PTP Digest 2003

CONTENTS * URGENT * ALERT * TAKE ACTION US House vote threatens to dismantle ISTEA Surface Transportation Policy Project September 2, 2003 * Istook: Fund highways, not transit, peds, bikes insight on the News Aug. 26, 2003 * Vancouver: Ottawa calls RAV rapid transit project "too risky" Vancouver Sun Saturday, July 19, 2003 * Vancouver: BC govt. ready to scuttle RAV transit line for highway Vancouver Sun Saturday » August 9 » 2003 * Vancouver: Ottawa calls RAV 'a very good project' Vancouver Sun Tuesday, August 12, 2003 * Vancouver: RAV line back on track for 2010 Vancouver Sun Tuesday, August 26, 2003 * Orange County: 8-mile CenterLine LRT to John Wayne Airport approved OCTA Press Release July 21, 2003 * Orange County: No recall vote on CenterLine LRT Los Angeles Times August 6, 2003 * Orange County: LRT opponents play on 'fear factor' OCWeekly August 15, 2003 * Dallas: Richardson seeks 5th LRT station Dallas Morning News 07/29/2003 * Dallas-Ft. Worth planners eye regional authority Dallas Business Journal - July 14, 2003 * Dallas: Time for region to unite for transit Dallas Morning News Thursday, August 14, 2003 * Dallas-Ft. Worth: Unity for regional transit needed Dallas Morning News 07/25/2003 * How light rail pays its way in Dallas Railway Age 2003/07/24 * Dallas: DART rains make Trinity Fest a 'sparkling success' Dallas Morning News 07/06/2003 =PTP============================================ ======================================================= URGENT * ALERT * TAKE ACTION ======================================================= Surface Transportation Policy Project Alliance for a New Transportation Charter September 2, 2003 HOUSE TO VOTE ON AMENDMENTS AFFECTING TRANSPORTATION CHOICES IN US BACKGROUND On Thursday, Sept. 4, the US House of Representatives will vote on the FY'04 Transportation Appropriations bill (H.R. 2989) -- it includes provisions that dismantle key transportation programs established in the landmark 1991 reform law ISTEA that allow local communities to provide the public with more transportation choices. if approved by Congress, H.R. 2989 would shut down Amtrak, terminate the Transportation Enhancements program, stagnate transit funding while expanding highways, and slow development of new transit systems. At this time, two of these areas -- restoration of the Enhancements Program and additional funding for Amtrak -- will be addressed through amendments during House action on H.R. 2989. We will keep you posted on further details regarding the Amtrak amendment and potential action to amend changes to transit funding levels, the New Starts program, the Jobs Access Reverse Commute program. (These issues will likely be taken up by the Senate Appropriations committee in their FY'04 budget bill). On Enhancements, Representatives Tom Petri (R-Wi) and John Olver (D- MA) are leading a bipartisan effort to ensure the continuation of the Transportation Enhancements (TE) program. Simply, their amendment eliminates Section 114 from H.R. 2989, the provision that eliminates Enhancements as a separate program. Others joining with Petri and Olver include Rep. Bill Lipinski (D-IL) and Rep. Sherwood Boehlert (R- NY); these Member will send a "Dear Colleague" letter to all House Members on Wednesday urging support for the Petri/Olver amendment. For further details and a sample letter, see our previous Action Alert at . ACTION NEEDED Contact your delegation TODAY and ask them to 1. Support the Petri/Olver amendment to continue the Enhancements program, and 2. Support an amendment to increase funding for Amtrak and keep passenger rail service in America. Find your Member's contact info at www.congress.org, or simply dial 800- 839-5276 for the Congressional switchboard and ask for their office. TALKING POINTS On Enhancements -- * Don't undermine a decade of success through the backdoor - attaching this change to an appropriations bill as the authorizing committee is working to develop a multi-year TEA-21 renewal is wrong * The Enhancements program has the greatest degree of local control - Enhancements projects are locally-initiated and locally-selected * it is a program where a modest commitment yields big results - less than 2 cents of every dollar for pedestrian and bicycling safety has made a real difference in communities * The protection provided in current law - a 10 percent set aside of Surface Transportation Funds (STP) funds - is key to continuation of the program On Amtrak -- * Amtrak President David Gunn has already announced that he will be forced to end all intercity passenger rail service -- including services to our community and state -- under H.R. 2989's funding level of $900 million, only 50% of his request * A majority of House Members have already indicated their support of the $1.8 billion level in a letter sent earlier this year to the leaders of the House Appropriations Committee FOLLOW THROUGH Report back what you hear to abroaddus@transact.org. Spread the word through your email networks, but make some calls and ask state and local elected officials - especially Mayors - to contact your Congressional delegation, also associations of cities, health orgs, and transportation orgs and ask them to make calls. =PTP=========================================== [PTP NOTE: US Rep. Ernest Istook, Jr. (R-Ok) has spearheaded the effort in the US Congress to bollix Sound Transit's light rail program in Seattle and pull the plug on national rail passenger service (Amtrak). While he has raised a flurry of extraneous issues to justify his actions, the following exposition of his views in the rightwing insight on the News (affiliated with the Washington Times) makes it clear that his agenda is to fundamentally wreck the current federal program for funding urban mass transportation and alternative mobility infrastructure such as pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Istook's ranting against "robbing the Highway Trust Fund" hearkens back decades and would effectively reverse sound transportation planning achievements and scuttle the progress made since the implementation of the federal ISTEA program.] insight on the News Aug. 26, 2003 Opinion: Highway Robbery By Rep. Ernest J. Istook Jr. it sparks justified rage whenever anyone suggests diverting money from the Social Security Trust Fund. Those dollars should be used for their intended purpose - Social Security - and nothing else. Yet another diversion of trust-fund dollars has been under way for many years, and it's time to stop the practice. Taxes paid by drivers don't all go to our roads. Almost one-sixth of federal fuel taxes are diverted to pay transit subsidies - mostly to benefit states with elaborate (and heavily subsidized) mass-transit systems. That diversion now totals $5 billion per year at a time when too many roads are in disrepair. Nowhere in government is the principle of "user pays" better demonstrated than with our roads. Road users pay for their vehicles: to operate them, fuel them, maintain them, house them and insure them, plus a tax that pays for other people's transportation. Transit users typically pay a fare that covers only a fraction of operating expenses and nothing toward the capital costs of vehicles, tracks or systems. Of course, they and everyone else pays some when general-revenue funds are used for any project - whether transit or highway. While diversion and inflation have hurt our Highway Trust Fund, the needs have grown immensely. More than 90 percent of America's passenger- miles and 71 percent of the freight tonnage go by road, because no alternative offers the huge flexibility provided by roads and highways. Yet when fuel-tax dollars aren't used to improve highways, congestion results, and gridlocked cars generate avoidable pollution when they stand idling. A full 40 percent of urban traffic constantly is congested due to lack of road investment and improvements. No other form of transportation can move as many people as roads, nor create the network that extends to every destination. Another challenge is that many light-rail systems across the country too often are planned as status symbols rather than to reduce congestion. In the proper situations, rail can reduce congestion, but that doesn't mean it always will do so. Some systems have too few riders to provide much relief. Others may have more riders, but mostly from people who formerly took a bus, meaning an inexpensive transit system has been replaced with a very expensive one. We need closer scrutiny of which systems work well and which do not. Unfortunately, heavy federal subsidies have skewed cost-benefit ratios and created such a clamor for light-rail funds that it's hard to separate the good projects from the bad. That is why the Bush administration deserves support for its proposal that communities must provide at least half the money to build the systems, rather than seeking 80 percent federal funding as current law permits. Meanwhile, our roads and bridges are being shortchanged. The country now has 167,000 deficient bridges. The national backlog of needed road and bridge work now tops $325 billion, and some say it's $400 billion. Narrow roads need to be widened; broader pull-over shoulders are needed; dangerous curves need to be realigned; safety dividers are lacking; bumps, potholes and rough pavement need to be repaired. This backlog costs lives - contributing to the 42,800 lives lost annually in America's backed-up traffic. Yet there's another major diversion, even after transit takes its cut. Another federal law dictates that each state must spend another 10 percent of all surface-transportation-program funds on "transportation enhancements." What are those? in part, these are bicycle and pedestrian trails - but our fuel-tax dollars also are spent restoring old buildings, creating transportation museums and buying rail right-of-way. These enhancements are popular with many people, but they don't move any of the traffic that paid the fuel taxes. These mandated diversions take another $648 million per year that could help fix roads and bridges. Sadly, those who clamor for enhancements don't offer to pay for them. Instead, they insist that fuel taxes must be diverted from road and bridge repairs, even at the expense of safety. The issue is not whether the enhancements offer "some" benefit, but whether they have the same high priority as traffic improvements. This practice of diverting Highway Trust Fund dollars can be changed. In a few weeks, Congress will be asked to agree that enhancements should be permitted rather than mandated. This change would permit states to use the $648 million for roads and bridges if they wish. Proponents of other uses should offer better ways to pay for them than the current robbing of the Highway Trust Fund. For example, communities that have (or want to encourage) widespread bicycle use should provide local funds for that purpose, rather than insisting that all 50 states are required to force road users to pay the costs for bicycle users. The Highway Trust Fund comes from the fuel taxes paid by each state's drivers, and we should trust states to assess their own needs and decide for themselves how to spend the money. It would greatly help to relieve congestion and correct unsafe roads and bridges. Diversions into so-called "enhancements" began at a time when fuel-tax revenue was constantly rising, so it was easier to afford these "enhancements." Today things are different; now highway funding is billions of dollars short of even covering the basic needs. Today lives are lost and the whole country is slowed down because we need better roads. The backlog is so great that many support raising fuel taxes to address it. Naturally, road users object because they're already paying extra money that is siphoned away from roads. Before raising taxes, shouldn't we maximize how we use what we already collect? it's time to revisit how our transportation dollars are spent. Each mode of transportation should help pay for itself, rather than expecting road users to pay for everyone else. Instead of overtaxing America's drivers, let's keep America moving. Istook, a Republican, is serving his fifth term representing Oklahoma's fifth Congressional District and is chairman of the U.S. House Appropriations subcommittee on Transportation and Treasury. http://www.insightmag.com/news/453049.html =PTP========================================= Vancouver Sun Saturday, July 19, 2003 RAV too risky, secret report says Peter O'Neil; with files from Matthew Ramsey, Doug Ward and Maureen Gulyas OTTAWA -- A secret federal government report dismisses B.C.'s request for $450 million for the proposed Richmond-Airport-Vancouver rapid transit megaproject and warns it faces "significant" risk of cost overruns, is unlikely to meet ridership projections, won't reduce traffic gridlock, and will do little to reduce Canada's greenhouse gas emissions. The 16-page internal federal cabinet document, prepared by officials in several government departments and stamped "secret," warns that a federal investment in the $1.7-billion project would drain resources from other federal-provincial initiatives in B.C., such as twinning the Trans- Canada Highway at Kicking Horse Canyon. it dismisses B.C.'s request for $450 million, suggesting instead that Ottawa could contribute at most $350 million, despite repeated warnings from the provincial government that a lesser amount may be meaningless. "The province . . . has been verbally unequivocal that, unless the federal government contributes this amount, the project will be terminated," states the report from infrastructure Canada that was completed last month and obtained by The Vancouver Sun. But even a $350 million commitment would entail considerable risk and could open the floodgates for similar applications from other Canadian cities, according to the report. Ken Dobell, the formerTransLink director who is now deputy minister to Premier Gordon Campbell, said Friday he was aware of but had not seen the report. Dobell, in Ottawa this week to discuss the RAV project with senior federal officials, suggested that some of the concerns may be dated. "We had very positive discussions," Dobell said. "Federal officials had indicated there were no technical issues, they were satisfied with management of the project, that it was a good project, and that they would like to see if proceed if we can work out the details." The report warns that the federal government's two prospective partners, the B.C. government and the Greater Vancouver Transportation Authority (TransLink), may turn to Ottawa for help if more cash is needed. "The other public sector contributors at this time appear to be potentially over-extended with major capital commitments and there is significant risk that construction costs will be higher than currently estimated," the report warns. "The risks of potential pressures to increase the share of public financing - -and a particular risk to the federal government if it is an investor in the project -- are significant." The bureaucrats suggest that federal cash be subject to several stringent conditions, including completion of underground geotechnical testing that could expose the risk of potentially higher costs. "Tunnelling in bedrock in the downtown core and in the area adjacent to and below False Creek may present particular challenges, since these sections of the construct will be below the water table and subject to infiltration," according to infrastructure Canada. "To add further complexity to the project, significant efforts will be needed during design and construction to address seismic considerations, as Vancouver is located in an area of high seismic risk." The report was published before Natural Resources Minister Herb Dhaliwal angered project proponents by saying Ottawa would contribute, at most, $300 million. The RAV line, according to its proponents, is needed by 2010 to deal with exploding growth, traffic congestion, and pollution in the Richmond-to- Vancouver corridor. "We need to add capacity in a sustainable way," states a project backgrounder on TransLink's Web site. in addition to the $450 million requested from Ottawa, the RAV project is to be funded with contributions of $300 million each from the provincial government, TransLink, and the Vancouver international Airport Authority. An additional $300 million is to come from a yet-to-be-determined private sector partner, representing 18 per cent of the capital costs. But the report lists seven areas of risk "that present particular concern to the federal government as a potential investor." Among those concerns: - The $1.7-billion estimated project cost doesn't take into account the final results of geotechnical testing of the areas to be tunnelled under Cambie Street, False Creek, and beneath various downtown streets leading to Waterfront Station near Canada Place. "Unanticipated ground conditions leading to delays in the construction schedule and changes in construction approaches can significantly drive up costs. Experiences in other jurisdictions indicates that tunnelling costs can be significantly higher than initiation estimates. -The project's current estimate on capital and operating costs is dependent on transit ridership in the corridor increasing from its current 40,000 daily to 100,000. "However, all rapid transit and commuter rail projects constructed in the Vancouver region during the past 20 years over-estimated ridership projections," it states. "Based on previous experiences, the estimates of riders on RAVP could be over-optimistic, thereby impacting on the rationale for the project." The report says significant usage of the RAV line is dependent on the region's bus fleet of 1,200 growing by one third to feed into the line. However, the RAVP project team is proposing to "decrease bus services in the Richmond-Vancouver corridor and apply savings to the costs of operating the new rapid transit line." -A May report on the impact of rapid transit on greenhouse gas emissions suggestions the line would contribute less than 0.5 per cent of Canada's target, and this estimate "may in fact be an over-estimation." The study's estimate didn't take into account the "quite high" emissions caused by project construction as well as the potential increase in car usage "that would result from roads gaining capacity where the subway would replace current on-street bus routes." -The report says B.C.'s request for RAV funding would effectively use up all of the province's share of the infrastructure budget, even though the province told Ottawa in March that the Kicking Horse project was "its highest priority." The B.C. government, according to the report, wants $270 million from Ottawa to complete the highway on top of the $100 million Ottawa has contributed so far for the project. "A commitment to RAVP would therefore allow no room for the federal government to contribute to the completion of the twinning the Trans- Canada Highway through Kicking Horse Canyon." Ottawa could therefore only commit to rapid transit if contributions to Kicking Horse were terminated for the "foreseeable future." Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan said the "secret" report sounds a lot like the one his city's transportation planner wrote months ago. "There was very little interest at the time in what we were saying," said Corrigan, who took the Burnaby report to Greater Vancouver regional district and TransLink boards but said it barely caused a ripple. That local report, written by a former transit employee, said the ridership statistics were unrealistic and, like the federal report, concluded tunneling was too risky and would leave taxpayers on the line for cost overruns. Richmond Councillor Bill McNulty, who is that city's acting mayor, insisted local statistics on ridership and the reduction of greenhouse emissions and traffic contradict the leaked federal report. In addition, he said, the $350-million maximum federal contribution is actually good news for the project, considering Dhaliwal's earlier statement that Ottawa would contribute no more than $300 million. "We're up $50 million, so that's very positive," McNulty said. Vancouver Mayor Larry Campbell was travelling and unavailable for comment, but his executive assistant Jeff Meggs suggested there was nothing new in the federal report. Vancouver 2010 Bid Corp. president John Furlong said the RAV line was never included in the official Vancouver 2010 bid book because the fate of the RAV line has always been uncertain. "RAV wasn't in the Olympic plan so this report doesn't really change the status of the bid," Furlong said. The RAV line's importance to Olympic organizers was always somewhat limited because the mega-project would be primarily used by visitors -- not by the "Olympic family" of athletes, coaches and officials. if the RAV project collapses, regional transit officials will need to find other ways to move the huge number of visitors expected to arrive in 2010 when Vancouver and Whistler host the Winter Olympic Games. Nevertheless, Furlong said the RAV line is a worthy project. Bid organizers, he added, had hoped that the Olympic process might accelerate the RAV line's completion by bringing the various levels of government together behind it. =PTP======================================== http://www.canada.com/vancouver/story.asp?id=3B0A1C08-8708-4693- AF91-4E406D7ED1AB Vancouver Sun Saturday » August 9 » 2003 B.C. ready to sacrifice RAV line for highway project Kicking Horse project would get nod ahead of urban transit Frances Bula Vancouver Sun B.C. has told Ottawa that concluding a deal on the $1.7-billion Richmond- Airport-Vancouver line may not be possible, The Vancouver Sun has learned. in what appears to be an abrupt U-turn in negotiations, Premier Gordon Campbell has indicated to federal officials within the last week that if the federal government can't commit to both the long-term $620-million Kicking Horse project and the RAV line, then the RAV project may not be possible. That's at odds with where negotiations were headed just prior to that, according to documents obtained by The Sun. in a July 25 letter and proposed memorandum of understanding to Prime Minister Jean Chretien, Campbell outlined a modified offer from the province, where Ottawa would be asked to contribute only $400 million, instead of the $450 million it has insisted on for the past year. That new provincial offer came a week after a critical federal report on the RAV line was leaked to the media, with a fairly negative appraisal of the project and a recommendation that the federal government commit no more than $350 million and only after certain conditions were met. in the proposal, TransLink's contribution to the project was set at $327 million, up from the $300 million currently committed, and the province's commitment was raised to $374 million, up from its previously committed $300 million, in order to "support the project via performance payments to improve the public-private partnership." in that positive and optimistic-sounding letter, Campbell wrote: "We support the allocation of $250 million from the Strategic infrastructure Fund, acknowledging that will limit British Columbia's future access to those funds." That $250 million represents all the money B.C. is due to get in the $2-billion, 10-year strategic infrastructure fund, which would mean there was no money left over for any other infrastructure. The province committed to naming the new line the Canada Line, with the Canada logo prominently displayed, and it outlined a staggered federal payment schedule of $50 million in 2004, $200 million in 2005, and $50 million in each of the three years after that. in a separate July 28 letter to deputy head of infrastructure Canada Andre Juneau, Campbell's chief of staff, Ken Dobell, also indicated that the federal government would be protected from any cost overruns. However, shortly after that, Campbell reversed positions, saying that Kicking Horse was the province's first priority and that, if the federal government was going to provide money for RAV, it should look for project funding outside the infrastructure fund. It has been estimated that the cost for creating a wider road for the crash-plagued stretch of mountain highway is $620 million. The province and federal government have already committed about $60 million each. Campbell also said that it might be necessary to recognize that an agreement on the RAV line may be impossible, despite everyone's best efforts. The province's apparent move to back Kicking Horse over RAV raises the possibility of an urban-rural fight over infrastructure money that has various political dimensions. Campbell and the provincial Liberals have presented themselves as champions of B.C.'s "heartland." However, federal Liberal MPs will likely be looking to argue for improved urban transit -- an issue close to the hearts of potential federal Liberal voters in their political power base -- as they head into an election year under a new prime minister. A representative from industry Minister Allan Rock's office, which has been handling the federal-provincial negotiations on the issue since MP Herb Dhaliwal withdrew after a perceived conflict of interest related to his airport limousine company, declined to speculate on the consequences of Campbell's letter to Rock outlining his new position. "Minister Rock continues to work with the B.C. government on a host of B.C. Infrastructure projects, with the understanding that Kicking Horse is the province's number one priority," said communications director Selena Beattie. Dobell, the province's chief negotiator for the line, dismissed the idea that the province may be looking for an exit strategy to a deal that looks increasingly tough for the province, especially if it cannot ask the federal government for help with cost overruns. "The province is not looking for an out," he said. Several deadlines the province imposed since the end of June have come and gone already and Dobell acknowledged that "ultimately, you run out of deadlines." But Dobell said the province is still in intense negotiations with federal officials. "We are in discussions with them today, we may well be in discussions Monday and Tuesday. It's very much the 11th hour." He also said that the province had not changed positions. It had always said that Kicking Horse was its first priority and that remains true. TransLink CEO Pat Jacobsen said that "all the dialogues I've heard make us very optimistic" and that it would surprise her if the province backed off. Jacobsen that although the province's priority for infrastructure funds is Kicking Horse, there are other places the federal government could go to fund the RAV line. "When Toronto was bidding for the Olympics, they didn't take [the federal contributions towards that] out of the infrastructure funds. Or the airport- rail link," said Jacobsen. "I think there is some interest that some of it be outside the infrastructure fund." Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan, who has been a vocal critic at Greater Vancouver regional district meetings of the process for developing the RAV line, said he's flummoxed by what the province is doing. He said GVRD directors were pressured to vote in favour of motions needed to enable the RAV line to proceed because they were repeatedly told that if they didn't, they would be giving up a substantial federal contribution. Now, he said, the province appears to be ready to pass on that federal contribution -- which was never firm to begin with -- with no suggestion of getting money for any alternative mass transit project. "I don't understand how things could be so disorganized, to move down a path so far and spend so much money, without the commitments in place," he said. Corrigan said he will be hugely disappointed if federal and provincial funds don't come into the transit system, even if the RAV line doesn't go ahead. =PTP======================================== http://www.canada.com/vancouver/story.asp?id=D895856A-2824-4038- 888A-62AAC31234EC Vancouver Sun Tuesday, August 12, 2003 PM, Campbell try to keep RAV line on track Jim Beatty VICTORIA -- Premier Gordon Campbell and Prime Minister Jean Chretien got together by phone late Monday afternoon to discuss the cost-sharing dispute threatening the Richmond-Airport-Vancouver rapid transit line. But officials refused to say whether they reached any agreement on the future of the project. "Our position is that it is a very good project. We hope at some point we can be a partner," said Thoren Hudyma, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister's Office. "We're still working on it." Hudyma refused to reveal any details regarding the conversation. The $1.7-billion rapid-transit line faces an uncertain future after Ottawa announced last month that it wouldn't contribute the $450 million it had been asked to put up. While Ottawa would normally fund the RAV line through its infrastructure fund, it is believed Campbell asked Chretien to contribute to the megaproject with money from a different fund. "Both levels of government clearly recognize the urgency of the situation and the need to get it resolved as quickly as possible," Campbell spokesman Mike Morton said Monday. Campbell, who interrupted a vacation to address the RAV issue, could not be reached for comment. The province wants Ottawa to contribute to both the $1.7 billion RAV line and to the twinning of the Trans-Canada Highway at Kicking Horse Canyon, a $620 million project. initially, the province maintained that both projects are of equal importance, but it has recently said the Kicking Horse project is the top priority. it is believed Campbell asked Ottawa to commit its infrastructure money to the Kicking Horse project and fund the RAV line from another, undisclosed source. Proponents of the RAV line say it is needed by 2010 to address exploding growth, traffic congestion and pollution in the Richmond-Vancouver corridor. But the fate of the RAV line is in significant doubt, after Ottawa expressed serious concern about its cost and effectiveness. In fact, Ottawa's contribution to the RAV project has never been assured. Although B.C. requested $450 million from Ottawa, a report leaked to the media last month shows the federal government has serious reservations about the megaproject. The report says the transit line faces significant cost overruns, limited ridership, won't reduce traffic gridlock and will do little to reduce greenhouse gases. At most, Ottawa has suggested a commitment of $350 million to the RAV line. Even then, the money would only be granted after the completion of underground geotechnical testing, which could expose the risk of higher costs. Provincial officials say time is of the essence. If the RAV line doesn't go ahead now, it won't be ready for the 2010 Winter Olympics. "We haven't heard anything," admitted Ken Hardie, communications manager at TransLink, the regional transportation authority. "We're counting on the province to do the negotiating." Sam Corea, spokesman for those organizing the 2010 Olympics, said the RAV line is not crucial to the transportation needs of the Games. While Olympic officials have no official comment on the current financial controversy surrounding the project, they acknowledge the need to make an immediate decision to ensure the RAV line construction is complete before 2010. jbeatty@direct.ca =PTP========================================= Vancouver Sun Tuesday, August 26, 2003 RAV line back on track for 2010 Ottawa agrees to pay $300 million toward the $1.7-billion project Jim Beatty "The province is quite entitled to assume there will be future infrastructure money . . . to draw from." VANCOUVER (CP) - A key cog in the effort to provide a smooth 2010 Winter Olympics was realized Tuesday with the announcement that public funding is in place for a transit line connecting Vancouver, the airport and suburban Richmond. "The RAV (Richmond-Airport-Vancouver) project is proceeding as of today," said Doug McCallum, mayor of Surrey and chairman of the Greater Vancouver Transit Authority, also known as TransLink. "it's a very exciting day for the region." The expensive rapid transit line now has $1.2 billion in secured funding, $300 million each from the federal and provincial governments, the Vancouver international Airport Authority and TransLink. The additional $300 million needed to get the minimum $1.5 billion required was to come from the private sector. Four short-listed companies have been selected and asked to submit "requests for proposals," which are detailed submissions that require the four companies to submit plans for construction and technology, said McCallum. He expressed confidence the additional $300 million would not be a problem for the winning private-sector builder. "We've been assured of $300 million from the private sector, which is within the range we've always said we were looking at," he said. The RAV line is a key part of the transportation plan for the 2010 Games and also aimed at improving public transit to Richmond, a city of about 165,000 just south of Vancouver. The line's route has been controversial with some residents, since it will involve tearing up a broad, picturesque boulevard from downtown Vancouver to the southern edge of the city. The B.C. government had initially requested $450 million from the federal government and indicated the project could not proceed otherwise. But McCallum and Ken Dobell, the deputy minister in the premier's office, said cost-estimate reductions assisted in getting the project to proceed regardless. They said the project's estimated cost was reduced by $50 million after that initial request, leaving the federal government request at $400 million. But although the federal government offered $400 million, the local authorities decided they didn't want Ottawa to commit all its B.C. Infrastructure allotment to one project. The local authorities agreed to allocate $300 million of the federal money to the RAV project. "We didn't want to be seen as taking all the infrastructure money (for one project)," said Dobell. "We felt comfortable the $300 million would leave money for other projects in B.C." Dobell and Jane Bird, the project director, also said they don't anticipate cost overruns, but if that occurred they would be borne by the corporate partner through contractual agreements. "Contract documentation will place the risk of overruns on the private sector," said Bird, acknowledging that didn't apply to tunnelling, which is still under negotiation regarding cost overruns. in Victoria, NDP Leader Joy MacPhail was predicting overruns and said the public needs to know all the facts about the funding. "He (Premier Gordon Campbell) has to release the PriceWaterhouseCoopers study about what the cost projections are on this," said MacPhail. "He has to explain why the federal government is assuming no risk of cost overruns." There has been too much secrecy surrounding the project, she said. "The facts around this have been kept secret," said MacPhail. "TransLink won't release the studies, even to their own board members. Mr. Campbell has released no studies to show the viability of this project." James Moore, the Canadian Alliance transport critic, suggested the federal contribution was inadequate. "In 2002, B.C. motorists paid Ottawa roughly $750 million in federal fuel taxes and an additional $378 million in GST on that fuel, making Ottawa's total tax bite just over $1.1 billion in 2002 alone," he said. Last year, Ottawa returned only $37 million to British Columbia for infrastructure improvements, said Moore. "And we're supposed to thank Ottawa for this money for the RAV project?" =PTP============================================== http://www.octa.net/news/late/072103.asp OCTA Press Release July 21, 2003 OCTA Approves CenterLine Light-Rail Route Between Santa Ana and John Wayne Airport Board Votes 9-2 to Proceed With Work on Eight-Mile initial Operating Segment ORANGE - After hearing testimony from 75 elected officials, business leaders and community members during a five-hour meeting, the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) Board of Directors voted 9-2 today (July 21) to support a CenterLine light-rail route between the Depot at Santa Ana and John Wayne Airport. The eight-mile initial operating segment will provide service to John Wayne Airport, the South Coast Plaza shopping center and Orange County Performing Arts Center, Mater Dei High School, the Santa Ana Civic Center, the County Government Center and Courthouse, the Santa Ana Artists Village, and the Depot at Santa Ana, where it will connect with Amtrak and Metrolink commuter trains as well as several OCTA bus routes. "OCTA's decision to proceed with the CenterLine project represents a major milestone for Orange County, " said OCTA Chairman Tim Keenan. "CenterLine is a crucial link in a balanced transportation system that will serve Orange County residents for years to come." The Board considered a variety of alternatives to CenterLine during the meeting, including a bus rapid transit system, light-rail lines to western and northern Orange County, increased Metrolink service, and shifting money to other highway and road projects. Of the 75 speakers who attended the meeting, nearly two-thirds voiced support for the CenterLine route between Santa Ana and John Wayne Airport. The revised CenterLine route will cost between $900 million and $1 billion to build and is expected to carry 15,000 to 20,000 riders per day when it opens in 2008. in a related motion, the Board voted unanimously to explore options for increasing the frequency of Metrolink commuter rail service between Fullerton and Laguna Niguel to offer day and evening service every 30 minutes, seven days a week. For More information: Ted Nguyen (714) 560-5334 tnguyen@octa.net =PTP========================================== http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me- centerline6aug06,1,4011599.story?coll=la-headlines-california Los Angeles Times August 6, 2003 ORANGE COUNTY CenterLine Won't Be on Recall Ballot Supervisors decline to seek an Oct. 7 straw vote on the light-rail project. Supporters say a vote would have put talks for federal funding at risk. By Jean O. Pasco Times Staff Writer Orange County supervisors on Tuesday rejected the idea of asking voters whether they approve of the CenterLine light-rail project, a move supporters said would have jeopardized negotiations for federal funding. Supervisor Chris Norby had suggested a CenterLine straw vote on the Oct. 7 recall ballot. Norby, who opposes the project, said a favorable vote would "silence most of the critics, including me." But, several speakers at the board's meeting insisted that the prospect of a vote would have killed chances of keeping funding for the project on target in the federal budget, which takes effect Oct. 1. "There's a lot of scrutiny and a lot of people playing politics to get their projects funded and not funding other people's projects," Rep. Loretta Sanchez (D-Santa Ana) said. "it's always easy to turn back federal funds, but it's never easy to get back our place in line." it could be another six years before money would be available if the project weren't funded this year, said Arthur Leahy, executive director of the Orange County Transportation Authority, the agency planning to build the $1-billion light-rail system using federal, state and local funds. The local money would come from voter-approved Measure M in 1990. Supporters should have welcomed a vote, Norby said after he managed to persuade only Supervisor Bill Campbell to support the ballot question. Supervisor Tom Wilson cast the deciding "no" vote but didn't comment on his reasons. Norby predicted that the project would "limp along" with questions about funding and its disappearing route, which shrank last month for the fourth time to 8 miles after irvine voters rejected city participation in the project. The line was once envisioned to stretch 28 miles. Leahy said federal financing had been approved and would stay on track without a divisive political campaign against the project. An environmental impact report is expected to be completed by early fall. "This allows us to continue," he said. Several speakers chided supervisors for getting involved in the issue, accusing members of meddling in the business of OCTA, a separate state-authorized agency. Norby and Campbell, who sit on the OCTA board, have opposed CenterLine on that panel. Last month, the transportation board voted 9 to 2 to continue with planning for an 8-mile line between John Wayne Airport and the Santa Ana Transportation Center. The same arguments that swayed a majority of transportation board members were reiterated Tuesday for supervisors by 19 people supporting the project. Among the arguments: Students at Santa Ana College, working-class people and senior citizens on retirement incomes need other forms of transportation than cars; expanding freeways won't accommodate all the county's future traffic needs; and voters approved the light-rail project 13 years ago when they voted for Measure M. The latter argument prompted a sharp response from Norby, who reminded the audience that some of the same people who favor CenterLine also argued in favor of voting repeatedly on whether a commercial airport should be built at the former El Toro Marine base despite an initial 1994 vote approving the plan. After three subsequent votes, the airport was defeated last year. About half a dozen speakers criticized the project, saying it would bleed riders and money from the bus system, not unclog freeways. "If the people want CenterLine," Anaheim City Councilman Tom Tait said in supporting an Oct. 7 vote, "I will fold my tent and shut up." =PTP============================================== http://www.ocweekly.com/printme.php?&eid=46304 OCWeekly August 15, 2003 Fear Factor The four horsemen of the suburban apocalypse by Julian Smith-Newman There are very good reasons to oppose the CenterLine light-rail project. Just eight miles long, it's only slightly longer than your average thrill ride, and—at $1 billion—about 10 times as expensive. Studies show it probably won't seduce people out of their cars, or decrease congestion or pollution. But that's apparently not enough for the anti-rail group Fund Alternatives instead of Rail (FAIR). Tearing the Willie Horton page from the smear- campaign playbook, FAIR now warns that CenterLine might trigger a crime wave. A headline on the group's website suggests light rail would bring to Orange County the four horsemen of the suburban apocalypse: "Home Values Down/Noise, Congestion, and Crime UP." The site offers links to just two sources to support its fear factor. One, a 2003 Cal State Fullerton study of property values near light rail, mentions crime just three times in its 50 pages. The only line that appears remotely relevant—"there are possible negative effects for properties adjacent to the line itself and properties ‘too close' (i.e. less than 300 meters) to a station that could suffer the negative nuisance effects of noise, congestion, and increased crime"—appears in bold on the FAIR site. But "possible" and "could" are pretty tepid, and the study offers no evidence to support the obvious speculation. The other link is to a 1999 article in Austin Review—a conservative publication managed by University of Texas students and funded by a free-enterprise booster group—that emphasizes the "dark side" of light rail by describing how a "criminal class" will "regard [the light rail system] as a hunting ground." The author vaguely refers to "FBI statistics," but doesn't tell us what they are, and cites numbers from the Santa Clara County Transit District, circa 1998, that show you're about 60 percent more likely to get hassled on a bus than on a train (23 vs. 14 assaults, respectively). CenterLine's friends—and many foes—don't take the crime argument seriously. "I don't think crime is a big problem," said Wayne King, a leading figure for Drivers for Highway Safety and a staunch light-rail opponent. Roy Shahbazian, a regular transit user and member of the Rail Advocates of Orange County, agreed. "Nobody's going to try to do a robbery on a light-rail line," he said. "This issue always comes up [in transit discussions]. People play on the fears of affluent neighborhoods in the area." Sarah Catz, a rail supporter and one-time member of the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA) board, said, "Those accusations sound so silly and ridiculous. They are obviously just scare tactics." But John Kleinpeter, FAIR's founder and director, swears they're not. "There's no personal fear [of something crime-related]," he said. "I don't want to be made out as someone who is afraid of the [light rail] system because of crime. I don't want it to be written that i'm afraid someone from Santa Ana is going to rob me. i've never said people riding trains are bad. Never once have I said that. What you can gain from the [FAIR] website is what's been written about light rail in other cities. Just like there's impact from noise and congestion, there's also impact from crime." But Bureau of Transportation Statistics studies from 1995 to 2000—compiled from U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration and National Transit Database figures—show violent crime is lower on light rail than on other modes of transportation. Just in case, OCTA is willing to take extra precautions. "Customer safety is obviously a priority," said Ted Nguyen, OCTA spokesman. "Once platforms and stations are constructed, there'll be an overall plan set up to address safety issues. Transit police, contracted through the sheriff's office, will be an integral part of that." =PTP=============================================== http://www.lightrail.com/news03-07-29-4.htm Dallas Morning News 07/29/2003 5th Richardson rail station sought Council offers to pay $8 million if DART will pledge to build site By SARAH POST / The Dallas Morning News RICHARDSON – The City Council, seeking to keep alive the idea of a downtown light-rail station, voted Monday night to relieve Dallas Area Rapid Transit of any commitment to pay for the facility. Council members voted, 5-2, to send a letter to DART offering to pay $8 million toward construction of a Main Street station, if the agency would commit to building it. City officials say they need DART's pledge to build the station because, without it, the city stands to lose $8 million in federal funding that would pay half of the project's cost. Ray Noah, Richardson's representative on DART's board, told council members that a new transportation bill in the Legislature could jeopardize the federal funding. He encouraged Richardson to "get a finger in the dike" before serious changes are made to transportation funding mandates. "Or you will pretty much be stuck with what you've got because all the money will be put to areas that haven't had funding," he said. DART and the North Central Texas Council of Governments are trying to determine whether there is a market and rider demand for a station, which officials envision building just south of Jackson Street and west of Greenville Avenue, less than a mile from the station on Arapaho Road. City Council member Jim Shepherd said he could not support the letter because it did not mention what sources of funding the city might use besides taxes. He said he wanted funding spelled out and preferred voter approval. "What I see is a black-and-white commitment in which the city hopes to raise money outside of taxes," he said. Council member Bob Townsend also voted against sending the letter. Mr. Noah said the funding source is not important to DART. irving and Dallas have made similar offers to DART, for a Texas Stadium station and a Love Field station, respectively. Neither city specified how it would pay for the construction. Richardson Mayor Pro Tem John Murphy said that any discussion of funding is premature and that the city's priority is to get the station onto DART's drawing board. "No developers or land owners are going to commit to something that's not on DART's plan," he said. "We are not shoving money across the table tonight. We are talking about a long-range commitment." Officials said it could be seven years or more before the station can be justified. "We're just trying to hold our place while we sort all this out," Assistant City Manager Michael Wanchick said. About 40 residents attended the meeting, but they were not allowed to address the council before its vote. Some were opposed to spending city money on the project. "Number one, the station is not needed," resident Jay Dalehite said after the meeting. "And at a time when the city is trying to pay its bills, I don't think this is fiscally responsible." Some in the community argue that the Jackson Street site is unnecessary because it is minutes away from another station in Richardson. But others said they came to the meeting to learn more about the city's involvement with the proposed station. "I don't know which side to take," said Ruth Mintline. "I see both sides," said Bob Macy. "But I tend to be conservative." E-mail spost@dallasnews.com =PTP========================================== http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2003/07/14/focus1.html Dallas Business Journal - July 14, 2003 IN DEPTH: LOGISTICS Workin' on the railroad Area planners already are studying options for a North Texas regional transit authority to present at the 79th legislative session in 2005 Margaret Allen Senior Writer in an attempt to resolve a long-running Metroplex dilemma, area planners hope to present the 79th Texas legislative session in 2005 with options for a new regional transit authority. The idea is to come up with a local solution, rather than have state lawmakers force one on the region, according to Michael Morris, executive director of the 16-county North Central Texas Council of Governments. NCTCOG is a voluntary association of local governments established to assist in planning regional development "By this time next summer, we'd like to have something in place to present to our legislative delegation, so (that) by next session, we have a specific proposal on how the region will develop an institutional structure to carry out this multicounty seamless transit system," Morris said. "If we don't go out and present the options, someone else will do it for us." Planners hope to create a single agency to oversee development of public rail and bus transportation in a six-county North Texas region. The Metroplex already has three separate transit agencies: Dallas Area Rapid Transit; the Fort Worth Transportation Authority; and the recently formed Denton County Transit Authority. The issue of a regional transit authority proved controversial during the 78th legislative session, when lawmakers wrote bills without local consensus. Driving the issue is gridlock on Dallas-Fort Worth highways, a shortage of funding and the area's non-conformance with the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments. By 2007, the region must meet standards set by the law or risk losing millions in federal highway dollars. A regional rail corridor study now under way is considered a key to solving the regional transit problem. A fundamental premise of the study is efficient land use and "sustainable development," which envisions people living close to where they work and shop. The traditional model called for factories on one side of town and homes on the other. "The region can't sustain itself in the traditional mold," said Morris, noting that legislators are no longer willing to boost taxes to pay for costly highway construction, and that "the public will never tolerate paving the region." One of those continuing to lead the charge is well-known community leader and Dallas businessman Walt Humann, a staunch advocate of a regional approach to transportation. Humann has met during the past few weeks with executives from DART, the T, DCTA and the chambers of commerce from various cities to talk about forming the regional transportation authority. "We need to get to work now," Humann said. In April, he was among a handful of Metroplex officials testifying in Austin against HB 2953. The bill -- sponsored by Rep. Steve Wolens, D-Dallas, to create a regional transportation authority -- was criticized widely in North Texas for its lack of local input. "We almost lost regional authority to the state in the last legislative session," Humann said. "We had a lot of internicene warfare. We didn't have our act together. "it's time for us to work together as a united front because we only have 400 days left." The 18-month, $1.5 million Regional Rail Corridor Study was commissioned by NCTCOG to come up with solutions. Fort Worth-based Carter & Burgess Inc. is a lead consultant. The project is just now getting under way in earnest, said Tom Shelton, project director for Carter & Burgess in the company's Dallas office. The study takes a look at eight existing freight-rail corridors identified by NCTCOG in Dallas, Collin, Tarrant, Denton, Johnson and Ellis counties. NCTCOG has said a regional rail system could carry 58,000 riders a day. Through a process of public hearings, NCTCOG and its hired consultants will determine when and how corridors should be developed for commuter rail, light rail and bus service; the cost for each corridor; the priority corridors; a development timeline; and the development of adjacent real estate for efficient land use. "We can no longer continue to build more and more lanes of highways and freeways," Shelton said. "There gets to be a point of diminishing returns. It's not just money. But we physically cannot build the highway lanes fast enough to alleviate the congestion." Many options are being considered and will be presented, he said. For example, it might be that freight and commuter rail lines could operate on shared track; or that the commuter track might be built inside existing rights of way and operate alongside freight lines. With three transit agencies already in place, Shelton said the region wants to avoid competing with itself for tight federal dollars. "The first hurdle has been cleared," he said. "Everyone realizes we have a problem on a regional basis and that it needs to be addressed." Besides Carter & Burgess, which is handling the western subregion routes, consultants hired to help are San Francisco-based URS Corp. (NYSE: URS), lead consultant, eastern subregion routes in the Dallas area; Atlanta-based Manuel Padron & Associates Inc., revenue and costs; Fort Worth-based interStar Marketing & Public Relations, public participation; Bloomington, ill.-based Dunbar Transportation Consulting, feasibility, travel markets and planning services; and California-based Jacobs Engineering Group Inc. (NYSE: JEC), railroad coordination. Six "policy" and "technical" committees were formed to lead what Morris envisions as a grassroots process. Each committee will have 20 to 30 members. Public hearings scheduled through early fall will enable NCTCOG, the consultants and the committees to assess community reaction to commuter rail, where rail stations are required and the commercial and residential development needed around stations. When completed, NCTCOG can apply to the Federal Transit Administration's "New Starts Program" for federal funding for the system. Contact DBJ writer Margaret Allen at mallen@bizjournals.com or (214) 706-7119. =PTP=============================================== http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/stories/072703dnedidmntran sit.c4e4dbd6.html it's time for region to unite for transit Dallas Morning News Thursday, August 14, 2003 in an unprecedented collaboration, the editorial boards of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and The Dallas Morning News have linked arms to invite 1,600 North Texas political and transportation leaders to a public transit summit in the city of irving on Friday, Aug. 15, from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. The summit will be held at the Omni Mandalay Hotel at Los Colinas, 221 E. Las Colinas Blvd. The goal is to convince the leaders of the need to create a unified, all-encompassing public transit agency as a means of obtaining cleaner air, less-congested highways and a better economy. As the invitation states, the summit may be the region's last chance to build a self-directed solution as it moves toward a new era of sustainability. Satan should don a parka and mittens, for Hell has officially frozen over. No, Osama bin Laden didn't renounce violence. No, President Bush didn't hire Molly ivins to write his speeches. No, Metallica didn't recruit Tony Bennett to be its lead vocalist. it's more radical and startling than that. The editorial boards of the Fort Worth Star-Telegram and The Dallas Morning News have stacked their rifles and furled their standards. They've put their mortal competition in abeyance and temporarily joined forces to advance a noble cause in which both fervently believe: the creation of a unified, all-encompassing public transit agency to which all the region's more than 200 municipalities and counties would belong and contribute. it doesn't mean that the newspapers will suspend their rivalries. It does mean that, on this single issue, which both hold to be supremely important to the common good, the editorial boards will take the unprecedented step of advocating and arguing as one. Many editorial writers for the newspapers would rather swallow fetid fish oil than cavort with the enemy. We do it because the need is great and the consequences of inaction enormous. We do it because we hope to set an example of public spiritedness for a region that sometimes makes the former Yugoslavia look like Switzerland. if we can do it, so can the region's often fractious and quarreling political subdivisions. If we can do it, so by God can they. Why create a unified public transit agency? Concisely put, because the roads are congested, the air is filthy and the quality of life is eroding. To make matters worse, the federal government's threat to sanction the region unless the state fulfills its 14-year-old commitment to write an adequate clean-air plan has become a de facto sanction. Some companies are declining to invest here either because the roads are already chockablock or because they're concerned about what the future costs might be. it doesn't help that the state is failing in its responsibility to lead and that there is no coherent instrument for helping the region to operate more as a team and less as a bunch of strong-minded individuals with conflicting agendas. The region already has two good transit agencies -- Dallas Area Public Transit and the Fort Worth Transportation Authority. Another transit agency is aborning in Denton County. But not all municipalities belong. In fact, more don't than do. As a consequence, fewer residents are commuting by train, bus or high-occupancy vehicle than otherwise might. That translates into denser traffic, dirtier air and an unsustainable pattern of economic development. The region's jurisdictional fragmentation, its division into consortia of public transit haves and have-nots, also translates into a reduced ability to compete for scarce federal public transit funds. Washington tends to frown on communities that allow their opposing interests and petty rivalries to impede the efficient use of such funds; it tends to smile on communities that work and plan together. inaction is guaranteed to make the problem worse. That's because the population is exploding. By 2030, the region's 5 million people are expected to multiply to 8.4 million. The impact on crowded highways, distressed air sheds and a jumpy business climate will be predictably dire unless we act immediately, and concertedly. Therefore, we challenge the region's mayors, city council members, county judges and commissioners and transit planners to come together at a transit summit on Aug. 15, in the neutral and central city of irving. Our goals are humble and presuppose no particular method of structure or funding. Delegates will agree that there's a problem requiring urgent and combined action. They'll agree that any solution Washington might impose would be inferior to any that we might develop on our own. They'll agree that the risk of federal sanctions in the form of freezes on highway funds and planning and strict limits on industrial development fortify the case for action. They'll agree to adopt by the same time next year an implementation plan for such a transit agency, which they will in turn propose to the 2005 Legislature. May the 1,600 people to whom we are mailing formal invitations accept our extraordinary challenge. May they choose to be present at the creation. May they seize the opportunity to make Dallas-Fort Worth a world-class place to live, work and visit. May they grasp that this may be the last chance to create the kind of institution that the region emphatically needs to preserve and increase its prosperity and attractiveness. They'll be glad they did. Besides, it's not every day that you get to see Satan wearing mukluks and a balaclava. =PTP============================================== http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/stories/072703dnedifwtransit .c4e3a799.html Dallas Morning News 07/25/2003 it's time to get on the same road Reprinted from the Fort Worth Star-Telegram it's not fair to even imply that there is a lack of effort in North Texas to solve the area's growing transportation and air quality problems. People are working and studying all over the place -- 16 different groups involved in air quality issues alone, according to the North Texas Commission. At least four alliances are involved in policy and advocacy on transportation and at least two in planning, three in public transit (four if you count the Trinity Railway Express joint venture between DART and the T) and others working on toll roads and the like. But there is no truly central authority that can call all of these groups together, along with the elected and appointed officials who sanction them and the various issue-oriented groups that would like to influence the process. And there certainly is no one with the authority to involve the ordinary citizen -- made king in the process because he or she pays the tax bill. There are 200 or more municipalities and counties in the area and, frankly, they don't have a history of working particularly well with one another. The state hasn't taken a lead role. And the federal government is looming out there somewhere both as a source of money for the right plans and as a stern and punishing taskmaster for those who fall short of the standards. On Nov. 10, 2002, the Star-Telegram Editorial Board, after extensive study of the issues and years of concern, called for the formation of a regional transportation authority as the only entity that could deal with the magnitude of the problems. "The term 'rush hour' is virtually obsolete in the Fort Worth-Dallas area,'' the editorial said, noting that people can seldom "rush'' anywhere, given the area's congestion. It urged public officials throughout the Metroplex to "accelerate discussions on forming a regional transit authority.'' That same Sunday, The Dallas Morning News called for "a unified transit agency.'' The News said the "region's Balkanization -- into cities with separate public transportation agendas -- hinders its ability to solve its grave congestion and pollution problems and to make itself more attractive to investors.'' The two editorial boards reached those conclusions independently. But last week, the two boards took an unusual step. invitations are going into the mail to elected and appointed officials to attend a brief Aug. 15 meeting in irving, co-hosted by the papers, to see if those officials can agree to bring multiple efforts under one umbrella. With the invitations, the newspapers included a protocol statement that said in part that "If we can agree that we have a problem that threatens our collective well being, and if we can agree that we are powerless to solve the problem individually, we will have moved far toward a solution.'' it asks those invited to agree that: North Texas has a problem that won't solve itself. The problem won't get solved without cooperation. One of the biggest impediments to a solution is the lack of a public transit system that encompasses and unites the region. We will commit ourselves to keep meeting and talking and brainstorming until we've figured out how to create that kind of system. "The uncomfortable truth is that Washington tends to frown on communities that let their opposing interests and petty rivalries impede the efficient use of such funds,'' the protocol says. "It tends to smile on communities that work and plan together.'' The document notes that if The Dallas Morning News and the Fort Worth Star-Telegram can hold their fierce competition in abeyance and work together for this common good, so can the region's elected officials.'' it asks them to sign this statement: "Therefore, be it resolved that we -- sundry mayors, city council members, city managers, county judges and commissioners and transit leaders of the region -- hereby pledge ourselves to this task. We know that the excellence of our leadership and our collaboration will produce results that make our communities better places to live and prosper.'' You might ask what the newspapers expect to come immediately from such a meeting. There's no good answer beyond the obvious desire of both editorial boards to see some form of transportation authority that can plan and implement regionally. That may -- no, will -- be difficult to achieve. in 1980, voters in Fort Worth, Arlington and Dallas overwhelmingly rejected the proposed regional Lone Star Transit Authority. But since then, the DART and the T have been formed, and a transportation authority was just recently approved in Denton County. Since then, the Environmental Protection Agency has demanded that the area clean up its air or face sanctions that could halt expansion. Since then -- 16 years ago, to be exact -- Airport Freeway traffic passed its stated capacity of 140,000 vehicles per day. Since then, the average amount of fuel wasted annually per motorist because of gridlock has increased from 20 gallons to 120 gallons, according to the Texas Transportation institute at Texas A&M University. A typical Metroplex driver spends nearly two workweeks -- 74 hours -- stuck in traffic each year, and the congestion costs the region $1.4 billion annually. That's about $1,390 per rush-hour driver in wasted fuel, accidents and other expenses, the institute says. Officials working to overcome the problems are quick to point out that mass transit issues, highway transportation issues and air quality issues pose differing challenges. But all those problems are best addressed via a unified, regional approach. Of course, there will be problems. Some communities, at least at first, will pay for more than they get. DART has a penny on the sales tax, but the T only has a half cent. How will that difference be made up? in fact, how will any of this be funded? Some will argue that this is a problem belonging primarily to Tarrant, Dallas, Denton and Collin counties. To those we say: if the people and the congestion aren't in your backyard yet, they will be. This is already the nation's fifth-largest metropolitan area under new federal guidelines that include Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Hunt, Johnson, Kaufman, Parker, Rockwall, Tarrant and Wise counties. The population of the entire North Texas area has grown more than 30 percent in 10 years. Projections are that it will be up 20 percent in a dozen years and up 65 percent 15 years after that and will reach nearly 10 million people by 2040. The newspapers are not endorsing any specific plan. But they are endorsing the concept and the effort. The climate for regional cooperation is more favorable now than it was in 1980. The need is greater -- and more pressing. And although the Aug. 15 meeting is directed primarily to elected and appointed officials, it also is up to other interested groups and individuals to seek a place at the table, volunteering their time and expertise on committees and in public forums to address an almost overwhelming problem. You know what they say about shade trees, don't you? The best time to plant one was 20 years ago. The next best time is today. Perhaps we can plant a seed Aug. 15. =PTP============================================ http://www.railwayage.com/feb01/dart.html Railway Age 2003/07/24 How light rail pays its way in Dallas Thinking outside the farebox, this southwestern metropolis is reaping big rewards from a fast-growing LRT system. By Luther S. Miller The $1 fares that 37,500 riders a day pay to board light rail trains in Dallas, Tex., cover only about 17% of the cost of their rides. Rail transit's think-tank critics call it highway robbery. Dallas calls it something else. The fact is that the light rail service introduced in this sprawling southwestern metropolis five years ago is widely viewed as a solid success, not only by the people who ride it but by a business community that has benefited hugely from its stimulus. That's why Dallas is pushing ahead with the nation's largest passenger rail expansion program. Dallas Area Rapid Transit's 20-mile, 21-station starter light rail line will soon be more than doubled in size, and then will be doubled again to a system totaling 95 miles. It's also why outlying areas that are not among DART's 13 member cities are beginning to clamor for rail service. The spreading appetite for rail is whetted by a regional/commuter service, Trinity Railway Express, that will connect Dallas and Fort Worth by the end of this year, and in its incomplete phase is already carrying more than 4,000 riders a day. Urban areas elsewhere that have failed to win voter support for transportation bond issues may take heart from the Dallas experience. After voters rejected a transit bond issue in 1989, DART's constituent communities voted to impose a one-cent transit sales tax. Half of that goes for capital costs and half for an operating subsidy. This enabled DART to build its $848-million starter system with 80% local funds, and 20% federal, a reversal of the usual formula. There's a greater federal contribution to the ongoing building program. DART has a $330 million full-funding agreement with the Federal Transit Administration to help pay for the 12.3-mile North Central extension that will reach Richardson in 2002 and Plano in 2003. The 11-mile Northeast extension to Garland will be fully funded by the local sales tax. Still more new lines are planned, and based on light rail's initial success, taxpayers are enthusiastic. Last August DART's member cities voted by a three to one ratio to approve long-term financing to accelerate construction of future LRT lines to Carrolton, Farmers Branch, North irving, South Dallas, Fair Park, Pleasant Grove, and Rowlett. More services mean more cars, and in about five years DART will be in the market for 80 to 100 vehicles to augment the 95 that have been supplied by Kinkisharyo. A class act pays off Wherever DART has gone, business development has followed. Both business and residential developers cite proximity to DART as important determinants in site selection. The economic benefits produced by DART derive from the fact that the system is a demonstrated crowd-pleaser. "The main secret to our success is that the system is designed to save people time and money, and do it in a way that is safe and secure and pleasant," says DART President and Executive Director Roger Snoble. "in Dallas, you know, you have to do things in a way that's worthy of people's interest. We have modern-looking trains, we have great stations, we have art projects, we have helpful, friendly, uniformed security officers on our trains. I think this says to people that DART is an attractive alternative to driving in congestion." Adding to DART's reputation as a class act was the opening late in 2000 of the $50 million, stylishly-designed Cityplace Station in the subway section of the initial line. "Some people said Texans would never give up their pickup trucks," says Snoble. "That undersells the qualities of Texans. They're very upbeat, very modern people, and they've just been waiting for some alternatives." if rail transit is so effective, why is it so consistently fought by the think- tank drones? Why did it fail at the polls in Austin last year? "Where these people are coming from are taxpayers' groups that don't want to pay tax money for anything except maybe their own projects," says Snoble. "I think the problem in Austin was one of taxes-you sometimes have the same problem building highways because you're asking the whole region to support a corridor improvement that may not serve everybody. Then there are the people who feel their automobiles are threatened. But they have a free choice. I always say that if you love your car you'll take good care of it and leave it in your garage, not in a parking lot." Snoble is careful to suggest to visitors that the road to rail transit is not an easy one. "We've had people from Austin and all over the state and country come here to look at DART," he says. "We always tell them light rail is not a slam-bang guarantee. It's got to really be planned properly, it's got to be in the right place. The advantage of light rail, of course, is that it has a broad range of operating situations so it can do a broad range of jobs. We take a lot of pride in designing the right tool for the job." As for light rail's critics, he feels they're simply missing the point. DART's strategy is to keep people moving, providing access to every aspect of metropolitan life-education, jobs, shopping, health care-which is why it touted the late 2000 opening of its new $50 million Cityplace Station in the subway section of the initial line. "Let's keep things moving" "One thing that is important to point out to our critics is the economic development that has occurred around the rail lines," Snoble says. "Light rail is a real land-shaping tool, and we've seen it happen here big-time. The original public investment that we put into the system has paid itself back just in the private investment around the rail lines. It's a terribly strong argument against the people who don't see benefits measuring up to the costs." Snoble freely acknowledges that the farebox pays only a fraction of operating costs. "Our focus, quite frankly, has nothing to do with farebox recovery. We've always said that half of that one-cent sales tax is used to support operations and keep fares low. That's important if we're going to get people out of their automobiles." if DART's focus isn't on the farebox, it's very much on the economics of mobility. "The question is, how do you make a large urban area able to continue to move, because that's such a critical part of every aspect of metropolitan life, from education to jobs to shopping to health care-to everything," says Snoble. "If a metropolitan area doesn't have good access to all the things it offers, then it doesn't work as a good urban area any more. Our strategy is simply, let's keep things moving." it's a strategy that has won DART broad community approval. "The media are big supporters; they're saying we really are making a difference," says Snoble. "The business community is a big supporter because if we get congested and things slow down, it costs them money. They also don't have to supply as many parking places for their employees. Business has, quite frankly, helped shape our policies. We're very close partners. "Our task is to help make Dallas continue to grow and still be a good place to live in with a high quality of life. One strength DART has is that we are a total transportation company. We're not just a bus company or a train company or an HOV lane company. We're in business to move people. We deal a lot with city traffic engineers whose business is moving cars. We think we can balance that out a bit." When will the Dallas system be complete? "I don't know if we'll ever be finished, but for the next 20 years we'll be building toward a 95-mile light rail system and 110 miles of HOV lanes," says Snoble. "Trinity Express will, of course, go on to Fort Worth, and we're already working on plans for some other commuter rail lines more or less in the northern part of the metroplex. "There really is no let-up in the need for mass transit tools like we offer, because the region will continue to grow and this is a way to help it grow in a sensible, sane way." Does DART face any big problems-funding, for example? "We've managed our funding very well," says Snoble. "One of the challenges is to keep everybody else's hands out of our pockets so we can concentrate on what we're supposed to be doing-providing transit services." "A real challenge we have in front of us," he adds, "is that because of our success, the cities around us that are not members of DART are saying, 'There's more to this transit thing than we ever thought, and we want to come in as well.' But they want to come in on the cheap." The expansion of services to cities that don't want to pay the price of admission could be a major future problem, says Snoble. DART simply doesn't do things on the cheap. While some people thought Texans would never give up their pickup trucks, DART's 20-mile starter line will soon grow to 95 miles. Pictured above: DART's new Cityplace Station. Dallas Area Rapid Transit Photo =PTP============================================ Dallas Morning News 07/06/2003 Trinity Fest called sparkling success Fair organizers, DART say event improved greatly in its 2nd year By SELWYN CRAWFORD and LaKISHA LADSON / The Dallas Morning News it was a blast! That was the final word Saturday from Trinity Fest officials, a day after the second annual event went off with more fanfare – and less stress – than the inaugural affair. "We are so thrilled with the event that we had for the city of Dallas last night," said Carol Reed, president of the Trinity Festival Corp. "The whole purpose was to draw attention to what I think is the city's best asset – which is the Trinity River. My hope is that one day, we will be able to bring this event to the shore of the Trinity." Plagued by post-event problems last year that caused downtown traffic jams and forced some DART rail riders to wait up to two hours to catch trains from Union Station, festival officials promised improvement. Damon Winter / DMN DART officials said the longest wait for most passengers was about a half hour. After last year's Trinity Fest, some riders had to hang around the station for two hours waiting for a train. Massive planning, changes in Dallas Area Rapid Transit routes, additional manpower and a smaller crowd all combined to make the 2003 event better, officials said. in 2002, officials estimated that nearly 300,000 people packed Reunion Arena parking lots and the nearby area for the free celebration. This year, with tickets ranging from $3.50 for general admission to $125 for an air- conditioned skybox, the Reunion crowd was estimated at 75,000 to 80,000. While the paying crowd was much smaller – tens of thousands more watched the fireworks from outside the festival grounds – Ms. Reed said she was still pleased. "We came out of the box so quick last year with that huge crowd," she said. "Now we can ... grow like you're supposed to grow." Richard Michael Pruitt / DMN Trinity Fest fireworks are reflected off the Hyatt Regency Hotel in downtown Dallas. DART officials pleased DART officials also were beaming. The agency handled an estimated 45,000 to 55,000 riders Friday. The agency altered its train schedule for the day. Its blue line skipped the Convention Center and stopped only at Union Station, while the red line stopped at the Convention Center and skipped Union Station. And the Trinity Railway Express, which normally doesn't operate on holidays, ran on a limited schedule. As a result of the changes, DART spokesman Morgan Lyons said, the longest wait for most customers after Friday's event was about 30 minutes, with the bulk of the people cleared out by 11:15 p.m. "It was a good day for us and a good day for our customers," Mr. Lyons said, adding that the only thing DART may do differently next year is add or enlarge its signs at the convention center to reduce confusion. "The program worked for moving customers around." Mr. Lyons said that DART had 40 buses on standby to transport stranded rail riders if the rail stations exceeded capacity. He said about 225 people who didn't want to wait for a train used five of those buses – which all left from the Convention Center. Just in case things had gone wrong, police and volunteer health care workers from Parkland Hospital and Methodist Health System were at the ready, Ms. Reed said. Police made only one arrest during the night, for public intoxication. Medical personnel treated 60 people, mainly for minor heat-related incidents. Ten of those were hospitalized, but their injuries were not serious. There was still a problem with post-event traffic near Reunion Arena. It took some motorists up to 30 minutes to go two blocks, but Ms. Reed, who noted that police added more than 100 officers to help with traffic, said the situation was still an improvement over the first Trinity Fest. "I was sitting on top of the [Reunion Arena] garage last year, and it was just a sea of lights out there and it looked like no one was moving anywhere," Ms. Reed said. "This year it was not that way. "There will always be backups," she said. "You're going to wait for DART longer than you normally do. That's a good problem to have. That means people are interested in what we're doing down here." July heat About the only problem organizers said they couldn't beat Friday was the heat, with the high reaching 93 degrees. Ms. Reed said that Trinity Fest officials next year would consider moving the kid's zone to a shaded location and trying to figure out "how we soften the parking lot." But after two years, Ms. Reed said there's no turning back now. She declared that Trinity Fest, highlighted by the nation's second-largest fireworks show, is ready to take its independence Day place in Dallas alongside hot dogs and barbecue. "Everybody's pretty much a believer that we will be having Trinity Fest in 2004, whereas last year I think everybody was kind of wondering whether we would do it again," she said. "We're here; we're going to stay here." E-mail scrawford@dallasnews.com or lladson@dallasnews.com

