Mass Transit 2 the Disneyland Resort

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

I have a solution, call it the "Westside Connector".

Let Green Line trains from Redondo continue North along the Crenshaw Line as planned, but then let them merge West on the Expo line to Sepulveda.

Then get the Sepulveda Pass/ I-405 line to Exposition.

Make one Green Line go from Redondo to the SFV's Orange Line busway.

[sediment]

You High-Speed Rail folks aren't going to like this:

Why High-Speed Trains Don't Make Sense - Newsweek

Pretty much what I've been saying all along: I'd like to see them built, but a small fraction of the cost. There is no need for them to be so freaking expensive, except to funnel public dollars from our wallets to construction owners' and workers' wallets, who then move some of that to the politicians' wallets.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

The Source reminds readers that amidst all the weed and GOP news, Prop. 22 passed by an overwhelming margin last night. The initiative formally prevents the state from taking money put aside for transportation, redevelopment or local government projects and services. The campaign to pass Prop22 was led by the California Redevelopment Association, which had decried all those state raids.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

The Disneyland Resort is an enthusiastic backer of the San Francisco-to-Anaheim bullet train project, which could serve millions of passengers at a proposed rail station just a short hop from the theme park. Disney also has interests in land along the rail right-of-way, specifically a ranch-style studio property close to the spot where the train would turn toward Palmdale as it exits the San Fernando Valley.

Pringle and Katz, both influential former state lawmakers, say they have not mixed their private business interests with their high-speed rail duties.

Read more: "High-speed rail leaders receive consulting fees from firms with financial interests in project."

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

The first segment of California's proposed $43-billion high-speed rail system may not be built in the high-population coastal areas of state, but in the Central Valley, officials said Thursday.

The federal government indicated Wednesday that it wants all of its initial funding of the project -- about $3 billion -- directed to a single segment between Fresno and Merced or Fresno and Bakersfield. The focus on the Central Valley was made in collaboration with the California High Speed Rail Authority, said Rob Kulat, spokesman for the Federal Railroad Administration.

The Central Valley portion of the route would form the backbone of a system linking San Francisco and Anaheim, and passing through Los Angeles' Union Station. Eventually, the system would connect to Sacramento and San Diego.

Many observers had expected the Los Angeles-to-Anaheim segment to be the first built because engineering on that section was further along.

California?s first high-speed rail segment may run through Central Valley | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

The Central Valley segment could offer a chance to build more quickly in less-congested areas and provide the open track needed for a national demonstration of bullet trains traveling more than 200 mph.

But without initially linking to the population centers of the state's largest cities, ridership and revenue could lag until more segments are completed.

"The Central Valley is indeed key to creating the core of a true high-speed rail system in California," said Roelof van Ark, chief executive officer of the state bullet train agency.

"But no matter where we start building, the goal remains the same," he said, referring to having a Bay Area-to-Anaheim system up and running by 2020.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

GOP-controlled House might hinder Villaraigosa's transit funding request

Republicans are vowing to cut government spending, but the L.A. mayor and others argue that his 30/10 plan — seeking federal loans to expedite key transit projects — is a wise use of federal money.

The mayor hopes he can convince lawmakers that his plan would not only benefit taxpayers but also serve as a template for creating transit options and generating jobs in other places, perhaps even in their own districts.
"My hope is we're going to be able to convince them that this is the only way for us to address our infrastructure needs, particularly when their priority is cutting the deficit," Villaraigosa said.

He still has a lot going for him. The Obama administration is enthusiastic about his initiative. Another key supporter, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.), who chairs the Senate committee that will write the next big transportation bill, survived a tough electoral challenge. And Florida Republican John Mica, who is in line to chair the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, considers the mayor's proposal the kind of innovative financing that should be explored, according to an aide.

Villaraigosa's 30/10 plan seeks federal loans and subsidies to build a dozen projects in 10 years, instead of the 30 years envisioned when Los Angeles County voters passed Measure R, a half-cent sales tax for transportation, in 2008. Included in those plans are a long-sought rail extension to Los Angeles International Airport, a Gold Line light-rail extension through the San Gabriel Valley and busways in the San Fernando Valley.

Another project is the 9.5-mile subway extension that would run along the Wilshire Corridor from the Purple Line's Wilshire-Western station to the Veterans Affairs' West Los Angeles Medical Center. The L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority board selected that alignment last week.

