office space, and 30,000 square feet of retail space, according to Blaine Fetter, the Principal/Organizer at Samuelson & Fetter. Some of those apartments and offices will be completed by the time the train begins operation in 2014, he said.

Read more...