CONTENTS * Seattle: Sound Transit trains, buses gain riders News Tribune - Tacoma August 30th, 2003 * Seattle: 'King County Monorail' campaign derailed, backers upset King County Journal 2003-08-29 * Weyrich: White House off track on 'bus rapid transit' Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 * Toronto transit comes through for 450,000 concert fans Toronto Star Aug. 1, 2003 * LA's new Gold Line LRT appeals to USC students, workers Daily Trojan Vol. 150, No. 01 (Monday, August 18, 2003) * Houston: Letters pro & con on Metro's rail plans Houston Chronicle Aug. 23, 2003 =PTP===================================== News Tribune - Tacoma August 30th, 2003 Commuter buses, trains gain ridership, routes BETH SILVER; The News Tribune More commuters are hopping on buses and trains to make the trek from Tacoma to Seattle as Sound Transit continues to add more routes, according to the agency's latest ridership figures. The express buses saw an 18 percent increase in ridership in the second quarter of this year over the same period last year. That represents about 1.8 million boardings on the Sound Transit express buses, up from 1.5 million a year ago. The Downtown Connector bus sees an average of 26,032 passengers a day. Without the addition of the new buses, ridership would have increased by about 8 percent over last year, Sound Transit figures show. Ridership took a slight dip, though, on two major bus routes: the Lakewood-Tacoma-Seattle Express and the Bellevue-Seattle Express. Mike Bergman, regional express bus program manager, said about 2 percent fewer commuters boarded the buses last quarter. He attributes the numbers, which have been falling for a few years, to a worsening economy. As the commuters' jobs return, though, he said he expects fuller buses on the mainstay routes. "The ridership decline is really starting to screech to a halt and we're hoping in the next few months we'll see a turnaround," Bergman said. Sound Transit saw its biggest gains on its new routes, he said, which made up for the occasional drop-off. On average, Sound Transit's buses are a little more than half full, Bergman said. Meanwhile, Sounder's ridership increased by nearly the same percentage as the express buses'. Some 179,000 people boarded the trains in the second quarter of this year, compared with 155,000 last year at this time. About 2,700 people ride the trains every weekday. Sounder runs three round trips every day from Tacoma to Seattle. It plans to add six more trips to the schedule by 2005, said Geoff Patrick, Sound Transit spokesman. Beth Silver: 206-467-9845 beth.silver@mail.tribnet.com At a glance Sound Transit express bus - Passengers in 2nd quarter 2002: 1,564,573 - Passengers in 2nd quarter 2003: 1,850,420 - Average weekday boardings in 2nd quarter 2002: 22,290 - Average weekday boardings in 2nd quarter 2003: 26,032 Sounder Commuter Rail - Ridership in 2nd quarter 2002: 155,569 - Ridership in 2nd quarter 2003: 179,336 - Average weekday boardings in 2nd quarter 2002: 2,331 - Average weekday boardings in 2nd quarter 2003: 2,727 =PTP============================================== King County Journal 2003-08-29 County rules derail monorail backers by Jeff Switzer Journal Reporter The dream of a suburban monorail crisscrossing King County will be delayed, supporters said Thursday, due to difficulty meeting the county's rules on initiatives. Twenty-five percent of the signatures gathered to date likely will be invalidated because of stray marks, comments in petition margins or graffiti. ''We have thousands of signatures on petitions where somebody inadvertently made a check mark,'' said Ed Stone, monorail volunteer coordinator. ''That makes all of the signatures on the petition invalid.'' Citizens for King County Monorail said they plan to refile the group's initiative to investigate a conceptual $5 billion, 59-mile monorail system from Bothell to Federal Way, from Redmond to Seattle. The new goal is to file an initiative in spring 2004 to qualify for the high- profile presidential election in November 2004. Since July 1, about 200 supporters had gathered an estimated 10,000 signatures for initiative 21. They were gearing up for Bumbershoot weekend -- one of the last big events before the Sept. 29 deadline for signatures -- when leaders aborted their effort. County Council Clerk Anne Noris informed monorail backers Aug. 11 that County Code restricts altering petitions. ''I would consider ... writing any words, either in support or opposition, anywhere on the petition would constitute alterations under the Code,'' she wrote. Supporters said they are very upset and very disappointed. Some pointed to a bureaucratic opposition of the monorail. King County has had just 21 proposed initiatives, compared to more than 80 in Seattle and more than 800 statewide. ''We will be back with a vengeance gathering signatures to go on that ballot,'' Stone said. The group first filed its initiative with Noris on March 24, and after several technical revisions it was approved July 1. Stone said the county initiative guidelines are ''much, much more restrictive than the state's or Seattle's.'' Seattle requires just 18,000 valid signatures and allows petitions on standard 8½-by-11-inch paper, and allows supporters to print their own petitions at home. King County requires petitions on 9½-by-13-inch paper. ''There is no such thing,'' Stone said. ''it must be custom cut.'' ''Doing a citizens initiative in King County is more difficult. We recognize that, and we're going to adjust our strategy and tactics taking that into account.'' To be heard by the County Council and possibly reach the ballot, initiative backers need 45,000 valid signatures. Monorail supporters were shooting for 60,000 to be safe, but now say the strict rules force them to collect as many as 100,000 signatures. Stone said future signatures will be gathered on a one-on-one basis. Jeff Switzer can be reached at jeff.switzer@kingcountyjour nal.com or 425-453-4234. =PTP========================================= Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 Viewpoint White House off track on 'bus rapid transit' By PAUL M. WEYRICH The Bush administration is right about most things, but it is dead wrong about one of them -- urban mass transit. I am known for my work in cultural conservatism, for putting grass-roots coalitions together and for efforts to liberate the former Soviet empire. If truth be known, my real expertise is in urban mass transit. I helped to organize a commuter group aimed at saving a threatened rail line in the Midwest and served as Washington correspondent for a transit publication. I did transportation appropriations work in the U.S. Senate for six years, published a rail transit magazine for eight years, served on the Amtrak board for six years and served as vice chairman of the Amtrak Reform Council for five years. With my colleague Bill Lind, I have co- authored six monographs on urban transit in cooperation with the American Public Transit Association. So when I take issue with an administration policy, it is because I have some background in doing so. The Bush administration is anti-rail transit and is pushing something called "bus rapid transit". What is bus rapid transit? Whatever the Bush administration says it is. So in one case, it means buses operating on a completely separate right of way reserved just for transit vehicles; in other cases, it means buses running in carpool lanes that can often get just as congested as regular highway lanes; in still another case, it means buses running on city streets with lanes reserved for buses during certain hours. There are other versions as well. Supposedly, bus rapid transit is a substitute for light rail. The administration says that bus rapid transit is so much cheaper to build and achieves speeds comparable to light rail. That assertion is questionable, but, even if true, has one major flaw. People don't want to ride buses! Light rail lines, on the other hand, although more expensive to construct, have almost always attracted more passengers than projected. Many of those users are not transit dependent but are leaving their automobiles behind for fast, reliable trains. That will happen with sleek, modern trains. It won't happen with buses. No matter how much the seats are made more comfortable, a bus is still a bus. The administration says buses are superior because they are more flexible. Yet, that is the weakness of a bus system. Riders aren't sure if the bus is really coming, and moreover, they aren't sure a bus rapid transit system will be there next year. A fixed rail system is reliable and will be there for decades to come. Bus rapid transit may be cheaper to build, but it is not cheaper to operate. Light-rail trains in San Diego, Sacramento and other places regularly run four car trains in rush hour. These are long, articulated cars, so we are looking at the equivalent of a six-car train. Los Angeles just lengthened all of its platforms on the Blue Line to Long Beach in order to accommodate three articulated cars that they run during morning and evening rush hours. That line, by the way, was the last route of the once great Pacific Electric System to be abandoned. It carried 12,000 people a day in its last full year of operation, 1960. Substitute bus service carried only about 8,000 a day. Today, the fast, air-conditioned and reliable trains carry about 73,000 each weekday. Thousands have left their cars to ride light rail. Since these trains rely on ticket machines with random inspections for operations, there is only a single operator per train. Each bus would require a driver. Even though buses would attract a small percentage of passengers of what light rail would get, it would require dozens and dozens and dozens of additional operators. Labor is well over 50 percent of the cost of operating any transit system. Light rail is a solid means of mass transit. It can operate in the street, in a median of highways, in a subway, on an elevated structure and so on. We had excellent systems all over America. Most were abandoned in favor of buses, but beginning in San Diego in 1981, light rail has made a remarkable comeback. We were down to seven cities with light-rail lines in the 1970s. Now 26 cities have some sort of light-rail lines. There are 19 more looking at light rail seriously. The administration has told most of these cities that they can forget rail. The administration has implied that if cities want federal money, they should plan for bus rapid transit. Local officials are telling the administration that they don't want buses. Some cities are planning to go it alone with state and local funds providing the revenue necessary to construct rail. Bus rapid transit is a fad. It won't last. The administration has been sold a bill of goods, no doubt by highway interests that have always opposed rail from the very beginning of federal mass transit involvement in 1965. it is hard to get policy-makers to ever admit they are wrong. It would behoove Federal Transit Administration officials to reverse themselves. There would be dividends for doing so. Ronald Reagan, who was the prototype conservative president for modern times, was pro-rail. Some pundits call George W. Bush, Reagan Junior. He ought to emulate Reagan in this arena. Weyrich is chairman and chief executive officer of the Free Congress Foundation in Washington, D.C. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2074090 =PTP======================================== [PTP NOTE: More proof that congestion isn't just a matter of peakhour work trips...] http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/La yout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1059732962728 Toronto Star Aug. 1, 2003 TOBIN GRIMSHAW/TORONTO STAR Concert goers load into the TTC at Downsview station late Wednesday night just after the Stones concert. Smooth sailing on buses, trains 'Perfect' end to massive concert, TTC says By 3 a.m. 'polite' crowds all well on their way home KEVIN MCGRAN TRANSPORTATION REPORTER And we all made it home safely. After fears were raised that folks would have to walk for miles all through the night because the TTC simply couldn't handle everybody at once, leaving the Stones concert turned out to be not so bad. The last of the stragglers out of Downsview Park headed home around 3 a.m. yesterday, part of the flock of 450,000 rock fans. "Perfect. Everything came together," said TTC general manager Rick Ducharme. "Everything was in order. We were still putting the odd bus out at 3 a.m. because we didn't want to strand anybody. "It went as good as any one would ever want it to go." The TTC helped its own cause in terms of speeding up the flow by not charging fares for patrons at the peak when the show ended after 11 p.m. Ducharme couldn't estimate how many people got on the system free. "Safety comes first," said Ducharme. "When we get masses of some significance, you've got to move them through safely because trying to stop everybody for all the fares, you create another problem and it doesn't pay off. It's a balancing act and they (fare collectors) use their discretion and I think everybody's happy with that." Tina Small of Nova Scotia was particularly impressed with how smoothly everything went, even though it took her three hours to get from the site to her sister's home in Scarborough. She went to Wilson station - where she was in a 40-minute line-up for a train - and got to Union in time for the 2:13 a.m. GO train eastbound. "It was very well organized," said Small. "There were lots of police there but they were friendly, just trying to keep crowds under control. No shoving, no pushing." For some people the biggest hurdle was getting out of the park itself. By 7 p.m., more people were leaving Downsview than entering. Many of them followed the long wire fence surrounding the venue looking for an out. It led to frustration for Davin Lindfors. "Get me back to America," the burly 43-year-old growled. "This is a joke." More resourceful types didn't wait for a gate, but scaled the mesh fence and dropped to the other side. Once on the outside, the people who thought they were beating the crowd joined a long parade toward the Downsview subway station. Depending on which part of the fence they jumped, the trek took as long as half an hour. Outside of the subway station, officers from the Ontario Provincial Police stood on either side of the milling crowd. But everyone seemed intent on just getting home. Even at 10:30 p.m., the cars were filling up fast. Subway trains arrived sometimes two at a time and were no more than five minutes apart. Band members, roadies, some VIPS and some of the media, on the other hand, had their own exclusive way home. VIA Rail ran trains from its Mimico rail yard to Downsview Park along CN Rail's tracks every 90 minutes or so Wednesday night. "It went very smoothly," said Pierre Santoni, VIA Rail's regional director. Oddly enough, the idea was hatched for a train to accommodate the Rolling Stones, who ended up being the only act not to use it. Traffic turned out not to be so bad, and they were able to drive along with their police escort directly to the airport to make their getaway. GO managing director Gary McNeil said his system carried about 35,000 extra patrons, all of them well behaved. "We didn't really have any problems. The customers were fantastic, no damage to any equipment, people were polite." "Uneventful" was the word transit authorities used elsewhere in Greater Toronto, where late buses were run to meet with subways and GO trains. York Region Transit general manager Don Gordon said "we had probably way more capacity out there than we ended up needing." With files from Christian Cotroneo =PTP============================================= Daily Trojan Vol. 150, No. 01 (Monday, August 18, 2003), beginning on page 17 and ending on page 23. New Gold Line connects downtown to Pasadena Project cost about $859 million to build and 23 years to complete Joanne Jou | Daily Trojan All aboard. Pasadena locals enjoy a free ride on the newly opened Gold Line on its opening day. The line had nearly 150,000 riders that weekend. By SEUNG HWA HONG Staff Writer Freeways. Traffic. Road rage. These are Los Angeles's trademarks, a city that sees its open roads crowded with millions of drivers. in an effort to alleviate Los Angeles's extensive traffic problems, Metropolitan Transportation Authority recently opened the 13.7-mile Metro Gold line. The light rail extends from downtown Los Angeles to east Pasadena. The Gold Line cost an estimated $859 million and took 23 years to complete. MTA expects about 30,000 weekday riders for the first year. The line runs through Chinatown, Lincoln Heights, Mount Washington, Highland Park and Pasadena. Trains take 36 minutes to make all 13 stops in the line. Laura Voisin George, administrative services coordinator for Facilities Management Services and a South Pasadena resident, rode the Gold Line on the July 26 opening. She said she first heard about the project in 2001 and has been looking forward to it. "I like the idea of supporting public transit and reducing congestion," she said. "My husband was very excited. He bought a monthly pass right away." Before the Gold Line opened, Voisin George drove the USC vanpool, a ridesharing program for commuters. Voisin George said she prefers taking the rail because it gives her more flexibility in her schedule. Some, however, said train and bus transfers are not worth the hassle. USC fifth-year architecture student Jennifer Lew, who lives in Rosemead, which is near the San Gabriel Valley, has another method to commute to school. She drives for about 15 minutes to the Health Sciences Campus, parks her car and takes the tram to University Park Campus. The trip takes a total of 45 minutes. "It would take me longer to get to school if I took the Gold Line," she said. While some will use the Gold Line for their workday commute, others said they would use the rail for recreation. Altadena resident Gloria Herod said she was planning to use the Gold Line often. "I'm retired, so me and my friends will have some place to go everyday, to the Southwest Museum, to Chinatown to eat and shop and to the Mexican village for taquitos," she said. =PTP=========================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 23, 2003 VIEWPOINTS Metro rail: Congestion buster or waste of taxpayers' money? Portlanders thank Houstonians I've just returned from an extensive automobile trip through the western United States and I want to give a few words of encouragement to Houstonians: · Fat City ... While we're known as fat city, everywhere we went we encountered many very overweight people. · Smog City ... While we may have some smog here, Denver, Colo., and Las Vegas, Nev., are at least as bad as Houston. · Traffic jams ... Seattle, Wash., and Denver are worse than Houston. Several freeways (in the middle of the day) were "parking lots," and both of these cities have only one major north/south artery. On the down side, the people in Portland thank Houston for supporting their transit system. We rode all over town on $1.20 [fare]. While Houston can't make up its mind about a rail system, Portlanders are using government assistance to expand theirs. H. Petri, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- New plan won't help traffic The Metropolitan Transit Authority has proposed a $640 million plan that does nothing to move people from the suburbs to the Galleria area, Greenway Plaza, Texas Medical Center or downtown, where most of the pollution and congestion exist. Jack Henderson, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reverse Metro's plundering This voter was dismayed by the Metropolitan Transit Authority's board's decision to gut its rail plan in order to build more roads. in 1978, voters approved the creation of Metro, as a means of funding and implementing an efficient mass-transit system. in 1988, voters approved a "mobility plan," whose centerpiece was a grade-separated rail "system connector," in addition to road improvements which were included to placate the highway interests. The roads were built and the rail connector was not. in the 1990s, Metro's "war chest," earmarked for rail transit, was plundered to pave streets. Metro has consistently strayed from its mission and has betrayed the voters' trust. It is time to reverse the plundering by diverting revenues from the Harris County Toll Road Authority to finance a comprehensive rail transit system to serve the Houston metropolitan area. David Haim, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rather dictate than serve us The Metropolitan Transit Authority may have cut the size of its bond proposal, but once again it is an all or nothing proposition. Why does Metro insist on combining buses, roads and rail in one single up/down vote? Why won't it let the taxpayers decide what kind of transportation they want to pay for instead of trying to shove an all-or-nothing plan down our throats? Put three items on the ballot -- Do you support rail expansion? Do you support improving bus service? Do you want Metro dollars to support road maintenance and improvement? --then go by what the citizens decide they want. Apparently, this is a difficult concept for bureaucrats who would rather dictate than serve. Wayne Herbert, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fact: Feds will match dollars Writers to the Viewpoints column have argued because of the statistics given by rail foes such as David Hutzelman (Aug. 20 Outlook article, "Weighing against Metro's latest white elephant") and Paul Bettencourt [see Chronicle article, Aug. 19, "Metro cuts rail plan by almost half / Reduction OK'd to appease foes"], that rail is a bad use of taxpayers' dollars. if only those statistics were true. Hutzelman argued that, according to projections, downtown will only make up 4 percent of the region's growth and thus, we should not build downtown rail lines that only serve 4 percent of the population. But this is faulty reasoning. What matters is not what portion of future jobs will be downtown, but how many are there now. With 150,000 workers, we are the third-largest downtown in the country, which makes our downtown a prime spot for light rail. As for Bettencourt's tax projections, he has been fervently against rail for years, so we should take any statistic he gives about rail with a grain of salt. The Metropolitan Transit Authority consulted two independent economists, both of whom validated Metro's projections. if voters want statistics, here is one: For every dollar the city spends on rail, the federal government will match us a dollar. And none of that money -- neither ours or the government's -- would be taken away from road funds. That should be a good enough reason to try something that has been wildly successful in Dallas and other cities. Michael Mattair, Spring -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Opponents are at it again Last week I visited a world-class city in another state. I took an electric train from the airport and made an easy transfer to another one that dropped me off a block from my hotel. I rode rapid transit to sporting events, museums and restaurants. All trains were full of riders every time I rode. The train back to the airport carried mainly airport workers, plus a few travelers with suitcases. Then I arrived home to read that the rail opponents have been at it again. it's too bad that Mayor Bob Lanier's legacy will be that he delayed Houston's ascension to world-class status at least 20 years by kowtowing to the road interests. irv Smith, Missouri City -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Can't please everyone Travel to any major city in the United States and you will find that you can step off the plane and onto a fixed-rail platform that links the airport to most popular destinations. A car is not necessary in Atlanta, New York or San Francisco. Yet the Metropolitan Transit Authority board has decided to appease many critics by scaling down its original plan, which would have linked the airports and connected our neighborhoods from east to west. The new version is a poor attempt at "something is better than nothing." You cannot please all of the people all of the time, but, in this case, Metro has succeeded in alienating its supporters (such as myself). Bill Boudreaux, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Remembers the 'Dinky' Having grown up in the suburbs of Houston -- Fulshear, straight out Westheimer -- we had a train. It was called the "Dinky" and it ran from Eagle Lake to Houston and back, daily. How great it was as a teenager to get on the train, ride to Houston, shop, have a nice lunch, see a movie, etc., and then head back home. With the population of the suburbs increasing daily, why not let them have this same experience? in the convention business, it is said: "Build it and they will come." As for rail: "Build it and they will ride." Patsy Sabrsula, Houston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- if Dallas can do it, so can we Regarding the planned light rail: There were many naysayers when the tollway was in the planning stages and look at it now! Used by countless thousands daily. No city can construct rail going north, south, east and west at the kickoff, but if 2,000 people ride it daily, that would be 2,000 people off of the freeways. If Dallas can do this, Houston can. Mary Joe Nixon, Livingston -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Expecting 2 million more here With Metro's vote to halve their proposed rail addition, Houston has been set back to the 19th century. Having used the rail facilities in Chicago, ill., and Washington, D.C., I have been longing to see Houston move forward to solve its mobility crisis. (And a "crisis" it is, don't let anyone fool you!) Two million more people are expected in Houston in the not-too-distant future. They will have to drive horses and buggies to get around in our city because of its antiquated mobility system. One thing is very clear: The "reluctant" vote was a sissy vote. One should stand up for what one believes in and let the devil take the hindmost. June R. Blasiol, Houston http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2061341

CONTENTS * Weyrich: Seattle wise to add LRT (op-ed) Seattle Times Wednesday, August 06, 2003 * O'Toole: 'Cruising to disaster' on LRT (op-ed) Seattle Times Monday, August 25, 2003 * Letters respond to O'Toole diatribe Seattle Times Sunday, August 31, 2003 * Kuala Lumpur monorail finally opens New Straits Times Aug 30 (2003) * Salt Lake: Suburb gets promise of earlier LRT Salt Lake Tribune WEDNESDAY July 30, 2003 * Vancouver BC: Coquitlam SkyTrain could take decade to install Vancouver Sun Saturday » August 2 » 2003 * Bush admin seeks to kill California air quality rule Associated Press Saturday, August 30, 2003 =PTP======================================== Seattle Times Wednesday, August 06, 2003 Seattle is wise to add light rail to its transit mix By Paul M. Weyrich Special to The Times The Greater Seattle area is at long last poised to join other major cities in America in doing something very smart: building a light-rail transit system. This is one of the best things elected leaders from the area could do to improve mobility, stimulate the area's economy and improve quality of life for citizens. As someone who is a conservative and who watches trends in transportation policy from the national level, I can assure you that Seattle is on the right track. Transit serves some important conservative goals, including economic development, helping move people off welfare and into productive employment, and strengthening the bonds of community. Time after time around the country, our most dynamic cities have turned to rail transit as an antidote to congested freeways, expensive housing and stagnating economies. As a final federal decision nears, critics have predictably intensified their attempts to stop the project. The latest argument seems to be that light rail won't relieve highway congestion. That's a red herring, and here's why. Common sense tells us, contrary to the laments of the anti-transit critics, that transit can and often does relieve congestion. There are examples around the country of communities such as Portland, Dallas, Denver and St. Louis where light-rail transit is taking cars off the street. St. Louis's Metrolink provides a good example: it is removing about 12,500 cars from St. Louis's rush-hour traffic every day and 79 percent of its riders were new to public transit. Some 3.2 million people live in the strip of land between the Cascade Mountains and Puget Sound. The number is going to increase by another 1.4 million in the next 20 years, according to the last census. Simply put, there is no room for these folks on the existing highways. Light rail is being designed to absorb a big chunk of this growth by giving people an alternative they are likely to choose. In the process, light rail will help keep the highways moving. The initial light-rail segment in Seattle is projected to carry 42,500 riders per day, including 16,000 new public-transit riders. The light-rail project is being designed to accommodate future expansions that would carry more than twice that number of people. While I have some concern about the cost of the stations, the incremental costs of future expansions will be lower because of the expandability of the first segment. There is no question that roads play a dominant role in the transportation system. After all, this is America, and we do love our cars. But the fact is, our reliance on roads costs us money. Billions of dollars are lost each year as a result of people and goods being jammed into the same overcrowded freeways. And while Seattle has a good bus system, buses alone will not solve this problem, because they end up stuck in the same traffic jams with everyone else. it's a fact that the most-effective alternative to congestion is rail transit. It has been repeatedly demonstrated around the country that the one choice people are regularly willing to make, other than their cars, is rail. I've seen this pattern repeat itself in Portland, Salt Lake City, Denver, St. Louis and a host of other cities. Seattle would be wise to follow suit. Paul M. Weyrich is chairman and CEO of the Free Congress & Research and Education Foundation. Weyrich, with his colleague William S. Lind, is the author of "Does Transit Work? A Conservative Reappraisal." =PTP=========================================== Seattle Times Monday, August 25, 2003 Cruising to disaster on light rail By Randal O'Toole Special to The Times Seattle's plans for an expensive and largely useless light-rail line have become the laughing stock of the transportation world. If built, the line will enrich engineering and construction firms and gratify transit-agency egos. But nothing more will result other than to take dollars from taxpayers' pockets. After studying light-rail operations in my hometown of Portland and other cities, I am surprised that people such as Paul Weyrich, with the Free Congress & Research and Education Foundation, still think light rail can reduce congestion ("Seattle is wise to add light rail to its transit mix" guest commentary, Aug. 6). Let's look carefully at the record for other cities. Weyrich claims light rail removes 12,500 cars from St. Louis rush-hour traffic each day. Yet the 2000 census revealed that the number of St. Louis-area commuters who ride transit to work declined 19 percent since light rail opened. How does that reduce congestion? Even if rail did remove 12,500 cars each day, what good is that in a region where people take 5 million or more auto trips a day? in regions the size of St. Louis and Seattle, daily auto trips grow by 12,500 each month. That means you can spend a billion dollars and five years building a light-rail line, and a month later any congestion relief is gone. Weyrich also claims success in Portland, Dallas and Denver. Federal data show that Portland light rail carries just three-quarters of a percent of regional passenger travel. That's not much of a return for something that cost nearly half the region's transport budget. At that, Portland's light rail carries a larger share of regional travel than any other light-rail system in the country. Denver's light rail carries less than a quarter of a percent of regional travel, Dallas just a tenth of a percent. These lines actually increase congestion since they often occupy lanes that could otherwise be open to cars. Rail boosters argue that one rail line has the capacity of an eight-lane freeway. But it's use, not capacity, that counts. Light rail is so slow and inconvenient that no light-rail system in the country carries more people per mile than two-thirds of a freeway lane. Since a typical light-rail mile costs as much to build as a five- to 10-lane freeway, rail is simply not cost- effective. if Seattle builds light rail, it will probably follow in the tracks of San Jose, Calif., whose light-rail cars carry fewer people than San Francisco cable cars. Partly because its light-rail lines cost more to operate than the buses they replaced, San Jose's transit agency is suffering a fiscal crisis, forcing it to shut down many bus routes. Yet it is stubbornly building more light-rail lines that it has no money to operate. After looking at federal census and transportation data, only someone who is deluding himself, or trying to delude you, would say, as Weyrich does, that "light rail will help keep the highways moving." So what is the solution to Seattle congestion? Transportation expert William Eager calculates that Seattle could relieve today's congestion and absorb 30 years of traffic growth by adding just 6 percent new lane miles to the region's highways. These could be high- occupancy/toll (HOT) lanes — free to high-occupancy vehicles, open to other vehicles that pay tolls that help pay for construction. Since commuters make up less than half of rush-hour traffic, varying tolls by time of day would reduce congestion without hurting workers. Whatever the answer to congestion, it must recognize that more than 90 percent of Seattle-area travel will always go by car. Light rail doesn't relieve congestion; all it does is spend your money. Randal O'Toole is director of the American Dream Coalition, www.americandreamcoalition.org, and author of "The Vanishing Automobile and Other Urban Myths." He also is an economist with The Thoreau institute in Bandon, Ore. E-mail him at rot@ti.org. =PTP======================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2001679024_sunlets31.ht ml Seattle Times Sunday, August 31, 2003 Letters to the editor Getting around Events may force many cars off roads faster than we expect Editor, The Times: it's fairly easy to shoot down Randal O'Toole's "straw man" statistics about transit ("Cruising to disaster on light rail," Times, guest commentary, Aug. 25). For example, anyone who has ever been to San Francisco knows that no transit mode in the world will ever equal the cable cars for density of ridership. Setting the cable cars as the benchmark is like comparing your wife to Marilyn Monroe, something no sane man would ever do. The important stats, however, are the rising cost of extracting oil and the falling interest of the Bush administration in preparing for the end of the age of oil. Throw in a generous dose of aging boomers who want to get off the road before an insane SUV driver pushes them off, and you have a potential market that may, due to events beyond our control, grow substantially before another decade has passed. in the '50s, Boeing made a bundle betting that jet airplanes would replace trains. in the '90s, another bundle was made by those who bet that computers would replace paper. When The Times resolutely insists that new highways are needed to deliver tons of newsprint to lethargic readers, they're missing the big picture. Times change and O'Toole's assertion that cars will always be 90 percent of the transport solution is palpably absurd — and no help at all in facing the onrushing future. - Terry Scott, Belfair Light rail's not magic, but it's a start to solving traffic congestion I find it interesting that in all the cities that have put in light rail, the systems have expanded. The expansion is due to passenger demand, not politicians' egos. Seattle desperately needs a system and it needs it now. We need to start breaking out of our auto and bus dependency and put alternatives in place that should have been there all along, such as commuter trains and light rail. Light rail isn't going to magically reduce congestion, but it's a start. It's a fact that rail cars running on rights of way that include stretches of private rights of way attract far more riders than a conventional bus system. Building more lanes on the freeways is an exercise in futility unless someone can persuade the automakers to stop building automobiles for the next 10 years so the road expansion can catch up to the cars that are already out there! Seattle is the last city of any consequence on the West Coast that doesn't have such a system. What do all the other cities in the country know that we don't seem to know? There is a light-rail renaissance going on all over the world as cities rediscover how to make light rail work for their transportation needs. Randal O'Toole, show me a light-rail system that has been a failure. I don't know of any. - John Cox, Seattle Forced changeover Randal O'Toole of the American Dream Coalition argues that "Light rail doesn't relieve congestion; all it does is spend your money." O'Toole doesn't realize that light rail is a replacement for the private automobile and is designed to work with the public bus system in moving large numbers of people at a much lower cost in fuel than highways full of cars. World oil production (from many sources) is expected to peak during this decade, if the peak has not already occurred. The changeover away from cars is being forced upon us. Richard Heinberg's recent "The Party's Over" and Walter Younquist's "Geodestinies" are quite good on the subject of oil depletion, as is an internet search. - Marvin Gregory, Renton Cruising to success Randal O'Toole's anti-transit diatribe extols our automobile-dependent transportation system. A glance at Seattle's rush-hour traffic speaks volumes about the credibility of his premise. Transit doesn't aim to unclog freeways, but to provide viable alternatives to cars. American transit ridership has been hitting its highest levels in nearly 40 years. So, O'Toole tries to bash Portland's light rail for failing to carry much "regional passenger traffic" in a region that includes Vancouver, Wash., not even served by light rail. Portland's a hard target. Ridership growth has outpaced growth in both population and vehicle-miles traveled, and it has actually increased transit-mode share of work trips. So O'Toole pounces on poor San Jose's light rail and its transit budget crisis. But all of California has a budget crisis — or maybe O'Toole hasn't heard? Besides schools and highways, every transit agency is hurting, including Oakland's huge AC Transit all- bus system. Between 1990-2000, U.S. transit registered an impressive 16-percent growth in passenger-miles. Of total growth, rail accounted for fully 84 percent, with light rail growing by more than 137 percent. Seems like rail transit is cruising, not to "disaster," but to success. - Lyndon Henry, transportation planner, Austin, Texas Enticement factor Randal O'Toole understands little but is good with the sound bites. "Removal" of cars from rush-hour traffic? Analytic fiction. In the real world, high-quality transit gets used for more than just the daily commute. If O'Toole compared those 2000 census figures with rail ridership in Portland, St. Louis, Dallas, Denver and elsewhere, he'd be forced to admit that rail attracts more "nonwork" trips than previous bus services. This is significant because nonwork trips are the majority of all trips in urban areas. Add 6 percent to our region's total highway lane-miles — "highway," not just "freeway" — to relieve today's congestion and absorb 30 years of traffic growth? Yeah, right. That would require tens of years and tens of billions. No metropolitan region has ever made traffic congestion go away. The practical "solution": high-quality alternatives to private autos. "Disaster" has indeed befallen Portland's freeway supporters. There's not much prospect for expansion, and one section through downtown Portland has even been removed. High-quality transit cannot "force" people out of their cars, but it has a demonstrated ability to "entice" them out. Sounds like what O'Toole and other pro-sprawl types fear most. - Leroy Demery Jr., Bainbridge island =PTP=============================================== http://www.emedia.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/National/2003083 1085122/Article/ New Straits Times Aug 30 (2003) PM to launch KL Monorail today KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 30: The KL Monorail transit system officially opens tomorrow. The Transport Ministry had ensured all the safety mechanisms were in place before issuing the operating licence to the operator, said Patrick Wong, executive director of MTrans Holdings, the parent company of KL Monorail System. "Security is not an issue anymore because all precautionary measures, including redesigning of certain parts of the system, have been done to minimise all technical risks," Wong said today. The RM1.18 billion inner-city transit system was to have been launched last September, but was postponed after a 13.4kg safety wheel came off and fell on a Bernama reporter who was walking under the overhead tracks during a trial run on Aug 16 last year. "The Railways Department often checked on our progress. Until a fortnight ago, they had been making daily checks," said Wong. The official launch by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad at 2.30pm tomorrow will be held at the Bukit Bintang station in Jalan Sultan ismail. Malaysians coming out for the Merdeka Day celebrations tomorrow can try out the monorail from 4pm onwards, at only RM1 for each journey, which is the special rate for September. Fifty per cent of all fares collected during the period will be donated to charitable organisations. "The 10,000th person who had registered to ride on the monorail last year can collect four free passes each at the station (Bukit Bintang) for a ride on any day in September," said Wong. Tickets for a ride on the monorail system, which stretches 8.6km from Titiwangsa to KL Sentral, are priced from RM1.20 to RM2.50. There are 11 stations in the monorail link. The monorail can travel up to 90kph with up to 214 passengers. It is estimated that it could reduce inner-city road traffic by 15 per cent. Meanwhile, the STAR and Putra Light Rail Transit systems are offering a flat rate of RM2 for return journeys between 5.30am and 9am on National Day to KL Sentral and Bandar Tasik Selatan. =PTP============================================= Salt Lake Tribune WEDNESDAY July 30, 2003 All a mistake: A transit planning report showing a long wait is quashed By John Keahey The Salt Lake Tribune Regional transportation planners touched off a firestorm Tuesday by saying it might be two decades before West Valley City gets a light-rail extension. Doug Hattery, planning manager for the Wasatch Front Regional Council staff, rescinded that statement late Tuesday and said the staff made a mistake in sending to The Salt Lake Tribune maps and other documents showing that time frame. "This map does not represent the council staff's recommendation for phasing," said a council statement. The statement and letters sent Tuesday to West Valley City Mayor Dennis Nordfelt and Utah Transit Authority boss John inglish were designed to assuage the officials' surprise over the staff's mistaken pronouncement. City and transit officials are pursuing a plan to build light-rail extensions within the next decade to West Valley City and the mid-Jordan area of the western Salt Lake Valley. The map released Monday showed that the mid-Jordan line through Midvale, West Jordan and South Jordan would be built between 2004 and 2012, and that the West Valley City line would be delayed until sometime between 2023 and 2030. This did not go down well in West Valley City. "We have a transit center that is the third-busiest in the valley behind Salt Lake City and the University of Utah, and we're the second-largest city in the state," said Jeff Hawker, West Valley City rails project coordinator. "The idea that a light-rail line to West Valley City would be moved to the third phase of a 30-year plan seems absurd to me." Hattery said the so-called priority alternatives were contained in internal planning documents and had no official council sanction. The staff will not present a list showing the recommended order for a variety of light-rail and other transit projects along the Wasatch Front, Hattery said. That decision rests with the Wasatch Front Regional Council membership, which is made up of elected officials from Wasatch Front communities. Before that decision can be made later this year when the council considers updating its 30-year transportation plan, the public must have a chance to weigh in on whether it supports the projects and in which order, Hattery said. Said UTA's inglish: "That's the right way to do it. It is way premature to start prioritizing. We are trying hard to keep West Valley City and mid- Jordan in the hopper as one project. "One may be built before the other, but the ideal is to make sure they are funded together so one can follow the other. That [approach] keeps faith with the communities." A series of public meetings are each scheduled for 5-7:30 p.m.: Thursday in the City-County Building, Room 126, 451 S. State St., Salt Lake City; Aug. 7 in the Weber County Commission chambers, 2380 Washington Blvd. In Ogden; and Aug. 12 in the Davis County commission chambers, 28 E. State St., Farmington. john.keahey@sltrib.com =PTP====================================== http://www.canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=c4281638-ef50-44ef-b22d- f10eef4f2d7c Vancouver Sun Saturday » August 2 » 2003 Decade wait for Coquitlam transit line SkyTrain-style line could cost up to $900 million Jeff Lee Vancouver Sun A proposed new rapid transit line for the northeast sector of the Lower Mainland could take seven to 10 years to open for service and cost up to $900 million, says a new TransLink report released Wednesday. While the $900 million is for the most expensive option -- a SkyTrain-style elevated rapid transit line as far as Port Moody and Port Coquitlam -- almost all the other options in the report are pricier than the $400 million TransLink has already agreed to borrow for the new line. The report identifies three potential routes and four modes of rapid transit for the northeast sector, which covers the municipalities of Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam, Burnaby, New Westminster and Port Moody. The SkyTrain-style option is similar to the $730-million system the former NDP provincial government was contemplating as an expansion to its Millennium Line. The project was shelved last year by TransLink because of funding problems and the decision to make the proposed Richmond-Airport- Vancouver (RAV) line a higher priority. The Coquitlam project's cancellation sparked anger among municipalities in that corner of the Lower Mainland, forcing TransLink to explore ways of resurrecting it in a cheaper fashion. The report delivered Wednesday is part of that effort. As well, when TransLink approved funding for the RAV line, it also agreed to borrow up to $400 million to build any system ultimately chosen for the area. But such a system may take as long as 10 years to design and put in place, according to the report's author, Clive Rock, TransLink's director of strategic planning. Unknown at this point is how much the province and the federal government might contribute. TransLink commissioned a preliminary study last December to initially examine possible service, demand, land use and costs of expanding rapid transit to the northeast sector. The report prompted TransLink directors Wednesday to move to a second phase in which detailed cost estimates will be prepared by the end of the year. The preliminary study looked at the original northern corridor that would extend from Lougheed Station via North Road up through Port Moody to Coquitlam Town Centre, and a new southern corridor that would run from Braid Street along the Lougheed Highway. It also examined a third corridor along the Canadian Pacific Railway line considered only for a heavy rail option. it also looked at four transportation technologies: light rail transit, SkyTrain, rubber-tired "guided light transit" and self-propelled "diesel multiple units" that would operate on existing CP tracks. The study then looked at the cost implications of operating each system on each of the corridors. The original SkyTrain technology would cost up to $900 million to build along the northern corridor, and up to $760 million on the southern route. At the other end of the spectrum, a guided light transit system that uses dedicated roadways would cost up to $480 million on the northern route, and $340 million on the southern. A light rail transit line is estimated to cost between $730 million and $530 million depending on the route. The diesel rail option, which would use CP tracks along both the southeast corridor and north Fraser corridor, would cost up to $430 million. The report makes no conclusions about which route or technology is best suited for the region, but notes that the northern corridor is more costly because of engineering requirements. Municipalities along the routes are divided as to which they want. Port Moody prefers the southern route and either guided light transit, diesel multiple units or SkyTrain. Burnaby prefers the northern route with SkyTrain technology. Whatever the routes and technologies available, there is a demonstrated need for rapid transit expansion, Rock said. Over the past decade, all regional plans, including the Livable Region Strategic Plan, Transport 2010 and the Greater Vancouver Transportation Agency's strategic transportation plan, have identified the need for rapid transit in the area. Most municipalities have also planned their growth around transportation corridors. Rock's group is expected to report back to TransLink next December. jefflee@png.canwest.com =PTP======================================== [BATN list] Associated Press Saturday, August 30, 2003 Feds Urge Overturn of Calif. Air Law By Andrew Bridges The federal government is backing a lawsuit before the U.S. Supreme Court that seeks to overturn a California clean-air agency's attempt to curb pollution from buses, taxis, trash trucks and other fleet vehicles. in a filing late Friday, the U.S. Department of Justice urged the court to overturn the South Coast Air Quality Management District's clean fleet rules for the greater Los Angeles metropolitan region. The laws, adopted in 2000 and 2001, require operators to buy cleaner-burning models when they replace or add vehicles to their fleets. The laws have resulted in the replacement of hundreds of diesel trucks, buses and other vehicles with models that burn natural gas and other alternative fuels, according to the AQMD, which is charged with cleaning up the air in much of Southern California. Two industry groups, the Western States Petroleum Association and the Engine Manufacturers Association, sued the AQMD in U.S. District Court. The clean-air agency prevailed in that court and in the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiffs then appealed to the Supreme Court, which is expected to hear the case in December. The Department of Justice's friend-of-the-court brief argues that under the federal Clean Air Act, states and local jurisdictions cannot establish their own emission standards for new vehicles without getting permission from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. A message seeking comment from the Department of Justice was not immediately returned Saturday. The AQMD maintains the rules do not set emissions standards. Instead, the rules ask fleet owners to choose from among the cleanest engine technologies available, and allow exceptions if no alternatives can be located, agency executive officer Barry Wallerstein said. The Engine Manufacturers Association has argued that the rules constitute a de facto ban on certain engines and vehicles. The brief marked the third time in a month the federal government has weighed in on issues that affect Southern California's fight against the nation's worst smog. Previously, the EPA refused to commit to any emission reduction measures that the AQMD sought for the region. The AQMD requested the action in the latest update to its plan to clean up Southern California's air by 2010. And on Wednesday, the EPA unveiled revisions to the 40-year-old Clean Air Act that will allow power plants and factories to upgrade without adopting the most up-to-date pollution control equipment. Several states, including California, are expected to go to court to block the revisions. On the Net: AQMD clean fleet rules http://www.aqmd.gov/news1/Fleet_Rule_Home.htm

CONTENTS * Seattle monorail to displace, impact local businesses The Queen Anne News - The Magnolia News 08/27/2003 * Seattle monorail project's 'Bad Numbers' may nix mitigation TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 50, Aug 28 - Sep 3 2003 * Houston Metro's 'cave in' on rail lambasted Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 * Motor vehicles now outnumber licensed drivers Charlotte Observer Saturday, Aug 30, 2003 * Suburban sprawl may foster obesity CNN.com Friday, August 29, 2003 * Tacoma Link LRT 'on time and under budget' Seattle Weekly August 27 - September 2, 2003 * Minneapolis LRT already sparking development at stations Minneapolis Star Tribune July 27, 2003 * Salem (Or) ponders possible LRT trolley Salem (Or) Statesman Journal August 24, 2003 * Dallas: LRT & buskers give big-city ambience Dallas Morning News Saturday, August 23, 2003 * Washington Metro mulls animated subway ads Washington Post Sunday, August 31, 2003; Page A01 * Congress threatening walking, riding options News Tribune - Tacoma August 31st, 2003 =PTP============================================ http://www.zwire.com/site/tab1.cfm?newsid=10072855&BRD=855&PAG= 461&dept_id=513931&rfi=6 The Queen Anne News The Magnolia News 08/27/2003 Monorail to displace, affect local businesses; question of which ones still up in the air By Russ Zabel Seattle Monorail Project planners released a Draft Environmental impact Statement last week, and it lists for the first time businesses and private properties that might have to make way for the proposed 14-mile route from Ballard to West Seattle. No fatal flaws were identified that could derail any of the many alternatives for track alignments or station locations, said Ross Macfarlane, the monorail staffer in charge of compiling the Draft EIS. "it's going to show a lot of impacts, but those impacts are relatively small in my mind compared to other projects of this size," he said at a monorail board meeting announcing the Draft EIS release. "The thing to stress is all these [business displacements] are potential locations," he said in a later telephone interview. "We're talking about options." in some cases, those options are worst-case scenarios, according to Monorail Project spokesman Paul Bergman. Still, a number of businesses and residences stand to get hit and hit hard by monorail construction around the interbay station near 15th Avenue West and West Dravus Street. in one proposed alignment, the monorail would travel south from the Lake Washington Ship Canal, cross over Fishermen's Terminal and shoot down 16th Avenue West before veering over to 15th Avenue West south of Dravus. That particular alignment calls for a station to be built on the eastern half of the parking lot at the newly remodeled QFC on Dravus. One scenario in the Draft EIS includes getting rid of the grocery entirely, "depending on design and construction issues." A second proposed alignment would see the monorail head south from the Ship Canal along 15th Avenue West before taking the exit that leads to the turn on West Dravus. in that case, according to the Draft EIS, the 7-Eleven, Chuck Dagg's State Farm insurance office, the Academy Press and J&L Houston Inc., two homes and a fourplex would be whacked to make way for the monorail. Macfarlane said he was confident everyone affected by potential route alignment and station location had been contacted, but Dagg disputes that. "There's been no official meeting of interbay business affected by the monorail," he said. "It was total news to me that there was a station on 15th," he said, adding that he did go to some of the community meetings about the monorail project. "I personally don't have a good feel-ing about what's going down," Dagg said. "it's sort of like, 'What's going on?'" Bill Low, director of real estate for QFC, said Monorail Project staffers informed him that a station might end up in the parking lot at the interbay store. "We had had some conversations with them and other real-estate folks," he said. "We're hopeful we can work with the monorail folks in a way that can ... minimize impacts to our store," he said. Asked about the possibility of the grocery being demolished, Low said: "We don't want to lose that location there." He also said the loss of the grocery would be of great concern to the Queen Anne and Magnolia residents who shop there. The Seattle Monorail Project has the right of eminent domain, meaning the agency can force the sale of property as long as fair-market prices are paid. But Low is hopeful that the grocery won't have to be torn down to make way for the monorail. "I think a lot can be done between now and then," he said. Also on the Draft EIS list of properties that potentially would need to be acquired in the area are: the interbay Animal Clinic, Blackstock Lumber, Magnolia Self Storage, Northwest Center and the Lee Chee Garden Restaurant. The final call on alignments and station locations is still months away, but Dagg is nonetheless nervous about his future. "The whole thing to me is kind of scary," he said. "I really don't think the people of Queen Anne and Magnolia understand the impacts." Staff reporter Russ Zabel can be reached at rzabel@nwlink.com =PTP=========================================== TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 50, Aug 28 - Sep 3 2003 MONORAIL MATH LESSON Monorail Supporters Confront Bad Numbers Erica Barnett When Peter Sherwin, the author of the second monorail initiative and a major supporter of the successful 2002 monorail campaign, turns into one of the Seattle Monorail Project's most outspoken watchdogs, you know the agency is facing more than just a minor blip in its budget. indeed, as monorail revenues continued last week to come in well below the agency's earlier forecasts, monorail diehards have been among the agency's harshest critics, lashing out at the SMP for failing to predict long- and short-term monthly revenue shortfalls ranging from about a third to nearly half of what the agency had projected. (The monorail agency, charged with building a $1.7 billion, 14-mile monorail line, took in about $2 million a month in June and July--half of the $4.2 million-per-month prediction used in the agency's 2003 budget, and just two-thirds of what the agency predicted in its original financial plan.) "They should have known about this earlier," Sherwin says. Two major errors explain the revenue shortfall. First, the monorail agency's finance director, Daniel Malarkey, inaccurately interpreted a spreadsheet that showed the city of Seattle's total tax base (the value of all taxable cars in Seattle) at $6 billion. The spreadsheet, provided by the state Department of Licensing, included both "renewals" (used cars, which are taxed by the SMP) and, in a separate column that the SMP contends was confusingly worded, new cars and used cars moving to Seattle from out of state (which are not taxed). Malarkey used both columns in calculating his revenue predictions--a tax base fully 33 percent higher than earlier estimates. That led to the short-term shortfall of nearly 50 percent. Second, even the monorail's long-term tax base assumption was about 20 percent higher than what the SMP now says is the actual base; that shortfall still hasn't been fully accounted for. Cindi Laws, a member of the monorail's governing board, acknowledges that there have been "times where I've said, 'Why didn't Malarkey raise that issue?'" Still, none of the agency's supporters were ready to call for Malarkey's resignation. Laws says she's "very glad" that the SMP has hired an outside firm to analyze the monorail's tax base. But that firm, ECONorthwest, is closely associated with Malarkey, who served as its managing director from 1992 to 1999--a rather ham-handed move for an agency that currently needs, more than anything, the appearance of fair play. What happens now? At last week's SMP finance committee meeting, agency head Joel Horn laid out several possible solutions to the long-term revenue shortfall. Most involve steps that would have to be taken by the DOL. Two suggestions--collecting the monorail tax on used cars that come to Seattle from out of state, and requiring Seattle residents to register their cars where they live (rather than out of town)--would require changes in state law. (The DOL contends that the law authorizing the monorail tax--which says cars should be taxed upon "relicensing"--doesn't allow it to tax used cars from out of state.) in the meantime, the SMP's primary plan appears to be what agency spokesperson Paul Bergman calls "prudent planning"--in other words, cutting costs. Laws predicts the agency may have to start axing "big-ticket items," such as mitigation and the monorail's 19 stations, to make up for the shortfall. Instead of buying land to build stations out of the street, Laws says, the agency might consider putting them in the public right-of- way. "If we don't buy a lot of property, we save a lot of money," Laws says. The disadvantage, she adds, is that "[stations are] big and bulky." Obtrusive stations were a major issue during the monorail campaign, when the monorail agency said it would do everything possible to ensure that stations, particularly downtown, were tucked into private property and out of the public right-of-way. barnett@thestranger.com =PTP========================================= http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2074093 Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 Viewpoint Metro caved in to few to detriment of many By STATE REP. SYLVESTER TURNER in my years in public service, I have learned to recognize a situation in which the public interest is not the guiding force behind the actions of public servants. In Austin, I have seen committee chairs listen to hours of testimony in opposition to a bill, only to pass the bill through the committee once the crowd has left. I have seen members of the Texas House of Representatives cry tears of compassion and make promises in front of members of the public, only to abandon their commitments when the time came to cross a special interest. No matter how many times it is done, it is always difficult to accept, and when I saw this in the Metropolitan Transit Authority Board's recent decision, I was particularly disheartened. Earlier this year, Metro proposed a rail system expansion plan that went from Greenspoint to Hobby Airport and from the Galleria to the East End. Metro took the plan to the public, and at meeting after meeting after meeting, citizens from every walk of life urged Metro not to shortchange Houston with a rail plan that takes too long or does too little. The Metro board responded and expanded the plan to include intercontinental Airport and Gulfgate. This plan presented Houston with a long-term vision for a city committed to making the traffic situation better; a city where tourists and business travelers could hop from a plane to a train and be in downtown; a city where the Texas Medical Center and our colleges and universities, Rice University, University of Houston and Texas Southern University, were connected and easily accessible for students and scholars; a city where working women and men could take rail to work or to seek job opportunities, and families could use rail to reach major public parks, the zoo, sporting events and Astroworld. Metro was praised in all corners of the city. Finally, it appeared that Houston was moving in the right direction by putting forth a plan that would bring our transportation system into the 21st century. Fearing the proposed plan would not be popular with those who oppose rail regardless of where it goes, because it reduces the need for freeway construction and does not enhance their particular business interests, i urged Metro not to back out of its commitment as the tough decisions came due. When the time came for the tough decisions, the Metro board, under pressure from a relatively small but powerful group, repeatedly retreated from a rail proposal of 72 miles, to 39 miles, to 22 miles. Consequently, those who support rail are being asked by Metro to choose the very minimum the opponents of rail would allow or nothing at all. The Metro board caved and in the process let millions of federal dollars go to other cities that are willing to make a sound commitment to public transit. During this rail discussion, it has become popular to reference Dallas. Since 1996, Dallas has built more than 40 miles of light rail. In seven years, it has built rail throughout its city and into some of the more populous and growing suburbs. In comparison, Houston's Metro rail has been under construction since April of 2001. According to Metro's current plan, seven years after rail construction first started, our rail lines will have reached a disappointing 12.9 miles. In fact, after 11 years of Metro rail construction, Houston will only have 29.6 miles to show for its protracted inconvenience. We know that Houstonians are willing to make sacrifices and incur inconvenience in order to achieve real progress. I cannot figure out why our current leaders are rushing to subject us to decade after decade of construction inconvenience when we can get the job done in a fraction of that time. The latest Metro plan will subject Houstonians to extended inconvenience and a very limited benefit. Metro has said that the plan was expanded after public input at a series of hearings. It was then reported in the Houston Chronicle that former Mayor Bob Lanier and mayoral candidate Bill White, along with others, all played a part in downsizing the plan. Allegedly, the current mayor threatened those Metro board members who would not bend to his will with removal from the board. White, who has never been elected to any office by the people of Houston, worked to shape the 22-mile plan. To be perfectly clear, those who helped craft this 22-mile proposal have collaborated to overturn the public will expressed though countless hours of hearings and community meetings. Is this really the way we should run our city? is this the model that encourages community participation and shared decision- making? I think not. The work of thousands of individuals, who felt so strongly about the process, has been overturned by those conspiring behind closed doors to skirt public input to propose a plan of the special interests, by the special interests and for the special interests. By passing a 22-mile light-rail plan that ignores the calls of Metro's riders and supporters, the board has allowed itself to be manipulated and, in the process, has derailed Houstons hope for a meaningful rail system. My support for rail has not wavered. My desire to see rail extended to both airports and Gulfgate as well as TSU, UH and the Galleria is as strong as ever. I have always been pro-rail. I am pro-rail today, and I will be pro-rail for years to come, regardless of the outcome of this referendum. But I am disappointed that Metro has succumbed to the will of a few to the detriment of all Houstonians. I'm now calling on the Metro board to rethink its direction. Take this 22- mile plan back to the drawing board. Remember what you heard at those public meetings, leave the special interests out of it and bring back to the people of Houston a plan that is worthy of our time, efforts, money and inconvenience. We know there is ample time to change the ballot language for the November election. This plan is broken. Fix it. Turner, a Democrat, is a candidate for Houston mayor. =PTP======================================= http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6653942.htm Charlotte Observer Saturday, Aug 30, 2003 Vehicles outnumber licensed drivers now People have lost ground since 1995, when the numbers were equal LESLIE MILLER Associated Press WASHINGTON - For the first time, the typical American family has more vehicles in the garage than licensed drivers in the house. There are 107 million U.S. households, each with an average of 1.9 cars, trucks or sport utility vehicles and 1.8 drivers, the Bureau of Transportation Statistics reported. That equals 204 million vehicles and 191 million drivers. The last time the survey was conducted, in 1995, those numbers were equal. "This is the final realization of the entire American ethos," said Robert Lang, director of Virginia Tech's Metropolitan institute, which researches regional growth. "There's a real love of the road." Americans taking to the roads for Labor Day weekend will find gasoline prices soaring around the country. AAA predicted 33.4 million Americans would travel at least 50 miles from home this weekend, the highest number since 1995. And 28.2 million, or 84 percent, were expected to travel by motor vehicle. Drivers who hadn't filled up lately were in for an unpleasant surprise: Gasoline prices have hit record highs in many parts of the country after the Northeast blackout shut down refineries and a pipeline broke in Arizona. Earlier this week, the Lundberg Survey reported its biggest two-week jump ever -- 15 cents per gallon -- and a national average of nearly $1.75 per gallon, just short of the survey's all-time high weighted average. The prices left many drivers peeved but undeterred. "At most, I may have to spend $10 or $15 more, but I'm not going to cancel a trip for $10," said Michael Moses, decked out in shorts, sandals and sunglasses as he filled up at a New Orleans service station Friday, his last task before departing for Pensacola, Fla., three hours away. Alan Pisarski, author of "Commuting in America," said America's love of the road had been clear for a long time. "We've added more cars than people for the last two decades," Pisarski said, "and the average number of people per household has been declining." There are myriad reasons for the proliferation of vehicles: more families with two breadwinners driving separately to work, more teens with cars of their own, more families with recreational or weekend wheels, longer- lasting automobiles. Cars once were sent to the scrap pile with 100,000 or fewer miles on their odometers. Now it's common to drive them for 200,000 miles or more. "There is an extraordinary availability of low-cost automobiles," Pisarski said. "People are buying 10-year-old cars." Debbie Dickens lives and works in Arlington, Va. She and her husband own three vehicles: a car she drives to work, a truck for his exterminating business and a family pickup. "He doesn't want to drive the work truck on weekends," she said. The Dickenses are typical, Pisarski said: Many Americans now use vehicles for specialized purposes. For example, he said, some people buy high-mileage cars for commutes and keep a gas-guzzling SUV for weekends and vacations. Americans love cars so much they've remade their communities because of them, Lang said. Suburban subdivisions have replaced downtown apartment buildings in many areas. The result is more daily trips to buy groceries or go to the mall. The average person in the United States takes four trips per day. Nearly half -- 45 percent -- are for shopping or errands. "We're taking many short trips we used to make on bike or on foot," said James Corless, spokesman for the Surface Transportation Policy Project, a group that advocates balanced transportation. The Transportation Department survey of 60,000 people, conducted in 2001 and 2002, found 91 percent of people who commute use their own cars or trucks. Of all personal vehicles, 57 percent are cars or station wagons, 21 percent vans or sport utility vehicles, and 19 percent light trucks. The survey also found 8 percent of U.S. households don't have cars. With a fear of terrorism, many people are staying closer to home. And that means car rides rather than plane trips. in 2000, 83 percent of all leisure trips were taken by car, according to the Falls Church, Va., travel research firm D.K. Shifflet & Associates. In 2002, that number rose to 84.9 percent. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Associated Press writer justin pope contributed. =PTP=========================================== http://www.cnn.com/2003/HEALTH/diet.fitness/08/29/unhealthy.sprawl.ap/ index.html CNN.com Friday, August 29, 2003 Suburban sprawl weighs on waistlines Suburbanites more likely to be fatter than urban counterparts Studies show that because they drive more, residents of suburbs are likely to weigh more than those in cities. WASHINGTON (AP) -- People who live in sprawled-out suburbs where they must drive to school, work or the store are likely to weigh 6 more pounds than their counterparts in old-fashioned, walkable cities. For those who still try to exercise, sprawl brings added concern: Pedestrians and bicyclists are much more likely to be killed by passing cars in the United States than in parts of Europe where cities are engineered to encourage physical activity -- and residents typically are skinnier and live longer than the average American. Major studies published Thursday call on urban planners and zoning commissions to consider public health in designing neighborhoods. "How you build things influences health in a much more pervasive way than I think most health professionals realize," said Dr. Richard Jackson of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, who helped edit the research, published in the American Journal of Public Health and the American Journal of Health Promotion. "Look at many new suburbs -- there are not any sidewalks at all. ... The result is we just don't walk," added John Pucher of Rutgers University, who uncovered the U.S.-European disparities. There is growing recognition that ever-fatter Americans' tendency to be sedentary is at least partially due to an environment that discourages getting off the couch and out of the car. Do adults walk three blocks to the bus stop, or drive to work? Can kids walk to school? is there a walking or biking path to the post office, a restaurant, a friend's house? in a sprawling community, homes are far from work, stores and schools, and safe walking and biking is difficult. This current research marks the first attempt to pinpoint just how much that matters. Tracking degrees of health While at Rutgers, urban planner Reid Ewing rated the amount of sprawl in 448 counties that surround metropolitan areas -- counties home to two- thirds of the population -- and then tracked CDC data on the health of 200,000 area residents. All other factors being equal, each extra degree of sprawl meant extra weight, less walking and a little more high blood pressure, he concluded. Someone living in the most sprawling county -- Geauga County outside Cleveland -- would weigh 6.3 pounds more than if that same person lived in the most compact area, Manhattan. The nation's most compact areas were four boroughs of New York City -- Manhattan, Brooklyn, the Bronx and Queens; San Francisco County; Jersey City, New Jersey's Hudson County; Philadelphia; and Boston's Suffolk County. Most sprawling were outlying counties of Southeast and Midwest metro areas: Cleveland's Geauga; Goochland County outside Richmond, Virginia; and Clinton County near Lansing, Michigan. in the 25 most compact counties, 22.8 percent of adults had high blood pressure and 19.2 percent were obese. In the 25 most sprawling counties, those rates were 25.3 percent and 21.2 percent, respectively. Those aren't huge differences, acknowledged Ewing, now at the University of Maryland. But the risk from sprawl equaled certain other risk factors for obesity and hypertension, such as eating few fruits and vegetables. Pedestrian caution Worse were Pucher's findings that per trip, American pedestrians are roughly three times more likely to be killed in traffic than German pedestrians -- and over six times more likely than Dutch pedestrians. For bicyclists, Americans are twice as likely to be killed as Germans and over three times as likely as Dutch cyclists. in Europe, people make 33 percent of their trips by foot or bicycle, compared with just 9.4 percent of Americans' trips. Pucher said the extra activity had to be healthy, as life expectancy in the Netherlands and Germany is about two years longer than in the United States, and obesity rates are lower. Why can these Europeans walk and bike more, and more safely, than Americans? it's not just travel distance -- 41 percent of U.S. trips are shorter than 2 miles, yet most are by car. instead, Pucher cited Dutch and German policies that encourage more sidewalks and bike paths; traffic-calming and auto-free zones in cities; extensive road-sharing education for drivers and cyclists; and pedestrian- friendly urban design. Some groups plan to use the research to back so-called smart-growth initiatives, including a battle in Congress next month over whether $600 million in transportation funds should go for safer cycling and walking programs and other transit alternatives, or for highway construction. Some U.S. cities are copying Europe's policies, said Andy Clarke of the League of American Bicyclists. Education and urban design let Portland, Ore., for instance, increase ridership by 143 percent in the last decade without increasing crashes, he said. =PTP========================================= Seattle Weekly August 27 - September 2, 2003 SOUND TRANSIT With the opening of the Tacoma Link light-rail line last week, Sound Transit demonstrated newfound ability for completing projects on time and under budget. The project was finished several weeks ahead of schedule and $900,000 short of the budgeted $88 million, although that figure was revised upward earlier from $50 million. But Sound Transit spokesperson Lee Somerstein is the first to point out that Sound Transit's accomplishments with the Tacoma Link hardly spell success for the Central Link in Seattle. The construction of the 1.6-mile Tacoma route—partly on streets, partly "grade-separated," and partly on exclusive right of way—faced none of the construction complexities (a tunnel, water crossing, and several problematic right-of-way acquisitions) that plague the Seattle project. Tacoma Link has more in common with the tourist- friendly George Benson waterfront streetcar in Seattle than a cohesive mass-transit system. Ferrying people from a 2,500-space park-and-ride at the Tacoma Dome through downtown, past the University of Washington Tacoma campus and a future convention center and on to the theater district, Tacoma Link doesn't serve any residential neighborhoods. The Tacoma Dome station is one aspect of the line that can serve as model for the Central Link segment, though. At the park-and-ride, light rail is integrated with the Sounder heavy commuter rail line, with several express buses, and with Pierce County Transit, demonstrating how future integration with other transit systems at Seattle's Westlake bus-tunnel station might be handled. That's the planned northern terminus for the first stage of the Central Link rail line to Seattle-Tacoma international Airport. NOAM REUVENi =PTP============================================== Minneapolis Star Tribune July 27, 2003 Sparks of development beginning at light-rail stations Laurie Blake, Star Tribune A light-rail station in a park-like plaza in Bloomington is at the heart of the first large-scale development proposal sparked by the Hiawatha Line. The rail line runs directly through a prime 45-acre site off 34th Avenue near the Mall of America, where McGough Development proposes to build offices, a hotel, restaurants and 1,000 condominiums -- all just steps from the Bloomington Central Station plaza. The plan is contingent upon Bloomington declaring the area a tax- increment financing district under which the developer could borrow money from the city for public improvements included in the project and pay it back with taxes generated by the new development. The city has only just begun to consider the idea, said development director Larry Lee. A serious review will not begin until McGough submits a preliminary development proposal describing what it plans to build and when it plans to build it, Lee said. But as a measure of its seriousness, Roseville-based McGough recently paid $1 million to the project to have the light-rail tracks embedded in the ground to make them less obtrusive as they cross the site. Because construction crews are extending the line through Bloomington this summer, the decision to embed the tracks had to be made in advance of final approval of the development. The property, the former Control Data campus, now includes the HealthPartners headquarters building and parking lots. The proposed condominiums would range in price from $175,000 to $250,000 and would be aimed at young working singles or couples who could ride the rail line to jobs at Minneapolis-St. Paul international Airport, the Minneapolis Veterans Medical Center, the Mall of America, the University of Minnesota and downtown Minneapolis. if couples can use rail transportation to get to work, they might be able to get by with one car, said Gregory Miller, manager of development for McGough. "That's a huge economic advantage for people." Condos next to a rail station also might attract empty nesters who like the idea of leaving their cars in the garage and taking the train to the airport, Miller said. Because the site is close to the airport and near the end of the north- south runway now under construction, the condos would be built with sound-deadening materials in the walls and roof, said Mark Fabel, director of the project for McGough. The condos would be completed by 2005. in Minneapolis The 12-mile rail line is in the third of four years of construction. Service is scheduled to start next April between downtown Minneapolis and the government services building at Fort Snelling, with full service to Bloomington later in the year. Promoters of the rail line had predicted that it would prompt development. So far, in Minneapolis, the rail service figures at least in part into three new residential buildings, said city planner Mike Larson. A block and a half from the 38th Street station, a three-story condominium building is under construction. A four-story apartment building has been proposed near the 46th Street station and a senior housing cooperative has been proposed near the 50th Street station, he said. Land O'Lakes Inc., the dairy producer based in Arden Hills, also announced recently that it would close its Purina Mills building just south of 38th Street on the east side of Hwy. 55 and that it is exploring future uses for that site, Larson said. Continuous activity For McGough, high-density construction that would promote its proximity to the rail line is such a new concept that it sought the help of San Francisco consultants in drawing its plans, said Gregory Miller, McGough's manager of development. The advice was to build both offices and housing to create continuous activity around the station. "As the office workers are going home you want the residents to be coming home to their homes and providing a sense of security and presence 24 hours a day around the stop," Miller said. HealthPartners already has 1,400 employees commuting to the site, and its building would be included in the new development. McGough would like to add another major employer and is courting a company, not yet publicly identified, that never would have considered the site had it not been for the rail line, Miller said. "They were not considering this area of Bloomington. They wanted to be west, more toward Highway 100," Miller said. But the company sees the appeal of having a rail line that would make it easy for employees to reach the airport or to go to the Mall of America at lunchtime to eat or shop, he said. "If you can have those benefits which only the rail gives us, it's very attractive," he said. =PTP=========================================== Salem (Or) Statesman Journal August 24, 2003 Salem may study idea for trolley Downtown businesses would get more foot traffic, some say. TARA MCLAIN Vanessa Garcia might leave her car at home in South Salem if there were an easier way to get around downtown. Say, on a trolley. The Academy of Hair Design student pays to park her car downtown, but she would consider riding the bus from home if she could ride a frequently circulating trolley once she got downtown. "I usually use my car, but if it were more available, I would use it," she said of downtown transportation. On Monday, trolley enthusiasts will ask the Salem City Council for $25,000 to study whether a trolley — either on rubber tires or tracks — would work in the city's core area. Supporters say it would help connect the major employers in and near downtown with shopping and dining. It also would make it easier for downtown visitors and workers to park on the fringe. Mayor Janet Taylor likes the idea, especially if it would mean getting guests of the new conference center into the downtown shopping district or move state workers from the Capitol Mall into downtown for lunch. She wants the various downtown groups and committees to weigh in on spending the initial money for the study — the first step in a long process. The study would take three months to complete. "Certainly, this isn't something for the immediate future," she said, "but it's exciting to be visionary and look out into our future and make the best it can be." The Salem Area Mass Transit District already has offered to pay half of the cost of the $50,000 study, if the city will pay the other half. issues to be explored in the study include: •Potential routes within downtown and the location and distance between major employment centers, including the Capitol Mall, Willamette University, Salem Hospital and others. •How much different routes would cost and where money would come from to pay for them. •How the trolley would be an advantage or disadvantage to downtown residents and business owners. A committee of downtown supporters and city, county and transit officials has been researching the potential of a trolley. The committee envisions a 3- to 4-mile loop of tracks that could be centered downtown and stretch to other areas. The project would cost an estimated $11 million per mile of track. Urban- renewal dollars, federal transit funds and transit capital improvement money are possible funding sources. Not everyone wants a trolley. Downtown worker Dan Saddler doesn't think the city center is big enough for a trolley or streetcar. He said the city should first fill the empty office and retail spaces. "We need to get some places to go to before we get transportation to them," he said. Tara McLain can be reached at (503) 399-6705. =PTP============================================ http://www.dallasnews.com/localnews/stories/082403dnmetaboutdowntow n.6f889.html Dallas Morning News Saturday, August 23, 2003 Why living in a big city strikes a chord By VICTORIA LOE HICKS / The Dallas Morning News I don't know about you, but I'll never forget the first time I saw a DART train: With a catch in my throat, I thought: "Omigod, I live in a real city!" Well, I got that same catch and that same rush last week, when I heard the soulful thump of Jason Stuart's bass fiddle echoing off the brick facades of the West End. "Omigod, there's a street musician – a real, live, actual human being, playing an acoustic bass and crooning 'A Whiter Shade of Pale' in a funky, agile tenor. Here. On a corner in downtown Dallas. Omigod." My first impulse was to rush over and throw some money in his bucket, which I did. My second impulse was to scan our surroundings to make sure that no cops were bearing down on him. I had always assumed that Dallas law barred street performers. You never see them, so it must be against the law, right? But Jason, who's putting himself through theater school at Texas Wesleyan University in Fort Worth, told me the police have shooed him away only when he's stood on DART property. And he's been doing this for a year. So I looked up the city code, and guess what: Street performers are allowed to play on public property in the central business district, as long as they don't "solicit" payment. Pursuant to which, I called the city attorney's office to find out where the line is between soliciting "remuneration" and accepting "voluntary contributions" – which is OK under the code. Lisa Christopherson, who's drafted ordinances for the city for many years, said she's not familiar with this one, so it's probably been on the books for a good while. Being unfamiliar with it, she didn't want to speculate about where accepting ends and soliciting begins. Bottom line, though, she said, "You can't stop people from throwing money." And that's our cue, folks. You wanna live in a real city? First, be on the listen for Jason Stuart or any of his brethren in the Most Noble Order of Street Minstrels. Then, throw money. And not just loose change. Bills. Nice, large bills. Because the main thing now is to make sure the word gets out that Dallas, Texas is very, very kind to street performers. Just think, someday we could actually find some there when we step off the DART train. E-mail vloe@dallasnews.com =PTP======================================== http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5355-2003Aug30.html Washington Post Sunday, August 31, 2003; Page A01 A Tunnel With a View -- and a Profit Metro Looks at New Technology for Ads to Boost Revenue By Lyndsey Layton Metro officials seeking ways to increase revenue are hoping there's a light in the middle of the tunnel. The transit system is considering selling advertising space inside subway tunnels, using a new technology that creates mini-movies that appear to float in the darkness outside the train windows. The technique relies on a series of illuminated panels that give the illusion of motion to a passenger on a train rushing past, much the way the images in a child's flip book appear to move. "This is unusual, and it holds a lot of promise," said Leona Agourides, Metro's assistant general manager for communications, who will seek approval for the new type of advertising from Metro directors next month. Selling advertising space on subway walls is one of several new ideas from Metro staff members trying to boost revenue in the face of looming deficits. Metro raised fares July 1 and trimmed costs to avert a $48 million deficit in the current fiscal year's $899.8 million operating budget. But analysts looking ahead to next year are projecting a $60 million shortfall. So the transit agency also is considering whether to allow McDonald's Corp. to locate Redbox, its nine-foot-tall "automated convenience store" that sells everything from Q-tips to laundry detergent, in Metro parking lots in exchange for a slice of the profits. Another idea calls for allowing advertising companies to install video monitors on trains and buses to play commercials as well as "programming." All strategies require approval from Metro directors, Agourides said. The push toward more advertising is a departure for Metro, which earns $23 million a year from advertising inside stations and on trains and buses but has historically tried to minimize commercial advertising to keep its cathedral-like stations and carpeted trains free from clutter. "It doesn't mean we have to be a monument to brown and gray," said T. Dana Kaufmann, who represents Fairfax on the Metro board of directors. "We just have to figure out how you do advertising in a way that helps support the system without making it garish." it is unclear how much Metro could earn from animated tunnel advertising, since the medium is new. Peter Corrigan, chief executive of Submedia Inc., one of three companies installing subway tunnel advertising around the world, said revenues depend on the location of the display and the number of passengers who would ride past. But in an optimistic research paper for the American Public Transportation Association, Submedia reported that major transit systems can earn $100 million to $200 million over five years. The company says dark, vacant subway tunnels are an untapped gold mine for advertisers and transit systems alike. Just a few years old, animated tunnel advertising is used by two other U.S. transit systems: MARTA in Atlanta and the PATH system between New Jersey and New York City. Each of those agencies recently tested ads in a single tunnel, and both now plan to expand to other locations in their systems. Both have contracted with New York-based Submedia, the only U.S. firm in the fledgling industry. "We're very happy with it," said Tony Griffin, manager of business development at MARTA. The transit agency has been testing ads in one location for nearly two years and has earned about $270,000 in revenue, Griffin said. The first commercial was for Dasani, the bottled water produced by Atlanta-based Coca-Cola Co., and showed a close-up stream of clear blue water pouring into a pool of blue-silver water. "The first time I saw it, I'll never forget it," Griffin said. "I've ridden the subway many, many times before, and there's really nothing to look at outside the window. It's dark. With this, you look and see the window completely filled up with blue, moving video. You really have to see it to understand it." Advertising experts say subway tunnel advertising is the latest innovation in the battle for the attention of the consumer. "Over the last decade, there's been movement away from traditional media -- print, TV and newspapers -- so that advertisers are looking at every possible contact point with a customer," said George E. Belch, chairman of the department of marketing at San Diego State University. "I was in an elevator in Chicago, and there was a TV screen showing ads. I go to my ATM machine, and there are ads on the screen. There's TV at the gas pump. Transit advertising has always been around because you've got crowds of people who get on a train and they're going to be there for X amount of time. But this is a more dynamic approach. It's interesting technology." Submedia was founded in 1999 by Joshua Spodek, who came up with the idea while a graduate student in astrophysics at Columbia University. Spodek was mesmerized by the zoetrope, a 19th-century optical toy that makes images inside a revolving cylinder appear to move. A Submedia display is mechanically simple. It has no moving parts or flashing lights. The display consists of a series of seven-inch-deep metal boxes installed side by side on a tunnel wall. The boxes are 3 feet by 4 feet and contain backlit compressed images. As the train speeds past, the passengers inside the train see images that appear to move. The train must be moving at least three miles an hour for the animation effect. Submedia's clients for the displays in the PATH and MARTA systems have been national companies, including Target Stores, Discovery Network, Calvin Klein Cosmetics, Snapple and Cadillac. While Submedia's patented technology took three years to refine, the concept wasn't entirely new. In 1980, filmmaker Bill Brand installed 228 hand-painted panels inside the Myrtle Avenue subway station in Brooklyn. He called it the Masstransiscope, and millions of passengers saw the colorful cartoonlike images for years. But it fell into disrepair and was never restored. in the PATH and MARTA systems, riders have reacted well to the tunnel ads, transit officials said. "We've had no complaints, and one of our customers called us up and poured on the compliments about the ad," Griffin said. Tunnel advertising is not visual pollution, Spodek said. "Everybody overwhelmingly says it takes away from the boredom of the ride," he said. "It's not like it's taking away from a beautiful view, like a billboard as you're driving around a beautiful area in Vermont. A subway tunnel is a semi- industrial environment." =PTP========================================= News Tribune - Tacoma August 31st, 2003 Congress threatening walking, riding options ERNIE BAY The transportation enhancements component of the federal highway program, which has benefited Washington state with more than 500 miles of rail trails and dozens of bicycle/pedestrian community improvements since 1991, is in danger. Just before its August recess, the House Appropriations Committee narrowly voted to allow states the option of spending on roads what was previously a required 10 percent set-aside for enhancements. We do not need more roads. What we do need are more transportation choices, especially in our most congested areas. Several years ago, while on a World Health Organization assignment in Ghana, I waited almost an entire morning to be picked up by the official i was scheduled to meet. She was waiting for her vehicle. Within a couple of blocks after leaving my hotel in her chauffeured car we became stranded in traffic. Sweltering, she remarked, "I do not know whether we should praise or curse the man who invented the automobile." Within another couple of blocks, on the opposite side of a park from my hotel, we were at her office. I could have walked the distance in minutes and enjoyed it more. The point of this anecdote is that we here are in the same situation. According to the Federal Highway Administration, 75 percent of trips in the United States less than a mile are made by car. Another survey found that in the central Puget Sound region, one-third of all trips under half a mile are also made by car. The problem is that we have sacrificed mobility for motility. We have divided communities with superhighways and separated shopping centers from residential neighborhoods with roadways and parking lots too stark and intimidating to invite travel by foot. Some people are reluctant to cross an intersection in anything less than an SUV. The Transportation Enhancements Program was established in response to surveys that indicated overwhelmingly that Americans wanted more places to walk and bicycle safely. If this is the case, then providing attractive, safe and strategically situated bicycle/pedestrian facilities offers more opportunity to relieve urban traffic congestion than does increasing road capacity. if the full Congress does not restore SAFETEA 2003 (Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act) upon its return from recess, the enhancements mandate will expire Sept. 30. Without it, most of 746 Washington rail trail miles in progress will surely be stopped in their tracks. Ernest C. Bay of Puyallup is president of the Foothills Rails-To-Trails Coalition. Contact him at bugtrail@aol.com.