GOP-controlled House might hinder Villaraigosa's transit funding request - latimes.com

Our best hope is to convince them that this sets the model for localities finding their own money first, with an incentive that they'll get federal loans to speed up their projects.

It's a win for locals, for the feds, for people in LA and people accross the United States. I hope the message isn't lost in the political climate.

Still, a number of Congress watchers note that transportation spending has historically enjoyed bipartisan support and that Republicans have a long tradition of supporting infrastructure development, from the transcontinental railroad to the interstate highway system.

"In a big-picture way, L.A.'s general thrust toward financing assistance, which is more cost-effective to the federal government than conventional grant funding, is very much in step with controlling federal spending," said David Seltzer, a principal at Mercator Advisors, a consulting firm that advises organizations on infrastructure financing issues and was recently hired by MTA.

Republicans also could be open to creative financing ideas, especially if business groups and officials from other cities get behind them.

"The kinds of things that the mayor of Los Angeles wants to do, a lot of other mayors would like to do," said Jack Schenendorf, a former chief of staff to Republicans on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee who now works as a transportation lobbyist. "It's not just Democrats who are going to beat down the doors of Congress."

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

/\
Dreier was on NBC's "News Conference" show immediately following "Meet the Press" on Sunday morning and he vowed to support transportation in a bipartisan way. So hopefully the large delegation of lawmakers from California will work together for our state.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/station...106804483.html

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

Bombardier

This was fun for a half hour.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

As Angelenos, we complain about LA traffic and talk regularly about a future with fast, affordable mass transit. We encourage carpooling, bicycling, ridesharing, walking. Yet, when it comes to ditching our cars in favor of a high-speed rail system that could help alleviate many of our daily (and environmental) concerns, are we all talk or is LA ready to embrace a solution?

Can We Ditch Our Cars and Embrace High-Speed Rail? - LAist

[sediment]

Can We Ditch Our Cars and Embrace High-Speed Rail? - LAist

Easier and cheaper would be to ditch cars, move closer to work, and walk or bike back and forth.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

This had me rolling on the floor with laughter:

Obama Replaces Costly High-Speed Rail Plan With High-Speed Bus Plan | The Onion - America's Finest News Source | Onion News Network

[Bruce Bergman]

Easier and cheaper would be to ditch cars, move closer to work, and walk or bike back and forth.

Yeah, right, Suuuuure. I'm going to move willy-nilly to chase the work. If you are ex-Military and are already used to living out of a suitcase or a sea-bag, and can pack all your possessions in a small trailer and go, that could work. However...

With most people it's a major production to move, and a large financial hit - you pay a minimum of 10% of the house value at both ends of selling and buying. (And for me, lose the Prop 13 stability of knowing what it will cost to live in your house long term.) Not to mention the costs of paying a crew to come in and pack it all up and cart it all off, then unload and unpack at the new place.

Or for those who don't own, you'd go from a reasonable rent of a long term resident to a "New Renter, Top Dollar" situation. And get bumped up every time you moved across town to a new job again.

It's a lovely pipe dream to get everyone to live within walking distance of their work, but it's simply not practical for most people - you make the shift when the job moves 2000 miles - for 20 mile changes, you commute.

And government needs to disabuse themselves of the notion of forcing us to do it - unless they plan to offer incentives that cover those huge costs.

--<< Bruce >>--

[sediment]

So, there's no way to ditch our cars? Besides personal pods that deliver us door-to-door.

HSR costs about ten times more than the revenue that can be generated. I'll do the math later, but there is a reason why private companies are not clamoring to own and operate HSR in our country. Certainly not until after the debt is out of the way.

Oh, and it would be nice to work at the same company for life. No one seems to be offering that these days.

[CaliforniaAdventurer]

How're you and your spouse both going to find jobs walking distance from the same house?

[sediment]

My wife has a work-at-home job: Manager of Home-Maintenance and Child-Chauffering.

In short, it would have been better in the long-run for LA to grow up around a mass-transit system. But it didn't. It grew up around freeways.
Extremely expensive (Important Note: this dollar issue is the crux) retrofitting a mass transit system will not be successful on a large scale, like old-school systems like NYC or Boston. Only those fortunate enough to live near one stop and work near another stop will benefit. Some repositioning of homes (NoHo is the classic example I give) and jobs will occur over a decade or so, but nothing on a grand scale. End of the story.