CONTENTS * Columbus suburb backs regional LRT plan ThisWeek - Worthington, Ohio Thursday, August 21, 2003 * Seattle monorail may zap 97 homes, 'numerous' businesses Seattle Weekly August 27 - September 2, 2003 * Seattle: Slow down monorail project, 'get real' Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 * Seattle: impact flap continues with 'Dueling mockups' SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 29, 2003 * Seattle monorail finances to get outside review SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 29, 2003 * Seattle: 'Suburban monorail' petition drive shelved till spring Seattle Times Friday, August 29, 2003 * Seattle: 'Too few signatures' for 'suburban monorail' petition SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, August 30, 2003 * Houston: Metro board makes 'cosmetic' changes to transit plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 =PTP============================================ http://www.thisweeknews.com/thisweek.php?edition=common&story=this weeknews/082103/uar/News/082103-News-301157.html ThisWeek - Worthington, Ohio Thursday, August 21, 2003 Upper Arlington Council supports plan for light-rail NATE ELLIS ThisWeek Staff Writer After two weeks of consideration, the Upper Arlington City Council has officially endorsed a plan to help the local transit authority seek federal funding to establish a light-rail system in central Ohio. During a Tuesday night special meeting, council unanimously approved a resolution urging the Federal Transit Administration to provide $250- million to the Central Ohio Transit Authority for the development of a light- rail transit route, which would travel from downtown Columbus to the Polaris area. The action effectively provides one more piece of the puzzle for COTA, which ultimately is seeking to construct a regional light-rail system consisting of eight transit routes by 2020. It currently is preparing an application for submission to the FTA in order to garner federal funds to begin the project. COTA already has received a "recommend" rating from the FTA for the impending north corridor light-rail transit plan, making it eligible to receive up to 50-percent of federal funding for the estimated $501-million project. COTA now must show it has support from local municipalities by Aug. 15, to continue its pursuit of $250-million in federal funds. Council lent its support to COTA's effort Tuesday after delaying a vote on the measure two weeks ago. At the time, council President Clark Pritchett indicated he wanted more time to ensure the language of the resolution the city was planning to support was consistent with COTA's objectives for the project. After it was determined that the resolution was in keeping with COTA's plans, council invited several COTA representatives to brief them on the impending light-rail project. The presentation took place Tuesday evening during a conference session, which preceded council's special meeting. During the presentation, several council members pressed COTA representatives to explain ways in which the proposed light-rail routes would benefit Upper Arlington. in particular, council members Paula Brooks, Jeff Kurz, Linda Mauger and Tim Rankin wanted to know what Upper Arlington might gain from the development of a light-rail system that would not actually pass through the city. According to Mike Bradley, rail director for COTA, a light-rail system in central Ohio would increase Upper Arlington residents' mobility because some of the projected routes would be in close proximity to the city and easily accessible. He added that with the rail system would come expanded bus services, which would include services to, from and throughout Upper Arlington. Bradley also said the establishment of a light-rail system would yield positive effects for the local environment by reducing traffic congestion. Additionally, Bradley said light-rail systems in Dallas, Texas, Denver, and Portland, Ore., have created commercial development boons throughout their respective regions. He said similar enhancements to local communities were expected, but local support is necessary in order for COTA to obtain federal assistance. "To actually build the line, we will need local support," he said. "If you want federal support, you have to follow their procedure to get the money." if COTA is able to obtain funding from the FTA and several other sources, which Bradley said was a good possibility, construction on the first light- rail route from downtown Columbus to the Polaris area likely would begin in 2006. If all goes as planned, Bradley said, the route would be operational by the end of 2008. Prior to approving the resolution to support COTA's effort to solicit federal funding, several council members said they believed a light-rail system throughout central Ohio would bolster mobility and the economic stability of the region and Upper Arlington. Among them was Mauger, who said she believed light-rail and expanded bus services would increase the mobility of residents, and allow older individuals to be more independent. "I think light rail is definitely where we need to go," Mauger said. =PTP============================================ Seattle Weekly August 27 - September 2, 2003 MONORAIL The Seattle Monorail Project released its draft environmental-impact statement (DEIS) last week. The 1,872-page document details almost everything that might be affected by the construction and is mostly good news: Traffic along the 14-mile Green Line corridor will decrease, air and water quality will improve, and numerous hazardous material sites stand to be cleaned up. But depending on which route the monorail project chooses, numerous businesses and up to 97 households would be displaced, with Lower Queen Anne and Belltown being hit particularly hard. In Belltown, if the monorail elects to run along the east side of Second Avenue, a 55-unit apartment building will have to be taken out. And in Lower Queen Anne, if the monorail runs through the Seattle Center grounds or along Mercer Street, a 29-unit apartment building will be lost. NOAM REUVENi =PTP============================================= Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 Editorial Let's get real about monorail, right away Backers of the Seattle Monorail need to stop the project from zooming so quickly down the track and fully explain why monorail tax revenues are lower than anticipated and how the line can be built with fewer resources. Tax revenues received from car tabs are considerably behind projections, a significant warning sign. The new car-tab tax collected only $2.2 million a month in June and July, roughly two-thirds the amount assumed in the organization's financial plan for a line connecting Ballard, downtown and West Seattle. The Seattle City Council should take immediate steps to get a better sense of the possible and aggressively assert itself into monorail proceedings. A group of downtown business interests this week asked the council to make sure the project has enough money to build the entire 14-mile line before construction begins. Good idea. They also asked that the downtown segment be built last to avoid disruption that will come from building in the city's complicated economic center. Business interests and others are becoming jittery about monorail finances. Without greater transparency and openness on the part of monorail leaders — and a full and convincing explanation of how the numbers still can work — public trust will erode. No area of the city — downtown, Ballard or West Seattle — wants a project launched on their streets if it can't be completed properly. Monorail leaders often have a tin ear when it comes to interacting with the council and the public. Merely arguing money will be there in subsequent monthly collections or suggesting taxes can be collected for a longer period of time than anticipated is not a good way to shore up public confidence. This community is legitimately nervous about overly ambitious projects that promise one thing and deliver something less. Less than a year after voters approved the monorail, the project is sending up warning flares. City Council and monorail watchdogs have to respond aggressively. Let's get real about the monorail right away. =PTP============================================= SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 29, 2003 Dueling mockups of monorail on display at Seattle Center By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Headed to Bumbershoot this weekend to immerse yourself in a world of art and music? it'll be hard to avoid the whiff of civic controversy as you stroll the Seattle Center grounds. Finishing touches were being applied yesterday to a full-scale mockup of the monorail that, under one proposed alignment, would run across Seattle Center grounds. The mockup consists of steel scaffolding towers rising 57 feet high with a banner strung between them bearing a depiction of the monorail cars. It's located on the north side of the international Fountain, close to one proposed route. it was put up by a coalition that includes Northwest Folklife Festival and One Reel, which produces Bumbershoot and other arts events. "I'm hoping people will look at the mockup and say this is a horrible idea to run the train through the park," said Michael Herschensohn, executive director of Northwest Folklife. "We need to run it on the main streets where it belongs." Bumbershoot-goers can get the monorail's view of the story, but they'll have to want to. The monorail's information center is on the second floor of the Center House. "it's located, unfortunately, in a not-very-visible location," said Paul Bergman, a spokesman for the Seattle Monorail Project. So whom does he complain to? One Reel. "We've asked the One Reel folks if they could move us to a more visible location," said Bergman. "For other festivals, we were put in more visible locations." Jane Zalutsky, president of One Reel, says Seattle Center, not One Reel, decided the monorail booth's placement, but One Reel will try to find a better space, though it will be difficult. "Every square inch of this place is filled up," Zalutsky said. The location the monorail had at the Folklife Festival is being used by visual art installations. The spot the monorail had at the Bite of Seattle is where the hip-hop demonstration area is, Zalutsky said. The monorail will have its own mockup, but it's of the indoor variety: a computer simulation. Bergman calls the monorail's information center "the truth booth," while branding the One Reel mockup "the mythical monorail." City Council members Peter Steinbrueck and Nick Licata asked the monorail project to do a life-size mockup at summer festivals. Bergman said the monorail considered it but thought the money spent would not be worth it because the mockup can't give an accurate picture, as the coalition mockup proves. The biggest objection to the One Reel coalition's mockup is that the columns are only 33 feet apart, whereas the actual monorail's columns will be 100 to 120 feet apart. "That's very misleading to the public," Bergman said. Another problem is that a mockup is static, suggesting the monorail will be present at all times, Bergman said. in fact, the monorail, except during rush hour, will be going through the campus about 15 times an hour, representing a presence of about 2.5 minutes out of every hour, Bergman said. Finally, the coalition's mockup is about 12 feet closer to the international Fountain than the actual proposed route is, he said. Zalutsky said the coalition would have had to take down trees to put it where the actual monorail would run. She readily concedes the mockup is not an exact replica, but says the limitations of safety, budget and time didn't allow that. "This is to give an indication of scale," she said. "The impact will be significant." The coalition is providing information to the public explaining the deviations from reality, she said. Bergman said few people will stop to pick up that information. "They're asking people to 'use their imaginations' -- to imagine that the columns are 100 feet instead of 33," Bergman complained. "Good decisions are based on accurate information, not imagination." The monorail has produced computerized simulations and visualizations. He estimated those cost about $25,000 to produce. Zalutsky said her coalition had spent about $20,000 on its mockup. But Zalutsky said the monorail's simulations require just as much imagination as the coalition mockup. ON THE WEB Jane Zalutsky, president of One Reel, and others have established a Web site called Save Seattle Center, which has posted some of the monorail's own "before" and "after" images at Seattle Center. The Web address is: www.exordia.net/saveseattlecenter/imagebeforeafter.htm The Seattle Monorail Project's Web site, www.elevated.org, has a wealth of information and images about the monorail project. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com =PTP======================================== SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 29, 2003 Monorail finances to get outside review By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER The revenues and finances of the Seattle Monorail Project will undergo independent scrutiny. "I'm convinced that it's appropriate for us to have an independent review of finances," said Tom Weeks, chairman of the monorail board. Details such as who would do the review, how long it would take and what it would include are to be discussed at the September Finance Committee meeting. The review comes after recent revelations that the monorail's tax revenues are running one-third to one-half below earlier projections. The monorail staff believes that in the long run revenues will fall somewhere between 11 percent and 33 percent below projections. Executive Director Joel Horn and others have said the monorail can still complete a high-quality project on time within those revenues, but board member Steve Williamson, executive secretary of the King County Labor Council, said yesterday it's important to get the facts before being "too reassuring." Williamson was pleased about the independent review. Peter Sherwin, who led Seattle's two monorail campaigns, urged the board to start slashing expenses immediately, starting with considering calling a halt to planning for a second monorail line to be built after the 14- mile Green Line from Ballard to West Seattle is built. Horn assured Sherwin that he is working aggressively on the revenue shortage. "This is absolutely in the bulls'-eye for me every day," Horn said. Yesterday, Horn released a study of property values near transit stations in Vancouver, B.C., Portland and San Francisco. The study found that the value of property goes up the closer it is to the transit stations. The effect extends a half-mile out from the station. "it's the improved accessibility," Horn said. The study also found that people valued the proximity to transit more than they did a view. The stations must be well designed and safe, Horn cautioned. in San Francisco, which has a heavy-rail system known as BART, multifamily housing had a 10 to 15 percent higher value if it was within a quarter-mile of a station. Single-family homes within 500 to 1,000 feet of BART stations had a $14,400 sales premium, the study found. in Portland, single-family homes within 1,400 yards of a station had a 10 percent sales premium. The higher property values from the Seattle monorail would add $121 million in today's dollars in tax revenue over a 30-year period, the staff estimated. Board member Kristina Hill said the information was interesting but wondered what the purpose of the study was. Horn said the public is interested in the information, and it would also help in discussions with the community and with property owners near the line. Board member Richard Stevenson said such studies do not always satisfy affected property owners. Monorail critic Richard Borkowski, president of People for Modern Transit, questioned the conclusions of the study in an interview after the meeting. Property values might well increase in lightly developed areas such as Sodo or interbay, Borkowski said, but putting the monorail in a dense, built-up downtown area with heavy pedestrian traffic will likely not have that result, he said. "Who wants to walk underneath a train overhead? it's really unprecedented to do something like this," he said. "it's a negative." P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com =PTP============================================= Seattle Times Friday, August 29, 2003 Local Digest Suburban monorail backers postpone petition drive KING COUNTY — Thwarted by vandalism and what they say are overly strict county regulations, Citizens for King County Monorail have ended their petition drive to get an initiative on the November ballot that would begin planning for a suburban monorail. The group will instead work on a new initiative for November 2004. The group is pushing for the construction of a monorail that would connect the Eastside to Seattle and South King County. Supporters needed to gather at least 45,000 valid signatures from King County voters by Sept. 29 in order to get the initiative on this fall's ballot. If approved by voters, the initiative would have authorized a $6.4 million, two-year planning process. The group had to refile the initiative with the clerk of the Metropolitan King County Council three times because of technical problems, causing delays. When the petition drive began, 36 signature boards were placed around King County. Some of the petitions have been vandalized, or contain stray marks or comments, making up to a quarter of the 10,000 counted signatures unusable, group coordinator Ed Stone said. =PTP============================================= http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/137333_signatures30.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, August 30, 2003 Monorail initiative hits the brakes till spring Too few signatures, deadline looming By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER A group pushing to build a King Countywide monorail system has suspended its signature-gathering effort for initiative 21, and will start over next spring, hoping to get the measure on the November 2004 ballot. Citizens for King County Monorail was having trouble gathering the 45,000 valid signatures by the deadline of Sept. 29, a statement from the group said yesterday. The activists cited difficult requirements in King County for initiatives. First, the group has only 90 days to collect the 45,000 signatures. Second, the county has a number of requirements ranging from the size of paper to disallowing stray marks or words on petitions. Finally, if a voter signs a petition more than once, all the signatures are considered invalid. "This campaign will continue -- deeper and stronger than before," said Karin Blakley, a Newcastle resident and steering committee member. "We have strong endorsements and we've learned a lot from this effort. We'll be even more effective in the spring." The initiative calls for creating a commission to come up with a plan for the monorail system. The commission would then bring its plan before voters in two years. King County would finance the planning with $6.4 million. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com =PTP============================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 29, 2003 Metro board amends transit plan Phrases altered to reassure voters By RAD SALLEE The Metropolitan Transit Authority board approved some politically cosmetic changes in wording Thursday for its Nov. 4 referendum on the controversial transit plan it approved Aug 18. The amended language, approved 7-1, includes phrases reminding voters that the Metro Solutions plan calls for more bus service as well as more rail, and gives assurance that a "for" vote will not increase Metro's 1 cent sales tax. A third change replaces "commuter rail" with "commuter line," leaving Metro free to choose light rail or some other form of transit to Fort Bend County if future voters approve the line. The term commuter rail usually refers to a form of heavy rail with cars like those of passenger trains. The transit plan has drawn fire mainly because of its rail component, which calls for an eventual 64.8 miles of additional light rail and an eight- mile commuter line to be completed by 2025 at a total cost of nearly $5 billion. Metro's 7.5-mile light rail line, under construction and testing from downtown to Reliant Park, is scheduled to open in January. To gain support from business and political leaders, the board voted Aug. 18 to issue bonds for only the first 22 new miles of light rail, to be built by 2012 at an estimated cost of $640 million. Any further expansion would be subject to another referendum, to be held between Nov. 1, 2009, and Jan. 1, 2013. That vote would also determine whether Metro would keep on sending 25 percent of its tax revenues to member cities and to the county for street projects. Metro is under contract to continue these payments to Sept. 30, 2009, and the plan now before voters would extend that five more years. Art Morales, a Harris County appointee to the board, voted against changing the wording, saying it could mislead voters to think that Metro has power to change its tax rate, which voters approved in 1978 with authorization from the Legislature. County appointee Jackie Freeman abstained from voting. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2072316

CONTENTS * Dallas-Ft. Worth: Colorado Railcar to be showcased Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) 2003/08/29 * Colorado Railcar in D-FW area: Specific event information North Central Texas Council of Governments 2003/08/29 * Houston: Mayor wannabe disses Metro's rail plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 28, 2003 * Seattle: 'Keep monorail on track' & in one piece SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Thursday, August 28, 2003 * Boston intros new 'Slinky' buses for 'rapid transit' Silver Line Boston Globe 7/25/2003 * Phoenix LRT: 1st project out for bid The Arizona Republic Aug. 16, 2003 * Phoenix LRT: 5 companies seek carbuilding contract The Arizona Republic Aug. 2, 2003 PTP========================================== http://www.dart.org/ColoradoRailCar.asp Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) 2003/08/29 New Rail Technology Being Showcased in North Central Texas You are invited to learn more about the Colorado Railcar, a self-propelled passenger railcar. The Future of Regional Rail on Display in Dallas Join Us Friday, September 5 Dallas Union Station Event Time: 11 a.m. — 3 p.m. Times and location subject to change Visit www.nctcog.org/trans/public_involvement for directions and additional information. PTP========================================== http://www.nctcog.org/trans/public_involvement/Colorado_railcar/specifics. html North Central Texas Council of Governments 2003/08/29 Colorado Railcar: Event Specific information Monday, September 1 City of Denton Noon - 3:00 PM Location: Near City Hall East Annex intersection of Hickory Street and Bell Avenue Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: John Cabrales Public information Officer, City of Denton (940) 349-8509 Tuesday, September 2 Fort Worth T&P Station 9:00 AM - 3:00 PM Location: Texas & Pacific Station 221 West Lancaster Avenue, Fort Worth (76102) intersection of West Lancaster and Throckmorton Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Richard Maxwell Marketing Director, Fort Worth Transportation Authority (817) 215-8645 Wednesday, September 3 Cleburne intermodal Depot 9:00 AM - Noon Location: intersection of Chambers and Front Street 0.2 miles south of the intermodal Depot Depot located at 206 Border Street, Cleburne (76031) Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Debra Hollida City of Cleburne (817) 645-0901 Thursday, September 4 Grapevine Station 11:00 AM - 1:00 PM Location: Grapevine/Tarantula Train Station 705 Main Street, Grapevine (76051) Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Roger Nelson City Manager, City of Grapevine (817) 410-3104 Friday, September 5 Dallas Union Station 11:00 AM - 3:00 PM Location: Union Station 400 South Houston Street, Dallas (75202) Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Morgan Lyons Media Relations, Dallas Area Rapid Transit (214) 749-2662 Saturday, September 6 Waxahachie Station 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM Location: Old Rock island Station South of Madison Street between Rogers and College Streets Close to Boyce Feed & Grain 411 South College Street, Waxahachie (75165) Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Paul Stevens Assistant City Manager, City of Waxahachie (972) 937-7330 Sunday, September 7 Frisco Main Street 11:00 AM - 2:00 PM Location: On 1st Street between Elm and Main Street Click here for Yahoo! Map and Directions Click here for NCTCOG Aerial Photo Map Contact: Dana Baird Public information Officer, City of Frisco (972) 335-5551 PTP============================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 28, 2003 Turner rails against transit plan Candidate says $640 million expansion is too small, helps rival By JOHN WILLIAMS and STEPHANIE WEINTRAUB Mayoral candidate Sylvester Turner harshly criticized Metro's proposed rail plan Thursday, saying it was too small and complaining it was scaled back to help one of his opponents -- Bill White. Standing adjacent to a rail station on the 7.5-mile rail line under construction, Turner said the Metro board should reconsider its decision to take a $640 million expansion to voters Nov. 4. instead, Turner said, the board should offer a $980 million alternative that would provide 40 miles over 14 years rather than 22 miles over nine years. Metro has three more weeks to consider the matter before setting the final ballot language, Turner said. At that time, Turner will decide whether he will support or oppose the referendum. "I am now and have always been pro-rail," Turner said. "I will be pro-rail for years to come, but this plan is broken. To the Metro board, I say, 'Fix it.' " Turner's comments came shortly after the Metro board voted 7-1 to approve ballot language for the $640 million plan. Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter said there was no chance the board would reconsider the decision. Because the 22-mile plan does not rely on using sales tax money now dedicated for road repairs, he said, it has a better chance of winning voter approval than the 40-mile plan that would have started using the road money after 2009. "He (Turner) is misinterpreting what is happening as a reduction of the plan," Schechter said. "The Metro board has moved forward with a consensus that we hope will help us pass the plan." Turner said the plan was designed to boost White's candidacy. White is supported by former Mayor Bob Lanier, who took part in negotiations that resulted in the 22-mile plan. "In public, the Metro board was all too eager to do what it needed to placate the masses," Turner said. "Behind closed doors, Metro lost its backbone and caved in to rail opponents and special interests who did not bother to attend Metro's public meetings." Schechter said White did not take part in negotiations. He noted that while White has supported the $640 million plan, the candidate also voiced prior support for as much as $980 million. White warned that Turner was playing a dangerous political game if he ultimately opposes the referendum. "Sylvester says he is for rail, but defeating the bond issue could set us back a decade," White said. "Nobody gets exactly everything they want. Leadership is building consensus and moving forward." White pointed out that when Turner ran for mayor in 1991, eventually losing to Lanier in a runoff, he and Lanier both opposed a monorail plan proposed by then-Mayor Kathy Whitmire. During that campaign, Turner said that if elected, he would return with a different rail plan. Rail has been one of the most-discussed issues in the mayor's race because the next mayor must oversee implementation of the plan if one is approved. Of the other major candidates, Michael Berry has said he opposes the plan and Orlando Sanchez continues to study it. But as the mayoral candidates took differing positions, opponents of the plan were busy Thursday trying to defeat the referendum. David Hutzelman, who heads opposition group Business Committee Against Rail, presented an alternative mobility plan that places more emphasis on roads and buses. Metro's $640 million rail plan is cumbersome, archaic and expensive and won't solve the city's congestion, Hutzelman said. Rail is a bad idea, Hutzelman argues, because it will only serve a small portion of the Houston area, and buses are faster and less expensive. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2071921 PTP========================================= SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Thursday, August 28, 2003 Keep monorail on track, whole SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD Downtown business interests waded in Tuesday night with two suggestions on the monorail. One of the suggestions was patently bad, the other badly timed. The Building Owners and Managers Association and the Downtown Seattle Association proposed that the 14-mile Ballard-to-West Seattle monorail line be built in segments, leaving the downtown segment until last. This is classic meddling by special interests. The system should be built in the fashion and order that makes the most sense physically and fiscally. Engineering and efficacy should dictate the course of construction, not turf. The obvious concern is that -- like Sound Transit's light rail -- budget woes will drive the monorail agency to opt for a truncated system. If part of the city must be torn up for an incomplete monorail system, let it not be downtown. With its design-build-operate-and-maintain approach, monorail construction cannot begin until there is a bona fide bid to do the project for the available revenue. The onus is then on the bidder to follow through. There is no harm in the call for additional City Council review. It's hard to imagine the council would allow the city's largest public works project to begin without it. But using the land use code Tuesday night was the wrong approach to call for that funding stamp of approval. And there is no right venue for hamstringing the construction plan. PTP============================================= Boston Globe 7/25/2003 page B1 'Slinky' buses await their Boston debut By Mac Daniel, Globe Staff, 7/25/2003 As MBTA bus driver Rich Hartel sat behind the wheel of the 60-foot bus -- 20 feet longer than anything he had ever handled -- driving instructor Jay Orlando began to list the differences in driving the two. The blind spots are larger, and when pulling out of a stop, the bus's flexible, accordion-like midsection has a habit of swinging out 9 to 15 inches in the opposite direction of travel. ''You should never let your guard down for one second. If you let your guard down for one second, you're going to hear the crunch,'' Orlando said, referring to a driver's nightmare: the sickening sound of metal-on- metal when a bus hits another vehicle. Hartel scanned his sideview mirrors, politely complained about the rigid brakes on the new bus, and came away from the training run along Washington Street's Silver Line route warily confident. ''it's as difficult as it is dealing with Boston traffic in a 40-foot bus,'' said Hartel, a 12-year veteran behind the wheel. in the next month, 44 of the 60-foot Neoplan USA compressed natural gas buses will make their debut on the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's Silver Line and the Route 39 route in Jamaica Plain. Their presence will be expanding in the coming months. The 40-foot buses currently in use hold a total of 76 passengers seating and standing. The 60-footers -- which looks like two buses connected by a ''Slinky'' -- hold 104. The smaller bus has six tires. The larger one has 10. The new buses, which feature two air-conditioning units and an automated announcement system that MBTA officials promise will be intelligible, are expected to greatly enhance bus service in Boston. But despite rigorous analysis of the routes the new buses will be running, T officials and others said there are some minor logistical problems to mesh the new fleet with Boston's driving habits, parking oddities, and roads that were designed for 19th century carriages than 60-foot articulated buses. When the longer and larger buses with the rubber, flexible middle were put into use in New York City in 2001, critics reported they had a higher accident rate on some routes than regular buses, registering 3.8 accidents per month on one Manhattan route compared to 2.5 for a shorter bus, according to a City Council study. Transit Authority officials in New York said the study was flawed. No further traffic safety studies have been performed on the buses in New York, according to Neysa Pranger, campaign coordinator with New York's Straphangers Campaign, a nonprofit passenger advocacy group. But Pranger said the 60-foot buses, which are mostly used on crosstown curcuits, are now experiencing long loading times, several minutes at busy stops. There are also problems with the buses blocking intersections, she said. MBTA officials aren't expressing concern. They borrowed a 60-foot bus from the company running a shuttle for the University of Massachusetts at Boston, tested it extensively along the two Boston routes, and are currently in the midst of a driver training program. The college has used similar-sized buses to shuttle students from the JFK-UMass T stop for years without incident, albeit on a relatively straight route, according to officials at Crystal Transport, which runs the service. ''They actually turn better than our 40-foot buses,'' said Kevin Sheehan, Crystal's general manager. ''A bus is a bus,'' Steve Epps, the T's director of bus operations, said of the new vehicles. ''it's just a little longer. You just have to get used to it.'' The Silver Line's route from Roxbury's Dudley Square to Downtown Crossing takes buses through several very tight turns, including a left onto Temple Place downtown that is made perilous by new construction, and a right-hander from Kneeland Avenue onto Washington Street in Chinatown, where illegally parked cars make the cornering more prone to ''the crunch'' Orlando warned drivers about. Route 39's corridor for Centre and South streets is also notoriously congested. in addition, should a longer bus get stuck, its length complicates reversing directions. The T's training manual for the 60-footers begins its section on backing-up procedures by stating in all capital letters: ''DO NOT PLACE BUS INTO THE POSITION TO HAVE TO BACK UP.'' After that, the manual advises drivers to wait until a guide or MBTA official can arrive to help, turning any incident requiring reversing into a time- consuming affair. PTP========================================= http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0816lightrail16.htm l The Arizona Republic Aug. 16, 2003 1st light rail work bids out To replace canal bridge Bob Golfen Valley Metro Rail has started the bidding process for the first piece of construction of the light rail system. The construction involves the replacement of a concrete bridge that carries 48th Street over the SRP Grand Canal just east of Sky Harbor international Airport as part of the building of the transit system's maintenance facility. "This is essentially the first light rail contract," said Daina Mann, spokeswoman for Valley Metro Rail. invitations for bids were sent out to contractors Monday, with "a couple of dozen contractors interested and asking for the bid documents, both locally and out of state," Mann said. The contract is valued at about $2.5 million and will consist of tearing down and rebuilding the bridge, constructing underground utilities, putting pipes under the nearby Union Pacific railroad track, and paving. The transit authority is replacing the existing bridge with a stronger one to accommodate construction traffic. "What we found is that the existing bridge was not adequate to support the trucks carrying equipment to do construction of the maintenance facility," Mann said. The planned structure will be south of the 20-mile light rail line, which is now in its final design stage. The facility will be used for maintenance and repair of the rail cars and track and for storage. Valley Metro has requests out to five manufacturers who are competing to build railcars for the system. The finalist to build 36 to 60 of the 93-foot cars will be chosen in late September. The light rail system, which was approved by voters last year, will link the northwest and east Valley with downtown Phoenix. The Federal Transit Administration recently gave approval for the project to proceed. Rail system completion is scheduled for December 2006. PTP========================================= httg://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0802lightrail02.html The Arizona Republic Aug. 2, 2003 Light rail bidders span globe 5 foreign companies vying to build cars for Valley system Bob Golfen Five companies from five different nations are competing to build rail cars for the Valley's planned light rail system. The companies have submitted bids for the contract, and Valley Metro Rail is poised to send them requests for final offers, said Richard Brown, director of design and construction. Valley Metro, the corporation overseeing design, construction and operation of the light rail system, expects to buy 36 to 60 rail cars, at an estimated cost of $3 million each. Specifications for the cars' appearance, design and technical components were created by Valley Metro, with the five manufacturers responding with their price tags. Some of the specifications were altered because of suggestions from the bidders, Brown said, and the upcoming requests for "best and final offers" reflect those changes. The companies are: • Ansaldobreda (Breda) of Italy, which has assembly plants in Contra Costa, Calif., and Pittsburgh. • Bombardier of Canada, which has a plant in Plattsburg, N.Y., and is proposing a Tucson factory for this project. • CAF USA, a Spanish company with an assembly plant in Elmira, N.Y. • Kinkisharyo of Japan, which has a factory in Mare island, Calif., and is proposing a Valley site for this project. • Siemens, a Germany company with a plant in Sacramento. Brown said that after the requests are sent out, Valley Metro will wait to receive bids from the companies then make a final decision in October. Each rail car will be 93 feet long and articulated at two points so it can bend around corners on city streets. Each will accommodate 150 passengers and will include inside racks for bicycles. The streamlined cars will be reversible, with driver's compartments at both ends. Power will be provided by overhead electric lines. The cars can be operated singly or coupled together in groups of as many as three cars. The limit on the number of cars hooked together is dictated by the length of a city block, said Daina Mann, communications manager for Valley Metro Rail. Any longer and the train would block traffic at intersections while it was stopped at a station. The Federal Transit Administration recently gave approval for the project to proceed, and the 20-mile light rail system is now in the final design stage. The light rail system, which will link the northwest and east Valley with downtown Phoenix, is scheduled for completion in December 2006. About 27,000 riders are expected to use the system daily.

CONTENTS * Seattle monorail: Business groups wary of revenue shortfall SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 27, 2003 * Seattle monorail: 'Not the time to panic' over cash shortage Ballard News Tribune 2003/08/28 * Seattle monorail: Debate heats up over Seattle Center route Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 * Seattle monorail board candidates debate tax, route issues Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 * Seattle: Monorail honcho Falkenbury runs for City Council TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 46, Jul 31 - Aug 6 2003 PTP============================================ http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/136790_monorail27.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 27, 2003 Wary business groups press city to tighten oversight of monorail By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Major downtown business interests want the City Council to step in and make sure the Seattle Monorail Project has enough money to build the entire 14-mile line before it begins construction. And they want to make sure the downtown segment of the Ballard-to- West Seattle structure is built last. The business interests made a surprise appearance last night at a public hearing on proposed land-use code changes for the monorail and urged the City Council to increase its oversight of the $1.75 billion project that voters approved last year. "it's important for the City Council to maintain control," said Donald Wise, senior vice president for UNICO and president of the Building Owners and Managers Association, or BOMA. Representatives of BOMA and of the Downtown Seattle Association, which represents downtown developers, submitted two amendments to the land-use code ordinance under consideration by the council. The monorail is opposed to both amendments. One would require the council to review and approve construction phasing for the project. The business representatives said they want the City Council to ensure that construction begins in West Seattle and Ballard before it begins downtown. Because of a concern about potential revenue shortfalls and an increase in construction costs, another amendment would have the City Council certify that the monorail's revenues are enough to pay for the entire system to be built. "it's really incumbent on the council to weigh in," said Patrick Gordon, an architect and co-chairman of the Downtown Seattle Association's monorail committee. The financial concerns follow recent revelations that the motor vehicle excise taxes -- the monorail's sole source of revenue -- are coming in one- third to one-half below monorail projections. City Council Chairman Peter Steinbrueck said he has referred both amendments to council staff for review. "We're taking them seriously and they're under review," Steinbrueck told the business representatives. Anne Levinson, director of government relations for the monorail, said in an interview after the meeting that the monorail did not learn until yesterday that the two business groups planned to testify last night, but was familiar with their concerns. The land use code is not the proper place to put either amendment, Levinson said. The purpose of the ordinance being proposed is "to streamline and simplify" the land use procedures for getting monorail building permits, she said. "To put this extraneous language in that's unrelated to the land use code would strike me as inconsistent with what the mayor's and council's and monorail's intent for the ordinance is," she said. Levinson said it doesn't make sense to build two unconnected parts of the system before building downtown, because it would require the monorail to purchase two sets of cars and build two operations centers. Each operations center costs $40 million. "We don't think it's a prudent use of taxpayer money," she said. The monorail would not mind the council requiring financial assurances in a later umbrella agreement that grants the monorail use of all of the city's rights of way, but does not want the financial review to be part of the land use code changes, Levinson said. The financial guarantee really isn't needed, she said, because the monorail is using a contracting arrangement known as "design-build- operate-maintain" or DBOM, under which the winning bidder gives a fixed price for designing and building the project and will operate and maintain it once it's built. All of the schedule, construction, inflation and other risks are negotiated into that fixed price, and there is no way for the price to go up, Levinson said. "That's one of the reasons we're doing DBOM," she said. "it's an all or nothing thing. You put out for bid the entirety of the project and either you have the financial wherewithal to build an excellent project in its entirety or you don't proceed." Matt Griffin, who is developing a project on Second Avenue and is former chairman of the Downtown Seattle Association, said the monorail should not be allowed to compromise the "urban environment" unless it can provide "evidence they'll build the whole system." Griffin said the concern is the monorail would build one part first and then wait for financing to build the next part later. Construction should not begin unless the City Council can be assured "we have a complete system that brings people into the city." The genesis of the business groups' concerns, Levinson said, is Sound Transit, which, because of cost overruns, had to shorten its original 21- mile light rail line to a 14-mile line that will take three years longer than initially planned to complete. Levinson said BOMA and the downtown developer association have been "very supportive" of the monorail project, which will bring people downtown and pump up revenue and the tax base in the retail core. "I certainly would not criticize them proposing these. I just don't think this is the right vehicle," she said. The council is scheduled to vote on the land use changes Sept. 8. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com PTP======================================== http://www.robinsonnews.com/ballardStory2.html Ballard News Tribune 2003/08/28 Monorail tabs stay low in July By Adam Richter News-Tribune Now is not the time to panic, insist the folks at the Seattle Monorail Project. Two months after the Washington State Department of Licensing began collecting car-tab revenues for the monorail, the cash is coming in shorter than expected. License tabs increased a little for the Seattle Monorail project in July, but the revenue was still close to what the agency collected in June. According to Brad Benfield from the Washington Department of Licensing, the excise tax on the monorail generated $2,243,781.93 in July. In June the state collected $2,197,110 for the monorail, plus an additional $371,574.58 in May. "This is the money that the state treasurer actually sends to the Seattle Monorail Project," said Benfield. Either way you look at it, both months represent a considerable revenue shortfall when compared with the Seattle Monorail Project's own projections. According to Monorail Project spokesperson Paul Bergman, the agency forecast $3.2 million in revenue per month this year, based on the .85 percent excise tax charged on cars in Seattle. That makes for a 19 percent shortfall for June, and 30 percent shortfall in July. "The good news is, we've been very tight-fisted," said Bergman. So far this year, said Bergman, the Seattle Monorail Project has stayed $6.5 million under budget. That kind of frugality will come in handy later this year. Bergman estimated that the agency will have a $13 million revenue shortfall for 2003, so they still need to either trim or raise an additional $7 million. With just two month's worth of car-tab money so far, Bergman said it's too early to know if the long-term financial picture looks grim. "We're feeling confident that we can design the 14-mile monorail system with the revenue the voters approved," he said. Last year the Elevated Transportation Company, the predecessor to the Seattle Monorail Project calculated its car-tab revenue projections based on data from DJM Consulting. The plan approved by voters last fall was based on those projections, which estimated a base of $4.5 billion in value of cars in Seattle. "That's what the monorail plan is based on," Bergman said. But there are two figures at work here: the base amount that DJM Consulting calculated, and that of the Department of Licensing. The state's base is closer to $5.9 billion, and it's the figure that the Seattle Monorail Project used to determine its 2003 budget this year. That $5.9 billion figure, said Benfield, included all Seattle ZIP codes, even those that lie partially outside the city. It also includes new cars, which are not subject to the monorail excise tax. "We're trying to provide them with the most accurate data we can," said Benfield. For that reason, the Department of Licensing gave the Seattle Monorail Project a copy of its database of cars owned in the city. Bergman said having the information in-house should help the monorail's financial team predict more accurately the amount of car-tab revenues they can expect in the future. He added that, over the long term, the best planning figure will be the lower $4.5 billion base that the Elevated Transportation Company used, because it's calculated over the life of the monorail plan. When the monorail initiative passed in November 2002, skeptics worried the monorail project would face a shortfall from car owners registering their cars with addresses outside the city. Only Seattle residents have to pay the monorail excise tax. So far, said Benfield, it's impossible to say whether such tax avoidance accounts for the smaller-than-projected revenues in June and July. "That's not something we're tracking at this point in time," he said. There is also the fear, equally impossible to prove, that some car dealers are not charging the motor vehicle excise tax on used car sales, and people transferring car titles from other states are not paying the tax. According to Bergman, both the Seattle Monorail Project and the Department of Licensing hope to get a clarification of when the state is supposed to collect the tax. PTP======================================= Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 Live, from Bumbershoot, music and monorail debate By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter GREG GILBERT / THE SEATTLE TIMES A banner hangs from a monorail mock-up at Seattle Center. The posts sit about 30 feet apart, not the planned 100 to 120 feet. Bumbershoot added a new dimension to the monorail debate yesterday. Stagehands erected a pair of 50-foot-tall simulated monorail columns in Seattle Center, on the lawn just north of the international Fountain, for perusal by the 200,000 or so people who will attend the music festival this weekend. Although the Seattle Monorail Project has released realistic computer- generated pictures of what a monorail would look like winding through the Center, it has not built a tangible three-dimensional structure as two City Council members have suggested. So Jane Zalutsky, president of the company that manages Bumbershoot, did it on her own, with private donations. She believes the future Green Line should go around, not through, the grounds. But monorail officials say the mock-up isn't to scale. Monorail at the Center • Bumbershoot's simulation of monorail columns, not to scale, is just north of the international Fountain. • The Seattle Monorail Project will have a booth at Bumbershoot, on the second floor of the Center House, that will show a tabletop model and computer-generated photos of Green Line routes at Seattle Center. Other images can be found at www.elevated.org/project/updates/ eis_imageindex.asp • A Web site, www.saveseattlecenter.org, also contains monorail illustrations and commentary opposing a route across the Center. "There are going to be hundreds of thousands of people who are left with an impression that isn't accurate," said Paul Bergman, spokesman for the monorail project. The mock-up is made of steel scaffolding, surrounded by boards to represent a 6-foot-wide monorail column. A horizontal scaffold — "the goalpost," assembler Mark Fleming of Portland called it — extends across the sky. A banner asks "Here?" in red letters. The posts sit about 30 feet apart, not the actual distance of 100 to 120 feet. Zalutsky said she couldn't space the columns farther apart because the temporary structure would become unstable and require tree removal. The actual monorail would be built in a service roadway, not on the lawn. The 6-foot column width is wider than the 3 to 4 feet promised by the monorail leadership. Zalutsky says she was told "four to six feet" by a monorail staffer, but Bergman said "there hasn't been a determination of what the column size will be." Zalutsky said the mock-up gives people a useful perspective they can't get from a picture. "I think the public is deserving of the opportunity to see if this is where it belongs," she said. Meanwhile, the monorail agency's outreach booth for Bumbershoot is relegated to an upstairs site in the Center House. The agency is asking for a better location. The disputed alignment, called the "Northwest Route," was suggested in January by a Seattle Center advisory committee. It winds in a semicircle past the fountain, then through the existing monorail gap in Experience Music Project. in late April, City Council members Peter Steinbrueck and Nick Licata asked the monorail agency "to erect a physical representation of the monorail during one or more of the summer festivals." Zalutsky said the mock-up cost about $20,000, funded by donors she would not identify. Early reviews were mixed. "The height, to me, is fine," said Marilyn Windsor, a homeless woman who watched workers assemble the mock-up. The monorail would bring visitors into the Center and provide good views, she said, adding that the elevation reduces noise for people below. Jazzminh Moore, a crew chief for Bumbershoot, looked upward and reflected: "I think a monorail is necessary in Seattle. I don't know how necessary it is to go through a recreational center. To have the reminder of all the business, all the hype, all the speed of the whole world outside, in the Center — it kind of undoes the peacefulness of the place," she said. Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP=============================================== Seattle Times Thursday, August 28, 2003 Monorail route, tax revenues play role in 5-person race for board position By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter Although five names appear on the ballot for Seattle Popular Monorail Authority Position 8, the only person aggressively campaigning is current board member Cindi Laws. Laws considers herself the "grass-roots" advocate on the nine-member board. She will lose her appointed seat at the end of this year, so she is running for one of two publicly elected seats. The board oversees the 14-mile Green Line monorail project approved by Seattle voters last year, making decisions about alignment, station sites, budgets and rider services, as well a $1.5 billion construction-and- operations contract to be awarded late next year. Currently, seven members are appointed and two are elected. Each is paid a maximum of $7,500 a year, depending on how many meetings and events are attended. "I'm the only person on the board that best represents the people that will ride transit," said Laws, an Alki resident who often rides Metro routes 37 and 56. "I make less than $50,000 a year," she said. "I came from a background off and on public assistance." She has worked as a waitress, congressional staffer and now as director of the Rainier institute, a nonpartisan progressive think tank. She insists that the trains include air-conditioning and wants the future Delridge monorail station positioned where shuttle buses from crowded Alki Beach can easily reach it. She would like to see a downtown station next to Wells Fargo Center at Second Avenue and Madison Street — where arriving commuters could walk to existing escalators in downtown buildings to travel the steep hills. Laws also said she leans toward the controversial Northwest Route, which would loop around the international Fountain at Seattle Center and wind through Paul Allen's Experience Music Project. "It by far provides better service to the Center for the 11 million people (a year) who use the Center, and it was preferred by the people who operate the various venues at Seattle Center, as well as the neighborhood," she said. She believes an alternative route, to the north along Mercer Street, would obstruct traffic. Her campaign received $650 from Allen's company, Vulcan, a donation that Laws said reflects her long acquaintance with Vulcan employees. Laws reported $10,400 in contributions from 107 donors as of last week, plus endorsements from labor and environmental groups. Her opponents said they would not raise money until after the Sept. 16 primary, when the two top vote-getters proceed to the November ballot. Laws has openly clashed with monorail board Chairman Tom Weeks, whose style she believes is not collaborative enough. Board appointees were recruited this year without public involvement, and Laws is outraged that she and board member Steve Williamson were not informed promptly about a shortfall in tax revenues this summer. Weeks said the dispute should not overshadow the 2-½ years he and Laws have been teammates in the monorail effort. "I was one who worked hard to get her on the board. I feel like she's a board member who cares about the monorail and wants it to be successful," he said. Among other candidates, the most familiar name is attorney Stan Lippman, who has entered local races on a platform of opposing mandatory vaccinations. Regarding the monorail, Lippman said the region would be best served by a 200-mile elevated system that uses frictionless, magnetic-levitation train technology. He said the monorail board should "confront Sound Transit" by opposing light rail. Candidate Chad Mishra, an occupational-health-and-safety officer at Harborview Medical Center, wants outside auditors to investigate why the monorail's car-tab taxes came in far below expectations. West Seattle resident Craig Bush, an industrial-tool salesman, favors a Fauntleroy Way alignment instead of the planned segment down California Avenue Southwest, but he would not seek a change if it would delay construction. James Egan, a criminal-defense attorney, supports a route through Seattle Center because it would raise the monorail's visibility to tourists. Visitors could be charged a higher fare of $10 or $15 for a daily pass to help operations break even, he said. In the first year, he said, the city should conduct an international public-relations campaign and unofficial "World's Fair" to draw attention to the monorail. The 14-mile Green Line, connecting Ballard, downtown and West Seattle, is scheduled for completion by 2009 at a cost of $1.75 billion. Craig Bush Age: 32 Residence: West Seattle Occupation: Sales representative for W.W. Grainger Education: B.A. In journalism, University of Wisconsin Experience: Former Chicago resident who rode elevated trains there James Egan Age: 32 Residence: Leschi Occupation: Criminal-defense attorney Education: B.A. In philosophy, Whitman College; J.D., University of Washington Experience: Wallingford Community Council vice president, 2000-02 Cindi Laws Age: 44 Residence: Alki Occupation: Executive director, Rainier institute Education: A.A. In business, Columbia Basin College; B.A. In political science, University of Washington Experience: Three years on monorail board; U.S. Senate transportation and environmental aide; past president, Alki Community Council Stan Lippman Age: 44 Residence: Eastlake Occupation: Attorney Education: B.S. In physics, New York University; Ph.D. In physics, Johns Hopkins University; J.D., University of Washington Experience: Worked on Ralph Nader's presidential campaign, 1996; has run for mayor, Congress, Seattle City Council and state Attorney General Chad Mishra Age: 55 Residence: Central District Occupation: Health-and-safety officer, Harborview Medical Center Education: B.S. In health and safety, Central Washington University; licensed pilot Experience: Vice president, indian- American Friendship Council; ran for state Legislature from 26th district in Kitsap County in 1994 Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP============================================= http://www.thestranger.com/2003-07-31/feature.html TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 46, Jul 31 - Aug 6 2003 SEE DICK RUN by Erica C. Barnett Monorail Visionary Dick Falkenbury is Running Against Seattle's Entire Do-Nothing City Council. And He Just Might Win. They all laughed, but Grant Cogswell and Dick Falkenbury--two idiosyncratic visionaries who cooked up a wild scheme to build a 40-mile monorail crisscrossing the city--lived to see their vision validated, when voters approved the monorail three times, in 1997, 2000, and 2002. Cogswell, a somber poet and environmentalist, nearly rode the monorail into public office, winning 45 percent of the vote against Seattle City Council incumbent Richard Mciver in 2001. Now Falkenbury, an unrepentant eccentric who refuses to pander to Seattle's congenial conventions, hopes to ride the monorail mystique into longtime incumbent Margaret Pageler's city council seat. But without volunteers, a solid support base, or even a decent suit--three crucial elements that helped Cogswell earn his respectable showing in 2001--Falkenbury will have to convince a lot of folks that his head full of ideas is what Seattle needs if he wants to make it through a crowded primary field, let alone win the final race. On a recent lazy afternoon, I'm sitting with Falkenbury on the second-story outdoor patio at the Red Door in Fremont. We're across the street from the ramshackle trailer that serves as Falkenbury's headquarters, and I've more or less accepted by this point that all my carefully planned questions are no match for Falkenbury's supercharged pinball machine of a brain. Falkenbury doesn't just dominate the conversation--he throttles it. No sooner have I asked a question about traffic congestion than the conversation careens helplessly from fireboats to the history of printing presses to just how far a person can drive on a blown-out tire before permanently damaging the wheel. All the while, Falkenbury--a giant, long- torsoed galoot of a man with scraggly hair and an unkempt, almost haphazard appearance--is a frenzy of motion: throwing ice cubes, diving under the table as a plane passes overhead, and stuffing French fries in his mouth like quarters into a Vegas slot machine. "We don't have the money for the big [transportation] megaprojects," Falkenbury declaims. "I can't think of any I would do. Thirteen billion dollars"--the high-end estimate for replacing and burying the Alaskan Way Viaduct--is "everything we've got. That's schools, cops--it's everything. That's insane to talk about that as if it's a good alternative. There's no one mile of traffic that's so crucial that we'll fix everything if we fix that." Falkenbury's mania for ideas--so unlike his two front-running opponents, who seem to be campaigning on the premise that the council needs consensus, not vision--is one reason so many people, from City Attorney Tom Carr to Seattle City Council member Nick Licata (neither of whom has endorsed anyone in Pageler's race), believe he would be a good addition to the Seattle City Council. Recalling the years they worked together on the monorail board, Carr says Falkenbury was often plotting world domination when others were focused on the weeds in the back yard. "He was always ten steps ahead of you," Carr says. "We'd be trying to figure out how we could get through next week, and he'd be talking about how we should sell advertising on the trains." While many on the council spend their time complaining that Mayor Greg Nickels unfairly dominates the council's agenda (rather than doing anything about it), Falkenbury cuts through the bullshit and comes up with not only criticisms, but alternatives. "Dick has an incredibly creative mind," says Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) board chairman Tom Weeks, who worked with Falkenbury for two years on the board of SMP's precursor, the Elevated Transportation Company (ETC). Whatever you think of Falkenbury's ill- conceived, sometimes half-baked notions, his occasional bursts of brilliance are what separate this candidate from most members of the current do-nothing city council, which seems incapable of presenting a compelling, competitive vision. You want ideas? Falkenbury has hundreds. As a city council member, he'd start by doing the simple stuff--synchronizing traffic lights, putting the ship canal drawbridges on a schedule, passing out smoke detectors to every house in the city, and towing people's cars if they break down too frequently--rather than wasting millions widening Mercer Street and building a Paul Allen-backed streetcar line from downtown to South Lake Union. If some of his proposals sound a little draconian, Falkenbury says the end result is worth the short-term pain. "I can tell you, you'll be glad to drive on my roads because you won't be stuck on 520 while some jerkoff has run out of gas for the third time," he says. "We need to manage traffic, instead of letting traffic manage us." Falkenbury, who's running as an anti-Sound Transit, Charlie Chong-style pro-neighborhood candidate, ought to be running at the head of the pack. But oddly, his top two opponents--incumbent Pageler, who in her 12 years in office has morphed from a neighborhood candidate to the head of the council's pro-business bloc and was head cheerleader for Sidran's civility laws along the way, and longtime city employee Tom Rasmussen, most recently the head of the mayor's office for senior citizens--are splitting up the big endorsements and donations, with $100,000 and $91,000, respectively. Falkenbury, in contrast, has pulled in just $5,800. "I still don't think people are taking him seriously, and I don't know that he's got time to make himself credible before the primary," says longtime friend and local political consultant Cathy Allen. "He's hardly raising any money." That's too bad, because it's clear that Falkenbury's pitch is striking a chord. At several recent Democratic campaign forums, Rasmussen and Pageler have traded in sound bites, with Pageler (who tried to leave the council for a job at the chamber of commerce in early 2002) repeating how "delighted" she is to be running and Rasmussen vowing blandly to be a council member "who listens and can work with" others. Meanwhile, Falkenbury--speaking without the benefit of a microphone or a script--has quietly dominated campaign events, winning sincere applause and even, at a forum held by Northwest Seattle Democrats in Ballard two weeks ago, one amen. One week after the Ballard forum, I'm standing in the basement of Dick Falkenbury's childhood home in Wedgwood, the bucolic northeast Seattle neighborhood where Falkenbury, 50, still lives. The walls are covered in faded fake-wood paneling, and the '60s-era linoleum in Falkenbury's modest kitchen would benefit from a couple gallons of Clorox. Cans of ravioli and chicken noodle soup line the exposed plastic shelves, and the dim outdoor light is augmented by a pair of bare compact-fluorescent bulbs that hang from the low ceiling like afterthoughts. Falkenbury's furniture--a homemade bed and wardrobe, a few forlorn-looking wooden shelves--is arranged haphazardly, and the books that are scattered everywhere--weighty tomes on Custer, Napoleon, and James Madison-- are the only personal touches in a bedroom that looks like an archaeological discovery from 1972, the year Falkenbury graduated from Roosevelt High School in northeast Seattle. You almost expect to see a poster of Alice Cooper on the closet door. For a guy who lives with his mother (and brings her to every campaign forum), Falkenbury is surprisingly rebellious. Except for a stint as a restaurant worker in Yellowstone National Park the summer after he graduated from high school, Falkenbury has never held a regular job; he tried his hand at being a landlord and at selling baked potatoes from a cart on the Ave before settling into a long-term gig as a cab driver and occasional tour guide. The baked-potato cart flopped, and he had to sell the rental house when a tenant failed to pay rent for eight months, costing Falkenbury $8,000. "The only way I finally got her out was I actually loaded up my truck three times and carried her stuff over to her new place," he says. But it was Falkenbury's long-term gig driving a cab that sealed his now- iconic reputation as "the cab driver half of the monorail campaign," as the New York Times called him in a front-page story in 1997. Frustrated by Seattle's traffic, Falkenbury came up with the idea for an elevated extension of the one-mile downtown-to-Seattle Center monorail, which he promoted and got on the ballot, with virtually no financial support, in 1997. Almost single-handedly, former ETC board member Carr recalls, Falkenbury "went out and won the election" at a time when "everybody was sort of joking about it," as if the monorail were about as real a transportation solution as personal jetpack helicopters. "I thought it was a bit of a fantasy," says council member Nick Licata, who won his first term on the council on the same ticket as the original monorail initiative in 1997. "I would have given him zero chance on the monorail." Over time, however, Licata came to respect Falkenbury both as a visionary and a pragmatist. "The thing that I liked most about Dick was his ability... to articulate his dream in a forceful but also rational way," Licata says. "He wasn't just a loony. He had his facts together. It gave him a tremendous amount of credence, even though he was, as they say, just a taxi driver." Clearly, the monorail wasn't just a fluke dreamed up by an intellectually diffuse visionary. On the contrary, Falkenbury is an idea machine--and of every 10 notions that spill from his mouth, at least one shines with forehead-slapping clarity. A brief conversation with Falkenbury reveals the range of his ideas. For example, Falkenbury wants to shoot perpendicular bridges off the sides of 520, allowing people to drive their broken-down vehicles out of traffic--which sounds, frankly, nuts. On the other hand, he also proposes replacing meter readers' three-wheeled golf carts and Toyota SUVs, which cost "a fortune" to insure, with a fleet of Segways, which studies show are not only cheaper but double workers' productivity-- not a bad idea. And he'd like the city to monitor traffic conditions by computer, so that people driving on the freeway can see how conditions are five miles down the road and adjust their trips accordingly--which is, when you think about it, kind of brilliant. Falkenbury's solutions can sound simplistic, but the bedrock message-- don't waste money fixing problems when you can prevent them--applies equally to every city boondoggle, from the planned expansion of Mercer Street to the South Lake Union streetcar to the $166 million downtown library. "In this new fiscal reality, we shouldn't build anything we can't afford to operate... When there are neighborhoods that don't have adequate sidewalks, why are we going to spend $40 million on a streetcar that's actually going to make the [traffic] situation worse?" Peter Sherwin, author of the second monorail initiative, I-53, seems like a natural supporter for Falkenbury's quixotic campaign. After all, he backed Cogswell, donating $600 to Cogswell's campaign. But despite the two men's ideological affinity, Sherwin hasn't contributed a single dime to Falkenbury's campaign, and odds are, he never will. "I haven't given him a penny," Sherwin says. There's a reason some people are reluctant to open their wallets. Falkenbury isn't just opinionated--he's exasperating. He'll bludgeon you with an idea until you concede the point, or he'll spend three hours trying. That tendency to say what he thinks, without the kind of social niceties with which most people leaven their conversations, is both Falkenbury's downfall and, paradoxically, his most disarming quality. Carr, who counts himself among those who find Falkenbury's honesty charming, not overbearing, remembers that the first time he met Falkenbury, the cab driver came up to the future monorail board member and told him, "'We don't need any goddamn lawyers on this [board].' I was a little taken aback," Carr chuckles. "He's about the most honest guy you would ever want to meet. He really did believe we didn't need any goddamn lawyers on this thing." indeed, that very candidness could explain why so many of the motions Falkenbury made during his six years on the monorail board died for lack of a second, and why he (unlike Cogswell) can't raise enough money to buy decent yard signs, let alone pay a consultant or send out campaign flyers. (Just the other day, Falkenbury was standing in his front yard, spray-painting his name on eight-foot pieces of plywood he rescued from a salvage heap; his "yard signs," 4-by-24-inch vertical strips that cost 10 cents apiece, are attached to filthy stakes Falkenbury dug out of a Dumpster.) Seattle Monorail Project board member Cindi Laws, another outspoken monorail acolyte, says Falkenbury's style "doesn't mix well in Seattle's overly polite society." And Nick Licata, a former insurance agent whose buttoned-down appearance belies his lefty-radical politics, says the unfortunate truth in Seattle is that "people discount what's there if they don't like the packaging." Sherwin believes Falkenbury's recalcitrance is deeper seated. He says that when he tried to convince Falkenbury to help him get the monorail passed a second time in 2000, Falkenbury not only refused to help, he launched his own competing campaign--a tactic he repeated in 2002, when the monorail car tax passed by a reed-thin 877-vote margin. "I've never really worked with him," Sherwin says. "Dick works alone." "There are a number of rules of politics Dick doesn't play by," SMP board chair Weeks says. "He doesn't do all that polite Seattle process stuff." Laws, who worked with Falkenbury on the ETC board, agrees. "Dick doesn't like to compromise," she says. "That's why he frequently was on the losing side of votes, often by a substantial margin." indeed, there were some people on the board, Laws recalls, who "would oppose anything Dick would say; it didn't matter what it was." Falkenbury remembers, with evident bitterness, a motion he made that would have tied Monorail Project staff bonuses to job performance, which failed to get a second from other members of the board. "You'd think that, just out of courtesy, someone would say, 'Look, I want to have further discussion of this,'" Falkenbury says. "That hurt." Falkenbury resigned from the board in February, citing frustration with the board's consensus politics. in a just universe, guys like Dick Falkenbury would have schools and libraries named in their honor. At the very least, they wouldn't be living in their mothers' basements while guys like Joel Horn, the schmoozy director of the Seattle Monorail Project, make $172,000 a year. After all, Falkenbury not only came up with the monorail idea, he was right about one of the biggest issues in Seattle's transportation history: light rail, which he predicted in 1996 to King County Council member Larry Phillips would never be built on time. "So far, I'm more right than he is," Falkenbury laughs. instead of being lauded for his vision, Falkenbury has been dismissed, in the press and by his political opponents, as "just a cab driver." Never mind that he has a college degree (from Fairhaven College, the hippie division of Western Washington University) and can hold his own on every topic from Bob Dylan to the bubonic plague. "Here's a guy who was pushing something that was opposed by the so-called best and brightest of our society," says Laws. "They said, 'He's just a taxi driver. What does a taxi driver know about transportation?'" The irony is that unlike focus-group consultants in their hermetic rooms, Falkenbury went out night after night and talked to Seattle's citizens about what they wanted their city to be. "Agencies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to collect data on what citizens feel and believe and want," Laws says. "I don't understand why, if a consultant collects that information, it's respected, and if a taxi driver does, it's scorned." Falkenbury himself has spent plenty of time mulling over that very conundrum. "I don't have money. I don't have a prestigious job. I don't have an organization behind me," Falkenbury says. "What I have is that all this time, I've been right on what really works and what doesn't. And for one thing, I should get some respect for that by now. I've been more right than they've been by a long shot, and somebody ought to stand up and say, 'Why can't we listen to this guy a little bit?'" Despite the odds against him, nearly everyone contacted for this story believed, against all conventional wisdom, that Falkenbury has a shot-- albeit a long one--against Pageler, a 12-year incumbent who many perceive as washed up and uninterested in her current job. Only Cathy Allen seems to consider Falkenbury an automatic also-ran. And she's working for Margaret Pageler. The question is, can Falkenbury get his name in voters' heads without the $40,000 he would need, at a minimum, to run a conventional campaign? Even Falkenbury--who has vowed not to run a negative campaign--has his doubts. "This is a really grueling thing on your psyche, especially if you're doing it wrong like I am," he says. "Money raising is not going well. So I'm going to have to be small and lean." That means no fancy campaign flyers, no paid consultants, and no phone bank; Falkenbury makes all his calls, in fact, from a single phone line inside the $280-a-month trailer. But as Carr, who says he "wouldn't be surprised" if Falkenbury pulled it off, notes, "Nobody will work harder than Dick Falkenbury." And Cindi Laws, perhaps the truest believer among Falkenbury's many fans, points out that as long as Falkenbury has been involved in Seattle politics, people have been downplaying his political acumen. "People have underestimated Dick Falkenbury for a long time. The one thing I tell people is, 'You should never underestimate Dick Falkenbury.'" barnett@thestranger.com

CONTENTS * LRT pushed for Tampa-St. Petersburg St. Petersburg Times August 29, 2003 * Tampa streetcar ridership 30,000 over forecast MSNBC Aug 21, 2003 * Houston: Nov. Rail vote rides on mayor's race, bond issue Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 * Houston Metro chairman explains board's rail vote Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 * Houston: intrigue, compromise behind Metro rail vote Houston Chronicle Aug. 24, 2003 * Houston Metro execs use cars, not transit? Houston Chronicle Aug. 24, 2003 PTP========================================== http://www.sptimes.com/2003/08/29/State/High_speed_off_track_.shtml St. Petersburg Times August 29, 2003 High-speed off track; light rail new tack? With private investors cold on the voter-mandated statewide rail system, a legislator says, let's aim for a bay area light rail system. By JEAN HELLER, Times Staff Writer ST. PETERSBURG - Sen. Jim Sebesta is changing trains. The St. Petersburg Republican, chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee and a supporter of privately financed high-speed rail for the state, all but declared Thursday that the project approved by the voters is dead. Private investors have shown little interest in the idea, the Legislature is offering no money for it and the governor is determined to repeal the constitutional amendment that mandates a statewide high-speed rail system. Combined, those factors led Sebesta to conclude that high-speed rail "isn't going to happen any time soon." So, he assembled a wide range of city, county and state officials at a workshop Thursday at the Koger Center to propose an alternative: a regional light rail system. Pinellas and Hillsborough counties have debated light rail extensively, but Sebesta raised the idea of integrating those systems and connecting them along the Howard Frankland Bridge. The Florida Department of Transportation has previously concluded that the bridge would be the best route for linking train systems across the bay. "We can't simply keep adding lanes (to area highways)," Sebesta said. "There are 200,000 cars a day across the bay on our bridges. If we could put 10 percent, just 10 percent, of those people on light rail, that's 20,000 cars a day we get off our roads. ... We're going to do this. If we don't do it, we ought to be horsewhipped." The group was overwhelmingly supportive of studying light rail, but there were questions about how such a project could be financed, and how soon. "I think it's a good idea. I think we need to plan for the future," said state Rep. Sandy Murman, R-Tampa. "But there are some serious infrastructure problems that have to be resolved in Hillsborough before going for light rail - buses and roads. I think to throw funding into this is putting the cart before the horse." Sebesta took volunteers to create an ad hoc subcommittee on the topic, which will meet within the next 10 days to discuss the feasibility of the plan. The full group that gathered Thursday will meet again in about two months. For those holding onto the idea of high-speed rail, Sebesta had nothing but bad news. "I had hoped we could talk about how high-speed rail is coming to the bay area, but it isn't going to happen any time soon," he said. Only two companies bid on the project, and the bids were much higher than the $1.6-billion estimate for the first leg of the system, from Tampa to Orlando. One bid, in fact, was $2.6-billion. But worse, neither bidder was willing to finance construction privately. "We needed private investment dollars, and we went after that hard," Sebesta said. "The state can't afford $70-million a year for 30 years. The High Speed Rail Authority is supposed to pick a preferred provider in October, or it can deep-six both of them and start the process over. But even if they pick a preferred provider, the Legislature hasn't appropriated one dime, and I don't think it will." The group said regional light rail, which eventually would extend to Pasco and Polk counties among others, could be financed in part by state and federal money. It also could be supported through local means such as a penny or less increase in sales tax, another gasoline tax, impact fees, or a combination of revenue sources. Whatever the proposal, it would have to be approved by voters. Hillsborough Commissioner Ronda Storms said the only way the system could work is if the bus systems in the two counties cooperate and everyone sheds the parochialism that often gets in the way of multicounty decisions. Storms also said the rail system would need to run to the places people want to go. "Remember," Storms said, "you're going to have to sell it to the voters who are going pay for it." PTP============================================ http://www.msnbc.com/local/wfla/MGAQ6ZA7MJD.asp MSNBC Aug 21, 2003 Harbour island Dodges Trolley Tax Reporter Andy Reid can be reached at (813) 259-8409. TAMPA - A deal that jump-started Tampa's new streetcar line also let Harbour island landowners avoid a tax that subsidizes the trolleys. The city plans to keep that arrangement on track today. What it means to other landowners and taxpayers is that the streetcar subsidy base won't increase significantly this year to help pay for a potential expansion. in the meantime, less than a year after the old-fashioned transportation returned to Tampa, riders could see fares increase. The streetcar finance committee is considering raising the one-way fare by a quarter, from $1.25 to $1.50. The situation dates back to 1999, when Harbour island developers struck a $5 million deal with the city to provide seed money for the streetcar line while exempting the island from the streetcar tax. The tax is charged to about 1,600 property owners in a special assessment district stretching from downtown to the Channel District and Ybor City. The streetcar line touches all those areas, and the city contends the trolleys benefit nearby property owners by providing transportation and attracting customers. The tax rate is 33 cents per $1,000 of taxable value. Some government buildings, as well as most residences within the special district, are not charged. No land on Harbour island is charged, either. Though linked to the streetcar line by trolley buses, the island was granted the exemption in the deal. Ybor City business leaders who support the streetcar tax have raised concerns about the exemption. Last month, the Ybor City Development Corp. called on the city to include Harbour island in the future. ''Some of those Harbour island properties were just as close to the streetcar line as properties south of Seventh Avenue,'' said development corporation manager Vince Pardo. City and streetcar representatives agreed Wednesday. However, there are no plans to change the arrangement. ''Without that deal, we wouldn't have a streetcar system today,'' said Michael English, president of Tampa Historic Streetcar Inc., a nonprofit group that manages trolley operations. ''it really got us the start we needed.'' The $56 million streetcar line was a joint venture between the city and the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority, funded by federal and city money. It includes 2.5 miles of track from Ybor to the Channel District. More than 370,000 people have paid to ride the streetcars since the line began operating in October. That's about 30,000 more than expected during the first year, said transit authority spokesman Ed Crawford. Projections called for about 950 riders a day. The streetcar averaged about 1,300 a day in July, Crawford said. The line's $1.5 million annual operating costs are paid by fares, the special property assessment and business sponsorships. Also helping is an endowment fund that came from the deal with the Harbour island developers. Beneficial Corp., owner of Harbour island Inc., agreed to pay $5 million to get out of 17 years remaining on its contract with the city for the People Mover, the monorail that once stretched from the island to the downtown Fort Brooke parking garage. Low ridership and mechanical problems left the People Mover running a deficit. About $1 million from Beneficial was used to demolish the People Mover. About $4 million went into the streetcar endowment fund. The agreement called for the transit authority to use $50,000 a year from the fund for a trolley bus linking the island to the streetcar line. Under then-Mayor Dick Greco, the city agreed to exclude Harbour island from the taxing district, even though the district includes parts of downtown where trolley buses similarly provide connections to the streetcar line. The proposal to renew the assessment district, which goes before the city council today, keeps the tax rate the same as previous years. Intended to tap commercial properties, it exempts properties where owners live and claim a homestead exemption. Long-term streetcar plans call for extending lines north on Franklin Street and possibly west toward a riverside cultural arts district that city leaders hope to develop near The Tampa Museum of Art. But Mayor Pam iorio said no more city money will be used to extend the streetcars. ''That phase two really depends on state and federal funding,'' iorio said. PTP========================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 Fate of rail rides on bond issue and mayor's race By DANIEL C. ARNOLD Without a practical, comprehensive plan to enhance regional mobility, Houston will face gridlock when our region adds 2 million more residents by 2025, as projected by the U.S. Census. Congestion is already bad, and getting worse, creating more problems with air quality. As the chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Authority who developed the rail and mobility plan passed in the 1988 referendum, I have been a staunch advocate of rail. I have worked decades in support of mass transit in our region. I support the bond issue proposition approved by Metro's board Aug. 18. Houstonians who want a new rail option should support the bond issue. Metro's rail plan and bond issue can be an important part of a new regional consensus on mobility. Defeat could set us back a decade. Citizens who support rail must learn from the experience of the 1988 referendum, which was never implemented as a result of the 1991 mayoral election. In that election, only one of the three candidates committed to implement the Metro plan that had been approved by the voters in 1988. One of the current mayoral candidates, Sylvester Turner, opposed it. From this experience, we need to learn that voters and candidates who oppose the bond authorization approved by Metro's board work against rail for our city. The experience of Houston in 1988 and 1991 is clear: The fate of rail depends on both the passage of a bond referendum and a mayor committed to implement it. Of the four major mayoral candidates, Bill White supports it; Michael Berry opposes it; and the candidates who have run unsuccessfully for mayor before, Sylvester Turner and Orlando Sanchez, have yet to declare. The key features in Metro's financing proposal are: · Acceleration of rail and bus service through the use of debt. · Rail construction in phases, so streets are not torn up at the same time. · Tight controls on budgeted future operating expenses at Metro. · A next phase of additions tying directly into the Main Street line. · New lines from large employment centers to areas where people reside, which have the potential for even greater residential development. Supporters of rail should not reject this expansion of rail as being too little. Metro's original financial plan, released April 24, 2003, showed a $1.315 billion investment in Metro Solutions through 2013. The use of bond debt to accelerate rail construction in Metro's plan adopted earlier on Aug. 18 results in virtually the same amount of investment during the next 10 years. Citizens should remember that even more mass transit and other mobility investments can occur if Metro has free cash flow above the amounts needed for operating expenses and debt service during the next decade. Debt may only be part of the financing. In the long run, Metro's ability to fund investments is based on its cash flow, not simply the amount of debt. We should learn that Houstonians must come together on rail and unite solidly behind a rail plan to get it under way. It helps that former Mayor and Metro Chair Bob Lanier has announced his support for the proposed bond issue. Surely Metro's plan will evolve with experience -- all good plans are updated from time to time. For example, we believe transit planners should consider a system not built entirely at street level, which could move commuters faster and encourages suburban riders to leave their cars at home or at a park and ride lot and ride transit. Metro should cooperate with suburban cities to relieve congestion on our freeways. Also, Metro's bus system should not be neglected because of the focus on rail. The views of members of Congress, now and in the future, should be solicited and taken seriously, since federal funding is essential to a mobility solution. No plan will satisfy everyone. But citizens of different views have found common ground in support of Metro's bond issue, to allow us to move forward without delay. Arnold, a Houston businessman, chaired the Board of the Metropolitan Transit Authority from January 1980 through March 1984. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2061780 PTP========================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 Viewpoints, Outlook Just what did Metro vote to do? its chariman explains By ARTHUR L. SCHECHTER The Metropolitan Transit Authority Board has been required to respond to two important challenges that in some ways cause an appearance of inconsistency. First, we were charged with the very urgent obligation of helping to process the public transit portion of the holistic transportation plan for our community to the year 2025. Secondly, we were charged with the responsibility of processing the presentation of the plan politically, understanding fully the vital importance of passing a progressive referendum in November or face the reality that many more years would pass before these issues could again be addressed. The Metro Solutions Plan will construct 64.8 miles of light rail and eight miles of commuter rail extending from airport to airport, connecting all major business centers and refacing the core of our city by the year 2025. Though all the chatter is about only the rail portion of the Metro Solutions Plan, more importantly the plan includes extensive additions to our bus system; more two-way, all day high-occupancy vehicle opportunities, and support for other traffic control elements. There are those in our community who say, amazingly, that Metro has not adequately processed its plan and that Metro has changed its plan. This simply is not true. In fact, I can think of no issue in Houston's history where there has been more public outreach and greater public input. In a process that lasted more than two years, dozens, perhaps hundreds of meetings have been held, dozens of groups have been addressed, thousands of Houstonians have participated. Nearly 400,000 brochures were mailed detailing the preliminary plan in April and requesting input and response from the public. More than 16,000 responses were received. On July 31, the Metro board took a historic action responding to three years of study in which our instruction to our expert planners was to consider every mode of transportation. The Metro Solutions Plan was brought before the board and voted out. We are proud of the achievement of our board, our staff and the nationally recognized experts with overwhelming help and support from the public. The second challenge that the Metro board faced was to create the broadest possible consensus to guarantee passage of the plan continuing the momentum and progress that has been made. The board decided that continuing on the 7-1/2 miles of light rail in downtown Houston was important, and that the next phase of 39 miles would be part of the entire 2025 Metro solution. These 39 miles of light rail, in addition to the other service developments, would carry us into the final stage of completion of the Metro Solutions total plan by 2025, using the starter line downtown as a commencement point. As Metro dialogued with the community, listening to the various concerns expressed, one of the things we heard was the concern of the potential discontinuation of the general mobility subsidy, and some concern about trying to bond more than we actually needed to complete the first 10 years of work on our plan. It was thus decided by the Metro board to go to referendum to bond out as much as we would need during the first 10 years of our plan, building as much as we would have built if we bonded much larger, and more politically difficult figures. The Metro Solutions Plan adopted by the board has not been changed, modified or reduced in scope. The issue on the [November] ballot will be the full 2025 plan. The lower bonding that the Metro board voted for simply provides the public an additional opportunity to voice its growing support for rail. A public vote is good public policy and will allow changes to be made over the years to come. It will also create greater accountability. The mayor and Metro board serving in 2009, in fact, will have an option to go back to the public with a bond issue to build out all or part of the entire plan, which can be completed by 2025 continuing the momentum toward our community's long-range goal. it is urgently important that the November referendum be passed, and broad consensus was necessary in order to achieve our goal of building the entire Metro Solution plan. There are many ideas of a creative nature being discussed to bring additional opportunity and funding to our community over the coming years. However, unless our leadership gets together, all will fail now and in the immediate future and Houston will suffer irreparable loss. We need visionary leadership and bold ideas to succeed. Let us make the Houston of our future the same city of opportunity and invitation that it has been in the past. Schechter is chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Authority. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2062113 PTP============================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 24, 2003 Rail compromise delays tough call By JOHN WILLIAMS Last Monday, Mayor Lee Brown was ready to give his marching orders to a perplexed Metro board. The board was poised to vote on a rail bond issue to take before voters in November. Most board members appeared ready to go with a $980 million plan to build about 39 miles of rail extending the 7.5-mile line nearing completion between downtown and Reliant Park. But Brown wanted compromise -- issue $640 million in debt and build 22 miles. Such a plan, he figured, was more politically palatable because it could gain the support of former Mayor Bob Lanier and the Greater Houston Partnership. So shortly before the board met to make a decision, Brown called Metro headquarters to chat with some of the board members he had supported. Go with the smaller plan, Brown said. When Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter, a Brown appointee, received his mayoral missive, he asked if he would have to resign if he disobeyed the mayor's wishes. Brown suggested that if Schechter was planning to cross the mayor, he'd better resign before voting. An agonizing decision That afternoon, during the board meeting, Schechter vacillated. He first supported the $980 million plan, then cast the deciding vote in a 5-4 decision to go with $640 million. Schechter and Metro officials couched the $640 million issue as a cutback and a capitulation to rail opponents. Their heads sagged after the vote. Rail was shrinking. "I hope future developments in our city make us not ashamed of the way we voted today," Schechter said afterward. The media picked up that story line and reported accordingly about a compromised plan. It would mean less rail. Proposed lines were shortened or eliminated. Schechter's agonizing -- which personified the entire board's difficulty with the decision -- befuddled pragmatic rail proponents. if Schechter and others continue to bellyache about a so-called reduced plan, they risk alienating rail supporters who might actually believe this is a smaller plan. It is not. Metro would build the same amount of rail during the next 10 years under the $640 million plan as it would have under the $980 million plan. The difference is that the smaller plan postpones a decision about what happens after that. improving rail chances Metro still hopes to build its entire master rail plan, some 64 miles of light rail and eight miles of commuter rail to Fort Bend County. The board simply changed the political dynamics and improved the referendum's chance of passing by neutralizing the most stirring argument against rail -- that it would cause a tax hike. Under the $980 million plan, Metro in 2014 would have taken back its general mobility funds -- the 25 percent of its sales tax revenue that now is given to cities and Harris County for road maintenance and construction. That likely would have resulted in a property tax hike for those entities that rely on the money to fix their potholes. Under the $640 million plan, the general mobility funds stay in place until at least 2009. After that, any transfer of the funding from roads to rail will require voters' permission. Essentially, Metro has postponed the harder decision -- the one that would affect local taxes -- hoping that once voters have seen rail in place they will be favorably disposed to paying for more. But more importantly, Metro has taken the advice given in November by syndicated columnist Neal Peirce, a rail supporter who chronicled the problems recent transportation and transit referendums had faced. Referendums fail when there is well-organized opposition, Peirce wrote. By getting Lanier and the Partnership on board, some of the the region's most effective political battlers are on Metro's side. And opponents won't have the "tax hike" argument. Among those who orchestrated the compromise were developers Ed Wulfe and Walt Mischer, and mayoral candidate Bill White, who counts Lanier as a supporter. Transportation referendums, Peirce wrote, "require true compromise -- listening to many voices, and identifying solutions that everyone can agree on. Everyone, that is, save the visceral anti-tax voters -- who can never be mollified." To date, the true anti-tax, anti-rail crowd epitomized by property rights crusader Barry Klein is poised to oppose the referendum. What remains uncertain is whether they will receive help from suburban developer Michael Stevens, a rail critic whose deep pockets and political connections would provide the opposition with a considerable boost. Stevens is talking about hiring political consultant Denis Calabrese, who helped run the campaign that killed zoning in 1993. Rail supporters are calling out their own big guns. Tomorrow, they will interview political consultant Mark McKinnon, who helped put George W. Bush in the White House. And now that the board has made its decision on what to ask voters for in November, Metro and its backers plan to take the offensive rather than treating the compromise proposal as a disappointment. "This is a good plan we're putting before voters and it must be passed," said Schechter, who still has his job. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2064284 PTP============================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 24, 2003 Metro motto: Do as we say, not as we do Lucas Wall Transportation beat METRO EXECUTIVES are campaigning for their mass-transit expansion plan on the Nov. 4 ballot, asking commuters to support more buses and trains to ease the region's traffic congestion. But don't expect them to give up their own cars. Work on the Metropolitan Transit Authority's new downtown headquarters and transit center passed the one-year mark last week. The transit-center part of the $41 million facility at Main and Pierce is to open Jan. 1, when the Main Street light rail line starts running. The 14-story office building opens in January 2005. Meanwhile, Metro is asking voters to endorse its 2025 transit plan this fall. The referendum includes a $640 million bond issue for the next 22 miles of light rail. Metro has been running ads promoting the plan, showing traffic-snarled freeways and snails poking along. Chairman Arthur Schechter has often said voters should oppose the transit plan only "If you want to sit in your car and not move and see a city that is drowned in traffic and smothered in exhaust fumes." A recent tour of Metro's headquarters construction site, however, revealed a basement that includes 15 parking spaces for use by the agency's brass. Shirley DeLibero, president and chief executive officer, said providing the spaces isn't hypocritical because her vice presidents need them for business use. They "have to circulate among the many Metro facilities spread around the service area," she said through her spokesman. Metro does have special buses that shuttle employees among its various facilities, however. Michael Tegethoff, headquarters project manager, said the agency ruled out building a garage because of high cost and a desire to set an example by promoting transit use among its employees. http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2064480

CONTENTS * Tacoma: LRT streetcar opens - expansion eyed News Tribune - Tacoma August 23rd, 2003 * Tacoma Link - small but popular Seattle Times Saturday, August 23, 2003 * Tacoma's streetcar -- 'delicious taste' of LRT SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, August 23, 2003 * Seattle monorail cash crisis could have 'domino effect' Seattle Times Sunday, August 24, 2003 * Seattle monorail crisis may sour credibility, trust SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Sunday, August 24, 2003 * Seattle monorail tops: Everything's OK SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Tuesday, August 26, 2003 PTP========================================= http://www.tribnet.com/news/local/story/3744667p-3771129c.html News Tribune - Tacoma August 23rd, 2003 Tacoma Link makes its debut AARON CORVIN; The News Tribune it felt like a carnival, sounded like the Fourth of July and looked like a who's who of prominent Democratic politicians in Washington state. Sound Transit's celebratory launch Friday of its $80.4 million, 1.6-mile streetcar system in Tacoma loudly introduced the agency's first segment of light rail. It also marked the first streetcar to run in Tacoma since 1938. "We really are going back to the future," said Tacoma Mayor Bill Baarsma. About 1,000 people swarmed 25th Street East, between Freighthouse Square and the Tacoma Dome Station, to participate in the daylong festivities. "My kids love trains," said Tacoma resident Dave Oliver, 34, who brought his son, Tony, 9, and daughter, Katie, 4, to Friday's event. "My wife works downtown, so they see the trolley. They didn't want to miss it." Adults snacked on baklava and potstickers. Children toted blue-and-white balloons. Firecrackers deafened ears. And compressed-air machines rained confetti on people as the streetcars carried the first riders from Freighthouse Square to South Ninth and Commerce streets downtown. in their speeches, politicians focused on the future. Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg, a vice chairman of the Sound Transit Board, announced the Puyallup Tribe of indians will spend up to $50,000 to study a possible extension of the streetcar line. The tribe wants to connect its planned casino complex off interstate 5 to Tacoma Link. The City of Tacoma and the tribe have discussed a plan to extend the light-rail line about a quarter-mile east from the streetcar's operations and maintenance base on East 25th Street near Freighthouse Square. Such an extension would reach Portland Avenue. "We are already studying the expansion of this light-rail system," Ladenburg said. King County Executive Ron Sims, who is the Sound Transit board chairman and a Democratic candidate for governor, said Tacoma Link is a sign that "Sound Transit can and does deliver." Tacoma's light-rail line is a "taste of what's going to be delivered 40 miles north of here," Sims added, referring to the agency's planned $2.4 billion, 14-mile Seattle-area light-rail project. Voters in Pierce, King and Snohomish counties approved the $4 billion initiative to create Sound Transit in 1996. The plan envisioned a regional system with light rail, commuter trains and express buses. The bulk of funding comes from local taxes, including a 0.4 percent sales tax and a 0.3 percent vehicle license tax. During Friday's celebration, the politicians not only spoke first, they also were the first people to board the streetcars. Next to board were winners of 100 promotional tickets. Then the streetcars were opened to the public. "Politicians are always first," said Steve Kennedy, a 67-year-old Tacoma native, as he watched another streetcar leave the station at Freighthouse Square. Kennedy, who lives in Del Mar, Calif., was in town visiting relatives. He grew up in Tacoma, attending Clover Park High School in Lakewood. He hopes Tacoma Link brings more development to the city. "I love this city," he said. "I'd love to see it do well." Federal Way resident Jeri Barth, 59, drove south to ride Tacoma Link. it met her expectations. She said the streetcar is quiet, comfortable and affords a great view of the city. Barth said she rarely visits Tacoma downtown because parking is hard to find. Now, she can park her car at the Tacoma Dome Station and ride the streetcar into the heart of the city. "I can ride this thing and find all kinds of neat places to go," she said. Barth said she doesn't like to log too many miles behind the wheel of her car or fight traffic congestion on interstate 5. She hopes light rail expands as a practical alternative to driving. "We need it all over." Aaron Corvin: 253-552-7058 aaron.corvin@mail.tribnet.com Link service Tacoma Link provides free rides from the Tacoma Dome Station to downtown. Streetcars will operate: - 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Friday - 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. Saturday - 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. Sunday and holidays A Tacoma Link streetcar pulls out of Tacoma Dome Station through a cloud of confetti on the light-rail system's 1st day of operation Friday. Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg, a Sound Transit vice chairman, said the agency is discussing an extension of the line with the Puyallup Tribe to its planned casino complex. PTP========================================= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001597437_link23m.ht ml Seattle Times Saturday, August 23, 2003 Sound Transit starts small with Tacoma Link system By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter SOUND TRANSIT Fireworks and confetti mark yesterday's launch of the Tacoma Link light rail. Officials have touted the new line as proof that Sound Transit can successfully build a high-capacity system in Seattle. TACOMA — As curious riders waited up to an hour to hop aboard, Sound Transit opened the state's first modern light-rail line here yesterday. Tacoma Link trains will run every few minutes to the University of Washington branch campus, the Museum of Glass, a future convention center, business towers and the historic theater district. This is a streetcar, not the ambitious 14-mile main rail line that Sound Transit hopes will connect Seattle with Tukwila by 2009. At $80 million for 1.6 miles of track, the Tacoma system serves relatively few passengers, is slightly faster than a bus and provides minimal traffic relief. On the other hand, the trains provide comfortable rides for tourists and the lunch crowd making short hops. Commuters can park in huge garages and lots near the Tacoma Dome and ride Link to their jobs, or they can transfer from light rail to express buses, Amtrak and Sounder trains. Tale of the trains The Tacoma streetcar line that opened yesterday is smaller than the "Central Link" system that Sound Transit hopes to begin building this fall between Seattle and Tukwila. Tacoma Link Most significantly, the system is one piece of a downtown renaissance that has brought new condominiums and the restoration of blighted brick buildings. Already, the neighboring Puyallup Tribe has shown an interest in extending the line to its casino on the east side of interstate 5. Sound Transit will soon consider whether to accept $50,000 from the tribe to study the route, which would be funded by the tribe or federal government rather than local taxpayers, said Kevin Phelps, a Tacoma city councilman and head of Sound Transit's finance committee. Officials touted the new line as proof the agency can successfully build a high-capacity system in Seattle. "It is a very clear notice that Sound Transit can and does deliver, and it is a delicious taste of what will be delivered 40 miles north of here," said Chairman Ron Sims, the King County executive. However, the Seattle project presents much greater challenges. The controversial 14-mile, $2.44 billion "Central Link" line from Westlake Center to Tukwila requires a tunnel under Beacon Hill as well as displacement of homes and businesses along a surface section in Rainier Valley. It was to have been running from the University District to Seattle- Tacoma international Airport by 2006, but because of high costs the route was shortened and the opening delayed to 2009. With a bottle of "Lite Rail Ale" from a restaurant along the route, Phelps christened the first train outside the refurbished Freighthouse Square. The trains have a low-floor midsection for wheelchairs. They are roomy enough to carry more than the official 56-person capacity if needed. Huge windows brighten the interiors, but the windows don't open. From the street, they are nearly silent. More than 3,000 people tried it out yesterday afternoon, said spokesman Geoff Patrick. One of the first trips had a one-minute delay because a truck was parked over the rail. Another one lingered at a station while waiting for the oncoming train to arrive in a single-track section. Five employees from DaVita, a provider of dialysis services, took a midday test ride. About 600 of the company's employees work in Tacoma, and a large share of them already park outside downtown. An existing downtown connector bus will be replaced by light rail that runs more often. "This is better because if my kid's sick and I have to pick him up from school, I can get to my car faster," said billing employee Jackie Meyers, who parks near the freeway and rides into downtown. "I'm all in favor of light rail and mass transit, but I don't see spending $80 million on this," said Perry Colombini, a bank manager who thought the money would be better spent on car-pool lanes to ease regional traffic. "I love Tacoma — I hope this does build on the renaissance." Phelps thanked downtown businesses for putting up with the noise and dirt. A beauty shop and a bookstore folded during the construction, according to Ruth Swanson, owner of the Connoisseur gifts and crafts shop, which survived. "Nobody could find us. Nobody could park. I had orange cones in my nightmares," she said. Swanson survived because of a 20-percent rent discount and a loyal clientele, she said. But she was excited to see yesterday's crowds of shoppers and busy sidewalks. "We're on our way. It's been a long struggle," she said. Laura Nole, manager of University Bookstore, said Link will be "a godsend" for part-time students who have trouble parking around campus, or who take up spaces needed by retailers. The $80 million price to taxpayers is higher than the $50 million advertised when voters approved the regional "Sound Move" transit plan in 1996. About $12 million of the increase was simply inflation, while the rest includes sidewalk improvements and other add-ons since the vote, officials said. At a per-mile price of $50 million, Tacoma Link was as expensive as high- capacity lines in other cities that carry long trains at higher speeds. Those systems, which provide more transit benefit, also had the advantage of abandoned railbed or other cheap land. "At 1.6 miles for $80 million, including a maintenance base, that stacks up extremely well for an urban line," Phelps said. - Route: 1.6 miles Train size: 66 feet long, 31 tons Capacity: 56 riders Top speed: 25 mph Ridership: 2,000 daily trips Project cost: $80 million Opening date: Yesterday Central Link, Seattle Route: 13.9 miles Capacity: 274 riders in a two-car train Top speed: 35 mph in Rainier Valley, 50 mph in elevated sections in Tukwila Ridership: 42,500 daily trips Project cost: $2.44 billion Opening date: 2009 Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP======================================= http://p-i.com/cgi- bin/pimail.asp?uid=2171&url=transportation/136363_link23.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Saturday, August 23, 2003 Tacoma's light rail -- 1.6 historic miles By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER TACOMA -- it may be short, but don't underestimate it, said Tacoma leaders yesterday as they launched the state's first modern light rail system in a hail of fireworks and confetti. "This is a delicious taste of what's going to be delivered 40 miles north of here," said King County Executive Ron Sims, chairman of the Sound Transit board. That was a reference to Seattle's long-delayed light rail line, which could begin construction before the end of the year. But yesterday was Tacoma's day. The Tacoma Link train glided smoothly from the Tacoma Dome through downtown to the theater district. It's a distance of 1.6 miles, but it will tie the whole world to Tacoma, said City Councilman Kevin Phelps, chairman of Sound Transit's finance committee. Along that route, the trains will stop at South 25th Street, near a fast- developing area of restaurants, stores and residences; at Union Station, near museums and the University of Washington's Tacoma branch campus; and at the future Convention Center, which is under construction. But the key stop is the Tacoma Dome Station, where light rail riders can get on a Sounder train headed north, a Sound Transit regional express or Pierce Transit bus in any direction, an Amtrak train or a Greyhound bus. Parking garages there provide 2,400 spaces. One of the first non-official riders yesterday was Helen Miller, 72, who lives in Puyallup. Miller, the daughter of a brakeman on the Great Northern Railroad, read about the launch of the light rail line in the newspaper and decided to come in and try it. She plans to use the train to go downtown to shop and look around. "I think people will go for it," she said. "I'm all for it." it's hard to beat the price: free. The Link trains will run every 10 minutes, 14 hours a day Monday through Saturday, beginning at 6 a.m. weekdays and 8 a.m. on Saturday. Sundays they will run every 20 minutes between 10 a.m. and 8 p.m. The trains, which can carry 30 seated and 26 standing passengers, won't go over the 25 mph speed limit. They get an automatic green light when they're going through intersections. The ride is smooth. The $80.4 million project cost more than the $50 million predicted in the 1996 Sound Move plan but came in under the budget adopted for it three years ago. It also came in ahead of schedule. Sound Transit predicts the line will carry 2,000 passengers a day by 2010. in 1993, things were so slow in downtown Tacoma that the city actually celebrated the opening of a coffee shop, Phelps said. In trying to get the city moving, business leaders knew it would take more than just a store here and a restaurant there. "We knew we needed a way to link it all together," Phelps said. Taken by itself, a 1.6-mile light rail line is not a good investment, Phelps said. But by linking the city's museums, theaters, university, business center, convention center and residences to each other and to the transit hub at the Tacoma Dome, the light rail system will be a major boon to Tacoma's ongoing renaissance, he said. Some folks eating lunch at Freighthouse Square across the street from the Tacoma Dome Station agreed, though not all. Becky Summers, 30, a medical records specialist who commutes to Tacoma from Gig Harbor, was positive on the new line. "I think it's a good idea," she said. Summers said she will probably drive to the Freighthouse Square area and hop on Tacoma Link to get downtown for shopping and entertainment. Stephenie Kuntz, 28, who works at Frank Russell, an international brokerage company, plans to get on the light rail line at the theater district station at lunchtime and take it to Pacific Avenue downtown or Freighthouse Square. But Robert Carey, who works at a truck dealership in the port area, does not welcome the new line nor expect to use it. "I just think it's a waste of spending and government should do something better with their money," he said. Among those who turned out for the launch yesterday were Rep. Norm Dicks and Rep. Adam Smith, both Washington Democrats; Tacoma Mayor Bill Baarsma; Pierce County Executive John Ladenburg; former state Rep. Ruth Fisher, D-Tacoma, whom many credited for providing crucial support; and many members of Sound Transit's board. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com PTP========================================= http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/opinion/2001601176_vesely24.html Seattle Times Sunday, August 24, 2003 James Vesely / Times editorial page editor The domino effect on monorail and a city's dreams Make no mistake: The sudden shortfall of money going toward Seattle's monorail has reverberations across the region with ripples into the planning rooms of large projects everywhere. During a skillful campaign prior to the monorail vote, dreams and aspirations were mixed with promises of speed and efficiency for a total- Seattle experience. Even though the monorail was approved by voters with a difference of less than 900 votes, the spirit of the monorail captured the fancy of a city looking for mobility. Those along the projected route were the foundation of the narrow approval. Opponents to the monorail, including these opinion pages, were sometimes portrayed as the last of the sticks-in-the-mud as monorail glided over our heads. But notice that the domino effect — the collision of one idea into another — still holds. Big projects that stumble, however slightly, touch on other big, unrelated projects to form a single notion in people's minds — whatever they're building isn't working. Monorail officials discovered a $2 million-a-month gap between taxes collected on cars against earlier projections of roughly $4 million a month. That tax, now at 0.085 percent of the depreciated value of a family car in Seattle, will rise to 1.4 percent next year, an owie with real sting, especially if monorail begins downsizing just as the taxes rise. I hope monorail pulls out of this because the region can't afford another failed promise. The domino weight of Sound Transit's mismanagement of light rail early in the process still echoes across the region, no matter how well the agency is managed today. During a luncheon address to the Bellevue Chamber of Commerce last week, Rep. Jennifer Dunn expressed her concern over adequate legal fire walls between sub-areas of the region. She and others on the Eastside remain unconvinced that light rail will not ultimately tap into all the region's pocketbooks, no matter what walls are in place today. Sub-area equity, the awful term of art used to describe that each section of the region gets to keep Sound Transit tax money for local transportation, is a concept open to skepticism as the agency hunts for more cash. Thus, the political differences emerge. During a KUOW interview program a few weeks ago, Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels expressed concern that a member of Congress was reaching outside her district to question federal contributions to Sound Transit. That only reinforces the idea that light rail is indeed Seattle's project. The domino effect begins with delays and lawsuits over Seattle-Tacoma international Airport's third runway, moves to frustration over how Safeco Field was voted and paid for, pushes right into light rail's troubles and, now, may tip public confidence in monorail. Ahead, a few more dominos stand waiting. The Alaskan Way Viaduct needs strong leadership and a plan. So does cross-lake agreement on the Highway 520 floating bridge, heading toward six lanes instead of the current four, with two HOV lanes. The domino representing that and other huge plans waits to be tested. I'd say get something done small, but get it done right. Dreams won't do any more. Fanciful ideas for boulevards instead of high-capacity roads or lanes that dive beneath Lake Washington in tunnels have the whimsical sound of yesterday's tune. On the next page, The Seattle Times makes endorsements for two seats on the Monorail Authority board of directors. We recommend two candidates out of a pretty good field. At least three candidates are qualified for the two positions. But in our candidate interviews, the question arose: Faced with either cutting back the scope of the monorail line or raising taxes, which would you do? The most skillful candidates responded that they felt the project would remain true to its promise and sufficient money would be collected. No one believes their domino will fall. James Vesely's e-mail address is: jvesely@seattletimes.com. PTP========================================== http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/136271_monoed.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Sunday, August 24, 2003 Keep monorail on credibility track SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD Monorail backers and staffers have chafed under the seeming unfair need to convince the public that "We're not Sound Transit." That's why the news that the project's tax revenues are falling short -- and suggestions that staff may have been slow in giving the news to board members -- is a double whammy. There are legitimate questions to answer about the how information should flow between monorail staff and board members and among the board members themselves. Some monorail board members complained that they had to learn the news from outside sources and media reports that staff had concerns over the accuracy of revenue projections and that there were indications that the revenue would be less than anticipated for June. it's easy to understand concerns by both the board members and the public at the notion that staff might be withholding crucial information. Executive Director Joel Horn, however, says staff members can't tell the board what they don't yet know themselves, and until the board was informed of the issue in July, the staff had many questions and few answers about the revenue estimates. What the staff did find was uncertainty and outright mistakes in estimating the vehicle tax base within the city limits, and that there was disagreement within the state Department of Licensing over whether vehicle owners should pay the monorail tax as soon as they move into the city. it's obvious that the new board and its staff need to hammer out the details of their relationship and their internal communications policy. Horn and Board Chairman Tom Weeks are convinced that the revenue problem is not only manageable but also is potentially short-lived. Time will tell. Most important, the board must be able to trust that staff is giving them the news -- good or bad. Lost revenue can be adjusted for. Lost trust cannot. PTP===================================== http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/136538_ltrs26.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Tuesday, August 26, 2003 Letters to the Editor MONORAIL Board members were aware of downturn in revenue Last Friday you published an article that implied that Seattle Monorail Project staff had not shared with us or with the public critical information about our revenues from the Seattle area Motor Vehicle Excise Tax. We are writing to say that's incorrect. The staff briefed us in May, when they had more questions than answers. You've printed a retraction, but we wanted to set the record straight. in May, we asked the staff to keep working with the Department of Licensing and independent consultants to understand as clearly as possible the extent and causes of the changes in our revenue base, if in fact they turned out to be genuine, before making a formal presentation to the board. Other board members were made aware of these issues at briefings that began in June and continued through July and early August. Our staff explained publicly at our committee meeting in July that they were working on understanding the issues and would be reporting whatever they learned at the August Finance Committee meeting. That is exactly what they did. We believe that our executive director, Joel Horn, and his staff are doing an excellent job of implementing a new model for public transit, as called for by Seattle voters. As responsible members of this board, we value both our independent points of view and the opportunity to make a careful study of the factual details of this important project on behalf of the public. After reviewing the facts, we are satisfied that we will be able to build our complete project through prudent management of the MVET revenues and continued efforts to cut costs. We will continue to discuss these questions at our public meetings over the next several months. Tom Weeks SMP Board chair Kristina Hill Vice chair

CONTENTS * LA: LRT to spark 'Gold Rush' for Chinatown? Los Angeles Times Friday, August 22, 2003 * Maryland gov nixes transit line The Gazette - Montgomery County (Md.) Aug. 27, 2003 * Houston's mass transit agonies Christian Science Monitor August 21, 2003 * Houston-Galveston holiday train adds a stop Houston Chronicle Aug. 27, 2003 * US Rep. Istook roadblocks bike trails Boston Globe 7/29/2003 PTP============================================ http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi- chinatown22aug22220422,1,1049680.story?coll=la-headlines-business Los Angeles Times Friday, August 22, 2003 Chinatown Awaits Gold Rush With a new light-rail line bringing in more visitors, merchants and community leaders are making plans to return the area to its glory days. By Elizabeth Kelly Times Staff Writer Making a run for dim sum is easier now, but will that be enough to turn Chinatown's fortunes around? Hopes for the district's revival are riding on the rails of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Gold Line, which travels 14 miles from downtown Pasadena to Los Angeles' Union Station, with a stop at the Chinatown Station at Spring and College streets. Since trains started running July 26, Chinatown merchants say, business has picked up. The newfound access to the district's 400 or so retailers, and its nearly 100 eateries, has attracted people such as Jerri Potras, an administrator at Los Angeles City College, which is near a Red Line station at Vermont Avenue and Santa Monica Boulevard. When Potras took the train over for lunch at Foo-Chow on a recent Friday, it had been more than a decade since her last visit. And she wondered what had happened to the Chinatown she remembered. "It wasn't nearly as busy and active as it had been before," she said. "I really hope the Gold Line can bring people back in." A glamorous nightspot during its mid-century heyday, the 303-acre neighborhood near Dodger Stadium has seen booms and busts since, and more of the latter. Merchants say problematic parking is a chief culprit. Now, the new light-rail line is giving Chinatown "a wonderful excuse to pull itself together," said Michael Woo, a former Los Angeles city councilman who served as a consultant for the MTA. "The test is whether Chinatown can keep building the momentum." There are big plans. Director Quentin Tarantino is in talks to purchase the vacant King Hing theater. The renovation of the Tin Hau Buddhist temple is slated for completion by Chinese New Year in January. Steve Riboli, owner of the San Antonio Winery just north of Chinatown, is pushing for- ward a proposal to convert the Capitol Mills site, once a grain mill and silo, into lofts and artists' space. One Los Angeles developer, sources say, is thinking about erecting a residential-retail complex — including a parking lot — near the light-rail station, on a site that once housed Little Joe's Restaurant. And several national retailers have inquired about bringing their shops to Chinatown. Community leaders figure that if the Gold Line keeps bringing people in, plans are more likely to get off the drawing board. The early returns are positive. At Ocean Seafood Restaurant on Hill Street, Gold Line riders are beginning to fill the gaps created in the dining room by diners' fear of severe acute respiratory syndrome, or SARS, a virus first reported in China that made some Angelenos wary of Asian neighborhoods. "The train has helped us out a lot," manager Linda Chen said. Luong Wong, who owns Hing-Fat Co., a grocery specializing in traditional Chinese remedies, said he was encouraged by the prospect of more foot traffic, especially after 4 p.m. During the day, locals meander into Wong's store on North Broadway to scan the collection of pills, extracts and lotions that he keeps behind the counter, or to browse the products arranged neatly in the aisles, which range from blue-lidded canisters of Horlick's "nourishing food drink" to bins of angelica root sold for $22.99 a pound. At night, however, Chinatown "is like a ghost town" compared with its glory days, said Kenneth Lee, whose family has owned the Jade Tree gift and antique store since 1947. Then, in the evenings, neon lights and hanging lanterns drew crowds searching for something exotic to the Hong Kong Cafe and Madame Wong's, or to the romantic piano bar at General Lee's, a favorite of Hollywood celebrities. Back then, Chinatown bustled until the wee hours of morning, Lee said. Now the Jade Tree closes at 5 p.m. sharp. "Without parking, you are without business," he said. "If Chinatown had parking like Beverly Hills, Santa Monica or Old Town, where they give people two hours of free parking, it would go back to how it was in the '50s and '60s." As they look ahead, community leaders say they're certain the blocks around the Chinatown Station won't suffer the fate of some of the neighborhoods on the MTA's Blue Line, which has linked Long Beach and Los Angeles for 13 years. That line didn't do much for working-class communities such as Florence and southern Los Angeles; the more than 70,000 people who ride trains on the route each day simply pass through, taking their dollars with them. "With the Blue Line, the impact is not as big as had been hoped, in part because there is not the same development around the stations" as there is around Gold Line stations, said Raphael Bostic, an associate professor of policy, planning and development at USC. "There is very little there that would draw people in." Even as it is, Chinatown boosters say, their district is a draw. "When people come here they are amazed," said George Yu, executive director of the Chinatown Business Council. "The architecture, the fragrances, the sounds — these are all things you will not see in suburbia." With the Gold Line up and running, a "certain flow of visitors" will naturally develop, he said. "Now, what can Chinatown do to make sure visitors find something to do?" Three years ago, property owners in Chinatown formed a business improvement district, taxing themselves to pay for security patrols and neighborhood cleanup and beautification efforts. On the Gold Line's opening day, and on weekends since, employees of the Los Angeles Chinatown Business Council, which manages the Chinatown improvement district, have greeted the riders at the station, handing out maps and restaurant guides. Noted Chinese American author Lisa See contributed to the guidebook for an informal tour called Angel's Walk, which leads visitors to historic sites such as the East Gate, built by groundbreaking attorney You Chung Hong to honor the memory of his mother; a 1950s-style alleyway used in a number of Hollywood films; and a thoroughly modernized General Lee's, now a trendy bar. "Magnets that pull the people out of the train and into the sidewalks are going to be critical," said Councilman Ed Reyes, whose district includes Chinatown. That means promoting historic restaurants and describing the different commercial corridors, Reyes said. "We have to show them not just the trinkets but the cultural elements as well. It's our challenge to get the mainstream to understand the richness." PTP======================================== [PTP NOTE: The Capital Crescent Trail mentioned is a former railway right-of-way purchased by publioc agencies for eventual public transit; use as a hiking/biking trail was intended to be temporary.] The Gazette - Montgomery County (Md.) Aug. 27, 2003 Ehrlich drawing the line by Catherine Dolinski Staff Writer Country club is off limits to trolley, governor says Activists and officials accused Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr. this week of choosing the needs of wealthy golfers over those of working-class commuters in declaring he will never allow a transit line to cross the grounds of Columbia Country Club. "It will not go through the country club," Ehrlich (R) said in an interview with The Gazette last week, referring to the inner Purple Line trolley that would link the two sides of the Metrorail Red Line in Montgomery County, and eventually connect to stations in Prince George's County. Trolley supporters said the governor's statements come as no surprise, but do cast light on a connection they have long suspected to exist between the governor and the exclusive club where Ehrlich has been spotted playing at least once. "it's an enormous statement," said Ben Ross of Bethesda, president of the Action Committee for Transit. "It just sweeps away all of these years of pretense that it's all about the [Capital Crescent] Trail. We've always maintained this wasn't about the trail, but about the country club. This forces the issue out into the open." For months, Maryland Transportation Secretary Robert L. Flanagan has couched the Ehrlich administration's skepticism about the downcounty transit project in terms of its impact on the Capital Crescent Trail, not the golf course. On Tuesday, however, he conceded Ehrlich has a soft spot for the sport. "The governor happens to love golf," Flanagan said. "So he would tend to be a little more focused on the beauty of a golf course. I am probably a little more focused on the trail." Ehrlich's statements come even as the Maryland Transit Administration wraps up its study of the inner Purple Line, which now includes both the trolley proposal and an alternate busway proposal put forth by Del. John A. Hurson (D-Dist. 18) of Chevy Chase. The busway has failed to garner much public support, but unlike the trolley line, it would use existing roads and avoid the country club. "We feel very confident the [busway] alternative is going to be very strongly competitive," Flanagan said. Flanagan said he has never received direct instructions from the governor regarding the Purple Line study. Regardless of Ehrlich's statements about the country club, Flanagan said his department will complete the study of the trolley line. "In terms of state resources, the money's already spent," he said. After more than a decade of debate, the Purple Line quickly gained momentum when Ehrlich's predecessor, Gov. Parris N. Glendening (D), endorsed the plan and launched the state study of it in 2000. But the project has remained mired in controversy because it would run on part of the popular Capital Crescent Trail and cut through the exclusive golf course and several Chevy Chase neighborhoods. Country club members have bitterly fought the light-rail proposal, funding an extensive lobbying campaign and aiding the campaign coffers of its allies. This week, Montgomery County Councilman George L. Leventhal (D-At large) of Takoma Park said the governor has made his allegiance to the country club apparent. "He wants to protect wealthy golfers over ordinary commuters, and that's his choice," Leventhal said. Prince George's County Council Chair Peter A. Shapiro (D-Dist. 2) of Brentwood agreed. "I think it's been the problem all along," he said. "The needs of a group of wealthy people seem to take priority over the needs of the most transit- dependent people in the State of Maryland. Frankly, the moment Ehrlich got elected, the future of the Purple Line was in peril. He's made it clear it's not his priority." Despite Ehrlich's statements, Flanagan maintained that the real priority of the administration is preserving the Capital Crescent Trail, not the country club. "We have gone through this process step by step, and I can guarantee you the golf course has not been a major fact in the secretary of transportation's analysis of what we are doing," Flanagan said. "In my mind, the golf course is the incidental beneficiary of the fact that you can't save the Capital Crescent Trail without also protecting the golf course." But Ed Asher, president of Chevy Chase Land Company, said Ehrlich is jeopardizing trail by stonewalling the inner Purple Line. Asher said his company owns about 12 acres of the trail, running from Jones Bridge Road east through Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, to the vicinity of the Air Rights Building along East-West Highway in Bethesda. Montgomery County has held easement rights to the property since 1985 under the federal Rails-to-Trails Act. But those rights end, Asher said, if the county fails to use the land for mass transit. "If there is a definite act, on the part of this or another administration, that the trail will not be used for rail, we will go back to court to try to reclaim ownership," he said. if successful, Asher said his company could develop the land. Pam Browning of Chevy Chase, who led a petition drive last summer to preserve the trail, said Asher and his fellow light-rail supporters are muddying the issue. "Light-rail proponents, supported by Chevy Chase Land Company, would like to see the issue of the trail disappear," she said. "They have long claimed that the Country Club is their only opposition. But community residents and trail users know otherwise." --Staff Writers David Abrams and Thomas Dennison contributed to this report. PTP======================================== http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0821/p03s01-ussc.html Christian Science Monitor August 21, 2003 Houston grapples with mass transit - and its ego As residents face a looming vote, city is tugged between its car culture and the realities of rising population and sprawl. By Kris Axtman | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor HOUSTON – Dale Patterson has taught herself Spanish. Each day she spends about three hours driving to and from work - and that gives her plenty of time to catch up on the news, make cellphone calls, and listen to Spanish-language tapes. Not part of her Berlitz lessons: How to politely complain to city officials that she's had it with these long commutes, clogged freeways, polluted skies, endless road construction, and practically non-existent mass transit. ¡Caramba! Ms. Patterson is one of 2.1 million commuters who take to the roads around Houston each day, frustrated and fed up. This transplant from Chicago says she'd gladly leave the driving to the city if that was an option. It's not - at least not yet. This November, Houstonians will get their chance to vote on the most ambitious mass-transit proposal since the creation of the Metropolitan Transit Authority in 1978. It includes 40 miles of light-rail extensions, an eight-mile commuter train track to Missouri City, 142 additional miles of Park & Ride bus service, 44 new bus routes, and bike racks on all buses. While it may sound good in theory, the idea of stepping out of cars and onto commuter trains is about as foreign to native Houstonians as a meal of leafy greens. This is a city built on the automobile, after all, fed on fossil fuel and the stretch of prairie land - with endless miles of road to cross it. But city officials warn that two million new faces will be pouring into the area over the next two decades, and freeways will simply not accommodate them all. 'The future of our city is at stake' The result is a fight over the city's soul. Will Houston change its character, become a denser, more pedestrian-friendly community like New York or Boston? Or will it keep spreading, with ever-greater freeway systems that snake through southeast Texas? That question will soon be in the hands of weary commuters who, according to a new report by the Surface Transportation Policy Project, drive more miles per capita than residents in any other US metropolitan area - 37.6 miles each day. "The future of our city is at stake," says Arthur Schechter, chair of the Metropolitan Transit Authority of Harris County. "If we don't do this [pass the mass-transit plan] or something like it, we're headed for disaster." Houston's lack of public transportation is already being felt, says Mr. Schechter - and not simply on the freeways. The city lost its bid for the 2012 Olympics in part because of a low transportation score. A new Toyota assembly plant scratched Houston from its list, naming air pollution as the main drawback. And more and more CEOs say they're having trouble luring bright, ambitious workers to the city because of quality-of-life qualms linked to congestion. But despite the clear hazards of sluggish mass transit, if history is any guide, the fight over the new multibillion-dollar proposal will be knotty. Opposition is well-funded and outspoken, spearheaded by business leaders (such as land developers and oil executives) who believe the answer lies in building more roads. They claim that cities with more sprawl have lower housing costs. That's the main reason Kaysie and Matt Colman live so far outside Houston. "You get more for your money," Kaysie says. They recently moved closer - but still commute two hours daily. And although they work at the same restaurant, they often drive in separately. Kaysie has visited cities with subways and says she'd definitely use one here, but Matt is more hesitant. He loves being independent and alone behind the wheel. "it's a sensible idea," he admits. "I would probably use it once in a while." But Kaysie smirks as she straightens her apron, unconvinced by the image of Matt on a subway. The will to drive and the drive to build Critics of the mass-transit plan say that fierce Texas independence - and the way it is manifested behind the wheel - may prove unconquerable by buses in a city with freeways nearly as wide as they are long. "The car culture is absolutely intrinsic to the whole nature of Houston. It was built by, for, and on behalf of the automobile," says Stephen Klineberg, a sociologist at Rice University in Houston. "So Houstonians are never going to want to give up their cars, but that does not mean they wouldn't want to ride in a state-of-the-art rail system." indeed, recent polls show enormous frustration with congestion and overwhelming support for mass transit - even if respondents say they wouldn't use it themselves. And though city leaders don't like to use Dallas as an example, that city's new light-rail system has exceeded all expectations - doubling the number of anticipated riders in its first year of operation. Other Western cities built around cars, have had varying success with mass transit. Denver and Salt Lake City are held up as good examples, while Los Angeles is still struggling to get commuters aboard. But most agree that mass transit should play a large role in their futures. "The list of cities in the South and West that want more transit is impressive: Fort Lauderdale, Houston, Phoenix, Las Vegas," says Anne Canby, president of the Surface Transportation Policy Project in Washington. "They are realizing that one transportation model may not be adequate to do the whole job, especially with the demographic changes happening in the next 20 years." But back in Houston, the big question is funding. With the economy already sputtering and cities forced to cut budgets, voters wonder how much they'll have to pay - and whether it will be worth it. Jamie Older, an IT manager downtown, has watched construction on the already- approved light-rail system, set to open next year. It will stretch 7.5 miles, linking downtown Houston with the medical center and sports arenas. "You're talking about a very small area being serviced when large suburbs don't have service," says Ms. Older, who gave up driving an hour into work each day and now rides an express bus in half the time. "I just don't see the benefit of it." While city leaders say this is just the first piece in a larger transit plan, it's still unclear whether Houstonians will agree to more. PTP========================================= Houston Chronicle Aug. 27, 2003 Holiday train adds Alvin to Galveston rail route By RICHARD STEWART Galveston-bound tourists once again can leave their cars and traffic snarls on the mainland over the Labor Day weekend and ride the rails instead. A special holiday excursion train called the Texas Gulfliner is adding Alvin to its route, making two round trips each day on Saturday, Sunday and Monday between Galveston and the Brazoria County town that started life as a railroad stop. As it did last Labor Day and during Mardi Gras, the four-car Amtrak charter train will also make two round trips on each of the three days between League City and Galveston. "What we're trying to do is reduce the pollution and congestion on the causeway," said Alvin City Manager Paul Horn. "And it's a lot of fun." Like many who ride the Gulfliner, Horn plans to take his first trip on a modern passenger railroad Saturday. He and hundreds of others will board the train at Alvin's 1907 Santa Fe railroad depot. The city has recently restored the outside of the old depot at 119 E. Willis St. In downtown Alvin. There are plans to convert the interior into a railroad museum that will be a smaller version of Galveston's railroad museum. Although 38 freight trains a day roll through Alvin, "This will be the first passenger service in Alvin since 1967," he said. Once rail travel was so common that 20 trains a day traveled between Houston and Galveston alone. Regular passenger service between Galveston and the mainland ended 36 years ago. The excursion trains are part of the Galveston intelligent Transportation System Demonstration Project. The project is backed mainly by a $750,000 federal grant. The League City terminus of the excursions will be at Perkins Station, 100 Perkins at Main (Highway 518) in League City. There are long-term plans to convert that station into a restaurant and entertainment area with an old-West theme. Round-trip tickets for the trips are $16 for adults and $8 for children ages 15 and younger and people 65 and older. Advance tickets can be purchased via telephone at 1-877-GAL-RAIL (1-877-425-7245), online at www.texasgulfliner.com or at the Alvin City Manager's office at City Hall. Some tickets may also be available on a walk-up basis, said Barry Goodman, president of the Houston-based transportation consulting company that is overseeing the project. The trip from League City takes about an hour and the trip from Alvin takes about 75 minutes. "Everybody has a good time," Goodman said. Food and drink service is available on the train. It's a decidedly family- friendly trip, with no alcohol allowed. Passengers also can't bring food or drinks on board, although each passenger can have one carry-on bag. After waving at the drivers in bumper-to-bumper traffic on the auto causeways as they traverse the older bridge with its arches and drawbridge, passengers will arrive at Galveston's Railroad Museum at 25th Street and The Strand. From there, passengers can visit the museum's collection, wander through the historic Strand District or take public transportation to other Galveston sites, Goodman said. Streetcars can take visitors to the beachfront and there are buses to Moody Gardens, he said. "The nice thing is that they won't have to bother to find places to park," he said. The demonstration project plans to offer excursion trains during at least two more high-traffic weekends and perhaps to develop more regular passenger rail traffic in the area. "Our passenger routes used to continue on up into Houston, going up through the southern part of town right where the light rail system will soon be," Alvin's Paul Hale said. "We'd like to see commuter service link up our area with Houston again." it's an idea that has long been considered, Goodman said. "People in The Woodlands, Kingwood, Katy or Sugar Land might prefer riding the railroad into Houston each day instead of fighting the traffic on the freeways." http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2070174 PTP========================================== http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2003/07 /30/bike_trails_roadblock?mode=PF Boston Globe 7/29/2003 Bike trails' roadblock By Derrick Z. Jackson WHEN HE WAS merely the three-time winner of the Tour de France, Lance Armstrong came to the White House. President Bush said, "Lance Armstrong is a vivid reminder that the great achievements of life are often won or lost in the mountains, when the climb is steepest, when the heart is tested." After his fourth straight victory, Armstrong returned to the White House when Bush announced new funds for cancer research. Armstrong is a celebrated cancer survivor. Bush said: "Regular exercise is another way to prevent illness and add years to your life. . . . Exercise is a really important part of my life. And I urge all Americans to make it an important part of your life, as well." Armstrong has now won the Tour de France for the fifth time. Tyler Hamilton of Marblehead finished in fourth place despite a broken collarbone. "When you worked that hard, you don't give up too easy," Hamilton said. Even as we praise the heart of Armstrong and the grit of Hamilton, even as Bush tells us to exercise, Bush's allies are making it harder for average Americans to get out their own cycles, strollers, rollerblades, and jogging shoes. Last Thursday, as Armstrong knocked off 112 miles to get to Bordeaux, a House subcommittee knocked out funding for bike paths and pedestrian trails. The Transportation and Treasury subcommittee, chaired by Republican Ernest Istook of Oklahoma, voted practically to kill a decade-old program that required states to set aside 10 percent of US transportation funds for "enhancement" projects such as exercise paths and historic preservation. The program has given out $5 billion, $77 million to Massachusetts. Those funds have helped states convert abandoned, unsightly railbeds into scenic paths. In Washington, D.C., and Boston, bike trails are a new source of commuting. On warm weekend days, the paths are a strip park of parents and grandparents pushing infants, small children trying out training wheels, teens rollerblading, and adults running, cycling, and conversing while walking. in an obesity epidemic, it would seem obvious that bike trails are an important way to inspire Americans to get up from the couch or get out of the car. Trails offer a safe way for small children and seniors to enjoy cycling in metropolitan areas like Boston where drivers show no mercy even if the cyclist resembles Mother Teresa. The national Rails-to-Trails Conservancy says there are about 1,200 trails totaling 12,500 miles. There are plans that would give the nation close to 30,000 miles of trails. Those plans are in jeopardy because of Istook. Istook is such a huge supporter of highways that a quarter of his 2001-02 political contributions came from transportation and petroleum interests. He also gets contributions from interests that benefit from massive concentrations of cars, such as Wal-Mart and Home Depot. In the current $90 billion spending plan, Istook would boost highway spending to $33.8 billion, $4.5 billion more than even President Bush wants. Conversely, he is such a critic of Amtrak that he tried to slash funding over the last few months to $580 million, only a third of what Amtrak says it needs to keep up its infrastructure and two-thirds of what even Bush was willing to provide. Istook originally wanted to kill outright the 10 percent rule for enhancements. After an outcry by rails-to-trails proponents, Istook said he would leave the 10 percent up to the states. John Olver of Massachusetts, the ranking Democrat on Istook's subcommittee, proposed an amendment to preserve the 10 percent. The amendment narrowly lost before the full Appropriations Committee. Olver said he will try again to save the program in September. Micah Swafford, Istook's press secretary, said Monday on the telephone that the cut was necessary during the national budget crunch and at a time when roads and bridges badly need repairing. Nicole Letourneau, Olver's press secretary, dismissed that rationale, saying that Istook "wants to pave the world with concrete." Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson recently noted that obesity costs the United States $117 billion a year. He said, "The best way to be healthy is to exercise and to watch what you eat and to lose some weight and stop smoking." But at a time when states are raiding tobacco settlements for basic services, giving states the option to spend on bike trails and other transportation enhancements effectively ends the program. Lance Armstrong cheated death and now has five Tour de France victories. For many Americans a bike path offers a way to cheat death every day. Perhaps the advocates of rail trails should get Armstrong to appear on their behalf. Armstrong once gave Bush a bike and said, "We expect him to ride it." An Armstrong who expects Congress to get behind cycling paths for average Americans just might force Istook to come along for the ride. Derrick Z. Jackson's e-mail address is jackson@globe.com.

CONTENTS * US Senator: ISTEA may be dead LAS VEGAS SUN August 19, 2003 * Letter: Bush & Co. aiming to strip bike path funding The Olympian, Olympia Washington - Saturday, August 23, 2003 * Phoenix gas shortage gives transit a boost Houston Chronicle Aug. 23, 2003 PTP======================================== http://www.lasvegassun.com/sunbin/stories/lv- gov/2003/aug/19/515496820.html LAS VEGAS SUN August 19, 2003 Reid: Transit bill is unlikely to pass Funding dispute, environmental issues blocking Transportation Equity Act By Steve Kanigher Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., said Monday he doubts Congress will reauthorize a comprehensive transportation bill this year because of arguments over funding levels and attempts to gut federal clean air and endangered species laws. The Transportation Equity Act, enacted in June 1998 to provide highway and transit funding to the 50 states, expires Sept. 30. Reid told the 2003 Fall Transportation Conference attendees at Cox Pavilion on the University of Nevada, Las Vegas campus that he would support reauthorization of the transportation funding for at least five more years. But, Reid said, President Bush and his fellow Republicans have been unwilling to provide a reasonable level of funding for transportation projects under the proposed new bill, known as TEA-3. "I'm not sure we'll get a bill this year, at least not a five-year bill," Reid, the Senate minority whip and a member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, told the gathering, made up largely of state and local transportation officials. "We're getting a tremendously low bill figure for the TEA-3 bill," he said. "The president is spending a lot of money except where it's needed." The Bush administration has proposed $190 billion to be spent through 2009, but transportation industry groups have been calling for at least $375 billion. The original bill called for appropriation of $218 billion from fiscal 1998 through the current fiscal year. Nevada received $1.05 billion during that period, mostly for highway improvements, interstate maintenance and surface transportation programs, according to data on the U.S. Department of Transportation website. Nevada's share this year is $195 million. Earlier this year the Southern Nevada Regional Transportation Commission approved a wish list should the bill make it though Congress. The RTC list includes funding for Las Vegas Beltway interchanges at U.S. 95, Summerlin Parkway, interstate 15 and the airport connector, as well as widening of interstate 15 from U.S. 95 to the Speedway interchange, widening of U.S. 95 from Rainbow Boulevard to Kyle Canyon, and widening of U.S. 95 from I-15 to Boulder Highway south of Henderson. While Congress returns to work on Sept. 2, Reid said he didn't think there would be enough time left this year to debate TEA-3. "We've missed our opportunity this year," Reid said. "We should have already had it reported out of committee and we need to find floor time, which will be difficult to do. It would take at least a week on the floor." One problem, Reid said, is that lawmakers are preoccupied with other issues that will likely eat up time on the Senate floor. "We have nine appropriations bills to pass," Reid said. "We have voted on one judge nine times and the vote hasn't changed. We'll spend a lot of time on partial-birth abortion and that hasn't changed. This takes away a lot of time from substantive issues." A Senate Republican aide said the leadership is certainly working hard to get the bill done and trying to get the Senate to take it up once members get back from the August recess. Even if the Senate had time to debate TEA-3, Reid said, Sen. James inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has indicated he wants to link transportation funding to the elimination of clean air and endangered species laws. Reid said he would support efforts to streamline those laws but would oppose any attempt to "simply do away with" them. Critics say those laws needlessly delay construction projects and amount to red tape. But Reid said Republican efforts to eliminate those laws threaten to delay passage of a comprehensive transportation bill. An inhofe aide said only "environmental streamlining" is included in the bill and that there is no mention of the Endangered Species Act. Any changes mentioned in the bill have bipartisan support and stem from recommendations by the General Accounting Office, the aide said. On a related subject, Reid said he would support increases in federal gasoline taxes to reflect inflation. Those taxes provide revenue for transportation projects. "There is some talk of indexing the gas tax to inflation," Reid said. "Some members of Congress get hung up on raising it even a penny." Reid also spoke in glowing terms about the need to fund magnetic levitation high-speed trains, which can reach 300 miles an hour. There are proposals to build the trains from Las Vegas to Primm with hopes of eventually running them to Southern California. Reid said that because the technology has already been studied, the time has come for the federal government to fund actual projects. He said Japan and Germany have a big jump on the United States in this form of transportation. "We've really missed the boat," he said. "Magnetic levitation will come to America, but we will have to import most of the stuff." The two-day transportation conference at UNLV ends today with work sessions that will include updates on the Las Vegas Monorail, interstate 215/interstate 515 interchange project and the Hoover Dam Bypass project. Sun reporter Suzanne Struglinski contributed to this story. PTP========================================= http://www.theolympian.com/home/news/20030823/opinion/82057.shtml The Olympian, Olympia Washington Saturday, August 23, 2003 Your Views: Letters to the Editor Bush administration will strip bike path funding For every bike commuter who pedals to work under the mantra "one less car," Congress has a message for you: Get back in your gas-guzzling SUV and hit the highway where you belong, burning fossil fuel like a real American. Fresh out of subcommittee, a congressional transportation appropriations bill will entirely eliminate $600 million in federal funding for bike paths, walkways and other such transportation niceties in fiscal year 2004. Enjoy the Chehalis Western Trail? Too bad! Defenders of the bill argue that, in light of huge federal deficits, something has to go. But for bike activists who have been pushing for decades for alternatives to driving, the cuts are giant steps backward. Under the bill, highways would receive $34.1 billion in fiscal year 2004, which is $2.5 billion more than this year, while the Transportation Enhancements program that funds bike paths and walkways would get nothing. is this a political move on the part of the anti-environment, anti-middle- class Bush administration? You bet! Seems Bush is more worried about lining his campaign coffers with dirty money from the oil tycoons than providing alternatives to the madness of our nation's highway system. We neither need nor want more pavement! Enough, America! This administration is out of control! From trashing the premier national service program, AmerICorps, to gutting funding for transportation alternatives, to raping and pillaging our national forests, this administration is leading us down the wrong road! Bush needs to go. Kevin Farrell, Olympia PTP========================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 23, 2003 Phoenix gasoline shortage gives bus system a boost By NICK MADIGAN New York Times PHOENIX -- A pipeline rupture that stanched the flow of gasoline to Phoenix has turned daily life here on its head for almost a week, prompting, among other things, a surge in car pooling, bus riding and even -- goodness gracious, in this heat -- walking. But most of the residents in this gas-starved metropolis are adjusting to the petroleum panic of 2003. People canceled weekend trips and visits to friends across town. Many just hunkered down at home, videotapes and popcorn at the ready, until the crisis blows over. Others railed at oil companies for crimping their movements and, to top it off, raising gas prices. "There's just a bunch of spooked-out people," Richard Harper, a deacon in a Catholic church here, said Friday morning as he rode a bus downtown, something, he added, that he does regularly. "They should learn not to count on their vehicles." Slim chance of that, not in a sprawling, scorching city like Phoenix, ringed with desert and crisscrossed by half a dozen freeways. Despite soothing assurances from Gov. Janet Napolitano that a full flow of gasoline could be restored to Phoenix some time this weekend, an effort earlier in the week to repair a 48-year-old four-mile section of the pipeline, which ruptured on July 30, did not go well. The 8-inch pipe broke again during a test that involved pumping water into it at high pressure to check for leaks. Workers employed by Houston-based Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, the line's operator, then began setting up another route for the gasoline, bypassing the troublesome section between here and Tucson and diverting the flow into an adjacent line that normally carries jet fuel. The new route is to carry about 35,000 barrels of gasoline a day into Phoenix, enough to suspend most of the truck deliveries that have helped to fill the gap. Kinder Morgan officials told the Associated Press on Saturday that a test on a bypassed portion of the pipeline was successful Saturday and that service was likely to resume today. For the first couple of weeks after the pipe ruptured, Phoenix motorists were able to subsist with gasoline stored in a distribution center here, but that supply quickly dwindled and in the last week panic buying set in. A few days ago, at the height of the shortage, some drivers were tailing tanker trunks and waiting for them to unload their precious cargo at the pumps. Many people -- by either choice or necessity -- took to the city's buses, although it was a measure of some people's unfamiliarity with the municipal transportation system that the Arizona Republic published hints on how and where to catch a bus, and the protocol for riding one. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/nation/2063471

CONTENTS * Tacoma: LRT streetcar line opening today King County Journal 2003-08-22 * Tacoma Link LRT's real potential lies in future News Tribune - Tacoma August 22nd, 2003 * Tacoma Link's debut stirs memories of earlier streetcars News Tribune - Tacoma August 22nd, 2003 PTP===================================== http://www.kingcountyjournal.com/sited/story/html/141075 King County Journal 2003-08-22 Light-rail service begins today in downtown Tacoma Sound Transit's first light-rail service begins carrying passengers today in downtown Tacoma. Ceremonies celebrating the new $80.4 million light-rail system begin at 10 a.m. at the Tacoma Dome Shelton Plaza. The new light-rail system connects five stations along a 1.6-mile route between the downtown theater district and the Tacoma Dome, which is near public parking garages, the Sounder commuter rail and Amtrak stations, and a transit hub for local and regional bus service. Passengers ride the new light-rail line free, not just today, but permanently. Sound Transit officials, struggling to secure federal funding to help build the planned $2.4 billion Link light-rail line from downtown Seattle to near Sea-Tac Airport, earlier decided Tacoma's limited system would offer free service to promote light-rail ridership. The Tacoma Link cars will stop at each station about every 10 minutes between 6 a.m. and 8 p.m. on weekdays; and between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. on Saturdays. On Sundays and holidays, the cars stop at each station every 10 minutes from 11:30 a.m. to 6:30 p.m.; and every 20 minutes from 10 to 11:30 a.m. and in the evening from 6:30 to 8 p.m. Each electric-powered car is 66 feet long and has seating for 30 passengers and standing room for about two dozen more. The light-rail cars will travel 25 mph. For more information, see the Sound Transit Web site at www.soundtransit.org or call the Tacoma Community Office at 1-253-572- 5484. PTP======================================= http://www.tribnet.com/opinion/story/3732459p-3759162c.html News Tribune - Tacoma August 22nd, 2003 Tacoma Link's true potential lies in the future The News Tribune Central Link - Sound Transit's embattled Seattle-area rail project - has long been mired in cost overruns and criticism. That's been a blessing for its little brother, Tacoma Link. With Central Link drawing most of the fire, Sound Transit quietly proceeded, over the last five years, to engineer and build the much smaller light rail line in Tacoma. Tacoma Link officially opens today amid fanfare and more than a little relief that the transit agency actually pulled it off. This is not the Orient Express. The entire line runs a mere 1.6 miles, from Sound Transit's Tacoma Dome Station through downtown Tacoma to its terminus in the Theater District. Plying this route will be three sleek and comfortable trolleys, each capable of carrying 56 passengers. Rides will be free, and the trains will stop at any given station every 10 to 20 minutes, 14 hours Monday through Satuday and 10 hours on Sunday. As mass transit projects go, Tacoma Link's costs have not been scandalous - nothing like the $1 billion in overruns racked up by Central Link in Seattle. Sound Transit originally estimated it would build the Tacoma project for $50 million in 1995 dollars, the equivalent of $60 million in 2003 dollars. The final price was $80.4 million, but this total includes various enhancements to the original plan, such as new sidewalks, benches, trees and bike racks. The important issue is not whether the project should have been built for $60 million, but whether this short rail line justifies the investment. And that question can be answered only with the passage of years. Right now, the 1.6-mile line can easily be ridiculed as a glorified toy train. Its defenders focus on the way it links downtown Tacoma to the Tacoma Dome Station, where passengers can connect to regional express buses and the fast Sounder commuter trains that go to downtown Seattle via the Kent Valley. Without Tacoma Link, the state's second-largest metropolitan center would have remained on the periphery of the Puget Sound region's new mass transit system. But Tacoma Link makes the most sense as the first phase of what should ultimately be a fully developed light rail line running up the interstate 5 corridor from Tacoma through Federal Way to Sea-Tac Airport and Seattle. The idea all along has been to create a transportation corridor that isn't prey to the congestion that increasingly paralyzes I-5 and other Puget Sound highways. This corridor's full value won't be realized until the region's population has grown substantially and mass transit becomes more convenient than the automobile for many trips. That growth will come. Tacoma Link may seem an odd way to spend $80 million in 2003; it will not seem so odd in 2053. Tacoma Link makes the most sense as the first phase of what should ultimately be a fully developed light rail line . . . PTP======================================= http://www.tribnet.com/news/local/story/3732733p-3759288c.html News Tribune - Tacoma August 22nd, 2003 Link's debut stirs memories of 1st streetcars AARON CORVIN; The News Tribune in 1938, Errol Flynn starred in "The Adventures of Robin Hood," Enrico Fermi won the Nobel Prize for Physics and Tacoma said goodbye to its streetcar. Fast-forward 65 years: Sound Transit opens its $80.4 million, 1.6-mile Tacoma Link streetcar system today. Joan Bunnell can't wait. The 50-year-old Tacoma resident plans to be there for the daylong celebration of the new streetcar system. And her enthusiasm is easy to understand: Bunnell is a granddaughter of Joseph Bunnell, who helped run Tacoma's old cable cars in the 1900s as a switchman and electrician. Bunnell said she'll be thinking of her grandfather when Tacoma Link rolls today. "I'm so into it," she said. "it's so cool." The streetcar covers a 1.6-mile route from South Ninth and Commerce streets downtown to Freighthouse Square. It will provide free rides, arriving at the five stations about every 10 minutes. Two cars will be in service, with a third in reserve. During today's festivities, Sound Transit will highlight Tacoma's old cable cars in a video presentation, "From Streetcars to Tacoma Link," from noon to 5 p.m. at the Washington State History Museum. Additionally, Tenino resident Cliff Fournier, 86, the last surviving trolley operator from the Tacoma Railway and Power Company, will participate in today's opening ceremony. King County Executive and Sound Transit Board Chairman Ron Sims is expected to introduce Fournier, who will don a vintage streetcar motorman hat and ring a bell from the original Tacoma streetcar system. Fournier operated a trolley on the old system's last day of service, June 11, 1938. Subsequently, Fournier worked for Tacoma Transit as a bus driver and continued with Pierce Transit when it was created in 1980. He retired from Pierce Transit in 1981. The construction and opening of Tacoma Link prompted Joan Bunnell to pore over old newspaper clippings and photos to learn more about her grandfather and the history of Tacoma's streetcar system. Joseph Harris Bunnell was born July 15, 1883, in Knox County, Mo. A tall man with an angular nose, Bunnell had a capacious appetite for learning. He wanted to know how things worked and, in the early 1900s, he became fascinated with electricity. He moved to Tacoma between 1913 and 1920 and fell in love with the city. He ended up working for the Tacoma Railway and Power Company, which had consolidated Tacoma's numerous streetcar lines in January 1899. That consolidation occurred 12 years after the city's first trolleys relied on horse and mule power to move along Pacific Avenue. Eventually, Tacoma's electrical streetcar lines branched to Pacific Avenue, South Tacoma, Spanaway, Center Street, Sixth Avenue, Tacoma Avenue, Puyallup Avenue and Point Defiance. By 1900, the system linked Tacoma and Seattle on the interurban line, making the two cities only a 70-minute ride apart. Then streetcars gave way to cars and buses. Tacoma's trolleys closed in 1938. Over the next several years, the city ripped up more than 90 miles of track. Joseph Bunnell was part of the team that shut down the system. Joan Bunnell said her grandfather kept busy in retirement, running his own popcorn wagon. He died Dec. 12, 1958, in Tacoma. His ashes were scattered throughout the city. On June 4, 1938, Tacoma's streetcars were shut down for good in power station A at 13th and A streets. From left, operators Joe Bunnell and Charles Schrum, assistants J. Ramsay and G. Gunderson. Aaron Corvin: 253-552-7058 aaron.corvin@mail.tribnet.com if you go Sound Transit begins its celebration of the beginning of Tacoma's Link light-rail system at 10 a.m. today at the Tacoma Dome Station Plaza, 423 E. 25th St. The opening ceremony will include blessings by the Puyallup Tribe of indians and the Salvation Army. Refreshments will be available as part of The Taste of Freighthouse Square, which runs until 1:30 p.m. Streetcar rides begin at noon and last until 10 p.m. Before noon, inaugural rides will carry public officials and the winners of 100 promotional tickets. The system operates on its regular schedule starting Saturday. Entertainment: • KAYO 99.3 FM radio remote UW Tacoma steps, 11:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m. • View Sound Transit Video, "From Streetcars to Tacoma Link," Washington State History Museum, auditorium, noon - 5 p.m. • Los De Rio mariachi band Along Pacific Avenue outside the history museum, noon • Seattle Kokon Taiko drum performance group UW Tacoma, steps on Pacific Avenue, 1:30 p.m. • Steve Stephanowitz, acoustic guitarist Harmon's Brewery, 1938 Pacific Ave., 3 p.m. • Tacoma Scots Bagpipes Tacoma Art Museum Plaza, 5 p.m. • Seattle Kokon Taiko drum performance group Tacoma Dome Station Plaza, 5 p.m. • Closing Ceremony: Theater Square on the Park, 7 p.m. Entertainment provided by The Fabulous Wailers. • There will be additional entertainment next to the Tacoma Link stations, including "mobile hot-shop" glass blowing and the Tacoma Youth Symphony.

CONTENTS * Amtrak ridership hitting new record highs The Washington Times August 22, 2003 * Seattle monorail heads blasted for 'gross negligence' SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 22, 2003 * Seattle monorail board resists independent audit Seattle Times Friday, August 22, 2003 * Seattle: (Old) monorail benefits Fifth Avenue Seattle Times Northwest Life: Sunday, August 17, 2003 PTP============================================ www.washingtontimes.com The Washington Times August 22, 2003 Ridership gains drive Amtrak funding bid By Tom Ramstack Amtrak's recent performance will help it make a strong argument for continued funding when Congress returns from its August recess to consider restructuring the national passenger railroad. in each of the past three months, Amtrak has set 32-year records for the number of riders it carried. "Slowly but surely, we are making improvements, and we are beginning to see results," Amtrak President David L. Gunn said in a statement. "With public support to bring our infrastructure, trains and stations to a state of good repair, Amtrak will continue to build on this success." The railroad credited the improvements to marketing, schedule changes and better economic conditions in some regions. The Pennsylvanian, for example, a train that runs between New York and Pittsburgh, increased ridership by 98 percent after discarding its mail- carrying and freight business. Now the train operates on a faster schedule, carrying only passengers. Amtrak improved Los Angeles-to-San Diego ridership 32 percent in the past year by agreeing with Metrolink, the Southern California commuter- rail agency, to honor each other's passenger tickets. Nevertheless, President Bush is urging Congress to permanently restructure Amtrak under proposals scheduled for action in the first or second week of September. The Bush administration wants to turn over more control and financing responsibility to the states. The federal government would help fund infrastructure, but the states would pay operating expenses. They also would oversee management of regional rail operations through interstate compacts. Another proposal in the Senate would maintain Amtrak as a federally operated system. Republican Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas and Trent Lott of Mississippi introduced a bill to give Amtrak $12 billion in operating funds over six years and $48 billion in federally backed bonds to pay for capital improvements. Some congressional critics have questioned the quality of Amtrak's management, including Sen. John McCain, Arizona Republican, and Rep. Don Young, Alaska Republican. Both are members of committees that oversee Amtrak's management As Congress prepares to debate restructuring proposals, Amtrak has been regularly updating members of Congress on its finances, operations and needs. "We're constantly going to meetings on Capitol Hill," Amtrak spokesman Dan Stessel said. "Mr. Gunn has meetings with various members of Congress every couple of weeks." Since Mr. Gunn took over leadership of Amtrak, he has trimmed its middle management and ceased business operations unrelated to the railroad's core mission of carrying passengers. Express freight, for example, brought in marginal profits, but interfered with passenger schedules. in addition, liberal use of discounted tickets has drawn in new riders. Mr. Gunn has said Amtrak needs at least $1.8 billion to continue operating for another fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. The Bush administration is offering $900 million, a proposal that Mr. Gunn calls "a nonstarter." "The issue here is one of underfunding, not mismanagement," Mr. Stessel said. "Ridership reflects that there have been improvements to the quality of our service." Amtrak carried 2.2 million passengers in July, the best month for ridership since the passenger railroad was founded in 1971. It carried more than 2.1 million passengers in both May and June. Fifteen Amtrak routes posted double-digit ridership gains last month compared with July 2002. Amtrak warns that the progress can continue only with adequate funding. Unless Congress develops a better funding source to maintain the railroad's tracks, bridges, tunnels and other infrastructure, "something is going to give," Mr. Stessel said. So far, Congress has provided enough money to keep trains running, but not enough to prevent the infrastructure from deteriorating, he said. Amtrak carries about 23 million passengers a year in 46 states over 22,000 miles of tracks. PTP========================================= http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/136217_monorail22.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 22, 2003 Monorail staff, boss criticized Word of revenue shortfall angers some on board By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Several monorail board members took Executive Director Joel Horn and the monorail staff to task yesterday, accusing them of "gross negligence" for failing to inform the board early on of concerns about a serious shortfall in revenues. Monorail staff members first learned in April that monorail tax bills being sent out to vehicle owners for June totaled far less than they had projected, Horn told the board yesterday. "I have been appalled ... to not have known about this," said Cindi Laws, a board member and executive director of a local think tank. Laws learned only within the past week or two from a citizen and from news stories that the monorail's tax revenues were running well below projections. She called it "gross negligence on the part of certain individuals" not to have informed board members earlier. in April, the monorail projected that it would receive $4.2 million a month in revenue this year. In fact, the tax brought in $2.2 million in June and $2.24 million for July. The motor-vehicle excise taxes are the monorail's sole source of revenue. Board member Steve Williamson, executive secretary of the King County Labor Council, called for an external evaluation of the agency's governance structure. "I have a lot of concerns," Williamson said. "As a board member, when it comes to a make or break issue ... I need to know right away," adding, "I've felt left out." it's serious enough to merit an independent review of the agency, he said. "This was not a small matter that happened." And, Williamson complained, "I have not heard a reassurance it won't happen again from leadership." But other board members took a less critical approach. "I really want to compliment the staff for their poise during this confusing period," said Kristina Hill, a professor of urban design. When staff members saw that there were questions, they hired outside advice. Lesser people "might have panicked," she said. "We now have the beginning of some answers." Tom Weeks, chairman of the monorail board, also was not perturbed. "I'm excited by the challenge in front of us," he said. The agency can get along with less money because it built in a lot of conservative assumptions, Weeks said. Susan Secker, an associate provost at Seattle University who heads the board's finance committee, said she thought Williamson's call for an external audit was premature. "We've all learned from this," she said. Daniel Malarkey, the monorail's chief financial officer, "now knows I want to be overwhelmed with information sooner rather than later." Horn did not respond directly to the criticism, but earlier laid out a chronology showing the difficulties staff members experienced as they tried to project how much revenue the motor vehicle excise tax would bring in. The problem was that the specific tax the monorail was levying to build the West Seattle-to-Ballard line had never been levied before, so there was no history of tax collections. The agency cast about for other data to look to and settled upon Sound Transit's collections for its North King County subarea, 90 percent of which is Seattle. But there are complications with the comparison. Sound Transit asked the state to make some corrections to exclude some ZIP codes in that subarea, but the monorail didn't realize until May what that meant. The monorail had assumed that the vehicles of people moving into state would be taxed, but the state Licensing Department believed the law as written did not allow that. Finally, the monorail tax is applied only to used vehicles, not new ones. Horn said yesterday that the ZIP code changes threw off the monorail's calculations by about 20 percent, and the lack of a tax on vehicles of people moving into the state has an effect of about 5 percent. Sound Transit Executive Director Joni Earl yesterday expressed sympathy for the monorail's tax forecasting difficulties. "We did struggle with ours at first," she said. Reliability comes with a collections history. Another unknown is how many Seattle residents are evading the monorail tax by registering their vehicles outside the city. Gloria Hardy, a title clerk for Worthington Licensing in downtown Bothell, said yesterday that the practice is very common among Seattle residents who face large tax bills. The monorail levies a 0.85 percent motor-vehicle excise tax on the depreciated value of vehicles owned by Seattle residents. That amounts to $85 on a car worth $10,000. The tax is scheduled to go up next year to 1.4 percent. Hardy said that when people are faced with a bill of several hundred dollars, they decide to give their weekend cabin as an address or a relative's home or a post office box. The monorail says it is illegal for residents to evade the tax, but there is no penalty for doing so. Horn said the monorail is working on a system to make it easy to determine how much evasion is going on. Horn laid out various means the agency has to handle the shortfall: * Continued belt-tightening on expenses. * Construction inflation that is running below projections. * Making "smart" decisions on the monorail alignment, station locations and mitigation of environmental impacts. * Persuading the Licensing Department to collect taxes when people move into the state. * Fighting evasion by requiring residents to "truthfully state their primary residence" when they register their vehicles. * Ensuring that car dealers are collecting on all used cars. * Auditing the Licensing Department's tax collecting. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com PTP=========================================== Seattle Times Friday, August 22, 2003 Monorail panel resists outside financial review By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter The Seattle Monorail Project governing board yesterday resisted calls for an independent financial review since a new car-tab tax is collecting only two-thirds as much money as projected. Sue Secker, chairwoman of the finance committee, said such a move would be premature, adding that the agency already has consulting economists working on the problem. "I'm very confident the analysis they have in place is going to move us down the road to future steps," she said. Chairman Tom Weeks reiterated his commitment to building the entire 14- mile Green Line with the money available. The project was budgeted at $1.75 billion, a figure that now appears likely to shrink. "The $1.75 billion was more than I believe is necessary to build 14 miles," he said. "Now we have the opportunity to test whether that belief of mine is true or not." Meanwhile, information disclosed by the state Department of Licensing (DOL) yesterday helps explain why tax forecasts were off the mark. A statement showing citywide car values, provided by the DOL in January, included new vehicles that are not subject to the monorail tax — and the monorail's economic team did not discover the flaw. Peter Sherwin, who co-wrote monorail initiatives in 2000 and 2002, lauded Executive Director Joel Horn for having "the optimism of an achiever," but said the board needs outside experts to help provide needed skepticism and balance. "We can't be 'faith-based.' We have to be fact-based," he said. And Henry Aronson, who led last year's anti-monorail campaign, said the City Council ought to sponsor an independent investigation. "If the agency is truly transparent, as Joel says it is, it should not be afraid to have other people take a look at it," Aronson said. Monorail board member Steve Williamson, addressing his colleagues via speakerphone from Spokane, encouraged them to consider an independent review of information that monorail staff and consultants are gathering. "How did we arrive at the point where we don't know the fundamental issue, which is our revenues?" he asked. Secker said she might consider an independent review or audit later. Monorail board member Cindi Laws said she also thought calls for an outside inquiry are premature, "but an audit is not completely out of the question." The car-tab tax, costing $85 per $10,000 of vehicle value, applies only within Seattle city limits. In June 2004 the annual rate goes up to $140. New cars are exempt during the first year after purchase. it is difficult to discern which vehicles are taxable and to mail out the appropriate bills. in January, at the request of monorail finance director Daniel Malarkey, DOL provided a spreadsheet showing the value of cars in Seattle to be $6 billion — a flawed number he would later use in writing this year's temporary budget for the monorail. But one of the two columns on that spreadsheet referred to $2.8 billion worth of new cars and cars owned by people who just moved to Seattle from out of state, DOL spokesman Brad Benfield explained yesterday. So about half of the $6 billion should not have been considered. The two agencies didn't communicate well, records show. The column was labeled in a complicated manner, and a related e-mail from a DOL economist did not warn that the spreadsheet totals included new cars. "There's a good chance that Daniel (Malarkey) didn't know," Benfield said. Asked about the spreadsheet yesterday, Malarkey said he had focused on the $6 billion bottom line. "There was nothing in their information to us to suggest we should adjust this down," he said. Malarkey said he was relying on DOL expertise. He added that once the numbers turned out wrong this spring, "at that point, we didn't go back" and press DOL to find out why. Right now, it is more important to work on making future information reliable, he said. "My view about DOL is they worked diligently about getting this tax implemented. There were some hiccups along the way," he said. The true value of taxable vehicles in Seattle is now believed to be around $3.7 billion, Horn reported. That is significantly less than both the $6 billion estimate and a lower $4.75 billion estimate provided last year for the long-term financial plan. Board member Richard Stevenson mentioned the shortfalls might translate to $140 million in reduced construction costs. Tom Stone, a member of a prospective bidding team that includes Bombardier and Granite Construction, offered to help with "innovative ways to reduce cost, also innovative ways to increase revenues." Those include helping the monorail authority get earlier cost estimates for major portions of the project. He alluded to his work on another project, the new Gold Line light rail in Los Angeles, which survived a cash shortfall. "I'm confident from the perspective of the industry that we'll all look forward to working with you over the next few months to resolve this issue." Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP============================================= Seattle Times Northwest Life: Sunday, August 17, 2003 Commentary Fifth Avenue is flourishing beneath the tracks By Mark Hinshaw Special to The Seattle Times One of the enduring bits of Seattle folklore is that the monorail ruined Fifth Avenue. Those opposed to the new monorail are particularly prone to cite the condition of Fifth as a dire warning about the future of streets in the construction zone, such as Second Avenue. Fifth Avenue is, in fact, increasingly lively, livable and getting more diverse and intriguing all the time. I suspect the past features and fortunes of the street have far less to do with the presence of the monorail than the fact that few people lived or worked there. After all, there are plenty of cities in the world — from Paris to Chicago — with lively streets lying beneath overhead tracks. The recent decision by the city to demolish the present monorail columns and guideway and replace them with new, more slender and stylized ones — along with a station to serve Belltown — will accelerate the continued transformation of the street. And it will surely support the presence of more shops and services, as well as housing. if you take a walk along the stretch of Fifth between Denny Way and Stewart Street, you will find a street that is emerging as a pretty fine urban corridor. These eight blocks are anchored at each end by two tiny, vastly underrated urban spaces. The first is Tilikum Place at the north end. It contains a statue of Chief Seattle, arm upraised. With a circular fountain, ornate lighting and a few trees, the place feels like a small, simple but elegant urban square that might be found in a European town. At the south end, a triangular island is marked by a statue of John Harte McGraw — a Washington state governor from 1893-97 who was instrumental in promoting the ship canal. This public space is overlooked by the ornate, Beaux Arts-era facade of Times Square Building, surely one of the most elegant "flatiron" structures anywhere in the country. Eclectic mix of businesses in between these two public spaces is a rich mixture of shops and services, cafes and restaurants, apartment buildings and office structures, three hotels, a health club, a pharmacy, a small grocery store, two art galleries, and theaters offering movies and live performances. You could spend a full day having a pretty good time and never leave the street: Get your hair cut in the morning, take a class in glass blowing in the afternoon, have a fine dinner, see a show, and linger over a late night cup of coffee. And the place is only getting better. Later this fall, the industrious and multitalented Klebeck brothers plan to open a new Zeitgeist coffeehouse between Blanchard and Lenora streets. Mark and Mike designed and built the store, which will bring high-style architecture to the street — and Top Pot Doughnuts, a business that might just give Krispy Kreme a run for its money. (Look for the larger-than- life neon sign with the rodeo cowboy on top.) Sprinkled along this end of the avenue are a number of stately, midrise masonry apartment buildings, built in the early part of the 20th century. The Sheridan is a fine example, with a canopy extending out to the sidewalk, much like many older apartment buildings in New York. Another building of this era is the Davenport, which, like its virtual twin the Devonshire (a block away) has broad steps leading up to an interior courtyard. The Windham and the Fifth Avenue Court are also gracious urban apartment buildings. All have aged well with time and contribute a sense of solidity and sophistication to the street — not to mention relatively affordable housing choices. The former Grosvenor House has a snazzy new paint job in its reincarnation as Wall Street Towers. I've always admired the civility of this high-rise structure. Along its Fifth Avenue side, the building is lined with a row of small storefronts, while its entrance on Wall presents a lush green forecourt to passers-by. This building could hold its own in mid-town Manhattan. Some newer residential buildings have built along the street with mixed results. The Montreux, with a quirky Parisian roof top and the splendid, but oddly named but very pleasant Alligator Pear cafe on the sidewalk is certainly a positive addition. On the other hand, the concrete block facade of Fountain Court presents an inexcusably harsh edge to an entire block. integrates well to neighborhood One of the recent pleasant surprises is the addition of a large new office building developed by a joint venture of Touchstone, based locally, and Orix Financial, based in Chicago. Located between Bell and Battery streets, this building demonstrates how to thoughtfully insert a totally different type of structure into an existing neighborhood. Rather than being one huge, multi-story mass, with an imposing bulk and dramatically different combination of materials, this building takes cues from its context. Architects CollinsWoerman designed it with three distinct parts in order to break down its otherwise larger scale. Parts of the new structure are wrapped in brick to reflect nearby buildings. The small, canopy-covered storefronts now occupied by a deli and a couple of good, reasonably priced cafes are attractive. While some of the street-level space is occupied by a corporation, the windows are covered by translucent scrims depicting historical scenes. Landscape architects Nakano Associates designed the sidewalk along Fifth to be somewhat whimsical, with undulating brickwork marking the location of street trees. Even the light fixtures on the building — the work of Genette Beaudette Lighting — add an idiosyncratic but welcome touch that has been missing in many recent buildings in Belltown. The home of the quirky, engaging theater, Teatro Zinzanni, enlivens life in these parts, too. (Although a new office building is planned for this block, the sluggish economy will likely ensure that this unique theatrical venue will not have to move again for a while.) it is wonderful to watch flamboyantly dressed patrons descend on the neighborhood. Farther down the block, the gorgeously renovated Cinerama movie theater offers another form of entertainment. (OK, it's technically on Fourth Avenue, but the ticket office most used these days faces Fifth and the lines for popular films — as well as for the Seattle international Film Festival — snake along Fifth Avenue and add to the evening ambience.) A world of dining options Theatergoers can find a wide range of dining choices along Fifth — 10 at last count. Along the street, or within a stone's throw away can be found cuisine that includes French, Spanish, Japanese, Chinese, Continental, Thai, and Mexican, as well as diner-style comfort food. Several places offer sidewalk seating. The Palace Kitchen throws open its big windows in good weather. And Nara offers a dining in a tree-top deck. For those wanting caffeine, there are a half-dozen choices. The Gee Whiz, with its winged sign, has been a mainstay for years, while the diminutive Belltown Bistro is so understated that its easy to miss on your first pass. Next door to this combination cafe and art gallery featuring blown glass is a storefront that seems as sophisticated as an entrance to an upscale nightclub. But instead, it houses Zum, a health club. Designer Rocky Rochon created this coolly understated exterior that conceals interior spaces and colors with a museum-like quality. A large room in the rear is outfitted with exercise equipment and flooded with light from overhead windows. The place is still a bit of a secret in the city — something that could be said for this entire string of blocks. One of the truly fine aspects of the street is the row of mature street trees that line each side. Regardless the quality or character of the buildings that abut the sidewalks, these majestic trees create a continuity that feels both gracious and urbane. Nope, Fifth Avenue has not been a victim of the monorail. It is alive and thriving. Mark Hinshaw is director of urban design for LMN Architects. He can be reached at homes@seattletimes.com.

CONTENTS * Gas prices head for 'highest level in history' Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 * Vegas redirects hotel tax to fund monorail Las Vegas Review-Journal Thursday, August 21, 2003 * Las Vegas Monorail to Open in 2004 KVBC-TV News (Las Vegas) August 21, 2003 * Ft. Lauderdale mulls monorail Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel August 19 2003 * Kuala Lumpur monorail service to begin on Aug 31 New Straits Times (Malaysia) 21 Aug 2003 * Kuala Lumpur: Lawsuit over monorail accident New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Tue, 03 Jun 2003 PTP========================================= Houston Chronicle Aug. 22, 2003 Brace for shock at pump Gas prices may reach highest level in history By NELSON ANTOSH and JENALIA MORENO The highest gasoline prices in history appear to be just down the road. Dwindling supplies in the face of increased demand threaten to push pump prices over the national record set last mid-March, when markets were shaken by the prospects of a war with iraq. On Thursday, the markets "went ballistic," says Tom Kloza, chief oil analyst for the Oil Price information Service in Lakewood, N.J. That means the highest pump prices ever seen are just a few days away. The futures price in New York jumped Thursday by more than 9.5 cents, the biggest move since 1991, while cash market increases of 10 to 15 cents were common across the country, Kloza said. The wholesale price in California is already at a record. That puts the nationwide retail record average of $1.722 on March 18 within striking distance, as well as the Texas record average of $1.616 also set on that date and the Houston record of $1.639 set May 12, 2001. "The pump prices are moving," said Alan Stanley, an oil trader who didn't see anything less than $1.55 on his drive home Thursday afternoon. The wholesale market follows the futures market on a daily basis, he said, and pump prices trail not long after that. "isn't it pitiful," Mary Mechler asked while paying $1.56 a gallon at a Chevron station on Washington Avenue. She pumped $18.60 worth into her 8-year-old Toyota Camry, "and I only got three-fourths of a tank." "Outta sight," said retiree Andrew Elliott, in a pickup that he plans to drive as little as possible. Ray Guerra was surprised by the $1.59 per gallon at a Texaco, speculating that the gasoline sellers are "playing the Labor Day weekend." AAA spokesman Justin McNaull in Washington said the markets hate uncertainty and that accounts for the big jump in the cash markets. The current dilemma for drivers dates back to early summer when gasoline inventories were lower than normal, only to be drawn down further in recent weeks. Meanwhile, demand increased as the summer progressed. A lot of people delayed their travel because of a cold and wet spring in the Northeast and the war with iraq, according to the AAA. Now they are taking a last shot at summer vacation, with predictions that 28.2 million, or 2.2 percent more than a year ago, will travel by motor vehicle on Labor Day weekend. Meanwhile, gasoline output has been hampered by a spate of refinery problems, and gasoline imports have fallen. The Wednesday federal inventory report showed another weekly decline in gasoline, but it wasn't until one of the biggest refiners in the Northeast started buying in New York harbor that prices really took off, said Kloza. This action "spooked a lot of the others," who began to worry about getting enough gas of the right specifications to make deliveries on contracts. Stanley said that people realized, all of a sudden, "there really aren't that many barrels for sale out there." But the high prices aren't expected to last for long. Gasoline that sells on the West Coast for the equivalent of crude oil at $77 a barrel isn't realistic and will correct itself, according to Kloza. And high prices will take a toll on demand, which could back off even before Labor Day, said Stanley. Demand usually stays fairly strong until Labor Day, then drops. Another positive wild card for motorists is that imports could be drawn back into the United States by the high prices here, said McNaull of the AAA. They fell recently because the Europeans found better margins at home, he said. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/topstory/2060592 PTP======================================== Las Vegas Review-Journal Thursday, August 21, 2003 Room tax to help fund downtown monorail leg The Las Vegas City Council pledged to redirect its share of the room tax to help finance a downtown monorail extension. Money collected under the tax wouldn't be directed to the rail project for several years, said Regional Transportation Commission General Manager Jacob Snow. But the vote was needed to show federal officials, who Snow and others are lobbying for additional dollars for the extension, that adequate financing is in place. The tax amounts to about $1.4 million a year, but transportation officials said through bonding they could raise between $15 million and $20 million for the project. Federal dollars and private bonds will be the other main sources of money for the downtown monorail. The Transportation Commission plans to link that stretch with the monorail now being completed between Tropicana and Sahara avenues. Mayor Oscar Goodman said the rail line, which would extend to Fremont Street, is an important component of downtown redevelopment, and he urged Snow to accelerate construction as much as possible. Snow said he expects the downtown monorail extension will be complete by July 2007. PTP======================================== KVBC-TV News (Las Vegas) August 21, 2003 Las Vegas Monorail to Open in 2004 Getting around the strip is about to get a lot easier thanks to a mega- monorail project. NBC's Vikki Vargas has more on what is driving officials to get this ride to the finish line. "it's quick, cheap, environmentally friendly, it has all the elements." This is no Disneyland fantasy, its Vegas baby, Vegas. It is being touted as the first monorail that connects the Las Vegas Convention Center with six hotels and casinos behind the strip from the Sahara to the MGM. It will be a three dollar, four mile ride. "You don't even have to want to go anywhere, you can just jump on the monorail to see the sights and to ride it as an attraction." Developers say the 650-million dollar investment is expected to do what every other business does - make money within two years but the 35-million annual visitors won't fit the bill alone. Advertisers like the ones who make the monster energy drink are paying a million dollars a year to get their name out in a not so subtle way. At times city officials say there are too many people creating a grid lock on Las Vegas Boulevard "Anyone who has been on the strip in a car will tell you that if there was an alternative than being on that road they would take it cabbies are worried. They say this high-tech caterpillar looking transportation device will cost them money." "It will cut into our business as far as the conventioneers." Still, even tourists complain this city is lacking in one thing - public transportation "The idea of a monorail, do you think that will help congestion?" "Oh ya, without a doubt...especially on this strip... It will help without a doubt." The monorail is set to open the first quarter of 2004. PTP========================================== http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/broward/sfl- cairport19aug19,1,5343254.story?coll=sfla-news-broward Ft. Lauderdale Sun-Sentinel August 19 2003 Lauderdale airport's environmental report says little about jet noise, wetland impact By Scott Wyman Staff Writer Environmental consultants have recommended ways the Fort Lauderdale- Hollywood international Airport can improve the area's environmental quality, but had little advice on the noise and wetland concerns that have surrounded expansion plans. The consultants with the Clean Airport Partnership suggested the airport move ahead with plans to build a monorail to Port Everglades and urban centers, impose more air pollution regulations on airlines, and explore more ways to cut its use of electricity and gas. The ideas included encouraging the use of energy-efficient taxis and further restrictions on cars idling in front of terminal gates. County commissioners said the report, which was issued to them Monday, may be beneficial despite its lack of advice of the environmental concerns at the heart of the opposition to expansion. They said they never intended for the report to zero in on the noise and wetland issues. "We want to be as environmentally friendly as possible," said Commissioner Lori Parrish, who pushed for the study last year when she chaired the board. "We want to make sure we do everything we can do upfront." Lisa Baumback, the Audubon Society's representative on the county's airport expansion task force, said that while the suggestions to limit air pollution and improve fuel efficiency would make the airport more environmentally friendly, they do not address her group's concerns. "We have to continue to be very concerned about the impact of noise on John Lloyd Park and the impact on the nearby wetlands," Baumback said. "That's where our attention is focused." The county has wanted to build a second major runway to accommodate the growing amount of air travel expected over the next two decades. The plan has been to extend the south runway from 5,276 feet to 8,920 feet so it can handle aircraft simultaneously with the main north runway, but critics charge it will harm nearby neighborhoods, parks and wetlands. Coastal wetlands east of the airport would be destroyed by the construction. Noise also would likely increase over nearby John U. Lloyd State Park and neighborhoods to the south of the airport. The Clean Airport Partnership described the airport as moving aggressively to reduce noise pollution in the past and held out hope that newer aircraft will be quieter. But its only suggestions were to review current aircraft departure procedures to ensure they limit noise over neighborhoods as much as possible and to move as quickly as possible to help any new neighborhoods determined to have noise problems in an ongoing government study. in regards to the loss of wetlands, the report suggested the airport better control storm water runoff, because the surrounding area will have less natural ability to cleanse the water. Most of the recommendations focused on energy efficiency and air pollution. The consultants suggested the airport require airlines to have their aircraft pushed back from gates by tractors rather than with engine power and that auxiliary power units be used to provide electricity and air conditioning for aircraft when they are waiting at the gates. The county's plans for the monorail and a consolidated car rental center also will reduce car pollution at the airport, according to the consultants. The airport could have travelers pay parking garage charges before they get in their cars rather than at exit plazas to further reduce car pollution. The Clean Airport Partnership also recommended greater use of alternative fuel vehicles at the airport and more carpooling for employees. More satellite parking could reduce traffic congestion at the airport and thus car emissions, the firm said. Scott Wyman can be reached at swyman@sun-sentinel.com or 954-356- 4511. PTP=========================================== http://www.emedia.com.my/Current_News/NST/Friday/National/20030822 074647/Ar ticle/ New Straits Times (Malaysia) 21 Aug 2003 Monorail service to begin on Aug 31 June Ramli KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 21: The much-awaited KL Monorail will start its operations on National Day "as a gift" to Klang Valley residents, Transport Minister Datuk Chan Kong Choy said today. He said all parties were working round-the-clock to ensure the KL Monorail service could begin on Aug 31. Speaking after visiting Syarikat Prasarana Negara Bhd, the operator of STAR LRT, Putra LRT, KL Monorail and KL Sentral, he said his ministry was conducting regular inspections on the infrastructure. On whether there would be a rail service between the KL Monorail station in Brickfields and KL Sentral, he said: "For the time being, there will be a free shuttle service between the two stations until the rail service starts in 2006 or 2007." He also said the ministry has taken precautions to ensure safety and to put things on the right track. "As far as the ministry is concerned, we are very happy with the current performance." Tickets for the Monorail service for 11 stations will be priced at RM1.20, RM1.60, RM2.10 and RM2.50. The stations are Titiwangsa, Chow Kit, Medan Tuanku, Bukit Nanas, Raja Chulan, Bukit Bintang, imbi, Hang Tuah, Maharajalela, Tun Sambanthan and KL Sentral. The RM1.18 billion KL Monorail project is an inner-city public transit system that serves the central business, hotel and shopping district in the Klang Valley. Chan said the Government was studying to integrate the transportation systems of Putra LRT, STAR LRT, KL Monorail, KTM Berhad, Express Rail Link and bus services in the Klang Valley. He said the study was being done by the Prime Minister's Department. It will be completed in November. "We are also looking at physical integration by building overhead bridges among the three rail systems that are located nearby, namely the Hang Tuah Monorail and the Hang Tuah STAR LRT, Bukit Nanas Monorail and Dang Wangi Putra LRT, Titiwangsa STAR LRT and Titiwangsa Monorail," he said, adding that RM10 million would be spent to build the bridges. Chan also said Syarikat Prasarana and KL Monorail System Sdn Bhd might merge. He added that the Finance Ministry would announce the common ticketing system soon. Present was Chan's deputy Datuk Douglas Unggah. PTP=========================================== http://www.mmail.com.my/Thursday/National/20030529121344 New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Tue, 03 Jun 2003 Reporter was jay-walking, says defence THE Bernama reporter who was hit by a falling monorail train safety wheel had contributed to the injury he suffered by jay-walking at Jalan Sultan ismail. This was the common defence filed by all four defendants in answer to the RM5 million suit by David Chelliah, 41. The four are Monorail Malaysia Technology Sdn Bhd, KL Monorail Systems Sdn Bhd, Mitrans Holdings Sdn Bhd and the Director-General of Railways. They claimed that Chelliah had failed to take adequate precautions to avoid being hit by the wheel and in taking care of his general safety when he crossed that part of the road not designated as a pedestrian crossing. The fourth defendant went on to say that Chelliah should have known the risk he was taking in being at the site of the accident. All four had filed their respective statements of defence in answer to Chelliah's March 7 suit. The incident saw him being admitted to the ICU of Hospital Kuala Lumpur for surgery to remove a blood clot in the head. On Aug 16 last year, Chelliah was hit by the wheel while crossing the road to his car after an assignment at a hotel along Jalan Sultan ismail. Chelliah had claimed that the wheel weighed 60 kg; a contention denied by the first three defendants who said the wheel was only 13.4kg in weight. Monorail Malaysia, KL Monorail and Mitrans also claimed the accident had occurred due to "deliberate intervention by a person or persons unknown or as yet to be identified", that is, sabotage. in its joint statement of defence filed through their lawyers, Azim, Tunku Farik and Wong, the three defendants said they had taken reasonable care in the design, assembly process and maintenance of the monorail train. They listed the several discoveries made in a report dated Sept 20 last year by an incident investigation Task Force, which had been appointed to investigate the incident. Among others, the three defendants claimed that: l The assembly process was compliant with checks and balances by competent staff and appropriate tests conducted at the various stages, l The safety wheel rim was in excellent condition and the guidance wheel correctly inflated, l The remaining 23 safety wheel had their fastening bolts intact l inspection shows the dislodged safety wheel showed score marks around the bolt holes which indicated all six fastening bolts were in place during assembly, l None of the six missing bolts had been recovered, despite extensive search and l There was no possibility that the design, assembly or maintenance of the safety wheel, being a reasonable factor in its dislodgement in the incident: the only possibility left was that it had been tampered with. Chelliah, who is attached to the general newsdesk of the national news agency, claimed the incident was caused by the negligence of the defendants in the operation of the said KL Monorail train while it was passing Jalan Sultan ismail about 2.50pm on that day. He had claimed, among others, that there was a defect in designing, assembling and installing the guidance and safety wheel that was inherently defective; that the operator undertook a test run of a train that was defective in design and wanting in safety over a public roadway and pedestrian area; and without ensuring full compliance with safety conditions. All four defendants denied being in breach of their duty of care.

CONTENTS * Croydon UK: Huge benefits brought by LRT Croydon Advertiser (South London) Aug 22 2003 * Birmingham UK: Riders back LRT expansion Birmingham Evening Mail Aug 20 2003 * Birmingham UK: LRT backed over metro plan Birmingham Post Aug 4 2003 * Birmingham UK: Transport planners face options, problems Birmingham Post Aug 4 2003 PTP============================================== http://icsouthlondon.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/0225croydon/content_obje ctid=13321930_method=full_siteid=53340_headline=-Tramlink-is-simply- tram-endous-name_page.html Croydon Advertiser (South London) Aug 22 2003 Croydon Tramlink is simply tram-endous By ian Austen TRAMLINK has brought a new buzz to Croydon, which has seen house prices, unemployment levels and businesses all benefit from its arrival three years ago, a new study has shown. The report's authors, transport and planning consultants Colin Buchanan & Partners, had a brief to establish the economic and regeneration effects Tramlink has had on the area it serves with Croydon as its hub and branches to New Addington, Wimbledon and Beckenham. it was commissioned by the South London Partnership, comprising local authorities and business groups, and was funded largely by the London Development Agency with help from Transport for London and Croydon and Sutton councils. More than 100 organisations, employers, community groups and individuals were interviewed for the study and the report says: "The vast majority were, unprompted, very positive in their comments about Tramlink." The main findings of the study show: * Businesses in Croydon have had their profiles raised by Tramlink, increasing customer numbers and business activity. * The accessibility of the tram system has been an important factor in attracting new firms into the area and making it easier for companies to recruit and retain staff. Some firms even reported staff using the reliable trams being more punctual, no longer having any excuse for being late * Fieldway in New Addington has seen a dramatic drop in unemployment since Tramlink started, down by 35 per cent in relation to wards not served by the trams. Between 2000 and 2002 unemployment fell by just under ten per cent along the whole of the route in wards served by trams compared with those that were not. * House prices along the route have risen faster than in other parts of the borough - about four per cent - with estate agents telling Buchanan's that properties near to Tramlink were highly sought after and easier to sell because of the better public transport links. The report makes it clear Croydon has been the main beneficiary of the system, taking more advantage of it than Wimbledon or Beckenham. it says: "It is evident that Croydon has seized the opportunity presented by Tramlink for new investment, to raise its profile and to bring a sense of penache and buzz to its centre." Christine Seaman, director of the South London Partnership, said the overall picture portrayed by the report was one of success. She said: "Probably the only downside was the loss of marginal businesses during the construction stage, but where they have now been replaced the new businesses are profitable." have your say is this a fair report on the tram system in Croydon? You can have your say by writing to Croydon Advertiser, 19 Bartlett Street, South Croydon, CR2 6TB, faxing 020 8763 6633, ee-emailing newsdesk@croydonadvertiser.co.uk or texting SCA, followed by a space, then your comment, to 07764 225225 PTP========================================== www.icbirmingham.co.uk Birmingham Evening Mail Aug 20 2003 By Ben Hurst, Evening Mail Plans to extend the Midland Metro system through Birmingham city centre have been given overwhelming backing by passengers. The news has given a big boost to plans to develop the tram system from the city to Wednesbury and Brierley Hill. Passengers said that the current route from Snow Hill to Wolverhampton was too "restricted" making it crucial that expansion went ahead. The survey into the Midland Metro also found 95 per cent of those using it were satisfied with the service provided by the light rail service. The best value report for the passenger transport authority, was chaired by Wolver-hampton Conservative Councillor Christine Mills. She said: "This very welcome report shows that Midland Metro Line One is a huge success both in terms of public popularity and reliability. "This track record should help the system reach its full potential through the extensions currently being planned and increase both patronage and awareness to current non-users." The report looked at the needs and requirements of the travelling public and operational and maintenance issues. In the first two years of operation Centro says Midland Metro Line One took an estimated 1.2 million car journeys off the roads and the 456 parking spaces at four park and ride sites along the line were often 80 per cent full. There will now be three weeks consultation with various bodies, including local transport committees, special needs groups, operators and businesses with comments going back to the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority to help finalise the report. its findings will then be used in future Metro planning. Centro has Government approval to build extensions from Wednesbury to Brierley Hill and through Birmingham City Centre and is approaching the final stages of the legislative process before construction can get under way. PTP===================================== Birmingham Post Aug 4 2003 Battle for new transport deal By Paul Dale, Birmingham Post Birmingham should stop talking-up the possibility of an underground railway system and concentrate instead on completing the Midland Metro tram network, the politician in charge of city transportation makes clear today. John Tyrrell sees little point in spending time developing proposals for a London-style tube because the cost would be exorbitant and passengers would not want to use subterranean stations. His remarks will come as a blow to Birmingham Conservative councillors, who are working with a private sector consortium to develop plans for a £3 billion underground. The idea has the backing of the business community, including the Chamber of Commerce and the CBi. Coun Tyrrell (Lab Sandwell) took the opportunity to make clear the Birmingham Labour group's policy on a possible underground, while giving his backing to The Birmingham Post Coun Tyrrell said the priority for Birmingham was to ensure the Midland Metro extension from Snow Hill to Five Ways was completed by 2007 and to make the Government see the sense of funding more Metro lines. Last month, Transport Secretary Alistair Darling cast doubt on five new Metro routes, including one from the city centre to Birmingham international Airport, when he gave details of a £1 billion West Midlands transportation package. The region had bid for £7.5 billion to cover the cost of an ambitious scheme to bring rail, tram and bus services and the motorways up to scratch. However, Coun Tyrrell insisted he was not despondent at the £1 billion settlement. It would have been difficult to spend much more in the timescale envisaged by Mr Darling. He vowed the "Metro vision" would not be allowed to die. "I am disappointed but this is not the end of the story. We will keep fighting and moving ahead," he said. He would be interested to see the business case for an underground railway but did not believe such a project could be delivered. "I am very sceptical," he said. "You wouldn't get one station for £25 million, it doesn't stack up." The requirement to dig stations deep under the city centre would be off- putting for passengers who would not want to "walk miles" to get to and from the platforms. Coun Tyrrell added: "The Metro is the thing we have started. Is it being suggested we stop that and start on something else? "We should continue with what we have started and make every effort to get the Metro network that we have planned." He accepted, however, that concerns about trams sharing roads with cars, buses and pedestrians had to be addressed. It might be necessary to run Midland Metro tracks partly underground as a means of keeping trams off narrow and congested roads. "The work done so far on looking at future routes suggests that an extensive network cannot easily be contained on-street within the city centre," Coun Tyrrell says in a letter to The Birmingham Post today. He is backing The Post's call today for a broad-based coalition to campaign for improved road, rail, bus and tram services in Birmingham and the West Midlands. He said the challenge was to overturn the bias towards London and the South-east shown by Government planners. "We need to get a groundswell of opinion and bring in other people outside of Birmingham," he said. The merits of modernising and extending New Street Station ought to be recognised nationally because sorting out the station would lead to more efficient train services along the entire West Coast Main Line between London and Glasgow, said Coun Tyrrell. He urged West Midlands MPs to forget party political differences and unite in support of an integrated transport system. "There is a case to be made and I would certainly like to hear more from the MPs," Coun Tyrrell said. Conservative group leader Coun Mike Whitby (Harborne) urged Coun Tyrrell to keep an open mind on the underground. "We are engaged on a feasibility study which is already showing there are no technical reasons why Birmingham could not have an underground railway. We are confident of securing the necessary financial backing. "At the same time, it has to be said Alistair Darling appears less than enthusiastic about the Midland Metro." PTP=========================================== Birmingham Post Aug 4 2003 News How do we get moving again? By Campbell Docherty, Birmingham Post The West Midlands is at the heart of the country's transport network but congestion across the region demands change. Transport Reporter Campbell Docherty looks at the main options, from New Street station to the possibility of a London-style underground system New Street Station There are two distinct projects for improving the West Midlands rail network which have somehow become conflated under the banner "New Street". One is to unblock the UK's worst train bottleneck, centred in Birmingham, with extra capacity on key West Midland lines and new platforms in a tunnel under New Street itself. More of that later. The other is providing extra capacity for passengers within the cramped and gloomy confines of the city's major station. The most overcrowded station in the UK outside London, New Street is now technically ‘at capacity' and will occasionally have to close its doors to new passengers at peak periods to avoid potential disaster. Even more worryingly, increasing demand for train travel - caused by road congestion, new rolling stock and new timetables - mean the situation can only get worse. Birmingham was treated to a pantomime recently when Network Rail unveiled £135 million plans to remodel the station to ease the overcrowding crisis. Delegates at the conference were treated to artist mock-ups of the new New Street. They hardly showed the radical revamp most observers crave but they at least represented an aesthetic improvement and importantly, quadrupled the capacity on the passenger concourse. Then, after washing this vision of a less embarrassing Birmingham rail hub down with morning coffee, the delegates choked on the first speech from Jim Steer of the Government's Strategic Rail Authority. He told them there was no money for the scheme and it was no more a priority then countless other rail projects across the UK. The Will Alsop-designed plan seeks to make the passenger concourse four times bigger and introduce new direct access points to Stevenson Street and to the new Bullring development via a new southern concourse area. The concourse will operate like an airport lounge, with passengers waiting upstairs before their train arrives at the station. Platform-level buildings, such as waiting rooms, guards rooms and toilets will go to create more platform space. A new retail development will be introduced on the concourse and a four- storey high gateway will be built to give the station a better presence in the city centre. Thankfully, a Birmingham City Council-led task force has set about securing private finance to make the project a reality. However, Government support remains crucial if letting the train take the strain is to be improved and more people persuaded to leave their cars behind. Rail Capacity Located in the heart of Birmingham and opened in 1854, New Street Station, was initially designed to deal with a maximum of 640 trains a day. This year, it is dealing with an average of 1,400 a day. Even more staggering is the fact that on an average day, a train leaves New Street every 58 seconds at peak times. Yet the main approaches to the station are single-track, a situation found in no other major English city station. And, unlike every other major English city, the Birmingham network has to deal with the hub of the national rail network as well as an increasingly busy commuter network around the West Midlands. The West Midlands Rail Capacity Study, carried out a number of years ago, strongly recommended four-tracking the Coventry to Wolverhampton corridor - which obviously runs through the heart of Birmingham. This was envisaged to happen by 2005 but listening to the SRA and Government you don't have to cup your ear to clearly hear "not likely old bean". But the region's transport officials are sticking to their guns. The four-tracking plan would allow six trains an hour on the route. Such capacity is clearly needed when one takes into account the projected increases in passenger demand. in 1998/1999, 4.8 million passengers travelled between Wolverhampton and Birmingham New Street. In under 20 years time, that number will have risen to 9.5 million. On the section of the route that runs from Birmingham to Coventry, 6.4 million passengers journeys were under-taken in 1998/1999. By 2020, that figure will have rocketed to 16.3 million. Clearly, the success of Virgin's comprehensive CrossCountry and West Coast Main Line networks will depend on capacity being improved. The other key to unblocking the UK railways' worst bottleneck - according to the SRA's previous chairman Sir Alistair Morton no less - is a tunnel underneath New Street Station with new platforms dealing with local train services. This billion-pound undertaking will leave the existing surface level platforms to deal with inter-city services. Four-tracking will not work without the tunnel, and vice versa. The SRA was once in favour and it is up to the West Midlands to persuade it, and its paymasters the Department for Transport, to open their wallets at a level commensurate with the national and regional importance of the projects. Roads The West Midlands motorway network, similar to the region's railways, serves as the central hub for the whole country. Spokes include the M6, M1, and the M42 which connect the M5 and M40 with the M6 and M1. in short, if any UK motorist takes a long car journey from North to South, East to West, there's a good chance they will pass through the West Midlands. Yet spending on roads in the region does not reflect this national importance. in general, those who favour increased capacity on the roads as a solution to crippling congestion want extra lanes on virtually all of the major roads in the region. Plans to widen the M6 north and south of Birmingham have been pencilled in by Government. However, the soon-to-open M6 Toll Road will have to provide extra capacity for the Birmingham stretch of the motorway as the insurmountable problem of Spaghetti Junction means widening is impossible. Starting in 2004, ATM involves intelligent traffic flow management with overhead gantry signs - meaning at times of particular congestion, the hard shoulder can be used as a fourth lane. if successful ATM could well be rolled out across other West Midland motorways. Some still want to see a widened M42 and plans do exist at the Department for Transport for a 12-lane upgrade. On local roads, the congestion is just as bad. Red Routes, a concept first introduced in London in the early 1990s, is one method favoured by transport bosses in the West Midlands of reducing road congestion. The scheme is focused on main arterial roads which will be subject to greater enforcement of parking controls to keep them clear. it has been calculated that if illegal parking is cut by 75 per cent, a fully enforced Red Route increases bus reliability by 27 per cent, with ten per cent shorter journey times. Cars have a 20 per cent shorter journey time. To placate local businesses, the scheme would include a large increase in legal parking spaces and dedicated loading areas. A recent study has identified a potential 312 mile network of Red Routes in the conurbation at a cost of £180 million. Also, a congestion-charging scheme involving satellite technology to track where cars actually go, is being studied by the DfT. Underground A London Tube-style underground for Birmingham is the most ambitious but perhaps the least feasible transport system currently being proposed. Currently backed by the Conservatives on the city council and the business community, the idea has undeniable immediate appeal. Existing heavy rail tunnels underneath the city centre would be augmented with fresh tunnelling and underground station construction - paid for by private financiers at a cost of at least £3 billion. Outlying districts would be served by the tube trains running on existing heavy rail commuter lines, in much the same system as in London. One immediate drawback would be the compact nature of Birmingham's city centre. None of the benefits off the hop-on, hop-off Metro will be available to the underground. That is, unless many new stations are built underground, although this might prove utterly cost prohibitive. it is difficult to talk about the major benefits of a Birmingham Underground because so little is known about the Conservative proposals. We are told a consortium of private developers is engaged in drawing up plans, although little is publicly known of its findings. However, it is clear an underground would bring a great deal of prestige for the city with it. From that, inward investment and all the accrued benefits might well flow. it's not hard, indeed, to see why the business community backs the idea. On the face of it, it would be a cash cow with the added benefit of clearing the streets of much traffic. Three years ago, the Conservatives suggested Birmingham should campaign for an underground system but it was not supported by the council's controlling Labour group or by the West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority. A similar scheme was rejected in the early 1990s, chiefly on technical grounds. it was felt Birmingham's geology made tunnelling an expensive and difficult prospect and such a project would not get Government backing. However, advances in engineering - such as the Channel Tunnel - perhaps mean that construction work is not the problem it once was. Metro The biggest advance in West Midlands transport in the last decade was the advent of the Midland Metro. But before you start visualising a mass transit system fit for the 21st Century with the theme from 2001: A Space Odyssey booming in your ears... the reality has not been quite so impressive. The first and, so far, only route has been the 13-mile Line One between Wolverhampton and Birmingham Snow Hill, with 23 stops at hitherto poorly served parts of Birmingham and the Black Country. The decision to reopen a disused railway line for much of the route and the lack of political nerve to actually run it through Birmingham city centre, where people can see and hop on to it, was a classic West Midlands Passenger Transport Authority fudge. Dissenting voices opposed to tearing up the streets and the subsequent disruption to motorists eventually bowed the politicians into submission. As it was, a line from the edge of Birmingham city centre to another city centre - surely the job of a train - also provided a nice little halfway split between the interests of Birmingham and the other districts that comprise WMPTA. A series of technical problems with Italian-built trams, bought relatively cheaply, and a sustained campaign by local vandals at the various Metro stations has knocked the project's financial stability. Nevertheless, it has not been a failure for the passengers. More than 5.5 million use it every year and the trams have been responsible for a shift from car usage of 13 per cent. New routes through Birmingham city centre and to Brierley Hill have been given Transport and Works Act approval by the Government. These extensions are absolutely crucial for the future of light rail in the conurbation and a strong political will, keeping its eye on the prize, must be maintained. Centro and WMPTA are also working on plans for three new lines - the "Varsity Line" from Great Barr to Selly Oak, a route from Birmingham Airport to Halesowen and finally, a line from Wolverhampton to Wednesbury. it is hoped these will be running by 2010 although a great deal of persuasion for Government funds is still needed if the West Midlands is to get the comprehensive network of trams it deserves. Buses While they are beset by many image problems, the buses are overwhelmingly the most important mode of public transport in the West Midlands today. About 340 million journeys are made in the conurbation every year and the long term decline of usage has been stemmed in recent years. The future of the bus network in the West Midlands depends on priority schemes being put in place. No one will ditch their car - with its air-conditioning and stereo system and distinct lack of teenagers smoking undesirable substances in your back seat - for buses if they are both subject to the same traffic jams. To this end, and also in an attempt to improve the public image of the bus, the concept of Showcase and Super Showcase routes was born. The first Showcase route was Line 33 (along the Walsall Road), which saw the introduction of dedicated bus lanes and junction improvements, modern buses with easy access for the elderly and disabled and attractive bus shelters with real-time information. Patronage on the route increased by 30 per cent. A second scheme on the Tyburn Road saw patronage increase by 28 per cent. However, while the long term projections show car drivers will be attracted on to the buses by the Showcase network, there is little evidence of that so far. in the West Midlands Multi-Modal Study, commissioned by the Government more than three years ago, completion of a network of 30 showcase routes was recommended within ten years. It also recommended the development of Super Showcase which takes the concept further, giving buses sufficient priority on the road so they can match the running speed of general traffic at peak times. in large part, this would be achieved by bus detection systems giving them more priority at traffic signals. One fly in the ointment has been the slow progress of local authorities in the West Midlands towards putting bus lanes on their roads. inevitable local objections have stalled many schemes.

CONTENTS * Atlanta: LRT is 'city's best option' The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 8/18/03 * Atlanta leaders back LRT streetcar plan Gwinnett Daily Post 2003-08-07 * LRT trolley plan picks up momentum The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 8/1/03 PTP======================================== The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 8/18/03 Light rail is city's best option Maria Saporta Cities around the country are enjoying great success with investments in light rail. Take Dallas. Its light-rail system has spawned development around its stations and generated transit ridership. And now the Dallas region is busy expanding light-rail lines as fast as it can. But in metro Atlanta, the move is toward bus rapid transit as a way to solve all our traffic and air pollution problems. We need to seriously rethink that strategy for the long-term health of our region. The transit proposal to connect central Atlanta with Cobb County provides the best opportunity to examine the direction we need to take. From the beginning, MARTA planned to have a rail line extend to Cobb County. And even though Cobb never approved MARTA, a rail line -- be it heavy or light rail -- has continued to be part of the region's transportation plan for more than 30 years. Today, the Georgia Regional Transportation Authority is conducting the Northwest Connectivity Study with three alternatives to serve the corridor between Atlanta and Cobb. Two of those alternatives call for bus rapid transit. Alternative A calls for buses to run along HOV lanes on I-75. Already, the Georgia Department of Transportation is extending its HOV lanes for a cost of about $700 million, so the additional cost of creating a bus rapid transit system is between $600 million and $700 million, for a total project cost of about $1.35 billion. This alternative has the lowest projected ridership of the three. Alternative B is the light-rail option. It would run primarily along railroad right-of-way from the North Avenue MARTA station through Atlantic Station all the way to Marietta. This alternative also calls for buses riding along HOV lanes up to Kennesaw from the rail line. This option is estimated to cost $1.6 billion, plus another $180 million for HOV improvements for a total cost of about $1.8 billion. And Alternative C proposes a bus rapid transit system roughly following the same corridor as the light rail option. The cost for that total project would be about $1.35 billion. Think about it. With two alternatives, the Atlanta region will get a dressed- up bus route. But with the third option, Atlanta will get a permanent investment in a true rail transit solution that would interlock with a regional transportation network. The I-75 corridor is one of the most heavily traveled corridors in our region. As such, it cries out for light rail instead of buses. "The key is ridership," said John Williams, an influential Cobb business leader who founded Post Properties and used to serve on GRTA's board. "If people perceive them to be buses, they won't ride them." in 1998, the Cumberland and Town Center community improvement districts paid for a $3.8 million study to determine the best solution for transit between central Atlanta and Cobb. "After 18 months, they made a light-rail recommendation in terms of ridership and efficiency," said Tad Leithead, a senior vice president with Cousins Properties who chairs the Cumberland CID. "We had a compelling study that showed light rail was the solution." in fact, former Gov. Roy Barnes included that project as a key piece of his $8.3 billion transportation plan. "In the current environment, funding and political support is in question for a light rail solution for Cobb," Leithead said. "We've begun to work with GRTA around a combination of bus rapid transit and HOV lanes. This is a compromise position based on what we think is possible. "In a perfect world, we would be funding and implementing a light rail line from Arts Center to Town Center," he added. "That would be the panacea." What is it about Atlanta that causes us to settle for second best? Do we really want our sister cities, like Dallas, to outshine us when it comes to creating a first-class transportation system? MARTA's general manager, Nathaniel Ford, believes Atlanta needs to think about long-term investments. "I have to be practical, but I also have to be visionary and think about what it would take to be a world-class city," Ford said. "Look at the investment. When you build rail, you are not building just for now but for the needs 50 to 100 years from now." Transit consultant Manuel Padron, who served as MARTA's director of planning from 1972 to 1982, understands that rail has a sense of permanence that busways do not. in Los Angeles, the El Monte Busway was established about 35 years ago exclusively for buses. And then political pressure opened up that busway first to three-person carpools, and now to two-person carpools. "Because it is a roadway, there is pressure from automobile drivers to use that roadway. There's always that danger," Padron said. "That would not happen in a rail corridor." Now bus rapid transit promoters would say that they can make buses feel just like rail. But what they don't tell you is that the difference in cost to implement rail-like (or rail-lite) bus systems and light rail is minimal. "It depends on how you design bus rapid transit," Padron said. "If we try to make them look like rail, they are going to become very, very expensive. And the cost advantage is going to be lost." So now we're faced with whether we want to invest $1.35 billion in a bus solution or $1.8 billion in a rail solution for the northwest corridor. "If money is the driver, light rail is at a disadvantage," said Don Beaver, chief operating officer of the Cobb Chamber of Commerce and executive director of the Cumberland CID. "But we should not let price be the only deciding factor. Ridership and economic development are two key points to consider. Whatever we come up with has to get people out of their cars." One reason the business community prefers light rail is because it generates development opportunities around stations. "Historically, you don't encourage commercial development nodes at bus transfer stations," Beaver said. "We have always believed that light rail was the answer because of the experiences we've seen in other areas where light rail operates efficiently, creates ridership and encourages development." Williams agreed. "All the other cities I'm familiar with are going to a light- rail solution. Dallas. San Diego. Los Angeles. Salt Lake City. Portland, [Ore.]," Williams said. "Bus rapid transit is a cheap solution, but you get what you pay for." The greatest cities in the world have invested and continue to invest in transit systems with rail lines serving as the backbone. Bus routes then can feed into those rail lines to serve less densely populated areas. Metro Atlanta must look for the greatest value, not just the lowest cost, when making transportation investments. Let's not settle for mediocrity when we aspire for greatness. -- Maria Saporta's column appears every Thursday in Business and every Monday in Horizon. PTP======================================== http://www.citizenonline.net/ Gwinnett Daily Post Online Edition 2003-08-07 Big names support Atlanta trolley plan ATLANTA (AP) — A plan to create a streetcar line on one of Atlanta's main thoroughfares is gaining momentum as a number of civic and business leaders hop on board. Home Depot co-founder Bernie Marcus and the heads of Georgia Tech and Georgia State University have joined Atlanta Streetcar Inc., a private, nonprofit group hoping to bring trolleys to an eight-mile stretch of Peachtree Street from downtown to Buckhead. Architect and developer John Portman Jr., who has helped bring landmarks such as the Westin Peachtree Plaza, SunTrust Plaza, Peachtree Center and the Hyatt Regency to the city skyline, said a streetcar line would help bring a sense of community to Atlanta and provide clean, efficient transportation. "I think it has a fairly good chance (of happening) because there is a need to more humanize our city," he said. The board of directors of Atlanta Streetcar, which filed its incorporation papers Tuesday, includes G. Wayne Clough, president of Georgia Tech, and Carl Patton, president of Georgia State, and the heads of several important neighborhood groups. The group has raised $100,000 from its new 25-member board of directors to study the feasibility of a streetcar line, which is estimated to cost $200 million. The feasibility study will evaluate potential ridership, revenue, expenses, financing and route options, said Michael Robison, Atlanta Streetcar's board chairman. Robison and Atlanta City Councilman H. Lamar Willis, who chairs the council's Transportation Committee, and state Sen. Tommie Williams (R- Lyons), chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, took a trip recently to Portland, Ore., where they talked to officials and developers about their new streetcar line and came home impressed. "The potential for development along Peachtree Street will be phenomenal, given Portland's success in a smaller metro area," Willis said. If the Peachtree line were a success, Robison said, a second phase could be developed that would circulate around key downtown tourist spots, including the new Georgia Aquarium and World of Coca-Cola planned next to Centennial Olympic Park, CNN Center, Phillips Arena, Georgia World Congress Center and Underground. PTP======================================== The Atlanta Journal-Constitution: 8/1/03 Trolley plans pick up speed Peachtree feasibility study could get green light soon By HENRY UNGER The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Ron Dingman / Special Vicky Diede, the streetcar project manager in Portland, Ore., shows off her city's popular streetcar system to Atlanta Councilman H. Lamar Willis (center) and businessman Michael Robison (right), who are leading Atlanta's effort. City streetcar organizers say they already have raised $100,000 to pay for a feasibility study to evaluate their plan to run trolleys on Peachtree from downtown to Buckhead. Pending favorable results, the private, nonprofit group hopes to raise an estimated $200 million for an eight-mile streetcar line that could begin operating in five years. Organizers of Atlanta Streetcar believe the trolley would spawn further commercial and residential development along Peachtree, as well as serve commuters and tourists traveling short distances. The group plans to file incorporation papers and announce its board of directors next week, said businessman Michael Robison, who is spearheading the effort. Some of the financial commitments to fund the feasibility study have come from board members. Robison, Atlanta City Councilman H. Lamar Willis, who chairs the council's Transportation Committee, and state Sen. Tommie Williams (R- Lyons), chairman of the Senate Transportation Committee, recently returned from Portland, Ore., where they grilled officials and developers about their success with a new streetcar line. A $55 million private-public investment helped create more than $1 billion in redevelopment in what was a struggling Portland warehouse district. What's more, Robison said, the project has been so popular that developers, retailers and landowners have asked Portland streetcar officials to expand the line to other areas of the city. "We walked away with the confidence that people will ride streetcars," said Robison, chief executive of Atlanta-based Lanier Holdings, which owns garages and parking lots nationwide. "The ride is smooth, quiet, comfortable and nostalgic." It has been 40 years since the last electric trolley rolled along Atlanta's streets. Financing a new streetcar line on Peachtree would require a combination of funding sources, just as it did in Portland. Money could come from private contributions, a special tax district created by Peachtree businesses, a parking surcharge that could support a bond issue and government support, Robison said. "The trip to Portland was very insightful," Willis said. "The potential for development along Peachtree Street will be phenomenal, given Portland's success in a smaller metro area." While many think of Peachtree as already quite developed, Willis, Robison and others believe there is still opportunity for ambitious projects and in-fill development. The group plans an initial board meeting this fall at which it expects to green-light the feasibility study, Robison said. The study, which would take up to four months to complete, would look at potential ridership, revenue, expenses, financing and route options. "It's either going to economically make sense, or it's not," Robison said. In addition to a route along Peachtree, Robison said the group is discussing a second phase of a streetcar line that could circulate around key downtown tourist spots, including the new Georgia Aquarium and World of Coca-Cola planned next to Centennial Olympic Park, CNN Center, Phillips Arena, Georgia World Congress Center and Underground. That could cost $50 million more. Robison believes money can be raised for both phases. "We don't see it as daunting, because we believe we will be able to show the inherent value to businesses and other stakeholders," he said.

CONTENTS * Seattle monorail planners wrestle with funding shortfall Seattle Times Thursday, August 21, 2003 * Seattle: 'Monorail revenue remains far short' SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Thursday, August 21, 2003 * Seattle monorail ‘iris' station design could be cheaper West Seattle Herald - White Center News 2003/08/21 * Seattle: Monorail DEIS reveals impacts Seattle Daily Journal August 20, 2003 * Seattle: Numerous monorail impacts laid out SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 20, 2003 * Seattle: Monorail could relocate over 80 businesses Seattle Times Wednesday, August 20, 2003 * Seattle monorail tax shortfall a lasting problem Seattle Times Saturday, August 16, 2003 * Seattle monorail planners need better math Seattle Times Sunday, August 17, 2003, 12:00 a.m. Pacific PTP=========================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001574360_monorailta x21m.html Seattle Times Thursday, August 21, 2003 Funding shortfall on agenda as monorail panel meets today By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter This morning, the Seattle Monorail Project's finance committee will make its first attempt to cope with a serious shortage in tax collections. A new car-tab tax collected only $2.2 million a month in June and July — just two-thirds of what was assumed in the organization's financial plan for the 14-mile Green Line connecting Ballard, downtown and West Seattle. Outside the agency, debates are already under way about whether the result will be deferred stations, simpler designs or even failure to fund the plan. The voter-approved monorail proposition requires the agency to build 14 miles of track or go back for another vote. "I totally believe the project is still doable," said Cindi Laws, a committee member who was briefed by Executive Director Joel Horn this week. "We have a lot of contingency built in. We had a lot of inflationary factors built in. We erred on the conservative side." The plan included $205 million for contingencies and a $76 million cash reserve. Two teams of potential bidders on a $1.5 billion construction-and- operations contract are watching how the agency responds. "We are going to go to the meeting and hear what they have to say. We don't know yet if it's a serious problem or not. I would say we have confidence in the monorail authority," said Sarah Clark of Bombardier, part of the "Team Monorail" consortium. The other team is the Cascadia Monorail Co., led by Hitachi. Monorail planners aren't the first to miss the mark on their car-tab tax predictions. So did Sound Transit. Here's how: Sound Transit divides its money into five regional funds; among them is the so-called "North King subarea" of Seattle, Shoreline and Lake Forest Park. But it accidentally routed $10 million from South King County drivers into the North King area, because of problems tracking the south-county driver addresses in state Department of Licensing (DOL) computer software. it turned out that the North King area got 17 to 18 percent too much car- tab revenue, or about $10 million, between 1997 and 2002, said Sound Transit spokesman Ric ilgenfritz. Such errors are no big deal to Sound Transit, which collects billions more in sales taxes, federal grants, passenger fares and car-rental taxes. But for the monorail, car tabs are the only tax source. Monorail planners based their estimates on inflated "North King" data, causing them to overstate the value of cars they could tax. Finance Director Daniel Malarkey, drawing on work by other consultants, predicted last August that the value of taxable vehicles in the city would be $4.5 billion to $4.75 billion. (The true value now appears to be $3.7 billion, Horn said this week.) That already-inflated $4.5 billion estimate went further awry this spring when Malarkey based his short-term 2003 budget on a tax base of $6 billion, based on a DOL spreadsheet report that Horn said arrived in January. Monorail executives say they accepted the $6 billion figure because it was the first estimate DOL provided specifically for their project. That led to income projections for 2003 that were almost double what's actually coming in. Licensing spokesman Brad Benfield said his agency still is reviewing what caused the confusion. A car-tab tax seems simple, but there are many complications. Economic recession is one — Sound Transit's proceeds dropped in 2001 and 2002. The monorail tax excludes new cars in the first year. Some residents avoid the monorail tax by registering cars outside the city. Some ZIP-code areas cross city limits, making the DOL's job harder. Despite the risks, a car-tab tax is potentially lucrative. Sound Transit predicts an annual growth of 4.9 percent through 2025, while the monorail assumed at least 4.75 percent. Current tax rates are $85 per $10,000 of vehicle value, expected to go up to $140 in June. To probe further, Horn is acquiring his own copy of DOL's huge database of taxable motor vehicles. "The issue is nailing this down. We're bringing it (the data) in-house. We're going to audit this and take control of it," he said. Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com Copyright © 2003 The Seattle Times Company PTP=========================================== http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/136023_monorail21.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Thursday, August 21, 2003 Monorail revenue remains far short Agency to reveal plans to adjust to shortfall By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Tax revenue for the nascent Seattle Monorail Project continues to come in far below projections. in April, the monorail projected that it would receive $4.2 million a month in revenue this year. In fact, the tax brought in $2.2 million in June and $2.24 million for July, according to figures released yesterday by the state Department of Licensing. The tax revenue is the sole source of income for building the $1.75 billion, 14-mile Green Line from Ballard to West Seattle. The revenue comes from a 0.85 percent motor vehicle excise tax levied on the depreciated value of vehicles owned by Seattle residents. That amounts to $85 on a car worth $10,000 and $170 on a $20,000 vehicle. The tax is scheduled to go up next year to 1.4 percent. The latest figures put monorail revenue about 48 percent below the projections used in this year's budget and about 31 percent below the revenue projections used in the monorail's original financial plan. The monorail still has not figured out why the forecasts were so inaccurate, spokesman Paul Bergman said yesterday. But he said it's still too early, with only two months of collections, to say that the revenue always will fall so far below projections. And Bergman stood by earlier statements from Executive Director Joel Horn that the monorail project can still be built at its full length without sacrificing quality. "Excellent design doesn't need to be expensive design," Bergman said. "We've brought in some of best architects internationally and locally together to work on designs that will make Seattle proud." The fact the revenue problem came to light early in the project allows the agency to deal with it, Bergman said. If it had arisen two or three years later, the problem would be much more serious, he said. Horn will reveal today a series of "action steps" the agency will take to manage the revenue problem. The monorail believes the revenue shortfall will end up somewhere between 11 to 33 percent of the assumptions being used to plan the monorail, Bergman said. But the monorail believes it can deal with the shortfall. Inflation in construction costs, for example, is running 70 percent below what was assumed in the plan. Also, the monorail hopes to persuade either the Department of Licensing or the Legislature to change the rules and begin collecting the tax when people move into the state. But others remained concerned yesterday about the financial hit. "A reasonable person would say if your base starts out 20 percent less than you thought, that's not a good thing," said Peter Sherwin, a monorail supporter who ran Seattle's two monorail initiative campaigns. "Clearly, it's a problem. How big a problem is the question." Critic Geof Logan, a legal-document researcher, said, "If the (tax revenue) shortfall continues at the current rate of anywhere from a third to a half, i do not see how this project can be built, because they will not be able to sell the bonds at a reasonable rate." Alan Hess, a professor of finance at the University of Washington School of Business, said bonds will be bought by institutions, which have a fiduciary responsibility to make sure there's enough tax revenue to repay them. "it's quite clear from a financial perspective that the interest rate the monorail pays will reflect the risk of these tax flows," Hess said. "If the bond buyers think the tax flows are at increased risk, they'll demand a higher interest rate to compensate them for the increased risk." The monorail likely would face one of two choices, he said. "Either the monorail authority will have to sell fewer bonds or they're going to have to extend the tax for a very long period of time." P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com PTP=========================================== http://www.robinsonnews.com/wsStory2.html West Seattle Herald White Center News 2003/08/21 ‘iris' station design could be cheaper By Tim St. Clair With a so-called "iris" design, the Morgan Junction monorail station would be the most futuristic structure in the business district, but that configuration could save money. The iris design features two platforms that are stacked rather than side by side. It would require a smaller "footprint" or base to build than a station with the monorail trains coming and going side by side, said Eric Schmidt of Cascade Design Collaborative Inc., an architecture firm that's working on the West Seattle monorail stations. Another savings advantage of the iris design is it would require only one elevator, he said. A station with a side-by-side arrangement of guideways would need two. Schmidt and Josh Stepherson, the Seattle Monorail Project's representative for West Seattle, spoke at last week's quarterly meeting of the Morgan Community Association, held at The Kenney retirement facility. The Monorail Project is seeking permission from the Seattle City Council to build monorail stations to a height of 65 feet regardless of existing zoning limitations in the neighborhoods where the stations are to be constructed. However, the Morgan Junction station might end up being lower than that, Stepherson said. Breaking down the components of the monorail station, there must be at least 22 feet of vertical clearance from the ground upward to the bottom of the guideway, Stepherson said. That's to provide large trucks enough space to maneuver under the entire monorail system. Atop that is the guideway itself, which is about 7 feet high. That pushes the station platform level up to at least 29 feet. In the public part of the monorail stations, architects say people will need 12 feet of vertical space from platform to ceiling. With two platforms, one set above the other, that's another 24 feet. That adds up to 53 feet. Planners are required to study different sites and alternative station designs as they prepare the monorail's environmental-impact statement. The "preferred alternative" site for the Morgan Junction station is on the west side of California Avenue in front of Fauntleroy Autoworks and West Seattle Video Vault. Another site being considered is on the east side of California Avenue, south of Morgan Street, in front of the Texaco station and the adjoining commercial development. Besides the West Seattle stations, Cascade Design Collaborative also is working on the Ballard stations. Schmidt has noticed similarities between Morgan Junction, which will be the southern end of the Green Line, and the Crown Hill station at 85th Street and 15th Avenue Northwest. That's the northern end of the monorail line. Schmidt said the Junction is comparable to 15th Avenue and Northwest Market Street in Ballard. Both are retail shopping areas with Metro bus service and car traffic. While designers, architects and engineers prepare the monorail's draft environmental-impact statement, the city of Seattle is examining what "opportunities" the monorail may present. A small team is looking at the 14-mile Green Line alignment and studying land-use impacts within a quarter-mile of the monorail and traffic impacts within a half-mile, said Ethan Melone, the city's monorail program manager. People at the Morgan Community Association meeting asked about parking facilities at the monorail station, but Melone echoed what city officials have said all along. "Generally it is city policy to try to avoid building park-and-ride lots," he said. Providing parking attracts more cars to the area. "They end up doing more harm than good to the neighborhood." Upcoming events in the continuing development of the monorail include a design open house in which competing architectural firms will present to the public their ideas for the four West Seattle stations. Monorail officials want public feedback about the various architectural ideas. That event is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. Wednesday, Aug. 27 at West Seattle High School. The draft version of the monorail's environmental-impact statement is due out Aug. 29. Tim St. Clair can be reached at tstclair@robinsonnews.com or 932-0300. PTP=========================================== http://www.djc.com/news/ae/11148111.html Seattle Daily Journal August 20, 2003 Now is the time to comment on Monorail DEIS By ARI KRAMER Journal Staff Reporter Those eager to digest technical details about the Green Line now have an expansive document to chew on -- and will soon have another. The Seattle Monorail Project at a board meeting on Tuesday unveiled the draft environmental impact statement for the 14-mile, $1.75 billion route from Ballard to West Seattle. The agency also released a preliminary internal "skeletal" draft of request for proposals for the contract to design, build, operate and maintain the line. The draft EIS includes possible impacts of station locations and alignments for the Green Line. The document focuses on six geographic segments -- Ballard, interbay, Queen Anne/Seattle Center/Belltown, Downtown, SoDo and West Seattle. The draft EIS should spark lively debate between SMP staff and board members and the public about which alignment and station locations will work best for the city. The agency is holding a public hearing on the draft on Sept. 29 and is accepting comments on the draft through Oct. 14. "Here's where we need everyone to give us their best shot," said Kristina Hill, chair of the SMP board's Green Line Design and Construction Committee, said at yesterday's meeting. Board member Richard Sundberg said he expects many of the comments to come from downtown residents and business owners. "The real issue is King Street to Broad Street," he said in a phone interview after the meeting. "it's where the power is in Seattle and where the most organized group of stakeholders are. But I don't want to belittle what's going on in the neighborhoods. I think there will be a struggle with every station. I don't think anything will roll over easily. Everyone along the route has an interest." Also at the meeting, representatives of Team Monorail and Cascadia Monorail Co. -- the teams competing for the $1 billion-plus Green Line DBOM contract -- watched attentively as SMP staff and consultants offered the first tangible peek into the draft RFP, which SMP expects to finish in October. The draft RFP will spark further debate between SMP and the two contractor teams about key Green Line technical and risk-allocation issues. As SMP's special counsel, Nossaman Guthner Knox Elliott is writing the terms and conditions, or the main legal section of the RFP, said Karen Hedlund, a government relations and infrastructure specialist with the California-based law and lobbying firm. Hedlund said the firm has done similar work on RFPs for other large infrastructure projects across the country, but "no two contracts look alike." One key monorail issue that didn't come up much at the meeting was Green Line revenue shortfalls. SMP acknowledged recently that the car- tab tax revenues expected to finance much of the project are running at least a third below agency estimates. Responding by phone after the meeting to questions about the impact that revenue shortfalls could have on the Green Line's budget, schedule and design, SMP spokesperson Paul Bergman said the agency will discuss the issue at its finance committee meeting at 7:30 a.m. Thursday. "We're confident we'll meet the schedule and all the milestones. Other variables will help offset revenue shortfalls," he said. "It means we have to make a lot of smart decisions. If there's a silver lining here, it's that we're learning this now so we can design the system according to our revenues if this was two or three years down the road, this would be a bigger problem." The final Green Line EIS, which SMP said will respond to all public comments, is due in January 2004. For more information on the draft EIS, visit wwwelevated.org. Ari Kramer can be reached at (206) 622-8272 or by e-mail at Ari@djc.com. PTP=========================================== SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 20, 2003 Report sketches monorail's impacts By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER The Bon-Macy's parking garage in downtown Seattle could be demolished, more than 450 residences could experience "potentially significant noise" and the westbound lanes on the West Seattle bridge could be narrowed by a foot when the new monorail is built. Between 25 and 86 businesses would be relocated, close to 2,500 parking spaces could be lost, and some travel lanes could be eliminated in most neighborhoods along the line. Those are among numerous potential impacts found in environmental documents released yesterday by the Seattle Monorail Project. Those looking to the environmental impact statement for ammunition in the fight over where to run the line at the Seattle Center probably will be disappointed. Many of the impacts listed for the four alternative routes evaluated at the Center are the same for all alternatives. For example, the executive summary had this to say about one of the key elements in the controversy -- visual impact and aesthetics: "impacts would be moderate to high for all alternatives" The projected impacts for the monorail as a whole are similar to those predicted in a general document issued last year, said Ross Macfarlane, the monorail's attorney, who oversaw preparation of the impact statement. There were no deal-breaking impacts mentioned yesterday. The loss of the Bon-Macy's parking garage is linked to an alternative that might not be selected, and even if that alternative is selected, the garage still might not be demolished, Macfarlane said. The loss of the garage is listed as an impact of building the line down the center of Second Avenue. Property owners on both sides of Second Avenue have lodged major objections to having the monorail built on their sides of the street, so a third possibility is building the line down the center. Running it down the center could also result in the removal of the bike lane on that street, the loss of more than 1,200 parking spaces and the narrowing of sidewalks. Many details of the monorail project, including selection of the route at two places and where on the street the line will run, are yet to be decided. As a result, the impact statement took the conservative approach of including impacts that might possibly occur even if they are not likely to occur, Macfarlane said. The Bon-Macy's garage is an example. Major impacts from the monorail include the visual effect in Pioneer Square and the noise for some residences during non-rush hours, said Helene Kornblatt, the monorail's environmental manager. However, they can be dealt with by such measures as designing the line to fit in with the historic district and by using the quietest trains, slowing the trains in residential areas where noise would be a problem, and perhaps insulating homes, Kornblatt said. Kristina Hill, chairwoman of the monorail's Green Line Design and Construction Committee, said the environmental documents are written to satisfy legal requirements and sometimes understate "common sense" impacts. "Obviously, there's a huge visual impact," Hill said. "it's a big change." Another impact that might be considered played down is the narrowing of the West Seattle lanes from 12 feet to 11 feet. That was not mentioned in the executive summary, Macfarlane said, because "based on our discussions with the city and the analysis of our own traffic engineers, it's not something we view as a significant impact." By contrast, the environmental impact statement done by Sound Transit for a project to provide for two-way transit operations on the interstate 90 bridge treated the narrowing of lanes to 11 feet as one of the most significant impacts of the project, and one that would result in added vehicle crashes and that would likely keep trucks carrying hazardous cargo on the bridge. The monorail continues to work at a fast clip. The environmental impact statement is expected to be final in the first quarter of next year -- about a year after it was started. The board is scheduled to select the route and alignment shortly after the final report is issued. More headlines and info from Ballard/Broadview/Blue Ridge, Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, Queen Anne, Sodo, West Seattle. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com PTP=========================================== Seattle Times Wednesday, August 20, 2003 Fast-track study details impacts of monorail By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter The average federal highway mega-project requires 60 months of planning and study before a final environmental-impact statement is produced, allowing construction to start. The Seattle Monorail Project is on track to reach the same point in a little more than 12 months. Yesterday the monorail agency, the U.S. Coast Guard and contractor Parametrix released a five-volume draft environmental-impact statement that discloses the visual, noise, land-use and transportation effects of the planned 14-mile Green Line through the western half of the city. For the size of the project, the expected impacts are relatively small, said Ross MacFarlane, monorail director of legal and environmental affairs. People can judge for themselves by reading the document at libraries or online. Public comments are being taken through Oct. 14, and a final environmental statement is due in early 2004 — a pace some critics consider too rapid for meaningful scrutiny. Construction is anticipated by 2005. Here are some key findings. - Business impacts: Between 25 and 86 businesses would be displaced or relocated, mainly in industrial zones. One alternative replaces the Home Depot store in Sodo with a monorail operations base. - Housing: Between one and 98 residences would be displaced, depending on the alignment choices. Mercer Street and the east side of Second Avenue are the most vulnerable areas. Displaced home and business owners would be compensated. - Parking: Between 122 and 236 on-street parking spaces, and between 332 and 1,027 off-street spaces, would be lost, mostly downtown. - Seattle Center routes: A segment on Denny Way, suggested for review by City Councilman Peter Steinbrueck, remains under study as a fourth option at Seattle Center. Two others pass through the Center and one winds around the north side on Mercer Street. - West Seattle Stadium: One option places a station on public parkland, facing 35th Avenue Southwest. - Ballard Bridge: Four to 11 columns must be built in water, with a cable- stayed bridge requiring fewer posts than a concrete-girder bridge. During construction, builders would set up a cofferdam encircling each post site, so dirty water could be pumped out and treated. Environmental-impact statement The Seattle Monorail Project has published 1,900 pages about the impacts of a 14-mile line linking Ballard and West Seattle to downtown. The report and illustrations can be found at www.elevated.org, public libraries or by phoning the agency at 206-382-1220. An open house will be held in the Seattle Center Northwest Rooms from 1 to 9 p.m. on Sept. 29. Public hearings will be from 1 to 3 p.m. and from 5 to 9 p.m. Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP=========================================== Seattle Times Local News: Saturday, August 16, 2003 No quick rebound seen for car-tab tax By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter A new car-tab tax to fund the Green Line monorail is bringing in much less money than proponents expected — and new figures show that the problem is not likely to go away anytime soon. The Seattle Monorail Project collected about $2.2 million in July, according to totals provided yesterday by the state Department of Licensing (DOL). That is one-third below what the monorail's long-term financial plan said and barely half the monthly cash flow in this year's 2003 monorail budget. And the state's upcoming car-tab tax bills, which have been sent to motorists through October, show taxes will remain below projections. Monorail leaders have known for at least three months they should expect prolonged shortfalls, but they recently downplayed the significance of a lower-than-expected June total, saying people couldn't draw conclusions based on the first month of the tax. Yesterday, Executive Director Joel Horn acknowledged the tax base within Seattle is 11 to 33 percent less than previously believed, and he will report that publicly to the agency's finance committee on Thursday. Sue Secker, a new board member who chairs the finance committee, said the agency needs a better handle on its revenue projections. But she said there is no need for panic. Secker, a vice president for planning at Seattle University, said she spent about 30 hours studying what she considers an exceedingly complicated tax situation. "This is not all that surprising to me. I think it's pretty typical when you're setting up an agency. I think it's premature to be anything like alarmed," she said. "I have to tell you, I'm very impressed with the quality of the agency and the quality of analysis they have in place to get us the information we need. There are too many variables for it to be a major concern at this stage of the project." Peter Sherwin, who co-wrote pro-monorail initiatives in 2000 and 2002, has been circulating e-mail that raises the possibility of a public revote in the event low tax proceeds undermine the project. "it's a serious problem," he said last night. "it's really too bad. I want to know what happened and find out what we can offer the people from here on out." Horn said he can still build the entire $1.75 billion Green Line linking West Seattle, downtown and Ballard and gave his reasons for optimism: - The conceptual budget includes $199 million to cover inflation, but inflation is low, he said. - Growth in motor-vehicle excise-tax revenues was 6.8 percent a year over the past three decades due to rising populations and car values. That rate of growth would put the monorail back into surplus, he said. The financial plan assumed 4.8 percent annual growth. - There may be ways to reduce tax evasion by Seattle residents who register their vehicles outside the city. - Because construction contracts will not be awarded until next year, there is room to negotiate with bidding teams about the scope of work or the financing. - in the short term, the agency already has saved $6 million because of a relatively small staff and affordable contracts signed with architects and engineers, he said. The car-tab revenues are the monorail's sole source of money. Chronic shortfalls in tax proceeds would not necessarily keep the agency from selling bonds to investors, said Rudi Bertschi, an economist and former chairman of Energy Northwest, who publicly opposed the monorail agency's former plan to issue $750 million in bonds this year. "All other things being equal, it makes the project less creditworthy. Bondholders' only concern is do we get our interest and principal back? The greater the security for their revenue sources, the more comfortable they feel." There are broader issues at stake, Bertschi said. "If the monorail wants to build a second line, will they exhaust the credibility with the public, in much the way Sound Transit did with its rising costs?" Horn said the problem dates back to DOL databases from early 2002 that significantly overstated the number of cars in Seattle. Licensing spokeswoman Gigi Zenk, however, said her agency made a mistake on Nov. 25 and fixed the glitch within a few days. The monorail finance director, Daniel Malarkey, raised his tax projections in April — to $4.2 million a month — while presenting this year's temporary budget. That figure was based on what Horn said was state data showing the total value of taxable cars in the city at $6 billion. In reality, the value is between $3 billion and $4 billion. The current tax rate is $85 per $10,000 of vehicle value, except on new cars during the first year. The rate is expected to rise to $140 in June 2004, as pending bond sales and a construction start require more cash flow. Next year's increase does not solve the shortfall; the monorail plan voters approved last year called for a $140 tax rate for 20 to 25 years, and this year's $85 level was later set as an introductory rate. A lower citywide tax base affects all years. Monorail officials said they discovered the problem in May. "When we first saw that, all of us said this makes no sense, we don't understand it, let's try to understand it," Horn said. "We said to ourselves, basically we need to study this until we see the collections." He said that Malarkey found the gap in May, once the real tax bills were mailed out. The situation was exposed last month by Joel Paston, a skeptic of the monorail who saw the surprisingly low June numbers on the DOL's public Web site and then posted a cautiously worded update at his www.monorailtax.org site. Tax evasion probably played a minor role, but neither the state nor monorail officials can track evasion rates. Though residents are legally obligated to pay the tax, there is no enforcement system to penalize Seattleites who register their cars outside city limits. However, the state agency is considering an administrative-rule change that would require motorists to provide a home or business address on car-tab renewals, as they do for driver licenses, Zenk said. That would make it more difficult to avoid monorail tax, as well as the smaller car-tab tax for Sound Transit or a future regional tax for urban highways and transit. Monorail tax lags So far, the state Department of Licensing (DOL) has mailed car-tab tax bills to motorists for renewals through October, so the DOL already knows proceeds from the new Seattle monorail tax will come in more than $1 million under what the Seattle Monorail Project announced in April. What the monorail agency projected last year: $3.2 million a month. What the monorail agency projected in April for the short-term 2003 budget: $4.3 million a month. Dollar figures reported by DOL: May: $371,575 (early payments for June or July tabs). June: $2,197,110 (actual dollars collected). July: $2,172,522 (actual dollars collected). August: $2,611,002 (expected revenue based on car-tab bills mailed in June). September: $2,432,723 (expected revenue based on car-tab bills mailed in July). October: $2,387,444 (expected revenue based on car-tab bills mailed in August). Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP=========================================== Seattle Times Sunday, August 17, 2003, 12:00 a.m. Pacific Monorail team eager, artistic, must finish homework in math By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter "On Time. On Budget. Working Hard for You." The Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) plastered its slogan on city buses last spring, at least in part to brace residents for the shock of a new car-tab tax to pay for the 14-mile Green Line connecting Ballard and West Seattle with downtown. SMP magnets on thousands of city refrigerators promise the line will open Dec. 15, 2007. How has the project actually fared in its freshman year? Here is a midterm report card based on the six stated goals of the organization: On time: A-minus Giddy from the monorail initiative's squeaker win last year, Executive Director Joel Horn accelerated the construction schedule by six months, with groundbreaking by mid-2004. Since then, he has retreated to early 2005. Still, preparations remain on a breakneck pace. Soil sampling is under way, engineering teams are hired, and a draft environmental-impact statement will be published in a few days. "I think we've surprised a lot of the skeptics by showing we are a flexible agency that knows how to get things done," said Chairman Tom Weeks. The monorail got an assist from the City Council, which voted to demolish old 1962 World's Fair Monorail posts to make way for new ones on Fifth Avenue, and it appears ready to approve stations towering 65 feet above the street. Cooperation from private landowners remains uncertain. Can the monorail secure airspace above Burlington Northern Santa Fe freight tracks in Sodo? Would Washington Mutual accept elevated tracks outside its planned 40-story tower on Second Avenue? Under budget: D-plus Shortfalls in car-tab tax revenues, running at least one-third below agency estimates, could result in a leaner project and damaged credibility. And nobody will know whether the Green Line can meet its $1.5 billion construction budget until next year, when two competing teams place their bids. The good news is there are no cost overruns to date. The project should also benefit from a 20 percent contingency fund cushion, low interest rates and an attentive board of directors. in April, an executive from Bombardier, a prospective bidder, warned that innovative "iris" columns, which support two tracks at different elevations, would boost construction costs. Dick Falkenbury, founder of the monorail movement, advocates generic, mass-produced columns and station parts. "I believe Joel Horn just likes to complicate things. He just can't stop himself," Falkenbury fears. "I think they can very easily keep it under $1.5 billion if they pursue a simpler program." Horn has said he will make design changes if necessary to stay on budget. "They're springing leaks all over the dikes, and running out of fingers," contends opponent Geof Logan. Break even on operations by 2020: C The monorail board saved an estimated $3 million a year by approving ticket gates in the stations instead of an "honor system" where payment would be enforced by roving ticket inspectors. Advertising and small shops could produce more income. No transit line in the U.S. breaks even. SkyTrain in Vancouver, B.C., covers its operations by handling more than 140,000 trips a day, double the Green Line's target of 69,000 rides. Board member Kristina Hill said she now doubts that break-even operation is possible but believes the agency should aim for it anyway. Excellent design: A A monorail will inevitably obstruct views, lid the sidewalks and offend many people. But the agency is trying to make the best of things. Hundreds of citizens gave suggestions during spring forums, and SMP hired a creative lead designer in Alan Hart, who was responsible for bright and affordable stations in Vancouver. Preliminary design at Seattle Center was entrusted to NBBJ, Safeco Field's architects, while Zimmer Gunsul Frasca is studying how to integrate the big columns with wider sidewalks downtown. Rick Sundberg, an architect and former opponent, is on the board and working overtime. if all these experts fail, the public can rely on downtown business groups, independent architects, historic preservationists, neighborhood associations and the Seattle Design Commission to challenge the plans. Stay true to grass-roots heritage: C Pro-monorail organizer Cleve Stockmeyer observed last year that grass roots are not enough, that the SMP must ally with the rich and powerful to get the line built. Agency employees continue to hobnob with hundreds of ordinary folks, but even some of its own board members wonder if the leadership has strayed too far from populist ideals. The agency has given six-figure salaries to its executives and conducted a secretive process for board appointees. Most public comment at board meetings has been pushed to the end of the agenda, a policy that's likely to change soon. Beginning this fall, two of the nine members of the board will be directly elected by voters. A test of SMP's commitment to the grass roots will come at Seattle Center, where Paul Allen's emissaries want the new monorail to travel through Experience Music Project, which would require a controversial route across the Center grounds. Whatever the decision, monorail leaders need to show that average citizens wield as much clout as Allen. Transparency, accountability to the public: B Last winter, when the agency sought to sell up to $1 billion worth of bonds, it failed to immediately disclose objections by state Treasurer Michael Murphy. This summer, the monorail team asked for zoning changes before affected neighborhoods got to see an environmental- impact statement — prompting City Councilman Nick Licata to call a timeout until next month. But in two important ways, the agency has kept the public informed. On April 2, Horn released his early "preliminary preferred alternative," which sparked healthy debates over Seattle Center routes, train-slowing curves through Sodo and a future station at the Magnolia Bridge. It also prompted auto dealer Steve Huling to suggest changing the route through West Seattle to avoid a tight stretch of Fauntleroy Way Southwest. Also, the car-tab tax is more noticeable to ordinary citizens than the typical sales tax, utility tax or property tax. Every year when the renewal notice arrives in the mailbox, people will second-guess the project. That isn't a bad thing. Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com

To all Public Transport List recipients: As an experiment, PTP may transfer (i.e., subscribe) all individual addresses to a Yahoo-Groups account (Public Transport Progress). Hopedly, this will simplify Emailing to a large mailing list. This will remain a distribution-only list; recipients' addresses will not be disclosed. You will probably receive notification from Yahoo-Groups that your address has been subscribed. You should not need to take any action. Other than this, and a slight change in the subject line, plus promotional material placed at the end of messages by Yahoo, functioning of the list from the user's standpoint should remain the same. However, if you have a problem with this, contact: nawdry@austin. rr.com if the Yahoo-Groups plan is implemented, and you wish to unsubscribe, you may do so at any time by sending an Unsubscribe message to the group address (instructions in every message). =PTP= CONTENTS * Houston: Rail plan slashed by nearly half to appease foes Houston Chronicle Aug. 18, 2003 * Houston: 'Heavy politics' behind vote to cut rail Houston Chronicle Aug. 19, 2003 * Houston: Mayoral wannabes have mixed reaction on rail plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 18, 2003 * Houston: Rail foe calls plan 'white elephant' Houston Chronicle Aug. 19, 2003 * Houston Chronicle: Region needs rail plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 17, 2003 * Houston: HOT lanes to fund transit? Houston Chronicle Aug. 15, 2003 PTP========================================== http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/printstory.hts/metropolitan/2054855 Houston Chronicle Aug. 18, 2003 Metro cuts rail plan by almost half Reduction OK'd to appease foes By LUCAS WALL and RAD SALLEE Houston's ever-changing rail plan got smaller again Monday when Metro's board, in another compromise designed to limit opposition, approved a financing package that is nearly half of what it originally planned to send to voters in November's election. The package, approved by a 5-4 vote, now calls for building 22 miles of rail during the next nine years and obtaining $640 million in bonds, instead of the more ambitious plan that would have funded 40 miles of rail with $980 million in bonds. The larger plan failed the first vote Monday 5-4, forcing Metropolitan Transit Authority board Chairman Arthur Schechter to switch his vote for the more modest proposal. Schechter said he changed his vote "very, very reluctantly" to ensure something got put on the ballot. "I hope future developments in our city make us not ashamed of the way we voted today. We need to look back with pride on what we have done," he added. "And I hope by casting our vote in this manner we can bring forward enough public consensus to move forward with this plan, which is going to determine the future of our city." Schechter stressed Monday's vote didn't kill the larger plan, just delayed it. In fact, he said, the two plans look alike for the first nine years. But the $640 million plan requires Metro to ask voters after 2009 for more money. It would also give voters a chance to again extend the "general mobility" road funding the Metropolitan Transit Authority makes to its 16 member governments. Metro came out with a 41-mile rail plan in April. The second draft bumped that up to 55 miles and the final draft went further, to 73 miles. Last week, the board voted to seek financing for only 40 miles, and Monday put just 22 miles of that on the ballot. The vote sent the region's first mass transit plan in 15 years to the ballot box, asking voters for authorization to build five rail segments by 2012. The referendum also seeks endorsement of Metro's overall system plan and a five-year extension of road funds to 2014. Mayor Lee Brown endorsed the scaled-down plan Monday after some rail skeptics, including former Mayor Bob Lanier, agreed to support the referendum. "There is widespread support for what Metro approved today as part of the solution to our transportation challenge," Brown said in a statement issued after the vote. "I encourage voters to add their stamp of approval." Lanier, who killed the last major rail plan after his election in 1991, also issued a brief statement Monday. "I believe the consensus reached today, including rail, buses and roads, is in the best interests of the city. And I support it," he said. in a phone interview, Lanier said the compromise means future voters can decide whether to extend the road payments beyond the 2014 date that Metro has agreed to honor. Lanier said he helped work out the $640 million compromise in meetings with Brown, Metro officials, developer Ed Wulfe -- spearheading private efforts to pass Metro's referendum -- and others, including officials of the Greater Houston Partnership, the region's chamber of commerce. Metro board member Art Morales, a Harris County appointee, voted Monday against both proposals, as he did the overall plan the week before, "because of cash shortfall projections." Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt put out a report last week showing Metro's revenue projections during the next 22 years are $3 billion too high based on the historic average over the past two decades. Morales also expressed concern the ballot language does not specify to voters how many miles of rail will be built. The paragraph that will appear on the Nov. 4 ballot only states the bond proceeds will be used "for Metro's transit authority system ... which includes construction of extensions and new segments of Metro's rail system." "We don't tell the public what they are getting for their money," Morales said. Metro's attorneys, in a luncheon before Monday's meeting to review the language, told the board it was too much detail to include the number of rail miles on the ballot. The accompanying eight-page resolution and attachments spell out the five segments to be built, two-thirds of which will be funded through bonds: extending the Main Street line north to Northline, adding a spur from Midtown past the Galleria, and building lines to the East End and toward Hobby Airport. Killed from this financing package: a line from downtown west along interstate 10 and then south along the West Loop to the Galleria, a branch of the Hobby Airport line to Sunnyside, and an extension of the East End line to Gulfgate Mall. Monday's meeting attracted great attention, including presentations from two local members of Congress. Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, who sits on the House transportation appropriations subcommittee, urged the board to postpone the Nov. 4 referendum. Culberson said the public and elected officials need more time to study the plan. A November vote, he said, would "leave me with no other option but to oppose what you would force upon us." To Culberson's comments, Schechter later responded "some of you have been hard at work in Washington" and probably were unaware that Metro had held extensive public meetings and discussions with elected officials in drafting the plan during the last two years. Rail supporters were left stunned by the board's decision to slash the plan for a second time in a week. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, said "a small core group of individuals" had derailed the more ambitious transit plan wanted by thousands of "early risers" who depend on transit to get to work. "I'm disappointed that we have come to this but I understand it, and i respect the process," she said. "I will support it." This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/topstory/2054855 PTP============================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 19, 2003 Light rail is heavy politics By RICK CASEY it would be hard enough to get a handle on Houston politics if all you were trying to figure out was a mayor's race that promises to be expensive and convoluted. Then they throw light rail at you. First, there's the timing. In Denver, Dallas and other more conventional places, they opened a relatively modest stretch of rail to build support, then waited for citizens in outlying areas to clamor for extensions. if you've ridden rail in those cities you can see why it worked. Your old image of trolleys jerking through crowded streets vanishes. The new technology makes for smooth, quiet starts and stops with trip triggers for traffic lights that grease the way through rush hour traffic. A couple of years ago, I interviewed riders in Denver who said they didn't save any time by riding the rail, but it was so much more pleasant than driving (and cheaper than downtown parking) that they parked on the perimeter and rode. Here, however, the train is scheduled to open in January and we're voting in November -- after several years of the urban equivalent of a root canal. We're still in agonizingly slow street construction pain. It's like asking a woman in labor if she wants more babies after this one. And why? Because, we're told, if we don't get into line for federal matching grants quickly we'll be shut out for seven years -- and we can't trust key congressmen (Tom DeLay and John Culbertson) from the area to save us a place in line. To the uninitiated, the notion that congressmen would stand in the way of pork flowing to their area sounds like expecting water to run uphill. Nikita Khrushchev expressed the universal dynamic succinctly. "Politicians are the same everywhere," he said. "They promise a bridge where there is no river." Then there was the conversion of former Mayor Bob Lanier. it was not exactly St. Paul's fall off his horse -- though that is a stage of transport technology some rail proponents associate with Lanier. The man who a decade ago killed a light rail program is no convert of Pauline proportions, but the fact that he has dropped his opposition changes the political landscape. As late as Friday afternoon knowledgeable political insiders were assuring me Lanier would never, never endorse a rail project. in fact, Lanier had made his decision to support a compromise plan earlier in the week. By Friday he was holding out for ballot language protecting the 25 percent of Metro money that goes to roads. "In business the deal is closed when the other fellow's check is in my bank account," he said Friday. Lanier said he decided to support the plan because although a debate would be good for the city, consensus would be better. In addition he gave some credit to mayoral candidate Bill White. "He's more optimistic about the impact of rail than I am," Lanier noted, "but he's brought me along." it wasn't just optimism. It was mayoral politics. White had proposed in February a compromise that looks very much like the one approved by the Metro board on Monday. Had Metro approved its earlier, more aggressive plan, White's proposal would have looked like waffling. Mayoral opponent Sylvester Turner, who has enthusiastically supported rail, would have savaged White among a pro-rail inner-city constituency that White badly needs. Now White gets not only to endorse the plan, but to claim it as his own. Turner can say he wanted more light rail, but with White backing the only plan on the table, Turner can no longer use the issue to hurt White. This light rail is heavy politics. You can write to Rick Casey at P.O. Box 4260, Houston, TX 77210, or e- mail him at rick.casey@chron.com. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2056890 PTP============================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 18, 2003 White alone in backing rail bond By JOHN WILLIAMS Houston Chronicle Political Writer Businessman Bill White was the only one of the four major mayoral candidates to voice support Monday for the $640 million rail bond the Metropolitan Transit Authority will put before voters this November. Two other major candidates -- state Rep. Sylvester Turner and City Councilman Michael Berry -- expressed disappointment, but for different reasons. Turner said Metro should have gone for a bigger proposal, such as a $980 million bond package that was opposed by some in the city's business community. Berry attacked the plan as a "blank check" for rail that does not allow enough funding for roads. The fourth major candidate, former Councilman Orlando Sanchez, in Los Angeles on vacation, said he would reserve judgment until he has had time to analyze the Metro plan. Rail likely will be a defining issue in the race to replace term-limited Mayor Lee Brown. Not only will the Metro referendum be on the same ballot as the Nov. 4 city elections, but the next mayor will play a major role in how rail develops in Houston. "When cities are in competition with each other, rail tends to make it attractive for people to build residences and businesses along the rail lines," White said Monday. "For some people, rail is not a preferred option. For those who prefer it, I don't want to get behind the other large cities in the United States." Turner said he was disappointed by the Metro vote, saying that the area needs more than $640 million for rail. He said the board cratered to business interests demanding the lower amount. A $980 million plan would have built almost 40 miles of light rail, enough to complete Metro's plans for inside Loop 610. The smaller proposal would build about 22 miles. "This will be a rail that goes to nowhere," Turner said. Berry said Metro is proposing that voters "approve a blank check" for a project without telling them where the rail lines will go. Rather than spending the money on light rail, Berry said that more Metro money should go to roads than the 25 percent of Metro's penny sales tax earmarked for roads now. "Metro is further proving the point that we're building rail for rail's sake regardless of who might ride it," Berry said. "The public will reject it." Sanchez said he needed to talk with Harris County Tax Assessor- Collector Paul Bettencourt and others before voicing an opinion on the Metro proposal. Bettencourt contends that Metro overestimated its future sales tax revenues when deciding how much rail to build. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2054926 PTP================================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 19, 2003 Weighing against Metro's latest white elephant By DAVID HUTZELMAN in Eastern folklore, a white elephant was a gift you gave your enemies. At great expense and inconvenience, the recipient was obligated to care and feed the sacred beast, and if it died under his stewardship, he could be put to death. The backroom political compromise that led to the Metropolitan Transit Authority's scaled-down, $640 million, 22-mile rail extension proposal cannot change the fact that half of a transit white elephant is still a bad deal. it is still a bad deal because: · Rail will not change Metro's insignificant 2 percent average daily trip share in Harris County, making it impossible for new transit to have any measurable effect on either congestion or pollution in Houston. · All proposed rail routes are currently served by less costly buses. With rail, many transit-dependent commuters will be forced to transfer, stand for the peak-period ride, and walk further to and from stops that are one- half mile, rather than two blocks, apart. · Rail is slower than most buses and will not operate in more than three inches of standing water. Rail fatality rates are three times higher than buses per passenger mile, and crimes against property are six times higher. · Metro has used inflated ridership numbers and revenue projections to justify this pork-barrel expenditure. Cost overruns and revenue shortfalls have led other light-rail cities to cut bus service. In Los Angeles, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People sued to have bus service restored. Rail capacity on Main Street in Houston is 37 percent less than the buses to be replaced. · Rail construction will kill business along the proposed routes (as it did on Main Street), and removing lanes from auto use for rail will worsen street congestion. Harris County has 15,000 miles of roads that can be used by a flexible all-bus system to adapt to changing demographics. · All rail lines are directed to downtown, where the Houston-Galveston Area Council has projected only 4 percent of future jobs will be created. Buses will be able to better serve the remaining 96 percent of workers at one-tenth the cost of rail. Rather than being offended by the elimination of rail routes in their communities, minorities should welcome the fact that they will not have their neighborhoods disrupted and redeveloped. They will be able to enjoy faster, more convenient, more rider-friendly and reliable bus service. Hutzelman, of Houston, is director of BusCAR, the Business Committee Against Rail. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2056606 PTP========================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 17, 2003 Editorial CLEAR CHOICE Region needs Metro's multimodal transit expansion plan On Jan. 1, a few weeks before the Super Bowl is played here, Houstonians will gain the option of working downtown; seeing their doctor; visiting museums and parks; enjoying a concert, play or big-league sporting event; shopping and dining -- all without ever having to get behind the wheel of a car or SUV. On Election Day this November, voters will decide whether this safe, smooth and quiet option is expanded beyond the 7-mile Main Street corridor. in the next two decades, the Houston-area population is expected to grow by 2 million. If this region doubled its short ration of state and federal highway funds, the money still would be insufficient to pay for the expanded highways needed to alleviate today's congestion and handle future traffic. Even if unlimited state and federal highway funds were available, the Katy Freeway expansion is demonstrating that right of way for such projects is almost exhausted. Inside the beltway, new and expanded freeways will have to be carved from existing business centers and neighborhoods, at unbearable expense, intolerable displacement and unforgivable loss of quality of life. Most Houstonians -- including some transit skeptics such as U.S. Rep. John Culberson -- agree that the Houston region needs a mobility plan that embraces improvements to every mode of ground transportation. These include but are not limited to: more road capacity for vehicles, new toll roads and HOV lanes, more and better bus service, hike-and-bike trails, and a regional light-rail system supplemented by commuter rail service to distant suburbs. Based on that consensus, field-tested at numerous public hearings, the Metropolitan Transit Authority board has voted to adopt a 2025 transit expansion plan -- Metro Solutions -- that would provide the transit elements without preventing any highway construction projects that other agencies might want to build. State highway officials are eager for Metro and the voters to approve a long-range blueprint. Without it, precious millions of dollars will be wasted on uncoordinated, conflicting mobility projects. The plan does not require Houstonians to choose between rail and bus, or between roads and transit. Besides a maximum of 39 miles of expanded light rail in the first phase, Metro will almost double its bus and Park and Ride service, providing suburban commuters swifter public transportation in both directions. Fully built out, the plan will put almost 1 million residents within walking distance of mass transit. Those who can't or choose not to use public transport also will benefit, because every transit rider keeps a vehicle off the highway and contributes toward cleaner air. Metro Solutions is not perfect. It can't extend rail transit to every corridor at once. Chronic, misguided political opposition here for decades has caused Metro's share of federal funds to go elsewhere, and it will be decades more before rail can serve all quadrants of the region. Some area residents resent any money spent on transit and oppose taking Metro money away from road repairs. They should know that over the years Metro has given cities and Harris County more than $1 billion for road work, and will give more than a billion more between now and 2014, forfeiting the chance to double that amount with federal funds. That is a lot of Metro money spent for something that is not, in the end, Metro's prime responsibility. If cities and the county are dependent on Metro to maintain current roads, how can they finance and maintain new roads? Metro officials bent over backward to compromise with the agency's implacable detractors. A few wealthy developers and their political puppets, who did not seek the public's opinion, arrogantly demanded that Metro forever limit its rail expansion to 13 miles. How this would best serve the 5 million people who all too soon will live in the metropolitan region is impossible to discern. Some critics, who have hounded Metro for years with malicious lawsuits and caused Houston to lose hundreds of millions of dollars in federal transit aid, now say the agency is too weak financially to pursue its plan. That is like the murderer who kills a set of parents and then criticizes the orphans for their precarious financial condition. Metro can only do what it can afford. If the economy stagnates or tanks and revenues decline, Metro will have to delay light-rail expansions. in 1988, voters approved a plan that would spend half of Metro's money on maintaining the quality of bus service, 25 percent on road projects and 25 percent on a connector system involving rail or some other technology. The public got the road work immediately, but had to wait a decade and a half for the first leg of a connector system. Now is the time to invest Metro's money in a multimodal transit system that will attract federal dollars and offer all Houstonians an attractive alternative to the private car frequently stalled in traffic. On the November ballot will be a proposed Metro bond issue (it could be for $980 million or a more cautious $640 million). The proposal will offer Houstonians a deal they cannot refuse without courting gridlock, economic decline and reduced quality of life. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/2050719 PTP============================================ Houston Chronicle Aug. 15, 2003 Toll lanes proposed to boost Metro Single-occupant vehicles would pay a fee to use converted HOV lanes By LUCAS WALL Metro could raise about $200 million a year in new revenue to pay for its 2025 bus and rail expansion plan if it converted its HOV lanes into toll lanes, the chairman of the Houston City Council's transportation committee said Friday. Councilman Carroll Robinson said he's disappointed the Metropolitan Transit Authority decided earlier this week to trim the number of rail miles it plans to seek funding for in the November election. Metro drafted a 73- mile rail expansion plan but trimmed the financing package for it back to 40 miles to also help pay for five more years of local road construction and maintenance. Numerous new bus routes are also part of the "Metro Solutions" plan. Converting the High Occupancy Vehicle lanes into High Occupancy Toll lanes would create a revenue stream for Metro, Robinson stated in a paper he sent to transit officials Friday. The HOT lanes, as they are dubbed, would charge a toll for single-occupant vehicles while continuing to allow buses and car pools to use them for free. Metro now has HOV lanes on four Harris County freeways in cooperation with the Texas Department of Transportation. "We would have automobile users, on a voluntary basis, helping to construct a built-up transit system that would include rail, bus and Park & Ride lots," Robinson said in a phone interview from a transportation summit in irving. "With that kind of bold plan, you could develop the system quicker and to the fullest extent." Metro's decision to continue funding road projects through 2014 means it doesn't have the cash to build rail extensions to Bush intercontinental and Hobby airports plus a proposed commuter train to Fort Bend County. That has upset rail advocates, including Robinson. The board meets Monday to vote on ballot language for the November transit referendum. Robinson wants Metro directors to seek a $2 billion bond issue, relying on extra funding the HOT lanes would generate, instead of the $650 million to $1 billion bond issue that is expected. Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter, through a spokesman, said the transit authority is already studying the potential for converting HOV lanes to HOT lanes. "We're leaving no stone unturned to find sources of funding but it's premature to discuss it at this time," Schechter said. Robinson pitched his idea Friday in part to respond to complaints Metro critics have made recently that the 2025 transit plan relies on overly optimistic sales-tax projections. Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt issued a report Monday showing Metro's assumptions are $3 billion too high over the next 22 years. He expressed concern the transit authority wouldn't be able to build all the improvements it's promising voters without new revenue sources. Bettencourt applauded Robinson for proposing a new funding stream for Metro but said he'd need time to review the proposal before making further comment. Bettencourt said Metro's board needs to postpone Monday's ballot-language vote until it has time to review this and other ideas. "Let's slow down and take a chance to look at them," he said. "They are rushing ahead immediately and it doesn't allow these types of brainstorms to be checked out." in February, a Los Angeles think tank released a report showing how cities could generate new revenue each year by changing HOV lanes to HOT lanes. The concept is already in place on two California freeways, and a key hurdle was removed last year when the Federal Transit Administration agreed to allow toll-paying, single-occupant vehicles on federally funded HOV lanes -- including those in Harris County -- so long as buses maintain existing travel speeds and the revenue generated is used for mass transit. The report, which showed a fully developed Harris County HOT-lane system could produce an estimated $228 million in annual revenue, has prompted a scramble among local transportation agencies to figure out how to make the concept reality. Commissioners Court authorized a study last month of having the county's Toll Road Authority take over the HOV system from Metro and implement HOT lanes. County Judge Robert Eckels, who proposed the study, was traveling Friday and unavailable for comment. His spokesman said the Toll Road Authority has started the research but he didn't know when a feasibility report will be ready. Robinson said Metro could project about $200 million in annual HOT-lane revenue after covering additional operating and maintenance costs such as moving barriers to add an extra HOT lane and installing toll-collecting devices. State law allows the Transportation Department to permit tolls for congestion mitigation. To ensure fast travel time in the HOT lane, the toll price would change depending on congestion level. For example, at 8 p.m. a driver might pay $1 to get in the lane while the toll at 8 a.m. -- in the middle of morning rush hour -- could cost $5. The theory: the higher the price, the fewer drivers who will use the express lanes, allowing a constant travel speed at any time of day while producing the same revenue. Texas law permits the Transportation Department to contract with a regional toll or transit authority to collect the tolls, with the agreement spelling out who gets the proceeds. Presently the state has a deal with Metro to permit two-occupant vehicles on interstate 10 and U.S. 290 HOV lanes during hours when three or more occupancy is required. Such two-person car poolers must pay a $2 toll for each trip, with proceeds split evenly between the Transportation Department and Metro. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/front/2051271

CONTENTS * Seattle monorail project funding problems? TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 48, Aug 14 - Aug 20 2003 * Seattle monorail 'iris' design: Cost, impact issues Seattle Times Wednesday, August 06, 2003 * Seattle monorail: Controversy over design graphics TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 47, Aug 7 - Aug 13 2003 * Seattle monorail would damage salmon habitat Seattle Post-Intelligencer 25 Jul 2003 (letter) * Seattle: Old monorail demolition approved SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Tuesday, August 5, 2003 * Seattle: Voters deceived on existing monorail? Seattle Post-Intelligencer Thursday, August 7, 2003 (letters) PTP============================================ http://www.thestranger.com/current/city4.html TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 48, Aug 14 - Aug 20 2003 MONORAIL MATH Monorail Agency Faces Multimillion-Dollar Shortfall Erica Barnett The Seattle Monorail Project's finances are in sorry shape, though just how sorry won't be clear until at least next month, when updated reports reveal whether the agency's 50 percent revenue shortfall in June was a one-month anomaly--or an ongoing fiscal snafu. Back in April, SMP finance director Daniel Malarkey predicted that the monorail agency's annual car tax would generate $29.6 million between June and December 2003. When June revenues came in 50 percent shy of predictions, monorail director Joel Horn went on the offensive, accusing the state Department of Licensing (DOL)--which provided the figures on which the SMP based its predictions--of incorrectly estimating the agency's tax base. Horn says the monorail agency based its estimate on inaccurate DOL figures that had suggested a tax base (the total value of cars in Seattle) 33 percent larger than the SMP originally assumed. "Obviously, those numbers were not right," Horn says. "They made a mistake. We're going to deal with it." (DOL spokesperson Gigi Zenk says forecasting isn't the DOL's responsibility, though neither agency has been able to explain the discrepancy.) The 50 percent shortfall, Horn points out, only affects the SMP's budget for 2003, because the agency's long-term forecasts are based on the earlier, lower tax-base estimate. But Horn's response inadvertantly points to a larger long-term problem: Even assuming the SMP's more conservative early estimates, tax revenues still fell between 20 and 32 percent short of predictions. The agency will have to find some way to make up the shortfall, either by cutting its budget or by finding ways to increase revenues from monorail taxes. One possible solution, Horn points out, is to tax used cars whose owners move here from outside the state; currently, the DOL doesn't apply the monorail tax to out-of-state used cars for one full year. "They see a car coming from out of state as a new car [that wouldn't be subject to the tax]," Horn says. But DOL spokesperson Zenk points out that the legislation that allowed the SMP to levy the tax--written by monorail- agency lawyers--explicitly says the tax only applies to cars at relicensing, a term it interprets to mean all cars that are new to the state, including used cars from other states. The SMP is expected to detail likely reasons for the shortfall--and lay out its game plan for making up the lost revenues--at its finance committee meeting Thursday, August 21. barnett@thestranger.com PTP=================================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001397293_greenline0 6m.html Seattle Times Wednesday, August 06, 2003 What monorail might look like downtown By Mike Lindblom Seattle Times staff reporter PHOTO ILLUSTRATIONS BY ZIMMER GUNSUL FRASCA Preliminary images show the proposed Green Line monorail traveling on the west side and the east side of Second Avenue, with "iris"-shaped columns. The monorail eliminates one lane of on-street parking and shifts the existing bus, car and bike lanes. Visualize the monorail. Nine months after a dramatic public vote to build the 14-mile Green Line through the western half of Seattle, monorail architects are beginning to produce the first realistic portrayals of what tracks and pillars might look like on city streets. There is no avoiding their bulk, although landscaping and wider sidewalks might make the concrete posts less intrusive. Through downtown, planners favor "iris" columns that split like the flower, positioning the northbound track next to and above the southbound track. That blocks views in two places, but casts less shadow than traditional, side-by-side tracks. irises make it easier to run the monorail through tight corridors and erect stations next to buildings. During the 2002 campaign opponents claimed the monorail would turn downtown into another Beirut, while the pro-monorail campaign offered a print that showed ethereal, orange-tinted guideways soaring above Second and Pike. Now they have something more specific to talk about. Earlier this year, more than 1,000 citizens participated in Seattle Monorail Project design forums. Numerous organizations are now watchdogging the process: the Seattle Design Commission, the City Council, Seattle Center, the Downtown Seattle Association and neighborhood groups. Citizens have two more months to air their opinions before decision are made. A draft environmental-impact statement will be released Aug. 29, followed by public comment until Oct. 14. Then the Seattle Monorail Project board will decide exactly where the tracks will go. Some details may not be cemented until mid-2004, when two construction teams will bid on the $1.5 billion contract. Final design could continue for an additional year or so, said Ethan Melone, monorail liaison for the city Department of Transportation. Downtown irises Walking up Second Avenue last week, architect Don Miles of monorail consultant Zimmer Gunsul Frasca (ZGF) wove around through the planter boxes and the bystanders as he explained how a monorail adds a "fabulous kinetic relationship" to busy street corners. The Green Line adds a vertical dimension to the streetscape, he said. The Green Line project The route: A 14-mile line linking Ballard, Seattle Center, downtown and West Seattle. The cost: A total of $1.75 billion through 2020, including $1.5 billion for design and construction. Opening date: First segment to open in December 2007, with completion by 2009. Columns would wipe out a lane of parking, but the good news is that the sidewalks would also be widened by 8 feet, Miles said. That creates space for cafe tables and street trees, he said. Clumps of people at bus stops would no longer block other pedestrians. "It allows two groups of people having conversations to walk abreast ... without having to go single file," he said. The posts would be 100 feet apart, farther than the existing 1962 monorail's columns but less than the 120-foot interval advertised in last year's monorail plan. The shorter distance lines up better with downtown block lengths, architects said. ZGF drawings show the pillars with triangular bases, 40 inches long on the longest side. The highest track would be about 40 feet above the street. Emergency escapes An emergency escape catwalk would be attached to each elevated track in the iris. In outlying areas such as West Seattle, where tracks would run side by side, a single catwalk would run between them. Shadows should not be an issue downtown since buildings already block the sun. By 1 p.m. half the street is shadowed and by 4 p.m., the whole street is darkened. The monorail is facing skepticism from property owners, including Washington Mutual Bank. WaMu and the Seattle Art Museum have announced the joint development of a new 40-story tower on the west side of Second Avenue, the monorail's preliminary route. in June Mayor Greg Nickels ordered monorail officials to study a layout on the other side of the street. Miles said the monorail could complement the art museum because visitors could look out through tall atrium windows at the moving trains. Matt Griffin, a veteran downtown developer involved with the WaMu- museum development, doubts that the bulk of monorail posts could be alleviated by broad sidewalks or taller tracks. "As a downtown we've made some great progress in creating a healthy, vibrant urban core and we've done a lot of work on making this a pedestrian environment," Griffin said. "I worry this would be a major step backwards, especially at a time we are trying to free ourselves from the viaduct." Staying on budget The monorail authority promised excellent design, but the public also expects the project to be built on budget. If those goals conflict, Executive Director Joel Horn has said he would seek to simplify the Green Line rather than risk cost overruns. Construction executives from Bombardier, a potential bidder to build the monorail, have raised concerns that irises would drive up costs. On the other hand, the latest designs show a reduction in station length from 160 feet to 130 feet, to save on land expenses and make stations fit gracefully with other buildings. Last year's conceptual budget allocated $8 million per station, more than the Vancouver, B.C., SkyTrain system spent for stations twice as large. There should be sufficient cash for public art, station windows and landscaping, monorail spokesman Paul Bergman said. Updated cost estimates will be produced soon, at the same time the design advances, he said. Mike Lindblom: 206-515-5631 or mlindblom@seattletimes.com PTP================================= http://www.thestranger.com/current/city6.html TheStranger.com Vol 12 No. 47, Aug 7 - Aug 13 2003 IMAGE CONSCIOUS Licata Mindful of Monorail Backlash by Erica C. Barnett and Josh Feit Despite repeated requests, the Seattle Monorail Project (SMP) has refused to release 105 top-secret computer-generated "visualizations" of the monorail route from Ballard to West Seattle, part of its draft environmental impact statement (DEIS), which the agency will make public on August 20. More than a dozen city staff members, from Seattle Department of Transportation monorail advisor Ethan Melone on down, were given a sneak peek at the controversial images last week. Monorail spokesperson Paul Bergman says the agency can't release the pictures because they're part of the DEIS, which isn't finished. "You don't release your [DEIS] in pieces. We want to make sure that what goes out has been fully evaluated," Bergman says. But because the photos represent the "worst-case scenario," it's also likely the SMP doesn't want to incite an uproar with bulky, unflattering images of the monorail. The existence of potentially controversial monorail images may help explain why SMP director Joel Horn lobbied against an August 4 city council vote to postpone amending land-use codes (increasing building heights and waiving nonsensical street "setback" requirements) that affect the line [Five to Four, July 10]. The council voted 6-3, at the behest of Nick Licata, to hold off on the amendments until after the DEIS (including the photos) is issued. While Licata soundly argued that "additional time will be helpful for the community to consider the ordinance," Horn is likely worried that the pictures will prejudice neighbors against allowing the council to amend the land-use codes. Horn's got his politics mixed up on this one. By rushing the amendments (which seem to have solid council support), Horn may be unwittingly creating the conditions for a backlash by neighbors who--on the merits of the issue--wouldn't have much to complain about. Licata, who has said he supports the code amendments, is politically savvy enough to give neighbors more time to see that he's right. While Horn correctly says codes need to be changed soon in order to prevent the agency from promising illegal designs, he evidently lacks Licata's fine- tuned political antennae. barnett@thestranger.com; josh@thestranger.com PTP======================================== http://seattlepi.newsource.com/opinion/132276_ltrs25.html Seattle Post-Intelligencer 25 Jul 2003 MONORAIL STATION Structure would damage sensitive salmon habitat We recently learned that the monorail project folks are promoting a site adjacent to Longfellow Creek as their preferred Delridge station location. There are other locations closer to Spokane Street that would be safely away from the creek, as well as more accessible to bus lines and vehicle/pedestrian connections. Locating the Delridge station next to the creek and watershed areas (with tracks crossing directly over the creek) will bring sediment changes to this carefully reconstructed riparian area. These changes will disrupt the habitats of insects, frogs, lizards, crawdads, fresh-water mussels, beaver and, of course, salmon and other fish. The station will also bring storm- water drainage alterations, litter, vibrations, noise, tall structures blocking the flight patterns of migrating birds and butterflies, diesel fuel spills from additional buses servicing the station, compaction of soils, heavy foot traffic to the creek trails, changes to shade patterns over the creek and destruction of trees, shrubs and shorelines. The destruction will be exacerbated by new business structures springing up near the station. in the past 10 years, millions of dollars and thousands of hours have been invested toward restoring Longfellow Creek and its watershed. This year, more salmon returned to Longfellow Creek than any other creek in the Seattle watershed, but they are not reproducing. There is a very delicate balance required to sustain the vitality of the creek. The construction of the monorail station at this site will have an impact on the natural life cycle of the salmon in Longfellow Creek. Julia Chase and Joe Aprile Seattle PTP============================================ http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/133684_monorailmemories05.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Tuesday, August 5, 2003 Monorail to ride into the sunset Council clears the way for demolition By KERY MURAKAMI AND JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS Since its inaugural ride at the World's Fair back in 1962, the speed of the Seattle Center Monorail has thrilled. ========================== MONORAIL'S TIMELINE The monorail has been part of the Seattle experience for more than 40 years. Click here to see a timeline (PDF format, 229K) ================================ its height has inspired. its columns -- gray and concrete -- have been derided. it's been ridden by millions -- even Elvis. And now it's nearing the end of the ride. ========================== P-I File The second Monorail car arrived in 1962 and was unloaded at Terry Avenue and Republican Street. Some damage occurred in the shipping. ================================== City Council members yesterday cleared the way for its demolition sometime in the next few years when they declared it to be a historic landmark, but at the same time rejected pleas from its fans that the tracks and concrete columns be preserved. Only the Alweg cars will be protected. Council members didn't dispute the Monorail's place in the city's history. But with the new West Seattle-to-Ballard line also slated to go through Belltown on Fifth Avenue, the idea of two lines running side by side was too much to stomach. Nobody wants two monorail lines on Fifth Avenue, Councilman Nick Licata said, and that includes the Seattle Center, which owns the old Monorail; the Seattle Monorail Project, which is developing the new monorail; and the residents and business owners in the area. He called the decision "very practical" and said following the normal landmarks process would have been "going through the motions" and "unproductive." But Councilwoman Margaret Pageler objected that it's another example of the Monorail getting special treatment from the city. "If you're the favored project, you'll get a waiver," Pageler complained. If there's a problem with the landmarks process, then it should be reformed for everybody, not just the Monorail, Pageler said. The Landmarks Preservation Board in April designated the Monorail, including the cars and original columns and guideways, as a historic landmark. Council President Peter Steinbrueck said he was displeased with overturning the landmarks board's recommendations. "It does not set a good example when the city of Seattle exempts itself" from the landmarks process, he said. =========================== P-I File Construction of the original Monorail began in April 1961. The T-shaped pylons lining Fifth Avenue weigh 54 tons each and were cast where they stand and then lifted into place by a crane. ===================================== Nevertheless, Steinbrueck was one of the seven-vote majority who approved protecting only the cars, though he said he did so "with consternation." Pageler and Councilman Richard Mciver voted no. A companion resolution introduced by Licata also passed. It said the old Monorail couldn't be demolished until there was a contract to build a new one, and that the Seattle Monorail Project must try to minimize the time between demolition and construction of the new one. Another provision said the city would have the right to put a remnant of the beams, guideways and cars up at the Seattle Center, although the display would not conflict with the new monorail's operation. A lot of memories Some say a part of the city's history will be lost with the demise of the original Monorail. It was a reminder of the World's Fair that, to Seattle, was like a bar mitzvah or a first driver's license, marking its passage into adulthood. It was a place for Elvis sightings, when that still seemed plausible, and where children thrilled at flying through the air. And from the beginning to now, it created memories. Here are a few: ========================== P-I File The Monorail car damaged in the 1971 crash was repaired and returned to service by March 1973 at cost of $100,000. ================================== "I was still in high school on Bainbridge island and spent a lot of my summer in Seattle watching the Monorail and Space Needle being built. The Monorail was a wonderful project to watch as it seemed to go up overnight. One day you would see an area cordoned off with traffic cones and a guy with a backhoe digging a hole. Next they would install the form and steel and pour the column base. In a day or two, there would be a road crew in to redo the asphalt and a base with bolts sticking up ready to mount the columns. ... "As far as the Elvis sighting goes, I was with some friends downtown when someone saw the big crowd at the Westlake Station. We stopped to look, and, sure enough, Elvis was there filming 'Meet Me at the Fair.' it was great fun to watch and be in the crowd. "He looked just like he does in the movie. He was young and good- looking, and all the girls around were excited. They were shooting the scenes around the Monorail station. Remember, young boys were not as smitten as girls were with him, so we watched for a few minutes and left. It was fun to see the movie in later years and say, 'Hey, I was there.' " -- Clark Dodge, staff chief engineer, Washington State Ferries "I was a midshipman at the Naval Academy back during the fair. i remember the Life magazine cover -- being proud I was from Seattle. i didn't get to ride the Alweg until 1964, however -- on my way to my first ship in Pearl Harbor. ... "I was 21 at the time. I don't recall getting an up-front seat. I remember it really 'flew,' very fast. At that age, fast was important. Back then there weren't many roads you could even do 55 mph on -- legally, that is." -- Ed Brighton "I remember my first ride on the Monorail, the Space Needle, the Bubbleator and a sighting of Elvis when he was still known to be alive. "All the memories were of a good time, except the waiting lines (especially at the Monorail Westlake Station). Kids don't take kindly to waiting lines! "Elvis? I saw him near the Coliseum. Riding the Monorail was more fun than seeing Elvis. After all, the Century 21 Exposition was about the 'future.' " -- Bob Glanzman "I was born in Seattle in January 1959, so I was 3 1/2 in 1962 during the Century 21 World's Fair. ============================= P-I File in 1971, the Monorail crashed into the safety bumper at Seattle Center. ===================================== "Riding the Monorail with my mother and grandfather (and the crowds of other people) back and forth from downtown during Century 21 is not just my clearest memory of the Seattle World's Fair but one of my earliest retained memories, period. The Monorail made a huge impression on me. It seemed like MAGIC! -- a flying carpet rising above the city." -- Sandi Hogben "Last Halloween, the driver had red contacts in his eyes. He said 'hi' to everybody." -- Ellie, 11, riding the Monorail recently "My father started driving the old street cars. Then he drove buses, and he retired driving the Monorail. One of his stories (was) about the time the three astronauts who went to the moon got on the Monorail. One of them wanted to drive the Monorail. But my dad wouldn't let them." -- Mike McMullen P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or kerymurakami@seattlepi.com PTP===================================== http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/133936_ltrs7.html Seattle Post-Intelligencer Thursday, August 7, 2003 Letters to the Editor THE MONORAIL Fans of the original dismayed about its fate Thanks for finally giving top coverage to the coming demolition of Seattle's original 1962 monorail. Of course, such coverage comes only at a time when the local icon's fate has already been sealed. City Councilman Nick Licata, who sponsored the ordinance clearing the way for this historic action, says that this was part of the plan for a new monorail that Seattle voters approved last year. Yet nobody -- in the media, in the pro-monorail campaign or in the opposition -- did much to inform the public that this was one of the sacrifices they were being asked to make in order to build a new system. Such a heads-up on this issue was especially important because when the plan was first submitted to voters in 1997, it was billed as an effort to "extend" the World's Fair landmark. That measure was passed. So now the promised "extension" of the old monorail will finally take place in a manner hardly anyone would have expected: it will be drawn and quartered. Russell Scheidelman Seattle Who knew demolition was part of the package? it is a sad day for folks who loved the monorail just the way it was. We feel betrayed. Would thousands of Seattleites have signed a petition titled "Demolish the Monorail"? Surely not. Charles H. Bagley Seattle

CONTENTS * Norfolk: Planners hopeful on new LRT plan Norfolk Virginian-Pilot August 4, 2003 * Seattle monorail with 65-foot-high stations? Seattle Times Tuesday, August 12, 2003 * Atlanta streetcar backers eye Portland model Atlanta Journal-Constitution 7/14/03 * Atlanta group pushes streetcar comeback Atlanta Journal Constitution June 30, 2003 PTP===================================== http://home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=57893&ran=2280 0 Norfolk Virginian-Pilot August 4, 2003 Proposed light rail line has new end point By DEBBIE MESSINA NORFOLK -- Norfolk's proposed starter light rail line has a new end point that makes the route shorter and cheaper and, consultants say, should attract more riders. The new eastern terminus also spares The Barry Robinson Center, a program for youth with emotional and behavioral problems. Center officials and parents worried that plans to locate a rail station on a corner of its campus would undermine its program. Hampton Roads Transit now wants the 8-mile rail line to stop near the intersection of Newtown and Kempsville roads instead of turning up Kempsville Road to Barry Robinson and Sentara Leigh Hospital. Instead, the hospital and other offices would be served by a feeder bus. City and transit officials said the change was made to qualify for federal funding. It shaves about $8 million and about a third of a mile off the project. Because the new station would be more accessible from interstate 264, it would also pick up a few more riders than the other station, consultants say. ''it makes sense on all fronts,'' said HRT chairman W. Randy Wright, a Norfolk city councilman. The new route will be presented in a public meeting at 7 p.m. Tuesday at the Fairlawn Recreation Center, 1132 Wade St. HRT has been working to modify the light rail proposal to meet a new federal cost-effectiveness measure that considers costs, ridership and travel time savings. Federal regulators in March said the Norfolk project did not meet the new standard. The station change, plus some other tweaks, have decreased the total project cost from $222 million to $207 million. The changes have also brought HRT closer to a new federal standard, which uses a complex formula to calculate a ''user benefit.'' The required benefit must be no more than $25. Norfolk has reduced its user benefit from $49.92 to $26.58. HRT and its consultants are still working to reach the $25 threshold by an Aug. 29 deadline. HRT officials could not provide specific numbers of homes and businesses that would be affected by the change, though they said it would be fewer than the original route. Barry Robinson was very vocal in its opposition to the original plan, dominating two public hearings earlier this year. ''it's a huge cloud that's been hanging over our families and our workers,'' said Charles V. McPhillips, a Barry Robinson trustee. ''To lift that, I can't tell you how beautiful that is.'' Wright said Barry Robinson's objections had ''minimal impact'' on the decision to alter the light rail's path. ''The truth of the matter is this thing is dollars and cents,'' he said. ''if we can save money and increase ridership, we're going to do it, period.'' The new alignment also provides an easier connection to Virginia Beach, HRT officials said. Although Virginia Beach soundly rejected the light rail nearly four years ago, a few council members in recent weeks have expressed a desire to connect the new Town Center development with downtown Norfolk via rail. ''it may be fate or serendipity, but obviously it facilitates a smoother transition into the Beach if that distant possibility becomes more concrete,'' said Michael Townes, HRT president and CEO. Virginia Beach is seeking to work with HRT to purchase the soon-to-be abandoned Norfolk Southern freight rail right of way. Norfolk would use the Norfolk portion for light rail. Virginia Beach wants to preserve its rail line possibly for a future transportation corridor that could include light rail. Virginia Beach, Norfolk and HRT officials are now working on an agreement to negotiate together for the purchase of the Norfolk Southern property. ''Our actions are certainly not predicated on what actions Virginia Beach might take,'' Wright said. ''We hope Virginia Beach comes on line, but if they don't, we're prepared to move forward.'' Reach Debbie Messina at debbie.messina@pilotonline.com or 446-2588. PTP========================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001480289_dige12m.ht ml Seattle Times Tuesday, August 12, 2003 Local Digest Monorail Project posts Green Line images on Web SEATTLE — Would a 65-foot-tall monorail station dominate your neighborhood? The Seattle Monorail Project has just published scores of proposed Green Line images at www.elevated.org. They do not depict actual designs but give a raw indication of the size of the stations. They show what officials have called a "worst-case scenario," with the maximum-sized columns and no landscaping, artwork or creative roof shapes. The pictures were to be disclosed within a draft environmental-impact statement scheduled for publication Aug. 29, but the agency released them early because of political pressure and high public interest. PTP============================================ Atlanta Journal-Constitution 7/14/03 Streetcar backers look West By HENRY UNGER The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Can streetcars in downtown Atlanta mirror their success in Portland? That's what a local group traveling there this week hopes to find out. The group, led by businessman Michael Robison and Atlanta City Councilman H. Lamar Willis, wants to lay track and put streetcars on Peachtree Street from downtown to Buckhead. The eight-mile line would cost an estimated $200 million. Organizers hope a streetcar line will spawn further commercial and residential development along the Peachtree spine of the city, as well as serve commuters, office workers and tourists traveling short distances. While many think of Peachtree as already quite developed, some business people say there is still opportunity for ambitious projects and infill development. Their inspiration comes from a much-touted streetcar project in Oregon, in which a $55 million public-private investment helped create more than $1 billion in redevelopment in what was a struggling Portland warehouse district. "What we really want to see is how viable this is for Atlanta," said Willis, chair of the council's Transportation Committee. "It definitely worked for Portland." in Portland, 44 projects, many of them mixed-use with retail on the ground floor and condos above, have been built since the 1997 announcement that a streetcar line would be constructed in the Pearl District, said Vicky Diede, the Northwest city's streetcar project manager. The line opened two years ago. Willis, Robison and others from Atlanta plan to meet with city officials, business leaders and consultants to learn about the project in detail. Then they'll come back to Atlanta, which last saw electric trolleys 40 years ago, to put the finishing touches on a private, nonprofit organization that would spearhead the effort on Peachtree. "Assuming everyone is as enthusiastic upon our return, as I suspect they will be, the final pieces of the group will be put into place," said Robison, chief executive of Atlanta-based Lanier Holdings, which owns garages and parking lots nationwide. When the group's board is finalized, there will be several "household names," Robison said. "Many voices need to be heard. There are different organizations, businesses and neighborhoods throughout the eight miles." After the board is formed, the first task will be to raise $100,000 for a feasibility study to look at potential ridership, revenue, expenses, financing and route options. As in Portland, landowners and businesses along Peachtree could create a special district to tax themselves for the streetcar. They may be willing because the value and density of the area around the route is likely to increase over time. Other money might come from a parking surcharge that could support a bond issue, private contributions and government sources. Depending on how much money is raised, the Peachtree line could be done in chunks or all at once. In Portland, 2.5 miles of track have been laid in each direction. Another 0.6 of a mile is being constructed now, with an additional 0.6 of a mile planned after that. "In Portland, there were few federal funds," Willis said. "It was mostly a local initiative. There has to be a similar creative mode in Atlanta, given the competition for federal transit dollars. We have to find a mechanism to pay for it without competing with MARTA and other agencies." Willis believes the group will be able to do so, despite what appears to be a daunting task. "It has been a very exciting time," he said. "I have gotten a countless number of calls about it. I got stopped at the dry cleaners. They think it will be a tremendous growth opportunity for the city of Atlanta." Willis and others acknowledge that streetcars are just one idea to solve metro Atlanta's traffic woes. "I think it's great for that corridor, but I don't think it's going to solve the regionwide problems," said Sam Williams, president of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce. "We certainly applaud local business districts doing things on their own, but we're keeping our pressure on regionwide solutions." PTP=========================================== Atlanta Journal Constitution June 30, 2003 Stoking desire for streetcars: Group wants tracks along Peachtree Street in the next few years Henry Unger - Staff After a 40-year hiatus, the streetcar appears to be on the comeback track in Atlanta. A group of business, community and political leaders is in the final stages of forming a private, nonprofit organization to explore laying track and putting streetcars on Peachtree Street from downtown to Buckhead. "I would say it's a 70 to 80 percent chance a streetcar will roll down Peachtree in the next five years," said City Councilman H. Lamar Willis, who chairs the council's transportation committee. Peachtree has been selected because it's the spine of the city. Organizers hope a streetcar line will spawn further commercial and residential development along the route, as well as serve commuters, office workers and tourists traveling short distances. Once the nonprofit organization is formed, possibly within the next few weeks, the first step will be raising funds for a $100,000 feasibility study, said Michael Robison, chairman of the group and chief executive of Atlanta-based Lanier Holdings, which owns garages and parking lots throughout the country. Some money for the study, which will explore potential ridership, revenues, expenses, financing and route options, already has been committed. Robison does not expect a problem raising the rest. "At virtually every turn, people are excited about getting the project off the ground," he said. "It will help create a pedestrian mall along Peachtree." Eventually, the group hopes to put together private and public funds for an eight-mile line along Peachtree Street from Five Points to Buckhead, Robison said. The estimated cost is in the $200 million neighborhood, including the streetcars. As transportation projects go, that is relatively inexpensive. A subway project, for example, costs about 10 times more per mile than a streetcar line. "We're very supportive of the streetcar," said MARTA General Manager Nathaniel Ford. "Anything that increases mobility within our service area is good for MARTA." Down the road, especially if the Peachtree line is successful, public officials, business people and community leaders have discussed using streetcars on other routes. Streetcars could connect with trains or buses to form the proposed 22-mile Belt Line transit loop around Atlanta. They could go from Midtown to Atlantic Station across the yellow bridge; from the Emory/Centers for Disease Control area to the Lindbergh MARTA station; around Perimeter Center; and from downtown out Memorial Drive to Decatur. Robison, Willis and others in the group are getting their inspiration for the Peachtree line from a much-touted streetcar project in Portland, Ore. A $55 million private-public investment there has helped spawn more than $1 billion in redevelopment in what was a struggling warehouse district. Forty-four projects, many of them mixed-use developments with retail on the ground floor and condos above, have been constructed since the 1997 announcement that a streetcar would be built in the Pearl District, said Vicky Diede, Portland's streetcar project manager. "We're not claiming every bit of development is streetcar, but there is a synergy between streetcar and development, and the streetcar was a very big contributing force," Diede said. Two tracks running on each side of a street symbolize "permanence" to developers, meaning a long-term investment is not likely to be wasted. Buses, by contrast, do not have that kind of appeal to developers because routes can be changed or eliminated rapidly, increasing the risk for their investments. What's more, streetcars can encourage "linear development" --- up and down the entire route --- because passengers can get on and off every few blocks. With subways, developers generally cluster projects around stations. Diede said Portland's real estate market, interest rates and the right demographics all came together to make the project a success. The line started operating two years ago. in Atlanta, streetcar organizers are motivated by several factors: A significant portion of the funds may be easier and quicker to obtain because landowners, businesses and developers along the route may be willing to help finance the project. That's because the value and density of the area around the route is likely to increase over the long haul. While many think of Peachtree as already quite developed, some business people say there is still opportunity for ambitious projects and infill development. in Portland, the number of housing units along the streetcar line has risen to 100 per acre, from 15 per acre, generating considerably more revenue for developers, landowners and retailers. The streetcar, which existed in one form or another in Atlanta from 1871 to 1963, has a certain appeal with passengers that a bus cannot replicate. "Often, transit discussions focus on building something other people will use, so they will get out of our way on the highway," said Charlie Hales, former Portland commissioner in charge of transportation who now heads transit planning for the HDR consulting firm. "But these streetcar projects are different. We build those because we want to use them in the downtown where we live and work." in addition to Atlanta, Hales said several other cities are considering streetcar projects, including Charlotte and Winston-Salem, N.C., Miami and Seattle. Portland had a workable game plan Atlanta might be able to copy, at least in part. Peachtree businesses could create a special district to tax themselves for the streetcar, Robison said. Other money might come from a parking surcharge that could support a bond issue, private contributions and government sources. Depending on how much money is raised, the Peachtree line could be done in chunks or all at once. In Portland, 2.5 miles of track have been laid in each direction. Another 0.6 of a mile is being constructed in each direction now, with an additional 0.6 of a mile planned after that. Unlike subways or buses, streetcars are designed to go slow, about 15 mph. Many people use them to go about five or 10 blocks. Leon Eplan, a former Atlanta planning commissioner serving as a consultant to the streetcar group, said there are three basic markets for the Peachtree streetcar: workers riding MARTA who need to go several additional blocks between rail stations to reach their offices; tourists and conventioneers; and workers who need to meet people five, 10 or 15 blocks away for a meeting, lunch or dinner. "People can quickly hop on and off a streetcar," Eplan said. For short trips, he said, catching a streetcar can be preferable to driving a car, grabbing a taxi or going underground for the subway. "I think this could ... effectively open up a walking neighborhood up and down the Peachtree spine," added developer Charles Brewer, who said he will "quite likely" support the project financially. "A streetcar is a pedestrian accelerator." A streetcar line is not that difficult to construct. The track bed is about a foot deep, so there is not much disruption to the utility lines running under the street. Only a few blocks are laid at a time, which also minimizes the disruption. Power for the streetcar comes from an overhead electrical line that connects to the top of the non-polluting vehicle. And, finally, Peachtree line organizers believe streetcars can co-exist with cars better than buses do because streetcars are more predictable. They travel at a specific speed and stay on the tracks, allowing drivers to go around them or ride over the lines behind them. Buses are less predictable, changing lanes and speed frequently. Organizers point out that the Peachtree line would be different from streetcar lines in Tampa and Memphis that focus on tourists, moving them around a concentrated area. "The message of the tourist trolley is that this is transpor-tainment, a fun ride," said consultant Hales. "But the Portland project and what is now taking place in Tacoma [Wash.] ... send the signal that this is serious transit." While streetcars in Atlanta likely would get more people using mass transit, organizers do not see it as a panacea for the area's congestion problems. "I want to be perfectly clear that this is not the sole answer," said consultant Eplan. "Each technology has great benefits and some limitations. What we need is for each technology --- heavy rail, light rail, bus and streetcar --- to operate in the most favorable circumstance. ... And each technology needs to be tied together to the others in order to provide seamless movement." ATLANTA'S STREETCAR HISTORY 1871 Atlanta's first street railroad rolls away from downtown, pulled by a single horse along mostly unpaved streets to West End. 1889 The city's first electric streetcar tootles off to inman Park, Atlanta's first suburban residential development. 1900 The Atlanta City Council requires streetcar companies to provide "separate cars or compartments" for "the white and colored races." The streetcar operators evade the expense of providing separate cars, but require blacks to sit in the back. 1905 The first streetcars roll between Atlanta and Marietta. Within a few years, the dominant streetcar company has 195 miles of track, not counting the Marietta line, and serves Atlanta, Decatur, East Point, College Park and Hapeville. 1928 Six people die when two streetcars collide head-on near Marietta. It was Atlanta's worst transit accident to that point. 1949 The trackless trolley, an electric bus that gets its power from overhead cables, supersedes tracked trolleys. 1950 Atlanta Transit Co.'s trackless trolleys and buses operate over 244 miles of streets, and Atlantans average 241 rides apiece each year. 1963 Last of the trackless trolleys leaves streets, pushed out by diesel buses. --- Compiled by staff writer Hank Ezell based on information from the two- volume "Mule to MARTA" by Jean Martin.

CONTENTS * Houston: Adopted plan has less rail, more road Houston Chronicle Aug. 12, 2003 * Houston Metro adopts rail & road plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 12, 2003 * Houston: Critics try to derail rail in mobility plan Houston Chronicle Aug. 11, 2003 * Houston: Make a deal on roads & rail HoustonChronicle Aug. 8, 2003 PTP================================= Houston Chronicle Aug. 12, 2003 Metro reshapes funding plan, offers less track, more for roads By LUCAS WALL Metro scaled back the first phase of its 2025 mass-transit plan Tuesday, voting to slash rail expansion to 40 miles while continuing to help fund local roads for five additional years. The board's 8-1 vote to spend $774 million more on "general mobility" street projects means the Metropolitan Transit Authority must withhold financing for 33 miles of additional rail extensions. With the plan -- which includes continuing to give 25 percent of its sales- tax revenue to pouring asphalt and concrete in Houston, Harris County and other member cities five years beyond the current 2009 cut-off date -- Metro misses out on the potential to double that money to $1.55 billion with federal transit funds. That led to the decision Tuesday to kill financing for three rail segments, those to both Houston airports and Fort Bend County. The transit authority's board of directors will meet Monday to finalize ballot language and formally send the plan and financing package to voters in the Nov. 4 election. The package envisions paying for $4.6 billion in new rail, bus, and road projects through 2025. Metro is expected to ask voters for authorization to issue $980 million in bonds to accelerate construction. With Tuesday's decision, Metro met demands from the county and small cities to continue doling out road funding a few more years, limiting that as a political issue in the election. But the transit authority still expects a spirited battle against its plan from a coalition of interests opposed to inner-city rail construction, including suburban businesses and land developers. Metro board Chairman Arthur Schechter said the fall campaign will not be easy, but polls show a majority of voters want the authority to build more rail. Houston's first light rail line is scheduled to open Jan. 1; the new plan would extend that 7 1/2-mile Main Street line in nine segments opening between 2008 and 2019. "I don't think in the history of our community any effort has ever been made on any project to get the kind of community input and feedback that we've gotten," Schechter said. "The future of our city is really at stake in what we are doing right now." Schechter said he believes the public will endorse the package. Houston- area residents consistently rank traffic congestion as the region's No. 1 problem. "We end up with a plan that connects all the major business centers, that provides access in some of the neighborhoods where we have the highest ridership," he said. "It makes sense as an urban rail system." Two weeks ago, the board passed a 22-year transit blueprint that includes 73 miles of rail; an expansion of the commuter-bus system to 250 miles; adding 47 new bus routes that would increase service 50 percent; and building 18 additional transit centers and Park & Ride lots. That plan did not include any provision for road construction. The board compromised Tuesday by maintaining the blueprint as a guide for future development but agreeing to seek funding for only pieces of it this year. The two directors who represent the 14 small-city members had voted against the transit blueprint July 31 because it included no provision for roads. James Cumming and Thomas Whitson changed their votes Tuesday, agreeing to support the financing package because of the guarantee Metro will keep doling out road money. "It gives both sides something," Cumming said. Taylor Lake Village Mayor Natalie O'Neill said she's pleased with the vote. "Once rail gets in place and the greater Houston community gets to ride it, taste it, smell it, feel it, then there's going to be an outcry for more rail," O'Neill said. "But you can't just not fund road repairs and maintenance. You need roads to get to the rail stations." Not all mayors were content with the decision, however. Dee Srinivasan of Hedwig Village said she had expected the group of small cities to vote "no" Tuesday but three mayors agreed to support the plan at the last minute. "I am not happy," said Srinivasan, who expressed concern that Metro could dip into road funds for rail or bus projects without a written contract. "My thoughts are not printable." Schechter, however, promised during Tuesday's meeting that Metro will not go back on its pledge to continue full road funding for five additional years. He said Harris County and member cities now have a decade to figure out other ways to finance their streets after the road payments expire in 2014. Metro officials stressed that although they chopped rail lines to the airports and Missouri City out of the plan, they would seek funding for their construction later. Art Morales, who cast the sole "no" vote, said he could not support the plan because he believes the revenue projections are too high and he doesn't think Metro can afford everything it promises. "The bottom line is what goes into the bank," said Morales, an investment banker who represents Harris County on the board. "Although I do support rail, I have a serious concern about the fiscal responsibility." Concerns over whether Metro's 22-year plan is fiscally sound have expanded recently, including a report issued Monday by Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt that states Metro's tax-collection projections are $3 billion too high. But Metro officials countered the criticism at Tuesday's board meeting, contending they have built a $1.2 billion contingency into the budget and plan a $1.1 billion surplus in 2025. Francis Britton, Metro's chief financial officer, walked the board through a lengthy explanation of how he came up with the numbers that form the basis for the plan. He stressed that Metro's projections are in line with the historic growth rates the transit authority has seen since it began operations in 1979. Skeptics were not satisfied by Britton's presentation. "The sales-tax projections are too aggressive and therefore really shouldn't be the basis for a sound plan," Bettencourt said. "This plan, as adopted, is going to lead to either additional tax increases or service reductions. There is no other outcome." Barry Klein, a member of the Business Committee Against Rail, said his group remains opposed to the plan because it fundamentally believes rail is not an efficient transportation solution. Metro consultant Steve Beard presented data to support the authority's arguments that more mass transit will help. The figures show, for example, that the pumped-up rail and bus system could help eliminate the need for 82 new lanes on area freeways, the equivalent of roughly 10 new lanes on each of the county's eight major highway arteries. RESOURCES Graphic: Highlights of Metro rail financing plan This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/front/2045023 PTP======================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 12, 2003 Metro adopts plan for funding rail and road expansions By LUCAS WALL Metro's board of directors voted 8-1 this morning to submit a financing package to voters that will pay for 40 miles of light rail extensions and continue funding local road construction and maintenance through 2014. The plan, which includes nine light rail segments, will appear on the Nov. 4 ballot for voter endorsement. The package of new transit projects through 2025 is estimated to cost $8.9 billion. Metro will ask voters to approve $980 million in bonds to accelerate construction of the rail and bus projects. Art Morales, representing Harris County, cast the lone vote against the package. Two directors, who represent the 14 small cities who are part of the Metropolitan Transit Authority, changed their votes of two weeks ago, when they voted against the overall transit blueprint. Morales said he could not support the plan because he believes the financial projections are overly optimistic and he doesn't think Metro can afford to build all the new rail lines, offer a 50 percent increase in bus service, and continue giving away 25 percent of its sales-tax revenue to Houston, Harris County and the 14 small cities for road projects. "The bottom line is what goes into the bank," Morales said, arguing Metro's sales-tax revenue projections through 2025 are too high. "Although I do support rail, I have a serious concern about the fiscal responsibility." Concerns over whether Metro's 22-year plan is fiscally sound have expanded in recent days, including a report issued Monday by Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt that contends Metro's tax-collection projections are $3 billion too high over the period. But Metro officials debunked the criticism at this morning's board meeting, contending they have built a $1 billion contingency into the project budget and plan a $1 billion surplus in 2025. Francis Britton, Metro's chief financial officer, walked the board through a lengthy explanation of how he came up with the numbers that form the basis for the plan. Britton stressed Metro's projections are based on the reports of two Texas economists and are in line with the historic growth rates the transit authority has seen since it began operations in 1979. "If the view of the sales-tax income is worse than we forecast and we get less of it ... we can still adjust the plan," Britton told the board. "We would not do things as fast as the current plans call for." The nine light rail segments will extend the Main Street line north to Northline, southeast to Gulfgate Mall, south to Sunnyside, southwest to the Galleria and Hillcroft, and west along interstate 10 from downtown to the Loop and on to the Galleria. Rail lines are scheduled to be finished by 2019. Excluded from the financing package but part of the overall system plan to be funded later are light rail extensions to both Houston airports plus a commuter train to Missouri City. Metro officials stressed they will seek funds for those projects later but could not include them in the November bond issue because current projections do not show enough revenue to pay for them. The board meets again Monday to vote on the language voters will see on the November ballot. That will launch the campaign on the referendum, which is expected to be controversial even though the transit authority met a key demand of rail opponents by agreeing to fund the "general mobility" road payments for five more years through 2014. Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter said the authority has finalized a plan that should attract broad support from voters, who in recent polls consistentlyrank traffic congestion as the Houston region's No. 1 problem. Schechter said Harris County and member cities now have a decade to figure out other ways to finance their streets so they won't need to rely on Metro after the road payments expire in 2014. Barry Klein, a member of the Business Committee Against Rail, said his group remains opposed to the plan, because it fundamentally believes rail is not an efficient transportation solution. Metro consultant Steve Beard presented data to support the authority's arguments that rail will help relieve congestion. The figures show, for example, that the pumped-up rail and bus system by 2025 could help eliminate the need for 82 new lanes on area freeways, the equivalent of roughly 10 lanes each on the county's eight major highway arteries. This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/topstory2/2043844 PTP======================================== Houston Chronicle Aug. 11, 2003 Will Metro package be derailed? Critics say money is 'simply not there' for expansion plan By LUCAS WALL Metro's board is expected to approve a financing package for its 2025 transit expansion plan this morning that would build 39 miles of rail and extend payments to its member governments for road construction and maintenance another five years. Several critics said Monday that the Metropolitan Transit Authority can't afford the latest proposal of what it would send to voters in November. "That money, in my opinion, is simply not there," said Harris County Tax Assessor-Collector Paul Bettencourt. "The public needs to see real numbers before real solutions can be considered. We have not seen those real numbers." Bettencourt, at a Monday afternoon news conference, took reporters through an analysis of Metro's numbers his office compiled. It shows the transit plan projects almost $3 billion more in sales-tax revenue through 2025 than can be assumed using actual data from the previous two decades. Metro projects an average 5.4 percent annual growth rate in sales-tax collections over the next 22 years, higher than the average 4.3 percent annual growth rate since 1983. Metro said its forecast is based on the reports of two economists it hired to generate the money estimates and it has money set aside in case there is a shortfall. The sales-tax numbers are critical to Metro's 22-year plan because the penny tax makes up the majority of the transit authority's revenue. And each dollar raised locally is eligible for a federal matching dollar for rail and bus expansion projects. The two Metro board members who represent 14 small cities are expected to vote against the financing package today, as they did against the overall system plan last month. The cities have demanded Metro maintain its giveaway of 25 percent of its 1-cent sales tax for roads, a program dubbed "general mobility." While pleased the board is looking at extending the road funding from 2009 -- when current agreements expire -- to 2014, the small cities remain concerned about Metro's finances. "I would have to say, with 95 percent certainty, the multi-cities are not going to agree to this," said Hedwig Village Mayor Dee Srinivasan. "Financially there are no details of what they are going to go forward with. There's nothing in writing. Metro has not committed themselves to anything." Srinivasan said she shares Bettencourt's worries that Metro's sales-tax projections are too high and if they fail to materialize, the transit authority will take money from the general mobility fund to pay for rail and bus expansion. She said the cities also worry about the fate of Metro's road project fund, which gives small communities the chance to pay for massive street jobs that would otherwise overwhelm their budgets. "it's fine for them to make verbal commitments to continue for five years the 25 percent mobility payments, but if they can't put any teeth in it, i can't say, 'Let's go for it,' " Srinivasan said, wondering why Metro intends to vote on financing today when it has another five weeks left to place a referendum on the Nov. 4 ballot. Board member Art Morales, who represents Harris County, is also expected to vote "no" today. He opposed the system plan last month, which includes 73 miles of rail, in part because he doesn't trust the revenue projections. "I'm still uncomfortable with the assumptions we're using," he said at the July 31 meeting. The criticism is hurting Metro's efforts to build a broad consensus on the financing package so it can be approved by a wide margin of voters in November. Ballot issues in Houston that face an organized campaign against them have historically been much more difficult to pass than those with token opposition. "We have responded to what we believed was a plan given to us by people who were 'on the other side' who opposed rail, who continue to be concerned about the 25 percent," said Metro Chairman Arthur Schechter, who spent Monday shuttling around trying to nail down a final deal. "The 39-mile proposal, in my mind, creates a (rail) system that can stand alone and would require no further authorization. We've ended up with a good inner-city urban system." A recent poll conducted for rail supporters shows two-thirds of those questioned favor rail expansion but about half want to see Metro continue funding roads as well. A plan that mixed both elements, such as the one expected to be approved today, drew the greatest support. Metro's board gathered for a workshop Monday to discuss options, a meeting that was not announced to the news media. Also under consideration today but less likely, Schechter said, is a proposal floated last month to slice the road payments to 12 1/2 percent and extend them to 2019. That faces greater opposition because it reduces the percentage voters agreed to in 1988 and would send Houston, Harris County and the 14 small cities scrambling to replace the lost Metro money after 2009. Regarding the criticism over sales-tax projections, Schechter said Metro decided to take the average of the two economists' reports and it has built a 15 percent contingency into the expansion plan to cover a deficit if one were to materialize. Metro has run into trouble this year with overly optimistic sales-tax forecasts. It's running an estimated $44 million below budget because an economic rebound it predicted this year has yet to occur. Texas is expecting a second straight year of sales-tax declines thanks to the slump, which would be the first time that has happened, the state comptroller's office reported Friday. instead of a forecasted 6.1 percent growth in tax collection this year, Metro has seen a 4.9 percent decrease. The problem isn't unique to Houston. In Dallas, lower-than-expected tax collections have left the transit agency there $38 million in the red. It put in a request last week for federal funds to keep its trains and buses running. "Nobody can certify what can go on 25 years from now," Schechter said. "We're doing the best we can." http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/metropolitan/2042801 PTP=========================================== HoustonChronicle Aug. 8, 2003 Editorial DO THE DEAL Mobility consensus exists, just split the difference A billion-dollar transportation project for the Houston area is hundreds of millions of dollars over budget before it has really begun. It will cut into shopping centers and neighborhoods. Lawsuits and community groups seek to stop or alter it. Not a single voter approved it. Light rail? No, the widening of the Katy Freeway, including a four-lane Harris County toll road. if anything proves that Houston cannot concrete its way out of pollution and congestion, the badly needed Katy widening does. Creative mass transit, planned development, shorter commutes and other voluntary lifestyle changes must be part of Houston's mobility solution. in the last eight months, three surveys of residents in the Metropolitan Transit Authority's service area found that about two-thirds thought rail was a vital or important part of Houston's transportation system. To date, most complaints about proposed rail extensions are that rail is not coming to residents' neighborhoods fast enough. Unfortunately, among rail's few opponents are wealthy and powerful individuals accustomed to getting their way and profiting from it. If Metro can engineer a compromise with these developers and politicians without gutting its long-range transit plan, there is little reason not to do so. Metro officials have proposed giving Harris County and member cities $823 million for road maintenance between now and 2009. Representatives of small-city mayors (and others who don't want every dollar of Metro's sales tax to fund transit) want the road subsidies continued through 2013 or longer. This should not be a deal-breaker. Metro and transit opponents could split the difference, stretching out transit construction and allowing cities more time to adjust their road budgets. Doing the deal now would preserve the existing pro-rail consensus. It would decisively end the punishing anti- transit campaign of some developers, highway contractors and obliging politicians. Doing the deal now at long last would move Houston's mobility forward at a pace approaching that of its rival metropolises. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This article is: http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/2038744

CONTENTS * Portland LRT & urban renewal show way for Seattle South Seattle Star Aug. 6 - 19, 2003 Vol. 2, No. 16 * Seattle monorail tax revenue falling short SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 8, 2003 * Highway policy change threatens historic preservation New York Times August 9, 2003 PTP======================================= http://www.southseattlestar.com/index.asp?page=/issues/August.6.2003/r ail.html South Seattle Star Aug. 6 - 19, 2003 Vol. 2, No. 16 Lessons from Portland Photo courtesy Tri-Met A test run for Portland's newest light rail line By Margie Slovan What's the right track for Rainier Valley? What has Portland got that we don't? Transportation, for one. The city of Portland, Or. has one of the best-designed light rail systems in the country. Business has grown up around the light rail lines. Tri-Met, Oregon's equivalent to Sound Transit, says the trains—known as MAX—carry 10,000 people more than projected and have inspired $500 million in development along one spur. "We don't . . . say development happened in Portland because of light rail," the agency's director of strategic planning told the Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce back in 1999. "We believe a lot of development happened differently because of light rail." The Federal Transit Administration says Tri-Met has more riders than any transit system in the country of its size. Portland's interstate line, due to be completed next spring, runs through Northeast Portland—an area of many different immigrant populations and interest groups. Sound familiar? interstate is a lot like what Sound Transit's line might look like if and when it goes through Rainier Valley. it didn't just happen by itself. Kim Knox is the project manager for Shiels Obletz Johnson, the consulting firm that is handling the construction. Before that she worked directly for Tri-Met. "The way they came up with the money was a designation of an urban renewal district in that corridor," she says. The Portland City Council drew an imaginary line around that part of Portland where the interstate line was planned and figured out what kinds of improvements they wanted to make. Except for the financing, it's a lot like Washington state's "community renewal law," in existence since 1957, which allows a city or county to buy up land in blighted areas and redevelop it. The city of Seattle did this 30 years ago in the Central District (between Yesler and Atlantic Street) and also in the University District in order to improve the northeast campus, says Hugh Spitzer, a constitutional law expert who works for the Seattle law firm of Foster Pepper & Shefelman. The "community renewal" designation has been little used in Washington state in recent years, but a 2002 amendment to the law, which gives it more flexibility, is sparking interest among city planners around the state. "Under the old law," says Spitzer, "the city could condemn property, assemble it and sell it to the highest bidder." in the case of the Central District property, nobody was interested . . . not until three or four years ago, when the area began to gentrify. "Now, the city can find developers they know are interested," says Spitzer, "and work closely with them to acquire the property and get it redeveloped." We asked the city of Seattle if they'd ever considered making the light rail alignment along MLK a community renewal area. The designation would allow the city to buy up land along the light rail line and work with developers to create buildings where displaced businesses could go. As the Star has been reporting for the last few months, many immigrant businesses are in danger of being displaced from the Valley because of a lack of infrastructure. "I don't think the city had an interest in doing it," says Steve Johnson of the Office of Economic Development. He says the recent amendments to the law may make it more interesting to the Community Development Fund, but right now "the CDF has too much on its plate to seriously consider this an option." in a state that has few tools for economic development, this is one that seems to be overlooked. "Because of a convergence of court decisions and constitutional provisions," says Spitzer, "Washington state has about the toughest time in the country...to pull off effective community renewal and land assembly." These include strict limitations on lending of public credit and on buying up public land for private use. But there are ways around that. Another thing Portland did was create a Public Development Authority (PDA) for transit development, which is accountable to the city but functions almost like a private developer. City housing planner Eric Pravitz says it's as if the city owned its own development company. "So when we come up with visions for how a place should be developed, that entity can actually go in and buy property to fill out that vision." it is something the city could do, but it is difficult because of the state constitutional restrictions. Henry Markus is the senior project manager for King County. A former planner for Tri-Met in Portland, he is now working on transit development for Northgate and the Convention Center. He says the cities of Kent and Burien have figured out ways to buy up land for these kinds of developments. "If you want to do it and have money, a city council and a mayor who will let you, you can do it," he says. Still another tool for economic development might be to create a tax increment financing (TIF) district for Rainier Valley. The city could redevelop an area and calculate how much property taxes would increase as a result. The city could sell bonds, build infrastructure and get the money back when property taxes went up. "In the right hands," says Kim Knox, "It is a goodly powerful tool." in fact, tax increment financing paid for the urban renewal program that fostered improvements along Portland's interstate line. Washington state, however, allows TIFs in only the most limited form. During the last legislative session in Olympia, State Rep. Eric Pettigrew introduced a TIF bill aimed at supporting economically distressed areas like Rainier Valley, but the legislation was shot down as a handout to big developers. He plans to rework it and try again. "My primary motivation right now," said Pettigrew last week, "is figuring out how to get more money into the area to support HomeSight, SEED and the businesses that are going to be displaced. [HomeSight and SEED are nonprofit developers in Rainier Valley.] My main focus is . . . trying to lower the cost of housing." The more that people live around light rail lines, the more likely light rail will succeed, according to transit experts. PTP============================================== http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/134250_monorail08.asp SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 8, 2003 Monorail revenue falls short Vehicle excise-tax income 50% off projections in first month By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER Vehicle-tab taxes, which supply the sole source of revenue for the Seattle Monorail Project, came in nearly 50 percent below projections for the month of June, the first month the tax was collected. in April, the monorail, using information from the state Department of Licensing, projected that the agency would receive $4.2 million monthly in tax revenue. In fact, it received $2.2 million for the month of June. The revenue comes from a 0.85 percent motor vehicle excise tax levied on the depreciated value of vehicles owned by Seattle residents. That amounts to $85 on a car worth $10,000 and $170 on a $20,000 vehicle. Despite concerns expressed by some monorail supporters about the revenue shortfall, Joel Horn, the monorail's executive director, insisted yesterday that even if that trend continues, the monorail will still be built at its planned 14-mile length within the revenue raised. But if the revenue trend persists, it could mean that the monorail's critics were right when they predicted last year that many Seattle residents would seek to evade the tax by registering their vehicles to a post office box outside the city, leaving the monorail short of cash. Horn said it is too early to reach such a conclusion. The revenue figures are just for one month -- the first month the new tax is being collected, Horn said. it is too early to assume that future tax collections will be so far below projections. Also, although the monorail assumed monthly tax revenue of $4.2 million in putting together this year's budget, the original monorail plan was based on an assumption of $3.2 million monthly revenue, meaning revenues are 33 percent short of what was assumed in that plan. And, Horn said, tax revenues are only one factor among many and the project has many opportunities to make it up. These include: Vehicle-tab tax revenue taken in by the state generally is growing faster from one year to the next than assumed in the monorail's financial plan. inflation in construction costs is running about 70 percent less than assumed in the plan. The monorail project is at such an early stage that the monorail authority can make many changes to save money. Changes could be made to the design, the alignment, the stations and the environmental mitigations. "I'm confident we can design a project that can fit our revenue stream, because we have so much control over the project still," Horn said. But others were less sanguine. Peter Sherwin, a monorail supporter who ran Seattle's two monorail initiative campaigns, said that if the shortfall cannot be rectified, "of course, that's a serious matter." City Councilman Nick Licata, who learned about the shortfall from someone outside the monorail, said yesterday that he wrote a letter earlier this week to Horn telling him "It is critical to let the public know you still intend on building the entire system." Licata, a strong supporter of the monorail, said the letter urged the monorail authority to "tell the public what is going on before the public finds out from the press." Yesterday, Licata said he worries that the project, which used to be very open to the public, has become less so as it focuses on the mechanics of building the project. "I think they're being a little naive in thinking issues like this will go away or they can explain them at a later date," he said. Horn said the monorail will lay out all the facts at a finance committee meeting Aug. 21, when it will also have figures for a second month of tax collections and perhaps a better idea of why tax revenues are falling so short of projections. Joni Earl, chief executive officer of Sound Transit, which also gets part of its revenue from a vehicle-tab tax, said her agency had noticed a drop in vehicle-tab revenue for its North King County subarea, which is made up mostly of Seattle, beginning about July of last year. Part of it could be ZIP code issues as to who lives inside or outside subarea boundaries, she said, but she added, "I also think there's evasion." Paul Bergman, a spokesman for the monorail project, said it is illegal for a Seattle resident to register a car to a post office box outside the city to avoid paying the tax. The monorail authority asked the Legislature in January to pass a law imposing penalties for such evasion, but the bill never went anywhere. Explanations for the shortfall were far from clear yesterday. The Department of Licensing, which collects the tax, and monorail authority gave sharply contrasting accounts of what is going on. Horn said the department told him that vehicle dealers are "confused" about collecting the tax and that there often are bugs to work out in getting people to pay a new tax. However, Gigi Zenk, a spokeswoman for the Licensing Department, said, "We haven't been having any problems." Zenk said the department is very confident that it is collecting the taxes correctly and has no indication that dealers are confused. She said the department has worked closely with the monorail on ZIP code and boundary issues to ensure that all Seattle residents are being billed. Everybody billed has paid, Zenk said. Horn said the monorail has been working to get the department to begin taxing the vehicles of people who move into Seattle from outside the state, but Zenk, disagreeing with Horn, said doing so would require a change in the law. Although Horn said the monorail got its forecasts from the Licensing Department, Zenk said, "We don't do forecasts. We collect taxes." Zenk said the department provides anybody who asks data on the vehicles that are registered at Seattle addresses and a depreciation schedule set by the Legislature. She said the department is confident its information is correct. PTP======================================== New York Times August 9, 2003 Your Neighborhood Highway By RICHARD MOE WASHINGTON if you lived through the mid-1960's in an American city, your memories of the period are probably punctuated by the crash of the wrecking ball. In those days, the federal government's "urban renewal" program and the construction of the interstate System were operating in high gear, flattening older buildings and even entire neighborhoods from coast to coast. Eventually, Congress put the brakes on such destruction by adopting several important pieces of legislation, including the 1966 Department of Transportation Act. Specifically, Section 4(f) of the act states unequivocally that transportation officials must give paramount consideration to the protection of historic properties in planning their projects, making it the strongest federal preservation law on the books. it has been invoked to great success, keeping countless historic places from being sacrificed to America's seemingly insatiable appetite for asphalt. The law prevented, for example, the construction of an elevated highway between the Mississippi riverfront and the historic French Quarter of New Orleans, and it helped persuade officials to build a tunnel under Baltimore's harbor instead of a bridge that would have loomed above Fort McHenry. Unfortunately, the Bush administration has made changes that will eviscerate the law, and Congress will vote on them shortly. The proposed revisions would undo the most vital protection: forbidding highway construction at historic sites "unless there is no feasible and prudent alternative." instead, developers would merely be asked to conduct procedural reviews that "take into account" any historic resources that might be affected by their projects. The message to road-builders is unmistakable: try to avoid destroying America's heritage unless it's just too much trouble. That's a loophole big enough to drive a bulldozer through. The revision effort is largely fueled by the perception in some quarters that measures intended to protect natural and cultural treasures cause major delays in road projects. That is dead wrong. A 2002 report by the General Accounting Office found that the studies repeatedly cited as justification for weakening preservation and environmental reviews are based on anecdotal evidence rather than fact. Another report, this one prepared by the Federal Highway Administration itself, attributes road-building delays to many causes, with lack of money as the most common and environmental and preservation requirements ranking far down the list. Everyone agrees that construction delays are both irritating and expensive, and preservationists are prepared to work with transportation planners to find ways to make the approval process more efficient and less time consuming. But weakening or eliminating parts of the 1966 transportation act won't gain us anything — and could cost us a great deal. Take Ocmulgee Old Fields, for instance. This tract near Macon, Ga., is dotted with ceremonial and burial mounds built by the Muscogee Creek Nation. Even though much of the site was ruled eligible for the National Register of Historic Places as a "traditional cultural property" — the first area east of the Mississippi to be so designated — the Georgia Department of Transportation wants to push a multilane highway through it. Right now, Section 4(f) is the only major regulatory barrier in its way. So if this essential piece of legislation goes, an important chapter in America's story is almost sure to be paved over. Nobody wants that to happen, just as nobody wants to see more communities torn apart by transportation projects that are supposed to knit them together. Preservation and environmental reviews may be perceived as a nuisance to some, but saving something precious and irreplaceable for the benefit of future generations is surely worth a little extra time and thought. We shouldn't be content to go down in history as a people who allowed movement to take precedence over place. Bulldozing America's past is not the way to to build roads to its future. Richard Moe is president of the National Trust for Historic Preservation.

CONTENTS * Houston needs rail & creative solutions Houston Chronicle Aug. 6, 2003 * Seattle: Remove & relocate old monorail? SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 6, 2003 * Seattle: LRT, streetcar, monorail part of solution Seattle Post-Intelligencer Thursday, August 7, 2003 * Motorbikes made to make noise New York Times July 25, 2003 PTP============================================= http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/story.hts/editorial/outlook/2034023 Houston Chronicle Aug. 6, 2003 Viewpoints More at stake for region than 13 miles of rail By ARTHUR L. SCHECHTER I read with great interest John Williams' Aug. 4 column, "City crossties snarl backroom rail deal." it is certainly true that many diverse segments of our community have been working for a broader consensus on the Metropolitan Transit Authority plan. Despite the fact that public support remains extremely high, we believe it is in the best interest of the community to avoid a divisive conflict, if possible. Some have inferred from Williams' column that the discussions currently being held with some of the leaders of the Greater Houston Partnership are based on Metro's building only 13 miles or so of extension to our light- rail system in the next phase. This is not so. Metro has been charged with the responsibility of developing a 2025 plan for the public transportation portion of our region's transportation needs. This requires that enough rail be built in our next phase to be a system that stands on its own regardless of whether future extensions are authorized. it is necessary that enough rail be built in the next phase to meet both public demand and Federal Transit Administration requirements. Thirteen miles of rail meets neither requirement. There are several potential options being considered by the Metro board, none of which includes only 13 miles of light rail. These decisions will ultimately be based on years of study, public input and coordination with other agencies. However, we are sensitive to the concerns of those who are skeptical about rail and who have expressed concern about the reduction or potential elimination of the money that has gone into street repairs and development in Houston. in order to build a consensus, one idea being advanced would limit Metro's bonding authority for the next phase, and Metro would agree not to go back to the voters for additional bonding authority until 2013. This would give the public an opportunity to evaluate rail's place in our city's future. A second vote on continuing will take place sometime after Jan. 1, 2013. Other ideas include extending the general mobility payments or some portion thereof beyond the current contracts, which expire in 2009. Metro has paid more than $1.2 billion and is expected to pay in excess of $820 million more in general mobility, under the current contract. Before the current contracts expire, there will be many opportunities to identify ways to replace the money that will eventually be transferred from general mobility to Metro's transit solutions. Possibilities include more federal money and greater assistance from the Toll Road Authority, Harris County and the city of Houston, all of which will benefit from the development of light rail as part of an enhanced transit system. In addition, if our leadership will work together, a new regional mobility authority could generate hundreds of millions of dollars in our community. However, the latter would require a constitutional amendment and thus the cooperation of the city of Houston and its leadership, the county, multi-cities and other entities. The governance must be balanced in ways that are fair to taxpayers in order to be effective. it is critical that our community work together. The Metro plan should not be judged as roads vs. rail or county vs. city. It is a plan that we believe will produce greater opportunity in our community as more than 2 million more people arrive. As this population increase equals the population of both the cities of Dallas and Fort Worth placed on top of us, and as the 7,300 lane miles of roads necessary to maintain current congestion levels in 2025 cannot be built, we believe that public transportation will become all the more important. There is no single solution for our problems, but it is clear that nothing will be solved if community division continues. The future of our city is literally at stake. Schechter is chairman of the Metropolitan Transit Authority. PTP============================================ http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/133883_monorail06.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Wednesday, August 6, 2003 New monorail idea: Save the old one it's good business and historical sense, Falkenbury says By MATTHEW CRAFT SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER The former cab driver who led the push for the new and expanded monorail has started floating ideas to keep the old line intact. After the City Council decided Monday to save the original Monorail's cars but demolish the rest of it to make way for the new Ballard-to-West Seattle line, Dick Falkenbury began talking publicly about recycling the Monorail -- cars, cement columns, guideways, all of it. Falkenbury, who is running for a City Council seat, sees his suggestion as one part historical preservation, another part good business sense -- the best use of existing resources. Instead of building an expensive new streetcar for South Lake Union as some have proposed, it might be cheaper to connect the old Monorail to the new system at Fifth Avenue and Bell Street and have it run in a loop out to the south end of Lake Union. A Monorail car, unlike a streetcar, can't get stuck in traffic. if that doesn't pan out, the old Monorail could be dismantled and carted off to the Northwest Trek Wildlife Park in Eatonville or maybe the sprawling Microsoft campus, Falkenbury said. "I've been searching for a way to preserve the Monorail for about a year," he said. "And all of a sudden there's a time constraint. We need to get the people of Seattle behind reusing this thing rather than just demolishing it. We're not talking about something crazy like putting it out in a field in Othello but using it as a practical tool." The existing track, built for the 1962 World's Fair, has two miles of guideways and dozens of concrete pylons, each weighing 54 tons. It made its first run in March 1962 with a 5-year-old Peter Steinbrueck on board. Steinbrueck, now the City Council's president, wants to see more than just the Monorail's cars preserved. But he seemed amused by Falkenbury's suggestions. "That sounds silly," he said, before adding "far-fetched" and "hugely expensive." There's more to the Monorail, he said, than what sits above Fifth Avenue. All the visible cement that makes up the pylons and guideways above ground has an equal amount of cement below the street. "Moving that much concrete and setting it up somewhere else would be extremely costly," he said. Steinbrueck said his "dream of dreams" is to preserve the section of the 1962 Monorail starting at the Seattle Center running past the Experience Music Project and have it meet the new track at, perhaps, Fifth Avenue. Other artifacts from the Century 21 Exposition, when people imagined what a space-age century might look like, have wound up scattered across the Puget Sound area. Though no longer colored "Galaxy Gold" -- orange, basically -- the Space Needle remains in place, but the Union Oil Sky Ride wound up in Puyallup. The Bubbleator, an elevator that glided between floors of the Washington State Coliseum, now sits still, posing as a greenhouse in Des Moines. if nobody has an immediate use for the Monorail or if a suitable corporate parent doesn't adopt it, Falkenbury suggested tucking all the pylons and tracks under a highway in South Seattle. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P-I reporter Matthew Craft can be reached at 206-448-8126 or matthewcraft@seattlepi.com PTP=======================================' http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/133940_looped.html Seattle Post-Intelligencer Thursday, August 7, 2003 A loopy idea for streetcars SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER EDITORIAL BOARD One of the remarkable things we've learned since the development of the internet is how a chaotic network grid can bring about order. A wireless node here, a dial-up service there and a broadband connection at work -- all connecting so many of us to the World Wide Web. Urban transportation ought to be like that, too. There's not one solution to our traffic woes; there are nodes making it easier for us to move from place to place. Sound Transit? One node. The monorail? Another entry point into a chaotic grid of order. Same goes for buses, ferries and, yes, even single cars on highways. it's that network approach to transportation that made us think about what Dick Falkenbury had to say the other day. The godfather of the modern monorail, who is a candidate for the Seattle City Council, said he's been searching for a way to recycle the old system -- somewhere -- instead of just demolishing it. One suggestion is a new South Lake Union loop. We like this creative thinking. We're not sure monorail recycling works (it's probably not affordable) but we do like the loop and a multiple platform network. What if the George Benson Waterfront Streetcar turned east up Broad Street, making it a snap to travel from the waterfront to Seattle Center? Then turn the trolley south, say, at Third Street, and run back downtown before returning to the piers. That system also could link to the proposed streetcar loop between Lake Union and downtown. With multiple transportation nodes, we can have a world-class system moving a networked, urban Seattle. PTP========================================= ************************************************************** Why do motorbikes sound so loud? Because bikers deliberately customize them to make noise. =PTP= ************************************************************** New York Times July 25, 2003 The Biker Question: To Roar or Not to Roar By ANN FERRAR SOMEBODY out there is making Wayne Doenges look bad, and he's not happy about it. Mr. Doenges has been riding motorcycles for 30 years, and with his white hair and reflective two-toned riding jacket, he cuts an impressive figure on the roads of indiana on his chromed-out six-cylinder Honda Valkyrie. "The bike attracts attention," he said, adding a significant phrase, "in a positive way." Because he likes that positive reaction, he will not allow his bike to assault you with a mighty avalanche of sound. Bruce Czerwinski and Michele Moshier see things differently. They are a handsome, ruggedly stylish couple, favoring leather jackets. When Mr. Czerwinski cranks up the 1,500-cc V-twin-cylinder motor of his Suzuki intruder, the exhaust pipes emit a thunderous roar and a deafening staccato blat-blat-blat. He has replaced the exhaust system that came on his motorcycle with straight pipes — hollow chrome tubes devoid of any noise-dampening system. "I do rev the engine at stoplights and I do enjoy showing off," Mr. Czerwinski said. "It's big boys with their big loud toys." Ms. Moshier said she shared the thrill, reveling in the ear-splitting victory laps the couple take around their hometown of Lowville, N.Y. "Everybody knows it's us," she said. In the motorcycle world, Mr. Czerwinski, a 42-year-old factory worker, is part of an exuberant and growing cult, contemptuous of noise rules and eagerly supplied with noise enhancement by the aftermarket — the trade in car and motorcycle parts added by owners. He is also on one side of a mushrooming conflict among motorcycle owners, pitting the noise lovers against riders like Mr. Doenges, who think the fun isn't worth alienating fellow citizens. (Mr. Doenges, a 75-year-old retired engineer from New Haven, ind., said his opposition crystallized when he was getting ready to start his bike at a rest stop and saw a small boy cover his ears. He assured the boy not all bikes were loud, he said, annoyed that he had to "make up for what somebody else ruined.") The two groups don't mingle often, but they both show up at events like the Americade Motorcycle Rally, held last month in Lake George, N.Y., where Mr. Czerwinski and some other bikers on both sides of the issue were interviewed. More and more American bikers, from the faithful on Harley-Davidson Fatboys to riders on Kawasaki Vulcans and Suzukis like Mr. Czerwinski's, are telling dealers to replace the factory exhaust pipes with aftermarket high-performance exhaust systems, plunking down as much as $1,000 in the process. The snazzy chrome exhaust pipes have macho names like Samson Big Guns, Screaming Eagles and Cobra High Boy Shotguns. The noise they let out is often in excess of the federal maximum for motorcycles of 80 decibels. Still, it's not enough for some. Federal regulations say all motorcycle exhaust systems must contain noise dampeners, typically baffles, a series of passages through the muffler that dissipate sound. Straight pipes have no noise dampeners at all, in direct defiance of the law. To demonstrate the effect, Mr. Czerwinski cranked his intruder's engine. The pipes spat out a Niagara of noise. Movies like "Biker Boyz" and television programs like "American Chopper," on the Discovery Channel, project an outlaw biker image that celebrates sonic aggression, and many motorcycle magazines not only carry advertisements for performance pipes but print covers showing the kind of behavior that goes with them — riders leaning fast bikes aggressively into curves or doing burnouts: holding the hand brake while revving the engine and spinning the rear wheel until it smokes. "If people are sitting at an outdoor cafe and 50 motorcycles drive by quietly, no one notices," said Ed Moreland, a lobbyist in Washington for the 270,000-member American Motorcyclist Association, which is officially opposed to excessively loud pipes. "Then one guy rips off a salvo and they snap their heads around. People think all bikes are loud because that's the one they remember." He sees one result firsthand — part of his job is fighting outright bans on motorcycles, which he said are being proposed in many parks and gated communities and for some public roads by people fed up with the noise. All new on-road motorcycles sold in the United States must meet the 80- decibel noise limit. But nearly half of the five million or so registered motorcycles on the road — a conservative estimate is at least two million — have modified exhausts, according to a survey by the Motorcycle industry Council, a motorcycle trade association representing manufacturers and distributors. Many aftermarket pipes are stamped "for closed-course competition only," but it is widely accepted that they end up on street bikes. "Right now," said Pamela Amette, vice president of the industry council, "It's illegal to install an exhaust system that does not meet federal requirements, but it's not being enforced." States that inspect motorcycles check for exhaust leaks but not noise. Police with decibel meters would have to test bikes under controlled conditions that aren't feasible on the street. With little to stop riders from knocking out baffles, straight pipes can emit 110 decibels or more, akin to the sound level of a jet climbing at 1,000 feet. A large part of the motorcycle's allure is the visceral thrill of horsepower, and many riders consider the bike's sound as vital to this sensory experience as the rushing of the wind. The sound of loud pipes is "like opera," according to a Screaming Eagles fan who stated his opinion in a chat room at motorcyclecity.com. Some loud-pipe owners may enjoy annoying people. Paul Priolo, 30, a chiropractor from Brightwaters, N.Y., rode to Americade on his Harley Fatboy equipped with performance pipes. "I have to be kind and patient all week," he said. "On the bike I let it all hang out. Plus I like being a little obnoxious, riding down the street and setting off car alarms." As for quieter motorcycles, Dr. Priolo said: "I have a friend with a BMW that sounds like a blender. I tell him, 'Hey, I'll have two smoothies with that.' " Cris Dunham, a 52-year-old bus operator from Queens, is one of many bikers who contend that loud pipes save lives. Ostensibly, the extra noise makes motorcycles more noticeable to drivers in cars and trucks. Ms. Dunham's Kawasaki Vulcan breathes through nonbaffled Vance & Hines Long Shots. With the motor idling, they put forth a deep, loud drumbeat that reaches an earth-shaking crescendo when she revs the engine. "Having been a professional driver for many years, I think it's better for bikes to be seen and heard," she said. She also admits to the influence of peer pressure. "I mainly ride with Harley guys who teased me when I had a smaller bike," she said. "They told me it went tick-tick-tickety." No lifesaving value in loud pipes has been proved. Most collisions of motorcycles with larger vehicles occur when cars and trucks turn left in front of oncoming bikes, according to a study by the University of California at Los Angeles. Since exhaust noise is emitted behind the motorcycle, these drivers do not hear loud pipes. Jack Savage, a motorcycle safety instructor and a publisher of motorcycle books, isn't buying the safety angle. "If a guy is such a poor rider that he needs everybody to hear him coming from a mile away," Mr. Savage said, "maybe he should take up knitting." RICK GRAY, a 58-year-old lawyer from Lancaster, Pa., owns 13 motorcycles, rides 20,000 to 35,000 miles a year and is chairman of the American Motorcyclist Association. "Too many people tell me, 'I hate motorcycles because they're too loud,' " he said. "This hurts us in other areas, like when we want to lobby for fairer insurance policies." He fears worse consequences. "If we don't recognize we're a distinct minority in a world growing more environmentally concerned — and that means noise, too," he said, "we'll become an anachronism." Personally, Mr. Gray prefers a quieter ride anyway. "To me, riding is like a form of Buddhist meditation," he said. "Just hearing the sound of the wind with nothing intruding on it, not even the engine, is a Zen-like experience." His BMW R1100RT purrs along like a sewing machine. "It's like being in a chair and flying through the air," he said. Ms. Moshier, who said she loved the attention that a booming motorcycle attracts, may share this attitude to a degree. "At first I hated the straight pipes," she said. "But it's not as loud when you're on the bike."

CONTENTS * Seattle: 'BRT' vs. rail debate heats up Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 * Vancouver BC: Rail to replace 'BRT'? Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 * Eugene Or: 'BRT' project grapples with problems Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 * Seattle: Bits and pieces of 'BRT' Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 PTP======================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001368033_brt03m0.ht ml Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 Backers favor Bus Rapid Transit over rail for cost, convenience By Eric Pryne Seattle Times staff reporter BOSTON — The latest official maps of Boston's subway system show a brand-new line linking downtown with Roxbury, historic heart of the city's black community. It runs not on steel wheels and steel rails, but on rubber tires and city streets. The new Silver Line is a bus line. So why is it on the subway map? Because the buses come and go so frequently that riders don't need a timetable — much like rail. Because, for much of the route, the buses operate in their own, largely exclusive right-of-way — much like rail. The Silver Line is Boston's version of Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), a concept that encompasses all sorts of innovations aimed at repackaging bus service to make it faster, more reliable, more comfortable and more attractive. in other words, more like rail. South American cities pioneered BRT. The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) discovered it in the late 1990s, promoting it with the slogan "think rail, use buses." Now cities all over the country are building it. in Seattle, opponents of Sound Transit's $2.5 billion proposed light-rail line are touting BRT as a smarter alternative. "It costs less and it does more," says John Niles, technical coordinator of Citizens for Effective Transportation Alternatives, the leading anti-rail group. Boston's Silver Line began running last summer. Orlando; Miami; Charlotte, N.C.; Pittsburgh; Los Angeles; Honolulu; and Oakland, Calif., also have opened BRT projects over the last seven years. Projects are in the pipeline in Cleveland; Hartford, Conn.; Las Vegas; and Eugene, Ore. Those cities haven't necessarily rejected rail by embracing BRT. Many consider it a supplement to trains, or a precursor. Seattle-area transit officials are planning BRT projects in addition to rail. "I don't see them as competitive," FTA associate administrator Barbara Sisson says of the two technologies. "I see them as complementary." But the competitive undercurrent persists. BRT and rail forces have clashed not only in Seattle, but in Boston and the Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C. Supporters say BRT can be built faster and cheaper than rail and that it's usually more cost-effective. Rail backers argue that, no matter how you market it, a bus is still a bus. "It'll never have the appeal of light rail," says Richard Borkowski, president of Seattle's pro-rail People for Modern Transit. Almost everyone agrees BRT is more flexible than rail. Not everyone agrees that's necessarily an advantage. What is it? Transportation professionals still haven't decided exactly what Bus Rapid Transit is, or isn't. It looks and performs differently in each city. In many, its most prominent element is a separate right-of-way that takes buses out of general traffic — an arterial bus lane or a freeway HOV lane. Pittsburgh and Miami have built "busways" along abandoned railroad rights-of-way — completely separate roads reserved exclusively for buses. But not all BRT systems have dedicated rights-of-way. And BRT promoters say it takes more than a bus lane to transform a traditional bus system into BRT. Buses get no respect. They're widely perceived as dirty, uncomfortable and, above all, slow. BRT aims to overcome that image by revamping every aspect of bus service. "It's not your father's bus system," says Bill Vincent, a former Clinton administration transportation official who heads the Bus Rapid Transit Policy Center in Washington, D.C. BRT's features can include: - More frequent service than traditional buses, not just at rush hour but all day long. - Fewer stops. - Simpler routes. - Priority for buses at traffic signals. - Bus "stations" that are more inviting and comfortable than traditional bus stops. - Off-board fare collection. - High-tech passenger-information systems. - Next-generation, "low-floor" buses that allow riders to board without climbing stairs. These buses could burn cleaner fuels. Las Vegas has ordered futuristic buses from France that resemble trains. They include an optical-guidance system that will "read" a special paint stripe on the road to stay on course and allow the buses to "dock" within an inch or two of station platforms. For the most part, however, there's nothing revolutionary about most components of BRT. Seattle already has many in place. Frequent service? Sound Transit Route 550 between downtown Seattle and Bellevue runs every five to seven minutes in the peak direction at rush hour. Priority for buses at traffic signals? it's already installed on Aurora and Rainier avenues. Low-floor buses? Sound Transit and Community Transit operate them on some routes. Exclusive right-of-way? Seattle's downtown bus tunnel is the ultimate. But local transit officials say Seattle won't really have BRT unless most or all of those elements are offered in a single corridor, as in Boston. "We've got hints of it all over," says Scott Rutherford, a University of Washington transportation engineer and BRT authority, "but we haven't put it all together in one place." Boston's Silver Line Every weekday morning, Chris Rimpel walks to the corner of Washington and Newton streets in Boston's gentrifying South End to catch the Silver Line to work downtown. He used to ride a subway. He says the Silver Line is an improvement. It's closer to his home. It costs a quarter less to ride. "And it isn't as depressing as going into a tunnel every morning," Rimpel says. But most of all, he likes the Silver Line's frequency. Buses stop at Washington and Newton every four or five minutes during the peak commute hours. They run every seven or eight minutes at midday, every 10 or 12 minutes at night. They travel in their own lane, the second one out from the curb, for about two-thirds of the two-mile route. The only other vehicles allowed are those turning right or maneuvering into curbside parking spots. The Silver Line makes just eight stops, about half the number of the traditional bus line it replaced. Each station features a gleaming silver shelter and a digital sign that informs waiting passengers how many minutes before the next bus arrives. The low-floor coaches run on cleaner-burning compressed natural gas, not diesel. They're painted different colors than other buses, part of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority's campaign to give the Silver Line a distinct identity. On-board technology lets buses request — but not necessarily receive — a green light at five busy intersections when they're running late. The transportation authority says the Silver Line is faster than the old bus and far more popular. On average, BRT buses travel the route in 20 to 30 percent less time. Ridership is up 70 percent. "We have absolutely burst the planning models," says Michael Mulhern, the authority's general manager. And all for just $50 million. But the Silver Line still hasn't been accepted by some Boston environmentalists and Roxbury community leaders. They call it the Silver Lie. "The overwhelming majority of people in this neighborhood wanted light rail," says transit activist Robert Terrell. An elevated rail line once linked Roxbury with downtown Boston. When the transportation authority tore it down in 1987, it promised the community an equal or better replacement. The Silver Line is neither, Terrell says: "It doesn't have the speed (of rail). It doesn't have the dedicated right-of-way. It doesn't have the capacity." Cost comparisons Comparing rail and Bus Rapid Transit isn't easy, in part because BRT comes in so many flavors. But even many rail backers acknowledge BRT can be cheaper to build. That's one reason the Federal Transit Administration, which doles out scarce federal transit dollars, is promoting it. The Bush administration wants to make more BRT projects eligible for federal money that's now largely reserved for rail. "There just isn't the money to build rail anymore," says Vincent, of the BRT Policy Center. The General Accounting Office (GAO), Congress' research arm, examined the capital costs of selected newer light-rail and BRT projects in 2001. On average, light rail cost $35 million per mile, researchers reported, compared with $14 million for BRT projects with exclusive busways and $9 million for those using freeway HOV lanes. But rail backers noted that the GAO's comparison didn't include some of the most expensive BRT facilities — Seattle's 1.3-mile bus tunnel, for instance, which would cost more than $600 million in today's dollars to build. The GAO report compared only the costs of Bus Rapid Transit and light rail, not their relative benefits. Light rail may be more expensive than BRT, its advocates argue, but it also delivers more. People who won't ride buses will ride trains, they say. "Even with the best Bus Rapid Transit, you are not matching the image, the comfort, even the social status of rail," says Vukan Vuchic, a transportation professor at the University of Pennsylvania. Train tracks also impart a sense of permanence that BRT lacks, he says, drawing new development to neighborhoods. BRT backers say buses' image problems can be overcome. They say BRT also can serve as a catalyst for economic development. But they acknowledge there aren't many examples to point to yet in the U.S. Cloud behind Silver Line Silver Line buses still get stuck in Boston traffic sometimes. They share lanes with other traffic at either end of the route, where congestion is most severe. And sometimes the exclusive bus lanes in the middle of the route aren't really that exclusive. On one morning rush-hour trip downtown this summer, a Silver Line bus encountered a half-dozen obstacles in the bus lane: illegally double- parked cars, utility trucks, vehicles nosing into intersections from side streets. Traffic was light, so the bus simply slipped into the neighboring general- traffic lane to get around them. "That's the beauty of buses," Mulhern says. But when traffic is heavier, Silver Line critic Terrell says, buses often get stuck in the bus lanes behind delivery trucks or scofflaw motorists. The intruders in the Silver Line bus lane illustrate both BRT's strength and its potential Achilles' heel. Buses can go anywhere cars can go. They can get around obstacles. They can serve more neighborhoods. BRT routes can be altered as circumstances change more easily than a rail line. But cars also can encroach on bus lanes or busways. Some transportation professionals wonder if the political will exists to keep them out forever. Some cities built exclusive bus lanes in the 1970s. Most were later opened to car pools. Bus service suffered, Vuchic says: "You chip away at the corners ... and slowly you just downgrade (BRT) to the old, slow bus." Mark Hallenbeck, director of the Washington State Transportation Center at the University of Washington, points to the state Transportation Commission's recent decision to open some suburban HOV lanes to solo motorists at night. "What's going to prevent them from doing something like that to any BRT facility?" he asks. Bus Rapid Transit can be a much lower-cost alternative to rail that can provide high levels of service, Hallenbeck says. But, since BRT runs on asphalt and concrete rather than steel, it faces a potential threat rail doesn't: "No one," he says, "can drive cars on tracks." Eric Pryne: 206-464-2231 Seattle Times JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES Seattle's bus tunnel is considered a Bus Rapid Transit facility, but local transit officials say the region doesn't yet have a real BRT line or system. More on Bus Rapid Transit · The Federal Transit Administration's BRT Web site: www.fta.dot.gov/brt · An advocate's perspective: www.gobrt.org (Web site of the Bus Rapid Transit Policy Center, a year-old nonprofit based in Washington, D.C.) · A skeptic's view: www.lightrailnow.org (Web site of Light Rail Now!, a Texas-based group that backs light rail and doesn't think BRT compares. Scroll down and click on "Bus Rapid Transit Analyses," on the left side of the page.) individual cities' BRT projects: · Boston's Silver Line: www.allaboutsilverline.com · Eugene's proposed BRT line: www.ltd.org/site_files/brt /index.html · Vancouver's BRT lines: www.fta.dot.gov/brt/guide /vancouver.html JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES A passenger walks to the bus terminal at Northgate Transit Center, which is on various bus routes. JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES A Seattle Metro driver waits for his passengers to board along the E-3 Busway, one example of a Bus Rapid Transit facility. The bus-only lanes run along Fifth Avenue South from the downtown bus tunnel to South Spokane Street. JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES Jon Singer checks to see if his bus is on time at a display at the Northgate Transit Center. "Real-time" information technology is a common feature of Bus Rapid Transit. PTP======================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001368081_vancouver brt03m.html Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 Vancouver, B.C., edges closer to rail By Eric Pryne Seattle Times staff reporter JIMI LOTT / THE SEATTLE TIMES Pavel Postarenczak waits for a bus on the 98-B line, which runs from downtown Vancouver to the growing suburban center of Richmond. Vancouver's regional government voted in May to replace the 98-B with a rail line — the city's third — by 2010. RICHMOND, B.C. — Carlos Balcarcel has no complaints about the 98-B, greater Vancouver's premier Bus Rapid Transit line. The sales executive's daily bus ride from his south Vancouver home to his Richmond office used to take about 20 minutes. On the 98-B, he said, it usually takes just half that long. "it's a lot faster," Balcarcel said one sunny afternoon as he waited to catch the bus home. He didn't have to wait long. The 98-B buses run much more often than his old bus: every five or six minutes during peak periods, every seven or eight minutes at midday. Everything about the 98-B is better, Balcarcel said. But a rail line would be better yet, he added. The 98-B runs for 10 miles: from downtown Vancouver out stately Granville Street, over the Fraser River and past the airport to Richmond, an emerging suburban center of high-rise housing and high-tech jobs. Before the line opened two years ago TransLink, greater Vancouver's transportation-planning agency, hailed it as "one of the most advanced bus systems in North America." But Vancouver's regional government voted in May to replace the 98-B with a rail line — the city's third — by 2010. And, while some officials and activists question that proposal's timing, financing and alignment, few are promoting expanded Bus Rapid Transit as a better choice. From the start, Vancouver transit officials have billed BRT not as an alternative to rail, but as a step toward it. TransLink considers the 98-B a success but acknowledges buses still are widely perceived as inferior, by the public and by most local politicians. "I suppose it's adequate for the moment," Richmond Mayor Malcolm Brodie, a rail booster, says of the 98-B, "but it won't handle the growth we're expecting. ... It's a solution, but only a limited solution." TransLink's predecessor agency chose BRT for the Richmond-Vancouver corridor in the mid-1990s largely because it lacked the money for rail. The 98-B cost just $32 million (U.S.). Much of it went to build Canada's only median "busway": two bus-only lanes that run for 1.6 miles down the middle of Richmond's busy No. 3 Road, separated from other traffic in most places by curbs, landscaping and wrought-iron fences. The busway is the 98-B's most distinctive feature. Beyond Richmond, buses mostly mingle with other traffic. But near the airport they have their own signal at one intersection, and their own ramp onto a bridge across the Fraser. Buses make just 18 stops along the route, at "stations" with new shelters designed to convey a more modern, high-tech image. There's nothing revolutionary about the BRT buses' appearance, but each has a computer on board that monitors whether the bus is on schedule. If it's running more than two minutes late, a transponder can ask the next traffic signal to stay green a little longer, or turn green a little sooner. TransLink's Keenan Kitasaka says the 98-B has cut travel times between Richmond and downtown Vancouver by 20 percent. Buses don't fall behind schedule as often, he says. On-board surveys indicate riders like the 98-B better than other bus service. One-sixth of its passengers switched from driving solo. But the 98-B still hasn't achieved the ridership or the travel times officials projected. "The expectations were an awful lot higher than what we've been able to provide," says ian Gunion of the Coast Mountain Bus Co., the public agency that operates the line. He and other officials say that's because BRT needs an exclusive right-of- way to reach its full potential. For two-thirds of its route, the 98-B doesn't have one. That means buses sometimes get stuck in traffic, especially in and near downtown Vancouver. "There are limitations when you start mixing buses with general traffic," Gunion says. "The buses end up losing." Rob Schirra, another TransLink official, says the agency originally wanted exclusive bus lanes designated along the entire 10-mile route, but Vancouver merchants concerned about losing on-street parking objected. "The merchants won," he says. But BRT remains a "transitional strategy," says Schirra: Rail still is the ultimate goal. TransLink did compare expanded BRT with rail in the Richmond- Vancouver corridor earlier this year, before regional officials opted for trains. A BRT system with more exclusive right-of-way would be much cheaper to build, the report concluded: just $220 million (U.S.), less than one-fourth the capital cost of rail. But travel times would be 25 to 75 percent longer, the report said. And, at best, BRT would carry two-thirds as many passengers as rail. For Richmond Mayor Brodie, the choice is clear. "You gets what you pays for," he quips. PTP======================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001368046_eugenebrt0 3m.html Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 What does Eugene need with BRT? By Eric Pryne Seattle Times staff reporter LANE TRANSIT DISTRICT Eugene's Bus Rapid Transit system, shown in this artist's rendering, has been named one of 10 national BRT demonstration projects. EUGENE, Ore. — This leafy college town is planning one of the most ambitious, most complete Bus Rapid Transit systems in the country. The first question a visitor might ask is: Why? By big-city standards, the Eugene-Springfield metropolitan area — population 325,000 — doesn't have a traffic problem. "We have jokes about the rush minute," says Stefano Viggiano, the Lane Transit District's planning and development director. But this is a city that prides itself on looking ahead. Congestion will get worse, Viggiano says, and Eugene wants to have a better alternative to the automobile in place before that happens. What Eugene is planning could be the most radical departure from traditional bus service in the country so far. "it's the purest application (of BRT) we've seen," says Scott Rutherford, a University of Washington engineering professor and BRT authority. The Federal Transit Administration has named Eugene's one of 10 national BRT demonstration projects. It is providing most of the $16 million cost of building the system's first segment, a four-mile link from downtown Eugene past the University of Oregon campus to downtown Springfield. Eugene is on BRT's cutting edge. But life on the edge can be uncomfortable. Lane Transit has had trouble finding the right vehicle for a reasonable price. Largely because of that, the first segment won't open until 2006. And, for all its innovation, the agency has made compromises that prompt some transit supporters to question whether BRT will live up to its lofty goals. "Much of it's running in traffic," says Rob Zako, Willamette Valley transportation advocate for the anti-sprawl group 1000 Friends of Oregon. "It's hard to see how it's going to be that much faster than the existing service. ... I'm afraid people are going to say, 'Oh, that's just the bus.' " Lane Transit began exploring Bus Rapid Transit in 1995, before most cities had heard of it. Light rail was too expensive, Viggiano says: Eugene lacks the size or population density to justify it. And federal aid for a rail line seemed unlikely. Other cities see BRT is an interim step toward rail. Not Eugene. "For us, it would be the ultimate system," Viggiano says. Buses would run between downtown Eugene and downtown Springfield every 10 minutes. For about two-thirds of the route they would travel in exclusive rights-of-way: new bus lanes in downtown Eugene and Springfield, and a "guideway" down the grassy, tree-dotted median of the boulevard that runs past the university campus. Buses would have priority at traffic signals. Passengers would board at stations that vaguely resemble sails, where digital signs would tell riders when to expect the next bus. A one-way trip would take 16 minutes. That's just two to six minutes faster than the traditional bus that now serves the route. But as Eugene grows and other traffic slows, Viggiano says, BRT's running time won't: "In 10, 15, 20 years, it's still 16 minutes." By 2020, Lane Transit forecasts, taking BRT will be slightly faster than driving. It projects at least twice as many weekday passengers as today. Eugene's plan includes some features no existing U.S. BRT system enjoys. For instance, riders would buy tickets from machines at the stations instead of paying on the bus, allowing boarding through any door and eliminating long lines at the fare box. Lane Transit wants to create an image for BRT that's completely distinct from traditional bus service. It says no component is more important in accomplishing that than a dramatically different vehicle. But finding the right bus has been the agency's biggest headache. it thought it had found one a year ago: a hybrid electric, low-floor, Dutch- made bus like no other now in service anywhere in North America. It featured a magnetic-guidance system that would keep the buses in slightly depressed "tracks" in the boulevard guideway and allow them to "dock" within inches of station platforms. Best of all for BRT's image: it looked more like a train than a traditional, boxy city bus. Lane Transit talked of breaking ground last fall and opening the line in 2004. But the agency wanted the manufacturer to modify the bus to have doors on both sides to accommodate the station design. That drove up the cost. So did the dollar's declining value. By last spring, Viggiano says, the price tag for the five buses Lane Transit wanted had doubled. So in June the agency instead selected a new, American-made bus. It's also a hybrid, also mostly low-floor. It'll have doors on both sides, and it costs just half as much as the Dutch bus. But the buses won't be delivered for another three years. Viggiano says they're not as sleek-looking. And they don't come with a guidance system; Lane Transit will decide later whether to add one. Some Eugene-area observers worry compromises could keep BRT from fulfilling its promise. One example: Originally Lane Transit proposed running the line through Glenwood, an unincorporated area between Springfield and Eugene, in a bus lane down the middle of an arterial. That would have eliminated a two-way left-turn lane. Glenwood businesses protested. So Lane Transit changed the plan. BRT buses now will travel through Glenwood in mixed traffic. Viggiano says a bus lane through Glenwood can wait. But Don Kahle, former president of the Eugene City Club, says the decision was short- sighted. Without more dedicated right-of-way, he says, Bus Rapid Transit is less likely to capture commuters' imaginations or get them out of their cars: "We need to keep the 'R' in BRT." PTP======================================== http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2001368067_localbrt03 m.html Seattle Times Sunday, August 03, 2003 Bits and pieces of BRT in Seattle A rundown on Bus Rapid Transit plans and proposals in the Seattle area: Aurora Avenue North: The street is identified in Metro Transit's six-year development plan as the agency's first candidate for BRT service. Some components already in place: • Buses every five to 10 minutes during peak periods on Route 358, Aurora's trunk line. • "Traffic signal priority" for buses at 17 intersections. • Northbound lane reserved for buses and right-turning traffic between North 110th and North 145th streets. More changes, starting in September: • New shelters with benches, interior lighting and trash cans at 29 stops. • Scrolling digital monitors at stops at North 85th and North 46th streets to inform riders of arrival time of next bus. • Southbound morning peak-period bus/right-turn lane between North 62nd and North 38th streets to get buses past morning congestion approaching Aurora Bridge. • increased Route 358 midday and Saturday service from a bus every 20 minutes to one every 15. • Southbound bus/right-turn lane between North 145th and North 110th streets. Sound Transit "direct access" ramps: The regional transit agency plans to build at least eight on- and offramp projects exclusively for transit and car pools on interstates 5, 405 and 90 so buses in left-hand HOV lanes won't have to weave through other traffic when they enter or leave freeways. The first two are under construction on I-5 in Lynnwood. • One links HOV lanes in both directions directly with the Lynnwood Park & Ride Lot near 44th Avenue West. • The second, for buses only, connects Ash Way Park & Ride with HOV lanes to and from the south, bypassing signals on 164th Street Southwest. It could save northbound afternoon rush-hour buses up to 15 minutes, the agency says. interstate 405: The state's plan to increase capacity calls for BRT as well as new lanes in each direction. But there's no money. Project manager Craig Stone says 19 distinctive, low-floor buses would provide service every 10 minutes all day between SeaTac and Lynnwood, using HOV lanes that are managed to remain free-flowing. Direct-access ramps would carry buses to existing transit centers in Renton, Bellevue and Totem Lake, plus new stations on the freeway in Newcastle, Kirkland and Bothell. Stations may feature off-board ticket machines and "real-time" displays on bus arrivals. What light-rail opponents want: They have no detailed BRT plan. But, in a 2001 report, anti-rail consultants said filling in missing links in Seattle's freeway HOV network would be a big step toward BRT and would do more for transit riders, more quickly and cheaply, than building light rail. Gaps in the network keep the region's express buses from realizing their potential, authors John Niles, Jim Mcisaac and Dick Nelson wrote. They singled out 10 proposed HOV improvements, costing $300 million total. The most expensive — and probably most controversial: Convert westernmost reversible I-5 express lane between Ravenna Boulevard and downtown Seattle to an all-day, barrier-separated southbound bus lane. There are no HOV lanes on I-5 in that area now; buses traveling south are often mired in afternoon congestion when express lanes carry traffic north. A consultant told the state Transportation Department in 1997 such a change could save buses seven minutes per trip but could worsen congestion in the three remaining northbound lanes.

CONTENTS * Portland: Streetcar expansion to begin this fall The Oregonian - Portland 08/05/03 * Portland: interstate MAX ahead of schedule - fed money approved The Oregonian 07/18/03 PTP=============================== http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/portland_n ews/1060085398325390.xml The Oregonian - Portland 08/05/03 Expansion of streetcar to start in fall DAVID AUSTIN Officials with the city's Office of Transportation are gearing up for work this fall that will begin extending the Portland Streetcar to the emerging South Waterfront district. The planned spur for the streetcar will be a little more than a half-mile, from Portland State University to River Parkway, said Vicky Diede, the city's streetcar project manager. The streetcar line now runs from Portland State through the Pearl District to the Northwest District near Legacy Good Samaritan Hospital. "This is something that will help connect the waterfront," Diede said. "it's an ambitious project and a very important one." Work on the $18.2 million extension will begin in late September or early October, Diede said. The route will go from Portland State University at Southwest Fifth Avenue, continuing on Harrison Street across Naito Parkway. At Naito Parkway, workers will create an extension that will link with River Parkway, she said. Work will run in roughly three phases, Diede said: Advance work on utilities along the route. Workers will install sewer and water connections, along with other additions. Building the new part of the street between Naito and River parkways. Laying down the track and the stops along the route. Diede said the work will be done in three-block increments and will affect traffic in the area. The streetcar extension is a telling sign of how the city is moving quickly in its quest to develop the roughly 31 acres that represent the first phase of developing the area known both as North Macadam and South Waterfront. Another extension that is to take the streetcar a little more than a half-mile to Southwest Gibbs Street is in the works. Officials are trying to come up with another roughly $18 million to pay for it. City officials envision a South Waterfront development that will create as many as 2,700 condominiums and apartments and enough office space for 5,000 workers through 2008. The work is to transform what has long been seen as an industrial wasteland into a thriving neighborhood. On Monday, city officials and members of Oregon's congressional delegation gathered at the Marriott Residence inn, 2115 S.W. River Parkway, to hold a ceremonial groundbreaking for the streetcar extension. David Austin: 503-294-5910; davidaustin@news.oregonian.com PTP====================================== The Oregonian 07/18/03 Portland News Money for interstate MAX line approved FRED LEESON A congressional subcommittee has approved a $69.75 million payment for the next-to-last installment for construction of the 5.8-mile interstate MAX light-rail line that will open next year in North Portland. The installment, adopted by the House Subcommittee on Transportation and the Treasury, is about 10 percent, or $7 million, less than regional officials had requested. But it should be enough to keep construction of the $350 million project on schedule. Mary Fetsch, a TriMet spokeswoman, said the subcommittee cut 10 percent on requests across the board. "It wasn't a negative reflection on TriMet in any way," she said. "We expect the feds will fully fund their share of the project," she added. U.S. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Portland, said the subcommittee's funding recommendations are likely to be approved by the House Appropriations Committee and by the full House of Representatives later this summer. Similar transportation funding requests are pending in the U.S. Senate, which could lead to negotiations if the House and Senate disagree on transit funding. The House subcommittee also approved $1.5 million in fiscal 2004 for TriMet to replace buses that are 16 years old or have traveled more than 1 million miles. The package included $800,000 for a jobs access program, run by TriMet, that helps low-income residents commute to work. Other Portland-area transportation projects to win approval from the subcommittee included $500,000 for pre-engineering and environmental work on a new bridge connecting Sauvie island to U.S. 30, and $750,000 for a state transportation research and planning center at Portland State University. Multnomah County owns and is preparing to replace the Sauvie island Bridge, built in 1950, which has structural cracks and is operating with load limitations. The PSU research center would be part of the Northwest Center for Engineering, Science and Technology. The transportation section would be devoted to studying how technology can improve efficiency and safety of surface transportation. Construction of the interstate MAX rail line is running ahead of schedule. The line, from the Rose Quarter to the Expo Center, was originally scheduled to open in September 2004. TriMet is considering opening the line six months earlier but won't decide until early fall. Fred Leeson: 503-294-5946; fredleeson@news.oregonian.com

NOTE: To reduce the volume of Email postings, Public Transport Progress will try (experimentally) sending news items in batches, starting with this batch. Each posting will now have the Subject line "PTP Digest [date]-[letter]" where [date] is the date of posting, and [letter] gives a unique identifier (in case there's more than one digest on a given date). Let's see if this works out. Feedback is welcome. =PTP= **************************************************** httg://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/local/articles/0802lightrail02.html The Arizona Republic Aug. 2, 2003 12:00 AM Light rail bidders span globe 5 foreign companies vying to build cars for Valley system Bob Golfen Five companies from five different nations are competing to build rail cars for the Valley's planned light rail system. The companies have submitted bids for the contract, and Valley Metro Rail is poised to send them requests for final offers, said Richard Brown, director of design and construction. Valley Metro, the corporation overseeing design, construction and operation of the light rail system, expects to buy 36 to 60 rail cars, at an estimated cost of $3 million each. Specifications for the cars' appearance, design and technical components were created by Valley Metro, with the five manufacturers responding with their price tags. Some of the specifications were altered because of suggestions from the bidders, Brown said, and the upcoming requests for "best and final offers" reflect those changes. The companies are: • Ansaldobreda (Breda) of Italy, which has assembly plants in Contra Costa, Calif., and Pittsburgh. • Bombardier of Canada, which has a plant in Plattsburg, N.Y., and is proposing a Tucson factory for this project. • CAF USA, a Spanish company with an assembly plant in Elmira, N.Y. • Kinkisharyo of Japan, which has a factory in Mare island, Calif., and is proposing a Valley site for this project. • Siemens, a Germany company with a plant in Sacramento. Brown said that after the requests are sent out, Valley Metro will wait to receive bids from the companies then make a final decision in October. Each rail car will be 93 feet long and articulated at two points so it can bend around corners on city streets. Each will accommodate 150 passengers and will include inside racks for bicycles. The streamlined cars will be reversible, with driver's compartments at both ends. Power will be provided by overhead electric lines. The cars can be operated singly or coupled together in groups of as many as three cars. The limit on the number of cars hooked together is dictated by the length of a city block, said Daina Mann, communications manager for Valley Metro Rail. Any longer and the train would block traffic at intersections while it was stopped at a station. The Federal Transit Administration recently gave approval for the project to proceed, and the 20-mile light rail system is now in the final design stage. The light rail system, which will link the northwest and east Valley with downtown Phoenix, is scheduled for completion in December 2006. About 27,000 riders are expected to use the system daily. ********************************************** http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/133324_monorail01.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, August 1, 2003 Monorail bypassing citizens, critics say Pioneer Square group, Magnolia watchdog raise flags By JANE HADLEY SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER The Seattle Monorail Project will do things differently. The line will be built on budget and on time. That, at least, has been the theme touted by monorail leaders and supporters, but yesterday, some citizens said the agency is on too fast a track, rolling right on past citizens on some key matters. The Pioneer Square Community Association was angry to learn that the architectural contract for designing the King Street Station will not be put out to bid and the community will not be involved in the selection. instead, the agency's lead architect, VIA Suzuki, decided that the firm of Zimmer Gunsul Frasca will do the work. On a separate issue, monorail watchdog Patricia Stambor, a Magnolia resident, has been complaining that the monorail has withheld "visualizations" and other information that would show people what the stations generally will look like. "We've been asking for these for a long, long time," she said. Stambor said she wants the visual representations released, even put on billboards, as soon as possible, so that citizens will have a chance to participate meaningfully in some key land-use code changes that the monorail is asking the City Council to adopt. "I think they're fast-tracking. i think they're cutting corners. I think it's going to spell trouble for them down the track in the cost of litigation," Stambor said. But monorail representatives said they've gone to great lengths to involve the public, with countless public meetings. There are good reasons for the decision not to put the King Street design out to bid and for seeking the land-use code changes before completing the environmental impact statement, they said. "I grant you, it is not the traditional way that things are often done in Seattle," said Anne Levinson, the monorail's director of strategic planning, government and media relations. "We are striving to do this project differently. We think things can be built in Seattle successfully, and we think schedules can be kept to, and we think thoughtful public participation can be an integral part of that." Craig Montgomery, executive director of the Pioneer Square Community Association, said the monorail generally has been responsive to community concerns. But the King Street Station decision is an important exception, he said. The association represents social service agencies, residents, business owners and others in Pioneer Square. "We are very, very concerned with the fact that the monorail authority has decided to remove the King Street Station from the public input process regarding the selection of the architecture firm," he said. Montgomery said he had no objection to the firm itself, but said, "King Street Station is a critical station to Pioneer Square both in character and historic value. By removing that station from the public process, it isolates the neighborhood from having an active voice in the type of design that's going to impact the station." Paul Bergman, a monorail spokesman, said the design of stations in West Seattle and Ballard, as well as a station at Second Avenue and Yesler Way in Pioneer Square, are being put out to bid, and the community will participate in the selection of the architect. But two stations at the Seattle Center have been assigned to the NBBJ architectural firm, he said. Stations at Bell and Stewart streets on Fifth Avenue have been given to the Hewitt firm, and stations at Madison Street and Pike Street on Second Avenue as well as King Street Station have been awarded to the Zimmer firm. Bergman said the firms chosen had already done a great deal of preliminary urban design type work in those neighborhoods and understood the complex issues involved. Further, the public has had plenty of say on design issues. "We had a series of community meetings in May where we asked all of the communities to share their visions and values," Bergman said. The Zimmer firm "has spent a lot of time on urban design issues related to King Street Station," he said. The station is "really complex -- a major hub for light rail, commuter rail, monorail." The decision was that "rather than shuffle the deck and bring in somebody new and lose all that knowledge, we would continue on with all the expertise (Zimmer Gunsul Frasca) had built." But Stambor complains that the public involvement "isn't sincere." "They've had so many public meetings, but it's very controlled public involvement," she said. "They tend to be very vague and nebulous about their ideas of what the monorail will be and do." The land-use code changes involve such important issues as height and setbacks and should not be rushed through before the environmental impact statement is completed, Stambor said. But Levinson said the truth is the opposite of what Stambor says. The sought-after land-use code changes will enable the public to participate more meaningfully. Many of the regulations in the existing code wouldn't make sense for a monorail. The setback rules, for example, wouldn't allow stations to connect to tracks. Engineers can't meaningfully project in an environmental impact statement what monorail options might look like unless they know ahead of time what the code will allow the monorail to do, she said. "In some ways, it's like saying you're going to build a new house, but you're going to tell your engineers and architect that you don't know yet which lot you're building on, but they should just go ahead and do the engineering and design." More headlines and info from Ballard/Broadview/Blue Ridge, Belltown, Downtown, Pioneer Square, Queen Anne, Sodo, West Seattle. P-I reporter Jane Hadley can be reached at 206-448-8362 or janehadley@seattlepi.com ********************************************** http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/transportation/130419_monorail11.html SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER Friday, July 11, 2003 Monorail brainstorming open to public Uproar produces U-turn on idea of private sessions By KERY MURAKAMi SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTER in the face of criticism, the Seattle Monorail Project has decided to allow the public to attend a series of brainstorming sessions to come up with ideas to make money for the future Ballard-to-West Seattle line. Critics complained the monorail authority planned to close the sessions to the public, asked participants to sign a confidentiality agreement and offered them $150 to attend. Sunshine law experts such as the state attorney general's senior counsel Chip Holcomb declined to say definitively whether the original arrangement was legal. But he said generally that meetings between staff members and citizens are not required to be open to the public. Holcomb said documents pertaining to the meetings could be subject to the state's Public Disclosure Act. The monorail authority had said it would make public the list of ideas generated at the sessions, but it wanted the meetings closed so participants would not be shy about throwing out their ideas. Monorail Executive Director Joel Horn said the authority was trying to incorporate ideas from the private sector, such as generating ways such as advertising to make money. The authority worried that inviting the public would discourage participants from offering even the craziest ideas. But given the concerns, Horn said yesterday he decided to err on the side of openness. Critics such as Jane Zalutsky, who was invited to one of the sessions, had said the confidentiality agreement was not in keeping with a spirit of openness. Told of the change, she said: "Good for them. I completely applaud the response." Zalutsky, who runs Bumbershoot, has worried that the project would disrupt the festival if the authority decided to run the monorail line through instead of around the Seattle Center. She also criticized the stipend. Horn said the agency still would offer the money as payment for participants' time and ideas. But it would ask them to sign an agreement giving rights over the ideas to the project. Holcomb said governments can pay for services, but the payments would be a problem if they're considered gifts. Only those invited can participate in the sessions. Others will be given forms to submit ideas. The meetings, each focused on a certain type of ridership, will be from 7 to 9 p.m. July 14 and 23 (commuters), July 16 and 24 (tourists), July 17 and 22 (children) and July 21 (event-goers/occasional users). The meetings will be at the Seattle Monorail Project's offices, 1904 Third Ave. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- P-I reporter Kery Murakami can be reached at 206-448-8131 or kerymurakami@seattlepi.com *********************************************** http://www.canada.com/search/story.aspx?id=2893d679-1ac3-409b-aaa2- 77ff3b691fde Vancouver Sun Tuesday, August 05, 2003 Bring streetcars back to streetcar city, transportation expert says Money slated for RAV line could be better used, UBC planner says Frances Bula Portland has reaped the benefits of returning to streetcars as a major part of its transportation system. For the $1.7-billion tab for a SkyTrain-type line to Richmond, the Vancouver region could start putting back together its streetcar system, create a system of ferries linked to the bus system, or bring in a mix of improvements that would serve the transit needs of far more people, say three experts on transportation and urban planning. "Vancouver is a street-car city that has lost its streetcars," says Patrick Condon, who holds a chair in livable environments at the University of B.C. "We need to pick a mode that reinforces that old pattern of the city." Condon was one of three experts asked for their views by the Vancouver planning commission, which is trying to promote debate on this crucial issue. Condon points to Portland as a model for Vancouver. Portland, like almost all North American cities, lost its street-car system in the 1930s and 1940s after the automobile industry helped dismantle those systems, he said. (Only Toronto retained a part of its system.) However, Portland is rebuilding its street-car network, producing a system that costs one-fifth as much per mile of track as the proposed Richmond- Airport-Vancouver line. "They went with street-car because it was all they could afford. Today they could not be happier with their thrift," Condon wrote in his analysis for the planning commission. The neighbourhoods in which the street-car lines run have had "enormous increases in high-intensity mixed-used development" and the resulting increases in real-estate value "will likely make the streetcar the smartest public infrastructure investment in Portland's history." Condon suggested that, for $1.7 billion, the region could build street-car lines along Arbutus, Granville and Main Street, with money left over to connect the Commercial Ave. SkyTrain to UBC and connect Langley and Cloverdale to the Surrey SkyTrain terminus using the old interurban line. Condon said a RAV-type line assumes the main point of transit is to bring people in from the suburbs in a hub-and-spoke system. That only works if all the jobs stay in downtown Vancouver and the suburbs remain completely residential, which isn't likely. A smarter system would create a connected web, which helps develop neighbourhoods and allows people to commute easily to jobs that aren't necessarily in the downtown core. A second advocate for better urban planning also suggested a better use of the RAV money would be for two north-south surface rail systems, one along Arbutus to Richmond and a second on Main Street, linking to Gastown-Chinatown and the downtown. "This system would be a catalyst for development, where appropriate, in those communities," said Shane Simpson, a director at the non-profit group Smart Growth that advocates for better urban planning. Simpson also suggested a system of ferries linked to the bus system would not only be practical, but also an appealing system that would attract tourists. Marion Town, the executive director of Better Environmentally Sound Transportation, said putting some RAV money into simply improving the bike system would give people better transportation choices. She said one-third of the region's work commutes are less than five km, "a journey most cyclists would find convenient and enjoyable." However, the lack of bicycling infrastructure in the regional district makes that choice an unattractive one. Town also emphasized that buses continue to be the workhorses of transit. "The 99 B-Line bus has boosted ridership to UBC by 50 per cent in the last five years, while the Millennium SkyTrain line is still far from meeting ridership projections," said Town. The proposed line has become the subject of increasing controversy since it was proposed by then-TransLink executive director Ken Dobell three years ago. Federal and provincial government representatives are negotiating intensely this month on a deal over funding the line, expected to be announced at any moment. The provincial government had demanded a $450-million contribution from the federal government, which would be added to $300 million each from the province, the airport and TransLink, as well as an investment by a private partner to be chosen through a bidding process this fall. However, an internal federal report leaked to The Sun in July suggested the project was risky on several fronts, and recommended giving only $350 million with several conditions attached.